Analyze That (2002) Poster

(2002)

User Reviews

Review this title
138 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Analyze This, That, and the Other Thing...
MovieAddict201628 May 2003
"Analyze That" is proof the critics can be wrong. Which probably means you shouldn't be listening to me, either. But you are, oh well. I guess I'll have to review the movie, now.

The Boss and The Shrink are back in therapy: Paul Vitti (Robert De Niro) has been locked up in Sing-Sing for 850 days. Ben Sobel (Billy Crystal) has just lost his father. That's when he gets the call from Vitti. Vitti gives him the low-down: Someone is trying to kill Vitti in jail. Sobel hangs up, Vitti gets mad, so he fakes crazy, and Sobel gets called in (since he is Vitti's psychiatrist). Sobel believes Vitti is cuckoo in the slammer, as he sees him singing tunes from "West Side Story" (one of the funniest parts in the film). So Vitti is released into the custody of Ben Sobel. But on the ride to Sobel's house, Vitti snaps out of it, only to reveal that he is not crazy, but, in fact, quite well. Now Vitti must start a new life and get a real job - that involves working "from 9 to 5!" - and find out who is trying to kill him...and why.

Perhaps I am mistaken, but "Analyze That" is funnier than "Analyze This." Maybe it's just me, but I found it quite funny. I didn't think it was a "rip-off" sequel, there for "no artistic reason." Sure, it's a sequel. Of course it's not going to be an Oscar-winner for originality; I don't ask for that in a comedy. Honestly, can you think of any sequel (other than the rare "Godfather Part II" film) that is as good as the original in terms of reasons for being there? All I know is that I think "Analyze That" had some very funny moments. Take, for instance, the scenes where Vitti is trying to get a new job. He becomes a car salesman for a day, and leads around a couple, showing them a nice car. "Look at that trunk - you could fit three bodies in there!" he says. When they say they're going to think about it: "What's there to think about? You've been busting my b@lls for the last hour over this thing, asking me all these stupid questions, taking it for a test drive...so why don't you buy it?"

Scenes like these are hilarious. And while there are somewhat long sequences without any laughs, the laugh-out-loud scenes more than make up for those lacking.

The only thing about this film that makes me drop the rating a notch is the execution of the last half hour. Just like the first movie, they set up a ridiculous "action" ending, that isn't action at all. Its ending is overlong and goes way too long without any laughs.

But that is the only thing I didn't like about the movie. De Niro and Crystal have a real chemistry, even more so here than in the first film. De Niro steals the scenes he is in, and Crystal steals the scenes he is in, and when they are both on screen, you're not sure who to look at.

I find Robert De Niro's latest journeys into comedy quite funny. He made a few comedies here and there in the past, but in the last three years he's coughed out some funny movies. "Analyze This," "Meet the Parents," "Analyze That," and to a certain degree (it was okay), "Showtime."

Perhaps I am confused. Maybe I need to see the first again. But having seen the original about twice, and "Analyze That" once, I can honestly say that I laughed more in "Analyze That" than I did watching "Analyze This." And if that's not a good sequel, I don't know what is.

Here's to "Analyze This, That, and the Other Thing"!

3.5/5 stars -

John Ulmer
30 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
2/10
Oh Please!
Desmond Thomas11 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I don't usually write reviews, but I remember watching this stinker, and wanted to throw in my two cents.

This film is about Paul Vitti pretending to be insane to get out of jail, thereby driving his psychiatrist insane. How idiotic a premise is that? "Analyze This" was a good film. But "Analyze That" is bad. The plot is empty and chaotic. Apart from the beginning few scenes, there is almost nothing related to madness. The film tries so hard to be funny, by doing the exact opposite of "Analyze This". This time round, the psychiatrist gets crazy and the mobster has to cheer him up. And it is Ben who bugs Paul all the time. I feel that they try too hard to be funny. The end result is that the film ends up not being funny, and sometimes becomes just plain silly. "Analyze That" is a disappointing sequel. Don't waste your time on this.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Humor, action and a half-hearted attempt at depth
Analyze This had an element of novelty and a generous dose of humor. Lacking the novelty due to its sequelhood, Analyze That tries to compensate by making forays into the psyche of Dr. Ben Sobol (Billy Crystal) as well as a little more (very little) analysis of mobster Paul Vitti (Robert De Niro). The psychology angle is not given much time or emphasis, but I suppose director Harold Ramis should get a couple of points for making a token effort.

