movieId;username;date;review_title;rating;text;helpfulYes;helpfulTotal;isSpoiler tt0068646;CalRhys;20/06/2014;The Pinnacle Of Flawless Films!;;"'The Godfather' is the pinnacle of flawless films! The first time I viewed 'The Godfather' I was in my early teens and it was the most astounding film I had ever seen, and has since then stood as my all-time favourite film. It is due to this that I have been looking forward to writing a review of this unforgettable classic. So let's start from the beginning. The film opens to four words, 'I believe in America', it's crazy to think that this simple line has become a resonant quote solely due to the impact it made on the entrance to the film's ""threshold"". This is just one of the many renowned quotes that litter the film, and believe me, there are a lot. After the first take we are then absorbed into the life of Vito Corleone, brilliantly portrayed by the Oscar- winning performance of Marlon Brando. Vito is a feared man, he is a criminal, he is a mafioso, but above all he is a respected family man, his three sons are depicted by three excellent actors, James Caan, John Cazale and Al Pacino as well as his adopted child Tom Hagen, played by Robert Duvall. The film follows Vito as he attempts to transfer his crime empire to his reluctant son, Michael. With some of the most graphic and gruesome death scenes to have ever been seen in the 1970's film industry (including a certain horse's head), 'The Godfather' epitomises how violence can be used effectively within a film. The Corleone's are some of the greatest antiheroes to have ever been seen on screen, whilst they are villains, the audience will refuse to accept that fact, Coppola does something simple and audacious, he takes the guilt out of organised crime. A film rife with beautiful cinematography, memorable musical scores and well-paced action and drama. Overall, The Godfather is one of Hollywood's greatest critical and commercial successes that gets everything right; a gangster flick that is overflowing with life, rich with emotion and subtle acting, and further blessed with amazing direction from Francis Ford Coppola. Arguably the most unforgettable masterpiece to have ever been made.";501;555;True tt0068646;gogoschka-1;11/02/2018;For Me, This Is The Definitive Film;10;This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.

Favorite films: IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-Known Masterpieces: imdb.com/list/ls070242495/;353;413;False tt0068646;SJ_1;30/09/2005;"""The Godfather"" is pretty much flawless, and one of the greatest films ever made";10;Rather than concentrating on everything that is great about The Godfather, a much easier way for me to judge its quality is on what is bad about it. Almost every film has something that I don't like about it, but I can honestly say that I wouldn't change anything about The Godfather. There is nothing weak about it and nothing that stands out as bad. That's why it gets ten out of ten.

This is one of those films that made me wonder why I hadn't seen it earlier. The acting from everyone involved is great, Marlon Brando comes across perfectly as the head of the family, and James Caan and Al Pacino are excellent as his sons. The soundtrack by Nino Rota is also very memorable, bringing back memories of the film every time I hear it. The plot has to be excellent for it to get ten out of ten, and it is, it's far from predictable and the film is the definition of a great epic.

The film is pretty shocking in the way every death occurs almost instantaneously, and as it spans ten years so many different things happen and every minute of it is great entertainment. It's a well-made and entertaining film that is only the first part of a trilogy, but it stands on its own as a wonderful film in its own right. If you haven't seen it, what are you waiting for? This was one acclaimed film that didn't disappoint.;952;1167;True tt0068646;andrewburgereviews;01/04/2019;An offer so good, I couldn't refuse;10;"It is now past 1 PM and I just finished watching Francis Ford Coppola's ""The Godfather"". I should probably go to bed. It's late and tomorrow I have to wake up a bit early. But not early enough to postpone writing these lines. Now that I have seen it three times, the opportunity of sharing my thoughts and refreshed insights are too much of a good offer to sit on. So, bear with me.

This film works so well because it takes place in an underworld in which we are so embedded that we do not even observe it. Coppola puts us straight in the smack-dab center of what is, admittedly, a society made by criminals for criminals. It is also the reason why it's so welcoming. We are surrounded by its inhabitants--cold-blooded murderers, men who see crime like a 9 to 5 job masquerading as honorable men. And I do mean men. From the outside, we would only witness the horrifying, disturbing manifestations of their well-thought out actions.

But it goes even deeper than that. It all revolves around the Corleone family led by Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando). He is the most honest of these men, sitting right on the edge. But for people like him, who do not fully embrace this world, it's not easy. He avoids conflict until it is absolutely necessary. He is a man defined by moral principles. There is a scene at the beginning, in which, during his daughter's wedding day, one of his associates, Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana) practices his speech that he is going to give to the Don when he meets him. The scene with these two is funny and almost adorable. I could not help but sympathize both of them only to realize that I am feeling warmth for two mobsters. Not to even mention that Lenny Montana was an actual mob hit-man and that he was actually nervous as he said that line.

The more I watched the more I realized just how incredibly complex and ruthless this society is and how it has the power to corrupt anyone to come in contact with it. The best example is Corleone's youngest son, Michael (Al Pacino). He returns home for his sister's wedding as a war hero dressed the part with his long-time girlfriend, Kay Adams (Diane Keaton). At first, he avoids this underworld, but necessity, first-hand exposure and just its sheer devilish appealing nature draws him in. As we get further in the film, the change is shocking and every outsider who ever got close to him is tainted in one way or another. If they survive it, they are drawn in as well as we are as viewers.

Inside, Coppola exposes the family to us fully, with a bold personal approach and we witness every discussion, every methodically calculated choice. Crime is done simply because it is the nature of their business, and we are put on a chair alongside them, so we easily relate. For us, they are the good guys, the rival families are the bad guys. This is the greatest feat this film managed to pull off--set apart good guys and bad guys in a world filled with bad guys.

This is a film of unmatched subtlety. No other movie sustains itself as good. No other film is done with such precision, attention and completeness. There are many layers which I probably missed and maybe will never notice. But I felt them. What director Francis Ford Coppola and his partner in crime (poor choice of words, sorry) Mario Puzo did is nothing short of a timeless piece of reference cinema whose influence is not based on reinventing the wheel, but rather perfecting it to the absolute maximum.

Most masterpieces are remembered for their historical contributions. ""Citizen Kane"" brought the biggest step-up to the art form, the same things did ""Gone With the Wind"" or ""2001: A Space Odyssey"". ""The Godfather"" is one of the few films that will be remembered simply because they are that good and I cannot possibly imagine a greater achievement.";69;79;False tt0068646;alexkolokotronis;21/06/2008;An Iconic Film;10;"Tell me a movie that is more famous than this. Tell me a movie that has had more parodies spinned off its storyline than this. Tell me one movie that has been as quoted as a much as this. The answer is you can't. No movie has had as much of an impact as The Godfather has had ever since it was released.

The acting was simply amazing, what else could you say. What could be more appealing to people(even today) than watching actors like Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Robert Duvall. This is like heaven for someone who is a fan of movies. With this movie Brando was able to bring himself back into the limelight. His performance as the godfather alone is iconic. His character has been recreated so much in films that it has almost if it has not already become a cliché. His performance though was not a cliché. His performance was subtle and breathtaking. It was so genuine and realistic that it was not just probably but definitely more genuine than Marlon Brando himself. Al Pacino was perfect for this film as well. What a way to start up your career. His character was all about depth and he displayed it perfectly. He was able to display his own inner-battles in his mind as well as the battles he had with his family, friends and enemies. His character was more of a psychological character study than anything else to me. Robert Duvall to me was the glue to the movie. He added a different perspective to everything in just that he was not Italian yet having the respect of the mafia. His character is a man of high authority within the Corleone family who was listened to and insightful;. This was simply perfect giving the film great balance throughout. The rest of the cast was just icing on the cake.

The writing was phenomenal and breathtaking. As mentioned before there has been no movie quoted more than this. It is not even the quotes though that makes the writing in here so perfect. It is the symbolism and meaning that went into every scene. There are countless symbols, messages and lines in here that are so memorable yet it is as realistic as a movie could get.

The directing by Coppola was perfect as well. Not many movies can be 3 hours and yet maintain a good level of interest from the audience like The Godfather. Coppola deserves credit for this. The symbolism and messages that went into every scene also has to do with the directing not just the writing. The movie is so well edited and strung together that the only word that could come to my mind is perfection.

The cinematography and music were perfect. The score of this movie is one of the most memorable ever. If you were to hear it you could identify it right away. The cinematography was what actually really drove this movie. The Godfather seems to have this mystique to it, it gives you the feeling you are watching something truly remarkable.

The horse's head, the scene of Brando running with his groceries, the coffee shop scene, ""I'll give him an offer he can't refuse"" and countless other scenes and quotes from this movie have become a part of our culture. These scenes and lines have been recycled over and over again in comedies, commercials, etc. that it is impossible to avoid the greatness of The Godfather. The Godfather is like a disease once you see it you fall in love with it. I don't know if it is the greatest movie ever but it is definitely the most iconic film ever made.";243;294;True tt0068646;MR_Heraclius;23/02/2020;The greatest movie of all time!;10;One of the best films of all time, an absolute masterpiece. The Godfather is arguably the best gangster drama as well as setting the standard for cinema.;107;126;False tt0068646;b-a-h TNT-6;05/03/2002;"Another kind of ""family movie""";10;"The Godfather is one of the few films in which I personally did not find any significant weakness even after many viewings. From the direction, to the acting, to the storyline, to the score, The Godfather has the word classic written all over, and it really is not much of a surprise that it is now considered by many one of the top five movies of all time. Perhaps when it comes to cinematic techniques The Godfather has not been as revolutionary as Citizen Kane, but its influence on motion pictures is comparable. Rarely a movie has defined or re-defined a genre as much as this one did for ""gangster movies"", but its influence goes well beyond that.

The Godfather's influence has been so big through the years that elements of it can be found in virtually every ""organized crime film"" nowadays; almost every comedy featuring a gangster in the last few years has spoofed something in The Godfather. The Italian-American old mobster a-la Don Vito Corleone has become one of the most established figures in the public's imagination.

But to say that The Godfather is simply ""influential"" is to diminish its true qualities, and so is to describe it simply as ""a movie about gangsters"". The Mafia is certainly the main focus the story revolves around (despite the fact that the word is never mentioned), but although the movie never tries to forcedly insert separate subjects it contains an amount of psychological and social subtexts that cannot be overlooked. Considerations on how the social environments changes us, on how moral values appear different from different point of views, on how violence can destroy a human soul, and on how power can corrupt an individual are deeply blended into a story that stays practically always true to complete realism, and the result is a picture of astonishing efficacy and believability.

As good as the direction and the story are, it would be unfair not to consider the major role that the actors' performances had in the cinematic triumph that was The Godfather. Praised by many as the best cast to ever appear in an American movie, all the cast in The Godfather succeeds in portraying complex, three-dimensional characters without ever making a slip. The exceptional portrayals of Don Vito and Michael Corleone respectively by Marlon Brando and Al Pacino, the performances by Robert Duvall, James Caan and Diane Keaton as Tom Hagen, Santino Corleone and Kay Adams, the ruthless Virgil Sollozzo played by Al Lettieri -- as well as more than a few other roles -- are all perfect for the movie, and they all succeed in making us believe these are real people, not just actors. We are not watching a central character and a bunch of incomplete figures that revolve around him: although Michael Corleone is the character that gets the most screen time, everybody is the center of this world his own way. The movie makes it possible for the viewers to identify with different characters and to observe how their personality and story fits in, and it does it much more effectively than many bloated multiple-storyline movies that came out in the last few years.

The movie opens on the wedding of Don Vito Corleone's daughter, Connie (Talia Shire). Don Corleone is a powerful man, and it was not without the use of violence that he achieved this position during the course of his life. The wedding scene gives a perfect setting of where and how the Don's power extends; from the regular worker in a neighborhood, to the immensely popular singer, to the friends in politics and right to the ruthless killer, Don Corleone has links to people ready to ask him favors and to pay him back. Some are trustworthy, some are not, but thanks to his intelligence and intuit the Don can almost always distinguish the two.

However, this is 1946, times are changing, and to many of the younger people working in the crime business, Don Corleone's ideas are becoming obsolete. The Don believes that the new trend in the business, narcotics, is too dangerous and the families dealing with it would eventually end up self-destroying; while his family had deals in alcohol and gambling for a long time, part of the Government and law enforcement was ready to close one eye. Drugs are another thing.

To this day, Don Corleone was able to keep things together while maintaining his economic and political power, but things will brutally change when a powerful drug dealer name Sollozzo enters the picture. The refusal of Don Corleone to cooperate with Sollozzo, and a weakness immediately spotted by the latter, will ignite a war that will cost many lives, and that will see Michael Corleone, Vito's younger son and the one who never wanted to take part in the family business, lose his ""innocence"" and transform into a gangster as ruthless as the people he initially stood up against.

I purposely decided not to spoil much about the plot because I believe that the film is perfectly enjoyed without knowing anything in advance, and -- believe it or not -- there are still quite a lot of people who have never seen this movie. There are multiple scenes that manage to create an incredible tension, various twists, and although like any other masterpiece The Godfather can be watched knowing the whole story beforehand and still be a phenomenal experience, I believe it is always a pleasure to see it for the first time and enjoy its multiple climaxes. Besides, to outline such complicated characters and such an emotionally intense story in a short review like this one would be inadmissible.

There has been much speculation on how the events in The Godfather novel written by Mario Puzo, the book the film is based on, could be an exposé of true facts. Many believe that the character of Johnny Fontane , for instance, was based on Frank Sinatra's real life, and many of the other characters were modeled after real people. I won't go into that: frankly, I have no idea whether these voices are reliable, although the Frank Sinatra reference seems obviously quite believable.

The cinematography of The Godfather is dark and tasteful, and colors are used perfectly to give a true feel of the era it is set in. There is a fair amount of violence, though rarely gratuitous.

The Godfather certainly doesn't need my recommendation. The film is universally considered one of the best of all time, and the performances by Pacino and Brando alone is the stuff of legends.";513;655;True tt0068646;danielfeerst;22/01/2020;Amazing movie;10;"The acting was simply amazing, what else could you say. What could be more appealing to people(even today) than watching actors like Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Robert Duvall. This is like heaven for someone who is a fan of movies. With this movie Brando was able to bring himself back into the limelight. His performance as the godfather alone is iconic. His character has been recreated so much in films that it has almost if it has not already become a cliché. His performance though was not a cliché. His performance was subtle and breathtaking. It was so genuine and realistic that it was not just probably but definitely more genuine than Marlon Brando himself. Al Pacino was perfect for this film as well. What a way to start up your career. His character was all about depth and he displayed it perfectly. He was able to display his own inner-battles in his mind as well as the battles he had with his family, friends and enemies. His character was more of a psychological character study than anything else to me. Robert Duvall to me was the glue to the movie. He added a different perspective to everything in just that he was not Italian yet having the respect of the mafia. His character is a man of high authority within the Corleone family who was listened to and insightful;. This was simply perfect giving the film great balance throughout. The rest of the cast was just icing on the cake.

The writing was phenomenal and breathtaking. As mentioned before there has been no movie quoted more than this. It is not even the quotes though that makes the writing in here so perfect. It is the symbolism and meaning that went into every scene. There are countless symbols, messages and lines in here that are so memorable yet it is as realistic as a movie could get.";16;17;False tt0068646;mattrochman;14/10/2006;Initially, I wasn't a fan... but then I realised;10;"This is a masterpiece. A timeless masterpiece. Initially, I didn't like this film all that much - I found it rather over-hyped and boring. This was until the advent of DVD, which gave me the feature I needed for this sort of film: subtitles. Once I switched them on and heard (read) every last word of Brando's ramblings and other characters ramblings, I grew a true appreciation for this epic.

To make a true epic, you need all of three following ingredients working in near perfect harmony. For screenwriters who come across this, take the following pointers on board: 1) Contrasting Characters: Good films have some character distinction, but most fall rather flat because the core of each character is the same.

Of course, there are exceptions to rule (ie... where you want mono-tonal characters... aka matrix; or where you want outlandish contrasts... aka The Fifth Element), but ultimately, this is what makes films deep, meaningful and grand. Consider the contrasts between the Don's children. Michael is rather cool, rational and collected, whereas Sonny is more hot-headed, spontaneous and simple minded. But simply having these contrasts is not nearly enough. What you really need to do is to develop these characters - place them in situations - and then dwell on how their character impacts on the situation they're put in. The Godfather is a terrific example of how to pull this off. While many try to do this in screenplays, most lose the plot and create character obscurities that stretch credibility.

2) Transformation: The central character(s) must undergo a transformation, resulting in them being almost unrecognizable by the end of the film. By putting them into situations, the character's character must not only influence the outcome of the situation; it must also have a lasting impact on the character. Consider Michael at the wedding and compare that to the Michael we see at the end of the film. Again, many films try, but most fail because they come up with unreal (literally, not praisingly) or simply moronic transformations (eg, Wall Street).

3) Patience: Men in Black 2 was an astounding film for one simple reason - it was an entire film squashed into about 70 minutes. It was not much longer than an episode of ER or Buffy. I certainly hope the new goal of Hollywood isn't to make films as short as possible.

All the great ones spend time - time developing characters, family life, growth, patience with the story telling in general. This is the key (provided that the story isn't mind-numbingly boring). Dances with Wolves, Heat.. and so on are very patient but top-class films. While studios may be lukewarm on the idea of longer films, they are worth it if you have a ripper story to base it on.

I feel that this film has not dated all that much and has tremendous re-watch-ability.";437;584;False tt0068646;Godz365;27/02/2019;How things were done back then!;10;The directing by Coppola was perfect as well. Not many movies can be 3 hours and yet maintain a good level of interest from the audience like The Godfather. Coppola deserves credit for this. The symbolism and messages that went into every scene also has to do with the directing not just the writing. The movie is so well edited and strung together that the only word that could come to my mind is perfection.

The cinematography and music were perfect. The score of this movie is one of the most memorable ever. If you were to hear it you could identify it right away. The cinematography was what actually really drove this movie. The Godfather seems to have this mystique to it, it gives you the feeling you are watching something truly remarkable.;14;15;False tt0068646;winnantonio;10/10/2017;Top 5;10;One of the great movies of its time. Before, and even now is admire as one of the most classic and greatest films of all time. And I agree. I remember when I first watched it I never thought that Sonny would be the one killed, and Michael being the one taking over the family, and ruling with an iron fist. I have to watch at least one or two times a year.;39;47;True tt0068646;Trevizolga;09/07/2006;This Movie Has Haunted My Life...;10;I love this movie and all of the GF movies. I see something new every time I have seen it (countless, truly). The story of tragedy and (little) comedy that exists in this film is easily understood by people all over the world. This film has been called an American story however I have met others who have seen this movie in other languages and they seem to have the same love and appreciation for it that I do. I love the characters and all of the different personalities that they represent not just in families but in society itself. It seems like the entire cast is part of every other movie that I love as well. The sounds, music, color and light in the film are just as much a part of the film as the people. This could be attributed to the method in which it was filmed. At many parts of the film I can still find myself feeling the emotions conveyed in the film. I never tire of appreciating this film. I thank God that FFC is an American treasure. We are fortunate to have him.;333;461;False tt0068646;DaveDiggler;29/06/2008;An Epic, Masterful Look into the Underground World;10;"""The Godfather"" simply put, is one of the greatest films of all time. The script is thee best I've ever read. The direction is flawless. The acting may very well have the best ensemble cast in any movie I've ever seen or will ever see. It's also one of the most precise and intricate films I've ever come across as writer, Mario Puzo brings out some of the most hidden and guarded secrets of the underground world ever captured on film. Watching ""The Godfather,"" is like watching cinematic art. Francis Ford Coppola's direction is what brings this film, that's so ambitious and so grand, down to earth with precision direction as he handles each and every scene with such care. The film starts with a black screen and an opening monologue from an undertaker. As the man starts talking about honor, family, respect, and justice we are pulled right in on his luminous eyes as he stands in near darkness. He begs for justice since the American system has failed him. He goes to Don Corleone (Marlon Brando) for justice. Don Vito is the man of power. He's the one who pulls all the strings and watches his puppets dance from behind the stage and out of sight; untouchable, or so we think. Some of the greatest moments in the film- and very intentional to show the distinguishable difference between Michael and Vito- are of Vito crying over his son, Sonny's (James Caan), death. When Michael learns of the news, he has little reaction. Two of the most emotionally powerful scenes in the film are from the cause of a loved one that has died long before he should have, and they come from Brando. As Vito stands over the body of his son he nearly breaks down. There is clash of feelings between the two men that are never conflicting, but compared.

The film opens during the wedding of Don Vito' daughter, Connie (Talia Shire), and we see just how strong the bond of family really is. You have the family dancing with each other, drinking, laughing, and sitting next to each other to show how close they are, then we see some of the outsiders such as the Barzini family, and surprisingly Michael (Al Pacino) along with his girlfriend Kay (Diane Keaton) on the outskirts without much interaction. Michael seems almost out of place as if he is the adopted son and Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) is more apart of the family than he is. His opening words are to Kay, and they include, ""That's my family, Kay. That's not me.""

We get the feeling that Michael's nearly ashamed of the stigma that goes along with his last name: This is what makes Al Pacino' role- significantly- the hardest performance in the entire film to portray. He's the one doing all the heavy lifting as he has to go from outsider and completely against the family's actions and businesses to, by films end, head of the family. Brando has the teary eyed moments that actors live for, but Michael is too cold for that. Never for a second as he gradually comes to power do we think this turn is ridiculous or laughable, and in lesser hands it very easily could have been.

The final act of the film is loaded with plot points as decisions are made left and right as the film becomes visually and emotionally captivating. As the film draws to an end, Michael has gained half of the power of the family and makes most of the decisions. He's treated, not with respect, but as an outsider, too high ranking for his experience. The Corleone family is on the brink of disaster and losing everything, yet we never get that feeling. We see the two leader's confidence and we keep our confidence in them, even if the other family members doubt their decisions. Michael goes to Las Vegas and makes Moe Greene an offer he can't refuse. Then he refuses. This is Pacino' shinning moment in the film. There's no screaming or the hoopla that goes along with his name. After he treats Moe Greene like utter garbage, Fredo (John Cazale) get's upset and starts barking at him. Coppola is perfectly on his game here, too, as we watch from Fredo's height, looking down on Michael who sits in a chair as he coldly looks up with his radiating eyes, that have so much going on behind them, and simply says, ""Fredo, don't ever take sides with anyone against family again. Ever.""

That's some serious foreshadowing for the second film, and only after watching the second film can you go back and appreciate what Pacino and Coppola pulled off in this scene; Cazale too. We have no idea how serious Michael is. These are some of the stepping stones that make Michael's change believable. He's not quite his father- Vito has a soft spot for his children (admittedly so)- as he's capable of turning on anyone and using the line, ""It's strictly business"" when it comes to family issues. Michael's sister, Connie, calls him a ""cold hearted bastard"" at the end of the film. It's hard to find better superlatives than that, yet we still love him. The interesting thing about Pacino' performance is that he doesn't sugarcoat it. He doesn't try to make the audience love him. He plays the character as the character should be played. That's the sign of great writing; great acting; and great directing since we could have very easily seen someone try to make him likable. This crew just presents the character with all his flaws and let's us decide if we love him or hate him. Its films like ""The Godfather,"" that made me wish I had amnesia, so I could feel the same heart pounding moments over and over again.";119;159;True tt0068646;ks4;25/12/2002;Magnificent portrait of organized crime;9;"This is by far the best movie ever to give a portrait organized crime, this movie goes deep inside and shows it all inside out..

With superb acting by especially Al Pacino as Mike Corleone and Marlon Brando as Don Vito corleone this movie shows how one of the head mafia families in New York works, it gives a detailed picture of how their business runs and what kinda chances they got to take on their business, for example their denial to step inside the narcotic business brings on alot of troubles, but also it shows what kinda sacrifices they make, every day could be their last day..

Al Pacino shines above all in this movie, as the smart boy of the family he returns after fighting a war for his country, at that time not involved in the family business, but it doesn't take long before the war breaks lose and he see no other ways than to step in and fight for his family.

This is definetely a ""must see"" masterpiece.";559;790;True tt0068646;The-Other-Monkey;06/08/2006;A Masterpiece;10;This must rank as the best film (along with part 2)of all time.An ensemble performance that has no weak spot.

Particularly, John Cazale ( Fredo) and Richard Castellano ( Clemenza) give wonderfully understated performances. You just have to believe that Castellano WAS Clemenza, he brings a real touch to his role.

John Cazale brings the troubled Fredo to life, and you can see the weak Fredo desperately trying to live up to the family reputation but knowing that he can never be what his father wants.

The story of one man's reluctance to be drawn into the murky family business,and his gradual change through circumstance, paints a vivid picture of this violent period of US history.

Do not miss this film!;324;459;False tt0068646;mm-39;16/05/2001;perfect;10;This movie is strong, good script, great casting, excellent acting, and over the top directing. It is hard to fine a movie done this well, it is 29 years old and has aged well. Even if the viewer does not like mafia type of movies, he or she will watch the entire film, the audiences is glued to what will happen next as the film progresses. Its about, family, loyalty, greed, relationships, and real life. This is a great mix, and the artistic style make the film memorable.;678;1006;False tt0068646;vjeet_a;04/07/2005;The world inside the underworld!;10;"The godfather trilogy is an exclusive set of movies that will continue to live with humanity, every generation will see them to say, ""Oh that was 10 out of 10."" If you watch them you will know that the world that lives inside the underworld is same as the one we live in except that people in underworld are so smart, in fact smartness is the only thing that can keep them there. Don Vito Caroleone's early life shown in part-II is very well done to show the Don in making, how a kid who couldn't even tell his name went on becoming a underworld don who keep most senators, judges and lawyers in his pocket. Meeting of don with the so call five families are among most impressive scenes.

A saga that goes on for 9 continuous hours takes you around various walks in life of Mike (Don's younger son who become Don later), his school days, love life, personal life, family life, business life, political life and religious life. How all of these different roles Mike plays in his life and how intertwined these are.

I enjoyed watching these movies so much, I wish I had seen them much before then I did. Its amazing to see how the Part-III was made 18 years later the part-I was made and everything looks so continuous if watch them together.

I need not say much! The Godfather father trilogy been around for a while and everyone knows that they are great set of movies, its just the matter of when you actually get to see them.

Watch them! Kudos to Francis Ford Coppola! -Vishy";316;471;False tt0068646;Nazi_Fighter_David;24/02/2001;An exquisite Mafia epic with outstanding performances...;10;"""The Godfather"" is a huge piece of film entertaining, involving sentiment, nostalgia, filial affection, pride, integrity, loyalty, corruption, honor, betrayal and crime... Within weeks of its release, it was clearly a blockbuster, a cinematic phenomenon, an exquisite Mafia epic with outstanding performances... Coppola got everything right, creating a landmark in American cinema...

His film acutely details the inner workings of the criminal ""families,"" and the ruthlessness of those in organized crime, but also examines their steadfast loyalty, love for blood relations, and code of ethics... Coppola and Puzo subtly weave a complex narrative with themes of hypocrisy, power, and corruption which stands as a pulsating reflection of our uncertain times...

With his raspy voice, deliberate movements, and penetrating stare, Brando creates a personage that will be remembered for ever... The line ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse"" has reached legendary statues... Brando's Don Corleone is the moral center of the film: a tough, wise, feared old Sicilian who has risen to become an all powerful leader in an empire of Italian-American organized crime...

While crime may be the first image that comes into one's mind in the film, violence plays a vital part in this complicated tale... Brando is the head of one of the five families who are said to control the Mafia in the area of New York... He is opposed to any involvement in drugs, and refuses to risk his political contacts and prestige for such putrefied money... He is behind the time but he understands that society is not alarmed by ""liquor, gambling, and even women..."" He is also a loving family man... His sons, relatives and friends are part of his operations... He despises displays of weakness... He understands the strength of power and his wordless sympathy for Michael when he is forced to assume the ""sovereignty."" In the outdoor garden, father and son are affectionate to each other, but cannot express their emotions openly...

The Corleones are a warm, close family and the motion picture (with l0 Oscar Nominations) shows the flavor of Italian-American home life... Don Corleone is an undisputed patriarch, and as played by Brando, he has almost the manner of a religious leader... His voice is quite and rasping, his chin stands as a symbol of his authority, and men kisses his hand as they ask for his favors... He is a charismatic leader and his eyes reflect his kind heart as his implacability...

Pacino's gradual and subtle transformation is the heart of the film... From a gentle man to one of the most cunning, ruthless, and cold-blooded man ever to come on the screen, he has learned from his father never to talk in front of outsiders and always keep his own counsel... His commandment ""Never to take sides against the Family.""

The opening shot of ""The Godfather"" sets the tone of the film as Don Corleone and some of his family listen to an undertaker, Amerigo Bonasera (Salvatore Cirsitto), pleading for justice for the near-rape and brutal beating suffered by his daughter...

Attending the wedding of his sister Connie to young bookmaker Carlo Rizzi, Michael, a highly decorated Marine captain from World War II, points out the other guests to Kate (Diane Keaton), his non-Italian girlfriend... In the same time Coppola introduces us to his large cast of characters:

Sonny (James Caan), the rough, hot-headed impulsive kid who never really grew up; Fredo (John Cazale), the troubled, shy, weak young man who can't seem to do anything right; Tom (Robert Duvall), the right-hand man, the legal adviser and adopted son to the Godfather— steady, reliable, always thinking, always controlled; Connie (Talia Shire), the battered wife and rebellious sister, who achieves and promotes the movie's most horrific scene; Johnny Fontane (Al Martine), the idol star whose tears set up the shocking moment when a movie ""big shot"" named Jack Woltz (John Marley) finds himself in an horrifying pool of blood; Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana), the giant criminal thug, one of Corleone's most trusted enforcers; Tessio (Abbe Vigoda), the fearsome tall enforcer who implies the possibility of violent revenge guaranteeing Michael's safety; and Clemenza (Richard Castellano), the other faithful enforcer...

With a beautiful score by Nino Rota immensely memorable, Coppola's motion picture remains a triumph, nearly perfect in its execution, composition, and impact...";159;239;True tt0068646;cardsrock;09/03/2019;Simply the best;10;This film is pretty much the perfection of the craft. Every single aspect of The Godfather is outstanding. There are so many iconic lines and moments throughout the movie that have been replicated and entrenched in culture over the years. There really isn't too much else to say. This is truly the peak of filmmaking.;18;23;False tt0068646;Neve_Fan;11/08/1998;The Greatest Movie Ever Made;9;The Godfather is one of the very few films that doesn't have a single flaw. Seeing The Godfather for the first time was the most amazing movie experiences of my life. There's scenes that stay with you when the movies over, and you don't forget them. Everyone makes the mistake of calling this film a movie about crime. Its really a movie about family. The dialogue is just unbelievable. I've seen the movie at least 30, 40 times, and I'm still amazed at how perfect it is. The music, the acting, everything. People think that Citizen Kane is the greatest movie ever made...well, there's no way that ANYONE can think that Citizen Kane is more moving, and has a better storyline than The Godfather. The thing I find so amazing about The Godfather is how Michael (Al Pacino) changes throughout the movie. Its my opinion that this is the greatest movie ever made, and I doubt that anyone can watch this movie, and think I'm crazy.;461;757;True tt0068646;Coxer99;10/06/1999;The Godfather;10;Engrossing motion picture that features some of the finest editing, cinematography and performances ever. There is a wonderful theme of family that runs through this film and its later sequels. No one is truly judged. Love is unconditional. God is the one who truly judges. Easily, the word masterpiece describes this film, but that's been said by so many...Who am I to argue? Masterpiece is right on the money.;373;611;False tt0068646;JamesHitchcock;16/05/2004;A film of great power and a milestone in the history of the cinema;8;"Before 'The Godfather' came out in 1972, the gangster genre, chiefly associated with Jimmy Cagney and the film noir style of the forties and fifties, had been in something of a decline. It was, therefore, a brave move for Francis Ford Coppola to attempt a three-hour epic based upon the family life of a Mafia don.

The film opens in the immediate post-war period with the wedding of the daughter of Don Vito Corleone. Scenes of the wedding are intercut with scenes showing Don Vito himself in his study, granting favours and dispensing a crude form of justice as though he were an absolute monarch. We soon learn, however, that times are changing, even in the world of organised crime. Don Vito's empire has been based upon gambling, illicit liquor sales and prostitution. Other Mafia families, however, are eager for the profits to be made from drugs, and Corleone receives a proposal from a drug dealer named Sollozzo that the Corleone clan should join him in exploiting the narcotics market. Corleone refuses, ostensibly for business reasons, but it is made clear that his real objections to narcotics derive from his personal code of honour. Sollozzo, offended, orders an attempt to be made on Corleone's life. This fails, but Corleone is left seriously injured.

The focus now shifts to the younger generation. Don Vito has three sons, Santino ('Sonny'), Fredo and Michael, and an adopted son, Tom Hagen. These four have contrasting characters. Sonny is hot-headed and impetuous, Fredo weak, Tom cautious and moderate. Michael, the youngest, loves his family, but initially wants to play no part in their criminal enterprises. Recently returned from the war, his ambitions are to qualify as a lawyer and to settle down in a respectable life with his Anglo-Saxon wife-to-be, Kay. The attempt on his father's life, however, persuades Michael that his first loyalty is to the family, and he agrees to be part of a revenge attack on Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey the corrupt policeman who is on his payroll. There follows a brutal cycle of revenge, as each killing is avenged by another murder.

The film's emphasis on family ties, honour and vengeance recall the revengers' tragedies of the Shakespearean and Jacobean theatre. Coppola does seem to be aiming for a Shakespearean grandeur. Don Vito, the ageing monarch whose powers slip away is reminiscent of King Lear, Michael, a good man corrupted by power, of Macbeth (a comparison which will become even more apt in the later episodes of the trilogy). There is also something of Hamlet in Michael and Sonny's resolve to avenge their father. Such an ambitious film requires acting of a very high order if it is to seem credible, but Coppola was able to draw upon some of the best performances of the seventies. To my mind, this was Marlon Brando's last great role (I have never cared much for 'Apocalypse Now' and loathed 'Last Tango in Paris'), but it was one that he made the most of. His Don Vito is both terrifying and pitiable, part dictator and part lonely old man. His rasping voice (the result of an earlier bullet wound in the throat) conveys both menace and physical weakness. Don Vito may be a bad man, but he is also in a way a magnificent one, and his passing marks the end of an era.

If the film was notable for the last of the great Brando, it also saw the birth of a new star. Except perhaps for 'The Godfather Part II', I have never seen Al Pacino give a better performance than he did here, as he portrayed Michael's passage from a 'civilian' (as his brother calls him) to a warlord, from an innocent young idealist to a ruthless killer. Given the length of time that Pacino is on screen, I am surprised that he was only nominated for Best Supporting Actor rather than Best Actor. It would be interesting to speculate who might have won if he and Brando had been in competition for the award. I am even more surprised that Pacino did not win as Best Supporting Actor; Joel Grey's role in 'Cabaret' (which did win) is more showy and a technical tour de force, but it lacks the emotional depth of Pacino's performance. I also greatly admired James Caan's role as the hot-headed Sonny.

This is not a perfect film; it has flaws, both artistic and ethical. Artistically, there are places where it tends to drag, particularly after the killings of Sollozzo and McCluskey, and even more so after the killing of Sonny, although it recovers at the ending, which is a highly effective piece of cinema.

Ethically, I felt that the film tended to take the characters' world view too much at face value. Don Vito may be a dictator, but he is in his own eyes a benevolent dictator, a man of honour who lives by his own moral code. As others such as Roger Ebert have pointed out, this is a film which views a closed society from the inside; the only outsider is Kay, and her role is a relatively minor one. As a result, we do not get to see the damage that organised crime does to the fabric of society, and the Mafia's own view of itself is never openly challenged. That is not to say, however, that the film is totally amoral. We do see that an ethos of taking revenge can spiral out of control and lead to unforeseen consequences, to the innocent as well as the guilty. This is particularly true of the scenes where Michael takes refuge in Sicily after killing Sollozzo. The dead man's associates track him down, and a bomb meant for him instead kills his innocent young Italian wife Apollonia.

Although there may be no overt condemnation of the moral position of the Mafia, there is implied criticism of its bloodier deeds. All the characters, whatever the crimes of which they may be guilty, are careful to pay lip-service to the Catholic Church and its rituals. Throughout the film (indeed, throughout the trilogy as a whole) the traditional ceremonies of the Church form a backdrop to various criminal activities. ('The Godfather' begins with a wedding and ends with a baptism). It seemed to me that Coppola was using these scenes to make an ironic contrast between the values of organised crime and those of Christianity, especially at the end of the film. Michael, already a 'godfather' in the metaphorical sense of a Mafia boss, becomes one in the literal sense of a baptismal sponsor. Shots of him taking vows on behalf of his godchild to reject the works of the devil are intercut with shots of his enemies being gunned down on his orders.

Despite my reservations about this film, and although I personally would not have ranked it as my all-time favourite, there can be no denying that it is a film of great power and a milestone in the history of the cinema. 8/10";138;217;True tt0068646;t-turnquest1;20/03/2015;The Pioneer of All Filmmaking;10;The Godfather is one of the most iconic films in cinema history. There are three points in the film that made it stand alone: direction, acting, and writing.

The direction of this film was great! Frances Fran Coppela really knows how to make a great film. Like Steven Spilberg, Peter Jackson, James Cameron, and so many others, he as list himself as one of the most greatest directors in Hollywood. He's my role model.

The acting was terrible, just kidding! :) The Acting was amazing. Marlon Brando carries the anchor of this movie, but Al Pacino holds it carefully. The cast of this movie was a good example of cast chemistry. Great Cast!

The Writing was awesome. Coppela knows what he is doing when he is writing a script to a major blockbuster hit. That's why he's my role model.

The Godfather is one my favorite films of all time. I would recommend you see this movie. It's awesome.;34;48;False tt0068646;JosephD3193;11/05/2018;A Legitimately Perfect Film;10;Really what more about The Godfather can I say that hasen't already been said?

Everything about this movie is perfectly executed and incredibly well put together. The characters are really what added that extra depth to the film. The first character I want to bring up is Sonny. Throughout the movie, you know him as an ignorant and almost childish person, yet when he is shot and killed, you feel immediate sympathy for him. And at the same time he is a determined member of their family business and also caring when the time is needed for that trait to be exposed (ex: when Vito nearly dies in the first act). And when Vito is looking down at his dead body, you really feel for them even though someone like Vito may come across like an incredibly serious and emotionless man. But what they accomplished was, not making him another one dimensional Mafia/mob boss, but someone who legitimately cares for his family. The way they introduce him in the beginning of the film is very well conducted and shows the audience how intimidating he is and the impact he has on other people in what he says and how his word/opinion is extremely important to people. Brando is incomparable in his role and is irreplaceable as his role as Don Corleone.

My favorite aspect of this movie, however, is seeing the riveting transition of Michael Corleone throughout the film. They first introduce Michael as someone who wants nothing to do with the family business, but is eventually the new Don replacing his father at the end of the film. Wow! What a transformation! He is a former Marine who is committed to living a normal, happy life with his wife Kay. However Michael eventually gets involved in the criminal empire after Vito is shot and almost killed. This leads up to the best scene, in my opinion, of the movie. Michael goes out to a restaurant with Sollozzo, the head of one of the rival families of the Corleones, the Tattaglias, in addition to Police Captain McCluskey, with intentions to kill both of them. He does after contemplating it in his head, and this is an incredibly important scene because it is the start of Michael's transition into the new Don we see at the end of the movie. It was not rushed in any way and that's another great aspect of the film. It's nearly three hours long, but it's necessary for the person watching it to be fully immersed into the story and characters. The ending is really well directed and thought out because without any explanation, you know what just happened as soon as someone kisses Michael's hand, which was shown earlier in the film but to Vito, a gesture only given to the Don. Al Pacino gave a great performance and so did every single other person in the movie. Perfect casting all around.

I think one performance that is very undervalued is Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. He plays a super important role in the movie, but is not quickly thought of by most people. He was a side character, but incorporated well in the film as the advisor for Vito, and later Michael.

Many Of the characters in the movie and constantly conflicted with themselves and they display it very well. The entire story is one of the best ever put to the big screen and the praise that it's gotten over all these years are very deserving.

The way they utilize lighting in the film is also very important such as every scene of Vito in his office at the beginning of the film is constantly lit dark showing the fear people feel when entering his office and the seriousness of situations involving him. This also applies to Vito's soft spoken voice demonstrating how intimidating he comes off as without screaming for example. A vast majority of the film, basically the entire 2nd and 3rd acts, with the exception of the very beginning with the wedding to go also how with the 1st act, are all lit dim, in dark tones. On the other hand, Michael, in the beginning of the film, is shown in the bright daylight outside talking with his girlfriend, an excellent contrast between him and the rest of his family.

Great acting, great script, and all put into great hands that made it as amazing as it is even 40 years later.

RATING: 10.0/10;15;19;True tt0068646;gab-14712;18/10/2017;"""I'm Going To Make Him An Offer He Can't Refuse""";9;"When I first saw The Godfather many years ago, I initially called the film ""a long, boring piece of crap."" Luckily as I have matured, so have my tastes in cinema. This film is heralded as an American classic, and now I can wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. As famed critic Roger Ebert pointed out, this movie is the one where most people can agree on its quality.

Ultimately, The Godfather is still a very long movie but I have come to appreciate it more with each viewing. The film is obviously about the mafia, but this is a different kind of mafia film. Prior mafia films and even those after this one deals with perspectives from an outsider and their perceptions of violence and death with the mafia. However, this film is told within the confinements of a mafia family. The story is told within the inside and that was a unique story angle at that time. I like how the film doesn't show corruption from the mafia family, the Corleones. There are no civilian casualties from organized crime and the only corrupt person in the film is in the form of a police officer. Don Corleone doesn't believe in dealing with drugs, because of how they affect people. The themes of the Corleone family and the movie itself is family and loyalty. As Michael Corleone points out in the movie, ""never take sides against the family."" That is when crazy things begin to happen.

The beginning of the movie is very crucial. It is basically a large wedding scene with scenes intercut of Don Corleone in his darkened office taking care of family business. This beginning is important for several reasons. We get the tone of the film and we understand who the Corleone family is. This is also where all the characters are introduced and explained. By the time the scene is over, we get the big picture of the film and we get a sense where the film is heading. The scene is a bit long, but I felt director Francis Ford Coppola did an excellent job on introducing all of his main characters in the film

This is a film about family and it takes advantage of the classic structure of handing power between generations. The patriarch of the family is Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) who is the head of one of the most powerful mafia families. His children, who play a huge factor in the family, are Sonny (James Caan), Michael (Al Pacino), Connie (Talia Shire), and Fredo (John Cazale). Also playing a huge role is the family lawyer, Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall). The aging Vito decides to transfer power to one of his subalterns, and that causes a ripple between the five Mafia families in New York. The main child here is Michael, who didn't want anything to do with his family and instead join the military. But after Vito is shot, Mike decides to join the family business and take control.

The acting is absolutely fantastic. Marlon Brando delivered one of the best performances of his career as the aging head of the family. He is known for using his devices in the beginning such as his puffy cheeks and the cat on his lap. The way he delivered his dialogue in such a soft-spoken voice is also very memorable. Al Pacino does a very good job, taking wise advice from his father while delivering on his own counsel. This is the beginning for Pacino's illustrious career. Robert Duvall does a fantastic job as Hagen. Duvall has had a legendary career, but the one role I think of every time I reflect on his career is his role as Tom Hagen. James Caan does a great job as the quick-tempered Sonny.

The one thing that does irk me about the film is the use of women. It seems like women has no part of the family. Mike's sister, Connie (played solidly by Talia Shire) is only used for a target of her husband's Carlo anger. He treats her like a piece of filth. Although, Mike does have a special place in his heart for Connie. Mike also has a romantic interest in the film named Kay Adams (played by the eccentric Diane Keaton). I didn't think Kay was a strong character in the film. Also, Vito has a wife but she is just an insignificant shadow only meant for the family pictures. Finally, there is a Sicilian woman we meet. After Michael goes on exile in Sicily for shooting a cop who played a role in the shooting of his father, he falls in love with this girl ..but she ends up getting blown up. My only qualm abut the film is how little importance women play in it.

Also playing a huge role in the film is the music. Coppola traveled to Italy to find a composer who can bring an Italian feeling to the film. His find, Nino Rota did just that. The main title is heavily influenced by Italian culture and it gave an authentic feeling to the film-as the main characters are an Italian family. It's a shame that the Academy snubbed his music, because I felt it should have won an Oscar. It's one of my favorite all-time scores.

Nominated for 11 Oscars and winning 3 of them including Best Picture, The Godfather is one of America's most influential films. The movie remains popular to this day and if you haven't seen the film, you should see it. It's almost three hours long, but this is a portrait of a mafia family that is all about family. Francis Ford Coppola did an amazing job directing this film from the very popular novel written by Mario Puzo. The Godfather is an instant American classic.

My Grade: A-";5;5;False tt0068646;sirwickmusic;21/10/2019;The film of films;10;A flawless movie. This movie translates from the book perfectly!This movie made me want to be a director and create film. Everyone's acting was perfect. To think that Puza wrote this specifically to make a hit is at first crazy.;8;9;False tt0068646;Tolispro;30/03/2019;Perfection;10;Alright, this movie is simply perfect. I don't have one bad thing to say about it honestly. Phenomenal acting from few of Hollywood's greatest talents. Al Pacino gives a career defying performance in The Godfather along side Marlon Brando, James Caan, Robert Duvall and a young Diane Keaton. This movie is simply perfect. This adaptation of Mario Puzo's book tells the tale of an immigrant living the American Dream. But even though all of the starts were absolutely phenomenal in their individual roles only one remains more iconic than the others--Marlon Brando as Don Vito. Fans of the movie will come back and watch it again and again to witness Brando in his absolute finest.;8;9;False tt0068646;crendine;24/03/2015;The Greatest Film of All Time ! Period.;10;"This film contains all the elements of a genuine masterpiece. Its attention to detail, history, and tradition. An absolutely wonderful screenplay. Its comparative closeness to the novel and a storyline which became the template for future stories in this genre. As for the performances: there is not one single character flaw in this entire cast. What continues to amaze me about this film more than any other is the fact that not only were the correct actors and actresses chosen for the roles but that they were each chosen at the perfect point in their respective careers. Throughout this film, there is not one actor nor actress who seems ""too old or young for the part"". Nor does anyone (including an extremely strong Diane Keaton) seem ""out of place"" or ""unconvincing"". The plot and storyline could not have been better and this is one film that no matter how many times you've seen it, it still continues to amaze, entertain, and (in some ways) inform. Like some of the classics which preceded it, it holds up very well over time and will probably continue to do so. I currently own on VHS ""The Godfather Saga"" (the first 2 movies woven together in chronological order) which is absolutely amazing. It begins with the birth of Vito and ends with the eventual rise of Michael. Although Francis Ford Coppola does not like this version of his epic, I sure wish he would release it on DVD.";18;24;False tt0068646;eric262003;26/05/2014;The Geatest Movie Ever Made;10;"You can't really criticize a film like ""The Godfather"", especially from a younger-type guy like me. Since its release in 1972, ""The Godfather"" has been highly praised by fans universally. It's extremely hard for a person who has never seen ""The Godfather"" without having high expectations because millions of people, maybe more have been talking about how wonderful it is. But as a film critic who has seen the movie several times and has read the novel that it was based on by Mario Puzo, this movie really deserves the credibility it gets. It really is that special. The film is a gripping epic that indulges the viewer with plenty of unsuspecting twists and a plot that works in a multitude of dimensions. The mobster's depicted here face many trials and tribulation that involve marriage, favours, family struggles, turncoats, tragic events, violence and rigor mortis.

Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the head patriarch and kingpin of his esteemed enterprise is acquainted to at his daughter's wedding, which is a special occurrence in Italian tradition (Sicilian in particular) where the father of the bride is to refrain from offering the groom any special favours. His representatives showing their signs of respect towards the Don are featured in the opening scenes are told through their ways of personal address and greeting regimentations. The Don is to be treated with respect and dignity, a man who follows his own frame of mind to what is fair, and will likely deny any means of avenge. As an example, if anyone was to fondle with his daughter in any kind of way grounds for murder. It's not revenge, as long as your daughter's still breathing.

There are also numerous facets that indicate how not so respected the Don really is. Vito comes from the old school of Mafia, and can be labeled as a ""Moustache"" Pete. For one, unlike his adversaries, he refuses to get involved with drugs or smuggling for that matter. It this is much to the chagrin of other rival mob units in the state of New York. The violence is described disturbingly as nothing personal, it's just business. The philosophy behind this organized crime is chilling, but quite convincing. The violence is creepily accepted and sometimes happens all of the sudden. Suddenly, the Corleone enterprise falls on its foundations, and it's up to the next generation to restore the family so it could be ranked as the top of the best mob families.

The cast features a myriad of talented performers each playing their respective roles flawlessly. The top stars like Brando as Vito, James Caan as the hot-tempered Sonny, Al Pacino as the likable Michael, John Cazale as middle-sibling Fredo, Robert Duvall as mob attorney Tom Hagen, Richard Castellano as Clemenza, Abe Vigoda as Tessio and Diane Keaton as Kay Adams are what I may have expected what the characters from Puzo's book look like physically. Even the smaller roles deserve special credit. The performances were absolutely amazing. The characters in the film compliment the characters from the novel and it is mainly due to the physical structuring and the carefully planned interpretation.

The novel this movie was based on by Mario Puzo deserves praise in itself. Even though this movie was a fictional, there are a lot of authentic features that make every scene and every chapter to be real. I guess people when they think of mob bosses they visualize a supreme Don, sitting in his chair with a long facial expression contemplating with endless level-headedness and leadership. ""The Godfather"" is a marvel from both the film and the novel and it is hard to determine what medium is the better of the two.

If there is one thing that the book is better would be character development. Al Pacino's Michael Corleone is a more prominent character in the novel than in the movie. Michael's transformation in the movie is at times a bit rushed, while in the book it's handled more gradual. The other character Luca Brasi played by Lenny Montana was a more vital character in the novel, which while he was an ally to the Corleone clan, is marked as a threatening adversary with a dark and dreary secret. In the movie comes across as a big oaf, and not as scary. It's also nice that some of the smaller characters from the novel have engaging back stories like Captain McCluskey (Sterling Hayden). But that's good for the novel's sake, while the film would result in overdone detailing.

Overall, ""The Godfather"" is one of the greatest films ever made. Thanks mainly to the crew for creating a well-structured setting that compliments nicely to the characters, the script and most importantly, the direction of Francis Ford Coppola. Hats off to the cinematography from Gordon Willis which is backed nicely by the elegant score from Nino Rota and Carlo Savina. This film truly defines the words ""required viewings.""";16;21;True tt0068646;anthonykiely;27/12/2015;The aging patriarch of an organized crime dynasty transfers control of his clandestine empire to his reluctant son.;10;"What a brilliant film. It is one of my favorites. The aging patriarch of an organized crime dynasty transfers control of his clandestine empire to his reluctant son. I love this film All of my family loves it My girlfriend loves it. I think it is one of the best films ever. It stars many actors such as Marlon Brando and Al Pacino. It is one of the most greatest films of all time. I have it on DVD at home and the Soundtrack at home.

The Godfather is a 1972 American crime film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Albert S. Ruddy from a screenplay by Mario Puzo and Coppola. Starring Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as the leaders of the fictional Corleone New York crime family, the story spans the years 1945–55, concentrating on the transformation of Michael Corleone from reluctant family outsider to ruthless Mafia boss while chronicling the family under the patriarch Vito.

Based on Puzo's best-selling novel of the same name, The Godfather is widely regarded as one of the greatest films in world cinema and as one of the most influential, especially in the gangster genre. Ranked second to Citizen Kane by the American Film Institute in 2007,it was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry of the Library of Congress in 1990 as being ""culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant"".

The film was the box office leader for 1972 and was, for a time, the highest-grossing picture ever made. It won three Academy Awards for that year: Best Picture, Best Actor (Brando) and in the category Best Adapted Screenplay for Puzo and Coppola. Its nominations in seven other categories included Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall for Best Supporting Actor and Coppola for Best Director. The success spawned two sequels: The Godfather Part II in 1974, and The Godfather Part III in 1990.";14;18;True tt0068646;L_film_N;02/04/2015;This Movie is an Offer you Can't Refuse;10;Incredible!! With the epic soundtrack, characters, plot, casting, and directing this movie has to be considered THE best of all time. Although it is one of many Francis Ford Coppola masterpieces, this movie stands apart from the others. By telling the Corleone story from the inside of the family and mafia, viewers easily identify with and care about the characters. The cinematography is amazing too, and some of the shots and scenes from this movie can be considered the best of any movie throughout time. You can see IMDb's 9.2 rating of The Godfather and hear about the movie as often as you want, but until you experience the power of this film yourself, it will be impossible to grasp the importance of the movie to cinema. Although this movie is from the early 70s, it is by no means dated. Michael Corleone is my personal favorite character of all time, and the chance to see James Caan, Robert Duvall, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, and John Cazale work together is unforgettable. Nobody could've known that Marlon Brando, with two cotton balls, would create the most famous voice in cinematic history.;14;18;True tt0068646;BrandtSponseller;24/04/2005;"For me it isn't ""the greatest ever"", but it's still great";10;"Marlon Brando is Don Vito Corleone, head of perhaps the most powerful New York-area mafia family in the 1940s, in this well-respected film by director/writer Francis Ford Coppola. As the film begins, Vito is receiving ""business"" guests in his office at his home while his daughter Connie's (Talia Shire) wedding and reception are taking place. The epic plot takes place over many years, telling the story of Vito, his family--including Michael (Al Pacino), Santino (James Caan) and Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), his associates, and their interactions with other mob syndicates.

The Godfather is commonly considered to be one of the ""greatest films of all time"". Even though I've given it a 10, I wouldn't put that same kind of exalted emphasis on it. I've given literally thousands of films 10s over the years, and for me, Godfather just barely made a 10. I think it has a number of flaws, but Coppola also has a knack for transcending the problems with some brilliant move or another. At any rate, it is definitely must-see viewing--even if it's only because it's so highly regarded--if you've not experienced the film yet. I think it's a good idea to attain cultural literacy, and films as popularly loved as The Godfather become necessary elements in achieving that literacy.

Shorn of its gangster trappings, The Godfather is sprawling and soap-operatic in tone. The sprawl is appropriate to its origins as a novel by Mario Puzo, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Coppola. There is a large cast of characters--maybe too large, as it can be difficult to keep track of just who everyone is. Even after you've watched the film a couple times you may find scenes where mobsters seem to spontaneously appear and you catch yourself saying, ""Wait, who is that guy supposed to be again?"" The soap opera angle can be a positive or negative depending on your tastes. I tend to not like soap-operatic stories, but of course Coppola put yummy gangster topping on this one to make it palatable for guys like me. At root, though, The Godfather is concerned with realistic depictions of a very dysfunctional family as they try to make it through life--including marriages, births, adultery, spats between family members, tiffs with others in their community, and so on. My theory is that the soap opera angle accounts for much of the film's appeal. For me, it (and the slight lack of focus from the sprawl) accounts for much of the reason that I barely gave the film a 10.

But two things help the film transcend a lower score for me. Even though the gangster stuff has been far surpassed in graphic brutality in the intervening years, the dramatic context of the violence usually gives it tremendous impact. Films like Ichi the Killer (2001), which I just watched for the first time the night before watching The Godfather again, make the Godfather's brutality fit for Sesame Street in comparison. However, although Ichi's violence is effective, setting that knob to ""11"" doesn't make it better. Besides, Ichi is so over the top that it would make many Godfather fans want to hurl.

To the extent that Coppola and Puzo just focus on the extended Corleone family, they create tremendous depth in their relationships. The whole film can be looked at as a fascinating depiction of ""oscillating"" dynamics in the family, with the pole pairs being interacting/distancing, control/lack of control, benevolence/malevolence. Most character stances and actions are some combination of those ranges of characteristics, and everyone dances around the poles, so to speak, throughout the film. From this angle, even the attractive surface violence (well, attractive to us fans of that stuff in artworks) is mainly there for the purpose of pushing characters more to one pole or the other. There is an implication that underlying these mechanisms is some natural tendency towards achieving (a dynamic) equilibrium.

But there are more superficial stylistic factors that help push my score up to a 10, also. The most obvious, which everyone and their grandparents have mentioned, are the performances. It's tough to go wrong when you have a cast including Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, James Caan, Diane Keaton, and so on. Another commonly mentioned element that I agree is fantastic and superbly integrated to create atmosphere is Nino Rota's score.

Less often mentioned is the consistently intriguing cinematography by Gordon Willis. Most of Willis' unusual shots in the film are so subtle as to be barely noticeable unless you're looking for them. The opening, for example, consists of a long (it lasts a few minutes) ""zoom out"" from Amerigo Bonasera (Salvatore Corsitto). The shot is beautifully lit--most of the frame is extremely dark, giving Bonasera a chiaroscuro effect (the opening is also unusual in that it's a long monologue from a minor character).

Willis and Coppola have a knack for placing their actors in the frame to create depth and interesting visual patterns. This is done so slyly that at first blush you wouldn't believe it's something they thought about, but if you keep this in mind while watching, you can see delightful visual paths that zigzag, wind to a focal point, and so on, all created by the confluence of actors and scenery in the frame.

If you haven't seen The Godfather before, the most important thing you can do before watching is to forget about all of the ""greatest film of all time"" hype. That's only likely to set up expectations that could never be met; more than likely you'll be disappointed. Just think of it as one of the better films from one of Hollywood's more admirable but relatively odder directors, featuring earlier performances from a very well known cast, and keep in mind that it's as much a ""historical family saga"" as a crime or gangster film.";475;839;False tt0068646;jholman3081;19/02/2019;Perfection on film (with Godfather II as it's worthy companion piece ... sadly Godfather III - Godawful.);10;To the (few) giving poor revues ... be very careful. It'll be a late night knock on your door or an invitation for coffee from an old 'friend' or maybe you'll be in a cinema watching Shawshank Redemption, then KAPOW! You'll be nothing more than a red smudge on the wallpaper. You must never go against the family. Correct your revue now or it will be you who's 'corrected'.;7;8;False tt0068646;bbabb13;08/01/2016;History is made with this movie;10;I cannot think of a single negative of the Godfather. It truly is a classic and will always be one of the greatest films ever made. I have seen it many times and recently purchased the movie so that I could watch it anytime that I want.

I love the score for this film and get goosebumps when I hear that opening trumpet begin to play. As the movie progresses I begin to feel a connection to the characters and become invested in their growth and story. As many times as I have seen this movie, I continue to have the same feelings. It is one of the movies that can never get old and will always be a masterpiece.

It will be a number of years before anything can come close to the magnitude of this film and it may never be contested.;13;17;True tt0068646;danielgibbs-69210;21/07/2016;One of the all time greatest;9;"There is always a risk when a film becomes a huge part of popular culture. So many of it's iconic moments and scenes are ripped off, riffed on, or parodied by countless shows and movies, that there is always a fear that the original will lose some of it's impact, and become comical and stale.

The Godfather, however, disproves this. It is still a masterpiece, and always will be. The story-line proves once again how much the innocent public loves to view the lives of outright evil men, especially when they happen to be of the charming and charismatic variety. Let's look at the most iconic scene; a man chops off a horse's head, and leaves it in his owner's bed in order to scare him into submission. Oh yeah, he's one of the good guys though, so it's okay!

Everything is explored in the Godfather, either directly or subtly; family politics, gangland negotiation, corrupt officials, there is no part of the mafia experience that is not pictured here, taken from the viewpoint of Michael, a character whose transition from unwilling family outsider and war-hero into the don himself really gives the film a unique perspective.

Of course, for me, out of all the fantastic characters, the film is carried by Marlon Brando. There is something magnetic about his performance, a mixture of loving family man, ruthless career criminal, and sophisticated Sicilian gentleman, that is thrilling to watch. One of the all time greatest acting performances.";9;11;False tt0068646;bob the moo;01/07/2002;Great look at a family based around crime;;Michael Corleone returns home from the war for his sister's wedding. However his return coincides with the beginnings of a war between the main families sparked by the marketing of drugs. Michael's involvement in the family business increases when his father is the victim of an assassination attempt and Michael wants to kill the two men responsible before going to Italy for a year to lay low. When Michael's brother Sonny is murdered, Michael returns home to take control of the family and clear up the war.

The most famous and the best film about organised crime is also one of the best films ever made. The plot is at once straightforward and complex, it deals with things on many levels from the action to the theme of family. The basic story is gripping and sprawling at the same time. It creates many memorable scenes and lines that have become part of the general knowledge that we all share – that's why it's referred to in everything from Sopranos down to The Simpsons.

Every shot is perfectly framed and has a great sense of period throughout. From the opening speech with it's memorable lines and camera focus down to the final shot and all it implies, it is full throughout. The action is a pleasure to watch and the lines are so much more classy than more recent attempts at gangster films.

Pacino is great – he not only changes before our eyes over the 3 hours but he manages it into the next film too. Brando is always a risk on any film, and when he started mumbling and filling his cheeks with cotton wool, Coppola must have worried about what was happening, but he delivers a performance that is so good that almost everyone has impersonated him at some time. The main cast is full of good performances from actors from all stages. Up and comers such as Duvall, Caan, Keaton etc are as good as more ageing icons such as Richard Conte, Sterling Haydn, Castellano etc.

In every area the film oozes class and professionalism. The look at family life is excellent and the only downside is that it can't help but glamorise organised crime – people may be killed but it still looks and sounds cool. But then, if we're going to start criticising films because they glamorise violence or destruction then The Godfather comes along way down the hit list – long after countless hundreds of action movies and summer blockbusters.

Overall this film will always be a classic, your Harry Potters, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings etc will come and go based on how well hyped they are – but Godfather has been on most people's top 5 list for decades and will to continue to be for many more. Now that's respect.;51;81;True tt0068646;battista880;26/02/2019;The greatest film of all time.;10;The power of cinema at its purest and most vivid expression. Screenplay, direction, cinematography, acting, editing, it all comes in the most elevated form. Francis Ford Coppola is a craftsman, as every director and artist should be, that draws inspiration from the power of the words and of the actions of characters and provides the standard upon which all the following history of cinema relies. It's an historic work of art.;4;4;False tt0068646;BiiivAL;02/06/2018;A movie that can not be abandoned;9;"An important place in American history is the period when several thousand Sicilian emigrants went to the United States in search of a new, better life, in which there would be no tyranny of the Palermo and Messinxich dons. Who knew at that time that this ""bunch of Sicilian emigrants"" would occupy a high place in the United States and in the history of this country.

Sicily is one of the most beautiful places in Italy. Unfortunately Sicilians, quite friendly inhabitants of this island, the words-synonyms of Sicily are not only olives, butter and wine, but also words like omerta, vendetta and mafia. Yes, the mafia. A small bunch of bandit mackerel in Sicily, run by the Don. In the US, this word took a slightly different meaning. A huge number of gangsters who seek to conquer and rule all the States. A family is a mafia, a mafia is a family headed by a cruel and wise person who manages everything and who owns everything. Proudly and shortly - don.

Mario Puzo is a brilliant writer, rightly considered to be a recognized classic of the twentieth-century literature, having written several excellent and worthy works, the best of which is undoubtedly the novel ""The Godfather"". A book about the life of gangsters and revealing all the doors to the world of the mafia. Mario Puzo was a great connoisseur of human psychology, but the psychology of people who transgressed the law especially. That is why in his novel he explores each character to the depths of his soul and climbs into the most intimate corners of their thoughts.

The novel, and indeed, the film - is not a direct and reliable historical source, but, nevertheless, it contains the quintessence of the criminal world. Five families of New York Piuso wrote from the real five families of New York, Johnny Fontaine Puzo wrote from Frank Sinatra. The literature was tired of books about Al Capone and Frank Costello, and Puzo made a move to a horse-invented a criminal family that was not really there, but which subsequently won, without exaggeration, the whole world.

It often happens that the director, when stating a picture, leaves the original and is engaged in arbitrariness. Francis Ford Coppola director is no less brilliant than the rest of the directors. He squeezed everything that can be learned from the novel Puzo and put it into the film. Doing nothing without adding something new or removing something from the book, Coppola and Puzo created a masterpiece. A masterpiece in everything. Mario Puzo's book became a masterpiece of literature, and Francis Ford Coppola created the film - a masterpiece, a film - a classic that just can not help but like it. Coppola not only superbly put the film, but simply brilliantly picked up the actors. Who knows what was the fate of the film without Marlon Brando and Al Pacino. Coppola skillfully created the atmosphere of New York at the end of the forties, but also the atmosphere of family life, the life of people from Sicily.

Vito Carleone is a wise and cruel man with clear principles, a loving but stern father. Marlon Brando was just awesome dona Carleone. His character is a serious strategist who has achieved power and respect himself. Don Carleone's sad gaze, his smooth gestures, his unique voice and his unforgettable ""bulldog jaw"" forever blended into the image of the viewer.

Don Carleone - this is Marlon Brando - sloven and lover in life, but on the screen - a genius who embodied the image of Don Carleone - a strong spirit of a man and a cruel gangster, who has enormous authority. Vito Carleone is a very impressive person who knew how to get others to do things their own way. Marlon Brando with his game was able to make the viewer believe that before him is not just an actor playing a role, but a real person is that same severe don. Brando is a great improvisator.

Michael Carleone character is no less interesting than his father. Michael is kind-hearted and truthful, knowing what his father does, he never wanted to deal with his family and participate in criminal quarrels. Al Pacino played his character no less brilliant than Marlon Brando. Pacino showed all the destruction of the human psyche and the transformation of his hero: from the uninitiated in the affairs of the family of the young war hero, to the new Don Carleone, possessing an iron will, foresight, wisdom and dignity. Sonny Carleone is not at all like Michael and Vito. He is an impulsive warrior, but a bad strategist who prefers to go ahead, not act cunning. Coppola did not lose on the fact that he called for the role of an American from Sicily. James Caan brilliantly played the role of Sonny - a man with an explosive Italian temperament, ready to always stand up for the family.

In addition to the brilliant acting and excellent production in the film, there is the wonderful music of the composer Nina Rota. An excellent melody, fallen in love with everyone and has long become a classic.

""Godfather"" is a masterpiece, an ideal gangster movie. The film without minuses, blunders and cliches, which pulls to review, even if you know it by heart. This is a classic, a gangster epic, a bible for cinephiles, giving answers to all the questions. A movie that teems with crown phrases that have long since become part of everyday life. A worthy picture, without exaggeration, is the best in its kind.

""Behind every wealth lies a crime"" (c) - it is this phrase Honore De Balzac stands at the beginning of the work of Puzo. The film, if briefly, actually about it. And about the proposal, ""from which you can not refuse"" (c).";101;173;False tt0068646;TheLittleSongbird;18/07/2010;I'm finding it hard to describe how amazing this movie was;10;There is very little that I can add to the reviews on here, that have explained what is so wonderful about The Godfather so well. I have seen many amazing movies, as well as some clunkers, but The Godfather was beyond amazing. There are so many images, details and scenes that I seriously cannot get out of my head since watching it for the first time just nine hours ago. The Godfather is so incredibly well-made and acted that it stands out among the rest of those other amazing films I've seen, so much so I couldn't think of a single flaw, and I am struggling to think of a good enough reason to why I didn't see this film before now.

True, The Godfather is a little slow-moving and the plot takes a while to unfold, but neither of these are flaws as such. The slow pacing added to the elegiac quality The Godfather has, and as for the plot what is special about this plot is that it is very unpredictable because you have next to no idea where it is next going to take you. Being 18, I was worried whether I was old enough to appreciate this film or even understand it, but luckily I understood it perfectly, and I can well and truly appreciate it for the masterpiece it is considered to be.

The Godfather for one thing looks stunning. I strongly disagree with the previous reviewer who said the cinematography was horrid, for me the cinematography was one of the best assets of the film. In some scenes you have cinematography and lighting that is quite dark and mysterious, and then in scenes such as the wedding it is evergreen, autumnal and very picturesque. It is not just the cinematography that makes The Godfather look stunning, the costumes are beautifully tailored, the houses are gorgeous and majestic to look at and even the cars were immaculate.

Then there is the score by Nina Rota. One word, outstanding! I have heard many wonderful scores in my lifetime, but after hearing this score few stick in the memory as much as the score for The Godfather. This score is both beautiful as seen with the main theme, and haunting in the way it sticks in your head after watching the film itself. Other outstanding assets are the masterly direction from Francis Ford Coppola, and the brilliantly written screenplay that is intelligent, thought-provoking and darkly humorous. As for the violence, some of it is shocking and intense especially in the climax which was enough to almost make your heart either beat twice as fast or stop, and I almost covered my eyes when the producer found the horse's head in his bed, but underneath that this family is somewhat loyal and honourable come to think of it.

The acting is absolutely fantastic, bringing to life characters that are rich and complex, perhaps unlikeable at first but as you get to know them you warm to them. And I have to say, The Godfather is one of those rarities where no actor gives a weak performance. In particular, Marlon Brando is brilliant as Don Vito, very heavily disguised yet stately. Every word of dialogue, every subtle hand gesture and every facial expression was brilliantly judged. Al Pacino's casting was admittedly risky, but he still did a truly wonderful job carrying the film, while James Caan is dignified and loyal, Diane Keaton beautiful and alluring and Robert Duvall nicely understated.

In conclusion, absolutely amazing, and I can see completely why it is considered one of the 10 greatest movies ever made, it is that good. In fact my 15-year old brother loved it so much, he wants to see it again. 10/10, though this film is too good for that rating. Bethany Cox;20;29;False tt0068646;waynegavin1;20/01/2020;MAFIA MAGIC;10;A mafia masterpiece from FRANCIS FORD COPPOLA,the first part of this chronological trilogy tells the rise of MICHAEL CORLEONE in superb fashion,everything from the sets to the stellar cast is perfect to the point of almost feeling like its a fly on the wall drama,AL PACINO excels here but it is truly MARLON BRANDO that steals the show with a fantastic portrayal of an ageing head of a crime family.with a fantastic script from MARIO PUZO of SUPERMAN the movie fame this is without a doubt the best mafia story portrayed on the silver screen....if you like mafia/gangster movies this is the one that will explain why...this is a trilogy you wont forget;6;7;False tt0068646;hall895;16/06/2010;What is there to say?;9;Does it even need to be said that The Godfather is an amazing film? Is there really any purpose at all in pointing out all the things which make it so wonderful? Everybody knows. Everybody will always know. This is a film which will live forever. The story, the performances, the cinematography, the music...all so perfect. And all woven together so wonderfully by director Francis Ford Coppola who created a true classic.

There are so very many good reasons why this film will always be remembered so fondly. No matter how many times you see it the film never fails to make an impact. Even if you've seen the film so often you essentially have it memorized line for line and shot for shot it remains a thrilling experience. From the famous opening scene with Marlon Brando's Don Vito Corleone receiving requests for favors on the occasion of his daughter's wedding all the way to the end and the final settling of all family business the film never lets up. It's an undeniably powerful story and one which retains the capacity to surprise. Because initially it seems obvious that the story is about Don Vito Corleone. He is the Godfather after all. But, for as powerful a presence as Brando is, as the story plays itself out there comes the moment where you realize this is the story of Don Vito's son Michael, as played so wonderfully by Al Pacino. When Michael comes into his own the film, gripping from the start, becomes even more compelling. Has any character in any film evolved more than Michael Corleone does here? The Michael we meet at his sister's wedding bears no resemblance to the man we see in the end. And what a performance by Pacino, changing along with his character. What a journey it is for Michael as his story unfolds. And it is quite a ride as well for us who have the privilege of seeing it.

Brando and Pacino are the headliners but they are wonderfully supported by an amazing cast which includes the likes of James Caan, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and Al Lettieri. And that is just scratching the surface. There are so many memorable characters. And what a world Coppola has created for these characters to inhabit. The film has a unique look and feel to it. The world of The Godfather is quite unlike any other, often imitated but never duplicated. It's a triumph in every sense for Coppola. But perhaps his biggest success is in making you sympathize with the Corleones. We know right from the start that Don Vito Corleone is a man capable of doing monstrous things. But we identify with him anyway. And one cannot help but feel for Michael as he is inexorably pulled into the family business.

Everyone has their favorite Godfather characters, favorite moments, favorite lines. The film has become a cultural touchstone. And as it continues to be discovered by new generations it seems that the film, if possible, actually continues to grow in stature. It is a classic film which stands the test of time. The Godfather has earned its place of honor in the history of film. A true masterpiece.;6;7;False tt0068646;ccthemovieman-1;14/06/2006;One Can See Why It's So Highly-Rated;9;"Some people have called this one of the best movies of all time. I can see why they say that, although I wouldn't quite rate it that high. It does feature an interesting storyline, great acting and magnificent photography so I am not going to argue with those who place in so high, because it's understandable. It also has a memorable score.

One needs to see this on a nice widescreen DVD because it's so beautifully photographed with tons of greens, grays and browns that are just beautiful. It makes me want to visit Italy. The only reason I personally didn't rate it as high as others was I didn't like any of the characters, and especially the hot-headed James Caan. When he got riddled with bullets and was done with, a la ""Bonnie & Clyde,"" that was fine with me!

There isn't as much violence as people might think, if they've never seen this movie. To some, this film might be too slow, in fact. However, when the violence or something dramatic occurs it is intense and can be very brutal. Who can ever forget a guy waking up with a dead, bloody horse in his bed?!!

Like a good film noir, there is a lot of tension running throughout the Godfather films. Everybody is after somebody it seems and you never know whom to trust. That's part of the downsides of living a criminal life: constant paranoia. All this is put together nicely as we become close observers of the Corleone family, its family ties and its ""business.""

Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Caan, Robert DeNiro (later in the saga), Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Sterling Hayden, Richard Conte, John Cazale, Richard Castellano, on and on - quite a cast and quite a movie. I enjoyed both sequels, too.

I am also fortunate to own ""The Godfather Epic"" on tape, which must be some sort of collector's item by now. It is three two-hour tapes in which Godfather I and II are sliced together and the story is presented in chronological order, instead of with all the flashbacks. It's well-done and I would have printed a review on that version, but I don't see it listed on IMDb.";72;126;True tt0068646;ironhorse_iv;08/09/2015;The Godfather make me an offer that I cannot refuse. This movie is a masterpiece.;10;"It's basically impossible to watch this movie directed by Francis Ford Coppola, without already knowing some of the major themes, motifs, plot twists, within author Mario Puzo's story; due to how popular the film is. Even, if you haven't saw the movie, you probably heard of it. If you had, saw it. You might agree with me, in scope, that this movie is indeed, one of the greatest films ever made. Based off, Mario Puzo's 1969 novel with the same name, The Godfather tells the story of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) on his journey, from reluctant family outsider to ruthless Mafia boss, during the criminal drug wars of the 1940/early 1950s. Without spoiling the movie, too much, I found that a lot of critics, overpraise Marlon Brando's work in this, a way too much. Don't get me wrong, Marlon Brando does deserve, a lot of credit for making his character, the patriarch Vito Corleone, so iconic. I just don't believe, that he deserve, the Oscar for Best Actor, that year. In my opinion, Al Pacino should had be nominated & won. After all, Michael is pretty much, the main character, not Vito. Also, Pacino is the one actor that kept the movie, going, with his great range of emotional. Brando show-what disappears, toward the middle of the film. If any, Brando deserve to win, Best Supporting Actor at the Academy Awards, because Brando's acting is secondary to that of Pacino. It's not personality, it's only business. Besides that, the acting throughout the film was well-performed, from all the actors. I just wish, there wasn't much, many characters. It was so hard to keep track of each one. Some actors, worth noting for their performance are James Caan as Michael's hot-headed brother, Sonny Corleone, Robert Duvall as Irish lawyer, Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton as Michael's girlfriend, Kay Adams & last, John Cazale as Michael's weaker brother, Fredo Corleone. As much, as I despise, certain gangster films. There was something, likable with these characters. Yes, they do, horrible stuff, but you can't help, feeling bad for them. Indeed, keep your friends close, your enemies closer. Not only was the film had gifted actors, but it was very well-shot. I love, how the film used doors, as a way to symbolize, the different between family life, and 'the family life'. A great example of this, was the last few minutes of the film in which Kay finds out, the truth nature about Michael. It's a crucial theme of the film. The five families are essentially living the American dream with specific ideals that America at the time greatly treasured. One could easily see this as a deconstruction or even an attack on the idea of the American Dream. So it was no surprise that the families met inside a Federal Reserve Bank. Talk about smart! I also like, how the movie has this stark bleak look to it. All the colors in the film, looks so muted, as if to say, this gangster film was indeed shot in early 1940s, technicolor. I like how, clever, the filmmaker was, when using bright colors. Most of the only bright color, used in the film, was orange. It was used as mostly an item, like a fruit symbol. It representing sin, and greed. It's as if it was the forbidden fruit, in the bible. It was also, used as a sexual way to show impending judgment. Everybody that got near it, end up, dying in the film. While, the movie has tons of other symbolism. It's also shroud in darkness and mystery. The movie even has a few film noir inspire scenes, where shadow, become a big factor to show, how shady, the underworld, can be. Vito's daughter's wedding scene shows the best of this. The movie has a lot of violence as well. Scenes like the real horse severed head were pretty gruesome. Still, compare to modern day, gangster movies, the sex, drugs and violence is pretty tame. For the most part, the movie kept to a somewhat classy mode with its subject matter. I do like the editing. The whole baptize sequence was amazing to watch. The pacing for the film is a mixed bag for me. There were some parts of the film that I kinda found boring or out of place, such as the Sicily, Las Vegas & Hollywood scenes. It felt like, I was watching two different films, due to how unfamiliar, each of those scenes, were, when comparing to the New York settling. I just glad, they were very short. The film also drops a lot of the novel's subplots, such as Sonny's mistress, having a large vagina, and having to get surgery on it. Another thing worth cutting is a lot of Johnny Fontane (Al Martino) and Lucy Mancini (Jeannie Linero) scenes. In the novel they both get big story lines nearly the equal of the main storyline with Michael. I'm glad, they cut it out, because it was too jarring. Though one major one, they cut out in this film: Don Vito's youth and rise to power came back, as part of the sequel, 1974's the Godfather: Part II. Happy, that they found, a way to add that, back in. Leave the Fontane BS. Take the cannoli, instead. The film score by Nino Rota was great. You really think of the word 'mafia' when you hear that tune. While, the film doesn't deliberately speak that word, it did expose, what was then, a mostly hidden underworld of Mafia organizations. Overall: While, some big time criminals and even some stars, like Frank Sinatra were against it, and boycott the film, but they couldn't stop the movie, from being made. The Godfather continues to influence producers of films, television shows, and video games more than 40 years after its release. It's a classic.";11;15;True tt0068646;ericjg623;04/04/2002;Slightly overrated;8;"One thing that's a bit annoying when seeing `The Godfather' is the sense that, as a viewer, you feel you are required to bow down before this film and worship it as movie perfection, or else reveal yourself to be a person of no taste. Well, I can definitely acknowledge that this is a very good movie, but not necessarily great, nor is it on my personal favorites list.

For starters, while this definitely gives you some great characters and atmosphere, there's really nothing in this movie that you couldn't get from reading the book. In fact, the strength of this film comes from the way the director and actors faithfully bring the novel to life.

What's best? No question - the acting. Judged on that scale alone, it gets a 10. I cannot disagree with those who state that this combines the best acting performances in American film history. The directing and scriptwriting are also very good, worthy of at least a 9.

What's not so good? The pacing. As others have noted, this film can be boring at times. Most notably, at least for me, was the time spent showing Mike in Sicily after he shot the cop and the Turk. Other than getting married, it doesn't really show him doing much of anything, nor does it really contribute much to the story. In contrast, the book made this particular sub-plot far more interesting and relevant.

And that, at heart, is my problem. I've seen the movie and I've read the book. And I far more enjoyed the latter. The book gives all sorts of details the movie skips. For example, in the film, Al Neri is just a guy dressed up as a cop who performs as one of Mike's hit men. In the book, we learn how he went from being a good cop with a bad temper to taking over the role once held by Luca Brasi (another character who is developed far more fully in the book).

So there you have it. On the one hand, you have to intellectually acknowledge the great talent displayed in the making of this film, but on the other, I must admit it just isn't very satisfying emotionally. These characters seem cold and distant, and I never really cared much for any of them. In that respect, I much more preferred ""Goodfellas"". The acting wasn't as good, but the characters were far more engaging and the pacing much more lively. In short, `The Godfather' is sort of like a great, but somber, piece of music, something you can admire but not dance to.

8/10";140;261;False tt0068646;Wiizardii321;15/03/2015;The best movie by far.;10;So at first I always heard from a lot of people when I was younger that Godfather was the most epic movie of all time, I always memorized Vito Corleone's face when I was a kid... Years later I decided it's time I watch this movie and I did it on Netflix. Oh, and when I did, it was so good...

The sharp chemistry is what makes up most of the stuff, these actors always just transcend and transcend so much. Vito Corleone is one of the best movie characters ever. And the performances? These actors gave one of the best performances of all time. Al Pacino as Michael Corleone is arguably his best performance ever. I can't say enough of Marlon Brando. Do I need to state the obvious? He is the best for a reason. I would go on forever on Godfather and why it is my favourite movie of all time, but that would be more than 1,000 words. If you haven't watched this, give it a try and see to yourself - a masterpiece.

What ALSO makes the godfather so special is it's line of who is a hero and a villain, can one really call a calm guy like Vito Corleone a bad guy? Technically he should be because, well because.. He is, a good... bla bla bla, it all just goes into your mind and it challenges you. I always saw Vito as a hero, but as Godfather grew more on me, I thought he was more like an Anti-hero. As for Michael, he will always be an anti hero in my opinion. Godfather gives out the most blend and epic characters in fiction history ever, let alone movies.;7;9;False tt0068646;ahmad-samara;13/02/2015;Legendary Movie;10;This type of movies which you get to watch over and over again without getting bored of it, they way it has been scripted, acted, produced and directed is really attractive and amazingly catching your breath, it has a lot of life lessons to learn from no matter what do you do in your life, it also shows the importance of family bonding and keeping it all balanced. I'm convinced that I will never ever get to watch a similar movie to this one with this brilliance in every aspect, I don't even believe that if there would be anyone on this earth who has never saw the Godfather Trilogy, it is absolutely highly recommended, but of course its not suitable for the little kids, it has lots of violent scenes, hopefully we'll get to see more and more of these awesome titles.;7;9;True tt0068646;sddavis63;25/11/2002;Count Me In The Minority;6;"First I have to say that it is very difficult to watch this movie for the first time (which I just did) and approach it with an open mind. The glowing reviews it gets everywhere (many of course calling it the best movie ever made) gives one extremely high expectations and the possibility of being easily disappointed. The many parodies of the movie also give it a cult status that makes one think one knows the story even if one has never seen it.

I thought ""The Godfather"" was a good movie, but nothing more than that really. I personally wouldn't call it the greatest movie ever made; not even one of the greatest. It was good, worth watching once and I'm glad I've finally seen it, but nothing more.

The portrayal of mob life in the post-war era seemed realistic enough, and the appropriate atmosphere was set. The opening scenes (revolving around Don Corleone's daughter's wedding) gave me mixed feelings. I thought the whole thing went on too long, but it did demonstrate that Corleone's ""business"" never ended - he was constantly meeting with various people looking for favours rather than being front and centre at the wedding. Brando, of course, won (and refused to accept) the Oscar for Best Actor for his portrayal of Corleone, but I wasn't actually taken with his performance. First, I really didn't think of him as the Lead Actor. Al Pacino (as Corleone's son Mike) was, I thought, far more important to the story and far more interesting to watch. Brando had - to me - an almost cartoonish aura around him. Over-rated in my view. But Pacino was excellent, and the character of Mike the most interesting in the movie, as he evolves from the returned war hero who wants nothing to do with the family ""business"" to the eventual ""Don.""

It's not that I thought this was a bad movie. It was quite watchable and for the most part very interesting. I just think I've seen better.

6/10";191;390;False tt0068646;jensenfrederick;22/09/2020;Best Movie Of All Time;10;This movie is great in every way. Great plot, great characters, memorable quotes and scenes, and a great representation of the book it's based on. It's a must see for everyone.;3;3;False tt0068646;goswamidiptanshu;26/04/2020;The Classic,Iconic movie ever!;10;It was slow burn the way every scene played it was amazing to look it's too slow yet engaging to look the meetings background were skeptical.the Music and the use of it is phenomenal whenever something is happening the music was way too calm and terrifying at same time!the story was amazing the family of gangster and the society of gangsters and there feuds!the acting was iconic especially by marlon and al and everyone was amazing as there characters!screenplay was good at start it was slow and boring at the wedding as it was just intro to what is next then when the horse scene up from then it was entertaining and calm to watch,the ending was satisfyingly amazing the way mike turned gangster was iconic and at last the look on the face and music while talking to wife was the signal that he's no more mike he's The Godfather now!overall A Classic Gangster Masterpiece the theme is dark and calm at same time.Iconic movie!;3;3;False tt0068646;efd-10467;23/02/2019;Never Fails;10;I must have watched this movie 30 times, yet it is interesting and enjoyable every time. Beautifully filmed and written, it is like reading a great novel, the heroes are villains but you get so lost in the story it doesn't matter, it is a prime example of the art of movie making, perhaps the best.;3;3;False tt0068646;MartinHafer;30/03/2013;#2 on IMDb's Top 100, a multi-Oscar-winner and over 1500 reviews...what more can I say about the movie?!;10;"Up until today, I haven't bothered to review ""The Godfather"". After all, everyone pretty much knows it's one of the greatest films ever made. It's #2 on IMDb's Top 100. It won the Best Picture Oscar. And, there are nearly 1600 reviews on IMDb. So what's one more review?! Well, after completing 14,000 reviews (because I am nuts), I guess it's time I got around to reviewing a film I should have reviewed a long time ago. So, here goes....the film is perfect and only a dope wouldn't watch it. Unfortunately, IMDb requires me to say more to meet it's 10 line minimum for reviews. So, I'll point out that you do NOT need to like gangster films to enjoy this film. Yes, it's violent and nasty in spots--but it's also brilliantly written and produced from start to finish and deserves the accolades it's received.

My advice is that instead of just watching ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather: Part II"", see the combined version they created for television--with additional scenes that made it a very rich experience.";19;31;False tt0068646;Stormchaser99;14/10/2013;Perhaps the Greatest of All Time?;;I never liked the IMDb top 250 list. So i haven't thought about this one for a very long time. Then i watched Shawshank and immediately became a fan. Somewhere i read that Godfather was at the top of the 250 before Shawshank and that's when i decided to take a chance with Godfather.

I wasn't a fan of gangster flicks so it's fair to say i never thought i'd sit through all 3 hours and minutes. What can i say? This film changed every thing about my taste in movies. After watching this i ended up as a fan of gangster movies and i went on to watch some pretty old movies and some of the longest running films. (And now i am a fan of IMDb's 250)

I had a go at this movie again (for the 5th time)yesterday and compelled to write a review here.I'm not gonna say anything new here after all these 1687 reviews but anyone reading this i guess you probably watched the movie and inspired enough to read the reviews here. If that so give me a thumps up!

In my opinion The Greatest Gangster Film ever. And Arguably the greatest movie of all time. 10 out of 10.;12;18;False tt0068646;izachzzz;01/09/2018;Great movie;10;Great movie. This is the type of movie you just want to watch time and time again. A real classic.;5;6;False tt0068646;murtaza_mma;29/09/2008;A Potpourri of Vestiges Review: A cinematic magnum opus;10;The Godfather is an extravaganza, nigh flawless, a cinematic magnum opus, ubiquitously acclaimed for its brilliance and for being in a league of its own. The Godfather doesn't depict poetic justice but rather portrays the triumph of perspicacious potency over abject vulnerability. The Godfather is known, not for its cogency but for its eloquence.

The movie being star-studded is decorated with a plethora of supernal performances and it won't be a hyperbole that almost every actor gave an Oscar worthy performance. Marlon Brando is exceptionally brilliant in his sterling portrayal of Vito Corleone and so is Al Pacino in his remarkable portrayal of Michael Corleone. The grandeur of Don Vito Corleone ironically lies in his austerity and inexorable equanimity.

The grandiosity of the movie is such, that even the biggest complement made about it may sound like a picayune remark. The Godfather may most aptly be described as an obituary of humanity, a requiem of mankind, owing to the pervasive violence and the brutality that it portrays in an utmost sanguinary fashion. In a nutshell, the movie has transcended all the limits of mortality only to achieve apotheosis.

http://www.apotpourriofvestiges.com/;79;154;False tt0068646;kingzdartist;16/04/2015;A must watch especially with director's commentary;10;Excellent film, from the opening to the end you sense a genuine touch into lives of the characters and the world created by the actors and Coppola.

Just the intro of the movie immediately reveals the world you've entered and in the next few scenes you familiarized with family which shows who they are at heart.

Personally, I love a movie that takes the time to deliver a well told story and The Godfather does just that - the scenes revealing the inner struggles of the characters, the conflict in matters regarding their world, and how each character deals with issues is well done.

When a movie makes all their scenes have significant impact so much so that you don't find yourself wanting to pick favorites, you know you're dealing with greatness.

From beginning to end I was immersed, and if you like well done movies I'm sure you'll experience the same.;8;11;False tt0068646;mullahk3;04/02/2006;Best film ever made;10;As an Films Studies student from London. Watching this film was one of the most exciting thrill that ever happened to me. The powerful use of script and the Cinematography used to shoot the scenes were perfect and powerful. The first sequence of the film grips the audiences attention that this is not about brutal murders or shooting people without reason but involves discipline and symbolises the role played by Vito Corleone as being like a senator or a president when people come to help. I have watched this film more than 20 times and still don't get bored of it. If you want to compare it with Citizen Cane or Scarface, you can't. Because its too artistic and a perfect film for a gangster/crime hybrid film. When Al Pacino's role changes the film creates more suspense and concern on how he would run the family, but everyone then believes in him and he then becomes the next Godfather.

This film is one of the best film ever to be made. Perfect in the way it starts and subsequently the ending as well, if you haven't watch this film didn't understand the concept of it, then don't bother watching films. This is the best film ever to be made...10/10;46;86;False tt0068646;perica-43151;20/07/2018;It is good;10;This movie is often considered the best ever. And it lives to the hype, everyone should see this movie at some point. The Hollywood at its best, with some money and advice taken in from the mob itself. A classic.;9;13;False tt0068646;jennakristiina;06/04/2016;Let me begin with just one word.. Masterpiece.;10;The Godfather is not just a crime film, it's much more deeper than that. It's about loyalty, respect and more than anything, it's about family and real life. The casting in this movie is flawless. Marlon Brando as the Godfather is a perfect casting choice. He brings his unique style to his character and makes him alive. He's not just acting his role, he's living it, at least that's what it feels like. He truly deserves his Best Actor Oscar. Every scene where he is in and every line he says is emotionally touching and breathtaking, and it's not just because of his acting, but it's also because of the film's magnificent writing and directing. The storyline is outstanding. It's based on a novel written by Mario Puzo. Francis Ford Coppola did an amazing job with bringing his story to the screen. He really gave us the best film of all time. Brando wasn't the only one who did a wonderful job with his character, because even though Vito Corleone was the key element of the movie, the movie was still mostly about his son, Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino. You can really see his character develop during the movie, and you can feel the respect that his character has toward his father. There's a real connection between those two, even though they have a small number of scenes together. Besides Marlon Brando and Al Pacino, there were other supporting roles that were amazing as well, like James Caan as Sonny Corleone, Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen and of course the beautiful Diana Keaton as Kay Adams. This movie has everything. Good acting, directing, writing, cinematography and of course memorable and recognizable music by Nino Rota. In my opinion, there is only one misstep in this film, and that is the lighting in the wedding scene in the beginning of the movie. I can honestly say that this is my favorite movie and if you haven't seen it yet, you should watch it as soon as possible! 10/10 Excellent!

(These are just my quick thoughts about this movie);10;15;True tt0068646;GeorgeRoots;30/08/2014;The Greatest Cast For A Movie Ever.;10;"Regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time. ""The Godfather"" is a beloved classic about organised crime, and the Sicilian lifestyles in America. Of course the movie is about the building of a dynasty, a business built on death, murder and betrayal that goes on to run itself on favours and illegal pleasures. However, in this story we see the life of Don Vito Corleone (Played to a tee by the magnificent Marlon Brando), giving favours on his daughter's Wedding day. Here we see a loving, caring man who is both equally loved and feared. So far in the movie, it has had fair tension and introduced us to the family. Then all of a sudden a film-maker awakens to find his prized race horse's head under his bed sheets, and suddenly the tensions of this movie rises considerably.

Without really explaining anything else (I mean I really shouldn't have to), our focus is on the youngest Corleone son Michael (Stunning work from Al Pacino). As a man of considerable morals and high grounds, how far will he be willing to go when push comes to shove? Lets just say ""Falls from grace"" is a perfect statement, befitting of this rich ""Sepia"" toned movie.

Something of a Masterpiece when the film came out back in 1972. ""The Godfather"", has only gotten better of age. There are so many iconic quotes and moments in the movie, and the cast is just seriously one of the best ever put to film. James Caan I hardly recognised, and Robert Duvall was just as brilliant as always. But obviously the biggest argument is, was this movie Brando's or Pachino's? Personally, I thought Brando was just incredible as always, and totally deserved the Oscar he turned down. Both nevertheless are unforgettable on screen.

The pacing was impeccable, as well as the locations that are all shot beautifully. Some part of me does feel that the film is a bit too long, however a lot does happen and instantly captivates you enough to check out the sequels. The music was fantastic, helping bring the era and authenticity out of the picture and into the deepest parts of my brain. I could listen to the ""Love theme"" all day. As said earlier, the movie is about the dynasty of the family, the business of the family and the vengeance of the family. So many themes are present and so much more are explored. Every gangster film ever made owes something to Francis Ford Coppola's efforts.

Final Verdict: Probably the first modern gangster epic ever made. As director Stanley Kubrick said: ""Probably the finest cast ever assembled"". 10/10.";10;15;True tt0068646;davidburrows89;23/09/2013;Very Average Film. Very Overrated;7;Marlon Brando's acting as the Godfather is sublime and this film is worth watching for that.

However I did find the film very long-winded and at times boring. I liked the slow progression of the storyline and understand why Francis Ford Coppola did the film in the way he did. It's just that I felt the film was lacking something. It could have done with a bit more excitement or suspense to make the film more gripping.

Lets just say I watched this film about a year ago and I still haven't seen The Godfather 2, and I am in no hurry to either.

7/10. Average film. Worth watching to say that you have seen it.;91;187;False tt0068646;shadowchirag;22/01/2019;This is what i call a MOVIE;10;This is one of the best movies i have ever seen,the way they directed it was really good and actors have performed very well in their own characters;6;8;False tt0068646;shaun_sat;29/03/2015;A tour de force of cinema;10;Since I was a small boy, whenever I heard of others talking of the greatest movies ever made, The Godfather always came up,most of the time, at the top. I always thought that the movie was overrated, that is, until watched it two years ago.

How to tell if a movie is good? If you can't stop thinking about it, if you keep replaying the characters' lines in your sleep, then the movie isn't just good, it's great. The Godfather's impact on the movie industry is incalculable, in almost ever modern gangster movie there is at least one reference to it.

I can find no flaw in this movie. If there were anything such as a 'perfect' movie, this is it. Coppola provides excellent direction such that though the movie stretches to almost three hours, you won't be bored for one minute.

The highlight of this film is an innovation. The gangsters here are not portrayed as mindless monsters but as men with families. We see Vito and Michael Corleone as protagonists rather than antagonists. Credit for this goes to Mario Puzo's original source material but let us not forget the actors.

Marlon Brando gives the greatest performance of not only his career but of any other actor as the family patriarch. He's so Don-like that you just wished you could go to him with all your problems too. Al Pacino plays Michael Corleone. But he doesn't give a single performance, he gives two. At the beginning, he plays a war hero who doesn't want anything to do with the family business. Pacino skillfully shows us Michael's transition from this to a cold blooded Don at the end. The other actors play their parts well too. In fact, there has never been any other better cast than the cast of The Godfather.

A cinematic masterpiece, this is one for the ages.;6;8;True tt0068646;tsakiridis1217;18/03/2015;A Must-See For All Generations;10;"""The Godfather"" has been a title so beloved and entirely embraced as a significant, cultural phenomenon, that in a certain level demands of you to watch it with full recommendations off of it. Especially if you're young, there is absolutely no way that the buzz of the ""greatest movie in history"" did not get you. So, even though that buzz doesn't necessarily ruin the viewing for you all-together, I will accept that while I was watching, I was unintentionally trying to like it and feel it.

The beginning of the film sets the mood perfectly. There are no attachments to settled humor or dry dialogue. It warns us that this is going to be a serious take, on some pretty serious issues. Don Corleone's first lines are self-aware and carefully put. This dominating appearance shows us a man trusted, beloved and respected and at the same time feared, depressed and deserted. And that goes for both his family and outsiders. He is a mafia man, one of the greatest, and his life is surrounded by his business partners, by his associates and comrades in this dark lifestyle. And throughout the entire movie, he is presented to have balanced the time between family and business, yet that seems like one impossible task.

Micheal Corleone, son of the Godfather, is introduced like a man with a very different approach and very different opinions on the case of life and choices than the rest of his family and especially his father. That happens for two reasons: early on his life he decided not to be like him (even though he seems to be the one attached by the Godfather as the favorite) and he has chosen a decent life for him and Kay, the love of his life.

Then, everything goes down the drain: someone attempts to kill the Godfather.

It is at that point when the son Micheal starts his decay... No promises, no commitments, no wrongs... Someone tried to kill his loving father. He stares at every single person in his family just standing by, so in his rage, decides to do the unthinkable. Using his status as the most innocent of the Corleone family, he exacts revenge.

When he succeeds, he exiles himself out of the country until things can settle down. He attempts to start a new life away from the madness with Apollonia, a beautiful woman he meets and falls in love with (although never convincing even himself that he has forgotten Kay). He comes to know the hard way that he can't run away from what he has done and what his family stands for. Someone tries to kill him even so far from his home but gets to Apollonia. So upon his return, he accepts the position of the new ""Godfather"" and immediately seems to be a changed man.

Micheal retrieves Kay, makes unconditional promises and ends up being the very person he was trying to avoid.

There are several things in this film that make it astounding. Relationships within the family are displayed in such a truthful way. Francis Ford Coppola offers us a chance to connect with many different characters and their several views. The main plot is driven excellently, with Don Corleone and Micheal taking the grandeur, but in the meanwhile we get to know the deep motions and powers of every person slightly connected to this world. What we get is a fiery and passionate film exploring deep meanings and strong notions.

Marlon Brando won the Academy Award for what was an unbelievably great performance. After this film, I totally get his worldwide fame as one of the greatest actors of all time. Al Pacino shines with charisma (which he perfected on the second part) in the greatest role of his career. And besides these two super-actors, is there anyone from the cast that I can talk badly for? All great.

I guess the only issue with this movie is it's running-time and most importantly the somewhat complicated way things glue together. I understand that Mario Puzo had a difficult task of bringing the book on- screen, but it's the way we are drawn to these characters that makes me confused about who is who. And that is the reason I suggest we stick to the father-son relationship and not worry about certain aspects and scenes we don't understand or just keep asking ""who is that guy talking""?

This is the ""Godfather"" that everyone is talking about for decades, and if you don't like what you hear in the very first scene in that dark room, I warn you... turn of the picture and don't watch anymore. Come back a few years later when you could probably handle it.

On the other hand, you must ask yourself: can you feel the zest for respect and loyalty when Don Corleone whispers his lines? Don't you yearn for the moral and innocent Micheal as the movie goes? Can you sympathize with Kay when the door closes at the end? Then ""The Godfather"" got you where it should have.";6;8;True tt0068646;sme_no_densetsu;05/10/2010;"Allow ""The Godfather"" to make you an offer you can't refuse";9;"""The Godfather"" has long enjoyed a reputation as one of the greatest films of all time. Is that a fair assessment? After re-watching the film recently, I'd say yes.

The 'godfather' of the title is Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), the aging head of the Corleone crime family. His time is coming to an end and some of his rivals would like to precipitate that end. When an attempt is made on the Don's life his sons follow in their father's footsteps as they seek to silence their enemies and protect the family interests.

The Oscar-winning script was co-written by director Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo, the author of the original novel. While trimmed significantly from the novel the film still clocks in at two hours and forty-five minutes. The film progresses at a stately pace and features countless classic scenes.

Coppola's direction received a well-deserved Oscar nomination and so did Nino Rota's score (at least until it was deemed ineligible). Gordon Willis' cinematography is good (but not great) and the film's evocation of the 40's & 50's is both attractive and authentic.

As for the actors, Marlon Brando was rewarded with his second Best Actor Oscar for his iconic portrayal of Vito Corleone. Al Pacino was nearly as good in his role as Vito's youngest son but he had to settle for a nomination in the supporting category. He had good company, though, since James Caan and Robert Duvall were also nominated. Any one of these three performances would have been Oscar-worthy. There were also several memorable performances in smaller roles from the likes of John Cazale, Talia Shire, Sterling Hayden and others.

Is ""The Godfather"" the best American film of all time? Personally, I don't think so but I wouldn't rank it too far from the top. In any case, this is one of those films that every movie lover should see.";6;8;False tt0068646;emperor_bender;26/02/2008;Truly a Masterpiece;10;"This movie was everything a good movie should be. I got The Godfather box set last Christmas (I had already watched the series about 20 times by then) and I watched it honestly about 3 weeks straight after getting it. This movie however is hands-down my favorite of the series. The story was amazing, and sure made Mafia life look like paradise. I loved the characters, all of them, even the antagonists were unforgettable. Everything looked authentic 1940's style, there weren't any slip-ups as far as I can tell. Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, John Cazale all make a very authentic looking, and truly remarkable family. I was a huge Godfather encyclopedia for a while, I knew 95% of the characters and everything, and its easy to see why, this is a very memorable movie in every aspect. I loved this film at first sight. I read some of the ""Hated it"" comments, and they all say its boring or something. Those people need to grow up, if you want an action movie watch Die Hard or something, this movie is a classic and if those people lack the taste for good movies to watch it they need to take their hate of it elsewhere. This is a perfect movie and deserves a 10/10. Watch this if you want a truly unforgettable experience.";6;8;False tt0068646;tedg;19/02/2003;Respect;;Spoilers herein.

Building a life in film is not so much a matter of discovering the worthwhile films, but choosing which of those have the stuff worth building with. I have a clear understanding of what Scorsese is about, which I attribute to the Latin convention for storytelling. This convention is totally invested in characters, not situation or place or God help us, ideas. Scorsese's camera is attached to people, never place. His curiosity is always about people. This is a form of visual gossip that I eschew.

So it is with Coppola. But his two projects (the Godfather and Apocalypse journeys) have another merit in how they work with what came before. Apocalypse is far more interesting in this respect. But `Godfather' is very clever in how it places itself. Gangster pictures began as a matter of a pretend world, and became ever more so as the genre matured. Mobsters lived in a world not unlike that of the Roadrunner, always at a distance from reality, often winking at the audience.

Coppola took his focus on the human to this genre. The film itself is no masterpiece without this placement, but is great with it. We inherit all the machinery and momentum of the genre to place behind the characters. Brando understood this, and alone is able to effect the transferral. Pacino would go on to sledgehammer his roles, but is appropriately subdued here.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.;18;31;True tt0068646;EThompsonUMD;26/09/2008;Sets the standard for the gangster art film.;10;"The Godfather (1972) did for gangster movies what 2001: A Space Odyssey did for science fiction. Like Stanley Kubrick, Francis Ford Coppola re-energized and, to a degree, reinvented a basic Hollywood pulp fiction action-entertainment genre, using it as a vehicle for the high artistic ambitions of a post-New Wave film ""auteur.""

Within his narrower focus on 20th century American civilization (as opposed to Kubrick's philosophical speculations on human evolution), Coppola shapes the story of the Corleone Mafia family into an epic/satiric vision of American business, government, justice, and moral decline. The Godfather's brilliantly constructed opening sequence, the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter, not only establishes the Don's character, the nature of his organization, the role of family and Sicilian tradition in his world, and the character of his sons (three natural and one adopted), but also establishes the relationship between the Don's world and ""legitimate"" society. For instance, the film's opening words are those of Bonasera, a petitioner for a wedding ""favor,"" whose voice over a dark screen first asserts the American Dream, ""I believe in America. America has made my fortune,"" and then turns to disillusioned contradiction: ""for justice, we must go to Don Corleone.""

Numerous subsequent lines of dialog establish literal or metaphorical connections between the criminal underworld and social institutions. Some of the most memorable ones include: ""My father is no different than any powerful man, any man with power, like a president or senator.""""Now we have the unions, we have the gambling; and they're the best things to have. But narcotics is a thing of the future. And if we don't get a piece of that action, we risk everything we have. I mean not now, but ten years from now."" ""It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business."" And most famously of all: ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse.""

The film's title refers to two godfathers, the original Don Corleone and his youngest son - and ultimate successor - Michael. Marlon Brando's performance as Don Corleone, for which he was awarded a Best Actor Academy Award, balances the Don's subtly counter-pointed functions as beloved, grandfatherly patriarch and fearsome, brutal crime boss. Yet Michael, as the character most centrally and significantly affected by the film's plot and played with a brilliance equaling Brando's by a then unknown Al Pacino, is the principal protagonist.

At the wedding, Michael's centrality is signaled by the Don's frantic call, ""Where's Michael? We are not taking the picture without Michael!"" A World War II hero still in decorated uniform, Michael is meanwhile busy differentiating himself from his family to his girl friend and future second wife, Kay (Diane Keaton). ""Luca Brasi held a gun to the band leader's head,"" he relates, ""and my father assured him that either his signature or his brains would be on the release. That's my family Kay. It's not me."" Michael's initial disinterest in Mafia activities is reinforced by his adoring father who envisions him as ""Senator Corleone"" or ""Governor Corleone"" not as his successor. That role is reserved for his hot-headed eldest son, Sonny (James Caan). But, of course, events conspire to suck Michael in - and to keep sucking him in right through Godfather III - the assassination attempt on his father, Michael's coolly murderous response, the car bomb meant for him that kills his first wife, the Sicilian beauty Apollonia (aptly named for the god of sun light), the riddled body of his brother Sonny. Inevitably, a morally darkened Michael emerges at the end of the film, one who outdoes his father in guile and ruthlessness and whose final brutal and deceitful acts in Godfather I seal his doom as a Macbeth-like villainous tragic hero.

Shot mainly on location in various New York City locales, The Godfather spans a ten-year post World War II period. A multitude of props, costumes, and pop culture artifacts arranged by the film's art director, Warren Clyner, and production designer, Dean Tavoularis, lend a rich sense of historical authenticity to the film's mise en scene. Moreover, the film's lighting by brilliant cinematographer Gordon (""prince of darkness"") Willis, contributes greatly to both the film's realism and its thematic symbolism. Compare, for instance, the use of extremely dark, shadowy, color desaturated interior scenes – especially in the Don's home office – with the brightly lit, vivaciously colored outdoor wedding scene or the sun-drenched, romanticized Sicilian landscape.

The Godfather is edited in the classic Hollywood invisible style, subordinating technique to the needs of narrative and visual continuity. But the film is expertly edited nonetheless. In particular one might note the stunning use of multiple parallel editing that occurs in one of the film's last scenes: the assassination of the other crime family heads, elaborately planned to coincide with Michael's participation in the baptism of sister Connie's child. Likewise, The Godfather's soundtrack is a memorable combination of diegetic period music (""Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"") and a lush, operatic original score composed by one of the greatest film music composers, Nino Rota (a frequent Fellini collaborator as in 8 1/2).

With The Godfather and its even more ambitious sequel, Coppola pushed the classic gangster film in the direction of high art and released it once and for all from the moralistic grip of the Hays Code, which arose in the 1930s in large part as a response to the romanticizing of criminals found in such early examples of the gangster genre as Scarface, Little Cesar, and Public Enemy. Not only did the code regulate the degree and nature of sexual and violent imagery in all films, but it also specifically required that criminals be portrayed as morally repulsive social deviants and that plots involving them be resolved with the implicit or explicit lesson that ""crime did not pay."" Fortunately for American popular culture The Godfather radically rewrote the rulebook and paved the way for a generation's-worth of gangster masterpieces ranging from the Scarface remake to Pulp Fiction to The Sopranos.";15;25;True tt0068646;oneblip;30/09/2006;The best movie ever? Nah, an entertaining film? Yes.;9;"I bought The Godfather: The Game and was sucked so deeply into it that I wanted to see the movies. My brother kept telling me about how the scenes in the movie played out and that alone was enough to make me buy the entire collection on DVD. I will never regret that decision so long as I live.

The Godfather plays out like a documentary with out the corny voice over. The actors in this movie do such a great job it feels as though you aren't watching a movie but are instead watching the individual lives play out. There isn't a plot that can be fingered out. If you had to it would be the war between all the families and the cause of it.

Don Vito Corleone is approached by a member of the Tattaglia family to form a deal between the two families in a new business venture: the selling of drugs. Don Corleone, a vigilant believer in the old ways, feels that getting into the business of drugs will draw too much heat. And because of this he refuses the offer that is placed before him.

This fuels a fire with the Tattaglia family and it has a domino effect that causes wars between all of the families. The movie revolves around this central premise and comes to a head with the ending of the war. The outcome and what ends the war is also unpredictable and full of strategic writing. And I feel that the ending will surprise any body who doesn't already know how it all does.

The only reason I didn't give this movie a 10/10 is because although it is a very entertaining and among the best movies I've ever seen, I don't feel that it is THEE best. There are movies out there that will entertain all audiences and that are just as good. There are movies that I can watch with friends without them growing bored. It gets a 9 because, as much as I love this movie, I can admit that it will only entertain a certain kind of person. I know there are movies that don't have this restriction.

A definite must buy for collectors; Make sure you like dramatic movies and not action movies though.";16;27;False tt0068646;GusF;23/05/2015;An absolute masterpiece from beginning to end;;"Today, I managed to fill one of the biggest gaps in my film knowledge by watching one of the most popularly and critically acclaimed films of all time. I had picked up some of it by osmosis through references and parodies in other works but most of it was completely new to me, I'm glad to say. The acting, writing and direction are all of an extraordinarily high standard. It is a wonderfully told epic tale of family, betrayal, vengeance and a twisted sense of honour.

As the title character Don Vito Corleone, Marlon Brando gives a fantastic performance which afforded him his second and final Best Actor Oscar, though he did not accept it. The Don is a fascinating character. He prides himself on being a man of honour who values loyalty above everything else and has a strict moral code, albeit an extremely warped one. The family business encompasses murder, gambling, bootlegging and widespread political and judicial corruption and yet he refuses to enter the narcotics trade as he thinks that it will be too messy and lose the family its support among the police and politicians. I generally prefer Brando when he enunciates more clearly as opposed to mumbling but he is very frightening as the soft spoken Don. Truly powerful people do not need to shout all of the time and the Don understands this. He seldom loses his temper, using violence as an instrument after a reasonable offer has been refused. He is an incredibly strong and compelling character and Brando's performance represents some of his best work. Francis Ford Coppola said that he wanted the best actor in the world to play Don Corleone, which meant either Brando or Laurence Olivier. Olivier is one of my absolute favourite actors but I can't imagine him as the Don.

In his first major film appearance, Al Pacino is excellent as the Don's youngest son Michael Corleone, another wonderfully compelling character. In his first scene, we are introduced to him as a US Army captain who has just returned from the recently ended World War II. He is the outsider as he is the only member of his family to have attended college and wants no part of the family business. He instead wants a normal life with his girlfriend Kay Adams and this is illustrated by the two of them going Christmas shopping and going to see ""The Bells of St. Mary's"" – in a funny coincidence, that was the first sequel nominated for Best Picture while ""The Godfather Part II"" was the second – in the cinema. However, everything changes after the assassination attempt on the Don and Michael's first involvement with the family business when he murders Sollozzo and McCluskey in the restaurant, one of the best scenes in the film. He spends several years in Sicily, marries a young woman named Apollonia and sees her killed in a car bomb which was meant for him as part of the ongoing war between the Five Families. This experience hardens him and he begins to lose touch with his humanity. He returns to New York City to find that his family is no longer feared as it once was, given that his father has grown weak. The Corleones relocate to Las Vegas and, under Michael's leadership, attempt to legitimise the business but this is mocked by the Nevada based gangster Moe Greene, a thinly veiled version of Bugsy Siegel. It could be argued that Michael does not truly become his own man until after his father's death when he not only establishes himself as the new Don but reestablishes the Corleones as the most feared and powerful crime family. Pacino was deservedly nominated for an Oscar but for Best Supporting Actor rather than Best Actor, which justifiably annoyed him as he had more screen time than Brando.

James Caan is likewise excellent as the Don's hotheaded eldest son Sonny whose frequent outbursts provide a great contrast to the measured, reasonable approaches of both his father and Michael and whose very bloody murder provides another of the best scenes in the film. Robert Duvall is extremely good as Tom Hagen, the Don's unofficially adopted German- Irish-American son and the family's consigliere who is often the voice of reason. A very young Diane Keaton is impressive in the supporting role of the initially naive Kay, who undergoes a steep learning curve in the brilliant final scene when she realises that Michael was lying when he said that he did not have his brother-in-law Carlo killed. The film has a very strong cast overall: John Cazale, Sterling Hayden, Abe Vigoda (along with Brando, one of the few non-Italian-Americans playing one in the film), Richard Conte (who was considered for Don Corleone), Richard S. Castellano, Al Lettieri, John Marley, Alex Rocco and Coppola's sister Talia Shire. Although Shire is a little over the top in the last scene, she is excellent in the extremely unpleasant scene in which Connie breaks down and Carlo beats her.

The film's cinematography is beautiful. I particularly loved the frequent use of shadow and darkness. The long takes, one of my favourite film techniques, are not of the same duration as in the films of Orson Welles or Kenneth Branagh but they are used very effectively. My absolute favourite scene in the film is the baptism of Connie's son Michael which is interspersed with a series of brutal murders. Not only is it shot in a fantastic way but it provides another great contrast as well as illustrating Michael's descent.

Overall, this is an absolutely brilliant film which lives up to the hype.";7;10;True tt0068646;bkoganbing;09/03/2008;The Don And His Sons;10;"My nephew who is all of 17 told me in no uncertain terms that movie making with him starts with The Godfather. He doesn't believe anything made before it is of any great merit. For him The Godfather is like The Birth of a Nation.

All three of The Godfather films can bear viewing over and over again. Mario Puzo created such compelling characters and Francis Ford Coppola brought them to life so vividly that you just get sucked in permanently. Like that other mammoth novel about a period, Gone With the Wind, Mario Puzo was like Margaret Mitchell in that there was no way he could top himself after the book was published.

Anyone steeped in organized crime history will know a lot about who is being alluded to in all of the Godfather films. Case in point, Alex Rocco who plays the minor character of Moe Green who takes it upon himself to slap Fredo Corleone around. He's also got a cash flow problem at the casino he's running. One would have to have been living on another planet to not know he was referring to Bugsy Siegal.

The Godfather story begins at the end of World War II where Marlon Brando rules the roost as Vito Corleone head of one of the large crime families. Two sons, James Caan (Sonny) and John Cazale (Fredo) are in the business and the third Al Pacino (Michael) has just come back from the war a decorated hero. The occasion is the gathering of the clan and friends for daughter Talia Shire (Connie) to Gianni Rizzi (Carlo Russo). All the characters are marvelously introduced and the plot situations laid out beautifully.

Marlon Brando who apparently decided that what George C. Scott did was so good in refusing the Oscar for Patton decided to do him one better and send up a bogus Indian princess to tell why. Despite that bit of cheek Brando certainly deserved an Oscar for his performance. Don Vito is compelling as criminal and family man. Brando might have been lucky though in that Al Pacino who really is the main character in all three Godfather films was nominated in the Supporting Actor category.

In fact Pacino was nominated with James Caan and Robert Duvall who plays Tom Heggen the family lawyer/consigliere and Brando's adopted son. That three way tie guaranteed the Oscar for Joel Grey in Cabaret with Eddie Albert being nominated for The Heartbreak Kid as the fifth. They're all great, but Pacino should have been in The Best Actor category.

Singer Al Martino plays Johnny Fontaine who if you didn't know that this was Frank Sinatra again you'd have to have been living on another planet. In fact the identification is made complete by the fact that Martino sings I Have But One Heart at the Corleone wedding which was an early Sinatra hit. Sinatra was not happy with The Godfather and broke off relations with Martino and with Richard Conte who plays Don Barzini one of the other Mafia Dons. Part of the underside of the Sinatra legend is worked into the plot as well.

The images and dialog of The Godfather have entered into our popular culture. The horse's head in John Marley's bed, the cryptic gangster dialog of speaking of an ""offer he can't refuse"", or ""Lucabrazzi sleeps with the fishes"" is all stuff we remember forever after seeing the film.

The key scene I think in The Godfather is between the retired Brando and Pacino who has taken over the crime family. Brando isn't happy about the road he took for success, but it's what was available to him. He hoped that Pacino could have stayed out of the family business and had a clean life. It wasn't to be, but maybe the next generation. I think it's beautifully played.

In fact it's all beautifully played.";8;12;False tt0068646;didi-5;23/02/2005;Mario Puzo's soapy Mafia saga;8;"Think epic novel crossed with Mafia speak.

Imagine excellent cinematography and direction, a great musical theme, violence, tragedy, spectacle, and the family, and a cast which can't be faulted, and here you have a film which fits the bill on all counts.

Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando in one of his greatest roles, one which he supposedly didn't initially want to play) is the powerful Mafia Don we meet early in the film. He has three sons (Sonny - James Caan; Fredo - John Cazale; and Michael - Al Pacino) and a daughter (Talia Shire), and an adopted son (Tom Hagen - Robert Duvall). These are his beloved family and the centre of his world. His day job involves building his empire by making 'offers you can't refuse'.

'The Godfather' was the first film in a trilogy following the fortunes of the Corleone family, and I think the best. It has some well-presented set pieces (Connie's wedding; Sonny's murder; Michael's killing of family enemies in the restaurant; the horse's head in the bed; and Vito's death while playing with his grand-child) and is extremely well-written. The novel itself was more soapy, a work of pulp fiction - the film pulls it together and gives it a bit more class.

I particularly like the characterisations of Vito and his sons. Vito is assured in his role at the head of the premier Mafia family. Sonny is a vain libertine who is hot-headed. Fredo is a weak disappointment. Michael takes his place in the family when he has to (in fact throughout the three films he is shown to be far more ruthless than any of his relatives).

Is 'The Godfather' the greatest film ever made? No, but it is one of the best. Certainly in the top 10 films of the 1970s.";14;24;True tt0068646;Kpmtaxes;30/06/2013;Filming of Horse's Head Scene;10;"I was present when the filming of the Horse's head scene was done. I was a Police Officer in 1970 for the Nassau County Police Department, New York. I believe in the mid part of 1971, I was assigned, along with about 10 other officers and a Sergeant, to be at the Guggenheim Estate, Sands Point, Nassau County, NY. This estate was County property. The filming of the Horse's head scene and the dining room scene where Robert Duvall requests John Marley to give a film/singing role to one of the Don's relatives. Marley declines Duvall as you see a horse prancing in the meadow outside. Duvall says he will tell the Don in NY. Marley shrugs off Duvall. I was within 50' of both scenes. Coppola actually used real heads of horses ( they were shipped in ice in huge crates, they mixed a blood concoction). Coppola actually was very picky about the head he wanted to use. When Marley opens the sheet and discovers the head, it looks like sunrise. It was actually raining outside, and yellow cellophane was put on the windows. With the proper lighting, it looks like the sun was coming up, yet it was raining outside. The scene of the horse prancing outside was done at another location. The Guggenheim family were very rich and had art collections, etc throughout the mansion. The police were there to safeguard any of these collections. My girlfriend (now wife of over 41 years) was away at college. Banks of phones were set up. I was on the phone talking for a long time each of the three or four days assigned there. I was young and did not realize the assignment that I was on would be so important in the movie world. There were plenty of staff, extras, etc there. We were there for over 10/12 hours per day. Meals were catered. I also was assigned on traffic sometime later near the toll booth scene, filmed out on the old Mitchel Field Air Base. If you look close, at the toll booth, yellow parking lines are on the ground. Lindbergh, a friend of Guggenheim, flew from nearby Roosevelt Field. Somewhere in my attic, is my police memo book with exact dates when assigned as a ""rookie"" to the making of ""The Godfather"". Well, I guess I said enough, contact me if you need any more information. BTW, I retired in 2003, 33 year career. I became a supervisor in 1987 and was assigned to several movie filming on the ""Gold Coast"" of Long Island. One was the new version of ""Sabrina"", starring Harrison Ford....PS I never saw Marlon Brando, I think other scenes were done in Staten Island, part of NYC....thanks...";9;14;False tt0068646;mjneu59;22/11/2010;"a classic when first released; only improves with age";10;"The first words in Francis Coppola's organized crime saga (""I believe in America"") are spoken by a wronged father seeking justice from Mafia Don Vito Corleone, and with an immigrant's passion invoke the spirit of his adapted homeland. It's an ironic gesture in a film which embraces the American Dream with a vengeance, beginning with a joyful celebration of marriage, ending with a solemn Catholic Church baptism, and continuing in between with murder after bloody murder: for vengeance; for punishment; or (with a severed horse head under the bed sheets) simply for leverage. The film gained notoriety for such epic displays of gangland violence, but its real power lies in nuance: a shading of phrase; a deceptive fall of lamplight; the sound of footsteps on a hospital stairway. Credit goes to co-writers Coppola and Mario Puzo for the leisurely paced but tightly plotted screenplay, by itself a remarkable study in contrasts, showing the thin line dividing patriotism and graft; honor and brutality; family affections and ritual violence. Seeing Part One independent from its companion/sequel is like reading only the middle chapters of a long and complex historical novel, rich in detail and drama, about an immigrant family coping with changing times in the New World. The result is one of the few truly effective adaptations of a popular novel, and together with Part Two perhaps the last word in gangster film dramas.";9;14;False tt0068646;classicsoncall;28/11/2009;"""For justice, we must go to Don Corleone"".";10;"Lately it seems, ""The Godfather"" has had a ubiquitous presence on the cable channels; not a week goes by where I don't see it listed playing at one time or another. For some reason I've never considered watching the film from start to finish since the first time I saw it during it's theatrical release back in 1972 - until today. There's a good reason why. I don't think there's ever been another movie to stay with me the way this one has over the past four decades. I remember virtually everything about it, even the minor scenes like the hit on driver Paulie and the 'sleeps with the fishes' calling card regarding Luca Brasi. Also the names - Clemenza, Barzini, Solozzo, Tartaglia; Moe Green too, even though he wasn't Italian. So effective was the magic of the film that I still have to check every now and then to see if Abe Vigoda (Tessio) is still alive (like I did today), only to find out that yes he is, still going strong at nearly ninety!

Quite simply, ""The Godfather"" is, with no pun intended, the godfather of all the great gangster films, dating all the way back to 1931's ""Little Caesar"" and ""Public Enemy"". For Marlon Brando, it was the quintessential performance of American cinema, so nuanced and mesmerizing that it's impossible to forget. The movie in fact was so powerful that it literally made overnight stars of it's supporting players - Pacino, Caan and Duvall.

There has been enough written about the film that I don't need to get into the story itself. I'll content myself with mentioning the scenes that literally blow me away, then and now - Sonny's job on Carlo in the middle of the neighborhood (that last kick is priceless), the mob hit on Sonny in the causeway, Michael's restaurant rubout of Solozzo and McCluskey, and the way Michael handled Tom Hagen's ouster as consigliere. The cherry topping of course is the baptismal scene, Michael renouncing Satan as he does the devil's work of eliminating the heads of the families who stood in opposition to the Corleones. Every scene of the movie is staged perfectly, yet rendered effortlessly as if it were just another day in the life.

It would have been too easy to use the classic tag line in my summary above, you know, the one about making an offer that can't be refused. With ""The Godfather"", it seems that every scene is larger than life, with the total picture being even greater than the sum of it's parts. So I'll content myself with a recommendation that seems apropos by quoting Clemenza after his man whacked Paulie - ""Leave the gun. Take the cannoli"". For cinema fans, ""The Godfather"" is all cannoli.";10;16;True tt0068646;jchandbab;28/10/2000;A bit long, but at least there's quality as well as quantity;9;Part of the reason that The Godfather has been so popular, is that on first viewing it really does seem to have something for everyone. It's a thriller, it's a (fascinating) documentary on 'Mafia Code', and half way through, for 45 minutes, a tragic love story.

For starters, the acting is sensational. There are very few people on Earth that cannot identify Marlon Brando's whispering, horse voice and bulldog expression. It has become what is probably the most famous performance in Hollywood's history. The appearance of Al Pacino in the starring role is also a highlight. The other highlights are of course the 'sound bytes'. For anyone who has not scene this masterpiece, I will not give the more famous quotes away- but they will be instantly recognisable when heard.

This movie is split into three parts- the crime of the family, and its consequences, the exile of Pacino, and the reunion of the family in which the characters carry out the parts of the plot which set us up for the sequel.

My only criticism of this film is how long winded it is. Virtually three hours long, it is so meticulous that it becomes very hard to digest. While the sequel is very deep and thoughtful, this tries to balance intellect and action- and although to a certain extent it succeeds, you wonder if this film would be a more enjoyable experience if there was less discussion and plot details, and a few more thrills.;54;114;False tt0068646;TJBullz93;19/02/2020;Perfect;10;This movie is simply perfect. Whether it's the acting, scenery, pacing or anything else, it's all just so brilliantly executed. Every scene is so memorable, that I just can't think of any reason to rate this movie lower than a 10/10.;4;5;False tt0068646;Smells_Like_Cheese;15/01/2004;A little over rated, but I know good film making when I see it;9;"I did get a little bored here and there. But this film is classic. A work of art that will be remembered forever, and I admire the acting. It's so wonderful and you see so many familular faces that you see today. I will never forget ""The Godfather"".

9/10";31;63;False tt0068646;Rectangular_businessman;10/07/2010;A flawless masterpiece;10;"So, those of you who haven't seen it may wonder, ""What's so good about the Godfather? Why is it that this, out of every movie ever made, is considered by so many people to be one of the if not the all-time best?"" Allow me to explain as best I can. It's the kind of movie where everything is perfect. Everything. The acting, the script, the pacing, the cinematography, right down to the soundtrack. All of it.

Oh, sure, it's a leisurely movie. It clocks in at just under three hours, and the plot takes a while to unfold. But it is NOT ""slow"" or ""boring."" While not a suspense film in the traditional sense, the movie is definitely suspenseful, and I have to applaud Coppola for his excellent use of tension building. In other words, he uses the three-hour length of the film perfectly: there's not a wasted minute among these 175, not a single bit I'd take out.

And besides, the acting is great. Just awesome. Brando's performance is stunning; the guy just oozes cool, as he always does. He's magnetic as Vito Corleone, arguably his most famous role ever. And, of course, Al Pacino's Michael Corleone deserves nothing but the highest of praise. It was the guy's big break, and he does a fantastic job displaying Michael's ruthless, cunning, coldly intelligent rise to power. The two of them pretty much make the movie, but even people playing bit parts give their all, resulting in a movie that makes mobsters seem very human. Special shout-out to Robert Duvall for his excellent turn as Tom ""Badass"" Hagen, and Diane Keaton (one of my favorite actresses, I'll add) as Michael's girlfriend and moral compass Kay. Having been mostly familiar with her for her roles in those classic Woody Allen movies, I had no idea she could carry a dramatic role, but she does an excellent job. And the script is just awesome, including a couple classic lines.

Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes."" And, of course, ""He made him an offer he couldn't refuse."" A whole ton of memorable ones. Actually, pretty much every line in this movie is quotable, and given its three-hour length, that's pretty impressive. And that theme song... oh man. One of the best ever written.

A note also must be made on the baptism scene. All aspiring filmmakers should watch this movie for a lot of reasons, but for that scene in particular. The building of tension, the symbolism, the sacred-profane juxtaposition, the heart-stopping climax... perfect. The scene encapsulates everything I love about the movie into just a few minutes.

And that's the Godfather for you. It's bleak, tender, touching, violent, thoughtful, occasionally horrifying (the famed horse head scene, anyone?), and sometimes even darkly funny. It's a complete masterpiece in every sense of the word.

This, and its sequel for that matter, is a movie for the ages. Basically, if it's directed by Francis Ford Coppola and it's got Robert Duvall in it, you're in for a fantastic movie. That's a good rule of thumb. And the book it's based on is just as good!";13;23;True tt0068646;MohitBabbar;02/12/2015;This was an Awesome movie which i ever watched in my life;9;First time i saw this movie i did not understand the actual realty of movie and characters acting was speech less. Rest i can said when i saw and understand this movie after my 5th 100% successful attempt to watch full movie then i realize this was the awesome movie i need to buy original, and well be in my personal collection . Currently my family and my friends also buy the original blue ray of this movie very hard to find a seller because all want this one to their collection part.

fabulous acting, superb story and played with characters am speechless. We all knows we well not again see to like this kind of level of movie in any decades hats off to all super actors in the movie.;5;7;False tt0068646;sh_ayush15;14/11/2015;Amazing Movie;10;This movie is directed wonderfully. Dialogs are good. You don't even know how 3 hours are passed away. Al Pacino's acting takes movie to whole another level. The good news is that The Godfather has many amazing qualities, including fantastic performances, unprecedented visuals and very engaging stories. The bad news is that this should have easily been a 10, but overall, it is so sprawling and unfocused that I can't possibly give it more than a 9, which it only earns because the assets transcend what's basically a mess overall.Although all of the cinematography and production design is great, what really impressed me were some of the darkly lit scenes. Characters and features of sets emerge from pitch-blackness, and everything is rich, deep shades of burgundy, brown, and orange. Amazingly, nothing gets lost in these scenes.;5;7;False tt0068646;AnkAgarwal;13/02/2015;Great movies are not born great, they are made great.;10;"I have rated over a 100 movies in IMDb and none of them could get a 10/10 score, but this. I think that perfect score was waiting for me to watch this movie. This movie that has set a benchmark for me to rate other movies, ""Is it The Godfather level good or not ?"".

This movie for me is an epitome of perfection, it scores a perfect score in almost all the departments, be it direction, acting, music, screenplay, character development, cinematography etc. I just couldn't find a fault with it (and mind you I tried really hard).

With a blazing canon of actors which include Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall this film pierces right through you and makes a place for itself. Even days after you watch this movie you will find yourself, in your own private moments, speaking out those wonderful lines, trying to copy Vito Corleone or shape your voice like Michael Corleone. In its own mysterious ways the movie will sure remain with you.

It leaves you wanting more, not because there are questions that remain unanswered, but because this film feels so good that you never want to leave it, leave the streets of New York or the Godfather's mansion.

All in all Francis Ford Coppola has done a remarkable job that, in the least, deserves a standing ovation and an unanimous cheer of ""Bravo!"". This movie leaves you with an aftertaste of knowing that you have cherished watching an excellent movie.";5;7;False tt0068646;AlexVlad14;06/02/2015;Review;10;"The few ""perfect"" films to ever been released are so perfect in every aspect that each scene almost feels like a masterpiece on its own. In the case of Coppola's revolutionary The Godfather, this statement holds especially true. Phenomenal and sheer brilliance in every aspect that cannot be matched by modern ""cinema"", Coppola's The Godfather is cinematic perfection in every aspect of filmmaking. From performances delivered by an astounding ensemble cast, to Nina Rota's breathtakingly soaring and epic musical score to Coppola's very direction, The Godfather should essentially be viewed as a three hour masterclass on filmmaking for any aspiring filmmakers. So perfect in every aspect and so free of flaws, no film since its time has matched even half the brilliance of The Godfather.";5;7;False tt0068646;clarahevia9;03/02/2015;Masterpiece;10;"It's hard to find a moment in the film that isn't great. The Godfather lives up to the term masterpiece. A defining film in the history of cinema, ""The Godfather"" introduced a legendary filmmaker and several acting greats in the telling of an Italian American dynasty undone by the tragic circumstances of their criminal exploits. ""The Godfather"" is highly regarded as the greatest American movie of all-time. No other movie has garnered such praise as this movie has. Undoubtedly, everything has been meticulously put together to create an entertaining, captivating, and phenomenal masterpiece. Starring the best actor of all times (this movie can prove it), Marlon Brando, the rebellious prodigy, who electrified a generation and forever transformed the art of screen acting.

You can't miss this movie.";5;7;False tt0068646;jimmycerf;15/09/2014;Look how they massacred my boy;10;"The Godfather is an endless movie. No matter the age in which it has been discovered or the number of times you have seen it, this is a work that does not lose its ability to fascination and mystery. The problem is how to talk about it not limited to the amount of praise that his expertise justifies either the wonderful performance of Brando as Don Vito Corleone is evoked (note modulation of dialogues and play with the cat in the three interviews of the first sequence: all his character is defined), the tormented role Pacino as Michael Corleone (is a war hero who works they require to take their place in the crime family), the impulsive character of James Caan, with its counterpart in reflective Tom Hagen who plays Robert Duvall or accuracy of the smallest side, corresponding to names as Italian as Sollozzo and Tattaglia.

The ribbon structure wise, it does not feel his nearly three hours, is also exemplary. It could be considered that The Godfather is organized around collective sequences religious-family: marriage of Connie (the only sunny sequence of the film to the Sicilian intermediate achieved), the justly celebrated baptism-slaughter, disease and death (the Don Vito was playing with his grandson among the vines, is another anthology moment) and the rest comes down to await the arrival of the violence, unrelenting brutality from the shooting of Sonny at the foot of the house (a tribute Coppola to Arthur Penn's Bonnie & Clyde) to the ""premiere"" of Michael in the restaurant. There riddled bodies, stabbed, dismembered, strangled or blunt: a kind of feast of degraded meat, without which there is no mafia ""order.""";5;7;False tt0068646;Rickting;11/05/2014;The godfather of American cinema;10;The Godfather is regarded as one of the greatest films of them all and it's not difficult to see why. It is a bit cliché to like this movie, but it really does deserve it. Al Pacino plays the son of the head of a crime family who, following an assassination attempt on his father, rises up to become the head of the family, despite previously wanting nothing to do with his family's criminal activities. Aside from the slightly excessive length and the fact that the film made the memory of Al Pacino humiliating himself in Jack And Jill even more painful, The Godfather is one of the few films which could be seen as borderline perfect. Like many great movies, it requires patience. The film draws its audience in slowly as it gets better and more intense as it progresses and by the extremely sad ending there is a sense of awe and genuine astonishment at the quality and power of the movie. It beats Citizen Kane, the other general choice for the best movie ever made. One of the first things to set it apart is the amazing cast, although Marlon Brando is a bit difficult to understand.

The direction is excellent as well, as Francis Ford Coppola's filmmaking isn't showy and visually stunning like in Apocalypse Now, but it's more subtle and restrained and draws the viewer in. The dramatic moments are handled brilliantly, and having a great script to work with certainly doesn't hurt either. What makes the film a success isn't any of the above, but the storyline. The story is perfectly structured, and gets better and better as the film progresses. Not only does it have a multitude of brilliant movie moments, it also has many jaw dropping and startling outbreaks of violence, with the multiple assassinations/baptism finale being one of the best movie moments in the history of the medium. Michael Corleone's conversion into the head of his crime family is very sad, and the movie is overall proof that a family drama can still be thrilling, moving and have people queuing around the block. I don't usually agree with the best picture winners, but this is one which totally deserved to win. Like I said earlier, it's a cliché to love this movie but it really does deserve it.

10/10;5;7;True tt0068646;slokes;20/03/2013;An Offer You Don't Want To Refuse;10;"""The Godfather's"" greatness extends beyond my ability to sing its praises, so there's not much insight I can offer. Except this: If you haven't seen the movie, and think like I did that you'll be disappointed doing so, see it anyway.

I did. And I was disappointed, at least the first time I saw it. It was good, I thought, but not that good. Like this character gets killed off too quickly, or the movie spends too much time away from the main story following one character in Sicily, or that famous lilting melody I grew up with doesn't come up for over an hour. I thought it was good, but overrated.

But then I saw it again. Wow, what a difference. Three hours flew so quickly, and I found myself totally immersed in the many different stories going on simultaneously, as well as the way director Francis Ford Coppola weaves them so effectively. ""The Godfather"" has this ability to hit you a completely different way when you see it again, because there's so much depth to what you see on screen at any given moment. But at the same time, unlike a lot of ""deep-thought"" pictures, it's wonderfully accessible, at least to a multiple-time viewer like me.

The story at the heart of things is simple. A mafia family, the Corleones, are going through a rough patch. Don Vito (Marlon Brando) appears to be slipping as rival crime families vie to get into the narcotics market, which Don Vito has always eschewed. After one particularly rough gangster named Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) makes a move on the Don, its up to Vito's previously clean son Michael (Al Pacino) to involve himself in family affairs and help Pop out.

That the Corleones are the underdogs in this movie is part of its brilliant perversity. The movie gets you rooting for them, to the point where your journey becomes similar to Michael's. The corruption he embraces in pursuit of his father's salvation becomes something you root for, until at the end, when it culminates in an orgy of violence, you might like me get as pumped about it as you would be watching your favorite sports team pull out a come-from-behind win.

Great dialogue, too, fantastically delivered. Everyone is so excellent in this movie, yet at the same time so understated. From the direction to the cinematography to the music, there's a quietness to the movie that's almost eerie, and does a lot to pull you in. Pacino, Brando, and Lettieri could all be big actors, but they all keep it contained here, especially Brando whose opening scene as the Don sets the bar very high. James Caan is the closest this movie has to an outsized performance, as Michael's hot-tempered older brother Sonny, but even he only boils up once in a while. The phrase ""It's not personal, it's business,"" comes up a few times in this movie, and the scary thing is it really is for them.

Do yourself a favor and watch this movie. And if you have already, and didn't think it was that great, see it again. You may wind up as amazed as me at what a difference a second viewing can make.";5;7;True tt0068646;illbebackreviews;09/12/2012;'The Godfather' to be called the greatest movie of all time is a fair judgment;10;The last time I watched the Godfather I gave this movie a 7 out of 10 and I didn't particularly love it and so I was disappointed. I wasn't looking forward to sitting through this 3 hour movie once more but I'm definitely glad that I did as the second time, the whole story became so much easier to understand.

The Godfather is simply a movie that deals with the crime business within the Corleone family. The summary given on IMDb doesn't seem accurate to me as it simply deals with the lives of Michael and Vito Corleone, as well as Sonny and Tom Hagen.

The greatest strength in the movie is EVERYTHING! I LOVE IT! The acting in the movie is pretty much, beyond explanation with words. Marlon Brando is absolutely a genius of an actor playing Vito, one of my favorite movie characters. Al Pacino did a fantastic job playing the young war hero, Michael Corleone. The only bit of a weakness in terms of acting was Diane Keaton, but it doesn't bother me one little bit.

The writing and direction in the movie is superb. Every scene is executed at top notch and this movie is simply a great explanation of what a great movie should be like and clearly defines Francis Coppola as a superb director. The dialogue is entertaining, and unlike the first time, no scene in the movie bored me one little bit. I love the whole movie and honestly, it felt half its running time The characters in the movie are just brilliantly conjured up. They are all so great in their own ways and each have their own personalities making them unique. I love Vito, Michael, Tom, Sonny, Kay, Sollozo, the corrupted cop and everyone, including such minor characters.

***SPOILERS*** When Luca Brasi and Sonny were killed off, that left such a strange feeling of emotion in me. Luca Brasi seemed like such a warrior of a man and seeing that Sonny was killed when he was on his way to kill Carlo for his actions against Connie was just heartbreaking.

However, no moment in movie history affected me the same way that this scene did and that is the classic scene with Marlon Brando's Vito playing with his grandson in the garden and abruptly, falling dead. It was so beautifully done. In any other movie, this scene would feel so unrealistic that you wouldn't buy it, the fact that a mob leader's final moments were playing with his grandson but here, the scene is executed to the perfect level. It is in fact, my favorite scene of the movie The scene where Connie and Carlo's character is being baptized at the end was just a brilliant scene and was great to see some bloody action at the end of the film. The final scene with Michael lying to Kay about Carlo's murder was great and when the heads of the families meet in his room and call him 'Don Corleone' is perhaps the greatest ending to any movie along with the Empire Strikes Back **END OF SPOILERS*** In conclusion, upon my second viewing, I can gladly say that the Godfather totally deserves to be called the best movie of all time in every way possible though it may not necessarily be mine. My Flickchart list reports this movie as my 6th highest and it all comes for good reason. Superb directing, action, writing, characters and story totally pay off as this 3 hour movie for me, feels more like a 90 minute film!;8;13;True tt0068646;colinsiterecruitment;22/12/2015;Cinema at its best;10;What's to say about this movie that hasn't been said already. Pure cinema magic. The casting is superb, the character development is superb, the acting is first class, coupled with the legendary soundtrack a true masterpiece.

From the script to the whole dialogue and interactions between the characters the attention to detail is stunning and I wish more modern movie makers would take the time to build and develop the characters like this movie does.

From the opening scene, when Bonasera is looking for revenge for the beating of his daughter, to the closing scene when Kay sees Michael crowned as the Don and Neri closes the door, the movie just flows seamlessly from act to act. Coupled with the legendary soundtrack

The scene where Sonny, Michael, Tessio, Hagen and Clemenza are discussing hitting Solozzo is pure gold. As they all sit around nonchalantly discussing murder, before Michael pipes up and tells them how if they arrange a meeting he will kill them both is so just so well acted, that you actually believe these guys are gangsters.

A real example of great story telling transferred to film.;6;9;True tt0068646;grantss;20/12/2015;A genre-defining masterpiece;10;New York, 1945. Don Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando) is the aging Godfather of a mafia family. He has three sons - Sonny (James Caan), Fredo (John Cazale) and Michael (Al Pacino). Sonny is his natural successor but is impulsive, short-tempered and not much of a thinker. Fredo is overly passive. Michael is a war hero and looking to stay out of the family business. The Corleone family and the other four mafia families of New York and New Jersey have been at peace for several years now. Then one of the families decides to get into the illegal narcotics business and wants Don Corleone's help. Don Corleone decides that his family should stay out of narcotics. This has disastrous and far-reaching consequences, consequences that will suck Michael deeper and deeper into the family business.

Hard to come up with any more superlatives for this movie, as it is rightfully regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time. Great story, based on the book by Mario Puzo and adapted by Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola. Superb direction by Coppola - some wonderful moments of sensitivity and great drama scenes. Despite being nearly three hours long it doesn't feel like it at all. The movie is very well paced and there's always something happening. Coppola sucks you in from the word go and keeps you enthralled and engaged the whole time.

Excellent performances too. Marlon Brando well deserved his Best Actor Oscar, as did Al Pacino, Robert Duvall and James Caan their nominations for Best Supporting Actor. The movie launched Pacino's career and revitalised Brando's.

Beyond the pure art and entertainment of the movie, it defined, and set the benchmark for, the gangster-drama. There had been gritty crime-dramas before. In the 1930s and 40s we had several excellent James Cagney movies (White Heat from 1949 being the pick of the bunch), as well as the original Scarface and other crime dramas. In the 1940s and 50s there were some great film noir dramas. However, none of these had the grittiness, profundity and sheer breadth and depth of story of The Godfather.

So monumental its influence can be seen in the works of Scorsese (Goodfellas, especially), Tarantino, many other directors and, most overtly, the excellent TV series The Sopranos.

An all-time classic.;6;9;False tt0068646;tedojanelize;17/12/2015;the best movie I have ever seen;10;"The remarkable thing about Mario Puzo's novel was the way it seemed to be told from the inside out; he didn't give us a world of international intrigue, but a private club as constricted as the seventh grade. Everybody knew everybody else and had a pretty shrewd hunch what they were up to.

The movie (based on a script labored over for some time by Puzo and then finally given form, I suspect, by director Francis Ford Coppola) gets the same feel. We tend to identify with Don Corleone's family not because we dig gang wars, but because we have been with them from the beginning, watching them wait for battle while sitting at the kitchen table and eating chow Min out of paper cartons.

""The Godfather"" himself is not even the central character in the drama. That position goes to the youngest, brightest son, Michael, who understands the nature of his father's position while revising his old-fashioned ways. The Godfather's role in the family enterprise is described by his name; he stands outside the next generation which will carry on and, hopefully, angle the family into legitimate enterprises.

Those who have read the novel may be surprised to find Michael at the center of the movie, instead of Don Corleone. In fact, this is simply an economical way for Coppola to get at the heart of the Puzo story, which dealt with the transfer of power within the family. Marlon Brando, who plays the Godfather as a shrewd, unbreakable old man, actually has the character lead in the movie; Al Pacino, with a brilliantly developed performance as Michael, is the lead.

But Brando's performance is a skillful throwaway, even though it earned him an Academy Award for best actor. His voice is wheezy and whisper, and his physical movements deliberately lack precision; the effect is of a man so accustomed to power that he no longer needs to remind others. Brando does look the part of old Don Corleone, mostly because of acting and partly because of the makeup, although he seems to have stuffed a little too much cotton into his jowls, making his lower face immobile.

The rest of the actors supply one example after another of inspired casting. Although ""The Godfather"" is a long, minutely detailed movie of some three hours, there naturally isn't time to go into the backgrounds and identities of such characters as Clemenza, the family lieutenant; Jack Woltz, the movie czar; Luca Brasi, the loyal professional killer; McCluskey, the crooked cop; and the rest. Coppola and producer Al Ruddy skirt this problem with understated typecasting. As the Irish cop, for example, they simply slide in Sterling Hayden and let the character go about his business. Richard Castellano is an unshakable Clemenza. John Marley makes a perfectly hateful Hollywood mogul (and, yes, he still wakes up to find he'll have to cancel his day at the races).

The success of ""The Godfather"" as a novel was largely due to a series of unforgettable scenes. Puzo is a good storyteller, but no great shakes as a writer. The movie gives almost everything in the novel except the gynecological repair job. It doesn't miss a single killing; it opens with the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter (and attendant upstairs activity); and there are the right number of auto bombs, double crosses, and garroting.";6;9;True tt0068646;evanbenlian;14/12/2015;Best Movie Ever.;10;The Godfather movie series is the best that I have ever seen. It's really joy and fun and exciting to watch the movie all over again. I really enjoy the first part the most, but I think the second part is very interesting and adds lots of elements to part one. I wish the Godfather was a whole new TV series, that dose extend beyond three parts. I enjoy the excellent acting, story, and drama. I can't say enough about the music. It's something that many people enjoy listening to on regular bases. Overall I would rank this movie top notch on my list. Highly recommended. have seen The Godfather movies too many times to count. It's part of the lexicon in my family, we quote lines from it all the time in regular conversation. So, I thought this book might be a little boring, just because I already knew the story so well. Not the case! The book adds so much detail to the story that I think I'll be watching the movie again soon in a whole new light. Joe Mantegna does such a wonderful job narrating this story and I'd absolutely recommend his version as opposed to the other full cast version that's out there, especially for people that are really in tune with the movie.;6;9;False tt0068646;jeancarloros;01/12/2015;The Best;10;The movie is phenomenal, is rightly considered one of the greatest films ever made. The Godfather continues to influence producers of films, television shows, and video games more than 40 years after its release.

It takes its subjects seriously, bestowing legitimacy upon the internecine power struggles of the Mafia normally reserved for classical themes in high art. There is something deeply resonant in the film's treatment of filial piety, the need for respect, and our culture's abiding interest in the parallel moral universe of the Mafia. Just the best.;6;9;False tt0068646;HusseinAlor;26/11/2015;Movie , which is unparalleled .;10;"Rarely can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. Since the release of the 1972 epic (which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and was named Best Picture), all ""gangster movies"" have been judged by the standards of this one (unfair as the comparison may be). If a film is about Jewish mobsters, it's a ""Jewish Godfather""; if it's about the Chinese underworld, it's an ""Oriental Godfather""; if it takes place in contemporary times, it's a ""modern day Godfather"".

If The Godfather was only about gun-toting Mafia types, it would never have garnered as many accolades. The characteristic that sets this film apart from so many of its predecessors and successors is its ability to weave the often-disparate layers of story into a cohesive whole. Any of the individual issues explored by The Godfather are strong enough to form the foundation of a movie. Here, however, bolstered by so many complimentary themes, each is given added resonance. The picture is a series of mini-climaxes, all building to the devastating, definitive conclusion.

Rarely does a film tell as many diverse-yet-interconnected stories. Strong performances, solid directing, and a tightly-plotted script all contribute to The Godfather's success. This motion picture was not slapped together to satiate the appetite of the masses; it was carefully and painstakingly crafted. Every major character - and more than a few minor ones - is molded into a distinct, complex individual. Stereotypes did not influence Coppola's film, although certain ones were formed as a result of it.";6;9;False tt0068646;ivo-cobra8;17/10/2015;Francis Ford Coppola's Epic Classic Masterpice;10;"The Godfather (1972) is Francis Ford Coppola's epic classic masterpiece and is one of the best crime films in the world that it ever was made. It is my favorite best film and I will always watch it. None of the movies like are The Godfather didn't make or did a job well done like Mario Puzo's The Godfather. The Godfather is a 1972 film about a Mafia crime family and the outbreak of a New York City gang war in the late 1940s. One of the original ""Movie Brats"" who had not had a hit after seven films, director Coppola collaborated on the epic film's screenplay with Mario Puzo who had written a best-selling novel of the same name about a Mafia dynasty (the Corleones). The Godfather catapulted Francis Ford Coppola to directorial superstardom, and popularized the following euphemistic phrase (of brutal coercion): ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."" I love this film to death! Marlon Brando's performance is one of his best, the acting in here is superb and awesome. Marlon Brando's the most memorable character. The only two films that he later made were Superman (1978) and Apocalypse Now (1979) that were a major hit in the box office. He never made in to making any sequels so those three films are his brilliant performances that are known today. Al Pacino played Michael Corleone superb and brilliant. I love that this film is set in In late summer 1945 and shows how the history really was. When the aging head of a famous crime family decides to transfer his position to one of his subalterns, a series of unfortunate events start happening to the family, and a war begins between all the well-known families leading to insolence, deportation, murder and revenge, and ends with the favorable successor being finally chosen. The Best of the best film of the world I love it!!!!

The superb, three-part gangster saga was inaugurated with this film from Italian-American director Francis Ford Coppola, The Godfather (1972). The first two parts of the lush and grand saga are among the most celebrated, landmark films of all time. Many film reviewers consider the second part equal or superior to the original, although the first part was a tremendous critical and commercial success - and the highest grossing film of its time. This mythic, tragic film contributed to a resurgence in the American film industry, after a decade of competition from cinema abroad.

Francis Ford Coppola's epic features Marlon Brando in his Oscar-winning role as the patriarch of the Corleone family. Director Coppola paints a chilling portrait of the Sicilian clan's rise and near fall from power in America, masterfully balancing the story between the Corleone's family life and the ugly crime business in which they are engaged. Based on Mario Puzo's best-selling novel and featuring career-making performances by Al Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall, this searing and brilliant film garnered ten Academy Award nominations, and won three including Best Picture of 1972. (Paramount Pictures)

The Godfather is a 1972 American crime film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Albert S. Ruddy from a screenplay by Mario Puzo and Coppola. Starring Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as the leaders of the fictional Corleone New York crime family, the story spans the years 1945-55, concentrating on the transformation of Michael Corleone from reluctant family outsider to ruthless Mafia boss while chronicling the family under the patriarch Vito.

Definitely one of the best crime gangster movie of all time. The movie that changed the history forever! Francis Ford Coppola's direction was superb and fantastic, not even that he shot with camera scenes that is impossible to lost. The film has character development, a terrific cast and awesome epic scenes that I love. Talia Shire as Connie Corleone did a wonderful fantastic job as Michael's Sister and Vito's daughter. Gosh this movie is awesome and fantastic! I love it to death!!!!!

10/10 Grade: Bad-Ass Seal Of Approval Studio: Paramount Pictures Starring: Marlon Brando,Al Pacino,James Caan, Richard Castellano, Robert Duvall,Sterling Hayden, John Marley, Richard Conte,Diane Keaton Director: Francis Ford Coppola Producer: Albert S. Ruddy Screenplay: Mario Puzo, Francis Ford Coppola Rated: R Running Time: 2 Hrs. 55 Mins. Budget: $6.000.000 Box Office: $134.821.952";6;9;False tt0068646;jeffreyfoster;04/09/2015;One of the best films ever made!;10;The first Godfather movie may be over 43 years old but still holds up well after all of these years. The film is at heart a story of family. It is the story of Vito Corleone and his three sons, Santino (Sonny), Frederico (Fredo), and Michael. It is also the story of Vito's other family, the mafia. The story focuses on Michael, the youngest son. At first, he wants nothing to do with the family business but as the film progresses, he is drawn more and more into it and by the end, he is running the family - both families. The transformation of Michael from family outcast to Godfather is fascinating to see. Al Pacino does a wonderful job of transforming from playful young man to fearsome gangster. Without going into too much detail so as not to ruin the movie for those few who have never seen it, several scenes stand out: The horses head is probably the most famous, or infamous, and has been used in homage and parody by many others in the years since the movie was released. When I rank the best movies I have seen, the original Godfather is always number one on my list.;6;9;True tt0068646;851222;07/05/2015;The Mona Liza of Motion Pictures art;10;"Greetings from Lithuania.

To call ""The Godfather"" a masterpiece or a classic would be underestimating. This is simply put, one of the very best (if not the best) motion pictures ever created. I saw this movie 3 or 4 times, and i never get tired of it. After some time passes, you kinda feel a need to revisit it again.

There isn't anything new that i could say about this picture that wasn't said before countless times. Everything works here on such level, that it creates this rich, deep and unforgettable world. From whole trilogy, Part 1 is my favorite by a mile. 2nd and 3rd movies are great in their own terms, but first one is another level.

Acting, directing, writing, music (the music!), set design - it's a thing of beauty and admiration to a movie crafting art.

Overall, because you have probably already have seen this masterpiece, I can only recommend it to not forget it for a long time and revisit it once in a while. It contains everything that an educated cinema-goer can wish. The unforgettable and one of the kind motion picture, which probably like a great wine just keeps getting better with years.";6;9;False tt0068646;valdebek21;12/04/2015;Mind blowing drama, a must see;10;"Taking a best-selling novel of more drive than genius (Mario Puzo's The Godfather), about a subject of something less than common experience (the Mafia), involving an isolated portion of one very particular ethnic group (first-generation and second-generation Italian-Americans), Francis Ford Coppola has made one of the most brutal and moving chronicles of American life ever designed within the limits of popular entertainment.

The Godfather, which opened at five theaters here yesterday, is a superb Hollywood movie that was photographed mostly in New York (with locations in Las Vegas, Sicily, and Hollywood). It's the gangster melodrama come of age, truly sorrowful and truly exciting, without the false piety of the films that flourished forty years ago, scaring the delighted hell out of us while cautioning that crime doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't) pay.

It still doesn't, but the punishments suffered by the members of the Corleone Family aren't limited to sudden ambushes on street corners or to the more elaborately choreographed assassinations on thruways. They also include lifelong sentences of ostracism in terrible, bourgeois confinement, of money and power, but of not much more glory than can be obtained by the ability to purchase expensive bedroom suites, the kind that include everything from the rug on the floor to the pictures on the wall with, perhaps, a horrible satin bedspread thrown in.

Yet The Godfather is not quite that simple. It was Mr. Puzo's point, which has been made somehow more ambiguous and more interesting in the film, that the experience of the Corleone Family, as particular as it is, may be the mid-twentieth-century equivalent of the oil and lumber and railroad barons of nineteenth-century America. In the course of the ten years of intra-Mafia gang wars (1945-1955) dramatized by the film, the Corleones are, in fact, inching toward social and financial respectability.

For the Corleones, the land of opportunity is America the Ugly, in which almost everyone who is not Sicilian or, more narrowly, not a Corleone, is a potential enemy. Mr. Coppola captures this feeling of remoteness through the physical look of place and period, and through the narrative's point of view. The Godfather seems to take place entirely inside a huge, smoky, plastic dome, through which the Corleones see our real world only dimly.

Thus, at the crucial meeting of Mafia families, when the decision is made to take over the hard drug market, one old don argues in favor, saying he would keep the trade confined to blacks—""they are animals anyway.""

This is all the more terrifying because, within their isolation, there is such a sense of love and honor, no matter how bizarre.

The film is affecting for many reasons, including the return of Marlon Brando, who has been away only in spirit, as Don Vito Corleone, the magnificent, shrewd old Corleone patriarch. It's not a large role, but he is the key to the film, and to the contributions of all of the other performers, so many actors that it is impossible to give everyone his due.

Some, however, must be cited, especially Al Pacino, as the college- educated son who takes over the family business and becomes, in the process, an actor worthy to have Brando as his father; as well as James Caan, Richard Castellano, Robert Duvall, Al Lettieri, Abe Vigoda, Gianni Russo, Al Martino, and Morgana King. Mr. Coppola has not denied the characters' Italian heritage (as can be gathered by a quick reading of the cast), and by emphasizing it, he has made a movie that transcends its immediate milieu and genre.

The Godfather plays havoc with the emotions as the sweet things of life—marriages, baptisms, family feasts—become an inextricable part of the background for explicitly depicted murders by shotgun, garrote, machine gun, and booby-trapped automobile. The film is about an empire run from a dark, suburban Tudor palace where people, in siege, eat out of cardboard containers while babies cry and get underfoot. It is also more than a little disturbing to realize that characters, who are so moving one minute, are likely, in the next scene, to be blowing out the brains of a competitor over a white tablecloth. It's nothing personal, just their way of doing business as usual.";6;9;True tt0068646;mrcarmack;13/02/2015;The Finest American Cinema Has To Offer;10;"It has been said so many times that it seems cliché, but I wil continue to say it. The Godfather is one of he greatest movies ever made. Words cannot express how well the film combines all the elements a film needs, to be good. The acting is top notch, the cinematography is beautiful, the filming locations and sets are perfect, the sound is great, the music is excellent... I could talk about how great this movie is for hours. Francis Ford Coppola has a clear vision for this movie, and is expertly brought to life.

The beginning of the film starts out at the wedding of Don Vito Corleone's daughter, Connie. At the wedding reception we are introduced to the many of the members of the Corleone crime family, however not all of them are part of the ""family business"". At the wedding, Vito's youngest son, Michael, tells his then girlfriend, Kay, that he was not like his family. Throughout the rest of the film, we see Michael Corleone transform into the very thing he claims he hates. It's an excellent example of how character growth should be done.

From the intriguing beginning where we find Vito Corleone being asked for favors, to the climatic ending where Michael finishes his transformation, The Godfather is a landmark film in American cinema.";6;9;True tt0068646;RossRivero99;16/01/2015;Arguably the greatest of all mob films;10;Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather (1972) is undoubtedly one of the best movies ever made because to me it was a pitch perfect mafia film that definitely compares to the greatness of Scorsese's GoodFellas (1990), and Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde (1967) but so much better than those two great films put together. The best summary for this film would be about an aging mob boss named Don Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in an Oscar winning performance) who in a few years time is going to retire from his position as Godfather and pass the Corleone family leadership to his reluctant war hero son Michael (played by Al Pacino in a performance that should have won him the Oscar as 1972s best supporting actor). Besides GoodFellas and Bonnie and Clyde having the most obvious thing in common with this film is that all three films talk about the mob, and the second thing that all three films have in common is that they give people who watch them how ruthless the mob can be in real life. Though I didn't read the Mario Puzo novel I understood this film perfectly thanks to all the perfectly acted performances by Brando and Pacino, but as well as Robert Duvall as the family lawyer Tom Hagen, James Caan as Sonny, as well as John Cazale as Fredo. Coppola's film not only depicts how ruthless the mob can be in some instances but also how violent the mob can be as well as those were the perfect requirements for movies like this. The one thing I really disagreed with most with the 45th Oscar ceremony is why Marlon Brando rejected his 2nd academy award for lead acting when in this movie he gave the best performance of his entire since A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) and On the Waterfront (1954), and as to why Francis Ford Coppola didn't win the Academy Award for best director when I really do think he deserved it. But in the end this film is an absolute masterpiece from start to finish.;6;9;True tt0068646;andkonst;08/09/2014;The Godfather (1972);10;"Taking a best-selling novel of more drive than genius (Mario Puzo's The Godfather), about a subject of something less than common experience (the Mafia), involving an isolated portion of one very particular ethnic group (first-generation and second-generation Italian-Americans), Francis Ford Coppola has made one of the most brutal and moving chronicles of American life ever designed within the limits of popular entertainment.

The Godfather, which opened at five theaters here yesterday, is a superb Hollywood movie that was photographed mostly in New York (with locations in Las Vegas, Sicily, and Hollywood). It's the gangster melodrama come of age, truly sorrowful and truly exciting, without the false piety of the films that flourished forty years ago, scaring the delighted hell out of us while cautioning that crime doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't) pay.

It still doesn't, but the punishments suffered by the members of the Corleone Family aren't limited to sudden ambushes on street corners or to the more elaborately choreographed assassinations on thruways. They also include lifelong sentences of ostracism in terrible, bourgeois confinement, of money and power, but of not much more glory than can be obtained by the ability to purchase expensive bedroom suites, the kind that include everything from the rug on the floor to the pictures on the wall with, perhaps, a horrible satin bedspread thrown in.

Yet The Godfather is not quite that simple. It was Mr. Puzo's point, which has been made somehow more ambiguous and more interesting in the film, that the experience of the Corleone Family, as particular as it is, may be the mid-twentieth-century equivalent of the oil and lumber and railroad barons of nineteenth-century America. In the course of the ten years of intra-Mafia gang wars (1945-1955) dramatized by the film, the Corleones are, in fact, inching toward social and financial respectability.

For the Corleones, the land of opportunity is America the Ugly, in which almost everyone who is not Sicilian or, more narrowly, not a Corleone, is a potential enemy. Mr. Coppola captures this feeling of remoteness through the physical look of place and period, and through the narrative's point of view. The Godfather seems to take place entirely inside a huge, smoky, plastic dome, through which the Corleones see our real world only dimly.

Thus, at the crucial meeting of Mafia families, when the decision is made to take over the hard drug market, one old don argues in favor, saying he would keep the trade confined to blacks—""they are animals anyway.""

This is all the more terrifying because, within their isolation, there is such a sense of love and honor, no matter how bizarre.

The film is affecting for many reasons, including the return of Marlon Brando, who has been away only in spirit, as Don Vito Corleone, the magnificent, shrewd old Corleone patriarch. It's not a large role, but he is the key to the film, and to the contributions of all of the other performers, so many actors that it is impossible to give everyone his due.

Some, however, must be cited, especially Al Pacino, as the college- educated son who takes over the family business and becomes, in the process, an actor worthy to have Brando as his father; as well as James Caan, Richard Castellano, Robert Duvall, Al Lettieri, Abe Vigoda, Gianni Russo, Al Martino, and Morgana King. Mr. Coppola has not denied the characters' Italian heritage (as can be gathered by a quick reading of the cast), and by emphasizing it, he has made a movie that transcends its immediate milieu and genre.

The Godfather plays havoc with the emotions as the sweet things of life—marriages, baptisms, family feasts—become an inextricable part of the background for explicitly depicted murders by shotgun, garrote, machine gun, and booby-trapped automobile. The film is about an empire run from a dark, suburban Tudor palace where people, in siege, eat out of cardboard containers while babies cry and get underfoot. It is also more than a little disturbing to realize that characters, who are so moving one minute, are likely, in the next scene, to be blowing out the brains of a competitor over a white tablecloth. It's nothing personal, just their way of doing business as usual.

THE GODFATHER (MOVIE)

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola; written by Mario Puzo and Mr. Coppola, based on the novel by Mr. Puzo; director of photography, Gordon Willis; edited by William Reynolds, Peter Zinner, Marc Laub, and Murray Solomon; music by Nino Rota; production designer, Dean Tavoularis; produced by Albert S. Ruddy; released by Paramount Pictures. Running time: 175 minutes.";6;9;True tt0068646;utgard14;15/07/2014;"""Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.""";10;The Godfather, for the few of you who don't already know, is about the Corleone mafia family struggling to survive a war with a rival family. That's about as simplistic a summary as you can get for this masterpiece. There's no way to describe it in a few simple lines and there's already a ton of excellent, well-thought-out reviews here on IMDb. There's really very little I can add to the overwhelming praise for this film. It's obviously one of the greatest movies of all time and its reputation as such is well-deserved. The direction, the cast, the score, the script are as good as it gets. The whole production is as flawless as you're likely to find on any film. There isn't a thing about it I would change. It's one of those movies you have to see at least once before you die.;6;9;False tt0068646;CinemaClown;05/01/2016;Filmmaking At Its Most Perfect, Genuine, Complete, Crystalline & Pure.;;"Immortal for its contribution to cinema & one of the prime examples of filmmaking art, The Godfather is a remarkable inside-out look at the life of a mafia family that also paints an astounding portrait of organised crime. Scoring full marks in all aspects of filmmaking, be it direction, screenplay, acting, cinematography, editing or music, this crime drama immerses viewers into its world from the very beginning and narrates its story with such strong magnetic grip for the next three hours that it's impossible to not be impressed & amazed by it. Even after so many viewings, there is nothing to complain about this classic, there is no weakness to exploit and with each view, the respect for this motion picture masterpiece only gets higher.

Based on the novel of the same name by Mario Puzo, The Godfather tells the story of the Corleone family, a respectable & powerful family having major underworld influences which are overseen by Don Vito Corleone, who is termed as Godfather by his peers as a token of respect. But when Don Corleone refuses to enter the drug business, a series of events are set in motion which results in an assassination attempt on the Don, increasing rivalries among the mafia families, and paves way for Don's youngest son to rise & take up his father's job in order to protect his family and to settle all disputes. The film revolves around Michael Corleone (Don's youngest son) and even the main plot of the story is the evolution of Michael from a doe-eyed outsider, who didn't want to get into the family business, into a ruthless boss later in the story.

The direction by Francis Ford Coppola is no short of amazement. The way he filmed most of the scenes from the very beginning to the end, the casting decisions he made, the chosen locations for shooting, the remarkable screenplay & memorable quotes co-written with Mario Puzo and the overall style of narration & look of the film, it's all brilliantly done. Cinematography is carried out beautifully and the decision to shoot in Technicolor print pays off enormously well for it provided this film a vintage look that wonderfully matched the timeline it represented and also added an artistic flair to the whole medium. Editing is very precisely done with each character getting enough time on-screen without robbing its expertly controlled pace. Nino Rota's score opens the film with a sad, almost funeral-like theme music, and boasts tracks which sound very unusual for a crime drama but then it also fits the film's ambiance remarkably well. The overall work by the entire technical crew is as much responsible for this film's success as the direction, writing & performances.

As far as performances go, The Godfather features a cast of incredibly gifted actors in Marlon Brando, James Caan, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, John Cazale, Diane Keaton, Richard S. Castellano, Talia Shire, Al Lettieri & many more, and every one of them is in top-notch form. Marlon Brando makes Don Corleone truly his own, giving his character a set of unique look & traits and delivers, possibly, the greatest performance of all time which also immortalised the character of Don Corleone in cinema forever and permanently engraved Brando's status as one of world's finest actors. Al Pacino also makes his mark on the big stage and delivers the next great performance as Michael Corleone, plus his rise to power from a reluctant outsider into a ruthless mafia boss remains one of the most spectacular character arcs ever exhibited on film canvas. James Caan stars as Sonny Corleone, Don's hot-headed eldest son, and I don't recall Caan delivering any other performance of this calibre and same goes for Richard S. Castellano who plays Clemenza, a caporegime for the Corleone family. Other notable works include Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton as Kay Adams, Talia Shire as Connie Corleone, Abe Vigoda as Tessio & Al Lettieri as Virgil Sollozzo. All in all, there are no complains in this department either.

Telling a tale that spans ten years of the Corleone family in three hours, while also reflecting the world of organised crime with immense character depth & complexity unlike anything before it, and ingeniously blending it with impressive direction, sturdy writing, impeccable performances, striking quotes, innovative storytelling & a mesmerizing score, The Godfather is an exceptionally well-made motion picture and certainly the one with the best cast. Ever since its release, it has become the benchmark by which all the great masterpieces are measured and its influence on cinema, especially gangster genre, is unprecedented. On an overall scale, The Godfather is universally accepted as one of world cinema's finest films, arguably the greatest ever, and the performances by Marlon Brando & Al Pacino alone are the stuff of legends. Plus, this films also marks a significant moment in cinema, in my opinion, in which the baton was passed from Marlon Brando, the finest actor of his generation, to Al Pacino who later became the finest actor of the subsequent era. The film doesn't need my recommendation because it's a must watch for every cinema lover. There are very few movies which are unanimously hailed as a great one from critics, filmmakers & viewers all around the world and The Godfather is unquestionably one of those classics and, in my opinion, the only one that deserves the top spot. A cinematic treasure you should neither refuse nor ignore, The Godfather is genre filmmaking at its most perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline & pure. One hundred percent recommended.";7;11;False tt0068646;evanston_dad;29/04/2005;Oh, Those Corleones....;9;"No American filmmaker has had a more disappointing trajectory to his film career than Francis Ford Coppola. To have directed four of the most influential films of the 70's (the first two ""Godfather"" films, ""The Conversation,"" and ""Apocalypse Now"") and then to spend the last two decades churning out one stinky product after another (""Peggy Sue Got Married,"" ""Bram Stoker's Dracula"", the third ""Godfather"") earns Coppola my award for Most Promising Director Who Most Miserably Failed at Establishing Himself as an Important Figure of American Cinema. But before ""Jack"" there was ""The Godfather."" While I feel the whole ""Godfather"" trilogy has been lauded into oblivion and is somewhat overrated, who am I to argue with the majority? People think these are great movies, and they've certainly implanted themselves permanently in our cultural consciousness.

And don't get me wrong: these films have moments of greatness (at least the first two installments do). But I think ""The Conversation"" and ""Apocalypse Now"" are ultimately more interesting films, and I think Coppola stretched himself more artistically in those two films than he did in the entire ""Godfather"" trilogy combined.

Of the trilogy, the first film is by far the best. It shows Coppola's flair for being able to craft a story with extreme mainstream appeal while staying faithful to his artistic vision. ""The Godfather"" doesn't look or sound quite like any gangster film before it, with it's muddy lighting and sound. It's also much more ambiguous morally than the usual Hollywood gangster film, at least any produced up to that point. The line between crime and justice is blurred sometimes beyond distinction, and the Corleone family at times acts with more honor (in its own way) than the institutions charged with upholding freedom, justice and morality. In this way, ""The Godfather"" offered a scathing critique of the foundations on which America as a country was built.

