kosmasp

17 June 2013

Back and forth

Not only the arguments if this one is better than the first Godfather(Godfather II has been used by many as an example that sequels can bebetter than the original movie), but also the time line of the movie.So while this is the first movie that includes Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro in one movie, the time line constraints did not allow for them tobe in the same scene (wouldn't make any sense, you'll understand whenand if you have watched the movie). Also De Niro won an Oscar (funnyfact, for the same role/character Marlon Brando won one in the firstGodfather, must be a first and I don't know if it happened again, doubtit though) while Al Pacino didn't. And while it may seem unfair toPacino, it was more than well deserved for De Niro, who really mergedhimself into the character that Brando created. From the way he talked,to gestures to mannerisms. Everything is there!But the movie won a few Oscars and the acting was really good too. Thestory continues (though gives us a few flashbacks) from the ending ofpart 1. So while the first one is conclusive and has a satisfyingending itself, the story could be continued. Especially with theoriginal author on board (Mr. Puzzi). There are new themes introducedin this movie. One big one is loneliness. And it's not only about beingalone when you have power or being the Godfather. As with the firstmovie this explores quite a lot of things in Gang related familyliving.A great movie that was even longer than the first one (and the sequelthat came after it). But you probably won't mind the length. Especiallyif you buy into the drama, that really works. And even without itstating the time jumps/leaps it makes, you'll get the (time) change onyour own. A great sequel to a great movie

16 June 2013

rented for a flight

This review is from: The Godfather Part II (Amazon Instant Video) great movie and the quality seemed good enough on my kindle. wish the rentals were for a longer period of time though.

ElMaruecan82

16 June 2013

Shakespeare meets Machiavelli in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Mary ...

