I didn't find myself cracking up as much with this movie as I did with the original "City Slickers", but it had it's moments, and finding a way to bring Jack Palance back was a definite must for a sequel. One thing I did like was the way they worked in the concept of the treasure hunt into the story line after Mitch (Billy Crystal), Phil (Daniel Stern) and Greg (Jon Lovitz) all thought they really were on to a million dollar discovery. Along the way, the picture makes clever use of geography and terrain to support the Western Pacific Railroad robbery saga, and references to "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" were entertaining and well placed.You probably had to see the first movie in order to appreciate some of the repeat gags offered by Mitch and Phil on the trail like programming a VCR, and an early scene with Mitch running along side of Norman wouldn't have made any sense without having done so. Crystal manages once again to plug his admiration for Mickey Mantle while wearing a Mets cap, and when he simulated that drag under the runaway wagon it brought to mind all those B Westerns for which Yakima Canutt invented the gimmick.There's at least one takeaway I got from the picture that makes it memorable; I'll bet this is the only movie ever made in which a character uses the word 'pi--pot'. It occurs when Duke (Palance) gets irritated over the boys whining about how cold it is as they try to figure out a way to warm up. Right around the same time Duke doubled me over when he described how his mother died, stabbed in a bar fight at ninety five. The imagery there is simply impossible. Go ahead, try it.

You can probably tell from the review title that I absolutely loved the first film, the sentimentality occasionally got in the way, but it was funny, beautifully filmed and had adept direction and performances. I admit I was disappointed in this sequel, but there are much worse sequels out there, reading my past reviews you'll probably guess which ones I'm talking about. The film is beautiful to watch with a nice score, and the ending was great. And there were some funny moments, if not anything that I would quote like in the first. Plus the performances are good, Jack Palance makes a brief but worthwhile reprisal here, and Daniel Stern is as goofy and as charming as ever. Billy Crystal is much more reserved here though, and Jon Lovitz did irritate me. The flaws however come in mainly the basic plot structure, I know the first film had a simple story structure but this one had more so and the direction which isn't as skillful or as efficient this time around. Another problem was the pacing, while the film's length itself is fine there are times when the film does drag and badly. As I have said already there were times when I did laugh, but for me it wasn't quite enough. Overall, not an awful sequel, but it was disappointing. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Why isn't there a City Slickers III? The first two movies were very good and the end of City Slickers II would make you think it leaves the door open for another sequel.I think anyone who rips this movie is one of those people who is looking to rip movies because, in my opinion, this movie is pretty good! I'd really like to see Billy Crystal come back to this role with Daniel Stern and, hopefully Jack Palance.Maybe it could be a tribute to many of the Western stars by having people like Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Kirk Douglas in it.What do you think?

I would say the movie city slickers 2 would of been an excellent movie except for all the sex stuff, I mean do we really need to see him with his wife? do they really need to throw that in during the ride for the gold? is it because the producers felt that they would get more viewers, thus more money by throwing that in where it really didn't fit the drama? to often they try to get more viewers and buyers by throwing sex scenes in there that really don't' fit the theme or drama unfolding, who cares about what someone's parents were doing, that should of never been even mentioned, it is disrespectful anyway to even bring that up. and frankly not funny or entertaining.but i loved the scenery, the horses, and the other drama, the chase for glen before he goes over the edge, and the feeling like billy crystal is really doing some of the stunts there, and that he can really ride and ride fast and hard, as opposed to a lot of actors who have doubles do the fast and furious scenes in their movies.I enjoyed the duh ness of glen and phil who seem to be from another planet sometimes. out of touch with reality so to speak they seem to be. and mitch jogging with his cow was funny, but they could of left out the milking the cow part, it was disgusting.I enjoyed it when they thought they found the gold and we so happy and they had to find out the hard way it was lead. and the campfire scenes, where they are sitting talking and joking around.but i have to say if you saw the first one you know the horse he is riding is the same horse with it's face painted. so overall it was okay, no terrific, but not really all that bad either.I personally didn't like the third guy in the first movie, in fact I can't remember his name I thought he was a jerk, really stupid character there.RR