Coppola, however, drives this point into the ground over the course of three films. There's really not much more to say after the first film (it's already apparent that Michael Corleone's style of rule is different from his father's, his coldness and ruthlessness necessitated by a changing time), but we have to sit through a nearly 3 1/2 hour second installment that does nothing but reiterate this point again and again. Part II at least is saved by the back story of Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in Part I and Robert De Niro in Part II), and that story alone keeps Part II afloat. But Part III is wholly unnecessary and mars the whole enterprise, turning the franchise into the stuff of parody and camp.

Al Pacino is the glue that holds the trilogy together, though his character really isn't as complex as a first viewing would have you believe. The major conflict facing him is resolved in the first film, and the second and third films give him nothing to do but replay what are essentially the same scenes over and over again.

Other standouts in the cast include Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and Talia Shire (who alone makes the third chapter worth watching).

Obviously a must see for cinema buffs, or even casual fans, but don't feel you have to label this trilogy as great just because of the reputation that precedes it.

My Grade--- Part I: A Part II: B Part III: C-";13;24;False tt0068646;miguelsanchez9753;06/10/2007;Very over-hyped;5;Given the rave reviews, I was very excited when I finally had time to sit down and watch this movie start to finish. I ended up more than a little disappointed. My biggest complaint is that the movie glorifies the underworld in a way that ends up seeming very corny--one scene features a bunch of civilized looking crime lords sitting around a table talking about how gambling, alcohol, and prostitution are OK, but drugs cross the line.

Sure, the story incorporates a lot of dramatic effects, but in the end I felt like the drama was forced into the setting in a cheap attempt to make mid-20th century organized crime look serious and exciting. In this way, The Godfather is a little bit like rap music--it validates a fast-paced, unlawful lifestyle by glorifying the coming of power and masculinity that its main characters undergo.;25;53;True tt0068646;arhabmazo;14/09/2020;Still a masterpiece!;10;It's true, this is still a masterpiece! But you didn't need me to tell you that.;2;2;False tt0068646;niklov;14/09/2020;Masterpiece;10;Almost 50 years old this film is still one of the greatest ever. The depth, feeling and acting is top of the charts. For a movie 50 years old, the action scenes and violent parts keep up impressivly well. It is the ultimate film for using the cliché: You dont watch this movie, you experience it.;2;2;False tt0068646;dxfilmsusa;03/09/2020;Awesome!;10;One of the greatest sagas of all time!! I've watched every single minute. The depth that writer takes is not easily written and the actors brings it to life with absolute brilliance.;2;2;False tt0068646;indersaini-49055;23/08/2020;Best Movie ever;10;This is a marvelous work, it cannot be better than that;2;2;False tt0068646;sukhmanpreetsingh76;22/08/2020;A complete crime drama must watch;10;"A classy story of italian crime family ""corleone"", story rolls around the family head vito corleone who is now not as powerful as used to be and so the son michael corleone jumps in the family business to bind the scattered things once again ! A complete crime drama, filled with music, classy dialouges and character that cannot be find in any other movie !";2;2;False tt0068646;qfmovie;21/08/2020;Where there are people, there are rivers and lakes.;10;The Godfather is a great movie, which not only tells about the vendetta of the gang, but also the cruel environment of human existence. Where there are people, there are rivers and lakes.;2;2;False tt0068646;anuragsharma-17471;20/08/2020;Masterpiece!!!;10;"This is the 3rd time I watched this movie and it gave me the same chill , it gave me the first time. At end when Alpachino is called ""Don Corleone"". Summaries the movie. Loved Marlon Brando.";2;2;True tt0068646;adambilimadami;24/10/2019;A True Masterpiece;10;In fact, visually, Copolla lets us know that Kay and Apollonia are opposites in respect to what they mean to Michael and what their relationships mean to him. As Michael is courting Apollonia, he takes her for a walk, the camera remains behind the couple and we are not privy to their conversation as they walk onward, followed by a formative collection of sisters, cousins and perhaps even Apollonia's mother. In contrast, when Michael is courting Kay, back from his long time away, he walks with her, much like he walked with Apollonia, but now the camera is in front of the couple, and we are privy to their conversation. They too have an escort following them at a discreet distance, but now it is a black car with muscle/protection.;2;2;True tt0068646;preppy-3;22/04/2019;A masterpiece;10;"Epic film about a Mafia family called the Corleones. It takes place from the 1940s to 1950s. The family is overseen by Don Corleone (Marlon Brando). His sons help their father...except for his youngest Michael (Al Pacino). He wants no part of the family business...but he might have no choice.

A fantastic film. It runs three hours but you're never bored. It's wonderfully directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It also is one of those rare films with a perfect cast--no one is bad! It's also fun to see Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall and Diane Keaton so young and full of life. Many of the lines (""I'll make him an offer he can't refuse"") have become legendary. Also there is some violence which was considered extreme in 1972 but is pretty tame today. Only a character getting shoot at a toll booth is pretty over the top. My favorite scene has to be at the end when Keaton realizes what she's married into. The look on her face is perfect.

This was a HUGE hit at the box office. It was loved by critics and the public alike. It was (rightfully) called the Gone With the Wind of the 1970s. A masterpiece and well worth seeing.";2;2;False tt0068646;kearneyro;11/03/2019;This movie is amazing!!!!!;9;"Here it is, the big boss man Vito is sitting in his gold chair, petting his cat, showing power. The poor man is begging for money from Vito but Vito just taunts him. This is one of the first scenes and probably one of the greatest scene in the movie because it shows how dramatic the movie is by the Vito showing power and wealth by petting a cat and sitting in a gold chair.

As I was watching this scene I thought I might give my opinion and review on the movie The Godfather. I think that The Godfather is a great movie for the time period it was made in. When it was made there wasn't a lot of technology they could use. But the movie is ultimately dramatic in a good way and it really expresses the characters feelings and emotions. Even though it is fictionalized The Godfather does add historic information to build off their plot which I love that the director did that. They also used one of the most amazing soundtracks I have heard in a movie. If that's not enough to convince you to watch it then I don't know what will.

The movie is set in the 1950's where mafia superpowers are fighting for more power in New York. But this movie focuses on one specific family, the Corleone family. But when the leader of the family, Vito, gets in trouble with the other families he asks his son, Michael, to join the mafia and Michael reluctantly joins the mafia. But Michael starts getting involved in the violence in the mafia and he tries to maintain a normal relationship with his wife but ultimately keeps getting dragged deeper and deeper into the dirty, family business.

One reason you should watch this movie is because even though it is old it got multiple awards for best actors and best pictures in 1973. To add on to that it got the BAFTA award for best film music. Now this is important because you can enjoy this movie, even though its old, and you can really experience the dramatic fashion of this movie because of the best actor awards and the best film music contributing to the greatness.

Think about it, Vito's men are getting threatened and Vito is not having any of that. Then all of a sudden one of his men are killed and he says this line ""Revenge is best served cold"". Then out of nowhere two of Vito's men drowns another man that was apart of the gang threatening Vito and his gang. I love this line because it shows how dramatic the movie can be and how it expressive Vito is to go through with the murder.

The movie is really good and I suggest that you give it a watch. It is definitely worth your time and is a 70's classic. And all the achievements and lines from this movie is amazing and will executed. Also this movie also influenced me to really go and try out different things outside my comfort zone. I really hope this review convinced you to give it a watch and this movie shows that joining gangs only leads to violence so don't join a gang.";2;2;True tt0068646;nmn565;14/02/2019;Best Crime Movies Ever;10;The Godfather is a 1972 American crime film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Elbert Roddy and by Coppola and Mario Bozo, adapted from the same novel of 1969. The film starring Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as leaders of one of New York's most powerful crime families. The story stretches from 1945 to 1955, centered on the transformation of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) from an ordinary person into a merciless mafia leader while also chronicling the Corleone family led by Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando).

The Godfather is widely regarded as one of the greatest films in the world cinema and one of the most influential films, especially in gang films. The film is now in second place as the biggest film in American cinema (behind Kane) by the American Film Institute. The film was selected to be kept in the National Film Registry in 1990.

He was the godfather for the highest-grossing films of all time, the highest income film of 1972.;2;2;False tt0068646;Karimousa;02/05/2016;The best Movie ever made;10;If you think again, you will realize that writing a review about The Godfather is quite stupid! This is a movie, every person in this world should have seen before death! I cannot understand people who do not like this movie!

It is suspenseful, partly shocking, political, love story and much more... Simply the best movie of all time

If there is someone who reads this review and hasn't watched The Godfather... WATCH THIS ONE and you will agree that there is no movie that is better! Believe me! Watch The Godfather!

NOW!!!;2;2;False tt0068646;NoArrow;14/08/2003;VERY good, but not the best...;10;"...""The Godfather"", as everyone knows, is a classic. It follows the Corleone family over a period of a few years in the forties. It starts with godfather Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) and ends with godfather - and Vito's son - Michael Corleone (Al Pacino). Also involved are Sonny Corleone (James Caan), adopted son Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) and muscle Peter Clemenza (Richard S. Castellano) to name a few.

The acting ensemble is one of the greatest put together in film history. Brando plays the wise Vito Corleone very well, but the best performances come from Pacino as Michael and Caan as Sonny. Pacino is probably the greatest character actor of all time, and this film shows it. He plays Michael at the start with a young naivety and is able to bring the character along to the end of the film, where he shows the growth of Michael's knowledge and wisdom. Unfortunately, Caan is only in about half the movie, but he certainly does an incredible job as the hot tempered Sonny.

""The Godfather"" is the template for good drama. Few films achieve it's greatness, but in the end, it is surely not the best. In my opinion, there is no best movie of all time, but many 'best' films per genre. ""The Godfather"" is the best crime drama. ""Casablanca"" is the best romance. ""The Lord of the Rings"" and ""Star Wars"" movies are the best adventures. All of said movies would tie, and be equal in greatness.

So, if you're ever tired of these days' mindless action and mediocre drama films, then pop in one of the classics. Any one will do, they are all equally entertaining. Films like ""The Godfather"", ""Casablanca"", ""Lord of the Rings"" and ""Star Wars"" are the reason movies are so popular.

Enjoy, 9/10.";22;46;False tt0068646;stand_out2;18/04/2008;I can honestly say that it's overrated;3;"The day before yesterday I decided that I should watch The Godfather since it's pretty much a movie that one would have to see during his lifetime, but I was very disappointed. I thought that it would be a great movie with a plot that would be interesting, characters that I could relate to and give me some form of entertainment during the course of the movie, but boy was I wrong.

I was pretty much bored from the start to the end of the movie and the only reason why I kept watching was because I thought to myself ""This is a movie everyone must have seen during their lifetime"". It even took me two days to watch it because I was so bored that I paused the movie and went to bed and continued to watch it the day after and was still just as bored.

The acting was okay at best and I felt that the actors could have done better but failed to do so, and the director failed to even get me interested in the characters. When some of the characters die I didn't care one bit, not once did I care. They could have killed everyone in the movie and I wouldn't care at all because I could not relate to anything of the characters persona.

Due to the lack of character-interest I didn't get interested in the plot at all and it felt like I was dragged through the whole movie with a barbwire around my neck.

Today I plan to get dragged once more when I'm going to watch The Godfather 2 and if it's anything like the first one it's going to be a horrible experience.";106;267;True tt0068646;Stud-12;21/08/1999;An overrated classic.;7;Personally, I found this movie to be quite overrated. Even though it was a good movie, I see very little that makes it great. The movie is long, and often long winded. The only standout that I see is Brando's incredible acting. Mr. Brando and Al Pacino both make this long film bearable.;16;32;False tt0068646;philerritty;21/04/2004;not the godfather of all movies;9;As much as i did enjoy this film, and was intrigued throughout, I still don't like to see it gain the repetitive status of 'the greatest movie of all time'. I feel a movie has to have a more relevant context than the glamourised lifestyle and crooked dealings of Italian-American mafia to gain such a grand title. However, admittedly, unlike 'The Goodfellas' for instance, 'The godfather' is not glamourised that much, and I'm thankful for Coppolla turning what was at times a tedious book into a 3 hour long gripping tale. I did enjoy the book, but it's lucky that Coppolla was the man who got his hands on it. He turned some of 'The Godfather''s sections into the most mind-bendingly gripping scenes ever.

In a film genre that is incredibly overrated, 'The Godfather' certainly stands head and shoulders above the rest, however, i feel it's genre should forever hold it back from being THE greatest movie of all time.;9;16;False tt0068646;tfrizzell;24/03/2004;Monumental Film-Making and Arguably the Greatest Movie Ever.;;"""The Godfather"" is so smart, so well written (an Oscar winner for Best Adapted Screenplay) and so well performed that it would have succeeded under the very worst of circumstances. Marlon Brando (Oscar-winning, even though he refused the award) gives the performance of a lifetime as the head of a Mafia family that will do anything and everything to dominate organized crime in post-World War II New York City. However, the face of crime is quickly changing and other syndicates are targeting Brando to eliminate him as competition. What no one figured was that youngest son Al Pacino (Oscar-nominated) may be even more ruthless and maniacal than his father. Robert Duvall and James Caan both received Oscar nominations for their roles in the wicked mix. Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Abe Vigoda and John Cazale all do arguably the best work of their respective careers. ""The Godfather"" is epic film-making which ended up being the first true picture to deal with the topic in a non-film noir style. It is an amazing achievement which is probably the best movie produced in the 1970s (that is saying a whole lot by the way) and quite possibly the greatest motion picture of all time. An excellent movie from every cinematic angle imaginable. 5 stars out of 5.";9;16;False tt0068646;lee_eisenberg;16/07/2005;Coppola made us a movie we can't refuse;10;"When people think of ""The Godfather"", they usually think of the Mafia. But, as Entertainment Weekly noted, calling ""The Godfather"" a Mafia movie is like calling ""The Odyssey"" a guide to the Aegean Sea. This story of how the Corleone family rules New York with their own version of justice entails everything that makes movies good.

First, the opening scene. The shot of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) sitting in his chair petting his cat sets the Don up as a fatherly - but shady - figure. Then, you see Connie's (Talia Shire) wedding: the Corleones are not just a bunch of evil slime-balls. During the wedding, Michael (Al Pacino) arrives. Wearing his military uniform, Michael looks like a handsome young man - possibly an allusion to how these people are adept at deceiving other people. At the wedding, Michael meets WASP-ish outsider Kay Adams (Diane Keaton), who's naturally a little weirded out by the whole Mafia lifestyle - at one point, Michael has to tell her: ""That's my family, Kay. That's not me."" The other two sons are Sonny (James Caan), the immature playboy, and Fredo (John Cazale), the loser. And there's also the adopted son Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), now a lawyer. After a trip to Hollywood where he unsuccessfully tries to get a producer to hire singer Johnny Fontane (who apparently was not really based on Frank Sinatra), we all know what Tom does with the horse.

A scene that did a really good job showing the break between 1st and 2nd generation Americans is the scene where Michael and Kay are Christmas shopping and ""Santa Claus is Coming to Town"" is playing. Vito, as an immigrant, kept many of the traditions from his native country. Michael, born and raised in the US, certainly seems less Italian that his father.

Then, of course, Vito gets shot. After Michael gets revenge, he has to hide out in Sicily. While he's there...well, we all know what happens to Sonny. This prompts Vito to negotiate with the other families. But then, Michael turns out to be even more ruthless than his father.

Probably the most incredible scene is when Michael presides over the baptism of Connie's child. As soon as Michael ""renounces"" Satan, things get ugly. It basically says that every time that they say something holy, someone gets slaughtered.

All in all, Francis Ford Coppola created an inimitable cinematic masterpiece. And the sequel actually managed to equal the original.";12;23;True tt0068646;phil-mach;06/06/2005;A Thing of Perfection;10;"From the opening credits, you become completely immersed in the world of the Godfather. One of this film's greatest strengths is the pure power of the culture surrounding it. When you watch it, you feel like the society and the people in have descended from generations of people who have been in the ""business"".

The acting is nothing less than sensational and the music accentuates and complements the film beautifully.

Not much else can be said of perfection.

This film is a must-have for anyone who professes to watch movies and is a required viewing for cultural education.";14;28;False tt0068646;Leofwine_draca;01/04/2014;Everything you've ever heard is true...;10;"THE GODFATHER is quite simply a masterful piece of film-making, an epic in the truest sense of the word and by far the finest gangster film ever shot. Made with finesse, style to spare and a director who elicits pitch-perfect performances from a talented cast, this is movie-making as it should be.

Yes, it's a very long film and yes, some sections are quite slow. Nevertheless, none of the film is any less than riveting. The story - of a father/son takeover in one of New York's major Italian Mafia families - is fairly straight forward, and yet Francis Ford Coppola turns it into something else so much more; a meditation on the human condition, perhaps.

Certainly this is a film that explores the darker side of humanity. Jealousy, betrayal, anger and revenge are all key themes here, and the film is inevitably punctuated by moments of graphic and shocking violence. And I'm glad Coppola chooses not to shy away from the said violence, which makes it all the more gritty and realistic when it does happen.

Marlon Brando takes the showrunner role here, the patriarch who's past his prime, but it's easy to spot the real star of the piece: Al Pacino, who burns up the screen with sheer ferocity. Robert Duvall is easy to miss in a quieter part, but watch out for James Caan whose volatile Sonny is one of the film's most engaging characters. Altogether this is a splendid and unforgettable piece of film-making, which inevitably spawned sequels and a whole gamut of similar gangster fare, but THE GODFATHER towers head and shoulders above them all.";8;14;False tt0068646;anewave;26/08/2008;The Godfather is no doubt one of the top five or six greatest films ever made;10;"The Godfather is an insightful sociological study of violence, power, honor and obligation, corruption, justice and crime in America. Part I of The Godfather Trilogy centers on the Corleone crime ""family"" in the boroughs of New York City in the mid 1940s, dominated at first by aging godfather/patriarch ""Don"" Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando in a tremendous, award-winning acting portrayal that revived his career). A turn-of-the-century Silician immigrant, he is the head of one of the five Italian-American ""families"" that operates a crime syndicate. The 'honorable' crime ""family,"" working outside the system due to exclusion by social prejudice, serves as a metaphor for the way business (the pursuit of the American dream) is conducted in capitalistic, profit-making corporations and governmental circles.

This epic story traces the history of their close-knit Mafia family and organization over a ten year period (although the specific words ""Mafia"" and ""Cosa Nostra"" are not found in the film's script - they were replaced with ""the family""). The presiding, dominant Corleone patriarch, who is threatened by the rise of modern criminal activities - the drug trade, is ultimately succeeded by his decent youngest son Michael (Al Pacino), a US Marine Corps officer in WWII who becomes even more ruthless to persist. Family loyalty and blood ties are juxtaposed with brutal and vengeful blood-letting and the inevitable downfall of the family. Romanticized scenes of the domestic home life of members of the family - a family wedding, shopping, a baptism, kitchen cooking, etc., are intertwined with scenes of horrific violence and murder contracts - a total of 23 deaths litter the film. Over 50 scenes involved food and drink.";8;14;True tt0068646;TxMike;12/12/2004;Simply a great classic, number one on many lists.;;"I was fortunate to see ""The Godfather"" back in 1972 upon its theatrical release. No matter how many ""gangster"" movies were made before this, here we had a different kind of movie. We had a movie foremost about ""family"" and dedication to one another. If you could manage to ignore the fact that this was one of the New York mafia families (set in the 1940s), it was as if we were watching a model family. At once honoring the family patriarch, Don Vito Corleone memorably played by Marlon Brando , and at the same time witnessing the rise of the new family leader, Michael Corleone played by Al Pacino. Equally memorable was the role of Santino 'Sonny' Corleone created by James Caan. And memorable for Robert Duvall who created the quiet role of Tom Hagen. Many list have ""The Godfather"" as number one of all time. To me that doesn't matter, films are meant to be enjoyed each for its own merit. Regardless, there probably will never be a ""gang family"" movie that approaches the overall impact of this one.

Coppola directed this movie and its follow-ups. Not all of his have been great efforts. For me ""One From The Heart"", shot entirely on a sound stage, looks and sounds cheap, I consider it a failure. But he also directed such a fun movie as ""Peggy Sue Got Married"", another ""family"" theme. Al Pacino, even though he was 31 during filming, was still essentially an unknown, but his role as Michael put him on the map, and he is still going strong. ""The Godfather"" is a long movie at three hours, but it never seems long, so well told is its story. It is a classic in every respect, and a copy belongs in the library of every serious movie fan.";8;14;False tt0068646;george.schmidt;31/03/2003;The American Dream & One of the Greatest Films Ever Made;10;"THE GODFATHER (1972) **** Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Sterling Hayden, Diane Keaton, John Cazale, John Marley, Talia Shire, Richard Conte, Abe Vigoda, Richard Castellano, Richard Bright, Al Martino, Alex Rocco. Francis Ford Coppola's masterpiece of cinema and one of the most memorable films of all time: Brando (Best Actor) gives a superb performance as Don Vito Corleone, the head of a Long Island crime family who faces all sorts of dilemmas, most of which embroil his youngest son Michael (Pacino in a star-making role), fresh from WWII, who takes on the awesome task of being the next leader in crime, violence and double-crossing. Great ensemble cast and some truly remarkable moments captured on film: offering film studio head Marley ""an offer he can't refuse"" resulting with a horse's head in bed; assassination attempts and successes (Caan's hot-tempered Sonny buying the farm at a toll booth massacre the likes of ""Bonnie and Clyde"") and the piece de resistance of baptism of Michael's' godson and the wiping out of his enemies is the stuff of Greek legend. Pure filmmaking at its best. Oscar winner for Best Picture, adapted screenplay by Coppola and Mario Puzo (from his best seller) and some beautiful cinematography by Gordon Willis (suggesting a Rembrandt painting come to life). Pacino, Caan and Duvall were all nominated for Best Supporting Actor (all losing to Joel Grey in ""Cabaret""). Kudos also to make-up guru Dick Smith for his realistic old age make up on Brando and also to Nina Rota's famous haunting foreboding score.";8;14;True tt0068646;daveisit;29/11/2000;IT'S JUST TOO LONG;9;"""The Godfather"" is awesome. I could go on all day about all its strengths and why it is such a great movie. Instead I will comment on its weaknesses, or should I say weakness. It's too long. One thing that drives me nuts are movies that are a little bit too lengthy. Otherwise I loved everything about the Godfather.

8 out of 10. (Pushing a 9)";20;43;False tt0068646;Spleen;17/04/2002;Solid, classy, all but perfect yet not quite great;10;"What happened to the sure-footed director of this film? How did his impeccable craftsmanship ever give rise to such things as the slipshod, overwrought ""Dracula""?

SPOILERS FOLLOW

It's hard to say, but there IS that moment near the end, which some mistake for a climax or even a turning point: Michael is in church, at the Christening ceremony of his sister's child; his henchmen are in various positions around the city (one in Nevada), poised to murder the Corleone family's most powerful enemies and rivals. Coppola introduces a device he had hitherto studiously avoided: fast cross cutting. ""Do you, Michael Corleone, renounce Satan?"" asks a priest. Cut to some act of violence. Cut back to Michael: ""I do."" Cut to violence. ""And all his works?"" Cut: Blam! Michael: ""I do."" Cut: another stylishly staged shooting. It's a wonder Francis Ford Coppola doesn't write the words ""Please note the irony"" across the screen.

I don't fault the decision to use rapid, gliding montage at this point, given that it ISN'T a key moment, merely one that plays out decisions we had seen made earlier, but there's no denying that in the way it's done Coppola both hits us over the head and goes over the top (some of the killings are too operatic for what is essentially a stealth operation) - although thankfully, less far over the top than he probably planned, since the gravitational pull of his carefully made world remains strong.

I must stress that this excess doesn't matter HERE. I mention it because it's perhaps the seed of something that would grow and grow and ultimately choke later Coppola films. Just a thought. ""The Godfather"" itself is perfectly crafted and shaded. There's the well realised and well photographed settings, both 1940s New York and timeless Sicily; there's the believability and depth (when The Don is shot and thought to be dead, the tears look unforced and REAL, which I doubt you could say of those in any other gangster film); there's the sense that we know these people, culturally homogenous yet not at all the same. There's Nino Rota's wonderful score. I don't think this is a GREAT film, in the sense that so many other people seem to think it is. It doesn't matter.

Interestingly, the morning of the day I saw ""The Godfather"" (I'd seen it before, but this was the first actual screening), someone wrote to me to protest that my harsh comments on Marlon Brando based on his performance in another film (""Viva Zapata!"") were unfair. What I'd said had struck me as obvious: that Brando's introspective style reveals his character far more to him than it does to us; that he acts without INTERacting, failing to mesh with the rest of the cast; that he mumbles too much. In my reply I had to admit that I hadn't seen many Brando performances, and of the earlier ones, only Zapata. I was almost going to admit that his performance in ""The Godfather"" was faultless. A good thing I didn't! When I saw it again I realised that Brando may have sufficient grip on his character not to let the film down, but just barely; again, he introspects too much, interacts too little, and mumbles.

Yet the acting in ""The Godfather"" and the film overall are too strong for this to matter in the least.";16;33;True tt0068646;eamon-hennedy;28/10/2003;A work of art.;10;Undeniably one of the finest American motion pictures ever made, The Godfather is a magnificent film beginning what would be one of the finest trilogies and stories to grace the big screen. The Godfather is a pitch perfect film with many factors that mark it out as not only the best film of the 70's but as one of the finest films ever made. The performances from all are superb, not one actor is out of place and they are given some of the finest dialog to work with. Brando is majestic as Vito and while his performance in this film may be the most famous as well as iconic it is Al Pacino who is undeniably the star. While his films nowadays usually consist of his chewing scenery with a blustering personality and dialog which he shouts, as Michael Corleone, the war hero of a son who is dragged into the family business when there is a hit attempt on his father, he is fantastic, his performance here one of the undisputed best of what is a golden era in Hollywood film making. The journey that the character goes on, from war hero with a loving girlfriend to the head of the 'family' is masterful. It is hard to believe that this was the actor who would go on to be so excessive in Scarface and The Devil's Advocate.

Both Brando and Pacino are fantastically supported by a fine supporting cast. Robert Duvall, James Cann, John Cazale and Diane Keaton all put in superb work. The film contains some of the finest acting, writing and directing for a Hollywood film and many a moment that you cannot forget. The Horse's Head scene is one of the most disturbing yet brilliantly executed scenes that you will ever witness, the screenplay by Mario Puzo and Coppola is sublime and tells a wonderful story, while Coppola's direction is his best. Finally, Nina Rota's music is without doubt one of the best music scores ever composed for a film. Going from waltz to terrifying orchestra in a matter of minutes, it is a music score that will stay with you forever.

To sum up, The Godfather is sensational. A fine film from a fine filmmaker.;11;21;False tt0068646;SnoopyStyle;28/11/2013;Truly the Godfather of movies;10;Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the head of a Mafia family. Sonny (James Caan) is his eldest and heir apparent. Michael (Al Pacino) is a return WWII hero and wants to keep out of the family business. The Don refuses to go into the drug business which precipitate a mob war.

There is no doubt that this is one of the greatest movie of all times. Director Francis Ford Coppola has crafted a masterpiece from Mario Puzo's novel. It is not just a great story, but great characters and great actors playing them. Forty years later, it's still as compelling as ever. The pacing is slower than today's standard, but it packs a punch more potent than anything recent. The acting power alone is incredible. When you consider that Al Pacino is the new unknown kid, the cast is unquestionable the best that Hollywood has to offer in that era. Every 10 minutes, there is an iconic scene. There is no way I can list them all.

I rarely give a 10. Rarer still do I give it with no reservation. A perfect movie is not enough. It has to have cultural significance and some originality. That is 'The Godfather'. It is still being referenced today. May all the haters sleep with the fishes.;7;12;False tt0068646;ElMaruecan82;28/04/2011;Simply the Greatest Movie Ever Made ...;10;"In the beginning, a young war hero tells his future wife, how his father helped a successful crooner in his career, by making his manager an offer he couldn't refuse : basically threatening him to death with a gun on his head. Through a true story, he was revealing a secret that showed how menacing is his family, and how different he is. At the end, not only did he threaten his brother in law, but he killed him, and when asked by his wife, if it was true, he answered: 'no', concluding one of the most fascinating characters' arcs in a movie. What happened in between is just the greatest cinematic metamorphosis, pure magic.

This is not the story of a pure soul being corrupted, but the story of a soul whose only choice in order to protect someone dear was to become like him and therefore to realize that the crime that inhabited his father's life, not only could be justified, but ultimately, was the only destiny that could allow him to succeed. This is the irony of the American Dream, of a man who parodied the capitalism to underline its own limits, the same limits that ultimately built his power. An irony that inherited his youngest son, who lost his soul for the sake of blood loyalty: losing principles for the sake of mightier principles.

The fact is that some principles transcend the conventional ones, and if the father didn't want to be a puppet, he had to be the one who pulls the strings, like Presidents who don't pull the trigger, to be the ones to declare the war. More than an iconic cinematic allegory, the strings symbolize the tight frontier between being a legitimate politician and a respected criminal, in other words, being Vito Corleone. Being the master who gives you protection, in exchange of loyalty, letting you act knowingly that everything is under control. That's the point, with Vito, everything is under control. When he promises that the two thugs who brutalized a poor undertaker's daughter will get their comeuppance, we know he'll do it. Now, the question asked in the beginning is : which of his three sons will succeed to this exceptional man?

The answer relies on one scene. Michael kisses his father's hand, in danger in the hospital, and tells him respectfully: ""I'm with you, Pop"" and a tear runs in Vito's face. His son is protecting him and for some reason, we're almost sure that his father will survive, just like with the undertaker. The only man who inspired the same level of confidence than Vito is his son, Michael, who's (ironically again) the civilian, the non criminal. Not because the other sons were not meant to be Dons, the older one was Sonny, hot headed, good hearted, the other was as good hearted but weaken minded, both were criminals in a way or another. Michael was the one because he had to be. More than a story of succession, it's a story of destiny.

And ""The Godfather"" is one of the greatest evolutions that ever enriched the silver screen. Mainly because of this story that everyone could relate to, one who loved his family and whose only choice was to corrupt his soul to protect it. It's not about crime, it's about the very necessities that make crime, not legitimate, but justifiable. It's not about crime; it's about its roots. It's not a crime or gangster movie, it's a movie where the crime setting highlights some principles like blood loyalty, friendship, or family that would have been meaningless in a more legitimate world. This is the thought provoking genius of ""The Godfather"", that made it so universally appealing, because people from every cultures respect values like courage, loyalty, family, and respect itself.

The nature of the story is just one of the pillars on which the greatness of ""The Godfather"" has built its legend ... and I focused on this because the rest has not to be proved: the acting, the direction, the music, the quotes, the characters, the cinematography every analyzable element is a living proof of the movie's closeness to perfection. Why should I develop this? If you read these lines, you know what I'm talking about, so let's keep this prudish and not try to be too enthusiastic. How ironic that the movie was based on a kind of pulp fiction novel How ironic that the direction that made the movie with such confidence was so imperceptible

Indeed, Coppola makes us feel as part of this family, of the Corleones, they are criminals, yes, but the intimacy helps us to root for them But another irony is that the direction is still present by these little details that gave the film its legendary feeling, every single death occurring has a little something that makes it memorable, from Khartoum's decapitation, to Sonny's ambush, from the restaurant to the baptism scenes, not to forget the two strangulations that opened and concluded the human deaths' series. The details are everywhere, in the script that enriched the cinematic language with so many iconic quotes, from delightful culinary parallels to other fishy metaphors a script that transcended the novel, and made the film even more legendary.

When it comes to defend ""The Godfather"", I'm the most passionate fan you'll ever find, but I prefer to prevent this review from an overdose of superlatives. I know the movie is the greatest, not because it's my personal belief, but because I can't see another movie to top it, whatever cinematic category I use : story, acting, casting, writing, scoring, editing, direction I can find a movie better in every element but not in all of them, and beyond all this technicality it's just a movie that grows on you, after so many viewings, that shines cinematic respect in every single frame. The greatest";7;12;True tt0068646;kenjha;27/12/2008;Mafia 101;10;The Puzo novel is brought to the screen in the definitive tale of the Mafia. A towering achievement for Coppola, who was only 32 when this film was released. Brando is ideally cast in the title role, but his is basically a supporting role. This is the story of Michael, and Pacino is excellent in conveying the transformation of the character from a geeky soldier to a tough mob boss. Caan, Duvall, and Castellano head the terrific supporting cast. Despite the nearly three-hour running time, it does not drag for a minute. The cinematography perfectly evokes the period. Rota's score is one of the most memorable in film history.;7;12;False tt0068646;RainDogJr;26/12/2008;The Godfather is my favourite film of all time;10;"A family, the Don, everyone knows him, everyone knows of his power, here is the end of his era and simply the beginning of another, we a fantastic look into a family, into a style of life. It begins and we see who Vito Corleone is, we see another man who shares some things with Vito, both are Italians now established in America, that other man believes in the country that gave him and his family a fine life certainly, here you see what the Corleone family can do. And is a wonderful contrast, is the life the Corleone family, Vito ordered for justice and next he is dancing with his daughter. Family and the business, so in the business part we meet Sollozzo, big nose Italian, great businessman, narcotics are the future and Sollozzo knows that to get to that bright future Vito is important. And all is simply because of don't keeping you very own thoughts with you, every one knew that narcotics means dollars, Vito's son and right hand Tom Hagen, Vito's eldest son Santino but the decision was only of Vito. Then this is a terrific story, logic and business, ""nothing personal"", here Michael Corleone will enter, not to the film certainly but to the business. As any other character Michael is really interesting, here we know that he is a war hero, he is not like his family but certainly he knows the world of his family, he was born in that world. Basically during the very first part of the film we see Michael as a normal man with his former girlfriend Kay, buying Christmas presents, going to the cinema, having dinner and stuff. Soon we will see him in Sicily but before we see his first contact with the business part, obviously he suffered like Santino or Tom when he saw on the newspaper that Vito Corleone was shoot and that was still unknown if he was dead or alive so basically is this what puts Michael closer to the business part. So this is the very beginning of a new era but we don't know that yet, after all Michael was going to have a meet with Sollozzo and his dirty police officer because he was a civilian, not related with the family business. Is a great scene, the very best of Pacino in this film so Sollozo and his dirty police officer are dead, a new ""chapter"" in The Godfather begins, another engaging part of the film, for me each second of The Godfather is wonderful. So we for the first time see Sicily, there Michael is just waiting, there he meets a beautiful girl, she becomes his wife, certainly there are news from New York, Santino was killed (an emblematic scene), the future of Michael is only one. The last time we see Vito as the Don we see him together with Tattaglia, Barzini, Cuneo and Stracci, after this Vito realizes about something and that will save Michael's life. He is still the Don for the men of the Corleone family but certainly if they trust in Vito and are loyal to Vito they must trust in Michael and be loyal to Michael who at the time was already father, Anthony the name of his son, together with Anthony Vito is laughing, enjoying a normal time with his grandson, the most unexpected death thinking in Don Vito Corleone after the life he had, he always had honor, love for his family, he died in a peaceful way, playing with his grandson, in his house, if that would have been an offer certainly would have an offer he can't refuse.

The cast is simply perfect, the voice of Brando, the strange charisma of James Caan as Santino, one of Pacino's best performances, simply each actor/actress is fantastic giving life to all those memorable characters. My very first experience with The Godfather was not a really long time ago, was in 2005 and I came to them together with some members of my family who like me had never seen by then any of the three films, I loved The Godfather and in 2006 I read the novel by Mario Puzo. I remember not having clear in my mind each detail of the film when I started reading the novel, by then I had seen only once The Godfather. I loved the novel and after reading it I went to another one by Puzo, The Last Don and I loved it also. So after this I remember having this sort of Mafia summer by watching first the miniseries based on The Last Don and later watching again The Godfather trilogy. This film has become the one I love the most, its long runtime feels like nothing, I watched it a lot of times back in 2006 once I had read the novel, fantastic.

I received for Christmas the Coppola Restoration four-disc set on Blu-ray, while I haven't seen yet Part II and III (and the new bonus material) on Blu-ray this part looks so beautiful, in short you remember how it looks the blood of Moe Greene (during that memorable baptism sequence)? Well on Blu-ray it finally looks like blood!

PD: my very first IMDb comment was precisely for The Godfather. While I'm not at all ashamed or anything like that about it I don't like it either so I decided to delete it and write another one. I was going to put it here just because it was my very first comment but thanks to the words limit I can't. I will put it on my message board profile.";7;12;True tt0068646;Ibuk;13/11/2008;"""I am going to make him an offer he can't refuse""";10;Adapted from a Mario Puzo novel, The Godfather has had the most extreme change in views for me, until a couple of weeks I despised it but that was before I rewatched it and now I love it. I think my hate for it was based on when I first saw it at the age of about 16, I really wasn't mature to appreciate the sheer beauty of The Godfather. When released it became of the biggest grossing movies of the 70's and it's no hard to see why. There are so many great aspects of The Godfather. The characters are just so well etched out. The story centres around the Corleone family who are involved with the underworld and their fight to gain supremacy of the underworld over a couple of decades. There is Don Corleone, who maybe an underworld figure but is a man of principle. An example of that is in the scene where he refuses to start selling drugs. Then there is Sonny,who is a far more ruthless man than his father. Micheal, who is the good son is working towards a respectable career. Their worlds turn upside down when Don is almost killed by rival. Sonny takes over the family business and wants revenge. Micheal gets his hands dirty by gunning down the rival(in the famous restaurant scene). Micheal is forced to flee the country so that he can avoid going to jail. Sonny is then eventually killed by rivals and Micheal is forced to run the business. After a few murders Micheal becomes as much of a ruthless mobster as his deceased brother Sonny. What is so remarkable is how family life and business life are intertwined so beautifully. In the beginning at the wedding for instance when they decide to do favours for their guests. All the leads were extraordinary,my personal favourite being Marlon Brando as Don Corleone. There are very few movies that can still shock audiences thirty years after they were first released, The Godfather is one of those rare movies. The scene in which a producer finds his beloved horse in bed with him was deeply disturbing. The Godfather I believe stands heads and shoulders above any Gangster movies because The Godfather is not just about the Mafia, it's also about family. I think most of the credit for the Godfather should go to Francis Ford Coppola. I regard The Godfather to be one of the most remarkable and iconic movies ever made and all the people involved with it should be applauded. Highly recommended to lovers of classic cinema.;7;12;True tt0068646;butchfilms;06/11/2008;"I'm going to make you an offer you can't refuse. Give ""The Godfather"" 10 stars.";10;"I am not saying anything new when I say that this is the best movie in the history of cinema (at least for most of the people). ""The godfather"" is a major film with a great plot, great performances and it is entertaining since its first moment until the last second. Most of us who have watched it know at least almost of memory some little phrase told by any of its characters.

I am not a big fan of Marlon Brando (even thought I found him extraordinary in ""A Streetcar Named Desire (1951)"") but I recognize that he made the role of ""vito corleone"" one of the 5 most important characters in the history of cinema, nobody could have made this character better than him. Al Pacino became famous thanks to his performance as Michael Corleone in this film, where we can see his transformation from a nice guy to a cold mafia boss.

I have watched this film like 10 times and each new time I watch it I like it more.

The best movie ever";7;12;False tt0068646;satankitty13;08/07/2008;Arguably, the greatest film of all time.;10;The Godfather in one word...Perfect. This film has some of the best scenes I've seen all my life. The script is superb and the director is one of the best in the business. The actors were great and all played a vital role in this masterpiece. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino have possibly given their best performances in this film than any other they have starred in. Some people might not like this film because it's too long but I think that's sad. People like them should absolutely give this film a chance and if they still don't like it then there is something completely wrong with their taste in movies. Overall, The Godfather is an outstanding achievement of Hollywood cinema and it delivers on ALL accounts. There is nothing bad I have to say about this film. It is literally perfect.

I give The Godfather a perfect:

5/5 or 10/10;7;12;False tt0068646;vampi1960;30/07/2006;The King Of Mob Movies;10;"The godfather is one of those movies i never get tired of watching,its a classic Mob movie,Francis ford Coppola directed this gem with great acting by Marlon Brando,jimmy caan,AL pacino,Robert duvall,Diane Keaton, and john cazale.its a violent,gritty and realistic account of a mafia family with Marlon Brando as don corleone,the big boss.this classic is often imitated but never topped.the story was written by Mario puzo, from his best selling novel.it also stars;Talia shire,Gianni Russo, lee strasberg,john Marley,Alex rocco,and Marianna hill.its an extremely long,a little over 3 hours,best seen uncensored.it was followed by 2 sequels.part 2 was very good,part 3 not so good.as an Italian American i can appreciate the godfather.it is one of a kind.10 out of 10.";10;19;False tt0068646;Engage_With_Zorp;13/06/2007;The Best Movie Ever Made? I Think Not.;6;"With a movie as critically acclaimed as The Godfather, you'd think it was the best movie of all time. Sadly, for me, this was not the case. It was a decent movie, of course; but, in the end, it had a few major flaws.

First and foremost is a flaw that many may see as a great asset (thus pointing out the obviously subjective nature of movie watching): its length. Now, I have nothing against long movies, but this one just seemed to drag on and on and on. I've seen many people who made this complaint get called people with low attention spans and low intelligence; this is complete idiocy. The movie had, for all its apparent greatness, many superfluous scenes (the parts of the movie that took place in Sicily seemed particularly long and drawn out). It truly did not know when to end, and thus did not keep my interest.

Another flaw was the the pompousness of the film. It truly seemed to me that every person involved was completely full of themselves and the movie they were making. It just bugged the crud out of me.

Another flaw was the underdevelopment of many of the other crime bosses in the film, all of which are of course killed by Michael's men. I didn't even know any of their names, and this alone should show you how little I could care about them. A great movie makes you care about even the villains, so that their deaths are affecting.

There's more I could say, but I have limited space here, so I'll just sum it up by saying that it was decent, but far from the greatest movie ever made. In fact, it is probably the most highly overrated movie of all time.";20;44;True tt0068646;aliciadipesto;05/09/2005;Agonising, overrated, what's all the fuss about?;4;"Time and time again my friends berate me for not seeing this film and yet consider me to be something of a 'movie buff'. So they duly sat me down on Saturday night with a curry and the director's cut for my entertainment and delight.

All I can say is, there's 3 hours of my life I'm never going to get back. Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of gangster movies, I've studied some of the early Cagney/Robinson films and seen most of the more important ones: Scarface, Casino, Goodfellas - I even stayed awake through Once Upon A Time In America. But The Godfather was agonising. Slow, meandering, overly-complicated, lacking punch - what it lashed out in bullets and horses heads, it certainly lacked in dynamite. Watching The Godfather is the cinematic equivalent of the Beach Boys' Pet Sounds; 30 years on it's impossible to see why on earth it was considered so ground-breakingly new and exciting. But by all accounts Coppolla was making a brave movie here, reintroducing a genre stuck in the 1920's and lavishing 168 minutes on the minutiae of one Mafia family.

And lavish it he does. The only thing I can say in its defence is that the production design was superb, it lacked for nothing, the overall look of the film was excellent. The budget must have been colossal. What a pity the plot and the dialogue didn't live up to its promise. With a cast so huge and impressive as well, it's twice as pitiful.

The legendary Marlon Brando couldn't fail to disappoint - the poor man's legend - in my opinion - far exceeded his talent. I understand the director begged Brando to come out of retirement for this, although I kind of wish he'd stayed there. His incessant mumbling, padded cheeks and all, peering out of dark corners and scratching his face just had me turning the volume way up high and becoming increasingly frustrated. Diane Keaton just played Diane Keaton/Annie Hall (her real name, trivia hounds)as usual, with an increasingly terrible haircut. She looked like she wasn't sure what she was doing in the movie any more than we did, she just looked like she wanted to go home. Her relationship with Pacino totally lacked chemistry and I found his return to her from Sicily as a widower highly unbelievable. Even Pacino's 'thunderbolt' relationship with Apollonia seemed contrived and wooden - I know he's meant to be a hard man but he remained so poker-faced throughout the movie I lost any feelings of sympathy for him.

The best part I felt was played by James Caan, whose character was labelled as 'hot tempered' by his father (is that what it takes to be interesting within the Corleone family?!) so of course he met a predictably sticky end like a lot of the better characters. I found a lot of the meandering plot very predictable - to the extent where I was annoying my die-hard fans who put on the show for me, but I couldn't help it: ""Something tells me Apollonia isn't going to get out of that car"" etc. The plot didn't really go anywhere, it just seemed to be setting itself up for that sequel; every 20 minutes or so Brando/Pacino were inviting people to take advantage of 'an offer they couldn't refuse'. It was laughable.

Other than Caan's, none of the characters were the slightest bit appealing; the outrageous behaviour of Tommy in Scorsese's Goodfellas, for example, is counterbalanced by his likable personality: you're laughing in spite of yourself. Pacino's protagonist in Scarface is the same - snorting copious amounts of cocaine and waving a gun around - you still care about the guy, however monstrous he's become. But Pacino in The Godfather was just a cartoon bad-ass, like the rest of them, identikit baddies with no depth whatsoever, no remorse, no weakness, no humanity, no growth. When Brando stumbles to his death among the tomato plants in play with his grandson I take that to mean that Coppolla was showing us Vito had a heart but really, it was too little too late.

Coppolla may well have been brave in 1972 to reintroduce a decidedly unfashionable genre on a conservative audience, and for the time it might have been a breath of fresh air, but the glamour and pace of subsequent, better, gangster fare puts The Godfather in the shade, however responsible the film may be for the genre's future output.";20;44;False tt0068646;jzappa;04/10/2008;This Consummate, Quintessential World-Class Masterwork Is Head Over Heels Better Than The Dark Knight By a Long Shot, and You All Know It.;10;The Godfather soaks us up so dry it never has to hustle through. There is something in the deliberate journey of time as Don Corleone entrusts his reins of power that would have made an hour-and-forty-minute-long thriller unbecoming. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you understand merely by the way they exchange looks, or don't, or speak to each other. We are inclined to associate with Don Corleone's family not because we enjoy their gang wars, but because we have been with them from the opening, where they celebrate a wonderful wedding full of old Italian songs, dances and love, and later we watch them await violence while sitting at the kitchen table and eating the pasta cooked by Clemenza.

Endowed with Nino Rota's immortal, extraordinary music score, this consummate masterpiece is entitled The Godfather, a title not only relevant because of the wise Don Vito Corleone, who heads his family with unruffled effectiveness, but also to his son Michael, a hesitant college graduate who is in the beginning feeling shame of his criminal background and firm on living the life of an upright citizen. Coppola follows Michael's ascent to power within the family, on top of the concurrent wearing away of his heart.

Vito Corleone himself is not even the central character in the drama. He is a relaxed puppeteer. The central character, really, slowly comes to be the youngest, smartest son, Michael, who absorbs the spirit of his father's standing while reworking his outdated customs. The Godfather's function in the family enterprise is illustrated by his name, existing outside the following generation which will continue and, with any luck, point the family into legal endeavors. Marlon Brando, who plays Vito as a perceptive, resilient model family man in his wise latter years, in fact has the character lead whereas Al Pacino, as Michael, is the lead. Unhurried and physically at ease, one knows his reaction would be of great anger if he were to be harassed. In the face of his grooming, which is given the least effort needed for a good, attractive look, there's a look about him as if he's just awakened, and that first groggy morning hour is the time he always seems to be stuck within. His presence is imprinted with a brooding, nonchalant style. Smooth and understated, he musters a searing inner fire that makes his tremendous character arc so impactful and amazing. But Brando's performance, as always, is expertly offhand, and it earned him an Oscar. His voice and physicality consciously lack precision, and the incidental result is of a man so at home with power that he no longer needs to prompt anyone.

The remaining actors furnish one case-in-point after another of superb, instinctive casting. Macho and tempestuous James Caan and pragmatic and down-to-earth Robert Duvall, for instance, hardly have to act to embody their roles. While this, the quintessential crime drama, is an extensive, painstakingly thorough film of nearly three hours, there genuinely isn't time to go into the personal history and distinctiveness of such characters as Clemenza (Richard Castellano), the hardened, heavyset family lieutenant, Jack Woltz (John Marley, who was excellent in Faces), the movie baron, Luca Brasi, the faithful contract killer, McCluskey (Sterling Hayden), the corrupt cop, and the rest. Coppola meets this issue head-on with unassuming typecasting. A character who appears in a story long enough to say hello and goodbye, no matter how small, better be real enough that you can assume who he votes for.

Really, the opening wedding sequence deeply familiarizes us with the dynamics of the family, an authoritarianism in the guise of Old World ceremony. Coppola asserts a style and a visual guise that is quintessential, through Gordon Willis's reddish-brown tinted, overexposed cinematography, everything period furnishings.

Men wearing black suits sitting in dark boardrooms parley the particulars of prostitution and gambling, and fashion an isolated society that issues stability and integrity, that is in terms of their own advantages. Politicians and policemen are merely intimidated or trafficked. Esteem and reliability are the legal tender, and all influence emerges from the Don, who calmly keeps quiet control over his territory.

His successor is Santino, the Caan role, always cooking with implicit rage and is incredibly eager to inherit the position. His brothers are Michael and the sniveling pushover Fredo, played by the late John Cazale. The Duvall role is Tom Hagen, the unemotional, factual family lawyer and all-around professional shrewd pragmatist embraced by Vito as a child and brought up as his own. The women are not much more than background scenery. Vito's wife scarcely speaks or even appears. Sonny's wife suffers silently through his shameless infidelity, and the Corleone daughter, Connie, played by Talia Shire, is so often overlooked that her brothers take no notice of her unless she protests about her disgusting husband having beaten her.

An assault on Vito's life alters Michael's attitude, and he comes back to help defend his family's wellbeing as Sonny takes rash control, making a mess of the business and laying everyone on the line, while the laid up and incapacitated Vito can do no more than look on. Michael's bona fide defining moment make its mark in one of the film's most unforgettable scenes of ultimate virtuosity. He takes it upon himself to do a hit at a small Italian restaurant, using a gun that was left for him in a bathroom stall. This forces him into banishment in Sicily, where he solidifies his determination to return his family to a status of eminence.;12;24;False tt0068646;liudj;25/10/2000;Pretty good, but bore at times.;8;Pretty good, but a bore at times. The plot was very good and has some turns, but overall the story unfolded very slowly. Only the actors did a great job to save the day. I was also very impressed by the music, when you closed your eyes, the music alone can put you in the story.;14;29;False tt0068646;troyputland;06/12/2015;One of the greats, if not the great.;10;"There isn't a gangster film out there bigger or better than The Godfather. It's hard to some it up in a few words, but here goes. At the centre of this film is the family. The Corleone family, headed by Vito (Marlon Brando), a.k.a. The Don, or The Godfather. His daughter's wedding tells us all we need to know about the Corleone's; key individuals, small but incredibly thought out sub-plots and a running theme of business and personal matters never mix.

The Godfather is based on the simplest of foundations. Love thy family. Think before you act. Never betray your own. Vito attempts to keep the peace between the crime families. When things go south Vito's youngest son Michael (Al Pacino) gets involved. Michael's innocence is torn apart as he takes control of the family business.

With every view comes a new discovery, a piece of the puzzle missed the last time round. The Godfather is a labyrinth waiting to be deciphered. Brando is sublime. He's able to radiate warmth and coercion with the smallest of reactions. It sets up careers for James Caan and Robert Duvall, who're brothers with dissimilar attitudes. The best is to come for Pacino, as this first part in a trilogy only shows his potential. The Godfather is a one of the most intense gangsters films you're ever likely to see.";6;10;False tt0068646;dinadinovska;18/11/2015;Best movie of all time;10;One of the best movies I have ever see, and I love it everything about this movie. Nothing in this movie is too much, every scene in the movie is perfect. The movie is with best cast ever, best directing, good story. It is about crime, family and their relationship. The best thing about it is that movie don't have any flaw. The best way to describe it is with word MASTERPIECE. When movie is in parts I, II ... often only first part is good and others bad, but it is not case with this movie. It's 40 years old movie, and still one of the best, I thing that information tells a lot. Don't miss this movie, because most of you will watch it again and again. :D;6;10;False tt0068646;dexter-vane;16/05/2015;Masterpiece;10;No one can deny this movie being one of the (if not THE) greatest movies ever made. It is brilliant. Great performances by an amazing cast (that was controversial among the studio), beautiful music, brilliant directing of course, cinematography to die for and a storyline that fascinated me from the very first to the very last minute. The movie goes deep into the family and lets you be part of a dramatic journey. I would definitely recommend this movie to ANYONE. It is one of my all time favourite movies and I can watch it over and over again, finding more and more beauty in it every time. It is sad that many friends my age have never seen this movie.;6;10;False tt0068646;abhilashn-26296;20/03/2015;Timeless classic...!!!!!;10;Contains no spoiler..!!.

Firstly i must say what mind blowing performance by Al Pacino and Marlon Brando.

Even after 40 years this movie doesn't get old .Based on novel by

Mario Puzo's,Francis has done beautiful job portraying greatest mob drama

of all time. Francis ford Coppola's 'The Godfather' is regarded as

greatest movie of all time.And when i saw it i understood why.

Everything has been meticulously put together to create an entertaining.captivating. and phenomenal masterpiece!!!!.

JUST BUY THE MOVIE AND WATCH IT ...!!!;6;10;False tt0068646;MiladAbolghasemi;25/01/2015;The Best Movie of all time;10;"The Godfather is the greatest film of all time. Films like The Godfather are the reason i have a passion and love for film. In few movies can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. Since the release of the 1972 epic (which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and was named Best Picture), all ""gangster movies"" have been judged by the standards of this one.

If The Godfather was only about gun Mafia types, it would never have garnered as many accolades. The characteristic that sets this film apart from so many of its predecessors and successors is its ability to weave the often-disparate layers of story into a cohesive whole. Any of the individual issues explored by The Godfather are strong enough to form the foundation of a movie. Here, however, bolstered by so many complimentary themes, each is given added resonance. The picture is a series of mini-climaxes, all building to the devastating, definitive conclusion.

Strong performances, solid directing, and a tightly-plotted script all contribute to The Godfather's success. Every major character,and more than a few minor ones is molded into a distinct, complex individual.

The film Begins in the study of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), the Godfather, who is holding court. It is the wedding of his daughter Connie (Talia Shire), and no Sicilian can refuse a request on that day. So the supplicants come, each wanting something different - revenge, a husband for their daughter, a part in a movie.

The family has gathered for the event. Michael (Al Pacino), Don Vito's youngest son and a second world war hero, is back home in the company of a new girlfriend (Diane Keaton). The two older boys, Sonny (James Caan) and Fredo (John Cazale), are there as well, along with their ""adopted"" brother, Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), the don's right-hand man.

With the end of the war, the times are changing, and as much as Don Vito seems in control at the wedding, his power is beginning to erode. By the standards of some, his views on the importance of family, loyalty, and respect are antiquated. Even his heir apparent, Sonny, disagrees with his refusal to get into the drug business. Gambling and alcohol are forces of the past and present; narcotics are the future. But Don Vito will not compromise, even when a powerful drug supplier named Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) arrives with promises of high profits for those who back him.

Don Vito's refusal to do business with Sollozzo strikes the first sparks of a war that will last for years and cost many lives. Each of the five major mob families in New York will be gouged by the bloodshed, and a new order will emerge. Betrayals will take place, and the Corleone family will be shaken to its roots by treachery from both within and without.

The Corleone with the most screen time is Michael (it's therefore odd that Al Pacino received a Best Supporting Actor nomination), and his tale, because of its scope and breadth, is marginally dominant. His transformation from ""innocent"" bystander to central manipulator is the stuff of a Shakespearean tragedy. By the end, this man who claimed to be different from the rest of his family has become more ruthless than Don Vito ever was.

Next to Humphrey Bogart's Rick from Casablanca, Oscar winner Marlon Brando's Don Vito may be the most imitated character in screen history. The line ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse"" has attained legendary status, as has the entire performance. With his raspy voice, deliberate movements, and penetrating stare, Brando has created a personae that will be recalled for as long as motion pictures exist.

Don Vito is a most complicated gangster. In his own words, he is not a killer, and he never mixes business with personal matters. He puts family first (""A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man"") and despises displays of weakness. He understands the burden of power, and his wordless sympathy for Michael when he is forced to assume the ""throne"", is one of The Godfather's most revealing moments (about both father and son).

The Godfather had three Best Supporting Actor nominees, all well-deserved. The first was Pacino (who probably should have been nominated alongside Brando in the Best Actor category). The other two were James Caan and Robert Duvall. In a way, it's surprising that Duvall wasn't passed over. His presence in The Godfather isn't flashy or attention-arresting. Like his character of Tom Hagen, he is steady, reliable, and stays in the background. Not so for Caan's Sonny, whose demonstrative and volatile personality can't be overlooked.

Family responsibility. A father's legacy. The need to earn respect. The corrupting influence of power. These are some of the ingredients combined in Francis Ford Coppola's cinematic blender. They are themes which have intrigued the greatest authors of every medium through the centuries.

Although the issues presented in The Godfather are universal in scope, the characters and setting are decidedly ethnic. Even to this day, there is an odd romanticism associated with New York's Italian crime families. The word ""Mafia"" conjures up images of the sinister and mysterious - scenes of the sort where Luca Brasi meets his fate. Francis Ford Coppola has tapped into this fascination and woven it as yet another element of the many that make his motion picture a compelling experience.";6;10;True tt0068646;powermandan;03/12/2014;I Don't Think It's THE Greatest. I Think It's ALMOST The Greatest.;10;"Like many, I consider Citizen Kane to be the greatest film of all time. For unknown reasons, Gone With The Wind is my second favourite movie. Right behind these two is The Godfather, the mafia epic that perhaps tops more ""best of"" lists than Citizen Kane and Gone With The Wind today. As my third favourite film, I do not mind The Godfather ranking number 1 on lists and don't mind when it is raved as being ""the greatest of all time."" It is not the best in my eyes, but I can see why it would be the best in others. Anyway, my reaction to seeing The Godfather is just like anybody else's that feel mesmerized by this mammoth piece of work.

The Godfather launched the careers of director Francis Ford Coppola, author Mario Puzo, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and relaunched the career of Marlon Brando. Because of early classics like On The Waterfront and A Streetcar Named Desire, Marlon Brando earned the rep as the greatest and most influential actor in film history. With a string of less successful movies right before The Godfather, Brando's greatest rival, Sir Laurence Olivier (the greatest stage actor of the 20 century), was the original choice to play protagonist, Vito Chorleone. With Olivier still a huge movie star, Brando's performance in this epic put him back on the map and gave him an Academy Award win for best actor. Others actors, as mentioned above were also nominated for other categories, but all lost. I'm glad they lost, it was such a close call that it would have been a polar-opposing house of opinions.

The Godfather tells the story of the Chorleone family: the most powerful and ruthless mafia clan in America. Don Vito Chorleone (Brando) helps out whomever he feels and makes people ""an offer they can't refuse."" When drug dealer, Sollozzo approaches Vito asking for political protection, Vito, against drugs, declines. So Sollozzo and his current entourage of mob families attempt to kill Vito, which would make his son, Santino (Caan), the new Don as he wants to join Sollozzo. Instead, Vito survives and a deadly web of mob violence explodes. Vito's youngest son Michael (Pacino), is a war veteran who wants nothing to do with the family business, but as the violence rises and the family drastically weakens, Michael is the only one that can bring the family to their original status, by being more clever and deadlier than his father could ever be.

The first half or so, to me, is more of a thriller than drama. Lots of suspense is created after Vito makes the rejection does not stop until after Michael kills Sollozzo and crooked cop, McCluskey. The second half is a drama as we see the family struggling with their downfall and soon rise. The story get more complex as the movie goes on, which may result in a confusion of who's who. That is why this movie needs your full, undivided attention and full concentration. It took me a few watches to completely understand. I love movies that require multiple viewings.

The acting is the best ensemble ever put to film. Brando passes the torch to Al Pacino, as this was Brando's last monumental film and Pacino's first. I don't recall any other movie with such good acting by every single actor.

4/4";6;10;True tt0068646;MattBrady099;10/10/2014;Such a freaking classic.;10;"Don Vito Corleone: ""You talk about vengeance. Is vengeance going to bring your son back to you? Or my boy to me?"".

The godfather to me is a bloody brilliant masterpiece of a film and people may say it is not they cup of tea and am okay with that but this movie changed the way that I thought of movies, the story is about a man called Don Vito Corleone who has this big family and big friends and all in the middle of all of that the family and friends don't know that he works with the gangsters, The acting is out of this world and the music is so chilling and moving with a gangster feel mixed with it, R.I.P. Marlon Brando you beautiful man your brilliant actor bring us a strong Character in the movie that you deserved more then one Oscar and this movie deserved more then 3 Oscars it deserved 10 Oscars that's how good to movie is.";6;10;False tt0068646;jcbutthead86;30/03/2014;One Of The Greatest Films Ever Made. An Excellent,Brilliant,Powerful Unforgettable Masterpiece From Francis Ford Coppola.;10;The Godfather is one of the greatest films ever made,an excellent,brilliant,powerful and unforgettable masterpiece that combines terrific direction,amazing performances from an outstanding cast,a wonderful script and a powerful score. All of those elements make The Godfather a flawless film that is cinema and Francis Ford Coppola at their best.

Based on Mario Puzo's novel and set in New York City in the 1940s and 50s,The Godfather tells the story of Vito Corleone(Marlon Brando),a Don and Mob Boss who is the head of The Corleone Family but is aging. But when Vito becomes a victim of Mob warfare,his youngest son Michael Corleone(Al Pacino)steps in to take over the family as the new don and to protect his Father and family at all costs.

What else can be said about The Godfather that hasn't been said before? It's an absolute masterpiece of cinema that is an instant classic from the moment you first watch it. There are plenty of iconic and memorable characters,lines and moments throughout the film that have become apart of our pop culture that when you the name The Godfather everyone knows what the film is even if people haven't seen it. The Godfather is a very revolutionary film especially with the Gangster/Mob genre because before The Godfather Gangster and Mob films used to be defined by the great Warner Bros Gangster Crime Dramas that starred movie icons James Cagney,Edward G. Robinson and Humphrey Bogart but The Godfather reinvented the Gangster/Mob genre and has a style that has been imitated but not duplicated. Where would Martin Scorsese's classic Gangster epics Goodfellas and Casino or the classic TV series The Sopranos be without The Godfather? The Godfather is a big,epic film that gives viewers a larger than life depiction of a organized Crime family showing the danger,tragedy and sadness that goes on in the violent world that the Corleone's have to deal with throughout the film. Some have said that The Godfather and it's sequels romanticizes the Gangster and Mafia lifestyle and made the mafia world bright and while that may or may not be true,The Godfather is still surrounded with darkness showing the horrifying and deadly consequences of being in the Gangster world where no one is safe. The film is an epic in the truest sense of the world with the length being 175 minutes(2 hrs and 55 minutes)and with The Godfather being an epic there is multiple characters and story lines but director Francis Coppola keeps the film interesting and keeps you glued to the screen with many powerful,intense scenes that punch the viewer in the gut. The screenplay by Francis Coppola and Mario Puzo is amazing and flawless with many scenes and dialog that is riveting and powerful and none of the dialog and scenes feel forced or fake but feel natural and believable. The screenplay while taking out some of the subplots of the book stays true to Mario Puzo's book with dialog that comes directly from the book. The Godfather's script is movie screen writing at it's very best The Godfather gave birth to two of the greatest and most iconic characters in movie history in Vito Corleone and Michael Corleone. When we see Vito in the first we are easily captivated by him and how he is because despite being a don and major crime figure he can be friendly and helpful with his family and friends earning tons of respect. Vito is also smart and has a moral code when it comes with his family while at the same time using violence against his enemies when needed. With Michael we see how different he becomes throughout the film because at first he wants nothing to do with the family business but when his Father and family are in danger in Michael's mind he has no choice but to run the family but in his own way. Where as Vito is a friendly and helpful don,Michael is cold and vicious but with these two characters there is many levels of depth that make them classic characters you will never forget. Violence plays a big part in The Godfather and the violence in this film shocking with scenes that are brutal and harsh but are true to the universe that The Godfather takes place in. The ending of The Godfather is easily one of the best endings in movie history and greatly sets up the events in Part II. A terrific ending.

The cast is flawless. Marlon Brando is excellent,iconic and at his very best in his Oscar winning role as Vito Corleone,with Brando being charismatic,powerful and sympathetic in the role. Masterful performance from Brando. Al Pacino is brilliant as Michael Corleone,with Pacino being intense,cool and captivating in the role and having great scenes with Brando. James Caan is amazing and fiery as Santino 'Sonny' Corleone,Michael's short tempered older brother. Roberl DuVall is terrific as Tom Hagan,the Corleone's adopted family member and lawyer. Diane Keaton is great as Kay Adams,Michael's girlfriend. Richard Castellano(Clemenza)and Abe Vigoda(Tessio)do wonderful jobs as Vito's Caporegimes. John Gazale(Fredo Corleone),Talia Shire(Connie Corleone),Al Lettieri(Sollozzo),Sterling Hayden(Capt. McCluskey),John Marley(Jack Woltz),Richard Conte(Don Barzini),Alex Rocco(Moe Greeneand Gianni Russo(Carlo)give riveting performances as well.

The direction by Francis Coppola is brilliant and stylish,with Coppola always moving the camera and using great lighting and a visual look to the movie that makes The Godfather what it is. Masterful direction,Coppola.

The score by Nino Rota is amazing,beautiful,haunting and iconic matching the movie and every scene perfectly. Terrific score Rota.

In final word,if you love Francis Coppola,Gangster Films,Mob Movies,Crime Dramas or cinema in general,I highly suggest you see The Godfather,an excellent and unforgettable masterpiece that you will watch again,again and again and is film making at it's best. Highly Recommended. 10/10.;6;10;False tt0068646;bobsgrock;17/11/2009;A view from the other side of life.;10;The mafia was always seen as evil, secretive and not interesting enough to be a story. Then came The Godfather and today countless movies and television shows take place about gangsters and the mafia. But what a great risk it must have been for Francis Ford Coppola to adapt Mario Puzo's best-seller to the big screen. He succeeded in the two areas I believe are the most important in film: acting and writing.

The screenplay by Coppola and Puzo is one of the tightest and carefully constructed scripts of any movie. The film takes place completely within the world of the Corleone family, so we are never asked to hate these people nor sympathize with them. Yet we do, due to the countless scenes involving them eating, drinking, talking. There is a 30 minute wedding scene in the beginning that sets the mood and tone, showing how these people have taken advantage of the American dream. Now that we know them, we care for what happens to them despite the fact that they are evil.

The acting is so powerful, so effective that it is impossible to think anyone could have filled these roles instead. Al Pacino, who was hated by the producers but loved by Coppola, plays Michael very straight and emotionless. His blank stare says everything and nothing, but all along we see change and it is his change of heart and personality that is the most amazing development in the whole film. James Caan is perfect as the hot-headed Sonny, Robert Duvall perfect as the level-headed Tom Hagen, and of course Marlon Brando overtakes everyone as the aging patriarch, Don Vito Corleone. Brando is usually considered the greatest actor ever, and here he goes full length, portraying a man who has been in America most of his life and is growing weary of the direction in which business seems to be going.

The Godfather is one of the best films ever if only for the fact that it is able to suck you in completely to this world. It is long but never plods and always builds with every scene. Indeed, each early scene is somewhat of a set-up for something later. The actors all play it so straight and smooth, everything is completely convincing. And Gordon Willis' dark, moody photography adds to the drama, evoking hidden agendas and secrets. Nino Rota composed one of the most famous of all movie themes, and here it seems to tell us that life is going to get bad and we should have listened to Don Vito. This film put Coppola on the map and made him a director to reckon with. Just like the Corleones.;6;10;False tt0068646;Boba_Fett1138;04/10/2009;THE crime epic of the 20th century.;10;"""The Godfather"" is a movie that tops many list as the greatest movie ever made. It also tops some list concerning the greatest and most memorable movie lines and the movie it's characters and performances from its actors have also received lots of acclaim throughout the years. And yes, the movie is truly deserving all of the praise that is receiving from everywhere and everyone.

Even though in my opinion part II is an even better movie, this is still the movie that began it all. Without this movie there of course would had never been a second one and this movie beautifully laid down the foundations for the even greater masterpiece that part II was, even though it's missing the presence of the great Marlon Brando in it.

The movie is a greatly epic one, not in the least due to it's amazing running time of 175 minutes. But despite it's very long running time it really is not a movie that ever bores, even not at moments when not a lot is happening in the story. There always is something great or intriguing happening.

But the movie is also really epic in many more different ways. It's like an operatic drama about a large Italian mafia family, located in New York. The movie features really a lot of characters in it and therefore also some different plot lines and dramatic developments but the movie does an amazing job with its story and the diversity of it. It binds it all beautifully together and even though the movie does take some big leaps in time and gets located at different locations throughout the world, throughout the entire movie, the movie always keeps flowing very well with a real steady pace.

The family and basically all of the character have to go through some great ordeals. This means that characters keep developing throughout the entire, which is most notable with the Al Pacino character. His character goes through a great transformation, from being a polite, quite and perhaps also soft guy, to a tough and commanding crime boss, who doesn't back off for violence or any killings.

In its essence it's a movie about tight bond of a family and what it means to stay loyal and stick together through tough times. Even though you know that all of these people are big criminals and even killers, the movie at all times keeps giving them a very human face by showing what makes them tick and it also isn't afraid to show the character emotions.

It's of course also thanks to the many great characters of the movie that the characters develop so well and work out on basically every level. It features a still quite young Al Pacino in his break through role and the already more experienced and better known actors James Caan and James Caan, among many others, in important supporting roles. But it is of course Marlon Brando who gives the movie its most body. He plays one of the most memorable movie characters of all time and it was also basically this movie that made him immortal as an actor. The movie only won 3 Oscars but it's no big surprise that one of those 3 went to Brando, who himself of course refused to accept it and instead let faked Indian Sacheen Littlefeather pick it up, as a sign of protest against the treatment of native Americans. The other two Oscar's that the movie won were for best motion picture and best writing.

It deserved to win way more of course and the movie was also nominated for 7 more (not counting in the withdrawn nomination for best music). But one of the Oscar's the movie really deserved to win was for a category it wasn't even nominated in. I was surprised how great the cinematography of the movie was and it truly deserves some more credit. The movie often picks some long shots, in which it isn't always showing a lot. The movie often chooses to show a minimum of things and only chooses to show what the characters also see, so we get more close to the characters and their feelings and thoughts. Truly some effective cinematography throughout, though Francis Ford Coppola directing also needs to take lots of credit for that.

Simply THE crime epic of the 20th century.

10/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/";6;10;False tt0068646;TheUnknown837-1;11/05/2009;"with its long, but taut running time, perfect casting, and all under the control of Francis Ford Coppola, ""The Godfather"" easily scores as one of the best films ever made";10;"When it comes to naming the greatest and most influential motion pictures of all time, Francis Ford Coppola's 1972 masterpiece ""The Godfather"" is a title that is practically guaranteed to be among the many listed. Famed director Stanley Kubrick called ""The Godfather"" a candidate for the best movie ever made and ""without a doubt, the best cast."" Although not very familiar with Kubrick's films and his tastes, I will say that on the second regard, he is absolutely correct.

Based on a very good, hard-to-put-down novel by Italian American novelist Mario Puzo, the film revolves around a fictional 1940s Sicilian crime family based in New York. The family is run by a wispy-voiced, puffy-cheeked man named Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) who has, for the most part, moved away from the days of violence in favor of peace and prosperity without blood and above all things, lectures on the topics of friendship and loyalty. When an attempt is made on Vito's life, his two sons (James Caan, Al Pacino) and his adoptive son (Robert Duvall) take control of his dynasty and fight to keep him alive and what unfolds is a repeat of days gone by and the world of the Mafia is exposed to a spellbound, absorbed audience.

""The Godfather"" is nearly three hours in length and part of this is due to the fact that it follows Mario Puzo's novel almost exactly detail-by-detail, scene-by-scene: a very rare thing in Hollywood, which always seems more than happy to alter and reshape the mold of the authors' visions for the big screen. Coppola's film will without a doubt satisfy the purists, and even to those who have not had the privilege of reading Puzo's fantastic book, this is still a more than enjoyable way to spend three hours. Even at such a length, ""The Godfather"" never fails to keep our eyes focused on the screen.

Number one, we have great characters in what is possibly the greatest cast ever assembled for a single movie. Marlon Brando was great; that was a given. But what really impressed the audiences of 1972, and what still impresses people, are the performances of the supporting cast. Names such as Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, and James Caan, who are at icon status today, were nobodies at the time. Al Pacino, in particular, gives a noteworthy performance that garnered him an Academy Award nomination and made the producers who initially wanted to ban him from the role feel like the biggest idiots on the face of the planet. Pacino is undoubtedly the most ironic character in the film. When we first see him, he's not even so much as a sliver of a Mafia-type image. He's passive, he's quiet, shy, with a clean record, and a war hero. Then, when he has to assume a Family role to defend his father, he slowly turns into the image of his predecessor and by the time the film ends, Pacino is the exact opposite of how we first saw him. Of course I can't leave out Diane Keaton as Pacino's love interest, who watches him change before her eyes, James Caan as the fiery-tempered brother, Robert Duvall as the Family consiligere, and one of my favorites, Al Lettieri as the villainous, steely-eyed Virgil Sollozzo, who fits the exact image of how I pictured the character while reading the novel.

Second, there is the fantastic element that the whole realm of the story takes place in the world of the Mafia. There is none of the tired old elements of, shall we say, detectives trying to uncover the Mafia and take them down or civilians who become victims of the organized crime families. With this method, we successfully connect with and understand the motivations of the characters while the outside world, law and otherwise, simply lies in the background. The outside world meant little to the Mafia, and thus it means little to us as well.

But of course, ""The Godfather"" does not glorify the Mafia. Yes, we do identify and sometimes feel for the characters in this savage world, but never do we justify for them. And when director Francis Ford Coppola tries to give us horrifying violence, he delivers. As he noted in his commentary on the film, Coppola worked hard with his pyrotechnics crew to make all of the shootings and killings in ""The Godfather"" look real as opposed to making them obvious simulations. He uses blood, but not so much to the point where it becomes over the top, but just enough to make it convincing and disgusting.

""The Godfather"" was an enormous hit when it was first released. It garnered there Academy Award wins included Best Picture of the Year and broke box office records that would not be topped until ""Jaws"" (1975) was released three years later. Al Pacino, James Caan, and Robert Duvall were all secured nominations in the Best Supporting Actor category but surprisingly none of them won. It also spawned two successful sequels, one of which I feel is actually superior to the original. And now Francis Ford Coppola has worked with Robert A. Harris to restore his famous trilogy and give it the pristine print that he always wanted audiences to see it in. Among other films such as ""Lawrence of Arabia"" (1962), ""Vertigo"" (1958), and ""Spartacus"" (1960), ""The Godfather"" is certainly a film that deserves a beautiful restoration so that it may linger in our collective minds for generations to come.";6;10;False tt0068646;ackstasis;06/03/2009;"""I believe in America""";10;"'The Godfather (1972)' doesn't need an introduction, nor does it necessarily require a review. Nevertheless, I'm going to go on telling you what you already know: this is one of the great American films of the twentieth century. The 1970s was a landmark decade for Hollywood film-making, and Francis Ford Coppola was particularly productive, releasing the first two 'Godfather' films (1972 - 1974), 'The Conversation (1974)' and, perhaps his magnum opus, 'Apocalypse Now (1979).' This week I was fortunate enough to experience a cinema screening of 'The Godfather,' and this second viewing only inflated my respect for Coppola's achievement. On my initial viewing in 2006, I had been very impressed with the film, but also hopelessly lost for the most part. With literally dozens of speaking roles, and frequent allusions to otherwise unseen characters, the plot had left me stranded, just as 'The Big Sleep (1946)' always manages to do. Suddenly, however, much of it became clear to me; the characters' motivations, deceptions and emotions gently drifted into focus. This was stunning, complex cinema, the sort of bold film-making that puts most modern movies to shame.

A notable artistic observation regarding 'The Godfather' is that Coppola's film-making style is strictly traditional. Whereas a new generation of filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and William Friedkin were introducing a gritty new cinema aesthetic, Gordon Willis' cinematography is graceful, understated and handsome, predating his excellent work for Woody Allen {the most notable example being 'Manhattan (1979)'}. A sprawling family saga, 'The Godfather' boasts a staggering ensemble cast of emerging and established actors, as well as many unknowns who nevertheless give letter-perfect performances. The scenes of violence are typically abrupt and effective, but much of the film's running-time is more closely concerned with dialogue and human interaction, particularly among family members. Needless to say, the quality of talent is more than enough to make these scenes, not only watchable, but astonishingly compelling. Every character down to the smallest speaking part – and there are a lot of them – has such a richly fleshed-out personality, making their actions and development throughout the film both authentic and interesting.

Marlon Brando – in what, along with 'Last Tango in Paris (1972),' was deemed a grand comeback – gives a towering, Oscar-winning portrayal as Don Vito Corleone, the aging head of an Italian organised-crime family. Having endured decades of corruption and inter-family conflict, and seeing his household disintegrate in the futile pursuit of family honour, Vito finally understands in his final moments the folly of his wasted life, and the fateful mistakes that led to this undesirable lifestyle {these precursor years would be explored in greater depth, with Robert DeNiro in the role, in 'The Godfather: Part II (1974)'}. Most central to the story, however, is the transformation of youngest son Michael (Al Pacino), who, in the course of the film, effectively sells his soul to retain that elusive ""family honour."" The climactic sequence, utilising Eisenstein's style of montage to its fullest extent, intercuts the baptism of Michael's nephew with the simultaneous assassination of the Corleone family's enemies. This scene also serves as a baptism of sorts for Michael, symbolising his irreversible initiation into a life of crime, and the final transaction of his soul.";6;10;False tt0068646;leplatypus;04/01/2009;Brando Rex ! Godfather Marathon – 28/12/08 – 13H30 (Screen);10;"The Godfather Trilogy was projected on one single day at the Paris cinematheque: 9 hours of film and 9 hours of pure delight!

I was motivated to see this trilogy in particular because it's one of my first heart-struck in movies! I should thank my father for this, because as kids, we watched what he watched and it formatted me for ever: the music, the pride and honor of the family, their confidence find a resonance in me, even though their heart are deeply corrupted by evil and they pay the price by the death of all dear ones! What's the point of getting rich and powerful if it to live alone ? You can read my review of the ""The Last Don"" for an in-depth analysis because the thematic background is the same

Brando is wonderful as an old Don and he looks like my late grandfather. As we haven't time to spend time together, I am sure I take Vito as an idealized root!

What caught my eyes in this first movie was that: - the story takes place just after WWII (and not in 60 or 70) - it's Christmas time just as the projection - the dementia greed of Vito who wants a son to be President! - Their way of getting at the top: when they are denied help, they kill & when they are asked for help, they exchange it for a favor! It's far from streets tugs who ransom people!

So, as it is maybe the best movie ever made, you should see it and it's an offer you can't refuse!";6;10;False tt0068646;FilmFanInTheHouse;22/12/2008;Cinematic Classic;10;The Godfather (1972, Dir. Francis Ford Coppola)

Don Vito Corleone (Brando) is the head of an organised dynasty, who has an expanded family, which he loves truly. But when Don Vito is shot and ends up in hospital, control of the family business is given to his son, Michael (Pacino), who must go into hiding for the protection of himself and his father.

Cinematic classic which can't go wrong. Marlon Brando has been perfectly cast in the role which gains every emotion from him. Along with Pacino and the rest of the supporting cast, the Godfather keeps you hooked in for the entire length of its running time.

He came all the way from California. I told you he'd come! - Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando);6;10;False tt0068646;rizwan-vja;15/11/2008;Simply Magical!!!;10;There might be many movies made since the inception of cinema and trust me wen i say that I have seen superb cinema of many ages and of many genres but never have I come across a movie like the Godfather. It just is the perfect synonym for cinema which can change your life.It is no secret that The Godfather has impacted so many moviegoers and made them into successful film makers or at least aspiring film makers. There are so many things which can be written about the genius of the Godfather.But the most striking thing which has to be mentioned is the perfect transition of the book onto screen.The book has been adapted so well that the movie seems better than the book in some frames.Mario Puzo and Coppola have collaborated so well that its a product of genius. Now we have heard a lot about the casting,but what can i say.I feel I am nothing to speak about the acting prowess of Marlon Brando.I have never come across a performance so spell binding with an amazing screen presence.Brando was Don Corleone will remain etched in every body's mind as the perfect man for the role. Al Pacino was simply sensational.The way he portrayed his emotions are a joy to watch on screen.His acting to me has to shown to every aspiring actor because its such a powerful act which just refuses to fade away from your memory.The supporting cast of Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen and James Cann as Sonny are exemplary. The back ground score and cinematography is of the highest class. And the dialogues are just extra ordinary.For example dialogues such as, i will make him an offer he cant refuse.I will reason with him are just so powerful but yet so subtle. Mafia was never so stylish nor powerful.It is a movie to watch for every film connoisseur because until one does not watch the God father he cannot know or cant fantasize A PERFECT MOVIE. a work of absolute Genius.I believe everybody associated with the movie is so god damn proud of himself for having his name attached to it. and I am proud of being a FANATIC of the Godfather.;6;10;True tt0068646;jm-deblois;11/05/2008;Really one of the greatest films ever made...;10;"The Godfather tells us the tale of a Mafia family and their struggles to keep up with the changing times, and at the same time to value their own morals about family and friendship.

This is an excellent movie, the cast ensemble is perfect and the subtle characterization of Michael Corleone played by Al Pacino is beyond recognition. Marlon Brando kicks up a great acting as the Godfather and at the same time a family man. Talia Shire is, as always, quite overacting, nevertheless that quality proved to be effective in this film.

The story is unique in every aspect and convincing to the last scene. The irony presented within every climactic event in the story will put you in the edge of your seats and think ""How the heck did they come up to this idea?"" The way the twists are presented subtly, the absence of unessential brutality (which is present in almost every crime films these days), the hidden message of the story, the tragedy, the drama, the flawless direction, and most of all the realistic storyline that makes us infinitely more aware of the life experienced by a family whose business is crime-oriented. A very disturbing yet wonderful experience to watch this film.

This is really one of the greatest ever made by the movie industry. You'll miss more than half of your life not watching it. :)";6;10;False tt0068646;qprmal;10/05/2008;A beautiful film;10;"I have not watched this film since the 70's. But my 18 year old son kept on pestering me to watch it with him because it was the IMDb No1. The IMDb rating is our guide for watching any film and that infuriates my wife ""Why can't you two just enjoy a film without checking if it's good or not on that website you go on?"" I put off watching it with him for ages because it's about 3 hours long and I'm prone to falling asleep. But I watched the Godfather again tonight with my wife and son. We were silent from start to finish with the power and emotion of this film. I just love the way this the film portrays the mafia as an ordinary family that we begin to like. They have staunch religious beliefs in attending weddings, baptisms and funerals plus morals like we won't do narcotics. Yet they can murder somebody and it's just ""business"". The Godfather has no car chase, no gory violence and no idol threats like ""I'm going to blow you away motherf*cker"" It just makes you an offer that you can't refuse.";6;10;False tt0068646;gindara123;06/05/2008;Why The Godfather Rocks !!!;10;"I saw the movie some years back mainly due to the hype.. I liked it & would have given it 6/10 at that time..

Three years later I bought the book(accidentally).. Well just for the sake of buying something really wasn't going to read it anyway (so I thought)..

A few days later I read a few pages & started loving it.. I was hooked on to the book like a Harry Potter fan & couldn't put it down..

THEN..I watched the movie ... Then I knew why there was so much hype around the movie even after 30 years...

The movie just brought back the characters to life...

I loved it & thus the rating 9.6/10 However the movie is not as good as the book.... but I think it's as close a movie will ever get to the original.. Which by the way is a masterpiece..

The casting for the movie is flawless..You really feel that they belong in the book..

All in all The Godfather won the Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Actor in a Leading Role and Best Writing (adapted screenplay) (Francis Coppola, Mario Puzo)...

The film was nominated for eight additional Academy Awards. Furthermore, it won five Golden Globes, one Grammy, and numerous other awards...

My final piece of advice...

""READ THE BOOK THEN WATCH THE MOVIE""

If you really want to enjoy it..";6;10;False tt0068646;ManuElBlanco;29/04/2008;"""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse""";10;"Don Vito Corleone is the mightiest Mafia boss of New York. He has contacts to the most esteemed politicians and achieves everything he gets into his head. This changes when a drug dealer asks him to join the drug traffic. Vito declines this offer, because he (ironically) considers this ""line of business"" to be a crime. Thereon the drug dealers' men assault Vito and he nearly loses his life. His sons Sonny and Michael thereupon start a campaign of vengeance against the drug dealer and the other dons of New York.

With high expectations I began to watch the film, due to the fact that it is the highest rated movie of the IMDb and regarded as one of the best films all-time.

In the first half hour there are comparatively few spectacular events, but ""The Godfather"" manages it to tie the viewer, conveying the atmosphere very well. So the movie never becomes boring. The interaction of the Mafiosi, their language and methods are amazingly enthralling. Also the setting (amongst others the film takes place in Sicily) and the film music are outstanding.

The main characters are presented very well: The mighty Godfather, who has moralities and takes care of his family despite his racketeering, and on the other hand the ""good boy"" of the family, who is impelled to dirty his hands and become an unscrupulous, ice cold gangster by the assault on his father.

Francis Ford Coppola's film becomes a true masterpiece by the performance of the two leading actors, Marlon Brando (Vito Corleone) and Al Pacino (Michael Corleone). Their facial expressions and gestures are just unparalleled and don't lay you to rest.

The film won prizes in series (Oscars, Golden Globes) – that's absolutely merited: Everyone should watch this film at least one time; it is a very prestigious film, above all amongst men it is popular, and it has a very high cultic-factor.";6;10;False tt0068646;SnorrSm1989;05/10/2006;Hard to refuse;10;"It could be said that the film-adaptation of Mario Puzo's novel marked the beginning of a new era, as it established talents hitherto unknown to the wider public, including Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, and director Francis Ford Coppola. Furthermore, THE GODFATHER is often thought of as a ""comeback"" to Marlon Brando, which apparently puzzled the actor himself, as he pointed out in his autobiography that he'd been doing movies without considerable intermission for the last twenty-or-so years. However, the claim may not have been so unreasonable after all, as the role of Vito Corleone made Brando truly sought-after again. By the time Brando embarked on the role, no major studios would hire him due to a reputation for being ""impossible"" to work with, and Coppola was only able to convince Paramount that the actor was simply tailor-made for the part and could not be neglected by having him do a screen-test first. Considering that Brando had once revolutionized acting in America through his raw, unmasked portrayals of Stanley Kowalski and Terry Malloy in the 1950's, this procedure may sound shocking, but once accomplished, Brando proved that he remained the king of acting in the end. His portrayal of Corleone may strike us as being somewhat of a caricature today, as it has been endlessly imitated (and parodied) since, but Brando did in fact attribute the character with far more attention to complex detail than seen in a typical movie ""gangster-boss"" up till that time. That Brando's performance has now, in the eyes of younger generations such as my own, turned somewhat into a cliché is simply the inevitable result of his initial originality.

Also Pacino, Keaton, James Caan and Robert Duvall are, of course, quite outstanding in their roles. Particularly in Pacino's case, his handling of his character Michael Corleone's dramatic development as a person which is so crucial to the story, comes off as completely convincing. From being apparently a rather sympathetic character at the beginning, he changes as he becomes increasingly involved in his father's business life. It is this devoted focus on character development, as well as on how conflicting aspects of a personality interchange such as in Vito Corleone's case, that truly make the story so intriguing as it is. However, it is one thing to have a story of nearly endless potential, but this does not necessarily result in a successful cinematic interpretation of it. Other than outstanding performances, the direction of Francis Ford Coppolla is, of course, more than merely significant; even if one neglects the other qualities of the film, it may be treasured for its own sake, due to Coppolla's extremely competent, innovative techniques. There seems to be too many scenes and moments to pick out just one or two favorites; his ability to define the mood and atmosphere of a particular event through a painstaking attention to every single detail, is arguably of equal impact to the story as the performances of the actors, and make the film a visual delight. This is no less impressive when considering that THE GODFATHER was Coppolla's first major film; he was to establish himself further into the decade with other brilliant films such as THE CONVERSATION, APOCALYPSE NOW and this film's second act.

When released in 1972, THE GODFATHER turned out to be, not surprisingly, one of the most widely-seen, lavishly- praised films in the history of the medium, and earned three Academy Awards out of eleven nominations (Marlon Brando's refusal to accept the award, due to the ""treatment of American Indians today by the film industry,"" has become famous in its own right). This is not to say, however, that THE GODFATHER is a film one is likely to grasp at first viewing; I, for one, did not quite understand its incredible reputation at first (though I did think it was a good film). Much as with CITIZEN KANE or BLADERUNNER, it is probably required to view THE GODFATHER through an historical context, and compare it to other films made around the same time, to get why it is so much adored. It helps matters that it's not only brilliantly made but really entertaining as well, so you're likely to have a good time no matter how you watch it.";6;10;True tt0068646;Movies8586;25/01/2002;The most overrated movie of all time.;1;Let me just start by saying that I am 50% Italian. I have nothing against Mafia movies. In fact, I have nothing against ANY type of movie. But, to say that this is the best movie of all time is simply insane.

I saw absolutely nothing special. I kind of enjoyed the performances of Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, and James Caan... but besides that, there is not one really exceptional feature in sight. And the fact that it is one hour too long only brought down my enjoyment. It's not the worst film of all time... but not the best either.;61;159;False tt0068646;Quinoa1984;19/02/2000;an obvious word: masterpiece;10;"The Godfather is Franis Ford Coppolla's best work (next to Apocalypse Now) and is one of the best films I have ever seen. It shows a way of life not shown before this film was released and most likely it shocked them as much as it shocked me. The Acting (among many other things) highlight this film-noir/gangster/epic including Marlon Brando in his most recognizable performance ever as the man himself, Don Corleone, but also subtle work from breakthrough star Al Pacino and others like James Caan, Robert Duvall, and great bit parts for wonderful character actors like John Marley and Sterling Hayden.

Corleone gets wounded and, by default through various 'circumstances' in the family (not least of which his ailing health) hands his ""business"" over to his ambivalent but cunning son, Michael (in a well done performance by Al Pacino). The film goes on long, but after watching it a few times, you hardly notice it at all. Every time ones watches this film it gets better because of noticing something small, something wildly creative, one didn't notice the last time and thanks to that it gets richer every time. With a beautiful score, terrific cinematography, and sublime directing and writing by Coppolla (with Puzo) this film belongs not only a place in film history, but in world history as well.";17;37;False tt0068646;galileo3;27/12/2005;"""Perfection...""";10;The Godfather (1972)

Number 1 - 1972

Number 1 - 1970s

Top 5 - All Time

An offer you can't refuse ...

The Godfather is considered one of the greatest films of all time, perhaps the best. Marlon Brando's perfect portrayal of Mafia boss Don Vito Corleone is simply unforgettable and one of the finest performances ever

Francis Ford Coppola adapts Mario Puzo's superb novel in a breathtaking fashion.

Upon its release in 1972, many people knew that something special was expected - the result, one of, if not the greatest and superior film of all time. I won't sit here defending this colossal masterpiece, it needs no such thing. The Godfather is the definitive inside to the operations, bonds and thoughts of the Mafia. Only one other film manages to give us a breathtaking panorama of the Mafia and that is Martin Scorsese's 'Goodfellas'.

Every gangster film is measured alogn the breadth of The Godfather:

'The best gangster film since The Godfather'

Coppola has created something so powerful, so unique that essentially cemented a whole new genre of film-making. This film did not follow stereotypes, arguably it created them.

Breathtaking direction, incomparable acting, one of the best screenplays in the history of film amount to one of the most memorable achievements in film history.

-10/10-;9;17;False tt0068646;Benny37;09/10/2005;The Godfather and Othello;10;"I am studying Shakespeare's Othello in my Literature class, and i cant believe how much of The Godfather (trilogy) relates to the play.

There is xenophobia-Both Othello and Michael are military leaders who are somewhat distanced from their society (the trials in part 2) The idea of Othello and Michael both wanting redemption at the end of their lives by God (Othello kills himself, whereas Michael crushes his internal personality) Women become the object of the men around them, but lead them to their deaths- Sonny trying to save his sister from her husband, & Othello being destroyed by Iago's manipulations about Desdemona's infidelity The patriarchal society, where both Desdemona and Kay are excluded from society The over trusting nature of Othello vs the suspicious nature of Michael The theme of family and the destruction of family internally There are a few other similarities, but i cant think of them at the moment So i simply present this idea as something to look into.

Hope this provides some food for thought :)";9;17;True tt0068646;jboothmillard;13/03/2005;The Godfather;10;"The most brilliant and famous gangster crime film in history. The late, great Oscar and Golden Globe winning, and BAFTA nominated Marlon Brando stars as Don Vito Corleone, or The Godfather. Introduced, and Oscar, BAFTA and Golden Globe nominated Al Pacino also stars as his son, Michael Corleone. They are a family that do a lot of ""business"". The Godfather is meant to help people with problems, and solve them how ever intense or simple they are. When Vito starts to feel ill Michael has to take his place until he is better. In the end Vito dies and Michael becomes the new Godfather. Also, he eliminates all of Vito's enemies to avenge his death. Also starring Oscar and Golden Globe nominated James Caan as Santino 'Sonny' Corleone, Richard S. Castellano as Pete Clemenza, Oscar BAFTA nominated Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, Sterling Hayden as Capt. Mark McCluskey, John Marley as Jack Woltz, Richard Conte as Emilio Barzini, Al Lettieri as Virgil 'The Turk' Sollozzo and Diane Keaton as Kay Adams. A work of genius from Oscar and Golden Globe nominated (lost Oscar to Bob Fosse for Cabaret) director Francis Ford Coppola, with a superb sequel followed, and unfortunately the rubbish third film. It won the Oscars for Best Picture and Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, and it was nominated for Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Music for Nino Rota and Best Sound, it won the BAFTA for the Anthony Asquith Award for Film Music, and it was nominated for Best Costume Design, and it won the Golden Globes for Best Motion Picture - Drama, Best Original Score and Best Screenplay. Marlon Brando was number 30, and Al Pacino number 1 on The 100 Greatest Movie Stars, Pacino was also number 26 on The 100 Greatest Pop Culture Icons, Brando was number 11 on The 100 Greatest Sex Symbols, he was number 4 on 100 Years, 100 Stars - Men, Pacino was number 5 (along with Robert De Niro), and Brando number 1 on The World's Greatest Actor, Michael Corleone was number 11 on 100 Years, 100 Heroes & Villains, the film was number 2 on 100 Years, 100 Quotes (""I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse.""), it was number 5 on 100 Years of Film Scores, it was number 11 on 100 Years, 100 Thrills, it was number 46 on The Ultimate Film, it was number 3 on 100 Years, 100 Movies, and along with the sequel, both were number 2 on The 100 Greatest Films. Outstanding!";9;17;True tt0068646;cubiegirl;02/06/2002;The best!;10;"I picked this movie up at my local video store this past weekend, as I planned a ""movie night"" for myself. Quickly into the movie, I found out why many consider this film as the best of all time. Every performance was gripping, every scene, every character. Even the time frame (late 1940s) was perfect. After the movie's final scene, I wanted to rush back to the video store and rent Parts 2 and 3. Truly a GREAT piece of cinema!";9;17;False tt0068646;kgenev;26/07/2006;A Godly Bore;2;"I read ""The Godfather"" novel, it was one of the best books that I have ever read. Not one minute in the story was I not entertained or interested. I was very excited to see how Frances Ford Coppola's collaboration with Mario Puzo, the author of the book, would translate this into a movie.

When watching the movie I tried to put all of my memory of the book into the back of my head and try to enjoy the movie. But sadly the movie was just not entertaining as a movie by itself. Yes, the cast is one of the best ever assembled, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duval, etc.

But all of the main events that should be entertaining, like the elimination of all the bosses in the end. Or the murder of Sunny Corleone at the toll both. But sadly they just bore you to the point were you want even Marlon Brando to die, which he later does. Even the performances from the actors themselves, especially Marlon Brando, leave much to be desired from these awesome actors.

This is without a doubt the most overrated movie of all time. If you want to see the life of a mobster done right, see Scorcese's ""Casino"" and ""Goddfellas"". These do not only show the life of a mobster, but they are also entertaining with awesome acting from Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci every time.

I give this movie 2/10, that's because Mario Puzo was involved.";48;123;True tt0068646;karahan-kaya;13/12/2015;Legend İn The World;10;"he Godfather (1972) did for gangster movies what 2001: A Space Odyssey did for science fiction. Like Stanley Kubrick, Francis Ford Coppola re-energized and, to a degree, reinvented a basic Hollywood pulp fiction action-entertainment genre, using it as a vehicle for the high artistic ambitions of a post-New Wave film ""auteur.""

Within his narrower focus on 20th century American civilization (as opposed to Kubrick's philosophical speculations on human evolution), Coppola shapes the story of the Corleone Mafia family into an epic/satiric vision of American business, government, justice, and moral decline. The Godfather's brilliantly constructed opening sequence, the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter, not only establishes the Don's character, the nature of his organization, the role of family and Sicilian tradition in his world, and the character of his sons (three natural and one adopted), but also establishes the relationship between the Don's world and ""legitimate"" society. For instance, the film's opening words are those of Bonasera, a petitioner for a wedding ""favor,"" whose voice over a dark screen first asserts the American Dream, ""I believe in America. America has made my fortune,"" and then turns to disillusioned contradiction: ""for justice, we must go to Don Corleone.""

Numerous subsequent lines of dialog establish literal or metaphorical connections between the criminal underworld and social institutions. Some of the most memorable ones include: ""My father is no different than any powerful man, any man with power, like a president or senator.""""Now we have the unions, we have the gambling; and they're the best things to have. But narcotics is a thing of the future. And if we don't get a piece of that action, we risk everything we have. I mean not now, but ten years from now."" ""It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business."" And most famously of all: ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse.""

The film's title refers to two godfathers, the original Don Corleone and his youngest son - and ultimate successor - Michael. Marlon Brando's performance as Don Corleone, for which he was awarded a Best Actor Academy Award, balances the Don's subtly counter-pointed functions as beloved, grandfatherly patriarch and fearsome, brutal crime boss. Yet Michael, as the character most centrally and significantly affected by the film's plot and played with a brilliance equaling Brando's by a then unknown Al Pacino, is the principal protagonist.

At the wedding, Michael's centrality is signaled by the Don's frantic call, ""Where's Michael? We are not taking the picture without Michael!"" A World War II hero still in decorated uniform, Michael is meanwhile busy differentiating himself from his family to his girl friend and future second wife, Kay (Diane Keaton). ""Luca Brasi held a gun to the band leader's head,"" he relates, ""and my father assured him that either his signature or his brains would be on the release. That's my family Kay. It's not me."" Michael's initial disinterest in Mafia activities is reinforced by his adoring father who envisions him as ""Senator Corleone"" or ""Governor Corleone"" not as his successor. That role is reserved for his hot-headed eldest son, Sonny (James Caan). But, of course, events conspire to suck Michael in - and to keep sucking him in right through Godfather III - the assassination attempt on his father, Michael's coolly murderous response, the car bomb meant for him that kills his first wife, the Sicilian beauty Apollonia (aptly named for the god of sun light), the riddled body of his brother Sonny. Inevitably, a morally darkened Michael emerges at the end of the film, one who outdoes his father in guile and ruthlessness and whose final brutal and deceitful acts in Godfather I seal his doom as a Macbeth-like villainous tragic hero.

Shot mainly on location in various New York City locales, The Godfather spans a ten- year post World War II period. A multitude of props, costumes, and pop culture artifacts arranged by the film's art director, Warren Clyner, and production designer, Dean Tavoularis, lend a rich sense of historical authenticity to the film's mise en scene. Moreover, the film's lighting by brilliant cinematographer Gordon (""prince of darkness"") Willis, contributes greatly to both the film's realism and its thematic symbolism. Compare, for instance, the use of extremely dark, shadowy, color desaturated interior scenes – especially in the Don's home office – with the brightly lit, vivaciously colored outdoor wedding scene or the sun-drenched, romanticized Sicilian landscape.

The Godfather is edited in the classic Hollywood invisible style, subordinating technique to the needs of narrative and visual continuity. But the film is expertly edited nonetheless. In particular one might note the stunning use of multiple parallel editing that occurs in one of the film's last scenes: the assassination of the other crime family heads, elaborately planned to coincide with Michael's participation in the baptism of sister Connie's child. Likewise, The Godfather's soundtrack is a memorable combination of diegetic period music (""Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"") and a lush, operatic original score composed by one of the greatest film music composers, Nino Rota (a frequent Fellini collaborator as in 8 1/2).

With The Godfather and its even more ambitious sequel, Coppola pushed the classic gangster film in the direction of high art and released it once and for all from the moralistic grip of the Hays Code, which arose in the 1930s in large part as a response to the romanticizing of criminals found in such early examples of the gangster genre as Scarface, Little Cesar, and Public Enemy. Not only did the code regulate the degree and nature of sexual and violent imagery in all films, but it also specifically required that criminals be portrayed as morally repulsive social deviants and that plots involving them be resolved with the implicit or explicit lesson that ""crime did not pay."" Fortunately for American popular culture The Godfather radically rewrote the rulebook and paved the way for a generation's-worth of gangster masterpieces ranging from the Scarface remake to Pulp Fiction to The Sopranos.";5;8;False tt0068646;gerardfarre;11/10/2015;Simply amazing;10;"This has to be a masterpiece for me and for my understanding and knowledge. I adore mob films like this one and TV series about the mob as the great TV series I've ever watched: The Sopranos. The shooting of the whole film is sublime, and the shots of the two sequels as well. Coppola got to manage this as a master of film composing. The plot and the development in general is majestic too. The scene of the head horse in the film director's bed is very shocking; I never saw something like that. Now I can only say that this has become one of my favorites films ever (for me and for most of you who are reading this). This is the sort of films that I would watch for many times.";5;8;False tt0068646;AlexGiddel;20/04/2015;Best movie ever;10;I love this movie. It's the greatest movie I ever seen in my life. Every time I watch it I see something new. It has drama, action and even comedy. The story is great. It centers around the most powerful New York mafia run by The Godfather. It teaches you about family and betrayal, about life in general. All that Michael does is for his family. He even sacrifices his relationship with his girlfriend to protect his family. The movie is amazingly shot, giving it amazing light. The characters are bigger than life and played by some of the greatest actors to ever live. The soundtrack is very good. All in all is must see.;5;8;True tt0068646;sgrizzle;18/01/2003;One of those films everyone loves but no-one wants to watch.;1;"I follow recommendations on this site highly. I rented this movie and wanted my money back. Ever been to one of those parties with distant relatives where you don't know anyone there and just sit in the corner waiting for it to end? If so, you've seen 90% of this movie. Throw in a few good scenes that happen so far apart, you forget the last one by the time you see the next one. Might be worth watching once just to say you have, but you'll probably never watch it again. Definitely not ""best movie ever material.""";81;222;False tt0068646;amedfcb;01/08/2020;I think it's Overrated film;6;Not worth to present in top 10 Popular Movie, yesss i know it's Impossible to ignore the performance and evaluation of characters via marlon Brandon and Al pacino Both are Incredible actors, but the long period of movie is boring, there is a lot of Scenes Not important.;8;15;False tt0068646;maryolalov;28/01/2019;A real classic in the crime genre;8;There are many mafia movies out there but The Godfather truly stands out among them. And it is not great just because it is one of the first movies in the crime genre but also because of it's great cinematography and outstanding storytelling .

If you retell the plot to someone it will sound like it is extremely dull. It's just the story of how a son takes over his father's business. But the way the movie presents this plot (with many betrayals and deaths) makes it great and memorable.

The acting is not always good. In some scenes it is extremely bad. Take the scene where Connie starts breaking utensils. The acting in this scene is so bad that when it comes up while I'm watching the movie, I just turn my head away. Of course I should metion that Marlon Brando and Al Pacino do a great job. Their acting is outstanding and deserves the pride it gets.

The Godfather is truly a classic in the crime genre that must be on everyone's top movies list.;8;15;True tt0068646;Azzurrim17;13/08/2008;Perfect;10;First I would like to state that I am 20 years old this movie was made 16 years after I was born, but it is my favorite movie of all time. I really get annoyed when I hear this nonsense about young people can't judge movies because they haven't seen all the classics, well I have seen them all , Casablanca, Citizen Kane, On the Waterfront, North by Northwest and so on. I own all three of these movies, and the original is the best, 2 is very close to the original and 3 is decent. I also hate these people who judge this movie poorly because its all about Italians its pathetic I read so many comments here and everywhere that the sole basis of a poor rating is it being about Italians its a joke, Like in on the waterfront when Marlon Brando's character, transitions from a goon for organized crime to at the end of the film a changed man who wants to be a better man, Michael Corleone's character I feel is the greatest transformation in all of film history, he changes from this nice quiet military, war hero, good citizen, to a dark, ruthless, emotionless character, which he really has to do the collapse of his family. That alone i think makes this movie great, not to forget how great Marlon Brando is in this along with James Caan and Robert Duvall. This movie broke a lot of barriers in film, starting a lot of trends and setting standards for so many other mafia movies, like Goodfellas, and the Departed etc... I really think that if you have never seen it you should invest some time because you will not be disappointed.;8;15;True tt0068646;uzziek;07/01/2006;A Landmark in Film;10;Well what superlatives can i give a movie that probably has had them all. This film is and will remain a classic in any era. Up step Al Pacino, from virtually nowhere this actor, amongst a frighteningly illustrious cast, absolutely blows them away and gives a performance that has given him legendary status.

Everything about this movie, form the acting, to the direction to the sound track is perfect in every sense of the word. Most people that have not seen the movie will probably think of it as a classic gangster movie, but it so much more then that, family, love, romance, revenge all this in one movie is truly remarkable.

For me this movie is my all time favourite it gets better every time I watch it and it rightly deserves to be at the top of the all time movies;8;15;False tt0068646;bosoxfan7191;29/10/2005;Execlent movie but short changed the book;10;"This is an excellent movie. It has great actors great scenes and a great storyline. There is only one complaint that I have about it, a lot of the material covered in the book is not in the movie. Without giving away too much of the story there are many ""books""(more like parts to the book) of the Godfather novel, such as the book II( focusing on Johnny Fontaine). Other than the exclusion of some parts that aren't focus on the main characters this is an extremely close adaptation of the novel( word for word in many sense epically near the begging of the movie). Al Pachino is at the top in this movie and steals the show, Brando is great also and Robert Duvol as Tom Hagen was wonderful.This is one of the best movies ever made.";8;15;False tt0068646;davideo-2;13/05/2005;Truly masterly film-making, right up there with Citizen Kane, Lawrence of Arabia and Schindler's List;10;STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

The epic tale of Don Vito (Marlon Brando) head and patriarch of the Corleone crime family.When a rival family tries to muscle in on their patch,they offer the usual resistance.But when the Don is brutally gunned down in the street,a vicious attempt on his life,it falls to his sons,Michael (Al Pacino),the youngest,a Vietnam vet just returned home from active service,Fredo (John Cazele) the more reserved,prone-to-mistakes brother and Scillio (James Caan) his hot-headed,violent son,to settle the score both amicably and with mettle.

It's funny that just six days ago I was reviewing a film that ranked #18 on the bottom 100 list and yet today I'm reviewing a film that ranks right up at #1 on the top 250.Yet,indeed,this is truly an epic film that everyone who would like to call themselves a film connoisseur owes it to themselves to see.

Brando sadly passed away last year.If not for his extroverted private life,he will undoubtedly be best remembered for his leading role here,despite the staggeringly short amount of screen-time he actually occupies.Pacino too really launched his career here,and it's amazing to look back and see how young and fresh-faced he looked.In supporting roles,the film also undoubtedly helped make big names out of Caan and Robert Duvall as the family lawyer.Even the director,Francis Ford Coppola,probably never made anything that matched this (especially if you consider the chunks of cr*p he was shooting out later in his career.)

What I found most notable about the film is actually the sweeping,powerful score that plays over all the scenes with a majesty that is truly compelling and will stick in your mind for a while after you've seen it.But more than that,it is a film that is truly rich and flowing with texture and depth,that manages to flow with the vitality of the characters.I have a short attention span,like a lot of people of the MTV generation,so it's a film you might find hard to settle down and watch without fidgeting around a lot.But anyone who sees it would be unable to deny that it is,well,really what film-making is all about,truly masterful,fulfilled,dynamic stuff that puts a lot of the rubbish that gets spewed out today to shame.*****;8;15;False tt0068646;vito-corleone;20/10/2003;Brando in the most charismatic performance of all time;10;The movie has it all, and everything is handled to perfection.

The plot is so intriguing, one never gets bored.

The performances are top notch, especially Marlon Brando(the MOST CHARISMATIC PERFORMANCE OF ALL TIME), Al Pacino, Robert Duvall and James Caan.

HIGHLY recommended for anyone who has missed the best movie ever made.;8;15;False tt0068646;Prismark10;14/10/2019;The Godfather;10;Francis Ford Coppola got Mario Puzo's pulpy novel and turned it into a cinematic masterpiece with Puzo as co-scriptwriter. Robert McKee famous for his seminars on script writing offers Casablanca as the perfect film. He deconstructs the script and movie in his seminars. He is wrong. The Godfather is as perfect as a movie you can get.

When Paramount Pictures gave the movie a greenlight. The mafia families were concerned that it would lift the lid on how they operated and shine an unwelcome spotlight on the crime bosses. There were attempts to stop the movie being made. They had nothing to worry about, when the movie came out the mob bosses realized that no amount of money could buy the public relations they got from the film.

Instead of murderous gangsters. The Godfather portrays the mafia as men of honour, family men who value loyalty and live by a code. Violence would only be used as a last resort. It is because we never see the outside victims of these people. The story is set within gangsters and their families and associates.

The film opens with an epic wedding sequence set after the war. On the day of his daughter's wedding Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) cannot refuse a request made of him. His godson Johnny Fontane drops by to sing at the wedding and requests Don Vito's help to secure a part in a movie that would secure his comeback. His informally adopted son Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) is sent to Hollywood to persuade the film producer and when he refuses, the producer wakes up in bed with the head of his prized horse.

Don Vito Corleone is a criminal, the head of the five families. He is also the moral centre of this movie. He is wise, he can be kind but he is also ageing and his values are of a world that is disappearing. Don Vito's reluctance to enter the drugs trade would be his undoing.

The Godfather is really the story of youngest son, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino.) The war hero who wanted to have nothing to do with the family business but is pulled in first when his father is shot and then when a further attempt is made on his life in the hospital. After the death of his hot headed brother Sonny Corleone (James Caan.) Michael is groomed by Don Vito to become the head of the family. After his father's death, Michael plans revenge on those who betrayed his family and the rival families.

In his first scenes at the family wedding, Michael explains to his girlfriend Kay Adams (Diane Keaton) the various heavies hanging around and some of the things his father did to pull favours. Michael is an outsider in his own family as he tells Kay that he is not like them. As the film progresses Michael becomes exactly like them.

The Godfather has terrific performances. Marlon Brando won his second Best Actor Oscar and rejuvenated his career. On the other hand Al Pacino, Robert Duvall and James Caan were all nominated for the best supporting actor Oscars and cancelled each other out. The film won three Oscars including Best Picture. The big winner that year was actually Cabaret with eight Oscar wins including Best Director.

So much of The Godfather has been emulated since. Michael Cimino was so enamoured by the movie, he opens The Deer Hunter with an epic wedding sequence to set up his story. He also cast Robert De Niro and John Cazale, two actors who appeared in The Godfather films. On the other hand Coppola would later cast John Savage who plays an important role in The Deer Hunter in The Godfather III in 1990.

Then there is the climax. The christening scenes where Michael Corleone renounces the devil and all his work which is intercut with his various henchmen killing the Corleone's rivals. A trick Coppola has used in his other movies.;3;4;False tt0068646;gandalf_theWise14;15/08/2019;One of the greatest, most iconic cinematic achievements of all time;;"Where do you even start with a film like this? There are so many layers to The Godfather, so many little intricacies among the plot, that it is simply impossible to fully analyze this film in one review. With this in mind, I'm just going to give some of my thoughts on the film here.

The Godfather does not really have one focused plot line that you can point to. It really just focuses on the inner dealings of the Corleone crime family. There are many things going on, but at its core, it is a film about this family. Through this, though, there are a few stories told. We see the fall of the once immensely powerful Don Vito Corleone, and then, as it would appear at the end of the film, the eventual rise of the family again under its new leader. We see the transformation of Michael, the Don's youngest son, throughout the movie, as he goes from the young man that wanted nothing to do with his family's illegal business to the man in charge of the whole thing. We also witness the terrible and bloody gang war that the Corleone family becomes deeply involved in. Ultimately, The Godfather tells an incredible story, or multiple connected stories, revolving around the Corleone family, as we learn about the inner dealings of this crime organization along the way. From the opening scene, I was completely pulled into the story of this family, and didn't return to reality until the end credits started rolling. It was truly an intriguing and fascinating tale that I couldn't get enough of.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the film was the story of Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino. His eventual rise through the ranks to the new head of the Corleone crime family is so intriguing because of his transformation as a person that was required to make this happen. He becomes more and more morally corrupt as the film goes on, until at the end he becomes the cold-hearted, ruthless leader of the crime family. The film does an excellent job of illustrating what you have to become to rise to the top in a business like this, and shows how these leaders end up having to lose a bit of their humanity to be able to do the things that are necessary to keep their power.

Francis Ford Coppola's masterful direction is one of the main factors that made this film as iconic as it is. The overall mood of each scene is done perfectly; nothing ever feels out of place, everything always feels like it was done exactly as it should be. In fact, I can't really think of anything at all that should have been done different. The one thing throughout the whole film that was messed up slightly was when Sonny was beating up Carlo in the street. You see one punch that clearly was way off, yet Carlo still reacts as if he were hit. It's a very minor detail that can be missed quite easily, but it pulls you out of the film for a moment. Once you get a visual reminder that these are all actors on the screen, it can throw you off just a bit for the rest of the movie and taint your enjoyment of it. Of course, this didn't happen as everything else was done to perfection, so nothing really bad came of this one minor hiccup. The film is still a masterpiece, and a few seconds of confusion won't ruin that.

The iconic cinematography of this film is also such a key part of it. The low-lighting used in many of the scenes captures the mood of so many of the moments, especially in the first sequence of the film. Vito Corleone's daughter is having a wedding outside, and the sun is shining and everyone is dancing and happy. Then, throughout the wedding, the scene will switch to inside, where Vito will be talking business with someone. In these moments, the background is so dark we can barely see the characters. This important feature draws attention to how dark and shady the family business is, in contrast to the overall upbeat and hopeful tone of the wedding. There are many more instances quite like this in the film, but I am not going to point them all out, as, like I said, it is impossible to talk about all of the details of this film in one review. In short, the cinematography and use of lighting are used to perfection to help the viewer derive the mood of the situation from scene to scene.

The score of this film is just as iconic as everything else about it. The music is fittingly dark and used to appropriately set the mood at the right times. It is perhaps one of the best scores ever composed for a film; if not, it is certainly one of the most iconic.

The movies epic 175 minute runtime does not feel excessive or unnecessary like some 3-hour films can. Instead, it feels just right for the story it is telling, and somehow manages to never overstay its welcome. The lengthy runtime feels completely justified due to the overall nature of a film like this, and there is really nothing I can think of that could be taken out without negatively affecting the final product.

The acting in this film is absolutely outstanding. It's stunning how great the cast is at times. Some of the most interesting characters ever created were brought to life by these incredible performances.

Marlon Brando is on a whole different level is this film. There are so many times you can't even believe he's acting. His iconic voice and line delivery has created some of the most iconic and recognizable quotes ever. The performance he gives is chillingly effective and almost frightening, and fittingly so. It is simply one of the best displays of acting I have ever seen.

Al Pacino is also outstanding in this film. I believe he had the most screen time in the movie (despite his best supporting actor nomination), and he does a great job of living up to that. It is really his first iconic role, and it ended up becoming perhaps his most iconic role. Perhaps he doesn't outperform Brando, but he certainly does as good as anyone possibly could at living up to the standard that Brando sets from the opening scene.

James Caan and Robert Duvall do not disappoint either, giving strong performances to back up Brando and Pacino. In fact, there is not a single member of the cast who I think underperforms. At the very least, everyone did their job well, with many going above and beyond to make this movie the incredible achievement that it is.

And then there's the big question: does this film stand the test of time? The answer is yes. The Godfather is a timeless classic that I really don't see ever falling off. Many of the themes are still relevant today, and even without that, it is worth watching simply for the incredible cinematic achievement that it is, and the filmmaking lessons that can be learned from it.

The Godfather is, in short, an epic masterpiece of a film. The direction, story, acting, cinematography, music; all are outstanding and iconic, and they all come together to make this incredible, nearly flawless movie. This review really only scratches the surface of all this movie has to offer, as there is just so much under the surface to be uncovered through deep analysis of this film. Because of this, I would recommend multiple viewings of the film to ensure you are getting the full experience and not missing anything. I know that I will certainly be watching this many more times in the years to come. It is almost undoubtedly one of the best films ever made, and one that everyone has to see at least once in their lives.";3;4;True tt0068646;sammehta;09/06/2019;The very definition of a Masterpiece!;10;"No doubt the novel by Mario Puzo is awesome by it's own standards but the adaptation of the plot by Coppola is flawless! Every character is given time to develop and leave his/her mark on the movie.

It starts with Don Vito Corleone(Marlon Brando) heading the Corleone crime family. Even though it doesn't deal in vices like prostitution and gambling, the Corleone family is the biggest and the strongest crime family in New York! It is made up of family and loyal friends of Don Vito- like the terrifying Luca, the muscle-maker Clemenza, the smart tactician Tessio, an adopted German-Irish son Tom and the hot-headed eldest blood of Vito Sonny among the others.

The Don hears various requests from his troubled friends and uses his contacts in order to help them out, asking for nothing but loyalty and friendship in return.

This calm boat is however rocked by heavy waters when the Turk Virgil Sollozo meets Don Vito Corleone to ask for protection and finance for his narcotics business. Don Corleone refuses. However during the meeting, Sonny shoots off his mouth and shows that he is interested in the deal. And that starts unfolding of a spiral of events.

Vito is shot. Sonny is killed. Fredo, the second son of Don Vito, is sent away to Vegas under protection. Michael Corleone, the reluctant outside, who has led his life they he wanted, away from his father's influence takes over the family reins from his ailing father.

Then transcripts a story of Michael from a family outsider to a ruthless Mafia boss.

After Vito dies, Michael arranges to assassinate Tessio who's turned a traitor, Moe Green- who was a block in Michael's path to buying the entire stake in a Las Vegas Hotel, and the heads of the other families- Stracci, Cuneo, Barzini and Tattaglia! Michael cleverly gets his brother-in-law Carlo Rizzi assassinated who was responsible for Sonny's murder.

With all the other heads of the Five New York Families dead, Michael Corleone becomes the undisputed leader of the Underworld in New York. In the final scene, he is surrounded by his loyalists- Rocco Lampone, Al Neri and the good old Clemenza who refers to Michael as ""Don Corleone"" before the scene blacks out!

Unlike the Mafia films back then, The Godfather portrayed the Underworld as a response to the corrupt politicians rather than goons with guns and money!

Undoubtedly, it still remains the greatest Masterpiece in World Cinema even today after more than 47 years and will continue to remain so for centuries to come!

""I'll make him an offer he can't refuse!""";3;4;True tt0068646;TheOriginalCinephile;01/04/2019;The greatest movie ever made.;10;"02/04/2019

The Godfather (1972)

Director - Francis Ford Coppola

Cast - Marlon Brando & Al Pacino

Based on the Classic novel 'The Godfather' by Mario Puzo, this movie is a resounding masterpiece in the field of arts & entertainment. So what makes it the greatest movie ever made. Is it the background score that stirs your soul every time it plays. Is it the detailed direction by the master Coppola that not only takes you through the character's journey or the timeline but also helps you unravel deep rooted mysteries of the human psyche. Is it the alluring cinematography by Gordon Willis that makes every frame in the movie look like the most fascinating visual a human eye can ever stand witness to. Or is it the Masterclass in Acting given by a Brando as the iconic DON Vito Corleone & furthermore an even better performance by Al Pacino in not only the best role of his acting career, but also the most iconic character ever created on celluloid as Michael Corleone. I guess this is the problem with this film, that all the creative geniuses in the field of Arts & Entertainment got their A game on & filled it with so much of class, passion, performance & excellence, that the film did not have an option but to be the best film in the world of cinema.";3;4;False tt0068646;gpeevers;01/04/2019;Incredible Film-making;10;"The story of a Mafia family it's about honor and loyalty but it's also a story of crime, it both espouses and perverts the American dream. The film has so many iconic scenes that stand out in the memory, even when years pass between viewings. The film was based upon the best selling novel by Mario Puzo.

The film has an amazing cast who bring to life memorable and well rounded characters to earn our sympathy, despite some of the deeds they perpetrate. While Marlon Brando would receive the accolades and the Academy Award, we also have Oscar nominated performances from James Caan, Robert Duvall and Al Pacino. Also of note is John Cazale (he appeared in only 6 films before his untimely death, all of them were nominated for Best Picture). Not to be forgotten are; Sterling Hayden, Diane Keaton, Abe Vigoda and Talia Shire. The cast between them have thus far won 5 Oscars wins and been nominated for another 22.

We have the incredible score of Nino Rota remains one of the most evocative scores in film, and it is a tribute to the composer and the film that just a few notes can conjure such images almost 50 years later.

We also have the wonderful cinematography of Gordon Willis who created such powerful images, at times very warm while at other times so very dark.

There's no doubt that the film does paint a somewhat romanticized portrait of a mafia family but it's not just a film about crime it's about family. The film was followed up shortly by a very good sequel (Godfather II) that maintained the high standards of its predecessor even to the extent of achieving the Academy Award for Best Picture, but for me it wasn't quite as compelling. These films were followed by a less memorable sequel (Godfather III) 16 years later that while earning 7 Oscar nominations itself, mostly served as a reminder of how much less powerful it was than its predecessors.";3;4;True tt0068646;thespencerwelch;27/01/2019;Good movie, classic;10;Yeah its a good movie I guess, not the greatest of all time in my book but still vastly enjoyable by movie fans of all sorts, even fans of other types of movies;3;4;False tt0068646;dumitru_mario_valente;22/01/2019;masterpiece!;10;A very good movie, a must-see! its very interesting;3;4;False tt0068646;amesmonde;19/03/2010;Brando's aged make-up is incredible;;Coppola's near perfect masterpiece. A first class cast including, James Caan, Al Pacino and heavy weight Marlon Brando to name a few. There is not much I can add that hasn't already been written, it frankly is the quintessential family, Mafia gangster film.

The 1950's nostalgic feel is captured, distinguished cinematography by Gordon Willis and the script honed. The costumes, locations and sets add to the overall authentic experience. Brando's aged make-up is incredible, particularly for 1972 and apart from some insignificant choppy editing and stock footage the film is near enough picture perfect.

Timeless, compulsive viewing, there is a reason why The Godfather is on a pedestal as one of the greatest movies or of all time There is no offer to refuse, it's a must see.;3;4;False tt0068646;Amyth47;01/10/2018;ONE OF THE GREATEST EVER.;10;My Rating : 10/10 ♠ MASTERPIECE ♠

'The Godfather' is a masterpiece, a perfect gangster movie. A film without flaws, blunders and cliches, which pulls me to writing a review and it feels like I know it completely by heart having seen it a million times now. This is a classic, a gangster epic and a bible for cinephiles. A worthy picture, without exaggeration, the best of it's kind.

Adapted from Mario Puzo's best-selling Mafia saga, 'The Godfather' is a serious dramatic masterpiece directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It is genuinely a top-notch film which depicts the blood, sweat and drama of the Corleone Mafia family.

The film is a long (running time of 2 hours 55 minutes) and leisurely apotheosis of the Corleone family which marvellously builds up a rich pattern of relationships, meticulously detailing the rituals of an enclosed group. The tone of the film is laudatory and romantic and the extraordinary chiaroscuro of the cinematography completely steals my heart.

'The Godfather' contains famous unforgettable scenes such as the opening wedding celebration, a severed horse's head left in an enemy's bed and the cold-blooded killing happening simultaneously with a baby's baptism. However, my favourite scene in the movie is the one wherein Michael Corleone's new bride dies in a car bomb-blast.

Coppola not only superbly created the film, but brilliantly chose his actors. Who knows what the fate of the film would have been without Marlon Brando and Al Pacino. Marlon Brando is outstanding. His cotton-stuffed cheeks and an almost inaudible whisper perfectly define the style of a reigning Head of Mafia. His presence brings energy to the screen. This was definitely Brando's best ever performance which won him an Oscar which he infamously refused. Yes, the man who made offers others couldn't refuse once refused the movie industry's heftiest honour. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is no less interesting than his father. Michael is kind-hearted and truthful, knowing what his father does, he never wanted to deal in his family's business and participate in criminal quarrels. Al Pacino played his character no less brilliantly than Marlon Brando. Pacino showed the destruction and the transformation of his character: from the uninitiated in the affairs of the family being the young war hero, to the new Don of the Corleone family, possessing an iron will, foresight, wisdom and dignity.

For all its cold-bloodedness, the film is most powerful in conveying the codes of loyalty, love, masculine honour and feminine subservience, enterprise and corporate self-interests in a crime-ridden America. In addition to the brilliant acting and excellent production of the film, there is the wonderful music score of the composer Nino Rota. An excellent melody which has long become a classic. 10/10 for me.;4;6;False tt0068646;monikahlon;10/10/2017;What an outstanding cinema work;9;The first movie I've ever watched that left me with the feeling that I saw something bigger than just a movie. I remember it really well - I was 16, my parents were abroad and I watched it at home with a couple of good friends. When you remember the time and setting you watched a movie so well, it is because it really touched you and influenced you, and that's what I think that movie did to me. You really should watch it. It is an offer you can't refuse!;4;6;False tt0068646;Marian20;29/08/2017;A Film About Succession Is A Masterpiece;10;"""The Godfather"" is about the Corleones - an organized crime family better known as the mob or mafia - that tells a great story of succession of the leadership of the crime family from an aging Don Vito Corleone to his reluctant and youngest son,Michael Corleone.

This film directed by Francis Ford Coppola that was based on the novel of Mario Puzo stars legendary actor Marlon Brando and Al Pacino,an up-and-coming young actor back then who just happened to appear on his only second major film role.The cast also includes talented actors and actresses such as James Caan, Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,John Cazale and Talia Shire.

The story starts during the wedding of Don Vito Corleone's daughter Connie.In it,we get meet the members of the Corleone family such Don Vito's oldest son Sonny and his adopted son as well as the consigliere Tom Hagen together with the different henchmen like Tessio and Clemenza as well as different people who are obtaining favors from Don Vito who is also known as the godfather.Then,we get to meet Michael and his girlfriend Kay.It was evident that Michael has no intentions of joining his father's business.But several events happen such as Don Vito getting shot,Sonny getting killed and the other rival members of the Five Families trying to overthrow the Corleones power and influence as Don Vito does not want to be part of the illegal drugs trade.Then,it became clear that the only son who should replace Don Vito,who is getting older and weaker as he approaching near his death,as the leader of the family is reluctant Michael.After Don Vito died,Michael made moves to retain the family's power and influence by killing the leaders of the rival families and getting rid of the traitors of among family.It ended with Michael succeeding and becoming the new godfather.

This epic film definitely is the greatest film ever made.We have great performances coming from Marlon Brando,who won an Oscar as Don Vito,the upstart Al Pacino and the rest of the cast.We also have a great story involving the Corleones as we get to see the transition of the family's leadership from Don Vito to Michael.The characters of the story are definitely far from one-note and they can be as complex evoking humanity.We are also treated to great production set designs, memorable musical scores coming from Nino Rota, a superb script coming from Puzo and Coppola, and a magnificent direction coming from Coppola.With that said,it has become a benchmark for excellence in film and has for many years remained relevant despite being initially released 45 years ago when this review is written.Overall,it is simply a masterpiece.";4;6;True tt0068646;BA_Harrison;06/03/2016;Be sure to give it the respect it deserves.;10;"The Godfather used to hold the top spot in IMDb's Top 250 movies list; it now sits at number two, behind Frank Darabont's emotionally manipulative crowd-pleaser The Shawshank Redemption, which has become the go-to title for people who can't be arsed to think for themselves when it comes to naming their favourite film. People clearly aren't showing The Godfather enough respect (perhaps they need to be taught a lesson, capiche?).

In my opinion, Francis Ford Coppola's sweeping Mafia epic (based on Mario Puza's bestselling novel) trumps Shawshank in every way

The film boasts a superior cast headed by Marlon Brando and Al Pacino, with excellent support from James Caan and Robert Duvall; Tom Robbins and Morgan Fairchild are simply no match.

Coppola's storytelling is impeccable from start to finish, drawing the viewer into the film as inextricably as Michael Corleone (Pacino) is drawn into the sinister, violent underworld of Sicilian organised crime. Darabont does a reasonable enough job at papering over Shawshank's plot holes, but fails to lend his film the sense of style and class so evident in every scene of the Godfather.

Nino Rota's score for Coppola's movie is sublime, a majestic piece of music so emotive that just a few notes evoke an entire genre. I can't even recall Shawshank's score.

Rather unsurprisingly, The Shawshank Redemption deals with the theme of redemption, and closes with a contrived feel-good ending. The Godfather is darker and far more complex, dealing with loyalty, honour, obligation, destiny, desire, vengeance, violence, love, hate, and trust; it doesn't sell-out with a sappy, happy ending, closing instead with Michael embracing the lifestyle that he once sought to avoid. Perfectamundo (that's Italian for 'perfect'. Possibly).

In short, The Godfather is the don in every department.";4;6;False tt0068646;joshuafagan-64214;03/03/2016;America's Masterpiece;10;"Let's talk about what many people call the greatest movie of all time: Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather. Released in 1972, it took the world by storm, becoming the highest-grossing movie of all time and ushering in a new era of film. Centering around a New York mob family and the descent into darkness of young Michael Corleone, played famously and fantastically by Al Pacino, it took us fully out of the Hays Code era and showed what film could do with mature subject matter.

It is also wonderfully acted, stunningly scored, scorchingly directed, and thrillingly cinematographed. When someone says 'The Godfather', a detailed series of images pop into my mind, a series of images distinct from every other film series in the world. It could copyright its aesthetic, an aesthetic that fits its tone and mood like climatic battles fit action movies or long kisses fit romance movies or sunsets fit the island of Santorini.

This film won five Academy Awards. I can safely that is too low. There is nothing in these films that is any less than the finest filmmaking ever produced. It is the work of a group of men and women at the height of their prowess. Pacino has starred in some terrible movies over the last twenty-five years, including the one that one him an Oscar. And Coppola? The best thing he did after the 70's were adaptations of teen novels. Now, doesn't that seem backwards to you? You're supposed to start off making adaptations of teen novels and move on to 'serious', 'adult' fare afterwards.

But none of that matters, not really. You don't remember Audrey Hepburn as an old woman dying of caner in the 90's. You think of her as one of the influential symbols of the 50's and 60's. And so it is here. Coppola could have jumped off a bridge in 1980, leaving little Sofia without a father. That would have a terrible tragedy, but for better or for worse, it would not be the first thing people remember about him. People die. Art survives. Good art grows. And this is certainly good art.

The next time I watch this movie, I should do a full analysis. It'd take a day or so, and it'd probably run over 30 pages, but I think it's be worth it. There are so many themes at play here. There is enough symbolism floating around to drive someone bad. As a general rule of thumb, if it looks symbolic, it probably is.

There are so many memorable quotes from this movie. I hope you guys don't mind me closing out this review by posting a slew of them.

""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."" ""Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."" ""It's a Sicilian message. It means Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes."" ""In Sicily, women are more dangerous than shotguns."" ""I believe in America."" ...Okay, I'm not seriously gonna stop the review. But you get my point. And none of these quotes come at the expense of telling a great story. Many scripts pick between being watertight and being evocative. This one is both, and because of that, all these lines stick in the audience's mind.

One of the greatest lies of cinema is that the lines people remember are the best lines in any given film. If that were true, we'd have stoned college kids and vapid teenage blondes quoting long, flowery speeches instead of catchphrases. People remember lines in films because 1) the lines are important to the plot, 2) the lines are not something that would normally be spoken, and 3) the lines are delivered well.

The people who make animated kids' films have a tendency to forget steps 1 and 3.

Throughout the history of filmmaking, there has never been a film both as good and as iconic as The Godfather. When people talk about films, it is one of the first to come to mind.

In my opinion, it is the face of American filmmaking. Of all the films I have watched, none have more accurately portrayed what it is to be American. Yes, this a film about crime and the mafia. But it is also a film about identity and opportunity and progress and transition and cutthroat business and hope and fear and assimilation and betrayal and broken dreams and uncertainty and family and traditionalism and modernism and ascending and descending.

Annie Hall and especially Manhattan are love letters to NYC. This is a love letter to America. But it is also a hate letter. It explores both sides of the American Dream. It explores the highs and lows and temptations and opportunity everyone faces as they try to make it in this country. It is explores this glorious mess of a land.

Not much else I can say. If you haven't yet seen it, see it.";4;6;False tt0068646;hlycmt;27/10/2015;I love it;10;I liked it a lot. It's truly a masterpiece. I thought he cast was well priced and he director did a phenomenal job at directing this film. I also think the sequel is as good as the first, if not better. If I could give this film more than 10 stars right now, I honestly would. I remember going with my boyfriend to see it, for it is his favorite film. He laughed and cried and wanted to see it again and again. I am the same exact way. I not only likes this movie, but I loved it, and I still do. Even now when I see a grandfather clock I always think of this movie. Actually, writing this review right now is giving me so many amazing and beautiful memories of the movie that I want to go and see it again. I would truly recommend see this movie as soon as possible. I'm sure you wouldn't regret it. It made me the person I am today.;4;6;False tt0068646;johnpap8;25/10/2015;Simply put its a masterpiece;10;One of the greatest stories ever told through film. From the cinematography to the cast there isn't a single flaw.The performance by Marlon Brando is just stunning and Al Pacino amazes with his talent with this being one of his first movies. The legacy of this movie and the way it has affected cinema cant be described in words. Being a fan of organized crime movies I can say that this is my absolute favorite and I cant remember how many times I have watched it.It might be a bit long but It never ceases to amaze the viewer with its brilliant dialogue and excellent cinematography.I would like to thank personally everyone who worked on this achievement of a film. A must see for everyone who has even the slightest appreciation for cinema!!!;4;6;False tt0068646;Clockwork_Orange55;11/10/2015;"""It is the ultra-American movie classic, which shares its place alongside movies like ""Casablanca"" and ""Citizen Kane""""";10;"I can understand on why ""The Godfather"" is being regarded as one of the greatest motion pictures of all time, if not the greatest by some professionals. ""The Godfather"" is the soul of a perfected cinema, one that will be looked upon by passionate students, and one that will be studied for generations. It is the ultra-American movie classic, which shares its place alongside movies like ""Casablanca"" and ""Citizen Kane"". Even its formidable sequel never holds the same kind of stature. To admire ""The Godfather"", is to celebrate American cinema, or just simply movies.

Some time ago, I told a friend that ""The Godfather"" is a great example of a 'complete' movie, and my opinion stays in that manner still. It has everything a movie requires: cinematography, acting, editing, screenplay, directing and obviously, a glorious plot. 'Overrated' is the term adopted by some for ""The Godfather"", and my assumption is that either he dislikes the picture, or he lacks the understanding to realise the wonders of the medium. ""The Godfather"" is the first great film I caught. It is the initiator of my love for cinema. Undoubtedly, the film will always have a special place in my heart.

What began and seemed like a happy family, plunges into darkness too quickly. The joy and light at the beginning are merely silhouettes of the Corleone family. Sonny's (James Caan) trifling with adultery, and the show of his temper, a man asking for murder, an unholy loyalty, and Michael's (Al Pacino) telling of his father's ways of abusing power - all these are signs shown by Coppola on the dangers that will rain down upon them. One who flirts with sin, will face a punishment.

Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), who is the head of the family, is a very powerful and influential figure. With considerable loyalty that his friends pay for him, he holds the power to accomplish his ambitions. ""The Godfather"" serves introductions to the Corleone family, and only with the arrival of a narcotic baron, a spark of its drama, lighted. Although Vito portrays the main character of the story, I treat it such that the Corleone family is the 'protagonist' instead, with their businesses and goals are the greatest displays of the story.

My favourite moment is a scene where Michael places his sick father in a hidden room to avoid a possible assassination. And Vito's tears flow down his cheek upon discovering that his son, has performed with utmost sincerity to keep him safe. That part, clearly magnified a genuine father-son relationship and too, the sheer love that Vito has for Michael and also a magnificent clue that Michael is the right person to succeed his father as the head of the family. No matter how villainous, or powerful or influential Vito may be, he is still an ordinary father who preserves love for his children.

The movie opens up relationships between the people in the family. To witness Sonny embracing his brother, Michael, before the disinclined departure, says a lot about the soft spoken allegiance he has for Michael. And also it brings to light about loyalty and protectiveness within. Not only the story painted picture of aggressiveness of the organisation, but also about characters, that men carry.

James Caan, John Cazale, Robert Duvall and the rest from the cast delivers perfect performances that have made ""The Godfather"" to be inarguably one of the best acted films in history. Marlon might already have passed terrific performances for his earlier movies like ""On the Waterfront"" and ""A Streetcar Named Desire"", but his work for the ""The Godfather"" transcended all these. His embodiment of an old, fading Don gives life for excellence and the body of an acting genius. Al Pacino is responsible for the convincing but subtle transformation of Michael from an innocent war hero, to a cold, hard – hitting Don. That effortless changeover by Pacino is a marvellous piece of acting. John Marley is terrific as the outspoken movie producer but a very short screen time was given for him, and his performance is severely underrated.

There is ""The Godfather"", living under the shades of cinematic greatness. The legacy and influence that the movie brings, endures till today. It is pretty much ironic that the greatest gangster movie is actually the one that romanticises the subject, not the ones that vomit the brutalities that many find a strong connection in between. Coppola made a statement that sounds like the movie is actually ""an accidental success"". I refuse to believe in that. I believe that the geniuses of Coppola, the actors, the writer and the filmmakers involved, that have had truly made ""The Godfather"" a timeless masterpiece.

(Cinematicmadness.blogspot.com) twitter: @Alex_DeSmall";4;6;True tt0068646;filmnyc-165-275026;30/09/2015;The best Gangster film ever made, Possibly the best film ever made.;10;The Godfather is not only a great Noir style gangster movie but also a tale of the immigrants that came to this country in the last part of the 1800's through the depression. Poor families from Europe that came to the land of the free only to find that all the wealth was controlled by the land barons, Bankers and well to do. Like Most parents Vito Corleone did what he had to do to raise his family and never wanted this life for his sons. Realizing his words were lost on Sonny and Fredo who was a sickly child did not have much hope of making it on his own. But Michael was different he went to college then into the service in WW2. He was never supposed to be in that world but the attempt on his fathers life makes him realize he is his fathers son. He swears revenge on Salatso and the police captain that protects him and so the story unravels. Great performances By Brando, Caan, Pacino,Duvall,with an incredible supporting cast with Abe Vigoda,Richard Castalano, Diane Keaton and Talia SHire. Perhaps the best of the supporting cast is John Cazale as Fredo Supposedly not the brightest bulb in the bunch turns out to be a very good schemer who wants whats coming to him.;4;6;False tt0068646;joshgst;30/09/2015;A True Classic;10;"This was truly a history rival and fascinating piece of cinematography. The godfather was one of my favorite and classical films from a he series. Its involves mystery, action, crime, food and the mafia some of my favorite subjects for a good film. I particularly like the entire Godfather Trilogy but personally the first one is my absolute favorite. The scene where everyone has dinner and the party shows how caring and loving the family. Also when all the families meet together to discuss the ""buisness of the mafia was awesome. Then all of sonny dramatic scenes were just hilariously funny but it was sad yet obvious sonny temper was get him into trouble one day. Then when Michael took over I could see he reflected his father a lot";4;6;False tt0068646;iceskergirl123;24/09/2015;Great Movie;10;Francis Ford Coppola's screen adaptation of Mario Puzo's novel The Godfather is a cinematic master piece. The thought provoking irony that shrouds the film leaves the audience astounded by the excellence of the work. The characters are all very dynamic and go through extensive amounts of growth throughout the duration of the film. The use of irony, antithesis, and juxtaposition create such a complex story above and below the surface. Although the movie is very complex and layered, it is not too difficult to follow. It is long, so if you want to get the most of the experience I recommend watching it in installments rather than all at once. It will make the movie easier to follow and keep your attention span fresh. There is a lot of violence, but it is not overly gory. It's more tasteful than films of the Tarantino nature. So, leave your guns behind, grab a cannoli and enjoy this exemplary film full of plot and grade A acting.;4;6;False tt0068646;samwellcross;08/09/2015;Can't believe there are non believers off this film out there.;10;I was searching through the reviews of this film and came across a couple that weren't particularly complimentary about the film. Firstly I have to say that this film is not my favourite film of all time, but is definitely in my top 3. Secondly, one person seemed to take offence of Marlon Brando's performance, that in itself is an insult as Brando was incredible in this film. Coppola's direction and attention to detail are inch perfect for me. The whole cast was brilliant in particular Al Pacino who gives an Oscar worthy performance of epic proportions. You don't just watch this film for me, you experience a whole new chapter of life that most would never experience through this film. The word epic can be overused in terms of film but this is 100% an epic of epic proportions. I agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion but get with it man, you don't get films better than this and I refuse to believe that people who have rated the likes of 'Django unchained' as close in terms of quality to this film should be allowed to comment on film in general. 10/10!!!;4;6;True tt0068646;vladislavbalayan;07/09/2015;Good;10;"Tell me a movie that is more famous than this. Tell me a movie that has had more parodies enjambé off its storyline than this. Tell me one movie that has been as quoted as a much as this. The answer is you can't. No movie has had as much of an impact as The Godfather has had ever since it was released.

The acting was simply amazing, what else could you say. What could be more appealing to people(even today) than watching actors like Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Robert Duvall. This is like heaven for someone who is a fan of movies. With this movie Brando was able to bring himself back into the limelight. His performance as the godfather alone is iconic. His character has been recreated so much in films that it has almost if it has not already become a cliché. His performance though was not a cliché. His performance was subtle and breathtaking. It was so genuine and realistic that it was not just probably but definitely more genuine than Marlon Brando himself. Al Pacino was perfect for this film as well. What a way to start up your career. His character was all about depth and he displayed it perfectly. He was able to display his own inner-battles in his mind as well as the battles he had with his family, friends and enemies. His character was more of a psychological character study than anything else to me. Robert Duvall to me was the glue to the movie. He added a different perspective to everything in just that he was not Italian yet having the respect of the mafia. His character is a man of high authority within the Corleone family who was listened to and insightful;. This was simply perfect giving the film great balance throughout. The rest of the cast was just icing on the cake.

The writing was phenomenal and breathtaking. As mentioned before there has been no movie quoted more than this. It is not even the quotes though that makes the writing in here so perfect. It is the symbolism and meaning that went into every scene. There are countless symbols, messages and lines in here that are so memorable yet it is as realistic as a movie could get.

The directing by Coppola was perfect as well. Not many movies can be 3 hours and yet maintain a good level of interest from the audience like The Godfather. Coppola deserves credit for this. The symbolism and messages that went into every scene also has to do with the directing not just the writing. The movie is so well edited and strung together that the only word that could come to my mind is perfection.

The cinematography and music were perfect. The score of this movie is one of the most memorable ever. If you were to hear it you could identify it right away. The cinematography was what actually really drove this movie. The Godfather seems to have this mystique to it, it gives you the feeling you are watching something truly remarkable.";4;6;False tt0068646;lloyd00;30/08/2015;Epic;10;"This film represents the absolute perfection, either in cinematography or acting. The perfects book's perfect adaptation. The only minor ""problem"" is that this and the Part II are complete each other, one by one these movies are less, but this little detail won't minor their merits. In the lead role Al Pacino was the best choice, and don't forget to mention the legend, Marlon Brando as THE Godfather. I think this film represents what nowadays movie are lack of. In this movie the story and the characters are the main parts not the visual effects. In my opinion to this very day, this was Coppola's best directing. And don't forget Nino Rota's melodies which are inseparable from the movie.";4;6;False tt0068646;Gustavo071;21/08/2015;The best movie;10;One of the best movies ever made about the mafia until today! I'm still waiting that arises a work like this movie. Violent and realistic, is a perfect picture of how the mafia could be good and cruel at the same time. Full of meaning, deaths and colorful characters, is absolutely impossible to peel off eyes of the screen for a second even. Is an epic about a descent into hell and desperate attempts to see the light again. And the rise of credits, the viewer realizes that he was facing one of the most powerful stories of love and hatred of the cinema.

The Godfather is without a doubt one of my 5 favorite movies, one of the most important films in history, the most commented, imitated and revered in cinema. And is the question: is the best movie ever? When we stop to think about days after seeing the movie we were in doubt, but to watch no doubt of the answer. Almost like an offer we can't refuse. Note: 10;4;6;False tt0068646;sas_ribeiro;18/08/2015;Family Business;10;"As the film opens, it is the last Saturday in August, 1945 - the Japanese have just surrendered. In the opening scene of the film, the camera (very slowly) pulls back from the face of a man who is in Corleone's dark home office, where the Don regally and ruthlessly holds court. He carries on with the crime family business during his daughter's wedding reception, that is being held in the bright, sunshiny outdoor veranda of his Long Island compound. According to Corleone's Irish-German overseer and surrogate son Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall): ""It's part of the wedding. No Sicilian can refuse any request on his daughter's wedding day."" It is the custom of the father of the bride to grant favors and promises to all petitioners and supplicants who pay homage.

Seated in front of the Don's desk is an undertaker named Amerigo Bonasera (Salvatore Corsitto), speaking in a heavy accent (Vito Corleone's wife is god-mother to Bonasera's daughter). Bonasera desperately pleads for a favor - proper vengeful ""justice"" (rather than American justice) for the threatened near-rape and brutal beating suffered by his daughter (whom he raised ""in the American fashion"") by her non-Italian boyfriend and his friend. The two brutes had received a court date and only a suspended sentence:

I believe in America. America has made my fortune. And I raised my daughter in the American fashion. I gave her freedom, but - I taught her never to dishonor her family. She found a boyfriend, not an Italian...Two months ago, he took her for a drive, with another boyfriend. They made her drink whiskey. And then they tried to take advantage of her. She resisted. She kept her honor. So they beat her like an animal...She was the light of my life - my beautiful girl. Now she will never be beautiful again...I-I went to the police like a good American. These two boys were brought to trial. The judge sentenced them to three years in prison - suspended sentence. Suspended sentence! They went free that very day! I stood in the courtroom like a fool. And those two bastards, they smiled at me. Then I said to my wife, 'for justice, we must go to Don Corleone.'";4;6;False tt0068646;yeahclowns;18/08/2015;Couldn't get any better than this...;10;"I'm not gonna write another review of how great and flawless the Godfather is because there are already a lot of them and pretty much everyone knows how perfect the movie is. Instead, I'm gonna share my 17year old guy view of this masterpiece and thus i'll highlight the importance of it. First things first, yes I like blockbuster kind of movies (you know the types) and i've absolutely adored what cinema has brought in, the past 10 years... But, I've seen many movies from the 50's-80's unlike my generation and i have to say that i am fond of 2/10 of them (The 90's, especially 1994 is a happy exception). That being said you cant imagine how big it is that this movie is my 2nd favorite of all time in all of 400+ movies i've seen...! The pacing is incredible, the picture is meant to be timeless, the sound is captivating, the plot is classic, and don't get me started on the performances. Marlon Brando, the greatest actor to have walked on this earth, proved why he is the best with ,maybe, the best performance of all time. I'd seen the streetcar and on the waterfront and i could believe in my eyes... It's a shame it has a rating of 9.2/10 because it truly is at least 9.9/10... even for an objective voting. This generation that spends 15 bucks for 1,5 hour of explosions every summer and another 15 for useless moneymaker ""movies"" will never know the greatness of this 3hour epic... a true masterpiece!!! 10/10!";4;6;False tt0068646;mhamaddarin;14/08/2015;Greatest of all the time !!;10;The Godfather is one of the very few films that doesn't have a single flaw. Seeing The Godfather for the first time was the most amazing movie experiences of my life. There's scenes that stay with you when the movies over, and you don't forget them. Everyone makes the mistake of calling this film a movie about crime. Its really a movie about family. The dialogue is just unbelievable. I've seen the movie at least 30, 40 times, and I'm still amazed at how perfect it is. The music, the acting, everything. People think that Citizen Kane is the greatest movie ever made...well, there's no way that ANYONE can think that Citizen Kane is more moving, and has a better storyline than The Godfather. The thing I find so amazing about The Godfather is how Michael (Al Pacino) changes throughout the movie. Its my opinion that this is the greatest movie ever made, and Marlon Brando's performance is absolutely flawless.;4;6;True tt0068646;cuthwy;12/08/2015;Mafia Classic;10;I grew up watching this movie and it's definitely one of my favorite movies of all time. This movie is a gangster classic that every film buff should watch.

The great performances from Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, James Caan other veteran actors are outstanding in this culture-changing epic. A Sicilian wedding, gun and cannolis, fishes in a vest, a horse head, a corrupt cop, the Don's demise - there are so many events in this movie that you will never get bored of it. I know I never do.

I definitely suggest it.;4;6;True tt0068646;kaimgoedecke;08/08/2015;Best Movie ever done (My Opinion);10;In my Opinion this is one of the best (if not the best) movie ever done. Francis Ford Copolla does such a great job, that You want to watch it over and over. The actors are picked so carefully and good, that you couldn't imagine others playing those characters. The movie portrays the sicilian mafia and the problems the godfather has to face pretty perfect. Compared to other gangster movies like Goodfellas for example, The Godfather has definitely a longer and more interesting story.

If you haven't watched it, you definitely should. With 175 minutes running time the movie is quite long, but I promise it is worth it.;4;6;False tt0068646;gabriellbb-76895;07/08/2015;Inspiring movie;10;Just an amazing movie with an awesome script! One of the best stories ever told. The way this story is told is something that I couldn't expect, with so much drama but also the reality of that world. We feel so connected with the family, with the characters. The photography increase the drama of the movie. Like the last take, we want so much to see how his going to be with all that power. Absolutely worth watching this movie, especially. You are learning from the very best. It's also the kind of a movie that every time that I watch I can see something different. Very honest with the book. Almost three hours that we can't feel. I wish there were more movies like this these days.;4;6;False tt0068646;ReviewBuff;03/08/2015;It never gets old!;10;"This movie is my favorite. I literally have this movie on every device that I own. And that just tells you how much I love this movie. I mean every scene is a classic.

When we can't pick a movie to watch, me and my friends just instinctively settle for ""The Godfather"". We know each and every dialogue and we love saying the dialogues verbatim!

Besides, what other movie has so many great actors doing their best work? Where else will you find someone beating Al Pacino at acting then in this movie?

This movie just never gets old for me and my friends. And that is why it deserves a 10 star vote!";4;6;False tt0068646;m-golshani32;31/07/2015;the best film in history of cinema;10;I Think this film is best in cinema history.one awesome film. alpacino was great in film i like his play Brando was strong kind and square!

godfather best dialoge:

Luca Brasi: Don Corleone, I am honored and grateful that you have invited me to your home on the wedding day of your daughter. And may their first child be a masculine child. Don Corleone: I'm gonna make him an offer he won't refuse. Clemenza: Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes. Michael: Just lie here, Pop. I'll take care of you now. I'm with you now. I'm with you. Michael: My father is no different than any powerful man, any man with power, like a president or senator. Kay Adams: Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and senators don't have men killed. Michael: Oh. Who's being naive, Kay? Don Corleone: You talk about veangance. Is vengeance going to bring your son back to you or my boy to me? Peter Clemenza: Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Michael: Fredo, you're my older brother, and I love you. But don't ever take sides with anyone against the Family again. Ever. Michael: Barzini is dead. So is Phillip Tattaglia. Moe Greene. Stracci. Cuneo. Today I settled all family business so don't tell me that you're innocent. Admit what you did...Get him a drink. Don't be afraid, Carlo. Come on, you think I'd make my sister a widow? I'm Godfather to your son...Go ahead. Drink. Drink. No, you're out of the family business, that's your punishment. You're finished. I'm putting you on a plane to Vegas. Tom?...I want you to stay there, you understand?...Only don't tell me that you're innocent. Because it insults my intelligence and it makes me very angry. Now, who approached you first? Barzini or Tattaglia? Michael Corleone: Don't ask me about my business!!;4;6;False tt0068646;ainidemant;29/07/2015;Excellent;10;"you need to watch it to understand how excellent this movie is.

It has a great story, actors, acting and is a piece of art.

This was my first English movie and loved it and still do. Never will get tired of watching it.

""Don't ever take sides against the family again, ever and Never hate your enemies, it affects your judgement.""

Many quotes and words that actually make sense, its not a wordless and nonsense argument. It can be extreme but some of the quotes do make sense.

Watch, See, Listen, and enjoy.";4;6;False tt0068646;elias-90928;25/07/2015;Definitely, a great film!;10;"""The Godfather"" is perhaps one of the greatest films of all time. For me, this film is remarkable, as the authors have managed to create an indescribable atmosphere of Sicily and the mores that reigned there. When you watch the film you think that even the smell of streets, herbs and flowers. A magical music does not leave any chances to watch this movie with popcorn. Definitely, a great film! Great director, cinematographer and composer! In addition, it is deeply Sorcerer movie makes you think and analyze life, the finer points of human relations, reveals the true values ​​of life. Great game actors, watching where you wake up in empathy. This is my favorite movie.";4;6;False tt0068646;AndreFilip;17/07/2015;The ultimate scriptwriting inspiration.;10;"As argued by Tom Hanks in You've Got Mail, ""The Godfather meets all the vital questions that come your way in life."" Although for that reason I never would eat oranges: every time someone takes one of those citrus or play with them in the film, has every chance to perish. Maybe because a film that begins without credits, with a speech in which in its initial nine words patriotism, immigration, business, honor, beliefs and hard reality blend (""I believe in America. America has made my fortune ""), and that there does not fail until the final climax, even the high treason-the Michael Corleone takes himself, his beliefs, because the family is above oneself-can not be bad. For Coppola lived to the limit on the set, with the constant feeling that was going to be fired, the producer Robert Evans and Paramount nor were giving truce, nor would leave to finish a film in which he did not believe the beginning (the end of the day, it was about something far removed from his life, the Mafia and was based on a best-seller); and that pressure came the juice of talent, the essence that inspired the new Hollywood. Because Marlon Brando did a test to be hired him, he refused to do so. For young boys came of interpretation: Al Pacino, John Cazale (which only made five films before dying of cancer, but do five jobs), Diane Keaton, James Caan and Robert de Niro reinforcement for the second part. Because neither the music of Nino Rota or photography Gordon Willis have a second of weakness. Because we all love to say what the ""offer he could not refuse"" and think you can get into the bed of an enemy head of a horse. For these reasons and many others, The Godfather is the best movie ever.";4;6;False tt0068646;shahkhawar;14/07/2015;One of the greatest movies ever made;10;This is one of those movies that made me wonder why I hadn't seen it earlier.

With superb acting by especially Al Pacino as Mike Corleone and Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone this movie shows how one of the head mafia families in New York works, it gives a detailed picture of how their business runs and what kinda chances they got to take on their business.

The plot has to be excellent for it to get ten out of ten, and it is, it's far from predictable and the movie is the definition of a great epic. I feel that this movie has not dated all that much and has tremendous re-watch-ability.

Do not miss this movie!;4;6;False tt0068646;mahadevsah10;13/06/2015;"The strongest movie ever made ""The Godfather""";10;"I saw this movie and i fell in love with it. It is the strongest movie i have ever seen .This movie gave a clear and transparent view of ""The Mafia Family"".This movie defines what cinema is(are).Four Thumbs Up!!!! for ""The Godfather"" and i hope everybody who watches this movies falls in love with it. Marlon Brando,i got no words for his appreciation what shall i tell him ""The Real Godfather of Actors"" yes that would be very less to call him so he is above that also. He was born to do Don Vitto Corleone and Don Vitto Corleone was written for him only.Al Pacino,ah what a strong Performance speechless,boundless loved him as Michael Corleone The real Son of The Godfather just can say this.and James Caan,Robert Duvall and Diana Keaton are also the important part without them ""The Godfather"" would be incomplete.just wanna say watch it";4;6;False tt0068646;efsanedilcan;05/06/2015;Magnificent portrait of organized crime;10;Rather than concentrating on everything that is great about The Godfather, a much easier way for me to judge its quality is on what is bad about it. Almost every film has something that I don't like about it, but I can honestly say that I wouldn't change anything about The Godfather. There is nothing weak about it and nothing that stands out as bad. That's why it gets ten out of ten.

This is one of those films that made me wonder why I hadn't seen it earlier. The acting from everyone involved is great, Marlon Brando comes across perfectly as the head of the family, and James Caan and Al Pacino are excellent as his sons. The soundtrack by Nino Rota is also very memorable, bringing back memories of the film every time I hear it. The plot has to be excellent for it to get ten out of ten, and it is, it's far from predictable and the film is the definition of a great epic.

The film is pretty shocking in the way every death occurs almost instantaneously, and as it spans ten years so many different things happen and every minute of it is great entertainment. It's a well-made and entertaining film that is only the first part of a trilogy, but it stands on its own as a wonderful film in its own right. If you haven't seen it, what are you waiting for? This was one acclaimed film that didn't disappoint.;4;6;True tt0068646;mahtabkowsari-71833;14/05/2015;One of the best film ever made;10;Godfather is one of the rare films that I watch over and over and every time I enjoy it the same as first time. It is true masterpiece in many ways from directing and acting to mesmerizing quotes and music. To me it has layers that every time I watch I find something new in it. Its interesting approach to the world of women that overshadowed under Muscular games of men mirrored the social issues of 50s in its hidden layers. The color theme in dark brown scenes reminded the Gothic era and architecture works perfectly. Men in dark rooms and covered windows taking care of their mostly illegal business. Soundtrack inspired by Italian old song comes on the task of dramatizing events moved some scenes in some scenes of violence with the hypocritical guise of characters, that lead us to a deep inferiority.;4;6;True tt0068646;kieran-wright;24/04/2015;The definitive mob movie;10;Chances are you may have heard of this film, then again maybe you haven't. Anyway, let's cut to the chase. 'The Godfather', running at just under three hours, boasts at least four set pieces which will have you at the edge of your seat. The director takes care in familiarising us with not just the Corleone family, but also their staff and associates, which really engages the viewer. We are also witness to the transformation of a certain Michael Corleone. There are elements of tragedy in this film which sows the seeds for future perpetrations of revenge, and the ultimate message that I took away was that man has the capacity to cause absolute carnage, which clearly we already know: I suppose that it does no little harm to remind ourselves of that fact. In terms of the acting, it superlative with everyone putting in credible performances. Given that the director was under incredible pressure to make this a success, it is a fantastic feat and still holds up today as the definitive mob movie. However, let me put all that to one side and reserve special credit to Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola who have created quite possibly the best and most recognisable soundtrack in movie history. If you don't already have it, I recommend that you buy 'The Godfather Trilogy' album: there are songs on the album which, if they don't send a shiver up your spine, will reduce you to tears, such is the poignancy of these compositions. I strongly believe that this film would not have been what it is without this soundtrack - it is that crucial to the overall structure.;4;6;False tt0068646;adilomer60;16/02/2015;mafia;10;"God Father came to the best mafia movie history owes the beauty of the depth of the event although not touching the films screenwriter. Generally greater than all of the family prominent in Mafia movies keep the subject here treated as.           But if the head is feeling lonely (in every sense) family and professional life is no longer the way it was put right.          God Father 1 and 2 family integrity while maintaining almost 3 arises where I also ended up in the film.          There is also something that should not be forgotten alone; When thick to go through every stage of life between the stay should be limits to what the best deals are to be considered.";4;6;True tt0068646;ToddLargo;07/02/2015;A elegiac and well organize American Crime drama, that hits home with what it means to die for your family.;10;It's a bit difficult to find a part, a moment, within the film that doesn't showcase great acting, story-telling, and a heart to what it means to have honor and pride. A well deserved film. Brando's brilliance is showcased within The Godfather. Al Pacino is a the seed that is placed within the story, who continually grows throughout by the light of his father. Although, some seeds are worth pulling. The undertone of the story is the concept of corruption and the fall of an empire, and a start to a new one. Fracis Ford Coppola's masterpiece, an everlasting mark on American Cinema. Definitely a piece of history, and you're along for the ride, and experiencing the visceral feeling of that era.;4;6;True tt0068646;PatrickRiley71;27/04/2014;The Gopdfather: The Best Movie;10;This may be regarded as the best film of the entire history of cinema, it is almost perfect in all respects, photography, script, editing, all with great technique and art at the same time, I find it significant errors.

All the performances are great, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, John Cazale, etc.. All individually and collectively make a masterpiece of interpretation.

The script is perhaps most shocking, the story of a reluctant to participate in the murky family business man, and the gradual change of their convictions through circumstances, recreates a picture of that violent era of U.S. history.

Photographic techniques are also impressive, not only for the beauty of the image, but also for the handling of camera you are carrying the story gets very intense feelings in the viewer.

A film that nobody should miss.;4;6;False tt0068646;AaronCapenBanner;31/08/2013;Timeless Mafia Film.;10;Francis Ford Coppola directs this masterful, brilliantly acted(Marlon Brando, Academy Award winner, Al Pacino, James Caan, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall among many others) and supremely well-crafted film about the saga of the Corleones, a Mafia family who find themselves in changing times, and their struggles to adapt. Aging Don Vito Corleone must pick a successor, but a violent war among a rival family, and betrayal from within, threaten to shatter this close-knit family.

Long, but not over-long, this moves at a fantastic pace, and is among the most engrossing films ever made, many memorable scenes and lines.

A masterpiece.;4;6;False tt0068646;LeonLouisRicci;07/07/2013;No Movie is the Best Movie Ever;10;One of the many things that stand the test of time in this Film is how the rich and deeply colored softness of the image doesn't seem at all dated, in fact, it is a beautiful way of peddling the presentation. A testament to its Artistic framing. It is the Art of the Godfather that along with the Characters and the forbidden, to outsiders, World of the Mafia that make this a memorable monument to the craft of Filmmaking.

The period detail and the Casting are another spot on representation of these larger than Life Characters and their primal environment. So there is the look, the Actors, the semi-whispered dialog in tightly confined rooms, the verboten landscape, and the fact that these People are not real but are a realization of expectations and surprises.

This may not be the best Film of all time, can a claim like that for any one Movie be taken seriously, but it is certainly a most finely crafted work of Art. Its influence can hardly be measured, and although the Director only came close to the two Godfather Movies with the incredible Apocalypse Now (1979), he will forever be noticed as the creative force behind Godfather and Godfather II that are both worthy inclusions in any Best Films list.;4;6;False tt0068646;Al_The_Strange;02/01/2013;"""He is a good godson.""";8;"This film has spawned so many gangster clichés and parodies that it's not even funny. Every time you've heard of people ""sleeping with da fishies"" or ""making an offer you can't refuse,"" it'll all boil back to this classic, highly-tutted film.

On first glance, I dismissed the film as being rather dull, despite a few standout moments. On repeat viewings, I have found it more compelling. The film is most memorable for the scenes everybody knows and loves: the scene with the horse's head, the street fighting scene, Marlon Brando's mumbling, the restaurant shooting, sporadic bursts of gunfights and violence...it's all there. Dialogue dominates most of the film, but when given due attention, the story can be rather gripping and mesmerizing. At this point, the only drag I've felt is in the last thirty minutes or so; the film just kinda winds down after nearly 150 minutes of epic-scale gangster mayhem.

The story is long, dense, and chock full of quality characterizations. The film does a fine job of keeping its events in order so that the politics of each situation makes some kind of sense. What matters the most will be the characters, who are endearing, and the underlying themes of family, honor, and loyalty. Family and generations are probably the most blatant themes, especially since most scenes show some strong contrast (or perhaps comparisons) between adults and children.

As a film, it looks really classy. Photography never was a huge standout for these films, but the sepia tones and framing lends the movie a type of classic family-portrait appeal. Editing is decent. Acting is probably the biggest virtue here. Marlon Brando chews the scenery, despite his mumbling and constant fiddling with things, he does show endless nuance and expressions that brings Vito Corleone to life really well. Al Pacino must be at his most nuanced as Michael, and the rest of the magnificent cast fulfills their parts well. Writing is decent. This production has good-looking sets, props, and costumes, and is especially noteworthy for its period reproduction. Music is nice too.

Everybody should see this at least once in their lifetime.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Perfect)";4;6;False tt0068646;setanta-;18/01/2002;Completely un-redeeming in any way. Garbage.;1;"I remember distinctly the first time I saw ""The Godfather"". I was a child and it was being shown on broadcast television. Granted, neither of theses are optimal conditions for rendering an informed opinion but I remember being struck with how unremarkable- in fact how boring I found the film. I was particularly surprised by this, as there had been a great fanfare over the broadcast. I chalked this up to my own immaturity and thought no more of it.

The second time I saw the film was in college. My friend had a brother who was quite a film enthusiast and he, like many others, counted ""The Godfather"" as the finest film. One evening my friend and I watched the film. The viewing once again left me unimpressed. I feigned an enthusiasm for the film that I did not feel, as it seemed the popular, and even the intellectual expectation. Once again I associated my dislike for the movie with a failing in myself. I apparently did not appreciate a ""good movie"" when I saw one.

Since that time I have seen many films, from many directors, from many countries, in many languages, and with varying budgets from independent offerings to mainstream Hollywood fare. I certainly do not consider myself to be an expert but feel myself to be an informed member of an audience. Armed with my experience I recently viewed ""The Godfather"" again to expunge my previous failures and to gleefully join the ranks of Godfather sycophants. Well, I think you know the outcome. As they say in baseball, three strikes and you're out.

I find the film to be completely un-redeeming in every way. I do not have space to address the film systematically or technically so I will speak to my central grievance- the story is hollow. There is no moral center.

I do not demand that a movie have morality. I do not demand that a film even have a point. I can take a film at its face value for what it is. A slapstick comedy is foolish and an action flick is mindless, I do not ask that they be a different movie- only that they meet the narrow definition to which they aspire. The problem is that ""The Godfather"" aspires to be a great drama and that aspiration comes with high expectations.

Gratuitous violence is expected in big-budget action flicks, amorality can be understood in the quiet desperation of an independent film's philosophy, and self-indulgence is to be expected in the over-the-top musical extravaganza. However, violence, amorality, and self-indulgence in a film that portrays itself as mainstream drama or even tragedy are reprehensible. This is not art- it is base voyeurism at its worst. We are standing in the bailey at New Castle or at the Coliseum watching with leering stares at the baseness and depravity of man. This film is not a criticism of man's foul nature, as in the above referenced independent film; it is a celebration of it. Anyone who claims otherwise deludes himself.

Thus conceived I can appreciate `The Godfather' as a film oddity, a curious victory of the popularity of evil men. But to say that it is a great film is scandalous, and to say that it is the greatest film is blasphemous. To say that the highest achievement of man in film is a celebration of cruelty, deception, and greed is a statement that many should reconsider.

I find it interesting that many of those who claim ""The Godfather"" as their favorite film, or the best film of all time can count their viewings of the film on one hand. In fact, I myself (who thinks unfavorably of the film) have given the film more attention then many of the ""fans"" I know. A friend of mine who professes to like the film recently returned the box-set DVD ""Godfather"" collection that he received for Christmas. As he put it, he loved the film but when was he ever going to watch it? That is faint praise indeed for the ""greatest film of all time"".

I am sure there are those who genuinely enjoy the film, but you could say that about any movie. I would advise those who fawn over this film so to ask themselves if their enthusiasm comes from within or from a modern mythology. ""The Godfather"" is a paper tiger.";118;339;False tt0068646;jojofla;05/08/2002;Massively overrated.;1;"I continually fail to understand why The Godfather is hailed as ""The Greatest Movie of All Time"". I've seen it twice--a second time just to make sure--and I have to tell you that I sat there in a stupor, bored out of my mind. And I'm not a teenager raised on MTV; I'm in my 30s and am absolutely devoted to movies--I've seen as many classics (American & foreign) that I can get my hands on. But, for me, The Godfather ranks alongside Singin' in the Rain as the most overrated films of all time.

Singin' in the Rain, at least, I get (it's just my intense dislike for Donald O'Connor that makes me dislike this film). But The Godfather? It's just a bland epic about a bunch of moronic gangsters, with Marlon Brando giving a campy performance, and riddled with repulsive violence. Give me a break. The fact that this movie is so ""beloved"" has had the direct result that nowadays we got absurdly worse and worse films every year, created by clueless filmmakers.";95;272;False tt0068646;mikelogan;01/04/2002;A bore fest from beginning to end;1;I saw this movie when it first came out in the movie theaters. It was the first movie I seriously considered walking out of. Up to that point in my life I had never fidgeted so much in a movie. I blame the director - his pacing was so ponderous that the story seemed to go on and on and I could hardly wait for it to be over. The whole Godfather series is vastly overrated.;60;165;False tt0068646;mbuchwal;15/02/2006;Bait and Switch is the Name of this Game;1;"Does ""Godfather"" romanticize crime and criminals? Yes, it does. Take, for instance, the Godfather's name ""Corleone"" which translates as ""Lionhearted,"" suggesting that the heroes are to be compared to Richard the Lionhearted, legendary chivalrous hero of the Crusades and friend to Robin Hood. There can be no doubt that author Mario Puzo and director Francis Ford Coppola have made romantic idols of the Corleones, as the film gilds them with mystery, honor and gallantry. But of what Holy Crusade are the Corleones the leaders? Seemingly a war for survival against vicious enemies who would destroy their gang. But why should we care what happens to a bunch of evil criminals?