"Every man has but one destiny", this is from "The Godfather" novel andno other quotes best summarizes the second opus of the Corleone's epicsaga. Through a masterstroke of directing, Francis Ford Coppolaapproached this time the gangster world with a Shakespearian eye,drawing the parallel between Vito's ascension and Michael's descent tohell: a tragedy full of irony … Vito Corleone, beautifully portrayed by Robert De Niro, came to NewYork after his family's been killed by a ruthless Sicilian Mafia Don.He was just a simple emigrant, about to elevate the American Dream tothe extreme. It was all a matter of destiny, whose tool was a thugnamed Fanucci. Vito used early what would become his most redoubtableweapons: calm and reason. He reacted to Fanucci's threats by politelyreplying he had to talk with his associates: Clemenza and Tessio. Thetwo future capos accepted to pay but Vito thought differently andintuitively felt that he could go far away with that secret ability tosee through things. He discovered his own instinctive intelligence andused it to test and eliminate Fanucci as he became a potential threatto the new path he chose for his life.Vito Corleone's biggest achievement in his ascension was to becomerespected as a man of morality, duty and principles, loved as a fatherand a friend, and feared as a Don who never spared the enemy, not inNY, not in Sicily where he avenged his family. He was so bloodilySicilian he recreated the traditional order dictating to the weak torespect the strong in exchange of protection. Vito was the strong asthe one who pulled the strings. In his logic, he's not morally wrong;the Law is and doesn't apply to him, Vito's law were Family and bloodloyalty. No matter what you lose, you can never lose your family andyour family can't stop being loyal because its survival depends on thisloyalty. These beliefs were Vito's heritage, "Pop talking", Sonny saysto Michael "Your country ain't your blood" in the nostalgic birthdayscene, a reminiscence of Michael's innocence and reluctance to becomelike his father, as to accentuate the irony of his destiny: Michaelkilled many persons present in that scene and became a feared andrespected Don, but not as loved as his father.Michael, Al Pacino's greatest performance, was a feared Don, whoseexpansion in Hotels and Casinos business faced the adversity of apowerful Jewish boss, Hyman Roth who acted as an associate and fatherlyfigure about to build with him an empire "bigger than U.S. Steel", tomake him lower his guard. Michael's assassination attempts "in hishouse!" proved Roth's real objectives, and indicated the presence of anaccomplice within the family. This was the first step in Michael'sdescent to paranoia and only the "keeping friends close and enemiescloser" tactic (inherited from Vito) revealed the traitor. Michael hasbeen betrayed by his own blood, Fredo, and his devastation is clearlypalpable during the 'Superman' scene. Fredo Corleone, played by aheart-breaking John Cazale, wasn't just the brother but was also theweak to protect. Michael acted with him as a brother and a Donprotecting him from his softness and manipulability. But protecting theweak implied a respect from this person and Fredo showed no respect, hedidn't follow Michael's advice "not to take sides with anyone againstthe Family" and finally betrayed him because he felt being "steppedover". Fredo's betrayal turned Michael's destiny into a real tragedy,breaking not just his heart but all his beliefs.When Mama Corleone said "But you can never lose your family" This isVito talking, "Times change", replies Michael, skeptical. If his ownbrother betrayed him, then there were no blood, no Family, noprinciples to believe in anymore. At that point, he became a ruthlessDon. Kay's abortion was the 'deathblow' that made him turn into anauthoritarian paranoid, almost 'zombie-like' figure. Michael believedin nothing anymore, he did everything to protect his Family, right orwrong, and as a reward, everyone was stabbing him in the back. Afterthat, his children was his only family and the only palpable thingremaining was 'business', even the loyal, Tom Hagen, Robert Duvall, wastreated suspiciously. Michael's power was the only valuable thing hehad to keep intact, at least for his children's future. That's why hecouldn't afford any sign of weakness, even if it implied killing hisown brother. This is what "wiping out the enemies" was about.Why sparing the life of Fredo who showed no sign of remorse, even afterthe incident? Isn't a brother who commits such an act symbolicallybanishing himself from the Family anyway? Besides, after Fredo'sviolent outburst in the Lake Tahoe scene, Michael didn't consider himas a brother anymore. Technically, he didn't kill Fredo, he killed anenemy. Why should he feel guilty? It was definitely business in theMachiavelian meaning of the word, because Michael had more 'personal'reasons to spare Fredo (Connie's attempt to reconcile the brothers,Fredo's developing relationship with Anthony ...) but he was soheartless he couldn't believe in anything positively personal. He wasdoomed and so was Fredo. And Fredo still being the son of his mother,Michael waited until Mama's death so the last sacred link between Fredoand him would have definitely vanished.The 'Holy Mary' signed the death of both Fredo and Michael's soul, withthis cruel act, Vito's heritage was destroyed. This is the ironictragedy of a man who did everything to protect his family to ultimatelylose it. And maybe Michael meditates about this loss in the lasthaunting, contemplating shot of the film …

rossrjensen

15 June 2013

One of the greatest films of all time

I can think of a few "sequels" that can be considered great films. Twowhich I can think of are Aliens and Terminator 2...but I still liked theoriginal to those films more. I can remember watching the Godfather for the first time. I was young, andalthough I liked it, it would be years until I really came to realize justhow great it is. After actually seeing the Godfather II, I was amazed. Anincessant battle ensued inside my soul which continues to rage today, overwhich is the better movie...and I have to say I generally lean towards theGodfather II. It is the only sequel to win an academy award for bestpicture, and rightfully so. Many consider the Godfather to be the greatestfilm of all time, and it's sequel is just as, if not better than itspredecessor.This film could've been broken into two movies, as a prequel to theGodfather, and as a sequel...my favorite aspect of the movie is when itshows how "the Godfather", portrayed by Robert De Niro came to be sopowerful.

14 June 2013

correction part II

i would like to correct myself again. i once said that the the lord of the rings: the return of the king was right after raiders of the lost ark. that was before i saw the godfather movies. when i saw the godfather i put it ahead of raiders of the lost ark on my list of fav movies, and then i saw part II and i put it right behind raiders of the lost ark. this is my third favorite trilogy of all time behind lord of the rings and star wars. its because the story is so interesting and the acting is so good and also the directing is superb and the visuals are amazing. the first one is a little bit better but this one is still very good, the last one isnt as good as the first two but i still recommened it. i guess what im trying to say is... PLEASE GO SEE THESE MOVIES! thank you for your time.

