The Godfather: Part II (1974)
June 3, 2020 2:54 PM - Subscribe

The second installment in The Godfather trilogy. Partially based on Puzo's novel The Godfather, the film is both sequel and prequel to The Godfather, presenting parallel dramas: one picks up the 1958 story of Michael Corleone (Pacino), the new Don of the Corleone family, protecting the family business in the aftermath of an attempt on his life; the prequel covers the journey of his father, Vito Corleone (De Niro), from his Sicilian childhood to the founding of his family enterprise in New York City.

My kind of a perfect film.
posted by growabrain (12 comments total) 2 users marked this as a favorite
How many times did I see it?
And tonight was another impromptu re-watch.
I wanted to see what was written about it here on fanfare, and discovered that nobody bothered to post it before. So here you go.
posted by growabrain at 2:57 PM on June 3, 2020 [3 favorites]

On the very short list of "sequels arguably better than the first film."
posted by Chrysostom at 3:57 PM on June 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

The Godfather: Part II is streaming in the US via CBS All Access on Amazon.
posted by Etrigan at 8:51 PM on June 3, 2020

Chris Cuomo 'Fredo' debate: Is the term considered an Italian slur?

Cuomo claimed that Fredo is "like the N-word" for Italians.

"It's possible to see how Chris Cuomo may have taken it personally as well considering his father was one of the United States' best contemporary orators and considering his brother is the Governor of New York,"

posted by ActingTheGoat at 10:25 PM on June 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

After his brazen theft of this entire movie, Lee Strasberg absconded to Miami Beach where he lived out the rest of his days watching football with one leg slung over the arm of his living room chair.
posted by theory at 11:06 PM on June 3, 2020 [6 favorites]

That RobertDuvall is the second tag makes me happy. Bless whoever did the tags.

Is it ever made clear where Michael picked up the man in black who served as his bodyguard and assassin through a lot of the movie?
posted by Fukiyama at 9:44 AM on June 4, 2020 [1 favorite]

Maybe I’m a simpleton but I liked the first film over this one. This film always bums me out, how the Corleone family splinters apart and Michael putting the hit on Fredo after his betrayal. I love the young Vito storyline with DeNiro but Michael’s character arc always makes me sad. Also seeing how Connie and Kay turned out was quite depressing. I suppose this is the reality of mob life whereas the first film was more of a romanticized view.
posted by cazoo at 1:03 PM on June 4, 2020 [4 favorites]

I may be exactly on the fence w/r/t the "which is better" question. Something about this one felt too pompous, too convinced of its own importance as a Motion Picture Event, in a way that the first one didn't as much. I.e., maybe the first one felt more "pure" to me. Yet this one is more engrossing. Both great cinema, nevertheless.

Previously on FanFare: the watchable but justly-derided Third One
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 6:16 AM on June 5, 2020

Great movie. It'd been done before, but I remember watching the time-jumping back and forth and being struck by it at the time.

I'm also a bit conflicted about this movie series. They're presented as cautionary tales, but I feel like so many people see them (and other movies like Scarface, etc.) as aspirational. There is a through-line in our culture that celebrates ruthlessness, cruelty and the stamping out of our human qualities. Empathy is a luxury, a weakness, makes you bad at business.

Yes, Michael Corleone dies alone, but only after he presided over the greatest criminal organization of his time. Him dying alone and losing his daughter are supposed to be essential to his character and plot, but they feel tacked on to me, the cost of doing business.

I suppose there is no answer to this, and it's belaboring an obvious point, but when I revisit some of my favorite movies, I can't get away from questioning their underlying messages. If I'm being honest, which parts of those messages have I incorporated into my personal character?
posted by ishmael at 9:16 AM on June 5, 2020 [1 favorite]

The closing moments of this movie make the third one thematically redundant and unnecessary. At the end of this movie Michael has destroyed his family in the name of saving it. Other than the excellent production design and nostalgia at visiting from the previous movies, III is pointless.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:20 AM on June 9, 2020 [2 favorites]

Is it ever made clear where Michael picked up the man in black who served as his bodyguard and assassin through a lot of the movie?

Al Neri. He's the assassin in the police uniform at the end of Part I. His backstory is not in the films
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:41 PM on June 9, 2020 [1 favorite]

Al Neri is this guy, he is a bodyguard and assassin and shows up in both films, played by Richard Bright. I believe that Fukiyama is talking about the bodyguard and assassin in the black hat, who is shot to death while attempting to smother Hyman Roth in the hospital in Havana on New Years Eve. He is played by Amerigo Tot and is just credited on IMDB as Michael's Bodyguard. The fan wiki calls him Busseta. I think both he and Neri both have slightly larger roles in the novel, but it has been decades since I read it.
posted by ActingTheGoat at 1:42 PM on June 9, 2020 [2 favorites]

« Older Star Trek: The Animated Series...   |  The X-Files: Redux (Part 2/3)... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments