The resurrection of Mickey Rourke's career is for Hollywood to sort out. My job is simply to tell you my thoughts on his performance in a gritty and often depressing film.

Have you ever gone on a road trip and "that friend" of yours volunteers to drive. You know the one that swears they're a good driver, despite nearly driving while looking at the passengers all the time and slamming on the breaks for chipmunks in the road:

The first Night at the Museum was good, but not great.  It was an enjoyable movie, but not something I was ranting and raving about.  The concept was original and full of potential, but not something that left me dying to see more.  So when it was announced that they were making a second one I was kind of confused.

I've always considered Ron Howard a competent if mediocre director.  He fashions a good tale with few bells and whistles.  Once in my viewing experience he crafted what I would call a masterpiece, Apollo 13.  He managed to create an atmosphere of tension in a tale where we already knew the outcome.  That's a pretty skillful move.