OllieZ

14 June 2013

A great sequel and enduring vision of corruption and family.

Without a doubt, Coppola made four of the best films of the 70's. TheGodfaher Part 1, Part 2, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now. Out ofthese, The Godfather Part 2 remains my favourite.It continues the Corleone family tale, of greed and corruption and yetPart 2 adds another vein to the bloodstream of this biblical tale; thestory of Vito Corleone and his arrival in New York. Thecinematographer, Gordon Willis creates a sepia-washed dream of a NewYork. Every shot is sumptuous ad full of depth - the production valuewas a help too, with some of the most authentic streets scenes evercommitted to film.Though, as wonderful as the film looks, the acting is stellar to. DeNiro completely transforms himself from the urban maniacs like Johnnyfrom Mean Streets and Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver, to form VitoCorleone, the younger Marlon Brando. De Niro doesn't over cook thecharacter, instead he simmers; his eyes tell two tales, one of beingcontent, the other of contempt, for the killing of his family.De Niro is backed up by great co-stars, such as Bruno Kirby who playedthe young Clemenza. The story itself in this section of the film isslow burning, much like the rest of the film, yet is here to serve acontrast to the story of Michael Corleone in Nevada.This is the part in the trilogy where Michael transforms from the"college boy" and "war hero" of part 1, into the heartless, mutedconfusion that he embodies here. Pacino plays the part with ease andnever goes wild and shout, much like his later work (Glengarry GlenRoss, Godfather Part 3...). Keaton is superb as the WASP wife, Kay, whotries to break free of the corruption she has married into. Cazale, whoplays Fredo is wonderful too, a helpless, jealous character, who formsone of the best brother characters in film history. The co-stars arealso great, with Strasberg as Hyman Roth.Just as Michael's family is dissolving, Vito's is just beginning. Thetwo fragments of the Corleone history run side by side to depict thedownfall of Michael's character. Constantly trying to please his deadfather, Michael talks of family, but doesn't understand how to sustainit.A classic.

jamesbutterford

13 June 2013

As Good as Movies Get

This is an excellent film. That's all there is to it. Personally, Ithink it's more than a little better than the first movie (excellentfilm also). In the DVD commentary, Coppola himself says that this is atleast as good as the first film and that this is where he wanted to endthings. The acting here is phenomenal from every character and I thinkthe best performance is perhaps from the actor of Don Fanucci. You justdon't see movies like this made anymore. I think the reason I preferthis over the first has a lot to do with the pacing. This movie is alittle more fun and the flashback/forward structure always keeps thingsmoving, as well as providing a beautiful contrast between the twogenerations of dons. By the way, don't let anybody tell you the storieshave nothing to do with each other. Its structure is what really makesthis a memorable movie, and it actually works without being tacky,unlike Once Upon a Time in America.

nchuh2-1

13 June 2013

Michaels soul

The Godfather Part II needs a few viewings in order for one to trulygrasp the emotional scope of the movie. On the surface it can beclassified as a movie about betrayal and revenge. But it's much morethan that. The arc that Michael Corleone goes through is the aspectthat packs the emotional punch of the movie. What makes this movie sogreat is that he tries so hard to protect his family and keep themsafe, but in the end, he ends up losing those he loves the most. Hefails to realize at what cost he sold his soul. The ends don't alwaysjustify the means. I must say it took me a few viewings to understand this all, but it wasdefinitely worth it. As bad as he gets, you still feel sorry for himbecause you understand why he makes certain decisions. Watching theyounger Vito grow into the great mafia don is also a great part of themovie. De Niro's ability to use body movements, facial tics, andexpressions is what made his portrayal of Vito one for the ages. Pleasesee the movie if you haven't yet. There's a reason it's been rated as atop-notch movie for the past 37+ years.