""Godfather"" is just as much interesting for what it fails to show the audience as what it does show. The film makers wrongly assume that the audience is sophisticated enough to infer the kind of lurid but educational scene that made such a great success of earlier gangster films, nitty gritty illustrations of the inside workings of organized crime: loan sharking, extortion and vice. ""Godfather"" for the most part ignores this subject matter, the everyday business of crime, in favor of what should be only the end part of its story: a war between gangs over control of the rackets. The drama is essentially without motivation. The movie is simply not interested in showing us much of the dirty business that is the reason for the war. That is because the heroes would seem much less chivalrous if their criminal enterprises were shown in any depth or with any real understanding. For most of its length, the movie plays as a revenge tragedy in which the gallant protagonists could be members of any great family (whether criminal or not) protecting their cherished honor.

Why did the film makers deliberately sanitize the criminal aspect of the Corleone family? Are they apologists for crime? I think they are. One confidence game employed by the film makers, which is also familiar among the annals of organized crime leaders, is a variation on the trick called ""bait and switch."" We expect a portrait of a ruthless and immoral criminal, instead we are made to believe in the essential moral rightness of Don Corleone when he condemns as a contemptible enemy the kind of criminal who trades in narcotics. In other words, we are lured into the theater with the promise of a true to life depiction of the actions of a bad guy, and then the film makers slyly pull a fast one and show us a good guy instead! (We are persuaded to ignore the fact that the Godfather is an extortionist and pimp – even worse we are asked to believe that extortion and pimping are not so bad, especially if practiced by an honorable guy like Don Corleone, who, whatever his failings, is much too decent to trade in narcotics.)

This jiggery pokery was so effective that around the time the movie and its sequel came out an ivy league educated friend of mine on his way to a brilliant career on Wall Street bitterly denounced a critic of ""Godfather"" for making the claim that Don Corleone was not entitled to be regarded as a great hero like President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, General Douglas MacArthur or Doctor Albert Schweitzer, who had received similarly adulatory treatment in film. My friend, having seen both Godfathers, was convinced that a Mafia leader might be just as honorable as the heroic portrait the movies presented.

So, I feel some need on this occasion to remind the public of what the Mafia does, even when they allegedly refuse to get involved in narcotics sales. The Mafia is mainly in the business of Vice. It feeds off the weaknesses of a mass of little people who are corruptible, who are vulnerable to the appeal of easy sex, cheap thrills, quick money and quick fixes of their problems. These little people pay for their vices all their lives, much more than they can afford to pay, and end up ruined for the greater glory of the Mafia. Most racket crime is not glorious; it is petty and mean and easily committed by anyone who has less courage or daring than the average person. But it's easy to understand why the film makers left this out of the movie. It would be kind of absurd to call a scuzzy dirtbag by the name ""Lionheart.""";110;320;False tt0068646;MovieAlien;16/02/2002;MAJOR difference in opinion...;1;"I finally got a chance to see this movie. I tried to watch it with an open mind, without letting the hype dilute an even slight bit of impartiality - and I just can't say it's a very good movie. Perchance if soap opera was its own category, this may stand true to its title as ""#1"" on the IMDb.

It perplexes me how people can call this landmark moviemaking when they probably have not seen works from other directors - Kurosawa, Truffaut, Lang... - all of whom had a much better eye than Coppolla. Most of these greats are now forgotten, with the exceptions of occasional screenings at film schools where one discovers that the Contemporary filmmaking style overseas (1950s and 1960s) was duplicated by American directors in the 1970s.

So what was wrong with this movie? Nonexistent or loose plot: No suspense, climax, excitement, or outcome. I thought the acting/characters were forgettable. Any other actor could have pulled off what Brando did and the fact they went through all that trouble to make him 10 or 20 year older just proves they shot for name recognition.

There were only a few things that I remember in this 3 hours of triviality: the ""offer you can't refuse"" line, Don Vito collapsing in a garden while a child obliviously plays, Caan's Santino character getting holed up, and bullets consistently going into foreheads. Maybe the artful yet repellent depiction of gratuitous violence is what made this such a masterpiece. But style without substance does not a good movie make.

For those who say ""oh, you just didn't get it, see it again"", please get your mind out of the gutter - stop basing your opinions on what you're conditioned to like.

The Emperor's New Clothes, big time. End of review.";78;221;True tt0068646;Phoenix-107;09/06/2001;Good, Maybe Great, Not The Best Movie Ever;7;Like I said: Definitely not the best movie ever. While the movie had its good points, I can't see why it's number 1 on IMDB. I don't even think it was better than Goodfellas, or even better than the other two movies I rented (American History X, Casablanca). Oh well, still good entertainment, looking forward to Godfather Part II.;11;23;False tt0068646;DJAkin;05/05/2006;The Godfather is a good movie;10;I loved this movie. I've seen it many times. I also bought the PS2 game which made me interested in it once again. I love all the characters especially Marlon Brando. He had a lot of good advice in this movie for those who refused his offers. Great one liners in this movie also. James Caan was a hot head and great at playing Sonny. Michael was great. What can you say about any aspect of this movie that is not great and flawless? The sets, language etc. are amazing. I watched this and Godfather 2 on the same week. I can't wait to see the new commentary by the director. I am so looking forward to it. How can you see a better movie? The horse head in the bed was amazing also.;7;13;False tt0068646;SeminolePhenom;25/07/2005;The Greatest, no questions asked;10;"Before giving a summary of this classic, let me just say that this is ""The Masterpiece of all Masterpieces"" when it comes to movies. When I review movies, I consider the godfather as the greatest of all time and rate the movies according. There is no greater movie than this one.

Don Vito Corleone(Marlon Brando, is The Godfather of the ""Corleone Family Mafia"". Michael Corleone(Al Pacino) returns from war with no intention of joining the family business. Bad blood between the heads of the five families cause a shooting on Don Vito, which keeps Michael away from Kay Adams(Diane Keaton), his girlfriend, and closer to his family with Sonny (James Caan), Fredo(John Cazale), Connie(Taila Shire), and family lawyer Tom Hagen(Robert Duvall). Sonny takes over the family business through Don Vito's bad health and takes very aggressive action. A war is created between the heads of the family, leading to assassinations, betrayal, revenge, and suffering on all parts. To end this chaos, Michael Corleone takes over the family business with his father as his adviser.

The movie is absolutely flawless. The lighting is incredible. It's so dark at some points that Brando's eyes are shadowed. The acting is insanely great. Brando does a better acting job in The Godfather, than he does in On the Waterfront. Pacino's acting is superb. He stars in his first major role, leading to many great performances following. James Caan, Robert Duvall, and Diane Keaton give great performances as well. The movie received 4 Oscar nominations for acting alone(Brando in leading role/ Pacino, Caan, and Duvall in supporting role). The movie was nominated for 11 academy awards and won 3 of them (Best Picture, Best Screenplay, and Best Actor-Marlon Brando)in 1972.

Overall, the movie is flawless in every aspect that a critic looks for. It is highly entertaining, shocking, and tear jerking of epic proportions.

I highly recommend this movie.";7;13;False tt0068646;callanvass;01/01/2005;It is indeed a true classic and one of the best films out there however best movie of all time i would have to say NO! *Spoilers*;10;It is indeed a true classic and one of the best movies out there, however best movie of all time i would have to say no. It does indeed deserve it's reputation as one of the best movies of all time, however based on the fact it was number 1 on the IMDb top 250 i was a tad disappointed. I was fascinated by it's very engrossing story telling, the absolutely stunning performances and the incredible direction from Francis Ford Coppola . It's a pretty powerful movie with a lot of disturbing moments. It starts of a little slow but once it gets going it never fails to grip you. The direction is Incredible. Apart from the slow beginning the direction is flawless, with an EXCELLENT pace,awesome camera work and the way the camera moved with the characters it was great!, plus he created a great atmosphere!. There is LOTS of bloody violence. We get LOTS of EXTREMELY bloody gunshot wounds, knife in the hand, bloody gunshot wound to the head,severed horse head in someone's bed (VERY bloody), a harsh beating and , an very gory gunshot wound to the eye. The Acting is some of the best i have ever seen. Marlon Brando without a doubt deserved his Oscar for his groundbreaking performance, however having said all that Al Pacino deserved the Oscar just as much, it also was hard to understand what Brando was saying at times!. Al Pacino's performance was just as good and was also deserving of The Oscar, he and Brando had some cool scenes together and watching Pacino was just plain fun to watch!. James Caan was EXCELLENT here in his scenes here and wish he had more screen time , he is a terrific actor!. Robert Duvall is very good here with what he had to do i liked him lots. Diane Keaton is excellent here as Pacino's wife and had awesome chemistry with Pacino. Talia Shire was very good here but went a little crazy at times and she sure broke a lot of dishes! (LOL, and the rest of the cast did a tremendous job as well. Overall this indeed a true classic and one of the best movies out there however i was expecting a little too much and was a tad disappointed however i HIGHLY suggest you buy or rent this now just don't go in expecting it to be the best of all time (although a lot of viewers will probably think it is). ***** out of 5;7;13;True tt0068646;mjw2305;19/02/2005;It's Not Worthy of number 1;6;I have just seen it, for the first time. £20 for the first 2 Godfather films and Fight Club on DVD, i figured that's got to be worth it for such acclaimed movies.

Strong performances from Pacino, Caan and Duvall do lend realism to the plot, but i have to say i found Brando's mumbled dialogue really annoying (Authentic? - Maybe? Acclaimed?) but still annoying, and i was disappointed to find he still had a part to play in the film, even after the film maker's had him shot.

The movie does have some fine moments (the horses head, Pacino's restaurant scene, Sonny's death) all good scenes, but when interlaced with tediously drawn out rubbish (The opening 20mins YAWN, Pacino's entire time spent in hiding, YAWN) I couldn't help but wish for the film to end.

At nearly 3 hours long, the movie could have easily been trimmed by a hour and not lost anything, in summary this film has brilliance mixed with tedium and simply doesn't deserve its place in the number 1 spot.

I hope part 2 is better, because part 1 has not inspired me to watch it, maybe when i have nothing else to do i will. Thank god Fight Club's a winner.

6/10 Watch Goodfellas instead (It makes this film look timid);18;42;True tt0068646;CinefanR;30/04/2012;Massively overrated;1;"I'm not a fan of this type of movies, but since I like Al Pacino and I've heard so much about this so-called ""legendary"" Godfather, I decided to give it a try. I must say this is the most inexplicably overrated piece of trash I've ever seen. The characters are all ridiculous, unsympathetic and under developed, the story drags and lacks any real conflict and dynamics

But the most disgusting aspect is the movie's intent to glorify a bunch of low-life criminals and turn them into larger-than-life figures, into some kind of royalty. This whole ""family"" tradition is just ludicrous. We're supposed to ""care"" about these characters, to think that they are ""cool"". The major problem here is that there's no real conflict. There's no redeeming value whatsoever, they're all despicable and one-dimensional, so why the hell would I care.

The violence (which is particularly sickening) is another issue, but I guess audiences have come to appreciate it, and it's now a ""hallmark"" of the genre. Imagine, the Godfather's pregnant daughter gets beaten with a belt. But guess what: she's not likable either! She's hysterical, obnoxious and, even worse, she keeps defending her abusive husband. In another scene, James Caan beats the hell out of someone in front of children. Marvelous! That's just great, not to mention cool and ""culturally relevant"".

Marlon Brando speaking with a husky voice and cotton in his mouth is incredibly ridiculous. Al Pacino as Michael Corleone suddenly turns, from a principled man who doesn't want to have anything to do with murder, into a ruthless criminal. What? This character has no depth, no consistency whatsoever. His relationships with women are so poorly portrayed, they add nothing to his development. It's Pacino's worst, I can't imagine why anyone would think this is a great performance. If you want to see a good gangster movie, go watch ""Donnie Brasco"" instead.";55;152;True tt0068646;Leon_Chang_2000;29/07/2004;There's no way this could be #1.;2;After watching a lot of the movies on the IMDb top 250 list, I have to somewhat agree with where the movie is placed. I watched the #2 movie, Shawshank Redemption, at least five times and it was just awesome. Finally, I got The Godfather and expected a lot from it, seeing that it would have to be better than Shawshank Redemption. However, I could barely sit through half of The Godfather. Absolutely NOTHING happens. Yeah, so some guy gets shot. Then some people get angry. Wow.

Anyway, I would have to grudgingly say that the acting is pretty good, but good acting doesn't make a movie worth seeing. As an old movie, I guess that the overall quality can't be too great. But, even with all that aside, this movie still lacks a good plot, and, maybe even more importantly, emotion. The Shawshank Redemption really made me sympathize with the characters, while this movie just made me go to sleep more quickly (it was that boring).

I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone.;28;71;False tt0068646;afbc-34842;27/09/2015;Vastly overrated movie.....;1;"Finally took the time to give myself a real treat and watch this film again after about 20 years as I remembered it as a supremely good film. I have watched many movies from all over the world during the years and have developed a keen eye for good film making, so wanted to review one of the ""greats"".

After having watched it again, I have no choice but to face the fact that this film is indeed very poor film making and I have to admit that I feel embarrassed that I once actually considered this a good film!

The biggest gripe I have with this film is the unbelievably poor and unconvincing acting, devoid of any emotional depth whatsoever. Everybody is sterile and no-one is worth caring even the least bit about.

Secondly, almost every opportunity for character dynamics and development is missed. The only character that is developed is Michael Corleone's and even that character is changing from one extreme to the other, in an instant, with no transition whatsoever. The result is characters as mere moronic caricatures to the point of absurdity. A staggering waste of talent.

To top it off, the storyline is thin and highly predictable, simply an unforgivable waste of potential.

The organized crime genre of films have always fascinated me and continue to do so. With so many truly great films in this genre, don't waste your time on this one. The Godfather is one of the very worst.";40;107;False tt0068646;maliceinwonderland88;24/08/2006;What is so great about it?;1;"This movie is ridiculously overrated. It is merely a overly dramatized celluloid interpretation of life involved with the Italian Mafia. Yes, organized crime is a problem, but this movie is NOT all that amazing. There are entirely too many references to it in other movies, too many spoofs and too many quotes. It's a bad movie. Let it go. There is no real plot line and the bad accents were enough to give me a headache. This movie is mind numbingly boring. It feels as though I lose brain cells every time I am forced to watch this painfully shallow film. Most films following along a similar premise are horribly dull. Why does everyone rave about movies like this and Scarface? They are awful, overly exaggerated and generally badly constructed cinematic failures. A decent script and plot line were substituted for gratuitous blood, gore and explosions. A good movie starts with a good story and a good script, this lacks both. Every aspect of this movie was horribly boring. It does NOT deserve to be named ""The Best Movie of All Time.""";83;242;False tt0068646;andalynne;29/01/2002;This is the #1 Movie?;5;I was finally forced to watch this 'masterpiece'. What, exactly, is the redeeming feature of this movie that all these film 'elites' love so much.

It was a long, boring, tedious experience I would never want to repeat. Watching old men convince young men to kill other old men was pointless. Was there an actual point to the story? Or was it crafted just to sell the next installment.

This movie has no business being so well-liked and shows what is wrong with both American cimema and the IMDB ranking system.;14;32;False tt0068646;braco;02/08/1998;an unforgetable film;10;This movie alongside Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Godfather:part II, The Third Man and Lawrence Of Arabia is my absolutely favorite film. Some scenes you just can't forget. Vito's character is one of the best played roles in movies history (done by Marlon Brando). This story about Corleone family (together with part 2 and 3) is the greatest movie epic ever made.;6;11;True tt0068646;bamatommy;21/05/2003;Most overrated film of all-time;1;"This movie continues to be praised, but when I rented it I only made it through 45 minutes before I stopped the video. There aren't many movies that are so bad I don't watch the whole thing, but ""The Godfather"" is that bad. I don't care how much other people may like it. I still say it sucks,sucks,sucks,sucks,sucks,sucks,sucks...";69;202;False tt0068646;bmattingly;20/01/2002;Not That Great, What're People Smoking?;4;I saw this movie twice. It's an alright movie but really has no

exceptional value. Certainly not as much as everyone seems to

think. I believe people heap praise upon it because other people

TELL them this is the best movie ever. I say to those people grow

a backbone and watch some better movies.;17;41;False tt0068646;joseayarza;22/06/2002;"List of things which are more entertaining than watching ""The Godfather""";3;"1.- Pouring alcohol into an injury. 2.- Counting the number of books available in a big library. 3.- Reading all those books. 4.- Watching the Weather Channel for 5 hours. 5.- Looking for a needle in a haystack. 6.- Counting the hays in the haystack. 7.- Sharpening 10,000 pencils in a row. 8.- Seeing a tortoise walk a distance of about let´s say, a million miles.

You get the idea, don´t you? This movie was so sloooooooooow, and the story just draaaaaaaaaaaags on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. It was a torture, and at the end, I wondered: WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS MESS OF A MOVIE? It seemed like it was also going to tell us the story of Michael's sons, grandsons, great grandsons, great great grandsons, and well.... it just seemed endless. ENDLESS. I wondered why IMDb users praise it so much if every single person that I know despises this movie. It's beyond dull. At the end, somehow Michael got rid of ALL of his enemies, in 2 minutes? Just that simple? He should have made that before, and he would have kept me from suffering this dreck. After watching this, I never want to watch one of those called ""classics"" (like Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Schindler´s list, Gone with the Wind, etc.) because it seems to ba a rule that a movie can´t be artistic and entertaining. Few movies combine those things. Those are the true classics. One example? Pulp Fiction. That movie is perfect in every possible way.

I'll rate this movie a 3. I don't give it a one just because Marlon Brando was great. By the way, Al Pacino sucked in this movie. He couldn't have been more inexpressive.";19;47;False tt0068646;danishdonjuan;12/03/2008;The hype of the movie is as interesting as the movie itself.;4;"Many men has called this the greatest movie ever made. I disagree, though I liked it very much. The hype of this movie is as interesting as the movie itself as it says a lot about the world we live in and the men who seek power.

I have seen and read intimidation used by people, trying to personally attack any who called this movie terrible or boring calling them stupid, while many other just jumped on the wagon calling it the greatest movie ever made to avoid such attack. A similar pattern to how physically strong, but emotionally weak men like Capone and Hitler came to power.

The movie is significant to both world and film history. I however only give the movie a 5 as by todays standard its less artistic, entertaining and original. I also did not feel there was much new or original to learn from this movie and I did not get that ""wow"" feeling. I would not have much interest to see it again.

This is one of my favorite gangster movies though and its certainly not terrible or boring. However it lacks in much of what I think a great movie should be such as: Moral points, emotion, surprise, humor, editing, cinematography, original thought, special effects, music score or even acting.(the tough guy role is not as challenging as it is to play mentally ill person)

It does also not appeal to a very broad audience (not a movie many women and children like). It was great for its time, but compared to some of todays movies is very limited in the areas of greatness.

If you like movies like old gangster movies or even tough guy movies like ""the departed"" and ""scarface"" or want to know what the hype is about. I recommend this movie it is a great movie for this genre. But it does not reach the emotional or theatrical heights of movies like ""Forrest Gump"", ""the Lord of the Rings"", ""Dances with Wolves"" or even my favorite gangster movie ""Goodfellas"".";20;50;False tt0068646;vegeta3986;07/07/2006;The Godawfulfather;1;"This movie has to be THE MOST OVERRATED MOVIE OF ALL TIME. i don't understand why everyone raves about this movie. it's boring, the acting is shallow and weak, the whole premise is annoying, and i had to fight off sleep 3 times to finish this ""movie"". This movie has two layers. Boring, barely audible speech, and explosions. I didn't think it to be possible, but even the EXPLOSIONS were boring. Where does the fascination for this movie come from? Marlon Brando may have been a good early actor, but this ""i'll make him an offer he can't refuse"" old man voice is so irritating i almost threw the DVD out the window, however, the movie ended up numbing all my extremities so that it was impossible to move as i had no choice but to sit on in horror. I'm sorry i ever wasted my time on this piece of garbage. With a weak premise, ludicrous character designs, and a plot that could cure insomnia, Godfather sleeps with the fishes, with a 1 out of 10.";53;154;False tt0068646;sullymazda;08/01/2015;Let's Get Down To The Facts;3;"OK, I see that the movie has many naysayers. I was one of them when I saw the film in 1972, and I was only fifteen at the time. I could go on and on about the film's myriad failures. It is contrived, self-important, at times even poorly staged. Which brings me to my point. A lot of people seem to forget that Coppola did not win Best Director-- Bob Fosse (for ""Cabaret') did, and deservedly so. He did a much better job. That is one of the eight Oscars that ""Cabaret"" won.The other seven just happen to be Art Direction, Cinematography, Sound, Editing,Original Score, Best Supporting Actor, and Best Actress. So when the time came to open the envelope and announce Best Picture, the Award goes instead to a film that, by that point, had won only two statues (for Actor and Adapted Screenplay). How does any movie win eight Academy Awards and fail to grab Best Picture? With that in mind, ""The Godfather"" is not merely arrogant film-making. Its history and legacy,both--just like its protagonists-- are just downright larcenous.";15;36;False tt0068646;Moviefan-24;14/02/1999;Number one movie? It's madness I tell you... madness.;1;I'm voting and commenting about this film just to bring it down from its pedestal and invite everyone to do the same. I have nothing against Italians, the Mafia or any of the principals, but best film ever? Never. It was an entertaining film, which displayed some rather ridiculous acting, in a gross piece of defamation perpetrated on the Italians. I have nothing again violence and gore... even sex, on screen when appropriate, but this is a ludicrous consensus your readership has reached and it must be corrected.;46;137;False tt0068646;chrisb69-2;17/06/2000;Not what I expected;1;"After hearing about this legendary film I decided it was about time I watched it....after about an hour I really wished I hadn't wasted the money renting it...after the movie finished I was bored. The film was nothing like I had expected and I don't know how it possibly made it as big as it has. It was quite well cast I love Diane Keaton but she's better in Woody Allen's comedy's than in this derivitive movie. You want a good gangster movie...watch Goodfella's...it actually has a good story, entertaining characters & violence and paints a much more realistic picture of the mob world of the era. I'm not even going to bother watching parts 2 or 3 of the godfather coz Marlon Brando ain't even in them so their ain't much point! I think I'll go watch Marlon Brando's greatest performance...Guy's N Doll's.";38;111;False tt0068646;dalton2;02/08/1998;The best film in movie history;10;What can I say about this film? In my opinion it's the best film ever made in movie history. Everything in it is perfect, the elements are combined in a brilliant way, and the result is a beautiful piece of art, a masterpiece. My rating is 10 of 10.;6;12;False tt0068646;jcucchisi-77-755989;22/10/2019;My favorite film of all time;10;For me The Godfather is the best film. Everything from the music to acting and script are all perfect. The film has tons of amazing iconic lines and scenes and of course the character of Vito Corleone is amazing and Marlon Brando does an amazing job of playing him. Everything about the film is perfect.;4;7;False tt0068646;colm-hearne365;01/11/2015;Marlon Brando at his best!;10;Of all the movies I love and admire, I just have to say The Godfather is my favourite movie ever. I could go on forever talking about how great it is. It's beautiful to watch from the opening monologue to the closing-door ending. I know it's kind of cliché to call The Godfather your favourite movie but I mean how could you not? It's pretty much perfect in every way: perfect acting, perfect directing, perfect writing, perfect pacing, perfect music, perfect cinematography etc. Not to mention it has one of the greatest actors of all time, Marlon Brando in one of the most iconic performances of all time and it helped restore his career. And it made actors like the great Al Pacino a superstar. In fact, The Godfather changed everything in terms of movie-making. Anyone who loves movies, should definitely see The Godfather. It's too bad Marlon Brando wasn't present at the Oscars in 1973 because it would've been amazing to see him give on speech on winning the award for Best Actor in a Leading Role for a second time and thanking everyone involved with The Godfather.

But even I'm surprised to call The Godfather my favourite movie ever because I'm not mad on gangster movies. Like I think Goodfellas is really overrated and I think Scarface with Al Pacino is nothing special. But I also think The Godfather: Part II is a masterpiece as well even though it's not as good as the original and it doesn't feel the same without Marlon Brando. Though I've never watched The Godfather: Part III but it's considered by many to be very disappointing so I choose to stay away from it.

But in conclusion, to put it rather bluntly, if you don't like The Godfather, it's hard to believe you like movies.;4;7;False tt0068646;andreiapepo-85369;23/04/2018;The most overrated movie of all-time..;4;I watched this movie three times in an attempt to see why such a poorly written, directed, and acted movie is so revered by fans and critics alike. Aside from the music (which is the only good thing about this movie really), I found everything about this movie to be mediocre at best. I found the plot to be thin and simplistic, the characters to be one-dimensional and underdeveloped, the cinematography to be pretentious and boring. And the movie itself to be unnecessarily long and lacking of suspense. Overall, it looks like a documentary, and a very bad one indeed. And the ending was a major simplistic plot convenience to the point of being stupid. The only logical explanation for this movie's acclaim is that this movie is a mafia propaganda movie to instill fear and respect towards them. And the mafia forced critics to praise this title by placing severed horse heads in their beds!;7;15;False tt0068646;tomimt;10/02/2006;Not the masterpiece people claim it to be.;7;"So, the best movie ever? No. Not in my opinion, but I can see where the sayers get it. the Godfather was rather ground breaking film for it's time, a rather bold film, but still it's not the cinematic masterpiece everyone keeps raving about.

Coppolas best film is ""Apocalypse, Now"". That is something that is extremely hard to top. When you compare the two the style of directing is so different, that they almost look like they were shot by two different directors.

Godfather's biggest issue is poorly made editing, unnecessarily lengthened out scenes and totally unnecessary scenes, but then again what can you expect of a film, which was something, or so I've heard, that even the director was frustrated about. Some scenes just linger on the screen, without any evidence, that the director really knew what he wanted, and, in the end, the producers decided to amp it all in the film just because the material was there.

The best thing about the film is acting. There's no way denying that. This is the film, which shows why people think Marlon Brando is one of the greatest actors of the history. This is the film that showed us the genius of Al Pacino.

It's been some time since I've seen part 2, but I remember liking it better, I've always thought it was a vast improvement from the first one.";8;18;False tt0068646;rebeljenn;30/11/2005;Has its moments, but not the best film;5;'The Godfather' is one of the most well-known films of all time, and its popularity has made it a legend. It is the ultimate Mafia film. The film crops up in everyday conversation: the memorable scene with the horse's severed head and the dead of the Mafia man in the tomato garden while he is chasing the little boy around. It's one of those films that some consider the best film ever made -- that is, by some people but not by me. While I thought that some of the scenes and story were done brilliantly, some of the film was difficult to follow. I've seen much better films that 'The Godfather', and despite some of the good scenes and the photography, I would only classify it as an average film. Good, and it probably could not have any better, but it just failed to really inspire me as a film.;11;27;False tt0068646;profpatsch;17/10/2009;I don't get it;4;"OK, I REALLY don't get it. I always thought: ""Oh well, the Godfather, masterpiece, everyone has to watch it at least once in their live, let's see it then (someday)"". Then today I finally decided myself to watch it and I was shocked about it.

To make it short, it was boring, WAY to long for the amount of real action (and I don't mean Micheal bay action, I mean something like a traceable storyline that doesn't introduce new names and character every time something really happens (and thats not often the case) so that in the end, you don't even know who's who and what is really happening. I don't like a film where you don't know who is doing the action you see, especially if some of the main characters are so similar that you can't distinguish them in some scenes. Also, the film is too long. Take the first set for example, the wedding (or was it a wedding?). If you count all the minutes you see some macaroni's dancing without sense or entertaining the viewer, I think it's around 5 to 10mins. If you look at that you know why the movie is around 3 hours long. Coming to the characters, I didn't have any emotional relationship to them after 3 hours of nearly non-stop conversation. I didn't really care when they died, first because in most cases, I didn't know who was killed in the scene most times and second, because I had no emotions for them. (Let's take that scene near the end, where all the people get killed, like 5 or 6 in three different locations. I didn't even recognize one of them, the whole scene didn't make sense for me. Why would they shoot a women with their child in the bed, especially if the viewer doesn't know who (the f**k) she is??? Not really a pro for a so-called ""masterpiece"") The only two pros I have are the acting and the music. I have to say I'm not a pro in commenting acting in films (watched Catwoman and didn't have a clue why Halle Berry became the golden raspberry for their acting after learning all that stuff with the walking like a cat, martial arts etc.). But I have to say what I've seen in this film is the most natural acting possible. None of the scenes looks contrived, the ""we are all family"" part came very good. Also the soundtrack is really worth recognizing.

To sum it up:

Acting: 10/10 Storyline: 4/10 (really disappointing) Action: 3/10 (even more disappointing) Lenght: 2/10 Soundtrack: 8/10

Overall: Around 4-5/10, I'll give it 4 because it's overrated.

PS: I watched ""The Rock"" the same day and found it much better than ""The Godfather"" (Better action, no lenghts, even better soundtrack, a very simple but at least traceable story)";9;21;False tt0068646;Bondo20;02/02/2002;To Many Unseen Plot Points;7;The Godfather series stands as the best in the mob dramas, but

that doesn't mean it is as spectacular as advertised. In general

mob dramas have been overrated from Godfather to the Sopranos

TV series. The main problem with The Godfather is that many plot

elements are not shown or even described. The following

example is a *spoiler* so if you don't wish to hear a fairly major

plot point don't read on. In the middle portion of the film Sonny

picks up the phone and then goes racing off in the car with others

scrambling to follow. He then is gunned down. Neither the topic

of the call nor the reason he was killed are told to the audience,

leaving them wondering why it happens aside from the usual

tension throughout the movie. These types of skimpy explanations make too many parts unbelievable that the plot is a

weakened form of a potentially great plot. Outside of that the

movie features fine acting and scenery for a decent but

disappointing experience.;10;24;True tt0068646;TexMetal4JC;01/08/2001;A victim to its hype.;6;When a movie is listed at No. 1 on the IMDb, and when this same movie is ranked No. 3 by the AFI, it has got to be a good film. And no one doubts that is what The Godfather is. Indeed, the acting is incredible, the directing awesome, the plot good and the climax shocking and beautiful.

Overall the movie is great, surely deserving a place in the Top 100, Top 20, maybe even the Top 10 (although not mine personally). But I truly do not see No. 1 or No. 3. I really can't place my finger on it, and perhaps another viewing on a better-quality tape will help, but it seems to me that The Godfather's hype has gotten to the point where enjoyment of the movie is starting to be flawed because of it.

9.5/10;10;24;False tt0068646;rudgeno1-1;27/02/2005;Overrated to the extent that perhaps makes me underrate it;1;This film is long and dull. As a result of the first it is dull for very long periods, which is why this film warrants no more than a miserly 1/10. The acting is competent but no more and I must confess I lost my focus towards the end due to the quite shocking lack of entertainment that can be attributed to a poor script, lacklustre direction and a plot which leaves a lot to be desired. People say Godfather is rare in that its sequel improves upon it, but that isn't hard. Al Pacino gained a big reputation from this one and I am left bemused as to why, and this unfortunate idea has meant Pacino, a mediocre actor at best has been able to infiltrate our cinema screens on far too many occasions with a distinct lack of passion or charisma in any role he displays.;39;122;False tt0068646;pop_suks;05/02/2006;Best Film Ever?;1;No.1 Movie of all time? I think that's what ruined it for me, I sat down expecting to watch the most spectacular cinematic experience of my life - but instead I ended up sitting rather bored for the good part of 3hours.

Everything about it just lacked in moving me, the vengeance was untouched, parts of the story seemed to obvious and other parts just left untouched. Thoroughly this was the most disappointing film I've ever seen, not the worst, just the most disappointing. I'm not trying to change anyone's thoughts on the film or make out the film is bad - just in case anyone gets the impression.

Thanks;37;116;False tt0068646;Roxy100;08/12/2014;Grossly and undeservingly overrated!;1;I watched the DVD recently because everyone seems to be hyped about this 'greatest movie on earth'!! Well, I wouldn't waste your valuable time any further writing a lot here after wasting my good 3 hours watching so called God Father. I nearly died of boredom. Simply, this is one of the most boring, longest movies I have ever watched. And it is horrible! Is it a great story? No. Is it a great movie? NOT AT ALL!! It is just a welded work of so many boring, long celluloid pieces together. There is no stature, depth, matter or even an exciting plot. After all, Brando is a good actor but not that great in this one for sure. And I am still at a loss to understand why people give this rut 9.2!! It would of course be totally right just without the 9!;28;85;False tt0068646;positive;05/10/2002;what is the big deal?;1;"I'm glad there are a few voices of dissent within all of the gushing

hype listed here. Do the fans of this movie rate ""Citizen Kane"" as

the 2nd best film of all time? Then maybe listen to the Beatles and

Elvis Presley as the greatest music of all time? Is America under

some kind of cultural mass-hypnosis?

Grossly overrated on all counts.";33;103;False tt0068646;accashak;26/11/2010;Massively over rated...;1;For years my boyfriend has been insisting that I watch this film - finally I did - big mistake...

My issues with this film are multiple ...

The pacing of the film is just terrible it's soooooooo slow and yet at the same time rushes through many things leaving many questions unanswered.

Character development is beyond terrible especially when it comes to Michael Who goes from nice guy who is nothing like his family to sociopath with no shades of grey in- between .

The relationships are also poor - one minute Michael is in love with Kay the next minute he's in Sicily and, in what feels like 5 minutes, married to Apollonia, then about 5 minutes later she's dead and he's home and married to Kay before Apollonia corpse is even cold...

Smaller issues include the fact that Michael seems to have a black eye for approximately a year - either that or he spent about a week abroad in which time he managed to get married. Also would have been nice to know what happened to Connie after getting beaten up by her husband - clearly she must have phoned Sonny I assume.... Did she lose the child ?... Or is that the child that Michael was godfather to - if so where did Michael's 4 year old son come from.... I guess I was asleep when that was explained or maybe I'd just lost the will to live.

All in all I found the film slow boring and rife withe cardboard cut out characters....

My tip avoid.... Especially if you watch with someone who loves the film....;31;96;True tt0068646;cleanimageuk-32139;16/12/2015;a bunch of Italians mumble to each other while dealing with daddy issues;1;forced to sit through this шit so many times by idiots extolling its virtues. i wish it was never made. I'm sick of mafia films and this dross started it all, moody, violent, miserable, and as intelligent as football and drinking. too many idiots today actually believe they are mafia because they sell some pot, or bought a dog that they beat until it turned nasty. grow up and bin this film. wooden acting throughout this title has set the bar for gangster films, and of course gangsters are not known for flair or intelligence when a beating or a bullet appears to cure all ills. the film is not a pleasure to watch, nor could i be less interested in the story of this mediocre family squabble. OK so this is my least favourite genre but it set that level. i urge anyone who hates this film to review it here and bring it down in the rankings to a reasonable 1-3 because the 10/10 that thousands of morons gave this is unreal.;27;82;False tt0068646;jdavisjdavis;29/09/2012;Overrated;2;If you aren't a thug lover... if you don't drool over less than smart bad guys somehow getting ahead... if you don't really like spectacle just for spectacle sake... then this movie may not be for you. To me, it just epitomizes the big dumb knock people over the head with a club, speak like you dropped out of school in fourth grade sort of guy movie. I'm a guy. I like guy movies, but I don't like this one.

Brando I like pretty well. Pacino too. Hell, probably half the cast I am very fond of. Why can't I like this movie? I don't know, but it has just never made me feel anything but annoyance and boredom. The problem is people over-hype it and make me want to try to like it. Every time I try to watch it, it's the same thing though.

So sorry, this movie just isn't great.;11;28;False tt0068646;joe_bear;13/11/2006;The Yawn Father...;1;"If there was a zero out of 10, that's what I'd give it.

I know so many people hear the movie title, ""The Godfather"" and automatically feel like praising that movie, that whole trilogy, to the high heavens. Well, I don't care if it was made well...apart from how it was made, the movie was bad and I'm still upset that my philosophy teacher made me suffer through the whole trilogy. Boring...slow...just plain snooze-ville.

I'm probably going to have an angry mob coming after me for speaking of the movie this way, but it's my opinion...and I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling this way.";29;90;False tt0068646;The Love Dragon;08/02/2001;Not as good as I remember.;2;"I saw this movie years ago, and I loved it. It was my favourite movie. This morning, I watched it again, and began to pick it apart.

This movie is first and foremost overlong. Unnecessary dialogue and scenes weaken the raw effect that could have been produced. The musical sequence after Pacino does his restauant thing is unlike any other in the movie, it doesn't fit in. The part of the movie detailing Pacino's stay in Italy is poorly done, and also doesn't fit in.

Some of the performances are dull, such as Keaton's, Lettieri, and Conti. Yes, I do believe Brando's part is badly written. I know I will be hated for saying this, but the character constantly changes, and his dialogue is never consistent. Brando does his best, and I don't think anyone could have done better, but it was still not a great part. The only outstanding performances were those of Caan and Pacino. Caan's acting is raw and Pacino is right on target.

Besides the main theme, music is weak and unfitting. As I have said, some of the scenes don't fit, and the music score doesn't help any. At one moment, the movie is a gritty masterpiece, and at another a cheesy, cliched piece of film, going back to the traditional style of film, ruining the film's effect. Had the movie cut all the silly dialogue, not to mention the sans-dialogue scenes that aren't even poetic, which a dialogueless scene should be, the effect might be better.

Also, to throw some more mud, the romance between Keaton and Pacino is awful, and no chemistry is arisen.

A disappointment, but not to be missed. I recommend a single viewing. One more thing, this film certainly doesn't deserve to be the best ever, it shouldn't even be in the top one hundred, but it doesn't deserve a ""1"" rating, I only give it that because I want the average rating to go down.";10;25;False tt0068646;spotdog19;29/09/2003;"More like the ""Godless"" Father....";8;"Quite possibly the MOST over rated film in history. Never has there been so much made of so little. It is an OK movie if you like discriminate killing and foul language and the glorification of ""gang"" lifestyle. This movie hardly belongs in the top 50 let alone be in the #1 spot.

Do you know what the saddest part of this movie is? That it was remade two more times with the Godfather III being quite possible the worst remake EVER. I'm not saying you won't like the movie. It is entertaining at times and certainly some very good lines have come from the movie. I just can't stand when movies can't stand up to their own hype.";23;69;False tt0068646;mackmason16;10/01/2020;Overrated;3;Maybe it's a generational thing, or I simply just don't get it, but The Godfather was bland and boring from start to finish. The story is hard to follow and lost me several times along the way. I felt emotionally disconnected from the movie and constantly found myself checking how long was left. Although the acting can be very good in some parts, the acting in other parts is downright terrible. It does not live up to the hype, for me.;6;13;False tt0068646;ameyakannur-03300;17/05/2020;Highly overrated;7;This movie is a great piece of work no doubt about that. The acting is natural, the direction is good and cinematography even better. When they say that every frame is a painting...they mean it. And the brilliantly exicuted deaths of whoever dies in this movie. But The problem is that it didn't match the hype for me. It was suggested to Me by my friend and he said that this was the best movie he had ever saw. As he had seen a lot of movies I decided to watch this movie. This movie is boring in some parts and not completely interesting throughout. I finished this movie in 5 sittings. The scenes are unnecessarily dragged for no reason at all. And I tried hard to really root for the characters which didn't happen in my case. The bgm is great.....but to use the same bgm again and again got me irritated.

Overall great movie but highly overrated and boring;3;5;False tt0068646;vtondom;02/01/2018;Perfection;10;Pure perfection, this is one of the greatest movies of all time;3;5;False tt0068646;petarmatic;06/02/2015;I remember when I saw this film for the first time...;8;"This was a classic for me when I saw it for the first time, later I made all of my family watch it, we became true la Familia ;) not really a crime syndicate, but rather we loved what we saw in this film. I think this one is the best of the three parts and it is a timeless classic.

I think Marlon Brando really deserves the Oscar for his role in this film, just as the film deserves other Oscars that it won.

It is hard to add more laudeamus about this film that has already been written, I will let you read other reviews which I read which makes it so interesting to read. I will leave you with a question. How much of this could happen in the real life? I will leave you to wonder.";3;5;False tt0068646;Mitiori;24/11/2004;Thankfully, I saw the Sopranos first;1;I also saw Godthumb first. Both are eminently more watchable and enjoyable. I actually do understand the characters and feel for them in both of those movies. But The Godfather...I just don't get why so many people say this is a great movie. Perhaps it's to be cool and one of the crowd? I was bored.

Yes, there are some powerful scenes. Yes the brutality was startling back then and it still works today and fits the story, as opposed to the gratuitous and badly done violence in many movies. Yes, it was also interesting to see some amazing actors at their start.

The story is even interesting so that I might be moved to read the book. However, I found the pacing too slow and the dialogue and interpersonal relationships trite and shallow.

I'm glad I finally saw this and found out it doesn't really glorify the mafia because I was not moved by anyone or empathetic with their choices. I'm glad I finally saw it so I could say I did.

But I won't be watching it again. I hear #2 is the best...it has to be.;27;85;False tt0068646;grossincoming3;17/11/2014;Awful film;1;The story is disjointed, the acting is terrible (especially Corleone who sounds like he's got a stick up his ass), the film is too long, the wedding scene is almost perpetual, which makes me ask, how did this get a 9.2? I'm shocked to be honest, what an awful, awful movie this is and I don't say that a lot about movies since I tend to appreciate what they are and what they are trying to convey, but this? This is an embarrassment and has to go down as the most overrated movie of all time in my book. There's no good acting performances in the movie, no memorable lines, no excitement, nothing. I'm genuinely disgusted that this movie has such high accolades because to me, it's crap. Absolute crap.

Brando's portrayal of Corleone has got to go down as one of the worst acting performances I've ever seen as well. The accent he uses is difficult to understand, the scene where he's shot in that assassination attempt is laughable as he over dramatizes the whole thing and his general acting performance and portrayal of Corleone, who is supposed to be a feared crime lord, is contrived and doesn't look believable. I'm honestly shocked that someone who is rated as one of the best actors who ever lived can perform this badly. This is the first film I've seen Brando in so I think it's unfair to judge his ability as an actor based on this poor performance, but my expectations will definitely be lowered when I watch another movie and see him as part of the cast.;29;93;False tt0068646;isaac-goldberg;20/04/2012;Lost For Words...;1;I honestly don't know what to say ... This has got to be the worst movie i've ever had the misfortune to watch and yet it's getting such good reviews. Why anyone would give it a rating above 5 is a mystery to me. Is almost everyone on IMDb just wannabe critics or is there actually something that i just missed while watching this? I found it a challenge just to get through the movie never mind enjoy it! My advice to anyone thinking of watching this - don't, it will only disappoint you. There is no real plot or storyline and the movie is very disengaging. Characters and events are boring to follow and personally I feel that there are plenty more movies more deserving of the credit this movie is given.;31;102;False tt0068646;orient_86;18/06/2005;Stupid!;1;The movie was based on a very bad book with a horrible language and style. It's no secret that the movie is better than the book, but it doesn't make it good.

The story that turns violent ruthless criminals into men of honor and the horrible world of crime into something beautiful and almost royal.

It's unnecessarily violent and why did Brando put paper towel in his mouth? I mean I like him as an actor, but this character is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't understand how anyone could give an Oscar for that film! It's just stupid!;35;119;False tt0068646;leeeroy;06/04/2004;Not very impressed-awful;1;Sorry, but i can't believe that this is the most popular film, it dragged on for so long i didn't even see the ending. Don't get me wrong, i love gangster films but this was so unengaging and that by the time Al Pacino shot the 'Bad' copper i had to turn off.

The storyline just seemed to be so pointless that i didn't care about whatever happened to the characters. How stupid is putting the horses head in the moviemaker's bed, he knew they were dodgey gangsters so why did change his mind?

I can't think of any reasons why this was a good film, if you do then you better tell me!!;30;101;False tt0068646;erikalizbeth-66965;20/07/2019;Not that great;7;This movie isnt that good but it's definitely not bad. Everyone talks about this movie like it's some masterpiece but quite frankly it's boring in some scenes, got to so bored the first time watching that I stopped watching a few times that day.;7;17;False tt0068646;Stibbert;26/10/2005;A true masterpiece;10;"The Godfather is a true classic. What differs this movie from others is the realism and that it's very believable. I thought 2 1/2 hour would be a long time, but time really flies when you're having fun! The movie follows the Carleone family, a good old Italian-American mafia family. The year is 1946 and the drug-market is just opening. When the Carleone refuses to take any part in this business some of the ones counting on this get's mad.

The movie is based on the book by Mario Puzo. It's a well written movie. A smart thing to let Mario Puzo do the screenplay as he knows all the characters and the story inside and out. The story is not a simple one and there are quite a few characters. That might make the story confusing, but if you just pay attention you'll do fine. The characters and the combination of characters are great. We have a kind of anti-hero (Michael), the boss (Don Vito), the trigger happy (Sonny), the bystander (Hagen) and more. That gives plenty of opportunities for conflicts between them. The characters are very believable and you get to know them, what kind of persons they are. The story and action is also very good. You get caught up and dragged into another world. The dialog, witch is important to this movie is well written. It's not that typical movie where everyone knows what to say at any time. There are silence and thought-breaks, that makes it all more casual and normal.

The actors are very good. The have settled for nothing less than quality actors in all roles. They use Italian-Americans and that makes it all more believable. Marlon Brando and does a good job and will forever be remembered as Don Carleone. Al Pachino's performance is nothing less than great. The rest of the cast are also very good an delivers a very good performance.

The cinematography is classic. There are nothing really special about it, but it's all over good. The composition is good and the lightning is nice. They've captured the mood very well. It's not happy, it's not dark, it's something in between. There are no shots that stands out in a bad way, so you don't really pay attention to it. You just focus on the story.

The sets, decoration and costumes are incredible. It's very realistic. It's 40's all the way, yet you don't really think about it. You never stop to think that ""this is the 40's"". It all just comes natural. It really helps you get caught up in the movie. Not once do you think ""why don't he just pick up a cell phone?"", because it all seem so realistic and well done.

Nino Rota has made a forever memorable score. It's classic and easy to recognize. It makes a nice, kind of gloomy mood, and fits the rest of the movie perfect. I also like the lack of music. In the action scenes there are no music. This makes it more tense, personal and human.

There are some special effects in this movies. Some blood, fights, shots and explosions, but it not that much. What there is is rather good. Some it has a little theatrical look to it and therefor I'm glad they didn't make a big deal out of it. The fact that they don't literally overkill and focus on this makes the story more serious and much more believable. This movie is no action movie, but 100% drama at it's finest.

The Godfater is a classic, must-see movie for everyone. It has a special place in movie history. It almost a legend. If you like movies this is not a movie to miss. It's a little long, but don't let that scare you. My tip is to watch this movie when you're up to it. If you watch at the wrong time it'll destroy you impression of it, but when you get the chance, watch it!";4;8;False tt0068646;BigWhiskers;18/12/2006;OMFG - This movie is so overrated it's disgusting;1;A 9.1 on IMDb? cat-scans please .I've never seen a worse depiction of Italians in my life. More like caricatures and stereotyping Italians from the turn of the century as smug talking idiots with Im gonna bust you upside yer f** head as the main dialog - every one is depicted as a ghetto talking grease monkey. Marlon Brando is a disgusting fat slob of a mafia boss - his offer you cant refuse scene is so laughably bad. All the rest of the cast looks like something out of a bad B movie with tough guy talk and slapping women around to be macho. James Caan is simply awful - he always trys hamming it up in every movie hes in as does Al Pacino. The movie itself is a disjointed mess with nothing but boring chatter and hearsay scenes in-between shooting people up or beating people up. Sure the mafia was bad and terrorized people but this movie just basically makes it look like a pay us for protection racket type thug movie. Overrrated,badly acted and boring. I give it a big fat zero.;27;91;False tt0068646;peacepit;13/02/2002;Maybe if the horse head got some lines it would be more interesting...;1;Long and boring and not worth writing two sentences. But since I have to, long and boring and not worth writing two sentences, long and boring and not worth writing two sentences, long and boring and not worth writing two sentences, I think you get my point!;28;97;False tt0068646;birdy3182;29/04/2002;What a load rubbish;1;why are people trying to make this film out to be something it is not??!

this has got to be one of the worst films i have ever seen. I mean come on, what a load of tripe.

I could get more enjoyment out of watching The Erotic Witch Project 2 (although I have to admit is pretty classy, the acting is superb, well done girls, you really do look and sound like you are cuming there!!)

Where is all the action the makes a mafia film class, like Goodfella's.

Marlon Brando's acting didn't deserve an oscar, it deserved a slap in the face. Sean Connery's performance as a spaniard in Highlander was more convincing.

Al Pacino's performance is total rubbish. The only good part he can do is a queer and that's in Dog Day afternoon.

As and for the director, Paul Verhoeven did a better job with Showgirls!!

What is wrong with a bit of rape in a film, this is the mafia we are watching on the screen, if they are going to portray what the mafia are really like, then at least show what they do behind closed door.

Very Poor!!!! 1 out of 10!!!;25;85;False tt0068646;tuhinuddinroni;25/07/2020;Greatest movie ever made.;10;This is not just movie, it is an emotion. The dialouges are very comfortable. the acting level is incomparable.;2;3;False tt0068646;mustafabilgen-98000;25/01/2020;MASTERPIECE !;10;Great scenario, perfect fiction, very good acting... A complete masterpiece...;2;3;False tt0068646;gambettatablette;15/08/2019;Stunnig, excellent, piece of art;10;This movie is one of thé best pièce of art in thé history of humanity;2;3;False tt0068646;ibrahimbengaoua;12/08/2019;Best movie ever;10;This movie is best movie ever This film taught me a lot of things like patience, caution, suspicion, restraint and quietly speaking;2;3;True tt0068646;alexandruachindinov;05/04/2019;review;10;Timeless! A masterpiece of cinematography, that encompasses almost all branches of human sentiment in real life situations.;2;3;False tt0068646;hamed-mousavi;09/10/2020;My Heart!!!;10;This movie is great in every way. Great plot, great characters, memorable quotes and scenes, and a great representation of the book it's based on.;1;1;False tt0068646;askeland89;08/10/2020;Cinemasins refuse to touch it and we all know why;10;"A famous YouTube channel by the name of ""Cinemasins"" who points out production errors in movies has yet to take a shot at this movie. My guess is that he simply can't find anything wrong with it. This movie is as close to flawless as we are ever gonna get. The story, the pacing and the acting is perfect. There is not a single wasted scene here! If you haven't seen this masterpiece yet I suggest you do it now!";1;1;False tt0068646;epicbrowniez;05/10/2020;I'm surprised I saw it finally;10;Watched it with family and I have yet to watch the sequels that I have been demanded to watch aha;1;1;False tt0068646;mettallas;05/10/2020;About The Godfather Movie!;10;Personally speaking, it is one of the best movies I've ever seen!!! I recommend this movie to everyone!!! I've seen this movie multiple times and I never get bored of it!!! I respect that some people might not like the movie. Each person has its own perspective and opinions.;1;1;False tt0068646;ccrisss;01/10/2020;Still the best after all these years. Flawless. Bravo.;10;"It's 2020, there was nothing else I felt like watching, so here I was watching Godfather for the 3rd time in my life. I thought I would just let it play in the background while i browsed my phone.

At the first scene, I watched & listened to the man sitting before Don Corleone, fully decided that I would just hear him out and then get back to browsing my phone.

But when Don Corleone appeared, all that changed. I was hypnotized. He commanded the screen. I could not look away. It was impossible. I had completely forgotten about my phone.

I sat there thinking to myself, how can this be? It's 2020 and this film is even better than I remembered it. I've watched this before already, I've watched countless of critically acclaimed films since then, why is this film having this kind of effect on me now?

For close to 3 hrs, I had forgotten where I was. All I knew was that I was part of their family. I was there with them in every meeting and planning. And I felt every worry, every betrayal, every attack, every death.

What a beautiful brilliant movie. Superb cast, script, music, direction & cinematography. Faultless. Timeless. Breathtaking. A true masterpiece. 10/10. The same rating every time I watch it.";1;1;False tt0068646;pamorosi;27/09/2020;10;10;My absolute favorite movie. I could watch it over and over again.;1;1;False tt0068646;dominikschinner;20/09/2020;Best movie of all time;10;There is nothing more to say The sences are longer than avarage, I think thats the reason many people are finding it boring but the acting is outstanding, even with not including the Oscar winning performance by Marlon Brando, that is widely considered as the best performance of the best actor of all time. I have seen this movie hundreds of times and every time I love it more;1;1;False tt0068646;auuwws;15/09/2020;The godfather;10;The Godfather deserves to be called the best movie in history, and from my personal point of view, nothing is wrong with it;1;1;False tt0068646;OguzhanDorul;10/09/2020;a great work for art;9;A great masterpiece made by Coppola 50 years ago, a great movie. The most important feature is that it is a natural film and it is a reflection of the Italian people to talk about the mafia work in America without causing any trouble. A big movie that brings big actors to the cinema (Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall);1;1;False tt0068646;breadandhammers;06/09/2020;Greatness;;Sometimes, I feel the movie goes over my head, but even with my pedestrian tastes, I can see the greatness of the film.;1;1;False tt0068646;Roiq;05/09/2020;it's Not Just a Movie !;10;"The Godfather It is a very tragic and logical story that teaches you the importance of something that unfortunately has lost its meaning in the present day: the family

Father (Vito) who lived alone and came as an expatriate from the city of Corleone, and the most important thing for him was the family and died among his family and the people who loved him

And his son Michael became the leader of the mafia, but he did not care about the family, and he was inside a life dedicated to him and wanted to influence it, so his daughter paid his selfish wish and died alone in the city where his father was born, the city of Corleone

What the movie wants to do is not a mafia dialogue, and this is what it is, it is the film that really communicates the importance of family and this is noticeable in the difference between Michael and Vito with their family

Vito: A man who does not spare time for his family is not a man

Michael killed his brother and deprived his daughter of the one she loved and forbade his son from singing and lied to his wife and told her that she was doing an abortion and widowed his sister

And of course we do not forget the great song ""Speak Softly, Love"" is a jewel and very tragic.";1;1;True tt0068646;antonyseb;04/09/2020;Acting powerhouse;10;As a young cinephile I am amazed that there is a movie like this one.Never seen such amazing acting done by Legend Marlon Brando 🔥🔥🔥🔥.My favourite is Al Pacino⚡⚡⚡ as Michael Corleone.That transformation from a simpleton to a beast💟💟💟💟;1;1;False tt0068646;nicholasf-60520;04/09/2020;Flawless;10;Start to finish, you're into it! Best film I have ever watched!;1;1;False tt0068646;minister_of_silly_walks;03/09/2020;One of the best films of all time;10;"To put it short, ""The Godfather"" is a timeless masterpiece. It is as close to a perfect movie as you can get to. It has an amazing script which is directed masterfully by Francis Ford Coppola. The cast is Hollywood royalty from top to bottom and everyone plays their part to perfection. Of course, the stars of the film are Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone and Al Pacino as Michael Corleone. Both of the actors give career defining performances portraying arguably two of the most famous characters to be ever put on film. The film is filled to the brim with unforgettable scenes and quotes all of which work seamlessly together in crafting a highly re-watchable masterpiece of cinema that will equally satisfy the casual moviegoer as well as the most harden film critics.";1;1;False tt0068646;ethanhanna-35545;03/09/2020;The godfather;10;One of the greatest films of all time the cast the writing the score everything in it and about it is masterful;1;1;False tt0068646;phelpssg-14952;02/09/2020;The Godfather is an amazing piece of art;10;The shot of the darkness of the crime and the lightness of the family in the beginning is one of my favourite bits. Not just in Godfather, but across both of the Godfather films. The anger of Sonny and that being what destroys him and the nice gentleness of Vito, and what you think is a nice college boy, Michael, becoming an evil psychopath and how Sicily is like a back in time place, and Michael becoming Godfather for his nephew and his crime family at the same time is just brilliant. I really can't say more.;1;1;True tt0068646;carloscaballeroolpz;31/08/2020;MASTERPIECE.;10;It's incredible how Coppola directed this film, every shot in this movie is well thought and incredibly executed. The script is basically perfect in every aspect. Cinematography is amazing as well, and the performances are impeccable. And off course the soundtrack is a character on his own. A true masterpiece.;1;1;False tt0068646;PRAKASH_VARMA_KAJULURI;31/08/2020;A TRUE MARVEL;10;I have been watching movies since last 35 years but have never been drawn more to a movie that can influece you to make your own film. Thats what made me a film maker to be honest. Reading Mario Puzos Godfather and seeing how it translated onto the silver screen told me how the writer in me could become the person who can visualize.

Cinematography, Editing, Direction, Acting and all the other Crafts that make it a 24 craft game are explained in this movie as to why you need all 24 crafts to be perfect. To make a masterpiece.

Godfather has been adapted by thousands or filmmakers which made a few great and a few legends, but there is no movie like the GodFather. Storaro at his very best, Brando at his prime, Al pacino in his element brought it all for the Director and the studio make their dream come true. One of those very rare must watch classics.;1;1;False tt0068646;kv-20578;30/08/2020;Fabulous movie;10;I absolutely appreciate all the artists of this movie, And character of Michael is superb.;1;1;False tt0068646;centvimphal;30/08/2020;Fantastic!;10;One of the best movie of all time! Everyone should watch this movie.;1;1;False tt0068646;sh-82335;29/08/2020;What's First or Second...?;10;Well, When first time I watched The movie it was not so cool to me I mean not so well, I don't know my mind try to say go and watch that again well I watched again but this time 'not bad',Again third time my mind say go and watch again,Third time when I watched, It Was Masterpiece for AllTime!;1;1;False tt0068646;gmkim-82030;29/08/2020;The Epitome of Cinematic Perfection;10;Mario Puzo's The Godfather is one of the best films in history, and definitely the most iconic. Starring Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as its lead characters, it is much more than just a mafia film. It delves deep into society and family. It explores the corruption of government, the power the mafia had at the time, and doesn't hold back to portray the brutal life of the Corleone family. It tells a tragic story of how the well-mannered Michael Corleone turns into a cold-blooded murderer and eventually a kingpin. Throughout its long runtime, it gives you no time to rest, throwing twist after twist, and by the time credits start rolling, you will be rooted to your seat, your jaw wide open. Its storytelling is flawless, its characters are multi-layered and you care about them, especially Vito and Michael, who are essentially bad individuals. This is more than a movie, it is an epic, a journey, an observation of how great men descent into the world of crime. If you have not seen this yet, do so right now. You will never be able to look at other films the same way ever again.;1;1;False tt0068646;nicorip22;28/08/2020;Best movie ever;10;Best movie ever, no matter when you read this, it will still be true. The adaptation of the book to the movie is also the best. Even if you don't like gangster movies you need to watch this classic, you are going to find really good but really good performances, i'm just going to highlight these 4 out of many more, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino (magnificent performances), Robert Duvall (Perfect), Talia Shire (extremely good). Please take the time to watch this movie, it's worth it.;1;1;False tt0068646;mohammadomar;26/08/2020;My Favorite;10;It is my favorite movie, I saw it many times with my family;1;1;False tt0068646;robothutbuivn;26/08/2020;The best movie;10;The best movie you can view, with my friend. I want to see more;1;1;True tt0068646;juddbean-22553;20/08/2020;Excellent;9;Terrific trip into the world of the Corleone's! Enjoyed all 3 hours!;1;1;False tt0068646;fionam-43725;20/08/2020;I was wrong;10;At first I didn't like the godfather but after forcing myself to sit through a rewatch gotta say not Half bad;1;1;False tt0068646;mrsamaro;20/08/2020;nice movie;10;I remember first time when I watch it it was 1998 night time in 1st channel it was awesome and excited!;1;1;True tt0068646;erfanshahsavaripour;16/08/2020;The best mafia movie;10;The essence of the story is full of raw violence in the interactions between characters. The Godfather has a manly world view which affects women's world and dominates it, using strong acting. (Don's daughter getting beaten by her husband, death of Michael's wife Apollonia, Michael's wife believing his lies);1;1;True tt0068646;jamie-rowlands1;19/07/2020;The greatest film of all time;10;"The word masterpiece is bandied about a lot, freely and, in my opinion, too often used to label films that aren't worthy. It's true, however, that my idea of what a masterpiece is could well be different to that of another film fan - at the end of the day, it's all about the relationship you have to what you see on screen, it's all subjective, isn't it? The latest CGI-laden blockbuster or socially relevant indie may be hailed as a genius piece of work, but surely it can only sit comfortably marked that way once some time has passed, once posterity has spoken, so we can see it if stands up. It might be considered a masterpiece now, but what about in ten years time when the world's changed a little bit?

The Godfather is, for me, a genuine work of art and a film that gives something new each time you watch it. It stands up, a timeless story, almost fifty years on, as powerful and as epic as it's ever been. It's a film about family, about love, about revenge and power, themes used in most modern movies but never more effectively than here, all deftly strung together into a three hour saga that hooks you in from the very first words, ""I believe in America"", and transports you through time and continent to that final iconic shot of the door shutting on Kay Corleone's doubtful, fearful face.

The first time I saw it, I remember so clearly being transfixed by the world Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo had created, by its characters, it's cinematography, by the haunting and operatic score, by the dialogue. The scene of no return for me, when I knew this film was really something I'd never forget, and watch countless times more, came right in the middle, that now infamous restaurant scene. Michael, the war hero who until now had shunned involvement in the family business, emerges from the bathroom and opens fire on the two men who have gravely injured his father. I remember my heart was in my mouth. I didn't want Michael to do it. I wanted him to keep hold of his goodness, to continue to shun that world, to be happy with Kay. But he did do it, and it devastated me, because his life was forever and irreparably changed. As a teenager who, up until that point, hadn't really ventured into what you'd call classic cinema, it became a milestone moment for me and ignited my love for what a film could truly be. It instantly became a favourite.

It's an obvious answer to the question ""what's the greatest movie of all time?"", and again it's all subjective, but for me The Godfather reigns supreme and nothing really comes close. It's a film I'm always up for watching, and a story that never fails to break my heart. It is, there's no doubt in my mind, a twenty four carat bona fide masterpiece.";1;1;True tt0068646;avisheksahu-96247;14/07/2020;When Capitalism Beckoned Communism With a Dash of Olive Oil!;10;This movie could easily be pitched as the most landmark creation in cinematographic history for setting the tone of Social Education in the coming years, given serious cosmetic evolution was just on the cards and more than ever, money just had to sit in the right hands to make social sense. While the thirst for bonafide business ventures has been ripe within mankind for the longest time, it is just a badly kept secret that suckers for reputation almost always fall back on triads and godfathers to save their skin from the vengeance of their hitherto ignorant audience suddenly awaken from their poverty induced deep sleep when outsiders take notice of their insouciance and insiders take notice of their pride. Made at the dawn of the fall of the family as a mega-institution, it insinuates that the appeal in gangsters never lay in the fashion or the thrust but in the starkly bare realisation imperative in their context that money finds you only when have people around you to call family, for what needs to find you needs a road to find you, and the homeless never ever had it easy in times of war and in times of peace! If that's too much of a lesson, Marlon Brando's otherworldly performance is just pure, uncorrupted education in theatre.;1;1;False tt0068646;alene-56179;23/06/2020;"""I Believe in America""";10;The Godfather is a masterpiece. It is one of the few films without any significant weaknesses (any that I've found, at least) and it's been my favorite film since I first saw it at age 15. Each and every actor gives a stellar performance, especially Marlon Brando as Don Corleone and Al Pacino as his son Michael. Both men completely disappear into their roles, transforming Mario Puzo's characters into pop culture icons. The pacing of the movie is brilliantly done, keeping the audience wanting more through the whole three-hour runtime. The score by Nino Rota is amazing and has stuck with me long after my last viewing (I will occasionally find myself humming the Love Theme without meaning to), and the writing is brilliant. I could go on and on about everything that makes this movie a classic, but it really has all been said before. All I have left to say is that you need to see this movie if you haven't already. The Godfather more than lives up to the hype.

10/10;1;1;False tt0068646;adeckofcards;20/06/2020;Perfect balance;10;"Considered by many as ""the best film in history"", 'The Godfather' has earned a prestige and respect over the years, something fully deserved. To speak of 'The Godfather' is to speak of a perfect balance, a masterful balance between an epic Gangsters story, a powerful family drama and a man's personal conflict. All these themes are carried by Coppola in such a fluid way that nothing ends up feeling forced within the story. And although it is true, there are a large number of plots, characters and relationships, the aforementioned fluidity of the narrative, added to a technical perfection to tell the story, causes all these elements to have an impact on the narrative, which is pretty intuitive. Each factor is decisive and influences history, something that every filmmaker aspires to achieve, but that no one can say has achieved as Coppola. It is difficult to define cinematographic perfection, but if this were a conflict that encompasses all its characters and that all the factors play in order to tell the story in the best possible way, then we can consider that 'The Godfather' is a perfect work.";1;1;False tt0068646;yaols-53324;13/06/2020;The Godfather;9;Whether it's acting or the use of lens or music, it gives people a kind of beautiful enjoyment. The film is in great need of deep appreciation.;1;1;False tt0068646;timmyminh;02/06/2020;The Van Gogh equivalent of films;10;I have had a distinct pleasure to have watched this picture for the first time in a 35mm screen this year in a cinema in London that shows classic films. I refrained from watching it years ago in my teenage years because my ignorant past thought this film was overrated, but honestly, there is no possible word or expression that can describe how wrong I was. The cinematography of this picture is so unheard of and monumental that every frame of this picture looks like something that could be hung as a painting in a museum. The story brings with it elements of something that came out of a Shakespearean Tragedy. I have watched it 7 times or more in a short time, and it takes A LOT to make me watch a film for a second time, let alone 7. It is one of, if not my favorite film of all time. If human civilization were to go extinct, this should be one of the few pieces of art that must survive for future intelligent lifeforms to discover and marvel at.;1;1;False tt0068646;ladik_nik;29/05/2020;Must watch;10;If they ask me which films will remain excellent forever, one of the first in this category will be «Godfather». To the word, it is the color and storyline basis of «Godfather» has won recognition of many critics and lovers of similar cinema. The background, excluding Sicilian landscapes and grape fields, is less dynamic, giving preference to acting. The risk was high, as the producers of the film had long been unable to understand the situation inside the work, taking away Coppola's directorial powers, and removing Brando from the main role. And what is most gratifying is that the end result has already been recognized as a classic, and the leading performers will remain in the annals of history for a long time to come. Everyone must see this masterpiece! 10 out of 10;1;1;False tt0068646;drqshadow-reviews;28/05/2020;A Behemoth of Modern Cinema, Still Potent After Fifty Years;10;"The mafia epic to which all others are measured. Maybe even the greatest film of all time, but I don't think that's a fair judgment to cast. In either case, Francis Coppola's much-heralded masterwork, jumbo-sized but not without good reason, still delivers. The sheer ambition of The Godfather is a sight to behold, packed full of strong characters, complicated choices, bitter twists of fate and a grand, decades-spanning arc.

It's as close as cinema has ever come to matching the rich, chewy abundance of a great novel, even if it does skim a few years in the third act. We're treated to layers upon layers of comprehensively-defined individuals, even the ancillary roles, with a strikingly complex dynasty at the center of it all. The Corleones are a crucially diverse group, distinct but also alike, fundamentally familiar despite the off-putting nature of the family business. Sonny, the hot-headed heir apparent; Fredo, the kowtowed black sheep; Vito, the rational, well-composed patriarch; Michael, the intellectual firebrand with lofty ideals. In retrospect, their paths are obvious, but in the heat of the moment we're shocked by every twist of the knife. Moments of deep contemplation contrast with explosions of spontaneous violence, loud illustrations of the literal dog-eat-dog nature of this particular line of work.

Coppola wrangles everything like the illustrated puppetmaster married to the franchise logo. It's all precisely orchestrated, timed for peak efficiency, yet somehow never grows formulaic or loses touch with its essentially human, organic pulse. Not a wasted movement, nor a missed opportunity. What an achievement, just to complete a film of this magnitude. That it was accomplished in just a year's time, first day of filming to opening day at the cinema, is absolutely baffling.";1;1;False tt0068646;thegirlisntallowed;28/05/2020;Story Rhyme;10;"In 1945 New York City, at his daughter Connie's wedding to Carlo, Vito Corleone listens to requests in his role as don of the Corleone crime family. His youngest son, Michael, who was a Marine during World War II, introduces his girlfriend, Kay Adams, to his family at the reception. Johnny Fontane, a popular singer and Vito's godson, seeks Vito's help in securing a movie role; Vito dispatches his consigliere, Tom Hagen, to Los Angeles to persuade studio head Jack Woltz to give Johnny the part. Woltz refuses until he wakes up in bed with the severed head of his prized stallion.

Shortly before Christmas, drug baron Sollozzo, backed by the Tattaglia crime family, asks Vito for investment in his narcotics business and protection through his political connections. Wary of involvement in a dangerous new trade that risks alienating political insiders, Vito declines. Suspicious, Vito sends his enforcer, Luca Brasi, to spy on them. Brasi is garroted to death during his first meeting with Bruno Tattaglia and Sollozzo. Later, Sollozzo kidnaps Hagen, then has Vito gunned down in the street. With Corleone first-born Sonny in command, Sollozzo pressures Hagen to persuade Sonny to accept Sollozzo's deal, then releases him. The family receives fish wrapped in Brasi's bullet-proof vest, indicating that Luca ""sleeps with the fishes"". Vito survives, and at the hospital, Michael thwarts another attempt on his father. Michael's jaw is broken by NYPD Capt. McCluskey, Sollozzo's unofficial bodyguard. Sonny retaliates with a hit on Tattaglia. Michael plots to murder Sollozzo and McCluskey; feigning a desire to settle the dispute, Michael meets them in a Bronx restaurant, where after retrieving a handgun planted by Clemenza, a Corleone capo, he kills both men.

Despite a clampdown by the authorities, the Five Families erupt in open warfare, and Vito fears for his sons' safety. Michael takes refuge in Sicily and Fredo is sheltered by Moe Greene in Las Vegas. Sonny attacks Carlo on the street for abusing Connie and threatens to kill him if it happens again. When it does, Sonny speeds to their home but is ambushed at a highway toll booth and violently murdered by gangsters wielding submachine guns. While in Sicily, Michael meets and marries Apollonia, but a car bomb intended for him takes her life.

Devastated by Sonny's death and realizing that the Tattaglias are controlled by the now-dominant don, Barzini, Vito attempts to end the feud. He assures the Five Families that he will withdraw his opposition to their heroin business and forgo avenging Sonny's murder. His safety guaranteed, Michael returns home to enter the family business and marry Kay, promising her that the business will be legitimate within five years. Kay gives birth to two children by the early 1950s. With his father nearing the end of his life and Fredo too weak, Michael takes the family reins. He insists Hagen relocate to Las Vegas and relinquish his role to Vito because Hagen is not a ""wartime consigliere""; Vito agrees Hagen should ""have no part in what will happen"" in the coming battles with the rival families. When Michael travels to Las Vegas to buy out Greene's stake in the family's casinos, he is dismayed to see that Fredo is more loyal to Greene than to his own family.

In 1955, Vito suffers a fatal heart attack. At the funeral, Tessio, a Corleone capo, asks Michael to meet with Barzini, signaling the betrayal that Vito had forewarned. The meeting is set for the same day as the baptism of Connie's baby. While Michael stands at the altar as the child's godfather, Corleone hitmen murder the other New York City dons and Greene. Tessio's treachery leads to his execution. Michael extracts Carlo's confession to his complicity in setting up Sonny's murder for Barzini; Clemenza garrotes Carlo to death. Connie accuses Michael of the murder, telling Kay that Michael ordered all the killings. Kay is relieved when Michael finally denies it, but when the capos arrive, they address her husband as Don Corleone and she watches them pay reverence to Michael as the newly installed don as they close the door on her.";1;1;False tt0068646;SteelVengeance;27/05/2020;The Highest Level of Film Making;10;The Godfather deserves all the love it gets with its fantastic acting, story, suspense, character development, music, and direction. This is the highest standard of film making, Francis Ford Coppola was a genius with his direction in this one and the second. This is a gangster film like no other, the perfect combination. Its like having your favorite food at your favorite restaurant in your favorite city, everything is perfect, from the front and center details to the small and minor ones.;1;1;False tt0068646;Marcuslemaunkirk;27/05/2020;Love movie;10;I must have watch this a 1,000 time amazing story and acting;1;1;False tt0068646;contoeroticoprive;27/05/2020;i likeee this film;10;Tell me a movie that is more famous than this. Tell me a movie that has had more parodies spinned off its storyline than this. Tell me one movie that has been as quoted as a much as this. The answer is you can't. No movie has had as much of an impact as The Godfather has had ever since it was released.;1;1;False tt0068646;Bipuljit_Basu;27/05/2020;This movie never getting old.;10;"This isn't just a crafted gangster film also family portrait too. An inspirational movie to generation to generation of actors, directors, producers & screenwriters.";1;1;False tt0068646;zml-90083;27/05/2020;Classic crime;9;The movie is very old. When I watched this movie, I was still young. I didn't understand the truth. When I grew up and watched it again, I really had a taste;1;1;False tt0068646;j-70786;26/05/2020;If you can't see it, don't force yourself!Because: one day, you'll feel sorry;10;The whole Godfather series is about the growth and death of a man, the rise and decline of a family. Brotherhood, father son relationship, rational and emotional love, friendship, men's sacrifice and responsibility in the face of family, career and love, the opposition and unity of justice and evil are vividly interpreted in the film. Countless classic lines and unforgettable plots.I am the same myself. In his early 20's, he stepped into the society, had contact with the world at the beginning, just opened the chapter of his life, and watching Godfather certainly felt obscure and gloomy. At this age, it's normal that we can't look down: we haven't understood the responsibilities and responsibilities of career, family, friendship and love, and we can't even know the cost of men's growth.When you are a little older, no one will help you or forgive you unconditionally. You are forced to understand that you need to work hard in society to survive. No one will give you money without any reason. Naturally, you will understand the difficulties and greatness of the old Godfather;1;1;True tt0068646;amapiano;25/05/2020;One of the best;10;One of the best movies i have ever seen

The theme is very gangster. most movies this year dont even match up;1;1;False tt0068646;Katherine1985;25/05/2020;The epic gangster film.;10;This film is a must see for any movie fan,a true masterpiece of the American cinema;1;1;False tt0068646;abdlrhmanalsayad;08/05/2020;Great Movie;9;"Don Vito Corleone: I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse. Don Vito Corleone: Revenge is a dish best served cold. Don Vito Corleone: ""A friend should always underestimate your virtues and an enemy overestimate your faults";1;1;False tt0068646;mrjmooo;08/05/2020;A clasic;9;This movies is pure class. I only am going to say you must whach it.;1;1;False tt0068646;ermackiyani;08/05/2020;best movie ever;10;"""The Godfather"" is told entirely within a closed world. That's why we sympathize with characters who are essentially evil";1;1;False tt0068646;Bandar-aqeeli;07/05/2020;Is getting better each year;10;The godfather. Where do I have to start? Marlon brando or Al Pacino 187 minutes of intense waiting just for (what is the next move?) It's like a game of chess when you have Protect the king ( the family) and to do that you have to move your pawn ( Michael) but on the way to win you have to sacrifice both of your queen ( veto corolonge) and knghts ( santino and tom ) to let your pawn flourish on the mat as a new queen controlling the whole board 10/10 is not enough for this kind of films;1;1;True tt0068646;kkw-41765;03/05/2020;Simply The Best Film Of All Time.;10;"It feels a bit redundant reviewing arguably the greatest and most well-known Hollywood film nearly 50 years after it's release, but I feel like I need to pay homage to this true masterpiece of American cinematic art. This is not simply a movie: this is a cultural touchstone, a landmark of human achievement, and a beautiful work of art realized by one of the few true masters of filmmaking, Francis Ford Coppola. THE GODFATHER comes as close to perfection as any film ever could. The directing, acting, writing, cinematography, editing, set design, etc. etc. etc. are all world-class and I've never seen a film do better. Marlon Brando is stunningly brilliant as Vito Corleone, the aging head of a New York crime family; I only wish he had more screen time. Al Pacino gives one of the most memorable and tragic performances ever put to film as Michael Corleone, the reluctant heir to the throne. The supporting cast all give remarkable performances without exception; but Robert Duvall, James Caan, Diane Keaton, and John Cazale stand out the most. This is one you'll want to watch again and again, especially if you love classic auteur filmmaking. If you somehow haven't seen it yet, I both envy and pity you! A true MUST WATCH if there ever was one.";1;1;False tt0068646;y-93230;23/04/2020;nice;10;That's life. You never know what you're going to get. When forrest came to the end of one after another, turned in another direction and continued running, he didn't know what he was going to see next. Forrest is really a person who goes with the flow. He doesn't think about what he's going to do next. He just takes it in stride. He did not ask for anything, he did not expect anything.That's life. You never know what you're going to get. When forrest came to the end of one after another, turned in another direction and continued running, he didn't know what he was going to see next. Forrest is really a person who goes with the flow. He doesn't think about what he's going to do next. He just takes it in stride. He did not ask for anything, he did not expect anything.;1;1;False tt0068646;kaandogusoy-377-467302;23/04/2020;absolutely a masterpiece;9;Visuals, story, acting, directing, musics... this is basically the maximum directors can reach. shawshank redemption is a great movie but it's lacking in many such as visuals. If I meet an alien and they ask me what's the best movie you guys ever made, I would give them this and say second one is almost as good as the first one.;1;1;False tt0068646;93_ysf;20/04/2020;Masterpiece;10;I thought it couldn't be done better. This idea completely changed when I watched the sequel.;1;1;False tt0068646;jamesraesimpson;06/04/2020;A must-watch;10;It's everything I ever wanted it to be based on extremely high reviews and my expectation.

The acting is incredible. The character development is fascinating to watch. Twists, turns, amazing dialogue and memorable moments.

It might be long, but not at any point did I think of taking a break. Simply stunning.;1;1;False tt0068646;Timbo_Watching;25/03/2020;A timeless classic!;9;"This film was way ahead of it's time, even to this day it's still the pinnacle of a masterpiece. Every single element of this is amazing. The cast, the acting, the writing, the settings, the directing... despite it being quite a long film, whereas I am known to be distracted more easily the longer a film is; this film made me hooked on it until the very last second. I just absolutely love the story too, such a well crafted Italian gangster film all about ""la familia"".. if you haven't seen this film yet what are you doing?? Watch it right now!!";1;1;False tt0068646;fireverse;24/03/2020;My favourite;10;This is awesome movie I enjoyed watching And it's the best movie ever Great job;1;1;False tt0068646;muratkayacim;24/03/2020;SOO GOOD;10;A great movie, really great. We especially see examples of leadership and motivation. The importance of leadership is emphasized here.;1;1;True tt0068646;Uriah43;09/03/2020;An Excellent Movie;10;"Based on the best-selling novel by the same name, this film begins in 1945 at a large party hosted by the head of the most powerful organized crime family in the United States ""Don Vito Corleone"" (Marlon Brando) to celebrate the marriage of his only daughter ""Connie Corleone"" (Talia Shire). As per Sicilian custom, several people have arrived to ask him a personal favor knowing that he cannot refuse during this particular event. It's also during this time that his youngest son ""Michael Corleone"" (Al Pacino) arrives having taken time off from his duties in the Marine Corps to attend. Unlike his older brothers ""Sonny Corleone"" (James Caan), ""Fredo Corleone"" (John Cazale) and his adopted brother ""Tom Hagen"" (Robert Duvall), Michael wants no part of the family business and Vito is respectful of that decision. Unfortunately, things don't go quite as planned and-like it or not-Michael is soon thrust into the situation due to matters outside of his control. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an outstanding film which combined great acting with a very deep and intricate plot. And to further illustrate its significance it was honored the following year with three Academy Awards and five Golden Globe Awards as well. In short, this is an excellent movie I strongly recommend it to all viewers looking for a film of this sort.";1;1;False tt0068646;mikayakatnt;04/03/2020;One of the best films ever made -- beautiful & poetic;10;This film isn't for everyone, I admit that. But for those who enjoy a good story but don't mind the wait to climax, WATCH THIS.

The story is the portrayal of the fall from grace of Michael Corleone. Michael is a tragic hero. Caught between an innocent outside world and the criminal underground of his family, he makes decisions we would've made as well.

The plotline and characters are worlds in themselves. The city itself serves as a backdrop into the fascinating world that makes this film so great.

The violence is satisfying, the scenery and camera work beautiful. Every scene in this film was a work of curated art. Not to mention the church scene which is instantly a memorable movie scene.

What I especially enjoyed in this film was the dedication to the original book that Mario Puzo wrote. Reading the book after watching the film made me appreciate the attention to detail.

5/5. Beautiful. A must watch.;1;1;False tt0068646;tomflinn123;24/02/2020;10/10;10;Really like this one. Must watch for any fans off mafia films. Will watch again.

T_dog reviews

#godfather #mafia;1;1;False tt0068646;alcineadictos;16/02/2020;It's a Fantastic Piece of Art...;9;"""The Godfather"" is probably one of the films that revolutionized the cine in the 70´ being able considering her the best movie of gansters. A set of very good performances, highlighting that of Al Pacino, A plot fanstatic and interesting, also, jointly with a big scenes and phrases that will remain in the memory of a lot of people ; everything this make the work that left in the history to the great director Francis Ford Coppola. I like the realistic and dared of the sequences, being the scenes that more I liked, the of the head of horse, the first scene in the Godfather's ofice (Vito Corleone), and the of the murders of Michael in the restaurant. A Jewel";1;1;True tt0068646;abhijeetgaurav-89181;16/02/2020;incredible movie;10;"It was the first event movie of the 70s, the one multitudes queued up to see, the one whose dialogue, characters and imagery instantly became ingrained in the collective consciousness. It made stars of Pacino and Caan, won Oscars for Picture, Screenplay and Brando, in a triumphant comeback. Shortly after its premiere in 1972 Variety reported, ""The Godfather is an historic smash of unprecedented proportions"". At the time the director, Francis Ford Coppola, was holed up in a hotel writing the screenplay for The Great Gatsby, a job he took to relieve his financial problems because he believed in his movie. He had only been given the film after a lengthy wish-list of veterans including Otto Preminger, Elia Kazan, Fred Zinnemann and Franklin Schaffner turned it down. He perked up when Frank Capra wrote to him, claiming it was, "" Out of this world. I cheered inwardly at scene after scene.""";1;1;False tt0068646;farleyf-63082;14/02/2020;Story Or Poem;10;"In 1945, at his daughter Connie's wedding to Carlo Rizzi, Don Vito Corleone hears requests in his role as head of a New York crime family. His youngest son, Michael, who was a Marine during World War II, introduces his girlfriend, Kay Adams, to his family at the reception. Johnny Fontane, a famous singer and Vito's godson, seeks Vito's help in securing a movie role; Vito dispatches his consigliere, Tom Hagen, to Los Angeles to persuade studio head Jack Woltz to give Johnny the part. Woltz refuses until he wakes up in bed with the severed head of his prized stallion.

Shortly before Christmas, drug baron Virgil ""The Turk"" Sollozzo, backed by the Tattaglia crime family, asks Vito for investment in his narcotics business and protection through his political connections. Wary of involvement in a dangerous new trade that risks alienating political insiders, Vito declines. Suspicious, Vito sends his enforcer, Luca Brasi, to spy on them. Brasi is garroted during his first meeting with Bruno Tattaglia and Sollozzo. Later Sollozzo has Vito gunned down in the street, then kidnaps Hagen. With Corleone first-born Sonny in command, Sollozzo pressures Hagen to persuade Sonny to accept Sollozzo's deal, then releases him. The family receives fish wrapped in Brasi's bullet-proof vest, indicating that Luca ""sleeps with the fishes"". Vito survives, and at the hospital, Michael thwarts another attempt on his father. Michael's jaw is broken by NYPD Captain Marc McCluskey, Sollozzo's unofficial bodyguard. Sonny retaliates with a hit on Bruno Tattaglia. Michael plots to murder Sollozzo and McCluskey; feigning a desire to settle the dispute, Michael meets them in a Bronx restaurant, where after retrieving a planted handgun, he kills both men.

Despite a clampdown by the authorities, the Five Families erupt in open warfare, and Vito fears for his sons' safety. Michael takes refuge in Sicily and Fredo is sheltered by Moe Greene in Las Vegas. Sonny attacks Carlo on the street for abusing Connie and threatens to kill him if it happens again. When it does, Sonny speeds to their home but is ambushed at a highway toll booth and riddled with submachine gunfire. While in Sicily, Michael meets and marries Apollonia Vitelli, but a car bomb intended for him takes her life.

Devastated by Sonny's death and realizing that the Tattaglias are controlled by the now-dominant Don Emilio Barzini, Vito attempts to end the feud. He assures the Five Families that he will withdraw his opposition to their heroin business and forgo avenging Sonny's murder. His safety guaranteed, Michael returns home to enter the family business and marry Kay, promising her that the business will be legitimate within five years. Kay gives birth to two children by the early 1950s. With his father nearing the end of his life and Fredo too weak, Michael takes the family reins. He insists Hagen relocate to Las Vegas and relinquish his role to Vito because Tom is not a ""wartime consigliere""; Vito agrees Tom should ""have no part in what will happen"" in the coming battles with rival families. When Michael travels to Las Vegas to buy out Greene's stake in the family's casinos, he is dismayed to see that Fredo is more loyal to Greene than to his own family.

In 1955, Vito suffers a fatal heart attack. At the funeral, Salvatore Tessio, a Corleone capo, asks Michael to meet with Don Barzini, signaling the betrayal that Vito had forewarned. The meeting is set for the same day as the baptism of Connie's baby. While Michael stands at the altar as the child's godfather, Corleone assassins murder the other New York dons and Moe Greene. Tessio is executed for his treachery and Michael extracts Carlo's confession to his complicity in setting up Sonny's murder for Barzini. A Corleone capo, Peter Clemenza, garrotes Carlo with a wire. Connie accuses Michael of the murder, telling Kay that Michael ordered all the killings. Kay is relieved when Michael finally denies it, but when the capos arrive, they address her husband as Don Corleone and she watches them pay reverence to Michael as the newly installed don as they close the door on her.";1;1;False tt0068646;jacobmeyerjkm;10/02/2020;Best film ever;10;I have no doubt in my mind that this film is crucial to the world of movies and the world in general. Every part was gripping, compelling, and emotional. I cared for every single character and felt for all of them individually. While watching this I placed sections into my brain for each character and started an emotional route for each of them. Even characters who seem as unimportant as Clemenza.;1;1;False tt0068646;momoplace;04/02/2020;i love it;10;The writing was phenomenal and breathtaking. As mentioned before there has been no movie quoted more than this. It is not even the quotes though that makes the writing in here so perfect. It is the symbolism and meaning that went into every scene. There are countless symbols, messages and lines in here that are so memorable yet it is as realistic as a movie could get.;1;1;False tt0068646;keirjosephwilson;03/02/2020;Trust me when I say this film has earned its reputation;10;It's very easy to let high expectations get the better of you when you watch a film. Maybe the film is perfectly fine, but nowhere near as good as you had expected, and so you are left with a bitter taste in your mouth when sans these expectations you would have had a fine few hours (looking at you, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood). Or maybe your expectations are simply too high for any film to realistically meet. The Godfather could have easily fallen into one of these two categories. After all, when it comes to films that carry high expectations, it's hard to top The Godfather. And yet, in spite of all that, the film is still a masterpiece that enthralled me for all 3 hours of its runtime. Trust me when I say this film is one of those classics that has earned its legendary reputation. Almost everything about in this film is done to great effect. Even things I don't usually notice (unless they're really bad) like the editing and the sound design are done masterfully, the score is not only beautiful but the film knows when not to use the score and let the tension build, and of course you can't talk about The Godfather without talking about the legendary director and cast. With Francis Ford Coppola at the helm of Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duval, James Caan, John Cazle and Diane Keaton, and an amazing story on top of that it really shouldn't surprise anyone this film is as good as it is. There are so many more things I could say to sing this films praises, and so many more things that deserve praise, so many amazing scenes and so many memorable moments/lines, but really, you should just see the film yourself.

10/10;1;1;False tt0068646;macrompictures;31/01/2020;A wonder craft and an absolute masterpiece;10;Such a complex story, beautifully executed and each and every characters done their job remarkably well. Well acted, well directed, well scripted- basically anything good you can say about a movie can relate to The Godfather. What makes this film so great is how it develops such a complex character (Michael). He starts out as a war hero, reluctant to head his father's crime empire. Then his father is attacked and just barely survives causing Michael to kill the two men responsible. He runs away to Sicily and marries a woman who is later killed and Michael goes back to America and take up his fathers position as the don of the Corleone crime family. He ultimately sends assassins to kill all of the dons of the other syndicates, completing his descent to an evil gangster. Let us also not forget the ending. Well actually I could go on and on about the baptism scene and the last 5 minutes, so just watch the clips on YouTube (or watch the entire movie). This is my all time favorite film. The sequel is also one of the greatest films of all time. 5/5 stars.;1;1;False tt0068646;smoesman;24/01/2020;Epic movie, almost as good as part 2;9;Great storytelling, every shot mathers and is done with perfection. The devolopment of the characters is stunning, especially Michaels. Al Pacino is just as good as Marlon Brando in this masterpiece. Only to be surpassed by part 2. Which is something that usually never happens.;1;1;False tt0068646;ozanylmz44;23/01/2020;Like wine is valuing over the years $$$;10;Thank god i didn't die without watching

I strongly recommend you to watch;1;1;False tt0068646;lordbenjamin98;19/01/2020;The greatest movie EVER MADE;10;This is the greatest movie ever made, I'm not joking. I have watched a lot of movies, movies with more oscars and not a single one is better than this. The story, the casting, even the soundtrack is perfect.;1;1;False tt0068646;TheDoubleO7;11/10/2019;The Godfather... Not just any movie;10;I have one word, this movie is a masterpiece. remains a reference for anyone loves make movies!;1;1;False tt0068646;aram81;04/09/2019;If there is such a thing as the perfect film, then the Godfather is at the top of the list;10;What is there to say that has not already been said about The Godfather. If you are judging a film on the basis of story, acting, direction, cinematography, score and impact, then Francis Ford Coppola's gangster saga is as close to perfect as a film can get. There is not a false note to be found in this epic and gripping story of family, loyalty and the corrupting nature of power. It has endlessly quotable dialogue and an iconic performance by Marlon Brando, as Don Vito Corleone. It also has one of the most memorable scores in motion picture history and some of the best acting you are ever going to see anywhere. In short, the Godfather is one of cinemas all-time great achievements. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and few films in history have been as imitated as the Godfather. A seminal work of American cinema.;1;1;False tt0068646;lelandbutler-21680;28/03/2019;An American Tradition;10;The gangster genre is a American as apple pie. We have had a love affair with mobsters. From James Cagney , Edward G. Robinson etc We Love the Mob. The Godfather is nothing different. It is one of the greatest pieces of film ever made. The story is a rags to riches story of a crime family that stared out with nothing then rose to the most powerful crime family. What I love more then that, Is the character development especially with Micheal from a war hero to a cold blooded boss. It is the story of a family that faces challenges from both outside and inside the family.

If you haven't seen this epic. Then please do your self a favor and watch this masterpieces. You won't be sorry.

American as apple pie;1;1;False tt0068646;baleelight;27/03/2019;Balee;10;Marlon Brando's acting as the Godfather is sublime and this film is worth watching for that.

However I did find the film very long-winded and at times boring. I liked the slow progression of the storyline and understand why Francis Ford Coppola did the film in the way he did. It's just that I felt the film was lacking something. It could have done with a bit more excitement or suspense to make the film more gripping.

Lets just say I watched this film about a year ago and I still haven't seen The Godfather 2, and I am in no hurry to either.

7/10. Average film. Worth watching to say that you have seen it.;1;1;True tt0068646;phare-92661;25/03/2019;The Greatest Film of All Time;10;If there were one film that I would say you should watch before you die, it is this one. This is the definition of a perfect film. Every aspect of it is brilliant and amazing. The acting, the story, the filmmaking, everything is incredible.;1;1;False tt0068646;sharryanwar;21/03/2019;gang gang;10;What a amazing movie. i am in love with this movie;1;1;True tt0068646;sarabagi;13/03/2019;A true classic;10;I cant count how many times i have watched this movie. And i love it even more with every watch. If you havent watched then youve missed a big part of film history!!;1;1;False tt0068646;paulrobertcohen;13/03/2019;Great;10;Greatest Movie of all time. Always have to stop and watch when it's on.;1;1;False tt0068646;jassim-24960;10/03/2019;A masterpiece of culture and anthropology;10;As an Qatari man watching this film for the first time in 2009, it struck me how much I got attached. More than four decades later, and a generation apart, and to a culture so distant from mine, and still this film strikes as one of the most memorable. What makes it that was the question that not only haunted me for years, but also pushed me to study filmmaking and dive intro the subject. This film has not only influenced my awareness and thinking, but ultimately my career and life.;1;1;False tt0068646;mickelmoney;05/03/2019;Sophisticated and Classic;8;"When I think of an ""old fashioned"" Hollywood movie I think of The Godfather. Someone who does not appreciate the early makings of Cinema will not enjoy this movie and even see certain scenes as cheesy and not realistic (Ex. When Sonny is shot to death, the marriage with Michael etc.) But when you step back and look at this being something created in 1972 these events come to life you in a new way, hence the title of a ""classic""

In this movie we see the theme of loyalty to family throughout, showing the viewer the importance of sticking with those we are the closest to. We also get to look at the inside of power struggle between different family members and how people can loose respect for an entire family because of one persons actions. This movies gives a great view at the way the world views both people, family and power.";1;1;True tt0068646;manuelwww;03/03/2019;asombroso;10;Cuenta una gran historia, cuenta con un buen elenco muy recomendada;1;1;False tt0068646;hooby-06875;20/02/2019;The Godfather of the cinema;10;I LOVE IT AS MUCH AS ENOUGH AS NEVER STOP LOVING IT EVERY TIME I SEE IT;1;1;True tt0068646;javidx-37980;20/02/2019;good God Father;10;One of the best movies I've ever seen in my life. There is no better movie in your world than this movie;1;1;True tt0068646;megasckan;19/02/2019;Best;10;This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.;1;1;False tt0068646;qinmingvip;18/02/2019;My most favorite movie ever. watch many times.;10;My most favorite movie ever. watch many times. shear with many friends. actors did great job in this movie.;1;1;False tt0068646;nvrangerkid;17/02/2019;Best movie of all time.;10;This film has made me appreciate being Italian so much more.;1;1;False tt0068646;zlatkowardrobeshop;15/02/2019;Priceless;10;There are no words to explain how good is this movie;1;1;False tt0068646;pethel1;12/02/2019;Must See;10;Why haven't I seen one of the most popular movies of all time? Well I finally did and it didn't disappoint. Despite the length of the movie, I was thoroughly engaged throughout. When a movie has you routing for the bad guys, it demonstrates the impact of an excellent story well executed. The film is so much more than just a gangster movie. It addresses politics, family values, crime and the social norms of the time. I know that I will watch this many more times as well as the Godfather films which follow. Fast paced, excellent acting, great music all combine to make this a must see.;1;1;False tt0068646;MatrixTitan;12/02/2019;Greateast movie of all time in my view;10;This must be the best movie I've seen. I watched this movie for over 5 times. Every scene and clue are useful. Those complicated relationship built a web for the fate of the chosen boy, which finally taught him to grow up as a grown man. I love this movie;1;1;False tt0068646;vitorle99;12/02/2019;Simple and Incredible.;10;"I am 19 years old, but I've been seeing and listening about this movie my whole life, so I finally sat and watched it. And it is astonishing by the fact, that what turns the movie to be so good is, the most common, usual, old conversations (knowing what that conversation will lead to). I enjoy Mafia movies since day one, so watching this masterpiece was like playing Mafia games. The Godfather has on hands an incredible cast. I do believe Al Pacino was born to portray mobsters in Mafia movies, and you clearly see how good he is, since the Dinosaurs age. (old times if you didn't understand what supposed to be a ""joke"").";1;1;False tt0068646;fcjsonl;10/02/2019;True classic;10;One of the most enjoyable movies ever, with deep an interesting charachters and realistic storylines. Quite toned down, no over the top action, but the gradual transformation of Michael into a mafia boss, despite his intent not to become one. An important scence in the beginning, from the wedding, has come to symbolize the type of relationship-based culture for me. Bonasera has been avioding the mob for a long time, but now that his daugther was assaulted, he needs their help. He comes and asks for help, offering money. The Godfather refuses - he does not want money, we wants respect. Debt precedes money as a social institution, according to Graeber. The original way of functioning in an economy was local and very trust-based. These types of institutions, together with a well-developed honor codex are very prevalent in the mafia culture. The gracious, private, inconspicuous nature of the mafia, and their honor of their word are central to their role in society.

The story touches on the American dream. I believe in America. America has made my fortune. Bonasera tells Don Vito who knows well enough that Bonasera earned his financial success through legal means, being a man of integrity and with faith in the American judicial system. Like a good American? who has assimilated in the American way of life, Bonasera raised his daughter in the American fashion and gave her freedom

onasera uses the American Dream and tries to live in it, relish in it, and bask in the glory of it. Once he encounters a pivotal moment in his life that threatens his ideals and his family and could not find clarity in the dark side of the Dream, he runs down to Don Vitoäs underworld.;1;1;True tt0068646;Saqroot;09/02/2019;have met others who have seen this movie in other;8;Have met others who have seen this movie in other languages and they seem to have the same love and appreciation for it that I do. I love the characters and all of the different personalities that they represent not just in families but in society itself. It seems like the entire cast is part of every other movie that I love as well. The sounds, music, color and light in the film are just as much a part of the film as the people;1;1;False tt0068646;pedramab-10851;08/02/2019;All the time;10;This movie is the best movies, I have seen forever. I wish, someone make a series for these collection.;1;1;False tt0068646;MahmoudEllithy;07/02/2019;Best Movie in the history;10;God father is the one of the best outstanding movie i have ever seen;1;1;False tt0068646;ranbnzz;07/02/2019;One of the best masterpiece in movie history;10;"It feels more like a documentary than a movie, a documentary on family history. This movie super-passed the original novel, it reminds me of Márquez's ""One Hundred Years of Solitude"".";1;1;False tt0068646;LluisLopezPerez;06/02/2019;Amazing;8;"It's hard to find a moment in the film that isn't great. The Godfather lives up to the term masterpiece. A defining film in the history of cinema, ""The Godfather"" introduced a legendary filmmaker and several acting greats in the telling of an Italian American dynasty undone by the tragic circumstances of their criminal exploits. ""The Godfather"" is highly regarded as the greatest American movie of all-time. No other movie has garnered such praise as this movie has. Undoubtedly, everything has been meticulously put together to create an entertaining, captivating, and phenomenal masterpiece. Starring the best actor of all times (this movie can prove it), Marlon Brando, the rebellious prodigy, who electrified a generation and forever transformed the art of screen acting.";1;1;False tt0068646;drdavidgreenearizonaorthopedic;06/02/2019;All Time Favorite !;10;This movie is my favorite all the times.I have seen its all three parts repeatedly.;1;1;False tt0068646;pdschandra;04/02/2019;Text;10;This is the textbook of how to do gangster movies. There are more than 1000 movies am sure inspired by this movie world over by this epic. Acting, Cinematography, Makeup, Action name any department and this movie excels. Have watched it for more than 100 times yet it never fails to amuse me.;1;1;False tt0068646;jerryleeburnett;04/02/2019;Mob Movies;10;One of the greatest mob movies ever made. i wish they had 11 stars instead of just 10. i can't wait to see the next one in series.;1;1;False tt0068646;one9eighty;31/01/2019;THE family film;10;"Based on the Mario Puzo book, the Godfather, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, tells the story of Vito Corleone, Don Vito Corleone, or more accurately, the Godfather. His vision is to transfer power of the organisation to an understudy - ideally his son. With any luck, the organisation can transcend the crime background it was born from and become self-sufficient as a legitimate business.

Don Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the head of a mafia crime organisation in New York; he's both respected and feared. Times though are changing; other crime families want a piece of the action - the only way to do that is to remove Don Corleone. Don Corleone, despite the fear he brings to people, he's shown to be a family man - always looking out for his immediate and extended family. We get to see a fabulous juxtaposition as he's both celebrating the marriage of his only daughter, but in the background he's finalising important family business. After concluding the celebration it's back to normal, Corleone assumes that everything is moving forward with no issues and he'll soon be out of the hot-seat. When he barely just escapes an assassination attempt it's up to his family to look after him, the organisation, the family, and themselves if possible.

The Corleone sons try their best to be there in the hour of need. James Caan plays Sunny, hot headed and determined to make sure the family is respected, even if that means looking for a fight. John Cazale plays middle child Freddo, who enjoys more of a hedonistic lifestyle than he does a life of aggressive crime - more a lover than a fighter it's always assumed that Freddo wouldn't be a success as the family head. Robert Duvall plays Tom Hagan, who, although not family by blood, he's the adopted child who plays a vital role of advisor and lawyer to the family. Then there is Michael, played by Al Pacino, the black sheep of the family - never doing what is expected and living by his own rules. When he was expected to stay at home - he leaves for an education, when a scholarship could be paid for - he's off to fight in WWII, when he's expected to find a nice Italian wife - he brings an American home to visit the parents. It seems he's always doing the opposite of what is expected and he's the son that's always at loggerheads with his dad as attempts to find his own place in the world. With the family in turmoil, young Michael does what nobody expects, and makes a stand. All the time he's adamant that the stand he's making is short term and he has no plans to follow in his father's footsteps.

This is an amazing film - which isn't just my own opinion, heck, just look at film review and polls over the years and this film usually finds its way into top five lists. It's beautifully written by Puzo (I've read all his Godfather books) and the film sticks extremely close to the source material. Coppola does a fantastic job directing it, focussing on even the tiniest details, for example; camera heights to portray perception in scenes, small mannerisms that he's asked actors to show shots that compare and contrast people in the same shot. There are brilliant performances from everybody on and off screen - the score and photography is just as strong as the actor's performances - which is top class.

Although the film is crime and mafia themed, it's just as easy to think of this as a social film, looking at interactions and relationships, character developments and family life. It's a haunting and powerful depiction of a family caught in the middle of conflict and upheaval - it's a film that stayed with me from the first time I watched it and still gives me goose-bumps when I re-watch it 20-30 years later. This absolutely gets a 10 out of 10 from me.";1;1;True tt0068646;Joeybananas5;26/01/2019;Never before, never again....;10;They say lighting never strikes twice and, while I hope that it isn't true in film as it isn't true in nature, I don't know that we'll ever see a movie up to the caliber of The Godfather again. The writing, directing, acting, soundtrack, cinematography....everything about the film is an A+. I've seen it so many times and I'm such a movie buff that I've made it my life's goal to actually FIND a flaw with the film, but I always come up empty. I've heard the runtime criticized, but there are no superfluous parts to the movie that deserve cutting. I can only hope that we someday see a film that measures up, but won't hold my breath. Bravo.;1;1;False tt0068646;MaximKozhevnikov;25/01/2019;The most incredible art piece of the 20th century;9;One of the most amazing Movies in the history. Very close to the original source and masterfully done. I believe everyone should check out this masterpiece.;1;1;False tt0068646;melinilorenzo;25/01/2019;What a movie;10;Magnifico, very magnifico, truly magnifico, always magnifico, never-ending magnifique.;1;1;False tt0068646;melo4777;23/01/2019;Flawless;10;I had always thought this movie was overrated before I had watched it, it truly deserves its rating. I usually get bored when watching dialogue scenes in movies but I didn't even flinch watching this masterpiece, even gave me goosebumps. The music is also playing an important role in making this movie perfect.

Best film I ever watched;1;1;False tt0068646;dangrinzzi;22/01/2019;The best Film;10;Very Very Good, This is a Film to if watch everydays;1;1;True tt0068646;latke93;22/01/2019;The movie;10;The best movie ever made, real gangster strategy. Similar to Miller's crossing. Micheal Corleone is an ordinary, quiet Ivy league alumni, which is about to change when his father is wounded in a assassination attempt. Being a decorated war hero, and knowing truth about his family business he decides to take control of the situation by implementing an ingenious plan.;1;1;True tt0068646;ablazark;21/01/2019;A work to remember !;9;Classic, contemporary, contemporary, fantastic What to say more about a film that perfectly portrays a system that existed and exists until today?! Congratulations on the job. And watch it, a must for any movie lover.;1;1;False tt0068646;ghostfiendghost;20/01/2019;another positive godfather review;10;I can't say anything about this movie that anybody else has said better or more clear than I can Just watch it do not be intimidated because it is 3 hours long and if so split each movie into 3 parts so that there is 9 godfather movies or sometin.;1;1;False tt0068646;pusatqq;20/01/2019;movie;10;This is a Good movie for everyone to wacth it, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.;1;1;True tt0068646;DennisDaniel01;19/01/2019;CLASSIC;10;ALL TIME GREATS COME TOGETHER ON THIS ONE LOVE IT. I ALWAYS WANTED TO BE IN A MOVIE WE ALL GREAT ACTORS AROUND ME MAKING A CLASSIC FILM WIT THERE SPECIAL TALENTS IN IT WHY NOT .;1;1;False tt0068646;bhaimanish-38940;19/01/2019;Must Watch;9;One of the best trilogy made till date. Despite the slow move of the movie sequences it catches the attention of the viewer. A better way to represent the DON families of that time.;1;1;False tt0068646;sdavis-83276;18/01/2019;GREAT FILM, STRONG ACTING;10;This is a strong film with great acting. Marlon is at this BEST in this film. The story line is strong and well written. Audiences are holding on to every moment to see what is going to happen next. #FABULOUS;1;1;False tt0068646;samroudaki;18/01/2019;gold;10;One of the best movies i have ever seen! 10 stars out of 10;1;1;False tt0068646;nutu_;17/01/2019;Must-Watch movie;10;This movie is a good one and its on the must-watch list, seriously, you must watch this :D;1;1;False tt0068646;amribah;17/01/2019;a masterpiece.;10;This is with out a doubt one of the most beautifully made gangster films in history.the acting was simply amazing and mesmerizing .the script and directing were one of the most brilliant and iconic in the film industry! Francis Ford Coppola did a remarkable job.for me it is a 10 out of 10 and a must see.;1;1;False tt0068646;as-88306;17/01/2019;Flashy glamour of the traditional gangs.;10;It absorbs us so effectively it never has to hurry. There is something in the measured passage of time as Don Corleone hands over his reins of power that would have made a shorter, faster moving film unseemly. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you can't quite understand unless you've read the novel.;1;1;False tt0068646;shiyarkendirci;16/01/2019;awesome;10;Awesome movie, i wath that movie almost 10 times. Awesome movie, i wath that movie almost 10 times.;1;1;True tt0068646;drvikasgupta12;15/01/2019;I love this title;10;It is a very attractive and unique title. I love it. It is attracting and perfect for the information provided in the context.;1;1;True tt0068646;abdulbakikalan;15/01/2019;Wonderful film;10;A film showing the quality in many ways. Actually, you're not really getting bored, and you won't see any unnecessary replica.;1;1;True tt0068646;dejancuric;09/01/2019;Masterpiece;10;Probably the best movie ever made. This kind of movies you can watch over and over without getting bored;1;1;False tt0068646;jpgranera;04/01/2019;Oh my Godfather!;10;"I don't know how I had not watched this film until just a week ago, but I'm glad because this is not a movie to watch with distractions or when you are too young because you will not enjoy it as much as an adult does. I saw this movie and immediately become an addict, watched it at least 3 more times the same week. There is so much to talk about it! I found it hard to think someone doesn't enjoying this one. The cast, the great dialogue, big plot twists, all the emotions, everything makes it just great. This is no a film as many of these times that need a 4K quality to be appealing, you will not waste your time, every minute of the almost 3 hours is worth. You will want even more. If you haven't watch it, what are you waiting for? (""This is an offer you can't refuse"")";1;1;False tt0068646;poliak-branislav;02/01/2019;essence of cinema...;10;"We know from Gay Talese's book Honor Thy Father that being a professional mobster isn't all sunshine and roses. More often, it's the boredom of stuffy rooms and a bad diet of carry-out food, punctuated by brief, terrible bursts of violence. This is exactly the feel of ""The Godfather,"" which brushes aside the flashy glamour of the traditional gangster picture and gives us what's left: fierce tribal loyalties, deadly little neighborhood quarrels in Brooklyn, and a form of vengeance to match every affront.";1;1;False tt0068646;joeflemming;05/09/2018;One of the greatest movies of all time;9;Rarely has a sequel been better than the original and in this case that is saying a lot. The Godfather 2 has Francis Ford Coppola bettering his original film which is such a tall task seeing as The Godfather was already so well received upon release. All emotions one can find in a life are presented here. Al Pacino is absolutely sublime as Michael Corleone who has taken over the business and family even though he is young. All the actors are so good you cannot fathom anyone else in their roles. The cinematography is exquisite and the direction so good it makes you wonder what happened to Coppola come the 80s. This is a must watch for any person who appreciates cinema.;1;1;False tt0068646;MichaelMRamey;26/08/2018;One Of The Greatest;9;I understand that this film has been argued as flawless, but I'm giving it a nine based on two reasons from a personal standpoint. This film can drag on at times which can become a bit dull and Goodfellas I think is a better film so I can't possibly give The Godfather a ten. That being said this film still lives up to the hype. The story is fascinating, the characters are well structured and this movie can really bring out every human emotion in its audience. The runtime be damned, this is a film you can easily watch over and over again.;1;1;False tt0068646;deram-77963;25/08/2018;In the top ten;10;Probably one of the greatest movies ever made to date. The carbage movies today can't even come close.;1;1;False tt0068646;filipvladov;16/08/2018;very good movie;10;The acting is absolutely professional and the story line is perfect;1;1;True tt0068646;danidog;15/08/2018;The best movie made ever;10;This is the best film made ever.

To learn and to understand how to make good movies The Godfather is the best movie ever that nobody filmed until now except Coppola. A perfect cinematic scenes, locations, art designs, wardrobe, plot, role acting, direction, art department, script, etc. This film has all the ingredients to know how to make a brilliant good film. Unfortunately knowing all of these parts too many people adding structural parts of the movies and making with all these ingredients didn't make a movie as Francis Ford Coppola made.;1;1;False tt0068646;Sfilmmaker;15/08/2018;Best;10;Love this movie and all of the GF movies It is indeed the most classic film history, each shot, each line, is so delicate and rich in meaning. People should spend more time watching this movie.;1;1;False tt0068646;Sfilmmaker;15/08/2018;Best;10;Men must watch! The Shawshank Redemption and Godfather are like two sides of a man. Freedom and constraint are actually the same thing.;1;1;False tt0068646;vebiwang;24/06/2018;Al Pacino Best Movies;9;At first i tough this movie will be a boring one. but after watching it ... it give me a gosebump... the storyline so good .. it makes me know how cruel the world back then;1;1;False tt0068646;MovieManChuck;22/06/2018;Coppola's Crime Family Classic;;"4/4 ESSENTIAL

The Godfather (1972) took many aspects essential to a film and pushed them past anything that had been done before. This movie takes the Corleone family, a mafia of sorts based out of NY, and creates for them an exclusive atmosphere. We get to see the Corleones in their criminal endeavors, interacting with the other crime families in NY, and working to make their family come out on top completely from their point of view. We never feel anything ""civilian"", nothing ever tugs at you that these people are evil. This is due in part to the phenomenal performances of (specifically) Al Pacino and Marlon Brando.

As far as script, any screenplay that can isolate your conscience and also entertain you is truly Grade A for a movie of this genre. Mario Puzo, of course, had experience with this story as it's based on his novel. That made him the obvious and excellent choice. These characters don't feel like actors at any point, they feel like family. Every member of the family has his own strengths and weakness that develop over the course of the movie, and they balance each other out perfectly. It's rare to find a movie with characters this real... nothing feels forced.

Coppola's keen attention to the smallest details makes this movie even more perfect. Look out for oranges appearing in the movie: they will always foreshadow a death in the Corleone family... He will always accompany the tone with lighting (a perfect example being the beginning sequence, which interchanges the mortician's visit to The Godfather and Connie's wedding with Carlos) and colors (darker shades of yellow and velvet are prevalent in most scenes with Don Corleone). Also, in The Godfather, there is a noticeable camera theme: fading drag-shots. Whenever these montages come up, they are accompanied by a very upbeat melody. Coppola borrows this tactic 11 years later when directing The Outsiders (1983).

The Godfather is a true classic, and my all-time favorite movie. It over-delivers and then some. Make a point to see this epic.";1;1;False tt0068646;apjc;10/06/2018;It's the ultimate groundbreaker in mob films.;9;Look at the cast, the director and writer, you know full well this is a film to watch, even if it's about an Italian pizzeria. Joking aside this was The Godfather of so many great mob films of later date. Certain well known Italians and Sicilians didn't like it, probably didn't run the studio and couldn't make an offer they can't refuse.Does romanticize these murderous clans somewhat, but does portray the Sicilian honour, blood feud and just business ideology well . This is a must see.;1;1;False tt0068646;SubhanBakhtiyarov;06/06/2018;Literally, A Masterpiece!;10;"Truth be told, The Godfather doesn't need a review. Without undue emphasis, Francis Ford Coppola's direction, Brando's and Pacino's performances are literally flawless.

The first time I watched ""The Godfather"", I was a child and it was the most astonishing film I'd ever seen. Due to my introversion, I was spending too much leisure time in front of TV, and consequently I watched many films during my childhood. However, I can hardly remember those films. But The Godfather isn't one of them. I remember The Godfather as if I watched it yesterday. The Godfather made me experience feelings of admiration. There is almost no film that has 3 hours running time and didn't bore me. But The Godfather was a breathtaking film for me.

I admire Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo for reducing the thick, best-selling book to the controllable screenplay which anticipated the expectations of the millions who had already read the book. For me, the strength of the Mario Puzo-Francis Ford Coppola script is the unbelievable interaction of all these characters.

Seeing 'The Godfather' is still one of the biggest milestones of the film industry 46 years after its release confirms the film's status as an outdated masterpiece.

Whenever I see it, it becomes better and impeccable.";1;1;False tt0068646;Hasan_Akif;27/05/2018;The Best of All Time;10;The epic story of an Italian mafia family in America in the 1940s. I've read your book, but the movie is completely different. The cinematography, the music, the acting, everything is perfect. The best in the world;1;1;False tt0068646;melas1984;26/05/2018;Best movie I've seen!;10;The best movie I have ever seen in my life!

Great actors, great scenes and plot. I haven't read the book but I am planning to. A must see if you haven't!;1;1;False tt0068646;suntek-31806;15/05/2018;The greatest movie ever made;10;Coppola's masterpiece is the greatest movie ever made in my opinion. The actors are amazing, the roles are fit perfect to the actors, the plot is fantastic, and the music.... that music is perfect, it is terrifying, and give you goosebumps, and fit absolutely to the depressing moments of the The Godfather. I recommend this movie to everyone who can appreciate the pleasure of the movie arts.;1;1;False tt0068646;JokerMichel;12/05/2018;Amazing;8;Very interesting story, great plot , great script, and amazing actors ! I don't think we could see a perfect movie like this in many years to come Im glad I finally watched it;1;1;False tt0068646;statistikaanomalos;09/05/2018;Amazing movie for academic and experienced viewers!;9;Coppola's Godfather is a landmark for gangster movies combining accurate storytelling, quality production, artistic freedom when necessary and a slow paced rhythm, allowing viewers to fully appreciate action scenes. Al Pacino is also delivering a sample of his future increasing talent along with Marlon Brando, the king of good looks and style;1;1;False tt0068646;reddaffair;09/05/2018;Amazing!;10;A film with a solid structure that is still relevant to contemporary audiences.;1;1;False tt0068646;bruskismail;08/05/2018;Best movie;10;This is by far the best movie ever made, despite being a low budget movie. Almost fifty years after its release there ain't no movie that can describe criminal life in us and at the same time include so much history. Watching this movie is like read a whole library of books.;1;1;False tt0068646;satarquality;07/05/2018;Nice;;I love this movie and all of the GF movies. I see something new every time I have seen it (countless, truly). The story of tragedy and (little) comedy that exists in this film is easily understood by people all over the world. This film has been called an American story however I have met others who have seen this movie in other languages and they seem to have the same love and appreciation for it that I do. I love the characters and all of the different personalities that they represent not just in families but in society itself. It seems like the entire cast is part of every other movie that I love as well. The sounds, music, color and light in the film are just as much a part of the film as the people. This could be attributed to the method in which it was filmed. At many parts of the film I can still find myself feeling the emotions conveyed in the film. I never tire of appreciating this film. I thank God that FFC is an American treasure. We are fortunate to have him.;1;1;True tt0068646;florrrentin;06/05/2018;Masterpiece;10;Godfather Trilogy, is a masterpiece of international cinematography!;1;1;False tt0068646;florrrentin;06/05/2018;Masterpiece;10;The Godfather Trilogy, is a masterpiece of international cinematography!;1;1;False tt0068646;ShadowRomeo1784;02/05/2018;Probably The Best Film That I Have Watched in My History of Watching Films;10;My Personal Rating 10/10

This film is an Timeless Classic Masterpiece. the Acting the Soundtrack the Atmosphere the Cinematography almost everything on this Film is unbelievably almost Perfect and aged like a Great Wine, i never saw anything like that in my history of watching Movies. the more time you watch this Movie the more you will love it, that's what i exactly did. This is now my Personal Favorite Movie yet, but it might not be a movie for everyone though. especially if you are not used on Slow Only Dialogue Films.

Pros:



Cons:



(See. For Me That's The Beauty of It. Every Time You Watch it You Learn Something, but I understand Some People That Only Watch Films Only Once)

Rating On Each Aspect

;1;1;False tt0068646;hbishk;30/04/2018;Wonderful movie;10;Scenario, directing, representation and cinematography masterpiece;1;1;False tt0068646;aliciasolo;30/04/2018;The Greatest;10;"One of the greatest movies of all time. The cast & characters were perfect.";1;1;False tt0068646;appvictorica;26/04/2018;greatest film;9;What a movie, what a cast. I love this flick so much, it blows me away every time I watch it.;1;1;False tt0068646;anwarilmi;26/04/2018;excellent film !!!!!!!;10;The most wonderful criminal film with the rebellion of the son makes you do not believe what you see !!!!!!!;1;1;True tt0068646;sassonlonner;24/04/2018;You Can't Call Yourself A Film Lover if you Haven't Seen This;10;Is The Godfather my favorite film ever made? No, but it definitely is one of the best movies out there. Not only does it follow an incredibly complex story, but it is filmed beautifly, and the acting from Marlon Brando and Al Pacino is brilliant. If you call yourself a film buff and haven't seen The Godfather, you definitely have some work to do. I saw The Godfather for the first time when I was probably around 14 or 15, and had some trouble fully grasping why people love it so much. But again, I was young and probably just thought to myself, oh, the movie's old so it's boring. Boring however is definitely not a word to describe this film. It is the complete opposite of boring, with more suspense than just about any other movie ever made. Coppola did not want a movie which was from start to finish mafia gangsters shooting at each other, but instead a movie that makes you bite your nails either hoping for a character to survive or the opposite... The characters (originally from Mario Puzo's book) are either characters you root for, or they are terrible people who don't deserve to live. One of the humanizing elements that is critical to numerous characters in the film is their love for their families. Marlon Brando's character of Vito Corleone is a terrible man, who has had dozens if not hundreds of people killed before, but he has a deep love and care for his family. To sum up what I think about this film without spoiling anything, even if you're not into the mafia genre, if you are a person who claims to like film, this movie is absolutely a must see.;1;1;False tt0068646;nobody-27784;24/04/2018;What do you include?;10;Reducing a fat, thick, best-selling novel to manageable screenplay terms has always been a major problem for any filmmaker blessed (or cursed) with the assignment. What do you include? What do you leave out? Perhaps even more important, how do you cast to anticipate the expectations of the millions who have already read the book?

They did it to the fullest!;1;1;False tt0068646;darnasius;23/04/2018;Insane;;This movie is insane. It the greatest movie I've ever saw.;1;1;False tt0068646;trandafireliza;22/04/2018;VERY GOOD;9;Very good movie, one of the best movies. I see last one, I want To give you so many movies made so good;1;1;False tt0068646;ThanasisProtatos;12/02/2018;An unmatched classic!;10;Although the movie is three hours long, it absorbs us so effectively it never has to hurry. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you can't quite understand unless you've read the novel. Or perhaps you can, just by the way the characters look at each other.;1;1;False tt0068646;Pjtaylor-96-138044;09/02/2018;Regarded a classic for good reason, Coppola's crime epic is sweeping in scale yet intimate in scope.;9;"Coppola's crime saga is sweeping in scale yet intimate in scope, focusing as much on family dynamics as mafia machinations, and is all the more impactful for it. 'The Godfather (1972)' honestly feels epic, despite the fact that its relatively few key events are all quite contained (considering it spans nearly three-hours.) This effect is hard to put your finger on but certainly tangible, especially in retrospect; it really feels as though you've witnessed a journey, the beginning of an empire or at least a transitioning period within it, in a way which few films have achieved. It's actually a fair while before we learn anything out-rightly illegitimate is actually transpiring, though, and even then its all treated so casually that it really does feel just like the family business. That's a real strength of the picture, too: how little it relies on needless exposition to convey its characters or world. It is refreshing to get a truly inside perspective on sometimes unseemly events without ever being bombarded with morality, but instead trusted to make up our own minds about several situations that are shaded in grey. While the piece is a little long and can sometimes meander, several explosive sequences and character-driven moments add up, in equal measure, to an excellent experience overall that has defined the gangster genre. It is regarded a classic for good reason. 9/10";1;1;False tt0068646;Kirpianuscus;06/01/2018;unique;;I saw it very late. the fame was one of basic motives. the theme - the second cause. for many friends, to see it was an experience. and it is an experience. without can say why. because , in a film about Mafia , for a special public, at first sigh, all is perfect. so perfect than, scene by scene, it becomes more than a masterpiece. great actors. special performances. memorable scenes. dialogues and situations and a cold feeling. a film about values. and near every day reality. and choices, errors and mistakes. who, after decades, remains fresh in memory. as an unique meet.;1;1;False tt0068646;BonaFideBOSS;22/11/2017;MASTERPIECE - Best Movie of All Time;10;"The Godfather is the best movie of all time because this movie got the most splendid crew. Al Pacino as Michael Corleone, Marlon Brando as Vito Corleone, Francis Ford Coppola (Director), Mario Puzo, the author of the book ""The Godfather"" on which the movie is based on, Nino Rota (composer). This is a TRUE MAFIA FAMILY drama movie. Epic in scope while maintaining a patience and intimacy characteristic of Italian art cinema, THE GODFATHER is rightly considered one of the greatest films ever made. The Godfather continues to influence producers of movies, television shows, and video games more than 30 years after its release. Nino Rota's score, the sumptuous set design, and Pacino's raspy pseudo- whisper have become part of our collective cultural memory.";1;1;False tt0068646;Morten_5;27/09/2017;Brilliant;10;"Yesterday, I was lucky to be able to watch 175 minutes of pure movie magic, restored and at a big screen, thanks to Cnema in Norrköping.

The pros: The incredible attention to detail in this impressively well-written and directed film. The iconic characters and intrigues that have since been the model for so many mafia movies. The brilliant acting from great Marlon Brando. The music by composer Nino Rota that is now almost more famous than the movie itself.

The cons: Marlon Brando is dead and Francis Ford Coppola haven't reached this level of mastery again since ""Apocalypse Now"" in 1979.";1;1;False tt0068646;RealChristian14;04/09/2017;The Story of Michael Corleone Begins In The Godfather;10;"Legendary actor Marlon Brando and Al Pacino,a young upstart who is only appearing on his third film and second major film role star in this classic film based on the bestselling novel by Mario Puzo about the mob in ""The Godfather"".

This arguably the best film made in cinema history tells the story of the Corleone organized crime family and the succession of the leadership of the family from the aging Don Vito Corleone,portrayed by Brando in an Oscar winning role, to his youngest son,Michael,portrayed by Pacino.Other members of the cast include James Caan, Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,John Cazale and Talia Shire.The film directed by Francis Ford Coppola tells the story of how Michael's transformation from being an outsider into becoming the mob boss and how the Corleone family were able to retain the power the family has enjoyed under Don Vito against the rival families such as the Tattaglias and the Barzinis.

No question that this film has remained popular among movie fans after more than 40 years it has been released theatrically. It provides a great story of the mob that was actually based on real- life gangsters and it provides the movie fan a view about gangsterism. Added to that,we also will get intrigued on the transformation of Michael from a war hero and an idealistic young man into ruthless and cold-hearted character as he assumes the position of the Godfather.The story clearly explains everything from the moment that his father Don Vito was almost assassinated until he decided to kill enemies of the family such as Virgin Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey and the untimely death of his Sicilian wife Apollonia,who was killed when the car she was driving was bombed. Aside from having a great story,there were a lot of interesting characters in addition to Don Vito and Michael such as Sonny Corleone,Tom Hagen,Kay Adams-Corleone, Connie Corleone and many others.Great performances by the thespians who portrayed them contributed a lot to these colorful characters.Finally,the script written by Coppola and Puzo remain memorable after many years as many of the dialogues continue to be popular such as ""I will given him an offer he cannot refuse"" and many others.No question that the screenplay being imitated and lampooned for so many years is a testament to its continuous popularity.

After having stated all these characteristics of cinematic excellence,there is no question that ""The Godfather"" remains to arguably the best film ever made.";1;1;True tt0068646;tlrg-legend;01/09/2017;True masterpiece;10;This movie is strong, good script, great casting, excellent acting, and over the top directing. It is hard to fine a movie done this well, it is 29 years old and has aged well. Even if the viewer does not like mafia type of movies, he or she will watch the entire film, the audiences is glued to what will happen next as the film progresses. Its about, family, loyalty, greed, relationships, and real life. This is a great mix, and the artistic style make the film memorable.;1;1;False tt0068646;felixmartinsson;02/08/2017;Family is important;9;"What matters is family, you pick a side and you stay on that side, if you switch side, you're the enemy and will forever be the enemy until you're dead. You look out for your family, and make sure everyone is okay. You don't discuss business at the table when having dinner. Power and Money - ""Business"" comes second! It's the Corleone family against Barzini and Tattaglia and 3 other mob leaders. The Corleone family is the biggest most powerful mafia family in New York, and the family you turn to if you need a problem to disappear. A lot of blood is spilled and Don Vito Corleone also known as the Godfather (Brandon Marlon) is almost killed in a shooting by another gang. Mike and Sonny are his sons. Sonny is his right hand at first until one day when he gets killed by a gang after going after his sisters boyfriend for assaulting her. Then Mike steps in and takes over, Don Vito gets older and more cripple and soon he dies too, that's when Mike (Al Pacino) becomes the new Godfather, and kills the 5 mafia leaders, to take control over New York, and eliminate all potential threats.

Ah, I just love this movie, slow pace and leaves nothing for your imagination (sometimes I don't like that about a film, but it works in this one). Can we just take a minute to appreciate Marlon Brando's role interpretation, I love the way he worked with the body language, his voice and acting calm. And same goes for Al Pacino, just amazing! I'm so glad I finally got to see this film.";1;1;True tt0068646;connerbrown-58742;01/08/2017;amazing master piece;;this is a masterpiece this is incredible and amazing watch this movie you won't regret it this is cool i love it people call it amazing and wonderful and outstanding it is cool and it has moments that other movies probably don't have enjoy this movie it is incredible and it has incredible action scenes and incredible special effects and directing;1;1;False tt0068646;t_knox-19544;29/07/2017;The perfect mobster movie and much more;10;"The Godfather is a film of undeniable triumph; everything from the set to the sound and lighting, the score to the amazing cast, is perfect and Francis Ford Coppola's vision does justice to Mario Puzo's stylish crime novel, with the author partnering with Coppola on the screenplay. The film is a masterpiece of acting and direction, with Coppola's influence clear, and the work of stars such as Marlon Brando, Al Pacino and Robert Duvall centre-stage in a beautifully dark and corrupt tale of a powerful Italian crime family. Never has the Mafia been better depicted in cinema, and I opine never will it be again.";1;1;True tt0068646;jmeador-09026;28/07/2017;Stands the Test of Time;10;I have to be honest - I first watched this at about 19 years old, and I did not like it much. I thought it was slow, and I missed a lot of the subtleties throughout the movie.

However, having watched it recently at 32, I am more appreciative of the slow-burn classic that this movie is. The acting is superb, and it feels like everything - even scenes, time periods that are left out of the movie - is intentional. The sequel makes this movie experience even better, as it once again makes you ponder the unknown gap between Part 1 and Part 2. Maybe that's addressed in the novels, I don't know.

Furthermore, this movie is complete with an epic finale that still blows my mind. I get so sick of movies that have that 'Stephen King Fizzle' nowadays!;1;1;False tt0068646;sarah-toce;29/06/2017;Classic Cinema;10;"Could it get any better than the Godfather? Classic film with iconic plot twists, incredible performances and an overall feeling of ""familia""...no wonder it stands the test of time. The performers were at the top of their games in this one. Maybe they should make a modern- day follow up. I mean, they are remaking everything else. Why not? Need a writer? Let me know! :)";1;1;False tt0068646;stormhawk2020;19/06/2017;A timeless classic;10;"The son of a Mafia boss returns from the war and following an attempt on his father's life becomes more and more embroiled in the shadowy world of organized crime. Francis Ford Coppola's classic gangster saga is the story of a criminal dynasty headed by Marlon Brando in one of his most iconic roles. Coppola's direction is deceptively simple in that he uses no gimmicks or stylistic tricks; he merely allows the story to unfold and lets the superb cast do their thing. Brando's mumbling family and loyalty obsessed don has since become part of popular culture folklore (along with the classic score) and all other accompanying performances are top notch, from James Caan's hot headed Santino to Robert Duval's purely business orientated adviser. But this film is really the story of Michael's transition from honest war hero to shadowy underworld figure, played by Al Pacino in his finest role. The pivotal scene in which his newborn godson is baptized while Michael himself, the newborn ""Godfather"", is baptized in blood is an all time great. This is the birth of the modern gangster film and with the possible exception of Goodfellas, it is still to be surpassed.";1;1;False tt0068646;gilhardwick-46440;14/05/2017;Louis Restaurant subtitles;9;"I hope nobody minds, but there was some discussion about missing English subtitles in the Louis Restaurant meeting scene with Michael and Sollozzo, and I had difficulty finding any apart from a general translation found here which does little to help beat and continuity.

I think this effort does the trick, it fits the dialogue as far as I can tell, not being even passing fluent in Italian. But I don't think subtitles should be exact translation anyway; different languages have their own feel to them.

If I am in breach of anyone's copyright after all these years, please let me know.

1:25:25.23,1:25:26.21: I'm sorry

1:25:26.21,1:25:27.04: Leave it alone.

1:25:31.13,1:25:35.02: What happened to your\Nfather was business.

1:25:37.22,1:25:42.04: I have much respect\Nfor your father.

1:25:42.05,1:25:45.14: But your father,\Nhis thinking is old-fashioned.

1:25:47.07,1:25:51.08: You must understand\Nwhy I had to do that.

1:25:51.12,1:25:54.50: I understand those things...

1:26:09.40,1:26:15.53: I had the unspoken support\Nof the other Family dons.

1:26:16.07,1:26:21.07: If your father were in better health,

1:26:21.15,1:26:23.07: without his eldest son running things,

1:26:24.15,1:26:26.07: no disrespect intended,

1:26:26.14,1:26:27.25: we wouldn't have this nonsense.

1:26:30.21,1:26:32.21: How do you say ?

1:28:50.17,1:28:52.01: Everything all right?

1:28:53.08,1:28:55.01: I respect myself, understand,

1:28:55.19,1:28:57.01: and cannot allow another\Nman to hold me back.

1:28:59.11,1:29:02.11: What happened was unavoidable.

1:29:03.14,1:29:06.21: We will stop fighting until your father\Nis well and can resume bargaining.

1:29:06.42,1:29:08.54: No vengeance will be taken.

1:29:09.19,1:29:09.19: We will have peace,

1:29:10.15,1:29:13.21: but your family should no longer interfere.

Thanks, and kindest regards,

Gil";1;1;False tt0068646;AlsExGal;25/02/2017;An examination of the Mafia from the view of the executive suite;10;"The Godfather films (the first two at least) are operatic in their intent and are as sweeping in their view of the human condition as any American film ever made. They are not violent slice-of-life character-driven action films like Goodfellas or ""The Sopranos,"" which are a superb film and an extremely watchable cable series, respectively. The Godfather is, to my mind, superior filmmaking because of its propulsive narrative and iconic characters.

What makes ""The Godfather"" great is that the characters in it know they are doing evil things, but rationalize it to themselves that ""the end justifies the means"". Coppola makes the hypocrisy and utterly failed values system pretty clear. A baptism inter-cut with scenes of murder...Vito Corleone is at his daughter's wedding, but sits there planning brutal mob stuff in his office...leave the gun take the cannoli...OK to cheat on your wife but ""dont discuss business at the table"" and so on.

I had to watch this movie several times before I completely ""got"" it. The plot alone is very difficult to follow with all of the questions it raises. However it is one of those movies that rewards the viewers with those very questions for us to ponder and with its richness of story and character. The questions are about how people who regard themselves as ""good"" can do terrible things and justify it to themselves. ""The Godfather"" posits one of the universal problems in life - what is the nature of evil, and how can we recognize it in all its forms? How can people who do evil things think of themselves as basically ""good"" , how can they lie to themselves as they do?

Central to all of this is the metamorphosis of Michael Corleone. He starts out as the returned all American WWII soldier with the respectable but outsider (in reference to ""The Family"") girlfriend, Kay, and by just doing what he thinks he must do to protect his family, one thing leads to another, and he ends up the cynical head of the Corleone crime family, morally miles from where he was when we first meet him.";1;1;True tt0068646;lucho8908;05/01/2017;Some of the most compelling characters are in this movie.;10;A classical film, deep characters, compelling story and awesome photography. Sit down and enjoy one of the most best movies of all time.

The grow in Michael Corleone is remarkable during the development of the movie. You will never feel as much fear and respect as for Don Vito in any other gangster (if one dares to call this film a gangster film) movie.

And the opening scene of this movie is the material of legends. The death of Sony Corleone is the best scene in the entire movie. You could dissect this movie scene by scene and find pure cinematographic gold in each one of them.

Definitively a must see for everyone.;1;1;True tt0068646;magnona-666;05/01/2017;The GREATEST movie ever <);10;"you will learn a lot from this movie about life, love, revenge, growing up, power, friendship & the most important of course Family :)) the relationship between Micheal and his father it's alone need another movie.. how Micheal character complicity changed but he still the same, what could revenge and anger achieved when they exits in smart person.

-It's not personal, it's just business. -I don't like violence, i'm businessman blood is a big expense. -Revenge is a dish best served cold -i'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse -Never hate your enemies, it effect your judgment. -Great men not born great, they grow great. the quotes in this film are endless..

it's a life guide movie not just another Hollywood movie.";1;1;False tt0068646;Rahal97;29/12/2016;the finest gangster movie ever made. take a bow!;10;Ladies and gentlemen, if you have watched The Godfather than you have witnessed what can be called the greatest movie of all time! Simply flawless.

The Godfather aged like fine wine the older it gets the better it is.

Great plot, legendary acting and directing, violent, bold and no gangster movie is as nearly as good as The Godfather. The Italians sure know how to make great gangster movie. This movie proved to everyone that Marlon Brando is the best actor in the world and started the career of the legendary Al Pacino, this says something. If you are starving for greatness watch The Godfather it is nothing less than a masterpiece and if you have seen it, take a bow!;1;1;False tt0068646;tohoanvu;02/11/2016;Nice;10;"I am not a big fan of the sequels even the second is a big step down from this one. What a cast? Like an earlier reviewer said; REWATCHABLE!! Yes, I am Italian, not a Sicilian, and I have seen it hundreds of times. What a cast: Brando, Pacino, Caan, Duvall. Even the supporting cast is excellent with the film noir legend Richard Conte as Barzini. Puzo wrote such a rich, deep script. The characters suck you in and are so lifelike. Each brother is radically different from the other. Fredo, the mama's boy, the useless one who Michael kills off in the second one. Sonny, the human volcano, with a temper that has to be seen to be believed. Michael, the quiet and deadly one most like Vito but colder more ruthless. Michael was always outside the family looking in; he was held in contempt by the rest as the soft college boy who didn't want to get his hands dirty. This is the answer to the riddle of how he could kill Fredo, his own brother, later in the second one. Notice where he sits at the wedding, as far away from the family as he can get.";1;1;False tt0068646;klabys;31/10/2016;good;10;"Marlon Brando's old flame that has glowed for years, and flickered along a trail bumpy with mediocre pictures, shines higher and brighter than ever. The old irresistible magic is revived in Paramount's ""The Godfather"" in his intuitive grasp of Mario Puzo's Don Corleone, a living symbol of the poetic translation of his name, the lionhearted.

Brando is cool as the godfather, sagacious head of the Corleone ""family,"" most powerful of the five ""families"" of organized crime in New York. He is relaxed as the loving, indulgent patriarch of his large blood family, in his mansion behind an iron fence in Long Beach, L.I. And he is terrifically appealing as the man who cheats death, recovers from bullet wounds inflicted by a rival gang, recuperates at home to enjoy his garden and grandchildren until he dies of old age. Once he comes out of seclusion, to warn chiefs of the five ""families"" that the gang war must stop.

Brando is the strong magnet that will draw fans to ""The Godfather."" But behind-the-scenes creativity is of equal value to this film of towering proportions.

The immensity of the project must have been staggering, but producer Albert S. Ruddy, director Francis Ford Coppola and screenwriter Mario Puzo, with Coppola, make it seem easy.";1;1;False tt0068646;davidcafor;27/10/2016;Traces the arc of this doomed idealism with a beauty that is still fresh.;9;"The son of a Mafia boss returns from the war and following an attempt on his father's life becomes more and more embroiled in the shadowy world of organised crime. Francis Ford Coppola's classic gangster saga is the story of a criminal dynasty headed by Marlon Brando in one of his most iconic roles. Coppola's direction is deceptively simple in that he uses no gimmicks or stylistic tricks; he merely allows the story to unfold and lets the superb cast do their thing. Brando's mumbling family and loyalty obsessed don has since become part of popular culture folklore (along with the classic score) and all other accompanying performances are top notch, from James Caan's hot headed Santino to Robert Duval's purely business orientated adviser. But this film is really the story of Michael's transition from honest war hero to shadowy underworld figure, played by Al Pacino in his finest role. The pivotal scene in which his newborn godson is baptised while Michael himself, the newborn ""Godfather"", is baptised in blood is an all time great. This is the birth of the modern gangster film and with the possible exception of Goodfellas, it is still to be surpassed.";1;1;False tt0068646;looeydoggy;21/09/2016;Godfather Review;;The Godfather is simply put a masterpiece. I would highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't had the chance to enjoy Coppola's best movie. First off, the actor's performances are top notch. Al-Gore especially does an amazing job as Michael, always wearing a serious face, really becoming a very professional gangster. The other actors also contribute immensely to the film but none stand out quite like Robert Duvall, Besides Al-Gore. From humble beginnings as Bo Riddley, Duvall really has come a far way as he plays the character of Tom Hagen, Lawyer of the mob. Next there's the shots. Almost all shots have a purpose, from the beginning shot over the godfather's shoulder to slowly approaching a man sleeping with his horse's head. Similar to how shots serve a purpose to the movies progression, so do props. An iconic prop from the godfather are the oranges. Coppola places oranges in scenes to foreshadow that something bad is about to happen, like when the godfather gets shot he's buying oranges! The sound track was also very well done. The violins really give a mobby feel and how the music built up during certain scenes really helped build up tension.(Spoilers) My favorite parts of the movie were when they hit the driver near the statue of liberty, when Michael kills the opposing mob boss and cop, The final scene when Michael closes the door on his girlfriend, and finally, my favorite, the epic finale where each mob boss is killed of one by one as Michael becomes a literal godfather to his sister's child and the godfather of the mob. Overall, I really enjoyed the Godfather for doing everything right, 10 out of 10;1;1;True tt0068646;ohjonkeat;12/09/2016;Subtle;9;The Godfather (including Part 2 for purpose of this review) is probably the most analysed film of all time, so really I don't see the point in repeating any of the rhetorics. Rather, what I intend to provide here is my honest two cents of this film.

The Godfather is not an easy film to watch, so it baffled me at that time of watching for the first time (and still baffles me to this day) how it is so universally loved by almost anyone who has watched it. Firstly, there are so many characters that I gave up remembering anyone other than the Corleone family. Secondly, the script is so subtle and tight that the moment I missed a single sentence, I did not get the next scene. It was no easy feat to follow every sentence given the frequent mutterings, so subtitles are almost indispensable. In the end, I pretty much referred to the plot synopsis every 5 minutes.

Make no mistake, the reasons above are also what probably makes the Godfather regarded as one of the greatest films of all time. It just surprises me how a film as subtle as the Godfather has received just as much attention as 'lighter' classics such as Star Wars, Pulp Fiction, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, etc.

Ultimately, my verdict is that the Godfather is a great, iconic film from the 70s era, but my honest take is that the Godfather is perhaps a little over-hyped (not overrated, but over-hyped) to the extent that it gets more exposure than some of the other equally great films from the olden era. For that, the Godfather is a great film, but is not in my consideration for the greatest film of all time.;1;1;False tt0068646;abdulla-20882;26/07/2016;No one can beat it. one cult classic movie ever;10;The Godfather is a 1972 American crime film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Albert S. Ruddy, based on Mario Puzo's best-selling novel of the same name. It stars Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as the leaders of a fictional New York crime family. The story, spanning 1945 to 1955, chronicles the family under the patriarch Vito Corleone, focusing on the transformation of Michael Corleone (Pacino) from reluctant family outsider to ruthless Mafia boss.

Paramount Pictures obtained the rights to the novel before it gained popularity for the price of $80,000. Studio executives had trouble finding a director, as their first few candidates turned down the position. They and Coppola disagreed over who would play several characters, in particular Vito and Michael. Filming was done on location and completed earlier than scheduled. The musical score was composed primarily by Nino Rota with additional pieces by Carmine Coppola.

The film was the highest-grossing film of 1972 and was for a time the highest-grossing film ever made. It won the Oscars for Best Picture, Best Actor (Brando) and Best Adapted Screenplay (for Puzo and Coppola). Its seven other Oscar nominations included Pacino, James Caan, and Robert Duvall for Best Supporting Actor and Coppola for Best Director. It was followed by sequels The Godfather Part II (1974) and Part III (1990).

The Godfather is widely regarded as one of the greatest films in world cinema and one of the most influential, especially in the gangster genre. It was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry in 1990 and is ranked the second-greatest film in American cinema (behind Citizen Kane) by the American Film Institute.;1;1;False tt0068646;albertobernal;11/07/2016;The best film ever;10;"The godfather trilogy is an exclusive set of movies that will continue to live with humanity, every generation will see them to say, ""Oh that was 10 out of 10."" If you watch them you will know that the world that lives inside the underworld is same as the one we live in except that people in underworld are so smart, in fact smartness is the only thing that can keep them there. Don Vito Caroleone's early life shown in part-II is very well done to show the Don in making, how a kid who couldn't even tell his name went on becoming a underworld don who keep most senators, judges and lawyers in his pocket. Meeting of don with the so call five families are among most impressive scenes.

A saga that goes on for 9 continuous hours takes you around various walks in life of Mike (Don's younger son who become Don later), his school days, love life, personal life, family life, business life, political life and religious life. How all of these different roles Mike plays in his life and how intertwined these are.

I enjoyed watching these movies so much, I wish I had seen them much before then I did. Its amazing to see how the Part-III was made 18 years later the part-I was made and everything looks so continuous if watch them together.

I need not say much! The Godfather father trilogy been around for a while and everyone knows that they are great set of movies, its just the matter of when you actually get to see them.

Watch them! Kudos to Francis Ford Coppola! -Vishy";1;1;False tt0068646;lindalindgren;05/07/2016;The best mafia movie ever;10;Yeah. I don't think i have to write more than that actually. I think the most of you already know how good this movie is (or how good these movies are), and what the story is.

It has so much emotion and is depicting that world so compelling, it's hard to explain it without spoilers.

If you like crime movies, watch it. If you like drama, watch it. Do you like suspense and action? Watch it. Do you like music? Watch it.

It's the kind of movie that has everything. The kind of movie that leaves you breathless, that you will never forget.

The only people who shouldn't watch it is the ones that only like modern movies with lots of cgi and big explosions and action from start to finish.;1;1;False tt0068646;akismastro;03/07/2016;One of The Best Movies Ever Made!;10;This film is one of the best! The acting and the chemistry between them are amazing. In this film Tony Montana is Micheal Corleone, born as the last child of Don Vito Corleone, played by Marlon Brando, the head of the Corleone family (Spoilers!: You see more of Vito's background in the second movie) , a big family in New York. But Micheal isn't like Tony, but though the movie he does some crimes for himself. The soundtrack blends really well with the sounds of the movie, you hear it but it isn't too loud, nor it's too low. Marlon and Al really make this movie. If you haven't seen it already, well buy it on Blue ray or watch it on Netflix. It gets only better when you seen all the trilogy.;1;1;True tt0068646;georgepeterson-97822;29/06/2016;One of the best movies of all time;10;"I'll start off by saying, as the title says that this is most certainly one of the best movies I ever watched. The movie is fun to watch, what's most important and it's not just for certain parts of the movie, but the whole movie all the way through from the beginning to the end is interesting and unpredictable. This is something that today's movies lack, and what the movies from the past always had which made them great. Story of the movie if fascinating allowing us to see what the real ""mobster world"", underground world to be precise looked in the 1960's, 1970's as many scenes in the movie show us. All in all this is one hell of a movie and I'd suggested to everyone to watch.";1;1;False tt0068646;beckylesabre18;28/06/2016;Review The Godfather(1972);10;"""The Godfather,"" a 1970s film detailing the struggles of a Mafia family in post-World War II New York City, not only changed the face of cinema forever, but also resurrected a genre that had been dead since the Howard Hughes mafia opus ""Scarface"" hit the silver screen in the 1930s.

Directed by then-novice Francis Ford Coppola, future mastermind behind ""Apocalypse Now,"" ""Tucker,"" and ""Youth Without Youth,"" ""The Godfather"" not only demonstrates poise and expertise in writing and directing but also in acting. Coppola put his career on the line fighting with power- hungry studio executives to get the actors he felt fit the roles.

Al Pacino, as Michael Corleone, youngest son of don Vito Corleone, expertly immerses himself in his character, down to the way he walks and talks, carries himself, and even shoots a gun in the famous ""gun behind the toilet"" assassination scene. Marlon Brando as the elder Corleone gives one of the greatest performances in cinematic history. With Robert Duvall as mild-mannered family consigliere Tom Hagen, and James Caan as the hotheaded Santino ""Sonny"" Corleone, every part is well cast and executed to perfection.

Not only are the acting, writing, and directing top-notch, but so is the way the film is carried with great setting, music, and a feeling of authenticity. As Michael travels the picturesque hills of 1940s Sicily, ""Speak Softly Love,"" the famous tune by Nino Rota, transports audiences into the beautiful but deadly world of upper-class criminals. Everything in the film is well timed and well placed, offering the audience a portal into a life filled with twists and turns.

""The Godfather"" also reflects the fact that Coppola collaborated well with Mario Puzo, the author of the novel, and Coppola did a plethora of research to ensure the authenticity of his mobsters. The actors talk, eat, sleep, and kill like real-world criminals, embodying the swagger of high-rolling Italian mobsters. The dialogue flows from their lips as if Al Capone or Jon Gotti said it.

""The Godfather"" will go down in history as one of the most well made films of all time.";1;1;False tt0068646;mperry35;27/06/2016;Extraordinary Film;10;"I have dissected this film, piece by piece. This is a film that can be seen several times, and each time, you take something else from the film. It's incredibly difficult to digest all of the beautiful layers that make The Godfather so special. There are thousands of films out there that are cut-n-dry. Basically, what u see is what u get....no less, no more. While, if u don't have an understanding of organized crime and its origin, u will most likely overlook the remarkable accuracy of the film. The life that is portrayed in The Godfather was very real, for many many years. However, as yrs went by, organized crime families, in America, began slowly straying from their core values...i.e., family, ""Omerta"" (code of silence), secrecy, respect, loyalty, etc. The Godfather illustrates life in the mafia during the 1st half of the 20th Century, where as a film like Goodfellas, shows mafia life during the 2nd half of the 20th Century. The Godfather is a film loaded w legendary actors who perform a script that's full of substance & grace, both, written & directed, by the great Francis Ford Coppola. Movies like, The Godfather, come around only a handful of times during a lifetime. Cinematic masterpiece.";1;1;False tt0068646;jamesisginger;10/06/2016;An outstanding look at the mobster hierarchy;9;Francis Ford Coppola manages to execute one of the finest pieces of American cinema with the first of his three part saga, The Godfather.

From the dialogue to the acting, this film excels in painting a gritty, realistic depiction of the mobster hierarchy, with one of the greatest pieces of acting in cinematic history with Marlon Brando's Don Vito Corleone.

This film has already stood the test of time and is deservedly ranked as one of the greatest films of all time. A true masterpiece.

I urge you if you have not yet checked out this film, what are you waiting for? It's a true hallmark of cinematic excellence and is undoubtedly one of the greatest films ever made, in my opinion.;1;1;False tt0068646;hani-beydoun;04/06/2016;One of the best classics;10;One of the best classics of all time, good story, with incredible acting. Even though the movie was three hours long, it's hard not finish it.The sequence of the movie flows so good in a way, the audience are always wondering what's going to happen next. Very enjoyable, even for people who don't like Mafia movies in general, because the movie discusses many things in life like family, greed, loyalty and relationships.

It's a really great combination that makes the movie one of the best movies of all time, and it always be enjoyable for future generations as well.;1;1;True tt0068646;ray_bradley;26/05/2016;A towering masterpiece in cinematic history.;10;"It is sort of disheartening to read the plethora of negative reviews of this film on IMDb. There seems to be a fundamental gap between those who understand and appreciate the history and the evolution of cinema and those whose powers of perception and attention spans have been impaired by mind-numbing video games and by a culture of total immersion in the utter banality of ""social media."" I even read one negative review which seriously attempted to draw a comparison between ""The Godfather"" and the ""Lord of the Rings"" trilogy. I loved both movies by the way, but FOR CHRISSAKES! It's apples and oranges! One of those movies was a thoughtful, introspective ADULT film, which are few and far between. The other film, though great entertainment, was not.

The acting (across the board), the script (almost entirely Coppola's) and directing (entirely Coppola's) in the ""The Godfather,"" though arguably equaled on occasion, have never been bested by any Hollywood or independent film. One qualification here: to the amazement of every film critic and everyone else alive in the 20th Century, the movie ""The Godfather"" was actually eclipsed by ""The Godfather, Part II,"" which really needs to be seen back-to-back with ""The Godfather"" in order to fully appreciate either film. The two films in combination are really just the 1st and 2nd halves of Mario Puzo's pulp fiction book, entitled ""The Godfather."" Coppola's screenplay elevated Puzo's 2nd-rate prose immeasurably, and together those two films constitute the single greatest piece of epic-scale movie-making in the history of American cinema.";1;1;False tt0068646;akashparakh;25/05/2016;The best cinematic work of the 20th Century;10;"In order to grasp the true depth of this movie - you have to read the novel. It's mandatory. To understand the Corleone s, the era in which they flourished & the times in which Vito made Don !!

Vito Corleone played by Marlon Brando is the greatest portrayal of a fictional character on screen. No one could have played him better.

The adapted screenplay is optimally redesigned to keep the movie fast paced, gripping & electric with the fair share of thrills.

In one scene, outside the hospital waiting for men, Michael examines his hand. It isn't shaking in spite of the fear. As in the novel, he is beginning to realize, he has a unique calm about him in times of grave danger.

That is a magnificent scene, one only Coppola could have directed.

I can go on and on and on .. each scene is a monument of artistry.

Watch this movie before you die !!!

PS: Read the novel first ....";1;1;True tt0068646;abracadabracosty;24/05/2016;the best;10;"We know from Gay Talese's book Honor Thy Father that being a professional mobster isn't all sunshine and roses. More often, it's the boredom of stuffy rooms and a bad diet of carry-out food, punctuated by brief, terrible bursts of violence. This is exactly the feel of ""The Godfather,"" which brushes aside the flashy glamour of the traditional gangster picture and gives us what's left: fierce tribal loyalties, deadly little neighborhood quarrels in Brooklyn, and a form of vengeance to match every affront.The remarkable thing about Mario Puzo's novel was the way it seemed to be told from the inside out; he didn't give us a world of international intrigue, but a private club as constricted as the seventh grade. Everybody knew everybody else and had a pretty shrewd hunch what they were up to.

The movie (based on a script labored over for some time by Puzo and then finally given form, I suspect, by director Francis Ford Coppola) gets the same feel. We tend to identify with Don Corleone's family not because we dig gang wars, but because we have been with them from the beginning, watching them wait for battle while sitting at the kitchen table and eating chow mein out of paper cartons.

""The Godfather"" himself is not even the central character in the drama. That position goes to the youngest, brightest son, Michael, who understands the nature of his father's position while revising his old-fashioned ways. The Godfather's role in the family enterprise is described by his name; he stands outside the next generation which will carry on and, hopefully, angle the family into legitimate enterprises.

Those who have read the novel may be surprised to find Michael at the center of the movie, instead of Don Corleone. In fact, this is simply an economical way for Coppola to get at the heart of the Puzo story, which dealt with the transfer of power within the family. Marlon Brando, who plays the Godfather as a shrewd, unbreakable old man, actually has the character lead in the movie; Al Pacino, with a brilliantly developed performance as Michael, is the lead.

But Brando's performance is a skillful throwaway, even though it earned him an Academy Award for best actor. His voice is wheezy and whispery, and his physical movements deliberately lack precision; the effect is of a man so accustomed to power that he no longer needs to remind others. Brando does look the part of old Don Corleone, mostly because of acting and partly because of the makeup, although he seems to have stuffed a little too much cotton into his jowls, making his lower face immobile.

The rest of the actors supply one example after another of inspired casting. Although ""The Godfather"" is a long, minutely detailed movie of some three hours, there naturally isn't time to go into the backgrounds and identities of such characters as Clemenza, the family lieutenant; Jack Woltz, the movie czar; Luca Brasi, the loyal professional killer; McCluskey, the crooked cop; and the rest. Coppola and producer Al Ruddy skirt this problem with understated typecasting. As the Irish cop, for example, they simply slide in Sterling Hayden and let the character go about his business. Richard Castellano is an unshakable Clemenza. John Marley makes a perfectly hateful Hollywood mogul (and, yes, he still wakes up to find he'll have to cancel his day at the races).

The success of ""The Godfather"" as a novel was largely due to a series of unforgettable scenes. Puzo is a good storyteller, but no great shakes as a writer. The movie gives almost everything in the novel except the gynecological repair job. It doesn't miss a single killing; it opens with the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter (and attendant upstairs activity); and there are the right number of auto bombs, double crosses, and garrotings.

Coppola has found a style and a visual look for all this material so ""The Godfather"" becomes something of a rarity: a really good movie squeezed from a bestseller. The decision to shoot everything in period decor (the middle and late 1940s) was crucial; if they'd tried to save money as they originally planned, by bringing everything up-to-date, the movie simply wouldn't have worked. But it's uncannily successful as a period piece, filled with sleek, bulging limousines and postwar fedoras. Coppola and his cinematographer, Gordon Willis, also do some interesting things with the color photography. The earlier scenes have a reddish-brown tint, slightly overexposed and feeling like nothing so much as a 1946 newspaper rotogravure supplement.

Although the movie is three hours long, it absorbs us so effectively it never has to hurry. There is something in the measured passage of time as Don Corleone hands over his reins of power that would have made a shorter, faster moving film unseemly. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you can't quite understand unless you've read the novel. Or perhaps you can, just by the way the characters look at each other.";1;1;False tt0068646;Leogetz100;18/05/2016;Godfather is Amazing;10;"The Godfather is an absolute ""Classic"". Both Al Pacino and Robert DeNero killed their roles. It's not often we get a movie with such in-depth detail as to why things happened the way they did. Politically correct in every ""bad"" way. I was very young when i first seen this movie and really didn't grasp the exact concept. Now, as an adult, it all makes sense. If anyone reading this has never seen this movie, I recommend you watch it and the others as well. It might even touch home with most that grew up in these neighborhoods and countries during the date allocated within the film. Film makers and anyone acting should make it an occupation to watch this film. Exciting, passionate, dramatic. These are the words I use to best describe my experience with watching this movie. It has also sparked my interest in making my own films. The action and originality of the film makes me want to create a movie just like this one in modern day times. Thank you Godfather, for you have given me much needed inspiration.";1;1;False tt0068646;JockeH;16/05/2016;Probably the best movie of our lifetime;10;"Hailed as the best movie ever by most people, and I tend to agree. We probably won't see a movie this perfect in quite some time. Everything from the casting to the execution of the finished film is handled with such precision it is truly astounding.

I guess you are wonder why I wrote ""probably"" in the summary and well, let me tell you this: There is another movie that is if not better at least on the same level as this one. And the movies name? It ends with II.

That Francis Ford Coppola was capable to pull this of at such a young age is awe inspiring and even more so when he did it a second time around. I mean how many movies have a sequel/prequel that is if not as good even better than the first one? Don't worry, you can count I will be right here waiting for you to finish. What did you find? Terminator 2, Lord of the rings 3, Toy Story 3, The Bourne trilogy and The Dark Knight? Well you would be correct and this shows you have rare it is when you think about how many sequels there are.";1;1;False tt0068646;ibnmahdy;10/05/2016;amazing;;"amazing movie The Godfather is a 1972 American crime drama film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Albert S. Ruddy from a screenplay by Mario Puzo and Coppola. Starring Marlon Brando and Al Pacino as the leaders of the fictional Corleone New York crime family, the story spans the years 1945–55, concentrating on the transformation of Michael Corleone from reluctant family outsider to ruthless Mafia boss while chronicling the family under the patriarch Vito Based on Puzo's best-selling novel of the same name, The Godfather is widely regarded as one of the greatest films in world cinema[6]— and as one of the most influential, especially in the gangster genre.[7] The film ranks #1 on Empire magazine's 2008 list of the 500 greatest movies of all time.[8] Ranked second to Citizen Kane by the American Film Institute in 2007,[9] it was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry of the Library of Congress in 1990 as being ""culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant"".

The film was the box office leader for 1972 and for a time, was the highest-grossing picture ever made. It won three Academy Awards for that year: Best Picture, Best Actor (Brando) and in the category Best Adapted Screenplay for Puzo and Coppola. Its nominations in seven other categories included Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall for Best Supporting Actor and Coppola for Best Director. The success spawned two sequels: The Godfather Part II in 1974, and The Godfather Part III in 1990.";1;1;False tt0068646;pthamura;09/05/2016;This film is Awesome;;"While some may claim showing the scenes in reverse is just an annoying trick to make a simple plot confusing and add a plethora of twists, I wholeheartedly disagree. Any good story teller knows it's not what you say, but how you say it.

By playing the scenes in reverse you experience the confusion Lenny undergoes throughout the film. Showing some of the scenes in chronological order (BTW, the use of B&W instead of color to make the time distinction was ingenious) creates suspense which builds as the two time lines converge. The somewhat rushed pace (compared to a written format) doesn't give you enough time to adequately analyze the events during the movie. This has two advantages: firstly you're going to talk about it after you leave the theater adding to experience immensely, and secondly you don't have time to think about what has happened (will happen) so you're experience better follows that of Lenny.";1;1;False tt0068646;jameslinton-75252;04/05/2016;The best film of all time. End of!;10;The Godfather is a timeless classic. Everything about it is just masterful from the performances to the direction to the wonderful soundtrack. Marlon Brando effortlessly portrayed the cool calm composure of Vito Corleone, whilst Al Pacino was great as Michael Corleone. His transformation from family outsider to ruthless mob boss was believable and realistic. The Godfather also felt authentic from the sets to the costumes. One thing that also surprised me was how despite the Godfather being a three hour film, it is paced very well. I never felt confused or bored whilst watching it. It is an amazing film.

Read my full review here: http://goo.gl/ToQuF3;1;1;False tt0068646;iamshubs;30/04/2016;A great piece of entertainment;10;"The Godfather is one of the rare movie which makes us sympathize the evil. Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) gives out the steam of a real mafia Don. The story views the Mafia from the inside. That is its secret, its charm, its spell; in a way, it has shaped the public perception of the Mafia ever since. The real world is replaced by an authoritarian patriarchy where power and justice flow from the Godfather, and the only villains are traitors. There is one commandment, spoken by Michael (Al Pacino): ""Don't ever take sides against the family."" Like Babe Ruth is to baseball, like John Steinbeck is to writing, their is no doubt about it, The Godfather is the greatest film of all time. Never before have we seen performances so stellar, by Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, and everyone else! The Godfather has little life lessons everywhere. Along with an engaging plot, that just completes the most critically acclaimed film of all time. The Godfather is Francis Ford Coppola's masterpiece.";1;1;False tt0068646;alipezeshkii;30/04/2016;The best movie in the world....;10;Strong story ... professional actors .... Directed by smart ... Everything was in its peak...No matter how I look at this film is still attractive...He gives lessons on life and politics.....Although the film is old but it was attractive and new and never be out of date....While the film is long but not boring any moment of the film up...About coming to power, says. About a poor family that is powerful....About sacrificing the values to achieve the target on the first letter of his power....Strong story ... professional actors .... Directed by smart ... Everything was in its peak...No matter how I look at this film is still attractive...He gives lessons on life and politics.....Although the film is old but it was attractive and new and never be out of date....While the film is long but not boring any moment of the film up...About coming to power, says. About a poor family that is powerful....About sacrificing the values to achieve the target on the first letter of his power....;1;1;False tt0068646;daniilpiispanen;13/04/2016;Excellent;10;"Marlon Brando's old flame that has glowed for years, and flickered along a trail bumpy with mediocre pictures, shines higher and brighter than ever. The old irresistible magic is revived in Paramount's ""The Godfather"" in his intuitive grasp of Mario Puzo's Don Corleone, a living symbol of the poetic translation of his name, the lionhearted.

Brando is cool as the godfather, sagacious head of the Corleone ""family,"" most powerful of the five ""families"" of organized crime in New York. He is relaxed as the loving, indulgent patriarch of his large blood family, in his mansion behind an iron fence in Long Beach, L.I. And he is terrifically appealing as the man who cheats death, recovers from bullet wounds inflicted by a rival gang, recuperates at home to enjoy his garden and grandchildren until he dies of old age. Once he comes out of seclusion, to warn chiefs of the five ""families"" that the gang war must stop.

Brando is the strong magnet that will draw fans to ""The Godfather."" But behind-the-scenes creativity is of equal value to this film of towering proportions.

The immensity of the project must have been staggering, but producer Albert S. Ruddy, director Francis Ford Coppola and screenwriter Mario Puzo, with Coppola, make it seem easy.";1;1;False tt0068646;TheoneK;11/04/2016;Beautiful Composition;10;This film really opened my eyes to the drama of beautiful cinematography and how compelling you can make an image simply with the framing. Having each shot tell its own story is an incredible element towards crafting an excellent film. In addition to the cinematography, I became a huge fan of Brando because of this film. I read that he used some personal techniques to craft his character and I really admire that now that I am looking for ways to make my own screen-time unique and dynamic. I wish films would continue to use The Godfather as a model for good cinema. There is something missing from modern movie-making that can be rediscovered by watching films like this.;1;1;False tt0068646;moisesalexramirez;06/04/2016;"If cinema is truly the 7th art, this will film will answer the ""what"", the ""how"" and the ""why""";10;"Prometheus, gave fire to humanity, a cherished and imperative gift for a foolish civilization that much needed it. Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo also gave a gift to humanity, a gift that should be the object of study of film students, an epic and dramatic visual tale for film lovers, and an incentive to appreciate cinema in its brightest and purest form for those who are willing to forget their lives for a little under 3 hours.

The Godfather never gets old, and I believe it never will. It has withstood the test of time and never truly feels like a film of over 40 years of history. At times, this masterpiece begins to resemble fine wine, seemingly acquiring a better taste as it ages on.

Its dialogue profoundly feels like discourse directly taken from the streets of New York at the beginning of the century. The cinematography and the acting feel exceptionally natural, and along with a cohesive and coherent pacing, these components make the flow of the film feel like a river in its calmest days: smooth, beautiful and noble. Every shot in the film faithfully serves a greater purpose; every shot feels like a piece of a jigsaw puzzle that never breaks apart.

The ambition of the storytelling surpasses, I believe, its own expectations. It provides a sense of wonder, of fascination, nothing short of admiration. Despite having seen the film for over easily 30 times, every time I place my eyes and ears over that glorious opening scene, I can't help but feel like a child going to the beach for the first time, or a teenager going on a road trip; I feel a roller-coaster under my seat in its peak, waiting slowly to descend into the sublime. Very few stories can relate in terms of value.

The characterization manifests itself over the course of a film in brilliant ways, exploiting the strengths and weaknesses of every one of its characters superbly. Even the minor characters have moments of spectacle. The motivations of each character come to life in outstanding takes, and not one of them ever truly feels expendable.

The Godfather is a colossus, perhaps the summit of filmmaking. It is something every individual can appreciate, from its little details to its grand climax. It is something to be remembered for generations to come. It is something that will likely be unmatched for a great many years.";1;1;False tt0068646;amanvij;28/03/2016;A movie worth its actors!;9;A must watch for every movie buff and specially for Fans of Al Pacino and Marlon Brando. The story shows how a man balances his work and family so well keeping in mind that his business is full of threat. Character of Vito Corleone defines what a real man is like and on the other hand Character of Michael Corleone shows how to contain anger and utilize it in most lethal way possible. This Story also shows how the mafia families have ruled the cities with both good and bad to their characters.The early life and career of Vito Corleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expands and tightens his grip on his crime syndicate stretching from Lake Tahoe, Nevada to pre-revolution 1958 Cuba. When the aging head of a famous crime family decides to transfer his position to one of his subalterns, a series of unfortunate events start happening to the family, and a war begins between all the well-known families leading to insolence, deportation, murder and revenge, and ends with the favorable successor being finally chosen.;1;1;False tt0068646;GC-Official;02/02/2016;Best Movie;;It's impressive movie that I have ever seen, I love Story of Corleone family so much! Every people can learn something from this movie.

The cinematography of The Godfather is dark and tasteful, and colors are used perfectly to give a true feel of the era it is set in. There is a fair amount of violence, though rarely gratuitous.

The Godfather certainly doesn't need my recommendation. The film is universally considered one of the best of all time, and the performances by Pacino and Brando alone is the stuff of legends.

This movie is strong, good script, great casting, excellent acting, and over the top directing. It is hard to fine a movie done this well, it is 29 years old and has aged well. Even if the viewer does not like mafia type of movies, he or she will watch the entire film, the audiences is glued to what will happen next as the film progresses. Its about, family, loyalty, greed, relationships, and real life. This is a great mix, and the artistic style make the film memorable.

This is the GREATEST MOVIE of the 20th century.;1;1;False tt0068646;lomelivelasco;28/01/2016;A Wonderful Movie;10;This film is truly epic, develops the characters in an amazing way, especially to Don Corleone, that he does in the film as a superior to all, with more knowledge and intelligence, based on their sense of friendship and favors. I love this kind of movies in which the protagonists or antagonists are complex beings, with ambitious and colossal ideas, and that not anyone could do. The conclusions of every act and decision that Don Corleone, or of his son, are amazing, doing all to the big, I consider at all of one of the best movies that I see in all my life, and I will never forgot the sound-track and the landscape, that is the final complement that does the movie unforgettable.;1;1;False tt0068646;garythemessage;26/01/2016;Old School Movie Making;9;You want story? You got it. You want characters? You got it. You want intrigue and movement and music and gala? You got it. This is the template for how movies should be made. You love/hate the people. You feel their lives. You believe and cast aside doubt. You get wrapped up in the thing. This is what a movie is supposed to do.

It's more than a mafia movie, it's a movie about family and loyalty, about love and determination. There is no comic relief, except Luca testing his devotion to the Don, and then tragedy. Yes, a very tragic movie but very well done. There are triumphs. There are falls. All very well mixed and very well done. Excellent work done on the costume and general set work. It draws you into the time and place, as a good movie should. No cheap shots, no pandering. Just very good cinema. Bravo.;1;1;False tt0068646;JRPGjr;25/01/2016;Any description is not enough;10;"Every character seems to be perfectly embedded, everyone has a specified reason to be in the plot and each one brings something substantial that makes us remember them. It is magnificent how the main characters show an ironic mix between honesty, respect, etc. and anger, betrayal and many other facets that makes us ask if they're good or bad people. Beyond a classification for the characters, you gonna love them as they are, and we can understand that there's more than just black and white. Definitely, a movie to watch, no matter how many years from his release, and no, I can't say that is a gangster movie, neither that is a Pacino's Movie, no no, It's more than that, The Godfather could be called for to many people like ""The Movie"".";1;1;False tt0068646;gintasdanil;25/01/2016;epic movie;;best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...best movie i ever seen, i watch like four times in the year...;1;1;False tt0068646;puschool98;22/01/2016;The best movie ever.;10;"Adapted by the book with the same written by ""Mario Puzo"" comes ""The Godfather which is literally acclaimed by the critics as the best movie of all time. It has everything: Drama, Action, Thriller, Mystery and perfect acting. It is the one movie that no one dares to criticize or hate. With stars like Marlon Brando, Al Pacio, Robert Duvall it shows you the quality of the movie at the first minutes of it even without even seeing the movie. I have seen ""The Godfather"" 10 to 12 times so far and i don't regret it a bit. Nobody does. If you haven't seen the movie yet(which is rare and unfortunate) you should. You will love it and want to watch it over and over again.";1;1;False tt0068646;EduardoRosa;22/01/2016;Extraordinary movie;9;"It is one of those movies you can watch over and over again and not get tired of seeing the movie repeatedly. The masterpiece of film history. Higher than the first by recreating childhood Vito and his subsequent rise in the world of the mafia, played by Robert de Niro, action that would be worth an Oscar masterful, and that would lead to stardom, being considered today one of the best actors of all time, but the best. Al Pacino makes the best performance in the history of cinema. A display of how to act it would enshrine in the film world as one of the best players in history, with a solid film career available to very few. Her performance is masterful, magnificent, powerful as it was in the first, but this far exceeds the. That look like ice shivers when you see it and freezes your blood, penetrates like you two knives stabbing you, this passivity when it is in front of his wife is historical, one of the best images from the history of cinema; also master the kiss with which condemns his brother Fredo, just spectacular ...";1;1;True tt0068646;suleiman-96114;16/01/2016;Best Movie!;10;"The remarkable thing about Mario Puzo's novel was the way it seemed to be told from the inside out; he didn't give us a world of international intrigue, but a private club as constricted as the seventh grade. Everybody knew everybody else and had a pretty shrewd hunch what they were up to.

