Nat. Treasure II: Book of Secrets(spoilers)

Discussion in 'Random Topic Center' started by Azure Kite, Dec 25, 2007.

8 league13 468 60
  1. Azure Kite

    Azure Kite New Member

    Great movie IMHO. I think we can say safely that this movie stuck with the unrealistic element of the last one, but hey come on its a movie..... I think Nicholas Cage did a great job. The storyline was pretty cool and gave a fictional answer to several intriguing events in history.(the Golden City, Lincoln's assasination, etc.) I thought Ben pretending to be drunk was the most hilarious thing ever!:lol: What are you humble opinions on the movie, for those of you who have seen it this early?
  2. TheDarkTwins

    TheDarkTwins Active Member

    I enjoyed the movie. I think they are gonna make a 3rd movie and they are going to be searching for whatever is on page 47. :biggrin:

  3. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Why the heck was a golden city that belonged to southern native Americans doing all the way up in South Dakota???
  4. supertyranitar

    supertyranitar New Member

    That's what I wondered too. All and all though, this movie was BRILLIANT. I hope they do make a third movie to find out what was on Page 47, because I myself want to know so VERY badly.
  5. Mob2099

    Mob2099 New Member

    Maybe thats why it was so hard to find? As in not located in a logical spot. :lol:
  6. Regis_Neo

    Regis_Neo Moderator

    As long as you ignore the unrealistic and somewhat impossible likelyhood of the events that transpired, it's a good movie.
  7. bullados

    bullados <a href="

    You could say this about 99% of all movies.
  8. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Not really.
    A really good movie may have a premise that requires you to suspend your disbelief, but after that, it follows the rules of that premise and doesn't pile more and more of them onto your shoulders until you are crushed under their weight.

    For example, Spider-man requires you to accept that being bitten by a genetically altered spider give Peter Parker spider-like abilities. OK. I'll accept that premise. But those abilities need to stay within the boundries initially outlined or there had better be a reason they don't. And they pretty much do. Peter doesn't suddenly get the ability to shrink down to the size of a spider because it's convenient for the plot, for example.

    Contrast that to some of the Superman movies where Chris Reeves suddenly gets all kinds of abilities just because the director thought they looked cool. Like telekenesis. Or when he split into two different beings just because he was going through a depression.

    For NT2, I accept that Nick Cage can con his way into the Queen's office. I'm sure that in the real world, security is much tighter. She is the queen, after all. But OK, I'll buy it.

    I'll also buy that a grainy stoplight camera is going to take a clear enough picture, through a windshield, of an aged indian relic for his mother to be able to translate it. Heck, I'll buy that is assistant is able to break into the London police network to pick up that image, even though in the real world, that image is probably sitting on a non-networked flash drive that probably has to be downloaded periodically.
    OK, I'll buy that.

    I'll buy that there are a dozen big black SUVs sitting in London waiting for the bad guys to hijack them. I've been to London. That's probably every single big black SUV in the entire country. But OK, I'll buy that.

    But to buy into the premise that Indians from Florida (it was Florida, right?) carted thousands of tons of gold all the way up to some hole in the Black Hills of South Dakota???? To build a city under a river?????
    I'm sorry. I just heard something snapping. Oh yeah. My disbelief.
  9. Azure Kite

    Azure Kite New Member

    M-Message received.:eek:
  10. master of puppets

    master of puppets New Member

    haha i agree with every statement thus far.
    it was a really good movie. i enjoyed it a lot.
    but the gold city being all the way in south dakota doesnt make a lot of sence at all.
    what do you think was on page 47?
    and personaly i would have just taken the whole secret book with me. and givin it back to the presedent later. but its a good thing he didnt cause if he did it would have gotten ruined in the water at the end.
    course i wouldnt have known that when i took the book.
  11. Papi/Manny

    Papi/Manny New Member

    I liked it but it felt like it ended too was alot easier to know what was going to happen next this time then last time.
  12. SuperWooper

    SuperWooper New Member

    It didn't measure up to the first one, for me. Nicholas Cage working out his problems with his ex-girlfriend and his dad working things out with his ex-wife were lame excuses for characterization. Riley's inferiority complex wasn't resolved, unless you count the cute girl at the end wanting his book signed. But the part that really got me was the total lack of a decent villain. Instead of it being Nicholas Cage versus the world (which is really what made the first one worth watching), it was Cage versus one guy who ended up being everybody's hero in the end. Villains that have redeemable qualities make for great storytelling, but not this guy. He was stale and boring.

  13. taurik

    taurik New Member

    Yeah, I was a bit disappointed that the baddie turned good at the end, but maybe that was just the Disney of the film. I was expecting that Ed Harris' character would be part of the "secret society" that was trying to keep alive the Confederacy as his ancestors before him did. It seemed at the end like it was more like he was trying redeem his family name by finding the lost city.
  14. Azure Kite

    Azure Kite New Member

    On the Riley thing, its like a lot of movies with goofy characters. You cannot expect them to get a gf out of the blue can you? It simply leaves the oppurtunity for a relationship because a girl actually talks to him, and he doesn't fail in the conversation. Perhaps we will see more of Riley's newfound attractive side.:rolleyes: The villian. Yes he was pretty lame. They did keep the same deal as last time with the stupid and goofy minion. This villian also had a stupid accent. So yeah its pretty sad when you wanna gain fame but lose your life to gain it.
  15. Papi/Manny

    Papi/Manny New Member

    ^OMG what was with that goofy movie??? Me and my friends were soo lost as to what the thing was doing before the movie.
  16. taurik

    taurik New Member

    "Back in the day", movies used to always have a cartoon short before the feature film. Most of the Bugs Bunny/Loony Toons cartoons were originally shown as shorts before a Warner Bros. film. Lately most Pixar films have had a short shown before the main film as well.
  17. bullados

    bullados <a href="

    "Back in the day", double features were the norm. That was when there was a B feature, then some kind of short, usually a newsreel or a cartoon, then the A feature. It'd be kewl to see that come back again...
  18. Pokemonpat

    Pokemonpat New Member

    Pixar films is a division of Disney--thats why the cartoons
  19. Azure Kite

    Azure Kite New Member

    The goofy cartoon was hilarious IMO, but I didn't know if it was just a theater extra or something.
  20. taurik

    taurik New Member

    Prior to Disney purchasing Pixar, Disney only distributed the Pixar films

Share This Page