10 June 2013

A Sequel That Will Break Your Heart

Despite its status as arguably the best movie sequel of all time, "The Godfather: Part II" is in some ways quite formulaic. Following a rigid template he set up in "The Godfather: Part I", Francis Ford Coppola has once again fashioned a story that begins with a festival, features a failed attempt on the Don's life, and offers as a turning point the murder of an untouchable power figure. It repeats successful motifs, and, while being less easily quotable, is composed of a very specific kind of language that lets you know the world into which you've entered.The biggest difference, though, is the inclusion of flashbacks to Vito Corleone's early life. These scenes, taken from Mario Puzo's original novel, let Coppola indulge an idea he had for another movie, to tell parallel stories of a father and a son at the same age. Far from an indulgence, though, these scenes do wonders in terms of fleshing out the history of the Corleone family. It drapes a more tragic pall over the story, for it becomes clear that Michael Corleone's fate, one that robs him of his soul and leaves him alone and heartbroken, could not have been avoided.Robert De Niro plays young Vito. When his job at a local grocery is given to the nephew of the neighbourhood boss, one Don Fanucci, Vito must turn to crime to support his family. The scenes with Fanucci, played with broad flair by Gastone Moschin, are impressive. For despite the power and style and fear embodied by the older man, Vito always looks to be in control. Much of the credit should go to De Niro, who was at the time shifting his career into a higher gear that would eventually lead him to Travis Bickle. He is at his best here when the scene calls for silence, displaying a whimsical grace that hides his violent nature. When he opens his mouth to speak it sounds an awful lot like the kind of Marlon-Brando-as-The-Godfather impression you've heard a million times.If the flashback scenes didn't mesh perfectly with the contemporary scenes, Coppola's little gimmick would seem redundant. Using a variety of devices, the past and the present mesh perfectly into one movie.The other half of the movie, set in the late-1950s and early-1960s, is epic in scope where the first half was small and personal. Despite the globetrotting antics of the story, it's still a tale of one individual's road to perdition.Without his father and brother around to steal the spotlight, Michael Corleone firmly establishes himself as the key piece of "The Godfather" puzzle. Gone, however, is the innocent Joe College of the first film, replaced by a detached and Machiavellian man. He's reached the top of the mountain, only to find it a place cold enough to freeze your heart, and lonely enough that you must look inward for solace. It is the internal nature of Michael's character that defines how this story will be told. Many of the killings are hidden, obstructed. "Part I" featured elaborate homicidal set-pieces, each culminating in a charismatic and compelling murder. "Part II" does no such thing. Instead of allowing us to see the bullet enter the eye, or the piano wire go around the neck, we get one murder partially hidden by wind-blown drapery, an attempted smothering that takes place behind closed doors, a suicide shown only in aftermath tableau, and finally a judicious edit, cutting away from the horrible act, to reveal who is really being destroyed by the final killing. Coppola, whose desire to make a personal film is more evident here than in "Part I" (which is, in comparison, almost a popcorn gobbling blockbuster), exhibits artful taste in the way he tells the story.A story, which rides on the shoulders of Al Pacino. His portrayal of Michael Corleone, to me, is his best work. It is the template for every great performance he will give in its wake: quiet, brooding, and all the while repressing the vaunted Pacino rage. The Michael Corleone of "Part II" is a more mysterious man, a less joyous man, and a more vengeful man.Despite Michael's (and Al's) ascension to prominence, I always find Fredo to be a more intriguing character. Relegated to a few undignified scenes in "Part I", Fredo doesn't come off much better here. He's still the simplest of the Corleone boys, a condition now explained by a childhood sickness in the flashback scenes. But despite his deficiencies it is Fredo, knowingly or otherwise, who comes closest to taking The Godfather down. John Cazale, who played Fredo, does a remarkable job portraying the man's joie de vivre, his melancholy, and his self-awareness. In Cazale's hands Fredo knows that he will never reach the heights of his brothers, a fact that more or less defines his existence. "You're my kid brother," he incredulously tells Michael, "and you take care of me?"A couple of newcomers are added to the mix, livening up an already tasty stew. Michael V. Gazzo, as underboss Frankie Pentangeli, brings a welcome dose of humour and brashness to the proceedings. His distinctive voice and broad gesticulations make him a wonderful character to watch. The other newcomer who makes his mark is legendary acting teacher Lee Strasberg, who plays Hyman Roth. Sickly and old, Strasberg still manages to imbue Roth with a sense of the man's former vitality, and his current bulldogedness. Strasberg never makes bold choices (as opposed to Gazzo, who is all bold choices), but his quiet tenacity is a perfect match for the same quality Pacino brings to Michael.At well over 3 hours long, "The Godfather: Part II" would be a torturous chore if it weren't such a fully-packed delight. Every scene is relevant to the plot, suspenseful, and wonderfully artistic. Coppola had an arduous task in trying to top the first "Godfather". While less overtly crowd-pleasing and propulsive, I'd say he pulled it off just fine.