The movie (based on a script labored over for some time by Puzo and then finally given form, I suspect, by director Francis Ford Coppola) gets the same feel. We tend to identify with Don Corleone's family not because we dig gang wars, but because we have been with them from the beginning, watching them wait for battle while sitting at the kitchen table and eating chow mein out of paper cartons.

""The Godfather"" himself is not even the central character in the drama. That position goes to the youngest, brightest son, Michael, who understands the nature of his father's position while revising his old-fashioned ways. The Godfather's role in the family enterprise is described by his name; he stands outside the next generation which will carry on and, hopefully, angle the family into legitimate enterprises.

Those who have read the novel may be surprised to find Michael at the center of the movie, instead of Don Corleone. In fact, this is simply an economical way for Coppola to get at the heart of the Puzo story, which dealt with the transfer of power within the family. Marlon Brando, who plays the Godfather as a shrewd, unbreakable old man, actually has the character lead in the movie; Al Pacino, with a brilliantly developed performance as Michael, is the lead.

But Brando's performance is a skillful throwaway, even though it earned him an Academy Award for best actor. His voice is wheezy and whispery, and his physical movements deliberately lack precision; the effect is of a man so accustomed to power that he no longer needs to remind others. Brando does look the part of old Don Corleone, mostly because of acting and partly because of the makeup, although he seems to have stuffed a little too much cotton into his jowls, making his lower face immobile.

The rest of the actors supply one example after another of inspired casting. Although ""The Godfather"" is a long, minutely detailed movie of some three hours, there naturally isn't time to go into the backgrounds and identities of such characters as Clemenza, the family lieutenant; Jack Woltz, the movie czar; Luca Brasi, the loyal professional killer; McCluskey, the crooked cop; and the rest. Coppola and producer Al Ruddy skirt this problem with understated typecasting. As the Irish cop, for example, they simply slide in Sterling Hayden and let the character go about his business. Richard Castellano is an unshakable Clemenza. John Marley makes a perfectly hateful Hollywood mogul (and, yes, he still wakes up to find he'll have to cancel his day at the races).

The success of ""The Godfather"" as a novel was largely due to a series of unforgettable scenes. Puzo is a good storyteller, but no great shakes as a writer. The movie gives almost everything in the novel except the gynecological repair job. It doesn't miss a single killing; it opens with the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter (and attendant upstairs activity); and there are the right number of auto bombs, double crosses, and garrotings.

Coppola has found a style and a visual look for all this material so ""The Godfather"" becomes something of a rarity: a really good movie squeezed from a bestseller. The decision to shoot everything in period decor (the middle and late 1940s) was crucial; if they'd tried to save money as they originally planned, by bringing everything up-to-date, the movie simply wouldn't have worked. But it's uncannily successful as a period piece, filled with sleek, bulging limousines and postwar fedoras. Coppola and his cinematographer, Gordon Willis, also do some interesting things with the color photography. The earlier scenes have a reddish-brown tint, slightly overexposed and feeling like nothing so much as a 1946 newspaper rotogravure supplement.

Although the movie is three hours long, it absorbs us so effectively it never has to hurry. There is something in the measured passage of time as Don Corleone hands over his reins of power that would have made a shorter, faster moving film unseemly. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you can't quite understand unless you've read the novel. Or perhaps you can, just by the way the characters look at each other.";1;1;False tt0068646;sterankofrank;14/01/2016;Best Movie ever;10;"This is by far the best movie ever to give a portrait organized crime, this movie goes deep inside and shows it all inside out..

With superb acting by especially Al Pacino as Mike Corleone and Marlon Brando as Don Vito corleone this movie shows how one of the head mafia families in New York works, it gives a detailed picture of how their business runs and what kinda chances they got to take on their business, for example their denial to step inside the narcotic business brings on a lot of troubles, but also it shows what kinda sacrifices they make, every day could be their last day..

Al Pacino shines above all in this movie, as the smart boy of the family he returns after fighting a war for his country, at that time not involved in the family business, but it doesn't take long before the war breaks lose and he see no other ways than to step in and fight for his family.

This is definitely a ""must see"" masterpiece.";1;1;True tt0068646;statxri;10/01/2016;Probably the best I've ever seen;10;This movie is excellent! Probably the best I've ever seen the props are very good minding the year it was released and the acting is out of this world. I've read the book before and after watching the movie and I tell you the second time was much better! It was like the pictures the book tried to create came out alive as I've seen the in the movie and it was really cool. They did put a lot of effort to this movie and it does pay off, as the scenery and the costumes and everything is so detailed. Of course the atmosphere of the movie is marvelous and really travels you back to the 40s spot on! You should totally see this movie, or better watch the whole trilogy. It is must!;1;1;False tt0068646;ssouravc;05/01/2016;Great Movie;9;OSM movie all time biggest movie of mine. I think no movie can be compared to this one.I love this movie and all of the GF movies. I see something new every time I have seen it (countless, truly). The story of tragedy and (little) comedy that exists in this film is easily understood by people all over the world. This film has been called an American story however I have met others who have seen this movie in other languages and they seem to have the same love and appreciation for it that I do. I love the characters and all of the different personalities that they represent not just in families but in society itself. It seems like the entire cast is part of every other movie that I love as well. The sounds, music, color and light in the film are just as much a part of the film as the people. This could be attributed to the method in which it was filmed. At many parts of the film I can still find myself feeling the emotions conveyed in the film. I never tire of appreciating this film. I thank God that FFC is an American treasure. We are fortunate to have him.;1;1;False tt0068646;artwearsusa;22/05/2015;The God Father will always be the best movie of all times in my book;10;I haven't seen a master yet like unto The God Father, while once a pond of time in America-mobsters is OK, or Mobsters as well is good, nothing has ever came close to matching the mobster action and masterpiece of the God Father. Since my youth I love action fighting movies, boxing, kung fu, and wrestling just to name a few. Why can't they make another Master Piece like until the God Father. As they made attempts nothing has ever come close, then again I can be wrong, prove me wrong. Show me another great all time master piece as the God Father Movies. And I will surely watch them and give you my honest opinion. While the Spanish version of the God Father known as Scare Face is great, but it has nothing on the God Father. Being African America the Old God Father don't even come close or near the God Father movies, never the less I do love the super-fly, that will always be one my favorites, Please anybody show me Master Pieces like until the God Father, I'm trying to build up my collection of these great master pieces. I get too tire of watching the master piece theater, while its great, it put me to sleep sometimes. Hey if you like to contact me at artwearsusa@gmail.com or go to my website at www.artination.com and share your opinion I'll be happy to read them and watch what ever you like me to watch and I will kindly share my opinion as well about the subject. Thanks this is Calvin Bridges.;1;1;True tt0068646;DatStooge;19/05/2015;One of the best mob films out;10;"In my opinion, this movie was the best mob movie I have seen in a long time.The acting was suburb and the written plot was extremely entertaining. The ending were the least suspected son gets 'Don"" is really astounding and reminiscent. The suspense shown was also extremely on point, when Micheal's newly married Italian women gets killed you don't know what to think. After when he returns it puts a strain on the viewers when Vito is seen to be supporting his son being 'Don' but you can tell that he does not like that deep inside of himself. Impressive acting made the movie really stand out and the ending would make you sit there and think... is there going to be another godfather or not? I rate this movie 10/10 because of all those reasons.";1;1;True tt0068646;porix4;24/09/2014;The Godfather 1972;;"The Godfather is a Crime/Drama movie that was released on March 24, 1971. The movie was directed by Francis Ford Coppola, and written by Mario Puzo and Franics Ford Coppola. This movie won several awards which include: Academy Awards, USA 1971; Golden Globes, USA 1973; BAFTA Awards 1973; David di Donatello 1973; Directors Guild of America, USA 1973, and many others. Main actors in this movie are Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone, Al Pacino as Michael Corleone, James Caan as Sonny Corleone, and Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen.

The movie takes place within the world of organized crime. This movie shows an inside point of view of the mafia world. Mr. Vito Corleone (main character) is a powerful man who is viewed as a man who is sympathetic, successful, and a loving family man. Mr. Corleone takes good care of his friends and family and in no way (through the whole movie) would do anything that reasonable people would disapprove of. Mr. Corleone takes revenge, executes, or teaches lessons to the ones who betray him in any way. This movie is not a typical crime/drama movie as it doesn't show victimization to anyone not involved in organized crime. Typical crime/drama movies do show victims such as women enslaved into prostitution, families torn apart by a family member who is addicted to gambling, drugs, or alcohol, and sometimes just innocent bystanders.

The editing in this movie was very appropriate as the scenes transitioned smoothly throughout the entire movie. From beginning to end, the sequence of every scene was put nicely in place and made perfect sense for the viewer to understand where the story was going and why. Every single sound effect used was played well within each scene, making the scene effective in making it seem real to the viewer. When there are outdoor scenes the viewer can hear the wind, birds, traffic, and other outdoor noises. When the scenes take place indoors, the viewer can hear the footsteps, door shutting or opening, and other indoor noises, which are appropriate for the scene. When watching the movie, the viewer can see and feel the strong family ties, the loyalty within a social circle, and the betrayal. The movie makes it seem as if it is okay to get rid of those who do you wrong, it is okay to tell white lies, it is okay to do something that is wrong to protect your loved one.

The cinematography of this movie was smooth with all scenes because they did close-up scenes whenever necessary, and in every single scene the viewer can follow the story to the next scene without wondering what is going on or why. There are some bloody and violent scenes; however, that is typical of crime/drama movies. Culture plays a big part in this movie, as there are parts where people are speaking Italian and are doing traditional cultural things such as in the wedding scenes when people are dancing and singing at Connie's wedding. There are also the scenes when Mike is in Italy, and he has to talk formally to the girl's father for permission to date her, the traditional visits to the girl's home and family and the traditional Italian wedding.

The movie is trying to influence the viewer to believe that there are good people who have good morals and family values in the mafia world, and that it is okay to do something that is wrong or breaks the law in order to keep your family or friends safe or away from harm's way. I am not a big fan of mafia movies, and my opinion will not change about organized crime. I do know they have families, and they love them, but that does not make it okay to break the law in any way. The Godfather is a good movie to watch just for the fun of it, for good entertainment, or just because you like watching good movies to kill time, no pun intended.";1;1;False tt0068646;Jake_GoldsteinStreet;23/05/2014;A Mafia Monster;10;"This movie is one that has got to be on anyone's bucket list. It is a masterpiece that will never be able to be paralleled in film making history. While it did have its moments of a little too much talk, these moments were fine due to the large amounts of action and death. Personally my favorite death was the one of Luca Brasi, where he will be sleeping with the fishes along side Solozzo and Captain Mccluskey who were of course killed by good guy Michael! The death that saddened me the most was the one of Sonny played by James Caan. With his temper he was able to keep me engaged and entertained throughout. He was probably my favorite character. But the one thing you should take from this is ""Never take sides against the family."" Be sure to check out my Youtube channel where I do many top 10 lists and its quite entertaining https://www.youtube.com/user/xAdmiralCacti";1;1;True tt0068646;avila-abraham;07/04/2014;One of the best;9;This Film is one of my favorite films of all times. I think that Coppola take a big risk after THX and Zootrope. This is a profound story about human nature trying to balance between the human desire of power the love of family. Every time I have the opportunity of see this film, I try to figure out how Francis resolve anything in the way to make a complete piece about the family issues, but in the same time a great portrait of the Italian mafia that today it's the ambiance and pace formula for the mafia films and also in Mexico the formula for the Mexican cartels. Also the great decision to invite a Al Pacino for the main role it's an excellent direction just below of the Brandon's performance.;1;1;False tt0068646;DaveTrevinoSoundDesign;06/03/2014;classic Hollywood narrative;9;"progression of the movie follows the development of the following linear, logical sequenced story lines – Don Corleone is shot; Michael seeks retaliation by shooting Sollozzo and McClusky; The mafia family wars begin with a parallel story of Michael taking refuge in Italy; Don Corleone holds a peace summit between the families; Michael returns to America and becomes the new family Don upon his father's death. This is a standard ""cause and effect"" progression with each scene logically leading to the next having characters with differing goals clashing, and obtaining help from other characters to resolve conflicts and meet their ultimate goals. As a result, the characters' individual actions as well as group interaction help move the movie along.";1;1;False tt0068646;Kenny_Griffin;21/10/2013;Excellent;10;Great movie, lots of emotions, incredible film. Though Marlon Brando's appearance adds up to the whole movie and makes it something wonderful, the trilogy is still great. A masterpiece and a great piece of ART. This movies travels you to the depicted age and era. It gives you the feeling of completeness although you never actually find closure in the film since nothing actually comes to an end. Wish that even more of such films would find their way to the cinemas, but these days these kinds of pieces of art are no more the main target of producers. Finally a great job by Nino Puzo for writing the novels. A fantastic job overall.;1;1;True tt0068646;dboccuti;30/09/2013;The Godfather.;9;"The Godfather is a classic movie directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It's about a mobster family where the whole family is involved except one, because he's a college student. The family didn't want to involve him because he had a good educated head on his shoulders. When his father is out one day, there is a mafia hit on him; however things don't go as planned exactly. Long story short, the dad ends up in the hospital and the educated son feels the need to get involved and help his father out. To my surprise, the son who didn't want to be involved finds himself completely wrapped up in the mafia lifestyle.

Shockingly due to previous mob movies that were not as popular with the box office, Paramount Pictures was very hesitant to adapt this film. It was a good thing they did because this was the start up to many successful mob movies. Mario Puzo is the author of the book ""The Godfather"" and thanks to the success from the book, the movie was able to be produced. In my opinion, I love the cast. Al Pacino is an amazing actor and he is known for mafia movies. I was shocked to find out he was almost fired from being in this movie! I can't imagine what it would have been like without him. All of the cast took their roles really seriously and met a lot of mobsters to really get the feel of the role.

One of the most important thematic elements is the very first scene when the bride's dad goes into the room to ask a favor from the Godfather. This is important because it shows how respected and powerful the Godfather really is. That scene was really good for character development and plot. Italian lifestyle is a big part in this movie and one of the ways its portrayed is through the language. Throughout the movie there are some parts that are fully in Italian. Even if you're not Italian after watching this movie you'll be sure to feel like you are. Violence is a big thematic element in this movie. It is constantly happening in almost every other scene. Violence and death are big parts in the Italian/ mafia lifestyle and thats how it always was and always will be.

A very important scene happens right off the bat, Coppola didn't waste anytime! The father is shot, and was supposed to be killed. This is the motivation for the sons change of heart and priorities in life. Another important scene is when Michael goes to visit his father in the hospital bed. While he's in here he has his eureka moment and saves his fathers life. All in the same five minutes another important scene takes place. As Michael was leaving the hospital he runs into a dirty cop who is also in touch with the mafia, and there is an altercation, you'll have to watch to see what happens next! When Michael gets up his confidence, another crazy scene takes place. Michael became sneaky and learned the ways of the mafia. He goes into a sit down with the guys that are above him on the mafia ranking and when he goes to the bathroom he takes the gun that he planted prior to the sit-down and kills all the men at the table. Obviously this is a key point because it shows Michael's growth. The last important scene happens after a lot of deaths take place. There is really no one left in the family so the responsibility of running the family business falls into Michael's hands.

This movie has a lot of story lines which only makes the movie more interesting. Obviously the mafia is a big one. In the first minute were in the room with the Godfather, the boss. Another storyline that unfolds is family relationships. The son, Michael didn't want anything to do with the mafia but once his father got involved he had to do what was right and stand by his father and help out anyway possible. Business is another storyline that keeps the movie moving. The Godfather's famous line is ""I'm going to make you an offer, you can't refuse."" Every time the Godfather says this you know some type of business exchange is about to go down.

I think the director did an amazing job of putting all of these story lines together. There was never a dull moment in the film from the first five minutes to the last. It wasn't like he added unnecessary scenes or additional story lines to make the movie more interesting, everything had a purpose and had me at the edge of my seat the whole three hours!

The most important relationship that is developed in this film is the relationship between Michael and not only his father, but the whole family. He was always the outcast of the family because he never wanted to live the Italian lifestyle but as the movie rolls on, he becomes closer and closer to the lifestyle and more importantly, his family. By the end of the movie Michael's life becomes the whole family business, and let's just say there's a new Godfather in town.";1;1;True tt0068646;johnnymarkka;29/09/2013;My Favourite Film Of All Time 10/10;10;"Popularly viewed as one of the best American films ever made, the multi- generational crime saga The Godfather is a touchstone of cinema: one of the most widely imitated, quoted, and lampooned movies of all time. One of Hollywood's greatest critical and commercial successes, The Godfather gets everything right; not only did the movie transcend expectations, it established new benchmarks for American cinema. Rarely can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. The film can be viewed on many levels, with equal satisfaction awaiting those who just want a good story, and those who demand much more. The Godfather is long, yes - but it is one-hundred seventy minutes well-spent. When the closing credits roll, only a portion of the story has been told.";1;1;False tt0068646;ronalexfr;28/09/2013;A Milestone in Cinema;;"Although the 19th Century saw the creation of motion pictures, it wasn't until the 20th Century that films really took off. During times of hardships, audience flocked to their local cinemas to catch the latest flick, which invigorated Hollywood's movie studios to create imaginative & lavish films. This subsequently lead to the creation of some of the most innovative & influential films during the 20th Century. Among the list of 20th Century masterpieces is the critically-acclaimed film The Godfather (1972). Based on the novel by Mario Puzo & directed by Francis Ford Coppola, The Godfather breaks all norms of the film industry. A phenomenal cast, a powerful soundtrack and an enriching plot propels The Godfather into a high standard of films. By the end of the film, the audience would be persuaded to sympathize with the Corleone family & their ""business"". The Godfather should be on everyone's bucket list for ""Movies to Watch Before You Die"". Stop reading this and go watch it if you already haven't!";1;1;False tt0068646;msmika18;28/09/2013;A Classic;10;The Godfather was an excellent film. I very much enjoy a good organized crime film. I think it was a break out roll for Alpacino who played Michael Corelone the son to the Don (Marlon Brando). I must say it made me wonder if the Italian mafia world really exists, and if so is this real in-site. There were some parts that could have been left out, I did feel the wedding scene was being dragged out, I understand that was the only day the Don would grant wishes. I still give it a 10 even the beginning was a slow start. In my opinion I do believe Michael made a good Don, and we all knew once the Don had an attempt on his life he would not fully recover from it. Sonny (James Caan) the eldest son to the Don was groomed to take his father's place if a tragedy were to happen to him, so i was very surprised and a little sadden when he was ambushed and murdered on his way to protect his sister. I think this movie gave some real in-site to a gangster's paradise. It showed how the power can change from one individual to the next in a blink of an eye.How ironic the one son whom wanted nothing to do with his fathers lifestyle, who went to college and fought in the war, was the son who ended up filling his shoes. I would recommend this movie for viewing as well as Thr Godfather II to explore Michael's Journey as the new Don Corelone.;1;1;True tt0068646;nakibification-16;15/06/2013;Simply a Masterpiece.;9;"It's a great film in the history of film. Such a well sculpted film- making. Must watch to experience the true art of film. What I loved about it was the story telling, not exaggerating the crimes, taking the tones seriously and the artful cinematography. Marlon Brando again defined acting and the range of acting. Al Pacino became a star through this film for his extravagant and powerful performance. The production was so neat, the timing of the dialogue. It lives up to the expectation of Mario Puzo's novel. Some of the scenes were so real and eye-opening. It really explores thorough the darkness of human behavior. This is a ""MUST SEE"" movie don't miss it.";1;1;False tt0068646;JamesLeeCooper;14/06/2013;Excellent Movie;10;"I just want to say that is the fantastic movie. If you wonder the old New York and mafias you're not going to be regret for watching this film. In the movie they're summarizing Italian's Life in 30's. Shorn of its gangster trappings, The Godfather is sprawling and soap- operatic in tone. The sprawl is appropriate to its origins as a novel by Mario Puzo, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Coppola. There is a large cast of characters--maybe too large, as it can be difficult to keep track of just who everyone is. Even after you've watched the film a couple times you may find scenes where mobsters seem to spontaneously appear and you catch yourself saying, ""Wait, who is that guy supposed to be again?"" The soap opera angle can be a positive or negative depending on your tastes. I tend to not like soap-operatic stories, but of course Coppola put yummy gangster topping on this one to make it palatable for guys like me. At root, though, The Godfather is concerned with realistic depictions of a very dysfunctional family as they try to make it through life--including marriages, births, adultery, spats between family members, tiffs with others in their community, and so on. My theory is that the soap opera angle accounts for much of the film's appeal. For me, it (and the slight lack of focus from the sprawl) accounts for much of the reason that I barely gave the film a 10.";1;1;False tt0068646;theonewithallthecontacts;16/03/2013;A masterpiece! A cinematic achievement not matched, nor bettered!;10;"The year was 1972. Francis Ford Coppola was in the beginning of this career, and he was only in the process of proving himself as a director. Little did he know, that he was going to direct a movie which would go down as possibly THE most beloved and acclaimed film of all time. The movie was ""The Godfather"". It became the highest grossing film of the year 1972, and of all time (in 1972)! It won 3 Oscars: Best Actor (Marlon Brando), Best Adapted Screenplay (Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola) and Best Picture (Albert S. Ruddy). Unfortunately, Coppola did not take home the gold for directing, nor did Al Pacino, Robert Duvall or James Caan for their brilliant supporting roles! But Oscars really doesn't matter, the movie still stands as a piece of cinematic brilliance!

The Godfather tells a relatively simple tale: Michael Corleone (Pacino) is son of the powerful mafia don Vito Corleone (Brando). Michael recently returned from the WW2, and he wants nothing to do with the ""family business"". Vito doesn't want that either, but after a chain of events, Michael is forced to rise as the new family don, in order to protect his family and allies from downfall. The movie doesn't pretend to be something it isn't. It's a simple plot, it's one we can all understand and it's still en epic gangster movie! And that's the other thing about the film: it's very epic in scope! All the locations, all the props, all the actors, etc. It all comes together to create something magical!

Al Pacino keys in an amazing performance as Michael, the son who must protect his family! At first eye-drop one could call his performance ""low-key"". But it's merely an observation of the characters calmness, subtlety and his cold nature, that transforms into a calculating, ruthless and chilling persona. Apparently, Pacino approached the role with this thought. For my money, this was an Academy Award-worthy performance. Marlon Brando is equally impressing as Vito Corelone. His performance is calm, determined and calculated. But Brando doesn't only present Vito Corleone as a cliché ruthless mafioso don, but also as a father that loves his family, and that the audience can admire and care for. Robert Duvall, James Caan, Talia Shire, John Gazale and Diane Keaton is also presented as capable and great characters! Everyone gets tons of character development, and their performances are spectacular!

Nino Rota's haunting score perfectly illustrates what kind of film we're dealing with here, and every time you hear it the score feels new and epic! This has got to be one of the most memorable film scores of all time! The cinematography is beautiful, the sound is fantastic and overall The Godfather is a truly beautiful film to admire!

Puzo and Coppola's screenplay is brilliant and filled with memorable lines: ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse"", ""Leave the gun, take the cannoli"" and ""It's not personal Sonny, it's strictly business"". Francis Ford Coppola truly captures the feeling of a spaghetti gangster movie, and his direction is brilliant, tireless and visible in every scene! Twentieth Century Fox wanted to replace him several times during production, but thankfully they didn't! He was robbed an Oscar!

The Godfather is a movie that will never grow old, and we will be able to watch if for many years to come! It always feels fresh and exiting every time you watch it! From the first monologue by Bonasera, to the last shot of Michael Corleone as the new don, this movie leaves you shattered by the perfection. Saying The Godfather is a perfect movie, is like saying Chuck Norris is badass. See my point? A must-watch for everyone!

10/10";1;1;False tt0068646;che-hooman;14/03/2013;One word, 'Perfect'!;9;"This is considered my favorite movie and to many others, no wonder why The Godfather was considered to be the Perfect movie, cause of Frances Ford Coppola's Unquestionable direction and the film's story of the family business and a human story as well! This is the holy grail of gangster films that is to me and everyone, a real unforgettable classic! Excellent movie, quality acting, screenplay,depth of characters, locations! Producer,director,music,all excellent. It will be a long time before this movie is exceeded in all these facets. Current films do not come close in matching Francis Ford Cappola's masterpiece. Mr.Cappola's refusal make another film only reflects great decision making in the industry. Many film makers in the future should emulate the overall quality shown in ""The Godfather"".";1;1;False tt0068646;Xarnis;11/03/2013;One of the best films of all time;10;"How does one begin to describe a film like The Godfather? Many call it a ""masterpiece,"" and I disagree with them. A masterpiece implies perfection and, in my opinion, no film will ever achieve perfection. But The Godfather comes pretty damn close.

Most already know the story of The Godfather. It's a narrative that's complex, yet simple and it's story that's fluid and interesting. It's complicated, but the story is told with such ease, it's like watching a master artist at work. The Godfather is superb storytelling at its finest.

The story's fluidity has very much to do with the characters. The men of the Corleone family are all distinct and interesting, due to the stellar performances. Of course, the standout here is Marlon Brando as Vito, the aging Patriarch of this crime family. He's simply magnificent whenever he's on screen. That's not to discount the other great performances from the rest of the cast, which includes Al Pacino, James Caan, and Robert Duvall

The film is technically brilliant as well. The cinematography is stunning, with the more bright colors jumping off the screen, while the blacks set the mood well for darker story moments. The sound is more subtle in its accomplishments, but when you hear the chatter of machine guns, it makes your heart skip a beat.

It's hard to pick my absolute favorite film of all time. I could easily say Lawrence of Arabia, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, or Lord of the Rings. And I could also easily say The Godfather, as most others have done. But I don't like making such conclusive statements. But don't worry, Godfather. It's not personal. It's strictly business.";1;1;False tt0068646;m1xer;11/03/2013;A movie you cant refuse;10;This is a trilogy that has Al Pacino as Michael Corleone in each one but in this film he goes from the nice, innocent boy in love who has a great respect for his father (Marlon Brando) to the leader of the family. THE DON. His transformation shows how amazing Pacino is as an actor. Him and De Niro who I consider the greatest two actors in the last 40 years both rules the 70s, they prove it again in the sequel that I don't find quite as good as the original, even though MANY people think that this is the one time the sequel finally surpasses the original in the Godfather Series.

I do not.

I think this first Godfather is leaps ahead of the rest, not exactly leaps maybe in front of the second but most definitely the third.

While I like Heat and Goodfellas more then the Godfather I think this is a perfect 10 out of 10 for everything. The morals, the messages, the family values, the acting, the story, the action, the characters, everything in this film is flawless.

This movie is one you need to be in the mood to watch due to the length and its time, but you feel slick after watching so many performances.

This what film-making is all about.

This is Cinema.

One of the greatest movies ever made and it will be like that for years to come.

A movie that will never be forgotten.

A movie....you just cant refuse!

10.;1;1;True tt0068646;holt21;13/02/2013;A compelling crime-drama, the Godfather, will never cease to disappoint its audience, and remains a top contender within its genre.;10;"""The Godfather"" is an American Crime film, which made its debut into theaters on March 24, 1972. The film was based on the original penned by Mario Puzo, with the same title. Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, the film was centralized around the lives of an elite mob family in New York. Regarded as a classic, The Godfather has been an iconic American film, having been considered one of the greatest features in American films. It is a film that is multifaceted having evidence of several emerging underlying themes.

The film commences with the wedding of mob leader, ""Don"" Vito Corelone's (Marlon Brando) daughter. Arriving as a decorated Marine, Corelone's son, Michael (Al Pacino) is in attendance to his sister's nuptials. Michael is adamant about his unwillingness to participate in his families' business of organized crime and is a decorated United States Marine returning from World War II. In the midst of the celebratory event, the Don has a private meeting with Virgil Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) whom requests a monetary commitment and protection to engage in a partnership within the emerging drug trade. Pursuant the investigation of a spy, it is unearthed that that Sollozzo was involved with Correlonne rivals, the Tattaglias.

The denial of the opportunity sparked a fire fight between the two clans; resulting in a failed assassination of the Don. This ordeal prompted Michael, to pursue involvement within the family business. After a visitation with his father at the hospital exposed that the two hired men hired to defend the mob boss were unable to located leaving Vito vulnerable to additional attacks. During his recovery, Vito's eldest son and Michael's brother, ""Sonny"", portrayed by actor James Caan, assumes seniority and regains control of the family affairs. It was following this change-of-command that a string of mafia murders commenced.

Continuation of the feuds between opposing families resulted in many casualties, including that of Sonny, was murdered en route to apprehend, brother-in-law Carlo, for brutally abusing his wife, and Vito's daughter Connie. While idling at a local toll-booth, a slue of heavily armed assassins relinquished gun fire succumbing Sunny to his demise. Away from the heart of the happenings, Michael meets romantic interest Appollonia (Simonetta Steffanelli) , in Sicily. The pair wed, however all is far from a fairy tale ending. The existence of the couple was short lived, as Appollonia was murdered in a vehicle by detonated car bombs that had been placed by assassins sent forth from the feuding families with an attempt to kill Michael.

It is with these developments that you truly see the development of Michael's character.Shaped by experiences, plagued my unspoken heartbreak by losing loved ones, and embracing a life of crime which he formerly opposed. ""The Godfather,"" continues with plights of violence and opposition, as Michael assumes control of the mob's affairs. The move, has set high standards for the genre, as standards for forthcoming films will be comparable to this favorite film. Other movies represented in the same category are those are well-crafted, however, aren't comparable to the storyline and the character development that is presented within the Godfather Trilogy. Movies such as ""Reservoir Dogs,"" imitate the same violent antics that are exhibited in other mafia features, however,lack the same continuity that the Godfather possesses.

As Michael is declared the new ""Don"", he seeks to relocate the business to Nevada to avenge his family, lovers, and friends. The film, is action packed with surprised lurking around every corner with unsuspecting twists that occur as a result of the gritty , unsuspecting life of a mobster. A compelling crime-drama, the Godfather, will never cease to disappoint its audience, and remains a top contender within its genre.";1;1;True tt0068646;teddy_unstead;19/11/2012;A Thorough Yet Spoiler-Free Review. Read it if you're unsure in any aspect about the movie;9;"Due to the restrictions of the 10 point voting system I have been forced to settle on a 9/10 rating, however I prefer a more accurate score, and that would be 8.9 stars.

The movie is an undoubtable classic. I've noticed on here there are a lot of 1 star reviews, all of which are rather ignorant and at times rather obnoxious. It's understandable if it doesn't live up to your expectations, but I don't even think this movie should have the option of a star rating below 5 because anyone who gives it lower rating should not really be reviewing movies. I admit that I was very against the idea of this film, the idea that it was so popular but would really live up to the standards set by so many sycophantic fans seemed almost impossible to me. Having already been disappointed by the movie ""Avatar"" (not visually of course, but for the predictable and, at times, tiresome plot). The Godfather, on the other hand, has a much more unpredictable storyline, yet nothing that happens is a huge shock. At times seemingly arbitrary events eventually collate into a cohesive part of the movie. Despite pushing the 3 hour mark, you are constantly entertained, and hanging on to every word, almost every action holds some importance and the feeling that something is about to happen is constant and justified.

I don't want to reveal too much about the movie so I shall attempt to keep the review vague in places, and will stop in regards to the storyline now.

Even if the storyline fails to inspire, at the very least, some sort of appreciation, there are five words that command respect: ""Al Pacino and Marlon Brando."" They give the film a level of cool, control and power that affects the viewer in many ways, and maybe even re-establishes the idea of acting. Powerful emotions, casually being used with an air on nonchalance and grace, emotions that are usually over-played, and over-acted in other movies in which actors flaunt their talents carelessly. In this film we get a masterclass in acting from two masters of the screen. The acting from every character is pitched perfectly, every character balances each other out, and their personalities are contrastingly complimentary towards each other.

I have a lot of good to say about this movie, so now I should explain why i gave it a ""mere"" 8.9. Firstly I must admit I don't believe in the idea that there is such thing as a ""perfect"" movie, so I am viewed as a somewhat ""harsh marker,"" and thus it would never get a full 10.0, but there are some aspects of this film that I believe to be either superfluous or under-developed. Basically put, there are bits that could maybe be replaced by some extra character or storyline developments. This, however, is just a personal issue, and I would stress that 8.9 is the second highest rating I have ever given, and to be honest, my mind is constantly changing on that score, and I may actually, in the future, wish to raise it.

On a final note, I will just say that this truly is one of the greatest films ever made, and I would urge anyone reading this to watch the film. If you don't like it that is a shame, but if you do (which you probably will), it will be a film you will carry with you for the rest of your life.";1;1;False tt0068646;stephanieamstutz;09/11/2012;The Godfather;9;"The movie ""The Godfather"" is an awesome movie! Some things that inspired me to watch the whole series was: tension, characters, and the love. All of these thing brought the movie to life. It was the most dramatic thing ever; however it was sad.

When Michael says ""Ah, that little farce you played with my sister. You think that would fool a Corleone?"" The director did the lines terrifically well. This line capturing to me. This would be the most exciting movie that I've ever seen! I'm so glad my family recommended it to me. At first I thought that the movie would be horrible, but then I realized that the tension was to much that I had to keep watching it. It was the kind of movie that when it ended you wanted to see the next one just to know what would happen. A few times I cried, but don't all movies have a crying point in them. It was just to much action, tension, and feeling in the movie for me to stop watching.

The character Al Pancio was my favorite because he has so much energy in his role plays. Some other movies that he played in was: ""ScarFace"", ""Heat"", and of course ""The Godfather"". All of these were his best yet. Al Pancio is the most vibrant actor that I have ever seen, that would probably be why I love his acting so much. Furthermore, another actor would be Richard S. Castellano. Additionally, this man was the one who taught Al Pancio how to shoot the crooked cop in the movie, and the shocking thing was that he used to be a construction manager. One woman, named Talia Shire, also played a role. She has stared not only in ""The Godfather"", but in ""Rocky"". She is also the stepmother of the Schwartzman family. All these actors/actress were magnificent during the movie, they played their part so well.

The sad thing about the movie would be the death. Moreover, the death was gruesome. It had so much detail that you can't seem to watch; however, you sometimes just can't turn away. Although if given a chance it will come to the point that it's awesome. This stage point of the death will soon rube off in less you hate the fact of blood (lots of blood and cursing). All I'm saying is give it a chance.

The love that the character give to each other is so affectionate, even off scene there still friends. It's like as though there one big family meeting for a family reunion. Even in the movie they gradually connect. For example, Al Panico and Richard S. Castellano. They were like father and son when they were together, and in the movie they were still like family except at the same time enemies. The movie, when seen, will have the same effect on you once you notice how well they act together. The film went on for $80,000 because Paramount bought in before the book became a best-seller. A previous gangster film bombed at the box office, the company was reluctant to even make the movie, and initially budgeted only $2 million to $3 million. That's a fact.

Over all, the movie is great to watch. Its tension will follow you until you've seen the whole series. ""The Godfather"" is one of the most never before seen movies with life in it. With what the movie has you will not no what was just watched. The movie is epic and will always be remembered as the most amazing movie ever.";1;1;False tt0068646;Abhishek_Pandey;28/10/2012;Awesome Movie - Hats off !!!!!!!;9;Well, I have seen a lot of movies in past, and will watch even more in the future. But, this one movie will always fascinate me.

I don't know whether its it story or what? I think it's his characters. Every character in the movie, right from, Sonny to Michael has its own impact.

The hero of the movie for me, was Godfather, himself and not Michael.

What I like most about GF, was that he was not like we have seen Gunshots in other and most of movies. He was calm and was much like a business tycoon. He was humble and respectful.

The story turns out that how a man, who wasn't and didn't want to get into all that mafia stuff, get into, for his father and family.

The film doesn't have a great story, but it has grip and aura, which fascinates the viewer.;1;1;True tt0068646;mdelbertcma;26/10/2012;The Godfather;10;Mario Puzo's The Godfather is an exciting thrill ride into the 1940's mob lifestyle. It follows a character theme with additional focus on the plot. Though all five theme elements are present, this story is told with a vision into the lives of a mob family and therefore takes on the character theme. Vito Corleone played by Marlon Brandon is the head of one of New York's five mob families. He lives with the old world style and the Italian tradition that family and business issues should never mingle. At his daughter Connie's (Talia Shire) wedding it is custom of the Godfather to take requests. This sets the scene for the ties that bind this family to power. Don Vito has three sons,Santino played by James Caan, Fredo played by John Cazale, and Michael played by Al Pacino. He has one adopted son Tom (Robert Duvall) which is his personal attorney and consilere(adviser). Each of these boys with the exception of Michael is learning the family business. Michael returns home from the military unsuspecting that he will take his role in the business after his father is gunned down by drug lord Virgil Sollozzo. In return for protection and political contacts Sollozzo offers the Godfather a reasonably large profit, but despite the advice of his boys he continues with his old world ways and denies the opportunity. Sollozzo, seeing that the next in line to run the family (Santino) found this to be a lucrative deal then orders the hit on Don Vito. This sparks the mob war of all the five families and the rise of the future Don.

This film in many ways is reminiscent of Donnie Brasco due to its focus on the characters in a series of events. The motifs within this film open up to the central theme of the characters by showing their power and lack of empathy when settling a score. The color pallet was not vibrant which would have been risky since the tone of the movie is more dark and sinister. The fact that this is a movie made in the 1970's as compared to the film technology of today is of no issue because you are truly lost in the actions of the characters. This film is now and will forever be iconic. It shows a blend of chaos and calm and that not all books can be judged by the cover. The reputation of the characters in this film will always be illuminated in the eye of the viewer and it will be difficult for those who have watched this movie to take them out of the characters they portray. The Godfather is a must see and will continue to be a front runner in movie history.;1;1;True tt0068646;ah-andy;01/12/2010;Beautiful!;9;"The Godfather is, in a nutshell, a terrific movie.

The cast is brilliant, from Marlon Brando (Vito Corleone) to Diane Keaton (Kay Adams); each one of them suits their role perfectly.

Marlon Brando is without a doubt, one of the best actors to ever set foot on this earth. His astonishing portrayal of Vito makes me sad that he's not going to appear in the sequels.

Al Pacino also plays a beautiful role, one of Vito's sons who later takes on the family business. Notice how he transforms himself from this calm war-hero to a hard-ass Don. Not a lot of people can do that.

I love how the movie - most of it at least - takes place in New York while most of the characters are Italian. But that only spices the movie up. The story is unique and smartly written, and it suits me since I like the time that it took place in.

So if you're a fan of the post-WWII age, then I strongly urge you to get this movie. Hell, even if you're not, it would be a shame if you don't watch it.";1;1;False tt0068646;dimitrisalomao;28/03/2010;The Best.;10;"Because this movie has Extraordinary performances, amazing direction, incredible screenplay, and an excellent soundtrack, it's more than good, more than great, it's perfection in every way. When I first saw this movie, I was 10 years old, and I couldn't stand it, and now I love it, so be patient, watch this movie and observe every detail, that will make it unforgettable.

Vito Corleone(Brando) is the aging don (head) of the Corleone Mafia Family. His youngest son Michael(Pacino) has returned from WWII just in time to see the wedding of Connie Corleone (Tania Shire, Michael's sister) to Carlo Rizzi(Russo). All of Michael's family is involved with the Mafia, but Michael just wants to live a normal life. Drug dealer Virgil Sollozzo(Lettieri) is looking for Mafia Families to offer him protection in exchange for a profit of the drug money. He approaches Don Corleone about it, but, much against the advice of the Don's lawyer Tom Hagen(Duvall), the Don is morally against the use of drugs, and turns down the offer. This does not please Sollozzo, who has the Don shot down by some of his hit men. The Don barely survives, which leads his son Michael to begin a violent mob war against Sollozzo and tears the Corleone family apart.

Everybody says that the movie gets everything right, and it's true. This movie follows a narrative rhythm that is impeccable, it never slows down too much, and that's because the whole movie is slow. And in some tense scenes (Like the scene where Michael is changing his father's room in the hospital), and even some funny ones (When Michael is in Sicily talking to a man about that girl that he met, and the guy finds out that she's his daughter), it's done with excellency.

The screenplay is one of the best ever made. It develops it's character so well, that almost everyone is learning something during the story. And of course, it gives us memorable quotes like the classic ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse!"" or ""I'm a superstitious man!"". The Soundtrack by Nino Rota is brilliant, and you can notice that right in the first scene.

The acting is equally impressing, even Pacino that don't usually blows my mind like everyone says (Not that he is a bad actor, he's excellent, but I prefer contained and calm performances), impressed me a lot, he's so cold and looks so smart that make his turns believable and intelligent. Brando gives one the best performances the world has ever seen, and considering that he was 48 when this movie was released, he convinced me that he was a sick, old man (Which Pacino didn't do that well in ""The Godfather: Part III""). And observe the scene where Hagen tells him about Sonny, and you'll see what I mean by saying that it's one of the best of all time.

Verdict: A lot of people, including me, say that it's the best movie ever made, so they probably have a good reason to say that.";1;1;False tt0068646;muhammadimrank;16/03/2010;Best Film Ever. . .;10;MOVIE MAKING AT ITS BEST Excellent in every aspect.... great story, great movie making and very best performances by all the actors. Truly the Best Film Ever. Every actor suited and performed best for his/her part. Marlon was awesome. Story line is very strong and compelling. Cheers to Francis F. C. and Mario Puzo for such a fantastic screenplay. Movie Making is at its best. All 3 movies in the trilogy are good. First Part was the best, second at second place and third at third. Story, making and the acting performances make this movie the best. This movie gave me a whole new perspective to Hollywood and made me realize what Hollywood's magic is. It should be voted number 1. Please vote for this film to make it number 1 of all times. God Bless.;1;1;False tt0068646;daryl42-1;22/02/2010;Greater than the sum of its parts. True art.;10;9.8

Everybody has heard of The Godfather. You may agree that everybody has seen The Godfather. You might say that everybody loves The Godfather. However, I disagree. It's been 38 years since The Godfather was released in theaters. Although everybody has heard of it, and holds it in high regards, I think that the reason why people enjoy the film is not because of its artistic merits, but its themes and pop culture phenomenon. I also believe that this type of film-making has been lost.

Every component of the film holds together well. Each individual aspect of it is finely tuned, and it is seamed together to as close to perfection as the medium allows, as far as we know it. However, it is not the sum of its parts that makes film or art, whatever medium it may be, great. It is not a group full of musicians that makes a record great. It is not great technical and artistic style that makes a painting great. It is not great dialogue, coupled with a good story that makes a novel great. I believe that when these components of an artistic medium are in harmony, it helps to allow for art to form. The Godfather has all of these components in spades and also becomes art.

The post WWII atmosphere, set in the midst of Italian crime organizations is engraved into the film. The colors are brown, gold and black, perfectly matching the antique tone. The acting is exceptional, with some performances by young actors that acted as a stepping stone for their careers. The music, while used sparingly, comes in and out at just the right times, and matches the mood of the film well.

The camera angles, cinematography and editing are why I used the term near- perfect. There are certain scenes in this film that are simply the best in all of film-making. One of the final scenes, interlaced with a baptism, is an amazing example of using the medium of film-making and its techniques such as editing and directing to inspire emotion and create art. Another scene, which simply just involves one person against a black background, and a single light source above them, is in my opinion one of the best shots of all time, not just in film-making, but photography as well.

The Godfather's greatest feat is not that it is a cultural phenomenon. It is, by all definitions, art. You might call expression and aesthetic values by themselves art, but ultimately it is pieces like The Godfather that inspires artists. There is a reason as to why half of this review is talking about art and not The Godfather. The film deserves to be seen, regardless of what you all ready know or what you think you might know about it. Regardless of its theme and setting, the work that the men and women did during the production of this film and its final form deserve to be recognized. This style of film-making is far and few between nowadays, and if you enjoy cinema, you owe it to yourself to experience Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather.;1;1;False tt0068646;BeatlesFan3287;15/09/2009;"BeatlesFan3287 Reviews ""The Godfather""";10;When the Godfather was released in 1972, the golden age of Hollywood was long over. Regardless, this film managed to recall that era while at the same time taking advantage of the ever changing times. This film is darker and more grittier than the films of the thirties and forties as such melancholy was starting to become more common in movies. It definitely didn't forget its roots however. The popular film noir style is very evident in this film: not just in the lighting but in the dark subject matter and often bleak themes. And the themes of the movie are indeed bleak. In fact, as people are shot, blown up, and have revenge acted upon them, an inexperienced movie viewer might wonder what the point is. The point is, under the violence and hate, there is a wealth of good: total justification for the mayhem. The Mafia may be murderous and revengeful, but they have values, possibly even more values than normal, law biding citizens.

Marlon Brando gives a breathtaking performance as Don Vito Corleone, a man who is vicious and harden, yet you learn to care for the guy and his family enough so that you eventually root for them every time they get their own way. Al Pacino also gives a great performance as Vito's son Michael, who is different from Vito in many ways. As we learn early on, he could care less about his family's business yet we know he will most likely be shoved into it eventually. We will then learn if he is able to control his family or if he will develop a lust for power and revenge that will cause him to fail altogether. Questions like this are what keep the film interesting and moving forward.

The well orchestrated characters also help the plot along and at no point do they seem unrealistic: even when they make drastic choices. And this is important since this is a very character driven film. And that's just one of the many strengths seen here. All great films have multiple strengths and this movie is no exception. Many crime films were made before this film as well as after it. The ones that came before were sometimes weighed down with Hollywood glamor while the ones that came after it were often all flash with no substance: relentlessly violent with no reward in the end for the viewer. The Godfather dodges those weaknesses and it also avoids being pretentious and overblown. Just one of the many things that make The Godfather the best movie of the seventies and possibly the best of all time.;1;1;False tt0068646;Sanou_san;09/09/2009;Excellent;10;"Being a youth (but I would safely consider myself now as an adult), I never get into much witnessing adult stories. I now realize that most of them are undoubtedly beautiful stories. Haven't read yet prior to the film Mario Puzo's novel, I pulled my guts to watch the film and did my best to understand the story as much as I do with other good-storied films. Godfather 1 had indeed made me witness another beautiful story of different origin. I never imagined how many beautiful stories would still be lingering out there, of every nature, of any environment or of any country it originates. Watching the film, starts with Marlon Brando playing the role of Don Vito Corleone, known as well as the ""Godfather"". I didn't quite understand really the way how crime worlds work, but to me I get the opportunity to understand dealing business with wits and cunning as how you deal practically with your teacher in school. The situation is different, but manner of dealing them is nonetheless similar. I appreciated well the film for Italian's value of family, relationship and trust. How Don Vito Corleone manage to deal business mixing trust and respect differently. How he mends and considers things equally and with weight. This is the first time I observed for the first time Al Pacino grasping a character filled with composure and serenity, and maintained such equanimity after tides turned inevitable to him in the story. I had to admit it is one of the excellent films I've watch so far. The characters, the setting, the environment, the story itself is so genuine and good that you couldn't deny it as a considerably first-rate film.";1;1;False tt0068646;harry-76;08/03/1999;An Ugly Movie;1;"""The Godfather"" was a sickening experience the first time I saw it in its initial release, and it hasn't changed. I thoroughly disliked the film's spirit, finding it very ugly at its heart. I saw little justification for its existence, was sorry I saw it, and have tried to forget it.";27;94;False tt0068646;lmp-6;19/09/2000;Overrated;1;"Either someone stuffed the ballot box on this one or people are merely voting for an icon without really thinking about it. This movie does not even remotely deserve its reputation. There is no significant character development; it is too long (and that's an understatement); and in quite a few places, the plot drags interminably.";21;70;False tt0068646;koenblomme3;10/06/2002;Wouldn't you fall a sleep?;1;Now I know this movie is the national pride of America, but I can't help it, it's a blown up, too long, stupid movie. Now you can say oh he's sixteen, he does know anything about movies, well you're wrong!;23;78;False tt0068646;jamkorytoski;16/09/2004;Crap;1;The Godfather is crap...it's a long movie about nothing. I would rather die than watch that crap again...notice crap is written more than a few times? That's because, this is what this movie is...CRAP! The acting is bad, the sets are bad. Overall this is junk. How in the world it's number one on the top 250 is beyond me. You people must have nothing better to do than to watch a movie where people get killed off because they opened their mouths or voiced their thoughts. I can watch that on the news. I hate this movie so much that my roommates are watching it right now, and I have my CD player on as loud as it will go, because I hate this movie! So in closing...The Godfather, all of them, are crap!;29;103;False tt0068646;joekonn;04/10/2006;A vastly over rated movie;1;"Childish romantic view of common criminals; in no way equal to ""Goodfella's"" which really captures the truth about the underworld. The director must have been fantasizing about some imaginary Sicilian aristocracy (drinking too much vino), or simply mining a vein he knew would be commercially successful. There are excellent performances by Brando, Pacino and Caan among others, but the operatic excesses of the film make a mockery of reality. The individual performances are wasted. Not unlike ""Apocalypse Now"", ""The Godfather"" is an arrogant film with little genuine substance, and undermines an accurate understanding of the subject matter. It substitutes a yarn for a true story and, while it is entertaining, it contributes to the deterioration of our culture. Like the ""Gladiator"" it grabs your attention, then tells you lies.

""The Godfather"" is the cinematic equivalent of Baroque architecture, excessive, gaudy and not worth the work to create.";24;83;False tt0068646;merkelov;28/03/2003;Almost nothing;1;A film about post war US life. Maybe I was tired while watching it but anyway I was disappointed. Nothing more than gangster movie at all. Marlon Brando is excellent though... I`m not going to say that it`s chicken-feed but from my point view it has artificially created reputation. La Piovra - italian tv-series is much better in every point.;24;83;False tt0068646;kiiuyua;06/09/2002;Slow, annoying dribble;1;the worst movie by one of the greatest director. I rented this movie because of the reviews. I was thoroughly disappointed with the garbage i wasted my time on. No Plot to hold on to throughout the movie.;23;80;False tt0068646;DoubleADolby;20/02/2004;Boredom at it's greatest, more like!;1;Possible Spoilers

I did have high hopes for this film (because it's at number one on this chart), but after about 40 minutes into it I think it's the most boring film I have ever watched. In my mind it's just a bunch of people talking total nonsense all the time and how on earth Marlon Brando got a best actor Oscar for what seems to be 10 minutes on screen time I will never know.

The only scene I liked from this movie is in the cafe I think it is, when Michael kills those two people in order to even the score for his father, and to be perfectly honest about 1 hour and 10 minutes into the movie I decided to stop watching it, otherwise I would have thrown myself out the window, that's how bad this movie is to me.

I did try to like it but you cant please all of the people all of the time can you, and the last thing I want to say is that if this film was so bad, I would dive off a cliff rather than see it's sequel.

In my personal opinion.;22;76;True tt0068646;undertakercowboyatyahoodotcom;26/02/2002;Overrated;6;A mate of mine loves this film, and the whole genre to boot. He made me watch this, instilling in me the notion that it was the second best film ever, behind its sequel.

Im glad I watched it, if only to argue with my mate. This film is overrated. It's good but not good enough for a top ten spot, especially when there are better films of its genre out there. Goodfellas comes to mind, and I even found Casino more entertaining.

Basically, I like a film which leaves me thinking about it, and moved. This didn't really do either. Apparantly the sequel is better. I hope so.;10;29;False tt0068646;eronavbj;24/02/2002;When did overacting become art?;5;"I thought the book was overdone and corny when I read it in 71; and I thought the movie was overacted and bordered on fantasy when I saw it in 72.

Having spent 22 years in a major city's police department, I had occasion to deal with these mob types now and again. They are nothing like those portrayed in the film. They are hollow shells of men who somehow know their bravado is a sham.

There are some good action scenes in the picture, but I find the constant atmosphere of universal admiration of thuggery to be aimed at the juvenile patron.";10;29;False tt0068646;almuktadirkhan;18/01/2019;Average movie.;6;Don't understand what is so special about the movie. Certainly doesn't deserve to be the best movie ever.;6;15;False tt0068646;Eamonn_green;23/07/2002;Dull and boring;;What? How did a film like this get a rating of 9? This bored the life out of me! For a start nothing happens in the first hour except a wedding! Once things do start happening the story is misleading and the plot is hard to follow. By the end of the film I was completely lost. Al Pachino has acted in better films(Donnie Brasco). Francis Ford Coppola has directed(The Outsiders) and produced(Jeepers Creepers) better films. 0 outta 10.;6;15;False tt0068646;DJAlejandros;10/04/2002;A good movie, however not worthy of its top ranking;1;When a prestige movie is made, utmost attention is given to detail, grandeur, style, and above all, popularity. Godfather was a movie made to honor the great work of Mario Puzo, who wrote a novel that brought true attention to the human side of the gangster/mobster. Capolla knew that he had embarked on a great mission when he set out to perform the unthinkable: to show the world that the leaders in crime have souls, and that they are certainly not invincible. This movie was what it was meant to be, a prestige movie, it took very few risks, and was filmed to simply document the lives of its characters.

I found the Godfather to be a very well done movie. In fact, I enjoyed this movie so much that I have watched it on many occasions. This movie serves as a soap opera of the gangster world to me, and it tells its story very well. However, I do not believe that any film of this character should be given such a high accord in the Top 100 ranking. The highest position on the rating scale should be given to a movie that fulfills the requirements of a movie to the tee. The godfather does not do this as precisely as other movies.

People go to see movies simply to be displaced from their ordinary lives. To be transported to another world, life, place, or perspective. The godfather does a very feeble attempt at fulfilling this essential requirement. Not at one moment in this movie does the audience become disconnected with themselves. There is not a single instance where the actions on the screen become real, and where the world in which the audience is watching from fades away. To those of us who believe in the true excellence of movies, the Godfather does not rate anywhere near the `best movie of all time'.

Movies such as Moulin Rouge, Citizen Kane, Requiem for a Dream, the Matrix, Casablanca, Momento, and even (depending on the viewer) Gladiator, all grasp the viewer by their hair, and thrust them into another world, if for only a few seconds. The movie watching experience is topped by this disconnection from the real world. It leaves us in a feeling of awe, and shows us that the movie we just watched was more than just a movie, but a journey into the minds of the characters on the screen, and in some unique cases, a journey into the great depths of our own minds. With this sort of depth and greatness, these types of movies should be all in the top 10.

This unique greatness is not easily achieved. In order to capture the audience in such a thrilling way, a great deal of effort must be spend meticulously building up the pace and timing of the movie. The climax should be the point where the viewer has already been captured into the movie, and should thus create a `climatic experience', thus blowing the viewer away. The Godfather has none of these elements perfected to such a state that they encapsulate the viewing public to a degree worthy of its ranking.

So it is therefore obvious that The Godfather does not reach the greatness of a few other better movies, and so it is not deserving of its top ranking. If it were up to me, I would move the Godfather down to 5 or 6, and leave room the real screen gems to be appreciated.

This movie gets a rating of 9 out of 10;24;85;False tt0068646;XIOMANGER;29/10/2004;Didn't get it!;5;"Call me crazy, call me whatever, but I simply didn't get the movie. I think I know the reason why. After seeing 1000s of rip-offs and the motives inside this movie explored to the death in countless movies since the 70s, the initial hand-kissing scene looks pretty trite. Or the making an offer you can't refuse? Puhleeze!

The movie is quite slow. I know it is all about the atmosphere, but it really is nothing special. Neither does the mumbling of Marlon Brando convey any special significance to me. Yes, he is remorseful for being a powerful leader of a criminal empire and assigning this fate to his son. Boo hoo hoo. If you don't become a crook you don't have these kinds of problems. And yes, we all get it. The aggressive son is doomed to be killed in retaliation, the ineffectual son is doomed to remain in the shadows and the resourceful son is destined to take over the ""family business"". He simply kills off his adversaries without it ever being made clear how he outsmarted them or why no one ever came for him in a similar fashion. He actually turns into quite a ruthless son-of-a-...

But there is something more fundamental about why the movie isn't ""doing anything"" for me. The entire notion of ""honor"" and ""chivalry"" among criminals. It's completely fake. Now that America is mostly out of the grip of such people (not so in my own country I'm afraid, but still far from Chicago of the 20s) glorifying them is easy. The truth however is quite different. Criminals usually talk of honor, but their actions are based on much baser things. And they always have an excuse for why they ended up being crooks. Don't get suckered into believing movies like these convey any truth.

Rating 5/10

Scale: 10 MASTERPIECE, 9 Excellent, 8 Good, 7 OK, 6 Adequate, 5 Average, 4 Mediocre, 3 Poor, 2 Bad, 1 HORRIBLE";8;22;False tt0068646;Fox in Socks;17/06/2002;It was alright;6;"Even quite tense at times - that restaurant scene had my heart pounding, as did the hospital scene. But it is overhyped. Okay, scene composition and direction are top notch, yadda yadda, acting is phenomenal, but you can't watch it without thinking ""everyone says this is the greatest film of all time"". Well maybe it is for some, but the film suffers from high expectations as a consequence. Not that you, gentle reader, are interested, but I didn't rate it as highly as Apocalypse Now, Seven Samurai or even Star Wars, but it deserves a respectable 8/10 and if you haven't seen it, its worth 3 hours of your time.

Just don't believe the hype.";8;22;False tt0068646;moviegeek43;17/01/2005;i hated it;1;i hated it. the movie was so long and it was hard to follow. the sequels were OK. i feel that this movie was over rated way too much. so it had a good year in the seventies but come on how can this boring movie stand for 3 decades i just don't understand how that is possible. Marlon Brando has had much better roles in on the waterfront, A streetcar named desire, and don Juan Marco just to name a few. Pacino wasn't even that good. i much preferred him in Carlitos way and Donnie bras-co and who could forget Scarface. Pacino is getting typecast. i think the only reason he did Simone was to get away from the typecasting as a mobster or criminal. i have to say i can't blame him. Pacino is also getting typecast as a cop i mean insomnia come on;22;77;False tt0068646;herkules-jonsson;01/05/2012;I really don't understand what people see in this movie;2;"I just don't get it. Sure the acting in some parts of the movie is good, but honestly, the entire ""angry Italian""-role is probably the easiest character to play. And i really don't get how every other character other then the ""angry Italian"" seems underdeveloped, plain boring and uninteresting.

The only way for you to like this movie is by sympathize with the characters. And sympathizing with the bad guys (since almost every main character is a murderer and a mob member, even the protagonist is a bad guy)is difficult, although not impossible. If the director makes the evil sides of those characters redeemable, then it would be a lot easier for the viewer to sympathize and worry about the protagonist if he/she was in danger. When i however see Michael Corleone in danger in this movie, every time i wish for him to be killed, for i feel nothing for him. Which means that watching this movie was a waste of time.

Although the soundtrack is quite good so instead of a rating of ""1"" The Godfather will receive a ""2"" out of generosity...";9;26;False tt0068646;billpappas-1;25/11/2010;It' looks expensive;3;I saw Godfather when it came out. I don't remember the movie but I remember going out to the lobby 2-3 times to get away from it and take a break. It was soooooooooooooo boring. It was like it was in slow motion or something and I just didn't care about anyone or anything including the plot.

I recall hearing that Brando stuffed cotton balls in his cheeks to get that effect and I couldn't not think about it during the movie. It looks like a lot of movie was spent on this movie to create the look of a certain era but so what.

I could see people's lips moving and hear people talking but the dialog might as well have been entirely in Italian as I had trouble paying attention. My mind would wander and I really didn't follow the plot or care. For some reason, the dialog seemed trapped in the movie itself as though I was watching it through a window that was muffling the sound a bit. Weird.

Many people may think this is the best movie ever but many people also thought the earth was flat in 1491. When it comes to movies, it only matters to me what I think.;9;26;False tt0068646;coastwatcher-47881;06/07/2020;Not Impressed;1;Over the years, I had heard a lot about this movie but, for some reason, had never seen it. About two years ago, I found myself with a free evening and began searching for a movie to watch online. I ran across The Godfather and thought all right, I'll finally get to see this masterpiece!

Although I began watching it with high expectations, they were gone within about 20 minutes. I found it to be boring to the extreme and almost turned it off on several occasions, but I decided to stick with it in the hope that it would improve. Unfortunately, it didn't. By the time that it had ended, I was actually mad that I had wasted over two hours of my life watching it.

I realize that I'm in the extreme minority, but I absolutely did not like this movie at all.;5;12;False tt0068646;sergeantbreinholt;30/11/2016;Probably - if not definitely - the most overrated movie of all time;7;"In a word, underwhelming. The Godfather is a decent film with some strong acting, but I did not find any exceptional or unique quality in the film that would render it a masterpiece. It's a simple a mob story in which everybody is an antagonist; the story is not gripping, the characters are hard to care about, the camera work is adequate but not in any way remarkable, the list goes on. I don't think The Godfather is a bad movie, but in no way is it the best I've ever seen, or anywhere close.

The movie has been so hyped that I really was expecting to see the best movie all time when I watched it. What I saw was a decent flick with some very quotable moments, but in my mind the film has no singular or superior quality when compared to other great films. Monstrously overrated, but still a respectable movie.";5;12;False tt0068646;movieguy1021;16/11/2002;The Godfather: 7/10;7;"I hate reviewing classic movies, since most have a reputation and I feel like I'm not an actual moviegoer/critic if I don't like the classics or give them a certain rating. Anyway, I finally got to see The Godfather. I was a little disappointed, but I still liked it.

In Francis Ford Coppola's Mario Puzo's The Godfather, Al Pacino plays Michael Corleone, son of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), a famous family mafia. The film goes through their various escapades as a crime family.

I really, really enjoyed watching The Godfather. The almost-three-hour runtime seemed to fly by. I was enthralled by the sincerity of the acting and the horrible true-to-life feel of the film. All of the acting was dead-on, although some of the screaming could have been a little better. With up-and-coming stars at the time such as Al Pacino, how can you go wrong?

However, with all movies, they can't be perfect. The film could, or should, have had more plot to it. I know it's supposed to be ""a day in the life of"" type movie, but if it had been with one adventure for most of the way it would have helped. Also, there were lots of supporting characters who we can't remember about for three hours. If that wasn't enough, all of the characters looked like either tall or fat white men with thick Italian accents, making them hard to understand (and of course I had to rent the VHS version so I couldn't read subtitles). More towards the end, I couldn't tell who was on whose side. The ending could have been trimmed down a little; the last half hour or so seemed to actually be boring and not very exciting. Maybe Coppola put it in there so the movie could have the designation of being ""one of those long classics"".

I was surprised about how little strong language there was for a crime movie like this. I would have guessed all the characters to be swearin' like a sailor, but I was surprised. The amount of blood didn't surprise me, but I commend Coppola for putting so much in.

Pacino looked like he does now, minus bags under his eyes. Brando gained about 200 pounds after The Godfather. And, Abe Vigoda looks exactly the same as he did thirty years ago. Yes, that's right. Abe Vigoda is in this movie. Hurray!

The Godfather is an entertaining movie that is overrated but still fun to watch as three hours pass.

My rating: 7/10

Rated R for strong violence, blood, brief nudity, and constant but mainly minor profanity.";5;12;False tt0068646;Scottys3k;22/07/2001;1 in 1000,000;;I seem 2 b 1 of the only other people in the whole world who didnt find this film as amazing as the hype makes it out 2 b. It was a good film, i give it that, but i didnt think it was anythin 2 special. It was good for its time, but i just felt that the plot was kinda obvious and i didnt think that the story was the best i have ever heard. Finally, in da end, i just found that i was left kind of disappointed. I feel Goodfellas dominates over this film threefold.;5;12;False tt0068646;kemper5;04/08/2003;If there was such thing as a good mob movie, this is it.;1;I hate mob movies and even though this is a classic, the genre means it is less than desirable. Mob movies have one thing in common: they are SLOW! Their main theme is character development and the characters they develop are not worth knowing.;20;70;False tt0068646;atari-survey;11/07/2004;Why??;2;This film leaves one big question behind: Why the hell is it rated no.1 in IMDb?? There is no basic storyline, sometimes some people are being murdered but nobody knows why, you can't even say if the acting is good or bad because they run around with hats and sad faces all the time.

From the beginning you simply sit there, waiting for some kind of message or at least some sense - and then after a much too long time the film is over. Why did they kill Don's friend? Why did they try to kill Don? Why did their enemies know that his son was driving to the husband of his sister? Where from did they know the one of the sons was in Italy? Why do they kill all the time at all? And where is the police I was wondering all the film. Lots and lots of murders, no police. Hm. It's nothing more than a bad 70's Mafia-trash-film.;10;30;False tt0068646;carlabrams;02/02/2004;I don't get it;2;I've got a masters in Criminology, and have studied filmography, and I just don't get it. This isn't a great movie. The only thing that could make it a classic is the quality of the actors that were hired - and while the actors themselves can and have made quality movies, this one just doesn't do it for me. Brando didn't impress me in the least in this movie.

And as for the portrayal of organized crime - nothing personal, but if you find it attractive to honor men who not just break the law but flout the laws of civilization, then more power to you. Crime and criminals aren't glamorous - they're a sore on the backside of humanity that should be expunged.;10;30;False tt0068646;LEE-95;08/10/2001;MOB FLICK NOT AS GOOD AS EVERYONE THINKS;5;"I would like to tell everyone that this movie is highly overated expecially considering it is the number one movie in the IMDB TOP 250 LIST!! Dont get me wrong i like like Francis Ford Coppola's movies but i have never been a fan of this series!! He definatly has an all star line up , but come on people Marlon Brando cannot act his way out of a paper bag!! Just like one of my favorite Coppola movies ""Apocalypse Now"" Marlon got top billing over Martin Sheen when right well Martin should have been the oscar nominee!! It is a good trilogy but let me tell you something? If you want a good down to earth mob movie see anything done by Martin Scorsese! I wasnt really over touched by this series but i know it has alot of fans!! See ya folks!!!";10;30;False tt0068646;richardskranium;22/06/2019;Decide for yourself;3;I am glad to see that I am not the only one that just does not 'get' this movie. It is spoken of almost religiously,and it seems that if you dare ask 'why?',your sanity is questioned. Maybe people are overwhelmed by the big-name cast,and have been told so many times what a great movie this is, for so long, and are afraid to say different. All I know is that I heard and read endless,over-the-top praise for this movie for years and years. I managed to avoid seeing it until well over a decade after it was released. What a disappointment. I could not believe I was watching the same movie that I had heard so,so much about. I was absolutely astonished with how boring it was. I could not believe how disjointed it was. I could not believe the praise that Marlon Brando was given for such a weak,lackluster performance- it is goofy beyond parody. As the film rambled and shambled along,I began to wonder if I was the victim of some sort of obscure joke-this crummy film could NOT be the same movie I had heard so much about. Unfortunately,somehow, the universally-praised movie and this boring and bloated bomb I was seeing turned out to be one and the same. Watch it on a rainy day and decide for yourself if this movie is worthy of all the hype.;7;19;False tt0068646;oak12;20/02/2009;Too overrated for words;1;"""The best film that's ever been made""

That's a lie by my book. This film is - yes, I think I'll go as far as to say this - bad, in many ways.

Where do I start?

1. Poor acting Brando was the only saving grace in this film, and the only reason I saw it through to the end. The rest of the cast were not good. I wanted to tear my eyes out and cut my ears off every time James Caan came on-screen for instance. Al Pacino was awful too. No chemistry in my opinion.

2. BORING Seriously, I was on the verge of turning this movie off; there were no engaging elements to the film or story.

3. It was very cheesy There are no words to describe this aspect, just...cheese all over.

4. An incredibly annoying score I've read comments calling the score a ""classic"". I don't find a score that consists of bringing in the same high-pitched melody in over and over again, ""classic"".

All in all, what are the people of the world thinking, ranking this movie so high?!

1/10, purely because of Brando

Scorsese does it a million times better...";21;75;True tt0068646;UACW;23/09/2002;Sucks;;"I cannot express strongly enough how bad this movie sucks. Great music, great actors - but what does that give you? Coppola has everyone but his nursemaid employed in this one; Puzo's screenplay is pure speculation and nothing but - and the mob supposedly loved it; but people took this seriously: they really thought Puzo (and Coppola) had an inside track when they did not. And Puzo and Coppola knew full well what they were doing, making this movie as unconscionable as they come. And after that I don't care how many monkey movies Brando studied at home, or whether he propped his cheeks with orange segments or thousand dollar bills: this movie is cheap, and it sucks, and please tell me: if Coppola is all that good, why is there nothing coming out of that supposedly great mind of his? Nothing but the same old schtick, the same three worn out pseudo epics, the same three better forgotten films, recycled and recycled and recycled? No one gets this, but despite the great acting ensemble, this movie, its two follow-ups, its creator and director, and its screenwriter are the biggest bunch of hyped losers in Hollywood history.";12;38;False tt0068646;DKosty123;20/11/2006;F Fords 2008 Restoration- An Offer I Didn't Refuse;10;"The Cordleone family is modeled on a Mafia family which existed. The Mario Puzo novel was highly fictionalized & made for an interesting premise. The classic line from this film ""I'm going to make them an offer they can't refuse,"" has become the most cliché line ever uttered from a film.

Marlon Brando was well suited for his role in this plodding drama. The 2008 restoration of the Godfather by Copola on DVD brings this film, not only back to original form but even better. The set available now has all 3 films plus extras. When I watched to original now restored, I realized just how great this movie is.

This film takes it time telling it's story and it is much more classic story telling over action. The restoration makes the dark film play much better than older prints I have seen before. It is in 5 speaker sound for home theater systems. After seeing how good this original is, I am looking foreword to checking out 2 & 3.

James Caan, Abe Vigoda head a stellar list of folks supporting Brando here with incredible acting by Al Pacino as the son heir apparent. There is plenty of reason to watch this restored version. It is done with an obvious flair and once you watch this, you easily forget HBO's poor relative, The Sopranos. If they face Brando, they wouldn't last 5 minutes.";4;9;False tt0068646;cant-affordsit;04/04/2006;The Greatest;10;"This is the greatest movie ever made. It not only gives an interesting view on the mafia, but it teaches many valuable lessons and ideas, for which a good example is in the first scene, the meeting between the Don and Bonasera (""What did I ever do to deserve such disrespect?""). I am 13 now, and the first time I saw this movie was when I was 8. The Godfather has definitely made me smarter and prepared me for the independence of being a teenager. I would recommend if your child is 8+ and has not seen this movie that they watch it right away. I have the full box set, and have seen them all numerous times. The third was disappointing though, with dry acting, repetitive plot, and many awkward moments between Sofia Coppola and Al Pacino. I was also glad that the first two movies did not have too much violence, although there is a fair amount of Thompson guns in them. I have a habit of quoting Brando, who plays a character who delivers some of the most powerful, meaningful lines in any movie I have seen. I have seen most of Brando's movies, from Streetcar to Missouri breaks to the Freshman, in which his lines are so unique and unconventionally spoken they sometimes make me laugh. It was a true shame for Brando to die at the not-too-old age of 80, although he was not in good health at the time. Although many people are sure to claim the fame that Brando accomplished, I will always remember him to be the greatest actor ever.";4;9;False tt0068646;moonspinner55;18/03/2006;Epic adaptation, and a cornerstone of 1970s cinema...;7;Heady, scalding adaptation of Mario Puzo's bestselling book about Italian Mafia family as seen through many years time. Flawless production design and palpably tense, prickly atmosphere are two of the picture's many riches, and indeed Marlon Brando's performance as the family patriarch is an incredible characterization, though several of the other characters don't always come off and the repellent violence is occasionally presented in a ham-fisted manner (with too much wicked glee behind the bloodshed). Francis Ford Coppola directed the proceedings like someone who has lived and breathed this material, and he doesn't allow his love for movie-making magic to cloud the realism of this family's dark dealings, but he perhaps allowed the cast too much free reign and some sequences tend to ramble. Won Oscars for Brando as Best Actor (he refused it), Coppola and Mario Puzo for their adapted screenplay and for Best Picture. Followed by two Coppola-directed sequels in 1974 and 1990. *** from ****;4;9;False tt0068646;jay4stein79-1;16/11/2004;Re-configured Genre;7;"During the 1970s, American directors decided, like their French counterparts did in the previous decade, to elevate and transcend the genres that appealed to them as children growing up in the 1940s and50s. Lucas took Buck Rodgers and Science Fiction to new levels, as didSpielberg with the Action/Adventure movie.

Some re-made war movies in their own image; others re-configured the Western. Coppola took a stab at elevating the gangster film from B-movie to artistic masterpiece.

On some level, he succeeded, transforming the gangster film from movies about crooks to movies about crooks and their families.

Though it may not seem like such a difference, adding that familial component made movies about organized crime much more interesting than they had previously been. When critics discuss the great gangster films, few films made before the Godfather are mentioned. The Godfather, in one sense, made gangster movies as we know them. That is no small feat and Coppola ought to be commended for that. He made a solidly acted and directed film in a genre not usually known for those attributes.

However, the Godfather is not the greatest movie of all time. It is not even the greatest gangster movie (that would have to go to Goodfellas) or the greatest movie of 1972 (compare it to the dynamic performances of Sleuth, the absolutely absurd and insane Ruling Class, and Bunuel's masterpiece, the Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie and you will find the Godfather lacking).

Do not mis-understand: the Godfather is an eminently watchable movie, filled with great performances and guided by the sure hand of a very gifted director. It is simply, though, a very good movie - no more, no less. Perhaps I'm able to take a step back from The Godfather because I wasn't there at the time

I understand its appeal and I understand why people call it one of the greatest motion pictures of all time, but I cannot agree with them. It lacks an intangible quality that all great movies have; it lacks an aura. Movies like Close Encounters and Chinatown have an aura that, though difficult to describe, simply exudes greatness.

The Godfather lacks that intangible quality while maintaining all of the tangible qualities of a great film. That one, almost invisible piece, though separates the very good from the great. That intangibleis vital and is something this film simply does not have.";4;9;True tt0068646;justafanuk;12/09/2003;The ultimate drama?;10;`I believe in America' are the first words spoken in The Godfather. The fact that they resonate with such power to someone who has no personal or professional ties with the country speaks volumes.

My first viewing of this film was anticipated with equal amounts excitement and trepidation. How could a film of such enormous stature possibly live up to anyone's expectations, let alone mine? Over two and a half hours later I realised I would probably never see a finer film in my life. And about six or seven years on from that revelatory experience, that view grows ever stronger. With the exception of The Godfather Part Two that is. But that's a film for another day.

The Godfather is now so much a part of our culture that it becomes difficult to talk about it as a film by itself. Entire books have been written on how it has not only affected change in the way films are conceived by individuals and whole studios, but also the very nature of the film industry itself. At the time nobody could have predicted that a lengthy (and costly) film set in the 1940's with a relatively little know cast and a serious and weighty subject matter could have made such a huge profit at the box office. Much like in the film itself, ambition and bravado is rewarded with great success and power, and this was true for many of the cast and crew with their subsequent careers.

There may be spoilers ahead but the plot and events in this film are now so well documented I doubt anyone will be surprised.

The film opens with a wedding taking place between Don Vito Corleone's daughter, Connie and Carlo, a wannabe member of the Family. While the celebrations take place outside in glorious sunshine, in the darkened rooms of the main house Don Vito pays court to various people requesting help with whatever problems they need assistance with. This is where Bonasera, a local baker, opens the film with the aforementioned line and seeks revenge on two men who savagely beat his daughter after she refused their advances. The subsequent conversation sets the tone for the rest of the film. Respect is always demanded from those in power and who are willing to use that power to benefit you. But there may always be a favour required by The Don in return. Later in the film, this favour is repaid to The Don in a way that is both shocking and relieving to Bonasera. Every element in this first scene demands attention from the audience and rewards them by setting a very high standard thereon. The way the camera slowly pulls back from Bonasera to reveal The Don listening to the story as we are, the use of lighting to almost hide The Don's eyes in the darkness, and the expressions, the voice and even the movement of Marlon Brando as The Don immediately put us in the company of one of THE great acting performances. Also attendant at the wedding are The Don's sons, Sonny the firey tempered James Cann, the weak willed Fredo played by John Cazale and Michael, the youngest and most cool headed of the brothers, played as such by Al Pacino. As with Brando, you are assured career defining performances by all three men, and I don't think any of them reached these acting heights again. Equally impressive but not strictly a family member is Robert Duvall as The Don's Consilgerie, Tom Hagen.

In a nutshell (if such a thing were possible) the film follows the reluctant but necessary rise of Michael to the head of The Family and his dealings with his immediate family, his wife Kay (Diane Keaton), the ranked members that protect their Family (Tessio, Clemenza, etc), other Mafia Families and corrupt state officials. Throughout the film Michael's views on his involvement with his Family change from the events that happen to his father after The Don refuses to involve his Families resources in distributing drugs into the city. When The Don is gunned down and left for dead in the street, and Michael has his jaw broken by corrupt Police Captain McCluskey, whilst trying to protect his unguarded father in the hospital, he sets in motion the revenge killing of both McCluskey and Sollozzo, the man partly responsible for the attempt on Don Vito. The result of the ensuing incredible set piece makes it necessary for Michael to leave the country to Sicily until it is safe to return. There he experiences both happiness and tragedy, as he takes a new bride, Apollonia, and receives news that Sonny was killed for a hit he had ordered on a rival Families son in previous retribution for the hit on The Don. Sonny's death scene is itself one of the most memorable set pieces in all of cinema. When a failed attempt on Michael leaves Apollonia dead, he returns to America, cold and hardened by these terrible events. There he begins to pick up where he left his life with Kay and moves to become his fathers heir.

The phrase that there is honour among thieves is nowhere more relevant than in The Godfather. Michael, Sonny, Fredo and Tom are bound together by the respect and loyalty they hold for their father (in Tom's case, unofficially adopted) and the Corleone name. Their Family will always come before anything else, as shown when Michael leaves for Sicily without much of a thought towards Kay (being both Jewish and a woman excludes her from the Family), or when Sonny rushes to his sister Connie's aid (and ultimately his demise) after she receives another vicious beating by Carlo.

Some of the most fondly remembered and famous scenes in cinema occur throughout The Godfather. The sequence with Khartum's severed head is an undisputed classic for both the shock value and for showing us early on how far and what type of methods the Family will employ. Sonny's murder is brutal and affecting, the attempted hit on The Don is wonderfully staged with the camera looking down on the event from above, the cumulative killings of the heads of the five Families at the end is a masterpiece of editing (note to George Lucas circa Phantom Menace. This is how you direct separate climactic events that reach toward the same goal!) , and these are only some of the major events that take place. There are so many great lines that it would be fruitless to list even some of them here, as many of them are now as much a part of the English language as any piece of classic text. What I will mention however, are the delivery on some of the lesser known phrases. When Tom has to tell The Don that `They shot Sonny on the causeway. He's dead', it's a heartbreaking moment both for himself, The Don and the audience and we can completely emphasise with their pain. The fact that we can emphasise at all with these criminals and killers is not only due to the acting, writing and directing of these characters, but that the Corleone Family is just that shade more moral and honourable than the other Families depicted in the film. When The Don calls a meeting with the heads of the five Families to clear the bad blood between them and prepare for Michael's return to America, his delivery of the line `..but I'm a superstitious man..' and subsequent warning is so powerful and commanding that nobody but Brando could have pulled it off with such weight and grandeur. When Michael asks the powerful Vegas hotel owner Moe Green that `You straightened out my brother?' the ‘threat' is so tangible that Moe is immediately sorry and Fredo tries to make light of the situation by assuring Mike that he and Moe are best of friends. Thus begins the tragic downfall of Fredo At the beginning of the film when Michael is telling Kay about his family he assures her that `That's my family Kay, it's not me'. At the end of the film he tells her `Don't ask me about my business Kay'. Both times he is completely sincere and believable.

All throughout the film there are little moments where there may not be any dialogue or anything particularly important that happens to the plot, but they made such an impression on me that I have to mention some of them. The moment when Sonny bites down on his fist so (I assume) he wouldn't swear in front of Connie when he sees the bruise marks left on her face by Carlo, gave me goosebumps. The shot of the Statue of Liberty in the backdrop after Clemenza takes Paulie out to pick up some Cannelloni and has Rocco kill him and leave him bleeding in the car. The simple shrug of The Don's eyebrows when Tom returns from meeting Jack Woltz, and the previous shot was hearing Woltz's continued screams after finding the head of his beloved horse Khartum, in his bed when he awoke. The impeccable way Michael looks, dresses and carries himself when we first see him after returning from America as he steps out of a car toward Kay, and the way Brando's face literally crumbles as he is told of Sonny's death.

Every technical element in this film is of the highest level. The cinematography is beautifully composed and framed, the period designs of New York are utterly believable and we never assume we're in any other time. The music is simply stunning and perfectly highlights the mood of the characters throughout, with the main theme one of the most recognisable pieces of music in cinema. When watching this, the film simply FEELS rich. I take a great sense of importance and history from it, as though it's not merely a film but something much bigger. And there are plenty of arguments to support this, given the massive impact it has left not only on the film industry, but also on American businesses, commerce and crime. There are many stories of real life Mafiosi who base their lifestyle and way of conducting business on the Corleone way.

I think the best compliment I can pay to The Godfather is that once the door is closed on Kay's face and we've both been shut out, I feel like I've witnessed an event, rather than just watch a film.;4;9;True tt0068646;Anonymous_Maxine;30/08/2001;Francis Ford Coppola takes a story written by Mario Puzo and makes it into one of the greatest films ever made.;10;Italian films have quite often come under some sort of controversy, in large part because of the fact that Italian immigrants have been given an undeserved reputation of being inherently violent and universally tied to some sort of organized crime. Mass media is one of the main reasons for this, which is why Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather instigated such fierce opposition and controversy when it was released in 1972. Coppola has insisted that the film is not about Italians involved in organized crime, but that it is instead a metaphorical representation of the American government. Personally, I don't believe that at all, if only because no one is going to watch a film like that and overlook exactly what they see and make the connection between the film and the American government.

However, this does not take away from the overall accomplishment that the film makes. The genius of The Godfather lies in Coppola's obvious directing skills, as well as author Mario Puzo's skill as a storyteller. The film tells the story of five tremendously powerful crime families that are at war with one another, but no one seems to be quite sure who committed the crimes that instigated the war, which makes for an interesting investigation as a subplot. Marlon Brando's performance as Don Vito Corleone is one of the best in history, and one of the major accomplishments of the film as a whole is that it is able to take this man, who is really a despicable person, and make him into an endearing character that we really care about. He is the leader of a crime family, but he is made into an antagonist. The film twists things around like that, which is one of the things that really makes it so watch-able.

Aside from making Don Corleone into such a likeable character, he is also made to be tremendously respectable. Personally, I noticed this because I watched The Godfather again recently while going through and watching all of the James Bond films. Here is James Bond, who is supposed to be one of the most tasteful, refined, and high-class figures in action film, and Brando's Don Corleone effortlessly makes even Sean Connery's Bond look like a Spice Girl. The story of The Godfather is complex and involved enough to have taken up three very long films, and they are tied together brilliantly. This film ends with Vito Corleone's son Michael taking over his leadership position, in a scene that doesn't only leave room for a sequel, but demands one.

The film ends with Michael Corleone in his father's office, being addressed by two of his father's assistants as Don Corleone, a title attributed only to his father until that point in the film. It would have been an unsatisfactory to end the film that way without continuing the story, and this was done two years later, with yet another Best Picture winner. The Godfather is a landmark in film history, because of the incredible story, the astronomical performances, the expert direction, and the picture perfect cinematography. The film is literally packed with memorable and famous scenes, and the performances from everyone involved are spectacular. Even at three hours, The Godfather never gets boring or slow. It is a stunningly intense ride from beginning to end.;4;9;False tt0068646;Maniac-9;05/08/1998;The Godfather is so good that real life gangsters patterned themselves after the movie;10;It is amazing to see such quality of actors all in one film. Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, James Caan, Al Pacino, and John Cazale fill out one of the more impressive casts seen in modern movie making. You can just feel the intensity of the whole chain of events that happen.;4;9;False tt0068646;The Big Lebowski;29/10/2000;Good, not perfect;;Yes this is a great film, but not flawless. The casting is great, nice plot, some excellent scenes. However the pace is really too slow. I understand that some films need to be long, films with lots going on. But this is 2 hours entertainment, not 3. If this film had been shorter then it may possibly have been the greatest ever.;4;9;False tt0068646;imdbmoviereview;12/02/2006;Has not aged well;2;This movie was probably relevant in the 70s and may have been a benchmark at the time it was made. Watching it in 2006, I can see how it added to the movie landscape and that effect that it had on subsequent film making.

Some of the film is amazing, but mostly it goes on and on. It is very long, with some of the scenes taking an age, without really adding to the atmosphere or the point. These are not impressive pauses, silences, looks, stares, or useful dwelling time, simply editing that never happened.

This film is worth seeing as a history lesson in film, to get an understanding of the development of the genre, but anybody who has seen goodfellas, casino, or any other mob flick is unlikely to find the moral tale worth the journey.;8;23;False tt0068646;Aidy;12/03/2001;A case of the Emperor's New Clothes;2;I don't see what all the fuss is about surrounding this movie. It is long, slow and boring. I'm partial to the odd gangster movie (yeah, I know, this isn't a gangster movie it's a 'family' movie...*yawn*) but have seen far better than this (Carlito's Way, Mean Streets, Scarface to name a few).

Judging by the comments left on IMDB people say this movie is great due to the acting, the cinematography, the direction etc....what about the plot? The characters? Isn't that what makes a good movie? Or are the people who so verbosely extol the virtues of The Godfather all film/media students studying it for their coursework? Do people say this is a great movie because that's what they hear everyone else say?

The Godfather is not a good movie and the emperor is well and truly naked.;8;23;False tt0068646;Bored_Dragon;17/10/2018;It is great, but hardly the best;8;"I finally set out to take three hours to watch ""the best movie ever"" and, frankly, I'm not thrilled. Is it good? It's great. But the best... not even close.

8/10";3;6;False tt0068646;ofpsmith;31/01/2015;"""I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse.""";10;One of the most critically acclaimed films in all of history, The Godfather shows us inside the world of the mob. But not in a usual way. The main character Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the crime lord of the biggest crime family in Ney York, but the film portrays him as an honorable person. He never really does anything that we can look down on him for. He has a strict moral code and always spends him free time with his family. He is an elderly man who has 3 sons and 1 daughter. Michael Corleone (Al Pachino) wants nothing to do with the crime family, Sonny Corleone (James Caan) is a hothead, Fredo Corleone (John Cazale) is a weakling, and Connie Corleone (Talia Shire) is Vito's only daughter. The story really begins when Vito refuses the request of local drug lord Virgil Sollozo (Al Lettieri) and as a result, Sollozo attempts to kill Vito. With Vito in the hospital Captain Mark McCluskey (Sterling Hayden) a corrupt police officer working for Sollozo arrests all of Vito's bodyguards leaving Vito unprotected. With Sonny as the acting don, Michael goes to visit Vito in the hospital but as he is leaving McCluskey shows up and attempts to arrest Michael but not before Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) the Corleone's lawyer shows up to save Michael. Later after convincing Sonny, Michael stages a meeting with Sollozo and McCluskey in a restaurant but in a life changing moment shoots them booth in the head. From that point on the film showcases the evolution of Michael from the college kid he was before now to a ruthless mobster. This film is one of the most celebrated and critically acclaimed in history, and it's easy to see why. The characters here are all great. The acting (which is important because that's what makes the memorable characters) is equally great. Brando in fact won an Oscar for his performance as Vito. If you ever come across this movie, stop and watch it.;3;6;True tt0068646;akash_sebastian;17/07/2014;"A Timeless Cinematic Classic; It's a Crime Masterpiece.";9;"'The Godfather', the first part in Francis Ford Coppola's classic crime trilogy, is an almost perfect movie, with every aspect of it working to its advantage. Before this film, Coppola wasn't known much for his directorial skills. But the mastery of art he showed with this masterpiece amazed everyone.

From Marlon Brando's stunning makeover to the incredible acting of almost every member of the cast, Gordon Willis' spectacular cinematography, tight editing, the remarkable background score (Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola), and almost everything else in the movie is quite flawless. No matter how many times you watch it, from the opening scene with Don Vito being asked for a favour at his daughter's wedding, to the final scene with door closing on Don Michael, the new ruthless boss of the Mafia family, the movie's three-hour long runtime captivates you till the very end. It's unlike most other crime movies with too many plot twists, action sequences, etc. The film is quite character-driven. It mainly shows the transformation of the character Michael Corleone, the war hero returning home during his sister Connie's wedding. Michael was the innocent and reluctant one in the family, who always stayed away from the family business. After certain events, he is compelled to take over the business, and it's sad and intriguing at the same time to see this character slowly evolve into something completely different from what Vito, Michael or any of us had expected. Ultimately, it's a movie all about family.

Marlon Brando was not even 50 when he gives his Oscar-winning incredible performance as the head of the Corleone family. Al Pacino, who plays the central character, gets his career launched with this movie, and shows what he's capable of. Other supporting actors like James Caan, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Richard S. Castellano, etc. - all of them give brilliant performances.

There are so many scenes and dialogues in the movie which are more than memorable: the opening favour scene, the horse head on the studio head's bed, the sequences together showing the planned downfall of the family (including shooting of Don Vito), and especially, the craftily directed baptism scene, during which the family executes a few things to finally rise up.

Nothing can be pinpointed in this movie to be called as flawed; it's an exceptional crime drama. It's an astute adaptation, and the movie stands on its own. But if it had a little more heart, I could have called it a flawless and perfect masterpiece.";3;6;False tt0068646;vrauto;13/04/2014;The remarkable thing about Mario Puzo's novel;10;"We know from Gay Talese's book Honor Thy Father that being a professional mobster isn't all sunshine and roses. More often, it's the boredom of stuffy rooms and a bad diet of carry-out food, punctuated by brief, terrible bursts of violence. This is exactly the feel of ""The Godfather,"" which brushes aside the flashy glamour of the traditional gangster picture and gives us what's left: fierce tribal loyalties, deadly little neighborhood quarrels in Brooklyn, and a form of vengeance to match every affront.

The remarkable thing about Mario Puzo's novel was the way it seemed to be told from the inside out; he didn't give us a world of international intrigue, but a private club as constricted as the seventh grade. Everybody knew everybody else and had a pretty shrewd hunch what they were up to.

The movie (based on a script labored over for some time by Puzo and then finally given form, I suspect, by director Francis Ford Coppola) gets the same feel. We tend to identify with Don Corleone's family not because we dig gang wars, but because we have been with them from the beginning, watching them wait for battle while sitting at the kitchen table and eating chow mein out of paper cartons.

""The Godfather"" himself is not even the central character in the drama. That position goes to the youngest, brightest son, Michael, who understands the nature of his father's position while revising his old- fashioned ways. The Godfather's role in the family enterprise is described by his name; he stands outside the next generation which will carry on and, hopefully, angle the family into legitimate enterprises.

Those who have read the novel may be surprised to find Michael at the center of the movie, instead of Don Corleone. In fact, this is simply an economical way for Coppola to get at the heart of the Puzo story, which dealt with the transfer of power within the family. Marlon Brando, who plays the Godfather as a shrewd, unbreakable old man, actually has the character lead in the movie; Al Pacino, with a brilliantly developed performance as Michael, is the lead.

But Brando's performance is a skillful throwaway, even though it earned him an Academy Award for best actor. His voice is wheezy and whispery, and his physical movements deliberately lack precision; the effect is of a man so accustomed to power that he no longer needs to remind others. Brando does look the part of old Don Corleone, mostly because of acting and partly because of the makeup, although he seems to have stuffed a little too much cotton into his jowls, making his lower face immobile.

The rest of the actors supply one example after another of inspired casting. Although ""The Godfather"" is a long, minutely detailed movie of some three hours, there naturally isn't time to go into the backgrounds and identities of such characters as Clemenza, the family lieutenant; Jack Woltz, the movie czar; Luca Brasi, the loyal professional killer; McCluskey, the crooked cop; and the rest. Coppola and producer Al Ruddy skirt this problem with understated typecasting. As the Irish cop, for example, they simply slide in Sterling Hayden and let the character go about his business. Richard Castellano is an unshakable Clemenza. John Marley makes a perfectly hateful Hollywood mogul (and, yes, he still wakes up to find he'll have to cancel his day at the races).

The success of ""The Godfather"" as a novel was largely due to a series of unforgettable scenes. Puzo is a good storyteller, but no great shakes as a writer. The movie gives almost everything in the novel except the gynecological repair job. It doesn't miss a single killing; it opens with the wedding of Don Corleone's daughter (and attendant upstairs activity); and there are the right number of auto bombs, double crosses, and garrotings.

Coppola has found a style and a visual look for all this material so ""The Godfather"" becomes something of a rarity: a really good movie squeezed from a bestseller. The decision to shoot everything in period decor (the middle and late 1940s) was crucial; if they'd tried to save money as they originally planned, by bringing everything up-to-date, the movie simply wouldn't have worked. But it's uncannily successful as a period piece, filled with sleek, bulging limousines and postwar fedoras. Coppola and his cinematographer, Gordon Willis, also do some interesting things with the color photography. The earlier scenes have a reddish- brown tint, slightly overexposed and feeling like nothing so much as a 1946 newspaper rotogravure supplement.

Although the movie is three hours long, it absorbs us so effectively it never has to hurry. There is something in the measured passage of time as Don Corleone hands over his reins of power that would have made a shorter, faster moving film unseemly. Even at this length, there are characters in relationships you can't quite understand unless you've read the novel. Or perhaps you can, just by the way the characters look at each other.";3;6;False tt0068646;felipehistory;21/01/2014;The drama that portrays some of the history of the 20th century in America;10;"Many words have been written about ""The Godfather"" since debut in 1972 and no doubt that all words are quite flattering, but always worth a few cents more about this great movie. The work, directed by then newcomer director Coppola, was awarded in the launch year and continued to receiving well-deserved awards, until soon became a landmark of international cinema . With substantial actors and flawless performance of Marlon Brando and Al Pacino, the story has traces of a true work of art. Its soundtrack also awarded, is absolutely amazing and remarkable. Who does not hear the chords of the soundtrack by Nino Rota and automatically remember the movie ?

Additionally all, ""The Godfather "" is a portrait of its time period and so it goes on all the other works of the trilogy. The film is built upon a significant historical period, shows not only the role of foreign immigrants and their difficulties in building an identity in America as it is also very thorough in addressing how the Italian mafia was organized for several decades in USA. For this and more, "" The Godfather "" is a film which must be seen, a reference that needs to be seen by all those who love movies and want to understand the social development of the United States at the beginning of the last century.";3;6;False tt0068646;aman_akhauri;03/07/2012;The Godfather : The Greatest Achievement in Cinematic History;10;"Some things are just meant to be perfect, flawless and well, godly. The Godfather , by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo is . The way every aspect of filmmaking and storytelling compliments the other in this unforgettable film causes one to wonder ( really) if such a feat can be repeated, ever .

I always have the highest regard for the script before anything associated with films , therefore I'd like to talk about Godfather's screenplay first .

Adapted from Mario Puzo's novel of the same name The Godfather is all about a man's relationship with his family and his responsibilties towards it, that can cause him to abandon his own dreams and ambitions. That this setup is showcased by one of the most powerful mafia families in 1940s New York makes it all the more interesting .

The simple plot being that the head of the Corleone crime family is aging and other crime bosses want him out of the way seems rather straightforward. Enter Don Vito Corleone's youngest son Michael aka 'the innocent college boy' - as his elder brother and apparent heir Sonny Corleone likes to call him - along with a girl. He sums up his life and all that he expects from it in future in one line - ""This is my family Kay , not me. "" Quite clearly the kid wants nothing to do with his crime family or its power. But this family thrives on crime and inevitably becomes a victim as well. After Vito refuses to deal with a narcotics kingpin named Virgil Sollozo, he sets off a chain of events that alters his family and business structure forever. Even a man who has experienced all that life could offer fails to see what's coming and expresses his surprise later on.

A heartbreaking and mind numbing tale of how a powerful crime family comes to terms with all that it feeds on and how the same entities almost destroy the family was , is and will remain unforgettable .

The number of memorable scenes and dialouges is mind boggling. The scene where the Don delivers his famous line "" I'm gonna make him ......."" is enough to express the immeasurable power that the man possesses . And the one where a proud Hollywood producer awakes to find on his bed a ....... , or the restaurant where Michael ......... , or when Sonny pays the price for being hotheaded , and when the Don talks to his son , or when Michael does what he is destined to do, The Godfather overflows with great scenes.

The music and cinematography by Nino Rota and Gordon Willis respectively contribute greatly to the film's overall impact .

The Godfather can never be mentioned without naming Marlon Brando and Al Pacino in the same breath. The level of acting is just ""Oh My Gosh"" . While Brando is great and very believable as Vito Corleone , Al Pacino is and will always remain the one and only choice for Michael Corleone . It is said that Brando developed the mannerisms of Vito himself and if so , then he absolutely deserves his Oscar . Al Pacino transforms Michael from the ideal son to the guy he eventually becomes making sure that one is overwhelmed by the portrayal .

Not once have i mentioned in my tribute ( i ain't that great enough to review The Godfather) that The Godfather is a person, because he isn't and as the Hindi film ' Sarkar' , influenced heavily by The Godfather , says "" The Godfather is not a man , but an idea."" Just that this idea created history.

Note: As much as i don't want to mention it , i do really feel that there is one sequence in the film that required the editor's attention. But nonetheless , it only appears as such in repeated viewings and not the first one . So set aside your coke and popcorn because you're not just watching any other flick , you are watching the greatest of them all and after the conclusion you'll realise that the coke and popcorn are as they were when the words The Godfather appeared on the screen some three hours ago .";3;6;False tt0068646;Desertman84;18/10/2011;The Godfather:The Greatest Film Ever Made;10;"The Godfather is the greatest film ever made.It has the greatest critical and commercial successes in Hollywood as it gets everything right and has no shortcomings whatsoever.It exceeded expectations as the Mario Puzo's novel,from which the film was based on which itself a classic,and it also created a new standard and benchmark for the great American movie.Aside from that,it was one of the most widely imitated, quoted, and lampooned movies of all time.In summary,it is the movie that provided the greatest on both excellence and entertainment.

The story begins as Don Vito Corleone,the head of a New York Mafia ""family"", oversees his daughter's wedding. His beloved son Michael has just come home from the war, but does not intend to become part of his father's business. Through Michael's life the nature of the family business becomes clear. The business of the family is just like the head of the family, kind and benevolent to those who give respect, but given to ruthless violence whenever anything stands against the good of the family. Don Vito lives his life in the way of the old country, but times are changing and some don't want to follow the old ways and look out for community and ""family"". An up and coming rival of the Corleone family wants to start selling drugs in New York, and needs the Don's influence to further his plan. The clash of the Don's fading old world values and the new ways will demand a terrible price.

The epic film stars Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Sterling Hayden, John Marley, Richard Conte and Diane Keaton, together with John Cazale and Talia Shire.The film benefited greatly from the performance from its stellar cast especially from Brando as Don Vito Corleone,the head of the New York Mafia ""family"".Also,the actors who played his sons like Pacino as Michael,Cazale as Fredo and Caan as Sonny,were also outstanding in their performance. The cast was simply superb in this film.

Other unforgettable features of this film is Nino Rota's haunting and memorable musical scores;the editing by William Reynolds and Peter Zinner;Dean Tavoularis's evocative set design; and the screenplay of Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola as well as the direction of Coppola.

Overall,The Godfather is the ultimate family film that member of the household will enjoy and could relate to.";3;6;True tt0068646;bondfish;23/07/2010;One of the most over rated films;8;I went into the Godfather expecting a masterpiece from all the reviews and how it number 2 or 3 on the IMDb top 250 films. After watching it I found it very disappointing for a few reasons.

1. You can't understand what the Godfather is saying half the time for the most part it all sounds like he's wheezing. If your going to watch this film put on subtitles.

2. Its way to long. the movie is just shy of 3 hours long! Thats long enough and especially most of the time nothing is going on. I found myself not paying attention to most of the boring parts in the film and there's a lot.

Now I know what your saying, your saying that i don't like long films. To you I say false i don't mind long films like the LOTR Return of the king is 4 hours + in the extended edition but there's a difference LOTR is entertaining there's action going on throughout 80% of the film.

Now I'm not saying I hated the movie I'm justing saying it has a few flaws and its not perfect by any means. Now I have yet to see Part 2 maybe that will change my mind but right now it doesn't appeal to me because its 4 hours + long! All I can saying is that it better be more stuff going on in the movie then the first one.

8.7/10 not a bad film but a few flaws;3;6;False tt0068646;tindur;27/12/2008;The perfect movie.;10;The Godfather is probably the most perfect movie ever made. A strong plot, a unique cast, direction, filming and editing are beyond words, and the music makes you blend in. There are other great movies of course, but some of them lack one or two things mentioned above. It's difficult to match this one. Francis Coppola probably did that with The Godfather Part II (1974), and he may have exceeded himself. The Godfather is such a masterpiece that you can watch it over and over again and you will never be bored but always surprised how wonderful it is. Just to see young Al Pacino change for a college boy to a ruthless mafioso is a miracle of movie-making, even more so than Marlon Brando in the title role, albeit a small one. But the most underrated role and actor in both the Godfather movies is Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen.;3;6;False tt0068646;loccomotive2000;21/09/2008;The Shakespearean Epic Of The Movie Generation;10;"How do you define a movie's greatness? For me, it's pretty straightforward; mainly the direction, the script, and the acting. And the Godfather triumphs on every level. Coppola and Puzo have created an epic tale of a powerful mafioso patriarch passing his crown down to his unwilling son, and the shift of power unfolds brilliantly with betrayal, vengeance and tragedy.

Marlon Brando delivers one of the most intensive performances ever seen in film seemingly effortlessly. His calm demeanor carries along a subtly powerful and intimidating presence. Al Pacino is a revelation in his first role in a major film, displaying his range as he moves from the role of a heroin addict in The Panic in Needle Park, to the reluctant successor of the Don who transforms from the righteous war hero into a ruthless king. James Caan is PERFECT for the hot-headed Sonny, as is Robert Duvall as the intelligent Tom Hagen and John Cazale as the tragic figure of Fredo.

I will run out of superlatives if I continue. Overall, The Godfather is a timeless classic that will always be the epitome of how a truly magnificent epic film should be.";3;6;False tt0068646;kyle-cruse;19/08/2008;A truly impressive film;9;"I had to watch the entire trilogy and reflect on the films for a while before I realized what a great film ""The Godfather"" is. As I watched all three films, I really got familiar with all of the characters and became more intrigued as the series went on. Looking back, I felt that this first film was the greatest of the trilogy for several reasons. First of all, it has Marlon Brando, who portrays the amazing character Vito Corleone. This is one of the most memorable, imitated, and lovable characters in film history. His character is masterfully balanced as a powerful mafia patriarch and a loving family man. For this he won a well-deserved Best Actor Oscar. I also prefer this film because Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is a hero rather than the villain he later becomes. As Vito Corelone is wounded by an enemy, Michael must take over leading his empire while he is recovering. The interactions between the characters is excellent here, as is the film's dialogue. There is also a great supporting cast, consisting of Robert Duvall, James Caan, Diane Keaton, and more. What a well-crafted story. Part II is almost as good, but I think this is slightly better. Close to perfect.

***1/2 out of ****";3;6;True tt0068646;lisa-cena;17/08/2008;A Definite Must See;10;I first watched this movie a few months ago and I loved it. I decided to watch it since I had heard it was one of the best movies ever made. And I now agree with those who said that. I thought that this is one of the best movies as it was well scripted and the characters were strong. Francis Ford Coppola casted some of the best actors for this movie.

The first time I watched it I loved it but I had to watch it a second time as I didn't get what some of it was about. But from the first time I watched this movie I knew it was a masterpiece.

Some people say that is is overrated but in my opinion you could not overrate The Godfather no matter how hard you try. But that is my opinion.

Marlon Brando did an amazing job portraying Don Corleone and he made me want to watch this movie over and over again as he just amazed me with his brilliant acting. Al Pacino gave an astounding performance as Michael Corleone and it is this film that made him my favourite actor. James Caan wowed me as Tom Hagen and his character was one of my favourites in The Godfather.

I loved this film and I could watch it over and over again and not get bored. In my opinion this movie is a definite must see.

I hope this review helped you.;3;6;False tt0068646;Spielberg_101;31/07/2008;"Stanley Kubrick, ""The Godfather is possibly the greatest movie ever made.""";10;"And he wasn't wrong. After recently viewing this masterpiece of American film for the first time it is understood why it has earned such acclaim for so many years. It is hard to put into the words how beautiful and flawless The Godfather really is, all I can say is that it is the most brilliant saga of family, business, and crime ever captured on camera.

One of the greatest qualities about The Godfather is its craft. The craft is impeccable in this film. This must be credited to the fantastic cast (from Marlon Brando to Al Pacino to James Caan and even to Abe Vigoda) and to one of the greatest directors of American cinema: Francis Ford Coppola. No other man could have unraveled such a craftily built epic that The Godfather is and remains today. Coppola and co-screenwriter Mario Puzo (who wrote the novel The Godfather) wrote the greatest screenplay Hollywood has seen. And it is due to the genius of both of these two gentlemen that The Godfather came to be.

Two scenes in the movie that prove the brilliance of this film are the fateful diner sequence and the fantastic ending. Micheal's emotion is so ever present in that scene it is like you are right there with him holding the gun, focused on killing the man that attempted the murder of his father. You are with Micheal. Brilliant Scene. I also love the ending in which the door closes on Kay who has just watched Clemenza kiss the hand of Don Michael Corleone, her husband. Best final scene I have ever witnessed.

In final, I return to my opening remarks and Stanley Kubrick's quote, ""The Godfather is possibly the greatest movie ever made."" To me, this statement is amazing. This came from Kubrick...KUBRICK!...quite possibly the greatest filmmaker that ever lived. That just goes to show how powerful The Godfather is. I love this movie and all who love the art of film-making are in debt to the men and women who gave us this film.

10/10 If you haven't seen it, watch it. And if you have seen it, watch it again.";3;6;False tt0068646;Movie_Muse_Reviews;22/06/2008;Classic. Timeless. Masterpiece. Perfect. Best film maybe ever...Must I continue?;10;"If you're reading this comment to decide if you should watch ""The Godfather,"" then I truly have no comment to that. That would mean that the #1 of 250 ranking on the title page, the name ""Francis Ford Coppola,"" the cast list including Marlon Brando, the ""won Oscar for best picture"" and the phrase ""I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse"" mean absolutely nothing to you.

This is the greatest crime drama if not the greatest drama if not the greatest film of all time, so yes, it is worth your time. Then you need to watch ""The Godfather: Part II.""

This is a deep, enriching and beautiful film in every sense of those words and will forever echo through cinematic history.

Looking for any other sweeping statements? I could go on and on. You can't say anything bad about this film. You could say 175 minutes is too long, but if that's what it takes for a masterpiece, so be it.

If it's not every bit of what I said it is, the canolli's on me.";3;6;False tt0068646;DeltaParadox;28/05/2008;A Timeless Epic;10;The Godfather has become over the years a classic and many consider it to be one of the best films ever made, this is truly deserved. Everything about the film is perfect and I simply cant think of anything that shouldn't be there as every single thing screams perfection. The performances by everyone are absolutely magnificent and possibly the best ensemble cast performance of all time, the actors live in their roles and do everything is done perfectly down to the last little detail, the screenplay and storyline are magnificent as the story evolves you get a engrossed in it and every second is epic, all the themes are well presented and the acting just makes everything stronger, I wasn't bored for a second. The music (original and not) is perfect and goes with the film and every time you hear it it reminds you of the film and the characters. This film is just the first out of three in the great Corleone saga but although i award the other two a 10/10 this one is the best in my opinion simply because it has so many memorable cinematic scenes that are some of the best in history but the other two films complete this one and add more to the story. All that said this movie should not be missed and anyone who enjoys cinema needs to check this out and then follow the rest of the story with the others. A true classic. 10/10;3;6;False tt0068646;reggaemuzik;01/01/2008;Best movie ever;10;The Godfather is the best movie ever made. Marlon Brando played his part so well. Al Pacino also played is part well as well. The setting was fantastic and the plot was engaging. The use of camera work was just outstanding. I don't know why anyone would hate this film. It is the best gangster/mobster ever produced. This movie is way better than 'Goodfellas' or 'Scarface'. This movie had so many Oscar winning actors which boosted the rating of this movie right up. There are some action scenes in this movie and they are fantastic to watch. But the best part of the movie has to be the acting and how engaging the characters are. For everyone who was reluctant to get this movie, I suggest you buy this film or hire it out because it is a blast.;3;6;False tt0068646;valadas;26/08/2007;It's all business;7;For mafia members murders are nothing but business. They never kill for pleasure. Only in case of need, cold revenge or even summary justice (punishment of traitors for instance). Besides this they all have normal family lives with most cherished spouses and children and are usually very religious making pompous wedding, christening and funeral ceremonies in the Church or under priests' directions. This reality and atmosphere is splendidly shown in this movie that Coppola directed in a superb way and with a competent and strong hand. The cast has a stupendous performance. Marlon Brando plays a magnificent part in the role of the old godfather of one of American powerful mafia families, mastering his intonation and facial expression effectively thus creating an unforgettable character in the history of cinema. The action unfolds itself along the movie in a very captivating way. I want to stress particularly the sequence of the christening in which the new family godfather (Al Pacino) makes all the oaths in the name of the child (of whom he is also the Catholic godfather) and before the priest while a parallel cut shows us all the time a series of murders of rival mafia chiefs that were taking place at same time in several other places and which had been ordered by himself. The contrast of the religious scene and the violence of the killings is really impressive and full of meaning. This is maybe the best movie about mafia ever made.;3;6;False tt0068646;emrelanur;06/08/2007;A Must See...if you still haven't.;10;Filmed over 30 years ago, i believe that The Godfather to this day, is simply the best movie ever made. To be honest, i think that before they make another movie this good, particularly in this genre, we will be watching it with our children's children...if we're lucky.

I had to watch The Godfather more than once to realise that this movie is actually more about family than the mafia or the underworld. Most of the vengeance and deaths in this movie are not caused by money or greed. They are for family. I must say i haven't seen a movie before that gives this much importance to family. Particularly Al Pacino's character - Michael does an unbelievable turn around when it comes to his family. It's just incredible. At first reluctant to get involved with the family business, Michael soon becomes more ambitious and tougher than everyone else, again only for his family.

The fact that this movie is non cliché makes it more enjoyable to watch. It's not predictable in a sense where the good guy wins and bad guy loses eventually. It's so much more realistic than that. I have nothing bad to say about the length, editing and definitely about the cast. Al Pacino especially just continues to surprise me with how good he portrays his character. He is no doubt the best actor in Hollywood.

Some people may find The Godfather very slow, dark and depressing. It's not the loudest and most 'vibrant' movie, but that's kind of the whole point. I believe those people should then stop watching movies from this genre, because if you did not like this one...you won't like any. No words and reviews can do this movie justice and i believe that unlike some over rated, inflated movies The Godfather actually deserves its big reputation of being a masterpiece and one of the best movies ever made. without a doubt...10/10;3;6;False tt0068646;dcldan;23/05/2007;just perfect;10;"What can I say about ""the godfather"" that has not been said before? That it is a masterpiece? That its staff is just wonderful? That the actors and soundtrack are superb? That it is considered one of the best films ever? Actually I don't know what more say, but it is true that it is hard to see more deserved good marks. I had never the opportunity of watching to it in original version and, when I did it, I could perfectly realize the fabulous wonder I was able to enjoy, Marlon Brando is just impressive, Al Pacino is as good as him, and James Caan, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton deserved to be congratulated. Thanks to Coppola, for giving us the pleasure of watching ""the Godfather""";3;6;False tt0068646;pinkliz41;03/03/2007;The Greatest gangster film EVER!!!!!!!;10;Well what can i say? A great cast, a great director and a great film. This surely has to be one of my all time greats, beautifully acted and directed by Francis Ford Coppola, in a sense that its almost ubelievable to believe that a director could achieve this. The cast line up includes Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Al Pacino and Diana Keaton. Marlon Brando gives an extraordinary performance as Don Voto Corleone aka the Godfather. With its breath taking story line and emotional story telling and a stellar cast.What more can you ask for this emotionally gritty drama. And the answer is nothing, because this is to as near perfect film making you are going to see. Don't MISS ME;3;6;True tt0068646;lnunez0306;14/02/2007;Greatest film of all time.;10;"Many who have viewed this film consider it one of the best films ever, if not the best film ever made. The performance by Marlon Brando is legendary and iconic. The plot development and character development by far is heads above any other film that I have have had the pleasure of seeing. What in my opinion stands out above all in this film and perhaps the most understated and unappreciated film performances ever.Al Pacino played what I believe to be the most believable and powerful performance in film history. The complexity of Michael Corleone and his slow and uncontrolled spiral into the dark side of power and influence.Never before have I seen a more complete and developed performance; it is as if you see this idealistic young man forced into a life he rejected, only to become the most ruthless and feared crime figure of all time,all the while maintaining a realism and not going over the top much like the Tony Montana Character Pacino Played in Scarface. Displaying power and intimidation with minimal effort or any threatening physical attributes Pacino is able to let us as the viewers delve deep in to the soul of this tortured young man and see the birth of power hungry perverse monster who carries himself like a wolf in sheep's clothing. It was a crime that this stellar performance was not awarded with the academy award. The first two films of this trilogy allows us to see Al Pacino reach the pinnacle of acting, closing out what might be considered the best overall character performance in a film series with a truly under appreciated and powerful performance in the Godfather Part III. Pacino's performance in the Godfather in my opinion is the single best performance in film history, and the Godfather is the greatest American film ever made.";3;6;False tt0068646;KillerLord;01/02/2007;"It is a movie ""you can't refuse""!";10;"Imagine a room full of seasoned movie goers and critics. The topic of discussion - what movies are the best ever? And the name that unanimously pops up as a strong contender for the top spot - The Godfather. With an incredible star cast, an incredible director (Francis Ford Coppola) and a strong story (Mario Puzo) this movie surely deserves all the praise that it can get.

The Godfather is a three hour movie based on the life of the Italian American Mafioso based on the original novel written by Mario Puzo, who also has written the screenplay along with Coppola for the movie as well. It stars legendary and highly respected actors namely Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, etc.

What makes Al Pacino's role particularly tough is the evolution and the development of his character. He starts out as a person who does not want to do anything with the family business and as circumstances change he gradually changes the direction of his life and evolves throughout the movie. And Pacino does it splendidly. Surely his acting skills are not overrated as some might feel.

The story is a depiction of bitter reality, a bitter reality that was already put forward in the novel and made more accessible and imaginable in the movie. Perhaps this also explains why some haters of the movie exist. It does not offer the escape from reality many other movies seem to offer and let us face it - it is not a simple, straight story to understand. Though 3 hours in length, many viewers could watch it over and over again and each time a viewer watches it he might understand it in greater depth.

The direction is near flawless. This is one huge reason why this movie is always critically on the top spot. Incredible research has been done by Copolla and Puzo in depicting the Mafia world. How does a Don think? How does he protect himself by organizing layers and layers within his empire that render him untouchable by the law? How insecure does he feel? What does he consider when he plans a move? How careful does he have to be in every step that he takes? How does he exploit the whole system around him in order to be the one controlling all the strings (please note the puppeteer's strings in the logo of the movie The Godfather)? These are some of the questions both the movie and the novel try and answer.

For those of you who have read the novel, I am pretty sure most of you will not be disappointed. It is the best example of how best can a movie be made out of a splendid novel! And for those who saw this movie and liked it, I'd suggest that you read the novel as well for it shall explain in even greater depth the subtle details of the working machinery of the Mafia empire. And yes, please see The Godfather 2 as well.

And may I also add in the end that the second part ""Godfather 2"" is a fulfillment of the first. A must watch for every person who has watched part one.

I am sure that this movie is going to retain the honour of its top spot and critical finesse for many years to come.";3;6;True tt0068646;cheetahchic;13/01/2007;Anyone speak Italian?;10;"Anyone speak Italian who can translate the restaurant scene between Solozzo and Mike. I understand that they didn't use the subtitle in order to add to the scene's tension; but for my curiosity, I want to know what was said. Can anybody help a sista out? lol (I'm somewhat new to IMDb as far as comments go, and it's telling me that I have to have a minimum of 10 lines but I don't have anything else to say or ask so I'm just gonna keep writing this pointless stuff here. Why do I have to have a minimum of ten lines. I'm only at eight right now so I guess I have to keep writing. Yeah, now I'm at nine, one more to go. And I'm done. thanx! :-)";3;6;False tt0068646;Angelus2;19/09/2006;An Offer You Cant Refuse;10;"The Godfather has influenced every gangster film that has been made since. In terms of mannerisms, quotes, story line and characters.

Vito Corleone is also known as Don Corleone, who is the head of the Corleone Crime family, who are one of the five crime families in the Italian Mafia that rule America. Don Corleone meets a drug dealer named Sollazzo who wants to make a deal involving narcotics, the Don who has old fashioned value see's this as a threat and rejects the offer only to be gunned down. The Corleone kids, Sonny, Tom, Michael and Fredo must unite to hold their family and organisation together. And for Michael the youngest, things will never be the same again.

The Godfather is a masterpiece. There are endless scenes in the movie that strike a strong and powerful cord with the audience. From the first scene which shows Don Corleone sort out a problem to the violent death of his son and the rise of Michael.

Although made in 1972, still connects with people today. Its a different type of family movie like someone previously reviewed. It holds a strong sense of loyalty and what one will do if they are pushed beyond their limits. The cast is perfect; Marlon Brando is amazing as the ageing Don, while James Caan plays the hot headed Sonny perfectly and Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall give a great performance. But it is Al Pacino who shines. He portrays the innocent young man who vows to never be like his family only to plunge himself into darkness in order to protect his beloved family.

A masterpiece. A masterpiece that has effected the world when it comes to gangster movies.";3;6;True tt0068646;Spuzzlightyear;03/07/2006;The one, The Original!;8;While I certainly wouldn't call this THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE, this movie sure has a lot going for it, starting with the cast. I of course like Brando and Pacino going at it, but my personal faves are James Caan and of course my main man Robert Duvall. All of them give dynamite performances here, forever raising the bar to new actors everywhere. Even though the movie is 3 hours, it hardly ever drags, Coppola has a tight rein on the story (or maybe it's the producers doing that?) and it makes for a highly charged, highly entertaining classic of the first order. Funny as It seems, I only got around to finally watching this movie last year. Although I'm not exactly doing facepalms over the fact I've waited this long to see it, this movie will never grow old with me,;3;6;False tt0068646;michelerealini;09/10/2005;A novel of images;9;"Francis Ford Coppola, maybe, didn't think in 1972 that this film would have become a cinematic icon. It's like a show business fairy tale: the young director needed a hit, he had debts and Paramount commissioned him to direct a movie based on Mario Puzo's bestseller. Coppola hired a big forgotten star -Marlon Brando- and some young and relatively unknown actors -Pacino, Caan, Duvall and Diane Keaton. Federico Fellini's music composer (Nino Rota) wrote the soundtrack. The film was shot in Sicily, New York and California. The rest is history.

""The Godfather"" is a novel about an Italian-American family and the relationships in the Mafia. It's not only a blockbuster, it is also a deep study of characters. Coppola says that ""Godfather"" is a metaphorical vision of power in America... We can see this especially in ""Part Two"", which is not just a sequel: it's another chapter, where Coppola shows more contradictions in US society -Mafia's reign talks more and more with the other social and political institutions. (Martin Scorsese, for his Mafia's movies, chooses a more neurotic way of telling stories, whereas Coppola prefer a more classical style for his tales and likes to novelize the events.).

""The Godfather"" (1972): we know the Corleone's family and the way a clan keeps its power. There are rhythm, action, drama. And strong acting performances.

""The Godfather, Part Two"" (1974): the story goes on. A more bitter trip into the power and the loneliness of a Boss. The highlight is the combination of two parallel stories -Robert De Niro is the young Vito Corleone, and Al Pacino is the established ""Don"" Michael in the Sixties. It's the best sequel ever realized, maybe better than the original film.

""The Godfather, Part Three"" (1990): not as good as the two previous -actually it is much inferior to them, it was made too many years later. Some allusions to Italian mysteries (the death of businessman Roberto Calvi, the P2 lodge) are quite superficial. For the rest, the movie is well directed. Pacino is more Shakespearean -Coppola says like King Lear...

A must for the new Hollywood movies lovers. The first two chapters in particular.";3;6;False tt0068646;psib0rg;21/09/2001;Good, but Great?;10;I appreciate this movie as a very good piece of cinema but i really cant understand why its #1 in the Top250.

Ok the performances are solid, the direction is fluid and the story tight, but it isn't one of those movies you leave the theatre feeling your life is changed or anything like that...

Greatest movie of all time? I think not.;3;6;False tt0068646;jack1141994;01/02/2007;A fairly good mob movie, which delves deep into the murky waters of the crime world.;5;"When I first went on this site, I was so excited what the top movie was I nearly exploded. When I saw that this prestigious position was taken by the Coppola classic, The Godfather, I was like ""Ah, not what I expected, but it seems deserving."" When I actually rented it out in the hope that it would be the best movie ever, I was quite shocked. What I'm trying to say people is DO NOT expect it to be the best movie ever made, because it is far from it. It takes SO MUCH out from the original book that you'll wonder if the book and the movie are written by the same person.

That's not to say this movie is bad, but rather it misses out on so much from one of the greatest books I've ever read. Where is the Adventures of Johnny and Nino!? Where is the vaginal surgery?? Why isn't Doctor Jules in this movie?! Why the hell did they make Tessio insignificant? Why didn't they let you know more about Paulie Gatto?? The only reason you'll want to see this is if you are a mob movie fanatic or so you will understand the 2nd movie more (which by the way is in every respect better). It is a good movie, but there are many flaws such as the acting quality, the way that you must practically smash your windows because your turning the volume up so high to understand what they're saying among other things. Good movie, but not #1.";9;27;False tt0068646;jonicokikay;22/10/2018;Boring;3;Overrated movie. not even in my top 1000 movie. I feelt so sleeping while watchin it and felt that I just wasted two hours watching it and decided to stop;6;16;False tt0068646;mmitchell-04112;20/03/2018;Definition of overrated;2;This movie is the definition of overrated, it is incredibly slow moving, half of the movie is dark. very bored after 30 minutes of watching. incredibly overrated.;6;16;False tt0068646;matt-12739;01/02/2018;Nah;2;Might be a lot of people's favourite but I can't gel with this picture. And I've tried!;6;16;False tt0068646;clearwinner;05/10/2014;Do not keep high expectations from this one;4;"The only good thing about the movie was its style. It is unique. The second thing was Al Pacino, I mean he just holds everything still while he speaks. REally commendable performance. The opening scene was fantastic""I believe in America"" perfectly lit shot. After that everything is a drag. I get bored by the end of the movie. It has elongated scenes , I mean these so elongated that you can take a nap without missing anything. It was more like a opera kind of movie. So the opera lovers may like this movie but for me it was boring. Go watch it if you kind of love family drama said in a kind of some song and well love to nourish the scenes";6;16;False tt0068646;Phil_H;23/08/1999;Interesting but hardly great.;6;"Without a doubt, this is a good film. It's got great acting all around, a fine musical score, the cinematography is practically flawless; but it is still lacking in the most important area:

It's still a movie that glorifies (or attempts to do so) the mafia.

Yes, this film is *really* about family and loyalty, but in the end that becomes sort of sublimated and what you have is a story about criminals, the massive power they wield, and the destruction they cause to those around them.

Hardly something worthy of praise.

The Godfather is an interesting film, but it's hardly a great film.";6;16;False tt0068646;numberonecubsfan;04/07/2003;The most over-rated movie of all time;1;I will never, ever understand the love affiar people have with this movie. It is completely and utterly over-rated. Marlon Brando is not the god of an actor he and people make him out to be. Neither is Al Pachino for that matter. The acting is pretty stiff and unbelieveable. It was so freaking LONG. Ugh, I hate this movie.;21;78;False tt0068646;imdb-5032;18/12/2004;Schmaltzy family epic;3;"This is a movie for people who want to watch fat guys eat pasta.

""The Godfather"" confuses sentiment with emotion and nostalgia with authenticity. Like ""Goodfellas"", it tries to capture something deep and meaningful about loyalty, family, and honor, but in the end manages only to convey that food plays an important role in Italian culture.

Brando's portrayal of Corleone becomes farcical as his brooding look tips over into a vacant stare.

In all fairness this is not an altogether bad movie, but it pales in comparison to the novel by Mario Puzo and deserves to be taken down a notch.

Watch this for the costumes.";7;20;False tt0068646;aedile;10/11/2002;Boooooring;1;Title says it all.... This movie was long, and cut out the best parts of the book. It had a good cast, but that can't make up for poor transition from the novel. Bottom line: read the book, it's better.;22;84;False tt0068646;Mr-kumar_ten;16/08/2015;one of the worst movie I've ever saw.;1;"I don't understand why this movie is on top of the list, i din't find any thing in this movie to top the list with highest ratings. The cast did very good acting though but story not deserve to be on top of best 250. This is one of those rubbish old mafia films This movies always fence around the gangster family about there revenge story sucks, ridiculously overrated in the end all you found that you wasted 3 good hours of your day, its a goddamn crap its annoying. soooooo boring! whatever the reviews and rating says i hate this crap and I won't recommend any one to see this it will only disappoint you from what you expected from ""The Godfather"" Don Out.";8;24;True tt0068646;millerbn;05/12/2007;Are you kidding me?;6;"Are you kidding me? This movie is at best a 6 on a good day. The mere fact that this movie continually shows up on AFI's Top Ten list tells me that action and brutality are preferred by Americans over plot and acting. It is a decent film but nothing more. There is no way it is in the same league as ""Gone with the Wind"", ""Casablanca"", or ""Lawrence of Arabia"". It angers me every time this movie gets voted # 2 on some movie list. Al Pacino and Brando are good, but it was not the best work that either of these actors produced. It is an entertaining film like ""Indiana Jones"" and ""National Treasure"" but it is not a classic. It is important to remember that just because a film is popular does not mean that it is a great movie. If you enjoy mob movies this one is probably the best of a bad lot in the modern era, but the older films with Bogart, Cagney, and Robinson put this film to shame. I will be delighted when people one day realize the true worth of this film.";8;24;False tt0068646;jenniferles1000;08/02/2006;most overrated trilogy of all time;4;I do not understand the big fuss about the Godfather trilogy OK yes the acting is top quality with brilliant performances from marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall and even talia Shire is good but the film just drags the whole story is boring and the films just seem to go over the same things over and over again.

I must admit that i am probably not the best person to review the godfather seeing as i don't really like gangster movies i didn't like Goodfellas either although i did like like the untouchables I believe people saying they love the godfather movies is simply because they have heard other people saying how good it is and think that in order to be considered a proper movie lover they have to like the godfathers.;8;24;False tt0068646;dferris-4;17/09/2006;Whats all the hype about???;1;Honesly couldn't see what all the fuss is about. I felt this film lacked the very basics which make a good film. Good actors boring story and even worse directing!!! Perhaps this is because i only watched the movie for the first time recently, and therefore am comparing it to the standard set by todays writers, producers, and directors? I don't doubt it was a masterful production in its day but honestly the bar set by current movie makers really sees the 'God father' sorely outclassed. It is my conjecture that those who voted 9 and 10 out of ten did so because they remember how good it was in its hay-day instead of comparing it to all movies past and present before rating it.;19;71;False tt0068646;Alanjackd;14/06/2015;Why all the fuss;4;Having seen this movie many years ago I sat to re-engage and watched again. I cannot understand the hype about this movie. I think that people hear that its the best movie made then automatically accept this opinion and convince themselves it is. The scene with the horses head was ridiculous really. Acting by Brando was at best mediocre and James Caan is useless . I don't even reckon FFC as a director either, especially after Gangs Of New York. If this was made in present day it would probably flop. The 2 sequels got worse and the supporting characters never seemed to fit in.I would imagine the book is a million times better. The only redeeming feature for me was seeing Al Pacino honing his acting skills he used so brilliantly used in the later Serpico and Scarface. Sorry but this never gripped me at all.Am I right in thinking Brando changed his looks,size and accent many times during this?;5;13;False tt0068646;brefane;26/11/2009;Showy and shallow;6;"Take a gangster film, dip it in sepia tones, wrap it in Nino Rota's elegiac score, add soap and sentiment, and you've got The Godfather, the ""Gone with the Wind"" of gangster films. And like GWTW, The Godfather represents old-style Hollywood film-making at its most popular, but it's no masterpiece, and Goodfellas and The Sopranos make it seem almost antiquated. Coppola's direction attempts to be sweeping, but the script and the characters are shallow and predictable. Scaled to be epic, the film is slow moving and talky with several characters and sequences that feel dispensable. The film doesn't really deepen or build excitement as it progresses, and despite all the talk about family, the members of the Corleone family are essentially stock characters. Pacino, Shire, Cazales, and Caan don't bond as a family, the patriarch is not a commanding or even likable figure who would inspire love or loyalty and Morgana King as mama barely exists. Though it netted an Oscar, Brando's largely immobile performance is gimmicky, and really a supporting role in terms of screen time. The Godfather is the story of Michael Corleone, and the film is owned by a brilliant Al Pacino. In support, Caan, Keaton and Duvall are pretty much one-note. The Godfather is an acknowledged film classic that became a cultural touchstone which inspired imitations and parodies;it was a media event and a box office phenomenon that swept the Oscars and Brando's sending Sasheen Littlefeather to refuse his Oscar only added to it's legend.";5;13;False tt0068646;Boyo-2;18/06/2004;Its good but Geez....;7;"I saw this for the first time as a teenager and was pretty bored. At the same time I was seeing things like ""Scarecrow"" and ""Deliverance"" so its not like I was just interested in seeing juvenile nonsense.

I've seen it again recently, twice. I admire the movie, I like it, it holds my interest, I think its very good. But I fail to understand why the imdb trolls think its the greatest thing since the invention of the lightbulb. For that reason I've rated it lower than I normally would cause you've all gone overboard in your admiration.

Pacino not winning an Oscar is a huge injustice. He makes the entire movie worthwhile and doesn't even have to talk. James Caan is miscast. Brando is terrific but if he didn't win, I don't think the earth would have ceased existing. Its Pacino's movie, through and through, and someone must have agreed w/me on that, since the second one is his, too.";5;13;False tt0068646;russ-189;01/06/2006;Uber-Overrated;1;Am I seemingly in a very small minority that find gangster films so soo sooo very dull. I concede that The Godfather is the most famous of this genre but as for it forever topping film polls I'm not so sure. And when I say not sure I mean Definitely not! I also admit that I'm not a Brando fan but if this film is meant to be the best of the best it shouldn't matter if I like Brando or not, I should still like the film right?, and I just don't. My dad is the biggest Brando fan and even he doesn't reach for this film when he fancies a bit of marlon. In my opinion Carlito's Way or The Untouchables are far superior 'films'of the genre. I think the main problem I have with The Godfather other then the never ending dullness of it, is that it always seems to be saying 'oh look isn't cool to be in the mob, we should all do it'. Of course it all goes belly up the the boys in the end but thats just a convention of the genre that has to be met, rather then being the message of the film. Not my cup of tea at all I'm afraid.;19;72;False tt0068646;invisibleunicornninja;16/12/2018;What?;4;How is this considered to be one of the greatest movies of all time? Does something amazing happen in the third act? I wouldn't know because I only got around an hour and a half into this absolute slog of a movie. This thing is so impossibly overlong and boring that I'm pretty sure that most of these 10/10 reviews are fakes. Or at least from people who have never seen any movies other than this one.;6;17;False tt0068646;godfather117;15/02/2007;Godfather: LET DOWN;4;I am a 14 year old film buff and have just set up my account on IMDb if i had set this up earlier i would have commented on this film before now. I watched the Godfather when i got it as a Christmas present 3 years ago, when i watched it i immediately thought wow what a let down!! everyone who i spoke to had said it was one of the best films they had ever seen. But i disagree, there is no denying that the acting and direction in the Godfather is sublime but it is the fact that it is so monotonous, many people will say that it is because i am 14 but i have seen many films including other Coppela films such as The Conversation and Apocalypse Now, which is my favourite film so i definitely am not saying that Coppela cannot direct but what i am saying is that he could have done so much better with the script, the talent and the locations. So overall I am saying this: The Godfather is not a Bad film just very poor and it is definitely not all it is cracked up to be. Thankyou for reading my review.;6;17;False tt0068646;xioned101;26/12/2003;What makes a movie a good movie;1;In my opinion a good movie is one that makes you feel diffrent when you leave the theater, or puts a feeling on you that you haven't experienced. You have a true feeling that you got just by watching somthing.

I also ask what makes and entertaining movie. To me its one that you just cant get enough of. You can watch over and over again and it never gets old.;20;78;False tt0068646;dwainegibson;30/07/2005;This film is nothing;1;This film is very stereotypical and as I am half Italian I feel I have the right to stick up for the crowds of real italians who find this film totally offensive and even boring. This kind of film can lead to racist attitudes in our society as it's portrayal of normal folk is completely over the top (OTT). Marlon Brando received many praises for his performance but there are too many inaccuracies too mention in his accent, never mind his mannerisms.

I watched this film with my friend, his Italian wife and her parents who don't speak English, and get this!!! they fell asleep!!! The greatest movie of all time and they fell asleep!!. I managed to stay awake but it was hard but my friend loved it for some weird reason, but he's an oddball so he doesn't count.

Certainly does not deserve to be numero one, instead may I suggest the princess bride, a classic tale of love and adventure.;18;70;False tt0068646;jibon-38878;12/06/2019;Over rated;6;I just want to sat that this is a over rated movie.;4;10;True tt0068646;DreamScapeSev7n;21/01/2019;Not for me;3;I don't typically like gangster mob films. I tried this film because I thought it would be a good film to see as a student studying film. I didn't like it and I guess I should have known I wouldn't. Cheers to those who do.;4;10;False tt0068646;gavin6942;17/08/2006;Greatest Movie in World History? Maybe. Maybe Not.;8;"The people who vote on the Internet Movie Database have ranked ""The Godfather"" as the greatest film ever in human history. Which is nothing to sneeze at, and deserves some seriously thought. I watched the film, thought it was great, but hardly found it to be the greatest film ever made. I mean, if you told me ""Citizen Kane"" was the greatest film ever made, I would wholeheartedly agree. And personally, as far as gangster movies go -- with or without Al Pacino -- I think the real choice should be ""Scarface"". But I'm not professionally trained as a movie critic, so maybe I'm missing something.

I asked my supervisor and a co-worker about the film, and while they both thought the film was good, they really did not think it was some amazing masterpiece. My supervisor said, ""maybe it's good because it is so real"", but that's not a convincing reason and how ""real"" it is I cannot say for sure.

If nothing else, the film might be great simply because it has become so cliché. The horse head, the Marlon Brando voice, the gun behind the toilet and the line ""an offer he can't refuse"" are all part of pop culture these days (over 30 years later). But does being cliché make the film great? I guess that would make ""Star Wars"" the greatest film ever made, which is certainly not true (though not a bad film by any means).

And sure, you have powerful and memorable performances. James Caan is amazing, Marlon Brando is a bit over-the-top (a mumbling, lock-jawed godfather? sure...). And Al Pacino is of course great as always, maybe more so here than anywhere else. Not only does he have more range here than any other film than ""Scent of a Woman"" (more often than not he simply repeats a variation of his Michael Corleone role), but he is so young and plain that he is not even recognizable as Al Pacino in many scenes (I didn't recognize him until 30 minutes into the picture).

I haven't yet mentioned the plot: an aging mafia boss (Marlon Brando) hands control over to his son (Al Pacino) when the father becomes ill, though he hoped never to do so since his son is Ivy League educated. Brando's role is actually quite small compared to the attention he is given (the film is really about Pacino coming of age).

The directing is decent. Nothing special, but not awful, either. Very real and almost gritty (but not dark). The acting is great. The music is perfect. The only thing that really needed work was the fact that many of the Italian scenes had no subtitles and were thus lost in (lack of) translation. The entire Sciliy subplot and Appollonia were excellent and could not have been improved upon.

I'm sure much more could have been said, but I'll cut myself off here. Certainly looking forward to Part II (though keeping my hopes and expectations low) and maybe someday I'll see Part III (though I've been warned not to).";4;10;False tt0068646;Doylenf;06/08/2006;Brilliant, engrossing study of organized crime family...;7;"Although I have a high regard for THE GODFATHER as a gutsy crime melodrama, I would not place it as the #1 film of all time. That place in cinema history should still go to GONE WITH THE WIND, in my opinion.

But it's a brilliant piece of work, gorgeously photographed, extremely well crafted throughout with everyone in the cast perfectly suited to their roles.

I read the Mario Puzo novel and it's as though each actor was hand- picked for their roles with uniform precision. Highest ranking among the performances are MARLON BRANDO (although I needed the caption feature to catch all of his mumbled words), AL PACINO, who practically carries the main part of the story with a very earnest, very strong portrayal of the favorite son, JAMES CAAN as the hot-headed Sonny, and DIANE KEATON as the romantic interest (Kay) for Pacino. All of the others do stand-out work, particularly RICHARD COSTELLANO as Clemenza.

Rumors that some of the details reflect the story behind Frank Sinatra's desperate quest for the role of Maggio in FROM HERE TO ETERNITY are apparently quite true. After all, here the crooning son who needs to save his fading singing career is eager to get a serious role in a war film that is just right for his own Italian persona. We learn that his sweetheart is also the object of lust by a studio head who has spent millions turning her into a studio star only to risk losing her as a property if she marries the crooner. Sound familiar? It should. Think Ava Gardner and Frank Sinatra. Or even Sinatra and Kim Novak. (Is Harry Cohn the lecherous producer???) But just how many of these details are true, I don't know. I like to think that author Mario Puzo invented some of them.

Aside from this aspect of the story, which culminates in a very famous and bloody comeuppance for the uncooperative producer, there are plenty of other gripping sequences where we know something bad is about to happen because of the various injustices within the crime families. This is the hook that ties all of the sequences together and maintains suspense right up until the final touching scene.

A brilliant piece of work--but still not at the top of my ""favorite movie"" list. It's a well-structured crime story by a man who really knew how to write for this genre--and a man (Francis Ford Coppola) who really knew how to direct this sort of crime melodrama, so meticulously detailed and realistically set in the 1940s.";4;10;False tt0068646;louong;19/01/2002;Doesn't deserve to be # 1;1;"I liked this film and all, but does anyone really think this film is better than Lord of the Rings? Come on! It's surprising how many people supposedly ""love"" this film, yet can only put up the defense that it was well acted. A few mumblings here and there do not good acting make. And the attention to detail argument? ""It's so detailed - exactly as that era!"" So what? Lord of the Rings brought to life a FANTASY land, far more challenging than 1940's New York.";18;71;False tt0068646;deymorin;24/01/2005;bloody disappointing;1;As a 19 yr old watching this film recently for my first time I simply cant see this film continuing to be considered the best film of all time.

Yes the acting is good and the script is very smooth but there are large chunks of this film that can only be described as horribly boring

Nearly everyone I know in my generation agrees this is highly overrated so I think its only a matter of time before another film lifts it off top spot (hopefully Shawshank redemption - although return of the king is more likely)

4/10;19;77;False tt0068646;sykotikLP;05/05/2003;sucks;1;I dont see the big deal about this movie. I think it sucks. Everyone always talks about how good it is and that it's a classic

and it makes me just want to tape their mouths shut. This movie does not deserve such a high rating.;19;77;False tt0068646;MyIMDbemailis;29/04/2018;I did not care for The Godfather!;1;"Did not care for The Godfather. Didn't like it! Everyone always says ""It's so good. It's like the perfect movie."" Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, all fine, fine actors, did not like the movie. Why? I couldn't get into it. It insists upon itself. It takes forever getting in, you spend like six and a half hours, I can't even get through it. I can't even finish the movie. I've never even seen the ending. I have tried on three separate occasions to get through it and I get to the scene where all the guys are sitting around on the easy chairs. I have no idea what they're talking about. It's like they're speaking a different language. That's where I lose interest and I go away. I love The Money Pit with the guy from Big. Funny guy, Tom Hanks, everything he says is a stitch!";7;22;False tt0068646;Chris@hame.org.uk;16/07/2006;I'm Sorry, Not Worth the Hype;3;I don't know why everybody who loves this film loves it so much. Maybe the fact everybody hyped it up meant i was never going to fully enjoy this but to be honest, it seemed slow and confusing and i struggled to keep my concentration. Constantly, i found myself drifting off and daydreaming. I would have stopped watching but i had a Uni assignment on it.

It has some great scenes but everybody has seen them before anyway. The acting is good but I thought Al Pacino has been better in other things.

Also, it was hard to make out, the characters speak so quietly it just turns into background noise.

It's not the worst film I've ever seen, no way. but it certainly isn't in the top 10, not even close.

The game is better, you get all the good scenes without the fairly dull bits in between.;7;22;False tt0068646;dcw-12;16/07/2007;Film gets its acclaim from being the first big budget anti-hero movie,;6;To understand this films acclaim you have to understand censorship in America. Wikipedia has a nice section on the 'Production Code'. In short nothing remotely like this film was seen for decades. So when it was released it was a revelation for American movie audiences.

In todays light the film doesn't have the same impact it did back then. The script isn't written that well, the dialogue is labored and dull. Though Brando is amazing and deserved all the accolades he got from the film.

The plot is labored as well and drags in many parts. The enemies of the Corleone family aren't 3-d enough to really be too invested in the power struggles. In fact things don't really seem to be alive as in other mobster films like Goodfellas. The illusion of reality here isn't complete.

Godfather II is by far the tauter and better film, and the best in the series.;5;14;False tt0068646;sausagebrigade;31/07/2003;Not great, merely very well made;5;The Godfather is arguably the most over-rated movie ever made. To be fair it is a technical feast, with impressive period design, and the music is memorable, but nothing else is. Pacino is dull, Keaton is forgettable, Duvall goes through the motions, and the script lacks the punch it probably had in 1972. Goodfellas, in one movie, tells the same rise and fall story that The Godfather has over three movies in a far more enjoyable and vivid way.;5;14;False tt0068646;idleguy;01/06/2003;Not the God of films;5;I expected a lot of this film especially after this was ranked as one of the best films. But to give it #1 ranking is way too much. I watched it and it was an OK film. The portrayal was real but a little too slow at times. Reality they say bites and I guess it was more like a documovie that chronicles the life of a mafia and his family. Facts were not the problem here, the speed was. I could find little that was debatable or something like that, just that it made me sleep. The sequel was no better in working as a sleeping pill.;5;14;False tt0068646;Aleona;25/08/2001;Weak compared to the book;6;"***Spoilers Ahead***

I read the book by Puzo before I saw the movie made out of it. I loved The Godfather in writing. I thought the characters were well thought out and portrayed. When I rented the movie, I knew that there is no way to give the whole story in four hours and make it interesting so I looked for characters and the way they were illustrated. I looked for the way relationships were passed on to the viewer compared how it was done in the book and after all this I was very disappointed.

I can forgive the movie for omitting histories about people like Luca Brasi and Al Neri. I can even forgive them for not working more with Johnny Fontane even though it was a great story that tied in well with the portrayal of Don's relationship with his Godson and how he expected to be repaid by people close to him. The movie skipped characters like Nino, Kay's parents and her background, the doctor and several others, but after all, the movie is not supposed to be a book word for word.

The Godfather had great cinematography. The scenes were beautifully picked and shot. My favorite is at the end when Michael stands as Godfather to his nephew and people are getting shot all around, that was amazing. The music was cheesy most of the time, but if that was my main complaint, I could still call this movie to be great.

What appalled me beyond belief is the horrible portrayal of Michael and his relationship with Kay (unfortunately it only gets worse in the 2nd movie) and complete lack of the mother's presence in the movie. Her and Kay develop a relationship. Kay becomes super Catholic and goes to church with her every morning. She ran away from Michael with his kids at some point because she was angry with him. And Michael was patient and never lost his temper with his wife. However, he was also very proud and when he returned from Cicily he did not go to her because did not expect to find her still waiting for him. And the movie failed to illustrate how much Tom Hagen was an outsider to the family. The Don lost some of his power because of Tom and that is why Michael removed him from the post.

I thought that Sonny was portrayed well as were Connie and Carlo. I thought that oranges as a foreshadowing device was a great idea. The ironies illustrated in the movie like the beginning of a movie with ""I believe in America"" are all good things that made this movie stronger. However, it lacks depth and complexity. I don't understand how one can understand what is going on in this movie without reading the book first.

This movie is considered to be America's best and that should be left on its conscience.";5;14;True tt0068646;didiermustntdie;22/02/2010;an overrated terrible movie;2;let's give it a good estimation

entertainment: it's been said many times that the acting is stupid , including Brando's character just mumbling and Pacino's character just ,well, staring.. truly over-hyped junkie so called acting.the script is bad , it's like a Mexican soap drama. the dialog is below the standard of those Indian cheese. the production value is fair though , shot in Sicily. it seems the producer is not interested in faking locations. overall rating 3/15

social/life message: the isn't a particular deep movie. isn't anywhere better than any eurocrime pic. the message is banal: criminals have souls.- rating 0/10

politically objectionable things : nothing big really, as I said the director/writer seems to be obsessed with organized crime, he hardly delivers any political or historical material. rating is high 3/5

overall rating: two out of ten;6;18;False tt0068646;schumifan78;11/11/2007;Just another violent movie...;4;"Just another violent gang movie, whats the big deal? I hate these sort of movies about mafia guys going around with guns thinking they are all tough, put them in a ring one on one with Tyson and see how tough they are. I Don't understand why this movie is so praised, Whats the big deal? There is enough violent gang movies around, what makes this one special? There are so many movies better than this one out there, don't waste your time with this. I suppose there must be lots of fans of this movie like there is for lots of other violent pointless ****house movies such as Sin City and the likes, I guess this just highlights that there must be fairly big problems in our society today, why would anyone find this sort of negative and pointless junk enjoyable? The way that this sort of thing is portrayed in movies as being ""cool"" is really quite sickening, I wonder how many people who have had personal experience with murder and violence would find this sort of thing enjoyable, not many I would say. If you think you are going to get anything worthwhile out of this movie think again, your life will not be enriched in any way by watching this, spend the three hours out enjoying the sunshine or talking to your friends and family or something instead...";6;18;False tt0068646;coolcookyuk;04/08/2006;The Godfather at Number 1?;9;"IT was good for its time yeah sure but do you really still think it deserves #1 of ALL TIME!!?? I just think there are better films out there ones with more action, suspense,special effects ( i know it was low budget),actors etc. There just seemed to be more dialogue than anything else in the film put together. If you showed this to the younger generation then they would simply not be impressed. There are bigger titles out now and why is everyone still voting this in? It would be much better to vote the lord of the rings trilogy in the top 3 or put the shaw shank redemption at #1 that would make more sense. I would personally put ""The Godfather"" at #5 seeing as it does have the best title for a film of all time.";14;54;True tt0068646;VIOTV;03/12/2014;I like movies more than books;2;"Godfather has a epic soundtrack. I am sure that someone who has a little knowledge about movies, is privy to this OST. It is a masterpiece for sure.

The first time I watched this movie I had a 2 CD version of it. The second CD was broken/scratched and I really was so bored that I did not consider to watch this part on stream. I don't know why this movie is so high rated even if my father likes this movies.

I do not blame anyone for watching this series of Godfather but those who watched it, cannot tell why they like this movies either. By the way I have watched every film starring Al Pacino and these are the only I could not finish at all! It has a very long, uninteresting and well known story which has a high budged.

If you don't believe me, ask your friends who watched it. You will see what I am trying to tell because they only will tell you: ""Well.. it is.. just watch it! It's a great movie"".";10;36;False tt0068646;sedergun;10/10/2018;it was ordinary or even worse than the current movie.;6;At that time, the rhythm of the movie was too far from the present, and the climax was not prominent. It seems to be outdated now. At that time, it was a good movie, but it was ordinary or even worse than the current movie.;3;7;False tt0068646;brefane-41162;25/01/2016;An Offer I Can Refuse;7;"I'm a fan of Goodfellas, Donnie Brasco as well as The Sopranos, but maybe because I didn't warm up to or really care about the Corleone family, I can't understand the high and to my mind excessive praise this film receives even if I understand its popularity. The characters are shallow and one-dimensional, yet the film takes them seriously and treats them with gravity; there isn't a shred of irony or humor in this nearly 3 hour film. I didn't find the numerous scenes of the family's business dealings compelling, nor was I persuaded by the film's attempts to draw a parallel between organized crime, business and politics. And Talia Shire, Robert Duvall, Morgana King, Brando, Caan, and Pacino never felt like a family to me; they rarely if ever are all together, and does the Godfather ever meet or talk with Michael's wife Kaye? Brando's performance is an impressive stunt, but it's really a supporting role and the Old Don's manner of speaking becomes tiresome as does the film's solemn pacing. Pacino is the film's star and he is excellent and convincing in his transformation from fresh-faced to poker face. Diane Keaton's Kaye is unbelievably naive, and Talia Shire as Connie carries the melodramatic scenes including a fight with her husband that is redolent of so many other scenes of marital discord. Morgana King as mama Corleone spouts clichés. And though most of the characters are guilty of betrayal, double crossing and murder, I actually developed more sympathy for some of the Corleone's victims notably Tessio and Moe Green than I did for them.";3;7;False tt0068646;freemantle_uk;22/04/2008;The daddy of the modern gangster film;10;There is no denying that the Godfather is a classic and one of the best movies ever made. It is a saga of a major Mafia father, the upper echelons and there struggles. It starts with Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) on the day of his daughter's wedding and doing favours for people invited to the wedding. The films shows the outcome of these favours, including the famous sense of the horse's head in the bed. The film then shows Vito refusing to take part in selling drugs and ends up having an assassination attempt against him. The Corleone family is forced into a tuft war before peace is made. At the same time the Godfather shows Michael's (Al Panico) rise in the family, from being a bit of an outsider not wanting to get involved to becoming the head of family after Vito's death. The film shows how person relationships developed and shows the characters as real people. It shows how the Mafia would have worked in the 1950s, focusing on deal making, rising up the ranks and showing acts of violence being conducted.

The gangster film was not a new genre, their were good films in the film noir period such as Scarface, Little Caesar and the Killing. However I am not aware of any major gangster films in the 60s. The Godfather focused on the characters and many different and complex plots and subplots. It was able to bring in more violence into the genre because by the late 60s films were allowed to show more violence. The film also benefits from a brilliant script, the excellent direction of Francis Ford Coppella (this film along with The Godfather Part II are his best films) and a brilliant cast. Marlon Brando was brought back into the mainstream after gaining a reputation for being an ego-maniac, and help made the careers of Al Panico, James Caan and Diane Keaton. This was also the first film I aware of focusing mainly on the Mafia and how it functions. I remember watching a document on the making of the film on Channel Four and how difficult it was for the filmmakers, fighting with the Italian-American community.

The Godfather and Godfather Part II are both classics and must watch films. I admit I have not watched Godfather Part III but that because I heard it wasn't as good and ruins the first two. It has been very influential in the gangster genre afterwards. They was Once Upon A Time in America which was similar in it approach, having many story lines and themes and similar filming of violence. They was Goodfellas which forced on foot-soldiers of the Mafia and set mainly in the 60s and 70s when it was filmed in the 80s. They are also films like Casino and American Gangster, the list goes on. They are also parodies such as Family Business and programmes such as the Simpsons, Futurama and Family Guy. Finally their was the Sopranos (one of the best programmes ever made), mixing elements of the Godfather and Goodfellas. All in all the Godfather is a very important film.;3;7;True tt0068646;Chaves7777;10/11/2006;I guess that this movie is an offer we cant refuse;10;"I hate gangsters movies, but ""The godfather"" is a big exception.

I always listen about ""The godfather"", and i always thought that it could be a lost of time. But, in a Sunday, i watch the film. At the marvelous and surprise ending, i say: I cant believe this movie exist.

""The godfather"" talk about Don Corleone, and his blood. How his family enjoy, and the same time they suffer. Besides a great music, the interpretations are incredible.

The violence is presented around the whole family, as if it a curse. This movie had a lot of good remembers, because is different story, a story of love, revenge, thrills and surprises.

""The godfather"" is interesting because in each take, in each second it takes you to the drama of this family, and you suffer as them.

Definitively, this it is a movie that has certain touch, because the story makes you give curiosity, because we don't know to where arrived this family with this risky business.

*sorry, for bad words... well, if there any";3;7;False tt0068646;mwmcmullen;10/08/2006;Greatest Movie of all Time;10;"Yes. It's that good.

This is one of the only films that I can watch, and still notice that detail more with each viewing.

This is one of the only films I've watched that hasn't got one flaw.

This is movie was the greatest film experience i've probably ever had (This and Scorsese's Goodfellas, Taxi Driver & Raging Bull).

These reasons alone should get everyone who hasn't seen it, to see it. - Because you haven't lived until you've seen this film. Al Pacino is absolutely amazing. The greatest thing about the trilogy however, is Michael's eyes. Oh my god, especially in part II. It is amazing. WATCH IT.

10/10";3;7;False tt0068646;ellie_auk;17/02/2006;One of my favourite films;10;"The Godfather recognises the polar opposite to the American dream. It itself represents the ""dark side to the dream"" in a romanticised way using mise-en-scene and costume as well as Coppola's clever use of binary opposition with light and mood.

The Godfather shows some clear morals also, such as the importance of family and patience. Loyalty is key and you find yourself, as with any good gangster film, becoming loyal to the characters, or the family introduced, in this case the Corleone's.

Coppola's time frame is clear from the beginning, it is set with Micheal's army uniform from world war two, which allows a certain amount of historical l context to be conveyed without being explicit.

Violence within this film is both implicit and explicit, you will view violent scenes and also know when violence is being implied. Which only adds to the beauty and the danger of the film.

Many have said this film is slow moving and confusing, however to watch with a careful eye, which is must be viewed with, it displays a complex world to a naive viewer, sympathy is invoked carefully and somehow all crime committed within the film is seemingly justified with careful use of versimilitude.";3;7;False tt0068646;exusninja;09/02/2006;Actually 9.5...Godfather is Good at everything;9;This is probably the best mob movie of all time which captures the old mob dramatics of the 1920-30s with the more business savvy mobs of the 1950-60s. It links the classic capones with the modern gambinos.

Al Pacino's finest silent work ever. With simple looks he envy's so much meaning. Brando at the best i have ever scene. The ensemble is absolutely amazing. This is the best of the 3, and miles above part 2 (which i like but don't think quite matches up this part 1 in anyway)

If you haven't watched this, rent the DVD and watch it this weekend. If you have and don't have the DVD collection, buy it.

IT is worth preserving this and having it in good quality.;3;7;False tt0068646;diand_;14/06/2005;Doors, windows, mirrors;8;In contrast to part 2 this is more loosely structured and sometimes less climactic and also seems more improvised. But thanks to the enormous effort put to detailed cinematography and camera-work it lends itself more to repeated viewings. (One example: when Vito is about to be shot there's a poster on the grocery store announcing a fight of Jake LaMotta thus foreshadowing the assassination attempt).

Probably the most interesting is the light and dark contrast between the outer, ordinary world and the inner, godfather world. Even when these two worlds meet in one shot they are still strictly separated by showing two rooms in a way where you watch one world from the other (the end shot e.g. where Kay is seen in one room and the men in another: then the door shuts).

Very effective use of mirrors (reflection), doors (separating worlds) and windows (showing perspective). From the back-to-back shots and other shots where an object obscures the picture we can see where many modern filmmakers get their ideas (Kar-Wai for example).

Coppola has himself watched Antonioni very well: Scenes where only buildings or spaces are shown to create an alienating effect or just loneliness combined with tension (hospital scene). Or characters disappear and only a static shot of the room is seen to signify emptiness (fight between Connie and Carlo).

Especially the end scene is well edited and composed: But they even improved on that scene just two years later.;3;7;False tt0068646;itsnikhil2001;08/06/2005;Excellent Performances;10;Marlon Brando is the Father of all actors when it comes to act as a don.

The novel(which is also great) has been converted beautifully into a movie. Every detail has been taken care of.

And what to say about Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), I became a fan f him after I watched the movie.

The background score is too good. I was wondering whether i can get it from somewhere.

All in all a great casting for the film.

The best mafia movie i have ever seen. better than its following two parts.;3;7;False tt0068646;villagranjohan;28/04/2005;The Godfather;10;The Godfather film is an excellent movie WHY? because of the drama, action and the loyalty.

The movie describes how it could be in a mafia family, both on family problems and political problems. The Godfather also gives you a picture of how a man with respect could be as Michael Corleone and Vito Corleone.

Alsow did the movie learned me something, that always love your family no matter what.

The movie haves good actors as Al Pacino and Marlyn. not only that it haves also good actions and original scenes!;3;7;False tt0068646;Odyssey-;23/09/2003;Very good, but lacking in some ways.;;The good points have been mentioned a lot and I will not repeat them, they are evident and make this movie very worthwhile.

Now my opinion about the flaws, it's a bit repetitive in the scenes, I cant help it but I think its a bit drawn out. Godfather in office, godfather this, godfather that, I come as a friend, ok I will help you, repeat. The characters lack depth in the sense that they all must act the gangster way which does not leave much room for emotion besides playing it cool, being angry or sympathy for the family. They all have distinct personalities but despite the distinctions it does not get much deeper in character development, imho.

All in all I dont feel much emotion watching this movie and I think thats an important measure to rate it.

This is just my way of looking at it and I can understand that a lot of people will not agree with me.

I rate this movie an 8;3;7;False tt0068646;richarevans1;12/08/2003;The greatest film of the 20th Century;10;This film has everything - Great actors at the top of their game, a brilliant and realistic story, a top director, brilliant cinematography, wonderfully evocative post war costumes and cars, brilliant scenes (horses head, restaurant shooting scene, hospital scene etc.) and a score that adds to the film without overpowering it. At first look it would seem to be a film about a family of gangsters, but I think that what it really is is a story of how a good, intelligent man, a war hero, can become a monster by degrees. Godfather II is probably superior but it couldn't have been made without this film. A true masterpiece.;3;7;False tt0068646;Mammad_Maleki;05/08/2003;the best movie of all the time;;a very exciting and interesting movie,including a lot of good acting specially Al Pacino as Michael Corleone ,which make you think about many things. a movie consist of cruel,clever,killer and of course lonely characters. a movie about violence,about mafia and about the life of us ,the true life of us.;3;7;False tt0068646;silentium;04/07/2003;The definition of epic.;10;"The entire scale for this movie is huge, and every scene carries emotions with it. The acting is amazing, as is the score and direction. So, what's wrong with it?

SPOILERS FOLLOW



First of all, people get their hopes up so high when they see this film that, it's to the point, if it doesn't change their life it's considered to be boring and dated. But, also, people also down vote it when it threatens the popularity of their trendy LOTR flicks and other movies that make you 'cool' if you like them.

Acting - Brando was so subtle and yet had such a dramatic impact on the way acting was done. I have images from this film that I remember, and mostly I remember Brando holding the cat in the opening scene. His voice has influenced modern film and television - as almost every show on television has paid homage to the father of all film.

Score - The score is haunting, and somber in all aspects of the word. It builds emotional tension and it has a pay off. The main theme is amazing and is beautifully put together and is always in the right context when it shows up in the film. It's beautiful, and I strongly urge you to get the original soundtrack.

Direction - Francis Ford Coppola took a very subtle and consistent approach in bringing this film to life. Think of Michael in the diner with Captain McCluskey and Sollozzo, as the train is perfectly timed in going by, before Michael (in Al Pacino's career making performance) explodes with rage. It is so apparent in his face, and we feel as he does -- nervous yet we still anticipate.

Story - The script is very well written, adapted from the brutal book by the brilliant Mario Puzo. The story of the film was ahead of it's time - and it still is. While being played on television today there are still people who refuse to like this simply because it's hyped. They try to go against anything that's popular in an attempt to look cool. It doesn't work - so give me The Godfather over Pulp Fiction (and all of the hip crime film copy cats that it spawned. i.e. The Usual Suspects [which is ranked higher than ON THE WATERFRONT] -- what is wrong with our society?)

Everything is perfect as we become immersed in the world of the mafia boss Don Vito Corleone, and we're along for the ride as well follow him through a few years of his life. This film changed the way I saw art within movies.

Yes, I hated it the first time I watched it. But, for some reason, felt I should watch it again. On the second viewing it was confirmed; I hated it. I trashed it everywhere, including on this site, and made it sound like the worst movie ever made. Boy, how much I've grown. I trashed it because I didn't want to be caught up in the frenzy this movie has produced. It created a whole spawn of copy-cats and followers trying to capture the art as The Godfather did, and sadly, it will never happen. This will never be duplicated or surpassed in any sense. From start to finish I am completely captivated at the imagery, the music, the brilliant acting, and the underlying script that holds so much warmth, and brutality.

For any true fan of film - do not hate this simply because you want to be 'different' from others and look like some sort of outsider since you went against society by not liking a great movie just to prove how original you are. Face it, you're not original - you're doing the same thing others have done when it comes to this film for years, and as I once done as well. All of these kids who hate this film will have the hip movies in their best of lists, and you can figure out their personality from reading them.

Their lists will have these films on it:

The Shawshank Redemption (another reason why people try to hate The Godfather; Shawshank is their favorite film and it burns them inside to see The Godfather best it in the top spot)

Fight Club (hip and trendy, violent and against society. What more could an angst filled teenager want?)

LOTR (The scenery is beautiful, but turning everything into some sort of contrived melodrama because the script calls for it is ridiculous; this is by no means the best film ever made. It's a flavor of the month that will die out as time goes by and people realize the acting is horrible.)

Etc, etc, etc. It seems like it's cool to dislike The Godfather films because it makes you look like some sort of 'rebel.' Trust me, Spock, it doesn't make you look like you're cool; it makes you look very stupid.

So many people have given this film a '1' in voting. How in the fudge? The music was awful, the acting was awful, the direction was awful? I highly doubt it. Anyone with an IQ over 100 would never say this film deserves a 1.

My proposal for a new IMDb rating system, based on categories.

SCORE: 1-10 [1 = awful 10 = excellent] ___10___ (KEY)

---------------------The Godfather:

Acting (leading) 10, Brando changed method acting forever and, in this role, plays the most memorable film character to ever grace the screen. His voice only deepens his enigma. Respect this man.

Acting (supporting) 10. Coppola got wonderful performances out of his mostly amateur cast.

Score: 10. It's at the same time haunting and beautifully done.

Direction: 10 easily. This changed American films forever.

Script: 10. Written with brilliance, sheer brilliance. The story is brutal, and so is this ambiguous adaptation.

Replay value: 10 -- this film never lets go of me, and has my eye from the very start. I could never get bored watching the masterful acting come from every character in the movie.

There, and I average it up and get my rating of: 10.

------------------2 Fast 2 Furious:

Acting (leading) 4. I've seen worse, but not much worse. Words are repeated so often it feels like a cheap video game.

Actor (supporting) 5. Tyrese gives needed comedy, but still needs to watch some good films.

Score. 1. Awful, tries too hard to market itself towards an ignorant mainstream teen audience.

Direction: 3. Some of the scenes are decently choreographed, that's about it.

Script: 1. Totally forgettable. The dialogue is stagnant and brings absolutely nothing profound or new to the table.

Replay value: I'd never watch the film again. It brings nothing new to the table and is stupid.

Average that up. If someone gives 2 Fast 2 Furious a 10 for ACTING -- they don't deserve the pleasure of being able to relate to the majesty of the best American film ever made; yes, that's right: The Godfather.

If you don't like it the first time -- watch it again and force yourself to not get bored. If you make it through the second time (it's an acquired taste) think about it, think about the profound story it expresses, the emotions it throws into scene after scene after scene, inviting us to consider, and even feel, the pain they are all going through, and the love and happiness they often share with their, you guessed it, family.

Don't like this movie? I'll make YOU an offer you can't refuse: a hip trendy blow-em-up-shoot-em-up flick with no moral value and no merit at its core.

Score: perfect all down the board, this film could never be topped. To me, the only films that come close are Apocalypse Now and Rashomon (in the woods - Akira Kurosawa)

But, before you trash this film -- do what I did: give it an honest chance and forget the hype. After a while you will realize the hype was there for a reason, this film is amazing and will continue to be looked at as the best film to ever be made, regardless of what anyone has to say about it. Say it's dumb, say it's long and boring, yeah yeah yeah, you've got ADD, go watch commercials. They're easy to understand and yet so informative. If anyone actually thinks this movie deserves more than a 6 in rating it is disturbed. No professional film goer (someone who has seen over 100,000 films) would EVER say this movie was horrible.

Goodfellas is just a mundane rehash of everything The Godfather had already perfectly portrayed. It's a good film in its own right, but could never match The Godfather. Sure, it's hip -- let's get some of that so people will invite us to the mall so we can check out the latest ORIGINAL clothing that everyone else that's trying to be original is wearing! Oh, a shirt that says ""you laugh because I'm different, I laugh because you're all the same."" What a wonderful paradox; there's a million cliche'd teenagers out there wearing that shirt now, thinking they're original for doing it - but yet it's a mainstream shirt that everyone has. Come on kids, watch some good films.";3;7;True tt0068646;Palegazer;24/03/2003;Best movie through all times.;10;"The heavy storyline from ""The Godfather"" by Mario Puzo couldn't be better. The best acting performance you poissibly can reach, Marlon Brando does his greatest role ever as Vito. You really don't notice that the movie has some years on it's shoulders, stunning by Francis Ford Coppola. This one cannot be anything else than the highest score possible.";3;7;False tt0068646;Pedro_H;02/10/2002;Great film making in a moral vacuum.;9;"A young Turk is asked to take over the family business. The only problem is that business is a franchise of New York's Murder Inc.

The bones of the original Godfather have been so raked over that there doesn't seem a lot left of the corpse to examine. I almost passed on it until I read some of the other reviews which miss so many important points.

Yes, great acting (Brando as the old Don and the Pacino as the new will never get better parts). Yes, great directing (Francis Ford Coppola). Yes, a great musical score (Nino Rota). But, nevertheless it is a film that won't quite a settle in my own mind. The information we are given on screen, while believable, is only a selected view of organised crime. I might even argue that it is a cop-out view.

I saw this film as a child and was, then, unable to stand back and examine it as a whole. I wanted the cheap bang-bang, the stripped suits and the violin cases. I was bored by the central theme and thought that watching it (for three hours!) was a bit of a chore. Even today it is a bit slow, but I am now an adult and I can see all the things I missed first time around, not all of which flatters.

Not that the central theme passed me by: The corruption of the innocent and the rights of passage. How many other people - other than Mafia sons - are born with a destiny? Members of the royal family, sure, but who else? Offspring's of Frank Sinatra (perhaps referred to, obliquely, in this movie) and Elvis Presley haven't even entered show biz no matter tried to take their father's crown. To tell such a story there is few other places that Director Francis Ford Coppola could go but to the mob.

Here you have it all: Wealth, politics, extreme violence, corporate problems, the psychology of power, double standards: The whole world of lies, truths and half-truths all together in one place. They say the devil has all the best tunes, but he has a few good film scripts in his locker too.

Coppola was nervous as a kitten back then. He introduces the characters in a good light and tries to highlight the good before we see the other side (and often it is not lingered on). He knows full well the audience could be lost before it is won. So no medals for bravery.

We see the wealth and power, in clear visuals, but we don't see where the money comes from. Where are the beatings, the robbery and the drug addictions that the mob perpetrate? The bricks and mortar of the Long Island mansion that we see before us.

The family is not involved in drugs (and is against them) says the old Don at a ""sit down""? How do we know? Crime is freelance, the only role of the mob is protection of its members which means a share of the money they earn out of direct sight.

(You could say that this sight-unseen street crime puts the cotton wool in Marlon Brando's mouth!)

Pornography and vice he doesn't have a problem with - although we don't see it and don't, in the main, care. Women are just another commodity ""that corporations cannot provide.""

Killing seems to be sacred (a theme we see repeated in this series). Pacino doesn't have to kill (it wouldn't have been beyond his wits to have the job done by others) but does so. As a vengeful killer he is real deal - as a non killer he is the baby-faced ""college boy"".

The film does little for women. They are all hand-wringers or professional lookers of the other way. Either that or victims. OK feminism wasn't around back then, but good actresses such as Talia Shire and Diane Keaton don't have a memorable line between them.

Many of the faults of the first part were put right in the second. We see how power was taken (not given) through the barrel of a gun and some of the home truths that Godfather (Part One) tiptoes around. Nevertheless three hours is a lot of screen time not to have a few minutes to look at what these people leave behind - namely innocent victims...";3;7;False tt0068646;SMLA11;24/05/2002;Excellent movie;10;The Godfather has to be one of the greatest movies ever. Ever. Marlon Brando is Vito Corleone, the don of a mafia who was injured by a shooting of another mafia. Al Pacino is Michael Corleone, a man who just got home and is ready to take over for his injured father and do the dirty work of repaying the other mafia. James Caan is Sonny Corleone, a raging psychopath of the family who is also ready to take over for his father before an accident happens. A big accident. Francis Ford Coppola is the greatest director. He created a true gem of a movie and I loved this every second. he proved he can direct wonderful movies and he started it here. the acting was wonderful from everybody. Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, James Caan, etc. everybody was awesome.

Overall this is one of the greatest movies of all time and I watch it all of the time. Rating 11 out of 10. (Tied for favorite movie);3;7;False tt0068646;emailbajaj;11/05/2002;I've seen this movie, don't want to see any other in my lifetime.;10;"The Best Movie of All times, Al Pacino & Marlon Brando are Superb. Al Pacino as the son of the Godfather rules the second half of the movie with its excellent histronics and style. How The ruthless Michael conquers the underworld empire is perhaps the most significant tales of ever times. GodFather II equally good but III simply disappoints.";3;7;False tt0068646;Rowdaddie79;10/05/2002;Pure classic;;"THE GODFATHER is the greatest movie of all time. There is no equal to this movie. More then just a crime drama, this movie explores another type of ""family"".

