The Godfather vs. The Godfather: Part II (1 Viewer)

[Carver]

You need a "have never seen either" option.

NFWNot you.ETA- REALLY?

 

[Abraham]

My answer: "whichever one is on".

Two of the ten best movies ever.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

You know how much of a badass Sonny was?

He dropped Carlo with punches that didn't come within a foot of his face.

 

[Joe Summer]

Kay was so stupid. She should have trusted her instinct when Michael came back from Italy, and told him to go to hell.

 

[RC94]

I read this on IMDB:

In 1974, The Godfather premiered on NBC over 2 nights - Saturday November 16th, and Monday November 18th, from 9-11pm. Both nights, at 11pm, New York City's Municipal Water Authorities had some overflow problems from all the toilets flushing around the same time.

 

[Joe Summer]

They're in Cuba and the Presidente is showing off his "solid gold telephone" and everyone is picking it up with one hand.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

2 is awesome but 1 is better.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

During Pacino's hearing before the Senate, I always focus on Keaton sitting behind him.

She does so much acting with just her eyes.

 

[Insein]

I picked both equally. I LOVED young Vito, but I has more Brando and more Caan. I just can't help but thinking of them as 1 great movie.I've actually never watched part III. I heard it was so bad and didn't want to taint I and II in any way. I should probably break down and watch it one day, i even own the trilogy. Just haven't ever been able to bring myself to watch it.

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

The original plot was Michael and Tom Hagen battling it out, but Duvall and Coppola clashed on salary, so they wrote him out.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I picked both equally. I LOVED young Vito, but I has more Brando and more Caan. I just can't help but thinking of them as 1 great movie.I've actually never watched part III. I heard it was so bad and didn't want to taint I and II in any way. I should probably break down and watch it one day, i even own the trilogy. Just haven't ever been able to bring myself to watch it.

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

III isn't nearly as bad as some say it is. It's pretty good - it's just not great like I and II are. Plus, by 1990 Pacino had become PACINO and that took a little away from it for me. If Duval would've been in it, it would've been much better.

 

[Billy Bats]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

This never bothered me. Fredo is just that stupid.

"I'm smaat, not like people say, like dumb."

 

[KarmaPolice]

You need a "have never seen either" option.

NFWNot you.ETA- REALLY?

'tis the truth. I plan on correcting this soon. Part of problem is I can't remember ever really liking a mob/crime family movie or show - Goodfellas, Sopranos, etc.. so I have been dragging my feet about popping in the Godfather movies.

 

[Insein]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

This never bothered me. Fredo is just that stupid.

"I'm smaat, not like people say, like dumb."

Don't get me wrong. Fredo's an idiot. I think something happened to his brain as a kid with the pneumonia. But at least show him a little tipsy like in the first movie when he meets Kay.

 

[Insein]

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

The original plot was Michael and Tom Hagen battling it out, but Duvall and Coppola clashed on salary, so they wrote him out.

That would have been interesting.

 

[Ghost Rider]

During Pacino's hearing before the Senate, I always focus on Keaton sitting behind him. She does so much acting with just her eyes.

Yeah, her reaction to the Senate accusing him of being personally responsible for the deaths of Sollozzo and McCluskey is telling, almost like she was not aware that Michael had been accused of that, which does seem a bit odd as she had to have wondered why he had to leave the country for so long, and Vito even says at the meeting with the heads of the five families in I that he needed to make arrangements to have Michael "cleared of these false charges," so it does seem odd that she wouldn't have been aware of his role in those killings prior to the Senate scene.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I picked both equally. I LOVED young Vito, but I has more Brando and more Caan. I just can't help but thinking of them as 1 great movie.I've actually never watched part III. I heard it was so bad and didn't want to taint I and II in any way. I should probably break down and watch it one day, i even own the trilogy. Just haven't ever been able to bring myself to watch it.

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

III isn't nearly as bad as some say it is. It's pretty good - it's just not great like I and II are. Plus, by 1990 Pacino had become PACINO and that took a little away from it for me. If Duval would've been in it, it would've been much better.