09 June 2013

FAR BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL

I didnt like the original that much but I loved this one. It is the best sequal of all time, and it is also the only sequal that I liked better than the original.

boutb006

07 June 2013

Not being mean here but of the worst films I have ever scene.

About six months ago I watched the Godfather Part I and to tell you thetruth I thoroughly enjoyed, It had good cast, good story but still notworth number two on IMDb's top 250 and technically every top 100 filmlist on the web but still I must give it some credit. However today15.7.12 I layed my eyes upon the masterpiece of terrible films I meanit truly is shockingly boring. I kept waiting for something to happenand nothing ever did. Robert De Niro's role: My second favourite actor of all time after JackNicholson who does proud in practically ever film I've seen with DeNiro in until today. I mean what in Gods holy name did he win an Oscarfor this pile of **beep** he wasn't even in half the film. Thoroughlydisappointed, no wonder he didn't appear at the Academy Awards becausehe probably thought what the hell I am I doing winning an Oscar for theworlds most boring films ever. He probably felt embarrassed. How people and watch that film and actually enjoy it is beyond me. Idon't think I am exaggerating either to be completely honest I onlywatched the film to the end to see if Michael Corleone died to boy washe getting on my nerves. I sorry if I have offended anyones opinion but if you want to sit andenjoy a film watch Pulp Fiction which by the way on paper if one worsethat The Godfather Part II.

Cocacolaguy912-2

07 June 2013

A masterpiece is every way.

The Godfather: Part II is my favorite movie, in addition to being, inmy opinion, the greatest movie ever, even a bit better than The firstGodfather. Every single imaginable element of a film is displayed atits absolute finest.Perhaps my very favorite thing about this movie is the incredible,incredible performance by Al Pacino. Marlon Brando was excellent, butunlike Brando's, Al Pacino's character was far more complicated. Hecouldn't just say, "I am going to make him an offer he can't refuse" ina slick Italian voice and accomplish the role. He so masterfully andingeniously displayed the coldness of his character. He can say so muchwithout opening his mouth. His stare, his movement, his subtly,everything is just incredible. The supporting cast is very good aswell, perhaps the worst performance being that of Talia Shire, who isstill alright.The two storyline thing is fine. It worked, and it worked well. We getenough of the early life of Vito Corleone story to know how iteventually gave rise to the plot of the first Godfather. In the endeverything seems to make since.The Godfather: Part II is an epic masterpiece.10/10, minor flaws.

noorur

05 June 2013

The only sequel that surpasses the original

This film is one of the best films I have ever been, with the bestactors ever cast; from Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton to ROBERTDE NIRO! Both megastars, Pacino and DeNiro do not out do each other,and play their roles really well, as their Oscar nominations reflectthis, with DeNiro actually winning one! Deniro played young VitoCorleone, and the film showed how the Vito Corleone became so powerful,from a peasant in Sicily to a big-time Godfather! Deniro's part was aprequel to the original film. From my point of view, Rober De Nirowasn't trying to play as young Vito Corleone, but tried to play asyoung Marlon Brando (RIP). He played it so well, that the Deniro sceneswere more enjoyable to watch than Pacino's scenes. The directing wasgreat in this film, and how the camera angles taken, the lightening,and how well the movie flowed.This film is probably the best film of the 19th century, with the bestactors, the best directing and a great storyline. This is easily aMUST-SEE!!

nama chakravorty

05 June 2013

Astonishing!

