What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

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

?

  • Godfather

    Votes: 89 43.8%
  • Godfather II

    Votes: 64 31.5%
  • Like them both equally

    Votes: 42 20.7%
  • Never saw The Godfather

    Votes: 3 1.5%
  • Never saw The Godfather: Part II

    Votes: 5 2.5%

  • Total voters
    203
Robert De Niro spent four months learning to speak the Sicilian dialect in order to play Vito Corleone. Nearly all the dialogue that his character speaks in the film was in Sicilian.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071562/trivia
Yeah, there's lots of different people speaking other languages in the 2 movies. My friend just always stood by that it wasn't actually Sicilian (which he was). Him being wrong wouldn't be anything new.
 
I've always found it curious as to why Vito felt he needed to dispose of the gun, in pieces and different places after whacking Don Fanucci ...

Any insight on this RN?
Beats me. Almost every other hit you see in the movies, they drop the gun right where they stand. Like Mike in the restaurant.
Exactly ... Plus given the time period, Vito breaking the gun and disposing in different places seems ... Well, out of place.

 
Robert De Niro spent four months learning to speak the Sicilian dialect in order to play Vito Corleone. Nearly all the dialogue that his character speaks in the film was in Sicilian.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071562/trivia
Yeah, there's lots of different people speaking other languages in the 2 movies. My friend just always stood by that it wasn't actually Sicilian (which he was). Him being wrong wouldn't be anything new.
Well, if DeNiro was speaking Sicilian exclusively in 2, I'm thinking Kirby (real name: Bruno Giovanni Quidaciolu, Jr!) and Black Hand Fanucci did as well. Solozzo seemed old-school-right-off-the-boat also. Not sure about the other dialects in the first one.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've always found it curious as to why Vito felt he needed to dispose of the gun, in pieces and different places after whacking Don Fanucci ...

Any insight on this RN?
Beats me. Almost every other hit you see in the movies, they drop the gun right where they stand. Like Mike in the restaurant.
Exactly ... Plus given the time period, Vito breaking the gun and disposing in different places seems ... Well, out of place.
Maye looking out for the kiddos - don't want any accidents. :shrug:

 
I've always found it curious as to why Vito felt he needed to dispose of the gun, in pieces and different places after whacking Don Fanucci ...

Any insight on this RN?
Beats me. Almost every other hit you see in the movies, they drop the gun right where they stand. Like Mike in the restaurant.
Exactly ... Plus given the time period, Vito breaking the gun and disposing in different places seems ... Well, out of place.
Maye looking out for the kiddos - don't want any accidents. :shrug:
Then keep the gun? I'd imagine they were quite valuable back then ... Especially after you just took down the "black hand" and were taking your place as boss.

I know there is no answer, just love talking all aspects of these films.

 
The gun Michael used was covered with tape that wouldn't leave fingerprints. He had a team of experienced killers to give him help and instructions. He also knew there was no hiding this from the police - that's why he had to leave the country.

Vito was an amateur, working alone, using somebody else's gun, killing a small time Dawn. He was trying to get away with it so he had to destroy the murder weapon and hide it in a way it would never be found.

 
Tom only handles specific areas of the family business - you know that just had to piss Tom off. Duvall does a great job expressing that without words.

 
The gun Michael used was covered with tape that wouldn't leave fingerprints. He had a team of experienced killers to give him help and instructions. He also knew there was no hiding this from the police - that's why he had to leave the country.

Vito was an amateur, working alone, using somebody else's gun, killing a small time Dawn. He was trying to get away with it so he had to destroy the murder weapon and hide it in a way it would never be found.
Because in tge early 1900's the police had forensic capabilities? In small town Sicily?

 
The gun Michael used was covered with tape that wouldn't leave fingerprints. He had a team of experienced killers to give him help and instructions. He also knew there was no hiding this from the police - that's why he had to leave the country.

Vito was an amateur, working alone, using somebody else's gun, killing a small time Dawn. He was trying to get away with it so he had to destroy the murder weapon and hide it in a way it would never be found.
Because in tge early 1900's the police had forensic capabilities? In small town Sicily?
Vito shot Fanucci in New York
 
The gun Michael used was covered with tape that wouldn't leave fingerprints. He had a team of experienced killers to give him help and instructions. He also knew there was no hiding this from the police - that's why he had to leave the country.

Vito was an amateur, working alone, using somebody else's gun, killing a small time Dawn. He was trying to get away with it so he had to destroy the murder weapon and hide it in a way it would never be found.
Because in tge early 1900's the police had forensic capabilities? In small town Sicily?
Vito shot Fanucci in New York
Those scenes in Little Italy were so beautifully shot.

 
I've always found it curious as to why Vito felt he needed to dispose of the gun, in pieces and different places after whacking Don Fanucci ...

Any insight on this RN?
Beats me. Almost every other hit you see in the movies, they drop the gun right where they stand. Like Mike in the restaurant.
Vito was a forward thinker. Why take a chance when you just killed a boss.
He was no criminal expert when he did it but it's actually a better method than dropping the gun. If you happen to be on a roof.

 
The shooting of Moe Greene through the eye was inspired by the death of gangster Bugsy Siegel.
It was actually the death of Albert Anastasia that inspired Moe's barbershop murder, but the character of Moe was indeed inspired by Bugsy.

Unrelated to the first two, I've decided to break down and watch the third one after a 25-year hiatus since it first came out. Have refused to watch III since it is effectively an insult to the first two, but willing to give it another shot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think the third one is that bad.
The letdown from the first two makes it seem much worse than it is. It was actually nominated for an Oscar (which I didn't know until I just looked at Wikipedia)
This has always been my contention. The first two were legendary masterpieces. The 3rd was never going to live up to that. It has its shortcomings but its a solid movie.

