One year after their first adventure, Mitch Robbins and his friends discover a treasure map that belonged to their late trail guide Curly and they set out to discover its secrets.One year after their first adventure, Mitch Robbins and his friends discover a treasure map that belonged to their late trail guide Curly and they set out to discover its secrets.One year after their first adventure, Mitch Robbins and his friends discover a treasure map that belonged to their late trail guide Curly and they set out to discover its secrets.
- Awards
- 2 nominations
Jennifer Crystal Foley
- Jogger
- (as Jennifer Crystal)
Storyline
Did you know
- Trivia$1,000,000 in Gold from 1908 would have been worth approximately $18,541,362.89 in 1994. In 2019 it should be worth $62,272,854.50.
- GoofsGold is a relatively soft metal. When Mitch scrapes the brick with a knife at the end of the movie, it would score.
- Alternate versionsThe post-2003 prints plastered the Columbia Pictures logo with the 2001 variant of the Warner Bros. Pictures logo and also added the closing 2001 Warner Bros. Pictures logo.
- SoundtracksThe Godfather Waltz
Composed by Nino Rota
Featured review
Amusing but really just a retread of the original's jokes with less conviction and energy
Now turning 40, Mitch Roberts is at ease with himself and full of confidence. He is doing well at work his marriage is good and he is happy. His friend Phil is causing him some trouble as he has Mitch's old job but isn't working well and further stress arrives for Mitch in the shape of his deadbeat brother Glen. However the trio get excited when Mitch discovers a map to hidden gold in the lining of Curly's hat. But can the group recover the gold successfully? Is it even real? And is Mitch just imagining that Curly has come back from the grave to haunt him?
I saw this years ago in the cinema and had vague memories of it as being pretty good. I saw it a few nights ago on TV and have to say that my memory has not served me well. The plot here is silly any excuse to get three wise-crackers out on horses again in the wild west. The way they manage to rope Jack Palance back in doesn't really work and hurts the feel of the film. In the original Palance worked but here it feels like he's been shoehorned into it and that he's forced to over egg the cake.
The film has a few good lines and laughs but too often it just repeats jokes from the first film to lesser effect. It's a shame because the film is freed from the sentimental soul searching that bogged down the latter stages of the original. However it does nothing with this freedom. I'm sure I remembered this as a comic adventure yarn, again I was mistaken. The same old jokes but it lacks a soul or a centre. The original may have been a little sentimental but it complimented the comedy for the most part here that is missing, and it hurts.
Crystal delivers his lines with vigour and is funny I always find him funny! But at times he does look like he's on autopilot. Stern is also just treading the same old material over and is only so-so. Kirby decides not to return so Lovitz replaces him and actually does alright. However his brand of humour isn't as good as Crystal and the two don't gel although he does get some good laughs. Palance tries again but the Oscar magic isn't there and I couldn't help feel he took away from his original role somewhat.
Overall this is amusing at best but really pales against the original (which wasn't a classic itself). The action isn't up to much and the comedy only delivers a few laughs, preferring instead to retread as many of the original's jokes as possible.
I saw this years ago in the cinema and had vague memories of it as being pretty good. I saw it a few nights ago on TV and have to say that my memory has not served me well. The plot here is silly any excuse to get three wise-crackers out on horses again in the wild west. The way they manage to rope Jack Palance back in doesn't really work and hurts the feel of the film. In the original Palance worked but here it feels like he's been shoehorned into it and that he's forced to over egg the cake.
The film has a few good lines and laughs but too often it just repeats jokes from the first film to lesser effect. It's a shame because the film is freed from the sentimental soul searching that bogged down the latter stages of the original. However it does nothing with this freedom. I'm sure I remembered this as a comic adventure yarn, again I was mistaken. The same old jokes but it lacks a soul or a centre. The original may have been a little sentimental but it complimented the comedy for the most part here that is missing, and it hurts.
Crystal delivers his lines with vigour and is funny I always find him funny! But at times he does look like he's on autopilot. Stern is also just treading the same old material over and is only so-so. Kirby decides not to return so Lovitz replaces him and actually does alright. However his brand of humour isn't as good as Crystal and the two don't gel although he does get some good laughs. Palance tries again but the Oscar magic isn't there and I couldn't help feel he took away from his original role somewhat.
Overall this is amusing at best but really pales against the original (which wasn't a classic itself). The action isn't up to much and the comedy only delivers a few laughs, preferring instead to retread as many of the original's jokes as possible.
helpful•95
- bob the moo
- Nov 12, 2002
- How long is City Slickers II: The Legend of Curly's Gold?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $40,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $43,622,150
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $11,516,375
- Jun 12, 1994
- Gross worldwide
- $43,622,150
- Runtime1 hour 56 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was City Slickers II: The Legend of Curly's Gold (1994) officially released in India in English?
Answer