PDA

View Full Version : Why is the Godfather Part II considered better than Godfather I?


Funko
09-11-2005, 13:37:06
You know the classic answer to the "name a sequel better than the original film" question.

I don't get it.

I was talking to my brother about this the other day and then subsequently with K_G.


I don't want to predjudice your replies with why I think Godfather I is better (of two great films) so I won't until a bit later.

Or do people here generally agree with me?

Venom
09-11-2005, 13:43:12
I think they're both pretty even. Godfather 1 gets extra points for being the OG, but I do think Godfather 2 is slighty deeper and more moving.

Now the real reason most people think it's better is because it has Deniro speaking in Italian.

maroule
09-11-2005, 17:01:37
because everybody was just plain amazed a sequel wasn't about ripping off/dumbing down the receipe for success established by the 1st, but actuallly building up the story and the characters

Chris
09-11-2005, 18:04:59
Never go against the family Funko.

Scabrous Birdseed
09-11-2005, 19:20:06
I think art-film buffs like it for its structure. They're suckers for the "skip and jump around time like Citizen Kane" way of doing things and dislike straightforwardly told, rounded epics. The Godfather is built up like a shakesperean play, with an introduction act, a things-are-set-in-motion second act, a climax in the third act (the restaurant scene), a slow fourth act and final inevitable fate in the fifth... It's way too classic for their liking.

Lazarus and the Gimp
09-11-2005, 19:56:04
Easy. Marlon Brando isn't in it.

Lazarus and the Gimp
09-11-2005, 19:56:46
I haven't seen any of the Godfather films.

King_Ghidra
10-11-2005, 09:14:37
you're missing out, laz

Funko
10-11-2005, 09:17:10
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
I think art-film buffs like it for its structure. They're suckers for the "skip and jump around time like Citizen Kane" way of doing things and dislike straightforwardly told, rounded epics. The Godfather is built up like a shakesperean play, with an introduction act, a things-are-set-in-motion second act, a climax in the third act (the restaurant scene), a slow fourth act and final inevitable fate in the fifth... It's way too classic for their liking.

Yeah... that makes a lot of sense.

Resource Consumer
10-11-2005, 16:07:36
I think the best one is the repackaged version - where they put the start of Godfa 2 at the beginning of Godfa 1. Makes a lot more sense to a linear thinker like me.

MattHiggs
10-11-2005, 16:14:12
I've not seen any of the Godfather trilogy either. I feel uncultured :(

King_Ghidra
10-11-2005, 16:58:37
forget culture, they're just great films, but they're cheap as chips on amazon, so go pick em up

i've not seen part 3 though, so can't comment on that

Resource Consumer
10-11-2005, 16:58:56
The location says it all ;)

King_Ghidra
10-11-2005, 17:03:33
:lol:

Funko
10-11-2005, 17:12:31
Part 3 is wank.

The Norks
11-11-2005, 18:53:03
I haven't seen them, I can't stand all that mafia stuff. Except Mickey Blue Eyes- 'forgeeedddd abowwd iddd'!! Now that's a classic :lol: :nervous:

Fergus & The Brazen Car
12-11-2005, 09:54:14
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
I think art-film buffs like it for its structure. They're suckers for the "skip and jump around time like Citizen Kane" way of doing things and dislike straightforwardly told, rounded epics. The Godfather is built up like a shakesperean play, with an introduction act, a things-are-set-in-motion second act, a climax in the third act (the restaurant scene), a slow fourth act and final inevitable fate in the fifth... It's way too classic for their liking.

Uhh... are you seriously suggesting that the structure of 'The Godfather II' is meant to be complex in a kind of Resnais/Godard/Antonioni way ?

'Cos if'n you is, you's sho' nuff wrong.


I suspect that as Laz. suggests, the sight of a gargantuan ham chewing cotton balls and speaking through what appears to be a combination of cleft palate and underbite may have more to do with people preferring part II to part I.

Scabrous Birdseed
12-11-2005, 10:02:02
Originally posted by Fergus & The Brazen Car
complex in a kind of Resnais/Godard/Antonioni way

I think the word you're looking for there is "random and largely nonsensical".

