Discuss The Godfather Part II
Discuss → Movies → The Godfather Part II → General
How is Godfather 2 better than the Original first one?
posted by MrCharmingManSTAFFMOD on November 24, 2018 at 4:36 PM
How is Godfather 2 better than the original Godfather?
I remember most publications seem to praise Godfather 2 as superior to Godfather 1 but I just saw it again on AMC the other night and NO WAY!
Godfather is a perfect movie where as Godfather 2 seems inferior on almost every level of story, acting, action continuity and it goes from one era back to Vito's prime young years with Robert Deniro and then back to current Michael's era out of no where with no logic or transition. Like not even a bad Waynes World flash back transition?
The action scenes looked boring and dull too. Michael gets his bedroom windows shot out and so he crawls low to the ground. Some cop chases Michaels goons into the street after trying to strangle whats his name and they end up all shooting it out in a very unrealistic sloppy gun fight that lasts only for like 4 seconds long.
Then some rebel like pulls a suicide bomber move in Cuba while Michael is waiting his turn to pass them on the street. Like these were all the action scenes in a almost 4 hour movie?
Very dull!
Oh and I can't forget Robert Deniro as Vito following the other Don home to his apartment where he fools with the hallway light to trick the Don. The Don instead of going straight in to his apartment says hmm let me play with this light so it turns back on and he gets it to turn back on and then walks into his apartment and then turns around and says to Vito hey what do you have there? But its pretty damn clear Vito is holding a damn gun wrapped up in his hands lol.
Is the Don that stupid? Also wasn't the Don pretty damn gay and flamboyant. With his gay eyes and facial expressions and mannerisms?
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on October 22, 2020 at 8:24 AM
Someone, maybe Coppola himself, has said that The Godfather saga is as much about the American dream as it is about mobsters. I understand where that is coming from. Michael in particular is cast as the son who wants to do it conventionally. College, enlisting, and so on. Sonny was the successor, and as the third and most loved son, Michael was not only allowed but encouraged to go straight. His choice, at least in America, to marry 'out', is a clever piece of writing because it deepens the sense of Michael being 'pulled back in' as the saga progresses. It also allows for a fair amount of exposition as Michael reveals to Kay, and hence to us, how things work. Incidental to that is how he is prepared to flat out lie to Kay to protect the family. So the character of Kay is important I think.
I also understand why Keaton would have been cast. She was near enough America's sweetheart at the time and she projects a sense of naivety. But she is way out of her depth acting wise surrounded by the actors she is. I know she has an Oscar to her name, but that was as a light comedic actor. The character should have been left blank and passive, in the way Mama Corleone was. (Particularly given that the Vito and Michael stories are supposed to parallel each other.) The idea to make her want to lash out at Michael, particularly in that abortion scene, apparently was an addition suggested by Talia Shire. The result is jarring and out of place because that is exactly what it is: a scene that doesn't belong, performed by an actor who is not up to the task.
I agree with all your other points.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on October 22, 2020 at 2:44 PM
I always skip thru love scenes in movies unless there is some important dialogue or plot point involved- tho nothing springs to mind that fulfilled that. I have never understood the point of it. Sure, I like to look at naked women, but not in the middle of a story. I like a good cigar too, just not between sets of tennis. Same thing in my mind.
Reply by Strange Bedfellows
on October 22, 2020 at 4:21 PM
JacintoCupboard.
Well put - I am in total agreeance with that. Talia Shire should have minded her own business.
For the reasons you give - yes - that makes sense - I guess I am biased because I don't like Diane Keaton!!
Another thing - in Godfather lll - I didn't buy the about face of the rebellious Connie - from globe trekking good timer to obedient and submissive sister in one fell swoop? Nah.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on October 22, 2020 at 7:35 PM
To be fair, 20 or so years have passed. And yeah, I realise the chronology of The Godfather trilogy is all over the map. But I think she is supposed to be a woman approaching her 60s. If anything, I would lean to her character in II being not well thought out, and III going some way to bringing it back. Not that III is a good movie.
Reply by Elrik83
on October 12, 2022 at 8:01 PM
For me the first one is a 11/10
Second, a solid 9,5/10