WAY BETTER THAN THE FIRST ONE!
-
JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies — 15 years ago(October 15, 2010 06:46 AM)
For me, the first one was a 10/10, this was a 9/10.
http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies -
Prismark10 — 15 years ago(January 04, 2011 08:00 AM)
The first film was rather dull but did great business on the BO. The sequel was better and went more for laughs. Great fight scene and they did well by actually making the Smith character likeable.
Its that man again!! -
SpankyMagooEsq — 15 years ago(March 15, 2011 05:32 PM)
I agree with the OP. I'm a huge Eastwood fan, but I was terribly disappointed when I saw
Every Which Way But Loose
. Not only was it an unfunny "comedy," but it was also a poorly made film. I hated it so much that I didn't want to see the sequel thinking that it would be even worse. Well, I decided to give
Any Which Way You Can
a try, and I actually liked it! It is a much better film in every aspect and it's actually funny. -
davebah — 14 years ago(July 22, 2011 08:33 AM)
Well folks i totally disagree with all on this thread. The original is an absolute classic and this was no more than a poor cash in. I think that one reason "Every" worked so well was that it happened by accident - the screenwriter jeremy kronsberg had intended his script for Burt Reynold's he knew someone who knew Clint and, knowing that Clint and Burt were friends had asked if it could be passed along Clint read the script and loved it so much especially since he was looking for a change from his tough guy roles, that he made it himself despite being warned not too, and it worked!!! This is certainly not the worst sequel ever made, but pales in comparison to the original.
-
gressos — 13 years ago(July 01, 2012 06:33 AM)
I agree.Although I believe they are two different films,' Any' is tied to my innocence and fills me with happiness every time I see it.
Maybe I am too romantic,maybe I liked that Philo reunited with Lynn(while the first film was too bitter concerning their relationship),loved that he and Wilson became friends as well as seeing the Bikers wishing him to take care of himself.Maybe I like fairy tales,I can't say.
Just the same,it's worth the time 100% and has never failed to do so for 30 years.
If nothing else,the music and songs are very beautiful. -
TheMagiciansWorkshop — 13 years ago(January 02, 2013 03:21 AM)
The first one has a better emotional story with Lynne using and screwing Philoe over. It's still funny as hell. But the second one had a lot more funnier scenes than the first, and Jack Wilson was an awesome character.
-
SunCanyonRoad — 11 years ago(April 09, 2014 12:49 PM)
Both are fun, but for me the original is better for the simple fact that the ending is more endearing and special. I loved how Clint's character Philo Beddoe realizes that this (bare knuckle brawling) is the ONLY thing "Tank Murdock" has in his life. The guy was STILL wearing his letterman's sweater from highschool! He was a local legend living on his past glory days and Philo realized not only was he being used for others to profit on in this fight, but he would be destroying everything Murdock had in his rotten life by beating him as well. That's why he throws the fight letting Tank win. He KNOWS he is MORE than a just bare knuckle brawler (that this doesn't define who he is as a person) and he didn't want to end up as pathetic as Tank Murdock. It's great character development and writing. Anyone could just have Beddoe go and win the match. But his character wouldn't grow any that way.
ANY WHICH WAY YOU CAN is just about having more fun. The characters are established. There is no growth. The ending is more predictable too.
"I don't want your watch, man. I want your friendship!" - Lightfoot