'The Godfather' is amongst the Greatest Films of Cinema. It left anhaunting impact on it's viewers. It's my favorite film from the 70's. It's sequel, 'The Godfather: Part II', is Astonishing work, as well.Francis Ford Coppola's Screenplay & Direction, both, are Godly, whilethe Performances, are Remarkable. It's a film, where everything seemsright, there is absolutely nothing wrong about this film. A FlawlessMotion-Picture, that is the Greatest Sequel, it's mighty Prequelcould've asked for. 'The Godfather: Part II' Synopsis: The early life and career of VitoCorleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expandsand tightens his grip on his crime syndicate stretching from LakeTahoe, Nevada to pre-revolution 1958 Cuba.'The Godfather: Part II' begins remarkably & culminates, astoundingly.As mentioned, there is absolutely nothing wrong about this film, it'sflawless work. Coppola's Screenplay & Direction, both, are truly Godly. Coppola has amade film, that can never be forgotten. Like it's prequel, it's a film,that will always enjoy a strong fan-base among film-buffs worldwide.Cinematography is picture-perfect. Editing & Art Design, are well-done.Performance-Wise: Al Pacino is simply INCREDIBLE as Michael Corleone.Pacino, truly, is the Epitome of "FINE" Acting. Robert De Niro, on theother-hand as the young Vito Corleone, is hugely impressive. RobertDuvall is outstanding, yet again. Diane Keaton is believable. JohnCazale is fabulous & stands out in many scenes. Lee Strasberg leaves astrong impact. Gastone Moschin, Dominic Chianese & Michael V. Gazzo aregood, as well. Others lend very good support. On the whole, 'The Godfather: Part II' is a film that makes CinemaProud. An Unbeatable & Unforgettable Film.

28 May 2013

Boring

I found myself falling asleep watching this movie. I don't know why anyone would think this movie is the best sequal of all time. it was too boring, although the actors were preety good.

Ian

28 May 2013

This is a perfect version of the oringinal.

I wrote a comment on this movie back in '99 (as oddjob-6) which I stillstand by, but now I see why. Pacino's acting in GF I was overshadowed bythe little production and directorial flaws that weren't apparent in GFII.Pacino in GF I changed from a naive happy (in love) character into aruthless killer. For that alone he deserved best supporting actor for theOscar. He also deserved best actor in GF II (He was so good in II), buthisbest transformation will always be the first movie. For these two moviesalone, Pacino should now have three Oscars (including his '92 film 'Scentofa Woman'). Now that gold statues really matter, movie buffs know thisalready.

Shea

27 May 2013

hello Veto, and you as well Michael

Now here is a sequel worth the making and time. The begining is given to us on a silver platter. There is nothing like a comparison of Michael's reign compared to his fathers reign. True, Puzo knew that his fans would not have a good time continuing on without the main character and the trademark. However, we are given a look at how Veto came to power and as well as Michael running the business.

27 May 2013

A must-watch and must-own

I've seen the Godfather trilogy many times over the years, and I watched it fresh in order to write this review. When so many sequels fall flat, The Godfather part 2 does a great job of holding steady with the high bar set by the first. The first movie gave us the here-and-now, the strength of the family. This second one gives us both the future and the past. We see how Don Corleone started from a young, honorable family man to building up his reputation and community care. We also see how his son, Michael, watches his family unravel around him.There are so many great actors here, so many great scenes and lines. The looks, the touches, are just amazing. It shows how amazing a movie can be when everything comes together just right. You get a powerful glimpse into issues of racism, both back when Don Corleone is living in the run-down streets of his young adulthood, and also when Michael deals with the modern power structure.I love the scenes in Italy, with their strong sense of life there. I love the scenes in old New York, where you see how the Italian immigrants band together (and sometimes tear each other apart). I love the delicate interplay of family members, their long term issues bubbling to the surface.One reason I rewatched this was to see if this passed the Bechdel Test. Sure, it's #21 on the AFI list, but does it have two named female characters who talk with each other about something other than men? It seemed a simple enough task for this epic film. After all we have the mom, we have Michael's wife, and his sister just to start. But ironically it does in fact seem that the few times the women talk it's about Michael. Connie pleads with her mom to let her talk to Michael. Connie pleads with Kay to leave before Michael gets home. There is a scene where Don Corleone's wife brings in a neighbor to plead for help. Even there, they don't really talk with each other. So despite there being some stellar actresses here, their main role is to be a part in a male dominated scene. Still, a minor complaint about an exceptional movie. Highly recommended, and well worth watching numerous times to pick up on the myriad of subtle details which fill the story.

illbebackreviews

26 May 2013

Masterful in every possible way but is it the greatest sequel of all time?

