In THE STING, Johnny Hooker’s (Robert Redford) grifting partner Luther was murdered by gangster Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw). Hooker then teamed with an old buddy of Luther’s, Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman) to sting Lonnegan and extract some revenge on behalf of his fallen friend. Now years later, Lonnegan (played in STING II by Oliver Reed) seeks revenge on the duo and their associates. He kills a minor player named Kid Colors and sets his sights on Hooker (now Mac Davis) and Gondorff (Jackie Gleason, of all people).

The cyclical nature of these stories is interesting; a murder set off the first film, which in turn sets off the murder that creates the second sting. But then, it’s not entirely clear that this truly is a sequel to the first film. Oh sure it’s called THE STING II and all the advertisements play up the characters and their history, but the script, by David S. Ward, is confusing. In THE STING, Hooker’s first name was Johnny, Gondorff’s Henry. In THE STING II they go by Jake and Fargo respectively. Kid Colors, their buddy whose murder ignites the plot of THE STING II? Not a character in the first film (there was, however, a Kid Twist). Lonnegan, is referred to as Lonnegan, and perhaps even could be assumed to be Doyle Lonnegan, but is never directly called by his first name.

Why the change? Who knows; the vagary could be a cover to explain why the characters look so different (Jackie Gleason and Paul Newman aren’t exactly physical doubles) and even act so different; with Hooker boasting a background in boxing and Gondorff showing off some impressive pool hustler skills (Naturally, since Gleason was Minnesota Fats). Coincidentally, the fact that the characters are only partially named and based on those in THE STING is ignored by all available online reviews, including one by Karl Williams that appears on The New York Times’ site that incorrectly states “Jackie Gleason fills the shoes of Paul Newman as Harry Gondorff,” but Jackie plays Fargo Gondorff and Newman played Henry Gondorff.

The script, by THE STING’s David S. Ward is shorter than the original by nearly a half hour, and the narrative suffers. When Luther is killed in THE STING we feel Hooker’s pain and share in his need for vengeance because we’ve gotten to know Luther and his family and we liked him. Kid Colors is killed only seconds after we meet him, reducing our personal stake in Gondorff and Hooker’s success. With only 100 minutes to tell the story of a complicated con game there’s little room for most of the things that make THE STING such a satisfying film. The characters are no longer complex and flawed (Hooker’s no longer a foolish risk taker and Gondorff doesn’t have a drinking problem) and there is no time for the authenticating con man details that filled the first movie, like the scene where Gondorff shows off his card handling skills. The con itself is good, and just when I figured it out, it convinced me I hadn’t, but a film is like a great meal: a story without strong subplot and character is like a good steak without mashed potatoes and vegetables. This doesn’t even address the thorny issue of Gleason and Davis trying to continue rolls originated by Newman and Redford, or the plausibility of the scrawny Davis convincingly portraying a heavyweight boxer (and a good one at that), or the period sets and costumes which are a lot less convincing than THE STING’s.