The film is pretty funny and worth seeing, but doesn't really offer us anything new. This is forgivable, though, because Crystal and De Niro are entertaining enough to carry the picture. Overall, I'd recommend it -- it's funny and watchable and the two leads are very good.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Shadows !
elshikh423 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
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.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
5/10
As expected: scarce
tributarystu31 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Another sequel on the market, another disappointment. It is not something totally new, but the fact that De Niro keeps playing in such movies is quite sad. I don't think he is really made for comedies, and if he is, then for no more than one. His type of character is quite clear and I wonder now how another sequel, to a good comedy, "Meet the Fockers" will be like. I sincerely doubt it will be good.

Spoilers

The story is quite predictable...There is De Niro, a mobster (the one we know from the first film- Paul Vitti) who has to spend some time behind bars...but it so happens that he escapes with the help of his doctor, Ben Sobol( Billy Cristal), and exactly as in the first movie he gives him a very hard time. And so the story starts...

The movie hasn't got an interesting plot, but it should've had many funny moments. Unfortunately these were quite missing, not totally, but I didn't laugh as much as I should've. The humor is dry, and not funny. The only question really was, how much they could squeeze out of all the mafia parodies. The answer: not much.

The actors lost their charm too, and neither De Niro, nor' Crystal gave the movie an exciting tempo. It was slow, despite lasting around one hour and a half, and the rest of the characters where poorly modeled on the screen. There were much to few interesting moments in this film.

If you want to see a good parody about the mafia, I would recommend "Mickey Blue Eyes", which I personally enjoyed very much! Or you could watch the first part to this sequel if you haven't seen it, because it is definitely better. Or if you want a comedy with De Niro just watch "Meet the Parents". All of these movies have more charm than this one. a cold 5.5/10
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
The Concept swings low
seamuss4 March 2003
The rise of the producing team of Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer (Top Gun, Flashdance and sundry other subtle works exploring the deepest secrets of the human heart) in the 1980s introduced the High Concept movie - one whose premise and entire raison d'être could be summed up in a single sentence, preferably referring to other hit movies – for example Days of Thunder was `Top Gun with cars.' 1999's Analyse This may have been a High Concept movie – Mafia Don Sees Shrink With Hilarious Results – but it had a lightness of touch that made it seem less like a focus-group product and more like an offbeat little comedy.

Unfortunately for Analyse That, the success of The Sopranos has made Mafioso-psychiatrist relations almost as much a cliché as two cops, one steady and by the book and the other an impulsive maverick, who initially hate each other but bond over the course of several gun battles. More fundamentally, the concept of Analyse This hasn't been taken any further. There could be some entertainment to be had when Robert de Niro's character takes a job as an advisor on `Little Caesar', a Mafia-themed TV drama, but the main joke is that the actor playing the Don is an Australian. It struck me that both actors who played Don Corleone in The Godfather series have now taken the mickey out of the mafia – Brando in The Freshman and now de Niro in the Analyse This and That series (if there's a sequel, what will it be called? Analyse The Other?)

Lisa Kudrow is grossly underused – one gets the feeling that much of her part ended up on the cutting room floor. Both Crystal and de Niro are pretty good (this is called `damning with faint praise' in the trade, if you're wondering) There are some pleasing shots of New York, and David Holmes' soundtrack has its moments (although is nothing to his work for Ocean's Eleven or Out of Sight) Analyse That is not a bad film, just a rather forgettable one. Puts the `sleep' into `sleeps with the fishes.'
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
10/10
Very Funny, A laugh a minute
Bruce Carson (stuntman-5)6 December 2002
All the revues said this was just o.k. but I have to tell you different. This film had me in stitches from the start. I am amazed how Robert DeNiro can be so strong in serious roles and yet he does comedy as good as any one. People like Robin Williams are trying to cross over to serious roles as is Jim Carrey and this guy makes it look like anybody could do it. Unreal !! Two thumbs way up for this one.
31 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Not as funny as "Analyze This", but still it's a good comedy
Kristine20 May 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I wasn't laughing as much as I did in the first movie. But there are some pretty funny scenes in "Analyze That". I think I am in love with Robert DeNiro. It's official. :D Just kidding. He's just so funny in the movie. Once again he steals the show. Especially with him singing songs from "West Side Story". The plot isn't as interesting as the fist movie of course, but they keep up with the same goofs. Over all, it's a good film. But don't expect another "Analyze This". It's not as funny. But it's good for a couple laughs.

