Love this movie, but it takes away from the first one

Let me just say, as a child of the 80's I LOVE both Young Guns movies. The first is one I can actually recite word for word. The second one had more of a "real" western feel to it and is great in its own right.

With that being said, I really think the part 2 didn't really need to be made. It seemed like, historically speaking, they put as much of the actual story as they could in the first one, picking specific events and characters and accommodating a film using Young Hollywood and a decent movie runtime. It was fun and didn't take itself too seriously.

The second film, however, although they did play around with the actual events as well, seemed a little more grounded in the historical records. But in doing so, the story kind of altered, and in some cases, negated many of the events in the first one.

I know that the thought of an actual movie franchise wasn't as common back then as it is today, so they more than likely weren't even considering a sequel when the first was made. If they were, I think the stories in both movies would have been more in sync with each other. Sometimes its just hard for me to watch the second film knowing that many of those parts and characters should have been in the first one.

You're a pushy little bastard, ain'tcha?-Sensei John Kreese