TS: Godfather vs Godfather II

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (308 of them)
i always watch I & II back to back .

kephm, Tuesday, 16 March 2004 20:53 (12 years ago) Permalink

I love how effective that phrase is when not used between lovers.

cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 20:53 (12 years ago) Permalink

i hated the 2nd. i watch all 3 for the 1st time about 1 month ago.
there was too much going on i think it should have been 2 movies.
+ shooting fredo at the end ruined everything. it was worse than the 3rd.

dyson (dyson), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 20:57 (12 years ago) Permalink

Part II is just, well, boring!

Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 21:15 (12 years ago) Permalink

Can I just say: "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli".

Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 21:20 (12 years ago) Permalink

I love how effective that phrase is when not used between lovers.

Yeah, right?

ModJ (ModJ), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 21:23 (12 years ago) Permalink

you broke my heart.

cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 21:27 (12 years ago) Permalink

I think the only film I've seen more often than I and II is The Wizard of Oz. But it's pretty close. If I'm flipping channels and notice one of the Godfather epics, I'll watch a scene or two or three, maybe four or five.
I liked the first one the best. Um, no, the second one. Wait a minute - the first one. Yeah, that's it. Aw damn.

jim wentworth (wench), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 03:56 (12 years ago) Permalink

I've never seen any of the Godfathers. (Or Goodfellas or Casino)

Even though I know the first is supposed to be the greatest film of all time and everything, I just have no desire to see it, but I can't figure out why.

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 03:59 (12 years ago) Permalink

Pick up the book while you figure it out; it's a great pulpy read.

m.e.a. (m.e.a.), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 04:05 (12 years ago) Permalink

Weekend at Bernie's 2.

latebloomer (latebloomer), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 04:18 (12 years ago) Permalink

5 months pass...
ok, so why does michael have a black mark on his cheek for the 2nd half of the movie?

kephm (kephm), Friday, 27 August 2004 17:47 (11 years ago) Permalink

maybe its just time to clean my television screen

kephm (kephm), Friday, 27 August 2004 17:50 (11 years ago) Permalink

Was this after the cop punched him?

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 27 August 2004 17:51 (11 years ago) Permalink

yes , this is what i thought, but doesnt a whole of time go by when michael is hiding out in italy?

kephm (kephm), Friday, 27 August 2004 17:54 (11 years ago) Permalink

His jaw never set back correctly.

Pleasant Plains (Pleasant Plains), Friday, 27 August 2004 18:00 (11 years ago) Permalink

ok, seems like an odd place to bruise, but that makes sense.

kephm (kephm), Friday, 27 August 2004 18:04 (11 years ago) Permalink

I prefer the first since it works as a stand-alone but II is possibly the best sequel ever (starts slow but has astonishing power by the end). As much as I love the catchphrases and moments that III gave everybody, it's embarassing that the thing exists.

CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 27 August 2004 18:05 (11 years ago) Permalink

Godfather II, if only for the Fredo breakdown scene in the conservatory.

57 7th (calstars), Friday, 27 August 2004 18:10 (11 years ago) Permalink

In Part I: the "I like to drink wine more than I used to..." part

In Part II: I always liked the end of Frankie Five Angels with Tom in the prison yard.

Jimmy Mod, Man About Towne (ModJ), Friday, 27 August 2004 19:03 (11 years ago) Permalink

I'M SMART!!!

s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 27 August 2004 21:48 (11 years ago) Permalink

Ha, yeah. While Michael just ignores him.

Monetizing Eyeballs (diamond), Friday, 27 August 2004 21:49 (11 years ago) Permalink

they're both great, but I prefer the second one. Deeper in every way. I like the scene in Miami when Hyman Roth asks Michael if he watches the baseball...not so much, Michael says. And the way Lee Strasberg has his leg over the arm of the chair.

eddie hurt (ddduncan), Saturday, 28 August 2004 17:30 (11 years ago) Permalink

1 year passes...
cozen is otm, wtf @ the plotting of II?

the deniro bits are straightforward enough. childlike, really.

but can anyone come out here and explain the rest of it?

there are two brothers michael is trying to shake down in vegas? and hyman roth is in cahoots with them, possibly? but hyman claims to be on michael's side?

they try to kill michael, and try to pin it on the old guy back from new york.

and then they try to kill that old guy, and tell him it's on michael's orders (this is confusing, because maybe it is michael!).

er, and at some undisclosed point the feds investigate the corleone family and they have to go to court.

i think i would have liked a godfather 1.5, in which vito and mo green (=bugsy siegel?) and hyman roth build up their empire of crime. i guess roth is coming out of chicago?

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 09:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

they're both pretty overrated.

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 11:59 (10 years ago) Permalink

II.

Brando's performance is mostly hammy crap. And if you ever see I in a theater, Diane Keaton's assorted hairstyles draw gales of laughter.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:51 (10 years ago) Permalink

morbius, what is the plot of II?

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:52 (10 years ago) Permalink

i saw it last night. but seriously, what the fuck at the senate committee etc?

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:52 (10 years ago) Permalink

JD OTM

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:04 (10 years ago) Permalink

A man builds his family with murder, his son destroys it with murder.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:08 (10 years ago) Permalink

They really go a lot of convoluted ways to make that point though, in fairness.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:10 (10 years ago) Permalink

i'd rather they made it about organized crime really -- roth, ie meyer lansky, would be a good subject for a biopic. if 'family' is the plot of 'GF2', why fanny about with cuba and the senate hearings &c?

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:25 (10 years ago) Permalink

They really go a lot of convoluted ways to make that point

Not compared to III!

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:27 (10 years ago) Permalink

This is heretical, but fuck it: Brando was 10 times funnier, warmer, and more human in The Freshman, in which he parodied Don Corleone.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:30 (10 years ago) Permalink

And Lee Strasberg is an ever bigger ham than Alex Rocco.

does "ham" mean "jew"?

kidding.

I loved Strasberg in 2, the scene where he's talking about Moe Green (Siegel), not getting a plaque and all that...

Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

Alfred OTM

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

"Brando was 10 times funnier, warmer, and more human in The Freshman"

right, but don corleone isn't a funny, warm, or human kinda guy.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:47 (10 years ago) Permalink

he's, you know, a crime lord.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:47 (10 years ago) Permalink

Yeah but in the Paulie-from-Goodfellas friendly neighborhood don type of way. He was no Michael Corleone.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

but he loves his grandkids! and he's such a lovable crime lord!

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

paulie is also a vicious psychopath -- they have paternal instincts, but if you go a few feet astray, they will definitely fuck you up.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:51 (10 years ago) Permalink

Yes but they're presented in a different light, I mean in a manner where it's like, "Yeah, those guys deserved to be fucked up anyway."

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:53 (10 years ago) Permalink

Don Corleone didn't have a Komodo dragon!

Coppola himself says he could've done a smarter, more polished job on the first one (much of which he shot under rumor of being imminently fired).

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 15:57 (10 years ago) Permalink

i just like the first one a lot. i think the sinatra storyline is basically pointless, but it's a good crime saga.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:02 (10 years ago) Permalink

It's a fun Hollywood anecdote, if done better on SCTV with Candy as Johnny Pavarotti and John Marley as Leonard Bernstein.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:08 (10 years ago) Permalink

Both of them are kind of only ok though, the first is good for how hot Al Pacino was back then though. I think the first is overblown and really hammy, and the second is a complete trainwreck.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:38 (10 years ago) Permalink

Oh yeah, DeNiro didn't approach his later work in The Fan and Rocky and Bullwinkle.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:41 (10 years ago) Permalink

it took 30 years for jimmy caan to get round to 'elf'.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:54 (10 years ago) Permalink

Having a good performance in a movie /= making a good movie. Either DeNiro was completely and utterly unnecessary to that film, or the majority of the rest of the film was completely unnecessary. Hence "train wreck".