And since I am so in love with Robert, I'm going to be nice.

7/10
16 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
6/10
Meh.
Topher19 November 2010
Analyse This had a freshness and uniqueness of concept that carried right through the film and made it an enjoyable fluffy comedy. Analyse That falls very adeptly into the stereotype of the sequel that tries to emulate the original and fails miserably. The jokes are the same but somehow less funny, the new characters add nothing notable, Robert DeNiro seemed lost and unsure of his character, Billy Crystal was just plain annoying at times and the story was alternately ridiculous and pedantic. Are we really supposed to be curious about whether or not he's going straight? And in the end, did he?

6 is actually a bit generous, consider it a 5.5 rounded up.

But that's just my two scents. ;)
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
7/10
Some great laughs, but not as good as the original. Worth seeing, though...
bopdog6 December 2002
As sequels go, this was above average. Which translates into a so-so+ movie. I gave it a 7 out of 10, instead of a 5 or a 6, because there ARE some great laughs in it. Although it pains me to say it, overall, as a movie, "Analyze That" was a bit flaccid, a bit pale, and certainly not as good as the original. It seemed tired and faded, somehow--- kind of like the recent "Men in Black II" sequel to MIB. However, if you are a Billy Crystal-hitting-old-age fan, and if you are a Robert DiNiro fan (and who isn't???--- and if you are gracious enough to be willing to be entertained for a couple of hours, go see it. You'll probably have a pleasant evening!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
don't bother to analyze it
vladymirror9 August 2003
Analyze me this: "Analyze That" (AT) makes as much of a comedy as "Jaws" makes a popular science film on Discovery channel. Got the point? OK let me try this: AT is not funny, it's humiliating. It was humiliating to watch De Niro tearing down the memories of a once great actor.

How long has been since we saw him act, I mean act la De Niro. Let's see. The last memorable performance was in "Cape Fear" in 1991 and since then the only worth mentioning are "Frankenstein", "Casino" and sure "Analyze This". The rest complete crap - "The Fan", "Sleepers", "Jackie Brown", "Ronin", "Meet the Parents", "The Score" to mention a few. Don't forget, we are talking about Robert De Niro. Is he blind? Doesn't he read the scripts? Or is just about money again. 20 million for this sequel-now that's laughable.

Don't waste your time with this movie. It's not that you gonna hate it, De Niro and Billy Crystal are in it, but it's a waste of time. AT is so contrived with an idiotic plot and the jokes are so stupid with most of them actually repeated from "Analyze This". For me this movie ranks below 5 out of 10.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Yep, it streaks with bumpy and rough romps for raunchy laughs.
janyeap2 December 2002
This sequel of the 1999 mob comedy "Analyze This" has plenty to keep the viewers laughing, bemused, and sometimes shocked. It's no longer a tale of a sweet psychiatrist keeping a mafia don sober. On the contrary, it's the gangster who's showing his shrink the reality of the tough side to every human soul. Guess who's expected to be lying on the psychiatric couch? Yep, this film offers a fun ride to the psychology of the shrink! And it makes no apologies for pumping up enough guffaws to keep one's throat sore. It may not be the comedy for the puritanical grandmas and grand-papas, but face it, it's gangland - foul-mouthed, and rude gestures, vulgarities, et. al. Yep, Director Harold Ramis can't be accused of not injecting new flavor and spice to this sequel's characters! Nope, there's no way one can complain that it has the same old jokes. De Niro and Billy Crystal, and a cast of amusing actors are offering a new outlook on mob life and it's influence. There are demons lurking in every mind; there is the identity crisis to consider - even with the good, old professional folks.

