Teacher:In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? Solve this instance: i had a chance to see a sneak preview of city slickers ii on campus last night .
i went in with the expectation of a film with the similar flavor which made the original such a success : personal growth and insightful humor about life .
i came away somewhat disappointed in this regard , getting some of the latter and not much of the former .
the basic plot revolves around billy crystal , who plays mitch robbins , turning forty .
he 's now become the station manager of the radio station in which he worked in the original .
he 's given a job at the radio station to his best friend , played by daniel stern , out of sympathy while stern 's character works through his divorce .
his loser younger brother ( john lovitz ) comes to mitch 's house to bum a money and place to live , all while mitch and his wife try to celebrate his birthday .
during the celebration , mitch discovers what appears to be a treasure map in curly 's ( the cattle drive leader in the original played by jack palance ) old hat .
after a business trip to las vegas , crystal , stern , and lovitz stay a few extra days to go off in search of the treasure .
on the way , they run into curly 's twin brother , duke , played by ( you know who ) jack palance .
first of all ,
the cinematography was beautifully done , especially the outdoor scenes in the desert .
the scenes are such that i would like to see some of those sights filmed myself .
there is some character development during the film .
the actors remain true to their characters and play them well , without overplaying the jokes .
the movie is a good basic adventure , with enough plot twists to provide for an ending that is difficult to predict .
the movie is paced well
, but with a couple slow spots in the middle and towards the end .
humor - wise , the film has a good number of jokes which maintained my interest throughout the film .
there are memorable moments
like when stern is bitten by a snake , but there are fewer jokes to laugh at in the sequel ( surprise , surprise for a sequel , right ? ) .
however , the slight bitter aftertaste i have with this film has to do mainly with the film 's manipulation of the audience .
the film tries to pull your heart - strings too much regarding how close the characters are to each other , like when mitch had decided to suck the snake marrow out of his best friend 's butt .
this is done again when the gang meets up with some members of the cattle drive group from the original .
there were also some parts which appeared unrealistic , like whether the stampede would start in the way it did or why they did n't worry more about water while tromping around the desert .
some strenuous stretches of the imagination are required here .
since the objective of the gang is to find gold and get rich ( unlike finding themselves in middle age like in the original ) , i also found it harder to empathize with the characters during their journey .
overall , i 'd say that the film is an entertaining and humorous adventure with some story - line deficiencies making it less worthy than the original .
it may be worth the full price of admission , but a matinee would be a better bargain .
Student:
P