No, I mean complex as in not straightforwardly told, limited in time and linear, more Raging Bull than Pierrot Le Fou. Traditional hollywood films work along the lines of One-thing-happens-then-another (see entire filmed output of Hitchcock, for example), and The Godfather is a bit like that while Pt. 2 is all about single scenes representing key events throughout two longer periods, or whatever.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
12-11-2005, 11:01:03
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
I think the word you're looking for there is "random and largely nonsensical".




I think you'll find that's a phrase, not a word, O luscious lingonberry. ;)


The structure of 'Godfather II' is quite simple: a 1950s section, a turn of the century section, a 1950s section, a turn of the century section.

Not complex at all, but one does get the idea that the past predicts (and comments upon) the present, which is I one of the film's key points.

KrazyHorse@home
12-11-2005, 11:10:14
Originally posted by Venom
Now the real reason most people think it's better is because it has Deniro

:beer:

KrazyHorse@home
12-11-2005, 11:11:46
nm

Funko
14-11-2005, 10:25:23
Originally posted by The Norks
I haven't seen them, I can't stand all that mafia stuff. Except Mickey Blue Eyes- 'forgeeedddd abowwd iddd'!! Now that's a classic :lol: :nervous:

Funnily enough, the whole reason this discussion started was because a girl said that to me and Peter and we were trying to explain it wasn't just "a gangster movie" it was much more than that.

The Norks
15-11-2005, 19:40:02
Everyone tells me that but the mafia element in itself is enough to put me off- add moody lighting and fat croaky bloater Brando and you have a losing combination. I did see Carlito's Way recently though and I liked that.

Scabrous Birdseed
15-11-2005, 19:55:27
The "Mafia" bit is basically just to create a world with more drama, bloodshed and power struggles in it - five hundred years ago it would have been "kingdom".

King_Ghidra
16-11-2005, 08:56:44
Originally posted by The Norks
I did see Carlito's Way recently though and I liked that.

then never mention this mafia bollocks thing again and just go and watch godfather

Funko
16-11-2005, 09:22:12
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
The "Mafia" bit is basically just to create a world with more drama, bloodshed and power struggles in it - five hundred years ago it would have been "kingdom".

Exactly.

Venom
16-11-2005, 13:40:26
It's a coming of age tale of a young man who's life takes an unexpected turn.

King_Ghidra
16-11-2005, 13:41:55
it's a romantic comedy about a girl trying to get on with her boyfriend's overbearing family

Funko
16-11-2005, 13:47:01
It's hardcore animal porn.

The Norks
16-11-2005, 18:42:54
its bollocks. Italian men swaggering around bleating about 'family' and shooting each other.

Scabrous Birdseed
16-11-2005, 20:06:43
Says the woman who hasn't seen it.

It's a political tragedy about a man's moral corruption.

King_Ghidra
17-11-2005, 09:06:25
Originally posted by The Norks
its bollocks. Italian men swaggering around bleating about 'family' and shooting each other.

no, you're talking bollocks, now stop making a show of your ignorance and watch it instead

Funko
17-11-2005, 09:49:54
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
It's a political tragedy about a man's moral corruption.

Yeah, exactly. It's kind of a classical story, could be transposed into any era.

The Norks
17-11-2005, 12:26:17
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
no, you're talking bollocks, now stop making a show of your ignorance and watch it instead

I've seen parts of it, I'm not totally in the dark you pompous knob. I've sat down and tried to watch it about three times but I just can't stand it.

It doesn't appeal to me, I have no wish to see it, Mafia stuff bores me rigid. I didn't like the Sopranos either which everyone raved about, I just find all that retalliatory shooting and gang stuff really dull no matter how its dressed up with other themes. I can't relate to it, its very predictable, and its glorifying some of the most dislikeable people on planet earth imo.

Oddly, I do like a good 30's gangster film. Go figure.