It is that bad though. Ive tried several times to sit and like it. But its brutal.

 

[Billy Bats]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

This never bothered me. Fredo is just that stupid.

"I'm smaat, not like people say, like dumb."

Don't get me wrong. Fredo's an idiot. I think something happened to his brain as a kid with the pneumonia. But at least show him a little tipsy like in the first movie when he meets Kay.

I hear ya. Im just making excuses now, but you can say that because Fredo never spends time with Michael, he may have just forgotten that Michael was even there once he started hanging with his buddies. At least that's what I always thought during that scene.

 

[Ilov80s]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

This never bothered me. Fredo is just that stupid.

"I'm smaat, not like people say, like dumb."

Don't get me wrong. Fredo's an idiot. I think something happened to his brain as a kid with the pneumonia. But at least show him a little tipsy like in the first movie when he meets Kay.

I hear ya. Im just making excuses now, but you can say that because Fredo never spends time with Michael, he may have just forgotten that Michael was even there once he started hanging with his buddies. At least that's what I always thought during that scene.

I always assumed he was a little drunk and slipped. They had been out awhile that night and Fredo was drinking.

 

[Ilov80s]

I picked both equally. I LOVED young Vito, but I has more Brando and more Caan. I just can't help but thinking of them as 1 great movie.I've actually never watched part III. I heard it was so bad and didn't want to taint I and II in any way. I should probably break down and watch it one day, i even own the trilogy. Just haven't ever been able to bring myself to watch it.

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

III isn't nearly as bad as some say it is. It's pretty good - it's just not great like I and II are. Plus, by 1990 Pacino had become PACINO and that took a little away from it for me. If Duval would've been in it, it would've been much better.

Also the casting of Sofia Copploa over Winona Ryder. She was a terrible actress and so ugly it made the incest storyline implausible.

 

[Tom Hagen]

It was made in 1990 with a setting of the mid 70's. So just getting used to old Pacino as Michael takes some time. The story is ok and its interesting enough on its own as a movie but the pedigree it had to live up to was too much. That movie was doomed to fail to live up to the hype. However, it is good in that it completes the story. You see the tragic fall of Michael come to fruition.

The original plot was Michael and Tom Hagen battling it out, but Duvall and Coppola clashed on salary, so they wrote him out.

Big mistake IMO

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I thought Duval just didnt like the script. I think there is an interview out there.

 

[Thunderlips]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

This never bothered me. Fredo is just that stupid.

"I'm smaat, not like people say, like dumb."

Don't get me wrong. Fredo's an idiot. I think something happened to his brain as a kid with the pneumonia. But at least show him a little tipsy like in the first movie when he meets Kay.

I hear ya. Im just making excuses now, but you can say that because Fredo never spends time with Michael, he may have just forgotten that Michael was even there once he started hanging with his buddies. At least that's what I always thought during that scene.

Fredo just was unable to be a leader...he was unable to see or remember all the angles. He's the perfect schlub brother. They changed him from the book though....IIRC, he was as big and as tough as Sonny..even being Vito's bodyguard. When he failed to protect him when he was getting shot...he just lost it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The interesting thing about Fredo's betrayal is this: after the attempt on his life in II, when Michaels sits down and talks with Tom, he flat-out says that Fredo is weak and stupid, so a part of him must have wondered if Fredo was the one who betrayed him, yet when Fredo gets to Cuba and they go out for a drink, Michael tells him that he knows that Roth is the one who tried to kill him, and even goes so far as to tell him that "Hyman Roth will never see the new year." Makes you wonder why he would reveal that he knows the truth to Fredo if even a little part of him suspected Fredo. Then again, Michael might have known deep down that if Fredo had betrayed him, it probably was because of his stupidity, not because he was being treacherous.

 

[Sea Duck]

The interesting thing about Fredo's betrayal is this: after the attempt on his life in II, when Michaels sits down and talks with Tom, he flat-out says that Fredo is weak and stupid, so a part of him must have wondered if Fredo was the one who betrayed him, yet when Fredo gets to Cuba and they go out for a drink, Michael tells him that he knows that Roth is the one who tried to kill him, and even goes so far as to tell him that "Hyman Roth will never see the new year." Makes you wonder why he would reveal that he knows the truth to Fredo if even a little part of him suspected Fredo. Then again, Michael might have known deep down that if Fredo had betrayed him, it probably was because of his stupidity, not because he was being treacherous.

Michael waffles between acting like he knows Fredo did it (like when he introduced Fredo to Johnny Ola) and acting like he has no idea that Fredo was involved (like when he tells Fredo that Roth won't see the new year).

 

[zamboni]

Not sure if anyone posted this, but there were several scenes were deleted from the original I and II, but included as part of the chronological saga that aired this weekend. Most aren't all that important, but some do explain loose ends here and there:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W10us4Q-cb4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPp0a5OEsTw&feature=related

 

[jdoggydogg]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

 

[RBM]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

i enjoyed it as well. Flawed but solid for the most part. The transformation of Vincent from some nobody into the don is pretty far fetched. Would have rather had the movie focus more on the relationship between Michael and Vincent and learning about Vincent overall than the convuluted church nonsense. Ending always gets to me.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

 

[Flying V]

Godfather II is still great but the way they handled Fredo is my one gripe. They attach 2 scenes back to back that portray Fredo as so ### ####ed stupid its painful. In one scene he's setting up all the senators and judges for a new years party. Meets Johnny Ola and says yea we've never met. Then it cuts to the scene with the cuban chick tied to a pole and he blurts out how he and Johnny Ola came to places like that all the time. It wasn't like he was acting drunk or anything either. He just blurts it out knowing his brother is right there. That scene always annoyed me.

I'm kinda with you on this. Michael discovering that Fredo betrayed him was vital to the storyline, of course, but it could have been executed better. It's one thing if he was falling-down-Snooki-drunk, but that wasn't the case at all."The Godfather Saga" is on AMC all day.

The saga has been great. I've literally been watching all day since noon. They're only at the end of where 2 would be. Having all the young Vito scenes linked together in the beginning was great. A lot of extra scenes added in too that are only available on the extended version DVDs. Adds so much more explanation behind why certain characters did what they did. For example, Michael calling before the assassination to say he's still in New Hampshire and won't be back because he's still distant from his family. Then once he finds out, it starts his descent towards joining the other side of his family. Gives you so much more insight into what Michael's motivations are.

It was interesting to watch the scene where Vito gives Hyman Roth his name when Roth first comes to work for him. I had always assumed Roth was older than Vito.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

Sonny's son (Andy Garcia) was dating Michael's daughter (Sophia Coppola) in the movie. They were 1st cousins.

 

[Billy Bats]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

Are you sure you watched the right movie?! It's kind of hard to forget incest! Especially with the ugly ducking Coppola. :X

 

[Insein]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

Are you sure you watched the right movie?! It's kind of hard to forget incest! Especially with the ugly ducking Coppola. :X

But if it was WINona Rider, its WINCEST!

 

[jdoggydogg]

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

Sonny's son (Andy Garcia) was dating Michael's daughter (Sophia Coppola) in the movie. They were 1st cousins.

I didn't know the Corleones were from Kentucky.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I might be the only one, but, I enjoyed 3 as well. I kinda liked the 20+ year jump and how the Corleone family "evolved" or maintained their stature.

Re-watching III, I think it's a pretty damned good movie - sans the horrific performance by Sophia Coppola.

The story and the sums of money and the vatican all make very little sense. The incest? Why??????

It's been awhile since I've seen it, because I can't even recall the incest

Are you sure you watched the right movie?! It's kind of hard to forget incest! Especially with the ugly ducking Coppola. :X

I own The Godfather Collection, but obviously I've watched I and II a lot more than III.

