itsjustaaro_1 It's always been Hollywood's ongoing, unforgivable sin to make an unwanted sequel to a well-established classic. At some point the decision was made to try and make another story to High Noon; it seems almost like an impossible mission to completely mess this up - decent actors, gorgeous location, respectable if not a fantastic script... and... well, as I sit here and watch this film I regret to say this movie simply does not hold a candle. It does not hold a candle as most "forced" sequels do to ingenious films preceding them.All I can see in this movie is an aged Pernell Roberts who left 'Bonanza' for all the right reasons but his taste in scripts probably lead to such a stagnant career. Lee Majors doesn't quite impress and neither does Carradine; it would take until Kill Bill with Quentin Tarrantino to finally put the spotlight on him. Most of the acting falls flat and the story doesn't quite make up it's mind as to whether it should be about one person or several of them. In a two-hour time slot, that's not a good sign: if your characters still aren't quite relatable or memorable for a large chunk of my viewing time, why should I be watching this? This is a movie that tries so hard but it shouldn't have to. Maybe it is a good film compared to what most folks disagree with, myself among them, but I can't quite see what makes this particularly good. It feels more like an extended modern remake of Bonanza, the same show Roberts was trying to avoid. A pity. This movie shouldn't have low scores, but it does. Why? Someone decided to call it 'High Noon II'....had marketing not attached it to something better, maybe, just maybe, we'd all like this a little bit better than we do now.

john_aalsmeer Pernell Roberts left Bonanza because, as a serious actor, there was not enough opportunity for him to show his acting skills. He made this movie? Why oh why?! My wife is a fan of Lee Majors, so we watched this movie! Why oh why?! Everyone knows High Noon was a truly great movie, so they made a 'sequel'. Why oh why?! If you watch this movie before reading the reviews, you too will say 'Why oh why?!' This movie truly deserves the accolade of 'awful'. The story line is extraordinarily weak - an excuse for a final, face-to-face showdown between an ex-hero (Lee Majors) who doesn't like to use a gun and a nasty piece of work (pseudo-lawman Pernell Roberts) who is an expert with a rifle from long distance (note the scene where he pulls his rifle quickly to his eye and shoots a 'baddy' from super long distance without barely a moment to take aim, using a rifle without a sight???) but, according to Kane (Majors), only likes to face up to his victims from a distance. I suffered the pathetic story line hoping for a dramatic ending - it wasn't dramatic, but at least it was an ending! Yes, I watched it all the way through - why oh why?!

dillardstan I enjoyed the movie very much. I thought Lee Majors captured the essence of Will Kane better than Gary Cooper. David Carradine was great as a likable, not so bad, not so good, down on his luck guy, who wasn't real particular about the letter of the law. Bonanza's "Adam" was a particularly unlikable bad guy as the law officer who conducted himself and the duties of his office to satisfy his own personal greed and needs. The theme of a wrong, for which the good guy seeks recompense, was good and evident throughout the movie, as it evolved into a theme of "standing up to evil." Lee Majors was great as Will Kane, just trying to do right and finally not being able to walk away from evil, knowing he had what it takes to fight it.

slavojzizek HIGH NOON PT. 2 (BRING ON THE DISAPPOINTMENT) There really isn't an adequate way to describe how terrible this movie was. I believe in a fair system of evaluating movies: that they have certain goals in mind and try their very hardest to achieve them. The single goal of this movie was to point out events that happened in the plot line of the original High Noon through stale and unbelievable situations, as much as possible, as to conceal its completely lack of meaningful dialog or purpose in general. As a standalone movie, it failed to have any semblance of an interesting plot. As a sequel, it completely rejected the motivations of the characters in the original movie, reducing the cinematic experience to, "suffer through the terrible dialog for 5 minutes until a gunfight occurs". If only a few words or a single phrase could convey how completely vacuous this movie is, then this review would definitely be paragraphs shorter and most likely contain a few expletives.Will Kane (the fake one, Lee Majors) comes back to Hadleyville with his not-as-hot-as-Grace-Kelley bride Amy Kane (Katherine Cannon) with the intent of setting up a small cattle farm, with some horses here, and some cows and bulls there. Lacking any explained or implied purpose or intent, three villains decide to come to town in a fashion that is strangely plagiarized (and far better executed) by the original High Noon. Ben Irons (David Carradine), the main outlaw, is hunted down by the new Marshal of the town (Michael Pataki) and his posse, setting in motion a not-so-epic struggle that could have easily been resolved by never making this film in the first place. In a strange twist of foundational beliefs, Kane decides to wield a gun whenever possible and shoot people to the tunes of the awfully compiled soundtrack. Jerry Jameson, the director, should have taken a second of his time to realize that he should have opted out of butchering the sequel to such a great movie and quit his dead-end job at the prestigious USA Film studios, if not only to spare his future audiences from torture that could possibly be used to extract valuable information from the inmates at Guantanamo bay. "Tell us the truth or you will be forced to watch this movie!" Usually movies rely on nuanced cinematography and great acting to create an interesting story that an audience would actually surrender some of their valuable time to watch. Apparently USA Studios went ahead and skipped this chapter in the book entitled "how not to make a bomb of a movie". The only way High Noon Pt. 2 could produce drama was by putting some poorly written, 80's syn th music on top of the action. You know, the kind of music that makes you want to vomit and throw away that old Casio you have been storing in your closet for decades. Apparently mentioning important events in the previous High Noon was not enough to make this movie interesting, and dramatic "DUN DUN DUNS" and "SHREEK SHREEKS" needed to be added to jar the audience into submission. "Oh no, please don't do this to me," I kept screaming as the fake Kane plunged into dialog about "how he needed to get back at the new marshal." My efforts to somehow use my shrieking voice to alter the soundtrack on the magnetic VHS tape were in vain, and I nearly suffered a few mortal wounds. Fortunately, I was able to return the movie to the Hollywood video drop-off box two hours after viewing it, saying my last "thank you" to the legacy of High Noon sell-out movies that need to be quickly forgotten. If you want more heartaches, try the 80's remake of the original High Noon. I swear, the purple pill isn't going to save you this time.Most of this review has contained ambiguous bad-mouthing that does not confront the terrible reality of the movie itself. I'll fix that in the flick of a wand! Remember the original High Noon, where Will Kane was a reluctant hero who did the right thing and fought Miller to the death? Say goodbye. Kane takes part in a series of events that run contrary to his "no violence unless absolutely necessary" beliefs, shifting the movie from an allegory about political persecution into a poorly executed Western that completely relies on gunfighting to entertain the audience. Kane fights the new Marshal a number of times, shooting back and forth, never getting hit, utilizing almost every bankrupt Western movie convention known to humanity. Instead of leaving you with the message that you need to stand up for yourself when outside pressures become overwhelming, this film lets you know that violence is always the answer, even when it comes to deciding whether someone is innocent or not. Why ask questions if you can just shoot people? High Noon pt. 2 failed to live up to its own standards, and was so incredibly bad and unwatchable that it descended beyond the point of being "so bad that its actually funny" to become "two hours of pain that will not be easily forgotten". The specifics of the plot are not even worthy of discussion, because at best they were completely ripped from the original film, or taken straight from the journal of a screenwriter who has the same ability to tell stories as a veteran who can't get over a war. "One day, back in 'Nam" becomes "One day, back in High Noon the original". Please, do not see this film. If you happen to start a class action lawsuit against USA Studios for releasing it, please notify me so I can sign up my name along with as many fake names as I can possibly think of.