Funko
17-11-2005, 12:38:28
Bizarre. :confused:

The Norks
17-11-2005, 12:45:47
probably a lot to do with being brought up on Cagney and Bogart films and having an appreciation of the historical period.

Venom
17-11-2005, 13:07:51
Norks doing something contradictive? NO WAY!

Funko
17-11-2005, 13:27:31
Originally posted by The Norks
probably a lot to do with being brought up on Cagney and Bogart films and having an appreciation of the historical period.

I don't think I understand that... an appreciation of the historical period as shown through Cagney and Bogart films?

The Norks
17-11-2005, 14:30:57
Originally posted by Venom
Norks doing something contradictive? NO WAY!

As Walt Whitman said 'I contradict myself, so I contradict myself'

he was a sagittarius too.

The Norks
17-11-2005, 14:36:43
Originally posted by Funko
I don't think I understand that... an appreciation of the historical period as shown through Cagney and Bogart films?

I like the style and filmmaking of that period, the dress, the art , the music etc blah blah,
There isn't anything in the Godfather that grabs me like that.

Funko
17-11-2005, 14:39:56
Ah I see.

The Godfather is a 70s film though, has the style of that period.

The Norks
17-11-2005, 16:23:33
I know, the moody lighting irritates me. I suppose I prefer the authentic 30's films (although I think GF starts in the 40's). maybe one day I'll manage to get through the whole film. Boyf has the trilogy box set so I might get him to tie me to the sofa and watch it or something. I know its meant to be a masterpiece, but I've been similarly bored or disappointed with other masterpieces, notably Casablanca (don't start!). I guess if something doesn't grab you it doesn't grab you.

Funko
17-11-2005, 16:26:08
Never seen Casablanca, looks boring. I don't like old black and white films. :D

novacane
17-11-2005, 16:59:18
:rolleyes: only

Tizzy
17-11-2005, 17:25:59
Originally posted by The Norks
I might get him to tie me to the sofa and watch it or something.

Go with "or something", no matter how good the film is :D

The Norks
17-11-2005, 17:26:13
Its very dull and highly overrated. I'm a big Bogart fan but I think The African Queen wipes the floor with Casablanca. Then again I never did like Ingrid Bergman.

Funko
17-11-2005, 17:27:25
Can you say you don't like Gone With the Wind so I can say I don't give a damn?

The Norks
17-11-2005, 17:28:37
Originally posted by Tizzy
Go with "or something", no matter how good the film is :D

well that goes without saying ;)

Fergus & The Brazen Car
18-11-2005, 10:04:13
Originally posted by The Norks
... and its glorifying some of the most dislikeable people on planet earth imo.




Whereas Richard III and Macbeth are clearly really nice guys who fell in with the wrong crowd....


I don't believe the character of Michael Corleone is glorified by the end of the sequel- here's a man who originally (out of whatever motives) sought to protect his gangster father because his elder brother (who would have done the job) was killed by a rival group.

At the climax of 'Godfather II' this erstwhile non-combatant has ordered many murders, connived at the killing of a prostitute for political gain, had his own brother killed and has expanded his range of criminal operations.

On the other hand, Richard III (in the play by Shakespeare) had his own brother killed, his nephews murdered, married the widow of one his victims, et cetera, et cetera.

I don't think anyone seriously expects us to 'admire' Tony Soprano or Richard III or Michael Corleone; their ruthlessness and amorality (and internal conflicts) generate fascination.

King_Ghidra
18-11-2005, 10:10:11
amen

Funko
18-11-2005, 10:19:06
I have been struggling not to compare it to Macbeth. :D

The Norks
18-11-2005, 18:27:43
I never mentioned Macbeth or Richard the 3rd. What a fucking tangent that was!! Macbeth is a fictional character for a start and both those examples are about 500 years out of date.

I do think mafia films in general glorify the mafia, perhaps not as heroes, but certainly as anti heroes. They are portrayed as having a certain type of 'honour' and in fact just the making of films about them on whatever level gives them a credibility they wouldn't otherwise have. I can't think of any other real life criminal organisation who are so romanticised, forgiven for their crimes, and have almost an entire genre to themselves. I don't like that, I don't think we should make criminals into icons.