Mario Puzo writes a fantastic tale of family honor and loyalty. Al Pacino shines as Michael Corleone along with Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone. I loved every minute of this film.";3;7;False tt0068646;typingonwriters;24/11/2015;Terrible... Just terrible!;1;Terrible... Just terrible. Nauseatingly dull and exceedingly over-hyped. Honestly I could never even think to sit through any of Diane Keaton's acting in my life it is so horrid. Possibly the worst acting that I have ever even witnessed! (Let me tell you I mean that about every single person that is in this film).

I wouldn't even consider writing any more review for such a scathing, vile film of nothingness. Evil movie, don't open this. Do not watch this. Do not speak its words. If I could take back any of the time that I spent watching this movie then I would, because I feel as if a piece of my hollow soul has been torn from my within, and that it is not something that I could ever have back.;15;60;False tt0068646;mrbisco;23/01/2003;What is the appeal of grand failure?;1;I really don't understand people sometimes. Here we have the #1 rated movie on the list. An extremely famous film. A well made film in it's own right. But the story. It's AWFUL.

This is a story about a man how starts off as a fine upstanding citizen, a soldier, no less, and his gradual change into what I can only describe as a Total S**t.

I really did NOT like this movie. I did like it up to a point...once I realized that Michael was not going to overcome his demons.

I really don't feel I should waste any more time on this film, so I won't.;19;80;False tt0068646;mike-1899;11/11/2006;hogwash;1;what a load of hogwash.absolute tripe typical American rubbish.overrated.bad acting you name it was there.give me will hay any day.why people watch this trash ,i don't know.Marlon Brando,whats he talking about,he justs mumbles.give me a British actor anyday.let me sum up and say this is the worst film,i have ever seen.i hope to god i never see it again.i have been watching movies for thirty years and this is just the worst movie i have seen.it typifies what is wrong with the movie industry,when they can waste money on overblown claptrap such as this.if this is the best Hollywood can offer,god help us.lets just hope it was just a blipand Hollywood can again start making decent movies.;18;75;False tt0068646;toysoldier_johnnybanks;26/09/2003;That was pathetic.;1;I don't see what anybody saw in this movie, boring, and redundant. I was bored with the film, and it is a horrible attempt to make a good movie. If you have any taste what so ever you will turn down a crapfest like this and watch something respectful like Batman, or The Rookie, or heck even Mortal Kombat: Annihilation. In any event stay away from this waste of film. 0 out of 10.;17;70;False tt0068646;knows_film;19/01/2006;Terrible, Junk Film;10;"""The Godfather"" is a 'terrible' film.

It's 'the worst' movie I've seen in a decade. The acting in this film is 'excruciatingly painful'. The whole family are 'watered down Sopranos' who show some phenomenally strong 'lack of' chemistry. The 'boring' weeding scene is the 'highlight'.

Michael is a 'wet fish' and his relationship with Kay is very dumb, and also 'stupid' and 'weird'. The Godfather scenes make me 'sick' and 'woozy'. I haven't seen such dramatized 'try to be cool' dialogue since ""Any Given Sunday"".

Pacino was less wooden in ""Gigli"". That other film he also 'carried'. Both Puzo and Brest were largely let down thanks to this 'Tony Montana' The characters of Sonny and Fredo were so 'unrealistic' I thought they were 'comic book'. I must also highly criticize the music in this film as being 'childish' and sometimes often 'out of place'.

Now on to some other failings of this 'pathetic' movie. The dialogue was 'silly'. If it was supposed to be nail-biting, well, it 'failed'. The manner in which the actors delivered their lines was 'uninspiring'. Brando in particular 'sucked'. What about the 'long' and 'tired' Sicily scenes? Reference to four hours of ""Lawrence of Arabia"" I don't know? The car exploding was so 'unoriginal' and 'clichéd'. And the 'take over' cross baptism montage. Come on, do some CGI instead! Bah, 'armatures'.

How this is ranked above that masterpiece ""Muriel's Wedding"" stumps me. If they had replaced the old and tired Francis Ford with the more youthful Nicolas they might have hit pay dirt.";13;51;False tt0068646;Maul_40;18/01/2004;Quite an interesting piece of film.;1;"I love the fact that the movie give us an insight in something we would, as ""normal"" people, never get the chance to know. It's a world full of traditions, family values, rich and explicit verbal and behavior language, but also a world of corruption, power, deceit and murder. Francis Ford Coppola knows how to create this Italian-American feeling throughout the whole movie, and it never feels superficial. It's a very good movie, but not extra-ordinary. I lack a bit of depth in the storyline like in the approach of the young son Michael being dragged into the world of the mafia. It was a bit too easy. He gets smacked in the face by a corrupt cop, and suddenly he wants to shoot everybody. I think I miss an essential scene between him and his father in the clinic. Anyway, trying to keep The Godfather on number feels a bit compulsory and bizarre. I think that this great movie needs to get away from this forced spotlight position, so we can appreciate the film without all this hype. And we shouldn't be blind to other great cinematic pearls being made in recent years.";16;66;False tt0068646;jaimitoeguisastegui;26/07/2019;Worst anime ever;1;Dis moive lacks deep plots and is bad anime so worst anime ever it doent have gud things;10;37;False tt0068646;bigtkeller;01/06/2005;Overrated;2;The Godfather is probably the most overrated movies of all time. I don't see why everyone gives this movie such a high rating. The movie sucks. The movie is just so darn boring and the only reason I kept watching it was because I kept wanting it to get better. I know a movie is not all about action, but come on, who wants to watch a movie that is just all talk and no action. Look at Scarface and The Untouchables, those were good Mafia movies. They both had a great storyline, great acting, and had at least some action. The Godfather is just way to boring and I don't get why it is number on the all time list. Some reviews that didn't like this movie have said many people like this movie because its about the Mafia and its influence. Those people who have said that are absolutely right. The only reason I don't give this movie a 1 is because Marlon Brando and Al Pacino's performances were pretty darn good, but the story itself which carry's the movie is just so darn boring and this is without a doubt the most overrated movie ever. I'll stick to the Star Wars Saga instead of the Godfather Trilogy.;6;19;False tt0068646;Discern;26/03/1999;Violence, Violence and more Violence;1;A ponderously slow moving script interspersed with vulgar blood and guts scenes. After about 20 minutes of this tripe I wanted to drop a bomb in the middle and wipe out the whole lot of them -- for the good of humanity. With few exceptions (Pacino) the acting was also of low caliber. All the money spent on the sets, costumes, and backdrops could not make up for the lack of any direction or purpose to the main storyline.;18;77;False tt0068646;youdontknowwhoiambutiamw;25/01/2006;Holy crap that was boring.;1;I could not maintain concentration throughout that film. When I heard it was on, I had high expectations. But I was throughly disappointed with how boring it was. I can't see how it was so good, it's just a load of Italians in America killing others. So boring I decided not to watch the last hour.

I will admit that the scene where the police captain and the drug guy was shot was quite good. The uncertainty of whether the gun is there or not is well produced and the effect with the white noise sounding like blood rushing through your ears was much more effective than the lame heart beats that you get it some films.;17;72;True tt0068646;phenomynouss;14/05/2006;Long and laborious, and so very cold and pointless... how is this a classic?;1;"I'm a modern type of movie viewer, but I can appreciate classics, like ""Annie Hall"", ""Midnight Cowboy"", ""Forrest Gump"", ""Casablanca"", etc. I simply do not understand what people see in ""The Godfather"" To start with, I'm not really into the whole crime mob Italian Sicilian Naples mafiosi family thing, so it didn't have my attention at that. The acting was good, but Marlon Brando was annoying--his weirdy voice is infamous, but I couldn't understand anything he said! It sounded very flaccid and emotionless, too.

The story itself seemed very pointless... Michael Corleone kills a bunch of people, mob hits, his father gets shot or something, he becomes the new Godfather or something. Nothing had shown itself much changed or resolved. Didn't serve a purpose other than to show a bunch of cursing and killing. With thick accents.

The mood was also very very cold-hearted. There's a general complaint about Steven Spielberg's ""Munich"" that it's very cold, too, that the characters don't have a warmth to them that you can identify with. ""The Godfather"" characters are like this too. You can't identify with any of the characters because they seem so heartless and cold, not even with a hint of charm to them to make you like them, except maybe Marlon Brando, who seemed like a crazy old grandpa who's half-senile.

I can't see the classic status of this movie. If it were released today, would it receive the same praise?";16;67;True tt0068646;wds-3;17/11/1999;The Truth;1;What can I say? I gave this thing a 1 because I honestly have never felt it was all that good. I that saw the average was a 9 at the time I voted and I felt the dissenters should get some representation. Brando isn't all that great in it. I mean the thing is better than the average film (at least I'm supposed to believe that), but 9 out of 10!? No way. Watch different movies. In fact, watch other coppala movies. I personally like 'The Outsiders' and 'The Conversation' better. I find the story to be boring. I also think the structure of the script is a little too gimicky and amateurish. I won't go into detail on this. I will just say the thing left me dry.;15;62;False tt0068646;dharmaprija;14/12/2007;Imbeciles;4;"A friend of mine and I were arguing as to the greatest film of all time and he sent me to this site to see what the idiots (all 250k of em) here had decided was the best pic. I of course (like anyone with sense and taste or knowledge of film) was extolling the unlimited virtues and impact of the REAL best picture of all time, Citizen Kane. He meanwhile was arguing for the Godfather and I just figured it was his immaturity or possibly his ignorance and then when told me to go to imfd id10t or whatever this site is I was ASTONISHED to find that there were a quarter of million other people who agreed. Habadashery!!! There could not have even been a ""godfather"" without Citizen Kane, ALL of modern film owes a debt of gratitude to that film and anyone who knows anything about film making knows this. Please refer to AFI or just ask any freshman student of film. Blasphemy! and everyone knows that Peewees big adventure is the foundation for the future of film./ HAHA.";5;15;False tt0068646;vengpah;27/11/2006;Never did like it;2;I recently saw the godfather again, 34 times I think. Now, never was a Brando fan, can't stand mob movies, so why should I like this one? Simply, because everyone else does. Its not that the acting's bad (except for brando) its not that its a mob movie, OK, it is that it is a mob movie. I mean seriously, pick a better topic! Not a realistic view of the mob. The mob did things quietly never have I heard in history of a mobsters getting gunned down in his car by many bullets. Oh, and another thing, if this movie is supposed to be realistic, why did the gas can blow up when the shot the car?

Only see this movie if you love mob movies and love brando;5;15;False tt0068646;marcosmarino;27/08/2002;Overrated;7;No doubt a good movie, but to place it among the top ten is foolish. It hasn't introduced anything new at any cinematic level. Its influence on the living trends of cinema is practically zero (no interesting movie made after The Godfather owes anything to it). It's the paradigmatic example of what Fredric Jameson calls nostalgia cinema, a pastiche of the old conventions of gangster movies, a kind of funerary monument. Classical cinema ended long time ago (probably in the fifties), and this movie is just a well-done late survivor, a kind of aesthetic dinosaur.;5;15;False tt0068646;gkeenan-15223;21/07/2020;Great film, but it's nothing compared to Foodfight.;1;Godfather, more like, Cringefather. It is a film that is good, but cannot compare to the horror masterpiece that is Foodfight.;4;11;False tt0068646;KurtGScott;10/05/2019;Unfinished unclear, can't believe this is top250;4;Basically you see messy things like killings, distrust, disappointment, suspicious people and stories, sudden things, and it does not seem like it has ending, neither positive nor negative. Ending is like beginning, except that this time it is his son. Very negative and long. Not worth watching! Maybe good for older audience, as movie is old too. Old times, no devices, cars, or anything new I got used to.;4;11;False tt0068646;whystone2001;30/01/2019;Boriiiiiiing;3;One of the most boring movies I have ever watched. All these good reviews they must have watched a different movie than I did. Just a bunch of crap and talking which you can hardly understand cuz one guy talks with his mouth full the whole movie and then a lot of Italian. Just a really suckkkky movie.;4;11;False tt0068646;josuemariano;29/01/2019;Didn´t like very much;4;A bad movie, just lots of conversation for 3 hours, and little action.;4;11;False tt0068646;portaeporta-47060;28/06/2018;Expensive Crap;2;Violence, Emotions, Violence. Nothing than celebration of the pure violence motivated by pseudo social reasons. No thanks. htpp://adrianalecu.us;4;11;True tt0068646;zachary_a_erickson-26701;23/02/2018;Over Rated;5;This is over done and over rated. It sucks.

It just doesn't make any sense why people like one crime film so much. There are so many good motion pictures out there, and out of all of them, people pick this one? Honestly Francis Ford Coppola is over rated, and he makes lots of trash films.;4;11;False tt0068646;davidbretherick;06/12/2017;A Terrible overrated movie;2;The fact this movie is consistently called the best movie of all time absolutely baffles me. This isn't even remotely one of my favorite movies, in fact its one of the worst I've seen. Its 3 hours long, which is far too long, it's beyond boring and the story, or what little story there is makes no sense. I did not understand why anything happened throughout the whole movie, each death just happened for seemingly no reason out of the blue. Some of the actors mumble so much they are impossible to understand or speak in Italian without subtitles, which doesn't help in following along with what's happening. This movie does not deserve the extreme high praise it has received, not by a long shot. Its single redeeming factor to me is the excellent cinematography for its time, I'll give it that.;4;11;False tt0068646;irishm;19/04/2013;I just don't get it;6;"I finally watched this movie, and I just don't get the hype. I didn't dislike it, and the violence didn't bother me, but I found it over-long and very, very slow. I'm a 50-something who doesn't demand a break-neck pace in a film, even an ""action"" film I'm used to watching long movies that take some time to unfold, and I don't mind that. I have patience. But ""The Godfather"" just seemed to be moving at the wrong pace for its subject matter. I never got into it. I finished it, but I didn't feel drawn into their world.

Not helping was the fact that of course by now everyone, even those who haven't seen the film, knows about all the catch-phrases and classic scenes, so they seem like jokes (although naturally that wouldn't have been a problem when the film was newly-released). Brando almost seemed to be a caricature of himself in the early scenes although he got a little better, a little less heavy-handed, after the Don came home from the hospital. In that first sequence in his office during the wedding, I could hardly understand a word he was saying. How could anyone take a man who spoke that way seriously? But again, I was watching it after many years of encountering deliberately bad Brando imitations, so I was at a disadvantage in that respect.

That wedding good lord, it lasted longer than many marriages do! I thought it was never going to be over. But while I was watching it, I recalled that I had in fact tried to watch this movie about 30 years ago, when my brother was really into it. I didn't even make it through the wedding. I remember my brother fast-forwarding the VHS tape to show me Abe Vigoda when he became convinced I wasn't going to sit and watch the whole thing with him one quick look at Abe Vigoda and I was outta there. This time I also noticed one of my favorite character actors, Vito Scotti, in the wedding sequence.

The people who did ""General Hospital"" in the 1990's must have loved this film. They even lifted the mobster's-chick-gets-blown-up-in-car idea for recycling on the soap opera.

I watched the DVD over two nights. The local public library gives me 7, and for a while there I thought I was gonna need 'em all. A good illustration of my feelings for the tension and pacing of the film are that after Sonny bought it at the tollbooth, I turned it off for the night and went to bed, since that was as good a place as any to break. Just didn't care, one way or the other, what was going to happen next. One less character to keep track of. Plenty more where he came from. I was just hoping Vito Scotti would come back.

I won't give it a 1 as others have in a deliberate attempt to bring down its average I'll give it an honest rating that I really feel it deserves. The fact that I don't understand why so many people are so crazy about this film doesn't necessarily mean that I'm right and they're wrong in fact, it might well be the opposite. But I stand by the title of this review: I just don't get it.";4;11;True tt0068646;jwaterworth;27/05/2001;Great moments, but disjointed and slow in parts;7;Some memorable sequences, in particular a string of assassinations intercut with the family at church, but too many overly long scenes. To me the film seems disjointed, and is let down by poor central performances (yes poor) by Brando (hammy), Pacino (stiff) and Keaton (invisible).

The Conversation, which Coppola directed a couple of years later, is a better film, with a brilliant performance from Hackman. But even that takes an hour to get moving.;4;11;False tt0068646;rshrmn;19/02/2001;A tasteless piece of trash;;"Wow! Let me say right off the bat that watching ""The Godfather"" is a hideous waste of time. After sitting through three laborious hours of terrible dialogue, pointless plot twists, and senseless violence I was thoroughly sickened. Al Pacino and Marlon Brando team up in what is surely one the most mindless, long winded, and utterly tiresome films of the century. Here's a tip: rent this film if you are big on self-torture. Or do yourself a favor and check out ""Mulholland Falls"" if you are into gangster films.";4;11;False tt0068646;Shai_gars;27/03/2007;I don't think i could write a title.....;1;The Godfather... 3 Oscars... NONONONONONONONONO!!!!!!! This film (And its others) Is THE worst piece of rubbish i have ever endured!

I feel that it was an insult to my backside who was forced to grow carbuncles under the weight of such mafia slush. the acting is terrible, the premise is horrible and the time is awful.

They made more than 1? yes. were any of them good (and i'm not biased, i always watch things till the end to get a full view... i even watched the others although i hated it) no.. all awful, all too long, need i say more?

My view -10/10;17;73;False tt0068646;sandeepventrapragada98;08/12/2019;This timeless masterpiece slowly grows on you.;10;I've stopped watching 4 different times after the first 30mins but later one day i've decided to finish it because I've never heard great things about a film like this then happened to watch I was totally mindblown and got to know why this film is undisputed inspiration for 100's of films even after 40years of its release. It's a character driven film more than a plot driven film that's why we feel unsettling while watching the first 1 hour but as long as you travel with the characters and their emotions you can feel the magic. Can't thank enough the cast and crew for this greatest cinematic experience, I wish every movie buff will check out this film to witness how a grand masterpiece can influence their work.;2;4;False tt0068646;maximiliandingler;07/06/2019;There are just better movies;7;This one is good but not a 10/10 (at least for me) It's to slow paced just is too long for what is actually happening And after this movie I just feel exhausted it feels like work and not entertainment Maybe it was a revelation back then but if you watch this in your 20s for the first time you may be dissapoited sorry;2;4;False tt0068646;nuparu17;11/02/2019;Look how they massacred my boy;8;They massacred my boy. Its a little bit overrated. But overall æ good movie;2;4;True tt0068646;ddibbayou;06/12/2015;How this works that impressed so put your life and your family?;10;How this works that impressed so put your life and your family?

There is a lot of work sees boj1man loans surpassed the movie, would not continue.

Vito's most precious Son Michael, the pain passed on did not want him bitten

Michael would have understood better than anyone the age-old, yet beloved Anthony

Did not allow easy thing to dream, Vito's father passed on that proud

Gyesil show his father watching from somewhere in heaven sake do I want to have been no ...;2;4;True tt0068646;renegadeviking-271-528568;01/11/2015;Masterpiece;9;"This is certainly one of the greatest movies ever made. It's such amazingly well-acted, well-written movie with an epic story line that takes you through many themes like love, sadness, loyalty, revenge and betrayal is such an encompassing and totally believable way. I will never get tired of watching this masterpiece. ""The Godfather"" is one of the few gangster films that connects the members of the Mafia as a family. The cinematography is rich and the music is perfect. However, I failed to see how Marlon Brando's performance was top notch. His acting was decent; he did not move much nor talk much. His voice also was barely understandable due to his croaking voice mumbling what sounded like English. Ultimately ""The Godfather"" still stands up as the best movie in the American crime gen";2;4;False tt0068646;adolan-78718;23/10/2015;A Timeless Classic;9;I decided to read the novel before I watched this, just to allow me to write a fair critique of the movie afterwards. I would've rated this film 10/10 if during the hospital scene, the Godfather's bed rolled down the flight of hospital stairs and out the main doors, with Al Pacino and the nurse in hot pursuit. The bed would then continue to roll down the street, rapidly gaining velocity, as the mob hit men and several police officers continued in the pursuit of him. This scene would be more enjoyable if several civilians greeted The Godfather as he zoomed past them and wished him a Merry Christmas, perhaps piling presents onto the edge of his bed, happy to see he's doing well after being shot on the streets. Overall though, this was a perfect film that followed the novel closely- I don't have many complaints.;2;4;True tt0068646;yajurkochhar-156-94138;12/09/2015;Glory Glory Godfather!;9;Masterpiece in true sense..

Right people! coming together for the, Right script ! at the, Right Time!

Coppola nailed it in every aspect. Yes the movie is long but packs in itself a plethora of epic performances.

The main role was tailored-made for Marlon Brandon.

What this movie is and will always be is far Micheal.. a star that was bone from this movie.

Al Pacino's character Michael is immortal and sets the screen on fire whenever is walks into the frame.

If you love cinema, watch it.. watch it again and again and again..

Glory Glory Godfather!;2;4;False tt0068646;NerdyDan;01/09/2015;A Good Movie, Even For This CGI'd Up Generation;9;"I am 15 at the time of writing this review, and all the movies I have watched made before 1980 I didn't enjoy. It probably wasn't the films' fault; it's just I'm used to movies with realistic CGI effects, HD quality and current actors, but nonetheless I often found the films' quality too grainy to bear and the effects too cheap to appreciate. It was like this for every film until I watched The Godfather.

First of all, for a film made in 1972 its film quality is superb! Also, though I didn't recognise the actors I knew they were talented. Even the ones not essential to the story. An example of this is the man in the first scene coming to the Godfather for help. His emotions seemed real, and he perfectly delivered his lines in a single, lengthly shot.

In conclusion, this movie still holds up to this generation, even those like me who generally dislike old movies. It's the best start to a trilogy that I've ever seen!";2;4;False tt0068646;filipemanuelneto;25/08/2015;Best gangsters movie ever.;10;"This film tells the trajectory of the Corleone family and its leader, the ""godfather"" Don Vito Corleone. Rich, powerful and socially well-placed, this family leads one of the most important criminal cartels in New York, as one of the Mafia's ""five families"". Inadvertently drawn into a war with another family, the Corleone's will, throughout the film, showing their human side, as well as they will be able of the most cruel and vindictive acts.

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, this film needs no introduction. It's the cinema adaptation of a novel by Mario Puzo, who collaborated in the writing of the script, which is one of the best scripts of twentieth century cinema. In addition to this director and this script, we should highlight the cast, full of stars (Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and others) who gave us an ""offer we cannot refuse"": a masterpiece that anyone should watch at least once.

If there is a movie where there is no possible negative note, is this: the suspense is permanent, the Nino Rota's soundtrack is unforgettable and even the light contributes to the heavy and gloomy atmosphere that makes us wait for the moment we'll hear the next gun shots. Winner of three Oscars (Best Picture, Best Leading Actor and Best Adapted Screenplay), five Golden Globes (Best Film, Best Leading Actor: Drama, Best Screenplay, Best Original Score and Best Director) and a BAFTA (Best Soundtrack), this film received several other nominations and awards and is considered by many the best gangsters movie ever, and one of the best films of the twentieth century. Those who love good cinema must see this film.";2;4;False tt0068646;yashrajs536;08/07/2015;Epic Gangster Movie!!!;10;"""The Godfather"" is a superb movie it is all about a Gangster family and their crimes fights story business and all it is one of the greatest movies ever made.

The Direction done by ""Francis D Coppola"" is great and the acting done by ""Al Pacino"" and others were 100% Top notch.

I watched this movie recently about a year ago and I had no words describe this MASTERPIECE at that time!!!

Overall the movie was must watch and Top notch entertainment. It has got 9.2/10 rating on IMDb and 100% on Rotten tomatoes which is the greatest rating movie and it fully deserves it!!!!!";2;4;False tt0068646;mmckenna2016;06/03/2015;John Cena is the Next Star in Hollywood.;10;"Pretty much the best movie of all time. My favorite scene is the one in which John Cena body-slammed Michael Corleone. This scene is pivotal in movie history. The symbolism featured in the scene, such as the shiny body oil and the ""you can't see me"" hand gesture, is the best I've ever seen. By far the best movie I have ever seen. Pretty much the best movie of all time. My favorite scene is the one in which John Cena body-slammed Michael Corleone. This scene is pivotal in movie history. The symbolism featured in the scene, such as the shiny body oil and the ""you can't see me"" hand gesture, is the best I've ever seen. By far the best movie I have ever seen.";2;4;False tt0068646;theroninempire;25/02/2015;Over all;10;"This film is an example of a great director, quality actors, outstanding script writing/ screen play and an amazing film score. I love it!

My favorite scene:

Don Corleone: Why did you go to the police? Why didn't you come to me first?

Bonasera: What do you want of me? Tell me anything, but do what I beg you to do.

Don Corleone: What is that? ""Bonasera whispers his request in the Don's ear"" That I cannot do.

Bonasera: I will give you anything you ask.

Don Corleone: We've known each other many years, but this is the first time you ever came to me for counsel or for help. I can't remember the last time that you invited me to your house for a cup of coffee, even though my wife is godmother to your only child. But let's be frank here. You never wanted my friendship. And, uh, you were afraid to be in my debt.

Bonasera: I didn't want to get into trouble.

Don Corleone: I understand. You found paradise in America, you had a good trade, you made a good living. The police protected you and there were courts of law. And you didn't need a friend like me. But, uh, now you come to me, and you say: ""Don Corleone, give me justice."" But you don't ask with respect. You don't offer friendship. You don't even think to call me Godfather. Instead, you come into my house on the day my daughter is to be married, and you ask me to do murder for money.

Bonasera: I ask for justice.

Don Corleone: That is not justice. Your daughter is still alive.

Bonasera: Let them suffer then, as she suffers. How much shall I pay you?

Don Corleone: Bonasera, Bonasera. What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this scum that wounded your daughter would be suffering this very day. And if by chance an honest man like yourself should make enemies, then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you.

Bonasera: Be my friend – Godfather. ""Bonasera bows toward the Don and kisses the Don's hand""

Don Corleone: Good. Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me. But until that day – accept this justice as a gift on my daughter's wedding day.

Bonasera: Grazie, Godfather.

Don Corleone: Prego. Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all, we're not murderers, in spite of what this undertaker thinks. The Godfather";2;4;False tt0068646;TroyStr;24/02/2015;Best movie,excellent actor and amazing story;10;"Godfather amazing movie , i am 19 years old and i so much like this movie, with absolutely the best actor Marlon Brando ! Maybe i'm young but i know what quality and excellent movie . I think that never make movie like this , because this is the best movie ever. Amazing qutoes : ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."" ""You sonofabitch, do you know who I am? I'm Moe Greene! I made my bones when you were going out with cheerleaders."" ""Whatya gonna do? Nice college boy, eh? Don't wanna get mixed up in the family business? Now you wanna gun down a police captain because he slapped you in the face a little bit, huh? Whataya think this is, the Army, where you shoot 'em a mile away? You gotta get up close like this... badaBING! you blow their brains all over your nice Ivy League suit. C'mere... you're taking this very personal."" ""She was beautiful! She was young. She was innocent. She was the greatest piece of ass I ever had, and I've had'em all over the world!""";2;4;False tt0068646;Macintoxic;13/02/2015;The Best movie ever;10;The Godfather is overflowing with life, rich with all the grand emotions and vital juices of existence, up to and including blood. To permit us a glimpse at The Mob, with all of its ethnic insularity, is like giving a chronic gambler a chance to wander above the false mirrors that overlook every casino. A defining film in the history of cinema, The Godfather introduced a legendary filmmaker and several acting greats in the telling of an Italian American dynasty undone by the tragic circumstances of their criminal exploits. In its blending of new depth with an old genre, it becomes that rarity, a mass entertainment that is also great movie art. As filmmaking and storytelling, 'The Godfather' remains a bravura piece of work, its set pieces, dialogue and performances entrenched cinematic icons.;2;4;False tt0068646;slightlymad22;29/01/2015;I Know I'm In The Minority.....;8;"I know I will be in the minority with this review, but I think ""The Godfather"" and in particular Marlon Brando's performance are completely over rated. I'm not saying it's a bad movie at all, it's a good one, but I don't think it lives up to the hype.

Plot In A Paragraph: The Godfather ""Don"" Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the head of the Corleone mafia family in New York. Vito is a powerful man, and is kind to all those who give him respect but is ruthless against those who do not. But a powerful and treacherous rival wants to sell drugs, and Vito refuses his permission or help. What follows is a clash between Vito's old values and the new ways which may cause his youngest son Micheal (Al Pacino) to do the thing he is most reluctant in doing, and join the family business.

I found it to be over long and very drawn out. Sometimes a movie nearly three hours long, can feel like an hour and a half, as it is the engrossing and enjoyable the time flies by. This felt like I spent five hours watching it.

With the exception of Brando, all the cast are superb. And I don't mean that as a slant at Brando, he does what Brando does. No more no less. Al Pacino, James Caan, and Robert Duvall are all excellent as is Talia Shire (in my second favourite role of hers, behind Adrian in ""Rocky"") and Diane Keaton.

Ridiculously quotable, and still a movie I think everyone should see once. It's just over rated";2;4;False tt0068646;bpatrascu;27/10/2014;The Godfather is the greatest movie of all time.;;The Godfather is the greatest movie of all time. It is a flawless movie. Francis Ford Coppola's brilliant directing, This movie is his greatest achievement. Great performances by the actors especially the Oscar winning performance by Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone. Al Pacino's acting was phenomenal. The Godfather is told entirely within a closed world that's why we sympathize with characters who are essentially evil. Vito Corleone is the moral center of this movie. A movie of its caliber never becomes obsolete. It is a movie with actually no plot holes. It is a complete movie. The Godfather views the Mafia from inside. It is truly a masterpiece and the best movie.;2;4;False tt0068646;jaas45;14/08/2014;Amazing;10;One of the most successful movies ever made in Hollywood. Inspired me to study acting since I was 19 years of age so hard and become an actor in my country, Colombia. Spectacular work of acting in actors like Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Michael Kane, Marlon Brandon and the whole cast. The crew had to be amazing to, in order to make such successful film. Bringing a tragic story from reality to the magic world of the movies, so many people can enjoy it. Today seems the time has not past and it is very pleasant to enjoy amazing acting performances of each actor and still learn from each peace of scene. It will never past away and will stay as a classic, hope it can be around for all new generations of actors, directors and producers. Wish some day I can share tables and set with great actors like them, who have been inspiring and example in my work and professional life as an actor. Thank you all.;2;4;False tt0068646;diaa-dav-460-605284;01/08/2014;Great of all the times;10;It was like your building a high tower, and with the rules of construction to do something like that you must start with a solid tough base can hold the weight and levels. Godfather was written first with a unique way, that made you more interested to see the man's life, who can change you life, or even make your life in past with a word. For me it started with the DOP, with the amazing picture. Decoration, accessories, the site, and really the performance of all these stars together. Music was amazing and much matching the time of the movie, specially when you do your search of the music of that time. Last and least, the Director, who controlled all of his tools and made this great movie, i never felt bored of watching it.;2;4;False tt0068646;Thamer_94;09/02/2014;best movie ever !;10;"Popularly viewed as one of the best American films ever made, the multi-generational crime saga The Godfather is a touchstone of cinema: one of the most widely imitated, quoted, and lampooned movies of all time. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino star as Vito Corleone and his youngest son, Michael,

Popularly viewed as one of the best American films ever made, the multi-generational crime saga The Godfather is a touchstone of cinema: one of the most widely imitated, quoted, and lampooned movies of all time. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino star as Vito Corleone and his youngest son, Michael, respectively. It is the late 1940s in New York and Corleone is, in the parlance of organized crime, a ""godfather"" or ""don,"" the head of a Mafia family. Michael, a free thinker who defied his father by";2;4;False tt0068646;nrr817;31/01/2014;The Greatest Film Ever Made;10;"There isn't much that I can say about The Godfather that hasn't been said a million times. A masterpiece, as close to a perfect film as you can get, arguably the best film ever made, ""a film you can't refuse,"" etc. Coming from a guy who's favorite films have mafia/gangster-related themes, The Godfather is the greatest film ever made in the history of U.S. cinema, in my slightly biased opinion.

From the legendary music (beautiful work by Nino Rota), to the cast and the acting (Brando, Pacino, and Caan), to the cinematography (brilliantly done by Gordon Willis, aka ""The Prince of Darkness""), to the fascinating story and everything in between, there is nothing about this film that disappoints. It is one of those films that everyone should watch at least once in his or her lifetime, because the chances are that you will want to watch it again.";2;4;False tt0068646;ormessi;12/07/2013;A Great Film Art;9;A GREAT MOVIE, one of the best film art ever, the actors are great especially Al Pacino that made there(in my opinion) his best performance of his career. this movie takes you inside the Italian mafia world in the US but more important, it takes you inside the Corleone family, it shows the the relationship between the father, Don Vito and his children, especially with Michael(Al Pacino). What makes this movie so fascinating is the way that Francis Ford Coppola(the director) make you to identify with the main characters - people who murder their enemies and live like they are above the law, he make you love and admire the bad guys - The Mafia. In conclusion, the godfather is one of the best movies I have ever seen and i recommend it to all the film lovers. for anothe reviews: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur44998795/?ref_=nb_usr_prof;2;4;False tt0068646;rick_7;08/04/2010;Just about perfect;;"Until a viewing last month, I hadn't watched The Godfather (Francis Ford Coppola, 1972) for a good five years. In the interim it seems to have got even better - if such a thing is possible.

Marlon Brando is Vito Corleone, the mafia don whose empire starts to crumble when he opts out of a move into narcotics, only for war-hero son Michael (Al Pacino) to enter the fold, jettisoning his father's dream that he'd become a senator. It's grand and sweeping, and yet intensely personal: a wonderfully-acted fusion of family saga and human tragedy whose key players inhabit a vivid world of fierce ethics and bloody violence. Coppola and co-scripter Mario Puzo (who wrote the source novel) have plenty to say about family, honour and the American Dream - and the classic scenes are just legion.

Some have argued that Brando's Oscar-winning performance is really a supporting role, but despite a lack of screen time he dominates the entire film and provides many of its finest moments. There's the moment he learns of Sonny's death, then calls in an emotional favour (""Look how they massacred my boy""), and a simply staggering two-handed sequence in which he maps out past and future to his successor. ""I thought that... when it was your time that - that you would be the one to hold the strings,"" he says. ""This wasn't enough time, Michael, it wasn't enough time...""

The old-fashioned storytelling, complete with impeccable production design, is augmented by Coppola's use of '70s innovations, like overlapping dialogue and informal out-of-focus close-ups, as well as Nino Rota's unforgettable score. The staggering ensemble includes not only Brando and Pacino (who is simply brilliant), but also James Caan as the last word in likable hotheads, Robert Duvall playing pragmatic family lawyer Tom Hagen and veteran Richard Conte, superb in his key supporting role as Don Barzini. It's a magnificent movie.";2;4;True tt0068646;smithmjsjsmith-614-318703;21/12/2009;One of the Greatest Films of All Time;10;"I'll admit the movie at first was very boring, but after watching again, I fell in love with it. A movie that is really flawless. Incredible Story (I WON'T REVEAL ANY OF IT), Great Directing, Very Intense and deep scenes throughout the film, great music, the stage is very well set (this takes place in the 1940s, it was filmed in 1972 and it was almost as if it was filmed in the 1940s). And the most important of all is the acting, THIS MOVIE HAS PERHAPS THE GREATEST ACTING I HAVE EVER SEEN. To start, James Caan places as ""Sunny Corleone"", Robert Duvall as ""Tom Hagen"" (you may also know him from ""Apocalypse Now""), The Legendary Al Pacino as ""Michael Corleone"" puts up a hell of a show. And to top of it all was perhaps the Greatest Actor of All Time behind Humphrey Bogart: Marlon Brando as ""Vito Corleone"" Brando was the old actor, but still put up a great show starting a franchise that became one of the greatest films of all time. The film won Best Picture (despite being an R rated film), and Marlon Brando won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Lead Role. I'd probably start a debate just saying it's the greatest film of all time, but I'm going to do it anyway, THIS IS THE GREATEST FILM OF ALL TIME, everything is perfect in this film. You are not educated in Filmographically if you haven't seen this movie. If this movie didn't exist, the movies nowadays would be 100% different than what they are now. Period.";2;4;False tt0068646;Troll_Patrol101;24/09/2009;Utimately Great;10;"''The Godfather'' is told entirely within a closed world. That's why we sympathize with characters who are essentially evil. The story by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola is a brilliant conjuring act, inviting us to consider the Mafia entirely on its own terms. Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) emerges as a sympathetic and even admirable character; during the entire film, this lifelong professional criminal does nothing of which we can really disapprove.

During the movie we see not a single actual civilian victim of organized crime. No women trapped into prostitution. No lives wrecked by gambling. No victims of theft, fraud or protection rackets. The only police officer with a significant speaking role is corrupt.

The story views the Mafia from the inside. That is its secret, its charm, its spell; in a way, it has shaped the public perception of the Mafia ever since. The real world is replaced by an authoritarian patriarchy where power and justice flow from the Godfather, and the only villains are traitors. There is one commandment, spoken by Michael (Al Pacino): ''Don't ever take sides against the family.'' It is significant that the first shot is inside a dark, shuttered room. It is the wedding day of Vito Corleone's daughter, and on such a day a Sicilian must grant any reasonable request. A man has come to ask for punishment for his daughter's rapist. Don Vito asks why he did not come to him immediately.

''I went to the police, like a good American,'' the man says. The Godfather's reply will underpin the entire movie: ''Why did you go to the police? Why didn't you come to me first? What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this scum that ruined your daughter would be suffering this very day. And if, by chance, an honest man like yourself should make enemies . . . then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you.'' As the day continues, there are two more scenes in the Godfather's darkened study, intercut with scenes from the wedding outside. By the end of the wedding sequence, most of the main characters will have been introduced, and we will know essential things about their personalities. It is a virtuoso stretch of film-making: Coppola brings his large cast onstage so artfully that we are drawn at once into the Godfather's world.

The screenplay of ''The Godfather'' follows no formulas except for the classic structure in which power passes between the generations. The writing is subtly constructed to set up events later in the film. Notice how the request by Johnny Fontane, the failing singer, pays off in the Hollywood scenes; how his tears set up the shocking moment when a mogul wakes up in bed with what is left of his racehorse. Notice how the undertaker is told ''someday, and that day may never come, I will ask a favor of you. . .'' and how when the day comes the favor is not violence (as in a conventional movie) but Don Vito's desire to spare his wife the sight of their son's maimed body. And notice how a woman's ''mistaken'' phone call sets up the trap in which Sonny (James Caan) is murdered: It's done so neatly that you have to think back through the events to figure it out.";2;4;False tt0068646;jussi-kangas;22/01/2009;One of the most touching movies of all time;10;I must say that I did not like Godfather when i saw it for the first time. This may have something to do with the fact that i was 10 years old and loved Arnold Schwarzenegger action movies. I watched it again when i was 17 and i was blown away by the beauty (and tragedy) of the movie.

I can understand why everyone does not enjoy Godfather. It is quite slow paced and does not necessarily appeal to a viewer who is used to gangster movies with lot of action in them, movies with 'dramatic' Hollywood soundtrack and movies that have quick 'dramatic' plot twists.

First of all, you must remember that this is is not a gangster movie. This is a movie about family. This is movie about responsibilities. So if you are waiting to see Scarface then you are in for a big disappointment.

Best part of the movie is the story. Movie tells us tale of the youngest son of the American-Sicilian mafia family. Tale of the son who has decided to live his life by the laws of the united states and not have anything to do with businesses of his family. But through the tragedy that brings the whole family together, son is little by little drawn back to illegal side of family. Finally son becomes what he did not want to be. What he despised. Because of the responsibilities to the family he forgets his ambitions and plans and becomes the Godfather.

Coppola has really got the best performance out of the actors in this movie. Every emotion of Michael and other characters is forwarded to viewer. Special mention to the cast of this movie. I have not seen a movie with better casting. Cinematography of the movie may be a little out of date but it still is really really beautiful. Especially beautiful sets in Sicily deserve a mention. Nino Rota's soundtrack supports the drama of the movie in a way that I can hardly think of the soundtrack that does this better.

All in all, i love this movie. If you combine first two films, you get the classical story of man changing to what he does not want to be. Classical story about rise and the fall of the man who turns from kind and loving person to ambitious, greedy and paranoid leader who pushes all his loved ones away. Story not too far from another one of the greatest movies of all time. Story not too far from Citizen Kane.

And oh yes. I will dance Speak softly love in my wedding next august.;2;4;True tt0068646;mrmoviefreak261-1;29/11/2008;Take a look at the accomplishment of a masterpiece;10;Godfather is a one of a kind film. Nothing can ever beat this kind of story, with the Mafia and organized crime. Francis Ford Coppola just makes an amazing story like this come alive. It was made so that Francis could keep his studio running, Zoetrope, and probably didn't intend for it to be such a masterpiece it is. It's complete genius. Marlon Brando as the Godfather who gets a kiss on his hand and being told who should be killed, and getting lots of friendship from different people. Al Pacino, who is one of the most important actors of all time, is one of his sons, who is in the army, and not really into the family crime business unto soon enough. And other characters who make the Corleone family a one-in-a-million family, with astute heads. This is probably the, or probably one of my favorite movies of all time, just because it works, and is directed professionally, and perfectly. The acting puts a whole other atmosphere into this film. Watch it, and be sure to watch the second one also.;2;4;False tt0068646;addie1193;27/11/2008;my favorite gangster movie ever.;10;"THIS HAS A SPOILER IN IT!!!! DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE SEEN IT!!!!!!

I just saw this movie a couple of weeks ago, and i loved it. I had heard so much hype about it, and that it was the greatest movie ever, so I was skeptical. I was not disappointed; except when Sonny died, that just ruined my day. He was my favorite. This movie has everything that a good drama needs.

Actors: Everyone that had a role of significance, played it to a tee. I never noticed any moments of ""I can't believe he just said that. This is like CSI:Miami.""

Characters: This movie got you to root for basically the ""bad guys"". It portrays them in a way that makes you feel that they are just like your family, they just happen to kill people for a living. They were all dynamic and interesting, and you couldn't really just classify them as the good or bad guy.

Filming/technicalities: Their lighting was the one thing that I actually noticed about the technical aspect. They always had innocent events out in broad daylight, but when a bad guy came on, or something dark was going on, it was almost always concealed in the shadows. Normally I don't really care about those types of things, but it gave the movie a nice effect.";2;4;True tt0068646;vito7;02/11/2008;Greatest of all time;10;"For my money the original Godfather is the greatest movie ever made. Compelling, legendary and timeless, with Marlon Brando coming out of retirement to blow the barn doors off the hinges with his portrayal of Vito Corleone, one of the most revered characters in movie history. He once again raises the bar on what a great actor can achieve and should be expected to. This movie began one of the most amazing movie careers in history with Al Pacino and also took America's guilty obsession with the ""ganster"" to new heights. It is a constant frustration for me when The Godfather II gets a higher rating then the predecessor. Also an all time great but there is likely no movie that deserves higher praise then this original ground-breaker. It has set a level of excellence for crime dramas that every movie since only strives to reach. The number of referenced and quoted scenes in modern Americana is matched only by Casablanca and thirty five years later it has still not faded in the memories of its audience.

Logan Lamech www.eloquentbooks.com/LingeringPoets.html";2;4;False tt0068646;showtime-14;16/10/2008;Because Spielberg said so.;10;What i wanted to say has already been said countless times. Ill make this short. First off i love the Godfather. This is on my 10 favorite films of all time. We all know its top 3 material but when Steven Spielberg claims to have almost retired after seeing this movie because he feared that he could never make a movie of the same magnitude as the Godfather, thats saying something coming from arguably the best film maker of the last 25 years. I wanna say that this is the best film in history but thats really a matter of ones opinion and taste. Whether its better or worse than citizen Kane is your opinion, mine goes with the Godfather. Not that Citizen Kane is far off but what are we judging on here, The films impact, or the Film it self. Citizen is judged by its impact of every film that came after it. As a film it self, I don't feel it matches up to the Godfather nor gone with the wind or Schindlers list Given the difference in eras that they were all made. But hey, thats just me. Tons of Top directors believe that the Godfather is probably the greatest. M Night Shyamalan, Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick. Thats some good Company there. I believe the experts.;2;4;False tt0068646;aggaurav67;13/10/2008;One Of The Best Masterpiece;10;One realizes the importance of movies after watching this movie.Though paced slow , yet misses nothing. The movie tells the story not just of a mafioso but also of one of the strongest and most stable characters created -The GODFATHER. One of the most remarkable part of the movie is Al Pacino's acting. In the beginning he is a very cute person and you don't see any vice in him.Now, when things go bad for him ,you see him changing ,his eyes becoming dangerous.By the end of the movie he is entirely somebody else -The next GODFATHER. The theme music has a touch of negativity in it to depict the dark side of the Godfather but the Sicilian part has very soothing music also. The only drawback(if at all it is) is the pace of the movie which might seem slow compared to these days movie with so many cuts and pacing music,but if you have the patience to watch it, only then will you realize how great the movie is.;2;4;False tt0068646;nirmal_vijay;12/09/2008;Godfather lives;9;This movie has an answer for everyone. Don't know what that answer is watch again. Can't find an answer, dig deep.

The hierarchy in human beings is reflected in many forms of our creation including religion, race, communities and nations. The order is established only when there is a leader (even in communism).

Godfather and the other characters in the movie establish the order of human beings with balance of power (to lead, communicate and protect).

This movie has presented the ideology of Godfather in a way that predicts human nature better than many other films.

Those who cannot interpret/correlate this movie with their own lives, please see it again with that notion. Makes a world of difference.;2;4;False tt0068646;andrei-93;27/07/2008;the best film ever;10;I have been looking for a better film than this one for a long time, i have been looking for better acting, directing or writing but i haven't find it yet, not even the great geniuses of Bergman or Fellini have deliver us with such a masterpiece. Brando at his best, and the big appearances of such actors as Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, James Caan, Talia Shire and many others. The writing is superb, i've read the book, and together with the film they are both my favorites, and the directing is Coppola getting the whole essence of the honor, respect, devotion, love, desire and revenge. is totally illogical that two films like the dark knight or the The Shawshank Redemption (great films by the way) are better voted that this, the greatest masterpiece on cinematic history;2;4;False tt0068646;nuitsilencieux;07/07/2008;This *might* be the best picture in movie history.;10;"When Francis Ford Coppola is on, he is absolutely on. The Godfather, in all of its noirish glory, is brilliant in virtually every respect. It's hard to criticize it, so I'll just honor it some more.

In The Grapes of Wrath (the novel), Ma Joad asks Tom if being in prison has made him ""mean-mad."" She knew Pretty Boy Floyd's mother, and she recalls how Floyd started out as a nice boy who kept getting hurt time and again, and who eventually became a monstrous killer. Michael Corleone is the epitome of that concept. As soon as Vito says that Michael is not to enter the ""family business,"" you know that he will be damned. The movie is his struggle to overcome every single hurt that comes his way, especially when they involve the ones he loves most. You can watch him lose his soul as the movie progresses, and your heart breaks. Coppola and Pacino make you wonder if you should pity Michael, hate him, love him, admire him, condemn him, worship him. That's the difference between a film that skulks around the bottom of the Top 100 films ever made and a film that is always in the top three.";2;4;True tt0068646;filipekholm;27/06/2008;The Godfather might be the best movie ever made.;10;What is there to say about The Godfather? That it is one of the best movies ever we all already know. What makes me like it so much? It was the movie that got me interested in the Movie industry. The movie that touched me so much i immediately knew that I wanted to make movies. Without this movie my life wouldn't look like it does today. But it isn't just me that this movie has affected. The whole world loves it and hails it as one of the best movies ever. Some (including me) even ranks it as THE best movie ever.

Based on the Novel by Mario Puzo The Godfather, after a lot of problems during the shooting, was released in 1972 and was a great success. It was nominated for 10 Oscars including Best director Francis Ford Coppola, best Costumes, Best Supporting Actor: Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Best Scrip based on previously published or produced material: Mario Puzo, Francis Ford Coppola, Best Leading Actor: Marlon Brando and Best Movie, and won the three last mentioned. The movie got 3 sequel's, one released in 1974 and one in 1990, both directed by Coppola and written by Puzo.

The acting is superb, Brando does the performance of his life. Al Pacino, who got his breakthrough in this movie, together with James Caan and Robert Duvall make perfect supporting actors. For examples take a look at Pacino in the restaurant scene, Caan when he is arguing with Tom Hagen, or Duvall when he delivers a horrible message to his father played by Brando. The writing is amazing, it is true to the amazing novel, a lot of the dialogue is taken directly from it. The directing is perfect, he sets the perfect feeling and mood for the movie and it's a mystery that he didn't win the Oscar for his directing.

To conclude the review.The Godfather is a true masterpiece that no-one should miss, maybe it will change your life the way it changed mine? It is in my Opinion The best Motion Picture ever created.;2;4;False tt0068646;kushal2091;27/06/2008;Too Good!!!!!;10;First of all this Movie contains a message and that is 'If you have the power use it your way'. An in the movie the director followed it perfectly. His work should be applauded What a movie!!! This is basically a movie on gangsters! and this has everything in the life on a don 'The Godfather'. This movie obviously deserves 10! Acotrs acted brilliantly, Story was brilliant, direction was awesome, It's just perfect! 'The Godfather' has everything to call it 'The Godfather' it has emotions, action, real life, romance everything is perfect in it! I am not amazed with the fact that it's no.1 in the world it should be! And by the way a film which which is this real should be no.1! The film has answered everything about a don's questions! You can use this film's message into your life and that is: 'If you have the power use it your way';2;4;False tt0068646;n-mo;02/05/2008;Apparently it's popular with its subject matter, even...;10;"Everything about The Godfather is brilliantly framed--well, almost. The depiction of Sicilian country life is, perhaps, a bit crass. Even so, its insular depiction of the world of Cosa Nostra was true enough to life to win the laud even of members of the criminal organisation.

In the first place, ""The Godfather"" does an excellent job of weaving together the literal and metaphorical world of the mafia. Within the mafia, traditional institutions are given a warped, double meaning in which to frame illicit activity. For example, ""mafioso"" literally means, ""man of honour,"" but ""honour"" refers to a loyalty to an entirely different set of rules than those to which any Christian (or post-Christian) would consider even remotely acceptable. ""Famiglia,"" as used in Cosa Nostra, means a criminal corporation. ""Cristiano"" in the Sicilian tongue often designates not merely a Christian but any human being; to CN it signifies any ordinary man of honor. As for ""godfather,"" one mafioso standing godfather to another's son is often a formalisation of an illegal business pact.

Puzo's and Coppola's Corleonesci, however, carry the double-edged sword of actually showing both meanings of these loaded words. The mafia family here IS a literal family; the men of honor, portrayed as they are in a closed word, CAN actually be viewed sympathetically as ""honourable."" (Of course in real life most mafiosi are literally Catholics {albeit sham Catholics}.) Here, the closed world so carefully guarded through layers of command in real life is given further immunity and legitimacy by actually being what it publicly claims to be--and so much more.

Little needs to be said about the performances, which are by and large stellar; the casting of Al Pacino is of course a near sure sign that the film will succeed. Perhaps Diane Keaton may not be much to look at, but she does not play a major role in this installment. Neither do the cinematography, the score, the high-level tension, etc. ad infinitum, require further laud than has already been heaped upon this film. If you haven't seen it yet, you've probably been living under a rock. Immaculate taste and Latin sophistication await, all ye primitives...";2;4;False tt0068646;paul2001sw-1;21/01/2007;A tale of personal business;9;"Francis Ford Coppola's 'The Godfather' is often voted amongst the best films of all time, but watching it today, it's surprising how conservative it feels. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though, for, it's undoubtedly a piece of film-making of the highest class; but also a slow, stately epic that one could not imagine being made today in quite the same form (the contrast with Scorcese's 'Goodfellas', for example, shows clearly the direction in which film-making has evolved). On the other hand, to be fair to 'The Godfather', one must note how much it has influenced the gangster films that have succeeded it, perhaps making it seem more orthodox than it was at the time of its release (there are even stories that it influenced the real life mafia!). Of course, there's something conservative in the very idea of a gangster story, with its appeal to ideas of tradition and respect, even if the need for a plot means that such tales must inevitably focus on period when the traditional codes are breaking down (and the need for honesty must expose the extent to which they are a sham anyway). 'The Godfather' does both these things, in what is ultimately, behind the superficial subject matter, a story of personal transformation, that of Al Pacino's clean-cut college kid into the true successor of his mafioso father (played by Marlon Brando). The fact that this was arguably Brando's last great, complete, cinematic performance, as well as Pacino's first, has undoubtedly added to the movie's iconic status. Overall, I can't quite agree that this is the best movie ever: for all its sweep, it's a tale of people lacking a certain core of humanity, and therefore lacks the emotional intensity of my very favourite films. But it's still a mighty thing, worthy of its place in the cinematic canon.";2;4;False tt0068646;cariboolean;17/09/2006;Even this movie's goofs were great;10;"We all know what a wonderful movie this is. I saw it on original release in the Netherlands on a weekday afternoon with perhaps 5 people in the theater...when Michael killed the cop and the gangster and walked out right before the intermission, you could hear everyone in the theater gasping from the relief of pent-up breath. The Godfather has one of the great goofs ever shown. In the scene where Sonny beats up Carlo on the street in front of Carlo's bookmaking operation, there's a shot of Sonny swinging a roundhouse right to the left of Carlo's face; you hear the impact on Carlo's face (nice Foley work), and Carlo's head is jerked to his right from that impact. It is all quite persuasive except for one thing: the camera was positioned directly to the side of the fight on a line at zero degrees of angle, and so you can clearly see Sonny's hand miss Carlo's face by at least 4 or 5 inches. A phantom punch! I get a kick out of this every time I watch the film.";2;4;False tt0068646;pete_doyle7;06/04/2006;One of the greatest film ever, not just a good film but inspired follow up classics;10;It is very difficult to talk about this film as a film. It is the beginning of in institution of gangSTAR films. Scarface has it going on but this is beautiful artisty combining actors that were Oscar winners and actors who went on to win Oscars! Al Pachino was incredible in depiction of a dark Amrerican come Sicillian... Marlon Brando was inspiring and I think made it very hard for Bob DeNero to measure up to. James Caan was very good and even the support characters were so well written and acted out it was brilliant! Along with this the music was also very good with the mix of Italian and American Swing. I loved it!;2;4;False tt0068646;tutuandi;06/04/2006;One of those very few movies!;10;"""The Godfather"" - it is incredible what resonance this name has.I am from a poor country where cinematography has just started to become part of our lives and i've always heard of this movie but never until now got to see it.Before viewing it i checked up on it to see what i should expect from it and i was mesmerized by all the comments and the praise it gets.I said to myself i shouldn't get my hopes high because I most probably will be disappointed after i see it.So i acquired it and i started viewing...after 20 minutes i had the ""one of those movies"" feeling.I like to ""live"" every movie i watch and entering in the Corleone family was the most incredible cinematic experience i have ever had.It is one of those movies that you just can't get your mind off even after 2 weeks since you've seen it...you keep reminding the characters and the sets and everything and you blend in creating scenarios in your head and feel the drama.The music is superb and every time i hear it i get chills up my spine and begin day dreaming.I am afraid to watch it again because maybe i will get the impression it's not that great but it will happen soon i think and i will relive it though first time you watch it you get the most shocking experience you can get.This is one of the few movies that will always remain in my head and that my soul will hang on to in the desperate wish that I will actually live for real an experience like this ( my intellect knows it will never happen but you just can't control these strong feelings).";2;4;False tt0068646;jb993681;15/02/2006;Outstanding first part of the gangster epic that focuses on the life of the mafia from the perspective of the family.;10;This movie is outstanding for a great number of reasons. Not only is the film aesthetically pleasing but the grandiose storytelling at work is a must see for any film enthusiast.

The real success of this film is the much discussed, understated performance from Al Pacino. It is ironic that an actor who is famous in contemporary cinema for his over the top performances in 'Heat'(When I think of a woman's ass..) and 'Devil's Advocate (insert any line here) delivered one of the finest understated performances in cinema history. Another actor could have over played the part and rotted what has to be seen as the films core. Where Pacino is the core, admirable support surrounds him, with brother Sonny (James Caan was never better) and father Don Vito (Marlon Brando) played lovingly and sympathetically. Brando excels in his death sequence playing it with real heart and also displaying the frailty of a former 'tough guy'.

Although labelled as a masculine film, the film heralds to great supporting performances from Diane Keaton and Talia Shire. The chemistry between Diane Keaton and Al Pacino in the opening wedding scene is a rare thing and the Documentary featured on the DVD allows us to see more of this. Any couple not gripped by the inner turmoil of the male/female relationships in this film must have hearts made of stone.

Finally, my favourite aspect of the film is the work of Walter Murch. This is evident in the café sequence where Murch added the sound of the train to the soundtrack. Cinema has never been so tense.

The only way that anyone can realise the true power of what is the finest single achievement in cinema is by watching it themselves. And remember without the first film, the second would never have existed.;2;4;True tt0068646;rpan;16/10/2005;all movies should be made like this one;10;Best movie in my category. Brando's acting is magnitudes above any best actors in Hollywood and in any other world theaters. I suspect Brando's brilliance is unmatched by anyone before and (I suspect) after him. For example, Pacino is superb but still Brando is head and shoulders above Pacino. I just love Brando's acting, he simply grabs you and take you to anywhere the movie wants you to.

But a good movie is not only a good actor. The whole cast, the plot, the dialogs, the scenes and last but not least the director - Coppola are all near perfect. I thank GOD for bringing such talent to Hollywood as Brando and Coppola. Al Pacino is good but under Brando's brilliance his color did fade away a bit.

The supporting actor - Robert Duval is also a superb actor. Even in this cold and bloody killing movie he brings warmth of family friendship, loyalty and cool-headedness to the audience and making this movie this much more gripping.

The weight of a first-class movie is apparent starting from the first few scenes of the movie and lasted throughout the movie. Coppola knows how to grab audiences and move them up and down through the plot of the movie - a true master.

It is hard to compare Coppola with Lucas. They are both wonderful directors of different classes of movies. But I believe Coppola can better bring depth and intricate emotions to audience than Luca. This makes him a more memorable director even after we all pass on.;2;4;False tt0068646;rogierr;31/07/2001;Neither the best film ever, nor my favourite: the greatest crime flick it is;;Definitely not the greatest movie of all time, but the greatest crime movie it could be. Not only because of the very good and epic story (Mario Puzo), but also because of the aesthetics and fabulous cinematography by Gordon Willis (Annie Hall, Klute). Not to mention the absolutely fantastic cast. It's is impressive that Marlon Brando played the completely different part he did the same year in Bertolucci's 'Ultimo tango a Parigi'. I think it is a pity Sterling Hayden (The Killing, Dr. Strangelove, Asphalt Jungle) had such small part in this nine-hour trilogy.

One of the most distinctive elements of this great crime movie is the music, which was already recognizable in 'Rocco e i suoi fratelli' (Visconti, 1960) and was more or less recycled for this film by Nino Rota (Amarcord, Obsession, Boccaccio '70).

10 points out of 10 :-);2;4;False tt0068646;Yoda-21;02/12/1998;a movie beyond judgement;10;Let me start not with high praise, which is a regular sentence spoken on this movie. It is a motion-picture to discuss and yes there are elements in it that are extremely ambivalent. In the context of acting, directing and all the other formal aspects this is an exceptional achievement. I cannot think of too many others that can claim to have as polished dialogue and yet believable actors. But nevertheless the aspect of presenting a family-tragedy within a mafia-clan is at least to be consumed with your mind switched on. Coppola doesn't bother to present obvious critical points of view, but he presents the members of the Corleone-Clan as business-men. They react on their surroundings in the way it is necessary and to protect their family they don't bother to kill dozens of people. It is the contrast between the loving father and cold-blooded head of the clan, which attracts so many people to Brando's performance. He is so life-like on the one hand and yet manages to mute the questionable traits of character that would paint Don Vito as a criminal. On the whole it can be said that this is still a movie which should polarize audiences, not least due to the growing influence of mafia like structures in many poor countries.;2;4;False tt0068646;eibon09;13/02/2001;Modern Gangster Classic;;The Godfather(1972) helped resurrect a low budget genre known as the gangster genre and turned it into a major film genre for the next two decades. Many people found a new way in speaking to each other by watching this film. In fact many members of organized crime in the USA began to pattern themselves right after the characters in the film. The gangster genre would become one of the most popular genres to come out of Hollywood since the end of Film Noir in 1958.

The film deals more with the joys and sorrows of an mafia family then with what they do for a living. You can identify with many characters from the film because many people also go through almost similar problems in life. Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo contribute to give some excellent story telling visually. Marlon Brando gives a very good performance as the head of the family, Vito Corleone.

There are many memorable moments in this film. One, the Wedding scene at the beginning of the movie. Two, the Sollozzo-McCluskey murder sequence. Finally, the death of Vito Corleone.

The Godfather's success would spawn many classic gangster flicks including Mean Streets(1973), The Godfather Part 2(1974), Once Upon a Time in America(1984), Goodfellas(1990), and Donnie Brasco(1997). Also influences filmmakers ranging from Martin Scorsese to Abel Ferrara and John Woo to Takeshi Kitano. Sergio Leone was at one point offered to direct The Godfather(1972) but turned it down. I believe that The Godfather(1972) would be just as good if in the hands of a genius like Sergio Leone.

Al Pacino gives a terrific performance as the youngest son, Michael. James Caan gives the best performance of the film despite his role as a supporting actor. Frank Sinatara was considered for the role of Johnny the singer but didn't get it because the role was too close to home for the famed singer. Robert Duvall is outstanding as the lawyer for the Corleone family, Tom Hagan;2;4;False tt0068646;sanjaymondal-82732;29/10/2020;What a movie....awesome.;9;Following the helicopter attack, Vincent is adamant on killing Joey Zasa in retaliation for the massacre, but Michael says no as he wants to figure out who really gave the order.

Michael suffers a stroke and is incapacitated as Vincent decides to go after Zasa with the approval of Connie Corleone.

Vincent and cohorts surprise Zasa and his henchman at an Italian-American street parade. Vincent disguises himself as an equestrian police officer, tracks Zasa down and shoots him in the back. Michael scolds Vincent as his relationship with Mary deepens.

It is important in showing Vincent's increasingly important role in family affairs before Michael ultimately designates him Don Vincent.;0;0;True tt0068646;teckdarshan;29/10/2020;It is a strange comment to make about a film set inside a prison,;7;"Interesting that although the hero of the film is the convicted former banker Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins), the action is never seen from his point of view. The film's opening scene shows him being given two life sentences for the murder of his wife and her lover, and then we move, permanently, to a point of view representing the prison population and particularly the lifer Ellis 'Red' Redding (Morgan Freeman). It is his voice remembering the first time he saw Andy (""looked like a stiff breeze would blow him over""), and predicting, wrongly, that he wouldn't make it in prison.";0;0;False tt0068646;HealthPandora;29/10/2020;Nice;9;Nice program. you can see this program. its very nice.;0;0;True tt0068646;jokerpossum;27/10/2020;Greatest mafia/family film ever;10;This movie is incredible. It's the perfect story of family combined with the mafia. This is an amazing story of how power can corrupt and change people, and perfectly blends a balance of family into the mafia life. This movie truly shows the passage of time from the old ways of Vito corleone to the present day ways that do not suit him, and overall help mold the story and craft a beautiful and incredible movie that is one that everyone should see.;0;0;False tt0068646;veebeemedia;27/10/2020;Must Watch Movie;8;In this lockdown. this is the first movie i watched. a Must watch movie for all those who like something exciting. the power, Mind and Decision of Godfather. Mind blowing movie.;0;0;False tt0068646;abbascesar;27/10/2020;great;9;This movie is strong, good script, great casting, excellent acting, and over the top directing. It is hard to fine a movie done this well, it is 29 years old and has aged well. Even if the viewer does not like mafia type of movies, he or she will watch the entire film, the audiences is glued to what will happen next as the film progresses. Its about, family, loyalty, greed, relationships, and real life. This is a great mix, and the artistic style make the film memorable.;0;0;True tt0068646;OfficialGooglyFlix;27/10/2020;Good;9;This Content is Nice This Content is Nice This Content is Nice This Content is Nice This Content is Nice This Content is Nice;0;0;False tt0068646;pedrosoler-38639;25/10/2020;My favorite movie ever;10;"Think about this for one moment, ¿what makes a movie a good one?, ¿the performances?, ¿the cinematography?, ¿the script?, ¿the production?, ¿the style?, ¿the concept? ¿or all of them together?. ""The Godfather"", besides having all of this concepts, it has pasion and beauty. Every single scene is beautifully shotted and composed, this movie it´s used as an example of what is cinema. Cinema, it´s beauty or uglyness, cinema makes you feel something. I cried and laughed with this one. Since I was a kid, my dad rolled me this masterpiece and showed me how to appreciate it , not just ""The Godfather"", but every single piece of cinema I´ve watched. This movie taught me how to appreciate a film, it means a lot for me. Anyways, let´s leave my opinion for a moment and talk about why you should watch movie. First of all, the cast is amazing, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, John Cazale, James Caan, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall and more. Al Pacino, makes a perfect perfomance and Marlon Brand performs his best role in his entire career. The director, Francis Ford Coppola, knows everything about cinema, I learned so much watching his movies, he doesn´t try hard in putting his style on, he just puts on his style and makes it happen with his absolute genius mind. The script is full of famous and memorable lines, Mario Puzo mixes poetry with crime into a family melodrama, every character is more than well written. The movie grabs you and takes you into the screen, I watched it so many times that I found Vito as someone of the famil, imagine the level of writting. ""The Godfather"" is my favorite movie of all time, I hope if you haven´t watched it, please do. Thank you.";0;0;False tt0068646;isidroguzman;25/10/2020;best mafia movie;10;Overall the acting for everyone in this movie were really good tbh. would recomend this movie if yall havent watched it;0;0;False tt0068646;Aparicio777;25/10/2020;Part 1;7;Don't get me wrong, it was good, a pretty damn good film. But I read the book before I saw this film so I felt like the audience got skimped out on a lot of great and important details. And I'm sorry to say but Brando did not give The Don the justice he deserved. In the book The Don is beyond words. And Brando was simply excellent.

Overall though I really dug it, I'm excited to see part 2;0;0;False tt0068646;pinnara;25/10/2020;Love move;10;Love you I really like this movie. Get the concept of the good and the bad;0;0;True tt0068646;santicevasco;23/10/2020;A MUST WATCH;10;If you haven't seen this movie and you love Filmmaking... something is wrong.;0;0;False tt0068646;faisal-international;22/10/2020;Must Watch;8;I just love this movie although the its bit slow. Every character in the movie were so real. You MUST watch it at least once.;0;0;False tt0068646;FarhadBigdeloo000;21/10/2020;masterpiece;10;The godfather trilogy is best movie of all time.everything in godfather is perfect. from directing to acting and soundtrack and everythig...;0;0;False tt0068646;alexandru_buliga;19/10/2020;Masterpiece;10;This film is a masterpiece from a cinematic point of view!;0;0;False tt0068646;alitanba;16/10/2020;Best in genre;10;Not the best movie i ever seem but in My top 3 this movie dosent have a Hero or epic sence or...... Its just Show us Family life. Family matters (and some curismatic Character) and thats What i like abuot of this movie. I just can say. it was GREAT;0;0;False tt0068646;EviArgyriou;15/10/2020;Masterpiece;9;Masterpiece Brilliant acting Great storytelling Inspiration to all generations;0;0;False tt0068646;leomacaulay;15/10/2020;Good film please watch it;10;Please watch this film, it's perfect and Marlon Brando has probably the best acting performance ever;0;0;False tt0068646;benjamincepeda;15/10/2020;One of the best films ever;9;Yes. One of the best. But not the best. The film is so good, Marlon Brando is incredible, Al Pacino too. The history is perfect. Why I rate 9 and not 10? Because sometimes you don't know whats happening. You don't know who is who. But the film is one of the best in the history. I hope that The Godfather II to be better. If you haven't watched it, watch it.;0;0;False tt0068646;abinaashsharrma;13/10/2020;Masterpiece;10;One of the best films of all time, an absolute masterpiece.;0;0;True tt0068646;hakuyubaba;13/10/2020;SUCH A BADASS MOVIE!!;10;I REALLY LIKE IT SO MUCH. ITS JUST BEAUTIFULLY ACTING AND STORY. GODFATHER REALLY GIMME SUCH A GOOSBUMPS WHILE YOU GUYS WATCHING IT!;0;0;False tt0068646;aljabman;11/10/2020;The mafia film that started it all;10;I've just recently seen The Godfather and it's like eating gum with Italian flavors! There so much culture booming from here to there the wedding party is perfect start and so is the line of daughter being taken advantage as sad as that line was. The crime in this film is for most a epic movie there's guns murder and love. The scene where the narcotics team are getting messed up and they've chose to hurt each other is amazing seeing this people say there not gonna be like the dad and slowly turn evil is something of a masterpiece. This is a great film a master piece.;0;0;False tt0068646;Lisdorado;11/10/2020;(I think);10;Godfather of the movies.. That movie is my favourite mafia movie so thats normal because it needs be like that i don't like long movies but that was different for me.;0;0;False tt0068646;vaoloto188;10/10/2020;The film is for leaders;9;I believe that anyone standing in a high or low position in society should watch this film. It reflects many aspects and carries many different meanings, especially the way of living and treating people with each other.;0;0;False tt0068646;femaleloveu5;09/10/2020;ultimate awesome movie;10;This isn't fair a delightfully created hoodlum film. Or an exceptional family representation, for that matter. An astounding period piece. A character think about. A lesson in filmmaking and an motivation to eras of on-screen characters, chiefs, screenwriters and makers. For me, this can be more: this can be the authoritative film. 10 stars out of 10.;0;0;False tt0068646;bizflycdn;02/10/2020;best filmv;9;Film qua hay. best film. lam toi nho ve tuoi tho cua minh. film nay gan lien voi tuoi tho du doi cua toi;0;0;True tt0068646;monass-45627;01/10/2020;The best ever;10;The best movie ever made in my opinion, a pure classic with legendary actors in it! Must watch if you haven't.;0;0;False tt0068646;SadraSj;30/09/2020;Masterpiece;10;If you haven't watched it yet, go and watch it now.;0;0;False tt0068646;llgreco-78340;30/09/2020;Excellent;10;If this is on the TV I am always compelled to watch this. Amazing cast and characters. It's one of those films that just catches you and you have to watch the whole movie again. One of the greatest.;0;0;False tt0068646;radoslav_bogdanov;30/09/2020;Forever classic;10;A movie that has been watch through different generations and still finding a place among the best. A true classic that will always be interesting to watch again.;0;0;False tt0068646;sahabatcash;29/09/2020;Perfect;10;Nice movie to watch, you guys have to watch this, its a great movie. you guys will really enjoyed this movie like me.. belive me, you need to watch this.;0;0;False tt0068646;EricaCharleston;29/09/2020;This movie was exceptional;8;I loved this movie and to this day this movie still has recognition.;0;0;False tt0068646;joshtjj;28/09/2020;An overrated masterpiece;9;While certainly a little overrated, the Godfather still holds up as an amazing movie with some of the most iconic characters, moments and lines in all of film. The story is a crime drama that follows the leader of a massive crime family passing the torch to his youngest and most reluctant son. The genius and appeal of the story not only lies in its well executed structure and masterful dialogue, but also the realism and accuracy with which it tells a story about the mafia. However the film would be nothing without the characters and the actors that play them. Al Pachino is indeed fantastic in the film, and Robert Duvall is also good, but the film belongs to Marlon Brando. His performance as Vito Corleone is legendary and the character has become one of the best and most loved in all of fiction. This is an absolute masterpiece, though not quite the greatest of all time, and will remain a huge part of film history forever.;0;0;False tt0068646;Dattathreya-0309;28/09/2020;super movie;9;One of the best movie ever i watched.dont miss it, if anyone missed this watch it on amazon prime.;0;0;False tt0068646;bizflyserver;25/09/2020;bo phim cua thoi gian;8;Xem di xem lai den hon 10 nam roi ma bo phim nay van cu cuon hut su tap trung phim nhu ngay dau moi xem. Good film;0;0;False tt0068646;Vanescafe_20;20/09/2020;Better and Better;10;Each time I watch this I fall deeper in love. Brilliant.;0;0;False tt0068646;hlimifaical;20/09/2020;best movie;10;A very beautiful film which will remain in the memory of all cinephiles;0;0;True tt0068646;harshabale;18/09/2020;Powerful film with Powerful content;9;This cinema is a combination of all the unique talent met at one palce. The film is perfectly driven to its plot and play. Every scene is the best in this film. Without hesitation I can say this is the best Drama that I've seen to date.;0;0;False tt0068646;adambarta;17/09/2020;Loooking for something?;9;Like gangsta,mafia,and drama? This is for you! Its a great movie and i thing the best movie of mafia at all!

So watch it or i will make you an offer you can't refuse;0;0;False tt0068646;StstaMan007;17/09/2020;Bring Back 70s movies.;10;With the complete and total abscence of excessive computer effects, Godfather is impeccable on storyline, character development, and acting. No excessive violence. No excessive swearing. Simple how every movie should be.;0;0;False tt0068646;zodiacthekillercop;15/09/2020;Nice;10;As per my exprience this movie is very nice. hope u r like it !;0;0;False tt0068646;advaitkamthekar;14/09/2020;A staggering masterpiece;10;"The godfather is a staggering piece of art. It's flawless and mind blowing. It's a magnificent portrait of organised crime with marvellous performances. This movie was way ahead of its time . Basically when it came to creating Italian-American crime dramas , the 1900's was the perfect time. That era had such a charisma that these types of movies just feel so...perfect. It's a very serious movie which demands your attention at certain times. There's no action, no chills giving music rather jazz, no comedy just a serious movie about gangs and crime families that goes on for 3 hours. Not most people may like that but If you are more into dialogues and screenplay and can understand the true intensity and purpose of such films...you'll love it like I do. The actors don't feel the actors themselves at all , they feel the characters they are playing. Such a brilliant set of cast and chilling performances by both Marlon Brando and Al Pacino .This type of story telling and scriptwriting cannot be seen nowadays. It's truly an amazing period piece. ""This movie is an offer you can't refuse"" If you are gonna watch it then make sure that you watch it in one go cause the rhythm of such movie should not be broken. 10/10 Masterpiece!👍🏻✌🏼";0;0;False tt0068646;iwoegill;12/09/2020;The first installment of a perfect trilogy;10;The Godfather is masterpiece in every way the movie is written really well and even if it's 2h and 50m long i feel like it's only an hour long. The acting is also amazing by all the actors Marlon Brando, Al Pacino and James Caan, the cinematography is amazing, the direction is amazing and the movie itself is a masterpiece laying on my number 1 spot for favourite film. (I hope you found this review helpful and I recommend it unless you are afraid of blood);0;0;False tt0068646;BK8Asia;09/09/2020;For Me is a nice movie;10;"Marlon Brando, who plays the Godfather as an insightful, tough elderly person, really has the character lead in the film; Al Pacino, with a splendidly evolved presentation as Michael, is the lead. In any case, Brando's exhibition is a dexterous expendable, despite the fact that it earned him an Academy Award for best entertainer.";0;0;False tt0068646;troberson35;09/09/2020;Just wow;10;One of the great American Classics. Expresses what family is all about. Well thought out and ambitious. Each scene is amazing and filled with drama.;0;0;False tt0068646;abdulrahman-ot;07/09/2020;the best ever;10;In some where while watching you will understand or may like the gang work;0;0;False tt0068646;maricvta;06/09/2020;Must watch;10;It's the 1st out of 3 movies. If you ask me, you must watch all of them. As a gangster moive, and appart from this genre, it is one of the best movies I have ever watched.;0;0;False tt0068646;pabanor;05/09/2020;The Most Epic Gangster Movie of All Times.;10;An Amazing and Timeless Movie where the artistry in each scene is superb, unique and full of Astonishing Talented Acting.;0;0;False tt0068646;valentineclaraVC;04/09/2020;Just 2 words!!!;10;Piece of Art!!! Simply amazing movie , every person needs to see this, it teaches you many things in life, gives you inteligence and experience the movie like you've been there and came across all of those !! simply breath taking!;0;0;False tt0068646;gay_bolg;02/09/2020;good aCTORS;9;IL IKE AL APchino's g oo D A C TIN

I will ALSO re commend the RECNE T FIil with A BNOUNCH of IRSH PEople, WHICH he STARRED aASSJIMMY hoFFA;0;0;False tt0068646;iammahmoudbadawy;25/08/2020;A way to deal with life;;I consider this masterpiece with all the life issues and attitudes within it is a way to understand and deal with life but you have to look with more attention.;0;0;False tt0068646;bradleyunique;25/08/2020;classic;;Great movie will forever be a classic. alot of violence so make sure the kids arent around unless you want to ruin there little brains over all great movie enjoyed my time watching had me screaming the whole time;0;0;False tt0068646;Viz_DeadTalkLive;18/08/2020;My Favorite Movie of all Time!;10;Brando, Paccino, James Caan, Robert Duvall. What an ensemble of talent. And of course Francis Ford Coppola.;0;0;False tt0068646;jayghoshjan;18/08/2020;Above any comparison;10;"Strangling in between the golden age of hollywood and new hollywood , a watershed moment in cinematic history . Watch this to truly know what "" film "" is . And watch it if you like paintings , as every frame in the movie is like a painting . And watch it countless times for countless reasons .";0;0;False tt0068646;jtprint;17/08/2020;The Godfather review;9;"It's a very good movie, it's about family interests, family mafia, it could be said that a power struggle as well, there were scenes that really shocked me, the movie takes as well really unexpected directions, the perfomances were also very good, both Marlon Brando, Al Pacino and the other supporting actors.

The different camera angles that were used in the scenes, the only thing for which i put one point less, it's because of the way the mafia works, like a monopoly and some things that the movie want you to asume, that three years passed, for example, like: ""wait, hold on, what happened here?, and those things.";0;0;True tt0068646;skamranakmal;17/08/2020;No other movie can top this masterpiece;10;This is the maximum level, to which a cinema can ever reach. Undoubtedly the greatest movie ever made.;0;0;False tt0068646;Dynamic_Pouya;17/08/2020;1 of top movies;9;One of the top movies... i recommend to watch it.....think deeper, see deeper, seek deeper levels of the movie;0;0;False tt0068646;valentinionut;13/08/2020;beyond;10;I find this movie compelling and though crime is present in it, you can feel it is not an obscene ... scene. because it is art. i lked Duvall and Brando more. I like it lets us be smart and ,,see,, the traitors. the senes from Italy are amazing.;0;0;False tt0068646;rosalind-fuller-toronto-ex-dell;13/08/2020;Classic;;This movie make me happy. I like the performances, the story and the references of the characters.;0;0;False tt0068646;ugefilms-554-606382;11/08/2020;Marvelous;10;Marvelous, no words. The director, the cinematography were perfect. The best film.;0;0;False tt0068646;mohammadmsj;11/08/2020;simply a piece of Art;10;One of the best if not the best movie ever amazing piece of art;0;0;False tt0068646;tatanisha-browne;11/08/2020;"It really is ""The Best Movie Ever Made""";10;"I just recently got into this movie this year. I've never been able to sit down and pay attention for 3 hours. But when I finally did, OMG I'm mad at myself for not giving it a chance. Like another reviewer said, you see something new every time you watch it. I could watch this movie every day. I appreciate the snapshot into a world that I will never live in. The plot is rich and all of the characters are very well developed.

Michael Corleone actually haunts my thoughts sometimes. I felt genuine fear on the scene at the end where he talks to Carlo, just before ""sending him to Vegas"".

Marlon Brandon showed us that Vito Corleone, as ruthless as he is, was very human and vulnerable. I think my favorite part is when he dies. There is no more awesome way to go...enjoying your twilight years playing with the grandbaby. His death had nothing to do with mafia life. He just passes from natural causes like a regular human being.

I could say so much more but I dont want this to be a long review. I've heard for years the The Godfather was ""the best movie ever made"" and I have to agree. I rarely give a movie a perfect 10, but this one is genius on every level.";0;0;True tt0068646;igordanielpais;10/08/2020;Love this show, amazing, amazing;10;Love this show my god! It was amazing, amazing amazingamazingamazing;0;0;True tt0068646;nimazarei-02968;09/08/2020;Amazing;10;A movie that I can watch a hundred times and not get bored.;0;0;False tt0068646;sahpaio;08/08/2020;Yes, this movie is all that and beyond;10;The Godfather is a complicated film, with a really intricate storyline. And it never stops, or slows itself for explanations. This movie just trust that the person watching is smart enough to understand all the non verbal cues. And you see yourself so emocionally invested in the characters and the story itself... It's brilliant.;0;0;False tt0068646;lavaside-60237;08/08/2020;Should have left it alone.;10;"This movie is a masterpiece. They should have left it alone. Everyone talks bad about the 3rd; but the 2nd was to the 1st, what the 3rd was to the 2nd.";0;0;False tt0068646;vittoriocosanostra;07/08/2020;The Godfather (1972) is the Godfather of the films!;10;Good movie. I thought it was cool! In addition to having a lot of action, there is a lot of drama. The Godfather is the best movie ever, Michael Kyle said. In my opinion it is the best.;0;0;False tt0068646;makoridylan;06/08/2020;Loved this movie;7;Its just nice watch it you wont regret it. Loved every part of this movie;0;0;False tt0068646;llamalloydcho;06/08/2020;An Iconic film;10;This movie is flawless, it has amazing acting, powerful dialogs and great cinematography. I watches this today and I wish I watched it wat earlier;0;0;False tt0068646;tapchilaixe;06/08/2020;Best movie ever!!;10;In my opinion, this is definitely the greatest movie ever made!;0;0;False tt0068646;leslieu-93970;05/08/2020;love this;9;Love it for all types of reason. it feel like you are actually in the scene.;0;0;False tt0068646;animtakitahamid;24/07/2020;Awesome;;The great movie i have ever seen. Al Pacino acting was great.;0;0;False tt0068646;ulusoyaltay;24/07/2020;Best one!;9;Most beautiful movie in my watchlist. Everybody should watch this.;0;0;False tt0068646;naturalcalmcanada;21/07/2020;Awesome;9;One of the best of all time. The Godfather brings suspense, deep characters and a great plot.;0;0;False tt0068646;justinsims-91100;20/07/2020;Godfather Series;9;This was a great beginning to a timeless film. A master piece in and ahead of its time.;0;0;False tt0068646;forchoonfilms;20/07/2020;Favorite Movie;10;Best gangster Movie ever.. One of the best movie of all time. really love his acting.;0;0;False tt0068646;AzgotheDefiler;19/07/2020;Different for That Time;10;For years I ignored this movie thinking it might be too overrated and couldn't sit through such a long film . The movie is bit slow paced but has some fast paced sequences . Michael Corloene and Tom are my favorite characters . The climax was just amazing . Every actor did an amazing job . Must watch;0;0;False tt0068646;UdanaNandun;18/07/2020;Legendary movie;10;One of best movie i have ever watched. I didn't see any movie theme like god father present days;0;0;False tt0068646;kemguoyao;18/07/2020;Yes, Very good;10;Yes, I Like it, Very good!!! a movie that I can watch all day, so awesome;0;0;True tt0068646;huzaifajoyia;16/07/2020;Awesome;10;Best movie ever, watched many times but still it is the best movie watched ever;0;0;False tt0068646;clauspacheco;15/07/2020;The best movie all;10;This film is excellent, everything in it works in perfect harmony, performances, soundtrack, editing, direction, I started to love cinema because of it.;0;0;False tt0068646;clauspacheco;15/07/2020;The best movie of all time;10;This film is excellent, everything in it works in perfect harmony, performances, soundtrack, editing, direction, I started to love cinema because of it.;0;0;False tt0068646;armaansm;13/07/2020;Innovative movie of Gangster Genre;10;"""Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."" ""A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a good man."" ""Never let anyone know what you are thinking""

These overwhelming quotes are the most discussing insights of this popular gangster trilogy- The Godfather. The first installment released in 1972 and gained both commercial and critical acclaims.

The first part revolves around the godfather Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) and how he deals with his competitors at NY city. At the same time, he is too caring about his family. He wants to involve his younger son Micael Corleone (Al Pacino), who just returns from World War 2. He has a faith on his younger son than his two elder sons. He faces different troubles from his anti groups lead by Solozzo, to whom Vito refused to do narcotic business. Vito thinks that narcotics would harm the society a lot. And, he aspires to stop Solozzo by sending his men and later his elder son Sonny. But it was Michael, who successfully defeats in battles with the help of Clemenza (Richard Castellano), who is a caporegime and the godfather of Sonny. In a battle with the opponents, Vito losses his elder son Sonny. Also, in Sicily, Michael meets and marries Apollonia, but a car bomb intended for him takes her life. Devastated by Sonny's death and realizing that the Tattaglias are controlled by the now-dominant don, Barzini, Vito attempts to end the feud. He assures the Five Families that he will withdraw his opposition to their heroin business and forgo avenging Sonny's murder. His safety guaranteed, Michael returns home to enter the family business and marry Kay, promising her that the business will be legitimate within five years. Kay gives birth to two children by the early 1950s. With his father nearing the end of his life and Fredo too weak, Michael takes the family reins.

The performance of Marlon Brando and Al Pacino was quite remarkable and the accolades they received proved this.

In the 30th Golden Globe Award, the film had won the categories for: Best Screenplay, Best Director, Best Actor - Drama, Best Original Score, and Best Picture - Drama out of 7 nominations. In the 45th Academy Award (Oscar), the film had nominated in 11 categories,and out of them, it won three of the Academy Awards: Best Actor, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Picture. The interesting fact is that, Marlon Brando refused to take the Oscar for raising his voice against the poor treatment of American Indians by the film industry who have virtually no representation in the film industry and were primarily used as extras";0;0;False tt0068646;seppewillemsens;12/07/2020;A+++;10;Very good movie, TONY MONTANA MF4ERS ratatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatatata;0;0;False tt0068646;adriancampos-95424;12/07/2020;It is The Godfather. What can I say?;10;From Freddo, to Vito and Michael, the acting in this movie is too good, you forget you're watching one. Every single character in this movie is an icon. The score is also great and sets a very chilling atmosphere. The experience from watching this movie is like none other. It is very engaging and I can easily say it is one of the best films I've ever seen. Yes. I say film now because it sounds more passionate than movie. If you haven't seen this film don't wait. This and Part 2 will be one of your all time favorites. Part 2 is boring if you haven't seen Part 1 (I made that mistake because of my college film professor). But once you watch part 1, Part 2 is equally good and both are top 5 films of all time.;0;0;False tt0068646;elenasomerhalder;12/07/2020;It's just great.;10;This movie is absolutely worth watching. I loved everything about it. Godfather and his son Michael made this movie so cool.;0;0;False tt0068646;Andy_Ashton;11/07/2020;One of the Greatest Movies of all time!;10;Godfather is truly an iconic movie and one of Marlon Brando's most epic performances as an Actor. This movie represents, what it's like to be truly involved in the Italian Mafia, traditional family values, loyalty and most importantly to honor your word. Regardless of the years that go by, the Godfather will always remain as one of those movies, that will keep you on the edge of your seat.;0;0;False tt0068646;maliksulemalien;10/07/2020;Masterclass;9;The 70s masterclass was Super influential and still a masterpiece of classic films.;0;0;False tt0068646;cpaniccia;09/07/2020;The Godfather of all Gangster Movies;10;The movie delivers from scene one. Looking into the compelling underbelly of the criminal world know as the Mob, it shows the growth of an empire. The Holy Grail of Gangster Movies upon which all others are compared.;0;0;False tt0068646;sharonbinyaminov;08/07/2020;classic;10;A must watch classic. Amazing character development. Legendary soundtrack. This movie can only receive 10/10. Everyone who loves watching movies, I recommend this movie to them.;0;0;False tt0068646;surreygal;07/07/2020;Best film;10;"In my opinion ""The Godfather"" is, in every way, the best film ever made.";0;0;False tt0068646;kulinichnick;07/07/2020;Now this is a great story telling movie!;10;One of my favorites of all time. Very good acting, story, filmography! And to think that I was filmed so long ago is just insane. absolutely love this trilogy!;0;0;False tt0068646;mithchayane;05/07/2020;For me, big deal;10;This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10. Love it really love;0;0;False tt0068646;SaintJon92;05/07/2020;Ok. It is a GOOD film.;10;I did not know how good it was until I saw it not so long ago.

Coming back and forth (I am not one to write that much, I am very sorry) with the movie, one of the things which I felt in loved was the Soundtrack and the characters. Our young Al Pacino has at his shoulders such a big role and it is amazing how he makes a good transformation of the character. Marlon Brando, not just only as a actor but his persona makes goosebumps as he is in the room. Someone clearly to respect and admire.

The history looks simple enough but treasures such many things that make you enjoy every minute of it.

It is not for everyone, I got to admit it, It makes me sad in a way to know SO MANY people that have no make it 'till the end of the film.;0;0;False tt0068646;pablodoncic;05/07/2020;The greatest movie of all time;;Nothing really can be said about these movie... it's truly the best of all time;0;0;False tt0068646;huskiegaming;04/07/2020;The best movie ever made!!!!!!;10;I love everything about this movie. The actors, the plot, and the cinematography.;0;0;False tt0068646;zawad360;04/07/2020;One of the best, if not the best film of the genre;10;This film is artistic in it's own way, the depiction is perfection, the acting and the class the actors bring- breaks the ice in difficult situation. Brando was top notch in playing his role,. Also, Michael, from being a silent and shy person who stayed in the shadow, made his presence known in a wholesome way

Just watch it, if you haven't already. You won't be disappointed.;0;0;True tt0068646;narenjbm;04/07/2020;Art of portrait;10;America, American, Americans, American italian,american italian don,american italian don of crimes, american italian don of organized crimes with a spectacular screenplay and wonderful portait of characters in 1970's ,I saw that film in 2019 it's mesmerizing.;0;0;False tt0068646;underspell;29/06/2020;they don't make them like this anymore;10;Everything you want a film to be, this is it. Amazing character(s) development and story that keeps you interested. All the actors seemed to be born to play these characters, especially Brando and Pacino who are at their finest.;0;0;False tt0068646;rotanikolao;23/06/2020;One of the best movies ever made;10;Every actors' performance was great! The plot was intriguing and the cinematography was fantastic.;0;0;False tt0068646;martinpersson97;23/06/2020;A masterful adaptation that turned into one of the best movies of all time;9;This film, based on the legendary book by author Mario Puzo, is a prime example of movie making and the potential of Hollywood-flicks.

Helmed by the fantastic Francis Ford Coppola, who of course has an impressive legacy to account for in terms of all of his works - it followed the novel closely, but, like any good adaptation, made it into its own thing rather than an exact retreading. We are given an insight into the lives of the Siccilian mob in America during the post-ww2 area through the Corelone family, its most notable members being the leads played by Al Pacino and his father Marlon Brando. The Oscars received were of course completely justified, Brando, being at his peak during the 50s and 60s, sells it in this one and gives the performance of a life time. Don Vito Corleone stands as one of the most iconic movie characters of all time.

Pacino, though at his height in the sequel, is still fantastic in this one, playing a man who is tragically dragged into a life destined for him that he never wanted.

The cinematography is fantastic, and so is the writing - it is a sophisticated, yet very violent and melachonical story that does not shy away from ruthlesness, one of the best scenes being towards the end of the third act, which I will not spoil here.

It stands as one of the highest rated movies on IMDb's 250 list of best movies of all time, which is not an overstatement in any way. Coppola made movie history with this story, and the best (and worst) was yet to come with the movie's sequels, but more of that later...;0;0;False tt0068646;agvg-15110;22/06/2020;Masterpiece;10;The best movie in the history in my opinion. Is great, emocional and with excellent performances of Marlon Brando and Al Pacino. The final is epic too.;0;0;False tt0068646;perrythomaas;22/06/2020;Copy From Another But Some Feelings;10;One of the best films of all time, an absolute masterpiece. The Godfather is arguably the best gangster drama as well as setting the standard for cinema.;0;0;False tt0068646;abu_zraig;20/06/2020;#1 In History;10;Actually its not a review... it's a humble request, or maybe a favor. Please watch this movie. It's all you can ask for in a movie. 10/10

#ForzaMilan SZ;0;0;False tt0068646;z-12781;16/06/2020;The Godfather;10;The Godfather's discussion of religion looms large, with the boundaries of good and evil blurred by grace, warmth, kindness and family. The godfather upends the conventional wisdom about the gangster. Instead of being a bully, the gangster can be gentle and gentle. The director orchestrates mass assassinations and deftly USES a cross-montage of revenge. When Marlon Brando spoke in the calmest of voices that he would make an offer he could not refuse, the violence of the underworld was maximized and great aesthetic tension was generated.;0;0;False tt0068646;mohammadfahim-44749;15/06/2020;A classic crime movie;10;This movie has really aged well . I'd watched it for the first time in 2010 ,38 years since it was filmed and i loved it . The movie has a lot of characters and it'll be hard to remember all of them so to get the real gist of the movie you have to rewatch a couple of time . But it's worth it . It's one of the best movies ever made in my opinion .;0;0;False tt0068646;djgriffiths-76691;15/06/2020;An overwhelming journey;10;I don't know how this movie is not #1 in top movies. Brilliant storyline, writing, top notch acting from each actor, unbelievable direction and surreal music. I don't think any film will ever come near this movie. This is the definition of perfection. If not for some stupid people in 2008 who don't have the slightest idea what movies are all about, this would've been still in #1.;0;0;False tt0068646;pushprajkumar-35076;14/06/2020;best movie;9;"Tell me a movie that is more famous than this. Tell me a movie that has had more parodies spinned off its storyline than this. Tell me one movie that has been as quoted as a much as this. The answer is you can't. No movie has had as much of an impact as The Godfather has had ever since it was released.

The acting was simply amazing, what else could you say. What could be more appealing to people(even today) than watching actors like Al Pacino, Marlon Brando, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Robert Duvall. This is like heaven for someone who is a fan of movies. With this movie Brando was able to bring himself back into the limelight. His performance as the godfather alone is iconic. His character has been recreated so much in films that it has almost if it has not already become a cliché. His performance though was not a cliché. His performance was subtle and breathtaking. It was so genuine and realistic that it was not just probably but definitely more genuine than Marlon Brando himself. Al Pacino was perfect for this film as well. What a way to start up your career. His character was all about depth and he displayed it perfectly. He was able to display his own inner-battles in his mind as well as the battles he had with his family, friends and enemies. His character was more of a psychological character study than anything else to me. Robert Duvall to me was the glue to the movie. He added a different perspective to everything in just that he was not Italian yet having the respect of the mafia. His character is a man of high authority within the Corleone family who was listened to and insightful;. This was simply perfect giving the film great balance throughout. The rest of the cast was just icing on the cake.

The writing was phenomenal and breathtaking. As mentioned before there has been no movie quoted more than this. It is not even the quotes though that makes the writing in here so perfect. It is the symbolism and meaning that went into every scene. There are countless symbols, messages and lines in here that are so memorable yet it is as realistic as a movie could get.

The directing by Coppola was perfect as well. Not many movies can be 3 hours and yet maintain a good level of interest from the audience like The Godfather. Coppola deserves credit for this. The symbolism and messages that went into every scene also has to do with the directing not just the writing. The movie is so well edited and strung together that the only word that could come to my mind is perfection.

The cinematography and music were perfect. The score of this movie is one of the most memorable ever. If you were to hear it you could identify it right away. The cinematography was what actually really drove this movie. The Godfather seems to have this mystique to it, it gives you the feeling you are watching something truly remarkable.

The horse's head, the scene of Brando running with his groceries, the coffee shop scene, ""I'll give him an offer he can't refuse"" and countless other scenes and quotes from this movie have become a part of our culture. These scenes and lines have been recycled over and over again in comedies, commercials, etc. that it is impossible to avoid the greatness of The Godfather. The Godfather is like a disease once you see it you fall in love with it. I don't know if it is the greatest movie ever but it is definitely the most iconic film ever made.";0;0;False tt0068646;aljoschahamp;14/06/2020;Amazing timeless movie;9;This movie is true art and never get s okd. Perfect illustartion of the Italian underworld in the states with great actors, legendary conversations and good action scenes. On top of that great sountrack.;0;0;False tt0068646;okhamrakulov;13/06/2020;La cosa nostra...;9;For those who have not seen this movie. Just for you ...

It doesn't matter whether you are positive or negative towards representatives of such strata of society. This film will definitely change you and your views on the relationship between people in general. Relationships both within the family and in your environment. At least for me personally, he became the most important movie I have ever watched. If earlier the boundaries were good / bad enough blurred, now I can draw a clear line between these concepts.

Essentially ... And without retelling the plot.

A saga about the Corleone family, spanning several generations of characters. Before us open the doors to the ins and outs of the entire era of the reign of the mafia. Structure, methods, principles - everything is shown as well as possible.

Character, masculinity, honor, willpower, a keen and keen mind are the features of the main character (In this part of the trilogy, I mean Vito Carleone).

Marlon Brando, who played it excellently, in my opinion deserves separate praise. Remarkably accustomed to the role and secondary characters. Their characters are clearly traced. And this cannot be overlooked.

It doesn't matter whether you like thrillers, detectives or dramas, but if you are a fan of those films, after which there should be a trace in your memory and a sense of aftertaste that does not give you peace for a long time, then I definitely recommend it for viewing.

A cult film about an equally cult era ...;0;0;False tt0068646;sublimineyes;13/06/2020;If only it hadn't had Coppola in charge....;;"...there was potential for 9 or 10 stars. As it is, I'd generally give this 7 stars except that I find it better than Pt2 and that is better than 6 stars so this needs to be 8.

I can see and appreciate the subtleties of performance of Brando and Pacino in individual scenes and I can appreciate that there is some feel, some sense of time and place through the production. It is also consistent, no glaringly better or worse parts. And the story is interesting.

But 3 things.

First, it all feels heavy, flattened, less textured, less alive than any top quality production should. I lay that firmly at the hand of Coppola, a director I find uniformly overrated.

Second, I think the material works much better in The Godfather Sage. ""I think"", because that is the way I first watched Pt1 and Pt2 and I thought highly of it at the time. I've seen the theatrical versions now twice since, years apart, first in a cinema, now at home, and neither time thought as highly of each. I wasn't in any hurry to watch either again (this second time) but I hadn't seen the restored version and had access so gave it a go as I never see the Godfather Saga. I also read several reviews which overall tended toward preferring the standalone cinema installments. So gave it a go.

Third, the transformation of Michael from outsider with some humanity to the nasty piece of work later in the film is as weak as I can recall in any ""major"" production. OK, maybe this could go under point 1 (it is simply Coppola). But I think not. I think Pacino is talented enough to have worked something that could have got past Coppola and yet still been believable and substantial. It leaves a horribly flimsy core to everything else.

Unlike most 7 star or above productions, I can confidently say I won't be watching The Godfather again.";0;0;True tt0068646;denizbuyukilgaz;12/06/2020;No better in its kind, even in 2020.;9;"I think this film is one of the best films ever made and better than most gangster, mafia films which are published in 2010s, and of course of all time. Some people say it is so long and boring but i don't agree with them. I think this one is more non-boring than most 3 hours films. Also it has a so good cinematography that you can call this film an ""art"". Also the dialogues and acting is so good. To sum up, this film is a must-watch masterpiece about mafias and gangsters.";0;0;False tt0068646;sheldonABC;12/06/2020;classic;10;An ordinary man, who broke his throat and couldn't find a serious listener, but the slurred godfather, no one dared to ignore every word he said. He is always expressionless, but there is a power that cannot be ignored behind him-an elegant rage, calm cruelty, and makeup evil, like a mixture of viper and tiger.;0;0;False tt0068646;wy-90259;12/06/2020;A very classic gangster movie;10;The plot is not complicated, but it is inadvertently profound. Marlon Brando's performance is impeccable.;0;0;False tt0068646;vaezimohsen666;12/06/2020;Watch it again and again;10;Best movie of all time And you should see it and feel it and love it and for your brain its good Without this movie cinema doesn't exist;0;0;False tt0068646;ericterlato;11/06/2020;what else can be said?;10;Its a master piece! a must watch and highly recommencement to any fan of film.;0;0;False tt0068646;elliotjeory;10/06/2020;An all round classic film;10;The original and best. Marlon Brando was phenomenal in this role. Great supporting cast from everyone all round. The cinematography makes this the perfect piece of American nostalgia. Classic story perfectly executed.;0;0;False tt0068646;thevhsstrikesback;10/06/2020;The Godfather of Gangster Movies;10;I initially watched this trilogy in a VHS collectors edition that was in time order so most the Godfather 2 came first with De Niro. I loved it then back in the 90's then watched it multiple times as in cinematic release order.

Having just reviewed this on our show we both loved it a true cinematic experience that still stands up to this day. Fantastic;0;0;False tt0068646;tavongaishefaneti;10/06/2020;ASTOUNDING;10;This right here is cinema at its finest, this film has immediately broken into my top 5, and it is pretty tight up there so high praise to Don Carleone. Such a well written, well directed and well performed masterpiece that has definitely stood the test of time;0;0;False tt0068646;tanujsharmag;10/06/2020;Best Movie IN the World;10;This Is the one of my best movie in worlds and ever seen seriously i like itt too muchh superrb Work;0;0;True tt0068646;gabrusharma;10/06/2020;Best Movie ever Seen IN my Future;9;This is the one of my favourite movie I salutee To all Actors Keep It Upp;0;0;True tt0068646;indahbrank;09/06/2020;Favorites The Movie;10;Likes this movie, so i hope you can make movie slipt it;0;0;False tt0068646;pettovn;09/06/2020;Good Film;9;The Godfather (The Godfather English name) is a long, inspirational story centered around the Italian mafia family. The main character is the tycoon Vito Corleone in the last years of his life and unexpected events continuously occur to his seemingly peaceful family.;0;0;True tt0068646;hg-26582;08/06/2020;Masterpiece;10;I will never talk about anything. just watch it and enjoy the legendary music.and take advises from corleone's father it will be usefull for your life.;0;0;False tt0068646;RoboGarrett;07/06/2020;Still the Classic Mob Movie;;"This movie really is at or near ""perfect"" level filmmaking. The writing, directing and especially acting are all superb. What a great cast, what a great story (based on a great novel by Puzo)... no matter how many times I watch it, I never get tired of The Godfather.";0;0;False tt0068646;roshdilawyer;07/06/2020;this movie is strong;10;This movie is strong, i love it so much!! This is a great mix,thank you imdb team;0;0;True tt0068646;yls-12197;07/06/2020;The Godfather;10;Gentle rhythm contains great authority and tension. Music relieves light sadness and conflicts of human nature in interest game. Whether it's acting or the use of lens or music, it gives people a kind of beautiful enjoyment. And watching this movie is extremely need to sink to savor, and whenever you turn it out, you can have a new feeling.;0;0;False tt0068646;Pierre-Andre-17;07/06/2020;god father;10;All I want to say is that : The God Father is always god father.;0;0;False tt0068646;Pierre-Andre-17;07/06/2020;God Father;10;All I want to say is that:God Father is always god father.;0;0;False tt0068646;ringdangdoodlehd;06/06/2020;a classic masterpiece;10;When you haven't watched it yet, you have lost the control of your life. It's a must-see, cause its so good.;0;0;False tt0068646;swl-41633;06/06/2020;review;8;"A landmark classic of the gangster film genre. One of the lines in this movie that stood out to me was ""I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse.""Confident and relaxed.";0;0;False tt0068646;ghannadi;05/06/2020;amazing . One of the best movies that has a great role model for storytelling ......;10;It's hard to make a movie that doesn't bother the viewer at all, but the high power shakes the viewer. All I can say is that it doesn't diminish the appeal of this film;0;0;False tt0068646;nrlatif;05/06/2020;A Once in a life time experience!;9;A must watch. a once in a life time experience. All actors are perfect, the script is perfect, the drama is perfect. All is great.;0;0;False tt0068646;BABS-Production-Limited;05/06/2020;AMAZING MOVIE;10;The Godfather is a great movie with some iconic moments and delivery that will always be remembered globally;0;0;False tt0068646;nagasa-49255;05/06/2020;Unique;10;Among One of the best gangster movies And the characters are never forgotten by us;0;0;False tt0068646;ylings-45181;05/06/2020;The Godfather;10;What makes Batman different from hero movies is that it makes people feel more about darkness and human nature. Nolan's depiction of the character's personality color and expression of the inner action are incisive and incisive. As for the big scene, it is no less than other hero blockbusters.;0;0;False tt0068646;D1S7RE;05/06/2020;Great movie;10;Have a certain understanding of Italian customs and mafia;0;0;False tt0068646;IsahilKashyap;04/06/2020;GODFATHER;10;One of the best movie gangster movie. I am recommending this movie to everyone. If you are a die hard fan of gangster movies you will definitely going to love this.;0;0;False tt0068646;onlinesattamatkaa;04/06/2020;Amazing;9;I truly Like It!! It is one of my favourite one!! Beautifully scripted;0;0;False tt0068646;rs9899;04/06/2020;100 words review;10;"This is one of the best movies of all time. Direction, story, acting, even small things like camera angle and lighting are the best. Every scene of this movie seems to be worked on and executed perfectly. It has been highly rated in all of the movie rating websites and is a must watch for all the moviebuffs.

The story is based on Sicilian Mafia in America and their head Vito Corleone who is a criminal mastermind, works under certain rules strictly to be followed. He is aging and the story covers the transfer of power of his clandestine empire.

Trivia Directed by Francis Ford Cappola Based on a novel of the same name by Legendary crime novel writer Mario Puzo Whenever oranges appear in the film, they foreshadow death Quotes ""My father made him an offer he couldn't refuse."" ""A friend should always underestimate your virtues and an enemy overestimate your faults."" ""Revenge is a dish that tastes best when served cold.""";0;0;False tt0068646;tahaalzubeidi;04/06/2020;this movie that made me love cinema.;10;I watched this movie for the first time in 2018 and i enjoyed watching it a lot, which made me repeat it five times the godfather icon can not watch like it after 1 000,000 years;0;0;False tt0068646;hahmadnadeem;04/06/2020;Requires Serious Mind to Understand this Masterpiece;10;No words can define this movie it's100/10 and i still think this rating is way less and who am I to rate this movie.;0;0;False tt0068646;lucky_liu;03/06/2020;family;10;Laying the foundation for the story, the translation takes a scriptwrit-like approach to presenting the story to the reader. The whole book is as steady and slow as an Italian opera.;0;0;False tt0068646;shahdadfadaei;02/06/2020;Best;10;This movie is the best , if you don't see this you lost half of your life;0;0;False tt0068646;kpersian;02/06/2020;very good;10;This real movie is one of the best movies I've seen in my life. This film really immerses the viewer and also makes the famous actors of this film better;0;0;True tt0068646;l-64317-97959;02/06/2020;Forever classic;10;"After watching ""the godfather"" intermittently, my blood was boiling. The film left a deep impression on me in two aspects, one is the cold revenge, and the other is the warm affection. I have always dreamed of being able to have the supreme voice like godfather corleone when I am about to grow old. I also dream of having a happy family.";0;0;True tt0068646;a-43033-80873;01/06/2020;The movie is good, the style is too gloomy;10;Marlon Brando's acting and dedication are admirable. It perfectly restores the godfather in reality, tells the story between the families, and reads it many times.The textbook-style performance also exposed me to the mysterious and terrible organization of the Mafia. They are legends of that era and imprints of that era.;0;0;True tt0068646;buddhatelefilms;01/06/2020;Awesome;10;Awesome experience watching this movie. must watch films for the people who like suspense genre. all the actors made justice to their characters. with all available resources that time (1972), the films technical properties are up to the mark.;0;0;False tt0068646;sophy_icc;01/06/2020;Godfather;9;"70 out of 112 people found the following comment useful:- Initially, I wasn't a fan... but then I realised, 14 October 2006 Author: mattrochman from Australia This is a masterpiece. A timeless masterpiece. Initially, I didn't like this film all that much - I found it rather over-hyped and boring. This was until the advent of DVD, which gave me the feature I needed for this sort of film: subtitles. Once I switched them on and heard (read) every last word of Brando's ramblings and other characters ramblings, I grew a true appreciation for this epic. To make a true epic, you need all of three following ingredients working in near perfect harmony. For screenwriters who come across this, take the following pointers on board: 1) Contrasting Characters: Good films have some character distinction, but most fall rather flat because the core of each character is the same. Of course, there are exceptions to rule (ie... where you want mono-tonal characters... aka matrix; or where you want outlandish contrasts... aka The Fifth Element), but ultimately, this is what makes films deep, meaningful and grand. Consider the contrasts between the Don's children. Michael is rather cool, rational and collected, whereas Sonny is more hot-headed, spontaneous and simple minded. But simply having these contrasts is not nearly enough. What you really need to do is to develop these characters - place them in situations - and then dwell on how their character impacts on the situation they're put in. The Godfather is a terrific example of how to pull this off. While many try to do this in screenplays, most lose the plot and create character obscurities that stretch credibility. 2) Transformation: The central character(s) must undergo a transformation, resulting in them being almost unrecognizable by the end of the film. By putting them into situations, the character's character must not only influence the outcome of the situation; it must also have a lasting impact on the character. Consider Michael at the wedding and compare that to the Michael we see at the end of the film. Again, many films try, but most fail because they come up with unreal (literally, not praisingly) or simply moronic transformations (eg, Wall Street). 3) Patience: Men in Black 2 was an astounding film for one simple reason - it was an entire film squashed into about 70 minutes. It was not much longer than an episode of ER or Buffy. I certainly hope the new goal of Hollywood isn't to make films as short as possible. All the great ones spend time - time developing characters, family life, growth, patience with the story telling in general. This is the key (provided that the story isn't mind-numbingly boring). Dances with Wolves, Heat.. and so on are very patient but top-class films. While studios may be lukewarm on the idea of longer films, they are worth it if you have a ripper story to base it on. I feel that this film has not dated all that much and has tremendous re-watch-ability.";0;0;True tt0068646;karademirt;31/05/2020;The best of movie all time;10;The best all time marlon branda and al pacino best actors;0;0;False tt0068646;mcaatu;30/05/2020;It's great;7;The Godfather is a beautifully created mafia film. The thing about this movie is that every character has a complicated personality.;0;0;False tt0068646;stefannemanja7;30/05/2020;Analysts...;10;"""The Godfather"" is told entirely within a closed world. That's why we sympathize with characters who are essentially evil. The story by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola is a brilliant conjuring act, inviting us to consider the Mafia entirely on its own terms. Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) emerges as a sympathetic and even admirable character; during the entire film, this lifelong professional criminal does nothing of which we can really disapprove.

During the movie we see not a single actual civilian victim of organized crime. No women trapped into prostitution. No lives wrecked by gambling. No victims of theft, fraud or protection rackets. The only police officer with a significant speaking role is corrupt.

The story views the Mafia from the inside. That is its secret, its charm, its spell; in a way, it has shaped the public perception of the Mafia ever since. The real world is replaced by an authoritarian patriarchy where power and justice flow from the Godfather, and the only villains are traitors. There is one commandment, spoken by Michael (Al Pacino): ""Don't ever take sides against the family.""

It is significant that the first shot is inside a dark, shuttered room. It is the wedding day of Vito Corleone's daughter, and on such a day a Sicilian must grant any reasonable request. A man has come to ask for punishment for his daughter's rapist. Don Vito asks why he did not come to him immediately.

""I went to the police, like a good American,"" the man says. The Godfather's reply will underpin the entire movie: ""Why did you go to the police? Why didn't you come to me first? What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this scum that ruined your daughter would be suffering this very day. And if, by chance, an honest man like yourself should make enemies . . . then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you.""

As the day continues, there are two more scenes in the Godfather's darkened study, intercut with scenes from the wedding outside. By the end of the wedding sequence, most of the main characters will have been introduced, and we will know essential things about their personalities. It is a virtuoso stretch of filmmaking: Coppola brings his large cast onstage so artfully that we are drawn at once into the Godfather's world.

The screenplay of ""The Godfather"" follows no formulas except for the classic structure in which power passes between the generations. The writing is subtly constructed to set up events later in the film. Notice how the request by Johnny Fontane, the failing singer, pays off in the Hollywood scenes; how his tears set up the shocking moment when a mogul wakes up in bed with what is left of his racehorse. Notice how the undertaker is told ""someday, and that day may never come, I will ask a favor of you. . ."" and how when the day comes the favor is not violence (as in a conventional movie) but Don Vito's desire to spare his wife the sight of their son's maimed body. And notice how a woman's ""mistaken"" phone call sets up the trap in which Sonny (James Caan) is murdered: It's done so neatly that you have to think back through the events to figure it out.

Now here is a trivia question: What is the name of Vito's wife? She exists in the movie as an insignificant shadow, a plump Sicilian grandmother who poses with her husband in wedding pictures but plays no role in the events that take place in his study. There is little room for women in ""The Godfather."" Sonny uses and discards them, and ignores his wife. Connie (Talia Shire), the Don's daughter, is so disregarded that her husband is not allowed into the family business. He is thrown a bone--""a living""--and later, when he is killed, Michael coldly lies to his sister about what happened.

The irony of the title is that it eventually comes to refer to the son, not the father. As the film opens Michael is not part of the family business, and plans to marry a WASP, Kay Adams (Diane Keaton). His turning point comes when he saves his father's life by moving his hospital bed, and whispers to the unconscious man: ""I'm with you now.""

After he shoots the corrupt cop, Michael hides in Sicily, where he falls in love with and marries Appolonia (Simonetta Stefanelli). They do not speak the same language; small handicap for a Mafia wife. He undoubtedly loves Appolonia, as he loved Kay, but what is he thinking here: that he can no longer marry Kay because he has chosen a Mafia life? After Appolonia's death and his return to America, he seeks out Kay and eventually they marry. Did he tell her about Appolonia? Such details are unimportant to the story.

What is important is loyalty to the family. Much is said in the movie about trusting a man's word, but honesty is nothing compared to loyalty. Michael doesn't even trust Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) with the secret that he plans to murder the heads of the other families. The famous ""baptism massacre"" is tough, virtuoso filmmaking: The baptism provides him with an airtight alibi, and he becomes a godfather in both senses at the same time.

Vito Corleone is the moral center of the film. He is old, wise and opposed to dealing in drugs. He understands that society is not alarmed by ""liquor, gambling . . . even women."" But drugs are a dirty business to Don Vito, and one of the movie's best scenes is the Mafia summit at which he argues his point. The implication is that in the godfather's world there would be no drugs, only ""victimless crimes,"" and justice would be dispatched evenly and swiftly.

My argument is taking this form because I want to point out how cleverly Coppola structures his film to create sympathy for his heroes. The Mafia is not a benevolent and protective organization, and the Corleone family is only marginally better than the others. Yet when the old man falls dead among his tomato plants, we feel that a giant has passed.

Gordon Willis' cinematography is celebrated for its darkness; it is rich, atmospheric, expressive. You cannot appreciate this on television because the picture is artificially brightened. Coppola populates his dark interior spaces with remarkable faces. The front-line actors--Brando, Pacino, Caan, Duvall--are attractive in one way or another, but those who play their associates are chosen for their fleshy, thickly lined faces--for huge jaws and deeply set eyes. Look at Abe Vigoda as Tessio, the fearsome enforcer. The first time we see him, he's dancing with a child at the wedding, her satin pumps balanced on his shoes. The sun shines that day, but never again: He is developed as a hulking presence who implies the possibility of violent revenge. Only at the end is he brightly lit again, to make him look vulnerable as he begs for his life.

The Brando performance is justly famous and often imitated. We know all about his puffy cheeks, and his use of props like the kitten in the opening scene. Those are actor's devices. Brando uses them but does not depend on them: He embodies the character so convincingly that at the end, when he warns his son two or three times that ""the man who comes to you to set up a meeting--that's the traitor,"" we are not thinking of acting at all. We are thinking that the Don is growing old and repeating himself, but we are also thinking that he is probably absolutely right.

Pacino plays Michael close to his vest; he has learned from his father never to talk in front of outsiders, never to trust anyone unnecessarily, to take advice but keep his own counsel. All of the other roles are so successfully filled that a strange thing happened as I watched this restored 1997 version: Familiar as I am with Robert Duvall, when he first appeared on the screen I found myself thinking, ""There's Tom Hagen.""

Coppola went to Italy to find Nino Rota, composer of many Fellini films, to score the picture. Hearing the sadness and nostalgia of the movie's main theme, I realized what the music was telling us: Things would have turned out better if we had only listened to the Godfather.";0;0;True tt0068646;mariomucenica;29/05/2020;The best movie i have ever seen in my entire life;10;Now, i would like to point out that i am not an expert by any means, and also that i was never a fan of older movies to the point where i would never have watched a movie that was realesed for more than 20 years. But i can honestly tell that my opinion changed after i decided to watch this movie. This is a masterpiece and it most definitely deserves to be watched.;0;0;False tt0068646;skywind-49284;29/05/2020;A classic movie.;9;Plot and everything is good, but there's one thing I do n' t like. It seems that men need to think a lot, take a lot, but children and women don't. I feel a little sexist.;0;0;False tt0068646;saadanathan;25/05/2020;One of the greatest movies ever made 9/10;9;Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo created one of the greatest movies ever made and that's a fact: the story of Michael Corleone rising to power and becoming the successor of his father. This story is also about family, betrayal, honor, power, and fear of life of others. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino are simply the best in their roles. Top of their careers. The cinematography of shadows by Gordon Willis (prince of darkness) is the best cinematography ever seen. How the characters are always in the dark, half of their faces are covered in the dark to show their evil nature and the other half of their faces is in bright light to show they are family and they have weaknesses. My favorite sequence is when Michael's nephew is born and baptized and in the same time all the family headmasters are killed one by one. When Michael is being asked if he renounces the devil and says yes, All the enemies are being killed one by one and Michael is aware of it. Not only he lies but he becomes the only thing he wanted to stay away from... The Godfather.;0;0;True tt0068646;ismailalabrass;24/05/2020;one of the best;8;I wish to do the same Directing , its amazing in all way;0;0;False tt0068646;TonnerBowow;24/05/2020;Old yet Gold;10;There is a reason this is universally appraised as one of the greatest films of all time. Because it is. The story of Michael growing into the man of the family following Vito Corleones attempted assassination is entrancing and keeps viewers engaged throughout the course of the film. Although the pace is incredibly slow as most scenes are dialogue heavy, I believe it works with the film to create a story more about characters rather than one about fighting and explosions. Some people may not be able to sit through slow films like these, but those of you who are, will enjoy this film with all your heart.;0;0;True tt0068646;milaskarica;23/05/2020;It's the best movie ever made;10;I don't care if it's not in the first place on the list... The Godfather is the best movie ever made. Al Pacino and Marlon Brando played their roles perfectly and the plot is marvelous. It is a great representation of one world of mafia and underground. If you love movies you have to love it.;0;0;False tt0068646;seobecurious;23/05/2020;Great Movie;9;The Godfather is an evergreen movie that can be watched anywhere and anytime.;0;0;False tt0068646;johncalvin612;23/05/2020;One of the Best;9;Movie maybe old and Black'n White but it's a Real gem. Strongly recommend everyone to watch.;0;0;False tt0068646;stephenwhitworth-26755;23/05/2020;Stunning performance;9;The story is enough of an attraction but looking back at this years after first watch it in the Cinema Al Pacino's performance can be seen for the brilliant actor he is.;0;0;False tt0068646;joaosimonscunha;22/05/2020;More than just a mob movie;10;This masterpiece by Francis Ford Coppola explores the Corleone family much deeper than just their business activity. It is worth watching every single second to really understand the complexity of the mob. In addition to a great plot, the acting is just superb.;0;0;False tt0068646;mfellipecampos;21/05/2020;Masterpiece;10;A realistic and shocking portrait of how the mafia acted in the 1940s. A priceless masterpiece. Marlon Brando in a perfect performance, leaving a mark in cinema as one of the most respected and acclaimed characters by the public and critics.

Movie seen on May 12, 2020;0;0;False tt0068646;kayhan_hossaini;21/05/2020;best movie;10;One of the best films of all time, an absolute masterpiece.;0;0;False tt0068646;kayhan_hossaini;21/05/2020;the best movie for ever;10;One of the best films of all time, an absolute masterpiece. The Godfather is arguably the best gangster drama as well as setting the standard for cinema.;0;0;False tt0068646;nansheng-50708;21/05/2020;an excellent movie;9;"""Godfather"" is really an excellent movie, which can bring people unspeakable shock, impact and thinking. Don't do anything guilty, introverted, calm, brave, unselfish, love family, unselfish, responsible for lover and family In addition to the excellent script, the performance of the actors is also very wonderful, and their eyes are not willing to blink in the process of watching the film.";0;0;True tt0068646;danielgonjacobsen;20/05/2020;The taste of a film;10;A film that brings us the fullness of the time. When I watched it for the first time, it was as if I was visualizing a time, a family, a veritable simplicity in the details of each word of the actors. I always like to review it for feeling these things. You can even smell the blood!;0;0;False tt0068646;o-53411;20/05/2020;Wonderful movie;9;The Italian church and the successful representative of the underworld in the United States and other capitalist countries in the world of flight, adventure, foothold, revenge, whitewash growth history, mixed knead the family, love, friendship under different circumstances and burst. Family interests above all, all against the growth and development of the family must be eliminated. The coexistence of interests is the basis of harmony, and the difference of interests is the beginning of hostility. When the old father dies, a new one is born. Is the beginning of the end which cannot be stopped.;0;0;False tt0068646;aalmeendaredia;19/05/2020;One of the best movies in gangster genre;10;Very well written screenplay and one of the best cinematography;0;0;False tt0068646;t-75903;19/05/2020;great;9;The director launches this romantic gangster epic in a gloomy and calm style, and discusses more about the relationship between rights and crimes in the alternation of rights.;0;0;False tt0068646;shridharpatil-76861;18/05/2020;very nice;9;Very good film...nice hold..actors are performed very good;0;0;True tt0068646;arfenix;18/05/2020;the bes tittlle ever;9;Graeat. this film is clasical. very good. you can see the cuture of good father and all he have for the go to the top of money and power;0;0;False tt0068646;schizoidnightmares;18/05/2020;Slow and methodical masterpiece depiction of sociopathy;10;"While having a reputation for its slow pace, The Godfather's performances and tense atmosphere make every scene a pleasure to watch. In the end, the duration feels just right. The film does border on sentimentalism at times, but never departs from its earnest depiction of sociopathic barbarism that masquerades itself as ""honest business."" The mafia is shown their true colours as backstabbing power-hungry dangerous men with no place in any civilized society-do not let their style and presentation fool you otherwise.";0;0;False tt0068646;taniton-53154;17/05/2020;Super played;10;One of the best ever and it actually showed the reality of the fake personality of public elected politicians and real mafias;0;0;False tt0068646;huahongdou;17/05/2020;An unsurpassable classic movie!;10;Character portrayals are better than shooting techniques, but they have all been done very well. You can see the shadow of many modern gang team movies from here. However, it has always been imitated and unconsciously imitated, but it has never been surpassed. Robert Duvall is really handsome enough to explode.;0;0;True tt0068646;lubushiliu;17/05/2020;wonderful;10;"The old generation of godfather's calm, calm, deep eyes, with a vague tone about the dignity of men, the words ""I will make him an offer he can't refuse"" let me have a deep respect for this role. Another mission depicts sonny, the elder son of the godfather of the older generation, who is hot-tempered and bent on revenge after his father is shot.";0;0;False tt0068646;i-79629;17/05/2020;This is a wonderful movie!!!!!;9;"The film gave me a very different feeling. Splitting the ""Godfather"" apart, each small piece is actually bland, but when these bland small pieces are combined together, they produce such a huge magic force. Real emotions are the foundation, there is no pretentiousness, no exaggeration. Just like our real life, people are very sensitive to reality.";0;0;False tt0068646;d-48544;16/05/2020;The Review of the Godfather;10;The Godfather is one of the best important works in the history of the movies. It tells a story about the gangster.And it is the greatest gangster film of alltime. We can not only catch a glimpse ofthe life of the gangsters through this movie, but can know the principle that wehave to accept something we dislike, forthe duty, or someone we love.In the really life, we may have to accept something sometime, like the Michael.Maybe we may feel unhappy or angry. Butin a people's life, it's always the situationlike that, and we have to experience them.;0;0;False tt0068646;y-33180;16/05/2020;"Why is ""godfather"" a classic in classics?";9;"The godfather tells a romantic gangster epic in a melancholy and calm style. It is one of the greatest gangster movies in the history of the film and is known as the bible of men. Not only has the film been successful in criticism, art and box office, but it has also set an example for future generations. It is a classic film praised by many people, and it has a good rating of up to 100 percent on authoritative film websites. The American Film Academy, an authoritative film organization in the United States, appraised it as ""the greatest gangster classic film in the United States"" and ""godfather"" has a profound influence on film history, gangster type films and popular culture. It is the best film in the film history in the hearts of many directors. The excellent interpretation of actors such as Malone Brando, Alpacio, Robert de Niro and so on, coupled with the historical poetical nature of the story itself, makes the film a masterpiece. ""godfather"", as a gangster film, is not nihilism to dilute the meaning of religion, on the contrary, this film has a deep Christian brand, it rarely discusses good and evil, and rarely uses subjective lens to express religious morality, but at several nodes, it focuses on the inner suffering of the characters and lightly expresses this connotation.";0;0;True tt0068646;v-19461;16/05/2020;belief;10;The film, at first glance, tells the story of an aspiring young man who degenerated into a Mafia boss. However, if you think about it more deeply, you will find that it is actually a process in which people choose between survival, integration into the environment and changing the environment so as to complete themselves. To go a little bit further, it's about how people's beliefs change people.;0;0;False tt0068646;Evilaster;16/05/2020;best mafia movie ever made;10;I really adore this type of movies and i watched a lot of them but the godfather movie is an exception its soo much different how they build the characters the environment the story and the most amazing thing was the dialogue its just so great i cant even expect any movie in this period to compete with this piece of art;0;0;False tt0068646;RadiantJuli;15/05/2020;A Timeless Classic;10;"I do love its soundtrack. Each time I listen to the melody, I think about the heart of this film: how a father teaches the sons; how a boy becomes a man; how a man falls in love with a woman at the first sight; how a man deals with love, revenge and responsibilty; how a man protect his family.";0;0;True tt0068646;longlongmima;15/05/2020;_;7;"The scriptwriter and the performance of the magic of the numerous strokes, can be found in ""The Godfather"" to the audience ""big screen"" experience is enough to refute those who oppose.";0;0;False tt0068646;dongpyo-70231;15/05/2020;Very classic gangster movies.;9;The gentle rhythm contains huge authority and tension, the music soothes the faint sadness, the interest game human nature conflict. Whether it is acting or lens, the use of music, give people a beautiful enjoyment. And watching this film is extremely need to sink down to savor carefully, and no matter when it comes out to relive can have new thinking.;0;0;False tt0068646;kamerkosmak;15/05/2020;Very Nice;10;A series that I enjoyed watching. I offer my thanks;0;0;True tt0068646;h-42927-48851;14/05/2020;A classic movie;9;"This film, which is regarded as a legend, has finally been seen, holding a sense of sanctity to see the whole movie. In addition to my feeling of being blind to the face of foreigners, it's not bad. There are not too many stories in the last three hours that make you want to fast forward. At first, I feel that the godfather is a bad man, but it's only a matter of interest. At least he has his own principle and likes his saying: ""a man who doesn't often stay with his family will never be a real man."" No matter what happens outside, at least he does a good job in this aspect of family and feels happy at home What's more, I have also seen the sophistication of the world. Why can the godfather get the support of some politicians? Because they owe him more or less. In reality, it's the same thing. Sooner or later, what they owe others will be changed. I don't know whether I understand it or not. But the whole character of the godfather is complex and chaotic, and the actors are also soul level performances, Malone's saying ""never let anyone know what you are thinking"" should also be some of the top, undercover maxims.";0;0;False tt0068646;kyragd2009;14/05/2020;10 out of 10;10;Yup, 10 out of 10. Period! It's a classic. I don't even remember how many times I watched and I will watch Godfather movies.;0;0;True tt0068646;haldirman;14/05/2020;Best gangster movie;10;An amazing drama. This kind of movies are made once every 100 years. An absolute masterpiece.;0;0;False tt0068646;loganstol;14/05/2020;Greatest movie of all time!!! Period. Citizen Kane does not even come close it.;10;This is the greatest film ever!!! I don't care if people tell you that Citizen Kane is the greatest film ever hands down. Don't listen to those people. They are wrong and crazy. What Citizen Kane lacks in a compelling story, The Godfather has one. Every scene has so much detail in it which makes pretty much every scene memorable! From the opening of the movie to the baptism scene. Every scene has value to it. Francis Ford Coppola almost did not make a masterpiece at all. The production company refused to have Al Pacino and Marlon Brando in the movie and look how that turned out. They wanted Laurence Olivier or Orson Welles in the lead role of The Godfather. In any of those two were in the lead role they would have never delivered on a good performance. Michael Corleone is the greatest character to rise to power. It is much more interesting ride to power instead of Citizen Kane.;0;0;True tt0068646;shahrukh-94540;14/05/2020;Mastrpiece;10;As the reviews show! This movie truly is a gem! Al Pacino took it to another level!;0;0;False tt0068646;f-44119;14/05/2020;"A movie could be called ""bible of male""";10;"The film is stunningly good, gripping and entertaining. It shows a superb shooting technique, so that each character is molded into a three-dimensional image. This movie could be called ""man's bible"". The charm of the godfather is unique in that all the interests exchanged and the right family values and the love for friends allow you to see yourself again from your own world view. It is a far-reaching romantic epic gangster movie.";0;0;False tt0068646;halaakkawi;14/05/2020;Masterpiece;10;A film masterpiece:a dramatic gangster movie that deals with power, karma, true love. Photography wise, content wise, and music wise it's an absolute classic;0;0;False tt0068646;cortinalcaraz;14/05/2020;This film it's the very best of picture of New Hollywood;10;This is a film that contains almost all of the factors that a perfect film should have. Great themes, plot that hooks you from the beginning, little twist and details that make you love the film, fantastic cinematography and designing, good costumes, amazing character development, and of course the greatest cast any film has seen (Robert Duvall, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire...);0;0;False tt0068646;kowshikhk;14/05/2020;Excellent;9;It is old, still it has its distinctive aristocratic effulgence!;0;0;False tt0068646;RenoirSoda;14/05/2020;The originator of gangster movies;10;Representatives of Italian churches and triads 'successful people in the capitalist countries such as the United States have escaped, stolen, established, avenged, whitewashed growth history, and mixed the generation and destruction of family, love, and friendship in different situations. . Family interests are above everything else, and everything that is not conducive to the growth and development of the family must be eliminated. The coexistence of interests is the foundation of harmony, and the divergence of interests is the beginning of hostility. The death of the old godfather, the birth of the new godfather. Is the beginning of an unstoppable ending.;0;0;False tt0068646;v-03701;14/05/2020;Godfather film review;9;It's a movie of profound significance, worth watching repeatedly;0;0;True tt0068646;lengjingyidian;13/05/2020;great movie;8;98 percent this the best movie ever made. I've watched and loved it at least twenty times.;0;0;False tt0068646;bablupandit-38794;13/05/2020;Amazing;8;Such a great and amazing movie, God Father a marvelloues movie with a great screenplay and also a great cast.;0;0;False tt0068646;lengjingyidianba;13/05/2020;great movie;9;"Without a doubt one of the greatest and most important films EVER made. But one begins to think if its ""timely values"" still quite hold up in this day and age? I guess only more time and vengeance will tell.";0;0;False tt0068646;t-60255;13/05/2020;Reflection;10;Rest in peace, godfather. It's just, I have to correct you. Even though you don't spend much time with your family, you're still a real man. Because your role has taught countless boys to become men. For this reason alone, I will always respect you.;0;0;False tt0068646;kaan_berk_gencer;13/05/2020;The best moviee for me;10;It is not just a mafia movie.It has an idea of family and being together under mafia cover;0;0;False tt0068646;kaan_berk_gencer;13/05/2020;Best movie for me;10;It is not just a mafia movie.It has an idea of family and being together under mafia cover;0;0;False tt0068646;cheryl-81182;12/05/2020;Because a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man.;9;The plot is not complicated, but it gives people a profound impression inadvertently.;0;0;False tt0068646;yls-39781;12/05/2020;The Godfather;7;A good movie is never responsible for setting up three views, but only expressing it, and then leaving the rest to the audience to choose.;0;0;False tt0068646;nanahero-51637;12/05/2020;The play of Godfather;10;"The play of Godfather only follows one formula, that is, the classic mode of power passing on from generation to generation.

The structure of the story is very delicate, and the plots echo each other. The irony of the film's title is that it ultimately refers not to the father, but to the son. At the beginning of the film, Michael not only didn't get involved in the family business, but also planned to marry Kay Adams, a Protestant high-class American. Later, he saved his father's life by moving his father's bed in the hospital, and whispered in the ear of the comatose old man: ""I'm with you now."" From then on, his life took another road.";0;0;False tt0068646;elenaiulianaaldea;11/05/2020;Hold up really well even to this day. A classic.;10;I've never seen The Godfather from the beginning to the end until today. I was really impressed with how well it holds up, it is really well made and I enjoyed it a lot. This movie is timeless. I really liked seeing a young Al Pacino and Diane Keaton. It was like going back in time.;0;0;False tt0068646;yadavjnv;11/05/2020;THE GOD FATHER REVIEWS;10;The Godfather is an excellent movie with an excellent story. It is a film depicting the Sicilian mafia in USA as well as Italy itself, and is written by a person with direct Italian ancestry. ... The film had legendary actors like Marlon Brando, Al Pacino and Robert Duvall to mention a few.;0;0;False tt0068646;Amadeus_Cho;11/05/2020;Masterpiece;8;This movie is amazing. I can not believe this. this movie is absoultirly awesome.;0;0;False tt0068646;emiligarcia-83965;11/05/2020;Yass;10;Love it amazing .. a must watch .. I've watched it like 10000 times;0;0;False tt0068646;Mr_S_HasNat;10/05/2020;Best Gangster Movie;10;This is the best gangster movie I have ever seen. Acting, Story, Action all things are amazing.;0;0;False tt0068646;amkul-67687;10/05/2020;Amazing story;9;The Ending of the movie was amazing. Killing of the dons and Carlo then lying.. Michael has the don blood! There were just so many twists! I knew Sonny was going to die but never thought he was gonna die was so many bullets in his body! Loved every piece of it! But I rated it a 9 because the movie didn't actually connect properly in the beginning. But the scenes after the wedding were GODLIKE GODFATHER!;0;0;True tt0068646;SweetManishaPatil;10/05/2020;ABSOLUTE MASTERPIECE;9;The Godfather is simply one of the greatest movies ever made. I love the opening sequence. The drama and the crime is what really makes this movie phenomenal.;0;0;False tt0068646;saikatrezwan;10/05/2020;An amazing movie I ever seen;10;From the beginning the addiction of watching movie I ever found this, one of the best movie.;0;0;False tt0068646;karanthakur-79119;09/05/2020;marlon brando;10;Its good movie because of Marlon Brando.... And this is one of the favorite movie in list rank is 1st.;0;0;False tt0068646;kazuto_kirito;05/05/2020;Very nice movie;9;This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.;0;0;False tt0068646;averyvolpe;05/05/2020;Best movie ever made;10;This movie was a masterpiece. Every scene is a piece of history. Coppola had put so much work on this and it is still today the best movie ever;0;0;False tt0068646;manu407;05/05/2020;I'm going to give him a movie he can't refuse;10;You know the meaning of the word family, the meaning of friend, business, life, betrayal, relationships, love, loyalty and so on? Even if you don't really know the meaning nor describe it all, after seeing this movie you really understand them finally.

The truth is that this film is a complete masterpiece. The greatest of arts, represented in the best way possible. The production, the work of the actors, the storyline, the story, the accompaniment of the viewer is not secant but curious, a path that we want to continue to see, and when reaching the end, we still wanted to see it more, even tought he has 3 hours long, I wanted to watch more and more.

If every movie was like this, cinema would be a necessary lifestyle, something you can't live without. Mistakes are the best teachers of life, but this movie (and the sequel itself) is a god damn good teacher too. Without a doubt the best movie in all history of the film industry;0;0;False tt0068646;TOT_EchoofGlory;05/05/2020;An immortal masterpiece;10;Nearly 50 years later, Godfather is still a movie that audience are interested in. The legendary story background, vivid characters, power struggle between gangs, light, music and lines are all first-class. In video game Mafia, the leading role is also calling Vito. Maybe it's a tribute to Godfather.;0;0;False tt0068646;xuefeiding;04/05/2020;Classic film, immortal work;9;"The film tells the story of how Michael, the youngest son of Godfather Don Corleone, became the new godfather, and portrays the fictional New York Mafia in the novel as a family struggle to realize the American dream. This film has been upgraded from a police and bandit story to an epic about the pursuit of rights and the use of power, officially opening the era of ""New Hollywood"" of Oscar, and expanding the types of gangster crime films, which has a far-reaching impact on many classic gangster films.";0;0;False tt0068646;yuwenxiang;04/05/2020;So classical;10;So classical movie. Old godfather and young godfather are not only two generation, but also the support of the whole family.;0;0;False tt0068646;devdes-53847;04/05/2020;Godfather Review;10;Overall an awesome movie. Acting was great the motion picture was awesome and the story line is amazing in itself!;0;0;False tt0068646;amilgarayev;04/05/2020;One of the bests;8;Its a kind of movie that you can not replace it, you can replace it with only another two parts🙂;0;0;False tt0068646;aellsayed;04/05/2020;For Me, This is the top movies classics;10;"I love this movie and I recommend it to everyone. Epic in scope while maintaining a patience and intimacy characteristic of European art cinema, ""The Godfather"" is rightly considered one of the greatest films ever made. With performances, style and substance to savour, this shows how it is possible to smash box office records without being mindless.";0;0;False tt0068646;JuanManuelPinto;04/05/2020;The Best Gangster Movie Ever!.;10;I've watch thiis movie over a hundred times at least, and still it captures me.

It's a timeless epic movie, as simple as that.;0;0;False tt0068646;TahmidTaseen;03/05/2020;Movie of knowledg!;9;I saw it first when i was a kid and understood nothin!... Watching after im 20,.. I found it as a masterpiece !!;0;0;False tt0068646;lihaozhou;03/05/2020;The perfect opening made a legendary movie.;10;"I heard about ""The Godfather"" a long time ago. But the reason I watched it for the first time is because of my English conversation class. My teacher is crazy about it. He asked us to write a movie thesis. The story itself is very exciting. But as a movie, to turn this story into a legend, you need a team of extraordinary play. Marlon Brando, as a veteran actor, blended the two roles of father and godfather very well, and very natural. His first appearance in the movie has completely conquered the audience. He is a unique godfather. Director: Francis Ford Coppola also arranged the story very well. Although this is a very long movie, I have no fatigue at all. The climax and calm of the story have very good rhythm and regularity. Music is also iconic. You may forget it briefly, but when you hear it again, you will immediately know it is ""The Godfather"".";0;0;False tt0068646;yazznasir;03/05/2020;great watch;10;This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.;0;0;False tt0068646;overwatchgengi;03/05/2020;A Story about Family and Murder;10;The Godfather is a masterpiece that is almost so beloved that people have forgotten why. This movie has some of the best written dialogue ever put to screen. This movie is also unmatched in its acting, still being one of the greatest casts ever. On top of all of this there is a great story of someone becoming a family man even though that goes against what he previously thought moral. Micheal Corleone has one of the biggest character arcs of any character ever, he is a totally different man by the end of this movie. The Godfather is a timeless movie and inspired a generation of film.;0;0;False tt0068646;samantastafecka;02/05/2020;I like this film;9;An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an inspiration to generations of actors, directors, screenwriters and producers.This isn't just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. For me, this is more: this is the definitive film. 10 stars out of 10.;0;0;True tt0068646;like_cc;02/05/2020;unbelievable;10;"This epic movie, huge story structure, complicated character relationships, and many plot points all need to be established in the first act to lay a solid foundation for the subsequent narrative; pursue unlimited in this limited time Space, I think that as long as you can put all the relevant content into it without being bloated, it is already quite a realm; you can also comb in a paragraph in a clear and concise manner, which can only be done by the master's generous efforts.";0;0;False tt0068646;swaney-91327;30/04/2020;GOAT;10;GOAT! Plain and simply the greatest movie ever made.;0;0;False tt0068646;ahjaber25;29/04/2020;Al Pacino rises.;9;Great! This movie represents the deep departed in characters, Al Pacino did amazing job, he made all of his father's enemies pay, but with their lives instead with money. This transmission in his personality was not expected, he rises all the way from the bottom to the top while the movie runs.;0;0;True tt0068646;TaricOv;28/04/2020;It's a legend;9;One of the ever-lasting legends in the age of science!;0;0;False tt0068646;salihdora;28/04/2020;THE GODFATHER;9;"Rarely can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. Since the release of the 1972 epic (which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and was named Best Picture), all ""gangster movies"" have been judged by the standards of this one (unfair as the comparison may be). If a film is about Jewish mobsters, it's a ""Jewish Godfather""; if it's about the Chinese underworld, it's an ""Oriental Godfather""; if it takes place in contemporary times, it's a ""modern day Godfather.""";0;0;False tt0068646;freshayomideoluwa;27/04/2020;beatspice review;10;Very nice movie, i love it and will like to be updated when there is more movie by the artist.;0;0;False tt0068646;raugustinas1;27/04/2020;The Godfather is one of the greatest films ever made.;10;This movie is strong, good script, great casting, excellent acting, and over the top directing. It is hard to fine a movie done this well, it is 48 years old and has aged well. Even if the viewer does not like mafia type of movies, he or she will watch the entire film, the audiences is glued to what will happen next as the film progresses. Its about, family, loyalty, greed, relationships, and real life. This is a great mix, and the artistic style make the film memorable.;0;0;False tt0068646;farshadv;26/04/2020;Best;10;There is always a risk when a film becomes a huge part of popular culture. So many of it's iconic moments and scenes are ripped off, riffed on, or parodied by countless shows and movies, that there is always a fear that the original will lose some of it's impact, and become comical and stale.;0;0;False tt0068646;paolobarbon;26/04/2020;The Godfather;10;This is not only the great movie about mob but it is the best movie ever considered in many charts. The acting roles of Brando and Al Pacino are something unbelievable. The story is great exciting intense and famous catch phrases make this movie unique and remembered in the history of cinema.;0;0;False tt0068646;oneilllia;25/04/2020;Iconic;9;A latecomer to this classic. An iconic film. 9/10.;0;0;False tt0068646;x-54313;25/04/2020;Classic movie;10;Life is so beautiful. The plot is very good, but there is a saying that I don't like it. It seems to say that men need to think a lot and bear a lot, but children and women don't. With the feeling that it's a little sexist.;0;0;False tt0068646;EugeneOL;24/04/2020;All-time classic;10;"People often compare ""The Godfather"", which in many ways is thought of as the original crime drama, with many others that have come since(namely Goodfellas). However, I have yet to see one of these films surpass the original Godfather; it really is as great as everyone says it is.

Based on influence, iconic moments and authenticity alone, ""The Godfather"" has entrenched itself deeply in film history. The acting, character writing, cinematography and screenplay are all outstanding and make the three-hour long runtime more than worth the experience. In particular, I was most impressed with the ensemble staging when a crowd was present which, combined with the editing, kept the film more than engaging enough even when not much was happening. There are more great iconic moments in this film than I care to name; ""The Godfather"" has been referenced and mimicked countless times. Yet even without the glow of its influence, these moments would stand well on their own.

This film can be very daunting for a first-time viewer. It is nearly three hours long and a universally acclaimed classic that one feels the pressure to appreciate. However, I promise you that this one has earned every bit of praise that it gets.";0;0;False tt0068646;laurisanchez;22/04/2020;film;;Cool is good to see i recomed it, but king lion is so good so you have to see it too;0;0;False tt0068646;raymondskjaerstad;20/04/2020;Great Movie;10;What a Movie. Suspense, Story Everthing is amazing;0;0;False tt0068646;Zulfikar_Zahedi;20/04/2020;This encourage me always to make film;8;I love this movie, specially those are on 70s and 80s. I just love to go back on Analogue. Lets love films for mankind.;0;0;False tt0068646;jieer-95276;20/04/2020;great movie;9;The rhythm is gentle and the music is light and sad, but it contains great energy. Whether it is performance or the use of lenses and music, it gives people a beautiful enjoyment;0;0;False tt0068646;Diablo1616;20/04/2020;As no one can show light to the Sun as you wouldn't dare write a review for this masterpiece!;10;Winner of 3 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay, The Godfather is one of the most revered movies of all time and its contribution to cinema is remarkable. This movie will make you intrigued by its astounding depiction of the mafia and immerse you into its world from the very start while being impressed by its technical and narrative aspects.

Based on the Mario Puzo novel of the same name, The Godfather spans ten years and chronicles the history of the Corleone family under its patriarch, Vito Corleone, a respected Mafia don nicknamed the Godfather. But when Don Corleone refuses to enter drug business, a series of events are set in motion resulting in the assassination attempt on the Don and leading his youngest son to rise and take over his father's business.

Francis Ford Coppola's direction is nothing short of astounding. Many of the creative decisions he made, such as the way he shoots the film, the casting, the screenplay, which he co-wrote with Mario Puzo, it's all done brilliantly. The technical aspects will also make you impressed. The cinematography is done beautifully and the use of Technicolor provides a memorable look for the film. The editing is also done well and the soundtrack by Nino Rota is one of the most memorable scores in cinema history, as its almost funeral-themed opening track still remains iconic and fits the film's overall tone.

The performances in the film are amazing, as it features an amazing cast of brilliant actors such as Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, James Caan, Richard Duvall, John Cazale, Talia Shire and many more. I love how the film handles Michael Corleone's character arc in this film and Marlon Brando's performance as Vito Corleone is one of the greatest performances in cinema history.

Honestly, there's really nothing to complain about this film, as it's highly agreed to be of the greatest films in history. The Godfather brilliantly weaves an intriguing look into the world of organized crime along with innovative storytelling, focused direction and astounding performances.;0;0;False tt0068646;yasmeenseoud;17/04/2020;perfectly organised crime;9;Outstanding family portrait .this movie is a piece of art 100% i recommand;0;0;False tt0068646;collsg;17/04/2020;Best part;10;"I like the part when the guy says ""let them lose their souls"" :)";0;0;False tt0068646;b-22478-92115;17/04/2020;artwork;10;Compared with the requirement for a literary work to have a sense of picture, the film directly presents the picture. Therefore, the movie can be enjoyed by both elegance and vulgarity, because the picture can be seen by everyone, and the rich soundtrack and soundtrack make the movie this art form Exudes infinite charm. But the movie itself has its own art form and creative technique. Reading the movie itself can better experience the charm of movie art.;0;0;False tt0068646;q-02121-71714;16/04/2020;classic;9;"If there is one link in ""godfather"" that is related to fate, it is love. In such a man-dominated film, full of killing and yin. Mou, brotherly feelings, family feelings, love this thing seems to be just an optional embellishment. But when you go deep into the godfather's story, you will find that this seemingly insignificant wind and snow is sometimes a decisive link.

Mike is, to some extent, the most similar to his father among several sons. Closed inside, it is difficult to see what he really thinks, whether to his career or love; he is loyal to marriage and does not have an erosive private life like Sonny and Fredo. Many people say that Mike's greatest fate tragedy was the death of Apollo, which led him to marry an inappropriate woman, Kay. But maybe that's what Mario Puzzo is trying to tell us, some truth.

Kay and Mike met when they were students, or when he was in the army, it was not important in time, but what was important was that they met Mike in his green and ideal youth. Mike of that period, returned from World War II, the National Medal, handsome and gentle, always humble and courteous to people. He will spend Christmas with Kay after watching the movie and change his face as soon as he finds Kay's wrong face.

Say, ""No, you're Ingrid Bergman. I won't love you more."" If he wanted Kay to take pictures with her family at his sister's wedding, even if she was just a new girlfriend, he would say seriously and tenaciously, ""Kay, this is my family, not me."" I really like him at that time, the kind of fixed eyes for their own future, gentle expression, smiling face. But fate mercilessly went to the assassination, arousing Mike's deep family feelings, and made him go. There's no way back.

He left the United States helplessly and took refuge in his hometown of Sicily. With the godfather's theme song L ove

Theme, Mike walked on the beautiful and primitive Sicilian hillside, when Mike had completed the transformation of his life. He killed his enemy and fled to his hometown. Even though his face was still so handsome, something in his eyes had changed. He no longer has an innocent manner of tenderness. When. When the man who took care of him drove to the hillside to find him and told him not to walk around, he just said calmly, ""I want to see the village of Colion and walk."" There was no hesitation or temptation. By this time he was no longer the pure college student, and had become a young emperor.

In other words, this passage in Sicily is an important transition period in Mike's life. Before he came, he was a pure young man who suddenly killed his enemies and began to transform; and in Sicily, far from the sinful world, his character had begun to change, but he still had good wishes. And with the death of Apollo, at the end of his exile, Mike returned to New York, and the picture of the plot was depressing black. He found Kay and hoped to marry her, but by this time Mike had completely transformed into a new generation of godfather in his heart, and innocence had long been gone.

Maybe that's what we love about Sicily. Because it's too beautiful, as beautiful as Apollo.-it's pure. Mike was completely fascinated by her at first sight. Some people say that this kind of love is not a deep love, but a visual shock, an impulse. But I think she's the kind of woman who fits Mike during the metamorphosis.";0;0;False tt0068646;rizkypf-97007;16/04/2020;Top 10 Films;9;Everything is great! I don't know how to describe this movie. One thing for sure that this movie is aging like a fine wine. Someday in the future you watch this one more time and you won't be dissapointed, truly a masterpiece from Coppola.;0;0;False tt0068646;elldbry772;16/04/2020;"""I believe in America....""";10;"What is it about someone you care about that sets them apart? Are they family, a friend, or someone you feel just needs help? What causes you to go the extra mile to put someone else ahead of yourself? You may find the answers in your religion, your upbringing, or in movies. For example, say your daughter goes out on a date with a guy and she is violently beaten by him and one of his friends. You go see her in the hospital and she cannot even weep because of the pain. So trying to keep your cool you press charges and try by the legal means to bring the young men to justice. It doesn't happen, their sentences are suspended. That may make you lose faith in the system that is supposed to protect you. So now you go to someone else who could help. This person is a bigshot, a pezzonovante in his own way but outside the system. You explain what happened and what you did, and all he says is 'why didn't you come to me first?' How many times in your life have some of us gone to others that don't care and asked for help instead of going to the ones that actually care. And the problem is solved. Imagine for another example that your father is in the hospital and men are coming to kill him. And you are the only one there that can help him. Imagine that you had your own dreams and your own goals that were different to what your father wanted. But in this moment you put all that aside to help your father survive. You assure him that everything will be ok and you are with him now. You bluff out the men trying to kill him and your father is saved. Most of us may never have to defend our dads from someone trying to kill him. But seeing someone laying helpless in a hospital bed in need of help we can all relate to. Every son, every daughter, every parent, every sibling, every friend. You see everybody wants to talk about the gangster mafia element of The Godfather, and say that is what it is all about. But family plays an even bigger role in the story by being the driving force behind the main characters. Family, love, loyalty, sacrifice all these elements are used in the movie to bring a standard boring mafia shootout movie to the level of greatest movie of all time. Francis Ford Coppola used as much he could to bring this point home. The wedding scene was not made up by any means but instead taken from other weddings witnessed by every Italian who has ever been to a wedding. Bringing envelopes filled with money to the bride, nieces dancing on the feet of uncle's, people waiting in line to see the father of the bride, sandwiches in white paper being tossed around. 'two gabagool, one proshootoh!' Then go to the kitchen to make spaghetti. Need a recipe? Try 'a little of oil then fry some garlic, throw in some tomatoes and tomato paste, fry it, make sure it does not stick, get it to boil, put in all your sausage and meatballs, add some wine and a little bit of sugar and that's the trick.' That recipe has been in Italian kitchens long before the cameras rolled. Need an idea for some quality time with the kids, well go to work do what you have to do and pick up some cannolis before you get home. Just remember to leave the gun and take the cannolis. Coppola always said he had to be good or no cannolis when his dad got home to share with the family. Coppola also put in his own family to work, his dad scored the movie, his sister Talia was Connie, and his daughter played the baby in the baptism scene. The family was on both sides of the family. But for me the movie revolves around Don Vito Corleone and Marlon Brando. Mario Puzo based the character of Don Corleone on his mother, everytime the Don opened his mouth all that came out was the passion of his mother, her wisdom, her ruthlessness, and her unconquerable love for her family and for life itself. Therefore only the greatest actor of the day will do to play the part. Coppola agreed and suggested either Brando or Laurence Olivier. Olivier was considered and it would have been interesting but he eventually passed on the role. Only two men wanted Brando, Coppola and Puzo. Brando had a history of being difficult and the studio executives nearly vetoed his casting. Coppola was able to make a deal with in order to cast Brando. Brando had to agree to do the movie for nothing, he had to put up a bond in order to cover cost overruns, and he had to do a screen test. They only got to the screen test because Brando transformed himself from a forty year old man into a sixty year old mafia don before their eyes in a matter of minutes. When the executives saw the footage they said 'no no no, WOW THAT'S INCREDIBLE!' Brando would be The Godfather. But Brando still needed a little extra help. If you watch the movie, everytime Don Corleone is speaking and stops and looks off in the distance he is reading from a card with his lines on it. He still won an oscar though. Two scenes are my favorite in the movie. One is the scene in the restaurant, I feel like I don't need to explain it, because it is the most famous scene. Just know that without that scene the movie would not have existed. When you shoot a movie, the scenes are viewed day by day by the studio decision makers. They were hating what they were seeing, everything shot before the restaurant scene was met with cruel criticism by everyone on the outside not working on the movie. All Coppola could do was show them this scene and the movie was not only saved but validated. There are moments in the movie that other scenes build to, the restaurant was one of those scenes. You know of it's importance because of everything that preceded it. The other scene is the meeting. Don Corleone stands before the other mafia dons and surrenders to them and their wishes. He reasons with them in order to come to a peaceful solution. But there is a catch: if you mess with my other son or if 'he's struck by a bolt of lightning. Then I'm going to blame some of the people in this room and that I do not forgive. So with that aside let me say that I swear, on the souls of my grandchildren, that I will not be the one that breaks the peace that we've made here today.' There is a time for peace and a time for reckoning. This scene is my favorite because you believe him, you go along with his plea for peace. But the other dons do not realize it is not a surrender but a tactical retreat. So the movie went on to make a lot of money, win a bunch of awards, and won it's way on a bunch of lists that say it's great. I was lucky enough to not know that when I first saw the movie. I saw it for what it was: a father and three sons. One son was intense and savage, another was sweet and innocent, another was conviving and calculating, the father was all those combined. But the father was the steadying force in all their lives. That is why when they all find out he was shot they react in ways we all would react. When you see the father lying in the street his second son is there to help but can't, all he can do is cry and yell 'papa.' The first son nearly strong arms one of his father's closest associates because he wants someone to beat up. The third son panics and tries to do whatever he can to help. That is for the audience, and that that's how everyone relates. Finally, I'll quote Martin Sheen: 'The Godfather is the best filmmaking ever in the history of American cinema. There is nothing that speaks more to who we are, where we came from, what we stand for, and where we're gonna go. That's the work of a true genius.' I agree. It is my favorite, of what I've seen of course.

"".... Don Corleone.""";0;0;True tt0068646;o-12574;16/04/2020;Don't hate your enemy, it will affect your judgment.;9;The Italian church and the representative of the underworld of the successful people in the United States and other capitalist countries in the world of escape, adventure, foothold, revenge, whitewash growth history, mixed knead knead the family, love, friendship in different circumstances under the birth and destruction. Family interests above all, all against the growth and development of the family must be destroyed. The coexistence of interests is the basis of harmony, and the difference of interests is the beginning of hostility. The old godfather dies, the new godfather is born. Is the beginning of the end which cannot be stopped.;0;0;False tt0068646;mushfiqulhoque;15/04/2020;The Perfect movie, intense experience, doesnt feel like a movie, feels like you are watching real stories unveiled;10;"From the very first moment you just dive into the deep and dark world of the mafia and you just have to admire the acting of Marlon Brando from the very first scene. Although some might be scared to see the length of the movie, but every minute is worth watching. you never feel bored; not for a second. On the other hand you enjoy every second of it. The Al pacino part doesnt really come out in this part. this one is more of a Marlon Brando show. You feel the drama, tragedy, thrill, romace, action, violence all at the same time. truly a masterpiece movie made from a masterpiece epic of a book. No movie fan should miss it.";0;0;False tt0068646;rinadalsaadi;15/04/2020;Masterpiece, Greatest drama crime movie ever made👌;10;Amazing script, flawless from the opening scene to the end, great development of personalities, epic performance for Alpacino and Marlon Brando ,you gotta love the italian gangster after this movie One of Coppola's finest art;0;0;False tt0068646;johnbenrauto;14/04/2020;Mafia King;9;Probably the best Mafia ever! So many scenes that depict the life of living with the gangsters. A great cast of family in crime, and the trials of families involved.;0;0;False tt0068646;h-57839;14/04/2020;Great movie;9;"""The godfather"" is a very entertaining large film, involved in emotion, nostalgia, pride, integrity, loyalty, filial piety, corruption, honor, betrayal and crime, in a few weeks, it is clearly a blockbuster film, is a kind of film phenomenon, the epic is a wonderful Mafia, coppola all goes well, created a milestone in American cinema.";0;0;True tt0068646;afuss1987;14/04/2020;A classic;10;Took me 33 years of my life to watch this and I now understand why it's rated as an all-time classic.

Amazing performances from Brando and Pacino, this gritty mob movie feels authentic and tells a captivating story of a famous mob family in transition.

The casting is spot on and the way the film makers feel like you're in the family seeing this all unfold make this instantly one of my favourites.;0;0;False tt0068646;alshamari-marwa;13/04/2020;Amazing movie;9;"One of the greatest movies ever maid about the organized crime and there leader ship, the movie is a great classic that you have to watch acting directing story is just perfect, one thing to say the 3rd pat wasn't as good as the two before. Best line: ""all the power on earth can't change destiny""";0;0;False tt0068646;owenbenarm;12/04/2020;Just watch this.;10;Do yourself a favour, and just watch it for gods sake.;0;0;False tt0068646;aemdemir;12/04/2020;Masterpiece;10;"A real masterpiece; beautiful shots, great story and a good cast.";0;0;False tt0068646;yuzou-45815;12/04/2020;very nice;9;The gentle rhythm contains great authority and tension, the music is soothing and sad, and the interests of the game are conflicting human nature. Whether it is acting or the use of lenses and music, it gives people a beautiful enjoyment. And watching this movie is extremely necessary to sink your heart to taste carefully, and you can have a new feeling whenever you come back and revisit.;0;0;False tt0068646;zeekwunlau;12/04/2020;Man's bible;9;"I did n't understand when I was young, but I was not mature enough at the time. Now it seems that it can indeed be said that it is a man 's Bible.

In the United States in the 1940s, the mafia represented by the godfather Corleone fought openly for the benefit of their families, full of men's scams and conspiracies.

The godfather Corleone is one of the mafia leaders with political resources. Because he refused to expand the drug business with other mafia, he was excluded by other gangs. People in the family were killed one after another. Corleone was almost killed, but he Always keep to the bottom line of non-drug trafficking. After the death of Corleone, his youngest son, Mike, took over his father's class. He was calm, cold, and even cold-blooded, and he was vicious, gradually letting the family grow stronger and become the godfather of the new generation.

In the film, the director showed the image of a man who is a godfather. He has good insight and sensitivity. He is concealed, knows to adapt to the current situation, knows the good and evil, and also has a bottom line to take care of the family. It has excellent educational significance for men in troubled times or in today's peaceful age.

Baunasala 's opening request for help reflects that in the United States in that era, the law and the police did not fully represent justice, and people had to seek the Mafia to provide so-called justice. Even in the face of investigations by federal detectives, the Corleone family did not take them into consideration, because the good relationship between Corleone and politicians made the government not good for them.

Corleone has three sons, a daughter, son-in-law, and an adopted son. The eldest son Sonny is a typical son-in-law, and he doesn't understand politics and power. Because of his unfriendly attitude towards his sister-in-law, Carlo leads to collusion with the killing of outsiders. The second son, Fredo, was cowardly and became a playboy because of his involvement in the family's casino business in Las Vegas, but he was still timid. The daughter-in-law had not been planned into the family business, but Carloine killed Sonny and was also killed by his younger son Mike. Mike is Corleone's favorite son. Through Mike's composure to deal with the murder of his father in the hospital, the courage to enter the Tiger's Cave, and the later performance of taking over the family business, it should be most like Corleone. Corleone should be the earliest to see Mike's potential And he loves him the most, but Corleone did not want Mike to be involved in the family business. Because of the conflict with the drug lord Sorozo's business, there were too many accidents, and Mike had to take over the family business. Adopted son Tom is also a good player in politics, calm and calm in the event, and is loyal to the business of the Corleone family. The arrangement of ""being out"" after Mike took over the family business is estimated to let Carlo show the original shape.

After his gunshot wounds improved, even after his son Sonny was killed, Corleone did not concentrate on revenge and did not have full emotional affection. Instead, in exchange for a solution to the conflict, he promised to escort the drug business. This is really not easy. It is not what ordinary politicians can do.

Mike takes good care of his beloved woman, and although he will also find another couple, he will never get rid of flowers. Sometimes she used good faith lies in exchange for her wife 's trust, so that she would not fall into the fear of gangsters.

Movies and books are called men's bibles, and there are indeed many places that I should study and learn from. However, after all, it is still the Western ""Bible"". Our ancestors also have a lot to teach us, which is more worthy of all of us to understand and learn.";0;0;True tt0068646;amie_dawson;11/04/2020;All time favourite classic;10;I love this move. The scene with the horse head is one of the strongest movie moments ever. I love the directing and the acting.;0;0;False tt0068646;MB_West_Lafayette;11/04/2020;The ultimate guys movie;10;"First of all, this is THE ultimate guys movie. Phrases like ""Drop the gun, get the cannoli"" have never been topped in American movie history. This is the kind of movie you want to watch with your pals while drinking beer. The story is just great. That and Brando's acting make it a 10 in entertainment. The Godfather is almost a documentary of the Mafia Progress in America (forget Pilgrim's Progress). Most of the scenes are related to some real event. Of course they are all put together into a single story-line for entertainment but it does paint an accurate picture; Vito, the old Don with humane instincts, Michael, the ruthless and efficient successor, the roots in Brooklyn, the rise in NY, the move to Vegas, everything. Then there are the characters; Brando telling Michael that he has no regrets, except that he couldn't achieve more so Michael could be a ""Governor"" or something, that he had never walked on anybody's string, etc. The very image of the self-made man. Michael, descending from Straight and Gentle to making an offer that Moe Green couldn't refuse. The Family, which is a composite character that pervades everything and justifies everything. And on and on... so many contrasts, so much going on. This movie could only be made in America. It shows a raw and powerful side. It is Metaphor because it reflects the rest of the country. It is cultural because it educates. And the Finale is Epic.";0;0;True tt0068646;abekiou;11/04/2020;BEST MOVIE ever;10;A very strong movie, brilliant actors as incredibly good script, and over the top directing.;0;0;False tt0068646;traedprice;10/04/2020;I mean...;9;What can you say? Its a flawless film. This here is a pinnacle of crime films the cinematic lighting. The acting which is top notch, and that ending. I mean it has so much impact that it's impact is still in effect when I see it being parodied in other media.;0;0;False tt0068646;rojinaltin;10/04/2020;The Godfather is an excellent movie;9;Winner of 3 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay, The Godfather is one of the most revered movies of all time and its contribution to cinema is remarkable.;0;0;False tt0068646;alireza_berlin;10/04/2020;good;8;A very, very beautiful film and wonderful actors with success stories and writing;0;0;True tt0068646;gashiagron;10/04/2020;Best Best Best;10;One of the best movies eveeeeer made! I see this film 5 time, I can see it another 10 times. :);0;0;False tt0068646;dylanclark-57666;10/04/2020;Superior;10;My brother is a big fan of this movie, he suggested me to watch this and I must say I loved it. This is a fabulous movie of all time.;0;0;False tt0068646;morino-59166;09/04/2020;Outstanding performance;10;First, I've read and heard about this movie for a looong time before I watched it, and I heard alot of people talking about how they are crazy about this film, I couldn't know why all these people are talking about this movie as it is an invention that changed the history of cinema??all of these questions in my head had stopped suddenly when I watched it , I can't think of better performance for the whole line of actors like this one, what shocked me to the depth of my heart actually is that you are confused about who is the best actor in this masterpiece?? The Don,Micheal,santino, clemenza or even Bonasera in the very iconic intro scene. The characters, the cinematography, the sound track looks fabulous . I can't really imagine how Francis Coppola managed to gather all this cast together most of them were unknown to us. This movie is really a masterpiece and it is a reference for acting, directing, writing and everything else in the cinema business.;0;0;False tt0068646;DemonKiki;09/04/2020;It has a significant impact on crime-type movies and has epoch-making significance;10;"As a classic film, ""The Godfather"" is perfect in storytelling, performance, photography, and movie skills, and can be used as a textbook for movies. As an epic film, the whole story has a huge pattern, a complicated plot, and many characters. There are more than 20 characters who need to be expressed, but the film handles them in an orderly manner. Under Coppola's superb director skills, the characters are distinct in primary and secondary, and the character is full. Some characters only need one lens and one detail to express the character's character.";0;0;False tt0068646;stroroma;09/04/2020;Such a wonderful movie;10;One of the most favorite movie in my life i watched more times.;0;0;False tt0068646;ines_fr;08/04/2020;Flawless and iconic;9;"This movie is absolutely marvellous.

Everything in it is flawless: direction, acting, photography, screenplay....

It's not just a movie about the mob, it's about relationships, power and a powerful character study.

It has influenced modern cinema and will delight the audiences timelessly.

This movie keeps you constantly engaged and in utter suspense for 3 hours.

I especially liked small details that will always stay in mind such as: -The fact that Michael waited until being ""oficially"" a godfather to take care of the 5 Head Families, which happens while he declares that renounces to devil and his sins; -The final shot in which the door closes, leaving Kay wondering if Michael will ever make Corleon's family business legitimate like he promissed her;";0;0;True tt0068646;ztt-68376;08/04/2020;Great Movie;9;"A great gangster movie, after watching I really learn a lot, such as: never let others know your ideas, the real master are not in the mood, the event is indifferent, have their own bottom line; A man who doesn't spend time with his family isn't a man";0;0;False tt0068646;macdarren-87336;08/04/2020;The greatest American film of the last fifty years;10;It's such an iconic piece of cinema - no matter how many times I catch this on TV, I never change the channel. It's such a mythic study of power. Coppola never needed to make another film, but fortunately he did, creating three more classics within the same decade - The Godfather Part II, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now. The Godfather is just timeless, with such pitch perfect performances, cinematography, direction, editing, music, production design, sound design... the list goes on. This film and its sequel is the high water mark of American cinema in the latter half of the 20th century,;0;0;False tt0068646;AlfonsoNieva;08/04/2020;Amazing!;10;Big film art, amazing film and the history. Photography scenes pretty cool and darkness areas of the film is that I liked very much.;0;0;False tt0068646;vito_machiavelli;08/04/2020;One of the best movies in my life !;10;It's one of the best movies I've ever watched, The cast, the story, the characters, the music, and the color pallets, everything was perfect, and felt so real. This movie will remain always, the best gangster piece in cinema history.;0;0;False tt0068646;ballardowen-72673;08/04/2020;'This is my favorite movie;10;I love The Godfather it my favorites good movie my favorite movie is 1 and 2;0;0;True tt0068646;kataoka-12071;07/04/2020;a great movie;10;This is a masterpiece. A timeless masterpiece. Initially, I didn't like this film all that much - I found it rather over-hyped and boring. This was until the advent of DVD, which gave me the feature I needed for this sort of film: subtitles. Once I switched them on and heard (read) every last word of Brando's ramblings and other characters ramblings, I grew a true appreciation for this epic.;0;0;False tt0071562;Nazi_Fighter_David;10/03/2001;Breathtaking in its scope and tragic grandeur...;10;"Coppola's masterpiece is rivaled only by ""The Godfather, Part II"" in which the 1940s setting of the first movie is extended backwards and forwards to reveal the corrupting effect of power...The film, breathtaking in its scope and tragic grandeur, shows two parallel stories extending two different time periods: the early career of young Vito Corleone seen first around the turn of the 20th century in Sicily, and then in 1917, building his criminal underworld in the Italian ghettos of New York City, post World War I, plus that of his son, Michael (Al Pacino) desperately trying to keep his family together...

Al Pacino's performance is quiet and solemn... He is cold and ruthless, with a whole contrast from the idealistic innocent war hero we initially met at the beginning of the first film... Here he's a calculating and frightening force, seeking to expand casinos into Pre-Revolutionary Cuba and consolidating an empire surrounded by perfidy and treason, maintaining total confidence in his ability to control the situation whether testifying before enraging Senators or trying to outface his worst enemies...

The film's haunting final shot of a lonely, isolated paranoid Michael in his empty compound, is an unforgettable movie scene, a tragic portrait of a lonely and fully damned person, emotionally empty and finished, far from a waspish wife, more distant from a faithful lawyer...

De Niro's rise, from an orphan child by a family feud back in Italy to a hood in New York and his position as a respected Don, provides a welcome break from Pacino's relentless attitude... Since the people he kills seem to deserve it, Vito comes off better than Michael does, and it was wise of Coppola to shuffle the two stories together despite lengthy flashbacks and the disturbance of continuity...

The entire cast contributes greatly to the success of the film: Lee Strasberg, a fascinating mixture of lust and ruthlessness; G. D. Spradlin, absolutely right as the sinister and corrupt Nevada Senator; Michael V. Gazzo, unforgettable as the troubled gray-haired informer; Gastone Moschin, excellent as the blackmailer in white suit; John Cazale, marvelously timid as the vague, confused, and hesitant Fredo; Diane Keaton, clearly irrational as the long-suffering wife Kay; Talia Shire, too extravagant as the lousy mother; Troy Donahue too ambitious as the fortune-hunting suitor; and Robert Duvall excels as the confidant, and retainer to the all-powerful Corleone family...