Just observe Paul Vitti's 'manic-catatonic' stupor. I don't mind paying the regular price of a tix just to watch De Niro's facial expressions. I'm not sure whether you'd ever listen to 'West Side Story' without a smile, after watching this flick. Concentrate on how Dr. Ben Sobel entices him to respond to the psychiatric tests. The are great moments in this film. This comedy does work with the characters' new images. This is one hoity-toity hokum - out to spin laughs.
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
10/10
Well Worth Seeing
cbns13 December 2002
I liked Analyze That; however, not quite as much as I liked Analyze This. Analyze That had it's moments and definitely looked as though the actors enjoyed making the film. When Paul Vitti (Robert DeNiro) sings show tunes, you just can't help but laugh. Also, I loved Jelly's (Joe Viterelli) character. He does a good job as Vitti's right hand man. Dr. Ben Sobol's (Billy Crystal) scene when he is at the sushi restaurant had me almost out of my chair laughing.

Overall this movie is worth going if you like the first one. Be sure to stay for the out takes!
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
6/10
Pretty funny for a sequel....
Exeron10 August 2007
They are back, and Ben Sobel (Crystal) got more issues to deal with his patient who happens to be a Mob leader: Paul Vitti (De Niro). So folks Robert De Niro again with Billy Crystal, it turned out more fun then i expected, and I am hard to impress when it comes to sequels. Sequels often ruins the whole part of movie loving, in fact i couldn't imagine a sequel of ...on the top of my head "The Shawshank redemption" that would really make me angry. Anyway i could in no way say that this one is better than the first one, in fact it would be better if they just stopped after the first one, but actually this one was really funny (for a sequel), so it still gets 6/10 which is probably the highest vote for a sequel given by me...
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
I lost a friend because she liked this movie.
I went to see this movie with my friend Paulina when it first came out ... I really liked it's prequel ANALYZE THIS. I was expecting to laugh and be happy with it ... not wowed, but glad that i'd seen it. After about the first 20 minutes of me wrinkling my brow out of confusion to when it was going to get "good" I started to actually talk to my friend, which i never do during a movie, asking her if she liked it and asking her if her laughter was for real. This movie was an embarrassment for Robert Di Niro and Billy Crystal who have proved themselves over and over again. I felt like... why? WHY? Would they be so NOT picky in the material that they would choose? Why would they waste their time and talent on this piece of crap? She kept laughing and telling me she really liked it! I wish that I could erase the memory so I could go on loving Robert Di Niro and respecting him at the same time. I was also forced to look at Paulina in this awful light. How could I listen to anything she has to say if I couldn't understand how she could like such a mockery. I shortly after the movie started to be mean to her involuntarily because of this. A week later I never spoke to her again!
7 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
Not worth the price of admission: a good idea spoilt.
Kobalt4424 March 2007
Analyze That was a big disappointment. A potentially very funny film with a good, well-tried storyline and a good cast was spoilt by some very overdone, very silly, and very juvenile vulgarity. Crudity is only funny if it is cleverly ironic or satiric and parodying, Analyze That is none of these. The whole film seemed to revolve around how many times those actors playing assorted criminal slags could spit out the f-word in the dialogue of a scene, which is plainly pathetic as a device for comedy. The director, Harold Ramis, who has been a good comedic actor and a clever writer for other films, should go back and rethink his whole recent approach to comedy if this movie is any indication. And what is the point of having a resource such as De Niro if you can't use him better than this, or did he decide not to try too hard for this one. This film was just painful to watch. Analyze That is not worth the price of admission for this viewer.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
6/10
More of the same.
George Parker13 May 2003
"Analyze That", the first sequel to "Analyze This" is just more of the same. Of course, if you liked the original, that would be a good thing. If not...not. Crystal continues as the reluctant shrink while DeNiro continues a the mob boss with issues in this madcap attempt to capitalize on the success of "...This" by punching up "...That" with strippers, car chases, stunts, shootouts, etc. Enjoyable but, like most sequels, lacking the freshness of the original. (B-)
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
10/10
The Boys Are Back, and They're Good-- Yes, Yeeeees They Are--
jhclues22 December 2002
There was a time when `sequel' was synonymous with `less' with regards to quality, as mainly the studios wanted to capitalize on whatever was good about the original and duplicate or enhance in the follow-up the parts they `thought' were responsible for bringing in the big bucks at the box office. Which meant that usually, except in rare instances, the sequel failed to lived up to the first one and, more often than not was a huge disappointment. Happily, in the past few years that tide has seemingly turned, and as this film so aptly demonstrates, a sequel can, in fact, even surpass the original. `Analyze That,' directed by Harold Ramis, is the further adventures of Paul Vitti (Robert De Niro) and Dr. Ben Sobol (Billy Crystal), and in a word, it's a hoot. And, most importantly, this one stands on it's own; the characters are back, but the story is fresh-- it's decidedly NOT just more of the same or a rehash of `Analyze This.' As Paul Vitti himself would say about this film: `You... Yooou-- you're good, yes you are!'