Anyway i didn't mean to hijack this thread.

Lazarus and the Gimp
18-11-2005, 22:20:01
Originally posted by The Norks
Macbeth is a fictional character for a start

No he isn't. Admittedly, he bears little resemblance to Shakespeare's character, but he was a very real Scottish usurper.

The Norks
18-11-2005, 23:33:02
well maybe, but the play is hardly relevant in a modern context (to glorifying criminals). And its hardly relevant to this thread either since I wasn't using it to back up my point. Fergus randomly picked it out of the air.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
19-11-2005, 10:04:27
Originally posted by The Norks
I never mentioned Macbeth or Richard the 3rd. What a fucking tangent that was!! Macbeth is a fictional character for a start and both those examples are about 500 years out of date.

I

Both Macbeth and Richard III were of course real kings of their respective countries; both have been fictionalized in the dramatizations of their purported histories, one in the service of Tudor propaganda and hagiography, the other to serve the dynastic interests of the new Stuart monarchy of Great Britain.

Needless to say, Michael Corleone and Tony Soprano are also fictionalized characters, not necessarily based on any one real life mafioso, but undoubtedly based on composites of various different real life Italian-American mafiosi, such as Gotti and Capone.

..and both those examples are about 500 years out of date.

And yet strangely enough Bertolt Brecht (20th Century German dramatist- modern enuff for ya ?) felt the historical examples and parallels to be relevant enough to recast the rise of a modern dictator (not unlike Macbeth or Richard III) as a modern gangster story:

The action takes place in Chicago. Hitler is recast as a small-time Chicago gangster, Arturo Ui. It's a menacing parable. Brecht transposes Hitler's manipulation of the German and Austrian governments onto a gangster's attempts to take over the cauliflower trade in Chicago and neighbouring city, Cicero. Initially Ui is dismissed as an uncouth upstart. The Cauliflower Trust (representing German Capitalism and the Junker class) at first refuse to even meet Ui. Honest Old Dogsborough (Hindenburg) looks down his nose. As times become harder, stocks fall and comfortable lifestyles become threatened Ui slowly becomes more acceptable in their eyes.

http://www.altculture.org/ccult/ccult113.html

If the examples/parallels hold true, they never go out of date- people in Soviet era Rumania and Idi Amin's Uganda used Shakespeare's plays as coded attacks on the society they were living in- similarly, Elizabeth I of England banned a production of 'Richard II' because she felt the parallels with her own reign were too strong.


I fail to see what is attractive about Tony Soprano- a man who has a dysfunctional relationship with his blood relatives, who kills his friends and relatives, has panic attacks, separates from his wife and mistreats his mistresses.

Of course he runs a corrupt business empire out of a titties 'n' beer club in a less than salubrious part of New Jersey, so perhaps I'm setting too high a standard for my 'anti-hero' emulation....

Fergus randomly picked it out of the air.


No I used my knowledge of films, plays and history to find parallels.

You should maybe try it some time. 'Richard III' recast as a modern Fascist dictator- golly, do I mean the Loncraine/McKellen 'Richard III' from 1995, not 1595 ?

Indeed I do.

'Macbeth' retold as a modern day American gangster's story - do I mean 'Joe Macbeth', made in 1955 ?

Yessirree Bob!

Straining to create suitable counterparts for the Shakespearian characters in 20th century Chicago -- the three witches are sidewalk peddlers, while Hecate is a sandwich-board man -- Joe Macbeth veers towards the laughable at times; but the basic story has been a good one for nearly 500 years now, so Joe Macbeth succeeds as often as it falters. Incidentally, despite the American characters and Chicagoland setting, Joe Macbeth was filmed in England, with principally British supporting actors. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide


I could hardly put it better:

..but the basic story has been a good one for nearly 500 years now.

