All the films from all the editions, including those subsequently removed, presently totalling 1167. An easy way of seeing how…
The Godfather: Part II
I don't feel I have to wipe everybody out, Tom. Just my enemies.
The continuing saga of the Corleone crime family tells the story of a young Vito Corleone growing up in Sicily and in 1910s New York; and follows Michael Corleone in the 1950s as he attempts to expand the family business into Las Vegas, Hollywood and Cuba
It’s easy to assume that a complex plot is a sign of a great film. But the best films are deceptively simple in the same way that the greatest dancers make their movements look astonishingly easy. The Godfather creates its world so gracefully that we begin to think that it's a straightforward tale. But it's not simple to create a world so morally ambiguous, to introduce unforgettable characters, and to keep viewers fully cognizant of a plot so dense.
The Godfather: Part II doesn't make anything look easy the way The Godfather did. You can follow the plot threads, of course, but the constant breaks in Michael Corleone's story make it hard to continually keep returning to his dark world,…
"This is the business we have chosen!"
- Hyman Roth
This film's legacy is nearly impossible to live up to. Often cited as one of the greatest films ever, winning 6 academy awards, and boasting a star-studded cast; such a line up of positives are certain to make for a disappointment in any other situation. But not here. The Godfather part II manages to live up to its name, and excel in every area possible. Along with part I, this is a near-perfect cinematic experience.
The Godfather part II tells a tale of two Corleone's; father and son. One focuses on a young Vito Corleone as he comes to America after his family is killed by the Mafia chieftain in…
I'm sure to some the idea of following up The Godfather - which many consider the pinnacle of cinema - was not a wise one. But when The Godfather: Part II finally revealed itself to audiences worldwide on December 20th 1974, most - if not all - were truly mesmerized by it.
This was not just some sequel. This was a sequel with brains. A sequel that was just as - if not more - brilliant than its predecessor. It perfectly built upon the events and happenings of the original. It was exquisitely told. And it added so much more life to most of the characters from the original.
It did a marvelous job with the backstory of Don, Vito…
I believe I was asked in the comment section of my review of The Godfather why I liked Part II more than the first Godfather-film. I think I know the answer now. The story. Personally, I found the story so much interesting in Part II, here, it's toned down a little bit, it's much smaller, and personal, and about the relations between different characters. It's a tale of father and son, how one rises, while the other falls.
Robert De Niro's Vito Corleone is quite different from Marlon Brando's Vito, and I personally found him more fascinating than the older Vito, because we get to experience Vito grow, from a humble, grocery worker to a man with power,…
Looking back on my movie diary it has been almost five years since I saw this, possibly the greatest sequel ever made. During that time I've watched almost 3000 films, but hadn't returned to the Corleone saga until the missus popped it in on Thursday evening.
Much has been made of whether the second chapter of this Italian/American crime family drama is even better than Coppola's original film. Some like the De Niro factor that appears here, others prefer Brando's understated greatness, but to try and separate them seems futile as they both give incredible performances in a multi-layered story as complex as it is compelling. We get part sequel part prequel as the origin story of Don Vito's early…
The Godfather: Part II fulfills Michael's descent into the deep depths of darkness - before he's burnt in lava, dons a black mechanical suit and subsequently crushes all rebellions in the galaxy. His estranged son Anthony becomes the leader of a revolutionary force against his father's empire, and defeats him by blowing up his casino space station. Sounds silly and all, but Michael might as well become Darth Vader. However, this lunge into the abyss is handled far more masterfully than George Lucas could ever have. I don't even want to think about it.
And to cut a long story short, I have no definitive answer on which Godfather is superior. I believe this…
IMO better than the original classic and probably the best of the four masterpieces Coppola directed in the 70s.
hard to review such an iconic film without mentioning the outstanding directing and writing but i am at the camp of those who think it is too long and the two story structure is too distracting.
Should the plot go over my head, there is always the warmth of the golden lighting to keep me fascinated.
Even though I hadn't seen it since I was about fourteen, I used to think anyone who though Part II was better than Part I was crazy. I rewatched it and now I might be one of them.
I mean good lord. The structure. The performances. The complete deconstruction and lack of glamorization of the gangster genre, with significantly more complex characters than in the first film. The final few minutes are awe-inspiringly perfect and powerful, with the transition from the scene in the boat to the flashback to before the war to the flashback of young Vito and Michael on the train to Michael sitting alone, it's like a shot in the gut (like a certain character…
Siempre he visto a El Padrino parte 2 como la mejor representación de un hombre comprándose su boleto sin regreso al infierno y llevándose entre las patas a todas las personas que alguna vez lo amaron. Michael tiene que ser uno de los villanos más increíbles y mejor construidos en la historia del cine.
Algo que me gusta mucho en las películas del Padrino son los niños chillones. Normalmente en las películas siempre vemos a nenes encantadores, risueños y dormilones, pero en el Padrino 1 y 2 si hay un bebé, siempre, SIEMPRE va a estar chillando como si quisiera despertar a los mil demonios. Y eso le da un toque de realidad y cercanía que las hace más geniales…
Michael's fall contrasted with Vito's rise is one of the great stories of American cinema. Pacino and De Niro are riveting, and Gordon Willis once again proves that he is one of history's all-time finest cinematographers.
Yes, the actors are great, the cinematography is out of this world, the score is fantastic, and Francis Ford Coppola really nailed the setting. I've seldomly experienced a social environment that seemed so on point, thought through and realistic.
Why this film even exists, is beyond me though. I didn't think Michael's story was particularly interesting. He is still the same coldhearted crime boss he was in the first film and he kinda fucks things up in the end. So what? I didn't think the intrigues against him were very interesting and the whole thing with the brother didn't grab my attention either.
I much preferred the prequel plot with Robert DeNiro playing his father. DeNiro gives an amazing performance…
Tres horas y media en el cine me hicieron comprobar que mi capacidad de mantener la atención es limitada.
Tuve la suerte de verla en cine, al fin.
El inicio con Michael Corleone reflexionando, en todo su esplendor de pantalla de cine, es maravilloso. Cuántas cosas se pueden ver en esos pocos segundos.
Después, ya sabemos, es perfecta.
- A Trip to the Moon
- The Great Train Robbery
- The Birth of a Nation
- Les Vampires
- 12 Angry Men
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
- 25th Hour
- 3 Women
- Only God Forgives
- Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
- Spring Breakers
- A Field in England
Recently, I've become aware that certain films are able to transcend the medium by being completely self-assured in their atmospheres…