All is not well with Paul Vitti, currently doing a stretch at Sing Sing; someone, it appears, wants him whacked, and it's driven him into some kind of psychotic episode from which he may never emerge if he doesn't get out of prison, and soon-- like right away. And who better to treat the `boss' than his personal therapist, Dr. Ben Sobol; or so goes the reasoning of those in high places, who actually have some ulterior motives in mind.

So Vitti is released into the custody of Dr. Sobol, who is not all that thrilled at the prospect of having a mob boss as a house guest. Even less thrilled is Sobol's wife, Laura (Lisa Kudrow). But they don't know the half of it, yet. There's a war brewing between two `families,' and Vitti, it seems, is right in the middle of it. And soon, some old faces begin showing up at the Sobol residence, like Jelly (Joe Viterelli); and if that isn't enough, the good Dr. Sobol has just been through the death of his own father, and he's grieving. And it's `a process.'

And a `process' is what brought this film so successfully to the screen, and it's gratifying, not to mention enjoyable and entertaining, when the result of a creative collaboration like this works so well. Screenwriters Peter Steinfeld, Peter Tolan and Harold Ramis crafted and delivered a script that is imaginative and fresh, and Ramis, who also directed `Analyze This,' as well as a couple of modern day comedy classics, `Caddyshack' and `National Lampoon's Vacation,' hits his stride with arguably his best work yet. His sets a perfect pace and his sense of timing has never been better. Of course it helps when you've got one of the best comedic actors in the business in there `doing lines' with the best actor-- period-- in the business. Crystal and De Niro together? Well, forgetaboudit... They take what is already great dialogue and make it ring in a way Quasimodo never dreamed possible. It's witty, extremely clever (like the reference to Ben's son, Michael, as `Clemenza') and, most importantly, FUNNY. And Ramis goes with the flow, keeping it all right on track from beginning to end. And De Niro singing? Does it GET any better than that?

As expected, De Niro slips back into his Vitti persona with facility, as does Crystal with his Sobol; the way they pick it up, as if they've been living in these guys' skins since `Analyze This,' lends credibility to the film and allows the viewer to settle in with them from the opening frames. So it's not only an entertaining film, but `user-friendly' to boot.

The single disappointment comes from the fact that the lovely Kudrow isn't afforded more screen time. She's such a welcome presence when she's on, and to her credit she makes the most of what time she's given, holding her own with her dynamic co-stars right on down the line.

A nice addition this time around is Cathy Moriarty-Gentile as new mob boss Patti LoPresti. This particular character suits her extremely well, and she runs with it; especially in her scenes with De Niro she has a captivating, commanding screen presence and it puts some real life in the exchanges between Vitti and LoPresti.

Conspicuously absent in this one, however, is Elizabeth Bracco, who did a nice job as Marie Vitti in the original. Sister of Lorraine Bracco (of TV's `Sopranos,' the hit series to which this film successfully pays homage in some key sequences and plot developments), Elizabeth seems to gravitate more toward roles in `indie' films, however, where she's carved out something of a niche for herself (as in Steve Buscemi's `Trees Lounge' in ‘96), a la Parker Posey and Catherine Keener. And though she's missed here, it's understandable; career wise, she's in good company.