You clearly think differently:

...those examples are about 500 years out of date

I know whose opinion I prefer. ;)

The Norks
19-11-2005, 12:45:28
Fergus, its irrelevant because you're attacking a point I never made. Shakespearian characters and the validity thereof have sweet FA to do with anything I've said about the Godfather. Your self preening argument assumes that I must think its ok to glorify Macbeth and R3 and therefore my opinions about mafia films are invalid, when I've never said or implied anything of the sort. Its totally random to start off on some point about Shakespeare for that reason and no other (although its clear you like showing off your tediously masturbatory knowledge of film trivia).

And you're not going to trickily argue me out of disliking stupid films about Italian American men shooting the bejesus out of each other no matter how much Shakespeare or Brecht you can reference. Sorry!

Fergus & The Brazen Car
19-11-2005, 14:56:26
Originally posted by The Norks
Fergus, its irrelevant because you're attacking a point I never made. Shakespearian characters and the validity thereof have sweet FA to do with anything I've said about the Godfather. Your self preening argument assumes that I must think its ok to glorify Macbeth and R3 and therefore my opinions about mafia films are invalid, when I've never said or implied anything of the sort. Its totally random to start off on some point about Shakespeare for that reason and no other (although its clear you like showing off your tediously masturbatory knowledge of film trivia).

And you're not going to trickily argue me out of disliking stupid films about Italian American men shooting the bejesus out of each other no matter how much Shakespeare or Brecht you can reference. Sorry!


You are a sour old vinegary leathery badger's minge when you're in the wrong, aren't you ?


I'm sorry you've never managed to bypass your provincial ignorance and actually watch the films you're giving us your ill-considered opinion on.


You also need to brush up on what an allegory or an analogy is.


I've seen parts of it, I'm not totally in the dark .

Oh, so just partially eclipsed then, you mangey tosspot.

Debaser
19-11-2005, 15:12:52
Calm down Fergie, no need to throw your toys out of your pram.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
19-11-2005, 15:57:05
Originally posted by Debaser
Calm down Fergie, no need to throw your toys out of your pram.


I thought that given the Norks inability to frame an argument without reliance on this kind of phraseology:


self preening argument

and

its clear you like showing off your tediously masturbatory knowledge of film trivia

and

you pompous knob.

she deserved a reply in kind.


I'm perfectly calm, by the way.

It takes more than the borborygmic farts of The Norks to wind me up. I've just bought an Editions Gallimard copy of a book on Matisse for a pound, so I'm happy as sandboy.

Immortal Wombat
19-11-2005, 17:07:27
Originally posted by Fergus & The Brazen Car
You are a sour old vinegary leathery badger's minge when you're in the wrong, aren't you ? :lol:

The Norks
19-11-2005, 18:52:21
What colour is that handbag Fergus?

You were on a tangent. I don't like mafia films. Get over it.

Chris
20-11-2005, 02:40:07
You gotta problem?

http://www.musicbay.se/ao/bilder/casino.jpg

Lazarus and the Gimp
20-11-2005, 07:50:25
Fuggedaboudit.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
22-11-2005, 13:29:24
Originally posted by The Norks
What colour is that handbag Fergus?

You were on a tangent. I don't like mafia films. Get over it.


You poor old trout.


I've heard of women supposedly having penis envy, but I confess you're the first one I've met with apparent brain envy.


Where'd d'ya go to get excluded from, St. Ignatius's Convent for the Ignorant ?

maroule
22-11-2005, 13:46:33
this thread is fun! Keep it coming, but with more feelings this time.

The Norks
22-11-2005, 14:26:44
Originally posted by Fergus & The Brazen Car
You poor old trout.


I've heard of women supposedly having penis envy, but I confess you're the first one I've met with apparent brain envy.


Where'd d'ya go to get excluded from, St. Ignatius's Convent for the Ignorant ?

*yawn*

Go back to your copy of Halliwell's and bore someone else.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
22-11-2005, 14:43:19
Originally posted by The Norks
*yawn*

Go back to your copy of Halliwell's and bore someone else.


Not writing for 'Little Britain' then ? :lol:


I've never used Halliwell's, by the by. But thanks for playing!


:lol:

The Norks
22-11-2005, 14:56:14
ah the old 'It was just a game to me, I'm sooooo above you! Look- I'm laughing at you right now through the medium of the smiley face!' post. Textbook. Excellent stuff Fergus, any more gems?

Fergus & The Brazen Car
22-11-2005, 15:10:53
Originally posted by The Norks


Excellent stuff Fergus, any more gems?


A little gem.

It reminds me of your head.

The Norks
22-11-2005, 15:14:38
Excellent, we've got you down to playground insults. Any more?

Lurker the Second
22-11-2005, 16:46:05
'borborygmic farts" :lol:

*has no idea what that means*

Fergus & The Brazen Car
23-11-2005, 12:11:24
Originally posted by The Norks
Excellent, we've got you down to playground insults. Any more?


Cabbage would have been playground, little gem was a pun on your flabby would-be retort.


Carry on, Dulle Griet, I'm slightly amused....

The Norks
23-11-2005, 12:25:06
Carry on Dulle Griet.... was that one with Sid James?

Fergus & The Brazen Car
23-11-2005, 13:12:41
Originally posted by The Norks
Carry on Dulle Griet.... was that one with Sid James?

Hold on, are you saying that unlike The Godfather films, you've actually watched films in the 'Carry On' series ALL the way through ?


Or is this just a slight familiarity with some of the actors involved ?


Anyway, 'Carry On Dulle Griet' was the one with Schid IJames.

MoSe
16-12-2005, 16:05:31
hhmmmm.... I should come more often to this literature forum...

I was last year in "De Dulle Griet" pub in Gent, utterly unaware of its meaning (a sleepy drunkard I asked to, muttered something about 'broad lass'), and would have never dreamt to find a reference to it here in CG!!!

:awe:

anyway, as Iwas brought out of my lurking here:
I think I saw the trilogy, but probably never managed to watch any of the 3 straight from end to end.

I of course missed much of the reference and structure you showed me it's behind it.
I admit I failed to be fascinated.
OTOH I also think "Goodfellas" is terrible. And "The untouchables" is utter overdone crap, if you forgive my frenchism.

Re Scabby's "Traditional hollywood films work along the lines of One-thing-happens-then-another", do you really think that's a good thing?
One of my favourites is Sergio Leone's "Once upon a time in America", and I already had the chance to point out in this forum that the distribution was *forced* to RE-EDIT the version for the US-market to put the whol movie in a straightforward timeline, because the original version was "too complex for the average american joe". Of course that enormously added to the artistic value of the film, that dork italian director must have had his head up his arse to not understand it....

OK, I go back to the sports forum where I rather belong, at this age my cerebral circonvolutions begin to misfire at the barest hint of effort...

____
Oh, BTW, I thought that the Godfather was finally about tomato cultivation...

King_Ghidra
16-12-2005, 16:42:41
i couldn't disagree more.

i think once upon a time in america is grossly overlong, overblown and mostly empty

(how about that preposterous sub plot where they rob the bank and during the robbery he fucks the mouthy teller who of course actually really loves it and who later becomes a happy whore in their gangster's club)

whereas goodfellas is superb, a lesson in tight direction, use of image and sound, and great acting

the last half hour in particular, set during the coke paranoia day when the main character is arrested, is just brilliant

Funko
16-12-2005, 16:43:30
I haven't seen once upon a time in America but I think Goodfellas is excellent. (and agree with K_G's comments on it)

Fergus & The Brazen Car
17-12-2005, 09:54:58
Originally posted by MoSe
hhmmmm.... I should come more often to this literature forum...

I was last year in "De Dulle Griet" pub in Gent, utterly unaware of its meaning (a sleepy drunkard I asked to, muttered something about 'broad lass'), and would have never dreamt to find a reference to it here in CG!!!

:awe:



Ah, but then I like earlier Flemish and Dutch painting, especially the Brueghels and Hieronymus Bosch.

The way Ms. Norks was carrying on reminded me so much of Dulle Griet, that I simply couldn't resist the reference.


www.artchive.com is a great site for anyone interested in finding the image...