 

[Ghost Rider]

BTW, how big of a flop was Andy Garcia as an actor? After landing good roles in movies like The Untouchables and The Godfather III, he could have been the next Pacino (in a matter of speaking), but he subsequently went nowhere after that.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

BTW, how big of a flop was Andy Garcia as an actor? After landing good roles in movies like The Untouchables and The Godfather III, he could have been the next Pacino (in a matter of speaking), but he subsequently went nowhere after that.

He's great in Internal Affairs. So is Richard Gere.

 

[timschochet]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)

1. Luca is strangled

2. Michael kills the two men.

3. Sonny beats up Carlo.

4. Carlo beats up Connie.

5. Sonny is killed.

These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

 

[Raider Nation]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)1. Luca is strangled2. Michael kills the two men.3. Sonny beats up Carlo.4. Carlo beats up Connie.5. Sonny is killed. These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

 

[dutch]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)

1. Luca is strangled

2. Michael kills the two men.

3. Sonny beats up Carlo.

4. Carlo beats up Connie.

5. Sonny is killed.

These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

equal parts f**k no(they didn't just do that) and hell yes(die *******, die). You see it comin' but it's still such a release.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

BTW, how big of a flop was Andy Garcia as an actor? After landing good roles in movies like The Untouchables and The Godfather III, he could have been the next Pacino (in a matter of speaking), but he subsequently went nowhere after that.

He's great in Internal Affairs. So is Richard Gere.

I thought he was pretty good in that flick where Meg Ryan was a drunk. Ray Liotta is the guy that inexplicably did not capitalize on his big breakout role.

 

[timschochet]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)1. Luca is strangled2. Michael kills the two men.3. Sonny beats up Carlo.4. Carlo beats up Connie.5. Sonny is killed. These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

You're right. Not sure if that's the best one. But it's great though. For me, probably the best one is a tie between Sonny beating up Carlo and Michael killing the two. The emotion that passes through Al Pacino's face while he gets the nerve up fo pull his gun out is simply amazing. But the savage violence of Sonny destroying Carlo- that's as intense as any scene ever.

 

[Raider Nation]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)1. Luca is strangled2. Michael kills the two men.3. Sonny beats up Carlo.4. Carlo beats up Connie.5. Sonny is killed. These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

You're right. Not sure if that's the best one. But it's great though. For me, probably the best one is a tie between Sonny beating up Carlo and Michael killing the two. The emotion that passes through Al Pacino's face while he gets the nerve up fo pull his gun out is simply amazing. But the savage violence of Sonny destroying Carlo- that's as intense as any scene ever.

The phantom right hook which misses by three feet takes a little steam out of the Sonny/Carlo bout.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Wait, Carlo beating up Connie is one of the best film scenes ever? Yeah, if you like watching a woman getting beaten up by her abusive husband.

 

[Flying V]

Wait, Carlo beating up Connie is one of the best film scenes ever? Yeah, if you like watching a woman getting beaten up by her abusive husband.

Well, she WAS a spoiled guinea brat.

 

[RBM]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)1. Luca is strangled2. Michael kills the two men.3. Sonny beats up Carlo.4. Carlo beats up Connie.5. Sonny is killed. These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

Hello Carlo

 

[joffer]

the baptism while the heads of the families are getting bumped off trumps them all

 

[zamboni]

It's the violence of the first film that gives it the edge. 5 scenes come to mind (in no particular order)1. Luca is strangled2. Michael kills the two men.3. Sonny beats up Carlo.4. Carlo beats up Connie.5. Sonny is killed. These are 5 of the greatest scenes in film history IMO. II is great, but does not have quite the riveting moments as compared to these 5 scenes.

Geez man, you left out the best one of all. Clemenza garrotes Carlo in the car.

Hello Carlo

Cost a brand new windshield for that one.

 

[timschochet]

Wait, Carlo beating up Connie is one of the best film scenes ever? Yeah, if you like watching a woman getting beaten up by her abusive husband.

Well, she WAS a spoiled guinea brat.

NOW CLEAN IT UP