The supporting cast includes Anthony LaPaglia (Tony), Joe D'Onofrio (Gunman), Richard Maldone (Joey), William DeMeo (Al Pacino), Reg Rogers (Raoul), Brian Rogalski (Earl) and Thomas Rosales Jr. (Coyote). Given the nature of the story and the characters, this film necessarily has something of an `edge' to it, but Ramis navigates the R-rated waters in a way that makes `Analyze That' funny, friendly AND highly entertaining. There are those who will say that it should all end here, on a successful note; personally, however, I'm waiting to hear that `Analyze And the Other Thing' will soon be in pre-production. As far as I'm concerned, you can never get enough of a good thing.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
Like watching a 95 minute long trailer
blind Io13 May 2003
I thought this movie would be less fun than the first which I loved, but I had not expected it would be this horrible. It was like watching a very long and tedious trailer, where you get hints of the story, but not the whole thing.

The story was fractioned, unfitting and de Niro had an air to him that he really didn't care wether or not he was a part of the thing. And he sings bad too.

The rest of the cast, except for Billy Crystal, had no bearing on the movie, anyone could have taken their place and maybe done something good with their characters. The only light of the the 95 minutes of my life I wasted was Billy Crystal on all kind of medications that once in a while shines through as being funnier than the rest of this whole horrible waste of time.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
1/10
It Stinks
myersan16 March 2003
My mother would have whacked me on the head had I brought her to see this crappy sequel to a very funny movie. The "F" word is used to excess. The jokes are not funny and it was sad to see Billy Crystal and Robert DeNiro being wasted in this rotten film. I am truly sorry to have wasted my time in seeing this pile of crap. Stay away from this.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
5/10
Very Average
easmith0326 December 2002
I think I might have chuckled a couple of times. A pretty tame film that tries to draw laughs from getting the straight laced Ben Sobel (Billy Crystal) mixed up in the "Mobs" business as he seems to be trying to help someone, that he also knows doesn't need the help. The situations were ridiculous, and unrealistic, which would be ok if it were a hilarious "screw-ball" comedy, but it falls way short on the comedy.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Pleasantly surprising
davideo-227 February 2003
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

Having had sequel upon sequel piled on us,it's great to finally come across one that even in light of it's Hollywood gloss and glamour,is actually quite good.At first glance,it would be easy to dismiss it as a desperate,cynical attempt to get bums on seats.And yes,Analyze That is not without it's cliches and recycled material from the previous film.But the great thing about it is,it evenly balances out all the predictable stuff with some great new,inspired gags and dialogue.It has an unexpectedly neat soundtrack too,and the lead performances from Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal are excellent.Easily the best sequel in a very long while.***
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Typical DeNiro mob comedy
DJAkin11 December 2002
I liked this movie but not as much as the first one. It was not quite as clever. I did like it though. There are many great scenes between Billy Crystal and Bobby DeNiro. There is not a lot of violence in it as it IS a comedy for the most part. The funniest part was when Bobby D did his trademark point, shook his finger at Billy and said....."you....you.......you're good....you're good." Then there is JELLY, yes you heard me right...the gangster named Jelly. He was great! What was missing was Chaz P who was in the first one. Anyway, not much depth to this movie, just a ton of cussing and a few good laughs. It did deliver the goods.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
4/10
Calling Dr. Freud
jotix10010 January 2003
What's wrong with film studios these days? They come out with something as witty and funny as Analyze This, and sabotage our memory of that original movie with something as obvious and obnoxious as this Analize That.

In reading the credits, I almost fainted after seeing that the characters were written by Kenneth Lonergan, one of our best playwrights and by Peter Tolan, a good screen writer. Well, they both missed the target big time. It must be a cause for embarrassment for all the talent involved.

With the exception of the opening scenes and up to the point that Paul Vitti comes to the home of Dr. Ben Sobel, it showed great promise. But from there on the whole thing falls so flat that you hardly hear any laughter in the theatre.

The subplot of the TV serial, not unlike The Sopranos, is very badly presented and executed. Anthony LaPaglia who is one of the best screen actors around comes out as such an idiot that we kept wondering who advised him in taking this role. For that matter, who sold the idea to the great Robert Deniro, or someone of the stature of Billy Chrystal to repeat their original roles in this loser?

Thank goodness that Lisa Kudrow doesn't have much to do, she can't do much damage here. Cathy Moriarty comes out better as the Mafia Mamma, but she's an actress that can do no wrong. The rest of the cast is forgettable.

Sorry Mr. Ramis, better luck next time.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews