The Godfather - Epic

[Chestrockwell]

I haven't seen the Godfather trilogy in years and refrained from watching it as I remembered it being somewhat longer than it should be and felt like I have seen it so many times.

Until I was scrolling through netflix and it auto played the opening scene and I just didn't stop. I just finished part two feeling frustrated with Michael. He shouldn't have killed Fredo, the guy was a moron but he meant well.

I know it's fiction but I can't help but think Michael over done his role as a boss, I felt like he tried too hard and the charisma and respect his father had escaped him.

I also always used to prefer part 2 but actually, part 1 is the best of them

Thoughts?

[John D.]

I watched them all for the first time a couple of weeks ago (I had seen bits of Part 1 before).

Part 1 is brilliant and by far the best.

Part 2 is good.

Part 3 is not good. I only sat through it because I'd just watched the other two.

[MCBrowncoat]

I find it difficult to pick between 1 and 2

It's probably: "whichever one I'm watching"

One thing about two mind after many viewings - I always find the way Michael finds out about Fredo to be very weak. Couldn't they have done it so he overheard less obviously - round a corner or something - than Fredo just blurting out "me and Johnny Ola" moments after he'd said he never met him?

I think the last time I started watching 3 I turned it off first time I heard Sofia Coppola say "Cuz"....even Eli Wallace has a stinker.

[simons123]

Funnily enough I to just watched The Godfathers last week after not watching them for nearly 10 years.

Godfather 1 is just a pure masterpiece. 10 out of 10.

Godfather 2 really wasn't as good as I first remembered. Really wasn't a fan of Micheal Corleone in it like the OP said. Zero charisma or warmth like his father. Also his world / crew seemed very very small. Hard to imagine him being one of the biggest gangsters in America. A solid 8.5 to 9 out of 10 but just not on par with the first movie.

[badgerade]

John D. said:

I watched them all for the first time a couple of weeks ago (I had seen bits of Part 1 before).

Part 1 is brilliant and by far the best.

Part 2 is good.

Part 3 is not good. I only sat through it because I'd just watched the other two.

I prefer 2 to 1 I think. Both are brilliant though.

3 I wish had never been made. Sofia Coppola is so bad it doesn't even seem real.

[Gary C]

Wife likes 2 for all the italian stuff as it reminds her of her family, but 1 is the masterpiece

[Legacywr]

I also can’t chose between 1 and 2, both superb films.

Part 3 is soooo bad!

Poor story, poor casting, and Pacino had become a caricature of himself.

[biggbn]

For me, 2 is the best and I wish they hadn't made 3 at all...

[Roofless Toothless]

Am I imagining this?

I recall seeing a recut version of the films where they do away with the flashbacks and tell the whole story in chronological order. There may have even been some deleted scenes thrown in as well.

[wolfracesonic]

Gary C said:

Wife likes 2 for all the italian stuff as it reminds her of her family, but 1 is the masterpiece

[John D.]

Roofless Toothless said:

Am I imagining this?

I recall seeing a recut version of the films where they do away with the flashbacks and tell the whole story in chronological order. There may have even been some deleted scenes thrown in as well.

I watched the recut version of Part 3 on Netflix I believe. Designed to make the story line less confusing I believe. Not sure it really worked! (I've never seen the original).

[Countdown]

Apologies for slight thread hijack

I never really understood he Frank Pentangeli storyline in GF2. It seemed clear to me that the assassination attempt on him supposedly ordered by Mike was really by Hyman Roth. Why did the two of them (FP and MC) not realise this?

[MCBrowncoat]

Countdown said:

Apologies for slight thread hijack

I never really understood he Frank Pentangeli storyline in GF2. It seemed clear to me that the assassination attempt on him supposedly ordered by Mike was really by Hyman Roth. Why did the two of them (FP and MC) not realise this?

I think this is somewhat covered by the line "Michael Corleone says hello", but also, he's not left with many places to go, if the Rosato brothers are gonna make an attempt on him, and Michael has already told him he doesn't want Roth harmed, then he's no longer getting protection from the Corleone's.