Coppola's motion picture is not just a mere supply with new characters and events from the original, it's a far more complex and intimate movie than its predecessor... It is not really a sequel... It's just more... It cleverly shifts in time between two distinct narratives with extreme realistic violence and criminal mentality of gangsters...";248;281;True tt0071562;MR_Heraclius;23/02/2020;Best gangster dramas of all time arguably;10;"""The Godfather: Part II"" is a very suspenseful drama with a very exciting story, with great acting and great special effects. I would definitely recommend you watch this movie...but first watch the original classic from 1972 ""The Godfather"" . The movie may not be as good as the first movie but is still an amazing sequel.";75;84;False tt0071562;umunir-36959;09/08/2019;A masterpiece that can never be beaten...;10;"One of the all time greats. Or probably the alone greatest thing ever made in the history of cinematography. This movie is both ""prequel"" and ""sequel"" of the first godfather movie. I have never watched anything like this in my entire life. This movie has explained the life of underworld people in a great way. It also shows how vengeance eradicates happiness from your life. People don't even care about their family in greed of power. It's a masterpiece that can never be written off even after centuries. Even if you are not into these kind of movies, I will suggest to watch it for atleast once in your life or you'll be deprived of one of the greatest things to watch that have been ever made.";15;15;False tt0071562;taimur74;09/05/2001;To call it a sequel is a travesty;10;This movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other . IT is both a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and moral decline of Micheal . Both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino . To say that these two are good actors is like saying that a nuclear bomb makes a loud noise and in this movie they prove why they are at the top of their respective crafts .

Al Pacino is the standout in the ensemble cast and its amazing how his eyes have changed from the first part . They are now cold , ruthless and unemotional and betray the price which Micheal Corleone has paid for power .

Watch this movie and learn why it is the greatest gangster film of all time.;536;662;False tt0071562;sarabagi;13/03/2019;A must for everyone;10;A must watch for everybody. The backstory of the godfather... cant decided if part 1 or 2 is better... both beyond amazing!!;13;13;False tt0071562;DanB-4;07/05/1999;The Greatest Film Ever Made;10;"The original Godfather is a brilliant work. It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time and Brando created a cultural icon whose influence resonates as strong today as it did in 1972.

As extraordinary an achievement as this is, Part II is even better. It easily receives my nod as the best picture ever made. I have seen it at least 20 times, and each time its 200 minutes fly by.

The movie uses flashbacks to brilliantly weave two tales. The main story is the reign of Michael Corleone as the world's most powerful criminal. Now reaping the benefits of legalized gambling in Las Vegas, Michael is an evident billionaire with an iron fist on a world of treachery.

Behind this, Director Francis Ford Coppola spins the tale of the rise of Michael's father, Vito, to the center of the New York mafia. It is these scenes that make the film a work of art. Without spoiling, I will simply say the Robert DeNiro as the young Vito is the best acting performance of all time, a role for which he won a richly deserved Oscar.

The screenplay is full of delicious little underworld nuggets (""Keep your friends close ....."", ""I don't want to kill everyone, just my enemies""), while it blows a dense, twisted plot past you at a dizzying and merciless pace. The cinematography is depressing and atmospheric. The score continues in the eerie role of its predecessor, foretelling death and evil.

All of this makes the movie great and infinitely watchable. But it's what's deeper inside this film ... what it is really about ... that is its true genius.

The Godfather Part II is not really a movie about the mafia, it is a movie about a man's life long struggle. Michael controls a vast empire that is constantly slipping out of his hands. He grows increasingly distrustful and paranoid, and even shows signs that he hates his own life. Michael almost seems to resent the fact that he is a natural born crime lord, a man who puts the family business ahead of everything.

The great Don Michael Corleone can never come to terms with one simple fact.... his father's empire was built on love and respect, Michael's empire is built on fear and violent treachery.

See this movie. It's three-and-a-half hours very well spent.";446;553;False tt0071562;ballen8;01/02/2000;Great ensemble acting, great story, greatest sequel ever made.;10;The Godfather Part 2 is the finest sequel ever made and is arguably a finer film than the original Godfather. The film is divided into two main parts - the story of a young Vito Corleone (flawlessly acted by Robert De Niro and a worthy Oscar winner) and the rise to power of Michael as the head of the family. Francis Coppola recollaborated with many of the crew members of the first film and again achieves a quite superb period piece thanks to the cinematography of Gordon Willis and set design of Dean Tavoularis. The acting performances are outstanding, hence three supporting oscar nominations for acting guru Lee Strasberg (Hyman Roth), Michael Gazzo (Frank Pentangeli) and Robert De Niro (young Vito Corleone). Duvall, Keaton, Cazale and Shire all provided first rate performances but it is the performance of Al Pacino which steals the show, expertly portraying Michael as a cool, calculating, suspicious Don Corleone. The film expands upon the original movie and brings us into the family's activities in Nevada, Florida and Havana. Arguably the finest movie of the 70s, a cinematic masterpiece with the greatest ensemble acting you will probably see.;252;325;False tt0071562;tfrizzell;13/10/2001;The Greatest Sequel During the Cinema's History;;"""The Godfather, Part II"" is excellent just like its predecessor. While the first is arguably the greatest film ever made, the second installment is easily the best sequel produced hands down. The film is split between the stories of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino, Oscar-nominated) and a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro, in his star-making, first Oscar-winning performance). In the 1950s, Michael is trying to expand his crime empire to locales such as Las Vegas, Hollywood, and even turbulent Cuba. However, there are numerous problems as older brother Fredo (John Cazale) may have double-crossed the family. Also two prominent crime bosses pose a considerable threat as well (Lee Strasberg and Michael V. Gazzo, both Oscar-nominated). Younger sister Connie (Oscar nominee Talia Shire) is still reeling from her husband's murder and her father's death at the conclusion of the original film. Michael is also distancing himself from his wife (Diane Keaton) and some of his most trusted friends (Robert Duvall). While all this is occurring we get glimpses into the early life of Michael's father (De Niro). We learn that his parents and older brother have been killed in early-1900s Sicily and that he has immigrated to New York. Vito pays his dues and learns the tricks of the trade, buying his time, before deciding to create his own small empire which would of course grow and become what we saw in the original. It would seem that the film would be confusing by jumping back and forth between Michael and his father, but that is not so. Coppola gives you just enough information to keep the audience intrigued through each segment. The film is very well-made and runs very smoothly even though it lasts over 200 minutes. Many think that this installment is the best of the series. Even though I still think that the original is the best, I cannot totally disagree with this assertion as this is the definitive sequel. 5 stars out of 5.";100;129;True tt0071562;OriginalMovieBuff21;12/09/2004;One of the greatest sequels ever made;10;After seeing The Godfather and improving it as one of my favorite films, I wanted to get more into The Godfather so I rented this. Words can't describe how great this sequel was. The acting once again was amazing and the story and how the movie went on just never got me bored. Everything in this movie was clearly beautiful. The ending by far was my favorite when there all sitting at the table talking. There were so many great scenes like Vito when he was younger, Fredo at the lake, and many many more. You have to see this movie because it's just brilliant filmaking. It's not better than it's first film but still an extremely worth sequel.

10/10;150;198;False tt0071562;galileo3;31/12/2005;"""The Godfather Part II is the greatest sequel ever made, one of the greatest films of all time and possibly finer than its superb predecessor *****""";10;"The Godfather Part II (1974)

Number 1 - 1974

Top 3 - 1970s

""My father taught me many things. Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer""

""The Godfather Part II is truly a masterpiece. Timeless, Classic, Beautiful and endlessly watchable""

The second part of Francis Ford Coppola's Epic and violent Gangster Trilogy, follows the reign of Don Michael Corleone as the head of the Corleone family. As well the film shows us the early years of Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) played flawlessly by Academy Award Winner Robert De Niro, and how he created his empire of money, gambling and respect. Beautifully directed by Francis Ford Coppola, Godfather Part II exceeds every expectation with outstanding performances from Academy Award winners Al Pacino,Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall and Robert De Niro. The second part of this unforgettable trilogy is one of the finest films ever made.

This is cinematic art. A treasure of film history. The finest sequel ever made. A faultless, flawless gripping drama; Coppola's second part of his crime saga is in my opinion one of the top 5 films of all time and perhaps towering over the first part.

""As close to perfection as movies get""

""Pacino at his best""

-10/10-";195;265;False tt0071562;waynegavin1;21/01/2020;IN MY HOME,WERE MY WIFE SLEEPS AND WERE MY CHILDREN PLAY WITH THEIR TOYS;10;Michael is now established as the GODFATHER of the CORLEONE crime family,with great power comes great adversary's and MICHAEL soon learns that his life is in danger,a bold attempt hurls him into a personal vendetta and what lies ahead reveals some home truths,enter the back story of his father VITO CORLEONE as he rose to prominence from an orphaned boy hightailed from SICILY and thrown into a quarantine status at the NEW YORK harbor.VITO played chillingly by DE NIRO is a quiet family man with family values but a small taste of luxury soon gives him a desire to want more for his poverty stricken existence. now we hop back and forth from father to son in a comparable parody and the story line unfolds with devastating effect in both eras,this sequel is more than that it is a stand alone crime family story and one of the best ever made.;8;8;False tt0071562;alexkolokotronis;30/06/2008;An Insult To Call It A Sequel;10;"To me and probably to many other people The Godfather Part II is more of a continuation than sequel to The Godfather. Just look at the IMDb rating and you'll see I'm not the only one who feels this way. To me it as good as the first.

The acting may have been better than the acting in the original. Robert De Niro gave a perfect subtle performance as Vito Corleone. His portrayal was powerful and breathtaking. When I think De Niro I definitely do not think subtle and smooth but that is exactly what he was in here. It is definitely one of his top three performances in his career. The depth in his portrayal was able to justify the Vito Corleone that Marlon Brando portrayed in the first. Al Pacino gave a very strong performance playing Michael Corleone. In here we get to see more of the tough decisions that have to be made and the consequences of certain actions. Al Pacino perfectly displayed the amount of thought and struggle that goes into and comes out of every action you make; the way it affects relationships, family, power and influence. Diane Keaton was not really given a lot of room to act in the first but in here she is very good. She did not play the stereotypical wife who always stands behind her husband but rather the woman with a mind of her own who is willing to go after what she feels she deserves. Robert Duvall again to me was the glue to the movie. Just having him in there kind of makes you feel safe. John Cazale also had more of an impact in here than in the first playing the half-witted brother always needing to be bailed out. A lot of these characters sound so familiar and stereotypical but in The Godfather Part II every character is played out with such extraordinary depth. Everyone from Talia Shire who gave a fine performance to Lee Strasberg all the way down to the kid who played young Vito Corleone were perfect. Part II seems to me to be more of a character study than the original.

The directing once again is perfect. Francis Ford Coppola know or at least knew how to make a movie. The first to Godfather movie are done so precisely and perfectly that nothing really sticks out because they are so perfect throughout. Coppola just lets his actors play everything out as he should with type of cast he has here. Not to many movies can maintain such a consistent flow over 3 hours let alone even an hour and 45 minutes.

The writing may not have been quite as good as the first in terms of quoting but the storyline was perfect. Seeing the decisions made by new mob boss Michael Corleone was common sense but flashing back on Vito Corleone's life was genius. The storyline to me could not have been better and Coppola and Puzo do a great job with it all the way.

Like the first the cinematography was amazing but it had a slightly different tone to it. The first had more of a majestic, mythical look to it. In Part II you feel the modern times creeping in and the Corleones having to adjust to it. Part II has more of a corrupt and evil twist to it but I guess the end signifies that. The music obviously the same as the first was perfect and just fit so greatly with the rest of the movie.

The first to movies of The Godfather series are really like the same movie. They are not the same though, they are actually very different but the greatness of them both and the continuation of the storyline from the first to the second really create a strong band between each other. To me it is only a sequel in that it was the second movie of a great series. No let downs, no disappointments just a continuation of of the greatness from the first one.";110;147;False tt0071562;MovieAddict2016;23/08/2003;"Terrific continuation of the ""Godfather"" series; to call it a ""sequel"" almost seems insulting...";10;"This sequel is just as terrific as the first film, if not more so. I hesitate to call it a sequel, as ""sequel"" is quite simply the wrong word I am looking for. A film like ""The Matrix Reloaded"" is a sequel - ""The Godfather Part II"" is something more. It's just too good to be called a sequel.

The film won six Oscars in 1974, including Best Picture and Best Supporting Actor (Robert De Niro). It deserved every one. It involves the viewer from the start and never lets up. Particular aspects I enjoy in this film are the flashbacks to Don Vito Corleone as a child immigrating to New York City after social problems in his homeland, Sicily. I like the intertwining of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), his son, in present day, dealing with his crime inheritance, and Vito (Robert De Niro), his father, years ago. I like how, as Michael comes to terms with his family legacy, the film shows us Vito coming to terms with his future. The day he shoots that man in a gritty apartment complex is a turning point in his life.

Every actor is in top form here. Al Pacino has gradually made the move from a man who denies his future to a man who is accepting it. His character is the spotlight of this film, much more so than in the first film (though both center around his decisions).

Robert De Niro is particularly wonderful and convincing as a young Vito Corleone, who was of course played by the constantly-spoofed Marlon Brando in the original. De Niro takes an iron grip on his character and completely engulfs himself; this was, in 1974, the sign of an actor who would go places. Indeed, he did.

Coppola's magical sense of direction is at work here, as is the script by Coppola and Mario Puzo (whose novels the series is based upon). The original was a wonderful film, but the sequel presents more of a challenge. Flashbacks are often intercut in the middle of other films are awkward times, but in ""The Godfather Part II,"" Coppola uses them at precisely the right moments, managing to careen in and out of scenes and time periods with free abandon.

It takes a great kind of skill to master something like this, much less a sequel to one of the most beloved films of all time. ""The Godfather"" was an instant classic upon its release in 1972. Coppola had two years to plan for his continuation of the film. People told him it wouldn't work, he would never beat the original, and he would never pull it off. But he showed them all. ""The Godfather Part II"" may well be the best sequel I have ever seen in my entire lifetime. I wish they were all this good. To call it a ""sequel"" almost seems insulting.";95;127;True tt0071562;Bill-247;06/12/1998;A Hollywood Masterpiece!!!!;;"Francis Coppola and Mario Puzo continue their epic saga into the lives of the infamous Corleone family, which is headed by Michael Corleone (Al Pacino). It is a film which does better than its predessor, ""The Godfather"". The film flip-flops graciously and beautifully between Michael's struggle over the family business and the life of young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro, in a brilliant, Oscar-winning performance) in his rise to power as well. Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Lee Strassberg, and John Cazale give excellent supporting performances. Carmine Coppola's and Nino Rota's score is a masterpiece of music. The movie is expertly filmed and the cinematography is superb.";125;170;False tt0071562;jzappa;22/02/2009;"""Michael, I Never Wanted This For You.""";10;"Nino Rota's musical score plays an even greater role in this equal but different successor than it did in the predecessor. Yearning, lamenting, stimulating bygone ages, see how infectiously Nino Rota's music affects our sentiments for the savage events on screen. It is the pulse of the films. One cannot imagine them without their Nino Rota music. Against all our realistic deduction, it guides us to how to feel about the films, and condition us to understand the characters within their own world. Throughout the Corleone family's many criminal actions, we understand that one doesn't have to be a monster in order to live with having done them.

In what is both a dual expansion of its predecessor and a masterpiece of juxtaposition in itself, we see Michael Corleone forfeit his remaining shreds of morality and become an empty shell, insecure and merciless. As his father quietly knew in his latter days would be so, Michael has lost sight of those values that made Don Corleone better than he had to be and has become a new godfather every bit as evil as he has to be. The score, with its tonal harmony, its honeyed and emotional aesthetics, is sad, and music can often evoke emotion more surely and subtly than story. Consider several operas with ridiculous stories and lyrics yet contain arias that literally move us to tears.

The devolution of Michael Corleone is adjacent with flashbacks to the youth and young manhood of his father, Vito, played with paternal, home-loving subtlety by Robert De Niro. These scenes, in Sicily and old New York at the turn of the century, follow the conventional pattern of a young man on the rise and show the Mafia code being burned into the Corleone blood. No false romanticism conceals the necessity of murder to do business. We don't look at Vito as a victim of his environment, but a product of the depiction of the resorts to which the Italian culture had turned, initially to both protect their homeland and protect their livelihood as immigrants who came to America to be paid less than the blacks.

The film opens in 1901 Corleone, Sicily, at the funeral procession for young Vito's father, who had been killed by the local Mafia chieftain, Don Ciccio, over an insult. During the procession, Vito's older brother is also murdered because he swore to avenge his father. Vito's mother goes to Ciccio to beg for the life of young Vito. When he refuses, she sacrifices herself to allow Vito to escape. They scour the town for him, warning the sleeping townsfolk against harboring the boy. With the aid of a few of the townspeople, Vito finds his way by ship to Ellis Island, where an immigration agent, mishearing Vito's hometown of Corleone as his name, registers him as Vito Corleone. From this very opening, and the events that gradually follow, we see that Vito's damnable early experiences have enhanced his sense of family, and his experience of revenge as a necessity was passed on to Vito's sons.

The life of young Vito helps to explain the forming of the adult Don Corleone. As his unplanned successor Michael, his youngest child, transforms, we hark back to why, when his true desire is to make the Corleone family completely legitimate, he feels that he must play the game by its old rules. His wife says, ""You once told me: 'In five years, the Corleone family will be completely legitimate.' That was seven years ago."" What we have are two all-too-real narratives, two superb lead performances and lasting images. There is even a parallel between two elderly dons: Revenge must be had.

I admire the way Coppola and Puzo require us to think along with Michael as he feels out fragile deliberations involving Miami boss Hyman Roth, his older brother Fredo, and the death of Sonny in the previous film. Who is against him? Why? Michael drifts several explanations past several key players, misleading them all, or nearly. It's like a game of blindfolded chess. He has to envision the moves without seeing them. Coppola shows Michael breaking under the burden. We recall that he was a war hero, a successful college student, forging an honest life. Ultimately Michael has no one by whom to swear but his aging mother. Michael's desolation in that scene of dialogue informs the film's closing shot.

So this six-time Oscar-winning three-and-a-half-hour gangster epic is ultimately a dreary experience, a mourning for what could've been. It is a contrast with the earlier film, in which Don Corleone is seen defending old values against modern hungers. Young Vito was a murderer, too, as we more fully understand in the Sicily and New York scenes of Part II. But he was wise and diplomatic. Murder was personal. As Hyman Roth says, ""It had nothing to do with business."" The crucial difference between the father and son is that Vito is cognizant of and comprehending the needs, feelings, problems, and views of others, and Michael grows in the very opposite direction. Whereas the first movie was a taut ensemble piece, this second part is a more leisurely film that closely studies only these two characters, neither of whom share scenes with each other. Everyone else is periphery.

It must be seen as a piece with the consummate mastership of The Godfather. When the characters in a film truly take on a simulated environmental existence for us, it becomes a film that everyone who cherishes movies to any extent should see at least once.";23;28;False tt0071562;JoshtheGiant;15/10/2005;A Masterpiece;10;The Godfather Part Two is possibly the best film ever made, every part of this film is amazing, it is even better than the original, I was very surprised by this. The story is amazing, everything makes perfect sense. The Oscar winning screenplay is amazing, the dialogue is some of the most original, and realistic ever putt on screen, the characters are flawless, and it's in every way perfectly written. The acting is just as fantastic, I can't believe Al Pacino lost the Oscar, and for once Robert De Niro was even better, he was truly amazing, and interestingly he fails to say a single word in English. The direction is also amazing, Francis Ford Coppola even does a better job than he did in The Godfather, and Apocalypse Now. The visual effects are so much better than the amazing one's in the original Godfather. One of the best films ever, a must see. Flawless.;168;244;False tt0071562;alijafri-04199;08/01/2020;Al Pacino all the way;10;I'm NOT an Al Pacino fan but this movie has the best performance of Al. I think no one in the history of world cinema has played a character better than Al Pacino in Godfather 2. He deserved an Oscar. Godfather 2 is better than the first part. It is a great sequel, it expands the themes and the world of the first part. Robert De Niro is stunning as usual. Missed Marlon Brando. Best part of this movie is it shows the rise of Vito Corleone and Michael Corleone contrasting their times and personalities. You need to watch Godfather 2;6;6;False tt0071562;AgustinCesaratti;06/10/2019;One of the greatest films ever made.;10;To say that this film is a sequel is a sin. Al Pacino and Robert de Niro win the Oscar for this film, Robert de Niro's performance as Vito Corleone is perfect, every scene in which this one is perfect. Al Pacino as always perfect and unlike the first film, he is much better.

PROS:

EVERYTHING. The script, the direction, the cast, the performance, everything in this film is perfect and its 3 hours are worth it.

CONS:

NOTHING. This movie is perfect.;6;6;False tt0071562;BrandtSponseller;10/05/2005;"Excellent, but could be in the dictionary under ""sprawl""";9;"Series note: It is almost unthinkable to watch this film without having seen The Godfather (1972) first. This is a direct continuation of that story.

The good news is that The Godfather Part II has many amazing qualities, including fantastic performances from a superb cast, sublime, unprecedented visuals that no one else has been able to capture since, and very engaging stories. The bad news is that this should have easily been a 10, but overall, it is so sprawling and unfocused that I can't possibly give it more than a 9, which it only earns because the assets transcend what's basically a mess overall. Because it should have been a 10, and most other reviews will tell you about the positive points at length, I may pick on more things in my review than you would think I would for a 9, but rest assured that even with the flaws, The Godfather Part II is still essential viewing.

Director/co-writer Francis Ford Coppola cleverly begins the film with parallels to The Godfather. We see Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) ""in the role"" of his father, Vito (Marlon Brando), from the first film, accepting prostrating guests while a party is going on outside. Like the first film, the party consumes a lot of time while we get to know some of the principal characters. Perhaps during this segment, perhaps a bit after, we realize that maybe the beginning wasn't so clever after all, because the structure of The Godfather Part II parallels The Godfather from a broad perspective, as if Coppola and co-writer Mario Puzo used the first film as something of a template to create this one.

After the party is over, there is an attempted hit on Michael, and we quickly learn that not everything is rosy in the Corleone's mafia world. Michael believes that someone on the ""inside"" was involved with the hit. This launches a complicated sequence of events that has Michael, who is now living in Nevada, traveling to Miami, Cuba, New York, and so on. He accuses different people of involvement in the attempted hit depending on whom he is talking to. This may have all been part of a grand scheme to set up the responsible parties, but one of the flaws of the film is that Coppola doesn't convey Michael's underlying thoughts about this very well, not even later, and not through his actions. Rather than feeling like a clever set-up, it starts to feel like slightly muddled writing.

During the middle section of the film, which goes on for hours, we also have a hint of a problem that plagued The Godfather--a bloated cast. There are bit too many characters who aren't well enough presented or explained. You may need to keep a scorecard.

Coppola and Puzo also treat us to many extended ""flashback"" segments, and I mean way back, to Vito as a boy and young man, played by Robert De Niro. For my money, these were the best scenes of the film, although maybe that's a bit of my bias creeping in, as I'm a huge De Niro fan.

But let's talk about the main plague of the film--sprawl. This is maybe first evident in the flashbacks. As good as they are, they go on far too long, and happen far too frequently, to sustain the momentum of either the Michael story or the Vito-as-a-youngster story. It begins to feel like we're toggling back and forth between two films, which is the track that should have been taken. The prequel, at least, would have been a solid 10.

There's also a lot of sprawl in the Michael Corleone segments. Coppola appears to have been suffering from what I'd now call ""J.K. Rowling Syndrome"". That happens when an artist becomes successful enough that they can fire or ignore their editor(s). Instead of taking good advice about where to trim fat, the artist decides to just leave much of it in, and they now have the clout to override any dissenting and more sensible opinions. The Michael Corleone story has a lot of fat, including much of the Cuba material (for example, sitting around the table with the President, laboriously passing around a solid gold telephone), the Senate hearings (which go on far too long to make and provide the dramatic points), and so on.

The film begins to feel more like a couple seasons of a television show that Coppola tried to cram into a 3 and a half hour film, or worse, a collection of deleted scenes. The scenes, except for the fat that needed to be trimmed, are excellent in isolation. But by the time the climax rolls around, the whole has more of an arbitrary feeling--this is especially clear in the dénouement, which seems to just end.

I've barely left myself room to talk about the good points. The first one, which most people mention, is the acting. There isn't a bad performance in the film, but Pacino, De Niro, and some relatively minor characters, like those played by Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and John Cazale, really stand out.

The second outstanding point, similar to the first film, is the beautiful visuals. Although all of the cinematography and production design is great, what really impressed me were some of the darkly lit scenes. Characters and features of sets emerge from pitch-blackness, and everything is rich, deep shades of burgundy, brown, and orange. Amazingly, nothing gets lost in these scenes. It must be incredibly difficult to achieve without making the shots too dark, because I can't remember another film since that has been able to capture the same look. The flashback scenes are also in similar, but lighter, colors, creating an appropriate sepia-tone feel.

Although the broad perspective problems are unfortunate, a closer focus on most segments of the film provides exemplary artistry. Given that, and the film's importance culturally, The Godfather Part II is a must-see.";190;289;False tt0071562;newfiesailor;27/04/2006;As good as the original...;9;Sequel to the original Godfather is slower moving than the original but maybe better. The first was fresh material and Brando's presence was a huge plus. But this one digs into the blood and guts of the two main characters, provoking more thought, as well as introducing us to one of the most prolific actors today.

Michael's descent into darkness is terrible to behold. Tragedy surrounds him as he struggles to maintain his empire but alienates himself in the process. Hey, it's not easy holding a crime empire together. I think this film sets out to make Michael a tragic figure but how do you feel sympathy for a guy who murders family members? It's a cold world obviously, and takes a strong man to stay on top. Very interesting final scene, grim and stark, as Michael sits contemplating on a chair watching the dead leaves blow around him.

Pacino's performance is magnificent. Some great scenes, especially when Michael realizes Fredo betrayed him. That simple movement of covering his forehead in shock and despair conveys so much. Michael becomes a three dimensional character in this film as opposed to the first. Pacino just nails the part.

The secondary story is the rise of Michael's father, Vito Corleone and we watch the birth of a star. DeNiro even surpasses Pacino in his part, if that is possible. The calculating Vito as he calmly stalks Don Fanucci from the rooftops is classic film. DeNiro plays the role of Death himself: knife thin, pale yet slick and immaculate in appearance. How many other hit men in the movies borrowed DeNiro's look?

What the Godfather does, unlike so many other films of it's generation is convey thought in simple movements. Watch DeNiro as he pales visibly, staring at an old Italian remedy of his sick baby. We know right then that Vito Corleone will do whatever it takes to protect and save his family. Watch him as Don Fanucci boards his car and leans on him. By DeNiro's expression, we know Fanucci is already a dead man. That's unsurpassed acting.

The sets are beautiful to behold and this is probably the best cinematography I have seen in any movie. Early 1900's New York, in the Italian neighborhood is unreal. Watch the pedestrians and background movement while the focus of the scene is occurring. That's sheer magic. Once again, watch Hyman Roth in Cuba lie on the couch, shirtless and a gentle wind moving the drapes. We can practically feel the heat and hear and smell the city of Havana. It made me think how much care and calculation was put into this movie.

Some weak points: Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth was not on par with the other actors. Gazzo as Pentangeli just grated on my nerves, especially in the first hour. I was hoping he would get whacked so he would not appear in the rest of the film. The rest of the cast is great as usual, especially Duvall and Kirby. Not much to complain about.

The second Godfather, tries to do what the first does, a study of Vito vs. Michael. They both have different motivations for ruling their empire. Whereas Vito tries to do whatever it takes to rise from poverty and provide for his family out of love, Michael rules out of ruthlessness and a need to succeed to maintain his empire. You can see where the results have taken both.

One of the greatest films of all time.;26;36;True tt0071562;mk-2222;25/04/2009;I really think this is the greatest movie ever made...;10;Wow. This thing is almost three and a half hours long and yet it is not boring for a second. Not one moment. From the very first scenes up until the tragic and forlorn ending, this film seizes hold of the viewer's consciousness and does not ever loosen its grip, even when the credits roll. I walked away from the movie with what felt like a deep resonance inside me. It is at once heart-wrenchingly sad and stunningly beautiful.

Thematically, it actually shares much in common with later films such as American Beauty and Fight Club. The Godfather Part 2 is the story of a man who seems to have it all - but the only things he ends up not having are the only things that truly matter to him. Michael's character arc continues on from the first film, creating a great, epic tragedy and what I think is one of the saddest and yet most majestic endings in film.

I haven't even talked about the more technical aspects yet. This is because I don't have to - everything is perfect. Not just great, but perfect, as in there seems to be no way that they could be improved on. Acting, direction, cinematography, script and story. Everything.

The one thing, though, that clinches it for me is that the plot doesn't really matter. This is a movie about themes and ideas. The plot is quite thick, so don't worry if you don't get it - you don't have to. As long as you understand what the film is really about... you will walk away knowing that you have witnessed something almost life-changing.;16;21;False tt0071562;christoph-73;11/09/2007;even better than part 1;10;The Godfather Part 2 is easily better than part 1 for several reasons.

1. The telling of Con Coleones rise in power with Robert De Niro is very exciting and De Niro is amazing.

2. The scene where Micheals brother Fredo is killed is the best scene in the film.

3. I felt there was a bit more action but there was still time for story and character development.

4. The last scene with Micheal sitting on the bench is also very good.

5. The score is just as in Part 1 superb.

So all in all Part 2 is better than Part 1 which didn't really believe could be possible.;16;21;True tt0071562;murtaza_mma;17/05/2009;A Potpourri of Vestiges Review: The Godfather of all sequels;10;The Godfather Part II is a consummation of the saga of the Corleone Crime family. Regarded by many as the best sequel ever, the Godfather Part II is equally brilliant as its precursor and good enough to stand on its own. The movie juxtaposes, the early life of Vito Corleone (from his orphaned childhood to his rise in power in New York), with the life of his son, Michael (after Vito's death to Michael becoming the most powerful Mafia head). Al Pacino picks up from where he left in the first part, consummating Michael's journey to the dark side and in the process, presenting him as the greatest anti-hero, the western cinema ever embodied. The movie gave Pacino his third consecutive Oscar nomination and a perpetual stardom that catapulted him above the ruck, laying the foundations of his illustrious career. Just like in part I, his performance in this movie is absolutely worthy of an Oscar, but the Academy once again robbed him of the glory.

Robert De Niro in his Oscar winning portrayal of Vito Corleone, gives a great performance without uttering a single word in English. The synergy imparted by the brilliance of these two outstanding performers, makes the movie, a treat to watch. Robert Duvall reprises his role of Tom Hagen with a desired degree of subtlety and equanimity, reminding the viewer of Brando's portrayal in Godfather part I. The entire cast is brilliant with special mention of John Cazole as Fredo, Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth and Michael V.Gazzo as Frankie Pentageli, who are outstanding, to say the least. Cuppola's brilliant and innovative direction gives Puzo's masterful story, an incredible impetus, which is well complemented by Nino Rota's poignant score and Gordon Willis' vivid cinematography. In a nutshell, the movie, though sanguinary and lengthy than its precursor, is an equally brilliant work of cinema, a profound and a deeply engrossing master piece.

http://www.apotpourriofvestiges.com/;21;30;False tt0071562;nripeshdhungana-43780;11/01/2019;The best movie ever made?;10;Honestly I didn't like The Godfather very much in my first watching. I thought what was it doing it on 2nd highest rated movie on IMDb. Then after some days it started to grow on me. I couldn't help but watch The Godfather again. But i chose to watch The Godfather part 2 instead and boy I loved it. Perfect acting by everyone specially by the trio Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and John Cazale. These people gave the performance of their life. This is De Niro best performance after Raging bull and taxi driver and Al pacino's best after Scarface. The way this movie plays with your emotion is indescribable. The best part is when Michael hugs Fredo during their mother's funeral and they seem to have forgotten what had happened but the look Michael gives to Al Neri we know that Michael is going to kill Fredo. This part shows us the true haunting nature of Michael. And the part when Anthony is called by Connie and Fredo says to him that he will catch a fish for Anthony and Al Neri smiles at the back making it feel normal but we knowing what is behind the smile is haunting. Everything about this movie is perfect! For me this, The Godfather and Raging Bull are the best movies ever made;4;4;True tt0071562;cinephile-27690;31/07/2018;Superior sequel!;10;"After realizing I have just reviewed the first movie, I realized I should do the 2nd!

Out of Coppola's work that I have seen thus far, this is my favorite. This is quite ironic because upon my 1st viewing, I thought it was the weakest of the trilogy.

It may seem insane to rate this above the first, but Richard Roeper calls this his favorite movie.(See IMDB's trivia page for him.)

Now WHY do I like this above the other? Hmmm..I have a hard time explaining that. I think one thing is the quotes. ""My offer to you is this...nothing."" ""My Dad said you would always catch a fish if you said a Hail Mary.""(that's a paraphrase.) If I had to criticize something, it would be its length. Roger Ebert said ""no good movie is too long and no bad movie is too short."" I disagree with the first half.

TGP2 is very good but it's also very long. At 202 minutes, the movie actually seem longer and I had to repeatedly stop the DVD to get through it. Luckily there is an intermission you can skip.

Either way, I do think this is the best Coppola film and therefore-if you see the 1st movie before this, you will definitely thoroughly enjoy it!";4;4;False tt0071562;ChristopheriRuffin;20/07/2018;BEST MAFIA MOVIE OF ALL_TIME PERIOD!!!!!!;10;This movie is one of the Greatest Mafia Movies of all-time in my view! The depiction of a Mafia Family was really the focus of this movie! Deniro, Pacino, and Brando clearly killed this movie! I mean the scene where they took you back to the old country and showed how the first God father became the Boss of all Bosses was stellar! This movie can be watched over and over again! I've been watching this movie for over 25 plus years! Clearly a great classic!!!!!!!;4;4;False tt0071562;ioandelice;28/06/2018;Amazing!;10;A masterpiece! The perfect sequel. My favorite out of the series.;4;4;False tt0071562;Danimal-7;02/09/1999;"""They're saps, because they risk their lives for strangers.""";10;"I am one of the minority who like THE GODFATHER: PART II better than the original. In the first GODFATHER, we saw Michael give up his dream of an honest life to save his family and lead it back to greatness. Here, we see he sacrifices everything for his family, and in the end loses even that.

At the same time, we see how Michael's father Vito became the great Don. Starting out by doing his family and his fellow immigrants a great favor by eliminating the brutish, terroristic Don Fannucci, Vito ends up merely replacing one tyrant with another in ANIMAL-FARM-like style.

As we see Michael and Vito maneuver for power against their enemies (including Hyman Roth, excellently played by Lee Strasberg), we begin to wonder how much worse the mafiosi are than the government officials who surround them. Their dishonesty and their violence would hardly be out of place in many ""legitimate"" governments throughout history, and in some cases even today. As Michael tells a corrupt Senator played by G.D. Spradlin, ""we're both part of the same hypocrisy.""

(Spoilers below).

The ending of THE GODFATHER: PART II is one of the most poignant in history, as Michael's memory flashes back to a party before he joined the military. The scene contains four men besides himself: Santino, Fredo, Tessio, and Carlo. All are dead now - three of them by Michael's own order. As Tessio mentions that thousands of young men are enlisting to fight the Japanese after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Santino comments, ""They're saps, because they risk their lives for strangers."" Now Michael, having risked his life for his family for years, finds they are strangers to him who fear and loathe him. The third part notwithstanding, the tragedy is complete.

Rating: **** out of ****.";4;4;True tt0071562;VikramMohan;29/03/2008;The Greatest Movie the World has Ever Seen...;10;"I personally think that this film surpassed the glory of The Godfather I. you will have to watch it time and again in order to understand the nuances of it's brilliant film-making. the characterizations are exceptional: 1. Micheal Corleone (as the new don torn between family & business) 2. Hyman Roth (as the scheming old villain) 3. Kay Adams Corleone (as the worried wife) 4. Robert Duvall (as the loyal lawyer) 5. John Cazale (as the betraying brother) 6. Robert DeNiro (as young Vito) etc. etc.... It's just Brilliant!!! Speaking about the film-making the parallel narration of two different but interlinked stories is a fresh new lease of screenplay. the cinematography is outstanding. the indoors are lit up beautifully with overhead lighting which puts a shadow over the characters' eyes making it impossible to say what they're thinking. But unlike the first part where they had broken all the rules (the characters are established first before the place and time) in this film they've come back to the rules (the locations are established before the characters) Francis Ford Coppola should definitely be given another chance to make a sequel to the trio-logy so that the present generation can also experience the 'Magic of the Movie' and for anyone who's not seen this film, I bet they're surely missing something in life...";12;16;False tt0071562;gonzoparkinson;19/12/2018;Amazing Film;10;This is the greatest sequel ever made and in my opinion the finest film i have ever seen. I couldn't tell you how many time I have watched it.;6;7;False tt0071562;TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews;20/07/2004;About as good as the first one, but mainly because of De Niro;10;"It's rare to see a sequel that is as good as the first; it's even rarer to see the two acting veterans, De Niro and Pacino, together in a film. This is the only film that delivers both. I loved the first Godfather film, for it's acting talent, for it's cinematography, and for it's fantastic story. The acting is every bit as great, and the cinematography is about as good, but the story wasn't exactly as good as the first; had it not been for the flashbacks that showed Vito as young(beautifully portrayed by De Niro), it wouldn't have gotten a perfect rating from me. He saved the film, that was otherwise slow and a little bland, due to the story not being as great as the first. The first showed us a mafia war; this just shows the aftermath, and Michael Corleone's further rise to power, after the fall of Vito in the first. However, the film has a number of flashbacks, that show us Vito as young, and here De Niro perfectly shows us the entire range of his talents, by mimicking Brando's performance to perfection. The plot is good, but not as good as the first; it's saved by the flashback sequences that show us how and why Vito Corleone came to power. The acting is every bit as great as the first. Al Pacino still gives a great performance, like he did in the first, and the other cast members who came back from the first, including Robert Duvall and Diane Keaton, also give as great performances as they did in the first. The new actors also give great performances, though the following stand out as the best; Robert De Niro, Lee Strasberg and Michael V. Gazzo. The characters are as well-written as they were in the first. The mafia is portrayed as menacingly in this as it was in the first. The film, like the first, has it's share of memorable quotes, but not really any scenes that were memorable, like the first one had. All in all, a great film, but mainly because of De Niro and Pacino. De Niro fills Brando's part fairly well, but overall, the film isn't as entertaining and exciting as the first, though it does reach about the same quality overall. I recommend it to fans of the various actors involved, and of course anyone who enjoyed the first, as they should enjoy this one too, but possibly to a lesser extent. 10/10";76;136;False tt0071562;RichardKleiner;17/11/2007;Sorry, but it just didn't deliver;7;"OK. Let's get real. The Godfather is beyond excellent in every single way. I'm not giving comments on The Godfather, because it would be almost blasphemy. Nevertheless, I expected much more on part II. Personally, I didn't like it. Here's the deal: the story was way too slow paced. Nothing really happened. Only the hit on Michael's house, and the build up for young Vito's story was what makes you interested. The rest is just anti-climatic and dull. The dialogs weren't as quotable or stand alone as in the first. I thought as a sad imitation of the real thing.

Al Pacino's performance was absolutely superb. The problem wasn't that. The whole character was what failed. In the first, we get the glimpse of a warm man, but gets cold when is needed. A man who thinks before he talks. In this one, we see a man who is cold and heartless every single time you see him. He no longer has the eminence that Vito Corleone once had. The previous Don was eminent and even though he could scare the hell out of you with his stare, you respected and looked up to him. Now, his son is just pure evil. And that doesn't make sense. In the book, it's clear that Michael is the living image of his father. So, what happened? Him killing Fredo was completely useless. Even if he did betray him, there was no need to have him whacked. A Don just doesn't kill anyone from his own family (not ""the Family"", the real one). I know, Michael did kill Carlo, but let's remember he was not really family, just an in-law, and he did deserve what was coming. Another thing I personally hated was what happened to Connie. As you will see in the third, she radically changes from the naive Don's daughter to... Sorry, wrong movie. Anyway, all the other aspects, (filmmaking, score, performances, photography)were indeed flawless.

It's interesting. You can perfectly notice Coppola's anatomy for each ""Godfather"". You start with a prologue, then a religious ceremony and/or a party afterward, the plot then starts and a pivotal point is a hit on the Don. The rest is a slow, yet properly thought vengeance that ends with a gigantic and operatic blood bath. However, for part II, it wasn't's that operatic or with the same effect than part I. It was anti-climatic, and pretty disappointing.

Another flaw I found was that the story doesn't really stick to the book. One key aspect in the film didn't even appear in Mario Puzo's novel: Vito Corleone never returned to Sicily. The name of the Don who had his family killed doesn't even matter. Still, the scene prominently explains Don Tomassino's condition from the first.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a die hard fan of ""The Godfather"". I consider it to be the best movie ever (and the best novel ever, too). But part II just doesn't do it for me.";72;129;True tt0071562;DaveDiggler;16/08/2008;Overwritten Script Takes Away from What Could-Have-Been;10;"The sequel to ""The Godfather,"" at times, was just as impressive, and sometimes even more impressive than the original. Overall, though the film struggles with it's flashbacks to an early New York as we watch a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), rise to power. ""The Godfather II,"" wants to be both a prequel and sequel at the same time. When we're in the present time watching Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) fight off Senators that are trying to squeeze him, or when we're watching his house get shot up on an assassination attempt that involved someone very close to the family we always find our self in amazement. When we jump back in time, you get a feeling of intrusion. The script is to blame because its too bloated, and wants to accomplish so much in it's near three hour run time. When we're in the early 1920s we see things that are entertaining and gratifying, but ultimately not even close to being on par with the present day status of the Corleone family. Its good to know and see how the godfather started out, but there's too much to say and not enough time to say it. The bloated section of the film becomes underwritten. We don't really learn anything about Vito Corleone that we didn't already know. We don't really see how he gains his power. He kills ""The Black Hand,"" and one day, through rumors, he becomes the Don of the city. Just like that. Just like that? Really? Then we come back and he's all of a sudden in the Olive Oil business. We don't know how he got there or anything, he's just there. De Niro gives it his best, but he's just not working with anything to give any kind of performance that's remotely on the same level as Brando did in the previous film. I found it painful to watch De Niro try to imitate Brando.

When we see the city, it does have a good look to it, and its convincing as the set and costumes designs, along with the art direction, are very good. We never see big wide shots of the city block. We see a lot of people and grocery stores go by the quickly moving camera. Coppola does an excellent job of not pulling back too far (Probably didn't have the budget to make a huge set of the city), but we get a claustrophobic sensation. The kind of claustrophobic sensation where a guy right next door, in the next building, is close enough to stick his head out the window, call for you, and hand you a sack full of guns. Coppola encapsulates the city, and the time very well. There are some great moments in the flashbacks, but I could have lived without it entirely, and probably would have watched a much better film (Possibly better than the original).

When Michael finds that his own brother, Fredo (John Cazel), knew about the assassination attempt on his life, and that he was involved and that he never told Michael about his connection with Hymen Roth and Johnny Ola, it infuriates Michael to the point of no return. He feels as though he loses his family. When he confronts Fredo, he doesn't say much; he's sick of him; Fredo's too stupid to have around, and he can't even look at him. Coppola' direction here is magnificent. Even though its dark and you can't see the reactions of both of the men, they're both in the picture with the light shinning through the windows creating silhouettes of the men that were, and we see their body language, and the body language tells us everything we need to know.

Cazel gives a great performance throughout the entire film, and we wish we got to see more from his character. He's so good in this one scene that it stands as one of the best scenes in film history, and a huge part of that is due to him. The words that come out of his mouth are on par with Marlon Brando' speech in, ""On the Waterfront."" All this frustration, years of it, just boil over to point of pity. He's pleading with his brother. We watch him spill his guts on the table, and admit that he's well aware of being stupid and feeding into that stereotype as he watches his younger brother give him orders we feel his pain and frustration for not living up to the coldness and callousness of his family. He feels like an outsider, a coward, and a loser. All the while, Michael sits in front of the window looking at the boathouse. He doesn't care what Fredo has to say, which makes it all that more painful to watch for the both of them. Michael wants information from him, and that's it. One feels like an outsider, and one is an outsider. Neither of them fit in this lifestyle, but it ruins both of their lives. Fredo wants respect and power. Michael has the power, but no respect, and finds out that he loses everything that he ever cared about: his family. Its one of the most powerful scenes in cinematic history.";17;26;True tt0071562;BiiivAL;03/06/2018;The summit of Everest;8;"The second part of the family crime saga about the mafia of the Corleone clan was an event that was widely celebrated in the cinema. In particular, six Oscar awards and a recommendation of prestigious cinematographic universities where our VGIK enters, but the main thing is not this, but that after forty years this film is watched and is still being revised, and in terms of staging a frame and accents, many contemporaries have much to learn from the maestro The Corypoles. As far as I heard, the director was not going to be engaged in the second film and the studio had to make concessions, in particular in the history of Vittorio it was partly to address the source, and the story of Michael's becoming as Godfather had to be fully compiled. I finally looked at the second film and I want to share my impressions and thoughts on this matter.

The second film was no less a legend than the original, not only having earned a well-deserved viewer's success and recognition of the members of the American Film Academy, but also entering the history of cinema as the best ""sequel"" of all time, in a number of polls - even bypassing the brilliant first picture. It was with the ""Godfather, Part II"" began the general fashion of assigning continuations in the headings of serial numbers written in Latin or Arabic numerals.

Coppola and Puzo deliberately sacrificed the dynamic development of the plot, placing a stake on ""epic breathing"", amazingly conveys the scale of personalities - a special kind of titans, from each decision whose lives depend. Even the Griffith principle of the ""cross"" installation comparison of the vicissitudes of the fate of the founder of a powerful family who fled from his native Sicily and with great difficulty conquering authority in America, and his heir does not contribute to an increase, so to speak, the speed of rotation of the flywheel of History. The denouement is constructed in such a way that, inevitably recalling the final frames of the original, holds, rather, the opposite thought. The next cycle does not end, when you almost physically feel the change of the ""spiral coil"", which knocks everyone: from the exiled Coroleone rivals to the last close person, eliminated for the committed treachery. On the contrary, everything returns to its own place, as if an unperformed prophecy is being fulfilled, or the Fate enters into rights, allowing for the time being to be illusions about free will. The final turns into a start, the ghosts of the past briefly come to life at a festive family table, and Michael's strong words sound even more dramatic and naive, outraged by his father's agreement with Tom Hagen: ""I have my own plans for my future."" Further - silence ...

At the same time, the first and second (as well as the third, released after a decade and a half) parts are not so much refuted as complement one another. The authors, as if expanding the initial socio-philosophical premises, are no longer limited to analyzing the actual functioning of the mechanism of the mafia ""family"", even significantly increasing the scale: forcing Michael to defend honor at hearings in the Senate and acquainting himself with the international interests of Corleone, as if it is a full-fledged transnational corporation. The opening of the sources of the power of Vito Andolini, on the one hand, based on the centuries-old patriarchal traditions of Sicily, proved to be stronger and more effective than modern state institutions, and on the other hand acting under pressure of circumstances, adapting to the brutal realities of the poor New York quarter. However, it can not be considered a coincidence that a memorable musical leitmotif permeates inexpressibly disturbing notes, accurately warning of the omnipotence of Rock. From the interesting is also the concept of unfolding two plot layers, where in parallel with Michael is shown also the history of the formation of Witto, in order to better show us the father's features in the son, and the son could show the paternal character. The evolution of the mafia is visible in a huge conglomerate that has engulfed the whole of America and many infrastructures are in their hands, these people have a huge influence on politicians and other power-holders. From the philosophical point of view, this film is about how difficult it is to become an independent leader, how to show that you do not attach yourself to the glory of the Father, but you yourself are able to make weighted and complicated decisions. In this respect, the drama of Michael Corleone, whose marital status at first was shaky, and the other clans conceived the evil, worked well ...

Actor's works leave no doubt that before you the screen life, when the human pain is reflected on the faces of the actors. Al Pacino is great in the role of Michael, the warm heart gives way to the pragmatism inherent in the Head of the Mafia clan. Young Vittorio performed by Robert de Niro was able to show charm and become the future of Don with him, too, there were many events that change character. All the actors here are in unity and show how it is necessary to plunge into the role, in all to see a lot of work for what each of the actors thank you very much.

Verifying: A great movie that is recommended to watch everyone as an example of clear, competent and well-coordinated work of the creators' team, the whole mechanism works like a clock and as a result of hard work we get no less legendary film, somewhere even ahead of the original. Timing mastodon (202 minutes) does not interfere with perceiving history and imbued with the content of the saga. Such films are not at once to understand their greatness and strength to be reviewed and analyzed, but this film (like the whole trilogy) should not pass you by. All good and pleasant viewing!";78;145;False tt0071562;loveismywhy;06/02/2019;Forever My Fav;;From Cinematography , music, acting, etc.. I loved every part of this movie.;7;9;False tt0071562;ccthemovieman-1;03/04/2006;Not Far Behind The First Film;9;This isn't quite as powerful as the first Godfather, done two years earlier, but it isn't far behind. It's another magnificently filmed effort, wonderfully acted and a hard film to stop once you've put it in your tape or DVD player.

What makes this a notch below the first Godfather is the absence of Marlon Brando and a little too much disjointedness with flashbacks. Also missing from this film was the volatile James Caan. He was shown in a flashback scene near the end, and that was it.

One thing was just as good if not better than the first film, and that was the cinematography. The browns, blacks, greens and yellows are just great treats for the eyes. I especially love the Italian houses and scenery. Why this was not even nominated for an Academy Award in cinematography is mind-boggling.

The story centers around the brutal vengeance of youngest brother Michael (Al Pacino). It also gives a good demonstration of how the gangster lifestyle may look attractive on the outside but really is an unhappy one despite the wealth.

There are some excellent supporting performances in this film, too. I especially would cite the roles played by Michael Gazzo and Lee Strassburg.;21;34;False tt0071562;jacobmeyerjkm;10/02/2020;In some ways, better than the original;10;Now this film is in now way more iconic are crucial to the film world than the first one, but it doesn't need to be. It has yet another gripping and compelling crime narrative. I loved the sets a lot better in this, which is natural seeing as they had a bigger budget. I loved the Robert De Niro storyline and was not expecting it going into this movie, so it was a pleasant surprise. This has perhaps my favorite ending to a film ever, and many end scenes that can compete but it's hard to get better than this one.;3;3;False tt0071562;hhenshiri;03/10/2019;Best cinema productions;10;A series of films of the strongest productions of the world cinema wonderful in every sense of the drama in particular;3;3;False tt0071562;mrecredu;03/10/2019;Without words!;10;Probably one of the greatest film of history 10/10;3;3;False tt0071562;calspers;04/09/2019;All the power on earth can't change destiny;10;"Francis Ford Coppola's ""The Godfather: Part II"" (1974) is the second installment in the Godfather Saga, masterfully executed as a sequel.

In my view, it is the greatest sequel to have ever been conceived. How much pressure Coppola must have felt when embarking on this after the huge success and instant classic that ""The Godfather"" (1972) had become. In spite, he must have kept calm in perfecting the work of Part II.

The film centres partly on Michael's descent into the downward spiral of the crime world, as well as the history of his late father, Vito Andolini, beautifully portrayed in the original by the screen legend above them all, Marlon Brando.

In part II, Vito's life is presented from when he was a young boy in Sicily, and how the tragic events of his childhood shapes him as a person. We also follow him as a growing adult, portrayed by Robert De Niro, who gives a stunning performance, for which he deservedly won the Academy Award for best supporting actor. In this period piece part of the film, we see some intriguing character development which contributes to sophisticated storytelling, while simultaneously paying homage to Part I.

The character studies of Part II really is what drives the saga's perfection further. Along with a budget twice as large as in Part I, this highly ambitious effort was possible for Coppola to execute to perfection with beautiful shifting set designs and huge staging of the milieus. Naturally, it draws on the same perfect storytelling, direction, cinematography, score and all else that Part I is revered for. But it adds further, with even more intrigue and suspense than what we where exposed to in Part I.

A perfect film, and a deeply convincing character study of a man, who has it all but love, and who falls apart from his desires to power and money. Almost on par with Part I, and although some even think this surpasses its perfection, the original remains my favourite film.";3;3;False tt0071562;imseeg;07/04/2019;The original Godfather is like Spring. Watching The Godfather part 2 is like entering a never ending Winter. Part 2 is as powerful and as mesmirising, yet so saddening;10;2 word advice: Watch it. Just watch it. Watch the restored 4K version if you can, the picture quality is breathtakingly gorgeous. This isnt a review by the way, it's just a long tribute to the brilliance of this work.

For once a sequel is as powerful as the original. The Godfather part 2 is the proof. It is more elobarate, with a more detailed, complicated story, compared to the original. It has more character devellopment than part 1. Yet it definitely has a more saddening, melancholic mood as well. The original Godfather is like watching Spring, watching The Godfather part 2 however is like entering a never ending Winter. Part 2 is as powerful, as mesmirising and as brilliant as the original, but so saddening to watch. Sad, but beautiful.

Director Francis Ford Coppola pulled of something no other director has ever achieved. He created 2 masterpieces of American cinema back to back, within 2 years. Coppola was a mad man in the seventies. Bordering on lunacy and also bordering on bankruptcy. Although one would think the enormous succes of the original Godfather made him a millionaire, he risked all his money for the sequel. That risk of investing all of his own money gave him a lot of creative control though, with consequentially terrific results.

Just to mention one example in which director Coppola took risks no other director would dare take, I want to tell you about the Robert de Niro scenes shot in New York. The studio wanted to shoot these streetscenes on a cheaper indoor filmset, but director Coppola insisted he wanted to shoot on the streets of New York.

This was not just a regular shoot, no way. Coppola cordoned off two entire city blocks for weeks on end. He redesigned the entire 2 blocks to make them look exactly like pre-war conditions. New Yorkers being New Yorkers were complaining about the inability to enter their own houses for weeks on end. The costs that cordoning off entire city blocks costed were skyrocketing. And for what purpose? Coppola wanted an authentic looking scene of merely a couple a minutes in which Robert de Niro would walk the streets of his neighbourhood.

These scenes do look stunning, and because I know how many millions these few scenes have costed, I cant help but admire Coppola even more then I already did, for wanting to go to the limit in order to achieve ultimate credibility. And THAT is what the Godfather oozes in massive amounts: CREDIBILITY. Never before or after have life and love and the bonds of family been portrayed with such cinematic craftmanship and soul.

Originally released in 1974. It was brilliant, mesmirising and taking my breath away back then. It still does, to this very day...;3;3;False tt0071562;Tolispro;30/03/2019;To some better than the original;10;To some this movie is better than the original and I can see why. But to call it a sequel is a travesty. This film is way too good to be considered The Godfather Part II. Al Pacino reprising his role as the powerful now Boss of the Corleone family. In this film you see the a cold-blooded Michael that would do anything in his power to secure the happiness and well-being of himself and his family. From the house shooting to the killing of his own brother. But, with a beautiful fairytale about the up-bringing of his father in the States and his struggles. Robert De Niro giving one of what is considered to be his best performance to date. The beginning of a life in stealing and killing, his friendship with Clemenza and the killing of an Italian Boss in Sicily to revenge his mother's death. This movie is as good if not better than it's original.;3;3;True tt0071562;CubsandCulture;31/12/2018;Inter-cutting makes the film;10;The juxtaposition of Vito building the family up, personally and in terms of business, and Michael tearing the same structures down is what makes this movie. Less morally suspect than the 1st Godfather due Michael's fate this is Coppola at his best as director. It is simply remarkable that such an experimental story structure was allowed for a sequel to a blockbuster. No studio today would allow such a thing to occur.

I don't have much that can be added to the consensus but this is a mighty fine film.;3;3;False tt0071562;doding143;16/02/2018;cool;10;His movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other . IT is both a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and moral decline of Micheal . Both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino . To say that these two are good actors is like saying that a nuclear bomb makes a loud noise and in this movie they prove why they are at the top of their respective crafts .

Al Pacino is the standout in the ensemble cast and its amazing how his eyes have changed from the first part . They are now cold , ruthless and unemotional and betray the price which Micheal Corleone has paid for power .;3;3;False tt0071562;gab-14712;18/10/2017;Perfect Sequel!;10;Mike is the head of his family, but he is broken, angry man and no one can escape his wrath, not even his poor older brother. This film is a film that laments for loss and is full of bitter emotions .but this is also arguably one of the greatest sequels of all time to one of the greatest films of all time. This is one of favorite all-time films, and I wouldn't hesitate to call it better than the first movie. This movie excels at everything, especially when it comes to storytelling. and the devolution of Michael Corleone's humanity and morality. The film invokes emotion from us for many reasons from the sad but powerful score by Nino Rota, to the powerhouse acting from everyone in the cast especially from Al Pacino, a story that introduces the past effectively, a very shocking ending, tight editing, powerhouse directing by Francis Ford Coppola, and the list goes on and on. Sequels were not a commodity back in the day, and this sequel to the huge 1972 film The Godfather is one of the first of its kind. The success of this film is why today's movie business relies upon sequels to make money. Regardless, this is one of the greatest films of all time.

This film continues the saga of the Corleone family as we continue from the events of the first film. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is trying to expand the family's business into places like Hollywood and Cuba. His character takes a dive as he clashes with his brother Fredo (John Cazale), his lawyer Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), his wife Kay (Diane Keaton), and his sister Connie (Talia Shire). He is suspicious of his business associates activities such as folks like Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) and Frankie Pentangeli (Michael Gazzo). But this film incorporates another story into this story: the past. We meet Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) when he was growing up in Sicily and emigrates to New York City where be becomes connected with the mob life.

I loved how the story is told thanks to the masterful storytelling by screenwriter Mario Puzo and director Coppola. They successfully tell two stories over the course of the movie without any trouble. Each story complements each other very well. The continuing saga of the present day family remains a high point. Of course the central character is Michael Corleone. The first film he was a man reluctant to take over the family business, but now he is turning into a control monster who trusts no one, not even his inner circle. It's a sad thing to watch as his morality crumbles and the final scene-one of cinema's most famous scenes, makes the case to show why Michael Corleone turns into a monster.

I enjoyed the flashback sequences featuring young Vito. De Niro absolutely nails his role as Vito and he inherits the older Vito's mannerisms very well. It was fun to see how Vito turned into the man we knew him from the first film. The scenes in Sicily, where he is connected with a local mob boss is very powerful because Vito's mother was shot down. But that event helped turn Vito into the kind of man he was and to my happiness, Vito exacted the perfect kind of revenge. These scenes in Sicily and New York are beautifully shot and they really understood what New York was supposed to be in 1910.

This is a film full of performances, all of them wonderful. Pacino excels as Michael Corleone once again. I really wish he won an Oscar for this role because he deserved it. His performance was effectively scary. Robert De Niro was absolutely amazing as the younger Vito and his role showed the kind of versatility this man has. Diane Keaton was effective as Kay. This film has Kay standing up to his man as she eventually leaves his side. Duvall is always great as Tom Hagen. John Cazale has a bigger part in the second film, as he tries to do what's best but simply does not have the brains and ultimately pays the price. His performance was a powerful one. Then we have the likes of the little known actors who gave an impression like Lee Strasberg who played the business partner Hyman Roth who wants Michael killed and Michael Gazzo who plays Frankie, a relative and associate of Michael's.

The Godfather Part II is one of the greatest films of all time. The Godfather is an amazing film, but this one may just be a tad better. That is a rarity because 1.) Just look at the quality of the first film and 2.) sequels are rarely better than the original film. Speaking of sequels, this is the only sequel to this day that has won Best Picture at the Academy Award. Indeed, it's a very amazing feat. Although to be taken with a grain of salt, but on the website IMDb, this movie is ranked #2 of all-time. That goes to show the commercial value of the movie. I loved this movie for many reasons. From Al Pacino's wonderful performance to the chill-inducing score by Nino Rota. There was also a flashback sequence that hearkens back to the first movie as it brings back James Caan although Marlon Brando declined because he felt under-appreciated. Anyhow, Coppola does an amazing job with the first two movies in the series. That end shot just wow.

My Grade: A+;3;3;False tt0071562;Chuck-149;16/08/1999;The best sequel in cinema history.;10;"To all you movie-buffs who have seen ""The godfather"" and really loved it but haven't seen ""The godfather part II"" yet, you've got to see it. It's absolutely incredible.

Once again masterfully directed by Francis Ford Coppola, it lives up to both its reputation and its predecessor. One of the best parts of this movie is how you see two people changing in parallel:





The movie follows the steps of its predecessor with many classic scenes (the ending especially). Pacino, De Niro, Starsberg, Duvall, Keaton, and Shire give tremendous performances. See it.";3;3;False tt0071562;stevojaxon;24/02/2020;This is how they improve Godfather Part 1;10;They improved Part 1 by making Part 2. As I said about Part 1, just watch Part 2 if you haven't already. This is movie making history that makes modern movies look ordinary.;5;6;False tt0071562;bambuthegoat;01/09/2018;My Favorite Sequel;10;Growing up in my family, this movie was a staple and I have been watching the entire Godfather series since before I could understand what I was watching. Around the age of thirteen, I started to become a cinephile, a trait that was embedded in me by my father. I saw this film for the series for the first time around that age and understood it. The second edition of the series was perfect in that the theme of family ultimately stood and we got a chance to see great cinema at play as Coppola and Puzo told two stories simultaneously that ended up perfectly balancing.;5;6;True tt0071562;shiznykid;26/10/2008;this is a masterpiece, the definition of the word movie;10;this is something. if you thought The Godfather was special, brace yourselves, because The Godfather Part 2 is the greatest. Everything about this movie is perfect. the directing is brilliant. the way Coppola was able to weave two tales using only flashbacks was just groundbreaking. the acting, well it speaks for itself. De Niro won an Oscar for-this, and was richly deserved, but Pacino puts in the performance of his career, Duvall features much more and is marvelous. Cazale is picture perfect as the shaky Fredo. Bruno Kirby was my favourite as the straight talking Clemenza. All I'm saying is that this movie can do now wrong. the simple message of this movie is that of a man who has a firm grip on his job. but is losing his grip on his life;5;6;False tt0071562;edmunddavies21;18/09/2005;A rare sequel;10;The Godfather part II is a fantastic sequel and a great follow up to the original. Most sequels are not as good as the original, some are plain rubbish. But The Godfather part II is rare because it is just as good as the original (some reviewers say it is better than the first but i don't think so). The performances are brilliant just like in the first. Robert de Niro plays a young Vito Corleone. showing the young life of Vito in the 1920's While Michael tries to extend the family business in the 1950's. The godfather part II is a must see for fans of the original,what a must buy for fans of the original. fans of the original will love 10/10 definitive crime film. Thanks for reading.;5;6;False tt0071562;scorsese-1;10/04/2005;A cinematic epic by Coppola;10;The Godfather II is not really a movie about the mafia. The themes that run throughout the film are of power,corruption of power and family. Coppola expertly tells the parallel stories of a father and his son with the use of flashbacks and flashforwards. He simultaneously shows how the father builds an empire and how his son subsequently unwittingly destroys it. The scenes involving the son Michael Corleone are very serious in nature,whereas the scenes involving the father,a young Vito Corleone, are presented in a more jovial manner.Before a flashback or flashforward, Coppola uses an effective technique of having children or the mention of children in the scene in order to emphasize the generational link through children. The flasback scenes are also photographed using different methods of lighting to contrast the different moods.Metaphorically, the story of the Corleones parallels the rise and subsequent corruption of America. The ultimate symbol of America in the form of the Statue of Liberty appears throughout the film. The assassination of Hyman Roth the Jewish Mafia chieftain, is eerily similar to the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald the alleged assassin of President John Kennedy. Coppola effectively uses symbols such as the orange to represent evil. Several scenes show characters that do evil holding an orange (the fruit being a biblical symbol of evil).In an early scene Johnny Ola an emissary for Hyman Roth brings an orange to Michael Corleone from Miami. In a flashback scene, Don Fannucci (the black hand), is seen handling an orange before his demise. Michael Corleone is eating an orange as he plots the murder of his enemies. Coppola also uses catholic religious rituals as backdrops in major murder sequences. As Vito Corleone murders Don Fannucci there is a religious procession on the street. As Michael's brother Fredo is being murdered he is reciting the Hail Mary prayer. In the end Michael loses his soul and family to maintain his power. A great film by a talented director.;5;6;True tt0071562;Soysoy;02/11/2006;I feel totally disconnected...;5;"So this is something that ranks as #2 on IMDb... this time I think I have to face the fact that I'm totally disconnected from the vast majority of movie addicts. So take this review with a grain of salt: I'm an outsider, definitely.

I kinda liked the first Godfather, while not considering it as great cinema I found it engaging, well put together, with strong moments, all in all a good movie. Not so here. To me this was excruciatingly boring.

I actually liked the overture scenes very much. Then we leave Italy for the USA, and after 40 minutes I was still waiting for something to vaguely interest me. These endless contrived stories about the Italian Mafia (mob) have become such a cliché in movies that it's impossible for me to attend all this convoluted, ultra-codified stuff without getting successively amused, then annoyed, then plain bored. So when the cinematic and staging aspects are great, like in SCARFACE or ONCE UPON A TIME IN America, I just take that stuff for what it is, a genre film bound by rules, and enjoy it from the great acting, direction and purely cinematic elements (in De Palma's case -Scarface- the fabulous camera eye, in Leone's case -Once upon a time- the mindblowing psychological staging and the terrific cinematography).

Here the staging is mostly sloppy, long parts of the movie feels like it's been produced too fast, with poor cinematography and loose acting, some others are just as good as in the first movie but they're too scarce.

Pretty average, exploitative, complacent stuff for me. Sorry, I've seen so many movies that I need much more than that to be impressed. As far as classics goes, I'd rather watch ""12 angry men"" or ""Le Procès"" for the 30rd time than another of these cliché-ridden mob movies.";38;71;False tt0071562;BA_Harrison;07/03/2016;It's-a not so good.;6;"The Godfather Part II is one of those rare sequels that is regarded by many to be as good as, if not better than, the original. I'm guessing that much of its popularity lies in the fact that it is not just a sequel, following Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) as he continues to expand his family's 'business', but also a prequel, charting Vito Corleone's life from a child in Sicily at the turn of the 20th century to powerful New York mafia don. Two films for the price of one!

Unfortunately, as far as I'm concerned, only half of this 'double-bill' is really worth the time and effort. The flashbacks are great, with Robert De Niro superb as the young adult Vito, rising from shop assistant to mob boss; these parts reminded me of the excellent Once Upon A Time In America, which also charted the early lives of young gangsters (and which also starred De Niro). In contrast, the scenes featuring Michael's continuing underworld activities in the '50s are far too convoluted and slow for their own good, making keeping up with the Corleones more of a chore than a pleasure.

8/10 for the flashbacks; 4/10 for the rest. That's a disappointing average of 6/10.";26;47;False tt0071562;bruskismail;08/05/2018;Like it's predecessor just fantastic;10;Here we get an insight to both criminal life of mobsters as well as insight to history. This is a pure masterpiece!;6;8;False tt0071562;aml60;15/09/2005;Not just a sequel, but another masterpiece of a continuing story.;10;The Godfather Part II, is just as good as the first film. Al Pacino was absolutely awesome in this film. His performance in this film is one of my personal favorites, and probably one of his best performances of all time. This film was so good because it continues the story of Don Michael Corleone's rise to the top, and then slowly to the bottom at the end. Plus another cool thing about the movie, is that it has several flash backs on the life of younge Vito Corleone, played by Robert DeNiro (who also gave a great performance). Again the directing, and story telling, and the acting were great in this movie. It is truly the greatest sequel of all time.;6;8;False tt0071562;Steffi_P;31/07/2010;"""It had nothing to do with business""";7;"In the movies, sequels have always been difficult. The franchise pictures of the twenties and thirties were always careful to repeat cast and basic formula without reopening story lines that had already run their course. While the following decades saw the rise of the TV series, the screen sequel became almost unknown. Today the fad of numbered sequels, ubiquitous in the eighties, has now become synonymous with unspeakable badness. That tradition was started, quite innocently, by this 1974 follow-up to The Godfather.

Being a drama, The Godfather Part II's biggest asset is probably in retaining the sublime cast that made the original so powerful. Al Pacino picks up exactly where he left off a few years previously, retreating further into passive steeliness, suppressing all emotions except the occasional burst of anger. John Cazale has a somewhat expanded role, getting to show off a more impressive acting range and making Fredo seem sympathetic in his weakness. Welcome returns are also made by Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall and Talia Shire. However the greatest turn is that of newcomer Robert De Niro. De Niro gives a credible presentation of an up-and-coming mobster and proud family man, whilst cleverly working in mannerisms of Marlon Brando's middle-aged Don in The Godfather. It's still only a small demonstration of De Niro's talents however.

Perhaps an even more important factor is the return of producer-director Francis Ford Coppola. Coppola demonstrates again his ability to focus drama, going to lengths to show us only what is important. Take, as one example out of many, the scene where Pacino and Lee Strasberg first meet. Roth's wife greets Pacino, and bustles in and out of the scene once or twice to utter a few lines, but watch the way Coppola keeps her fluttering about in the foreground, often with her back to us, framed from the shoulder down so we never see her face. Coppola allows her to appear for reasons of logic, but as she's not a character we need to remember, he doesn't allow us to connect with her visually. This is really intelligent filmmaking.

But The Godfather Part II is more than ever about stunning imagery. With a bigger budget, vaster sets and hordes of extras, Coppola shows an impressive ability to create thriving tableaux of crowds and street scenes, repeatedly using horizontal scans to move us through an environment, showing off a hundred tiny instances of real life that really make us believe in the recreation of a bygone era. This is especially true in the young Vito flashbacks, which thanks to the cinematography of Gordon Willis and the production design team lead by Dean Tavoularis, have a wonderful sepia-toned look to them. It's intriguing how Coppola also tends to keep his camera further back from the action in the those scenes, giving us the impression of something we are looking in on rather than something we are in the midst of.

And yet this concentration on the visual has perhaps been taken a little too far. There are too many rather blatant bits of symbolism, such as the business of the dividing up of the Cuba-cake, which reminds me of some kind of twee history textbook illustration. This inconsequential prop gets several amount of close-ups, and even several references in the dialogue, everything but a flashing subtitle saying ""They're carving up Cuba – geddit?"" But instead of looking clever it just seems silly to have Hyman Roth going on about his stupid cake. And what's more, there are too many references to the best ideas in The Godfather – the dark Lake Tahoe office where Michael does his dealings: the murderous little montage at the end – all of which serve little purpose other than sly winks to those who are familiar with the earlier picture. None of these motifs is executed as effectively as they were first time round, and so really they look almost like poor copycats by some lesser filmmakers. The Godfather Part II is in many ways a decent work, but compared to its illustrious predecessor it is lukewarm; a flawed attempt to rekindle some of the old magic. In fact, it is just what we have come to associate with the movie sequel.";17;29;False tt0071562;sme_no_densetsu;06/10/2010;A decent follow-up but not great as far as I'm concerned;7;"""The Godfather: Part II"" hit theatres a couple of years after the first film and made history by becoming the first sequel to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. Today, it is routinely listed alongside the original as one of the best American films of all time.

The story picks up a few years after the end of the first film. Michael is firmly established as the head of the family and has moved to Nevada where he is edging the family towards legitimacy. However, when he is beset by betrayals he systematically sets about dealing with the betrayers mercilessly. There is also a second story thread (told in flashback) that traces the early years of Vito Corleone and his introduction to mob life.

The film clocks in at a hefty 200 minutes. Unlike the first film, though, I couldn't really get caught up in either of the parallel stories so the film seemed to drag quite a bit. I didn't find the Vito storyline particularly compelling and the Michael storyline is little more than a convoluted extension of part one. These stories were meant to be compared but I don't feel that the director or the editor really constructed the film optimally for this purpose. Nevertheless, the film still has a classic scene or two, though it's nowhere near as consistent as the first film.

Most of the actors whose characters survived the first film reprised their roles here. Returnees Al Pacino & Talia Shire each landed Oscar nominations and so did newcomers Michael V. Gazzo & Lee Strasberg. However, the only actor to take home an Oscar statuette was Robert De Niro for his portrayal of the young Vito Corleone. Personally, I think that Pacino gave the best performance of the film.

Francis Ford Coppola won an Oscar for his direction but I feel that the first film was a better effort. From a visual standpoint the film is attractive, though, and the Nino Rota score was justly rewarded with an Oscar.

Ultimately, I don't feel that ""The Godfather: Part II"" lives up to its pedigree. I've watched it a few times, so I'd say that I've given it a fair shake. That being said, I realize that I'm in the vast minority here so it must be a personal thing. As far as I'm concerned, ""Chinatown"" deserves the Best Picture Oscar that went to this film.";25;46;False tt0071562;Marian20;30/08/2017;The Continuation of the Corleone Family Saga of Ambition,Ruthlessness and Amorality Is Once Again A Masterpiece;10;"The saga of the Corleone family continues from ""The Godfather"" in this classic film directed by Francis Ford Coppola entitled ""The Godfather Part II"" that was released two years after the original film was released.

This movie that stars Al Pacino and Robert De Niro,who portrays Michael Corleone and the young Vito Corleone respectively,together with Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,John Cazale,G.D Spradlin, and Method acting teacher Lee Strasberg,tells the parallel story of the expansion of Corleone crime family headed by Don Michael during the 1950's and the rise to power of the young Don Vito during the 1920's.

No question that the themes of corruption,ruthlessness,amorality and ambition continues in this film as both Michael and the young Vito continues to pursue their respective American dreams in this parallel story being told when both father-and-son were at the same age.We get to see Michael expands the family's gambling operations in Cuba and his pursuit to making the Corleone family legitimate while dealing with rival mobsters who intend to eliminate him like Frank Pentangeli and Jew mobster Hyman Roth.It also tells the story of how he dealt with the federal indictment by the U.S.Senate.As for the young Vito,we get to witness from how his family got killed by the local mafia chieftain Don Ciccio in Corleone,Italy and how he migrated to New York a young age.Then,it narrates how he started as an ordinary worker and then rose into stature and power after dealing with the area's extortionist,Don Fannucci and killing Don Ciccio to strengthen his family's power in both the United States and in Italy.

This was definitely one great film just like the original.It definitely would compare to the first film as we get to witness two great parallel stories of ambition and rise to power.In addition to that,we also get to see how much the characters of Vito and Michael deteriorated into becoming ruthless,corrupt and amoral as their power and stature increased.

Aside from great stories,we also get to see great performances from its lead stars - Al Pacino and Robert De Niro - wherein the latter won an Oscar for his portrayal the young Vito.Added to that,we also get to see great performances from the other members of the cast such as Lee Strasberg,who got nominated for an Oscar as the Jew mobster, and Diane Keaton as Kay,the embittered wife of Michael.

After more than 43 years since it was initially released in the theaters while this review is currently written,it would still be a fun to watch and it will hold up.Just like what I have stated in my review of the first film ""The Godfather"",I also would say that this film that tells the story of amorality,ruthlessness and ambition ""The Godfather Part II"" is truly a masterpiece.";7;10;True tt0071562;RohitRajkumar;14/08/2009;The best sequel ever;10;There are bound to be comparisons to 'The Godfather',but it definitely comes close to surpass its predecessor but to no avail.But that doesn't take away any credit from another gem from Francis Ford Coppola.There would have definitely been immense pressure on Coppola to deliver the second time after the first one was a huge hit.

Robert De Niro was outstanding as the young Don Vito Corleone and truly deserved his Oscar.John Cazale delivers on getting more screen space.But I was disappointed to see that Al Pacino as Michael Corleone after having overshadowed his previous work in the first and having reached greater heights in this one, did not get an Academy award.

The film does not disappoint and matches the original in every aspect.Truly outstanding cinema.;7;10;False tt0071562;bkoganbing;17/03/2008;The Continuing Saga Of The Corleones;10;Although most movie sequels never equal the original this is certainly not the case of The Godfather: Part II. Many would argue it surpasses the original. With both films declared the Best Picture by the Motion Picture Academy in their separate years, I'd hate to argue the difference.

In this case we should thank the executives at Paramount for retaining both director Francis Ford Coppola and the original The Godfather author Mario Puzo to put their talents to this film. I'd hate to think what would have happened in other hands. Certainly these two men knew their characters and knew how to expand on them. And the best thing about The Godfather: Part II is that one can pick up the story, at least the modern portion of this one without reference to the original. In fact viewing this film will give you a burning passion to see the first.

Unlike The Godfather and The Godfather: Part III, this film runs on two parallel tracks. The modern story is a continuation of Al Pacino as Michael Corleone now residing on the shores of Lake Tahoe and now directing the family affairs from Nevada where the Corleone family is heavily into gambling as we well know organized crime was back in those days of the Fifties and Sixties. He's going into partnership with Lee Strassberg playing Hyman Roth, a thinly veiled portrait of Meyer Lansky. But there are a lot of things making Pacino hesitant about this move into Cuba under the Battista dictatorship.

The prequel parallel story is how young Vito Corleone came to this country as an orphan and worked his way up to establish himself as a crime boss. Here Coppola does a brilliant job in capturing the flavor of pre-World War I New York in the Italian ghetto. Robert DeNiro is young Vito Corleone and won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar. Remarkable when you consider that two of his rivals were Lee Strassberg from this film and Michael V. Gazzo playing Frankie Pantangeli from this film as well, the Mafia kingpin turned Senate witness modeled on Joe Valachi. DeNiro and Marlon Brando have the unique distinction as players of winning an Oscar for playing the same role.

The woman do better in this film as in the original. Talia Shire got an Oscar nomination in the Supporting Actress category as Connie Corleone Rizzi. You remember her husband betrays the family and is killed in the original. She now is a drunken dependent on Pacino. Diane Keaton's character of Kay Adams Corleone is expanded here as well. She's a cultural outsider and the Sicilian vendetta code that she's expected to approve without comment becomes too much to bare. Her scene with Pacino when she tells him she's leaving him is one of the best for both in their respective careers.

Overlooked unfortunately at award time was John Cazale as Fredo Corleone. He's the middle son who's passed over for succession after eldest son James Caan is killed in The Godfather. Fredo's big moment in The Godfather is being unable to fire his weapon in defense of his father being shot and how he breaks down.

Fredo's got feelings as John Cazale dramatically points out. He does something really stupid in this film and it costs him dear. Cazale has some of the best moments in this film.

If the first Godfather film doesn't do it, The Godfather: Part II will have you permanently hooked on the inner workings and dynamics of the Corleone family both in the criminal and personal sense.;8;12;False tt0071562;wrcong;10/02/2005;Sequel + Prequel = monumental film-making;10;"Francis Ford Coppola came perilously close in this film to accomplishing something rarely, if ever, done: he nearly made the second movie revolving around a particular set of characters and themes better than the first.

In the truest sense of the word, Godfather II is NOT a sequel, nor was it intended to be. What Part II does is fill in details about Don Vito Corleone's arrival in America and rise to underworld power. That story was told by Mario Puzo in the novel, but involved too lengthy a story to include in the 1972 film. Coppola and Puzo did the next best thing: they told the prequel, the rise to power of Don Vito Corleone (Robert DeNiro) and then appended to the prequel the story of the Corleone family subsequent to Michael's gangland triumph at the close of the first film. ""Appended"" should not be taken to have a pejorative connotation. There is certainly nothing slapdash about the tale of the Corleone family's fortunes following the obliteration of the rival gang leaders at the end of the first film.

Al Pacino is stunningly believable as the still-reluctant Don Michael Corleone. He wants to move the family business toward legitimacy, but in the end events compel him to ""be strong for everyone"" by taking down all of the family's enemies, even when one of them is his older brother Fredo (John Cazale, again brilliant).

Unlike the first film, Coppola does not pull off the same level of audience empathy for the Corleone family in the second film. Clearly the life of the crime boss is costing Michael everything while he gains all the power in the world. The first film is more equivocal on that point and also remarkably draws the viewer into a world where the Corleones can be viewed with some empathy. In Part II, Michael is far more cold-blooded and consequently a less sympathetic character. He seems less drawn into the vortex of organized crime by unexpected events, as was the case in the first film, and more the ruthless manipulator.

This is really two great films in one. Vito Corleone's rise to power is portrayed with subtle intensity by DeNiro, always observant and always absorbing important information from his observations. Those scenes really capture remarkably the story of Don Vito's early years woven by Puzo in the novel. Wrapped around that prequel is a marvelous continuation of the original story with remarkable twists and turns and deft uses of historical circumstances (Congressional racketeering hearings and the Castro revolution in Cuba). This is another magnificent film, and fitting second step in the Godfather story.

Don't end the story with the first Godfather movie. See them both. As for Godfather 3, well, if you really want to go ahead, but be prepared for a let down.";8;12;True tt0071562;son_of_cheese_messiah;12/06/2010;Over ambitious over long and over rated.;5;"At the time of its release, many claimed this to be a finer film than the original. However, the passage of time has been less kind to this than that iconic movie.

Much of the problem stems from the decision to make this both the sequel and prequel to the first film at the same time. So we have the back story of Vito Corleone and the ongoing adventures of his son Michael inter-cut throughout. This adds to the films inordinate length, which would have been long enough if Michael's story alone was told, but here is stretched to almost 4 hours.

Details in both stories fail to convince, the Vito back story most of all. It is scarcely believable that a well meaning outsider could so easily take over the underworld in the manner portrayed. As played by De Niro, he is a Robin Hood 'feared by the bad, loved by the good' but why he is so universally feared not plausible. He could have easily been taken out. The real Vito Corleone would have had to have been much nastier and been prepared to deal with his opponents brutally. His character is whitewashed for Hollywood consumption. And there is some cack handed attempts at humour during, for instance, the slum landlord scene.

There is, of course much fine acting from all, especially in Michael's story arc. This differs from Vito's since while Vito's is very simple, Michael's is very very complex. Too complex perhap. Various well known events from the 50s merely are stuck together to form the backdrop. The Mafia involvement with pre-revolutionary Cuba; congressional hearings; plus a few subtle hints at the Kennedy assassination. The narrative is exceptionally loose and meandering. The writing is surprisingly unsubtle, with clinking plot points being underlined again and again.

The female characters are under-used but make the most of their meagre parts. Talia Shire's impassioned plea to her brother sticks in the mind, but elsewhere she barely speaks a word. Diane Keen has a better role and sinks her teeth into it with gusto.

The film belongs to Al Pacino who dominates this in the way that Hamlet does in Shakespeare's play. Its an accomplished performance as would be expected. There is certainly enough here to make it worth watching, but it could have been much better.";22;42;False tt0071562;lifelinespublishing;16/02/2019;pure excellence;10;I will just write a short review of this because all of the points were said on the reviews on this but I have always marveled at how great all the actors were in this film, Al Pacino had that certain charm,gentleness and yet ruthlessness in him in carrying out all the things he had to do, John Cazale as Fredo is a perfect role, sad that man died with so much acting left in him., Duvall, Talia Shire, De Niro and Diane Keaton also played their part perfectly and with so much ease...

Overall, a perfect film that teaches you about everything.;4;5;False tt0071562;otsoar;18/02/2018;Not my personal favourite, but as perfect as a film can get.;10;"The Godfather is the mother of all mafia movies, and The Godfather part II is considered not just one of the best sequels of all time but one of the best films of all time. So you could say the expectations for this film were high.

I saw the original Godfather a few months ago and while I liked it, it didn't feel to me as amazing as people make it out to be. Part II on the other hand grabbed me right from the start and I loved every minute of it.

The film tells two stories simultaniosly. One is a direct continuation of the first film, in which Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) tries to balance his family life and leading the Corleone family's criminal empire. The other tells the story of a young Vito Corleone (Robert deNiro) who is the godfather from the first film. The two different stories make the three hour run-time fly by. The slices we get of each story are perfectly paced in a way that makes every scene interesting.

This film is also a visual masterpiece. The directing and editing are flawless and the production design is also amazing. The costumes and props bring the 50s and 1900s alive in a beautiful way. The score is also perfect for the film.

All the performances are great, but Robert deNiro and Al Pacino go above and beyond in this movie. They are the final piece in the puzzle for telling the coming up-story of Vito and the tragic tale of Michael.

It's films like this that truly deserve a ""perfect"" score of 10.";4;5;False tt0071562;FilmFanInTheHouse;05/04/2009;Need I say anything?;10;The Godfather: Part II (1974, Dir. Francis Ford Coppola)

It's the 1920's and young Vito Corleone (De Niro) moves to New York to his life and new crime career, whilst in the future, his son Don Michael Corleone (Pacino) continues to further his father's legacy.

Francis Ford Coppola pulls off another epic classic which this time focuses' on two different story lines. Al Pacino is just wonderful as always to watch, but Robert De Niro gets a mention for his amazing performance. The story remains at a steady pace and never goes off the tracks, making this a truly great film.

I trust these men with my life, Senator. To ask them to leave would be an insult. – Michael Corleone (Al Pacino);4;5;False tt0071562;jansen-aui;26/06/2006;More ambitious and grand in scope, Part II packs a powerful emotional punch;10;"Given complete control over the directorial proceedings by Paramount, and a much larger budget to boot, you would be forgiven to think Francis Ford Coppola had it good when, two years after the release of The Godfather, the studio convinced him to direct The Godfather: Part II. Despite this free reign, Coppola still faced challenges – most important being the daunting task of matching the first picture, creatively and financially. There are many critics who regard the second part of the Corleone saga as not only equal, but superior than the first, and while I don't think Part II is as ""classic"" as it's original, I can concede without hesitation that this is the more ambitious and grand in scope, and certainly more powerful as an exercise in tragedy.

The Godfather: Part II continues the story of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), established in the end of part one as the new Don of the Corleone crime family, who has moved all their interests out to Nevada. Michael looks to expand his empire and invest in businesses in Havana and Miami, where Hyman Roth (one of his father's aging ex-partners) resides. When betrayal comes from where he least expects, Michael must make decisions and sacrifices, however difficult, to save his family, and in doing so will perpetually change who he is as a person. Throughout Michael's ordeal, Coppola flashes back to the turn of the century, where a young Vito Corleone (then Vito Andolini) must flee Sicily when he becomes hunted by the local Mafioso at the age of only nine. As an immigrant, we are shown the rise of Vito (Robert De Niro from young adulthood onwards) as a man of respect, loyalty, enormous generosity and ever growing authority on the streets of New York.

Coppola must be given due for the transitions between the two parallel story lines, which are absolutely seamless. They come at natural breaks so as to not take away from the pacing of either narrative, and the episodic approach to covering thirty-odd years in the young Vito storyline is perfect for keeping the audience on the edge of their seats for the developments in the Michael story. With the interconnectedness of the narrative, Coppola encourages a contrast of the way Michael and Vito take control of their respective families – what decisions they make, what they value – and this helps to further punctuate and underline the film's harrowing final scenes.

In keeping with the tone of the first picture, Part II sees the return of Gordon Willis' dark, under lit photography, and Nino Rota's memorable, distinctive score (largely utilising the same cues as the first, with the addition of a few new themes including the magnificent ""The Immigrant""). The acting across the board is quality – just as it was in the original. John Cazale has a larger role here as Fredo, whose outburst at being stepped over as the family Don is as forceful and potent as any in his regrettably short career. Newcomers to the picture give excellent supporting turns, Michael Gazzo as caporegime Frank Pentangeli and Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone, preserving Brando's famous gesture and manner, but it's Al Pacino's picture through and through – his Michael is so intense, but yet is an empty shadow of his former self. By the end of the picture, Pacino's beady black eyes are cold: completely stripped of life, and reflect upon the tragedy of the loss of the family he committed all his power to trying to protect. It's a haunting, powerful, parting frame that lasts.";4;5;False tt0071562;richarevans1;12/08/2003;Truly a masterpiece;10;"Often seen as possibly a greater film than even ""The Godfather"" this film is truly remarkable. Part of the film is a pre-quel, with Robert De Nero playing a young Marlon Brando (is that a dream casting or not?) partly it's the story of Michael Corleone as he grows into the role of Godfather. Again brilliantly filmed, great acting, a great story of love revenge etc. but in some ways it's harder to sympathise with Michael as he slips further into a hell of revenge and murder. Like watching a car-crash.";4;5;False tt0071562;bob the moo;13/04/2004;A rich epic based on great performances - a little too lush but still a great tale of the corrupting nature of power;;"Michael Corleone continues his rise within organised crime in 1950's America, by expanding his family's empire across hotels and casinos. When an attempt on his life fails Michael proceeds with his dealings in Cuba with Hyman Roth, a deal that will not be as straightforward as it appears. Meanwhile we are told the story of a young Vito's move to American and his rise from the ghetto up into the world of organised crime.

I don't know what I can actually add to the sheer weight of praise that has been heaped onto this film - it is as accomplished a film as everyone says and is rightly one of the few examples of a sequel improving and building on a film. The plot follows two separate strands, the continuing rise of Michael that is as much detrimental to his family as it is beneficial to his pocket; the other thread being Vito's arrival in America as a child and his rise up within the Italian ghettos. The two stories are not as intertwined as I had remembered - they are very separate and the film can go for quite a while before it switches over. In a way this works better as it allows both stories to go ahead without fragmenting either too much.

This film, as with many gangster films, has been accused of glamorising the life of crime and those involved in it, however, if anything Godfather II does this even less than the original did. The film shows the moral collapse of Michael in the same way as the first showed his power. In fairness it does contrast the rise of the two dons - showing how Vito manages to keep his family together. Despite this I would still argue that Michael's path is far from glamorous.

The two narratives are both excellent but for different reasons. Vito's rise is very interesting and provides solid back story to the first film and we can clearly see the change in Vito from a quiet young man to the influential powerbroker that he became - we also sadly see the rise in his demons and his viciousness. Meanwhile Michael's tread sees more powerful deals and double crosses as he continues to gain more power. This was overly complicated for me the first time I saw it but, with reviewing it I have gotten more from it each time - more understanding and more enjoyment. The twin stories are both engaging and the three hour plus running time passes effortlessly - this is a saga and it never feels like the running time was anything more than what was necessary.

The cast are fantastic. Naturally the kudos go to the two leads, and they deserve it. Pacino has a less showy role than in the first film as he has already done his falling - here we only see further proof of the corrupting nature of his power. De Niro steals the film this time with a measured performance that parallels Michael's change in the first film - it is a performance that lacks a certain amount of personality but shows us the traits that the film is interested in. As before the support cast are great, Duvall is reliable as ever, while the most improved role goes to Cazale, who's Fredo becomes more important to the story and almost becomes a biblical character. Quality comes in waves with Shire, Strasberg, Spradlin, Kirby and many others with solid performances. Keaton is good but she is not given as much time as I would have liked, even if her scenes are important and powerful.

Overall this is a great film that is based on a classy pair of stories that bring the subtexts with them and a collection of characters that are well developed by a script and some great actors. It may be a little too lavish and plush for my own personal tastes, but it is a rich story. To a certain degree the production values and sheer class of this film could be accused of glamorisation, but generally those who say this have managed to totally miss the fact that this is a cautionary tale that shows the corruption of power.";11;19;False tt0071562;santmusik;11/09/2018;THIS MOVIE INSPIRED ME BIG TIME;10;I have to say that ever since I watched tis movie, my whole life changed. Thanks!;5;7;False tt0071562;NikkoFranco;25/05/2018;A must see for all cinebuffs;10;The Godfather Parts 1 and 2 is something that every self-respecting cinebuff must see, whether once , or again and again, there is no shame in admitting that something as beautiful book story from Mario Puzo reaches a wider audience through the silver screen.

As it is told in parts how Don Corleone escaped the claws of vengeance as a young child in Italy ( the young adult played seamlessly by Robert de Niro) and ending up in Staten Island without a word of English after being rescued by good samaritans, to the memories of his mother being assassinated right before his eyes, then intermittent change of scenes with Michael Corleone ( Al Pacino) in the present day who already took the mafia helm from his father Don Corleone.

Betrayal by your own kin, plotting for revenge at every opportunity, slowly and wyly eradicating all enemies, this film is THE film no CGI or modern tech can remake nor surpass. Superb acting by the cast and the haunting music that became known as the Godfather's theme. It is just marvelous.;5;7;False tt0071562;powermandan;04/12/2014;Better Than The Original? Maybe. Unbelievable Ride? HELL YEAH!!;10;"The Godfather Part II is said by many to be the best sequel ever. I personally think that is arguable, since it arguably surpasses its proceeder and checking out the Lord of the Rings sequels and the Empire Strikes Back. Say this is the best sequel ever and I will not disagree. Say this is better than the first and I will agree. Honestly, I keep changing my mind about which instalment is better every time I watch them. This last time I watched them, the first one seemed better to me. The time before, this one was the superior picture. I don't care which is better, as long as I have 200 minutes of no interruptions while watching this.

With the success of The Godfather in 1972, it was only natural for there to be a sequel. The Godfather Part II acts as both a sequel and a prequel, with the sequel being written by Coppola and Puzo and the prequel being taken from the novel. When Pacino broke out in the first movie, he topped it one year later with Serpico. His performance in this tops Serpico and everything else he's ever done. Unfortunately, he lost his sure Oscar win to Art Carney. Yes, Carney was worthy, but put him in the same category as Al Pacino for perhaps the best role ever and he becomes very unworthy. The people at the Academy probably thought Pacino would just get better and they could give him an award later. That would not come until 1993 when he won for a role in Scent of a Woman that was inferior to all that he did in the 70s. At least the Academy got the Best Picture win right. That was a given. Pacino's rival/friend/co- star, Robert De Niro took home the win for Best Supporting Actor, beating out their acting teacher, Lee Strasberg. De Niro became the first Oscar winner to not say a word of English. I don't know what it was about his portrayal, but there was some sort of magic contained with utter brilliance. Strasberg and Michael Gazzo where also fantastic, but both did not possess an unknown magic that few can bring to the table.

The prequel follows a child Vito Corleone who's family is poor. He witnesses his family begin murdered by Corleone's most powerful mob boss. He heads to America and grows up on the streets there too. Years later, an adult Vito (De Niro) rises to the top of New York's underworld and is determined to avenge his family's death. Revenge stories like this have been done to death, but almost none have been executed this good. The sequel takes place a few years after the first with Michael (Pacino) as the Don. After he successfully dodges an assassination attempt, ordered by Hyman Roth (Strasberg), Michael's fears about loyalty, betrayal and murder lead him to a severe paranoid state making him a deadly madman.

If there was one flaw this had, it would be that the antagonist in the sequel isn't much of a threat; we know Michael can destroy him and all he has. One reason the first one worked so well was because the family was losing and audience did not know how the family would regain power. That masterstroke isn't quite achieved in this. So maybe the first one is better.

Both stories are less complex than the original, but both together make one hefty team. Al Pacino outdoes Marlon Brando and himself in one of the top five greatest roles of the screen. He leads an all-star cast in what is arguably better acting than the first. With most of this being arguably better than the first, Coppola's direction surpasses the first. The cinematography, sets and camera tricks beat out all the first had, which were great.

4/4";5;7;True tt0071562;Boba_Fett1138;05/11/2009;The movie that does everything right.;10;"As far as sequels are concerned; they just don't get any better than this. As a matter of fact ""The Godfather: Part II"" even ranks above the sublime ""The Godfather"", which got made 2 years earlier, starring mostly the same cast.

The movie connects nicely with the first movie and decides to start off were the first movie had finished. Michael is the new Don now and he continues his father work by leading a crime syndicate based in New York. Besides the usual struggles with other the other families and other characters who are looking for opportunities to gain more power and control, Michael also needs to handle his personal life with his wife and his other family members, who aren't all on the same line.

But ""The Godfather: Part II"" is not just a movie that continues what the first movie had started. It also adds a story-line of the young Vito Corleone, played in the first movie by Marlon Brando. In this movie he is being portrayed by Robert De Niro, who wasn't really a big star yet at the time. It's amazing how these two different story-lines, set at completely different time periods and also in essence have really nothing to do with each other, blend in so perfectly. The historical settings of the New York of the early 20th century are also truly impressive.

It's a movie that got practically made by the same cast and crew as the first successful movie. Of course there also are some new addition to the cast this time, in which the earlier mentioned Robert De Niro and Lee Strasberg impress the most. Both also received an Oscar nomination in the category for best supporting actor, along with Michael V. Gazzo but it was Robert De Niro who would eventually take the statue back home.

What also makes this movie an even better one than its predecessor is the fact that this movie is filled with some classic moments of cinema. It contains some of the best known sequences and phrases. It also contains some great constructed and build-up sequences, for which the credit really needs to go to Francis Ford Coppola. Also the characters are more developed and expanded in this movie. A true accomplishment for a movie with so many characters in it but then again the movie has also more than 3 hours to tell its story.

A sequel that even surpasses its brilliant predecessor.

10/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/";5;7;False tt0071562;OllieZ;15/01/2007;A great sequel and enduring vision of corruption and family.;10;"Without a doubt, Coppola made four of the best films of the 70's. The Godfaher Part 1, Part 2, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now. Out of these, The Godfather Part 2 remains my favourite.

It continues the Corleone family tale, of greed and corruption and yet Part 2 adds another vein to the bloodstream of this biblical tale; the story of Vito Corleone and his arrival in New York. The cinematographer, Gordon Willis creates a sepia-washed dream of a New York. Every shot is sumptuous ad full of depth - the production value was a help too, with some of the most authentic streets scenes ever committed to film.

Though, as wonderful as the film looks, the acting is stellar to. De Niro completely transforms himself from the urban maniacs like Johnny from Mean Streets and Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver, to form Vito Corleone, the younger Marlon Brando. De Niro doesn't over cook the character, instead he simmers; his eyes tell two tales, one of being content, the other of contempt, for the killing of his family.

De Niro is backed up by great co-stars, such as Bruno Kirby who played the young Clemenza. The story itself in this section of the film is slow burning, much like the rest of the film, yet is here to serve a contrast to the story of Michael Corleone in Nevada.

This is the part in the trilogy where Michael transforms from the ""college boy"" and ""war hero"" of part 1, into the heartless, muted confusion that he embodies here. Pacino plays the part with ease and never goes wild and shout, much like his later work (Glengarry Glen Ross, Godfather Part 3...). Keaton is superb as the WASP wife, Kay, who tries to break free of the corruption she has married into. Cazale, who plays Fredo is wonderful too, a helpless, jealous character, who forms one of the best brother characters in film history. The co-stars are also great, with Strasberg as Hyman Roth.

Just as Michael's family is dissolving, Vito's is just beginning. The two fragments of the Corleone history run side by side to depict the downfall of Michael's character. Constantly trying to please his dead father, Michael talks of family, but doesn't understand how to sustain it.

A classic.";5;7;False tt0071562;MaxBorg89;15/03/2006;This is a sequel that demands respect!;10;"After the huge success of The Godfather, Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo go on with narrating the history of the Corleone family. It picks up right where we left it: Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) has replaced his deceased father as head of the family, becoming one of the most powerful criminals in America. Soon enough, however, he will realize absolute power also means absolute solitude. Apart from his henchmen and his lawyer (Robert Duvall) he can't trust anyone (""Keeps your friends close, but your enemies closer""), including his own brother Fredo (John Cazale). Hell, even his wife (Diane Keaton) doesn't feel safe next to him anymore.

As we witness Michael's dealings with power, corruption and murder, we're also given the chance to see what gave birth to the Corleone dynasty in the first place. We learn, through flashbacks, that a boy named Vito Andolini had to escape from his native Sicily when his father was brutally assassinated. Once at Ellis Island, his home-town was mistaken for his surname. From that day on, he would be known as Vito Corleone. Yes, it's the same Vito Corleone who made ""offers you can't refuse"" in the first movie, and this time we're shown how he slowly became a feared gangster in his younger years. It's a riveting look at yesterday's society, which doesn't differ that much from ours: power is still as easy to obtain as it is to lose forever, and no matter how sophisticated man's methods can get, violence is still the ""best"" way to achieve something under specific circumstances.

Just like Part I, this impeccable, superior sequel is masterfully staged by the filmmakers, their passion for the material breaking out of every single frame. The screenplay is flawless, Coppola and Puzo seamlessly moving back and forth in time to show us the origin and fate of the most beloved cinematic family that's ever shown up on a screen.The family theme emerges off-screen as well, as the director's father, Carmine Coppola, helps Nino Rota with the superb, tragic score.

But let's not forget the extraordinary actors who made each member of the Corleones memorable: Pacino steals the show with his best performance alongside Scarface's Tony Montana, while Duvall, Cazale and Talia Shire (not to mention James Caan in a priceless flashback cameo) display the same charisma they had in the previous installment. Yet there's one guy who tops all of them, the only one I haven't mentioned so far: Robert De Niro, who won his first Oscar for playing the young Vito Corleone. It's one of those rare times people don't complain about the fact that a thespian was replaced in a sequel (okay, so Marlon Brando wouldn't have looked young enough for the part, but otherwise he would have been perfect): De Niro's star-making turn has the power of not making you miss the older Don for the entire movie. It's a top notch performance based on gestures and looks rather than words (but then again, he only speaks Sicilian throughout the film), which would become De Niro's trademark and which he proved to master perfectly long before Travis Bickle, Jake La Motta and Jimmy Conway made their appearance.

Before The Godfather: Part II was released, all sequels were considered B-movies. I can see why opinions changed after this film: watch it back-to-back with its predecessor and you'll feel rewarded for giving that awesome twosome part of your time.";5;7;False tt0071562;harry_smyth;23/08/2005;A truly stunning feat in film making;10;"In my opinion this is the finest of the crime genre ever made. It is thoroughly compelling from start to finish and the fastest three hours i can remember spending. Every aspect of the film is virtually flawless; plot, cinematography and in particular the acting. Pacino and De Niro are amazing in their respective roles and one can only look on in awe at the levels of believability in the characters that they attain. Although i would not consider De Niro's performance to be the greatest of his career as i think he achieved even more in his portrayals of Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Jake La Motta in Raging Bull; for me this is Pacino at his best. The camera work in the flashback sequences chronicling the early life of Vito is stunning and would make you think you are looking at a picture from the twenties. There is obviously a lot of debate as to which is the better film, this or its predecessor, but i consider this to be superior as it holds the viewers attention more. An absolute Classic. 10/10";5;7;False tt0071562;arthurclay;02/07/2005;Considered by some;10;Critics to be better than the original artistically at least. I am still not sure myself but they may be right. It continues the legacy of the Corleone Family and digs into the roots of their criminal empire. There are a series of flashbacks and that could be confusing to some and to be honest I'm not sure that was positive for the flow of the picture but who am I to criticize that. There is more violence here than in the first Godfather and several scenes, like the original, feature real life events. I personally like the first one better probably because of Brando but I will watch both without reservation. Pacino shines here as brightly as in the first one and DeNiro gives it some much needed weight to replace or more accurately continue Brando's character. It is also much sadder than the first in my opinion and shows the misery and depravity of young Vito's life and why he was what he was. It is a true masterpiece.;6;9;False tt0071562;TheLittleSongbird;24/11/2010;One of the best sequels ever made;10;I do have to agree that calling Godfather Part II a sequel is rather insulting. It is one of those rare sequels that almost outdoes the first, and considering how amazing the first Godfather was that says a lot. The Godfather Part II is longer, but in some ways it is also richer. People may say like with the first it is slow and takes a while to unfold. Of course, but I think that was deliberate. Both this and the first Godfather have an elegiac quality to them that makes them even more compelling.

For one thing, the film is very well made. The cinematography is simply gorgeous, whether it is dark or autumnal or picturesque, and the settings are wondrous. The music once again is outstanding, it is haunting and sticks in your head for a very long time. Then there is a brilliantly written screenplay that is intelligent and thoughtful, masterly direction from Francis Ford Coppola and a fabulously constructed story. The film does have some wonderful scenes-: the scenes where Vito flees Sicily has the grandeur of a silent movie, while the scenes in Cuba actually avoid being clumsy and confusing and the climax is extremely chilling. Not to mention the Pop Goes the Weasel scene, which was very funny.

The acting is superb once again. Vito is brilliantly portrayed by Robert DeNiro in one of his better performances. I was also taken with Robert Duvall as loyal Tom, John Cazale and Diane Keaton. But the picture belongs to Al Pacino. He was great carrying the first Godfather movie, but he is even better here. He is simply phenomenal, and to be honest I think he should have won that Oscar. Overall, an amazing film and one of the best sequels ever to be conceived. 10/10 Bethany Cox;7;11;False tt0071562;Galina_movie_fan;30/11/2009;Requiem for a Dream;10;"You can write the volumes about the Godfather Part II phenomena. There is nothing that has not been said about it greatness, magnificence, perfection that radiate in every aspect, every moment, every inch of every frame, every performance, quote, glance, in the sound of the music, in both parts of the story, past and present that take the viewer to the journey in search of American Dream that turn to the epic vision of gaining ultimate power coming with ultimate loneliness. The story of one family of Italian Immigrants begins in Sicily in 1901, goes to New York City's ""Little Italy"" and spans over the most part of the 20th century. The viewers and the critics often argue which film is better, the original Godfather (1972) or Part 2. (1974). Both films are perfect in every way, and the vision and movie-making talent of a young director named Francis Ford Coppola are simply awesome. His idea of making an American epic, the story of one family raise to power, the price it takes and the eventual fall instead of a low budget fast moving gangster movie as the MGM studio had planned proved to be the stroke of genius. It is not easy to choose the best of two but I prefer Part II because I found the way Coppola tells two parts of the story by intertwining them and cutting effortlessly, seamlessly between the different time periods and geographic locations - incomparable. Yes, it's been done before and after him but never was I touched so deeply and amazed by the artistry and brilliancy of moving between past and future. I am surprised that the film was not rewarded for the editing because the team of editors contributed enormously in what is the magic of The Godfather, Part II. The film is unique by being at the same time a prequel and a sequel to the original Godfather because it tells the stories of young Vito Corleone first steps to the top of the criminal world and of Michael, his youngest son who became Godfather after his father passing. Part 2 has the most important scene in the whole trilogy, the scene when Vito kills Don Fanucci - the choice that would eventually lead to his raise as the crime family patriarch. I can go on forever. It is known how many great performances Al Pacino gave back in the 70s, his prime time (four Oscar nominations in the row, 1973-1976) but Michael Corleone in Part 2 is something that has to be studied and admired for as long as the young aspiring actors dream of not being stars but the ACTORS. I am not a fan of Pacino's latest films and roles. He screams a lot, he overplays but all screams can't say more than one glance from the scene during the New Year Celebration in Habana. He said so much by his eyes only that had literally darkened with disbelief, grief, anger, and despair when he realized that he had been betrayed by his own brother Fredo - who broke his heart and left the viewers heartbroken. John Casale had only given five performances during his tragically short career but every one of them was remarkable and every movie he worked in belongs to the best America has produced. ...Robert de Niro speaking only Italian as young Vito gives one of his finest performances speaking. He plays a beautiful, dignified, decent man, hard working, loving father and husband who would stop at nothing to make his family happy the best way he knows how... And above all - the melancholic, melodious, mournful score by Nino Rota, the Requiem for a dream, the best Rota's tunes outside Federico Fellini films, As great as it is, Godfather Part II would never be the same without musical themes written by Nino Rota specifically for the film, especially the main theme or the Kay theme - the sound of love lost and longing... And in the end - perhaps the best flash back scene ever filmed, Christmas and Vito Corleone's birthday celebration - the family is close together, the grown up children sit around the table, talk about future, some choices have been made, but there is no alienation, betrayal, losses, regrets, death....yet.";7;11;True tt0071562;Coxer99;21/03/1999;The Godfather Part II;10;"I have to agree with Robert Towne when he said this film is one of the greatest achievements in the history of screenwriting. When the camera follows DeNiro as he moves from rooftop to rooftop, falling into the abyss filled with crime and corrpution, it will affect him and his family forever. DeNiro is slick and smooth as the young Vito Corleone. The rise of Michael Corleone's power is superbly captured by Coppola and delivered with cold hearted villainy by Al Pacino, in his finest performance. Strasberg is also solid in his performance of Hyman Roth. It's nice to see him put that ""method"" to work. The only one who feels out of it here is Duvall who seems to be simply going through motions. It may have been that Tom's character is also given limited depth within the script. It is a superb sequel, argued by many to be superior to the original.";7;11;False tt0071562;jmlawton;06/03/2012;Astonishingly unapproachable, bored me to tears;;"I have been forced to watch the Godfather trilogy by a friend of mine who thinks, as do most people, that they are the best thing since sliced bread. I found ""The Godfather"" just about watchable, but no more - I would have given up if my friend hadn't been there, but this was completely intolerable. I couldn't follow who the people were (and didn't care) I couldn't relate it to the previous film. I couldn't relate the 1930s stuff to the 1950s stuff. There is no excitement no tension, no nothing. A complete waste of an evening. And it's so interminably long too. I'm having trouble filling out my ten lines for the review, because the film left almost no impression on me - except that feeling that I used to get at school when I was forced to sit through the most boring lesson in the world. And God help me, I'm going to have to watch the third one. Like taking cod-liver oil. Ugh.";17;33;False tt0071562;dommercaldi;05/10/2020;Although Not As Good As The First One, It's Still Mind-Blowingly Amazing;9;Pros: 1. The score is utterly magical with its quintessentially Italian feel which adds so much depth to the film. 2. The movie does a masterful job at creating a stifling atmosphere of tension and suspense, even with just the long silences and dialogue. 3. The set and costume design is brilliant, especially Michael Corleones' (Al Pacino) suits which just scream power. 4. The production is mind-blowing, particularly considering the scope of the film. 5. The transitions between the past and the present are perfect as they never miss a beat. 6. The violence feels incredibly raw and grounded in its execution which serves to harden its impact. 7. The scene where Fredo Corleone (John Cazale) comes clean to Michael Corleone about his betrayal is amazingly acted, particularly in regards to John Cazale, and it's exceedingly emotional. 8. Robert De Niro (Vito Corleone), Al Pacino, and John Cazale give phenomenal performances. 9. The ending sequence, like the one in the first film, masterfully ties everything together.

Cons: 1. The movie skips over Michael Corleone's first 7 years as the Don, but it would have been great to watch him in action after he took up his father's mantle.;2;2;False tt0071562;educallejero;04/08/2020;More complex (but not as good overall);10;After the first hour (or so) the movie improves into the elite level of the original, only with a more complex story, full of twists and turns and complications, filled with as intense and gripping moments, and full of Pacino and De Niro's impossibly great acting.

But the first hour is a bit boring setting the table for what was about to happen, and with some really long sequences here and there after that, the more than three hours are a bit much. Just a bit though. And the ending is superb.;2;2;False tt0071562;three8s2013;03/08/2020;It was an abortion. An abortion, Michael.;10;Just like our marriage is an abortion. Something that's unholy and evil. I didn't want your son, Michael! I wouldn't bring another one of you sons into this world! It was an abortion, Michael! It was a son Michael! A son! And I had it killed because this must all end!

Wowza! They don't make movies like this anymore. Better than the first? I say yes because this is more complicated. Just read the header. A true masterpiece.;2;2;False tt0071562;Farasaanjani;24/07/2020;A great movie you can watch again and again;10;Because you'll probably be confused the first time around. It's not a coincidence it stars some of the greatest actors of our time.;2;2;False tt0071562;jamie-rowlands1;19/07/2020;Continuation, conclusion and consequence...;10;"A good sequel should do two things: continue the story of the original, but also be a story in its own right. Most sequels try this and fail - sometimes it's made because of the financial success of the first film, and the studio wants to cash in; sometimes it's because the first film said everything that needed to be said and the original idea's been thinly exploited. Often, it's a mixture of both. The Godfather: Part II is a rare example of a sequel having the same power as the first, expanding the world we already know, adding context to things we've already seen, but also telling us a story (well, two actually) that can, proudly and confidently, stand on its own. In fact, it's almost unfair to label this film a sequel given the slightly negative connotations of the word, because it scarcely gets done this well. It's another work of art from Francis Ford Coppola.

The debate rages on amongst film fans - which Godfather film is the best? Well, it's not the third, although there are moments of brilliance in it, and it could well be the second (filmically, it might just clinch it), but for my money it's the first. That's not to detract from the achievement of this film, it's just personal preference, and I've rated it a ten so it's clear how highly I admire it. There's really not a lot in it.

The cinematography in Part II is stunning, some of the very best I've seen in a film, and possibly the Academy's greatest failure (in its entire history) is the lack of nomination here for Gordon Willis. Fredo, underused in the first, is also given more to do in the second film - he becomes an integral part of the story and we also get to understand what makes him tick. The scene, my favourite in the film, where he finally lets rip at Michael, following his discovery that Fredo's the family traitor, is staggeringly good - years of resentment comes pouring out of him after being passed over for his younger brother. Another Academy Award failure - where was John Cazale's nomination? Diane Keaton, too, as Kay, for me a character so integral to the whole saga, when she tells Michael the miscarriage she suffered wasn't that at all, it was an abortion. The fear and sadness in her eyes, knowing he'd hate her for it (spoiler: he does), but the absolute conviction in her decision, makes it another hugely underrated performance in the film, and in her career. De Niro as the young Vito, Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth, Pacino again as Michael - all great work. The music too, again, is haunting and operatic, adding so much. There really is so much to love about this film.

But, for me, the thing that puts the second just slightly below the first is the journey of Michael as a character. The first film took him from being the vulnerable war hero who had shunned the family business, by all accounts a good man, all the way to Mafia kingpin who ordered the deaths of those who tried to destroy his family. In Part II, he does the unthinkable (poor Fredo), but he starts off as a man warped by his own importance and hell bent on protecting his family, and he ends the film that way too - even though, as it turns out, the thing his family might need protection from is Michael himself (poor Fredo!). It's a small thing, and the character does subtly change in the second film, but the journey of Michael in the first is what made it so fascinating and captivating to watch. It's also, the second film, just a tad too long and the story's slightly harder to follow.

It's a work of art, though. No doubt. And it delivers a gut punch in the final few minutes that's become one of the greatest and most shocking endings in film history. Poor, poor Fredo...";2;2;True tt0071562;AzgotheDefiler;19/07/2020;No Words;9;The First part was amazing and although 2nd part is good cant defeat the first part . Again amazing writing , acting , direction and a must watch . Although the Vito Corleone back story seems weird at first with some absurd editing it is an amazing story of its own .;2;2;False tt0071562;Dragava;18/07/2020;The Godfather: Part II - Dragava Review;9;The only negatives produced by this film and its predecessor are that they're nigh-impossible to match in terms of cinematic strength. Perhaps we'll never see pictures like these again. Staggering filmmaking.;2;2;False tt0071562;Best_Professional_Music_Artist;10/07/2020;No one should miss this;10;Cant decided if part 1 or 2 is better... both beyond amazing!!;2;2;False tt0071562;paul-07726;01/07/2020;exciting;9;A fantastic exciting movie, from beginning to end I was in the movie!;2;2;True tt0071562;adeckofcards;26/06/2020;Doubly better;10;Often when you think of the second parts you say that these are never good, but it was only to be expected that 'The Godfather Part II' was the exception. How could you beat 'The Godfather', a practically perfect movie? It certainly wasn't an easy task, but Coppola knew how to do it.. Repeat the formula, but do it doubly better. In this second film we see how Michael takes care of the family's criminal business as well as seeing the beginnings and youth of Vito Corleone. It is quite interesting how these two narratives contrast, both very intuitive, in the first one seeing how Michael destroys his family in his search for power, while Vito builds it. In this way Coppola makes the two apparently separate stories interconnected in a way that is both subtle and masterful. But the real achievement of this second part may be as a slingshot in Michael and his criminal business, which in turn makes his humanity and family relationships compromised, giving the film a non-existent drama in the first part. Finally the conclusion I draw from this film is that Francis Ford Coppola has achieved higher status as an artist by being able to not only match his first masterpiece, but to make it even better.;2;2;False tt0071562;denzil-dunphy;20/06/2020;Simply the greatest movie ever made;10;Alongside the first Godfather it's a masterpiece and deserves its place as the greatest movie ever made.;2;2;False tt0071562;zml-90083;27/05/2020;Part II;9;Compared with the first one, I think each has its own merits. If you have to have a high score, the first one has a score of 0.1 points higher in my heart than the second one, both of which;2;2;False tt0071562;icc-12655;26/05/2020;Classic;9;After seeing The Godfather and improving it as one of my favorite films, I wanted to get more into The Godfather so I rented this. Words can't describe how great this sequel was. The acting once again was amazing and the story and how the movie went on just never got me bored. Everything in this movie was clearly beautiful. The ending by far was my favorite when there all sitting at the table talking. There were so many great scenes like Vito when he was younger, Fredo at the lake, and many many more. You have to see this movie because it's just brilliant filmaking. It's not better than it's first film but still an extremely worth sequel.;2;2;True tt0071562;saadanathan;25/05/2020;"Simply the best of ""the godfather"" 9/10";9;"For a while I've been thinking what makes ""The Godfather part two"" so successful. As it has won 6 academy awards and is well known among the fans and the world. Eventually I came to the conclusion that ""the godfather part two"" is amazing for its story: both story arcs of Michael Corleone and Vito Corleone are fantastic, challenging and beautiful. Robert DeNiro is an amazing actor, one of his best roles, Al Pacino = revolutionary. The character of Hyman Roth is smart and well written. The score composed by Nino Rota is perfectly balanced with the tone of the movie, the cinematography of Gordon Willis nailes it again. A lot of great shots and camera movements. The most emotional part of the film is the scene Michael is at the ""top"", the most powerful Don of all but alone without family and friends. The flashback of the family at the table waiting for Vito to return and then Michael is left all alone shows what he has become and how far he went to ""protect"" the family until there is no more family left to be with him. The shot of him sitting alone closess the movie and ends his arc for now.";2;2;True tt0071562;huahongdou;17/05/2020;If it is necessary to see a movie, this is one.;10;Darker and more violent than the first movie, the male owner is more handsome and the ending is more sad. It is the beginning of Mike's life tragedy. The plot of two interlaced generations of godfathers is great!;2;2;True tt0071562;slaycock-92298;17/05/2020;My offer is nothing;10;I don't generally enjoy being depressed but in this case I feel a depression of total uplift. From the crushed linen shirt sleeve through to the left to ponder at the supper table and everything in between (especially Mr De Niro) this film has my attention and admiration in a race of appreciation. Sicily, New York, Nevada, Cuba- wherever the scene is laid it does not fail. From the spirit and determination of Vito to the decay and decline of Michael this film is an engraving of cinematic blessing. Thank you Francis and all who participated! Salut;2;2;False tt0071562;AnirbanGoswami1;14/05/2020;Breathtaking....;10;"When Al Pacino,Robert De Niro are in the movie,you don't have to think twice how the movie will be.Actually this movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other.It is a film which does better than its predessor, ""The Godfather"". The acting is just as fantastic, I can't believe Al Pacino lost the Oscar, and for once Robert De Niro was even better, he was truly amazing, and interestingly he fails to say a single word in English. The direction is also amazing, Francis Ford Coppola even does a better job than he did in The Godfather, and Apocalypse Now. The visual effects are so much better than the amazing one's in the original Godfather. One of the best films ever, a must see. Flawless.Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Lee Strassberg, and John Cazale give excellent supporting performances. Carmine Coppola's and Nino Rota's score is a masterpiece of music. The movie is expertly filmed and the cinematography is superb.";2;2;False tt0071562;kuangzao;01/04/2020;well constructed film;10;Controversial opinion: way too long, could have made a tighter movie out of just the content set in the movie's present. That said, a very well constructed film.;2;2;False tt0071562;keirjosephwilson;13/02/2020;I was rather skeptical about this film;10;If you read my review of The Godfather you'd know I was very impressed. And so, when I heard people saying this film was even better than the original, I was rather skeptical. After all, this film doesn't have any Marlon Brando in it, and he was arguably the best part of the original, and more than that, any film topping The Godfather is an impressive task which few films are capable of pulling off, what with how good that film is, nevermind the film's own sequel. However, upon watching this film, I have to say, this film might actually be better than the original Godfather. It's hard to say definitely because they are such different films, and myself, I can't really say which film is better due to said difference, but there are certainly elements here that work better than they did in the original Godfather, and at the very least the two films are comparable in terms of quality (and trust me even that is high praise).;2;2;False tt0071562;d-24473;22/01/2020;The Godfather II, the Don of Drama;10;"Exhilarating, intense, passionate. These are words often used to describe Francis Ford Coppola's 1974 film, ""The Godfather II"". The film certainly delivers on all of those descriptions, and then some. It maintains the same themes of family, betrayal, and revenge as its preceding film, The Godfather, while still keeping the experience fresh and invigorating to experience.

The story is a continuation of The Godfather, following Michael Corleone played brilliantly by Al Pacino. After his father's death he becomes the new Don of the Corleone family. Due to the events that occurred in the previous installment, Michael has pulled out of New York to consolidate his operation in Nevada. While in his home, Michael is the victim of an assasination attempt. He suspects betrayal within his own family, and leads his own investigation into the matter. Meanwhile Michael has ambitions to expand business into Florida and Cuba with his father's old business partner Hyman Roth (played by Lee Strasberg). Throughout the movie it transitions using a flashback to Michael's father, Vito Corleone played by Robert De Nero. It takes us through his life growing up in Sicily, Italy, and eventually immigrating to New York. We see how Vito grew the Corleone name into a respected and powerful symbol, and building his business from the ground up.

Coppola displays his creative skill in screenwriting by telling two compelling narratives in the same film. The way he uses lighting to change the mood and tone of the setting adds depth to each scene. It creates an eerie and intense feeling at just the right moments, striking emotion into the scenes. The only problem I found with the writing was if you don't have any historical context, you will find yourself somewhat confused about what is happening. Though the use of history in the story is done perfectly, and adds another creative layer to the Cuba arc of the story. If you aren't paying attention or miss details because of the laid back and casual way lines are delivered at some key moments, then the following scene might fly over your head. My first viewing of the film I found myself asking myself ""Why are they doing that?"", or ""Why did that happen?"". Despite this, the story is still told in a mature and creative way that held my attention throughout the entire three and a half hour run time. All major themes found in the previous film family, betrayal, and revenge are built upon in this one. Each theme plays an important role in each of the decisions that are made. Coppola mixes themes that are like oil and water to make a shocking and compelling narrative. All themes in the film are ones that the majority of people watching can relate to, which allows the viewer to connect better with the characters and what they're feeling. The acting in the film mustn't go overlooked either. Al Pacino delivers his most notable performance in this film. I was able to feel the anger and passion through the screen during a major twist while he was arguing with his wife about their unborn child. All of the context built throughout the film and knowing how important family is for Michael, tears at the viewer which wouldn't be possible without Al Pacino's incredible performance. Robert De Nero and Robert Duvall each play their roles very notably, they where each casted perfectly and couldn't imagine any other actor playing their roles. There are some moments where the acting could be improved, like how a dead body is clearly breathing if you look close enough which can break the immersion. It's a very insignificant gripe, but worth mentioning. The soundtrack in the film is beautifully produced, and at times Coppola uses music being played in the scene to make the setting feel more natural.

The Godfather II is truly a timeless masterpiece of a film. It is the perfect example of a sequel done right, building on the key themes and elements that defined the previous film. The use of history and the blending of themes that on the surface wouldn't mix creates a compelling, exhilarating, and intense story that will hook you deep the entire time. Coppola is definitely a titan in the drama genre, which resulted in one of the most influential films of our time.";2;2;False tt0071562;eoing-35358;22/01/2020;The best movie ever made;10;Watch it, some of the best acting I've ever seen to date. And this movie is over 30 years old.;2;2;False tt0071562;peeedeee-94281;20/11/2019;A Good but Not Great Sequel (The First Part is Way Better);7;I commend Coppola for taking on Pt 2 and filling in a bit of Viteo Corleone's history, and continuing Michael's saga, with parallels between the two. It was a good sequel, but I didn't find it as engaging as the first one, which I've seen countless number of times. I just watched Pt 2 recently after not having seen it for a number of years. I'm not sure why it doesn't have the same feeling as the first. I think the lack of direction (i.e. a clear plot line) didn't help. There was an attempt on Michael's life, and there was talk here and there of doing some extra business, but a lot of it just seemed vague. Much of the movie was spent on the strained relationship between Michael and his family. Another missed opportunity was explaining Don Vito Corleone's rise to power. You see him assassinate the neighbourhood Don at one point, but then we fast forward years later when he's grown a mustache and is doing favors for people, and vice versa. But we don't get any information on whether he's affiliated with the crime boss that was the boss of the guy he killed, or if he had formed a completely different family. I guess that would have been a 4.5hr movie. Overall, a good, but not great sequel. Not as quotable either, like the first movie. Did it deserve the Best Oscar Nom and Win. I guess so. There were a lot of great movies that year. But I think the juggernaut of the Godfather saga was too much to pass up giving it the win.;2;2;False tt0071562;JMichaelAtchue;24/10/2019;The Greatest Crime Drama of All Time;10;"The first ""Godfather"" is one of my favorite movies. So is ""The Godfather Part II,"" which is not only superior to the original but has a serious claim to being my favorite movie of all time. While Marlon Brando's presence is sorely missed, ""Part II"" does everything the original did and does it better. Its story is deeper, richer, and ultimately more thought provoking. While ""Part I"" was a tale of good and evil, ""Part II"" explores the Mafia as the ultimate perversion of the American Dream - something that took the innocence of the immigrant ideal and warped it into a criminal monstrosity.

""Part I"" showed how a good man can become evil. ""Part II"" continues that story and demonstrates how an amoral but complicated man can lose his own soul in doing what he thinks is right. Like ""Part I,"" ""Part II"" is endlessly entertaining but it's also more emotionally involving and satisfying. I love how the filmmakers show the parallel stories of Vito and Michael Corleone, who're both played brilliantly by Robert De Niro and Al Pacino. The fact that Al Pacino didn't win the Oscar for ""Part II"" is unbelievable; it's easily the best performance of his career. In fact everyone in ""Part II"" is great, from Robert Duvall to Diane Keaton to John Cazale. Like ""Part I"" the writing, directing, and music of ""Part II"" are flawless and make for some of the greatest scenes in movie history. ""The Godfather Part II"" is an unqualified masterpiece and essential viewing for anyone who loves movies. 10/10.";2;2;False tt0071562;kierenamand;15/09/2019;Great addition to the Godfather series;10;This film is not a sequel to the first, its so much more than that. Its difficult to compare the two films against one another but they both sit in the top 5 films ever made - and that says enough.

Watching how Micheal is dealing with taking over the family is exciting yet you can't help but feel a little bit sorry for him as he never wanted this life. Seeing how he has to hold the family together with fear is even more disturbing as we flash back to seeing his father create the family with love.

De Niro is amazing as a young Don Vito and rightfully won an Oscar for his performance.

Easily a 10/10. Greatest Mafia film made.;2;2;False tt0071562;sadam-79164;06/09/2019;The second Masterpiece of masterpieces.;10;It's soo close to Beat part 1 of The Godfather trilogy. If The Godfather is the greatest movie of all time, part 2 is the second greatest movie of all time and the world's best sequel of all time. Just watch it!;2;2;False tt0071562;dpg-87522;08/08/2019;So great,but not better than the first one.;9;For me the Godfather trilogy is the best trylogy of all, this second part is so great, but is not better than the first one i have heard that a lot of people said that this part is better than the first one and is not, why?Well the answer of that is very simple, is because the first one had a story more interesting and had all the characters,charecters that they are not in this movie because they are dead, interesting characters,and yeah this second part give you new characters but they are not as interesting as the first one. But seeing the good side thhe conflict of the movie is very interesting and dramatic, as in the first one the performeance of Al pacino and the other actors is great, and the evolucion and the evolution of Michael Corleone is incredible, and i like very much that the movie tells you the orgins of Don Corleone.This movie, more than anything, tells us about Michael's path in the life of crime, everything he is doing and the bad decisions he has made. Finally the ending of the movie is great,because reminds you of what Michael used to have with a scene of him eating with his family and then he changes the scene to a lonely Michael who really has nothing left.;2;2;True tt0071562;schwallack;28/07/2019;Great movie;10;Masterclass acting from EVERYBODY. Personally I like John Cazales performance as Fredo most. His mental meltdown scene sitting in that crazy chair is probably the best scene in cinematic history. So sad he passed away that early....;2;2;False tt0071562;osmansabry;06/04/2019;Godfaher review;10;One of greatest movie overall Actors , and the director , and camera man , montage , story and writing , , movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to the godfather , rather it is more of companion piece the original and the two perfectely compliment each other . it is a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and mora decline of michael , both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by marevelous ropert deniro and the other great alpacino;2;2;True tt0071562;smithcolmenares;08/03/2019;Me parece una buena pelicula porque;10;I have never seen such an amazing film since I saw The Shawshank Redemption. Shawshank encompasses friendships, hardships, hopes, and dreams. And what is so great about the movie is that it moves you, it gives you hope. Even though the circumstances between the characters and the viewers are quite different, you don't feel that far removed from what the characters are going through.

It is a simple film, yet it has an everlasting message. Frank Darabont didn't need to put any kind of outlandish special effects to get us to love this film, the narration and the acting does that for him. Why this movie didn't win all seven Oscars is beyond me, but don't let that sway you to not see this film, let its ranking on the IMDb's top 250 list sway you, let your friends recommendation about the movie sway you.

Set aside a little over two hours tonight and rent this movie. You will finally understand what everyone is talking about and you will understand why this is my all time favorite movie.;2;2;True tt0071562;abtinmzhr;09/02/2019;best movie ever!!!;10;I've seen many good movies, but this movie is something different. Great acting, Great directing, Wonderful story and such an amazing ending. Al Pacino's performance in this movie is the greatest performance in cinema history. But I should say, first half of this movie is a little boring.;2;2;False tt0071562;minister_of_silly_walks;21/11/2018;Best sequel of all time;10;The second part of the Godfather trilogy manages something that seemed impossible - making a legitimate successor to one of the best movies ever. It is both a sequel and a prequel. Telling the stories of father Vito and son Micheal Corleone. The performances of DeNiro and Pacino are maybe the best of their impressive carriers.;2;2;False tt0071562;alextim-79307;08/11/2018;About this movie;10;This movie is completely amazing best of the best and i hope we watch again like this movies from paramount studio and only go forward there is no way backward I am very motivated from your films good luck I wish you ald and all the best;2;2;False tt0071562;afonsobritofalves;13/09/2018;When you see the first movie and you think: you can not do better, and then you'll see the continuation and say: I was wrong.;10;I thought the first one could not get better, but after seeing this, I have only to say that it is much better. With the enhancement of the characters, unexpected scenes, very good scenes, unexpected end, E.T.C. (just do not say more because this movie does not even have weaknesses). I highly recommend it.;2;2;False tt0071562;Krugmeister42;23/07/2018;Great;10;Absolutely Great. Good cinematography and great story line. I absolutely love how the two movies run along with each other;2;2;False tt0071562;ShadowRomeo1784;02/05/2018;Just as Good as The First One You Won't Be Disappointed Watch it If You Loved Godfather;10;My Personal Rating 9.6/10

The only Sequel Movie that is almost perfect as the original, some people says that this Film is better than original. well i guess it depends on your personal preference but i don't. this Film is one of the Best Sequel from a Movie that i have watched it's theme is just like the original one, The Acting, Story, Character Development, Dialogue. Almost Perfect and i love it. this is One of The Best Film I Have Watched.

Pros:



Cons:



(See. For Me That's The Beauty of It. Every Time You Watch it You Learn Something, but I understand Some People That Only Watch Films Only Once)

Rating On Each Aspect

;2;2;False tt0071562;tsmolar-1;24/02/2018;classic holds up well;10;Like most great works of art, the true test of time shows everything in it's true light -- and in the case of The Godfather -- it still shines supreme!;2;2;False tt0071562;Vartiainen;11/07/2017;Deep dive into Michael Corleone's psyche;;The original Godfather was more about Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) than it was about Michael (Al Pacino), his son. Michael was the other main character certainly, but it was Vito's movie all around. In this sequel the roles are switched and while it's still about Vito, specifically about his youth, it's much more about Michael and his struggle with power, responsibility, pride and greed.

The movie dances between two timelines, following both young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), and Michael as the new head of the Corleone family. The roles are also switched in that in the original film we followed the fall of an aging crime boss and the rise of a cunning mind in Vito and Michael, respectively. This time it's Vito that's rising to become the most feared and respected man in New York, whereas Michael is the one to suffer and watch as his life is torn down all around him.

Superb storytelling from Francis Ford Coppola, and the main reason why this is such a beloved movie. In lesser hands all these separate strings, characters and plot points would have become a convoluted mess, but in Coppola's hands they weave a tapestry of corruption, personal glory and ruthless ambition. And while it is a requirement to have seen the original film, it in no way takes away from the saga. In truth these films should be regarded as one long experience.

The secondary reason why these films work so well are of course the actors. Al Pacino once again gives us the performance of a century. He has moved from young man plagued by naivety, responsibility and obligation to a man burdened by expectations beyond any reason, inner struggles of family and endless ambition to prove himself worthy of his father's legacy. Robert De Niro as young Vito proves himself Pacino's equal. In him we get a character that's eerily similar to young Michael in intelligence, charisma and willingness to do what's necessary, but unlike his eventual son, this man isn't burdened by the expectations of larger society. He isn't an unreasonable man, but neither does he expect anything to be given to him if he isn't willing to take it by himself. Fantastic roles, both of them.

The only flaw I can name in this film in comparison to the original is the multitude of plot point and story lines. I mentioned that in Coppola's hands they are not the disaster they would otherwise be, but that doesn't mean that the original movie isn't a purer, more streamlined experience. Though only in comparison. This film is still a masterpiece by any standards.;2;2;False tt0071562;Rampaging Hulk;09/03/2000;Quite simply the best gangster movie ever made;10;The first Godfather movie was a milestone in cinematic history. Puzo's book was awesome, but when he and Coppola teamed up to make the movie they produced an almost flawless film. It seemed impossible that they could repeat that, let alone top it. They did. Largely thanks to an absolutely perfect performance from the ever amazing Robert De Niro, this is a superior sequel. Portraying the young Vito Corleone (De Niro) as he becomes 'The Godfather', and his son Michael's (Al Pacino) descent from innocent and moral kid to emotionless and malevolent crime king, this film is an epic masterpiece. With a fantastic plot and frankly flawless performances across the board it is quite simply the best gangster movie ever made.;2;2;False tt0071562;Don Juan-3;04/09/1999;THE BEST MOVIE EVER !!!;10;There isn't much to say about this movie.

The Godfather Part 2 is above all comments or votes.

It is the best you'll ever see. Perfect Stars, Perfect Acting, Perfect Story, Perfect Directing, Perfect Sound Track .

You won't believe it until you see it. Don't waste your time reading comments (even this one haha :o), Go ahead and rent it, Then you will find yourself buying all three parts, and keeping them for good.;2;2;False tt0071562;shoot_the_martini;09/09/2001;The greatest film of all time;10;The Godfather II is regarded as the only sequel to be as good as its predecessor. My opinion is that it is far better.

The story focuses on Michael Corleone, the new Godfather, and flashes back to tell the tale of his father Vito as a young man. These two characters are portrayed brilliantly by Al Pacino and Robert De Niro.

The performances are great on all accounts, as is the direction.

With this film I found I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. The story seems overly complicated at face value, but I found I understood more than I thought I did. And it was great.

I thought I'd not enjoy the film a second time round, but no I still loved it.

This chapter in the Corleone saga is better than its predecessor and Part III because of so many reasons. Part I I feel was not as interesting, and that Marlon Brando's Vito (many will disagree) was not as intriguing a character as Michael, or even De Niro's Vito. Part III was a decline in the trilogy while still a worthy end (in other words it fell short of Return of the Jedi as 'best final episode of a trilogy'. So much had happened between II and III that wasn't explained in detail and seems that it may have been pivotal - even Robert Duvall's excellent Tom Hagen character was just implied as dead, and no more so. Where's the 'closure' you US folk are on about (no offence)?

Anyway I think the three films are all amazing, but II stands proud among them all as the best of the lot, and the best film of all time.;2;2;False tt0071562;CTHCboy894;28/08/2001;The greatest sequel ever made! (spoiler);10;This is one of the few sequels that is considered equal or better than the original. The Godfather part 2 is the only sequel to win an Academy Award for best picture! This comes in a close second in my books for best movie right behind part 1! Part 2 lacks Marlon Brando, James Caan, and the enemies of part 1. This companion piece jumps between the rise of Vito during prohibition and Michael running the family in the 50's. There are many beautiful scenes in part 2. The most beautiful scene in my opinion is at the wake for Michael's mother and when Connie begs Michael to see his brother Fredo begging him to forgive him and when Michael walks through the house to Fredo and they hug each other. That scene has brought me to tears. Undoubtedly the best sequel of all time!

10/10;2;2;True tt0071562;kiran_bahl;03/08/2001;A Sequel That's Actually Better Than The Original!;10;FABULOUS! I've never seen Al Pacino or Robert DeNiro portrayed in this way before - they were absolutely magnificent. I still can't get over the fact that Godfather: Part II is indeed much BETTER than the original! :) Watch it!;2;2;False tt0071562;krumski;05/02/2000;An absolutely great sequel - NOT!;4;"As a huge fan of the original Godfather, I have never understood all the hoopla about this film. A great continuation of the story? The only sequel to be better than the original? No way, on both counts - not by a long shot.

First of all, The Godfather is a movie that truly needs no sequel. When that door closes on Kay at the end, that's it - an entire cycle has played out: power has been passed on, the new guard has superseded the old, evil has corrupted goodness and the sins of the father have come back to feast upon the sons. It is a perfect story, complete in itself and suggestive of all that is to come. Anything you could add would only be elaboration, nothing genuinely new. As such, there's nothing - not one single thing - which happens in The Godfather Part II that is not either already implied in the first movie or at least could be predicted by knowing the first movie. Therefore, the story just doesn't feel fresh; it feels more like a ""standard"" sequel - that is, one done just for the money, to capitalize on the series while it was hot. (The true greatest sequel of all time, of course, is The Empire Strikes Back - superceding the original in so many ways and on so many levels it's unbelievable.)

Now, I'll concede there's an awful lot of artistry on display in this movie - the acting is all great, the cinematography and production design, etc. It certainly doesn't have the *look* of a quickie re-hash. And you can tell that considerable time and effort has gone into the story and in the structuring of the movie. Which makes its failure all the more troubling to watch. First of all, the cross-cutting between the two time periods (Vito Corleone in the early part of the century and Michael in the late '50s) just DOES NOT WORK. I'll challenge anybody on this point; if you think it's a good idea, you're just WRONG! I can half see what Coppola had in mind here, but it's just annoying. First off, the two sequences are not equally weighted - we see far more of the ""modern day"" Michael segment - and so the Vito scenes come to feel more like an intrusion, a break up of the momentum of the real movie, rather than as a legitimate sequence in its own right. And frankly, it's not a legitimate sequence anyway - it's far too bathed in quaintness and romanticism, it never truly takes Vito to task for the life he has chosen; in fact, it doesn't even give us a good sense of why he has chosen that life. Except for the brief murder scenes, it mostly portrays Vito as a hero - a Robin Hood of the people - and does not give a clear picture of the ruthlessness and cold-bloodedness he would have needed to build up his empire. (For a good portrait of this side of the young Vito, read the chapter in the original Godfather book by Mario Puzo which focuses upon his rise to power. Compare this sequence to the movie's in order to see just how much Coppola has omitted and how much he has romanticized what he's kept.)

Coppola wants to save all his rage and condemnation for Michael, you see - almost as if the Corleone crime family was kind of a Mom and Pop store started by the old man in the good old days, and was great and wonderful until the young whippersnapper came in with all of his newfangled ways and started screwing everything up. If Michael's soul is shown as corroded by the end of the movie, why is Vito not assessed in the same harsh way? After all, if not for him, his son would never have been put in this position in the first place. Curiously, Michael's attempts to ""go legitimate"" are portrayed as the real horror here, which is certainly an interesting idea, but I think this is a theme much better developed in The Godfather Part III, where the agent of legitimacy becomes the Church (the Vatican), making for a much richer and headier mix. Here, Michael's mainly trying to buy into resorts and casinos in Cuba. How interesting is that?

Finally, this picture moves sooooo slowly and takes so much time to tell its story (er, stories) that it becomes sleep-inducing. Not enough of import happens here for the story to take as long as it does. In short, The Godfather Part II is a film with an inflated sense of its own importance; the wonder is that it has suckered so many millions of people into buying into it. The Godfather is a movie which truly needs no sequel, but if you feel compelled to see one, rent Part III and skip over this tired and pretentious mess.";28;63;False tt0071562;Spleen;14/07/1999;No, no: it's a sequel like any other;9;"""The only sequel better than its predecessor."" Come now, the ONLY sequel? How can you tell? I can think of several such examples - and this isn't one of them. The Godfather films (I presume we may ignore the third) are now a quarter of a century old, and if you haven't seen them, chances are that two snippets of information will leap into your mind when you think of them: they are about the Mafia, and the sequel is as good as the original. This latter line has been repeated so many times, always with the same air of surprise, that it has entered popular mythology. It is my sad duty to report that it's not true.

""The Godfather"" was a story about the corruption of a soul. It was a good such story, since the person who suffered such corruption did so from the noblest of motives, or at any rate from motives it would have been hard to question. But, of course, once the process of corruption is complete, the story's over. ""The Godfather Part II"" is afflicted with the same blight that afflicts most of the other sequels we dislike. It's just more of the same doodling at the end of the script, prompted by a desire to know what happens next after the point has been reached where we don't need to know - and, worse, it childishly gives in to the impulse to tell the same story AGAIN rather than think of a new one. When the original story concerned itself with the corruption of a good man this is just impossible to pull off.

Stylishly made, plenty of good bits, but heavily over-valued.";14;28;False tt0071562;pocomarc;04/07/2007;Godfather II Stunk;4;Godfather Two is Coppola's movie---and he had no instincts for the mafia. The Godfather author, Mario Puzo, objected to having Michael kill his own brother, but finally gave in to keep his share of the Hollywood millions.

Godfather Two has lightweights as heavies: the drunken New York mob guy and Hyman Roth can't compare to Barzini, Sollozo, and the other heavyweight bad guys of the original Godfather written by Puzo.

Godfather Two loses the atmosphere of the mob while it meanders lengthily into Cuba.

The main point that makes Godfather Two inferior is that it does not contain a single sympathetic character.The endless scenes in the Lake Tahoe home of Michael's are tiresome, dreary after a while, and lack interest as compared to the original Puzo story.

This movie shows a deterioration from the original, just as the mob has deteriorated in recent years.

Coppola had no right to think he could write his own Godfather, and his inferiority to Puzo when it comes to dealing with the mob shows up here in technicolor.

Meanwhile, poor Mario Puzo watched his story being degraded by the instinctless Coppola, objected at first, and then gave in. Pathetic.

The only scenes that actually ring true here are from the original Puzo book (the earlier life of Vito Corleone).

The contrast between the dreary Coppola script of Godfather Two and its dreary characters is brought home strongly by the final (flashback) scene where Sonny Corleone and the others are around the table. As soon as Sonny appears, everything comes to life.;30;69;True tt0071562;aggaurav67;13/10/2008;The Godfather never forgets,nor he ever forgives.;10;"If the Godfather is a masterpiece then this is a ""grand-masterpiece"". How often do you see a work of perfection in movies? After watching this movie,you can (at least) answer ""once"". The movie is the sequel and prequel to The Godfather as you all must know and shows the rise of Vito and Michael Corleone in two separate story lines. In this movie we see the rise of Vito Corleone to become The Godfather and how Michael Corleone expands his family business but we also see his moral degradation.In the Godfather we see Vito Corleone has no regrets for his deeds because he had maintained his virtues but in this movie Michael regrets his deeds very much because he has morally degraded(which we see at the end).This is a fair depiction of ""changing times"". If you want to see a movie that leaves you with doubts about right and wrong ,justice and injustice ,hero and villain ;do watch this movie.";6;10;False tt0071562;gavin6942;16/10/2006;In Some Ways Even Better Than the First One...;9;Seven years after the first film, Michael Corelone (Al Pacino) continues his family's quest to become legitimate. Also, more on his father's growing up in Sicily and coming to America. With Vito being played not by Marlon Brando, but Robert DeNiro.) If you liked the first film, you will like this film. If you didn't, you won't. It's really that simple, since you have all the same great people coming together for this film with just as solid a script and acting as you did the first time. You lose Marlon Brando, but you get Robert DeNiro. I consider that a fair trade.

This film has two things going for it: it has the early years of Don Corleone, which really fills in the missing mythos around the family. Without this, the film would appear to show the Corelones were always powerful, which is far from the truth. It does not explain how Don Corelone grew to talk in such a mumbled voice, though.

Also, I really enjoyed the entire Cuba sequence, because it put the film in a historical time frame (and I like Cuba). I was never fully sure when the first film was taking place, but this one made sure I knew the years when Don Coreleone was growing up and that the present day was not 1974, but rather in roughly 1958-1959. That changed my perspective on things completely.

If you have invested three hours in the first film, invest three more in this one. Why only get half the story of Vito Corleone? I cannot make any suggestions for part three, though, one way or the other.;6;10;False tt0071562;utgard14;15/07/2014;"""If anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it is that you can kill anyone.""";10;Phenomenal sequel to The Godfather is split between two stories. One follows the events of the first movie as Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) deals with strife inside and outside the family as he works to expand the business. The other tells the story of a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) and his rise to power.

The greatest sequel of all time? Yeah I can't see many doubts about that. It's often said to be even better than the first movie. I don't see the point in splitting hairs over it. I'll just say that I love both films a lot, though I rewatch the first one more often than this one. For the optimum experience you should watch both movies back-to-back like they're one long film. As with the first movie, this is pretty much flawless. I can't think of a thing about it I would change.;5;8;False tt0071562;stallone-9;22/03/2008;Almost as good as the original!!!;10;And that is saying a lot.Probably the most fantastic and well made sequel of all time.Some consider it to be even slightly better than the original but for me the first Godfather is still the best mainly because of Marlon Brando.Despite of that The Godfather part 2 is a flawless movie,a timeless masterpiece with countless qualities that crabs the viewer and never ceases to impress.Al Pacino delivers simply a stunning performance and deserved an Oscar for best actor.Here he isn't the fragile,insecure young man he was in the original film.Here he is wiser and more respectful.Perfect Michael Corleone.The rest of the cast is amazing too.Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen and John Cazale as Fredo shine once again.Cazale as the treacherous Fredo has a bigger role and makes an even greater impact on the audience.But a lot of the credit has to go to the brilliantly cast Robert De Niro who indeed deserved to win the Oscar for best supporting role.His portrayal of the young Vito Corleone and his rise to power is simply stunning.Excellent work.Director Francis Ford Coppola is simply one of the greatest directors not only of his time but of all times and shows once again that he is the biggest fan of the novel and shows great respect both towards Mario Puzo and his work.;5;8;False tt0071562;joelsaxton;14/02/2005;Better than the first? I still can't decide.;10;To those who say The Godfather glorifies the mob, I say watch both Part I and II in tandem. Observe where Michael Corleone begins and where he ends: he begins as the idealistic war hero, refusing to get involved in the family business, but he is quickly engulfed by circumstance and slowly transforms into a cold and ruthless underworld boss. The recurring theme of solitude is persistent throughout the film. Michael trusts nobody, and his instinct is ultimately proved correct when he learns Fredo has betrayed him. In the end, he is completely alone. He has destroyed his marriage, he has alienated his consiglierie, and he has murdered his brother. From this perspective, the story of the Godfather is a classic tragedy. The final shot solidifies this notion, showing Michael sitting alone, reflecting on his life. By trying to protect his family, Michael has destroyed it.;5;8;True tt0071562;FilmOtaku;08/04/2004;One of the best sequels ever made;8;An excellent follow up to the original, The Godfather Part II continues where the first film left off and explores the rise of Vito Corleone in a series of flashbacks that, for the most part, correlate with what is presently happening to Michael Corleone (Pacino) his son and successor. This is a beautifully produced piece of film, and while I still prefer the first installment, simply because of the story content, it is every bit as good. This film is best when watched together with the first film – if your body can stand it. Even better, watch the third one as well for a little closure and so you can argue over whether it's a good film or not. (I myself personally like the third film, but not as much as the first two.)

--Shelly;5;8;False tt0071562;BoikoJivkov;10/07/2020;Better than part 1;9;"For me ""The Godfather: Part 2"" is the most brilliant work from Francis Ford Coppola.";3;4;False tt0071562;Kirpianuscus;29/07/2019;more than masterpiece;;To define it as a masterpiece is easy, fair and silly. Because it is obvious - it is a masterpiece. But for each viewer, for specific reasons. Sure, the duel between Al Pacino and Robert de Niro is the key. For me, splendid is the job of John Cazale. The embroidery of the life of father and son, the metamorphose of Michael Corleone, the pressure of past, the air of nostalgia , the details as large mosaics and the cold feeling of a story about everything. A gangster movie ? Maybe not exactly. Because, at the each new view, it gives more than a story about Mafia. But universal history of mankind as a sort of parable.;3;4;False tt0071562;deram-77963;26/08/2018;One of the greats;10;Godfather and Godfather 2 probably 2 of the great movies made. Robert DeNiro has become a disappointment.;3;4;False tt0071562;RussHog;06/07/2018;The greatest tragedy ever told;10;This continuation of The Godfather Saga tells the story of how Vito Corleone rose as an honorable crime lord who cared for his family, but many years later his son Michael struggles to uphold Vito's legacy. It is both devastating and beautiful. The flashback scenes of young Vito are maybe the greatest cinematography of all time. Al Pacino's best work. This is one harrowing tale. Hold your loved ones close. Never let them go. .;3;4;True tt0071562;WubsTheFadger;16/05/2018;The Godfather: Part II;10;Short and Simple Review by WubsTheFadger

The Godfather: Part II lives up to the standard of the masterpiece film The Godfather. The story is full of twists and turns and features some of the most dynamic characters ever. The story is full of shocking and devastating moments that keep you enthralled. This film is another masterpiece that's lives up to the Godfather name.

The acting is masterful. Al Pacino delivers his best performance as Michael Corleone. Robert De Niro plays young Vito Corleone and he does so with power and originality. Robert Duvall, John Cazale, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and many others all perform in a way that adds to the story and showcases their talents.

The pacing is perfect. Coppola takes his time setting up the story, setting, and characters. The runtime is over three hours and this can scare the average movie goer.

Francis Ford Coppola has created another masterpiece that deserves all of the praise it has earned.

Pros: engaging story full of twists and turns, masterful acting, amazing performances by Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, perfect pacing, and wonderful directing by Coppola

Cons: The runtime can scare some people

Overall Rating: 10;3;4;False tt0071562;kevinorrell99;09/03/2018;This one, is the masterpiece of the series;9;I feel like the Godfather part one had a few mistakes in it but this one they learned from them and created a perfect film. The rooftop scene will always give me goosebumps;3;4;True tt0071562;TheMovieDiorama;25/02/2018;The Godfather Part 2 is often regarded as the greatest film of all time.;10;With many claiming it to be better than its predecessor. Racking up a runtime of 200 minutes, this behemoth is the longest theatrical film I've seen. For those of you who read my review on Part 1 would know that my only gripe was with pacing issues, particularly in its third act which dipped completely to a point where I became uninterested. With no Marlon Brando and a far superior runtime, does Part 2 better its predecessor? Drum roll please...The Godfather Part 2...is...the better chapter in this saga. Yes, everything that made the first so well acclaimed still exists here but with a much more detailed end result. The pacing was perfect. There was always something happening whether it be the Corleone family members just interacting with each other over family and business, or when the Don himself Michael conceptualises a thorough and genius plan to get him out of trouble. Then, in addition, Coppola brings in Robert De Niro to portray a young Vito Corleone depicting his rise to power in the mafia culture. This is interwoven brilliantly with the current story involving Michael, the two plots bounce off each other and further the rich developed characters that Coppola originally put on screen. The plenty of backstabbing as traitors lust for power and control makes for some tense and gripping moments in a bloated film. Many more exotic locations to spice up the cinematography, from sunny Havana to vintage Corleone. I appreciated the inclusion of the Italian language, Coppola could've forced the scenes to be spoken in English and yet he didn't in order to keep the authenticity of these characters. Everything I mentioned in Part 1 still remains. Coppola's direction is flawless, acting is masterful (particularly Pacino and De Niro), complex family narrative that left me compelled in every scene...I mean I could go on but there is no need to. The vast majority of reviews state everything that I'm describing here, which is why this is regarded as one of cinema's greatest films of all time.;3;4;False tt0071562;RealChristian14;04/09/2017;The Parallel Story of Don Vito Corleone And Michael Corleone;10;"After ""The Godfather"" became the most commercially and critically successful film when it was released back in 1972, a sequel or better yet a companion film to it was released known as ""The Godfather Part II"".Robert De Niro and Al Pacino star as the young Vito Corleone and Michael respectively in this second Godfather film together with Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,John Cazale,G.D Spradlin, and Lee Strasberg.

This film tells the story of Don Vito Corleone and his son Michael when both were of the same age with the former's story about his arrival in the United States coming from Sicily after his parents and older brother were killed as well as the rise of the Corleone crime family in the 1920's and latter's story with regards to the Corleone empire's expansion in its gambling operations during the 1950's as well as the deterioration of his character as he deals with the other rival mob bosses particularly Frank Pentangeli and Hyman Roth.

While the film maybe considered a sequel to the first film,I consider it more of a companion film of part I.In it,we get to know how Don Vito came into power as a mob boss when he killed Don Fanucci and a background story of how violence came early into his life when a local Sicilian mob boss killed his parents and older brother Paolo.We also get a better understanding how he transformed from being a worker of the Abandando Bakery into a criminal life in the mob.We also see how Michael was able to increase the success of the Corleone family and how more ruthless he has become when he ordered the death of his enemies that included his older brother Fredo.Added to that,we also see how Michael was able to outwit the U.S. Senate on their investigation.The story was told in parallel and I believe that the film provided the viewer a great story just like the first film.No question that director Francis Ford Coppola and novel's author Mario Puzo wrote a great screenplay together. Aside from the story,we also get to witness great performances from the cast.Al Pacino definitely did justice to the role of Michael which made him get an Oscar nomination while Robert DeNiro did a masterful job as the young Vito which earned him his first Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.Added to that,we also see credible performances from the other members of the cast such as DuVall,Keaton,Cazale, and Strasberg. With all these things mentioned,it is no question that part II is indeed a classic and a masterpiece just like the first film.That is why it continues to be popular for the last 43 years since it was first released in theaters.";3;4;True tt0071562;GusF;30/05/2015;A rare sequel that improves on its absolutely brilliant predecessor in every respect;;"One of the best sequels of all time and the only Best Picture winner to be the sequel to a previous one, this film improves on its absolutely brilliant predecessor in every respect. Al Pacino is mesmerising as Michael Corleone and Robert De Niro gives a fantastic performance as his father Vito Corleone in the prequel storyline, which won him his first Oscar. The character was very recognisable as a younger version of the Godfather from the first film but De Niro still managed to put his own stamp on the role. Incidentally, Pacino is one of only two actors to be nominated for both Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor for playing the same character, the other being Barry Fitzgerald who was nominated for both awards for playing Father Fitzgibbon in ""Going My Way"". The writing and direction are once again of an extremely high quality.

I've watched nine films which ran 3+ hours long so far this year and this is one of the best structured of those. There is a not a minute that drags. The two story lines are excellent and I loved the depiction of Michael's moral decay. My favourite scene in the film is the extremely powerful one where Kay tells Michael that she is leaving him and she aborted their child when she discovered that it was a boy as she did not want to perpetuate the next generation of Corleones. I think that Diane Keaton deserved a Best Actress nomination for the film. I was surprised that Talia Shire got a Best Supporting Actress one as, while she is excellent as Connie, she has such little screen time. Besides De Niro, the two strongest newcomers were Lee Strasberg - the legendary acting teacher who taught Pacino, De Niro, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe, among many others - and Michael V. Gazzo. Both of them were nominated for Best Supporting Actor but lost to De Niro. I thought that Robert Duvall deserved one too as his performance was even better than in the first film but I suppose that they needed to let other films get a look in!";3;4;True tt0071562;cristiantorvil;18/04/2015;A unique experience;10;I had already seen this movie 2 times, but last weekend I could watch it in a cinema, and it was awesome. The movie is perfect in all subjects, with incredible performances and a catching story.

It's nice to see how Coppola make us hate Michael for all the things he does, mainly the situation with Fredo. In this aspect, it's a opposite situation if we compare with The Godfather: Part I. In the first movie we love and respect Michael, and of course Vito, but in this film we can't. It's sad to see how Michael forgot what was the most important thing for Vito, the family.

It's a masterpiece even without the first part. In fact, it's a movie that make you feel a lot, even more than the first.

If in a strange moment of your life, you can have the opportunity of watch it in a cinema, don't doubt.

PD: Sorry for my English, it's not my native language.;3;4;True tt0071562;sickofenjoyingmyself;29/01/2015;Flawless masterpiece;10;This is, for me, one of the greatest of all time. Any sequel to the original - again - one of the all time greatest - was always going to be tough. But to follow it with such a timeless masterpiece is nothing short of astonishing. The acting all round is utterly electrifying - from the big performers to the bit part players and extras. Each part is played to perfection. This is one of those rare movies that is totally complete. Words can barely do it justice. You could watch it a thousand different times and take a thousand different lessons from it. You could notice something each time that you hadn't spotted before. This is cold, unforgettable and absolutely absorbing. If you haven't seen it before - go and watch it. If you have seen it before - go and re - watch it. I'm not sure we'll ever see anything that matches it's like again.;3;4;False tt0071562;JimBallard;16/01/2015;Coppola Puts Himself In The Pantheon With Epic Part II Of The Saga;10;It's hard to give an objective review when you are dealing with favourite movies. Having just watched this for the first time in years I was delighted to see it was as magnificent as I remembered it. Francis Ford Coppola would have been sensible to be wary of doing a sequel when he'd just made a film as acclaimed as The Godfather. How do you follow that? Amazingly he managed to broaden the themes of the original, producing a study of power and corruption that may be unequalled in Hollywood history. And whereas some critics found the first film questionable in its moral compass (is Michael supposed to be a hero?) the sequel leaves us in no doubt that he has passed on into something else and as his wife Kay shrewdly notices, there is no coming back. Judge the film on its own merits and ignore the continuation of the saga in Part III. This is the final Michael as we should always remember him.

The scope of Part II is extraordinary (as if the first film wasn't bold enough!) with the story of father Vito in 1920s New York cross- cut with son Michael's rivalry with ageing mobster Hymen Roth, a respected, though never trusted, business partner of his father. These later sequences may not make sense on first viewing but there are some remarkable set pieces from revolutionary Cuba to a Senate committee in Washington. This is a no holds barred portrait of American society corrupt and hypocritical from top to bottom. How often has Hollywood been so daring

The film invites a contrast between father and son, with young family man Vito embracing criminality out of necessity and using his status to become a 'Godfather' in the Italian American community. Meanwhile in his middle age Michael has become a Don hooked on vengeance with all business now personal. The inevitable conclusion of which is a violent crescendo with him not just wiping out his enemies (again) but committing the far worse sin of betraying his own family.

Few films can have gathered such a fine cast. Al Pacino's Michael is the symbol of idealism turned sour in extremis. More than anything this is what elevates The Godfather over so many other gangster films. He's not just some Goodfella or ordinary guy, he once aspired to be a great man but somewhere something went wrong. Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen is the great constant across the two films, always at the side, never changing, but in his reaction to the transformation of Michael we get confirmation of his moral decline. Diane Keaton as Kay has a meatier role this time and as the voice of 'respectable' America shows the futility of Michael's actions. If he can't keep his family together, what's it all for? John Cazale's Fredo is a tragedy of his own. Secretly resentful of his younger brother, their mutual betrayal becomes one of the emotional cores of the saga. Replacing the character of Clemenza proved relatively easy as even if the story loses something, Michael V. Gazzo was memorable whilst the legendary Lee Strasborg is a suitably cast as rival/partner and pretend Uncle to Michael Hymen Roth, delivering one of the movies' great speeches.

So often artists seem burdened by great achievements, but not here. One can only assume that the young Coppola was so exulted by the critical and commercial phenomenon of The Godfather, he felt capable of anything and judging by this, he near enough was. One only wonders why he's largely struggled to reach similar heights ever since.;3;4;False tt0071562;youcef-belkhir;03/01/2015;Certainly the best movie;10;I love this movie for of the very interesting scenario. I also consider the actors playing, certainly amongst the best of their generation. Decors, costumes are also part of the reason I love it.

The fact it is about European immigrants in the US, makes it also better for European to watch, without it being one 100% US culture movie. Also some points are true story, that makes it quite remarkable.

Overall, I can say that this movie is truly violent, but not as per 2015 understanding. The violence can come in many ways. However, and despite this aspect, this is quite one remarkable movie which deserves to stay up and high in the IMDb ratings.

The second part is maybe the best, but is actually really close from the first episode, which in my eyes is actually on the same level.;3;4;False tt0071562;andreeamirimia;20/09/2014;A great classic;10;"I enjoyed this movie tremendously. It gracefully blends two times: the father's, who rises to power through his own forces, and the sons' who takes care of his father legacy and increases his influence.Vito and Michael are to wonderful written characters, with both qualities and flaws. Also, the action is very captivating and i loved seeing Vito put the New York's scum in their place ;) and revenge his father! Michael is very intense and, just like his father, does everything for the good of the family. Overall, this movie is definitely worth seeing and completes the first film perfectly. As Coppola wanted, they should have stopped here because the 3rd film isn't even close to the masterpieces the 1st and 2nd ones are.";3;4;True tt0071562;joshuawood2012;13/09/2014;The Masterpiece Above All Others;10;"What is there to be said about the sequel to what many consider to be the greatest film of all time? ""The Godfather: Part II"" is a film unlike any other. From the seedy casinos of Nevada, to the revolution in Cuba, ""The Godfather: Part II"" chronicles the reign of Michael Corleone, acted to perfection by Al Pacino, over a massive criminal empire. Corleone's dealings with the manipulative and ruthless, but ailing, Hyman Roth, depicted by the masterful Lee Strasberg, are some of the best scenes captured on cinema. Roth is a weary, weathered old man, but he more than holds his own against the young, ambitious Michael Corleone. And how does one describe the character of Michael Corleone? Is he an evil killer that cares only about power, and will do anything to achieve it? Or is he a reluctant son, trying desperately to get out from under the enormous shadow of his father, but assailed on all fronts by enemies old and new? Perhaps both. The story of Michael Corleone in this film is a tragic one, without doubt. But his is not the only tale told in this masterpiece of cinema. The story of Vito Corleone, portrayed entirely in Sicilian by Robert De Niro, is interwoven with that of his son, and it is arguably as potent. A young Sicilian lad, orphaned by a violent Mafioso, Vito is smuggled off the island and to America. There, Vito is met with oppositions and struggles, and he overcomes them all to become the original Godfather. It is truly a journey, and shows the adversity that crafted a giant of a man.

""The Godfather: Part II"" beats the odds, and somehow, in my opinion, manages to be a greater film than its predecessor. It is a massive, complex, dark, tragic, ambitious film, and it succeeds in everything it does. 10/10";3;4;True tt0071562;long-ford;27/02/2009;Tremendous follow up to 'The godfather' though Brando is missed;;Part II in 'The Godfather' saga carries on in much the same vein though Marlon Brando is sorely missed. The plot has Al Pacino exerting complete dominance as mafia boss in the fifties. The film also depicts young Vito Corleone's (Robert De Niro) early years. This segment is slightly nostalgic but superbly acted by De Niro who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar. As a result of the film moving both backwards and forwards in time, it feels more convoluted than the first part. Robert Duvall and Diane Keaton both impress. The shocking climax (MINOR SPOILERS) mirrors the ending of the first film. Highly recommended.

Overall 9/10;3;4;False tt0071562;DKosty123;21/02/2009;A Second Offer Is Harder To Refuse;10;"Usually, a sequel is not as strong a film as the original. This one is every bit as good. I am thankful to have just viewed the Coppola 2007 restoration of this film.

At well over 3 hours, it is longer than the original. What is does is deftly fill in 2 stories that we saw small parts of in the first film. We find out how the Don, Vito Cordleone got his name, what his real name is, and the history that made him who he was in the first film.

The second story fills in more about his kids, particularly Michael, and how he took over in the late 1950's and his battles with one of his dads enemies. The back drop moves from Nevada to Sicily, and then to Havana. Michael faces down a series of folks including a Congressional Hearing about his life.

While this has no Brando, it has an excellent cast from the first film with some additional folks added. James Caan makes a brief cameo at the end of the movie. Talia Shire & Diane Keaton head up to female cast though these films seems to have a cast of 100's because there are so many parties & events.

The film keeps with the same strength as the first film, strong storytelling which brings you in and peeks your interest enough to keep you going. When you watch this, your always wondering what is going to happen next and who will get theirs.";3;4;True tt0071562;kenjha;27/12/2008;Best Sequel Ever;10;This, perhaps the greatest sequel ever, tells the parallel stories of Michael's struggles as the new Godfather and the rise of the legendary Vito Corleone. The presentation of Vito's story is particularly impressive, with DeNiro in a fine performance. Michael's story tends to bog down at times but never fails to be compelling. Pacino is terrific, as are Duvall, Cazale, and Strasberg. The cinematography is beautiful and Rota builds on his memorable score from the first film. Coppola pushes all the right buttons, letting the stories unfold majestically. Having made the two Godfather films by age 35, the talented director had nowhere to go but down.;3;4;False tt0071562;Azzurrim17;13/08/2008;Very Impressive;10;Maybe the greatest difficulty may have been to follow up a movie like The Godfather, possibly the greatest movie ever, and Francis Ford Coppola did an excellent job, most pretty good originals have a poor sequel, but how do you make a sequel to an almost perfect original. Without Marlon Brando, Al Pacino fills the big shoes as the Don in this movie, along with Robert Duvall, and flashbacks to a young Vito played none other than by Robert De Niro. This movie shows the rise of Vito and how he became so powerful, and gives you background on his upbringing and family. It also shows you how much different times are and how Michael handles current situations. I read somewhere that they asked Marlon Brando to come back for the second even though he passed in the first he probably would have done some flashbacks and It upsets me that he didn't do that, but then again who knows how it would have turned out, If that happened maybe they wouldn't have cast De Niro and would never have had the career hes had. So i guess everything happens for a reason. The Godfather Pt II is a great film and falls so close to the original.;3;4;True tt0071562;Huffman1;11/06/2006;One of the best films of all time;;The Godfather II, in my opinion, is just as good as the first. So rare is it for a sequel to be as gripping and as well-made as this movie is. First off, I have to mention the excellent musical score. It gives the film a sort of dark, moody atmosphere, and I think it was a very good idea to use the same score as in part I. Secondly, the idea of inter wining the story of Michael Corleone and of his early father Vito was brilliant and makes this sequel stand out from the first part. This idea of showing two stories in one film could have been quite risky and confusing but Coppola did a fantastic job at it. Both stories are very clear to follow and show the contrast between Vito and his son's way of handling the family business.

Of course, I cannot comment on this movie without mentioning Al Pacino's awesome performance. He definitely should have won the best actor's Oscar for that role. He has unbelievable screen presence and plays incredibly well the ruthless, suspicious Michael Corleone. The most poignant scene of the film, in my opinion, is definitely the one where Michael finds out at the party that his brother Fredo betrayed him.;3;4;True tt0071562;chunga95;28/04/2005;For anyone who thinks the Godfather is overrated;10;"This post is probably gonna tick you off. But I don't want to flame on your tastes. I'm not gonna trash what anyone thinks is the best movie. This is just a very long-winded argument about why The Godfathers stand as milestones in cinema. Spoilers throughout.

I've read a number of posts who think the characters are hollow. There are long scenes when the characters seems to be doing nothing, or just *thinking*. That's one of the great parts of the film. There are deep threads of loyalty and family and duty throughout the trilogy, and the original Godfather (and ptII) is one of the few films that does these moments justice. The cast assembled does what few ever have: you can ""see"" them thinking. Brando, Pacino, DeNiro, Strasberg (of course), Duvall - all masters of what is probably the most difficult talent to achieve on film. Pacino is especially great at this in GpartII when you watch him agonize over what to do with (if you've seen it) *you-know-who*. There is a subdued intensity to each character, living a life where death is always around the corner of one bad mistake. They're thoughtful, intelligent, and conflicted. The gift of these movies is they don't telegraph these undercurrents or make it painfully obvious. If you let yourself, the characters draw you in to these processes.

Much of our current standards for cinema are based on flair and fast-action-packed-editing. Not to sound cheesy, but the Godfathers unfold like a rare flower, slow and with purpose. Keep in mind, there are no accidents in movies. That is to say, what you see in the frame is completely planned (as much as can be in cinema). Watch the scene where Brando is advising Pacino on the particulars of the business. There is real heartbreak between them, two men doing the family's business. Vito Corleone never wanted it to be Michael, and neither did Michael want it for himself, but both esteem the family more than themselves, and so they discuss this ugly business. If this movie were made today, the scene would only be a few snappy lines, some quick wit dialogue, and cut to the big explosion. This is a gem of a scene because you watch the actors put these emotions away to do what's brutal and necessary, and in a sense, say goodbye.

Watch Brando in the car after the meeting with the Five Families. He comes to a chilling realization about who is behind the war, but how? Watch this scene and then re-watch the meeting with the Five Families for the moment this realization hits him. It happens and is gone in a second, but in that second you see him decide what to do. He tucks away his anger and waits. He waits until Michael takes over, and passes this knowledge on to him without ever telling him what to do. This is where the art of direction makes this possible. Without a word ever being spoken about what's coming, Michael takes over the family business and sets the table to take control over all the families. Of course, when the hits are actually being done, and splicing them into the scene where Michael's niece is being christened, is the best form of ironic cinematic poetry. What makes the GpartI and GpartII connection is you see the same process in DeNiro/Young Vito. After he's shaken down for the last time by Don Fanucci, he decides what and how to do it in a second - and DeNiro shows that, without a word ever being spoken.

Of course, there are the iconic moments of the movie. The horsehead in the bed, (in the restaurant with Solozzo and McCluskey) Pacino coming to a boil as the train gets louder in the background, the opening scene with the undertaker (a great homily to Italian-Americans), Brando moving around the room and brushing his cheek, Fredo on the lake reciting the Hail Mary, Pacino kissing Fredo in Cuba, Sonny on the causeway, etc...