Also, his performance in the film is overrated anyway! Oh noes, DeNiro learnt Eyetalian!!! Oh noes! FILM OF TEH YEAR! etc. If he learnt Eyetalian, got fat, and shaved a mohawk into his head, now you'd be talking.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

I mean, I'm sure the performances in the new King Kong might very well be pretty great but if the script they're all working from resembles pudding, well, you're still fucked.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:57 (10 years ago) Permalink

Wilford Brimley is still alive?!

Οὖτις, Monday, 19 May 2014 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink

he's not THAT old... he was barely 50 when he did Cocoon.

Anyway, Willis:

“There weren’t a lot of contemporary mechanics introduced, like helicopters and zoom lenses. It was a tableau form of moviemaking, where the actors move in and out of frame, very straightforward. It was supposed to feel like a period piece… There was no discussion of lighting. I just did what I felt like doing. The design came out of the juxtaposition of the bright, cheerful garden party wedding that was going on outside, and the underbelly in this dark house. I used overhead lighting because the Don was the personification of evil, and I didn’t always want the audience to look into his eyes, see what he was thinking. I just wanted to keep him dark… (In those days) screens were so blitzed with light that you could see into every corner of every toilet and closet on the set. I’d always hear, ‘They have to be able to see it in the drive-ins….’ When the dark stuff started to appear on the screen, it seemed a little scary to people who were used to looking at Doris Day movies.”

http://thedissolve.com/news/2271-gordon-willis-1931-2014/

images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 May 2014 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

wilford brimley is only 79 years old, but he's looked 60+ since 'the thing'.

christmas candy bar (al leong), Monday, 19 May 2014 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

yeah I didn't realize he was playing so much older

Οὖτις, Monday, 19 May 2014 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

it was always weird to see such an ornery 26 year old shilling for quaker oats.

christmas candy bar (al leong), Monday, 19 May 2014 21:27 (1 year ago) Permalink

because the Don was the personification of evil

this is weird, i never felt like the godfather movies ever portrayed the don as the personification of evil! pacino certainly esp. in part ii but vito was always potrayed in a heroic fashion

marcos, Tuesday, 20 May 2014 13:51 (1 year ago) Permalink

yeah, i thought that was the most interesting quote. i prefer whatever movie Gordon Willis saw. altho he seems to be referring only to the scenes in which he's shadowed and distant.

(maybe the moment most suggestive of this is the dissolve (yes?) from Jack Woltz's screams echoing around his estate to Vito in repose)

images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 May 2014 18:53 (1 year ago) Permalink

Yes.

clemenza, Wednesday, 21 May 2014 01:27 (1 year ago) Permalink

well, except his eyes appear to be lit if closed there?

images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 21 May 2014 03:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

1 year passes...

anyone see the 'new' HBO 7 hour doohickey? seems to be just The Saga (the VHS set from the late 80s) again, only in HD and widescreen.

piscesx, Tuesday, 26 January 2016 20:42 (3 months ago) Permalink

Really??! Oh man I want to see it then. VHS thing from the 80s (which was originally shown on TV in the late 70s) is my favorite version of I/II.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:10 (3 months ago) Permalink

Wow.

"The Godfather Epic is the TV version of Francis Ford Coppola’s famous gangster movie saga, in which The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are cut together chronologically with additional footage left out of the films. It aired on NBC in 1977 and was later released (in shortened version) on video in 1981. The result is a jumping-off point for debates about the differences between film and television, and even streaming content. Or, you know, you could just hang out with Al Pacino for a while."

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:18 (3 months ago) Permalink

i think thematically something is lost by Vito '20s and Michael '59 not being contiguous. or do people judge that tactic to be some kind of failure?