 
I don't think the third one is that bad.
The letdown from the first two makes it seem much worse than it is. It was actually nominated for an Oscar (which I didn't know until I just looked at Wikipedia)
That's probably it - the letdown factor is what has kept me away rather than the movie in and of itself.

As for the Oscar nomination, it wasn't exactly a strong year with other nominees being Goodfellas (criminal that this did not win), Dances With Wolves, Ghost, and Awakenings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think the third one is that bad.
The letdown from the first two makes it seem much worse than it is. It was actually nominated for an Oscar (which I didn't know until I just looked at Wikipedia)
This has always been my contention. The first two were legendary masterpieces. The 3rd was never going to live up to that. It has its shortcomings but its a solid movie.
I saw it in the theater, and was really on the edge of my seat the last 30 minutes...great climax.

 
I don't think the third one is that bad.
The letdown from the first two makes it seem much worse than it is. It was actually nominated for an Oscar (which I didn't know until I just looked at Wikipedia)
This has always been my contention. The first two were legendary masterpieces. The 3rd was never going to live up to that. It has its shortcomings but its a solid movie.
I saw it in the theater, and was really on the edge of my seat the last 30 minutes...great climax.
Definitely. Last few scenes were heartbreaking.

 
This may have already been discussed here.

Do you think Fredo knew his execution was coming? I tend to think that he did. When Michael had his son pulled off the boat just before they went fishing, Fredo's shoulders slumped and he immediately seemed sad. Now, it could have been disappointment, but I tend to think that at that moment, when he realized he was going out on the boat alone, that it was all over.
Just watched this again - he actually tells his nephew he'll take him fishing and catch him a big fish today. He genuinely seemed happy but maybe was putting on a show and IMO shows no sign that he knows.

HOWEVER, right before it happens he's sitting in the boat saying Hail Marys - who the hell does that unless they know they are about to get their brains blown out?

He knew.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Michael killed him on the boat because he wanted his brother to be able to say his prayers first. He knew the fishing story.

The really ####ed up part about that scene is that he used his kid to kill his brother. That's the last time his son saw his uncle. Ouch.

 
Michael killed him on the boat because he wanted his brother to be able to say his prayers first. He knew the fishing story.

The really ####ed up part about that scene is that he used his kid to kill his brother. That's the last time his son saw his uncle. Ouch.
So his fishing story wasn't just bull#### he told his nephew? I guess - either way, Fredo was an idiot.

 
HOWEVER, right before it happens he's sitting in the boat saying Hail Marys - who the hell does that unless they know they are about to get their brains blown out?

He knew.
Were you distracted while watching this movie? :oldunsure:

He just got done telling Anthony five seconds ago that he was gonna catch a fish with his old Hail Mary trick.

He was a simpleton. No need to read anything else into the scene.

 
Frankie Five Angels will be making his court appearance soon on AMC.
Saw it. His brother is definitely there of his own volition. He has a disappointed look on his face like he was about to watch his family's name be forever destroyed by his younger brother.

 
HOWEVER, right before it happens he's sitting in the boat saying Hail Marys - who the hell does that unless they know they are about to get their brains blown out?

He knew.
Were you distracted while watching this movie? :oldunsure: He just got done telling Anthony five seconds ago that he was gonna catch a fish with his old Hail Mary trick.

He was a simpleton. No need to read anything else into the scene.
I think he knew but didn't want to believe it. Why else have the "Hail Mary" story in the film if not to at least create the ambiguity?

 
Can someone tell me why in G1 Santino picks the most disgusting looking wedding guest to take upstairs for a quickie?

It has never made any sense to me.

Aside from that, IMO, G1 is as close to a flawless work of film story telling that has ever been made.

 
Can someone tell me why in G1 Santino picks the most disgusting looking wedding guest to take upstairs for a quickie?

It has never made any sense to me.

Aside from that, IMO, G1 is as close to a flawless work of film story telling that has ever been made.
I think RN had a synopsis on it earlier in this thread. It had to do with the size of his member fitting her enormous vagoo.

 
Can someone tell me why in G1 Santino picks the most disgusting looking wedding guest to take upstairs for a quickie?

It has never made any sense to me.

Aside from that, IMO, G1 is as close to a flawless work of film story telling that has ever been made.
I think RN had a synopsis on it earlier in this thread. It had to do with the size of his member fitting her enormous vagoo.
Yeah, that's Lucy. The detailed explanation is somewhere in this thread. The book went into much more detail.

 
Can someone tell me why in G1 Santino picks the most disgusting looking wedding guest to take upstairs for a quickie?

It has never made any sense to me.

Aside from that, IMO, G1 is as close to a flawless work of film story telling that has ever been made.
I think RN had a synopsis on it earlier in this thread. It had to do with the size of his member fitting her enormous vagoo.
Yeah, that's Lucy. The detailed explanation is somewhere in this thread. The book went into much more detail.
She's also the mother of Vincent (Andy Garcia) in III.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can someone tell me why in G1 Santino picks the most disgusting looking wedding guest to take upstairs for a quickie?

It has never made any sense to me.

Aside from that, IMO, G1 is as close to a flawless work of film story telling that has ever been made.
I think RN had a synopsis on it earlier in this thread. It had to do with the size of his member fitting her enormous vagoo.
Yeah, that's Lucy. The detailed explanation is somewhere in this thread. The book went into much more detail.
She's also the mother of Vincent (Andy Garcia) in III.
Was that a retcon or always the plan from the beginning? Seems like something added when drawing up the plot for 3.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top