This is one of those rare instances in which the sequel tops the original film. Both films are very funny, but this one made me laugh more and more often. DeNiro does a fabulous job of satirizing his many gangster roles and Billy Crystal is at his best. The same cast and crew returns with a few new additions including Cathy Moriarty as a female crime boss. The plot involves DeNiro again as Crime Boss Paul Vitti trying to extricate himself out of prison as rivals are trying to "knock him off" inside the prison. Crystal as Dr. Ben Sobel will not return his calls so he feigns psychotic acts and the feds call upon Dr. Sobel for help. He ends up right back where he started from with Crime Boss DeNiro. Some of the funniest scenes involve DeNiro job hunting. Both films, "Analyze This" and "Analyze That" are available on DVD and Blu-Ray as a dual-pack.

I just don't know why this film has got such a low rating. It was fun. It was not as good as the first one but they made a pretty decent second outing. Psychologically speaking, the first one had a lot to say. This one primarily concentrates on the situations and pairing up of the old team. so, story wise this is a weaker one but why the hell would I care as far as it tickles my funny bones :). Robert De Niro was a liiiitlllle bit on a low profile in this. So were Lisa Kudrow and Billy's kid. Other than that this movie is a cool cat. Just don't give a damn about all the negative reviews and watch, relax and enjoy. Rock on! ****

Sequel is mostly not a reputable thing in Hollywood. In one week I was reviewing sequels to memorable comedies like (Arthur 2: On the Rocks - 1988), (The Odd Couple II - 1998), and now (Analyze That - 2002) to have a bad result all the way. I think the commercial exploitation reached its explosion at the 2000s. Away from that, just look at this example : Director (Brad Bird) after the smash success of his Oscar-winner (The Incredibles - 2004) refuses to make any sequel, prequel, spin-off and dedicates himself to make totally another movie, another Oscar-winner (Ratatouille - 2007). This is wise creative person with bold decisions to make. Unlike Mr. Bird, here, after the genius simple (Analyze This) they produced (Analyze That) ! First off, the concept of this (That) was weak. I mean it could have been prettier idea to see some reversal as the mob man treats the doctor this time, or something like that. But unfortunately what we've seen was muddled, semi-pointless, and less funny compared to the first one. Basically the situations were on shaky ground. The sense of credibility, which was smartly coherent at the first (Analyze), is lost. And to hide that they made all the possible comic lines they can do, however none was well enough ! The best of this movie is its first half, where (De Niro) is a mad singing man or undesirable guest or failing at many jobs. As the second half was the best of perturbation; the wholly unfunny matter of the TV show (strange how they missed to produce any laughs out of it), some car chase, a sudden unbelievable heist, and one genuine fabricated happy end where (De Niro) must look as the criminal with the heart of gold, and everything finishes fine. (De Niro) seems rare as finally Mr. Hollywood; who's making the obligatory empty sequel, what a pity to hire a great comedian like him (who didn't have the chance much to express his talent at that area) just to be in a nice sketch or two. I'm sorry to say it, but (Billy Crystal) makes outrageously his Razzie-worthy role and movie, if you looked closer you'd find that the script gave him nothing to do, so he had to manage with what appeared as his most ridiculous performance yet. (Harold Ramis) turns to remakes (Bedazzled - 2000), and sequels (Analyze That - 2002) after years of his "original" masterpiece as a writer, producer, and director (Groundhog Day - 1993). It's nearly the perfect case for what Hollywood does with its people at the insolvent boring 2000s ! This movie is in disarray made it look poor. And after the success of the previous one, it's disappointing. What can I say? The hasty dealing and the absurd plot did it. The only good thing to be said about those couple of movies is that they're way better and more watchable than De Niro's other candy bars of the same time (Meet the Parents - 2000) and (Meet the Fockers - 2004) which were horrible.More often than not.. The shadows of good movies, which they call sequels, can shadow effectively.

A poor sequel (to a pretty lightweight predecessor). It's a narrative collection of sketch-style moments.Robert de Niro is the most watchable. Even in this comic-caper fare he manages to be genuinely menacing. However, one man recycling old tropes whilst having a ball as the grandstanding 'villain' does not a movie make.Billy Crystal plays himself. Lisa Kudrow plays a parody of his put upon wife from the first film. This is as nothing to the complete lack of a story. All we have to go on is a rough ultimatum drawn up by the FBI about how long de Niro's mafia boss must stay under Crystal's shrink-roof. It doesn't deal - like the first - with whether a leopard can change its spots. It's Hollywood big guns on a slow morning. 3/10