These are just a few of examples of what make these movies great. I've read where people can't identify to the characters. How many of us really can identify with the people we see on film? The Godfathers paint a portrait of a life unknown to just about everybody. The real gangsters liked it so much, they emulated the fictional parts (like the hand-kissing). The films are poetry, but there's nothing poetic about the events in it. The characters are sublime, but there's nothing sublime about their character. The movies don't give anything away (who saw the Fredo thing coming?), but are transparent at the same time. I know this is high minded and stuffy, but hopefully, even if you're not a fan, you can understand why the films are so highly regarded.

But, for the haters, I'll give you GpartIII - what in the h*ll was he thinking letting Sofia Coppola act? Part III is by far a weak addition to the trilogy...unless you're a die hard fan...not worth seeing. Now rub your eyes if you read the whole thing....";3;4;True tt0071562;TheNorthernMonkee;02/03/2005;amazing continuation, but personal preference remains with Part I;10;"SPOILERS If you were to stop people on the street nowadays and ask them to name their favourite series of films, they'll say either one thing. Either the person will believe the current hype and say ""The Lord Of The Rings"", they'll recount to their youth and say ""Star Wars"" or they'll answer ""The Godfather"" trilogy. Containing some truly breathtaking acting and a jaw dropping good plot, the original ""Godfather"" film was a masterpiece. Even more surprising though is just how many people seem to prefer the sequel from two years later. Once more starring Al Pacino, ""Godfather Part II"" is an awesome film which could technically also be classified as a masterpiece. Still, despite the technical genius of the film, this second episode in the story of the Corleone family is slightly inferior to it's predecessor.

In continuation from the first film, Michael Corleone (Pacino) is head of the family and living in Las Vegas. Apparently enjoying life, Michael is a much darker character than he was during the previous film. With plans to expand into foreign territories, Michael once more finds himself faced with difficult decisions and former friends turned enemies.

The true genius of ""The Godfather Part II"" is the combination of sequel and prequel. Rotating between the early life of Vito Corleone (played in the original by Marlon Brando, but now played by Robert De Niro) and the current affairs of his son Michael, the film manages to tell two superb stories side by side.

Pacino, as with the previous film, is once again stunning as the now cold and malicious Michael. Transformed from the outsider at the beginning of Part I, Michael has become a completely different person, and Pacino shows this with skill.

In ""The Godfather: Part II"" however, the true star of the picture is Robert De Niro. Taking hold of the role of a younger Marlon Brando, De Niro spends his time on screen replicating Brando's mannerisms with apparent ease. He takes a firm hold on the life of the young Godfather, and he impresses throughout.

Despite it's technical genius though, this second part in the story does feel slightly inferior to the original. To a degree this is possibly due to the Michael scenes being original rather than Mario Puzo's book, but the parts of the film dealing with Michael, never really seem to take off compared with the original. In the first film, we are shown a loving family who fight for each other and who come out on tops despite heavy casualties and strong opposition. In this second film, the view on the family feels much more dark and disturbing. Gone seem to be the family values, and instead Michael's direction seems much more obscure and unfocused.

It's entirely possible that this reviewer simply didn't understand this film. There's no denying that upon first viewing the original, the impression wasn't good and it took a second viewing before becoming a fan. In comparison to the Brando and Pacino led first chapter however, this second chapter doesn't really hold water. This doesn't stop it being a masterpiece, and it is. It is easily one of the finest films ever made, BUT compared with it's predecessor, it doesn't quite work.";3;4;True tt0071562;johnny-m;22/02/2004;The Economics of Destiny;;"Sequels rarely rise to the level of the original, and almost never surpass them. This phrase has been used so often in reference to ""The Godfather: Part II"" – the exception that makes the rule. What is even more laudable is the fact that the original is generally considered as a landmark in the history of film.

This is one film that proves cinema to be a form of art, and not merely one of entertainment. A skilful direction from Francis Ford Coppola, outstanding performances from the likes of Pacino, De Niro, Gazzo, Strasberg, Cazale, Duvall, Keaton, Shire, memorable cinematography from Willis, a soundtrack by Rota, Coppola and Curet Alonso, and an ingenious script by Coppola and Puzo (partly adapted from his novel), make ""The Godfather: Part II"" stand out as a story of courage, love, treachery, and devotion, crafted in the life of the Corleone saga.

The plot follows the consolidation of power of Michael Corleone, and his desire to gain the legality of his business, and the consolidation of power of a young Vito Corleone, and his desire to build a better life for his family. The old story of the father handing his wealth to his sons, gains a new twist by allowing a positive outcome to the original story. The wealth remains in the family, but there are losses to be incurred. An ontological thesis of Pareto optimality into the organisation of social structures is subtly brought into the view, without harming the general development of the story.

""The Godfather: Part II"" remains also as a text book for any actor. Al Pacino shows that temperance can be dramatic, making us empathise with his character even when made to realise the most brutal of actions. Robert De Niro is purely outstanding, in one of the best supporting performances the screen has witnessed. His charm, charisma, and vocal skills, help him achieve a complete transition to Puzo's Vito Corleone. The viewer is unarmed in the choice given between murder and love, between life and necessity. Talia Shire stands out as the lost woman in a world dominated by men.

Even if ""The Godfather"" is the point of reference when it comes to great cinema, ""The Godfather: Part II"" remains a powerful example which proves that there is always more to say in a story, and the additions can be more than surprising.";3;4;False tt0071562;Lydiaalzen;06/01/2016;A movie to surpass the first one.;10;The Godfather was excellent, so I was of course unsure about the second movie, but after watching it I can finally confirm it as being even better than the first.

The movie is about Michael Corleone's struggle to keep his mob family together. Therer is also another story within the movie, about Vito Corleone. Michael's dad. These scenes act sort of like prequels. The story about Michael takes place in the late fifties whilst the story about Vito takes place during the nineteen twenties.

Vito is played by Robert Deniro and Michael is played by Al Pacino. Both actors do a stellar job at portraying their roles and making them as likable as possible.

The cinematography is stellar and so is the writing and acting.

No one movie can be perfect but I think this is as close as we are going to get.;4;6;False tt0071562;EzioMonty117;25/10/2015;Better than the original and the best sequel i've ever seen;10;I really enjoyed The Godfather, so i decided to see The Godfather Part 2 if it's better or worse, and to my utter surprise, it's better than the original and has one of the best performances in a Movie ever. This film is a true masterpiece. Here's why.

The story is as good as the original, this time the film has two separate story lines: Vito Corleone as a Young man and Michael Corleone's storyline. Vito Corleone's story follows his life as he evacuates from New York and to Italy by his parents in 1910 and goes through his normal day life, and Michael Corleone's story follows him being accused for being a criminal by the Law after being framed by his Brother during a celebration when another criminal did the illegal Activity that happen in the celebration and Michael goes through Family life and has a divorce With his wife and all that stuff and must prove that he isn't guilty of the actions caused by a another person.

The film's direction is one of the biggest strengths of this film, it's switch between Vito and Michael is done in a good pace and well choreographed camera transitions makes this film direction nearly a masterpiece. The performances especially once again Al Pacino is so good, it deserved an Oscar for best performance, for a reason, Pacino's character is so emotional, you really care for him in the scenes With his wife. Oustanding i must say.

The film, despite being a serious drama, has some funny moments, like where one of the characters gives Vito Money and continuously regrets it, now that was funny, but the film really is quite serious apart from that one scene, that's why the change of pace makes this quite comforting of a Movie.

The characters are better and the film is longer, The Godfather Part 2 is one of the best films i've ever seen, Performances, humor, drama, direction, Music and characters are great, there is nothing terrible With this Movie. Check this out

10/10;4;6;False tt0071562;dpm12;23/02/2015;Incredible doesn't even BEGIN to describe it;9;The first sequel to win the Best Picture Oscar, and deservingly so, words cannot begin to describe how amazing this film is. Unlike the first (I'll admit, I'm not the biggest fan of the first film) which had several slow spots, GFII had me riveted from beginning to end. Pacino and Cazale turn in the performance of their careers, while Francis Ford Coppola, who co- wrote this with Mario Puzo, directs with such precision. This film is truly a gift of cinema by all the talent involved. Everybody, even the smallest supporting actor, give terrific performances. The pace is fantastic. The writing is brilliant. The last scene at the lake...chills! Watch this masterpiece NOW!

4/4;4;6;True tt0071562;awesomesteinberg;13/08/2014;The Best Sequel, Prequel, and Movie Ever Made;10;"Normally, movie sequels aren't very good. They are usually just rushed cash-grabs to make money off of a successful property, but occasionally they can be just as good, if not better, than the original film, as rare as this is. (""The Empire Strikes Back,"" ""Terminator 2,"" ""Aliens,"" ""The Dark Knight,"" and ""Spider-Man 2"" are examples of these.) Prequels are not so different, and are even harder to pull off. So, normally, the 1974 follow-up to Francis Ford Coppola's 1972 masterpiece ""The Godfather"" would have a lot to do in order to top the original. But, despite this, ""The Godfather Part II,"" is, in my opinion, not only better than the original, but also the best movie of all time. (I take back what I said in my review of the original about it being the best ever made, I hadn't seen this one yet.)

""The Godfather Part II"" is actually two films in one. Expertly presenting two story lines, one sequel and one prequel to the original, half of the film follows late-1950s Michael Corleone, now as the head of the Corleone crime family, expanding his power and picking off his enemies, becoming less and less like the man at the beginning of the previous film. The other half follows his father, Vito, in 1920s New York as he creates the empire that later gets passed down to Michael. Both stand out on their own, but the two story lines, brilliantly put together, create a masterpiece that is yet to be matched.

Like the first movie, the best element of this movie is the acting. Al Pacino returns as Michael, in what is undoubtedly his best performance of the two films. (I can't say the best of his career, because these two are the only movies of his I have seen. Sorry, ""Scarface"" fans.) He is perfect as a man who, through gaining power, loses his humanity. If you have read my review for ""Lawrence of Arabia,"" you'll remember I named some performances that would be on a list of the Top 10 Best Movie Performances. I have no doubts that Pacino in this film would be right on there.

Before watching this, I had doubts as to how the movie would make do without screen legend Marlon Brando, as his character is twenty-five years younger, and so played by Robert De Niro. (I haven't yet seen ""Taxi Driver"" or ""Raging Bull."") But after watching it, I feel that he is just as good, and he really deserved his Oscar win for Best Supporting Actor. He is so good that I can't decide who did a better job, him or Brando. Good thing he wasn't cast in the first film, otherwise the world wouldn't have this terrific performance.

Although Pacino and De Niro are the highlights in this movie's cast, the others are excellent as well. Robert Duvall as Michael's stepbrother, Tom Hagen, really sells his conflicted loyalty/fear of his changing stepbrother. Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth, a man who Michael is trying to kill, is excellent. Diane Keaton as Kay, Michael's wife, really shows how she is frightened at what he has now become. And, of course, there is John Cazale as Michael's brother Fredo, the weakling who tries to be stronger than everyone says,but things don't go according to plan. (I won't go into specifics.)

Just like the first film, another great aspect is the script. Doing one story line would be hard enough, but the fact that the movie does both so well, so flawlessly, is just amazing. It reintroduces the characters we already know, and take them to further places and develop them more, and also introduces more. It features parallels to the first movie, with similar scenes that show how things have changed. This installment also feels more epic than the first one, as things get bigger and darker.

The film is also marvelous in its technical aspects as well. The score by Nino Rota, once again, is beautifully haunting, and even better than in the previous film. The cinematography by Gordon Willis continues to shine. (Even though, ironically, he himself has regretted some scenes that he felt were too dark.) The production design is fantastic, and it helps with the epic scope I mentioned previously. The violence is more realistic, and somewhat more graphic, which gives it a better impact. The editing is also good, as the two story lines are connected beautifully. If I have one problem with the movie, it is that it is slower than the previous film, as it's longer by twenty-five minutes, and 3.3 hours makes for a pretty long movie. But, taking into account how brilliant the rest of the movie is, that can be forgiven.

This film is so amazing, it astonishes on every level. I may have been disappointed that the first film only won three Oscars, but fortunately this one managed to get six, including a second Best Picture, which were all well deserved. (I have no idea how Pacino didn't get Best Actor, but, according to ""Some Like It Hot,"" ""Nobody's perfect."") Clearly topping the original, ""The Godfather Part II"" is the Best Film of All Time, so of course, I have to give it a 10/10 rating.";4;6;False tt0071562;C22Man;29/10/2013;The greatest sequel ever made and equally as good as the original;9;"It seems impossible to think that the first Godfather could be topped, but its direct sequel may be even better. It effectively takes all the elements from the first and makes them bigger and more complex, as well as revolutionising the idea of flashbacks. The plot is possibly the greatest of all time, the characters are more diversely fascinating and everything feels even more epic than before.

The plot is split in two, one following the Corleone family in modern day and the other early life of Vito. The first follows Michael who is now Don as he attempts to expand the family business into Las Vegas. He faces much dissatisfaction in his own family, from Capo Frank Pentangeli and his own sister. He later survives an assassination attempt, and as he tries to learn who made the attempt he also faces a committee investigation that tears his family apart. This story is one of the best in film history, everything about it is incredibly set-up. The second charts the young life of Vito Corleone as he raises his family in New York and aims to build his own legacy. This sees him challenge the local Don and gain friends to help him achieve his goal. This part gives us a true insight into how all of what we're seeing started and is a fantastic mirror image to the modern events.

The huge cast is once again truly outstanding. Al Pacino gives an incredible performance as we see Michael transform into a cold monster who has no feelings for his family. The way Pacino shows the struggle as he edges closer to the abyss is astonishing. The other star is John Cazale as Fredo, he is outstanding as the timid Fredo, the chemistry between himself and Pacino sets their scenes alight. Robert Duvall is solid as a rock once again as the reserved Tom, while Diane Keaton is great showing Kay as confused and frightened of her situation. Michael V. Gazzo is superb as Frank showing him as a genuinely troubled person. Richard Bright deserves praise as, despite few lines, he commands the screen as the loyal but brutal Al Neri. Joe Spinell is great as the doubtful Cicci as is Lee Strasberg as the devious Hyman Roth. Robert De Niro made his name here, he plays Vito with assured comfort and is just as good as Brando, which is praise itself.

The film looks stunning. It is lit similar to the first and carries the same gloomily authentic feel being very atmospheric. The scenes of early New York and of Sicily are both excellent having a very natural look to them. The music from Nino Rota is once again marvellous. The script is full of classic lines, ""Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer"" and ""I don't want to kill everyone, just my enemies"" to name but two. It's great how the film focuses more on Michael and it's reflected by the look at Vito. Michael grows increasingly paranoid and unstable as he places the family business above all else. We see the differences in how the family is set. Vito's was built on loyalty and love, whereas Michael's family is built on fear and violence. It is a fascinating contrast which the film itself is built on, the whole scope is formed from this showing the pleasant start of the family and then it's tragic fall. There are so many classic scenes, Michael finding out the traitor, Kay's pregnancy reveal, all of the conversations with Fredo, the scenes at the hearing and the famous 'fishing trip' to name a few. The final shot of Michael sitting alone is one of the most memorable of all time.

The Godfather Part II is a breath taking achievement in film and has possibly the greatest story ever put on screen.";4;6;False tt0071562;Michael_Elliott;03/05/2012;Rather Amazing How Perfect This Turned Out;;The Godfather Part II (1974)

**** (out of 4)

Francis Ford Coppola's masterpiece shows the early life of Vito Corleone (Robert DeNiro) who tries to rise in power and seek revenge after his parents are murdered. In the current times, Michael (Al Pacino) survives an assassination attempt and goes to find out who was behind it as well as destroy anyone who might be trying to do the family any harm. There's always going to be a debate on whether this film or the first is the best but for my money I have to hand it to this sequel. While both movies are great, I think this one works so well for numerous reasons but the biggest being that not only is a great sequel by continuing the events of the first film but it's also a great prequel by showing the life of Vito.

I've always had a few minor problems with the original movie but I think it would be fair to say that this one here is flawless in every way. Coppola does such a masterful job at making sure everything was on par with the original but you can tell he knew people were going to be questioning him attempting to do a sequel so he wanted to make sure that he delivered even more. As with the first film, this one here has that very slow pace that wouldn't be allowed in any movie today but thankfully the 70s were a much different time. Coppola perfectly uses this slower pacing to really get inside the heads of these people and he really delivers so much character development that you're amazed that so much is able to be done in its epic 200-minute running time. Even more amazing is how quickly the film flies by, which is saying a lot of consider the length and pace.

Of course, no one could ever say a negative thing about the performances and they're all masterful. I had really forgotten how wonderful Pacino was here but he's so chilling, cold and deadly quiet that you really do begin to fear him. I'm certainly not going to spoil anything but if you've seen the movie then you know what happens at the end and how Pacino plays this was just a masterful touch. DeNiro, picking up his first Oscar, does a wonderful job too. Doing the Italian language and mastering is obviously impressive but so are the small touches that he brings that connects the character to the later one played by Marlon Brando in the previous film. John Cazale is often overlooked but he has some terrific moments here as does Talia Shire, Robert Duvall and especially Diane Keaton.

THE GODFATHER PART II contains all the greatness of the first film and it's a real miracle that Coppola was able to match it and deliver even more. The film works on so many levels but being able to pretty much see two movies rolled into one is something of a lost art. Even rarer is how perfectly both parts are as the drama, tension, violence and pain are all on full display and there's no question that this film deserves its reputation as one of the greatest ever made.;4;6;False tt0071562;Desertman84;18/10/2011;The Godfather Part II: The Greatest Sequel Ever Made;10;"If The Godfather is the greatest film ever made,then The Godfather Part II is the greatest sequel ever made. It is Francis Ford Coppola's continuation of Mario Puzo's Mafia saga set new standards for sequels that have yet to be matched or broken until present.

The Godfather Part II chronicles the story of the Corleone family following the events of the first film while also depicting the rise to power of the young Vito Corleone,played by excellently Robert De Niro in his Academy Award winning performance.The film stars Al Pacino, Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,Robert De Niro,Talia Shire, John Cazale, Michael V. Gazzo and Lee Strasberg.

The movie is a depiction of the dark side of the American dream. In the early 1900s, the child Vito flees his Sicilian village for America after the local Mafia kills his family. Vito struggles to make a living, legally or illegally, for his wife and growing brood in Little Italy, killing the local Black Hand Fanucci after he demands his customary cut of the tyro's business. With Fanucci gone, Vito's communal stature grows, but it is his family (past and present) who matters most to him - - a familial legacy then upended by Michael's business expansion in the 1950s.

Now based in Lake Tahoe, Michael conspires to make inroads in Las Vegas and Havana pleasure industries by any means necessary. As he realizes that allies like Hyman Roth are trying to kill him, the increasingly paranoid Michael also discovers that his ambition has crippled his marriage to Kay and turned his brother, Fredo, against him. Barely escaping a federal indictment, Michael turns his attention to dealing with his enemies, completing his own corruption.

The film still has a strong performance from the cast despite not having Marlon Brando in it.Aside from De Niro,Al Pacino, Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,John Cazale and Lee Strasberg provide honest performances. Still present in the film is the haunting score of Nino Rota;the superb screenplay of both Puzo and Coppola; and the excellent direction of Copolla.But it has darker themes as compared to the first film as the characters are violent and amoral in their values.Also,the story presents the deterioration of the characters as the viewers feel for them in their pain and vulnerability. It may not be the ultimate family picture but nevertheless,it remains as the greatest sequel ever made and definitely one of the best films ever made.";4;6;True tt0071562;estebangonzalez10;22/09/2010;Coppola directs a perfect sequel of a masterpiece;10;¨Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.¨ Coppola's (or should I say Puzo's) The Godfather Part II is considered by many as the best sequel of all time, and some even consider it to be better than the original. In my opinion it is not as good as the first part, but there is no denying this is a great film nonetheless. Coppola did a great job with the direction once again, and has created a timeless film that movie fans go back to time after time. There are several things he did well with this film. First of all he took a completely different approach towards romanticizing the Corleone's. In the first film we were attracted to Vito for his strong family beliefs and loyalty to his friends, in this film we see how Michael completely begins to lose control of his family and friends. Michael, who I admired in the first film, has become so blind in his lust for power that he losses the strong values his father had taught him. He has grown cold, distant, and even goes as far as to hitting his wife (something Vito would never have dreamed of doing). The parallel story of young Vito and how he became a Don also works really well as it is told in flashbacks during Michael's present reign as Don. This story serves as a reminder of how distant Michael has become from what his father wanted of him. Part II is more of a nostalgic movie as we see the decline in the once strong and united Corleone family, and Nino Rota's score is a perfect example of that. The final scenes of the film only confirm this sentiment. The performance from the cast is as equally as brilliant as it was from the first, and Gordon Willis's cinematography is also equally impressive with its dark scenes that help set the mood of the film.

The Godfather Part II continues where the first one left off with Michael (Al Pacino) as head of the Corleone family and Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) as his personal adviser and lawyer. They are living in Nevada now and running the gambling business in that state during the late 50's. While we follow the present storyline, Coppola introduces a series of flashbacks beginning all the way back in 1901 following the early life of Vito (Oreste Baldini) in Sicily. Vito's father, brother, and mother (in that specific order) have been killed by Don Ciccio (Giuseppe Sillato), but Vito is able to escape to New York. The film later jumps forward to 1917 where Vito (Robert De Niro) is making a living working as a clerk for a small store in New York. The movie jumps back and forth between both stories. On the one hand you have Michael trying to expand his empire traveling to Miami and Cuba, meeting with Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), a successful Jewish businessman, who Michael isn't sure he can trust. On the meantime he has problems back home with his wife Kay (Diane Keaton), problems with Nevada Senator Pat Geary (G. D. Spradlin), and problems in New York with Frankie Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo), Clemenza's replacement and friend of the family. After an attack on his life Michael isn't sure who is after him (or maybe he is and we don't know it). On the other hand, the other story continues to follow young Vito as he meets Clemenza (Bruno Kirby) and Tessio (John Aprea) and begins his imminent rise to becoming the Don.

Marlon Brando was a huge part of the success of the first film, but Coppola, along with Puzo, did a great job introducing new characters to the story that contributed to the success of the sequel. Michael V. Gazzo as Frankie and Lee Strasberg as Roth were great in this film and gave it a fresh new look. Another contributing factor was the addition of the flashbacks because Robert de Niro was the right man to play young Vito. His Oscar winning performance was outstanding and he just stood out in every scene he was in. Al Pacino continued with his transformation in the first film, and now he portrayed a much darker and colder Michael. He didn't have to say anything and we already knew what he was feeling. There are several memorable scenes in which he speaks louder with his facial expressions than he does with his words. The opening scene in Nevada where the family is reunited celebrating Michael's son's First Communion is reminiscent of Connie's wedding scene in the first Godfather, and the same thing can be said of several other scenes as the final one. The sequel serves as a nostalgic memory of what the Corleone's once were (or at least what Coppola wanted us to think of them in the first romantic movie), it is much darker, but it still works and compliments the first part really well. The Godfather Part II is not better than the original, but it is still a masterpiece.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/;4;6;False tt0071562;classicsoncall;10/04/2010;"""I came here because there's going to be more bloodshed"".";10;"It's difficult to imagine that ""Godfather II"" could trade punches with the original and still remain standing, but this is one brilliant film. Masterfully tracing the history of the Corleone Family from Vito's arrival at Ellis Island in 1901 to the Lake Tahoe empire of 1958, the story is a decades spanning saga that makes you wonder how almost three and a half hours can blow by so quickly. The picture's numerous flashback scenes work well to establish the beginnings of Don Corleone's rise to power, and Robert de Niro's portrayal of the young Vito effectively allow us to forget about asking why Marlon Brando didn't show up even once. Pacino is no longer the fresh faced kid home from the military who takes up the family business, but the brooding, brutal leader of a crime syndicate with a chessboard strategy of staying two and three steps ahead of his enemies at all times.

If you haven't seen the movie in a long time, you might be surprised like I was while watching today. It's easy to recall the highlights like Frank Pentangeli's courtroom scene and subsequent suicide, and the way Fredo met his timely demise. What I had long forgotten was the way the picture opens with the Sicilian back story, and the way the New York neighborhood flashback thread literally runs throughout the entire picture. It's funny how I recall those scenes as a single sequence leading up to the murder of Don Fanucci, but it just goes to show you how faulty memory can be.

You know, it's hard to believe that the first two Godfather movies are nearing the forty year mark since their original release. They've become American classics that have well withstood the test of time, and will continue maintain their appeal. It's fair to say that seeing both of these iconic films are a must for the true cinema fan.";4;6;True tt0071562;DarthVoorhees;10/04/2005;One of the finest sequels ever made,Beats the Original...;10;The Godfather is one of the best films of all time,it is a dark story and is brilliantly acted and told.It excelled in character development,directing,and acting.You'd kind of find it hard to believe that a sequel could be better,but Godfather II is the superior movie.Godfather II has the stories of the Rise of young Don Vito Corleone in the 1910's/1920's and the moral fall of his son Michael Corleone in the late 1950's.By the end of the original Godfather you thought Michael sank to the lowest he could be.Here he was a good hearted guy,he just returned from World War II,and he had plans to marry his girlfriend Kay,but through the film he declines into a monster worse than his father.Don Vito was an interesting character,he was no doubt evil,but you could tell he had a big heart.Coppola introduced a really great way to tell a story on film,you see Michael and Don Vito at the same ages in their lives,you see how the two Corleone generations differed,how one failed,and the other prevailed.Don Vito is played excellently by Robert DeNiro.This is definitely one of DeNiro's best performances.Don Vito speaks in Italian most of the film with subtitles,so DeNiro had to do a lot of work with his face,look,and posture.Its one thing to excel at giving lines,but DeNiro excels at both verbal acting and non-verbal acting.DeNiro's Vito isn't like the Brando one at all,he's quieter,and sadder,but really you don't want them to be clones all good prequels set-up their character to become the character they are in the sequel movie.The best acting of the film though has to be that of Al Pacino as Don Michael Corleone,he has changed for the worst between movies,in the first movie he ordered killings to get more business,in Part II he orders them to get even.His wife Kay who stood by him through out all of his evil deeds in the original is loosing faith that Michael is sane.Even Michael's good friend Tom Hagen(Played brilliantly again by Robert Duval) tells Michael he's won,and its over.Michael even gets to the point where he kills his own brother Fredo.

Coppola makes Godfather II a lot darker than the original.The film feels more evil.Pacino gives arguably the finest performance of his career,his Michael is downright evil.Pacino has been able to create a character you know is dark,evil,and sinister.He's established a look for Michael.When Pacino's Michael has eyes of fire you know he's angry.For those who thought the original Godfather glamorized the mafia,you have to take a look at Godfather II,you cringe at what happens.Better than the original and arguably one of the best films ever made. (Personal Note)I don't really think a 3rd Godfather film was necessary,you didn't need to see Michael physically die,he was dead mentally by the end of II.

A Very Very High 10/10;4;6;True tt0071562;Sylviastel;14/10/2002;Poor Fredo! We still miss John Cazale!;10;The Godfather Part II has excellent writing, plotting, editing is even brilliant, acting, and overall quality to watch over again and again. You can never get sick of watching this film. I miss John Cazale. He was truly a gifted actor and I miss him. He played my favorite Corleone brother. Sure Alfredo was never brilliant or vicious but he was sweet, gentle, and warm most of the time. He had a conscience and I despise Michael for killing his own brother. I think he killed him out of jealousy. Alfredo spent more time with Michael's son, Anthony, than he did and he resented him for it. Alfredo could have been spared. Four years after Godfather Part II, John Cazale died of cancer after filming the Deer Hunter. He never won an Oscar or made too many films but he made every role memorable. Rest in Peace, John. I miss you.;4;6;False tt0071562;Quinoa1984;21/02/2000;One of the best sequels ever made;10;"The Godfather part 2 gets very close to the title for best sequel ever made, but not quite. Even so, I would rank this among the superior films to follow up on another and still be as strong and appealing and dramatically satisfying as the former. The structure of the film is also very important as it jumps back and forth between two stories of Corleone's without any disconnected feelings for the audience. Both could work as perfect single films on their own; together it's like a double album of the dark side of crime and the perilous nature of rising up in America as an immigrant. It's spectacular in many ways, masterpiece in fact, and has become as important as the first one (it is the only sequel to win an Oscar for best picture in those terms) and the acting all around is well-knit (even the pioneer himself Lee Strasberg is on hand as Roth), the score is possibly better in some ways to the first film, and most of the scene work is fantastic.

One thing that attracted me to this film is also what I believe is one of the all-time great breakthrough performances in any film, as Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone has all of that confidence as an actor without channeling too much Brando. If there would be one reason to see the film and recommend it it would be because of him, as he gives one of his tour de force career turns in that streak of one after another in the 70s. Pacino is practically as good with enough lines that are realistically grounded but also highly quotable at times (the ""in my home"" bit is priceless). John Cazale, by the way, is also an element to make the film work as one of two performances that he'll be remembered for twenty years down the line (the other being Dog Day Afternoon). In short, it's just a very well done picture.";4;6;False tt0071562;The_Real_Review;07/10/2009;What a waste of time;1;"This movie was painful to finish. I felt like I was watching paint dry. Sure you can give it credit for getting the historic periods accurate but do set design, costumes and props make a great movie? I think not.

This actually could have easily been two movies and made each more bearable to watch though not anymore exciting.

The public's fascination with organized crime is very disturbing. These are hollow, morally void movies. So what the godfather was a ""family man"" that justifies his brutality? Just like people's attachment to the Godfather in the first movie because he didn't want to get into drugs and showed ""loyalty"" to his family (so long as he was king). You cannot sugar coat depravity and thuggery. They are what they are, pathetic and empty excuses for criminal behavior. Maybe people's lives are so boring they become mentally disturbed? I don't know, I am simply trying to rationalize this behavior. Idolizing criminals who get weak-minded people to fear them and then pretend themselves to be ""emperors"" among their ""subjects"" is downright pathetic. I suspect people pretend in their own minds to have this control over others, this fake respect and false sense of self-worth.

This is how I imagine they envision it,

""Hey look I'm a dumb Sicilian who says stupid phrases with double meanings and then brutally murders others. But it is OK because everything is about the fake ""family"" not the narcissistic personality disorder. Play some crappy music from the old country and drink some bad ""vino"". Make sure to speak in broken English gibberish with an Italian accent. Yes you too can be a loser thug.""

is your life this pathetic? Don't answer that (we know it is).

All I wanted to see was Michael Corleone die and he never died. He just kept brooding on and on and on for 3 hours! For some reason Michael can just kill everyone he wants in the last five minutes of every movie yet no one can kill him? Apparently he always wears full body armor and drives around only in a tank? Yet in the movie he frequently goes all over the place in just a regular suit and car. How is this so? Maybe his magic fear aura just repels anyone who would ever think of killing him!

The fans of these movies miss the obvious because they are so into Al Pacino brooding around posing for the camera and fantasizing of being the Godfather.

What a waste of time.";41;111;True tt0071562;bjornbouterse;15/07/2012;Not being mean here but of the worst films I have ever scene.;;About six months ago I watched the Godfather Part I and to tell you the truth I thoroughly enjoyed, It had good cast, good story but still not worth number two on IMDb's top 250 and technically every top 100 film list on the web but still I must give it some credit. However today 15.7.12 I layed my eyes upon the masterpiece of terrible films I mean it truly is shockingly boring. I kept waiting for something to happen and nothing ever did.

Robert De Niro's role: My second favourite actor of all time after Jack Nicholson who does proud in practically ever film I've seen with De Niro in until today. I mean what in Gods holy name did he win an Oscar for this pile of **beep** he wasn't even in half the film. Thoroughly disappointed, no wonder he didn't appear at the Academy Awards because he probably thought what the hell I am I doing winning an Oscar for the worlds most boring films ever. He probably felt embarrassed.

How people and watch that film and actually enjoy it is beyond me. I don't think I am exaggerating either to be completely honest I only watched the film to the end to see if Michael Corleone died to boy was he getting on my nerves.

I sorry if I have offended anyones opinion but if you want to sit and enjoy a film watch Pulp Fiction which by the way on paper if one worse that The Godfather Part II.;10;21;False tt0071562;Helg88;07/06/2007;Good God;2;I managed to tolerate the first but this one was an insult! I am not faulting the acting, just the film in general. It expects viewers to understand about the Mafia, and want to watch as these mundane characters speak in a secret coded language in Italian. I have forced myself through this film and would think it a cruel personal punishment to force myself to consider watching the third one. There must be other people out there who dislike this film as I do...? When comparing this film to others of a similar time (or before) I can still not understand its appeal. I can not believe any of this trilogy can make it into the top ten, let alone be people's favourite film!;27;70;False tt0071562;eddiez61;18/03/2010;If A Greek Philosopher Directed A Gangster Movie . . .;10;"I secretly read Mario Puzo's The Godfather in 1974 when I was 12 after my mother prohibited me from seeing the movie. She was trying to shield me from the rough language and lurid violence. There sure was a lot of both but more so there were great characters. Vivid, real, flesh and blood souls that acted on well drawn impulses and ambitions. Consequences were openly inevitable but somehow jarring, devastating and poignant. Historical elements were stunningly precise yet grandly broad and vast. I was entirely, absolutely overwhelmed by the visceral sensations and sprawling imagery. So this is what ""literature"" is all about. This is what ""reading"", I now understood, could be. I had been something of a sci-fi junkie previously, but from then on I was a converted disciple of the Great American Fable. The story was truly great and I never could have imagined a better one until I finally saw the movies.

Astoundingly, Francis Ford Coppola's film adaptations surpass the novel in a few key details. The casting of Al Pacino as Michael Corleone is the single greatest improvement on the original story. Where in the novel, Michael is something of a strapping, virile, obviously competent man of action, Coppola introduces a crucial element of doubt by way of Pacino's diminutive stature. Though we are told Michael is a returning war hero, we are skeptical of his leadership abilities, especially in the company of such physically imposing figures as his father and oldest brother Sonny. Pacino's bodily disadvantage works to emphasize the complexities of his reluctance to join in the Family Enterprise, and makes his cerebral and emotional challenges that much more epic.

The other notable improvement on the book, of course is Marlon Brando, who created one of the most indelible characters for the big screen. There wasn't then, nor is there now, any other person in the industry who could so monumentally fulfill the herculean task with which that character is charged. Don Vito Corleone's function in the story is metaphorical, transcendent, mythological. He is the living embodiment of the ageless value of Heritage. Heritage which only endures through the tenuous bonds of family unity, but transported to a young, naive, unsympathetic land, is now being severely tested.

But since Godfather II begins after the Don is dead it is faced with the considerable challenge of how to maintain this crucial historical perspective. So, Gf 2 immediately whisks us back into time with a vignette of Vito's tragic childhood in turn-of-the-century Sicily. Later begins a series of flashbacks to his early manhood in New York City played by a sublimely low key Robert DeNiro. Oddly, he is not engaged in acts of wanton destruction, sociological delinquency or self indulgent pride. Rather, we are casually informed of Vito's entry into the underworld by way of seemingly reasonable acts. He is drawn as a man not just doing what is necessary to survive in the rough, often brutal New World, but driven by his familial responsibilities and a sense of duty to his community.

The period from which we are ""flashing"" is the late 1950s and early 1960s. By butting the ""old"" up against the ""new"" we are offered a sparkling view of the clash of cultures, of just how much had changed in those few decades. This dichotomy introduces a two fold historical perspective. By way of the contrasts between early and mid century life we are being informed of our present day (1972 and after) cultural afflictions. It's a subtle, almost invisible point, but one that is, I believe, extremely profound, the central theme of the story, and even more relevant today. Consider how, just one single decade after the time when the story ends to when the films were made, American life had so radically changed. Now consider how much things have changed since then.

While most fans of the film are impressed with the robust characters, compelling dialog and and terrific action produced with expert cinematic skill, I was even more fascinated by the film's more abstract qualities. Coppola, much more so than Puzo, is playing Socrates here, posing a dialectic query - How is it that primal cultural tenets might survive in a climate of overwhelming opposition? Francis is troubled, alarmed by the assault on vital culture that all humanity is experiencing today, and obviously very cynical that cherished and valuable, essential traditions can persist. This cynicism was a pervasive theme at the close of the sixties and it infused nearly all the great art of the time. Remember, the year of the book's publication, 1969, also saw the release of ""Easy Rider."" Not insignificantly, that too was a story of social outsiders, antiheroes colliding with an increasingly corrupt, immoral majority. This cynicism is the intellectual, psychological and emotional driving force of the The Godfather I & II, and it's the thing that kept me coming back to them, again and again.

So, what for many is simply a superb, if not the greatest, Gangster Movie, is for me one of the finest critical views of the American Way. It is, in fact, irrelevant that the Corleones are mobsters, because ultimately what destroyed them is what is destroying all Americans. The disintegration of the essential commitment to family and community - our succumbing to all the temptations that undermine our strengths - is our downfall. It's no coincidence that the tragedy ultimately concludes in Las Vegas, the spiritual center of America's true religion, the Capitol City of Temptation. Our cultural decline has progressed to where it is now terminally incurable. Great art in the service of a dying society. We have all become Fredo.";6;11;False tt0071562;shhimundercoverdamnit;01/11/2006;The Godfather: Part II;9;"""It's not easy to be a son, Fredo. It's not easy."" Is undeniably the best sequel ever made and one of the best films ever made. First off, Robert De Niro's performance as the young Don Corleone completely owns. Pure genius, pure craft.

Secondly, well it's Pacino, all Pacino. One pure example, at its best is when Diane Keaton's character confesses to him ' it wasn't a miscarriage'' revealing that instead she had an abortion, so that she wouldn't bring him anymore sons into the world. Watch Pacino's face during this entire scene!!!!!!!! Or the last flashback scene where Michael reveals that he has joined the Marines to the disgust of his family and such, at this time he had his own ' dreams' now, we simply watch the price which Michael Corleone has paid himself for power.";6;11;True tt0071562;StarVVars;18/01/2004;Very Long and very boring.;1;While the first movie had a lot of freshness and intensity, this movie is explaining the rise of Vito and Michael with more detail and explanation, so that it is taking a much longer breathing to say it. The mixture of past and present may work for some, but it didn't work for me. I had the feeling the film was repeating itself constantly with past and present, even when the scenes with Vito Corleone weren't that good and a bit too cliché and strangely comical. I don't understand why this film is rated to high.;44;125;False tt0071562;laura5578;07/06/2007;Snooze-fest!;1;I really don't understand the obsession with the Godfather trilogy, brought up with society around me proclaiming it to be a classic I rented the first and found it just bearable! Determined on my task of watching all three I rented the second, I barely made it through, i found the storyline confusing and didn't see any of the quotes used in 'You've got Mail'! Please don't think that the only films I watch are chick flicks, I do like more serious, older films but ... oh dear... maybe I just can't relate to Italian mafia families, I must have wiped this film from my mind as I can hardly remember the storyline! I do not which to be stereotypical but maybe this really is a film for men! Please tell me there are other people out there who feel this way about these films! I can't understand how they always get to the top of 'Great film Lists'! If asked by a friend whether to watch this film I would say no, unless I wanted to punish them!

P.S I still haven't watched number three!!;48;138;False tt0071562;ozjeppe;03/12/2006;Good, but no match for part one... and certainly no masterpiece!;6;"NO, one shouldn't compare movies. But here, it's validated, since both part one and two are based on one book, so I WILL. And on its own, this one is just no match for part one. It's good; we have flawless production values and cinematography. Jumping between past and present works and mix of locations (wintry family residence and tropical Cuba) helps. But the major drawbacks are: 1. Its length. 2. Its stretched-out storytelling and protraction of many scenes, which made my attention and interest drop considerably. It is simply too draggy and meandering. I just FEEL so much more watching part one, because it cuts more to the chase - tighter, darker and deeper. This one seems made to sprawl - but stalls a bit too often.

However, some of the characters develop nicely (more depth from both Keaton, Cazale and Shire) , and the family heritage is cemented every time we move to Vito Corleone's younger days. Make no mistake, it's fine, solid and an indispensable part of the whole saga, but sorry folks - it's no masterpiece to me.

6 out of 10 from Ozjeppe.";14;33;False tt0071562;Kakueke;22/09/2001;Not so great;5;"The Godfather II is not nearly as good as Godfather I, even tho some intelligence and good acting went in. After the Godfather I, and Michael's evolution is complete, who needs a sequel about unsavory characters so much? The Godfather I, led by Vito and Sonny, had elements that provided for great entertainment and made you less bothered by the evil and sleaze (temporarily). Michael pales as an imposing figure next to Vito, and altho Al Pacino is a good actor, I just get tired of watching Michael too much--I was even getting a little tired of him at the end of Godfather I. In other words, I think the disadvantage sequels have of becoming-tiresome subject matter are more present, not less, here. The end of Godfather II, with Michael staring out morosely into the water from a chair, symbolizes the decadence of the story and the corrupt characters, especially Michael himself. I think more toward a pathetic character than a tragic one, despite some of the events he had to endure. And what is the point of Kay's back and forth moral concerns if she is staying with him? And wasn't that ""abortion"" blowup scene (natch, male child) so moving? Not to me.

The main story here is somewhat convoluted and disorganized, so when the flashbacks are inserted the confusion gets worse. We have sordid characters (Hyman Roth etc.) who do not particularly entertain me on a movie screen, and the depressing figures of Fredo (geez, isn't he such a compelling character) and Connie. This is a precursor to a lot of post mid-70s movies in which the plot is overcomplicated and not crisp and the characters sleazy and unappealing--in movies like this, I would like the characters to be less dwelled on and the action to rule.

On the other hand, there is reason to be somewhat interested in the development of Vito and the flashbacks of the family. Robert DeNiro does a good job as Vito, and the screenplay is thoughtful, but ultimately the main story dominates. Yes, it is true, modern movies are less uplifting than ones preceding the mid-60s, but in spite of the many elements that some people complain about--violence, corruption, sex, pomposity, ridiculously overdone and confusing special effects--there are often some redeeming or uplifting features. Certainly none here, and this film is depressing and sometimes boring, in spite of some good individual scenes and substance here and there to the story and characters. To each his own--I can see why some people like this movie more than I do, but I really do not think it belongs on a pedestal either.";16;39;False tt0071562;mjneu59;22/11/2010;more complex and even richer than the original;10;It's rare for a sequel to match its predecessor, but the follow-up to Francis Ford Coppola's monumental mob family drama does more than simply continue the same story, expanding on themes only suggested in Part One to present an ambitious overview of organized crime in 20th century America. The Corleone family tree is divided here into parallel histories, with young Vito (Robert De Niro) arriving in the New World to begin a family, and a family empire, which a generation later his bitter and lonely son Michael (Al Pacino) would consolidate, destroying in the process everything he holds dear. The sudden displays of gangland violence are no longer placed in ironic juxtaposition to the unlikely richness of Corleone family values, being used instead to measure the corruption of il padrone's immigrant idealism: murder to young Vito is strictly a matter of honor, but to Michael it's only an extension of his absolute power. The crosscutting between two stories sacrifices a consistent narrative flow in favor of complexity and depth, but it's a fair trade, and seen together with Part One (Part Two should not be seen without the introduction provided by the earlier film) is a rich experience not soon forgotten.;5;9;False tt0071562;danegem;23/09/2008;This should be #1 in the top 250 here in IMDb.;10;"""The Godfather"" is basically the bridge that connects to stories in this movie.This movie takes you to the origins of Don Corleone and gave you an idea of how he rose to power and how respected he was in Sicily.While ""The Godfather"" is a work of art, this is a masterpiece.Everything you saw in the original movie plus more.A lot of character development, strong performances from all actors and great storytelling exist in this Dark Drama.Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall and the rest are all excellent in their respected roles.With a movie this good, who knew the third one would not be as good as the first one at least? Highly recommended.

My rating: 10/10";5;9;True tt0071562;leplatypus;12/01/2009;More God, Less Father! Godfather Marathon – 28/12/08 – 17H00 (Screen);4;This second part was projected after a short pause of 30 min. If the movie is the longest and I never felt it dull, it's the weakest of the trilogy in my opinion.

The 60's trip into the Cuban revolution was too far away from the italo-American roots of the family. Maybe the drive of Michael Corleone to build his empire makes him too cold? But it was a pleasure to see Al playing with his mentor (Lee Strasberg) and watch their complicity.

The great moment of this movie was the story of the Don played by De Niro. He speaks little but when he said something, you'd better listen. The life of immigrants in little Italia around 1900 was very well depicted. Except those flashbacks, it's really about the criminal life thus putting aside the family content which is the heart of those movies. Happily, there's a part III.;11;26;False tt0071562;mehrshadchakameh;23/05/2018;My Review;10;The best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the worldThe best movie in the world;4;7;False tt0071562;Thanos_Alfie;11/08/2013;Touching perfection...;9;"Francis Ford Coppola directs the sequel of ""The Godfather"" the ""The Godfather: Part II"". ""The Godfather: Part II"" is a movie that show us the history of Corleone family and also show us how Vito Corleone attempts to expand the family business into Las Vegas, Hollywood and Cuba.

In this movie you will see an another perfect performance by Al Pacino as Michael Corleone (nominated for Oscar as Best Actor in a Leading Role) and Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone (won the Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role). An another good performance made by Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen.

""The Godfather: Part II"" is a really good movie but is a little lower than the first movie that explains my title ""Touching perfection..."", but it continues to be the best sequel of all times.";4;7;False tt0071562;bobsgrock;19/11/2009;Travesty abounds.;9;The Godfather: Part II is not a sequel in the traditional Hollywood sense, rather a companion piece to one of the greatest films ever made in The Godfather. Here, the story is epic and sprawling, as it covers Michael's reign as the new head of the Corleone family by moving the business to Nevada and at the same time flashes back to show the story of how a young Vito Corleone came to power and started the story now being continued.

Francis Ford Coppola returns to his old ground with writing partner Mario Puzo to expand on Michael and establish Vito and doing so by going back and forth. This leads to some incredible shots of the young Vito and the young Michael in the same frame, a haunting image and symbol of how far this family has come. It also shows how far Coppola has come in terms of directing these films. Once again, his direction is immaculate in every sense, perfectly balancing the time between Michael and Vito, always picking the right time to go from story to story.

All this aside, I haven't even mentioned the other strong points, which are basically all of them. The flawless acting continues here with Al Pacino cementing his legacy in this very subdued yet emotionally upsetting performance as Michael, the youngest who seemed ostracized from his family at the beginning and now has all the power and success and none of the love or affection his father had. Indeed, one of the main themes of the film is to show how different Michael handles things from his father and whether or not he is a better leader. Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, Talia Shire and the tragic John Cazale all contribute so much in their roles, and Robert De Niro made his name known with a flawless performance as the young, ambitious and loyal Vito.

Once again, Gordon Willis photographs and once again the darkness shrouds the characters, symbolizing the heavy-handed situations surrounding them. This adds so much to the tone and atmosphere of the story that it completely takes us up in the story and makes the 200 minute running time fly by smoothly. The Godfather and The Godfather: Part II have long been recognized as required viewing for any film lover and I cannot argue. They are so well-made and engrossing that it is impossible to not feel for these characters and the choices they make.

The final two scenes are quite something to behold. The first is a flashback to see the kids waiting for Vito to surprise him on his birthday. Here, we see how Michael truly was treated and how Sonny, Tom, and Connie related to one another and how it colored the rest of their existence. The final scene is Michael, alone and contemplating everything that has happened. It is a scene for the audience to contemplate and wonder at the travesty that has abounded. And these two films are truly something to behold and admire for their sheer quality and intensity.;4;7;False tt0071562;Brawl_666;18/10/2009;pretty amazing;9;"You're not allowed to dislike this film either. This is a massive achievement in every possible sense. Indeed, there is little that rivals these two films in opulence or production scale.

Coppola doesn't shy away from trying new things. Michael Corleone's story-arc is more realistic, more ambitious than anything in the first film. The scale of crime is upgraded. And I had never expected to see that scene between Michael & Kay, where she tells him of her departure, ""because of this 2000-year-old Sicilian thing."" Vito Corleone's backstory follows the earlier, more conventional combination of style and myth. Actually, Coppola makes Vito's arc too obvious, as though he's following a checklist. But again its very tastefully done, so you enjoy it.

I guess what this film lacks is a simpler plot and the phenomenal pacing of the first film. Also missing is the magisterial presence of a certain Marlon Brando. It is easier to appreciate this film when you place it together with the first, as one single epic of the rise of one Mafia generation, followed by the decline of another.";4;7;False tt0071562;michael_the_nermal;16/07/2007;Great Movie. Another Winner from Francis Ford Copolla;9;"Warning! Spoilers Ahead!

""The Godfather, Part II"" is another gem of a movie, worthy of a place alongside its revered predecessor. This movie's strengths lie in Copolla's retention of the best actors from the first film mixed in with terrific new actors for the second. John Cazale, Lee Strasberg, Robert de Niro and Michael Gazzo are given their moment to shine here, and play credible and unforgettable characters. Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, and Robert Duvall reprise their roles from the first movie, and put in an equal amount of effort to the first film, which means that the second is also very good. Copolla had a lot more creative freedom with this picture, but it doesn't differ much from the first in terms of style and camera angles. Still, the director does an admirable job crafting an interesting and wonderful film.

Pacino's Michael Corleone is, in the first, a quiet and understated character most of the time, only this time, whenever the character is riled by a tragic event, Pacino lets out his infamous ""scream"" to emphasize that his character is like a dangerous time bomb with an unpredictable temper: one minute he's calm, the next he's in a rage. Unfortunately, Pacino is most remembered for his loud, bombastic performances rather than his understated quiet ones. Keaton appears to have less screen time, but, like her husband Michael, undergoes a credible transformation from the naive, submissive character we remember from Part I into an assertive, strong woman who will not give in to her husband. She asserts control over her own body by aborting her baby rather than letting Michael have another heir to his criminal empire. Again, Keaton's performance is usually cited as the weakest of the ""Godfather"" saga, but this seems unfair, and she does well whenever she has screen time. Robert Duvall is back with another excellent turn as Corelone family adviser Tom Hagen.

The new faces do very well here, and again, Copolla was blessed with an excellent cast. Gazzo is simply delectable as mobster Frank Pentangeli, one of cinema's most memorable characters. One minute he's a lovable old man, sometimes seeming as dopey and sweet as your great-uncle, asking the band to play an Italian ""tarantella""; the next he's viciously asking for the blood of the Rosato Borthers. He, ultimately, cows to Michael's control during a Senate hearing, just as he is about to rat him out.Gazzo, a prolific playwright, showed he had the chops as an actor as well. Another memorable performance is the Italian actor who played the gangster Don Fanucci, a dandy tyrant who shakes down Italian immigrants for protection money. He, like the guy who played ""The Turk"" Solozzo in Part I, is a convincing actor who can make a slimy villain come to life. He seems to relish his role as the white coated mobster who confidently rules the neighborhood with an iron fist. Less potent is Lee Strasberg's Hyman Roth, who, after Don Fanucci, is the film's main antagonist. Roth's true evil is only revealed in other characters' dialogue and indirect screen action rather than anything we see Roth do on the screen. I wasn't fully convinced that Roth was a cunning double-crosser, as we don't actually see him engage in the double-cross. Strasberg gives an understated performance as the kingpin of the pre-Castro Havana casinos (an obvious representation of real-life gangster Meyer Lansky). Still, Strasberg does have some memorable moments, such as the famous ""This is the Business We've Chosen"" speech he gives to Michael.

Fresh performances from John Cazale and Robert de Niro round out this movie. We don't see much of Fredo in Part I, but he's essential to Part II. Cazale gives a memorable performance as the meek, weak, sweet, but ultimately treacherous middle brother of the Corleone family. His flaws include his lack of intelligence and possible naiveté, which ultimately result in his being a pawn in Roth's scheme to kill Michael. Fredo wants the keys to the kingdom, but will settle for some power, and Roth apparently offered him something special for his services. All Fredo says is that ""there was something in it for me!"", but what this was is rather vague; still, Fredo's ties with Roth are enough for Michael to commit the darkest murder he will commit in the saga: fratricide. We almost feel sorry for Fredo as he sweetly tells his nephew how to catch a fish by reciting a ""Hail Mary,"" right before Michael has one his goons shoot him from behind on a fishing trip. Fredo may be the rather weak and dopey member of the Corleone clan, but Cazale also manages to humanize Fredo and make a memorable performance as the ultimately tragic odd man out in the ""family business.""

Part II carries with it a sadder tragedy than Part I, as Michael ""loses his family,"" in terms of his wife's abortion and departure, and Fredo's treachery and his eventual murder. It is in Part II that we see the full scope of the perils of a life of crime in terms of keeping a family together. Even Don Vito, while running a criminal empire, was able to somehow keep his family glued together. We see the sad irony when Michael's mother tells him ""you will never lose your family.""

This is an excellent movie, much like the first one. Copolla does well here. (Copolla's further career is debatable. Radio host Phil Hendrie once gave a hilarious criticism of Copolla's career: ""what do you mean 'Charlie don't surf?!'"") He directs beautifully here, and the actors cooperate by giving excellent performances. This is a highly recommended movie.";4;7;False tt0071562;krumski;05/07/2002;OK, maybe I get it now (a qualified thumbs-up);4;"I have an earlier review of this movie posted somewhere on this site in which I pretty much deconstruct it and its status as a ""classic sequel"" and even ""a great movie."" A handful of great scenes populate it, to be sure, and a spate of fine performances (particularly a toweringly great one from Pacino), but nothing that coheres into greatness - particularly as it's at the service of a turgid and convoluted plot.

All of which I more or less stand by - at least as it befits my own taste and predilections. But I recently had some insight into why this sequel may be so well-respected: in its very dourness and lack of fire, it paints the unremittingly grim portrait of Mafia life that many apparently felt was missing from the first Godfather. I recently showed that movie to a group of my friends who had never seen it before (amazing in this day and age, no?) and they all enjoyed it - but, to a man, they felt that it definitely glorified and mythologized the violence it showed and the lifestyle it portrayed. Personally, I have a hard time seeing this - and, pay attention, because I believe here lies the discrepancy between the people who love the sequel and those who don't. On the most simplistic level, if you feel the first film glorifies the Mob - and feel at least slightly cheated because of it - you will most likely have an appreciation for the second film. If you feel, like I do, that the first movie sucks you into associating and sympathizing (hell, even *loving*!) these characters, but that the violence brings everything all back home and reminds you the evil and corruption which undergirds their way of life - then the second movie, though having perhaps some interesting elaborations upon this theme, offers nothing genuinely new. And is, therefore - despite all the evident care and superb craft involved - kind of a waste of time.

But, since the violence and worldview depicted in The Godfather is such a polarizing issue, I suppose it was a good idea that Francis Coppola decided to have another go at it, ramming down his point for all those who didn't get it the first time: ""The Mob is BAD, it CORRUPTS YOUR SOUL, and NO GOOD CAN COME OF IT!"" These are good points to be made, and perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to dismiss them. I had just thought, previously, that . . . well, they're obvious (or should be, anyway - and anyone to whom they're not obvious is probably beyond all hope) and that the director had already made them once. Clearly, not everyone feels The Godfather makes those points cogently enough (as my friend says about the end of the first movie: ""Sure, Michael is cold, ruthless and lies to his wife - but DAMN, he's just the *man*!""). For those people, The Godfather Part II exists, and that's fine. I'll never speak ill of the movie again.

Except for those flashback scenes - those are still terrible! Either they should form a completely different movie unto themselves, or they should be cut out entirely (watching the second film as part of ""The Godfather Saga"", where these flashbacks have been excised, is infinitely more rewarding to me). I still don't know what function they serve - if anything, they seem a throwback to the preciousness and romanticism of the first film, except far worse, in my opinion. But no one seems to agree with me, so I'll stop beating the tune on that one . . .

But as long as I'm here and have got this movie in my sights for a second time (and am inclined to dwell on its strengths rather than its faults), let me just expand upon what I said earlier about the acting: the film is a veritable master's class in great acting, coming in all shapes and varieties. The coiled intensity of Pacino is complemented by an equally quiet yet forceful turn by Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen (whose work in both Godfathers is some of the greatest, yet most unsung, in cinema history). Lee Strasberg does wonderful things with the Hyman Roth character, adding new layers and shadings in every scene, and his soliloquy to Michael about Moe Greene is as dead-on perfect as anything can be in this world. Similarly, Michael Gazzo takes a seemingly annoying and one-note character (Pentangeli) and works in so much depth and humanity, that at the end he's one of your favorite people in the entire Godfather story (doubly amazing, since he didn't have any automatic goodwill from the audience by being a carryover from the first film). The quiet scene between he and Duvall near the end is, in some ways, the most shocking, cold-hearted and violent of the whole series - and not one weapon is drawn, the two speaking in pleasantries the entire time, barely above a murmur. This, folks, is great acting - as well as sophisticated writing, all topped off by a director who has total confidence in the audience to get it, without his having to exaggerate or accentuate a thing. This is, simply, peerless moviemaking.

Such peerlessness exists, for me, in doses rather than all the way through in The Godfather Part II. But to extrapolate from this that the film is somehow worthless is a mistake - one I must apologize for. Though I still stand by my assessment that, for me anyway, the second Godfather is largely ""unnecessary"", I am more aware and sympathetic to the larger purpose it serves for a good deal of the audience. And, necessary or not, it still has on show some absolutely top-notch cinema acting, writing and directing. Maybe it, unlike the first one, is an offer I *can* refuse, but having once accepted it, I'm there for the duration.";14;38;False tt0071562;PWNYCNY;27/11/2005;This movie is a study in greed and depravity.;10;"This movie is about a struggle for power between two men: the pretentious upstart Michael Corleone, who is trying to establish his legitimacy as Godfather, and Hyman Roth, the most powerful crime figure on the planet, whom Michael both hates and wants to emulate. The movie also shows Michael's depravity and hypocrisy. While committing the most vicious acts in the name of the Family, he is actually systematically targeting for destruction every one closet to him. Michael is nothing but a phony. He reveres his father, Vito, who is his role model, but he can never be another Vito. Vito was respected and loved, while Michael is feared and loathed. Vito attracted people, inspired confidence, was acknowledged a leader, while Michael repels people away. Everyone close to Michael is driven away or killed: Tom, Freddie, Kay, Pentangeli. They are on to Michael and Michael knows it, so he must have them eliminated. The character of Michael Corleone is one of the most chilling characters in cinema history. Michael is cruel and depraved, yet tries to pass himself off as decent and moral. But that is a front which masks his greediness and deceit. Everything he touches he destroys. Michael is so nasty and mean that he even fights Hyman Roth, the one man who has real affection for Michael. But even that is not enough for Michael. For Michael, being a predator, Roth's good will is a sign of weakness to be exploited. The depth of Michael's depravity is bottomless. And in the end, the man for whom family meant everything, has no one. He has either murdered or driven away everyone. He is alone.

When this movie was first released oh those so many years ago, I liked it. Recently I watched the movie again. This time, the movie wasn't that good. My main objections to the movie are: the repeated use of flashbacks and the character of Michael. Regarding the flashbacks, they ruined the continuity of the movie. Is this movie about Michael or is it about the first Godfather? Second, the character Michael is so overblown and two-dimensional that not even Al Pacino's excellent performance could totally save it. It seemed that what Michael needed was a therapist to help him work through his misplaced aggression. Michael feels the need to defend his family but defend them against WHAT? Moreover, Michael is married, is the father of two children, is educated and thoroughly middle-class. This profile does not suggest someone who is likely to be directing an organized crime syndicate. Sorry, it just doesn't wash. And when Michael has his older brother murdered, even though his brother is mentally challenged, that defies all logic, even for Michael for whom the family comes first. If this movie is supposed to be a dramatic study of a deeply confused man who harbors paranoid delusions of persecution mixed with a big dose of grandiosity, then this movie is interesting. However, if this movie is trying to suggest that an intelligent, college-educated, married family man, who has the option to go ""legit"", would be interested in pursuing a career in organized crime, then this is stretching literary license a bit far. Why not have Michael run for political office instead? Now that could make for an interesting and credible movie.";6;13;True tt0071562;Ceruleanveritas;20/11/2014;Simply the best movie I've ever watched;10;"My title/summary says the essence of what I want to express, the best movie I've ever watched.

The only thing I would add is that this movie acts as both a sequel and a prequel to the first Godfather movie, which I believe makes it grander, more epic in scope. I also think it's a ""funner"" more entertaining movie.

And just to add a bit of context to my above statement;

I consider Lawrence of Arabia second. I think those are pretty solid, definitive for me.

Just behind I think I'd put Citizen Kane, Ben Hur, LOTR FOTR(still have to watch ROTK) and The Godfather, but I'm not as certain, particularly about the order.

I also liked, The Maltese Falcon, Slumdog Millionaire, The Empire Strikes Back, The Dark Knight(haven't seen Rises yet), Braveheart, Casablanca and City Lights(Charlie Chaplin).

Finally, I have not seen Gone with the Wind, and did not like The Third Man at all.

Just my opinion, thanks.";3;5;True tt0071562;jamesbutterford;28/10/2010;As Good as Movies Get;10;This is an excellent film. That's all there is to it. Personally, I think it's more than a little better than the first movie (excellent film also). In the DVD commentary, Coppola himself says that this is at least as good as the first film and that this is where he wanted to end things. The acting here is phenomenal from every character and I think the best performance is perhaps from the actor of Don Fanucci. You just don't see movies like this made anymore. I think the reason I prefer this over the first has a lot to do with the pacing. This movie is a little more fun and the flashback/forward structure always keeps things moving, as well as providing a beautiful contrast between the two generations of dons. By the way, don't let anybody tell you the stories have nothing to do with each other. Its structure is what really makes this a memorable movie, and it actually works without being tacky, unlike Once Upon a Time in America.;3;5;False tt0071562;remirezka;21/06/2010;beautiful. just beautiful;10;"i haven't seen the third part, but so far i prefer the 2nd to the first. not by a great deal, but i prefer it slightly to the first.

This is purely based on the fact that by Watching part two, i was made more aware of how much craftsmanship was implicated into the film's script.

The film begun to highlight on Michael's reluctance to continue in illicit practices in comparison to the first Godfather. the murders committed in the second part could be easily be seen as though Michael was getting carried away with the fact that he could get someone killed when he wanted and also that he acted on personal agendas rather than business. However, The fact was that he was eager to be rid of his enemies so quickly revolved around the idea that he wanted out; no more illegal dealings i.e. dealing with tergiversating, murders, money laundering etc.... The godfather became a story of thriving family men ( Vito and Michael) rather than a typical Mafia picture. i really appreciated the enactment of Vito's life as a young boy transcending into a respectable man of both virtue and vice, executed well by a young Robert De Niro.

what had really caught my senses- that really made me believe that the film was original, realistic and was created with diligence was the scene where Freddo supposedly met Johnny Ola for the first time and later had innocently neglected his concealment (of previously meeting Johnny Ola and Hyman Roth which he denied previously to Michael) and the presence of Michael only to implicitly slip out the fact that he had met both Roth and Ola previously, stated in a way that implicated that they all share a mutual friendship. instantly, i felt the inspirational factor of the film. that piece of simple originality in a film just made my day from then on, never in my early 17 years of life have i ever seen something so natural to human nature portrayed in a film, really beautiful.

so i have to say, the Godfather is one of the best made films not only for it's uniqueness and reality. but the timelessness of it's creation just makes it even more worth while and will continue to do so for many generations.";3;5;True tt0071562;blackmamba99971;30/04/2010;Francis's Best work;10;Seeing this film has never dulled the senses of how the world of the Mafia is in itself, a world of its own. Vito Corleone, an immigrant who lands on the shores of New York to escape the mafia in Cicily. Only to become the most powerful man later in life as the favour granting Don Corleone. Marlon Brando was brilliant as the Don as well as Robert Deniro who plays his younger self. The scope and gritty scale of the dirt ridden Ghetto was absolutely eye catching. You can actually smell the surroundings as you watch the film unfold. What was enjoyable also was seeing Al Pacino play the Don's young son, who later in life takes the reigns of his father's business and becomes even more powerful through the connections of the Las Vegas Game Circuit. Violence and revenge is what this movie is all about, to settle scores between families and factions which sometimes become chaotic. Through this is Micheal, a calm mild mannered child of Don Corleone who can take revenge to other levels. Another enjoyable character was Micheal's family lawyer played by Robert Duvall, without his connections, none of what the Corleone family gained would have been possible. This was a grand scale movie in all forms, the music, the gunfights, the revenge, and Coup De Gras type solutions which is only recognizable to those who appreciate this kind of genre. Beautiful story.;3;5;True tt0071562;redryan64;22/03/2009;"Boy Schultz, THE GODFATHER was so popular it spawned not one, but two sequels; not to mention a DOGFATHER Cartoon Series from DePathie-Freleng!";10;"THE SEQUEL has long been a reliable staple of Hollywood's yearly output. Forgoing any pretense of following a path toward the neither Artistic aspects nor Continuity. The all important a$pect$ of continuing a story from one hit movie i$, wa$ and always$ will be that of Box Office and Profit$; also known as the 'Bottom Line"". This is all understandable, for after all, making movies is a business.

HENCE, we generally treated to a parade of inferior stories, watered down story lines and lame ideas that get to the screen only because of perceived relationship to a real, true hit. The roster of examples are loaded with the likes of: SON OF KONG, FRENCH CONNECTION II, McHALE'S NAVY JOINS THE AIR FORCE, RTEURN TO PEYTON PLACE, BACK TO THE FUTURE II, III, IV etc., CITY SLICKERS II, ANALYZE THAT, BELLES ON THEIR TOES, HOUSE OF Dracula and all of those Friday THE 13th & HALLOWEEN spin-offs.

ON AN occasional a rarity occurs. A sequel picture comes along which is not only on par with the original, but in some cases actually tops the original. Titles such as BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, FOR THE LOVE OF BENJI and SUPERMAN II come to mind as prime examples. There are others out there; but for the sake of brevity, we'll hold down the roll call.

ARGUABLY the greatest example of a sequel that surpasses its progenitor is Francis Ford Coppola's production of MARIO PUZO'S THE GODFATHER: PART II; which just happens to be today's subject for dissection and analysis.

PERHAPS the success of the original GODFATHER paved the way for such an unexpected surprise and hit. Critically and at the Box Office, GODFATHER II is considered to be an even greater achievement of film making. The reason probably lies in a maturity and coming of age by Director Coppola .

IN LATER interviews, as well in his commentary that is included on the latest DVD set, Mr. Coppola speaks of the interference and attempted control of his artistic view of the picture was an almost daily bone of contention; especially during the early days of production. There was a great deal of meddling from the 'Suits' from the board room of Paramount Pictures; even extending to rumors that the big company wanted to replace the Director.

LUCKILY for F.F.C. and the rest of us, he managed to survive long enough to get the picture over the hump and into the final editing room. The resulting product came out of the film editors' shop as quite a sensational film; being one that would go down as, arguably, the best gangster film of all time. Surely it could not be eclipsed! THIS UNPRECEDENTED and unexpected success earned Francis Ford Coppola his spurs as a full fledged Hollywood Director. His name would from that point on be mentioned in the same breath as Capra, Ford, Hitchcock, Welles, Huston, Spielberg and Scorsase.

FOLLOWING such prestigious accolades, the Director now enjoyed full artistic control over his projects. Mr. Coppola was able to pull out all stops and do the picture he wanted in his own way. From this point on, the office gang at Paramount Corporate Headquarters could go and pound sand. The corporate monkey of the 'bottom line' was off his back, for good.

SUCH freedom allowed for the drafting of a fine, complex story not only to serve as a sequel, but at the same time it was functioning as a prequel; which is a term that wouldn't come into usage for some years yet. The mounting of having both the story of Michael Corleone's ascension to the heights of the Underworld, as well as the wonderful and lengthy flashbacks into the early life of Don Vito Corleone, was truly a work of genius. By using this dramatic device, the screen play, a collaboration done by both Mr. Puzo and Mr. Coppola gave us a chance to compare the life and times of two generations of the Family and our Nation as well.

WE do know that the working title of the project was announced as THE GODSON and some considerable amount of surgery had to be performed on the screen play; for the character of Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo) was a late addition to the starting line-up; as the story had Peter Clemenca (Richard Castellano) in the role of the discontented Cappo of the Corleone Family.

BUT Mr. Castellano proved to be unavailable; due to his insistence that his own writer would be the one to pen any and all of the character's dialogue. Refusing to give in to such demands, Coppola and Puzo wrote the Clemenca character out of the story; due to an unusual case of natural death; replacing him with this Pentangelli guy, who had been previously unmentioned.* WITHIN a short time of its release, GODFATHER II was hailed as a critical acclaim magnet; as well as being touted for its keeping high standards established in the first GODFATHER effort.

AND just for good measure, Coppola and the boys at Paramount had them a real good pitcher and hot item at the all important Box Office. (Just funnin' around with them improper used words & grammar, right Schultz?) OVERALL and with all factors considered, in order to be fair, we'd have to rate this film with a 10+ rasting. So, we will.

NOTE: * As further evidence, note all of the similarities in the two characters; what with his position, his henchman Willie Cicci (Joe Spinnell) and his keen interest & references to History.

POODLE SCHNITZ!!";3;5;True tt0071562;Hassard1994;09/07/2008;As good as the original!;;"I remember saying in my review of ""The Godfather"" that i was going to review this film a week later, that was more than one week ago that's for sure. I did actually start watching ""The Godfather Part II"" the next Friday, though i stopped watching after an hour because i wasn't really in the mood for it! So i decided that today, with nothing else to do, i'd give it another try and i wasn't disappointed! It was a great film, lots of talking but it's still great fun to watch.

I only have one criticism, the length. It was extremely long, about 3 and a half hours! But that's my only criticism, everything else was spot on! Hopefully i'll be watching ""The Godfather Part III"" soon and as soon as i do, i'll post my opinion right here!

So overall, ""The Godfather Part II"" is just as good as the original Godfather If you haven't seen this film yet, watch it now!

9/10";3;5;False tt0071562;Hitchcoc;16/02/2007;No More a Sequel that the Odyssey is to the Iliad;10;"It's only a sequel because of the Part II thing. This simply fills in the spaces with one of the greatest characters of all time. Remember, the two were put together in an incredible sage, putting things in chronological order. Talk about your psychological studies. Inside the head of Michael Corleone is a sense of power at all costs. Yet, he sees himself as a moral man. I wonder if one could look at organized criminals like one might look at a mideast country, because they have their own principalities, their own history, almost their own religion. They have parceled out their land and protect against invaders. They fear and react to threats from the outside, from ""non-family"" members.The product they sell is terror. Of course, all participants live on the edge. Their human failings are dismissed and magnified as weakness and disloyalty. Brothers kill brothers.

I haven't a lot to add because I am not a film expert. As uncomfortable as this film makes me (like the first one), I continue to watch. And in my heart of hearts I wonder if I were cast into this setting, could I stand up to the expectations of my culture?";3;5;False tt0071562;possumopossum;14/01/2007;Parts of the Book That Were Left Out in Part One...;;"...are included in Part II. This movie gives you the backstory of Vito Corleone's rise to power, from the time his father is murdered in Sicily until he ""makes his bones"" and creates his own empire in the United States. Robert DeNiro is very convincing as young Vito Corleone in what was, if memory serves correctly, is his big screen debut. I was almost convinced he was somehow related to Marlon Brando, he had the voice, the looks, the mannerisms, everything. Couple this with another story not included in the book of betrayal within the family while Michael tries to make a move in pre-Castro Cuba and you have a sequel that is every bit as good as the original. Michael has been stripped of all his humanity in this story, and he comes across as being a cold and heartless human being, one who would even have his own brother killed to preserve his nefarious empire. The ending is heartbreaking because he realizes that he lost his family trying to save it. And the soundtrack in this movie is even better than the original GODFATHER soundtrack. For the third time, I'm going to give a perfect 10 to this movie.";3;5;True tt0071562;Jsimpson5;09/01/2007;Best movie I have ever seen;9;I got the privilege to watch this film for the first last a few days ago. This has to be my favorite film of all time, along with one of the best films that I have ever seen.

The movie does very well in shown two different two stories in one movie. You have Michael's story of which shows his struggle in controlling one of the most powerful crime families in the United States. The second story is Vito Corleone's struggle as young boy in Sicily growing up and coming to America, and his start of the Corleone crime family.

This is a long film to watch, it took me a few days to watch it, as I watched about 30 to 40 minutes at a time.

All of the actor and actresses preformed there roles very well, and the actors and actresses who got Oscars for their roles in this movie were VERY WELL deserved. Robert De Niro does one of the best acting jobs I have ever seen in film, in my opinion one of the best actor's in 1974.

The script is well written and for the most part is easy to follow.

If you seen the first film, which is a must to understand this film, then you will like the second one, which is one of the best films of;3;5;True tt0071562;mentalcritic;08/05/2005;I prefer the first film, but this compares well;9;The Godfather, Part II is one of the most revered sequels of all time, if not the most. While I prefer the original for a few reasons, this sequel is not without more than its fair share of merits. However, it also has one or two flaws that, if I am going to be fair, I have to mention. Since they will take up the least amount of space in my comments, I'll get them out of the way first. The first flaw, in my opinion, is a jumping sense of focus. As the story goes from one part of America to Cuba to Sicily to another part of America, one can get a little giddy with the to and fro. The other problem is that when the screenplay doesn't follow Mario Puzo's original writings, it doesn't quite work. The big conspiracy with a Jewish smuggler and unnamed Italian rivals in the New York or Nevada underworlds doesn't quite seem to gel. Both stories, the historical story of Vito Corleone and the present-day story of Michael's decline, really needed three hours of their own. It is interesting to note that of all the deleted footage that went into the Godfather Legacy miniseries, the majority came from this film.

The acting from all concerned is top-notch, especially from Al Pacino, who sells himself beautifully as the dangerous head of a mafia family in spite of needing to be on platforms to appear at the same height as many of his castmates. Robert Duvall gives a workman-like performance, but he has little to do here other than act out the part of the ever-loyal brother. I think the fact that he was almost irrelevant to the storyline here has a lot to do with Duvall's refusal to join the cast of the third film. The real surprise here is John Cazale, who fleshes out Fredo Corleone far beyond anything in either the first film or the novel. It is unsurprising that all of the films Cazale has been in have been nominated for Best Picture. He portrays the rejected brother who just wants what he feels is his fair share with an uncanny grace. But these are just the highlights. The entire cast give top-notch performances, even the extras who appear for less than ten seconds.

The best thing about a Godfather film is how it builds a simple story of a family who, whether they wanted it or not, happen to be in the business of organised crime. The bloodshed of this film, much as was the case in the original, is secondary to the simple premise that these are ordinary people in an extraordinary position. Francis Ford Coppola has previously stated that he saw The Godfather as a (relatively) modern King Lear, and that style is kept up in the sequel. Michael is in essence the new King of the realm, but he learns the hard way that the more he tries to tighten his grip upon what is his, or what is loyal to him, the more it slips away. This is the film in which we learn why this is not what Vito Corleone wanted for his youngest son. Sadly, fate has a way of getting in the path of our best intentions, and nowhere is this more evident than in Diane Keaton's dialogue. Some of her speech to Al Pacino really sounds like it was either written at the last moment, or by someone who didn't have a whole lot of experience in writing films.

Like the other Godfather films, the most satisfying moments are when the opponents of the Corleone family get their hash settled in a big way. The montage shown in Part II is not as graphic as that of the original, but it brings the whole thing to a satisfying climax. Lee Strasberg's speech to the press after his character being deported from Israel is priceless, as is the manner in which it ends. Unfortunately, the etiquette that dictates I cannot reveal what happens at the end of the film means I cannot tell you anything about the most satisfying death in the film. Being one of the most debated and criticised scenes among Godfather fans, I am fairly certain that anyone with an interest in the film is going to hear about it elsewhere anyway. In spite of the fact that it, and the necessary lead-up, takes up most of the second half of Michael's plot segment, it will leave many a viewer stunned. But that is one of the things that detracts slightly from this cinematic tour de force. With the screen time so sharply divided between two stories, sometimes the linking between plot points seems to fall by the wayside.

I gave The Godfather, Part II a nine out of ten. In contrast to the original, I noticed the passage of time on a few occasions in its two hundred minutes. Still, if you're out to see a good drama, and you've already enjoyed the first Godfather, then this is worth a couple of viewings. If every director adaptating the writings of others into a film format took as much care as Francis Ford Coppola had here, then the world would be a better place.;3;5;False tt0071562;tejaswi-nimmagadda;02/02/2005;Great movie! Themes not thrills. An unexplored theme?;10;"For those of you looking for cheap thrills, or a no-brainer gangster movie, well this is not for you. On the other hand, if you are looking for a timeless classic, then this is at the cream of it. If you haven't watched the movie, then the following may be a spoiler - but seriously, you must be living under a rock!!?!

Anyway, I just wanted to mention how great Pt II was. I cannot compare Pt I and II but really the rewards cashed in Pt II is because of Pt I. But on the face of it Pt II is the best one because its slightly more dynamic and clever. For me, its clinched by a flashback scene towards the end of the movie. In this flashback, Don Vito, Tom, Sonny and Michael are sitting around a table talking about the war but otherwise are merry, and Michael out the blue says he wants to join the army. At this point, the full realisation that Michael was the ""black-sheep"" of the family right from the beginning hits you. Michael has not transformed, he had always been like that. He was always the villain in the story. His promise (in Pt I etc) not to enter into the family business can now be seen in new light. His actions in Pt I and Pt II can now be seen in new light. Only those who contributed to the building/maintenance of the family are the true heroes.

Corollary to this, the movie also shows how its easy to sit there and criticise, or to lose everything, and how much tact, skill and resilience (and people/business skills!!) is required to build and maintain something. We could be talking about running a mafia business or your local football team, or your life.

If there are any imperfections, then I respectfully submit that it lies with the viewer.";3;5;True tt0071562;pooch-8;16/03/1999;Excellent continuation of the classic saga;;"I do not like The Godfather Part II as well as the original, if only because the shift in focus from the subtle machinery of the Corleone family business to the historically inspired (Kefauver hearings, collapse of the Batista regime in Cuba) episodes shortchanges the elegant simplicity of the first film. We have already witnessed Michael's incredible transformation from ""civilian"" war hero into hard-as-steel overboss in the original, and this makes his character less interesting to me. I do not wish to suggest that Part II is not a good film. On the contrary, the intercutting of the Vito Corleone story with Michael's trials, troubles, and challenges gorgeously punctuates the importance of family tradition so crucial to the film's thematic fabric.";3;5;False tt0071562;jaceydoe-2;13/07/2001;Hate Michael by the end.;;"By the end of this classic sequel to ""The Godfather"", I absolutely felt nothing but hatred for Michael Chorleone. Even though he waited until his mother faded off to kill Fredo, I still couldn't feel anything for Mike. But when you see the last shot of the film, you realize that he is going to regret it for as long as he lives and will fall into a deep depression for the next decade or so. How could he be so mad at Fredo for being tricked by those two rats, Hyman Roth and Johnny Ola. That wasn't exactly all Fredo's fault. But, you not only do you feel the neglect from Michael to Fredo, but you feel the neglect from Michael to his family and household. That was one of the really haunting parts of the film. Michael's neglect is what causes him to fall into the deep depression by the end of the film and into the third installment of the trilogy. Francis Ford Coppola has a true gift in film making and to this day remains one of the best directors in the business. The best of the trilogy.

10/10 The best film ever made. *****/*****";3;5;False tt0071562;MyPetMongoose;08/07/1999;Dull and Predictable;;I hate being the lone voice of searing ridicule in a throng of glowing adulation, but I must say that I found the Godfather: Part II to be dull, predictable and pointless. The Godfather is a wonderful film with a compelling story arch of a good American war hero being pulled into the depths of organized crime due to his loyalty to family. While Part II makes an attempt to elaborate and deepen this theme it does very little to bring anything new to it. Michael's loss of his family and the fate of his brother Fredo is obvious by the end of the first reel. Such a predictable plot undermines what would otherwise be an interesting sequel to a great film. Only the flashback scenes with Robert DeNiro as a young Vito Corleone has any of the emotion and energy of the original Godfather. If only the rest of the film was written and directed with such flair. I was so disappointed by The Godfather: Part II that I haven't even bothered to see Part III and I have little interest in Coppola's other work to this day.;7;17;False tt0071562;secondtake;06/05/2011;A stand alone masterpiece that is, deliberately, slow and epic;9;"The Godfather Part II (1974)

Is this well made? Dramatic? Epic? Beautiful? Impressive?

Of course.

Is this better than the original Godfather? In some ways, yes. It lacks the originality of the whole world novelist Mario Puzo (and co-screenwriter Coppola) created, but it fills in background in Italy and adds wonderful new elements about immigration and the revolution in Cuba. It lacks Marlon Brando, who is a force of his own, but the presence of Robert DeNiro in the many long flashbacks is moving (and he has more presence than Pacino, frankly, who is intentionally stoic, but to the point of expressionless).

Is it a great movie? Why not? What is a great movie supposed to do that this one doesn't? Well, for one thing, I don't think it surprises at all. It doesn't reveal anything too deeply, despite all its deeply felt and emotionally turbulent scenes, and despite the apparent inner probing of the main character (who is last seen thinking very hard, staring into space). It doesn't suggest how to feel about any of this violence, this cold duplicity.

And maybe it shouldn't do any of these things. It is an oddly ""confirming"" experience. It shows what we have come to think we already know, more or less, about the mafia world with its combination of loyalty and bloody revenge, its attachment to business and its selfishness, its emphasis on family even as it kills those in its own family.

What Coppola does do, as director, is suck you in. You get wrapped up in the world of these men (mostly men, of course, though with a great small role by Talia Shire and a famously troubled larger role by Diane Keaton, who makes a better Annie Hall by far). You are easily and gladly transported from New York to Las Vegas to Miami to Italy back and forth, across time and space, in warm colors and sweeping scenes, inside and out. The pieces of this rather complex story are put together with ""artful"" deliberation--it's a work of art, surely, despite its relatively straight forward intentions.

It is also filmed, that is lit and photographed, with sensitivity, without becoming virtuosic for its own sake, by Gordon Willis. Part of the immersion happens because of how everything is depicted, and it's easier said than done to make it all cohere and remain beautiful.

So yes, it's surely a terrific movie. It might not be one of your favorite movies, and it really isn't one of mine. I've resisted watching it a second time for two decades, and finally have, and found my mind wandering sometimes. This might partly be a testament to the imprint the Godfather movies have made on American culture and on the movies, because part of my distraction was that it's all so familiar. But it's familiar partly because it's so influential and convincing.

But it's also partly true that there isn't a huge range of events here. I mean, a lot happens, but it falls mostly into a small diversity of power plays, deceptions, waiting games, and ruthless murders. It's all fascinating and terrifying on some level, but it all wraps around itself over and over again. You will find yourself understanding and even identifying with some of the characters, but you might not find yourself sympathizing with any of them, not the major ones, who are all (all) out for themselves in the end, or a pathetic followers yes men. In short, if you like this world and are fascinated by the male power aura, every second is filled with drama. But if like me this isn't really sufficient for over three hours of absorption, your mind might wander a bit, too.

Cosi sia.";4;8;False tt0071562;Mafia-Walking-Tour;09/04/2010;A few historic flaws, but one of the best glimpses into turn-of-century NYC;8;What else can be said about The Godfather series? One small gripe: The storyline shows young Vito Corleone (Robert Deniro) murder the local boss, then basically take control of the neighborhood. Historically, there would have been a dozen other guys in line to take the boss's spot -- young Vito, with no real connections outside of his petty thief neighbor, would have been disposed of immediately. In real life, bosses were bred into the position or it was taken hostilely from the inside. By the era that this movie portrays, Sicilian black handers and Neapolitan Camorra (among others) were fairly organized -- But, hey, its a (great) movie :);4;8;True tt0071562;movie_hater_12;27/04/2011;Laughably Dumb;1;SPOILER: THIS MOVIE WAS TERRIBLE

Seriously? I don't even get how he is anyone's Godfather. Is he? And more importantly do I care? I don't even know if they wanted this movie to be good. There was this part with old people talking quiet and I didn't know or care what they were talking about. Oh whoops I mean that was the whole movie. Seriously I think they just puked all over a roll of film and accidentally shipped it to me. I was keeping count and there weren't any car chases. ANY! The stuff with time travel was just weird and didn't fit in to the premise of the rest of the movie. Francis FORD Coppola? More like Francis BORED Coppola. Get a real job, guy.;24;79;True tt0071562;dynaman;19/01/2005;Overrated and Tedious;5;I had avoided watching this sequel for twenty years,fearful I would prefer it over the original. How wrong I was! Unlike most of the reviewers here who can't seem to gush effusively enough over this film, I feel it is a good distance behind the original. Here we have the overrated Al Pacino acting as if in a trance, stone-faced,humorless and cold-blooded, the epitome of egomania Nothing matters to him except crooked power and greed. A truly unsavory person.a rotten husband and father,he leaves little to admire,unlike his predecessor. Robert DeNiro gives another one of his elliptical performances. John Cazale as Fredo and Michael Gazzo as Freddie save the movie from being downright boring. What was the plot? Who cares?;11;31;False tt0071562;RoBiN_SinGH211221;30/09/2020;Masterpiece, No Doubt;10;"One of the all time greats. Or probably the alone greatest thing ever made in the history of cinematography. This movie is both ""prequel"" and ""sequel"" of the first godfather movie. I have never watched anything like this in my entire life. This movie has explained the life of underworld people in a great way. It also shows how vengeance eradicates happiness from your life. People don't even care about their family in greed of power. It's a masterpiece that can never be written off even after centuries. Even if you are not into these kind of movies, I will suggest to watch it for atleast once in your life or you'll be deprived of one of the greatest things to watch that have been ever made.";2;3;False tt0071562;sauravjoshi85;01/01/2019;Great acting by Robert de Niro but Al pacino steals the show;10;A great movie to watch and great acting by De Niro as a young don but al Pacino steals the show with his great acting. Good storyline, screenplay and beautiful locations. A great masterpiece;2;3;False tt0071562;barisayhan;27/12/2018;Best Picture;10;Best movie of cinema history. Acting,script and directing are awesome;2;3;False tt0071562;LuckyAlessio;15/03/2018;GOAT;10;The only film, (other than HEAT), where De Niro and Pacino are together. The story of the young Vito is flawless.;2;3;False tt0071562;tomgillespie2002;05/02/2017;One of the saddest movies ever made;10;"Of all the wonderful things that can be said about Francis Ford Coppola's American masterpiece The Godfather (1972), above all else the film is a masterclass in storytelling. It's essentially a classic, romantic story of family, loyalty and the passage of time, undercut with a dark, violent portrayal of what it takes to achieve the American dream. It told a detailed, complex, and often confusing story featuring a large ensemble of characters, but this only matched the complexity of what Coppola was trying to achieve. The director, adapting Mario Puzo's novel, famously had a torrid time at the hands of the producers, namely Robert Evans. Yet when the resulting three-hour epic became a box-office and award-season smash, Coppola would be given free reign if he was to helm a follow- up.

The resulting three hour twenty minute sequel was the director grabbing his chance to have complete control and pouring all of his artistry into it. This wasn't to be another classical Hollywood tale, but one of corruption, greed and pure evil. I first saw The Godfather Part II around 20 years ago at the age of 12 when I was first allowed to start watching movies for grown-ups. Watching it now, having seen it a handful of times in between, it's a completely different movie to the one I remember. I remembered it as an ambitious gangster movie with quite shocking violence, chocked full of great performances by actors who are now giants in their field. What I see now is a sequel truly like no other. A movie that is somehow optimistic and pessimistic in equal measures; one that sees its lead lose his soul while his father gains his; and quite possibly one of the saddest movies ever made.

At first, Part II mirrors the narrative of its predecessor, beginning with a grand wedding as the Don (now Al Pacino's Michael Corleone) makes his underlings sweat as they wait to greet the head of the 'family'. While the previous wedding was a joyous, boisterous occasion, this one is noticeably different. Of the family that remains - John Cazale's weak-willed Fredo; Talia Shire's gold- digging Connie - only the mother seems to be the same. The band doesn't even know any Italian songs. While Michael may have attempted to continue his father's legacy when he took over, the changing, capitalist world has driven him inward, isolating himself from everybody around him and drifting away from the Sicilian values of his father. He was once a proud war veteran with a bright future, but now he is solemn and aggressive, and becomes even more so when a hit on his home almost kills him and his wife Kay (Diane Keaton).

His close brush with death only fuels his paranoia, and he must navigate perilous waters as he moves into business in Cuba with one his father's business associates Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), who also happens to be backing a couple of brothers moving into Corleone capo Frankie Pentangeli's (Michael V. Gazzo) territory. Michael suspects a betrayer within his own ranks, suspecting everyone including his own family. It almost seems like a deliberately confusing plot to take in alongside Michael's descent into pure evil, and it may all be too overwhelming had Coppola not chosen to juxtapose this story with one of optimism and nostalgia; that of the young Vito Corleone's escape from a mafia boss in Sicily and his eventual arrival in America. There is infinitely more colour and hope in these moments, and while these scenes may gloss over Vito's own violent journey, it seems like Coppola is making a point about where he feels his country was heading. Of course, these flashbacks are made even more welcome by the astonishing performance from a young Robert De Niro.

The Godfather Part II currently sits in between The Godfather and The Dark Knight as #3 on IMDb's Top 250 list, and while I have little faith in the accuracy of a list that relies so heavily on popularity, it must be one of the most difficult and uncompromising movies in there. I'm actually pleasantly surprised that so many people love it, given the lack of flashy moments of violence the genre is so popular for. It's an experiment that could have gone so horribly wrong, and one that certainly wouldn't have been made outside of the innovative 1970s. Yet Coppola gets everything spectacularly right, from the inspirational casting of the Oscar- nominated Gazzo and Strasberg, to the chilling penultimate scene which sees James Caan's Sonny briefly return. In that final moment we realise that Michael has always been alone, destined to carve his own path, while forever gazing into the past to ponder what could have been.";2;3;False tt0071562;eagandersongil;04/09/2016;A perfect continuation of perfect;10;"It is very difficult continues a perfect work, but coppola succeeded, ""the Godfather, Part II"" may not be the perfect embodiment of cinema as its predecessor, but it is a spectacular film, as sublime photographs, screen elements of this trilogy are perfect, all the features of the characters, the extras, to the furniture contrasts with the scene, and the soundtrack of this film is something amazing, I discussed in my previous review of part I on the technical part of the film, which is still impeccable, along with the performances, good, if not here we have Marlon de niro, who although are Supla lack godfather, leaves us stuck in its moments of action, and Al Pacino, well, forget it .... the only sin here is the script, which although very good, contrasting the beginning of the corleone family to its maximum moment of crisis, but the script does not hold as the first, and at times becomes confused, and has 20 minutes more movies , which in a way are put to good use, and in the end he presents us with a scene set credit, to stay in our heads during the I5 years to part III, watch this trilogy is more than a movie, it is to learn about cinema.";2;3;False tt0071562;troyputland;06/12/2015;The greatest sequel ever made?;10;Pacino outdoes himself in The Godfather. He's just as powerful as Brando was in the role of The Don. Michael Corleone (Pacino) expands his cartel, making friends and enemies alike. Michael's story is spliced with his father's uprising. Vito is played by the mesmerising Robert De Niro. Vito's story could stand alone from Michael's, but both compliment the other in ways that cannot be described. Scenes end on cliffhangers. When one starts, we want to be back with the other. The Corleone family is corrupt, and Part II just shows how deep their roots run. This second act is more intense, more involving, incredibly climactic, leaving it's audience wanting more. Absolutely fine displays from Pacino and De Niro. The Godfather: Part II almost outdoes its predecessor.;2;3;False tt0071562;dvig-78675;12/07/2015;Best movie/Best sequel;10;The Godfather Part 2 is the best movie ever made. Better than the original on every level, this movie brings the source material to new heights with the addition of Robert Di Niro, speaking almost completely in Italian, and fleshing out the story lines of characters introduced in part one. If part one is the story of a good man being forced by circumstance into a life of crime then this movie is the story of that man embracing his life of crime and falling into complete moral despair. Al Pachino gives what many consider the best performance of all time. This movie is the bar that I personally hold all other movies to. Watch it;2;3;False tt0071562;ofpsmith;19/03/2015;One of the greatest sequels ever made.;10;The Godfather is a fantastic movie. It's one of the most celebrated in history and it has gone down in history as one of the best films ever made. And much of that can be repeated to be said in The Godfather Part 2. In this film it showcases Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) as the new don of the Corleone crime family. It also shows the early life of Don Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) Michael's father and the celebrated Godfather. Michael's story involves his rise to power . Vito's story involves his early start in the business after he is forced into the US from Italy as a child. The two stories are told in a parallel fashion. And both of them are what makes the film great. The two stories are helped by the great acting ability from Pacino and De Niro both. If you liked the first one watch this one. Even if you haven't seen the first one, you should still watch The Godfather Part 2 because it is a great movie in it's own right.;2;3;False tt0071562;Wiizardii321;16/03/2015;One of the, if not the best sequel ever.;10;What makes this movie movie so amazing is not the fact that it works as a sequel to the greatest movie of all time, The Godfather. But the fact that it can be a movie on its own that is as good as the original, and if not it is better than the godfather.

The sequel opens up with the same charismatic performances as the last one, obviously Al Pacino has solidified himself as one of the best actors ever because of the performance he gave here. Michael Corleone has grown into so much more than just a movie character, he represents a new creation to all fictional characters ever. This movie runs at a break neck speed, it clocks at 3 hours, but feels like an hour movie, just like the first one. That is what makes the godfather moves so great, and Francis Ford Cappola and Mario Puzo geniuses.;2;3;False tt0071562;slightlymad22;08/08/2014;possibly the greatest sequel ever made.;10;"Quite possibly the greatest sequel ever made.

The continuing saga of the Corleone crime family tells the story of a young Vito Corleone (Robert DeNiro) growing up in Sicily and in 1910s New York; and follows Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) in the 1950s as he attempts to expand the family business.

A good movie for me is one that does not end with the credits. Too many movies are designed merely to amuse or entertain for 90 minutes or so. But there are other movies that cling to you, stay in your subconscious and you don't forget them. ""Jaws"" for example, who does not hear the ""Jaws"" theme and worry a little about what's below them when they are swimming just a little too far out in the ocean!!

Godfather 2 is another of those movies. Even before the short opening credits have finished, the movie already starts to take effect. This is not just a gangster movie, it's a movie that poses deep moral problems for all of the main characters. It doesn't attempt to answer questions. The rights and wrongs that these people do to each other. What would I have done, had I been in Michael Corleone's shoes?

Of the cast, Al Pacino deserved the Oscar for his work in this, the middle of his three Oscar Nominations for Best Actor in a row 73-75. ""Serpico"" and ""Dog Day Afternoon"" the other two. Even if Dustin Hoffman (Lenny) or Jack Nicholson (Chinatown) won that night, you could still argue that Pacino deserved it for his tour de force performance. But Art Carney winning (Harry & Tonto) makes the decision not to give it to Pacino all the more baffling. He is simply the core of a movie, which runs at over 3 hours long.

Robert Duvall effectively underplays as his mild mannered adviser Tom Hagan. An Oscar nominated Talia Shire shows she deserved a better career than being type cast a Adrian Balboa in the ""Rocky"" franchise. Her scene towards the end with Pacino should have seen her take the award home, but she was inexplicably beaten by Ingrid Bergman (For Murder On The Orient Express) Bruno Kirby looks more than at home in his scenes with De Niro and it's a wonder how he never got more work in this genre. Next gangster movie he made was again with Pacino and this time with Johnny Depp 1997's ""Donnie Branco"" which is a shame, he'd have made a great Al Capone. Lee Strasberg deserves special mention too for his role as Hyman Roth as does Joe Spinelli. A young actress called Kathleen Beller makes an impression in her small role, and it's a shame she never had more of an acting career.

And that is without even mentioning The Superb Robert De Niro who did win the Oscar Beating his costars Lee Strasberg and Michael V. Gazzo as well as after Astaire and a young Jeff Bridges (Thunderbolt and Lightfoot) to the award. This was a young De Niro when Mean Streets was the only movie he'd made of more, and you could already see his future as one of our greats.";2;3;False tt0071562;Movie_Muse_Reviews;22/06/2008;"""Part 2"" is its own masterpiece, but more so a perfect extension of the original";10;"The most brilliant thing about ""The Godfather: Part II"" is that Oscar-winning director Francis Ford Coppola has seamlessly extended the original, and when I say seamless, I mean that Coppola has created a sequel that looks and feels like the original and actually makes the first film better. If I could, I would go back and change my rating of ""The Godfather"" to an 11 and make this a 10. With the exception of the Lord of the Rings films (and even that series didn't win two best pictures), no sequel can say that it strengthens the original film and that's why ""Part II"" is so good.

At an epic 200 minutes long yet rarely boring, ""Part II"" tells not only the story of Don Michael Corleone (Pacino) as he takes over the family, but simultaneously tells the background of Don Vito Corleone (DeNiro) who was played by Brando in the original. To the modern viewer, DeNiro feels like a gimmick, but this was his first prestigious role and he is quite convincing as a younger version of Brando's performance. Leading man Pacino is incredibly commanding yet again as Michael as this time we see the weight of being Don grow heavier and heavier on his shoulders. As usual, it's too difficult to explain the ""business"" plot of the film, which has plenty of double-crossings and twists that the pervasive feeling of paranoia that is so ingrained in the original continues quite masterfully in this film.

The acting talent is across the board so good that you have to give casting team and Coppola some of that credit. This film had three best supporting actor nominees at the Oscar's for goodness sake. If the Golden Globes that year had the best ensemble category, this film would have won it hands down. My personal favorite is Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. I would trust him with my life too.

Everything about this film is so well done (especially the set design for New York, Italy, Cuba, etc) that it's hard to notice sometimes because you're so drawn in to the plot and following it. Coppola makes you think something tragic can happen at any second and when it does, it always delivers. The ending sequence is something that directors have stolen left and right when trying to make their ending just as powerful. While ""The Godfather"" has more memorable scenes and dialogue, this film is a masterpiece in its own right despite not having as much glitz as the original.

Of course, in terms of themes, ""The Godfather: Part II"" continues to address the original's themes in new and meaningful ways. The themes of what family truly is and means get expanded upon and become so complex as seen through Michael's relationship with his wife and brother Fredo. The back-in-time plot arch with Vito sheds additional light on the ""Michael"" part of the film as well. All of it just makes ""Part II"" a rock-solid classic.";2;3;False tt0071562;bluedeluca;09/11/2003;The greatest American film Ever Made;10;"Citizen Cane, Casablanca, Lawerence Of Arabia and The Godfather are the American classics that usually vie for top film honors on all time great lists. Well, I can't argue those choices, but I can argue for the inclusion of, in my humble opinion, the greatest American film ever made, The Godfather Part II.

I truly believe that Coppola topped himself with his second installment of the operatic crime drama. The parallel story structure was expertly crafted, with the rise of Michael story line soaring to Shakespearean heights. The acting, editing, cinematogragphy and writing are so tight that I can't pick a single flaw, a single moment that doesn't work or isn't pitch perfect. One thing I will concede is that for some, the story might unfold a touch slower than The GodFather and of course James Caan and Marlon Brando are only in it for a couple of scenes at the end. The major acting assignments in Godfather II fall solely in the hands of two film icons, Robert Deniro and Al Pacino both are unbelievable, both are at their best, especially Deniro who gives the audience no doubt that he will grow up to become the ""Don"" himself.

Other notable performances are John Cazale and Lee Strasberg, actually every casting decision is note perfect, we believe everyones performance so much that they will forever be linked to those creations. I think the thing I love the most is the arc that Michael goes through, where he ends up at the end of Godfather II is so tragic and honest that the last shot of Pacino sitting, that look of pain, of loneliness of inexplicable loss, is engraved on my soul. Its a story of fathers and sons, we witness the connection of fates of choices and of lives over a century, its amazing. I know it is recognized but I think it should be regarded as a better film than the first one, by a slim margin but a margin nonetheless.";2;3;False tt0071562;isleofdawn;03/10/2003;Now, That's a Sequel;10;This movie accomplishes what very few sequels ever do, it rivals its predecessor in quality. This film doesn't hit a wrong note at any point. All performances are excellent and there isn't any problem switching back and forth between the early 1900's and the mid 1900's. It flowed so well. I can't argue with the top 3 rating given by IMDb users.;2;3;False tt0071562;lambiepie-2;02/07/2003;A rare film and occurance, indeed. Hollywood Take Note.;10;"This should have NEVER happened.

The Godfather part one was a wonderful film in 1972. We got to know the family, the business, the violence.

In 1974, Francis Ford Coppola does a sequel. And it's just as brilliant as the original.

I'm writing this in 2003 which will definately go down in film history as ""The Year of the Sequels"" and not one of those will come near this rare occurance of an epic of a saga. The real term here is ""saga"".

I got the feeling watching that ""The Godfather part two"" was NOT done for ""sequel's"" sake. It was done to complete a story, to answer questions and to get into your mind as to why things turned out for these folks the they way they did. Some things in the Godfather part two you never saw coming. That is the mark of good filmmaking...keeping you on your toes. A few things you KNEW were coming, you may have been upset to see why, but you watch to see HOW it will unfold.

The Godfather part 2 gives you history about Vito and at the same time shows you how his youngest son Michael is taking hold. You're interested in both..watching the past and present unfold and realizing HOW their futures entwine. A rare film making experience.

And even rarer than that, The Godfather part one is chosen best film of 1972, the Godfather part two is chosen best film of 1974. Both, deservingly so.

I got to see The Godfather part 2 as a salute to Francis Ford Coppola on the Los Angeles based ""Z"" channel immediately following The Godfather part one. The only other film I sat this long through mesmerized and thrilled with at that time was ""Fanny and Alexander""... and when you're young, its HARD to sit still.

The Godfather Part 2 is a rare film indeed, another to include in the top 25 of all time.";2;3;False tt0071562;matt-389;10/11/2002;Best Movie EVER;10;There's not a single flaw I can find in this film. Flawless acting, brilliant direction, a superlative story, phenomenal score... Everything's here. The rise of Vito presented in direct contrast with the fall of Michael is presented in absolutely perfect fashion. Not a single minute (of the 200 +) passes where you lose interest. Best movie I've ever seen.;2;3;False tt0071562;lionesss;03/11/1998;Perfection;10;Robert De Niro is so good an actor that his name itself has become a word in our language. (A good actor, of course.) The way the stories of Vito and Michael are linked is seamless. Al Pacino is not only my favorite actor but also much too good-looking for his own good. The moment he realizes who the traitor is- WOW. That instant captured on film-- it is immortal.;2;3;False tt0071562;anton-6;13/10/2001;"A masterpiece.Almost as good as ""the godfather""!!!!!";10;I don´t know why I like the first film a bit more then this.Still this is almost as good and it´s a really powerful film.The acting is masterful by Al Pacino and I was VERY impressed by Robert De Niro´s acting who deserved his Oscar for best Supporting Actor.It´s the same music as in the first film,and that music is fantastic.This film is over three hours but it´s not a bit boring and even if I have heard that the godfather part three can´t compare with the first two films I can´t wait to see it.This film is a beautiful epic.5/5;2;3;False tt0071562;cadmus79;19/06/2001;The best sequel ever made.;10;In fact, it's more than just a 'sequel'- it stands on it's own as a masterpiece of film making. Al Pacino is at his best, as is Mr. Coppola and his team of camera people and musicians and actors. Everyone in it shines, particularly the remainder of the Corleone family. I won't go into plot, I'll just praise it to high heaven and hope that if you haven't seen this, you'll buy the DVD TONIGHT to check it out. Amazing.;2;3;False tt0071562;nicorip22;28/08/2020;Second best movie ever;10;This movie is great, although I liked the first part more, this has nothing to envy the first. As I said in the first part, many good performances, in this part we lose Marlon Brando but we incorporate Robert De Niro, who I think in this movie does the best performance of his career. Do not miss this classic, it is one of the best cinema that you will be able to watch.;1;1;False tt0071562;llamalloydcho;08/08/2020;Amazing sequel;8;While I still think the first one is better, this is still a great movie. It can feel a little long but I didnt mind too much. This movie has a great score, great acting and once again powerful dialogs. Robert de niro and Al Pacino were great in this movie!!;1;1;False tt0071562;myz14;03/08/2020;A must-watch almost a master piece movie;9;Never boring but the story needed more creative twists to be as good as part 1. De Niro is just wow.;1;1;False tt0071562;surf-95045;27/07/2020;BEST;10;Better than all series for me. I love part 2. It's best movie.;1;1;False tt0071562;tobyambridge;27/07/2020;Brilliant;9;Incredible performances, Coppola's directing and a great story packed with meaning. What more could you want. The Godfather part 2 isn't just a sequel to what I believe to be the great movie of all time, but a masterpiece on its own.;1;1;False tt0071562;m-43036;22/07/2020;Banana video, Luffa video, cat app download, fast Cat Video official website online;10;"Click to enter: sepian.club Click to enter: sepian.club Click to enter: sepian.club The murderous elder brother Banana video, Luffa video, cat app download, fast Cat Video official website onlinemurmured and resented, but this foot was not enough to vent his anger! The chair fell to the ground, and the little sister was lying on her face. My nephew pushed the chair and rushed out to help my sister-in-law. ""What do you do"" and ""Banana video, Luffa video, cat app download, fast Cat Video official website onlinehow can you do this"" screamed and yelled, and all of a sudden the cicada outside the house stopped. But he still did not dispel his hatred, gnashing his teeth, staring at the blood red eyes, his fingers like a sharp knife, resentfully stabbed at the trembling younger sister: ""why do you blackmail me! On what basis

There was silence between the Banana video, Luffa video, cat app download, fast Cat Video official website onlinedinner! Breathing comes and goes. My little sister was in tears. Choked: ""yes, I blacked you! You don't know why? Who always calls me in the middle of the night? Who asked me for money again and again? Who is blaming people endlessly? I have to go to work! Not so much energy! I want to live! You need to support your family! "" The little sister's voice was hoarse: ""our family, who is sorry for you? Do we need your help when you are in the mood? Who have youBanana video, Luffa video, cat app download, fast Cat Video official website online helped? You ask yourself, who is living on you? You're in trouble now. Who hasn't helped you? There must be a beginning in everything The little sister sobbed: ""we can't help you, but we don't have the ability. I'm sorry for you, too? I don't want to hear your groundless accusations against your brothers and sisters. I don't want my life to be a mess You've got me";1;1;True tt0071562;avisheksahu-96247;14/07/2020;When Capitalism beckoned Communism With a Dash of Olive Oil: Part II;9;"Easily the most daring movie of our time for highlighting the persistent ignorance of the golden rule of survival in the modern world: Corporation is Labour! What Senior Corleone actuates as limitations of his empire, Junior Corleone perpetuates as inevitabilities of not having Senior around: the result as is easily decipherable as the foundations of the Modern American Empire, crass to say the least, in his case and when viewed from the tantalizing angle of the appeal in a true family, is caring two hoots about bourgeios propriety and going all out to mint his empire, suspect for its newly laid foundations, and dependant almost entirely on relationships forged in battle. The towering figure of Hyman Roth, a man as if goaded to stick around for kids pining for spiritual security, succeeds in driving home the abiding message inherent in all revolutions, communist or otherwise, that as far as money is concerned, you were, are, and shall always be on your own: if you make it, you'll have to find a family to keep it; if you don't, that's because you have a family to keep it; and if you still have to keep it for want of either, you as a Capitalist will have to beckon Communism because whenever Olive Oil is suggestive of labour lost, Peanut Oil is simultaneously suggestive of Labour wanting to globalise with a call of dibs on either.";1;1;False tt0071562;paul-07726;01/07/2020;Exciting;9;A fantastic exciting movie, from beginning to end I was in the movie!;1;1;False tt0071562;mazfar-79463;01/07/2020;Masterpiece that I didn't enjoyed;9;I love this film. I found out its acting is still out of the blue. To be honest I thought it was better than part 1. The soundtrack is full out upgrade. I don't the cinematography,though. It's not convincing a film has a good CGI if they don't use any. Overall, I though it was great, but I don't fully understand the plot.;1;1;False tt0071562;yaols-53324;21/06/2020;The Godfather: Part II;9;In the struggle between the military police and the revolutionary party, the former is for salary, while the latter is for faith, regardless of life and death, to go through fire and water. Therefore, the revolutionary party will be the final winner.;1;1;False tt0071562;yls-27389;14/06/2020;The Godfather: Part II;9;The story is quite good. The comparison of two lines for two generations, one for starting a business and one for keeping success is really impressive. Victor, who grew up without a father or a mother, was humiliated and humiliated, and finally reunited with his family. Mike, who grew up in the warmth of his family, was more selfish until he betrayed his family. Of course, in addition, the actors' interpretation of the role is still very good, flesh and blood, a good sense of watching the movie, and the ending is the finishing touch.;1;1;False tt0071562;theforager;12/06/2020;That's the offer no one can refuse;10;I was quite disappointed after watching part 1. But part 2 has totally changed the perspective. In this part, making of Vito Corleone is shown and how he made himself to challenge the strong of his time. Alongwith the history we see the rise of Michael making tough decisions about family while gathering powers.

If you have not watched any of godfather movie, watch this part first then other parts will make more sense.

Overall performance of Al Pacino was awesome.;1;1;False tt0071562;yellowtail_tuna;29/05/2020;The rise and decline of Corleone;10;After we had the unforgettable first film, the second film is not just combination of the sequel and prequel, but it is also storytelling by contrasting the two, the rise and decline of Corleone.

Vito's part is not just a personal story, but also the history of the United States. Even not as an American, I am very moved to see the immigrants at the harbor staring at the Statue of Liberty at the beggining of the twentieth century, and nine-year-old Vito is just one of them.

I can imagine there would be many Vitos in that period, hungry, oppressed young men with dim future, and some of them went for criminal paths. Everything in Vito's era is simple, and limited in the small neighborhood. And everyone is young, probably so is America itself.

On the other hand, in Michael's time things have become far more complicated. He has to deal with a governor, negotiating on gambling license. The family has now a bunch of associates running businesses around the country, and among them Michael is not sure who he can trust.

After an attempted assassination of Michael in his bedroom, he has to find out not only who is the plotter, but also who is the mole inside. His search leads him to Miami and then Havana. Havana gives the film many beautiful and memorable scenes, and they have also interesting historical background, set in the culmination of the Cuban Revolution.

Michael is a cold man. I don't like him. But probably he doesn't like himself more than anyone else. I just feel pity for him. I also feel pity for Key, Fredo, Pentangeli, and anyone else in Michael's era. I wonder what is wrong with Corleone family, when remembering how exhlarating things were in Vito's era.

When you are watching the film, probably in your head there is the image of Vito Corleone played by Maron Brando from the first film. Even though the two actors don't look like each other, Robert De Niro's Vito, with the hoarce voice and the elegant hand gesture, makes us believe he is the same Vito as played by Brando.

Of course Al Pacino is excellent too, playing the loneliest man, who finds himself in the miserable life that he cannot remember when he chose to go through.;1;1;False tt0071562;eid_1488;27/05/2020;AMAZING;10;It is just amazing al pacino in this movie did every thing;1;1;True tt0071562;yashkadulkar;26/05/2020;It's been 7 hours after watching Godfather 2 and I'm still sad!;9;I think I found it too deep than it actually is. I mean I'm too sad for whatever events happened throughout the movie. It's a little confusing that you might not feel all the scenes here are important but they are actually. Michael is now the head of the family and has to take some serious decisions for the welfare of the family and himself. The story turns out great and everything looks just at the end. I don't think you should watch it in your happy hours and I'm serious about it!;1;1;False tt0071562;x-05054;26/05/2020;nice;9;"""because a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man """;1;1;False tt0071562;ipcheslav;20/05/2020;Oscar-winning performance;10;Without a doubt, one of the best films of all time. As far as crime drama/mobster genre goes, it starts and ends with this masterpiece. Period;1;1;False tt0071562;schizoidnightmares;19/05/2020;Should have been split into two films;9;"The Godfather: Part II is beautifully directed and acted film, with an especially stellar performance from Al Pacino. The film is careful not to glorify the mafia and maintains their depiction as sociopathic power-hungry social parasites, who do not hesitate to opportunistically victimize the innocent in pursuit of their own gains. Also included in the film is many historical allusions as it takes place during the dawn of the Cold War. The setting of Cuba during one point in the film is an interesting reference to the political and socioeconomic situation of that country at the time.

The only obvious problem with this film is that it is split into two storylines... One of Al Pacino's character, Michael Corleone, in the ""present time."" The other of Robert De Niro's character, Vito Corleone, during his early upbringing in Italy and eventual rise to power in New York.

These two separate timeframes switch throughout the film and just make it feel a little disorganized. Would have been best to split those two timelines into their own films. By the end of the movie, The Godfather: Part II just feels slightly too long.";1;1;False tt0071562;taniton-53154;17/05/2020;Excellent;10;Very good movie . showed how the real society actually looks like.;1;1;False tt0071562;zhangangang-43797;13/05/2020;Very few sequels can hold a candle to their predecessor.;9;Very few sequels can hold a candle to their predecessor. This movie can stand tall on it's own OR as a sequel, a feat almost never achieved;1;1;False tt0071562;jamesraesimpson;14/04/2020;A must-watch movie - De Niro is the man;8;I saw someone say it's too good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather, and instead should be seen as a companion piece. I completely agree.

Robert De Niro's performance (both his acting and the whole story of his character) might be the best I've ever seen. He is simply unbelievable.

Al Pacino is a different Michael Corleone from the first movie, but plays him to perfection. However, I do actually prefer that character from the first simply due to the way he changes over the course of it.

Regardless, it is a must-see, and I challenge anyone to find a better performance than De Niro in this.;1;1;False tt0071562;alshamari-marwa;13/04/2020;Amazing movie;9;"One of the greatest movies ever maid about the organized crime and there leader ship, the movie is a great classic that you have to watch acting directing story is just perfect, one thing to say the 3rd pat wasn't as good as the two before. Best line: ""all the power on earth can't change destiny""";1;1;False tt0071562;g-39554;29/03/2020;Distressed Old Godfather;10;Recently relived this movie, the feeling is still the same, childhood memories, I feel the old godfather is so poor.;1;1;False tt0071562;timirex1322;27/03/2020;Very Impressive;10;Saying this is a sequel is questionable. It is equally as intruiging as the first part, the only difference being marlon brando as the Godfather. This is a very good movie, and i highly recommend it to everyone i meet!;1;1;False tt0071562;q-27562;19/03/2020;Glory and sorrow;10;The pattern is bigger than the first one. The power transfer of two generations of godfathers, one vigorous and the other prosperous and declining, but the final result is loneliness.;1;1;False tt0071562;h-28658;16/03/2020;Surprisingly better than the first film.;10;The Godfather: Part II brings in one of the best performances of all time by Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, Godfather: Part II as well as Part I are the best gangster dramas of all time arguably.;1;1;False tt0071562;marmar-69780;14/03/2020;godfather 2;10;Godfather 2 is another masterpiece from coppola and it can be argued which part is better first one or this one,both of them had incredible cast,script that is astonishing and stories that are so brilliantly made and told,godfather 2 is also one of best sequels ever made and it can be felt like they were able to improve if that is even possible some staff from first film,de niro as young vito was also brilliant and he was able to hold hes own in playing character that brando made iconic,pacino was also better here and he was able to sold every moment of tension and anger in every scene he was in,godfather 2 is another brilliantly made film and one of best made ever;1;1;False tt0071562;ArmandoManuelPereira;12/03/2020;Exceptional Sequel;8;Long, but interesting. Most of the scenes with DeNiro crackle, and Strasberg is fascinating to watch. Pacino is also very good. Years ago when I watched this movie, I believed it to be better then the first Godfather. Watching them both again, almost back to back, has solidified that opinion. Of course, it is not a perfect film, but it is a very good one. I have one criticism though. Why does some of the music sound as if it was lifted from an episode of Columbo?;1;1;False tt0071562;mikayakatnt;04/03/2020;A must-watch, great standalone or must-see for Godfather fans!;10;A great continuation of the world that was introduced to us in the original Godfather. This work would make even Mario Puzo himself proud.

Found the duality between father and son poetic. Great way to show how Don Vito and Michael forged their own paths with different motivations. Every character had their own motivations that were understandable and believable. Not to mention the conniving Hyman Roth being an excellent villain. The ending was especially chilling as both protagonists were worlds apart when they achieved the same goal... solidifying their power.

Justice was also done to make the film feel like the eras portrayed. It felt as if I was seeing real scenes of 1920 Italian New York slums and the rise of Las Vegas in the 1950s. Beautiful.

The only problem I had with The Godfather: Part II was how Robert De Niro looked nothing like Don Vito. Should I hold that against him? Definitely not considering his stellar performance.

5/5. A must-watch for lovers of the Godfather or good films in general.;1;1;False tt0071562;ali-yousef2010;02/03/2020;Historical;10;One of the greatest titles ever made in history. the plot is amazing and the characters are perfectly chosen. the over all sequel is great.;1;1;False tt0071562;Efe_lv;29/02/2020;a Masterpiece;10;Everyone must watch this movie.This film give me real mafia soul.Expect Part I.Part I better than part II but part II is very very good either.Part II is third place in top rated film but I think The Shawsank Redeption is overrated.To me Godfather and Part II is better than The Shawsank Redemption.My first Godfather Review include spoiler so this review hasn't got spoiler.I just say everyone must watch this film because Al Pacino and a lot of good actors in this movie but Al Pacino is amazing.I said in the title.This film is a masterpiece.Whatever just watch this film.Its perrfect.Thank you for reading this.;1;1;False tt0071562;ecstasyinfo;25/02/2020;DIALOGUES;8;I just love the dialogues. great work. i think the screenwriter did a great job.;1;1;False tt0071562;smoesman;24/01/2020;Greatest mafia movie ever made!;10;This film is so good on so many levels, it's even better then part 1, which was also great on it's own. But this one's just.. outstanding. It still is in my top 5 all time best movies.;1;1;False tt0071562;reggienunez;19/12/2019;Masterpiece- a truly epic film;9;Often considered the greatest sequel ever made The Godfather 2 is an excellent film in its own right and an even better companion to the first Godfather. The Godfather Part II is a more ambitious production than the original since it attempts not only to tell a pair of completely disconnected stories, but to do so in parallel. The less time consuming of the two presents the early life of Vito Corleone (played by Robert DeNiro) in Sicily and New York, and shows how he came into power. The other tale picks up approximately a decade after the conclusion of The Godfather, and shows the means by which Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), now secure in his position, attempts to expand the family empire into Las Vegas and Cuba. Few sequels have expanded upon the original with the faithfulness and detail of this one. The Godfather 2 is a masterpiece and should be a must watch for any serious cinema lover.;1;1;False tt0071562;msuliman-80194;12/12/2019;a movie to enjoy;10;A movie to enjoy and consider in every one favorite movie list. possibly the greatest movie i have ever seen ,;1;1;False tt0071562;wilkstracie;11/12/2019;Greatest Movies;10;I Love this movie so much I have to keep watching it...;1;1;False tt0071562;redredsugarred;09/12/2019;A lesson of storytelling;10;And there's nothing else to say. Just watch the film as many times as possible.;1;1;False tt0071562;kirankaursinger;04/12/2019;Fabulous;10;It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time;1;1;False tt0071562;mackrj-34546;12/11/2019;The Godfather Part II;10;Two years later after the initial release of the masterpiece that redefined cinema for the good, writer-director Francis Ford Coopla wanted a sequel that would outdo the original. For this purpose alone, when the film was released Christmas Day 1974, the movie was moderately successful and soon became a modern day epic and the best sequel Hollywood has ever produced. Without further ado, here's my review of the second chapter of the The Corleone Family legacy, The Godfather, Part II.

The opening shot of the film tells us what happened directly after the first film's closing moments. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now Don and Godfather of the Corleone Family. Setting the family business in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, Michael's promise to keep the family completely legitimate, selling interests in hotels and casinos throughout the States and in Cuba. As this is going down, and Michael is facing unexpected consequences and family life in every turn, the movie brilliantly flashbacks into the young life of Michael's father, young Vito Corleone (in an Oscar-winning performance from Robert De Niro) from his childhood to early adulthood in Hell's Kitchen, succeeding himself as a Don with an offer he couldn't refuse and is introduced to the criminal underworld.

I saw The Godfather, Part II the day after I saw the first one. It's more longer than the first, but it was very necessary. The acting here is a lot more complex than its processor. Pacino gives one of the most brilliant performances of his career as a flawed and evil man trying to make his family legitimately the best in the crime world. De Niro gives his second best career work (the first being Scorsese's Raging Bull.) The scenery here is gorgeously crafted filmed in several different locations including New York, Cuba, Lake Tahoe and Sicily. Each frame is a work of art at its highest level. The storytelling is perfect, mixing in past and present, as we go along.

The magic of these two timeless films are the heart and soul of moviemaking. Coppola directs with such vivid imagery that it's no surprise that this also would win Best Picture. Both films rightly deserved to win no matter what.

In conclusion, The Godfather, Part II is one of the best sequels ever made and not to be missed. I highly recommend this one and the first movie. This is certainly an offer you can't refuse.

10/10;1;1;False tt0071562;talqeen;10/11/2019;Al as godfather love it...;10;This movie is an amazing master piece of writing, direction, acting and many more... One of the great classics that I have watch which I love.....

Every one should watch this classic.;1;1;False tt0071562;cshelton-86906;03/11/2019;A masterpiece of a sequel;10;Like its predecessor, The Godfather II is cinematic masterpiece.;1;1;False tt0071562;watchfreemoviesdaily;17/10/2019;Sing like there's nobody listening;10;Youve gotta dance like there's nobody watching, Love like you'll never be hurt, Sing like there's nobody listening, And live like it's heaven on earth.William W. Purkey;1;1;False tt0071562;zameerahmedz;05/10/2019;Fantastic sequel;10;"Coppala sequel is just second to none..Al Pacino performance to it's best with fantastic storyline & screenplay. Never could be a sequel ever made like this which is crafted to it's perfection. Robert de Niro appearance was just icing on the cake";1;1;False tt0071562;gandhiraghav-96;20/09/2019;Probably better than part I;10;Al Pacino's character Michael Corleone is under the burden of carrying on the legacy of the godfather. He wants to be like his father, wants a wife, kids, a family, and wants their support. Michael is almost trying his best to get the family at the top again. But there's an evil side about him, which makes him violent and blind. He gets all his enemies murdered (even fredo) and Keeps kay away from her kids. Although he still has the money and power, he is loosing relationships and respect amongst the people. The life of the youngest son of the godfather is shown beautifully by the director, and the writing involved to create such a character is brilliant.;1;1;True tt0071562;jared-25331;23/08/2019;An outstanding sequel;10;The Godfather Part 2 is a perfect example of a phenomenal follow-up to the original.;1;1;False tt0071562;bookjdeross;19/08/2019;Always liked better than Part 1;10;One of the Best Classic movies of all time. Part one is Great But always liked part 2 even more.;1;1;False tt0071562;oguzhan-25645;18/07/2019;my opinion;10;Best movie ever!!!Best movie ever!!!Best movie ever!!!Best movie ever!!!Best movie ever!!!Best movie ever!!!;1;1;False tt0071562;ninenine-91201;20/06/2019;It's a masterpeice;10;This is the greatest film ever made. Not only did it live up to expectation it surpassed them by being even Better then the first;1;1;False tt0071562;LADYSHA-BK;17/06/2019;Best Movie;10;The action and intense behavior was amazing Respect of the hustle and power was well demonstrated in this film;1;1;False tt0071562;bobbi-15336;16/06/2019;#1;10;1st Best American Movie Ever.

No other comments are necessary. A comment on how capitalism has taken over the American Family told through the lens of three generations of immigrants. Abortion. Incest. Fratricide. Greed.;1;1;False tt0071562;pulsar-16;09/06/2019;Best Sequel of Any movie;10;"When I watched this movie I was amazed that how Robert de Niro nailed the role of Don Vito Corleone. It could be a pressure for any actor to play a role of it has been played by a famous and good actor before. And most problem to play younger Don was that it was played by the god of cinema: Marlon Brando. But deniro didn't hesitate or felt under pressure for a single moment in the movie. And some times he was even better than brando himself. Michael Corleone's life story after being the godfather was brilliant written and well played by Pacino. A man who tried to protect his family and get in the line of work he despised most and somehow he started to enjoy it. This was the fate of Michael in this segment. From being a sad army veteran to a needed devil but in this movie he was a satan who doesn't want to give up power and would do anything to protect his legacy and his Father. In this movie you would also like the match cut between Vito's timeline and Michael's timeline. A Cameo from James caan was very soothing and Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen was brilliant again. Francis Ford Coppola should be given all awards for making The godfather 1&2.";1;1;False tt0071562;proud_luddite;08/06/2019;Magnificent;9;"Both a prequel and a sequel to ""The Godfather"", this film tells parallel stories in different time periods. The early one takes place in the early 1900s when Vito Corleone escapes a traumatic childhood in Sicily and becomes part of the crime scene in New York City . The later story in the 1950s has Vito's son Michael taking over the family's business of organized crime.

As both crime drama and family drama, this film earns high marks in both categories. The later story includes a patriarch who is so ruthless and power-hungry that it would normally be tempting to despise him and those around him. Yet, the skillful directing by Francis Ford Coppola successfully tricks the audience into showing great interest to the clan almost to the point of sympathy.

The later story is sometimes difficult to follow. It's extremely busy with many details and characters that are sometimes difficult to follow and remember. Luckily, the earlier story is straightforward. Each story is enhanced with differing styles of photography by the very talented Gordon Willis. The music of Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola is also beautiful.

Despite the mentioned flaw, this film has so much talent involved that it ends up as a memorable experience even after multiple viewings. The supporting cast members John Cazale, Michael Gazzo, Lee Strasberg, and Talia Shire all have at least one scene that gives them a chance to shine. As Vito, Robert DeNiro shows greatness in the role that brought him to fame. But the highlight of the cast is Al Pacino as Michael who personifies the worst side of humanity in subtle ways especially in two scenes. In one, where he has a serious confrontation with his wife, his still face can't fully betray his anger as his jaw shakes. In another scene, he is viewed from a distance behind a glass screen door. Even at a distance, his silent pose conveys soullessness and evil.

Coppola's directing is at its best in crowd scenes, particularly a street festival in the earlier story where a murder is being planned; and a New Year's Eve party in Havana in the later story. Overall, ""The Godfather Part II"" has aged very well.

RATING: 9 out of 10

Outstanding Achievements:

Directing by Francis Ford Coppola

Acting by Al Pacino";1;1;False tt0071562;narmin_aghazadeh;02/06/2019;God;10;After seeing The Godfather and improving it as one of my favorite films, I wanted to get more into The Godfather so I rented this. Words can't describe how great this sequel was. The acting once again was amazing and the story and how the movie went on just never got me bored. Everything in this movie was clearly beautiful. The ending by far was my favorite when there all sitting at the table talking. There were so many great scenes like Vito when he was younger, Fredo at the lake, and many many more. You have to see this movie because it's just brilliant filmaking. It's not better than it's first film but still an extremely worth sequel;1;1;True tt0071562;waterofblessing;25/05/2019;The best acting I have ever seen!;10;After I watched the first part I had mixed feelings about the next one. It is common knowledge that when a franchise has several parts it could be easily screwed up. But in this case I felt that it was a great idea to continue the first godfather. One of my favourite actors is Al Pacino. There is a scene when Michael's wife tells him that their child was aborted, since Kay didn't want to drag the child into trouble. That scene just blew me away. Best scene in the film, and Al Pacino's greatest work i believe. That look on his face, filled with wrath and anger is such a masterpiece acting. This movie is definitely on my top list!;1;1;True tt0071562;gloncivalentin;23/05/2019;BEST FILM EVER AFTER GODFATHER PART I;10;Al Pacino excellent perfomance Brilliant film jjjojoojojojoooohihihkpylppyxkcljslsljlsjsmljos;1;1;False tt0071562;pmc69;07/05/2019;the greatest movie;10;For me the best movie out there and even better than part 1 and possibly the only sequel better than the original. both godfather part 1 and 2 are a masterpiece with such amazing actors and performances. al pacino and de niro in this movie are amazing.;1;1;False tt0071562;Bonitao;01/05/2019;i love this movie;10;"A sequence, the second best movie ever. I love godfather trillogy <3";1;1;False tt0071562;rmrumbata1;23/04/2019;One of a kind.;10;I'll try to discribe with one word - Masterpiece...;1;1;False tt0071562;richhustlemade;23/03/2019;"Rich Hu$tle ""off the pavement T.v show""";10;Love this movie the action blows me away. One of the greatest movies of all times. I've seen over a million times and still feel the suspense. You know mane.. Best line ever and I hope every one enjoy it.;1;1;False tt0071562;shoibnikashshah-60598;01/02/2019;amazinf film;10;I have seen this film, oputstanding, amazing fantastic job by director, cinematography and all the actors

thums up;1;1;True tt0071562;one9eighty;31/01/2019;The sequel to the best family film ever;10;"As the name would suggest, Godfather Part 2 is the sequel to Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather film. This film is an extreme rarity because it divides feelings; some people have suggested that this sequel is actually better than the first film (which doesn't really happen often for sequels), while other die-hard fans would argue that a sequel could never out-rate an original.

Godfather 2 could actually be split into 2 separate films, both showing separate events, in different times, with only a family name and blood being the connecting factor. One film is a rewind to a time already gone - a young Vito Corleone (the Godfather in the first film - played here by Robert De Niro). The other film; living in the present but with stark teachings of the past coming into fruition.

It's been 7 years since the events of the first film, and Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) attempts to expand and develop the family business as the head of the Corleone Mafia family - looking to get a toehold in Las Vegas and Cuba. Woven into this we also get to see a young Vito Coleone in flashbacks as he comes from Sicily to America and makes a new life for himself. The film uses these two stories to show similarities and contrast between father and son, separated by 30-40 odd years. This film is a masterpiece in storytelling, expanding on a world we've been introduced to via the first film, and moving forward with sublime character development and a complete story. Throw in a 'who-done-it' for Michael to solve (trying to find the mole in 'the family'), as well as the stresses he has to deal with from domestic family life and there is an awful lot going on.

It could probably be argued that rather than being a sequel, this is a follow on. Coppola expands on the groundwork laid out in the first film - it's not a whole new adventure, more the next chapter in a story that we, the audience, have been tantalized with in the first film. Like the first film, it's not just a film about crime and mafia; it's as much a film about a man's struggle to live in the world that life has dealt him. It is brilliantly climaxed as we see Michael, alone in his own compound at the end of the film, like he's strapped in his own head dealing with the thoughts and plots going on - playing a mental game of chess with himself in order to stay one step ahead of his real life enemies.

Pacino and De Niro are both fantastic in their respective roles, and the supporting cast is brilliant. There is plenty going on, and in some instances it's what you don't see which is as important as what is explained to you.

I love this film, I have no issue with awarding this 10 out of 10 the same as I gave the first Godfather film.";1;1;True tt0071562;wwwdanukasampath;19/12/2018;Feeling;10;Mmmmmmmm its very good.... no words to say about it guyz. I really like that type movie. So i would like to thnks imdb crew ,, we are very lucky to watch movie in imdb;1;1;True tt0071562;calebayemere;21/11/2018;Nice photo;10;Powerful movie ,awesome movie, action all the way Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vc;1;1;False tt0071562;RodrigAndrisan;08/11/2018;"The sequel to the complex masterpiece (read my review to ""The Godfather"")...";10;"...in which are introduced a number of other major actors: Robert De Niro, Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo, G. D. Spradlin, the exceptional Marianna Hill, Bruno Kirby and the great Italians Gastone Moschin and Leopoldo Trieste. In cameo roles, Peter Donat, Harry Dean Stanton, Danny Aiello, Roger Corman. And, remember, from the first movie: ""In Sicily women are more dangerous than shotguns."" (Michele, lascia perdere, in Sicilia femine sono piu pericolose che la lupara) (Franco Citti's memorable line)";1;1;False tt0071562;stephi_dio;09/08/2018;The Best one of the Trilogy;10;Long movie but excellent! Al Pacino and Robert De Niro were great in this movie!;1;1;False tt0071562;vanphuccity;07/08/2018;great;7;He direction is also amazing, Francis Ford Coppola even does a better job than he did in The Godfather, and Apocalypse Now. The visual effects are so much better than the amazing one's in the original Godfather. One of the best films ever, a must see. Flawless.;1;1;True tt0071562;Rasmus-S;05/07/2018;What an experience;10;Sequel to one of the best pictures made has long established itself in the same cast. And now to my heart as well. In fact, I found this one more enjoyable than the first one. Don´t get me wrong I´m not saying this is better, I can´t tell which one is. But watching two story-lines side-by-side and seeing both of the (astonishingly acted of course) Corleone main men grow made this more interesting. Pacing was more to my liking as well.

Definitely one of my all-time favorites.;1;1;False tt0071562;davutdemircan;05/04/2018;Best in the series;10;I think this part is the best. Of course first one also amazing but this one like little bit better.;1;1;False tt0071562;choppenson;01/03/2018;Pro movie;10;A must muxh for filmmakers, alot to learn. Cinematography,lighting composition, and line delivery.;1;1;False tt0071562;enginkaya06;20/12/2017;perfect...;10;"It has been a continuation film that is not very different from the first in quality. It is so good that they show us the differences of character between Michael and Vito during these turns as they return to Vito'n story. I do not think it was a Marlon Brando influence in the first movie, but I liked the second one more, especially because it is a two story movie and the De Niro factor has a big part for me; I was expecting more of this past time.";1;1;False tt0071562;kelvincampos;13/11/2017;The best movie;10;The best movie ever made, if you do not like it, do not enjoy it, you'll have to admit that at least it is an amazing movie, with an amazing story line. If you never watched it, you must. It's a long movie but while watching it time flies and you will want to watch it over and over again. Do not miss the chance.;1;1;False tt0071562;bellabanana93;19/10/2017;Spectacular Sequel!;10;The Godfather 2 gives you more insight into Don's character as a young boy growing up in Sicily and America as well as the changes in Michael's life. The acting and casting are excellent. The music is dramatic and perfect. The plot and dialogue are interesting. This movie is one of the best, if the best ever, sequel that I have watched to date. Anybody who enjoyed the first Godfather movie would most likely enjoy watching this one as well.;1;1;False tt0071562;jrbalby;26/09/2017;Fantastic;10;I love so much. The actors, the director, the history. This is a wonderful movies. One of my favorites. Script and photography are sensational. The effect The light and dark of the photo is wonderful. A script and directing class for all cinema lovers. One of the best in history.;1;1;False tt0071562;angelocrisolo;07/09/2017;Perfect movie and story ine;10;One of the best movies of all time! perfect storyline! The cast and crew made a fantastic job. I am young when the first time I saw this movie and I really did not understand it at first. I watch it again and fantastic! The actor here is also one of my favorite. I wish they can make a new one or part 2 for this hahaha;1;1;False tt0071562;arisk-77966;21/08/2017;The best movie of all times;10;The best movie of all times. The role of Al Pacino take him directly to the elite of Hollywood.You can see Al Pacino and Robert De Niro in peak of their careers. A movie with lot of suspense and lot of action. Maybe a few scenes of the film shocked you at least for a moment but remember this movie is based on the life of a Gangester. Enjoy it.;1;1;True tt0071562;Ciuski;21/03/2001;The Corleone story continues;10;"""The Godfather"" is simply wonderful, and ""the Godfather - part II"" couldn't be less good! It's the best sequel ever made.

It's wonderful to see 2 great actors as Al Pacino and DeNiro: I don't know who could be the best in this film, both are fantastic!";1;1;False tt0071562;aleeuw;12/03/2001;DeNiro and Pacino team up in this historic monument;10;"The Godfather was incredible, but this one is even better. Pacino is even cooler then in the first part, and DeNiro shows everybody how to become a Don. A arguable downside in the first part could possibly be the fact that Brando was a gentleman, not a Don. DeNiro does this a lot better. Of course the quote ""I'm gonna make him an offer he don't refuse"" is used again, and a lot have been added, like ""keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"". Pacino is better in the second part because here he plays a Don all the time. He's a cold-blooded killer, exceeding his father. He ditches his sister, brother and wife and becomes the most powerful man in the US. Everytime a Pacino scene ends, you don't want it to end, and the same happens when a DeNiro scene ends. Connie Corleone is incredibly annoying, Fredo Corleone is incredibly pathetic and Michael and Vito are incredible. Probably an underrated actor in part I and II is Robert Duvall. You never see him mentioned but he acts great. Frank Pentangeli is very funny. Don Fanucci is a ""Chazzer"", and if you don't know what a Chazzer is, you ought to watch Scarface. 2 downsides are: No Santino (James Caan), and the fact that Pacino and DeNiro never play a scene together.";1;1;False tt0071562;franzgehl;13/02/2001;Great family !;10;The lives of Vito Corleone and his son are told here with brio. The family has to face different kind of problems with traitors and justice. The reaction of the family is a fair to the reputation of of mafia gangs. It's very difficult to distinguish Robert de Niro from Al Pacino, so don't get lost with the different times and scenes ! A very good movie.;1;1;False tt0071562;crashman61;24/01/2001;Rare sequel;10;One of the all-time great movies, and probably the best sequel ever. A little slow at parts, but there's really little in this story that could be left out. De Niro is at his best as young Vito.

BTW, The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are the only original/sequel pair to both walk away with the Best Picture Oscar. That should tell you something.;1;1;False tt0071562;ween-3;24/12/2000;NUMBER ONE WITH A BULLET;10;"What superlatives can I hurl at this film that you haven't already heard? Okay. Let's try this one....The night before they strap me into the electric chair, I'm demanding TWO things...a big plate of cheesy homemade lasagna and one more screening of ""G2"" (which should bring my cumulative total up to about 53).

This is it. The filmmaker's bible. The ne plus ultra of American cinema. ""TEN"" ain't a high enough number for a vote on this one. This is in a category by itself and should be viewed as a one-piece unit with ""G1"" as THE reason that they invented film in the first place.

Not a word out of place. Not a shot that isn't perfection. Indelible. Wanna impress other life forms in the galaxy? Put ""G2""and ""G1"" in the capsule and send it up. And besides, I understand they need a good recipe for meat sauce on Alpha Centauri.

When they look back at our civilization a thousand years from now...they'll recognize this film as our generation's contribution to the development of the culture of all mankind. And maybe they'll forgive us for ""Titanic"".";1;1;False tt0071562;mrbluto;06/09/2000;The best of the two movies;10;One of the three best movie ever made along with Godfather 1 and apocalypse now. Gf two returns to the family and tells the history of how the godfather came to power. The best scene of the movie is when a young Vito returns to Italy and takes revenge on the man that killed his family. A 10 out of ten just like the first movie.;1;1;False tt0071562;theoldwizzard;16/03/2000;I finished watching it, wound it back and watched it again;10;"Please see this film and vote for it. ""Pacino"" was all you could expect from an actor of such quality. Better than the first one. If you miss it then you have my deepest sympathy for this is a must for serious film lovers.";1;1;False tt0071562;OddJob-6;20/08/1999;The greatest movie I've ever seen;10;"""The Godfather"" introduced to pop culture the inside of a fictional mafia family that many drew connections. The big secret is that GF II better's the original. It may be the only sequel in movie history to accomplish this feat (The Empire Strikes Back is debatable). For three hours and twenty minutes we are shown a two prong plot where Michael Corleone must deal with his current enemies while at the same time driving a wedge between his family. The other plotline is the rise of Vito Corleone. This is well played by Robert DeNiro, who received an Oscar for his performance. The movie viewer has a complex soap opera that does not disappoint. It's deep and dark. It shows that unlike his father, Michael has to sacrifice his wife and children to hold the family name. Meanwhile, Vito shows his ability to lead by taking out the local boss and establishing his own racket. Michael is seen as the tragic figure, the one member of the family who wanted to be legit and turns out to be more ruthless than his father. It's a shame this wasn't the original Godfather. Many love to mimic Brando's great performance, this movie is pure genius.";1;1;False tt0071562;JSMOOTH1;28/06/1999;Best Sequel Ever Made!!!!;10;"The Godfather part II is by far the best sequel ever made. Francis Ford Coppala did a great job of directing this movie. Al Pacino will always be known as Micheal Corleone to me and I don't see how he didn't win the Oscar for best actor. Robert DeNiro also did an outstanding job playing the young Vito Corleone. It is amazing to watch Micheal Corleone evolve from a young, unassuming war hero who knows nothing about the family business to the cold, ruthless Don we see at the end of the movie. My friends and I have debated on wheather or not Fredo had to die. My friends all say that Fredo was too dumb and careless therefore he had to die; I feel that Fredo had learned his lesson and was content on being a good brother to Micheal and a good uncle to Micheal's children. Anyway, the Godfather part II is by far one of my favorite movies of all times and I strongly recommend it along with part one to everyone. I was very disappointed in the Godfather part III so for me the Godfather concludes at the end of part II with Micheal sitting on the bench thinking back on his life.";1;1;False tt0071562;HAL9000-16;23/06/1999;A sequel that equals the excellence of the first;10;Now, this film was superior, to say the least. One of my top 10 favorite films of all time. I thought this film was every bit as excellent as the first Godfather. What elevates this film making it better than any other film sequel ever made, is the fact that the film is a sequel and a prequel in one.

Robert DeNiro does a brilliant job reprising the role that Marlon Brando made so famous as Vito Corleone, showing how the Corleone family rose to power, and in the present day Michael Corleone, (Al Pacino in his best performance yet) is now the head of the family business, who gets so caught up in success and himself that he ends up losing his entire family. Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, and Talia Shire also do fine jobs reprising their roles.

My favorite scene in The Godfather Part II is at the end, when Michael has flashbacks to the way his family used to be, and how everyone left him alone at the table when he announced he enlisted in the Marines, which fades into the final shot of the film as you see Michael Corleone sitting all alone with no one else in his life (as if he were in hell for his sins). It was an intensely gripping scene.

You haven't seen enough if you have only seen The Godfather, so Part II is one of those rare sequels which completes the story. Need I say more?;1;1;False tt0071562;Mr. Film;18/05/1999;The Best Sequel of All Time;9;"A brilliant companion to the first film, ""The Godfather Part II"" follows the Corleones into the late fifties, when the family business, as well as the family itself, undergoes changes. Don Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino, delivers a very convincing performance alongside Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. The story is crafted to fit the times and also to help define the characters and show their growth, and in some cases, their demise. When it's all finished, ""The Godfather Part II"" is thoroughly satisfying and moving. An exceptional film.";1;1;False tt0071562;Mec-6;15/05/1999;The only FLAWLESS film in motion picture history.;10;The Godfather: Part II is perhaps the only movie ever made with not one single flaw. While other movies may be great, they are all flawed. I have see this phenomenal sequel many times and still have not spotted a flaw. From a great story line to first class acting, this picture has it all.

If that doesn't say enough, all you have to think about is that this masterpiece is a sequel. It is a follow-up story to a classic. Usually, sequels are often weak and never live up to the original. The Godfather: Part II is the exception to the rule as it not only equals the original, it makes it subordinate!;1;1;False tt0071562;PIST-OFF;29/04/1999;Another movie you can't refuse.;10;There's so many good things in this movie it's ridiculous. Great performances all around from Al Pacino, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, Lee Strasburg, John Cazale and especially from Robert DeNiro who is the only one who could fill Marlon Brando's shoes. DeNiro does such a great job at acting as Brando's Vito Corleone that he won an Oscar. The first time two actors won an Oscar for playing the same character. Great writing by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola. Highly under-appreciated but great acting by Richard Bright and Bruno Kirby in bit parts. A well written score is a staple of this movie. Flawless directing of the two coinciding stories of young Vito Corleone and his aging son Michael as the heads of a powerful mob family. I especially love the scenes of young Vito Corleone as an up and coming mobster and wish there were more of them. I would have liked to know the orgins of Luca Brasi, Johnny Fontaine, and Tom Hagen. As well as Sonny's rise to power. The book covers Luca Brasi's orgins with the Corleone's but... This is a worthy sequel to the flawless movie The Godfather. Awesome.;1;1;False tt0071562;bobbymilk;12/01/2002;best movie I've ever seen;10;In these days when Lord of the Rings (FOTR) hit the box office and fantasy cinema is having its second peak after Star Wars, the best thing that a person who hate fantasy should do is watching this movie.

Godfather part II shines with the actors. De Niro and Pacino are on top of their undeniable talents. The most striking two things about the movie except great directing and acting, are the story of a father and son simultaneously (showing them nearly at the same age) and the great story that includes shocking moments like murder of Don Corleone (DeNiro) or his revenge after coming back to his hometown after years. What can I say, it worths every minute you spend and it is better than Godfather Part I...;1;1;False tt0071562;mc20138;11/10/2001;The greatest sequel ever, that's even better than the original;10;The first godfather was one of the most special films ever produced, but the second is a sequel and a prequel mixed into one spellbinding three hour movie event. The fact that Robert de Niro played a young Marlon Brando is ironic as the young de Niro was fast claiming the crown as one of the best actors of that or any other generation. The detail in the locations and set design is immense and well worth a closer look. The acting is amongst the finest ever seen on the screen and the direction is simply out of this world. Overall, one of the greatest films ever made, with an ensemble cast and script to match.;1;1;False tt0071562;Elizabeth-328;03/10/2001;Because the original just wasn't good enough;;"""The Godfather: Part II"" is one of the best sequels ever made, because it's so unlike other sequels. It not only tells the ongoing story of Michael Corleone, but it also tells the story of his father's rise to being the Godfather. Al Pacino superbly reprises his role of Michael, and Robert De Niro is, in one word, perfect as Vito Corleone. Imagine not only learning your lines, but learning them in Italian, and all the while trying to sound like Marlon Brando. If you can't imagine any one else besides Brando as Don Vito, just check out De Niro's brilliant, Oscar-winning performance. This is a must-see for any film fan, and especially any fan of the first ""Godfather."" I actually know people who prefer this sequel to the already fantastic original. I can't say enough about this movie. My one piece of advice is see ""The Godfather: Part II.""";1;1;False tt0071562;curena1;16/09/2001;La Familia;10;The movie is so captivating you are entrenced from beginning to end. The film chronicals the young life of Don Vito Corleone(Robert De Niro)and the assension of the mafia empire in the 1950's by his Michel(Al Pacino)The film is just as captivating as the original and gives you a stroll through Little Italy at the turn of the century.In all the greatest Mob/Drama of all time.;1;1;False tt0071562;NateW;17/08/2001;My personal favorite of the trilogy;10;Although I feel The Godfather is the better movie (only slightly, I might add), I actually prefer this to the original. Not only is this the greatest sequel ever, but one of the greatest movies ever. The Godfather II is more entertaining and more compelling in my opinion. What really makes this great however are the parallel story lines following Michael Corleone and a young Vito Corleone, played flawlessly by Robert DeNiro. As with the first Godfather, the ensemble acting is superb, especially from Pacino and the aforementioned DeNiro. This is simply put about as good as movie entertainment gets. 10/10;1;1;False tt0071562;scorsese-3;21/02/1999;A cinematic epic by Coppola;10;The Godfather II is not really a movie about the mafia. The themes that run throughout the film are of power,corruption of power and family. Coppola expertly tells the parallel stories of a father and his son with the use of flashbacks and flashforwards. He simultaneously shows how the father builds an empire and how his son subsequently unwittingly destroys it. The scenes involving the son Michael Corleone are very serious in nature,whereas the scenes involving the father,a young Vito Corleone, are presented in a more jovial manner.Before a flashback or flashforward, Coppola uses an effective technique of having children or the mention of children in the scene in order to emphasize the generational link through children. The flasback scenes are also photographed using different methods of lighting to contrast the different moods.Metaphorically, the story of the Corleones parallels the rise and subsequent corruption of America. The ultimate symbol of America in the form of the Statue of Liberty appears throughout the film. The assassination of Hyman Roth the jewish Mafia chieftain, is eerily similar to the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald the alleged assassin of President John Kennedy. Coppola effectively uses symbols such as the orange to represent evil. Several scenes show characters that do evil holding an orange (the fruit being a biblical symbol of evil).In an early scene Johnny Ola an emissary for Hyman Roth brings an orange to Michael Corleone from Miami. In a flashback scene, Don Fannucci (the black hand), is seen handling an orange before his demise. Michael Corleone is eating an orange as he plots the murder of his enemies. Coppola also uses catholic religious rituals as backdrops in major murder sequences. As Vito Corleone murders Don Fannucci there is a religious procession on the street. As Michael's brother Fredo is being murdered he is reciting the Hail Mary prayer. In the end Michael loses his soul and family to maintain his power. A great film by a talented director.;1;1;False tt0071562;PathetiCinema;02/03/2014;Excuse me while I gather myself.;1;I just watched Godfather Part II and now I must take a moment to gather myself. It's all too much. My mind and body have entered what seems to be a state of shock and awe. I feel like just collapsing into a chair and staring into blank space. A blank stare of contemplation: Much like Michael did throughout the whole three hour duration of the movie.

If you'll excuse me I have to go now. I need to get a grip on the life shatteringly staggering events that I have just witnessed. I really need to lie down. I must recuperate. You see, my knees have turned to jelly. I may have to support them with my plastic kneecap.

Movies this powerful should be banned.;11;33;False tt0071562;BSchin2188;14/06/2003;They should have stopped after the first one;1;The first Godfather is a very good movie. Great acting, some action scenes to releive the slower parts, and a good musical score. The only thing I can say in favor of this one is that it has good acting. Other than that, I'd rather take a nap than watch this three hour bore-a-thon.;29;107;False tt0071562;lewtaylor;15/05/2016;As overrated and boring as the first...if not more!;5;Well I watched the first Godfather film and wasn't impressed what so ever, completely overrated. However Part II is one of those films that people always go on about being a better sequel than the first...unfortunately it is even more boring and slow than the first.

Again its incredibly long, and literally nothing happens in this film! Only one 'big' event happens (Michael's home being shot up), which isn't that exciting, and the whole film slowly develops around this. There is also the De Niro 'becoming' Don Vito side story which I don't think adds anything to the story at all. He goes from being a normal guy to then shooting the main boss in the town then instantly somehow becomes The Don..with no retaliation what so ever, and it doesn't even show you him becoming The Don. The next time it cuts to his story he is already The Don. Maybe I missed a part (which is possible as I ended up messing around on the internet while watching as it was that boring);7;19;True tt0071562;sunznc;06/05/2012;Not as captivating as The Godfather;6;As far as sequels go this isn't awful. A lot of money went into this and the acting is excellent by everyone.

The sparkle and grit and realism that appears in almost every frame of The Godfather just isn't here. Some of this seemed forced and contrived and overall the story is quite grim and depressing. Even in The Godfather there were a few scenes here and there that were light and slightly amusing. You get none of that here. Everything here is black.

I also think that this a little bit too long. I think it could have moved faster.

All in all it isn't something I would watch a second time. Not like the original, which is a product of it's time.;4;9;False tt0071562;darkguardian-99861;27/05/2020;I think it's overrated;6;I recently saw the Godfather 2, hearing that it is one of the best movies ever made. However, what I saw certainly wasn't close to one of the best movies ever made. The most positive thing about the movie is that it's staged nicely with beautiful designs and sets, often being colorful. It's no wonder that the 3 Oscars, related to set design were won by this movie.

However, my issues with the movie are related to its story. It is 3 hours and 22 seconds long and what happens in those minutes? Nothing. The characters are talking the entire time, saying things that are either meaningless or trying to be smart, both failing to entertain me. My main grip with the movie is that it's supposed to be a crime film and in a crime film you would expect to have a little more action. What's more sad is that this movie has absolutely no memorable scenes or quotes. I like neither this nor the first one, but at least the first one had some memorable scenes.

I edited this review, to elaborate a bit better my arguements, but even if I reedit it, I don't think I will give it a more favorable rating.;3;6;True tt0071562;kalamjameel;29/03/2020;God father is overrated;3;I really don't know what is so special about this boring movie I cannot see anything interesting, I'am Literally forcing myself to finish it. I mean 3 hours is TOO MUCH. This is my opinion, The whole movie is about the same idea which is killing the betrays without knowing or fully understanding the reason of these murders.;3;6;False tt0071562;AhmetOzbay;29/05/2014;Better than the first movie;10;"This is my first review and I wanted this to be about a great movie. I'm from Turkey and sorry for my bad English.

I haven't seen the third movie yet but for now, this movie was better than the first one. Why? Because in this movie we saw the young Vito Corleone's life which was a good subject to curious about. About that, the other awesome part was Robert De Niro as young Vito Corleone. I've gotta say that, nobody could act any better. His moves, his gestures, the way he speak they all was like Marlon Brando's. Actually that's why I love this series so much, there are just great actors ever; Marlon Brando, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, John Cazale...

And then there is Al Pacino as ""the Godfather"" on the other side which is really awesome. He really is the one who should be the Godfather after Marlon Brando. He acted very good and he had this severity which is a trait if you are a ""Godfather"".

The scenario and fiction was better for the first movie I think, because in this movie they showed two stories and that was the key for me. They gone to the past, they came back to the present during all the movie, while we warm up ups, the whole 3 hours were gone. As soon as possible I am going to watch the last movie but I heard some rumors like ""the third movie wasn't that good after all"" kind of things, anyway I hope that is not correct.

I am freaking recommend to you this awesome production to watch. Take care.";3;6;False tt0071562;george.schmidt;31/03/2003;"Sequel better than its equal; the saga continues";10;"THE GODFATHER, PART II (1974) **** Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, John Cazale, Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo, Richard Bright, Bruno Kirby, G.D. Spradlin, Troy Donahue, Harry Dean Stanton. One of the greatest sequels in the rarest form (whereby it being even better than its predecessor in many ways) of sequels: continuing the epic storytelling of the Corleone crime family with Michael (brilliant Pacino, Oscar nominee Best Actor) beginning his dynasty with the family business taking over Las Vegas with only his middle brother and family screw up Fredo (Cazale) ineptly trying to prevent him his destiny. What makes this sequel a stand out is the parallel storyline showing young Vito Corleone (uncannily portrayed by Best Supporting Actor De Niro) and his immigrant migration to New York City's Lower East Side ghetto, establishing himself as a man of his word. Some truly great ensemble acting particularly the character actor Gazzo as a stoolie with a conscience and of course master of the Method Strasberg (both a nominee for Best Supporting Actor) as nemesis Hyman Roth. Superb screenplay by Coppola and Mario Puzo (Best Adapted Screenplay) as well as direction also by Coppola (Best Director). Winner of Best Picture and the only sequel to win this award as well. Academy Awards also went to Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola (Francis' papa) for Best Original Dramatic Score; Art Direction (Dean Tavoularis and Angelo Graham); and Shire getting a nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Look quick for Danny Aiello in a cameo as an assassin and famed low-budget quickie producer Roger Corman during the Congressional Hearings.";3;6;True tt0071562;borisreviews;26/06/2013;The First One was a Mess, the Second Is No Different;2;"Coming off the disappointment of the first ""Godfather,"" Coppola continues his overrated trilogy with the weak and incoherent Part II. The story outlines the earlier life of Vito Corleone in the early 20s and follows Michael Corleone in the 50s, but does so with very little coherency or flow.

Francis Ford Coppola has shown very limited improvement from the first ""Godfather"", failing to realize the weaknesses of the first. The dialogue is still lacking authenticity, and the crypto-fascist undertones are still ever present. It doesn't help when any of the actors, in particular Al Pacino and Robert de Niro, fail to deliver any of their lines with any real conviction.

The story is fairly interesting, but the lack of quality in the script is hard to overcome, and especially so in the hands of Coppola, who has proved over and over again that he does not deserve to be in the company of such legendary directors like Paul W.S. Anderson, Michael Bay, and Wych Kaosayananda.

Watching the film, it's obvious the troubles Coppola had in handling the material. There are many inconsistencies in the mood and atmosphere, and he doesn't seem to hold a grasp of the material that was so masterfully outlined by Mario Puzo.

The film hasn't aged well at all, and the boring cinematography highlights that combined with all the weaknesses pointed out in my review. ""The Godfather Part II"" marginally improves upon the first ""Godfather,"" but still contains many weaknesses that make it hard to enjoy or appreciate.";9;27;False tt0071562;maniuis;09/05/2011;2nd Most Overrated Movie of All Times;5;"Oh boy! After realizing that my favorite movie of all times was ranked number 1 in the IMDb list I thought it might be a good idea to watch all of the movies in the best 250 ranking... I'm starting to have second thoughts...

Ten years ago when I watched the Godfather for the first time I had no knowledge of English and I was almost a kid. My first impression of the movie was that it was plain boring. I have just watched ""The Godfather"" again ten years later. I am about to be twenty-seven years-old and I am a professor of English as a second language in two universities of my country so I can no longer think that my impression of the movie is biased by my young age or my lack of understanding of English -oh, I also speak Italian by the way.

After such a disappointment I didn't set up my hopes too high for its second installment... well, at least I can say I am not disappointed now because this is indeed a bad movie just like I expected. This movie is simply way too overrated. I am not saying this is a bad movie but it does NOT deserve his current position as 3rd greatest movie of all times.

I would really like to understand what it is that people see in movies like these. The plot is silly and confusing. Yes, the acting is more than decent but if there is no story to it there is little the actors can do to keep you intrigued.

Finally, if you have not watched this movie yet and feel tempted to do so, I recommend you get some decent movies like Kung Fu Panda or Inception and have some fun or go ahead and watch it and waste two hours of your life.

Regards, MANIUIS.";9;28;False tt0071562;garance-2;31/05/2000;Overrated pap;2;This is possibly the most overrated film that has ever been. It's confusing nonsense - the first plot, about Michael, is incoherent with way too many loose ends, while the second plot is unnecessary and doesn't tie to the first film (why wouldn't Vito Corleone have an Italian accent if he spoke Italian for so long?). The film should've been about half the length that it was - the writing is atrocious. The only high point of this film is the acting by Al Pacino.;19;73;False tt0071562;zensixties;10/08/2007;Weak Soap-Operaish Followup to much better Original;5;"Godfather Part 2 is so hailed as the greatest film of all time it's time someone burst that overblown bubble and I've got the needle right here. So let's take a closer look at what should be considered a mediocre sequel to the classic film, The Godfather. First of all Marlon Brando is nowhere to be seen here. Instead we get random flashbacks to Robert Deniro as the young Vito. We get some good scenes of old Little Italy though there's a Keystone-cops feel to some of it, especially the comic relief of the slumlord scene.

Part 2 has a much bigger budget but a script with weakened plot lines and dialogue, basically trying to followup everything from Part 1 logically becoming formulaic and soap-operaish, and ending up falling flat.

The film begins with another celebration of some kind. A brother's betrayal aspires to be that of Hamlet, but without the depth or wit (or brevity). It's now the 1950s and Mike is in Nevada and is trying to buy a corrupt Senator. The Senator is I suppose the film producer element of the first, but with nothing creative like a horse head...just crass dialogue that doesn't ring true. We also get a Mafia hearing in Congress which should have ended up on the cutting room floor. We also get (the great?) Lee Strasberg as some old shirtless and feeble mobster. He may be a great teacher, but someone tell me why this is an Academy Award winning acting performance! Am I just dumb? Al Pacino is great as always, this performance following Serpico, but his dialogue doesn't ring true. When he begins, ""If history has taught us anything.."" I expect some deep wisdom to follow...needless to say it doesn't. Talia Shire's character is also weakened compared to the original's Connie. Here she just ""needs money"" and wants Mike to forgive Fredo because ""he's so sweet"". This mess of a sequel ends with a literal bloodbath, but following the formula of the first, and a final scene with the original cast (sans Brando) the actors of which were paid more than all their good work in the original. I'm not saying it isn't worth seeing, just that it's inferior to the original in many ways. But of course it isn't near as bad as Part 3. My final criticism is that all these mob films intentionally or not glorify criminals. Okay, now you can click ""no"".";8;25;False tt0071562;billy-jackson56;17/09/2010;Best sequel ever?;1;even worse then the original and that is saying something! firstly this film suffers from the fact that it is not American gangster and the film makers should have thought twice about making a film like this after the fantastic American gangster set the bar so high for every other gangster film that would be made in latter years. I guess you can detect the sarcasm there but I have read the reviews of the afore mention movies and am getting pretty ticked off with every gangster film that gets made being compared to this and its jerk off predecessor, this is over long, boring and confusing rubbish with very little substance I don't know how the director of Your a big boy now and Finnians rainbow ever got to adapt the first film in the first place probably because he was an Italian American it is a shame they didn't wait around for Scorsese he's been making these kind of movies for the last thousand years. I don't know what it is about short badly dressed street thugs going around saying badder bing and shooting someone in a pizza restaurant is so appealing to everyone who happens to be a film buff I guess it's a hero worship thing you have to look up to somebody so why not some idiot who makes poorly adapted films from boring source material or dick heads who go around inflicting torment and anguish on normal people, I won't reviewing the third movie as it is just as bad as this probably not so bad because it doesn't go on for four years like this film does and Coppola did an interesting thing at the end of that one when he had Pacino screaming like a girl on the steps outside the opera with the music lifted from raging bull;15;56;False tt0071562;aroid;17/06/2005;mystified why this is so highly rated;4;This must be one of the most overrated movies of all time. I saw it when it first came out, and then again a couple days ago. Unlike Godfather I, almost nothing was memorable from the first viewing of this movie. It evaporates into instant oblivion, never to rise again. It's a slow, boring study of an obsessive, boring, violent man. Many of the lesser characters are even more uninteresting. And for this it's highly rated? The attention given to the incidents in Cuba seem to be an attempt to add something lively to the movie, but just go to show how little there is to the main story. Bright, patriot son can't break away, starts slow, downward spiral, and ends up alone, friendless and depressed. And this is a great movie?;10;35;True tt0071562;gethistr8;04/12/2001;Very good film, though not nearly as captivating as the original.;8;This is film is excellent. Don't get me wrong. I just found myself far more entertained with the first. Deniro's scenes as a young Pacino were brilliant, and I wish more time woudl have been spent detailing his rise towards superiority and the highest respect of all who surrounded him. I certainly recommend watching this film, but unlike the first, I don't feel it the kind of movie that I would want to watch over and over again.;3;7;False tt0071562;eragonbookfan;11/11/2014;happy 40th anniversary... NOT!;2;"And I write review based off the ENTIRE Godfather series. I may be in the minority, but I simply don't understand the hype all about these movies!!! Perhaps the most overrated trilogy ever. I really do believe so much of this hype & attention should be given to some other much BETTER films, like ""Iron Will"", which was a true story. Or the ""Great Escape"", another true story! Maybe it's just evident how much of a FETISH Hollywood has for violence, blood, gore, sexual innuendos, and bad language! That's NO ""ART"", you can trust me! I'm not much of a fan of Al Pacino, nor any of the work he has done - he just always seems to come off as scary & abusive (with his scary eyes & unpredictable attitudes.)

Couldn't Al Pacino take up a KINDER character role here and there sometime soon???

The film was a mess, and so was it's sequels! Everything is shot in the dark, most scenes are often times really boring, and half the time you can't understand what the characters are saying 'cause they're speaking in *freaking* Italian!! And don't forget the horrendous false cult of Catholicism especially being depicted on-screen; Catholics are DUPED. They worship idols, believe in a false Jesus, and are only all just about idolatry, bigotry, and superstition.

Though to be fair, I did like seeing Robert De Niro here and there, and I liked some of the talk concerning Israel & the Jewish people - because I have quite a soft spot for Jews, because they have literally got a long sad history of persecution, and deserve to be recognised for their incredible genius minds and intelligence.

But in the end, that really doesn't matter in a huge porous abomination nonsensical pile of worthless nothing that is this movie! And the other two. 2/10

PS: Everyone's saying ""the Godfather"" is the greatest film of all time. Nope, they're wrong! It's Groundhog Day! THAT film probably deserves the #2 spot on the Top 250 on IMDb.";7;23;True tt0071562;jose-cruz53;14/10/2012;Just give Coppola the Nobel Prize!;9;"Millions of people worldwide suffer from insomnia, that is difficulty in sleeping. However, Coppola, the genius filmmaker who brought us Apocalypse Now and The Godfather has utilized his mastery of the human psychology to also brought us the definitive cure for insomnia: The Godfather 2. This is a film specially designed to adjust to the human brainwaves in such a way to induce in a profound sleepiness.

Running at the monumental length of 200 minutes, with a convoluted mess of a story, made up of flashbacks, a few strong emotional moments and tons of other very boring moments, with one of the most boring scores ever made (please, that little ""Italian"" noise in the background surely is boring!, this film surely has made happy millions of people suffering from insomnia.

Coppola has made a masterwork of cinema: instead of using films to provoke emotions he managed to created an audio-visual experience that cuts the brain off and enables it to fall into sleep. Truly a work that deserves the Nobel Prize of Medicine. Bravo Coppola!

Highly recommended if you have insomnia!";4;11;False tt0071562;evanston_dad;26/07/2006;Oh, Those Corleones....;7;"No American filmmaker has had a more disappointing trajectory to his film career than Francis Ford Coppola. To have directed four of the most influential films of the 70's (the first two ""Godfather"" films, ""The Conversation,"" and ""Apocalypse Now"") and then to spend the last two decades churning out one stinky product after another (""Peggy Sue Got Married,"" ""Bram Stoker's Dracula"", the third ""Godfather"") earns Coppola my award for Most Promising Director Who Most Miserably Failed at Establishing Himself as an Important Figure of American Cinema. But before ""Jack"" there was ""The Godfather."" While I feel the whole ""Godfather"" trilogy has been lauded into oblivion and is somewhat overrated, who am I to argue with the majority? People think these are great movies, and they've certainly implanted themselves permanently in our cultural consciousness.

And don't get me wrong: these films have moments of greatness (at least the first two installments do). But I think ""The Conversation"" and ""Apocalypse Now"" are ultimately more interesting films, and I think Coppola stretched himself more artistically in those two films than he did in the entire ""Godfather"" trilogy combined.

Of the trilogy, the first film is by far the best. It shows Coppola's flair for being able to craft a story with extreme mainstream appeal while staying faithful to his artistic vision. ""The Godfather"" doesn't look or sound quite like any gangster film before it, with it's muddy lighting and sound. It's also much more ambiguous morally than the usual Hollywood gangster film, at least any produced up to that point. The line between crime and justice is blurred sometimes beyond distinction, and the Corleone family at times acts with more honor (in its own way) than the institutions charged with upholding freedom, justice and morality. In this way, ""The Godfather"" offered a scathing critique of the foundations on which America as a country was built.

Coppola, however, drives this point into the ground over the course of three films. There's really not much more to say after the first film (it's already apparent that Michael Corleone's style of rule is different from his father's, his coldness and ruthlessness necessitated by a changing time), but we have to sit through a nearly 3 1/2 hour second installment that does nothing but reiterate this point again and again. Part II at least is saved by the back story of Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in Part I and Robert De Niro in Part II), and that story alone keeps Part II afloat. But Part III is wholly unnecessary and mars the whole enterprise, turning the franchise into the stuff of parody and camp.

Al Pacino is the glue that holds the trilogy together, though his character really isn't as complex as a first viewing would have you believe. The major conflict facing him is resolved in the first film, and the second and third films give him nothing to do but replay what are essentially the same scenes over and over again.

Other standouts in the cast include Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and Talia Shire (who alone makes the third chapter worth watching).

Obviously a must see for cinema buffs, or even casual fans, but don't feel you have to label this trilogy as great just because of the reputation that precedes it.

Grade: Part I: A Part II: B Part III: C-";4;11;False tt0071562;pilot1009;11/11/2019;long winded and does not deliver;4;The original was good but this one just gets lost in convoluted flash backs and a too complex a plot with no real fullfilment. Also way too long. Dated now and I cannot understand the high scores reviewing it.;2;4;False tt0071562;Pjtaylor-96-138044;09/02/2018;It doesn't hold a candle to the original but yet is one of the finest sequels of all time.;8;It's baggy, wholly unnecessary and doesn't hold a candle to the original but yet is also an example of one of the finest sequels of all time and a phenomenal piece of film-making regardless of its few flaws. The 'Godfather: Part II (1974)' is an oddity in more ways than one, since it simply shouldn't work but totally does. There's almost no way you could believe that the piece powers past the three-hour mark, which it does thanks mainly to its unneeded and honestly less interesting flashback plots seemingly disconnected from the main story. There's not a moment in the foremost narrative I'd suggest cutting even for a second, and even those flashback bits are breathlessly entertaining (in a much more instantly gratifying way than the slow-burning main narrative.) Every second of the picture adds up to an experience that seems sweepingly massive yet strangely intimate, an effortlessly engaging examination of the fall of an empire and the nostalgic sadness at the heart of a man who's soul is slowly turning to stone. 8/10;2;4;False tt0071562;fkeoitwt;04/02/2015;understand;10;I rated this movie a 1 star not because it wasn't entertaining or wasn't cinematically compelling. I rated this movie one star because the message this movie delivers is ignorantly backwards. Throughout this film, we watch (in vivid detail) as Chris Kyle assassinates hundreds of Iraqi men, women, and even children in order to protect American troops. And yet, this movie ends a memorial. I understand that Chris Kyle did his job well. But that does not mean he should be honored as a hero.

I love the United States. This is an amazing country. And so it bothers me when Hollywood portrays an American hero as someone who is willing to kill people without critically evaluating why they should be killed, who sees war as purely good versus evil, and who is hopelessly blind to the bigger picture.

If there is ever to be peace in this world - heck, if we want to protect the US - we need to glorify people who are compassionate, who can put themselves in other people's shoes, and who act in ways that promote trust and love - instead of fueling the cycle of anger and hate.

Go see this movie. But please don't swallow it up without thinking first.;2;4;False tt0071562;JaydoDre;15/11/2014;Getting a bit overly dramatic, but still really good;8;"The problem with Godfather II is that it goes a bit too far for the sake of false drama. It is like a kid who gets hit by a parent, cries and as he is crying he keeps thinking about how sad his life is and how everyone would feel sorry once he is dead, and the kid keeps getting a kick out of this self-made drama.

Without spoiling much, the main protagonist, crime boss Michael Corleone, eventually starts making moves that feel unnecessary, unless you view them as a means by the writers of the story to create more crime drama.