Edited to add: he says it himself earlier in the film: "The Rosato brothers, they're taking hostages... they spit right in my face" or something very close to that. What's he gonna do back on the street? (assuming he's been picked up by the FBI following the assassination attempt and persuaded to cooperate)

So, what difference does it make? Whether he realises it or not, that's likely not the point. Because he's effectively a dead man anyway

Edited by MCBrowncoat on Wednesday 22 October 09:46

Edited by MCBrowncoat on Wednesday 22 October 09:49

[PRO5T]

It's interesting that some comments about Michael echo my own thoughts as it happens. I think the character has the charisma it's just (and I understand this may be controversial) Pacino doesn't seem cast right as him. Or at least, he fits him in ep1 just not going forward.

He always has a feint whiff of those weedy lads who take over their old man's business and do alright but just don't have the minerals to quite do it justice. Maybe it's just Pacino's playing of him-he manages it as VH in Heat.

I dunno, I question his portrayal of leadership maybe? Sonny was well played, I sometimes think Robert Duvall would have been better as Michael and Pacino as his consigliere.

[Roofless Toothless]

I watched a Sky Arts documentary on The Godfather recently. It was Pacino's first big film and you have to remember he was more or less an unknown at the time, brought in by Coppola, who saw something in him.

The company executives were not impressed with what they saw of the rushes of the early parts of the film and were putting pressure on Coppola to replace him. The situation on set was getting awkward - people going silent when he walked in the room, not wanting to make eye contact, all that kind of stuff. The view was that Pacino was not coming over as a Mafia boss at all, and very weak.

Coppola took him aside to talk about the situation. Pacino said that he was looking at the big picture as far as the character was concerned. At the beginning of the story he was weak, and he only began to find his inner strength as it went on. Pacino was deliberately underplaying the role.

What Coppola did was to bring forward the shooting of the scene in the restaurant where Michael kills the crooked cop and the rival mobster with the hidden gun. As we all know, this was one of the most powerful moments in the whole epic. The rushes were sent to the executives, and nobody heard any more criticism from them.

[ralphrj]

Roofless Toothless said:

Am I imagining this?

I recall seeing a recut version of the films where they do away with the flashbacks and tell the whole story in chronological order. There may have even been some deleted scenes thrown in as well.

You aren't imagining it. The first 2 films were re-edited into chronological order in the late 1970s for TV broadcast as 'The Godfather Saga'. This was how I remember seeing it for the first time on TV in the 1980s. The TV version had some edits for censorship and several scenes of additional footage inserted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godfather_Saga

[soad]

Both good films, the second part is probably even better.

[Superbad]

Worth a watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iowLzO9-aew

[leef44]

MCBrowncoat said:

I find it difficult to pick between 1 and 2

It's probably: "whichever one I'm watching"

One thing about two mind after many viewings - I always find the way Michael finds out about Fredo to be very weak. Couldn't they have done it so he overheard less obviously - round a corner or something - than Fredo just blurting out "me and Johnny Ola" moments after he'd said he never met him?

I think the last time I started watching 3 I turned it off first time I heard Sofia Coppola say "Cuz"....even Eli Wallace has a stinker.

This was to emphasise how careless/wreckless Fredo was. He would get caught in the moment enjoying the entertainment, have one too many to drink and blurt out things. This was why he was an easy target for Johnny Ola to manipulate to get the inside information on Michael. This was why he was never even in the consideration for running the family and it had to go to Michael.

At the end, Fredo gets to explain his side to Michael, explaining how he was the older brother and wanted to make some enterprise for himself. He got so obsessed with this that he let Johnny Ola get the better of him.

[leef44]

Countdown said:

Apologies for slight thread hijack

I never really understood he Frank Pentangeli storyline in GF2. It seemed clear to me that the assassination attempt on him supposedly ordered by Mike was really by Hyman Roth. Why did the two of them (FP and MC) not realise this?

After the incident, Frank went to FBI custody. Michael had no way to communicate with him so Frank had always thought it was Michael who ordered it to teach him a lesson for the outburst against Michael who would not order the hit on the Rossato brothers.

Nothing gets mentioned about this until Michael holds back from handing over the $2million project contribution to Roth. Roth asks where is the money. Michael asked who ordered the hit on Frank because it wasn't him.

In a round about way, Roth says Michael had ordered the kill on Mo Greene who was so well respected and given Roth did not seek retribution, Michael should let this one go and get on with the business deal.