Two years after the masterpiece that is The Godfather, Francis FordCoppola decided it was time to direct and release Part II of what wouldbecome a trilogy. A movie like this is extremely difficult to reviewand to have expectations for, especially when it is considered by mostto be much better than the original and perhaps the greatest sequelever made. However, is this an over statement or not? Quite simplysaid, yes and no! Much like The Godfather, everything works amazinglyin this film. In my opinion, it isn't the greatest sequel ever made, tothat I say The Empire Strikes Back and I much prefer the original overit but that is by no means a way to say I dislike this film in theslightest. I love this film and that's certain and much like TheGodfather, it took two viewings before I truly loved it.*Spoilers contained throughout this review* It has been a few yearssince the death of Don Vito Corleone and Michael has now become thehead of the Corleone Crime family as his business stretches throughNevada. An assassination attempt on his life leads him through a warwith Hyman Roth whilst the story of a young Vito Corleone, the to beDon of the family, is portrayed marvellously by an inexperienced actorat the time, Robert De Niro in an Oscar winning performance The majorissue I had with this film when its considered to be better than theoriginal is how the absence of Marlon Brando's Vito Corleone reallyleaves a big and unfinished hole. That was my issue the first time asthe word 'godfather' only brings one image into my mind. Not De Niro'sVito but Brando's. Despite amazing and legendary performances by AlPacino and Robert de Niro, the absence of Marlon Brando still leaves animpact. Luckily this absence doesn't prove too costly for me this timearound and most of it is well covered by the two.The strength to the film is a tough one to pick but the acting stillstands out. Apart from the acting, the storyline is extremely strongand powerful thanks to amazing De Niro and Al Pacino performances. Eventhat being said, the film is by no means more iconic or memorable thanthe first but a perfect continuation to what I believe, the greatestfilm of all time! The characters in this film are fantastic from ayoung Vito and his friends to Hyman Roth, Johnny Ola and various othercharacters such as Frank Pentanjali. Despite not having characters asmemorable as Luca Brasi and Sonny and an older Vito, The Godfather PartII is extremely strong in terms of good characters and a fantastic andyet again, an immersive story.Despite containing only a few words of English, my favourite proportionof the film would have to be the story of Vito Corleone as it providesall necessary background story perfectly. Contributing to a roughestimation of one third of the film's story, this is the stronger partof the film and thus, the more interesting part of it too! Words fromDe Niro such as 'I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse!' may notbe anywhere near as powerful coming from an inexperienced actor at thetime but is nevertheless amazing. One of my favourite lines from DeNiro would have to be when he talks to a young Michael stating that heloves him! This falls perfectly back in place with everything Vitostood for in the original film when he stated that he never wantedMichael mixed up in the family business. Vito Corleone was a flawlesscharacter in Part I but Part II improves upon everything about hischaracter, giving him necessary backstory that ultimately workssuperbly in such a film.The iconic soundtrack is yet again, amazing! The first few moments ofthe film when the soundtrack begins and the title fades in with abeautifully filmed shot of Michael Corleone as the Don was utterlyamazing! That has to be my favourite film introduction moment alongsideThe Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. The soundtrack ispowerful and moving from moments where Michael displays his love forhis son to moments such as a young Vito talking to his son. Thesoundtrack perfectly adds the necessary amount of emotion to each scenewithout ever attempting to out do itself. Such perfected soundtrackworks extremely powerfully in this film.

26 May 2013

That One Sequel

The Godfather Part 2 is the only triumphant sequel. This one was just as enjoyable as the first. Apparently I'm not the only one that feels this way, because this is the only sequel to win the best picture acadamey award.