4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Painfully Obvious Retread, May 23, 2003
"Analyze This" was somewhat amusing but not a film that stands up to repeat viewings. Especially since the freshness of the idea has been completely dampened by the successful & far superior HBO series "The Sopranos".
The sequel, and I don't know why they bothered(actually I do - $$$$$$$$), is depressing viewing simply b/c most of it is just a re-hash of the first film. The brief out-takes provided are funnier than the entire film.
With "Analyze That", we have Crystal's Dr. Sobel grieving the loss of his own father at the beginning of the film and we're treated to Sobel saying at least 5 times throughout: "I'm grieving. It's a process." We got it the first time you said it. And it wasn't very funny to begin with. We also get to go over the whole assassination of Vitti's father thing, with the requisite flashbacks, and how that has scarred him. This territory was mined in the first film and they didn't need to go there again. But they do. The only difference in this film is that we have Vitti faking lunacy(this is where we have to sit through the painfully unfunny scene of Deniro doing a few Broadway show tunes in prison) and being entrusted to the care of Crystal's Sobel with much hilarity ensuing. Not even close.
One of the best things about the first film was the character Jelly and some of Crystals reactions & line readings. I didn't find Deniro funny at all in the first film. But in "Analyze That", Jelly has hardly anything to do at all and isn't remotely funny. Crystal has a couple of lines I laughed at and Kudrow is again wasted along with Cathy Moriarty, whom I usually love. Vitti & Sobel get to cry again. Ugh!!! Why is it so often necessary to weigh down comedic films with mawkish sentimentality. And believe it or not, they have Vitti again pointing his finger at Sobel: "You.....you're good. You got a gift." This was something that brought a wan smile to my face in the first film but director/co-writer Harold Ramis must think we all find this a scream because they do it several times here. And if that isn't enough to put you off watching this, the film ends with Vitti, Sobel & Jelly entertaining us with a final show tune. YUCK!!! And not funny!!!
That said, if you LOVED the first film and have very low expectations and aren't too picky you may find yourself entertained for 90 minutes. Certainly possible considering some of the positive reviews here but if you're like me, and find that a sequel need not be the same-old same-old, don't bother with this by-the-numbers, playing-it-safe sequel.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
10 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
AN UNFUNNY SEQUEL..., May 30, 2003
My twenty one year old son is home from college for the summer, and, as it was raining out, he decided to rent some films from the local video place. Being a huge Robert De Niro fan and, having really enjoyed "Analyze This", the prequel to this film, he rented it, expecting a very funny film. We hunkered down to watch it together, waiting for the film to make us laugh. We had a very long wait.
It is hard to believe that Harold Ramis, the same director who successfully directed the very funny "Analyze This", as well as other successful comedic gems, such as "Groundhog Day" and "Bedazzled", could turn out such an unfunny clunker of a film. Ham handed, leaden, and obvious would best describe this effort. Of course, he is hampered by the material with which he had to work. There is only so much one can do with a script that is torpid, stupid, and just not funny. The director is lucky that he had such an excellent cast with which to work. Who knows how much worse this film would have fared in the hands of less talented and skillful actors.
Reprising their roles in "Analyze This", Robert De Niro, as Mob boss Paul Vitti, and Billy Crystal, as his reluctant shrink, Dr. Ben Sobel, do all they can to raise the material with which they had to work to another level. In the final analysis, they are unable to do so, and the film fails to deliver. In fact, the viewer ends up feeling almost embarrassed for them, so forced and contrived are their performances. They are simply not very funny.
The actual premise of the film is simple. Paul Vitti is in prison, on the cusp of completing his sentence, when he realizes someone is trying to kill him. He feigns insanity by singing show tunes and being seemingly catatonic, at times. The Feds call in Dr. Sobel, who is forced to take Vitti out of prison into his care and custody, with orders to get Vitti in shape for his parole board hearing and onto the straight and narrow. Once free, however, Vitti reveals to Dr. Sobel that his actions were merely part of a ruse to get out and discover who is trying to kill him.
Moving in with Dr. Sobel, Vitti disrupts the doctor's life. He fails to take to holding down a regular job, as he has socialization problems. When Vitti finally hooks up with a gig he can tolerate, as consultant to a TV series about a mob boss, he uses the job as a front for bringing his old crew together and finding out who is trying to ice him.
Lisa Kudrow, as Dr. Sobel's wife, is not given much with which to work, and the little material with which she has to work is not particularly funny. Cathy Moriarty, who once played De Niro's wife in "Raging Bull", the film about boxing great, Jake LaMotta, is teamed up with De Niro again. Looking none the worse for wear, she appears here as a rival mob boss. She, too, does the best she can do with the hand that she has been dealt. In fact, the only person in this film who is remotely funny is Anthony LaPaglia in the role of the mob boss on the television series for which Vitti is a consultant. Unfortunately, his is but a small role.
Still, this is a film that devoted Robert De Niro or Billy Crystal fans may wish to see. In that case, rent it rather than buy it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
"Back in therapy", January 22, 2005
While visiting some family in Utah a few years ago we decided to rent a few movies to pass the unforgivably hot mid-summer weather. We ended up renting "Analyze That" and boy, what a mistake that was! We were expecting at least a mildly funny sequel to 1999's "Analyze This." The potential was there, it's not as if writers (of course it's never a good sign to see numerous writers) Peter Tolan, Peter Steinfeld, and Harold Ramis didn't have decent material to work with; Robert DeNiro, Billy Crystal, Lisa Kudrow, and a funny and entertaining plotline regarding mobsters and therapy. However, this being Hollywood and all, another sequel was botched. It's because of movies like these that sequels have such a bad reputation.
Despite a few genuine laughs in the first twenty minutes or so regarding DeNiro and some "fish out of water" situations, the movie seemed to go downhill soon after. The jokes became few and between as the film laboriously plowed its way through an over-the-top heist setup and execution that felt about as inspired as "Crossroads." Now either they ran out of jokes, they didn't have enough time to invest in an actual story, or the material itself has been played out in so many different ways already ("The Sopranos", "The Whole 9 Yards", "Mickey Blue Eyes", etc. etc.), that there was simply nothing left to write about.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