(i saw it Saga-style on network TV)

we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:21 (3 months ago) Permalink

I judge it to be a failure simply because I judge the Michael section of II to be a failure. In the context of the extended epic, it's flaws are somewhat minimized.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:24 (3 months ago) Permalink

interesting... i spose i would agree as far as "he's lost his soul" was already the ending of I. But I think most of the supporting characters (Fredo in particular) are more fleshed out and human than in the first. Plus you have Strasberg, Gazzo etc.

(also as i don't much like Brando's performance his absence doesn't bother me)

we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:30 (3 months ago) Permalink

i enjoyed watching it in the saga format.

reggae mike love (polyphonic), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:36 (3 months ago) Permalink

i like the saga format because (slightly) more Godfather but it's lesser than the 2 movies precisely because of losing the chronological juxtapositions

Chikan wa akan de. Zettai akan de. (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 21:51 (3 months ago) Permalink

I watched the first half of III the other day. Not sure if I'll finish it. I'd heard how bad Sophia Coppola is, but I don't think she's much worse than everyone else. Everyone looks lost or indifferent.

jmm, Wednesday, 27 January 2016 00:41 (3 months ago) Permalink

certainly not worse than eli wallach

that said i didnt hate it in '90

we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 00:54 (3 months ago) Permalink

seeing The Epic on VHS (it came in a leather-y box!) back in 89/90 was most jarring to those of us in the UK who'd only ever seen the TV versions. loads of great extra scenes sure but also much more violence in the bits we thought we knew already. back in '73 the BBFC had insisted on cuts to the toll booth sequence for example (the kick to the head etc) so The Epic was even more gory than it had been in Theaters.

piscesx, Wednesday, 27 January 2016 00:54 (3 months ago) Permalink

I always thought she's possibly the best reason to see the film--a couple of really bad line readings, otherwise she's pretty good. Garcia and Mantegna are flashy and forgettable. Pacino, ugh.

clemenza, Wednesday, 27 January 2016 00:55 (3 months ago) Permalink

i always quite liked III, although no Duvall sucks.

piscesx, Wednesday, 27 January 2016 00:57 (3 months ago) Permalink

Pacino is basically just as good as he was in the first two. I'd rather he'd have won his Oscar for III than the shouty blind vet movie.

we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 01:50 (3 months ago) Permalink

I didn't hate III but I haven't seen it since I was 15

a fucking men (stevie), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 14:23 (3 months ago) Permalink

I do remember the audience at the cinema laughing when Pacino falls off his chair

a fucking men (stevie), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 14:24 (3 months ago) Permalink

my friend calls that 'Arte Johnson from Laugh-In'

we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 15:30 (3 months ago) Permalink

1 month passes...

So I spent, y'know, the entire day watching the HBO epic. Hypnotic, and maybe my favorite viewing (having seen the first two films probably four or five times before). I think the chronological restructuring may have led to me catching lots of little things I never noticed before. And the 'new' scenes were welcome additions (in much the same way that I thought the Redux scenes added to richness of the tapestry of Apocalypse Now). Recommended way to chuck a day away!

Telephone Meatballs (Old Lunch), Sunday, 6 March 2016 03:58 (1 month ago) Permalink

I don't know how I'd completely failed to previously notice that Harry Dean Stanton is in part 2.

Telephone Meatballs (Old Lunch), Sunday, 6 March 2016 05:27 (1 month ago) Permalink

Did you catch Danny Aiello?

clemenza, Sunday, 6 March 2016 05:35 (1 month ago) Permalink

No! Goddamnit, now I need to watch it again.

Telephone Meatballs (Old Lunch), Sunday, 6 March 2016 09:16 (1 month ago) Permalink

I didn't know who Danny Aiello was the first few times I saw the film (no one did), but after Moonstruck, I probably watched it another half-dozen times before picking him out. (It's a speaking part and a memorable line.)

clemenza, Sunday, 6 March 2016 13:06 (1 month ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.