The story of Godfather II has some weak and some strong points. If you retrace the steps of the storyline after you finish watching the film, they are not necessarily illogical but they do sit kind of loose in the plot. These plot points feel more like vehicles for specific dramatic scenes than a natural story. On the other hand, the story does provide some great historical perspective on the history of the mafia and also general commentary on certain social aspects of life.

Everything else about this film was pretty good. It is understandable how this film reached its position as one of the top films of the last century.

The acting is top notch. In fact, it is what serves as the main course and the desert. You do not go to Godfather movies for action; you go to them for the interaction between all these great actors. These shots are up close and personal, with strong dramatic shadows on characters' faces. The experience is sort of like eating a good steak, no salt or pepper needed.";2;4;False tt0071562;tein-kofein;28/11/2013;Thank you.;10;This movie is almost better than Godfather 1. Hats off to the director, actors and everyone who had anything to do with this film. It is simply wonderful, brilliant. And it seems to me that every word I write, I'm doing damage to the film.Tribute to Coppola and all players, creator of timeless classic. I would like to just say thank you. I just love this movie. Not only this part, but also the first. I think they're equivalent.Al Pacino unique, De Niro maybe even better. Dialogues excellent and historic.I want to highlight the role of Hyman Roth, without this role, the movie would not be what it is.For those who have not accessed this movie, I warmly recommend it. As for me, could have been even longer. Simply one of the best movies ever recorded.;2;4;False tt0071562;LeonLouisRicci;07/07/2013;If You Liked the First One! You'll Love the Sequel!;10;"You must have heard the raves...""the best Sequel of all time"", well, Star Wars Fans may disagree but it is a valid argument. This surpasses a Great Film with an even greater Film. It is certainly broader in Scope and even more lavish in its Production. The Flashback New York Scenes are a standout.

The warm, rich Cinematography remain and the sharp Characters with a wider palette to add even more richness to proceedings. It is more edgy and is less likely to linger with Portrait like introductions to already known participants. There are more interesting themes here like the expansion to Las Vegas, and the formation of the Family's Patriarch and sensibilities, and the Senate Hearings.

This one moves quite a bit faster than the original because it has much more to say. It says it and then some. Michael's descent into internal Madness is not a pretty sight and the Inheritor to all that is Corleone becomes a very unlikable Tyrant and shows virtually no signs of Humanity as the Modernity of events that take place have no place for that sort of thing.";2;4;False tt0071562;ferguson-6;20/04/2012;This is the business we have chosen;10;"Six weeks ago was The Godfather in a theatre setting. This time it was the sequel, which generated an equal amount of movie bliss. Experiencing these two classic movies on the big screen almost 40 years after release reinforces what great films they are and how few truly great films get made. We are reminded that a powerful well-written story, world class cast, visionary director, brilliant photographer and stunning composer are all necessary components for movie greatness.

This sequel explores three time periods: the journey of 9 year old Vito to the U.S., his rise to power in Little Italy, and Corleone life after Vito's death. Some find the cuts to varying timelines to be distracting. Personally, I find it fascinating and a very effective way to tell the entire story. Watching an almost mute 9 year old Vito land on Ellis Island and transform into a twenty-something community ""leader"" is one of the more powerful and unlikely events ever seen on screen. Mix that with Al Pacino holding little back as a power-mongering Michael is downright frightening. If you doubt this, look at it from the perspective of Diane Keaton's May, or John Cazale's Fredo.

The film received 11 Oscar nominations and won 6, including Best Picture. Robert DeNiro won for his tremendous turn as young Vito. This is early DeNiro the Mean Streets, Taxi Driver era. DeNiro and Marlon Brando remain the only two actors to have won Oscars for playing the same character. Two other acting nominations went to Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth and Michael V Gazzo as Pentangeli. Mr. Strasberg was the famed acting teacher whose prized pupils included none other than Al Pacino (who talked him into taking this role). Strasberg was also bequeathed 75% of the Marilyn Monroe estate and there was much scandal after his death when his widow auctioned off most of it.

A couple of other interesting points were that most of this script was original for the film, though the background story of Vito was drawn from Mario Puzo's novel. Director Francis Ford Coppola considered casting Joe Pesci as the young Clemenza, but ultimately decided on Bruno Kirby. Dominic Chianese plays Hyman Roth's right hand man Johnny Ola. Chianese has been recently seen in both The Sopranos and Boardwalk Empire. B-Movie mogul Roger Corman plays one of the Senators on the committee interrogating Michael and Pentangeli. Harry Dean Stanton plays one of the FBI bodyguards, and former heartthrob Troy Donahue plays Connie's (Talia Shire) goofy boyfriend Merle. One of my favorite characters in the film is Don Fanucci, robustly played by Gastone Moschin. His strutting and preening always creeps me out and makes me laugh.

Besides being the first sequel to win a Best Picture Oscar, The Godfather II is simply one of the finest films ever made. At 200 minutes, it requires both a time and mental commitment, but along with The Godfather, Coppola and Puzo have provided us exemplary story telling through expert filmmaking.";2;4;False tt0071562;disdressed12;10/04/2010;as good as the original;10;usually sequels are not as good as the original film,but in this case it's pretty close.this one is about 25 minutes or so longer(about 196 minutes)and it does feel a bit long on occasion.but it's just as engrossing as the original.i think the story has more depth to it.there's much more going on.the movie jumps back in forth in time.minor spoiler ahead***Robert De Niro is brilliant as a young Vito Corleone***end of spoiler.Al Pacino Returns as Michael Corleone.the supporting cast is great,as well.i'd say this film rivals it's predecessor,despite the few moments where it seemed it bit too long,due to the story being better.for me,The Godfather: Part II is a 10/10;2;4;False tt0071562;Jag85;30/04/2009;Not as good as the original, but still a great crime film;;My opinions on this movie are a bit mixed. The opening for the film was brilliant as it delves into the early life of Vito Corleone and then flash-forwards to the story of his son Michael Corleone following the events of The Godfather (1972). It was all interesting up until it started faltering during the lengthy middle portion of the film, when Michael travels around to various different places meeting different underworld figures. The pacing and editing was quite bad during the middle portion, so much so that I even found it somewhat boring to watch. It could have been better if Francis Ford Coppola was willing to trim some bits here and there during the middle portion. Nevertheless, the final portion of the film was back on track and largely made up for the weak middle portion. Like the original Godfather, the last 80 minutes of The Godfather Part II were very gripping and moving, with the ending probably being even more powerful than that of the original. The film had the potential to be just as good as, if not better than, the original Godfather if only if it wasn't for the overall inconsistency and the weak middle portion of the film.

As for the performances, Al Pacino was again brilliant as Michael Corleone, while Robert De Niro was also very believable as a young Vito Corleone. The other cast members were also impressive, with some of the more minor characters from the first film, like John Cazale (as Fredo Corleone) and Diane Keaton (as Kay), getting more major roles this time around. Although I have criticized this film quite a bit, those criticisms are only relative to its predecessor, as The Godfather Part II is still quite easily among the greatest crime films of all time in its own right.

9/10;2;4;False tt0071562;Cocacolaguy912-2;01/07/2007;A masterpiece is every way.;10;"The Godfather: Part II is my favorite movie, in addition to being, in my opinion, the greatest movie ever, even a bit better than The first Godfather. Every single imaginable element of a film is displayed at its absolute finest.

Perhaps my very favorite thing about this movie is the incredible, incredible performance by Al Pacino. Marlon Brando was excellent, but unlike Brando's, Al Pacino's character was far more complicated. He couldn't just say, ""I am going to make him an offer he can't refuse"" in a slick Italian voice and accomplish the role. He so masterfully and ingeniously displayed the coldness of his character. He can say so much without opening his mouth. His stare, his movement, his subtly, everything is just incredible. The supporting cast is very good as well, perhaps the worst performance being that of Talia Shire, who is still alright.

The two storyline thing is fine. It worked, and it worked well. We get enough of the early life of Vito Corleone story to know how it eventually gave rise to the plot of the first Godfather. In the end everything seems to make since.

The Godfather: Part II is an epic masterpiece.

10/10, minor flaws.";2;4;False tt0071562;lovepeacehappiness;26/06/2007;One of the greatest;10;Anybody who thinks that this movie is overrated, boring, confusing, etc., I'm sorry to say that you are probably too simple to really appreciate a great film and even greater sequel. You didn't understand the film or were confused by it? Then you should have watched the first one, or better yet, read the novel. Predictable? The movie came out in 1974. Everything since then has tried to copy it. Its only predictable to you because you've seen it now. Boring? What do you consider exciting, exactly? Not a great sequel? What is a better sequel then, Duece Bigalo Part 2? If you think this movie is over-hyped then I don't know what you could possibly think is better. The actors, the script, direction, music, cinematography is the best that American Film has to offer and another example of how 1970's cinema is some of the best ever produced. Go put your head back in the sand and go to sleep. Don't put any more idiotic postings here. This is a sacred page and your ignorance and baby writing has no place here. Go tell it to My Space.;2;4;False tt0071562;Davi-Jones;25/09/2006;A great Classic;10;The novel is brilliant and the performances are all awesome,specially the Young Pacino as the MIchael is superb. It will take so long for another movie to beat this masterpiece of Coppola. one must not forget the great MARLON BRANDO as the Don Vito Corleone,. The plot is full of vicissitudes and suspense, extraordinarily arranged by PUZO... As a movie fan and someone who will never forget the GODFATHERS I advise thee all to get a glimpse of this masterpiece. The picture keeps you thinking about the nature of American-Italian gangs and their doings. In my opinion it pictures the Italians as a mighty race,puissant and powerful.... It shows the American society perfectly and of course shows the violence prevalent at those days....;2;4;False tt0071562;msarchi;16/09/2006;Second to none;10;This movie is in my opinion the best movie ever.All actors play with such an enthusiasm and character that you are glued to the screen. Bobby De Niro and Al Pacino is at their best.The swaps between the life of Vito Corleone and present time work out fantastic.The music is fabulous and fit perfect to the pictures.Robert Duval in the role as Tom Hagen is probably one of the best he has ever made.The set hit the time in a tremendous way, In fact it's very hard to find anything not to praise in this movie. It's movie at it best before computers, blue-screen and orcs and elvers took over everything.So ill guess this movie is never to be pushed down from the top spots of best movie at all time. I happy to give it 10 out of 10. Only 10 because that there is no option to give it more thanks for a terrific experience at the screen. Guess which movie is second ob my list right Godfather 1.;2;4;False tt0071562;maverick1987;20/08/2005;one of the all time classics;10;As compelling sequel as you will ever see. Al Pacino and Robert De Niro delivers the best performances of their life. All the things are just miraculous including direction. Coppola's best. But I was surprised to see that Al Pacino did not get the Oscar for this. Most unexpected piece came from Robert Duvall. The background score was perfect as were the performances by Lee Starsberg(Hyman Roth), Michael Gazzo(Frank Pentangli) who justified there best supporting actor nominations. The best sequence of the film was the court sequence. Al Pacino's cold stare as Michael is the most significant part of the film which shows the domination of the don.;2;4;False tt0071562;Surecure;24/05/2005;Arguably the greatest sequel of all time;10;It can easily be argued that The Godfather Part 2 is the greatest sequel ever crafted in the history of film, and possibly a better film than its predecessor. It is always a difficult task to better a film in its sequel, doubly so when the original film is a masterpiece of cinematic perfection such as the Godfather was. However, Francis Ford Coppola proved that it is possible to improve on perfection.

The Godfather Part II is brilliant in the counterpoint created between Vito Corleone's rise to power and Michael Corleone's tragic fall from grace. Each character does what they must in order to strengthen the Corleone family. But, Michael's failures are made even more tragic when juxtaposed against Vito's successes. Whereas Vito was able to strengthen his family's bonds, Michael frays them to tragic ends.

Coppola yet again proves his understanding of the relationship between camera and performance. It is not enough to have a lush cinematic experience without engaging performances, and Coppola is able to achieve this masterful balance. The performances by the entire cast are as picture perfect as is possible, and the interaction between even the smallest roles are pristine. Noteworthy is the scene in the Washington Hotel where Kaye (Diane Keaton) opens the eyes of Michael (Al Pacino) to the depths their relationship has achieved. It remains one of the most powerfully performed scenes to ever have been captured on film.

Like it's predecessor, The Godfather Part II is one of those rare moments of cinematic perfection, well deserving of its place of reverence in the history of film.;2;4;False tt0071562;Smells_Like_Cheese;04/10/2004;Part 2 is one of the best movies of all time;10;"After giving kind of a harsh view on Part 1, I wanted to give the movie another chance. In fact, watch all 3 Godfather films. I bought my mom the trilogy on DVD and asked if I could borrow it. I misjugded the first one completely. And I found a great treasure with Part 2. It was such an amazing film. Robert DeNiro's performance is flawless. It can never be touched. The story is amazing. I love the story between Michael and Kay. There was such anger and betrayal, that I couldn't wait to see how it ended in the 3rd one. From what I've seen, I can say that Part 2 is my favorite. Then the 1st and then the 3rd. I would highly recommend ""The Godfather Part 2"". It is a great film. And it deserves all the credit we can give it. Bravo Mr. DeNiro!

10/10";2;4;False tt0071562;shoolaroon;15/08/2002;prefer the deniro flashbacks;;someone made the comment that he didn't understand why the flashbacks to don corleone's rise to power (with de niro as don vito) were included, that it romanticized the Mob. i think the reason that we have the 2 stories is that they parallel each other. while we are seeing how michael corleone is developing as a mob boss and as a man, and what forces are shaping him, we also see the same things in his father's early life - how don vito reacted to events, how he made plans and how he became the man he was. although both men lived a life of crime the difference in the two is striking and real - don vito worked his way out of poverty and immigration and tried to help his fellow italians in a way that seemed to work for him. don vito never lost his sense of caring for people in general and that they depended on him.he never lost his love for his family. he never lost the common touch, the things that would endear a man to a community and win their loyalty. when we look at michael in his criminal growth we see he becomes a completely different man - cold, ruthless, uncaring and increasingly isolated both from his family and from the greater community. don vito actually served, however wrongfully, a purpose in his community and did some good - he provided political and financial assistance, and a basic justice to many people who would have been denied it otherwise. michael corleone however is just a nasty, vicious, unfeeling, opportunist who does not have the same human touch his father did. and i think that is the main revelation of the 2 movies and why we have the flashbacks. frankly i prefer the first movie, and the flashbacks in the 2nd movie - don vito was a better man.;2;4;False tt0071562;nobody-1;03/01/2002;Great, but not as great as the Godfather.;8;This is a very good film, and if you liked Godfather, you'll like the sequel. But it IS a sequel, not a companion as one other reviewer claimed. The original film is a complete work without this, and a somewhat stronger one. There are a few inconsistencies with the historical stuff, and frankly the flashback story, while compelling, is a little weaker than the future one.

Worth seeing! But not worth being in the top 10 of all time.;2;4;False tt0071562;director03;11/10/2001;Excellent, although a notch below the original;8;"The Godfather Part II was just as good as the original in almost every way. My only problem was that the ""prequel"" part didn't achieve much and seemed not go anywhere. Other than that, an exceptional film. 9/10.";2;4;False tt0071562;irandmax;29/10/2020;tanx reat title movie;9;Tanx great movie tanx for director i watch agai and again best ...;0;0;False tt0071562;JaveQ;20/10/2020;Amazing movie;10;Tremendous movie , would recommend to check it out!;0;0;True tt0071562;benjamincepeda;16/10/2020;Best sequel in the history.;10;Yes. We're talking now. Marlon Brando is not here, but Robert De Niro yes. This is a film. Al pacino is incredible, his performance is so good. De Niro was amazing. I think that The Godfather II is better than The Godfather I. I missed Marlon Brando, but I loved De Niro. One of the best films in the history.;0;0;False tt0071562;bridneywinfrey;15/10/2020;How can you not LOVE Michael Corleone;10;This movie is AMAZING even to this day. How can you not like/love Al Pacino as Michael. My all time favorite movie.;0;0;False tt0071562;Abdulxoxo;08/10/2020;Worthy successor;8;The godfather part II is as good as the original, it's more lengthy and it's because of another whole different plot of Vito as kid up til he's the Don we saw in part I. Even though I enjoyed it and Robert Deniro killed it as young vito, I found it to be unnecessary and out of place, as it has no bearing on the actual present storyline. it could be a feature movie of itself and it'd have work much better.

Everything that makes the original great is here, the cinematography and dim photography, good score, terrific acting, suspense, drama, great story, you name it.;0;0;False tt0071562;damianphelps;08/10/2020;Great for a time;7;I love the GF 2. It does miss the presence of Brando but it is an engrossing story and a great addition to the saga.

Whilst I have always had time for this movie and have watched it a few times I suspect that for a new contemporary audience the pacing may be a bit slow and a lack of visual grit that a version made now may enjoy, would have many think it was a bit ho hum. Not a unique problem and unavoidable.

But, I feel it still has plenty to offer and may be as those younger new viewer age a little and are looking for more substance than bells and whistles, then they too can fall in love with it.;0;0;False tt0071562;manuwiesemes;05/10/2020;Une plongée dans la mafia;10;A dive into the life of the Corleone family. The film moves gracefully between Michael's war for the family business and the life of young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro, in a brilliant performance that won him an Oscar) in his rise to power. Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Lee Strassberg and John Cazale provide him with excellent support. The music of Carmine Coppola and Nino Rota is a true masterpiece. The film is professionally shot and the photography is remarkable.;0;0;False tt0071562;SUGAR2TWO;28/09/2020;Resident Sleeper;5;Incredibly overrated mess of a movie that just never ends. I heard Al Pacino said it's his most difficult role and I think I understand why. Having poker face in every scene must be really tough. Figuring out the plot was never this hard, but the hardest part is to give a damn, this movie surely cures insomnia I'm not kidding.;0;0;False tt0071562;harshabale;22/09/2020;This Film has an Individuality.;9;Compared to the first one this film is unique at its own style. Drama scenes are so intentional and Frictional. I could say this film has inpired a lot in Drama process. Every line is written and delivered perfectly. Cast and everyone about this are so perfect. With Godfather these film styles are trendsetters and reminders of the old film era.;0;0;False tt0071562;abdelmalekelkassaby;18/09/2020;the movie is good;10;I liked it and i watched it over 3 times it is amazing and if u wan so watch it watch is it is amazing omg watch it omg watch iti liked it;0;0;False tt0071562;iwoegill;13/09/2020;The best sequel out there;10;The Godfather: Part II is the best Godfather film out of three (in my opinion) as it has a balance between drama and mafia Al Pacino is great in this movie and so is Robert DeNiro. There is not to much blood in this film which is good it feels much shorter then 3h and 20m. The cinematography is great so is the writing and I love that we get to see Al Pacino and then Robert DeNiro. If you have not seen The Godfather: Part II and blood/brutality does not disturb you I highly recommend it.;0;0;False tt0071562;shouryachadha-35625;13/09/2020;Amazing;10;This is a masterpiece movie and totally loved it. The cast it too strong do anyone to watch and the story is simply pure masterpiece.;0;0;False tt0071562;mohammedabokhadija-19790;12/09/2020;Great movie;8;Great movie , I Think need to view Don Calroni's life more in the past because it is a very special part , The same problem in the first part was in the second part It is the absence of the mother's role;0;0;False tt0071562;PerfectSolutionsCasting;08/09/2020;The most complete mafia film ever!;10;The sublime transcendence between timelines is a thing of pure magic.;0;0;False tt0071562;breadandhammers;06/09/2020;More visceral;;While Part 1 flew over my head a bit, Part 2 hit much closer to home. More visceral and cerebral, Part 2 is more epic.;0;0;False tt0071562;jchambers-28444;05/09/2020;Masterpiece;10;The greatest sequel ever made with The Dark Knight.;0;0;False tt0071562;phelpssg-14952;02/09/2020;how the godfather part 2 lived up to its predecessor;10;Wow, this film is amazing! The flashbacks of young Vito becoming a well-respected man building his empire compared with Michael, leading it into destruction, killing his brother, kicking out his wife and turning his own sister into a woman who is mistreated by men make great contrast. The beginning with the house and the family in total darkness, forced and fake happiness compared with the light hearted party in the first film where people are actually having fun, is just great. Going to Cuba and a greedy world full of Americans that cannot last forever, I just love. In the first film when he shoots his enemies it has got music and a sense of victory to it, while the murders in the second film feel sad and dark. How in the first film one of his goons shut the door on his wife, whereas now he himself shuts the door. Well, that is it, I hope you liked it.;0;0;True tt0071562;Uriah43;30/08/2020;An Excellent Sequel;9;"This film essentially begins in Sicily with a young ""Vito Andolini"" (Oresti Baldini) having just lost his father and witnessing his mother also being murdered by a local Mafia chieftain. Knowing that he is now a target as well the 9 year old boy escapes on a ship to New York and not long afterward arrives in Ellis Island where he is given the last name of ""Corleone"". The film then fast forwards 57 years with ""Michael Corleone"" (Al Pacino) presiding over a party for his young son's First Communion party in Nevada. As is customary he meets with those who need to see him with one particularly powerful person named ""Senator Pat Geary"" (G. D. Spradlin) using the opportunity to attempt to extort some money from him. Little does he know just how vicious Michael actually is and the senator soon changes his tune not long after that. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this film constantly shifts its attention from the now grown ""Vito Corleone"" (played by Robert DeNiro) to his adult son Michael after he inherited the title of Godfather from his father. To that effect, although I didn't particularly care for the repeated flashbacks, the stories of both individuals are so riveting that it didn't really matter that much to me. Likewise, while sequels often fail in comparison to the original film, many people feel that this particular picture is as good as its predecessor and the fact that it won an Oscar for ""Best Picture"" and received numerous other Academy Award nominations certainly strengthens that argument. On that note, while I agree that this is an excellent film, I have rated it just slightly below the original movie.";0;0;False tt0071562;linkw88moinhat;29/08/2020;A good classic movie;10;I've watched this movie 3 times. For both parts of the film, it has so much meaning that only people who have watched and read the novel will understand.;0;0;False tt0071562;mohammadomar;26/08/2020;My Favorite;10;It is my favorite movie, I saw it many times with my family;0;0;False tt0071562;nayansinha;25/08/2020;Very nicem movies;10;I have watch this movie so many time and never get bored.I really love this movie and I watch it gaqin again;0;0;False tt0071562;alrisaedelman;23/08/2020;Greatest movie ever made;10;One of greatest movie ever made superb the acting of all cast is amazing and the tone is very dark;0;0;False tt0071562;Nate-48;16/08/2020;Great style but not as masterful as the original;9;As the years have gone by and AMC plays The Godfather on a constant loop, there has developed a sort of common wisdom that this film is as good or some even contend - better than the first.

This is simply not the case on either count.

There are come wonderful aspects to this film - namely the emergence of Robert De Niro, the 1910's New York City tenement scenes, the depictions of old rural Italy and some great acting from Al Pacino, John Cazale and Robert Duvall.

This film was automatically at a disadvantage from the first with no Marlon Brando, James Caan, Richard Conte and Sterling Hayden - four great actors, A fifth - Richard Castellano, is the greatest loss on the film because it is a self-inflicted wound due to a dispute over money and allegedly dialogue- so Clemenza is sloppily erased from the story with some confusing tale which we won't go into.

So this movie is at at a loss of five great actors to start with and picks up one monumental discovery in De Niro who on his own nearly makes this great to warch. The bad guy of the film - Italian actor Gastone Moschin essentially replaces the original bad guy Al Lettieri (who famously dies in the original) in a piece of good acting.

Hyman Roth, a Jewish mobster partly based around the story of Meyer Lansky (like most of the subjects in these movies these men are loose composites drawing from different characters). Roth is played by Lee Strasberg - a great acting teacher who developed the method style of acting deployed by Brando, Pacino and De Niro - but not the greatest actor.

Roth has some memorable lines and it is a good performance by Strasberg but the character is really nothing like Lansky's actual character and the film takes a lot of liberties with this storyline which is far from the truth and ends up really muddying the script in some nutty premise which is not believable. I won't give anything away, but Lansky never did half of the things that are suggested here. But his greatest line is about Moe Greene (loosely based as a composite of Bugsy Siegel).

Apparently, director Francis Ford Coppola wanted James Cagney to play Roth's part but perhaps Cagney didn't like what Coppola did with the character.

Fans of the show Sopranos may be interested to know that Roth's lieutenant Johnny Ola is played by Dominic Chianese who played Tony's uncle Junior.

The dialogue is not up to par with the first. Some of the scenes are more for show and effect and impression than substance.

There are a number of holes in the storyline which are not properly resolved.

There is a quick appearance by the late Danny Aiello.

Bruno Kirby makes a good impression in one of his earliest roles.

Michael Gazzo does an adequate job as essentially Clemenza/Richard Castellano's replacement but it always feels like he is a replacement player.

Pacino's new (and old) bodyguard seems completely out of place the entire time.

Diane Keaton and Talia Shire are good in returning roles. Keaton has a memorable showdown with Pacino.

All in all this is a great movie, and it is darker than the first - in some ways much darker. Most of its greatness lies in the back story that is told in the flashback scenes.;0;0;False tt0071562;cosmolot;10/08/2020;Good Film!;9;I like this film cause motivated to will be rich and work hard. When I play casino, always mention this film! Cool!;0;0;False tt0071562;yousefghunaim-04642;07/08/2020;My favorite movie;10;Definitely the best movie ever made no questions asked how could I even describe the greatness of this movie, the first godfather was absolutely great and probably my second favorite movie but this one was astounding absolutely blew me away.;0;0;False tt0071562;l-59417;21/06/2020;a brief evaluation;8;When at last we saw Mike sitting alone among the falling leaves in the autumn, when we imagined the long and arduous struggle he would have to go through in the years to come, our hearts were indescribably sad. We are so powerless to help him with his vanishing kindness and gentleness. I think Coppola taught us a simple but profound lesson: evil cannot be terminated by evil.;0;0;True tt0071562;wy-90259;20/06/2020;A successful sequel;9;Even though the enemy is unarmed, it still needs to be dealt with. Mike continued his father's character deeply. The only difference is the handling of family problems. It's the change of times and the difference between Mike and his father. The two main lines are interlaced, even if the contrast is more complementary.;0;0;False tt0071562;elliotjeory;10/06/2020;Classic film;10;An perfect follow up to the original. An epic story past and present. A pity Clamenza wasn't in it but otherwise a class film.;0;0;False tt0071562;lucky_liu;08/06/2020;fact;10;The deep significance of the Godfather lies in the fact that it opens up a broad prospect for crime films and gangster films in the history of American cinema. It not only expands the expression form of crime films, but more importantly, its film meaning and ideological connotation goes far beyond the scope of violence.;0;0;False tt0071562;ylshu-66191;07/06/2020;The Godfather: Part II;10;Even though the enemy is unarmed, it still needs to be dealt with. Mike continued his father's character deeply. The only difference is the handling of family problems. It's the change of times and the difference between Mike and his father. The two main lines are interlaced, even if the contrast is more complementary. The last look in Al Pacino's eyes, is that loneliness?;0;0;False tt0071562;skywind-49284;30/05/2020;A very successful sequel.;9;The contrast between the two generations, Al Pacino and Robert Duvall are too handsome, the difference is that the father has a family and Rong Hua, and Al Pacino almost lost all their relatives.;0;0;True tt0071562;wodexiaohaozi;29/05/2020;Nice sequel;8;It is both a prequel and a sequel, and the two lines are interlaced with narration, one side is entrepreneurship and the other is struggle. Both the lens and the treatment of the picture tone are as excellent as ever.;0;0;False tt0071562;mhmad-97596;28/05/2020;Master piece;9;Wonderfull acting Amazing performance The actors made a very wonderful film by their performance and their sensitivity to their roles;0;0;False tt0071562;lubushiliu;27/05/2020;fight;9;The hero was born in Sicily and died in Sicily. The hero went into the mountains to fight against the Mafia and the decadent government. The hero had love and wanted to be more stable, but he did not want to be betrayed by his brothers;0;0;False tt0071562;mfellipecampos;21/05/2020;Very good;8;The classic Godfather in its part 2, presents us with an improved plot compared to the first. This film discusses the history of Italian families who settled in the USA. However, some of these becoming part of a mafia, the so famous Italian mafia with its mannerisms and peculiarities of Italian culture. It is precisely the Corleone family that is presented in two phases, alternating between the present time with Michel and the past with Vito, this one from his childhood until reaching its peak. While Michel's story is about his conflicts, threats, enemies, deaths, promises, money ... And everything else you can think of. The film is long, but without creating monotony, being pleasant to watch.

Movie seen on May 16, 2020;0;0;False tt0071562;Chen-CC;18/05/2020;very great;8;Only this movie the sencond is also excellent and won oscar in history it is amazing;0;0;False tt0071562;RadiantJuli;17/05/2020;A Paradoxical Hearo;9;Michael is strong as much as weak. His position is just as much as illegal. He is respected as much as lonely.;0;0;False tt0071562;dongpyo-70231;16/05/2020;Not bad sequel;9;It's both a prequel and a sequel, with two lines interlaced, one with entrepreneurship and the other with struggle. Both the lens and the tone of the picture are as good as ever. Perfect as a sequel. But as a sequel to The Godfather, there's always something missing.;0;0;False tt0071562;j-00900;15/05/2020;A surprise sequel;9;The story is quite good. The comparison between the two lines for two generations, one for entrepreneurship and one for success, is really enough to make people feel very emotional. Vito, who grew up without a father and a mother, was finally reunited and happy, and Mike, who grew up in the warmth of the family, was more selfish until he was rebellious. Of course, in addition, the actors'interpretation of the characters is still very good, flesh and blood, a good sense of viewing, and the end is the finishing touch;0;0;True tt0071562;kyragd2009;14/05/2020;Of course, 10;10;It's a classic movie with great plot and great actors. I enjoy to watch this movie each time!;0;0;True tt0071562;lengjingyidianba;13/05/2020;epic crime film;9;Another sequel of The Godfather series that Melo drama epic crime film hasn't loss the character portrayal as mafia.;0;0;False tt0071562;m-18130;12/05/2020;Great!;10;"""The Godfather: Part II"" is a very suspenseful drama with a very exciting story, with great acting and great special effects. I would definitely recommend you watch this movie...but first watch the original classic from 1972 ""The Godfather"" . The movie may not be as good as the first movie but is still an amazing sequel.";0;0;True tt0071562;d-88504;12/05/2020;Godfather;9;Compared with the two generations, Al Pacino and Robert Duvall are too handsome. The difference is that the father has a family and glory, while Al Pacino almost lost all his relatives.;0;0;False tt0071562;like_cc;08/05/2020;wonderful;10;It is a movie worth recommending. It has been possible to shoot such storylines and shooting skills in 1974, proving that modern movies have really not improved much, or that the film industry really needs more blood to promote development, otherwise It will be like the Corleone family.;0;0;False tt0071562;pauldmolloy;05/05/2020;One of the best ever;9;Darker than the first one, focuses more on the contrast new and old America. Incredible performance by Pacino and Fredo. Exceptionally long but one of the best ever.;0;0;False tt0071562;zaidslopek101;05/05/2020;Better than the first;10;The first was a stable but the second is packed with so much more. Keeping it short but this is definitely a movie you want to watch at one time. I've seen it a ton of times and each time is more enjoyable.;0;0;False tt0071562;NimaOwji;04/05/2020;Very Nice;9;I suggest you to watch it. I loved it. But only problem is this film is too old and doesn't have a nice quality. but I love it. Nice. Nice. Nice;0;0;False tt0071562;amilgarayev;04/05/2020;One of the bests;8;This movie is too long, but it keeps you excited,so you dont feel the 3 hours at all. One of the best movies I have ever watched;0;0;False tt0071562;yazznasir;03/05/2020;classic film // end of debate;10;Fter seeing The Godfather and improving it as one of my favorite films, I wanted to get more into The Godfather so I rented this. Words can't describe how great this sequel was. The acting once again was amazing and the story and how the movie went on just never got me bored. Everything in this movie was clearly beautiful. The ending by far was my favorite when there all sitting at the table talking. There were so many great scenes like Vito when he was younger, Fredo at the lake, and many many more. You have to see this movie because it's just brilliant filmaking. It's not better than it's first film but still an extremely worth sequel.;0;0;False tt0071562;overwatchgengi;03/05/2020;The Collapse of a Criminal Empire;10;The Godfather: Part II is a story of how an empire falls. In this case, a criminal empire. It's acting and dialogue are of the same caliber of the first movie and the story is even better. The characters lose in this movie, there's a sense of dread and looming destruction in this movie. Combined with the rise of Vito Corleone, the Fall of Micheal Corleone feels like the end of this story. The Godfather: Part II is a brilliant movie and should be seen by anybody who loves film.;0;0;False tt0071562;rizacherryph;01/05/2020;A Good Movie;10;A Good Movie. Well scripted and the ending was fantastic;0;0;False tt0071562;swaney-91327;30/04/2020;GOAT Part Two;10;Simply the greatest movie of all time! Perfect sequel and completely necessary! Icons being icons.;0;0;False tt0071562;jackman-74739;27/04/2020;A little dated but still holds up;8;You can see why this is hailed as one of the greatest films of all time. The story, the script, the directing and the acting is on point. It's almost poetic in the way it carries itself. It's a very good character study of Michal corleone and creates this comparison between him and his father Vito as one built the family and the other is trying to maintain it. Filmmaking has changed very much from the 70s and that is clear in this film, as it's slow paced to the point of stopping entirely at moments. Most of the time it worked but some of the time it dragged a little. Furthermore it's a very dialogue heavy film, meaning you need to pay close attention to everything, which in a three hour film is a little different at times. Despite this, it's clear why this is hailed as such a good film, as it's one of the best examples of the continuation of a story from its predecessor. It very effectively shows the struggles this man has with both maintaining g his reputation and his personal life and both performances by De niro and pachino show this struggle between the cold calculating side and the emational side. Would recommend a watch, that is if you have the time.;0;0;False tt0071562;paolobarbon;26/04/2020;The Godfather: Part II;9;Wonderful movie that can reach the top of the chart also following the masterpiece of The Godfather. This movie complete the first with the incredible flashback that describe how grew up Vito Corleone acting by the incredible performance of Robert De Niro and the continuation of the Corleone's dynasty led by Michael Corleone.;0;0;False tt0071562;NicelyPutMovies;22/04/2020;More of a stand alone epic. Either way a triumph;9;The Godfather, Superman, Evil Dead. There are textbook answers to the question of sequels that are better than the original. The sequel of The Godfather, though, is a very different project to the first, engaging in something so unfathomably far-reaching and ambitious, a story of such epic proportions, that if it had gone wrong, it would have gone WRONG. Instead, we have a rolling, multi-dimensional, poly-era masterpiece. We must not compare the two as it does not make the prequel any less formidable (as is often the case with a successful sequel) but it is worthy of standing alone but also being recognised as part of the saga. A rare position and a lucky one but it seems to rather deserve it.

In the first review, tribute was paid to those who claim to not like the first film. Tribute in the form of contemptuous scorn and disrespectful suspicion. Here it will be the same. Once again if someone says it is too much for them, or they like simpler films, or have a problem with the violence, etc and do not like it for those reasons, this is perfectly fine. However, any folk saying it is just not any good are not being honest with themselves. It is a spellbinding triumph of incalculable dimensions with timeless honourable merit and standard-bearing assumed by its creators. So, if this is you, get some therapy, and another film review. You do not belong here. For the rest of you, let us begin.





Very differently we begin in Corleone, Sicily. We learn of the brutal instances that cause Vito to leave, alone and orphaned on a strange vessel, marked for death by a Mafia chieftain, headed for the New World. As he lands on what would become Ellis island, we see an understated but vital scene. Young Vito, a mute and barely eight years old walks in front of a crowd of fellow immigrants all staring at the Statue of Liberty. Vito also looks, but unlike his fellow boat-people, he is walking forward while looking up to the symbol of America while everyone around him stands still. The analogy does not take much figuring out. Smallpox quarantined, alone, and scared, for the first time, in his small single room with a table and a bed, we hear his voice as he sings to himself.

Time leaps to his grandson, Anthony, many years later in Tahoe, Nevada, at the same age. The rise of the family under Michael (Al Pacino) has moved into politics, a naive senator tries to strong-arm. An entertaining piece. A series of events leads to a violent head, Michael leaves to find out who betrayed them and nearly cost him his life. Temporarily the illegitimate German-Irish lawyer and Michaels assumed brother, Tom Hagen is at the helm after being stepped-over in the first movie's climax. Things take hold in Cuba, in a story meant to mirror that of a true Mafia event, The character of Hyman Roth, played by acting legend Lee Strasberg is painfully obvious in its basis upon famous Jewish mobster Meyer Lansky. A capable but mute bodyguard accompanies Michael everywhere as he weaves around finding out who betrayed them, who paid them too, and how to come out on top in both the long term and in the Cuban deal





As happened in real life, history decides the latter as Cuba collapses under Bautista as Fidel Castro takes power and throws the Mafia out., The traitor is revealed and Michael must act, but how he acts will be determined by actions he must control. Back home a wronged subordinate, manipulated by Michael's enemies, turns government witness to a senate committee (once again drawing from an event of recent history). Michael must also outwit the US Senate, treachery is everywhere and duplicity is lurking. Michael uses his wit and cunning with typical aplomb to outwit and crush his enemies at a cost of maybe losing his family. His main betrayal coming from a source that troubles him for the rest of is life. He remains at the top and yet it is at a terrible cost.

As all this happens, the second unit story evolves. Young Vito played in breathless mystery by a spellbinding pre-embarrassment Robert DeNiro in post-WWI New York. For you young-'uns who see Bad Grandpa, Meet the Fockers, and Joker, you may wonder why he is so revered, and it is a good question. The answer, is probably more than anywhere else, evident here. A young Vito, a grocery boy, is made unemployed by a Black-Hand (a particularly ferocious offshoot of the mafia) operatives and thus christened into the crime world by that often-occurring phenom in these movies, the life-changing chance encounter. This time is with a jolly but lethal neighbourhood tough called Clemenza. From here he rises, using his quiet viper-like strength and ability to listen and not react. He rises to the top of New York and returns to his home of Sicily to repay those who forced him out. If anyone has not seen it, they should check the deleted scenes on YouTube for a more detailed explanation.





The two parallels play together perfectly. The rolling camerawork of following young Vito across the rooftops of Little Italy as he pursues his quarry, interspersed with pyrotechnics and scenery from the Saint Genarro festival is something to behold. It shows that panoramic shots do not need to have half of Montana in the background and can even be poorly lit. All of the scenes of this section are dim and rather dusky and shot at close quarters. This is to express the claustrophobic nature of railway cold-water flats and tenement rows in early 20th-century New York. Somehow though, it has an epic feel too. In fairness, the cinematography of part II is way superior to the first installment, but that is possibly the way it is meant to be. The way a young colt of an experienced stud racehorse will have speed and strength its parents didn't, but all are remembered as fondly.

A lot more happens in this installment. As mentioned, Cuba falls. Then the act of betrayal at Michael's home is far beyond anything seen before, and the brutal slaying of an innocent prostitute simply to aid a blackmail case by the fearsome Al Neri (Richard Bright) is an act far beyond the romanticised broad-Brooklynese movie-star, ferret-faced behatted mobsters of the first film. One of the moral criticisms is that it glorified the Mafia (a word never uttered in the film) and it led to a backlash against this romanticised image of mobsters only killing other killers and raining gold on the innocent. You certainly do not feel this way at the end of part 2

It is full of crescendo-like scenes. The music of Nino Rota is used to explain for those looking away. The camerawork is ambitious, for example, a scene in a courtroom where Michael uses a defendant's brother to silence him, is often praised, but I have always found it clunky and out of pace. I think trying for too many cuts and bustling tension is a bridge too far in a movie that is all about subtlety. For example, Connie wants the children to leave the room, they ignore her, although they are so very young, just a glance from Michael shows his power among all who he rules. Paradoxically, we are shown that Vito does it differently, he gives people a chance to not fear him Take for instance, a quirky little comedy involving a reactionary landlord of a friend of Vito's wife is another testament to Nino Rota and his score. With a different tune it could have been terrifying, yet here it has a flutey Italian jig playing, so it is taken lightly. Michael never has such a frivolous sound accompaniment. His interactions have the whistling background of deep piano foreboding and in one of the most depressing scenes I have ever encountered, he returns to his wife, who is sewing and there is no love left. He gives no one a chance and is cruel, particularly to his step-brother, Tom, who is loyal beyond question.





A very complicated movie that no-one could fully comprehend in one sitting. For the most part, there is no book to refer to (except for Vito's segment being part of the original novel). It deserves multiple watching, it is a towering achievement in modern motion-picture artistry that will provide food for all thoughts. At once it is both a soap-opera and a mystery. It remains never-bettered by imitators. This is mostly due to it has been, aside from the hilariously inferior Once Upon a Time in America, largely unattempted. Not being one to romanticise the past, it is daft to say it could never happen I truly hope it does as it would be some kind of film to watch. Until that day 9.5/10;0;0;False tt0071562;Diablo1616;20/04/2020;Found the duality between father and son poetic.;9;When I watched this movie I was amazed how Robert de Niro nailed the role of Don Vito Corleone. It could be a pressure for any actor to play a role which has previously played by a famous and good actor before and much problem to play younger Vito was that it was played by the god of cinema: Marlon Brando but Bob De niro didn't hesitate or felt under pressure for a single moment in the movie. And some times he was even better than brando himself. Michael Corleone's life story after being the godfather was brilliant written and well played by Al Pacino. A man who tried to protect his family and get in the line of work he despised most and some where he started to enjoy it. This was the fate of Michael in this segment. From being a sad army veteran to a necerary devil but in this movie he was a satan who doesn't want to give up power and would do anything to protect his father's legacy and his crime empire. In this movie you would also like the match cut between Vito's timeline and Michael's timeline. A Cameo from James caan as Sonny in the end of movie was very soothing and Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen was brilliant again. Francis Ford Coppola should be given all kind of accolades for making The godfather part one and two;0;0;False tt0071562;albundy6969;16/04/2020;Better than the rest,This set the Bar for gangster movies.;10;What can I say that people dont already know about this movie. It is .it was.it will be the best gangster movie of all time.bar none.;0;0;False tt0071562;Timbo_Watching;13/04/2020;Fantastic!;8;"The Godfather part 1 set a very high bar of expectations regarding part 2, and this part came nothing short of that! It's just a great film and nothing less. Everything works so well together; acting, writing, setting... it's all fantastic and makes the very long duration of the film easily able to sit through!";0;0;False tt0071562;zeekwunlau;12/04/2020;Never unite outsiders against your family;9;No matter how stormy it is outside, the family is always the warmest haven.

The new and old godfathers are family-oriented, loyal and dedicated, but their endings are different. The wife married by the old godfather is a Sicilian. The woman there is pure and kind and cares for her family, and she lives in a mafia, so she can accept her husband's career. And they are supported by the trouble and together, so the relationship between husband and wife has been very harmonious. The old godfather is a person with a great sense of family responsibility. The original intention of the struggle is also to make the family better. No matter how much trouble is encountered outside, it is always a breeze to return home. Go to the theater to see beautiful women with friends. Friends said that the actress is beautiful. He said that is what you think, in my mind, only the wife and children are the most beautiful. So he will educate children, men who do n't take time to spend with their family, not real men. He will ask Mike if his wife and children are doing well. In his mind, no matter how big the outside career is, the family is always the most important. Why the godfather is a must-see movie for men to grow up, indeed, learn from the old godfather how to be a real man

The new godfather, under his father's words and examples, also paid great attention to the family. So he will fight back when his father is stabbed. After the death of his brother, he took the burden of the family, even if his original intention did not want to go this way. When Fredo helps an outsider talk about him, he will be very angry and say that you will not be allowed to unite outsiders to fight against the family, never. This also helped Fredo to betray the family several times, and finally he was buried and buried. Mike and Kay feel more that the two are suitable to talk together, and the elements of love are quite few. Kay called and asked Mike to say that she loved her, but Mike never said. And he fled to Sicily without saying a word, and never contacted him later. Perhaps he had always wanted to marry a wife like his mother, so when in Sicily, he would fall in love with the Sicilian girl at first sight. And soon a wedding was held with the girl, why many people talked for a long time but couldn't get married, and can quickly marry another person after breaking up, it is important to meet the right person at the right time. Unfortunately, the two were together for a short time, and the newlywed wife was killed by the bodyguard. Since then, the girl has always been a cinnabar mole in his heart. Mike came back to Kay only a year later, when the family was in a precarious situation, and Kay was the most suitable wife. Because they knew each other well, Kay also loved him. After all, he waited for six years, so the two got married. But the two of them did not hold a grand wedding in the movie, maybe the form was forced at that time. Kay is a native American. Her education and religious belief made her unable to accept Mike's triad family and even less understand the business he did. Therefore, the two were in conflict, and eventually moved away. Later, Kay killed Mike's child and said some unsympathetic words, completely breaking Mike's heart. So when Kay wanted to leave without keeping, Mike secretly closed the door when he secretly visited his children to leave. Like the last scene in Godfather 1, the door between family business and her. If the first wife is not killed, perhaps all three will be happier. Kay can find a thorough American marriage and establish a happy family. The first wife will be like Mike 's mother, praying for him to have children, taking care of the family, and not afraid of blaming him for his career. It is a pity there is no if, the road to the king is finally lonely.;0;0;True tt0071562;DemonKiki;10/04/2020;Character and fate;10;Different personalities determine different fate, and the contrast of fate is the core technique of the godfather series to build the story. Like the older brother Paul of Victor Jr. mentioned at the beginning of Godfather 2, it should be a young boy with strong blood. He vowed to avenge his father, but the result was the same as his father. On the contrary, Victor, who spoke little, was able to escape from danger and miraculously escaped into life. This is like the contrast between the second generation Sonny and Mike. A strong but too impulsive, and a calm and low-key yet bold. The fate of the two brothers is also surprisingly similar. This is a direct portrayal of character determining fate.

Similar examples abound in this series. The most obvious contrast is that the hot side of Widow's character corresponds to the cold side of Mike's character, which makes the two generations of godfathers dominate the road differently. The same is true for the supporting actors. The two chiefs, Clemenza and Tessio, one is a little bit reckless, and the other shows a shrewdness in calmness. This different character leads them to make different judgments at critical moments. By mistake.

Also has some more marginal supporting characters. Their character and fate are also closely linked, which makes the Godfather series of movies show a true to cruel atmosphere. Like Moglin mentioned when Hemingros sent his power to Mike, he knew that Mo's temperament would easily offend people, so he was not surprised when he learned that Mo died in a bad life. And Frank Pantancurie said when he mentioned his brother, he could have been king here, but he stayed in the small village with two donkeys in his hometown.

The group image created by the response between these personalities and fate makes me care about my personality and fate, and calls for correspondence in my heart. This is a deep and excellent way for Godfather 2 to impress the audience.;0;0;True tt0071562;InlyCii;09/04/2020;True gangster movie;9;The story is beautiful. The meaning of the gangster film is stronger, especially the betrayal and trap. It is different from the background of the godfather 1, and it is no longer confined to the circle where the Italians gather. Many gangster rules will also change.;0;0;False tt0071562;cagothic;09/04/2020;better than godfather part I;10;Because of michale's path being a godfather is more absorbing;0;0;False tt0071562;ines_fr;09/04/2020;Absolutely brilliant;10;"Having recently watched the first ""Godfather"" I had high expectations for this one and I have to say that I think it was was even better than the first one.

Everything in it is flawless: direction, cinematography, acting, screenplay...

Since we already know the characters and the Corleone family, it is less time ""wasted"" in introductions to the story. Therefore, there is more room to character study.

I loved the parallel between Vito Corleone and Michael Corleone. Both were once humble and completly away from the mob and they both were corrupted by power, with all the casualities associated with that. In that regard, I loved the final shot in which we see Michael some years before, declaring that we would make his own destiny away from the family business, because at that point we are so used to see Michael as the ""Godfather"" that we more or less ""forget"" who he once was.

The movie is also utterly suspensful, just an exchange of looks can make you at the edge of your seat.

Al Pacino's performance was just indescribable and Robert De Niro's slow incorporation of the singular Marlon Brando's voice just astonished me.

The moment in which Kay said that it was an abortion and not a miscarriage was probably one of the most painful experiences I ever had while watching a movie.

A movie that will certainly stay in your mind forever.";0;0;True tt0071562;z-75454;09/04/2020;Great story!;9;Time can prove everything,but it can also drop everything.Life is either ordinary or great.It can be seen from the godfather that the poor can't be fair with the so-called capitalist people in their life. Focusing on history or the present future,living is living for dignity and value.You can only grow up in cold eyes and ridicule,then destroy or survive. Life is just like the godfather,who either destroys or does everything to be a villain reviled by thousands of people and achieves his own life.Only when we have so-called strong and unlimited capital can we have the right to discuss everything.Just take this qualification to be a real self.To achieve their own status,the dominant side!;0;0;False tt0071562;michaelratnadeepakk;07/04/2020;Greatest Drama Ever Made in the History of Cinema;10;A true masterpiece, its arguably the best film ever made in terms of drama and screenwriting. An absolute delight to see Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, the classical duo of acting.;0;0;False tt0071562;graemepepper;06/04/2020;One word required;10;Nothing else needs said about this movie other than. Magnificent!!!! In my opinion the addition of DeNiro to the already stellar cast makes this the pinnacle of the trilogy. If gangster movies are not your cup of tea you won't like obviously. However if you do then this is THE movie. Again nothing that's not been said before, however to any new generation every confirmation is merited.;0;0;False tt0071562;arturman;04/04/2020;10/10;10;Masterpiece, chef-d'oeuvre. One of the best films of all time.;0;0;False tt0071562;t-81966-84968;04/04/2020;a brief evaluation;8;The godfather part ii was born and died in Sicily. The hero went into the mountains to fight against the Mafia and the decadent government.;0;0;True tt0071562;zzhhhqing;02/04/2020;Personally feel better than 1;10;Personally feel better than 1, probably because of the larger format, the director 's difficulty factor has increased a lot. The story of the two generations of the godfather is presented in a magnificent handwriting, one is full of vitality, the other is prosperity and decline, but in the end it is loneliness with different goals. The quality of the classic restoration is so touching!;0;0;False tt0071562;andrewchristianjr;02/04/2020;ACHIEVEMENT.;10;The dark yet linear storytelling of Mike with his father's slow rise is the perfect matchup for the plot. Just a very few sequels can hold a candle to their predecessor. This movie can stand tall on it's own or as a sequel, a rare achievement.;0;0;False tt0071562;undeaddt;01/04/2020;Astonishing.;8;This is without a doubt one of the most flawlessly made movies ever. You rarely get to see a movie longer than 3 hours that does not have a boring slow-paced part, but that is the case here. This is one of the most amazing movies ever made, from the setting, the acting, the costumes, the vehicles, the action sequences, the story, the emotions, absolutely everything. Many say Al Pacino is generic since he can act only as a mobster, but did they ever think about if there is someone better? Plus, there is a huge difference in the mafia style in Godfather and Scarface for exaple, a complete opposite, yet, he manages to clinge both rolls. Also, as we see the backroll transition from Marlon Brando to Al Pacino we get even more excited, wondering how many acting legends this ovie has yet to offer? There has never been a bigger, better and more suited anti-hero than that played by Al Pacino in The Godfather franchise.;0;0;False tt0071562;p-52388-53189;31/03/2020;A good movie;10;The two-generation contrastAl. Pacino and Robert Duvall are too handsome,But the father had the family and the honor.Al Pacino lost almost everyone.So sad.;0;0;True tt0071562;z-07842;31/03/2020;perfect;10;This is the greatest sequel ever made and in my opinion the finest film i have ever seen. I couldn't tell you how many time I have watched it.I haven't even talked about the more technical aspects yet. This is because I don't have to - everything is perfect. Not just great, but perfect, as in there seems to be no way that they could be improved on. Acting, direction, cinematography, script and story. Everything.;0;0;False tt0071562;k-08062;29/03/2020;I love this movie;9;"There is a chapter in Godfather Trilogy analysis called ""Major Character Analysis"", which makes some comparisons between the two godfathers. Some of these comparisons seem superficial, so here's a personal comparison between Vito and Michael godfathers.

The differences on the surface of Vito and Michael, I have always believed, must not be analyzed solely by the differences in the character of two people, but I prefer to analyze the way these two people behave from the times and experiences they live in.

One notable difference in careers is that Vito have a good grasp of the godfather role (ease), while Michael have been making great achievements but always seem laborious; another notable difference, for example, is that Vito maintain the family fairly well, and Michael is much worse. The authors of Godfather Trilogy Analysis tend to interpret both as Vito is a very enthusiastic person, but Michael is a cold-blooded.. The analysis is simple, however, because one obvious thing is that Michael have different personalities before and after becoming a godfather, that is to say, many of Michael personalities have evolved after becoming godfathers.

For three reasons Vito have a good grasp of the role: experience, interest, and historical background. Vito is from a poor boy who has nothing step by step to the godfather's throne, from childhood to adulthood along the way with a variety of people, including his close friends as brothers, but also his opponents. He was also closest to and tortured by two different-style gang bosses (both Italian style and American style). From the experience, it Vito clear how to be a gangster who is feared by the enemy, trusted by his godson and loved by his loved ones. And do Michael have such experiences? Too bad. He may have never thought of inheriting a profession like his father since childhood. He wants to live like the average American, he has an American name, he has an American sense of honor (joining the Navy), he looks for 100% of American women as girlfriends. So Santino death, Fredo incompetence led to the arrival of the godfather position is too sudden for Michael, how can we expect such an inexperienced man to be able to make the godfather as handy as his father in the short term? Vito used to help people solve the trivial things of rent. Michael? To represent huge family affairs and mass killings of real guns. Vito got Clemenza such a capable arm along the way, adopted and cultivated Tom Hagen such a perfect-minded family lawyer; and";0;0;True tt0071562;bevo-13678;29/03/2020;As good or better than the first;10;I like the bit where he shot that man. This movie was awesome just like the first. I can't wait till part 3 it must be awesome;0;0;True tt0071562;kelvinselimor;28/03/2020;Family is the main thing.;9;The Godfather: Part II. Family is the main thing. A good continuation of one of the best films of the century. The sequel, which did not get worse but also did not get better. The plot itself is not inferior to the first part, but there is some protractedness which I did not like a bit. If the first film was about how Michael becomes a more rude cruel and strong head of the family, then in the second film the plot is already built around another less interesting topic.;0;0;False tt0071562;uniquehakersin;27/03/2020;good;10;This is very good web series. I have seen this. Please watch this a soon as possible;0;0;True tt0071562;n-31048-46108;27/03/2020;Better than part 1;10;Never hold a grudge against your opponent, it will make you lose your mind. Part 1 is great. And this is better.;0;0;False tt0071562;finddietplan;27/03/2020;Winner of 3 Academy Awards;9;Winner of 3 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay, The Godfather is one of the most revered movies of all time and its contribution to cinema is remarkable. This movie will make you intrigued by its astounding depiction of the mafia and immerse you into its world from the very start while being impressed by its technical and narrative aspects.

Based on the Mario Puzo novel of the same name, The Godfather spans ten years and chronicles the history of the Corleone family under its patriarch, Vito Corleone, a respected Mafia don nicknamed the Godfather. But when Don Corleone refuses to enter drug business, a series of events are set in motion resulting in the assassination attempt on the Don and leading his youngest son to rise and take over his father's business.

Francis Ford Coppola's direction is nothing short of astounding. Many of the creative decisions he made, such as the way he shoots the film, the casting, the screenplay, which he co-wrote with Mario Puzo, it's all done brilliantly. The technical aspects will also make you impressed. The cinematography is done beautifully and the use of Technicolor provides a memorable look for the film. The editing is also done well and the soundtrack by Nino Rota is one of the most memorable scores in cinema history, as its almost funeral-themed opening track still remains iconic and fits the film's overall tone.

The performances in the film are amazing, as it features an amazing cast of brilliant actors such as Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, James Caan, Richard Duvall, John Cazale, Talia Shire and many more. I love how the film handles Michael Corleone's character arc in this film and Marlon Brando's performance as Vito Corleone is one of the greatest performances in cinema history.

Honestly, there's really nothing to complain about this film, as it's highly agreed to be of the greatest films in history. The Godfather brilliantly weaves an intriguing look into the world of organized crime along with innovative storytelling, focused direction and astounding performances.;0;0;True tt0071562;mendya17;26/03/2020;wonderful;10;De rero always seems to hide his passion behind his calm exterior, his power behind his unimpressive appearance, his Gunbuster in the midst of a painful life, to change his life.;0;0;True tt0071562;andreiasilva-91967;24/03/2020;.,ç;;Just a beautifully crafted gangster film. Or an outstanding family portrait, for that matter. An amazing period piece. A character study. A lesson in filmmaking and an;0;0;False tt0071562;k-09931;24/03/2020;The best movies about italian Mafia, perfect Trilogy.;9;Perhaps even grander than its predecessor, Part II throws us and Michael into the lion's den, continuing the Greek tragedy in the most potent, gripping way.;0;0;False tt0071562;f-57307;24/03/2020;classic movie;9;It is both a prequel and a sequel. The two lines are intertwined with narratives. Regardless of the lens or the tone of the picture, the processing is as good as ever. It's perfect as a sequel. But as a sequel to The Godfather, there is always something missing ...;0;0;False tt0071562;g-96059;23/03/2020;Perfect;9;"Compared with the godfather, the godfather II is as beautiful as porcelain. This refinement is mainly reflected in the form. One of the forms is that the architecture of the story is larger, and the time and space that spans, especially the times, is more complicated than that described in the previous episodes,Different from the coherent time in ""Godfather"", ""Godfather II"" contains two different eras. This large span breaks through the limitations of the individual and the times, creating a sense of destiny that is endless and repeated, and the fate of the characters is placed. Under the big times. It is the grand narrative necessary for the epic; in the narrative technique, the story develops from a single-line narrative to a two-line parallel narrative,The fate of the characters is placed under the great era, which is the essential grand narrative of the epic; in the narrative technique, the story from a single-line narrative into a two-line parallel narrative, telling the two generations of godfather ups and downs of the fate of the road, this approach has a formal sense of rigorous symmetry. Make the story full of contrast, metaphor and symbolism.";0;0;True tt0071562;r-48240;21/03/2020;Excellent sequel;9;"From ""Godfather 1"" to ""Godfather 2"", Coppola recorded the transition of power between the two generations of godfather, and also recorded the struggle of the second generation of ""Godfather"" Al Pacino from a boy to a man. Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro and Coppola are the three Godfathers of two generations. They are the integrators of typical American gangster films";0;0;False tt0071562;ssssgelojun;20/03/2020;the godfather;10;A man's struggle, and his endurance in the darkest hour. The scene that impressed me most was Vito's reaction when he was fired from his job as a fruit store clerk. No anger, no complaints, just honest thanks

You have been very kind to me since I came here. Thank you, and I'll never forget it.

And then, dead away. From that moment on, he was godfather.;0;0;False tt0071562;krational66;20/03/2020;It's a meaningful movie.;9;Way of doing things, a rose's death because mike driven Pan Tan Curie's death embodies the criminal rules, frodo is purely out of family ethics, the death of mike insisted on father's family first family idea, but times his family values die in change, and the lack of affinity and he couldn't a father to his cronies gentle and stern, both the enemy and close to his heart fear, also made him into a lonely and paranoid;0;0;True tt0071562;hukaiqun;18/03/2020;Hollywood film;9;Michael Corleone, successor to crime family leadership. It is neither a very happy or driving picture. But it is intellectually daring and marks an important breakthrough in the growing up of the Hollywood film.;0;0;False tt0071562;hussienkritus;17/03/2020;Superb;9;Ok the movie was great but not like the 1 it have changed but de niro was class and he made it wonderful;0;0;False tt0071562;Mnemosyne15;12/03/2020;So this movie is the Bible for men, right?;8;If the first is a landmark gangster epic, then the second is undoubtedly more refined and beautiful than the first. The connection between the two main lines in time and space tells the different struggle history of the two generations of the godfather. They are two extremes. Vito Corleone became the godfather because of the family, so the family relationship is more harmonious. Mike Corleone became the godfather for his career. A mild and indifferent extreme difference also makes their lives completely different, and this difference is also reflected in their different worldviews. If you have more career, you will have less family. It is still the same formula, but it makes people feel the delicate emotions and the difficult growth of a man. Maybe this movie is more suitable for young people to watch, and more suitable for the people who are going through it. I do n't know if I will use indifference to cut off family, friendship, love in exchange for success, but I think if I put;0;0;True tt0071562;arturopegueros;03/03/2020;Super movie;9;This is one of the best movies I have ever seen...;0;0;False tt0071562;compiflowgallery;22/02/2020;classic and good references;10;Once you watch the first movie you want to see them all. The way the family and mafia story was told is very attractive narratively and visually. The actions that lead you to be in history every moment and live it as if you were there. The photography during many scenes that were performed in low key is beautiful, they add drama to the dialogues and emotions. Definitely a classic to see.;0;0;False tt0071562;kadenwinterton;20/02/2020;The Godfather: Part II(1974);8;Its so god damn long but theres a memorable/quotable moment in every 5 minutes and career defining performences from the 2 stars (Pacino and De Niro) 100% must see for any gangster movie fan;0;0;False tt0071562;Anitaingame;20/02/2020;It is not worst than the first;8;The Godfather 2 has a lot of content to analyze, to enjoy, it is the second part of an interesting story and he still does not fully understand it.

It decays a little with respect to the first one, it is like deeper and perhaps that is what makes something slow, whatever it is that I understand 100% I think it is necessary to see it more than once (in my opinion). It is very good too and the final scenes had to extend a bit since they were wonderful.;0;0;False tt0071562;rogerdean-83545;17/02/2020;Beautiful;9;This is one of my absolute favorite movies of all time. Along with Godfather 1 it's a masterpiece! Robert De Niro brings such a vibrant performance to the young Corleone - just amazing!;0;0;False tt0071562;marvinsteinberg;29/01/2020;Great Movie;10;This is a beautiful movie, effects in this movie are amazing. The topic is unique and acting of everyone is fantastic.;0;0;False tt0071562;dhruv198620;18/01/2020;Best again;10;Al pacino rocked it. The way the story is told parallel of two main characters is amazing. Al Pacino deserved an Oscar for this.;0;0;False tt0071562;YerazankneriYerkir;15/01/2020;The best movie about Italian Mafia life.;10;Engrossing motion picture that features some of the finest editing, cinematography and performances ever. There is a wonderful theme of family that runs through this film and its later sequels. No one is truly judged. Love is unconditional. God is the one who truly judges. Easily, the word masterpiece describes this film, but that's been said by so many...Who am I to argue? Masterpiece is right on the money.;0;0;True tt0071562;henarmartinlopez;09/01/2020;perfect mixed;10;For me the film is the perfect mixed from the story of the family to now;0;0;False tt0071562;umlaziking;09/01/2020;Amazing film;10;Definitely one of the greatest films ever made, u can't even call this a sequel, it's sooo much more than that, the film mixes the past and present very very beautifully. This film sent shivers down my spine the whole time, with its incredible writing,directing and acting which is another level, if I watched this film 5 years ago, I wouldn't have understood why it's so great, but now that I'm a lot older and finally understand what real cinema is I can say that this film is one of the greatest films I've ever watched. I'm a huge fan of the godfather now;0;0;False tt0071562;henarmartinlopez;09/01/2020;Perfect mixed;10;For me the film is the perfect mixed from the story of the family to now;0;0;False tt0071562;Aidenbuster11;31/12/2019;Truly a Masterpiece;8;A work of cinematic art in every-way imaginable. The scope and brilliance of it all is hard to discuss. It just elevates the crime/mafia/mob movie to another level with its attention to details, acting, music and story telling.

A Must Watch for ALL CINEMA LOVERS!!!;0;0;False tt0071562;guilledequerol;27/12/2019;American Film' Crowning Jewel;10;Mario Puzo and Coppola provide a thrilling follow-up to Michael's journey and a riveting origin to Vito's quasi-mythological figure in one of cinema's greatest achievements.;0;0;False tt0071562;GBMpersonal;14/12/2019;It thrills me like the first time.;9;Michael scorned her as he closed the door in her face. But Kay was strong, and knew about herself. My favorite scene ever. It thrills me like the first time.;0;0;True tt0071562;daniel-651-950171;09/12/2019;My favourite movie of all time hands down;10;Is it just my amazon prime copy or at 1:46:00 in the movie is there a black patch at the bottom of the screen looks like a broken lens however its a amazing movie filled with action suspense and some comedic moments;0;0;False tt0071562;antiimatter;08/12/2019;Sprawling epic;9;A classic of cinema, a continuation and elaboration of part 1. Back drop is italian/american cultural integration mid-20th century. Multi-generational time shifts and meandering plot line make it slow at times, but rich with detail.;0;0;False tt0071562;albinwagsater;06/12/2019;What we consider flawless;10;This might be the finest and most cohesive storytelling to ever reach the big screen. The godfather part 2 is what you normally call a long movie. However, every second has a purpose, every breath has power behind it and everything ties together something that might be one of the absolute best movies of all time. It is a long time since Iast watched part 1 now but I think this is better. To have a mixture of breathtaking cinematography, unheard of acting and one of the best scrips ever made is something very rare. Only a handful of films has managed to have all these elements, and only this has it to that extreme. I think you know why this is breathtaking in every way, and if you are yet to see it I can't recommend it enough. This may not be my all time favourite, but I truly believe that from a technical and critical standpoint, this is a flawless story that can never be recreated.;0;0;False tt0071562;gene-07202;28/11/2019;Richard Bright;6;"Richard Bright as Al Neri. A good actor who tragically died young when a vehicle hit him in NYC. I will always remember the scene at the Mother's wake. Michael is talked into greeting Fredo by Connie. He walks up and hugs him. But he looks up at Al Neri with DEATH in his eyes. Neri knows that Fredo is not forgiven. Neri is LOYAL to Michael and knows he will one day kill Fredo by Michael's orders You see PLEADIING in Neri's eyes. But Michael is radiating ""Death"". Finally Neri can no longer maintain eye contact and just looks down sad and broken.";0;0;False tt0071562;rotalb;28/11/2019;Mind;9;This movie tells how to use the mind very carefully. In the stages of difficulties and problems, we have to mange ourselves according to the situation. If you want to get something then you should not snatch it from someone, but you have to do the thing that he himself agrees to give that to you.;0;0;False tt0071562;matthewbearman-433-381735;27/11/2019;Simply the best mafia movie ever made **Spoiler Free**;10;"I came to the Godfather series later in life than most and to be fair it was probably for the best. It's hard to put into words just how good this film (not sequel) is, it is best appreciated the way it should be, as a continuation of the best series committed to celluloid. This film starts years before the beginning of its predecessor and fills in all the story of a young Vito while it intertwines with Michael's descent into madness. The payoff of the ending of this film will never be forgotten as long as you watch films and richly deserves all the accolades it gets, ""I know it was you""";0;0;False tt0071562;korn11011;17/11/2019;epic movie;10;Best movie i ever seen story is great and soundtrack cant miss a part of this great master pace even better from first part;0;0;False tt0071562;Shyinx;08/11/2019;The mafia story continues with really good movie. Al Pacino is talented, he is a legend!;9;"⭐⭐ Screenplay: 93/100

⭐⭐⭐Acting Performance: 98/100

⭐ Film Editing: 88/100

⭐⭐ Cinematography: 94/100

⭐ Sound Effects: 89/100

⭐ Art Direction & Set Decoration: 87/100

⭐⭐ Original Scores: 90/100



⭐ Costume Design: 85/100

_________________________________";0;0;False tt0071562;amdhq;05/11/2019;Actual godfather of godfather series;10;This is the movie which should b in the no1 ranking;0;0;False tt0071562;ranisitompul7;27/10/2019;Good this film;10;This film is very good, I really like this film, this film must be watched very often, so that everyone knows about this film;0;0;True tt0071562;corbanspaghette;26/10/2019;The Perfect Sequel;9;The Godfather Part II does what very few sequels have accomplished and manages to surpass the original. Al Pacino gives an incredible preformance and manages to make Micheal Corleone into one of the most intersting and complex characters ever put to screen. The contrasts between him and a young Vito(Played by Robert De Niro) are portrayed in a subtle and masterful way that leaves you thinking.;0;0;False tt0071562;roneyhart;22/10/2019;Everything you can imagine is real.;9;This life is what you make it. No matter what, you're going to mess up sometimes, it's a universal truth. But the good part is you get to decide how you're going to mess it up. Girls will be your friends - they'll act like it anyway. But just remember, some come, some go.;0;0;True tt0071562;garyhendersonba;19/10/2019;fgfb;9;I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.;0;0;False tt0071562;ezzeldin-z7;25/09/2019;astounding work;10;One of the reasons I loved both Godfather I and Godfather II is because of Al Pacino is phenomenal, with not only his dialogue but his facial expressions successfully conveying strong emotions increasing the depth to his incredible performance, this is one of the best movies ever made.;0;0;False tt0071562;sarafi-84907;02/09/2019;yes;8;Ly acted by Robert De Niro and a worthy Oscar winner) and the rise to power of Michael as the head of the family. Francis Coppola recollaborated with many of the crew members of the first film and again achieves a quite superb period piece thanks to the cinematography of Gordon Willis and set design of Dean Tavoularis. The acting performances are outstanding, hence three supporting oscar nominations for acting guru Lee Strasberg (Hyman Roth), Michael Gazzo (Frank Pentangeli) and Robert De Niro (young Vito Corleone). Duvall, Keaton, Cazale and Shire all provided first rate performances but it is the performance of Al Pacino which steals the show, expertly portraying Michael as a cool, calculating, suspicious Don Corleone. The film expands upon;0;0;False tt0071562;MrTomCherry;25/08/2019;A lenghty masterpiece!;9;"The Godfather: Part II follows two parallel stories. One story is a sequel to ""The Godfather"", and follows Michael Corleone as he consolidates his power as the new Don of the Corleone family. The other story is the prequel to the first Godfather and shows us the origin of Vito Corleone and how he created his enterprise in New York. The movie is very long and just for that it gets a 9 but otherwise it is a masterpiece.";0;0;False tt0071562;cedrik-06537;28/07/2019;nice;10;Amazing work, keep it up and always make more Amazing work, keep it up and always make more Amazing work, keep it up and always make more Amazing work, keep it up and always make more;0;0;False tt0071562;ossamaalbayati;21/07/2019;awosome;10;The best movie, I watched many Times,the story and the director;0;0;True tt0071562;ossamaalbayati1;17/07/2019;awesome;10;The best movie ever, i watched many times, one of my favorite;0;0;True tt0071562;rbn_lrk-1;12/07/2019;O My God;10;With 4th July over it is time to look at one of the highest scored IMDB movies The second Godfather movie. Some of the highlights are the Havana New Year Eve scene, and the boat scene. If you have 4 hours to spare on a boring day don't miss this movie to take you back to decades long gone.;0;0;True tt0071562;PaulGerov;10/07/2019;Incredible switching between the two stories narrated;10;This movie has achieved really good storytelling... Especially the switching between the stories of the father Corleone and the son Corleone... It also has a very good cast and its being played really well! In comparison to the first, I think I prefer this one!;0;0;False tt0071562;toshironi123;09/07/2019;This movie is awesome;10;That mix of cinema geniuses is wonderful. I like it.;0;0;False tt0071562;jmaxjmjmjm;28/06/2019;1 of mini classic;9;Al Pacino is 1 of the greatest actors that through the live and he can never do anything wrong;0;0;False tt0071562;lilaankli;24/06/2019;amazing;10;Beautiful movie with amazing plot the cast is fantastic the scenery is breathtaking and overall a great great movie to watch;0;0;False tt0071562;ama-39188;22/06/2019;Beautiful movie;8;The best movie I've ever seen makes my information more relevant than anyone else;0;0;True tt0071562;astealthypenguin;18/06/2019;masterpiece;10;Is it cliche of me to call this a masterpiece? Because it really is. I don't have the words to properly convey my thoughts on this film. There's not a single second I dislike. Not a single story beat that doesn't work. The Godfather was a great film, but this tops it in every single area. It feels larger than life but grounded at the same time. A 3± hour runtime that feels better paced than most much shorter films. I am in love. It's taken me far too long to watch this and shame on me. But I finally have and I don't regret a damn minute of it.;0;0;False tt0071562;ahmedhemeda-03173;16/06/2019;The summary;9;"This part surely is better than first one ,the first part it feels like having problem with some characters as if it is getting interfered with each other,second a lot of names and functions at the beginning so it may be confusing and the third reason is the changing in aims&goals of Michael as he wanted first to be out of his father's matters as lately he wanted to involve in a murder may be after his father was shoot may be";0;0;True tt0071562;sojicko;08/06/2019;Also the one od the best movies ever made;9;I like the part II but not as much as first and third part.. The storyline is great! Absolutely masterpiece that you should watch!;0;0;False tt0071562;saeedmilani;07/06/2019;Every thing!;9;It's quite a repetition of the first version of the film, and it's not enough, it's great, thank you to the great director to build the historical masterpiece in which family relationships show us how the brother behaves with his siblings, his parents, and different opinions. How to keep your family home, how to get rid of a woman, bewildered treason, full of meaningful dialogue, and much more ....;0;0;False tt0071562;mertagur;27/05/2019;Father of legends;;Quality charcters and senario very succesful movie;0;0;False tt0071562;felking;23/05/2019;Great sequel;8;It's good but not up there with the first one but still way above the third one.;0;0;False tt0071562;weijack;23/05/2019;The Godfather part 2;10;Many cross montages and flashbacks make this movie's structure become more complex.Al Pacino and Robert De Niro's acting is so excellent!;0;0;False tt0071562;weijack;23/05/2019;The godfather part 2;10;Many cross montages and flashbacks make this movie's structure become more complex.Al Pacino and Robert De Niro's acting is so excellent!;0;0;False tt0071562;mickelmoe;18/05/2019;Sequel Sucess?;9;Better than the first Godfather? Possibly... but I'd like to edit the good bits from this fil and put them into Godfather Part 1 for an amazing experience.;0;0;False tt0071562;hakmellq-80217;16/05/2019;A Cinematic Masterpiece;10;I remember watching the first film a few years ago for the first time thinking that it was the greatest film I would ever see. A couple of months later I saw that there was a sequel that I did not know about. I am usually cautious when watching sequels since I often find them disappointing, but boy was I wrong. The mood, the acting, dialog, directing, cinematography was a feeling which I have yet to discover again. Every time I watch it I get the same feeling. I discover new things, small little details which I had not noticed before. A cinematic masterpiece of the highest degree. I truly believe it concluded an era of filmmaking which has yet to be beaten.;0;0;True tt0071562;duncanburton;09/05/2019;Epic & true perfection;10;"If I were to some this up, The Godfather II is one of the best films in all time. Incredible acting, storyline & legendary directing.";0;0;False tt0071562;elisa-90774;27/04/2019;A must see!;10;After watching the first movie, i wasn't sure to continue watching but the second part was really mesmerizing.;0;0;False tt0071562;united4d;25/04/2019;The Godfather: Part II;10;"The compelling sequel to ""The Godfather,"" contrasting the life of Corleone father and son. Traces the problems of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) in 1958 and that of a young immigrant Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) in 1917's Hell's Kitchen. Michael survives many misfortunes and Vito is introduced to a life of crime.";0;0;True tt0071562;miroslav_mikic;14/04/2019;Simply amazing;8;This is the best movi all the time. I remember seeing this movie for the first time in late 2008, and I was imressed. Everything has unpredicted.;0;0;False tt0071562;Devoncommons;04/04/2019;Godfather 5;10;Love this film very gangster incredible! Also Pacino it a great actor in this;0;0;False tt0071562;volpepj;25/03/2019;The ogdfather;8;The movie shows to be pretty exciting to watch, and it really catch peoples attention!;0;0;False tt0071562;valizadehseissankurosh;16/03/2019;third best film ever;10;Third best film ever no matter what most amazing thrilling dramatic and emotional and sad film ever no matter what.;0;0;False tt0071562;klo-31021;14/03/2019;The best Sequel ever made;10;Simply the best, ever cast did the job Specially Al Pacino and Robert de Nero;0;0;False tt0071562;darsh_tito;27/02/2019;Legendary;10;""" i know it was you fredo, you broke my heart you broke my heart"" this scene took the god father part 2 to be the most incredible film in our history. I admire this scene";0;0;False tt0071562;tymayleas;19/02/2019;The Definition of A Great Sequel;9;"This film changed the way cinema would think of sequels and the idea of ""film series"". Before George Lucas created the franchise of Star Wars and popularized continuous film sequels, Coppola was putting out a follow-up and continuation to an amazing trip of a film. Not only do we learn more about the Corleone families' past, but we watch the parallel story lines of father and son coincide in their respective growths as characters. Screenplay wise, this script is a masterpiece and serves as a template for how flashbacks and parallel character developments can be used.";0;0;False tt0071562;sanchopanzabr;19/02/2019;A classic movie;10;Impossible to watch just one time, a classic mafia's movie, i recommend.;0;0;False tt0071562;ghostfiendghost;20/01/2019;Best sequel ever?;9;Another great crime installment Probably will appreciate more over time but for now it is a 9;0;0;False tt0071562;kingkreck-18582;08/01/2019;ALL TIME;9;The best mafia movie ever....nothing can even come close to this movie;0;0;False tt0071562;Badmoviessuck;29/12/2018;Wonderful sequel;9;This movie is just as good if not better than The Godfather.

CHARACTERS Michael is unrecognisable in this movie. How his character developed and into this cold hearted man is amazing and compelling and he is one of the greatest protagonist i have seen. The prequel story was great as well. How they showed how Vito became so popular and owned the streets naming himself the godfather is a compelling story were we see how he develops and becomes who he was in the first movie. They managed to do what a sequel should do, expand on the lore. I like as well how they give Fredo an small arc and it shows how they care about each one of the characters. and the end of Vitos arc in the movie was great when he gave revenge and also that final shot were we see the Michael before The Godfather and the Micheal after and we can see how they are vastly different with the posture and look showing that Michael is different.

VERDICT This movie is great would rewatch.;0;0;True tt0071562;mardalsfossen01;28/12/2018;Complex and costly sequel;9;The end of Godfather Part I already hinted that Part II will continue with Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) being the new head of the family.

They change the location to Nevada and introduce a lot of new characters, depicturing Michael's own way of being 'The Godfather'. Additional they also show many flashbacks to the life of his father, Vito Corleone, how he got introduced to the Mafia as a kid in his home in Corleone, Sicily and his rise to a Mafia Godfather as an adult, played by Robert DeNiro, who fits the role very well, in 1917 onwards in the ghettos of New York City.

All in all, the movie is very lenghty and complex, I am not even sure I understood everything fully and might have to rewatch some parts or read through synopsises.;0;0;True tt0071562;imanauditore-650-709244;07/12/2018;overall review by me;10;Had a great murder scene A great soundtrack and design;0;0;False tt0071562;gopalkroy;23/11/2018;Indeed a classic ever green movie;8;Indeed a classic ever green movie. Great story of Don entering USA.;0;0;True tt0071562;Bored_Dragon;17/10/2018;Where's Oscar for Pacino?!;8;I liked it better than the first one, but I still think it's overrated. It is unfair that Pacino didn't win an Oscar for the role of Michael, because he definitely deserved one. Brando won it for the first movie and De Niro for this one, but, in my opinion, Pacino was better than both of them.

8/10;0;0;False tt0071562;aldo-64339;02/10/2018;One question....;9;Undeniably, the greatest sequel ever made. However, one thing I will never understand.... Bruno Kirby. Why?;0;0;False tt0071562;dweilermg-1;13/09/2018;He might have had a chance.;8;Michael never truly followed through on his earlier pledge to lead the family business into legitimate enterprises. When Merle Johnson who was dating Connie wanted to discuss a business opportunity with Michael he refused to talk with the man and ordered Connie to break up with him. Although we'll never know Merle's opportunity might have been a good legitimate business opportunity for the Corleone family. Sad that Michael never gave Merle a chance to tell him what his idea was. There might have even been a place for Fredo in such a business.;0;0;False tt0071562;infomarbet;19/08/2018;Best movie ever;9;The best movie I've ever seen. Al pacino role is perffect for him.;0;0;False tt0071562;cricketbat;17/08/2018;Better than the original? Maybe.;9;The Godfather II takes two compelling stories and weaves them together. Once again, Francis Ford Coppola makes a film that is interesting and emotional. Better than the original? Maybe - it's one of the few times that you can argue that point.;0;0;False tt0071562;nakkanagaraju;27/07/2018;Good screenplay;9;It was not as much as the first part. I was eagerly waiting for any twist in the film but it does not. A little disappointment for me as it was made a sequel to great film. Good screenplay and actors done well.;0;0;False tt0071562;burkbayrak94;12/04/2018;Best film ever;10;It is one of the best sequels of cinema history and it is the first time to have an oscar (and also 6) sequels, which is a great movie that has changed the angle of view of cinema cinema and its followers. Robert de niro has shown a great acting. I really enjoyed watching the he's being 'godfather'.;0;0;True tt0071562;zaidiphone;09/02/2018;amazing;9;One of the best movies ever...............................;0;0;False tt0071562;antonwaas;29/01/2018;The Greatest Sequel Ever Made;10;The Godfather Part II is The Best Sequel in cinematic History. Every single Frame in this Movie clicks together so impressive well, may it even surpasses Godfather Part I and you know this is really no small step. Nothing in The World is better than Al Pacino as Michael Corleone and Robert De Niro potraiting the Early Life of Vito Corleone.;0;0;False tt0071562;acsonbarreto;25/12/2017;Love this movie;10;I love this movie. The continuation is also excellent. Michael was a good successor to the Corleone family, but one of his biggest problems was at home: Kay. If Apollonia was alive to the end, it would be different. But, this is a excelent movie.;0;0;True tt0071562;Shreeee;19/12/2017;A sequal equally amazing as its first part..;10;Amazing sequel... All Pacino at his best... Amazing story carry forward never missing a single reference from part 1;0;0;False tt0071562;patelbinny-62778;13/12/2017;The Perfect sequel, which for me, marginally outdoes its predecessor;10;If you've heard of the saying lightning doesn't strike twice, guess what, you've been chaotically proven wrong here. The original movie on its own is cinematic brilliance delivered at it very best and has a cult following since generations. The second one however, is an inch even more perfect. May it be young Michael (Al Pacino) filling the boots of his infamous yet benevolent father Vito, may it be the portrayal of young Don Corleone played by Robert De Niro who is flawless at his job and may it be the transition of events before and after the movie, it all falls perfectly in place. It's also De Niro's first academy award win pretty reminiscent of the fact he subtly carves out Vito's early life struggle in America, his abandoning of his natives in Italy and rise to power in America. Diane Keaton (Kay) plays a woman who feels oppressed being a part of a family that is a part of a notorious criminal conglomerate. Robert Duvall (Tom Hagen) plays a shrewd advocate who is also the consigliere to the family. John Cazale (Fredo) plays the passive push-around as he was in the prequel but has more depth and purpose to his character. Overall it has more than what any ordinary Mafia based movie can offer. It shows the struggle of power to be the very best, and eventually the realization that the top spot isn't a single persons affair and knocking down your counter part by cunning and treacherous means is the only way to hail supreme in the business. And yes, all this coupled with a perfect setup to the post independence american scenario while reminiscing Vito's early days. I'd go for eleven even if i entitled to do it for only a single movie.;0;0;False tt0071562;christian-nguyen94;19/10/2017;Amazing movie.;10;One of the greatest sequels of all time. A timeless classic that still stands the test of time. A stand alone in its on right. A sequel that took what was good in the original Godfather and made it better even surpassing it. Some movies stories can be told without its sequels such as Aliens and Terminator 2.;0;0;False tt0071562;AndrewRozarioOfficial;21/09/2017;Once again ... Sick Film <3;;"Christopeher Nolan is a talented director. With batman begins,he created such a fantastic atmosphere that he brought batman character back in game. With the dark knight, he made not only a great second sequel, but also one of the best movies of the past 10 years. He mixed action, heroism, feeling, literature, colors so well that you feel kind of high when the movie ends. There is no doubt about it.

But i see some people who don't mind to compare this movie with some old masterpieces and say the dark knight is the best movie so far.Haha, this is completely unacceptable.

Let me clear this: If a movie can bring freshness to creativity, If a movie happens to change your insights, If a movie starts a new genre, gives away new techniques and styles, If a movie makes you understand your heart better; then I call that movie a masterpiece. As far as I see, The Dark Knight is far from it.";0;0;True tt0071562;banuelosins;03/07/2017;Greatest;;"What is there to say that has not been said. From the cinematography of Gordon Willis. The Directing of Francis Ford Coppola. With performances, style and substance to savour, this shows how it is possible to smash box office records without being mindless. Simply as a story, the Michael scenes in ""The Godfather: Part II"" engage our emotions. I admire the way Coppola and his co-writer Mario Puzo require us to think along with Michael as he handles delicate decisions involving Hyman Roth (Strasberg), the boss of Miami; Fredo (Cazale), his older brother, and the shooting of Sonny (James Caan).";0;0;True tt0071562;sid-Jo;30/06/2017;The Glorious Godfather;;I have always preferred Godfather II to the original and solely because De Niro was chillingly cool, cold blooded and subtle. His was a great character study. I loved the texture and atmosphere throughout the movie in capturing Little Italy and the Sicilian scenes. The commission hearings and other Italian characters complemented the main actors with a realistic thread. The interwoven flashback and present day interlinks were majestically done without detracting or lulling the story line and of course the theme music which you could instantly recognise years later. Definitely one of the top 3 greatest of all time movies.;0;0;False tt0071562;SartoriusTrey;29/06/2017;best movie ever;10;This movie is very good because i played in this movie as a boy named Noah. The movie was just fantastic so was the affects it was so fun filming with the cast and crew. Everyone had fun with all the action we had good laughs. I know you guys will like the movie i really think you guys should check it out. It is a very good movie and i promise you will love it. and you'll want your kids to watch it with you because your going to enjoy i promise you will just check it out near you.;0;0;False tt0071562;claudsonlana;23/06/2017;Wow very good;10;Film that passes a cool feeling. Interesting colors and its focus is totally geared towards fixing the looks of whoever watches it. Congratulations to the director who led this production, congratulations to all the team that worked on this project, which marked the lives of millions of people, writer is also to be congratulated.;0;0;False tt0071562;jsele-38952;11/06/2017;The Godfather part 2;10;"As I mentioned last time, the first Godfather from 1972 is widely considered a landmark in film history, considered one of the best American films of all time. Dark, brutal yet also hyper realistic, with no gangster film like that ever seen before. So the idea of a follow up in 1974 was a bit strange. Granted, Coppola was back in the director's chair, but some fans were wondering; what else was there to tell? Well, in my opinion, this movie took a bold chance and further explored how much humanity can be sacrificed for the ""greater good"" and sometimes that doesn't have a boundary. We see Al Pacino as Michael in a desperate attempt to hold onto power while dealing with family, betrayal and violence. It makes the viewer wonder if he has any decent mercy left. But on top of that, and why I personally like this film, we also get the backstory to a character that was done by one of the greatest performances of all time. Who could possibly play the younger version of the Oscar-winning Marlon Brando? Robert De Niro, of course. This not only won him his first Oscar for acting, but also cemented him as one of the big heavy-hitters in terms of acting in the gangster genre. Seeing how a child can come from obscurity in Sicily, with everything trying to kill you, yet become successful enough to become the epitome of power at a price. This was the first sequel to win Best Picture and remains the only one to win along with its predecessor. At a time when The Godfather was said to be the perfect movie that can never be topped, Godfather 2 tried and not only succeeded but exceeded everyone's expectations. It's hard enough making something like Godfather successful once but to do it twice and BOTH times win Best Picture? That is a DANG impressive achievement. It literally ""gave us an offer we just couldn't refuse.""";0;0;True tt0071562;cchase;11/02/2001;Does It Get Any Better Than This? FUGGEDDABOUDIT!!!;;"You could make a list that would reach Saturn and back, of all the films you could watch, that serve as on-screen primers on how NOT to make a movie. The list of those films that are the perfect examples of HOW to do it is lamentably shorter; those that instruct how to make a perfect sequel even more brief. At the top of that particular list stands THE GODFATHER, PART II.

People are often quick and harsh in their assessment of all the things that were wrong with the third sequel, and they are especially hard on Sofia Coppola. But even if she had turned in an Oscar-worthy performance, think about it...did Francis have a snowball's chance in hell of topping the Perfect Sequel?

First of all, we get a two-fer: not only do we get the magnificent performance from Al Pacino as Michael, the reluctant new Don Corleone, who has come full circle and has assumed the very mantle he had always hoped to avoid, as well as everything that goes with it, but we get Robert De Niro's breakout portrayal as young Vito in the old country. We get to see how the Family got started, and that the spiritual, moral and financial dilemmas that father and son had to face, spanning nearly a century, were not as different as either one of them might have thought.

The continuation of a story that deepens the situations and our insight into the characters; Gordon Willis' peerless photography; Dean Tavoularis' amazing sets and Theodora Van Runkle's costumes; the Nino Rota/Carmine Coppola themes that are so familiar to us now that they're almost subliminal, and that note-perfect casting of all the supporting players, even the appearance of some faces you may have forgotten were associated with the series, especially people like THE SOPRANO'S Dominic Chianese and CITY SLICKERS' Bruno Kirby.

Part Three never stood a chance.";0;0;False tt0071562;Lt_Kilgore;29/01/2001;The sequel to the award-winning masterpiece is jus...;;The sequel to the award-winning masterpiece is just as compelling. Although the two films are always compared, they really are very different. The original concentrates on what the mafia is and what it does, and it uses a more heartfelt approach. The Godfather: Part II is a sequel as well as a prequel, comparing Michael's rise into power with Vito's, making the story even more depressing. I've always found Vito's storyline more interesting, but the ending of the film, in which Michael murders or alienates everyone close to him, is perfectly executed. The Godfather: Part II is slow at times,`but in the end, it packs a wallop.

RATING: 9;0;0;False tt0071562;salvi-3;17/01/2001;Is there a better sequel?;10;It' s difficult enough to create a brilliant film, but to create a brilliant sequel is even more difficult. The temptation to use scenes that mirror others in the first (obviously, outstanding) film, are overwhelming. Most are guilty of this and lose their individuality.

Instead, the Godfather 2 answers most questions left open by the first and offers more insight into the life and workings of a Mafia family, in the hey day of the 'Cosa Nostra'

Both Godfather 1 and 2 belong in the top 10 of all time, some might say in the top 2.;0;0;False tt0071562;theshuttlewoods;22/12/2000;Best sequel ever;9;The first sequel to ever get a best film oscar, and well-deserved. Pacino puts in a possible 'career best' as Michael, while De Niro is very convincing as Vito Corleone. The film is really spilt into two parts from the late 50s with Michael and the 20s with Vito. It works well as we can spot differences between the two. I won't say anymore as I don't want to spoil it for everyone. The only disadvantage is that it is a tad long, so be prepared to watch for over 3 hours. Apart from that its excellent.;0;0;False tt0071562;darth_sidious;18/12/2000;Coppola spoils us again with his second masterpiece;;Coppola spoils us again, the continuing saga of the Corleoni family is an amazing piece of cinema. The Godfather part2 isn't a sequel, it just continues the story as Michael stretches his empire into new ventures whilst keeping his family together.

The film also features the backstory of Vito Corleoni and his rise in New York during the 1910s and 20s. The film is just as powerful as the first, this film is even stronger with the characters. John Cazle's Freddo is fully developed in this one.

The acting is flawless, I mean it just doesn't get any better than this. I love everyone in this film, the performances come right out of their hearts.

The direction is amazing as is the screenplay. Intricate details and characters have a lot of meat.

The story grabs you, you are in their world, 3 hours of near-perfection.

A Masterpiece, thank you Coppola!;0;0;False tt0071562;Hannibal Bates;04/12/2000;The Hollywood Family: Part 2;9;"The second installment of the Corleone family is again pure greatness. It's one and only mistake to myself was it got a little hazy & confusing in the middle, but it really doesn't hurt the film to much. In ""The Godfather Part II"" we get to see the man who once wanted nothing to do with the ""family biz"" become the heart of the family and the biz. His hand of judgment moves fast, and it's covered in blood. From ""The Godfather"" we see Michael Corleone a war hero with a beautiful bride. Then from the middle of ""The Godfather"" to the ending of ""The Godfather Part II"" we see the slow moral fall of Michael Corleone. Breaking his family, the biz & himself. It might be violent, but the most gruesome image is the one we cannot see. 9 out of 10";0;0;False tt0071562;Madman-10;30/11/2000;Superb- but not as good as part 1;;The Godfather part 2 is a spectacular, all-out brilliant film - the reason it does not better the original is the missing characters Sonny and Old Vito and Clemenza. And there aren't as many memorable moments.

Don't get me wrong however this is still a masterpiece of cinema and reminder of how films should be made rather than all the hyped up garbage we see on our screens today.

Al Pacino is BACK as Michael Corleone - the all powerful head of the corleone family. Robert Duvall returns, as does John Cazale, Diane Keaton and Talia Shire (also Morgana King, Richard Bright, Tom Rosqui and Joe Spinell) and are joined by 3 major new characters - Clemenza's replacement Frank Pentangeli (Michael. V. Gazzo), Meyer Lansky clone Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) and the slimy senator geary (G.D. Spradlin) There is also a supreme prequel section which takes up about a third of the film - This introduces Robert De Niro as the young Vito Corleone, flanked by Genco (Frank Sivero), Tessio (John Aprea) and Clemenza (Bruno Kirby) . And pursued by Don Fanucci (Gaston Moschin) and Don Ciccio.

The performances are superb - No doubt about that Pacino, Duvall, De Niro, V.Gazzo - all outstanding but special mention to the late GREAT John Cazale - who took his character Fredo Corleone from a brief role in the first film to elevated it to a sincerely higher plein. He was simply outstanding and should have won an oscar for his incredibly realistic and stunning portrayal of a resentful, useless, fool who can't accept that baby brother is better than him (and wouldn't we all) we can understand the way he feels and in a way we are sympathetic.

Cazale's supremacy aside, The film is 9 1/2 out of ten and i strongly recommend it , should watch part 1 first though.;0;0;False tt0071562;Rainfox;07/10/2000;Family Ties;;"* * * * * (5 out of 5)

The Godfather Part II

Directed by: Francis Ford Coppola, 1974

Stunning and utterly compelling sequel.

A side story telling the saga of how the Corleone family came to America is told in conjunction with the continuous saga of new Don Michael Corleone (Al Pacino). This is done with a puppeteer's focused hand (pun intended) by co-writer/director Coppola and the result is amazing. He seems to somehow intertwine the two stories of the old and new Don effortlessly and deliver grand entertainment.

Deservedly the movie won an Oscar for Best Picture – and for a sequel that's no small feat.

Robert De Niro is exquisite (watch those subtle Brando mannerisms) and under-plays elegantly as the young Vito Corleone, while Robert Duvall is brilliant once more as Tom Hagan – a voice of reason in a dark and sinister mob world.

By and large Al Pacino's film though. Michael Corleone was a great character and a great role for one of the greatest American actors of the 20th century. The new Don has become spiteful and Pacino's performance is harrowingly intense. His anger and pity comes so naturally; it's simply disturbing. Probably Pacino's finest hour.";0;0;False tt0071562;Time Tripper;13/09/2000;Man-oh-man, this is a good one!;10;"For me, ""The Godfather, Part II"" is the kind of movie that I would drive 30 miles to see at a run-down theater in a questionable part of town. I absolutely believe this is one of the best movies ever made. Maybe someday I'll see it on DVD (if it's ever released), but for now I've only watched the video. I could not stop watching this movie the first time, and every time I start to watch part of it, I have to watch it to the very end.

The story is both a prequel and a continuation of ""The Godfather."" We see a young Vito Corleone's rise to power. We also see his son Michael's consolidation of that power at the cost of his soul. Robert DeNiro gives a stellar performance as Vito, and almost entirely in Italian! His scenes are so rivetting, I really didn't care that I couldn't understand a word.

In any other movie, Michael Corleone would be the villian. As the main character, we don't have the luxury of seeing him as the ""bad-guy who must be stopped."" Al Pacino portrays him with a Machivellian brilliance that kept me glued in front of the TV.

This film's only flaw is that sometimes you don't want to switch from Vito to Michael because you're so wrapped up in what's going on. However, any movie that gets you that interested in the characters definitely deserves a good recommendation! I love this movie.";0;0;False tt0071562;paul sloan;05/09/2000;Epic Mob Adventures;;This must be the best sequel ever.It takes the story of the Corleone family to a truly epic stage.Tremendous acting from the star cast and the dreadfully under-rated Michael V. Gazzo and Lee Strasberg.The flashback scenes are great and who can forget the Black Hand wanting to wet his 'beak'. Shame Godfather III was so dull by comparison.;0;0;False tt0071562;Davva Robbo;17/07/2000;Even better than the first? Surely not!;10;The first Godfather movie was stunning. This one is simply breathtakingly good. Drawing parallels between the initial growth of the Corleone empire under young Vito for relatively noble reasons, and the greed and corruption that brings the family close to self-destruction under Michael, the film takes everything that was great about the first movie and builds upon it. A rare example of a sequel that is actually better than the original.;0;0;False tt0071562;oggy10607;13/07/2000;The Greatest movie of all time!;10;The Godfather: Part II is without doubt the most impressive example of film-making ever. Francis Ford Coppola displays his directorial genius once again in his story telling, based on Mario Puzo's powerful novel. Despite the absence of Marlon Brando and James Caan the cast is incredibly strong, notably Robert DeNiro who flawlessly plays the young Vito Corleone. Al Pacino gained excellent, well-deserved reviews as he convincingly plays the cool Michael Corleone. Robert Duvall also deserves a mention for his vital role in the movie, he plays the family's lawyer Tom Hagen as impeccably as in the original Godfather. Before I saw the sequel, I believed that the Godfather was the greatest movie ever made but the Godfather Part II surpasses the original, which is not common. I thought having two stories running parallel throughout the movie was a unique and intelligent idea but the most impressive element of the movie was the broader picture of the mafia family's dealings given to the audience. As great as the original was, I thought it was somewhat limited. However, where its predecessor fails the Godfather: Part II succeeds resulting in an exquisite movie.;0;0;False tt0071562;SlickDaddy;12/07/2000;Wonderful film (possible spoilers);10;"Is The Godfather Part II better than the first film? It is difficult to decide, but there is no disputing that these two films must always be considered together, as part of a greater whole.

When first I viewed both parts, I was a teenager. I found the first film to be much more satisfying. My initial argument was that part I covered a longer period in less screen time, and was therefore better-paced and more interesting. Since then, however, my opinion has changed somewhat.

I was able to see both films back-to-back a couple of years ago, and found that Part II really had moved up in my ranking. I have heard the argument that part I ended with Michael's full corruption, and therefore didn't need to be sequelized. However, I feel Part II is much more the second half of the story than just an overlong epilogue, as some people say.

While THE GODFATHER: THE COMPLETE EPIC (parts I & II chronologized) is a good telling of the story, this film is stronger for the juxtaposition of Vito's rise to glory with Michael's fall from grace. To watch for six and a half hours, only to see Pacino's Michael turn from the young, optimistic, ""It's my family, Kay. It's not me"" boy to the cold, lonely man who has just had his own brother murdered, it is one of the most affecting transformations in film history. In the third film (unnecessary and inferior, to be sure, but not a bad picture), the only truly moving scene is Michael's confession in the garden, which refers to the events of Part II. The end of Part III is even a pale copy of the final 1959 scene in Part II, with Michael on the bench, surveying his dying empire.

The final scene in Part II, the flashback to Pearl Harbor day, is perhaps the most touching reminder of the man Michael once could have grown up to be, especially after seeing what he has become: fatherless, brotherless, and without his estranged wife and children. And ultimately powerless. A beautiful elegy for a life that could have been.";0;0;True tt0071562;wildbill-23;12/07/2000;Superb sequel to the original masterpiece...score: 10+ (out of 10).;;A superb sequel to the original masterpiece. Pacino, De Niro, and Keaton are brilliant. Michael Corleone (Pacino) assumes control of the family business despite opposition from enemies around him. The life of a young Vito Corleone (De Niro) is wonderfully told in parallel with the story. Excellent score, editing, and screenplay. score: 10+ (out of 10).;0;0;False tt0071562;plsj;10/07/2000;The Best Sequel there is!;10;This film is the best sequel ever. The acting is great, especially Al Pacino as Michael(he was also brilliant in the first one), and Robert De Niro as young Don Vito. Everything is just right this great movie. If you loved the first one(I surely did) I guarantee you, you'll like this one too!!!;0;0;False tt0071562;Sonatine97;09/07/2000;A masterpiece of intelligent movie-making;9;"You have to hand it to Coppola; he is without doubt one of the finest directors/screenwriters of the 20 the Century. we know about his Godfather contributions, but when you also consider Patton, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now & RumpleFish, we have to appreciate what a superb writer he really is.

But The Godfather films will be his most-remembered for all the right reasons, and deservedly so, especially working in collaboration with Mario Puzo, one of best authors of the time.

Coppola is never a man who tries to cut us short with a dumbed-down version of any classic novel, especially Puzo's that have a breadth & majestic intensity all of their own. Coppola insists on giving us literally every element from book to film - boring, irrelevant bits as well. And yet those very same ""boring bits"" work so well in the hands of the Master that it gives the movie (any of his movies in fact) a more intelligent & rounded gloss.

I must admit to preferring G2 to the original because it offered so much richness & character-defining elements than the first. Although Brando was very good & suitably threatening in the first, he would also bring the pace of the film down to a stroll bringing the other characters down with him.

However, with the ""unknown"" De Niro playing the young Vito in G2 we get to see a revolution in his character development, in fact all the main characters including Pacino's, Keaton's & Duvell's are given greater scope to expand on their originals.

Special mention must go to Robert Duvell, probably one of the most outrageously under-rated stars of our time, who possesses more talent in one those ""Mona Lisa"" like smirks than a lot of so-called big A1 stars of today!

I truly loved G2, more so in the cinema than on video because an epic ""Italian opera"" such as this deserves room to breath and a 29"" TV screen just doesn't cut it.

G2 is better than the first, although it is just as dependent on it in order to build on the original's foundation. G2 is more intelligent to look at, the script sparkles, the violence is choreographed & not overdone; the acting is memorable and Coppola' talented hand at the tiller is there for all to see & aspire too.

*****/*****";0;0;False tt0071562;abettertomorrow;06/06/2000;The best made film of the 70s;10;While the first Godfather introduced us to a very powerful family and the way they protect their legacy, the second is about how that family builds and protects it's future. Vito Corleone (De Niro) builds it's future while Michael Corleone (Pacino) protects it. By showing father and son doing this, they also show the contrast in character between the two. The film shows that while Vito had a very strong, ambitious character, Michael showed equal strength but underneath he hid sadness and depression.

Of course, a complex character comparison/contrast like this needs great actors to fulfill the job. Al Pacino, fresh from his Oscar-nominated turn in The Godfather delivers one of his most memorable performances while Robert De Niro, a relative unknown then delivers an Oscar-winning performance. The two intercuts between Michael and Vito motionless is probably the most memorable images of The Godfather trilogy and shows what 'star power' really is. Other than De Niro/Pacino, Robert Duvall - one of the greatest character actors of the century - delivers yet another strong performance while the late John Cazale represents the price of power in a masterful, haunting performance.;0;0;False tt0071562;bonjamin;01/06/2000;An extraordinary Piece of work;;This Film is in second place in my top ten movies of all time just behind Pulp fICTION.The acting is flawless especially by De Niro portraying the young Don Vito Corleone.I saw this film on video this year and as soon as it finished i watched it all over again.It is so much better than the first film for many reasons,but most of all the story of Vito Corleone's rise in power. I strongly suggest you see this movie;0;0;False tt0071562;dave fitz;06/05/2000;a great sequel;10;"Everyone is familiar with The Godfather. The original novel by Mario Puzo is one of the best-selling books ever written. The movie is a total classic. Everyone can quote lines and scenes from it. It is one of the truly great films ever made.

Sequels are generally inferior to the original and mostly rehashing the same story. Godfather Part II is not like that. The only sequel to ever win Best Picture, it does surpass the original in many ways. They're both great movies and the Godfather series is the best ever made, including Part III which was nowhere near as good as the others but still enjoyable.

I prefer II over I. I just think it's more interesting, getting into the darker side of the mob. Al Pacino is outstanding as Michael Corleone. Robert DeNiro plays Vito as a young man in Little Italy. That was part of the book, but not in the first one. I love this movie. It's about as perfect as a movie could be. II together with I & III represent one of the great achievements in movie history. I thank Francis Ford Coppola, Al Pacino and the many talented people who brought us these great movies. It's things like The Godfather series that make us love movies so much.";0;0;False tt0071562;AsharaDayme;12/04/2000;A sequel that surpasses its monumental predecessor;;The proclivities of the majority of imdb users on this topic are well known: 'The Godfather' is a better film than 'The Godfather Part II'. However, having watched them back-to-back last night, then argued the relative merits with my friend, I have to say I disagree.

Let's look at the evidence. OK, so 'The Godfather' has better death scenes, better villains, James Caan and Marlon Brando. These things are not to be ignored. But 'Part II' is arguably more epic, and definitely more poetic. Here we get two films for the price (although admittedly not the typical length) of one. And in these two separate storylines we get two immense performances. At this time, it seems that if De Niro and Pacino were to share the screen, it would simply explode.

Al Pacino and De Niro both transform themselves to celluloid legends. Pacino eminates a presence that was only hinted at in the first movie, as we watch him chillingly guard the interests of his family. He visibly ages throughout the course of the movie, yet never loses his humanity.

De Niro not only delivers a spot on young Marlon Brando, but develops Don Vito and gives him a subtle and wholly appropriate sense of humour: just look at the scene where nothing more than a knowing smirk is needed to cause a previously tyrannical landlord to lower his rent $10!

At the end of the day, I just prefer the whole atmosphere of 'Part II'. What it may lack in the set pieces of its predecessor, it makes up for with its beautiful direction and cinematography, and an air of incredible confidence afforded by the success of the first instalment.;0;0;False tt0071562;AsharaDayme;12/04/2000;A sequel that surpasses its monumental predecessor;;The proclivities of the majority of imdb users on this topic are well known: 'The Godfather' is a better film than 'The Godfather Part II'. However, having watched them back-to-back last night, then argued the relative merits with my friend, I have to say I disagree.

Let's look at the evidence. OK, so 'The Godfather' has better death scenes, better villains, James Caan and Marlon Brando. These things are not to be ignored. But 'Part II' is arguably more epic, and definitely more poetic. Here we get two films for the price (although admittedly not the typical length) of one. And in these two separate storylines we get two immense performances. At this time, it seems that if De Niro and Pacino were to share the screen, it would simply explode.

Al Pacino and De Niro both transform themselves to celluloid legends. Pacino eminates a presence that was only hinted at in the first movie, and we watch him chillingly guard the interests of his family. He visibly ages throughout the course of the movie, yet never loses his humanity.

De Niro not only delivers a spot on young Marlon Brando, but develops Don Vito and gives him a subtle and wholly appropriate sense of humour: just look at the scene where nothing more than a knowing smirk is needed to cause a previously tyrannical landlord to lower his rent $10!

At the end of the day, I just prefer the whole atmosphere of 'Part II'. What it may lack in the set pieces of its predecessor, it makes up for with its beautiful direction and cinematography, and an air of incredible confidence afforded by the success of the first instalment.;0;0;False tt0071562;Funky A;03/04/2000;Even better than the first one...;10;The Godfather was incredibly good... but the sequel is even better!!! The idea of having the movie divided in two stories(The leadership of Don Michael and the rise of young Vito) is absolutely wonderful... and never slowed down the story. The acting is as superb as in the original Godfather, but the characters are even more interesting in this movie... If you haven't seen this movie or the first one, you are missing something incredible... A must-see...

102%... EVEN BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL!!!;0;0;False tt0071562;aercon;14/02/2000;A sequil so good that I & II make a virtually seamless presentation.;10;I have never understood how Godfather I and II can be separated on any list of ratings. They are virtually a single movie and one of the best ever made at that. From any critical perspective the presentation is a 10, perfect. The movie came to define a whole generation of American males. More characters from this story became icons than can be said of any other movie of the last fifty years. This fact alone makes it suitable for consideration as best ever. But if I is #1 than II should be #2. Nothing else makes any sense.;0;0;False tt0071562;yenlo;05/10/1999;Sequel and Prequel.;9;Godfather Part II is a sequel but it is also a prequel at the same time. The story of young Vito Corleone portrayed by Robert DeNiro from his violence enhanced humble beginnings to his rise as a mob boss is told along with the tale of son Michael who is now firmly in charge as Don of the Corleone Family. Brilliant cinematography with great acting makes this certainly the best PART TWO film ever. Michael V. Gazzo is particularly memorable as Frank Pentangeli a Capo in the Corleone family who was neither seen nor mentioned in the first film has now taken over the duties of the deceased Pete Clemenza. Lee Strasberg the legendary acting coach and teacher turns in a top performance himself as Hyman Roth friend yet enemy to Michael . Gastone Moschin as Fanucci a moustache Pete of the early mob days who young Vito must confront. G.D. Spradlin as Nevada Senator Pat Geary who's pleasant smile holds his slick veneer. Dominic Chianese as Johnny Ola `Sicilian Messenger Boy' to the powerful Roth.

Part Two is a much more complex picture than the first as many more characters are involved in the dual story line. At one point Gazzo's character Pentangeli comments that `The Corleone family was like the Roman Empire'. The Roman Empire however fell. Godfather Part II will never fall.;0;0;False tt0071562;Apolla;27/09/1999;Is there a better movie?;9;OK, so I've seen Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Star Wars Trilogy, Titanic, The Godfather, and all those other films that contest the sought after prize of Best Movie Ever. Well, I don't know if The Godfather Part II is that movie, but it sure feels like it sometimes. I love all those other movies, except maybe Star Wars. And yet I still keep coming back to Part II. The pull of both Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino in one movie is too much, and this is a better movie than Heat. It's got all you need- family, love, violence (a lot), passion, violence, opulent scenery, violence, what more do you need?;0;0;False tt0071562;JoshyR;10/09/1999;Contrast of Family Life;10;This movie is a masterpiece - it works beautifully as a contrast of changing times and the disintigration of family values. The last scenes sum up the picture perfectly. The young Vito Corleone holds the infant Michael, proclaiming his love for him. Thirty years later the grown Michael coldly has his brother murdered. Try and find a movie that has more emotional tragedy than this one. The chronoligical video release of the first two movies totally loses the point of the second film.;0;0;False tt0071562;EmptyLeo;19/08/1999;Better than the first? I dunno;9;I loved Marlon Brando but Al Pacino stepped into the role pretty good. The De Niro flashbacks, it's all good. I don't know which movie is better.

I loved when AFI's top 100 was on and one producer was saying how much he cursed Francis Ford Coppola because he had trouble listing his top 5 all-time films and dammit Coppola, you gave me 2 of them!

10/10 for Part II;0;0;False tt0071562;A Triump;09/08/1999;What a film should be;10;WoW! When i saw this movie, i was amazed. Coppola continues the riveting Corleone saga between pacino's Michael and deniro's Young Vito. Both have never been better, and the supporting cast is amazing. The film did not seem the nearly three and a half hours that it was. Also, I thought that scenes between Michael and Fredo were among the best i've seen. Along with Citizen kane, Lawrence of Arabia, and casablanca, this film, which somehow manages to outdo the first one (a great film in its own right), could possibly be the best I've ever seen.;0;0;False tt0071562;Nash;07/07/1999;Better than the original;;Possibly the only sequel better than the original. And one the the greatest 20 movies ever made.

A more complex storyline than the original. The follows the rise of the father and the fall of the son. Many themes are explored, probably most importantly the dehumanizing effect of greed and lust for power.

Beautifully acted all around.

A wonderful 200 minutes of cinema. An A+.;0;0;False tt0071562;grayman-2;09/06/1999;Still top of the list;10;After watching countless films , including all critics Top 100's , and all the five star movies. This is still the one to beat and I just can't find a better film (the first one comes close and It's a wonderful life).I Just keep on looking!!!;0;0;False tt0071562;Asterios;12/05/1999;Simply the best !;;I think that this is the greatest movie ever made . It can only be Godfather I better than this one . However here we have a much better job and much more professional , by people who already had success with the first episode . If episode I was the beginning , this one is something far more than the sequel.;0;0;False tt0071562;pgoodall;24/01/2002;the best film of the 70's;;It doesn't happen very often, but now and then a sequel - if you can call this film such a thing - ends up improving upon the themes and dramas of the first film. In this second slice of Corleone murder, intrigue and family ties, one misses Brando for about five minutes, and then Pacino takes the screen in what must surely be the finest piece of acting he has ever done. An Oscar for Scent Of A Woman? Typical blindness on the part of Academy voters, because Pacino blows everyone else away with just a look of hatred and coldness from his eyes, and by the way he reacts on the screen. By the end of the film he looks like a 20th century Richard III, complete with a blood-red shirt and a pale, almost lifeless face. Coppola, already scoring points that year for his excellent conspiracy drama, The Conversation, delivers what is, in my opinion, the best ever film made between the years 1970- 1979. In short, from start to finish, this film is totally mesmerising. DeNiro steps into Brando's shoes as the younger Don in a wonderfully evocative recreation of New York in the early part of the century, and yet come his last scene you will have no problem in believing that this will be the man who, in twenty years time, would grow up to be Marlon Brando in The Godfather. Twenty-eight years of meatier gangster flicks (Goodfellas, Once Upon A Time In America) have failed to erode its power and undeniable genius. This is because The Godfather part two is like every other classic work of cinematic art - it never ages and its power will never fade. Alas, a third part helped to remove some of its shine, but only a tiny part. A third chapter wasn't really nessecary - The story of Michael Corleone ends right there - on Lake Tahoe.

Movies like this come round once every decade, so do yourselves all a big favour and sit down for 200 minutes and indulge in a brilliant movie experience. You'll thank me later!

10/10!;0;0;False tt0071562;jquirmbach;07/01/2002;Great Movie!;9;Once again Al Pacino plays his character very strong. Also the rest of the cast, like Robert DeNiro and Robert Duvall, playing their roles beautiful. Not as good like the first part, but still a great film. 9 out of 10.;0;0;False tt0071562;taimur74;30/12/2001;Intensity;10;What makes this movie phenomenal is the performance by pacino . Famously hospitalized for exhaustion after this movie . His Micheal Corleone is a masterpiece fo characterization and undoubtedly the greatest performance ever . Do yourself a favor and watch this movie SOON !;0;0;False tt0071562;funnnnn;09/12/2001;Beautiful;10;Impossible to believe that the second movie could be as engaging as the first. The casting of young Don Vito was outstanding, with DeNiro portraying the mannerisms to a magnificent performance.

One of the outstanding movies of our lifetime.;0;0;False tt0071562;mikel weisser;09/12/2001;come on folks you know #2 tries harder;10;"Easily Francis Ford Coppola's 2nd best movie (OK maybe rivaled for that honor by ""The Conversation"") and #1 IS NOT the Godfather. ""Apocalypse Now"" forever of course. BUT Godfather II delivers on all the promises made by part one and then some. The film offers standout performances. sumptuous sets that span almost a century and two continents. The sweep of the story is fantastical the acting is in depth the structure a balanced homage to the principles of part one but far more polished. Get with the program. sure, part one is a great action movie, but this is pure cinema gold.";0;0;False tt0071562;taimur74;03/12/2001;The Greatest performance ever;10;We all know that this is an incredible movie adn the greatest sequel but this movie also has the greatest performance of all time in Al PAcino's Micheal . I have never seen any actor use his eyes to such devastating effect the way PAcino does and i have yet to see Pacino ( or any other actor ) better this performance .;0;0;False tt0071562;ZooR;27/11/2001;One of the greatest movies EVER made!;10;Personally I think that this is the best movie Francis Ford Coppola has ever made. But I personally see the Godfather triology as ONE masterpiece. And I can honestly say that this is the best movie ever made when it comes to drama films. I mean this is the reason why I started to watch movies in the first place!

The ONLY grade you can give this movie is 10/10!!! Anything under that is an act of war against REAL movie lovers.

Sign: ZooR;0;0;False tt0071562;caligal627;17/11/2001;I felt this movie was amazing and is a classic!;10;I am in love with all the Godfather movies and think Francis Ford Coppola did a fantastic job. One of the unique characteristics of this movie that separates it from the other two is the fact that is switches from Don's childhood to his adulthood. Robert DeNiro is awesome as well as Al Pacino.;0;0;False tt0071562;ycasey;06/11/2001;Better!Better!Better!;;The Godfather Part II surpasses the original (no mean feat!). DeNiro is a revelation as the young Vito and how fitting that he should be the one to portray Vito and take up the baton from Brando. Symbolism anyone? Two of the finest actors of their respective generations and Al Pacino giving a performance he has yet to better. What more do you want? The scenes shot in Sicily look sumptuous and the period scenes are also extraordinary (check out young Vito going across the rooftops to take out the local Godfather on the stairs)Fine, fine support from John Cazale as Fredo, Diane Keaton as Kay and Talia Shire as Connie deserves a special mention. This film is a classic and if you haven't seen it yet you'd better have a good excuse. Why is it only rated 8.9??!!;0;0;False tt0071562;citizen_manary;21/10/2001;Superlative (some spoilers);10;"After seeing ""The Godfather"" for the first time, it instantly rose to the ranks of my favorite films. Because I loved the film so much, I didn't think either of its sequels could surpass it. However, I was wrong. The Godfather Part II contains some of the finest acting, direction, screenwriting and design that has ever been seen in film. To call this film spectacular is an understatement of near criminal proportions. This is a masterwork, and however varied Coppola's career has been since, ""II"" will always redeem him.

Enough people have described the plot, so I won't go into that. Instead, I'll focus on the performances. De Niro is wonderful as young Vito Corleone. De Niro uses more facial communication than speech in the film, like Brando in ""I"". In De Niro, we see a hungry young man who comes the the U.S. with anger and a desire for vengeance, and watch him evolve into a man who obtains the power to achieve it. Additionally, his character's arc provides the perfect contrast to Michael's. Young Vito is a man who builds ties with others, has good professional and personal relationships, and would never lose his family. The last shot of his character is a tender moment between father and son.

As good as De Niro is, Pacino outshines him (and everyone else) in his part as Michael. In the last film, we saw a young man who gradually became caught in an undesired life. Here, we see him grow into that life, and what he does with the power he's attained. Pacino is brutal in this film. He commands the screen whenever on it, and his character's destruction of the family and enterprise his father worked hard to create is devastating. You feel for Michael, a man who is despicable and has lost the honor he had at the beginning of the first film, but who has also been caught in a world that he never could have avoided, much as he might have tried. As Michael becomes colder, harder and continues drawing his family's organization away from what it originally was, Pacino's character continues to become more sympathetic. Even his eyes communicate the change this character has gone through from the beginning of ""I"" to the end of ""II"". It's a brilliantly played part, and it isn't surprising that Pacino hasn't been able to surpass it. In fact, it could be argued that this is the greatest performance captured in cinema.

The other performances are uniformly spectacular. Keaton and Duvall are standouts. However, John Cazale, someone who deserved a career like Pacino or De Niro's (though the career he did have while he was alive was impeccable) is also brilliant. Michael's destruction of his family has much to do with his relationship with Fredo, and Fredo's inadverdent betrayal. Cazale is brilliant as a man who has always been viewed as a weakling and lived in the shadow of his brothers and tries to get out, only to bring about his own fall in the process. It's nearly as devastating a part as Pacino's, and Cazale plays it perfectly.

In conclusion, I cannot recommend this film highly enough. It enhances ""I"", and surpasses it at the same time. While ""III"" is a good film, it doesn't achieve the perfection that the first two have. If you haven't watched this series already, set aside a day and enjoy film perfection.";0;0;True tt0071562;SKG-2;05/03/1999;Achieves the impossible;10;"As I've said before, I really hate sequels. Technically, this may not strictly be a sequel (since half of this, the flashback half, was in the original novel), but what the hell; this is the rare sequel which is not only great, but improves on the original. If you held a gun to my head and asked me what my favorite movie was of all time, this would be the one. Though I disagree with Coppola, who felt he romanticized the Corleones in Part I, without that feeling, there would have been no Part II, and we must thank him for that.

The way time passes from present to pass effortlessly, the way we see how past affects present, the way the story of Michael Corleone achieves the level of Greek tragedy, the direction, the performances, the score, everything comes together even deeper than in the first one. But the primary reason to see this is Al Pacino. It is my humble opinion that not only is this the best of his five great performances from 1972-75 (the others being THE GODFATHER, SCARECROW, SERPICO, and DOG DAY AFTERNOON), it is the greatest performance by an actor I have ever seen, period (Liv Ullman's performance in PERSONA is the best performance by an actress I have seen). Michael Corleone becomes more closed off as he achieves power. He alienates friends, family, even the people who work for him, because he completely closes himself off from humanity. Yet we feel for him, partly because Pacino NEVER plays for our sympathy, but gives a closed performance. It's easy to overact, it's hard to play still and close to the vest, and Pacino chooses the more difficult path. We also feel for him because we can sense Michael acts this way because it's the only way he feels he can run things. If he ever came out of his detachment, he'd have to admit he was a failure and was being immoral(which he does in Part III). A masterpiece.";0;0;False tt0071562;mhsvikings;10/10/2001;A masterpiece, one of the best movies ever made;;"I am completely amazed by this movie, it is about as perfect as a movie can be in my opinion. The acting is first rate, the story is compelling and the characters are unforgettable. This movie to me is better than ""The Godfather"" and can stand alone as an individual feature. Also the music is some of the best in cinema history. All in all one of the cinematic landmarks in American history. I can't wait to see it on DVD!!! 11 out of 10 stars";0;0;False tt0071562;Braveheart1626;15/09/2001;Not a sequel, another terrific movie.;10;When you compare The Godfather to The Godfather, Part II, the only difference between the two films is the cast. There is no James Caan and Marlon Brando. Now, that doesn't make the movie worse, as most people would think. The storyline is interesting, yet very sad, although this movie is excellent, it is very sad. The Godfather, however, is inspiring due to Marlon Brando's beautiful and incouraging acting. Therefore, Al Pacino has to act twice as hard, and he's a great actor. He does a fantastic job. Every scene he acts he acts with passion and courage. Vito Corleone's childhood is also great, although the adaptation in the 1970's of The Godfather and The Godfather Part II, was called, The Godfather, A Novel of a movie, (I think). I watched that and it was the two Godfather's combined together. Vito Corleone's childhood from Part II is combined at the beginning of the movie. Amazing and terrific. Definetly worth watching.;0;0;False tt0071562;slybacon75;10/09/2001;Second. Best.;10;"I'm a decade or so too young to remember the cinematic days of the first two Godfather movies, but I bet that when rumours of a sequel first began to circulate, many moviegoers would have doubted the need for it and would have had serious doubts over whether it could possibly do justice to the masterpiece that was the first film.

Such sequel let-downs as Jurassic Park II and Die Hard II had sadly all become part-and-parcel of my 1990s moviegoing experience. The only rule of sequels which I was familiar with as I grew up was that they'd almost certainly get progressively worse from movie to movie. So, after loading the cassette for Godfather Part II, can you blame me for hitting the play button on my VCR with some trepidation?

Yes you can! I should have known better. The Godfather Part II is such an outstanding movie that, in fact, to call it a sequel to the first movie does it little justice. Call me clichéd, but 'companion piece' is indeed the best way to describe it in relation to the first. In terms of scope and magnitude of its vision, I don't think it has a rival, anywhere.

It is also one of those movies in which every little department is so perfect, that without even one of them, you can imagine the whole thing collapsing.

Nothing needs to be said that hasn't already been uttered innumerable times regarding the casting and their respective performances. Pacino and De Niro are simply mesmerising with Duvall, Cazale and Strasberg providing the rock-solid support. Coppola and Puzo's script charts Michael's moral demise so graphically, it almost pains you to think back to the squeaky-clean war hero presented in The Godfather's opening. As for the bold move to write flashbacks, they serve a hugely meaningful purpose throughout the movie and without them, the main storyline wouldn't impact half as much as it does. Nino Rota's music captures in just one theme (that which first appears as the young Vito approaches Ellis Island with fellow asylum-seekers) the grandness and sinking tragedy of this movie, and his incidental music is magnificent without being intrusive.

Perhaps the greatest individual plaudit should be reserved for Gordon Willis's cinematography; It captures the mood of the film perfectly and he betters even his work on the original. In itself it could be labelled a Cinematographer's Bible. And anyone who has borne witness to that final shot of the movie will know exactly what I'm talking about, but for now, that's for my fellow sequel-doubters out there to discover. An unparallelled masterpiece.";0;0;False tt0071562;stryker-5;26/02/1999;"""You Can Never Lose Your Family""";;"Here you have the supreme example of a sequel which eclipses its original. ""The Godfather Part II"" is a majestic tragedy, operatic in its sweep, gigantic in its architecture and a stand-alone masterpiece in its own right - but a film which also amplifies and explains the film which went before it. In the closing reverie sequence, the superbly-staged flashback, we finally understand what has driven Michael Corleone and why he has so persistently humiliated Tom Hagan.

Several narrative threads are embroidered into Michael's story. The scene shifts neatly from Sicily in 1901 to New York in 1917 and 1941, and to Nevada and Cuba in 1958. The period detail is nothing short of wonderful. The vendetta is enacted in the exact same locations which featured in Domingo's ""Cavalleria Rusticana"". Same streets, same theme.

Brooding ominously over everything is The Family. Many of the characters try to escape its clutches - Connie, Kay, Fredo, Frankie Pentangeli - but The Family is all-powerful and its reach is long. Michael was Don Vito's favourite son, and this is more a curse than a blessing. The college-educated marine officer expected and deserved to carve out a destiny for himself, but The Family had other plans. Chosen by fate to be the new Don, Michael succeeds brilliantly but also succumbs to despair as love eludes him and paranoia sets in. ""You wanna wipe everybody out?"" asks Tom. ""Just my enemies,"" answers Michael - as he plans the death of his own sibling. By the end, Michael's very existence is surrounded by, and predicated upon, death.

Tom Hagan is the non-Italian who has, through loyalty and intelligence, risen high in The Family. The Corleone lawyer and majordomo, Tom can always be relied upon to be calm, efficient and discreet. Robert Duvall was rightly accorded second billing after Pacino for his fascinating, understated performance. ""Tom isn't going to sit in with us,"" Michael tells Johnny Ola, and we see Tom masking his surprise at this humiliation. At one point he asks directly, ""Why do you hurt me, Michael?"" For this man, the consummate staff officer, to ask such a thing shows the depth of his pain. At the very end of the film, Michael's desire to wound Tom is explained.

""I intend to squeeze you. I don't like your kind of people,"" says the brash Senator Geary as he bargains over a corrupt gaming licence. Later, The Family rescues him from a deeply compromising situation and the Senator becomes yet another Corleone bagman, speaking in defence of Michael at the Senate hearings. The sunlit frivolity of the first communion party outside jars nicely with the dark dealings inside the tenebrous house, underlining Michael's remarks to Geary on the subject of hypocrisy.

Pacino is hugely authoritative as Michael, and carries much of the credit for the film's triumphant success, but it has to be said that Robert de Niro is astonishing as Don Vito. He grows in assurance as he ages before our eyes, and combines the human decency and the cold ruthlessness which are both the hallmarks of Vito Corleone. De Niro achieves all of this whilst marvellously and uncannily reproducing the mannerisms of Brando's creation.

Fredo is the weak brother. Lacking Sonny's cheerful brutality and Michael's gravity, he is passed over for the succession. The Rosado brothers manipulate him and make a traitor of him. John Cazale plays him beautifully as the nervy malcontent who feels he should be the Don, but who is given the whorehouse jobs. By the end, Fredo has regressed into a childlike state, fishing with the kids and tearfully grateful for being allowed into Michael's presence.

The Fanucci sequence is terrific. 1917 comes to life for us as a crowded New York street scene transforms into a theatre interior. We see a Neapolitan bel canto performance reproduced faultlessly. This story-within-a-story explains Vito Andolini's rise to prominence with pace and historical imagination. Similarly, Cuba on the eve of the communist takeover is brought vividly to life on the screen. We share Michael's growing sense of unease as the Batista regime unravels, and it becomes clear that Fredo has betrayed The Family. ""Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"" is Michael's motto, and we see him put this to devastating effect with Fredo and Hymie Roth.

For all Michael's success as a leader, he fails his wife Kay (Diane Keaton) and his private life is barren. Kay has to be protected from The Family's enemies, but to her it feels like a claustrophobic imprisonment. Things have gone badly wrong by the time of Michael's return from Cuba (he has to be briefed on which Christmas present he has 'given' his son). A richly emotional chiaroscuro scene with his mother brings Michael to admit that he has lost Kay's love. She is the loser, becoming inexorably estranged from The Family and from her own children. Michael symbolically obliterates her by closing the door in her face.

In the shifting sands of gangland treachery, it is hard to be sure who has double-crossed whom. Did Roth deceive Michael, or is Michael now hopelessly paranoid? What was the truth behind the bungled whacking of Frankie Five Angels? One reality emerges from the chimera. The Family alone is strong, and it crushes mercilessly those who fall victim to it. Even Don Michael.";0;0;False tt0071562;taimur74;05/09/2001;Pacino in his prime;10;If you want to see the most intense actor in cinematic history give the most intense performance in cinematic history look no further than this movie . Pacino is absoulutely magnificent as a tightly coiled don and creates the greatest character ever portrayed by any actor ever . Watch this movie !;0;0;False tt0071562;ShFo10;29/08/2001;A deep film. A deep sequel. Of course a classic.;10;"**SPOILERS**The opening scene is of Michael Corleone sitting in his chair in his office recieving respects from his advisors. The scripts states this as Michael being ""in profile"". He looks glumm and slightly stares down at them. Then the title reveals the that chair he was sitting in. An aspect of his life we have seen and preview.

At the beginning of the film, we get a view of the mafia that we didn't get in the first one. Of actual Sicilians in Sicily. This is probably the most brutal part and area of the hepacracy that is witnessed in the film. Don Ciccio is an evil mafia cheftain, asumed to be into all sorts of corruption including inteferring with civilain lives (such as ""protection""). When Antonio Andolini is killed for an insult made to the Don, he is of course killed. His son Paulo, probably one to have give spiritual inheritence to Santino, swears revenge and of course is killed in turn. Antonio's wife makes a reverent pleed to the Don to spare her last son, Vito. He refuses with a simple and cold ""No."" Vito escapes as his mother is killed. When he arrives in Ellis Island, he is given his name ""Vito Corleone"".

In Lake Tahoe, Navada, the Corleones have achieved wealth and are making their way. A great celebration is made for Michael and Kay's son Anthony. Michael meets with a recsenting senator, who even made a nice a comment in a speech ""Anthony VYETO Corleone."" He refuses to submit a gsambling licsense to Michael at a reasonable and fair price. When the meeting ends, Michael finally leads up to put ""My offer is this. Nothing.""

Kay is preagnant with a child. Connie has had at least one other failing marriage. Her next choice is mostly a complete stranger and anyone can see that the relationship will be useless. Michael even puts in to his sister like he does in battle talk ""Connie, if don't listen to me, and marry this man, you'll disapoint me."" Michael truly is in the business he never wanted.

Michael's intentions are to make a deal to own hotels in Vegas with long family friends Hyman Roth and Johnny Olah. Roth coneects with the Rosato brothers who another long family friend Frank Pantangili despises. So, he aks for the murder which is refuse. Before Michael knows it, his bedroom is shattered by bullets from hitmen. Thus brings us into the battle hyme.

**SPOILERS**

Vito lives in New York City in a ""minature Italy"" area with his wife and infant son. He is finally brought into something when Clamenza asks him to hide revolvers for him. There is a local mafia family known as the Black Hand. One of the main men and collectors is Don Funnucci, an evil ""protector"". Because of him, Vito loses his job at a baker, but kin heartedly reponds to his boss with ""You've always been good to me and watched over me like a father, and I won't forget it."" When he arrives home, he is in fact enjoyed. When he meets Clamenza, he rewards him by going into ""a friends"" house and taking a carpet for the apartment.

When Vito and his friends' business in corrupted by Funnucci, Vito dfecides to make a go at it. We get his line of ealier age ""I make him an offer he don't refuse."" Some of the best directing is put in when Vito goes into an apartment from the rooftop. He has a revolver and a dinner cloth. Vito unscrews the lightbulb and Funnucci taps it to get it back then soon discovers Vito. Vito fires through the cloth. Funnucci does't pay sattention to his attacker He wrather examines the wound as Vito fires more ans soon the cloth is on fire. He finally gives him a mout shot and escapes to the roof where he throw the cloth aout and destroys the pistol by breakng it into pieces and throwing them into chimneys and pipes. An absolutely genious scene.

When Michael discovers that his brother Fredo is the traitor adn gies him the kiss of death, we must be skcocked at the emotion. The script, of course, is real tight and spreads a lot. They finally pull themselves out of tight spot with a senate comittee by intemadating thei key witness Pantangeli with his brother from Sicily. I've seen the film five times and there's there's still a lot I could probably pick up on. Kay leaves Michael and informs him that she delaberertly termanated their coming child.

Vito takes his family on a trip to Sicily where he can expand hs olive oil business and take care of some certain matters. When he makkes the visit to Don Ciccio, he show the respect of kissing his hand and respecting him verbally. Then there's his line ""My father's name was Vito Andolini and this is for you!"" He slices him accross the stomach. Brilliant cene, of course. Then there's that train trip back where he holds Michaells hand out to wave good-bye.

At the funeral of Mama Corleone, Connie says she'll stay closer to the family and convinces Michael to fordive Fredo who has been eliminated from the family as far as Michael is concerened. there's the intensity of holding him and looking up at Neri who knows what's to be done. Michael is determined to have Roth killed. When Tom abjects he puts ""Tom, ya know you surprise me. If one thing's certain. If history has taught us anything, it's that you kill anyone."" Also there's ""I don't feel I have to wipe everybody out, Tom. Just my enemies. That's all."" Tom makes a visit to Pantangialli. They talk about reference of the Corleone family being the Roman Empire. Tom assures him ""Don't you worry about anything Franky Five Angles.""

In Tahoe, Kay make a goodbye to the children. Connie rushes her on account of Miachael who does show up and, like before, shuts her out at a doorway, now from her own family. Fredo intends to take Anthony out on a boat ride to fish. Anthony is called in to go to Reno, so Fredo goes alone with Al Neri. Then there's the seguence like the one in the original with killings, only, of course, shorter. Roth is to be handed over to protection at a Miami Airport and he give interviews. Rocco, as a reporter impersonator gets close up and shoots him in the stomach. Michael, being so nice and consederate, didn't bother at all tog ive Rocco protection and he was killed as well. The FBI break open the bathroom door to find Pantangiali in the tub, filled with blood, dead. Michael watches from the boat house as Fredo says his procedure for catching fish, a hail Marry. When he finishes, we are closes on Michael and hear a shot ring. Then we see Neri get up in the boat. Michael then sits down.

""Hey everyone, pay attention this is my friend Carlo Rizzi."" The flashback is exactly what is needed for emotion. It's the Godfather's birthday and the day or a few days after Pearl Harbor. Sonny, looking for someone for his sister, introduces Carlo to Connie. Then Sal Tessio comes in with a cake. He referes to the men who have inlisted as ""A bunch of saps."" Michael questions him and says that he quit school to join the Marines. An innocent and patriotic man who had recentment for his family who put him in an infirmary. Sonny and the others are shcocked and unpleased with this news. As their father comes in they go to sing ""For He's a Jolly Good Fellow"" while Michael sits alone at the table. Then there's the scene of Michael eing held by Vito, waving good-bye to Sicily. Finally, there's the incredibly pignant scene on him in his side yard being closed in on. Miserable and completely alone. He will now not be forgiven (at least by a good part of the audience) and is truly more evil then ever.

The score, of course, is very emotional and filled with good compasition. Coppola got the oscar for directing he deserved this time. Everything about the film is great. The acting by Pacino and De Niro. Cinemotagraphy Everything. There's the great powerful paralax of a man arising to hope and being a hero to his people and there's the crookid,villainess successor who destroys what the whole matter of the particular orginazation was and was to protect. Family. This is an encrddible film and an abolute great sequel about a serious subject.";0;0;True tt0071562;femihw;29/07/2001;Simply the greatest;10;"I've lost count of the number of times I've watched this film in awe rewinding the vcr to catch scenes again. It is one of the few films ever to have made an indelible mark on popular culture with it's script even being referenced in the tv mafia drama ""The Sopranos"". Al Pacino's performance is unbelievable emanating the coldness of death that is alluded to in the novel. Pacino is able to build upon the script to make Michael Corleone one of the greatest characters ever seen on celluloid. His performance alone is worth watching by itself. Michael's ascent to the top of the mafia in America and his descent in his family is the essence of this film. Robert De Niro and Robert Duvall are excellent with John Cazale giving notice of his immense talent which was tragically never fully realised due to his premature death through illness. The script is itself magnificent particularly where Michael and Fredo are together in the family home, Hyman Roth's (Lee Strasberg) speech on ""who gave the order"" and Vito Corleone's (Robert De Niro) apparent first use of ""make him an offer he can't refuse"". The script helps to make this film the natural completion of the ""Godfather"" saga. The third film is an irrelevance in the company of two of the greatest film's ever made as it is only average. There may never be a better film made or story written as ""The Godfather Part II"".";0;0;False tt0071562;Alanjackd;23/06/2015;Poor;2;another boring 3 hours. All bad performances. Im not going to say its good because everyone else does,,im going to say it as I see it.Anybody who gives this a good review is just listening to the media. I love movies so I watch them but this was a complete bore. Al Pacino and Bob De Niro cannot save this waste of time.Bad characters and bad direction heap on the misery of having to sit through this .Watched gf1 and now this...will not bother watching gf3 if its as bad as this. So many good movies from the 70s around but this pile of muck doesn't do the decade justice.I think FFC is a really bad director but if the mafia exists I reckon they paid him to make this bile.;6;20;False tt0071562;in1984;01/03/2013;Mafia-like Excess near its Worst;3;If you must see a Godfather film, see the 1st. Like #2, it's overrated and over-hyped, bot not nearly as much. Both are long films in need of more cuts, but 2 is like a film by a man who can't stop talking about himself and his friends.

The massive failing is the director gets far too much respect, as if he's a mafia godfather himself, so not nearly enough cuts are made, like Diane Keaton's awful acting. While it's easy enough to follow the 2 timelines, it's disappointing that because of the sloppy excesses of the main timeline, the 2 rarely tie together. Had it been up to me, I would have done only the early timeline as a prequel.

Pacino and DeNiro both deserve the acting credit they get. The whole film is filled with interesting, well acted male characters - probably what deceives many people into giving it excess credit. Unfortunately, great acting performances and characters don't add up to a masterpiece.;5;16;False tt0071562;pfgpowell-1;01/06/2009;The rotten core at the centre of this well-made film;5;What exactly are we talking about when we amateur critics write these reviews? What exactly is 'a film'? Certainly it is more than technical ability. It is more than just the acting, or the directing, or the story. It is everything which makes up that film. So The Godfather II (as did the first The Godfather) presents us all with something of a dilemma. It was made in the early Seventies when, possibly, the public, though not the police and the FBI, were largely unaware of the reality of the Mafia. The yellow press (called the red tops here in the UK) gave them unlimited publicity, and even when we were shown pictures of the bullet-riddled bodies of bosses lying outside barbershops and restaurants, there was a certain thrill about it all. Then came The Sopranos, whose central conceit of a Mafia head of a family suffering from panic attacks was more or less the keynote to a certain disrespect of the whole shooting match, and the public's view is different. We now see the Mafia for what it they are: nasty, brutish, cynical, heartless, sadistic thugs with, it would seem, no redeeming features. Forget all that talk of 'honour' and 'loyalty', these men, and the women who tolerated their brutality and were quite happy to live off its proceeds, were and are scum. So what to make of films such as the Godfather series? They are extremely well-made, well-written, well-directed, well-acted, well-designed and they stand head and shoulders above their peers. But in an odd sort of way, these films are thoroughly devalued by the central lie they tell. Vito Corleone and his son Michael are portrayed as honourable men, wise men, men to be admired. They are almost portrayed, in their convoluted heroism, as honest men. But they are nothing of the kind. They are brutal and murderous and do not deserve to be admired. The men in The Sopranos apparently came far closer to portraying the real mafiosi. Indeed real mafiosi are widely quoted as saying as much. So why did Coppola choose to present them as something close to heroes? And that brings me back to my first question and the very real dilemma faced by someone making a judgement of these very well-made films: as the portrayal of what is basically scum as honourable men is so central to Coppola's films, where does that leave the films? I really have no answer. As a piece of entertainment, of course, the Godfather films are superb. But once you consider the wider context, the butchery, the misery, the killing, the heroin dealing, the pimping, the whoring, you do have to wonder. As film-making this would get 8/9 our of 10. But given the corrupt moral ambiguity at its centre, only a 5.;5;16;True tt0071562;barnabyrudge;09/04/2014;A remarkable epic crime movie, utterly compelling as a sequel though it requires some knowledge of the previous movie to fully enjoy it.;10;"The Godfather: Part II has the rare distinction of being a sequel that is equal to, possibly even greater than, its predecessor. Indeed, it is one of the finest films ever made, a gangster picture that manages to be epic in scope as well as length, showcasing a number of brilliant performances and proving that, for all the fancy special effects in the world, nothing beats a truly compelling story. The only thing to bear in mind is that The Godfather: Part II relies heavily on a knowledge of the previous film – it is not one of those follow-ups that can be watched out of sequence with any hope of grasping what is going on. 'Sequel' might be the wrong word actually, as the film is divided into two sections, one continuing the story of the Corleone crime family from where it left off at the end of Part I, the other acting as a turn-of- the-century prequel, showing the rise of Vito Corleone from orphaned Sicilian immigrant to powerful Mob boss. In effect, The Godfather: Part II is therefore a continuation of, and prequel to, the existing narrative dealt with in the original.

Following the death of his father and older brother, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is the new head of his family's empire, based now in Nevada having moved out of New York several years earlier. Running the 'business' is taking its toll on the once-honest Michael – his relationship with wife Kay (Diane Keaton) is frosty and distant; his brother Fredo (John Cazale) is becoming more of a burden than ever; he must deal with rumblings of discontent from New York; and his pledge to legitimise the Corleone family is further than ever from becoming a reality. Following an unsuccessful assassination attempt, Michael puts consigliere Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) in charge of the family for a while, while he goes away to deal with some business matters and investigate who tried to have him killed. His adventures bring him into contact with Jewish gangster Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), who may be Michael's ally or enemy. The story traces Michael's long descent into isolation and paranoia, alienating himself from everyone in his all- consuming quest to come out on top in this epic gangland-battle-of-wits. Interwoven into the story are a number of flashbacks showing the rise of Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando's character from Part I, here portrayed by Robert De Niro). After arriving in New York a poor immigrant, Vito eventually finds honest work in a grocery store but is hounded out of his job by local gangster Don Fanucci (Gastone Moschin). Making ends meet through petty burglaries, he gradually rises up the criminal ranks, killing Fanucci and eventually becoming a feared and respected figure in the neighbourhood.

Whereas The Godfather was criticised for glamorising violent crime and the Mafia, The Godfather: Part II shows things in a much uglier light. Families are torn apart by jealousy and betrayal; relationships are destroyed by the lack of communication; innocence is tarnished irrevocably. In short, the world seems somehow more rotten and corrupt in The Godfather: Part II. It's an altogether more ruthless film, harder-edged, shockingly authentic even. The performances are exemplary throughout. How Pacino didn't win the Best Actor Oscar of the year is beyond comprehension, creating as he does this incredible character whose grip on his empire comes at a terrible price. De Niro is excellent as the young Vito Corleone; Keaton fabulous as Michael's neglected wife; Duvall convincing as ever as the family lawyer; and Strasberg mesmerising as the slippery Hyman Roth, one of the truly great characters of gangster cinema. If it seems like in this review I have done nothing but shower superlatives upon this film, that's because I have. The Godfather: Part II is, quite simply, one of the greatest movies of all- time.";3;8;True tt0071562;Leofwine_draca;07/04/2014;Good, but not as good as the first;8;"A lot of people seem to consider THE GODFATHER PART II to be the best film ever made, a film that's even better than it's already excellent predecessor. Unfortunately, I have to disagree. While this movie is very good, and as well made as the original, I think the original has the edge.

The reason for that is the script, which was just better, and more involved, the first time around. Here, there are dual narratives, one of which follows the traditional sequel route of showing that happened to the Corleone family after the events of the first movie, while the second is a prequel revealing how Vito Corleone became the mafia boss he ended up as.

While I love Robert De Niro and I enjoyed the flashback scenes, I felt this whole sequence was slightly unnecessary. From the material given, the viewer can already guess how the De Niro character rose through the ranks and the events we witness feel a little bit superfluous. Sure, the pair of assassination scenes are excellent, but the rest just feels obvious and expected.

Meanwhile, the Pacino narrative also has its problems, although cast and director aren't at fault; Coppola reunites many of his principals here and to excellent effect. However, there isn't nearly as much incident in the narrative and the whole story feels a little dragged out, a little over-emphasised. In the first film, the Pacino character had three or four major plot points to deal with, whereas this time the events are limited; for example, the entire film focuses on the situation with Roth, whereas in THE GODFATHER that would have just taken up half an hour or so. Therefore the ending, when it comes, is admittedly powerful, but not as effective in comparison to the genuinely amazing things we saw in the first film. It's been done before, and apart from a little more depth and character focus, we can't take much more away from this sequel. So it's very good, but not quite up there to the level of the first.";3;8;False tt0071562;jboothmillard;13/03/2005;The Godfather Part II;10;"This is equally as great as the first, and another success for Oscar and Golden Globe winning director Francis Ford Coppola (he could have won the Oscar for the first). This film tells two stories of the Corleones, it tells the current events of the new Godfather, Michael Corleone, and the story of young Vito Corleone. BAFTA winning, and Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Al Pacino is brilliant at being a villain, the worst thing he did as the character was to kill his own brother. But it's Oscar and BAFTA winning Robert DeNiro as young Vito that's my favourite of the whole film, because he is very good at impersonating Brando, and being just as mean as him. He is just as good at being the Godfather as the late, great Marlon Brando was. Also starring Diane Keaton as Kay Corleone, John Cazale as Fredo Corleone, Oscar nominated Talia Shire as Connie Corleone, Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth and Oscar nominated Michael V. Gazzo as Frankie Pentangeli. A lot more interesting and complex than the first, a masterpiece sequel, I only wish it was left here and there was no third film. It won the Oscars for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Music for Nino Rota, Best Writing, Screenplay Adapted From Other Material and Best Picture, and it was nominated for Best Costume Design, it was nominated the BAFTAs for the Anthony Asquith Award for Film Music and Best Film Editing, and it as nominated the Golden Globes for Best Motion Picture - Drama, Best Original Score and Best Screenplay. Robert De Niro was number 2, and Al Pacino number 1 on The 100 Greatest Movie Stars, De Niro was number 50, and Pacino number 26 on The 100 Greatest Pop Culture Icons, and Pacino and De Niro together were number 5 on The World's Greatest Actor, Michael Corleone was number 11 on 100 Years, 100 Heroes & Villains, the film was number 58 on 100 Years, 100 Quotes (""Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.""), and along with the first film, both were number 2 on The 100 Greatest Films. Outstanding!";3;8;True tt0071562;bladesboycurt;12/06/2013;Awful;1;This film is so bad it made my knees burn !! I could only sit through 2 hours of this, and that was the worst part of my life. Ever. Although Godfather 1 was good this was not and I don't know how they got a third film out of this. Instead of watching the film i wish i would have made a daisy chain. I really wish i didn't watch this and i wish i could unwatch this film. The film is too long and boring and the storyline is blown way out of proportion. On the other hand i really enjoyed dumber and dumber and i would recommend watching that or anything with Will Smith in especially I am legend that is a great film. Overall i think the be who made this film should really question what they was thinking. PS. Death race is good the one with Jason Statham;11;47;False tt0071562;The-Sarkologist;03/03/2012;Comparison Between Father and Son;6;Well, it seems that I agree partially with Ebert on this film, except that he rated it higher than I did. The reason that I rated it lower is because there seems to be little to tie the entire film together. The character development and interaction is brilliant, but the plot itself seems to be quite loose and very thin in places. Also the movie seems to follow very closely to the style of the first film, with an almost sudden ending, where everybody that appears to be an antagonist is simply killed, or put out of the picture.

What this movie does well though is to offer a comparison between Don Vito Corleone and his son Michael Corleone. Here we see how Vito's family was killed by a powerful mafia Don in Sicily, and then flees to America to build his empire. We then jump to the present (in the film, which is 1959) to see the crowning glory of what his family became. The difference is that Michael Corleone is a cold and heartless man who slowly pushes everybody close to him away, while Vito Corleone, even though he can be a brutal murderer at times, is an honourable man who is there to help the poor and the weak. We see this when he bullies the landlord who bullies a poor widow tenant.

I guess the thing that strikes us most in this movie is how Michael and Vito Corleone change. Vito goes from being a poor orphan boy with small pox to a powerful Mafia Don, while Michael goes from being a rich family man to a cold and powerful man with no friends. In the final scenes he falls to the lowest and kills his brother.

I have never been all that great about sequels, and I feel that this movie is really no different.;4;13;True tt0071562;hadleya;24/11/2004;Spielberg meets Ed Wood - No Plot, Monumental Failure;;"Why Francis Ford Coppolla received such accolade for this film is beyond me. I suppose he must've hired everyone in Hollywood to do this picture. Do you think everyone had a piece? Piece of what you may ask. A piece of a failure of monumental proportions. This movie reminded me of the Titanic - the boat, not the movie.

Why is this movie a failure? This film suffers from terrible dramatic fundamentals. It is a classic example of the movie drives the plot which is not the way it works. Rather, good drama has as its one trademark, the plot drives the movie. Any first year director in any dramatic medium should know this. You do the scenes so that the plot is revealed, not rewritten. The reader is kept on edge, waiting to see what happens next.

And that is the key. The following notes on the characters are inconsequential. This movie suffers most from appalling writing that undermines everything. Nice dialogue does nothing if the storyline makes no sense. Who cares? In this film, the reader is constantly wondering, 'what just happened there.' Did I miss something? What are they talking about? Do I need to remember all these characters? No, you don't, Francis just wanted to get his cousin in the picture, so he's wasting your time to do it.

That is why the first film, despite its relatively meager budget was a success. Coppola was forced to quell his massive ego and improvise to make it work. He was sloppy and sometimes almost juvenile, but it didn't matter. The plot was so good, all he really had to do is show up. And he almost blew that. Here you see the true Coppola at his ultimate worse. Now you know why the producers of the first film were so worried.

All I could think about during the entire film was, 'Where is Brando?'

Bobby Deniro and the Italian language were annoying. Deniro was annoying, in general. All I could think about was, ""okay, so deniro wants to join the gang...of misfits.""

Pacino was lost. I started muting his outbursts because they were so predictable. The key to a good outburst is it has to be explosive meaning unpredictable. In Al's case it was just load and annoying. I yawned. The rest of the film focused on Pacino's facial movements from the restaurant scene in the first film. It was like ""Okay Al, remember that restaurant scene? Let's have you do those facial expressions again, for three whole hours. Do you think we'll get tired of it?""

Diane Keaton shouldn't have even been there. The stupid and pitiful moral struggles of family life made me wonder if Coppolla didn't spend his entire childhood watching the Brady bunch. What a load!!!!!! I can't believe he even attempted to address such things. Does he think I'm some kind of idiot? Obviously. ""But Daddy doesn't spend enough time with me."" ""Don't worry boy, he's in Cuba. I'll buy you a red toy car. let's go fishing."" I vomit.

The first half introduced so many utterly inconsequential characters, I couldn't help but wonder if they were all Coppolla's cousins. I've never seen so many gala affairs and parties in one film. I thought I was reading a travel brochure.

Coppolla had so overextended himself that at some point he was probably no longer even part of the film. I don't care how many hours he worked. All he did was serve the interests of his own ego. The artist was left helpless in a pile of rubble. It was a managerial catastrophe.

This movie was nothing more than a hackneyed soap opera overblown on a proportion that boggles the mind. Great sets, great music, great cameras, do nothing whatsoever if there is no storyline and the characters are uninteresting. ugh. I couldn't help but think that anyone who actually was a mobster would look at this and say, 'what a load of crap.'

Fortunately, you don't have to be a mobster to understand that you are being sold a bill of goods. All you have to do is read this. Oh, and for those who actually liked this film...I'll bet you liked Rocky II.

Don't waste your time.";4;13;False tt0071562;ehsanelite;03/09/2017;Boring and overrated;4;This movie is really boring, nothing happens, no energy, it's not a bad movie, it could be between the best 1000th movies of all time but 3?! number 3 in the list of top 250 movies of all time, that is sure overrated...

I have nothing to say cause nothing happens in this movie, it took me 2 days to watch it cause i got bored after every 10 minutes of it;3;9;False tt0071562;jacobjohntaylor1;30/06/2014;Don't wast your money;1;O.k so I used to think the Godfather was the worst gangster movie ever I stand corrected. The Godfather II is even stinker. Why do people who say they don't like violent movies like this piece pooh pooh I will never know. Ever one is a bad guy. And they all kill each other. Pooh pooh. Pooh pooh. Pooh pooh. It same thing as the first one. Stinky stinky pooh. Pooh pooh. Pooh pooh. Pooh pooh. A fresher pile of pooh then the first one that does make it better. Every one knows that manure is better then fresher pooh. Don't wast your money. Don't wast your time. It is long and boring just like the first one. I seen better movie in my toilet. Stinky stinky stinky pooh. All movie are better then is except of Godfather III. The is a real stinky one.;11;53;False tt0071562;dtdenver-987-925546;13/07/2017;Boring!;1;"This is what happens when a director's first movie is a huge hit. All stops and restraints imposed by the studio and producers disappear. Coppola was constantly told to put ""more action"" in Godfather I so he reluctantly did it. Not being forced to in Godfather II resulted in this snooze-fest. It might have been an entertaining 90-minute movie if the prolonged ""I'm a big filmmaker"" mood shots, pensive looks, silly symbolism (enough with the oranges already) had been curtailed by someone. The best part of the movie was a reject scene from Godfather I - that about says it all. A couple minutes of actual energy.";5;19;True tt0071562;Misael_Matos;11/05/2014;The Godfather trilogy, the great work of world cinema;10;"Speaking specifically of The Godfather 2, is of the few films that managed to keep the quality a result, the Godfather 2 was one of the best sequences of world cinema. During the second movie we have a parallel story: A young Don Vito Corleone and his accession, played by Rober De Niro and sequence of Michael Corleone to Don since the second film Michael expands the empire of the father and continues relentlessly, but unlike Don Vito Corleone, he failed to reconcile the protection of their ""family"" and also be loved by her. With that Michael becomes increasingly isolating the film, doing things his father while Don would never do. The movie is amazing and so many ways, certainly a masterpiece of cinema.";2;5;True tt0071562;veryape-887-913905;17/01/2014;A highly entertaining sequel;8;In my opinion this is not as good as the first film but is still a highly entertaining sequel this film was released in 1974 two years after The Godfather and the film is a go between the early life of Vito Corleone and also shows how his son Michel is doing after he has became leader of the family business after his father's passing this was a good sequel i recommend just as much as the first one in my opinion it isn't as good but i can see why people would disagree with me. I am yet to see the 3rd chapter in this series i am not confident that it will live up to this of the first one but i am sure it will be good. This film stars Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Diane Keaton.

****/*****;2;5;False tt0071562;MarcoMario;27/12/2013;Really loved it;10;"The only remarkable thing about Francis Ford Coppola's ""The Godfather, Part II"" is the insistent manner in which it recalls how much better his original film was. Among other things, one remembers ""The Godfather's"" tremendous narrative drive and the dominating presence of Marlon Brando in the title role, which, though not large, unified the film and transformed a super-gangster movie into a unique family chronicle.

""Part II,"" also written by Mr. Coppola and Mario Puzo, is not a sequel in any engaging way. It's not really much of anything that can be easily defined.

It's a second movie made largely out of the bits and pieces of Mr. Puzo's novel that didn't fit into the first. It's a Frankenstein's monster stitched together from leftover parts. It talks. It moves in fits and starts but it has no mind of its own. Occasionally it repeats a point made in ""The Godfather"" (organized crime is just another kind of American business, say) but its insights are fairly lame at this point.

""The Godfather, Part II,"" which opened yesterday at five theaters, is not very far along before one realizes that it hasn't anything more to say. Everything of any interest was thoroughly covered in the original film, but like many people who have nothing to say, ""Part II"" won't shut up.

Not the least of its problems is its fractured form. ""Part II"" moves continually back and forth in time between two distinct narratives. It's the story of the young Vito Corleone (who grew up to be played by Marlon Brando in the first movie) seen first around the turn of the century in Sicily and then in 1917 in New York, where he's played by Robert De Niro, and it's the story of Vito's son, Michael, played again by Al Pacino, the new Mafia don who sets out to control Las Vegas in the late nineteen-fifties.

One story doesn't necessarily illuminate the other, it's just additional data, like footnotes. I can't readily imagine what Mr. Coppola and Mr. Puzo were trying to do, except to turn their first film into a long parenthesis that would fit between the halves of the new movie.

Even if ""Part II"" were a lot more cohesive, revealing and exciting than it is, it probably would have run the risk of appearing to be the self- parody it now seems.

Looking very expensive but spiritually desperate, ""Part II"" has the air of a very long, very elaborate revue sketch. Nothing is sacred. The photography by Gordon Willis, so effective originally, is now comically fancy—the exteriors are too bright and glow while the interiors are so dark you wonder if these Mafia chiefs can't afford to buy bigger light bulbs.

Nino Rota's old score keeps thumping away like a heavenly juke box. The performers, especially those repeating their original roles, seem locked into waxy rigid attitudes. Mr. Pacino, so fine the first time out, goes through the film looking glum, sighing wearily as he orders the execution of an old associate or a brother, winding up very lonely and powerful, which is just about the way he wound up before. Mr. De Niro, one of our best young actors, is interesting as the young Vito until, toward the end of his section of the film, he starts giving a nightclub imitation of Mr. Brando's elderly Vito.

There are a couple of notable exceptions. Lee Strasberg, the head of the Actors Studio, makes an extraordinarily effective screen debut as Hyman Roth, the powerful Jewish mobster (reportedly modeled on Meyer Lansky) with whom Michael attempts to take over the Havana rackets under the Battista regime. Mr. Strasberg's Roth is a fascinating mixture of lust, ruthlessness and chicken soup. Michael V. Gazzo, the playwright (""A Hatful of Rain""), is also superb as a Corleone captain who crosses the Family. Another more or less non pro, G. D. Spradlin (a former politician, according to publicity sources) is absolutely right as a crooked, very WASPish United States Senator from Nevada.

The plot defies any rational synopsis, but it allows Mr. Coppola, in his role as director, to rework lots of scenes that were done far better the first time: family reunions, shoot-outs, ambushes and occasional dumb exchanges between Don Michael Corleone and his square, long-suffering wife, Kay (Diane Keaton). ""Oh, Michael,"" says the slow-to-take-offense Kay when Michael is about to sew up the Vegas rackets, ""seven years ago you told me you'd be legitimate in five years.""";2;5;False tt0071562;AaronCapenBanner;31/08/2013;Superlative Sequel.;10;Francis Ford Coppola returns to direct this brilliant sequel that matches the original, a stunning achievement. Story continues the saga of the Corleone family, which sees the return of Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Robert Duvall, and John Cazale. Robert De Nero joins the cast as a young Vito Corleone, who is forced to leave his native Sicily as a boy, then arrives in New York city, where he grows to be an ambitious man who challenges a local corrupt gangster, takes him out in memorable fashion, then sets up the beginning of his empire. Film contrasts that with the ambitions of his son Michael, who is building his father's business in ways he never would have imagined, but in ways that will come at a very high cost indeed...

Just as engrossing as the first, with a brilliant script and performances. A timeless classic that won Academy Awards for Best Picture(like Part I), supporting actor De Nero, but also for director Coppola himself(overdue!);2;5;False tt0071562;lesleyharris30;27/07/2013;One of the Most Pleasing Sequels There is,;9;"The Godfather: Part II is a terrific movie with a very well developed plot and an outstanding cast. This sequel is just as good, and in some ways better, than the original. Unlike most sequels, it remembers why the first movie was so loved and goes back on that, without copying it.

I do think it was overlong, running at almost three hours and a half. There is so much too it because it is telling two fully fledged stories, at times I did feel the separate plots could have been broken up in to two movies.

The cast is absolutely marvelous, Al Pacino delivers one of the highlights of his career as we watch Michael Corleone become corrupt as he takes control of his father's empire. He is joined by a stellar supporting cast that includes Robert Duvall and Diane Keaton.

The main reason you would think this movie could not work out is because Marlon Brando could not be in it, but Robert De Niro manages to shine as a younger version of Vito Corleone, putting in an engrossing performance that is worthy to Brando's in every way, so much so that they are the only two actors to receive an Academy Award for portraying the same characters. Dramatic, intense and extremely well acted, The Godfather: Part II is a long journey, but it's worth every minute, I would recommend to all moviegoers.

As Michael takes over his father's business, we learn the origins of Vito and his empire.

Best Performance; Robert De Niro";2;5;False tt0071562;droog67;27/02/2012;The Godfather Part II Review;10;"""The Godfather Part II"", made in 1974, is the sequel to the movie ""The Godfather"", made in 1972. It's the dark and tragic story of a Sicilian mafia family, the Corleones. It's an amazing film that I consider to be superior to the first and one of the best films of all time. It starts with a 9 year old Vito Corleone, A.K.A. 'The Godfather"", the future head of the Corleone crime family. He is in Sicily at his father's funeral, who had been murdered by the local mafia. At the funeral Vito's older brother is also killed, and the mafia chief is determined to murder Vito too. His mother begs for his freedom, but the mafia chief knows that if he lets him go, Vito will one day come back for revenge. Vito's mother bravely picks up a knife and holds it to the chief's throat, allowing him to escape, but she is quickly gunned down. Vito then immigrates to New York and arrives at Ellis Island. The movie then flashes forward through time and the darker story of his son, Michael Corleone, begins.

The movie then starts to alternate between the stories of Vito Corleone as he rises in the New York Mafia in the 1920's, and Michael Corleone as he struggles to maintain his father's empire in the late 50's. So it acts as both a prequel and a sequel. I thought that this was the most interesting part of the film, because you see how Vito started with nothing and built an empire, while Michael starts with this empire and has to keep it all from crumbling. Another thing that you see throughout the film is the extreme transformation of the character of Michael. In just a few years, he had become more brutal and ruthless than Vito ever was. You see just how corrupted Michael had become when he does something at the end that is horrifying and unforgivable. That's the point when his job and corruption from power had driven him to do something that destroys his family and himself.

Another strong part of the film is its performances. The movie dominated the Academy Awards nominations for Best Supporting Actor/Actress, with Robert De Niro (Vito Corleone), Michael V. Gazzo (Frank Pentangeli), Talia Shire (Connie Corleone), and Lee Strasberg (Hyman Roth) all nominated for that category, and Al Pacino (Michael Corleone) nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role. Robert De Niro was the one awarded the Oscar, one of the many awards that the film has been given. Robert De Niro was also awarded an Oscar for his performance as the character). Al Pacino also did a great job of portraying the change of his character from the first film and throughout this one. He went from a young WWII veteran trying to break away from his family's ""business"" to being the country's most powerful mob bosses.

All of these things are what make the movie a masterpiece. It won many awards, including Best Picture at the 1974 Academy Awards. The characters are great, which is helped by the award-winning performances of the actors. The two alternating stories are what made the movie so much more interesting than the first. It's currently number 32 on the American Film Institute's 100 Years 100 Movies list, and number 3 on IMDb's top 250 movies list. I agree with the reviews, and I think that it is one of the greatest films ever made.";2;5;False tt0071562;ElMaruecan82;11/02/2011;A Shakespearian tragedy for a Macchiavellian triumph ...;10;"By tracing a parallel story between Vito's ascension to power and the consolidation of this very power by his son Michael, ""The Godfather Part II"" has an epic scope that remarkably contrasts with the 'intimate feeling' of the first opus. Yes, there's a cruel lack of warmth, of genuine love, of this very 'Family spirit' that cemented the iconic greatness of ""Part I"" but that's because the very purpose of the film is to show another kind of intimacy, the one between Politics, Business and Crime, as to highlight a sort of inner perversity in the American Dream. This is also why the film is regarded as an epic.

In ""Part II"", it's not a Five-Families-war that structures the plot anymore, so there's no need for this 'team spirit' anymore, we're far from the good old days with Sonny, Hagen, Tessio and Clemenza, when the Corleones were fighting for their survival. The bigger your territory gets, the more invisible is your enemy ... so invisible he can even be one of your own. Indeed, even the first film ended with a betrayal from Tessio, Vito's trustful capo-regime, a shock that foreshadowed the idea expressed by Michael in ""Part II"", the fact that ""loyalty relies on business"". What a world where you can't call your friends ""friends"" because they are only your ""associates"" but you still call your enemies ""enemies""! What a world when your enemies have to be kept closer than your ""friends""! And what a world when even your brother can betray you!

""Part II"" is a much darker film in its content because it plunges us in a world where there's no room for genuine and non-calculating people –after all, isn't one of the many things that make the first film more enjoyable the presence of such characters as Sonny- Even Michael has these words about Fredo, ""he's a good heart but he's weak and stupid, and this is life and death"". Life and death indeed, the family expanded its power, becoming one of the wealthiest in Nevada, but it's not New York City anymore, it's time to deal with a new category of enemies, more dangerous because they are more respectable. The film opens with a conversation between Michael Corleone and Senator Geary, but this time the politician is not the criminal's friend, he not only despises him but explicitly affirms his intention to ""squeeze him"".

Michael's reply sets the tone of the film ""Senator, my offer is this: nothing"", he wouldn't feign legitimacy with a man who just asserted his moral corruption. If politicians and criminals play in the same arena: business, then they'll play according to the rule of the strongest. Crime has ceased to be an underworld, on the contrary, it embraced the world, getting ""bigger than US Steel"" as Hyman Roth would say, in the name of making a profit that would go as far for legitimacy as pretending to serve a country's economy, Las Vegas, pre-Revolution Cuba, even be able to elect a new President. If Coppola was accused of romanticizing the mob in the first opus, no one can hold the same accusation against ""Part II"", and the directing plays a significant role to that.

Indeed, it's impossible to end the second film with the same level of fascination created by the magical moment where Neri shuts the door on Kay's face, and maybe that's why we still enjoy the first film, because it has this sort of 'happy end' feel, because we are still within the Corleone's inner circle and ""the good team won"" and could savor the victory behind the closed door. Michael became another man, even more ruthless than his father, but he was the Don in this 'underworld' context, so he can only inspire our empathy, if not our respect.

But in Part II, crime, business and politics are all part of the same hypocrisy, and while Michael could count on the loyalty of Neri, Rocco, Hagen and even Fredo at the end of the first part, in Part II, he becomes aware that greed and thirst for power can triumph over the most loyal individual.... and if he didn't knew that before, the assassination attempt he miraculously escaped from, sent a clear message about it. So, while ""Part I"" established the necessity of a strong loyalty to overcome a clearly identifiable enemy, ""Part I""I highlights the illusory aspect of loyalty when it comes to an invisible enemy that can be on your own side, even your own brother, consequently leading to Michael's descent into paranoia.

The first film was a consolidation of power, built on Family, friendship and loyalty, incarnated by the warmth and quiet strength of Vito Corleone, we find him again with the traits of Robert De Niro, in his Oscar-winning role. He represents the heritage of Michael Corleone, the proper use of power, of intelligence, of heart but the tragedy of ""Part II"" is to highlight the obsolescence of a figure like Vito Corleone in a world that got more blinded by greed and power, a world where Machiavellian intelligence was a more valuable asset than pure intuition and where even love and brotherhood could be reduced to sheer abstractions. Times have changed and Michael realized that the time of his father is over, and that he can indeed ""lose his family"". The tragic irony is that he lost it by trying to preserve it.

The second film deconstructed all the values that its glorious predecessor stood for to draw a dark, gripping and harrowing portrait of Crime, incarnated by the cold and ruthless eyes of Michael Corleone, Al Pacino in what I believe to be one of the all-time greatest performances. It's thought-provoking, it's even more realistic, but maybe we blame it for not being 'more enjoyable' than the first film, more romantic I mean. For me, it's perfect the way it is.";2;5;True tt0071562;a15haddad;15/02/2005;The greatest sequel ever? Absolutely;9;"The Godfather: Part II came out in 1974 with incredible hype, but when it first was released it was labeled a disappointment. Only a few months later, however, it could be heard among many a debate that this movie was superior to the original.

The plot is arguably even more intense and chilling and, unlike its predecessor, it tells two tales: one of how Michael Corleone tightens his grip on the criminal underworld in the late 1950s and another of the beginnings of his father, Vito, this time played by Robert De Niro to outstanding effect, and his business empire. It is this near-seamless change that propels The Godfather: Part II into the discussion of the greatest movies ever, where it belongs right there with the first.

Al Pacino returns as Michael Corleone and this time plays him even better. On top of that, De Niro, in the role that made him famous, is sublime as Vito. While De Niro's performance is not as memorable as Marlon Brando's and his character not quite as endearing, it is still one of the highlights in the history of acting in the cinema. It's sad that when most people today think of De Niro it is for his performances in Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas, or, God forbid, 21st century comedies like Showtime or Analyze This. It's simply amazing that the Holy Trinity of modern American actors- Brando, Pacino, and De Niro, in that order- all were stars in the first two Godfather pictures, and the first two's careers are still highlighted by it.

However, I do not find this film to be on the exact same level as the original for a variety of reasons. Make no mistake, this is an outstanding film in its own right, the best sequel ever, and the praise I could give it is very similar to the praise I give The Godfather for it's consistent brilliance and masterful direction. Never before have I seen a pair of films that are so beautifully orchestrated. But unlike its predecessor this movie has a couple flaws.

The biggest one is with the Vito Corleone section. In the book, this part is detailed from Vito's birth right up to the events in the Godfather. However, here it only goes to about a Roosevelt administration away from the start of the events detailed in The Godfather. For someone who has only watched the movies this is a huge chunk of backstory that is missing. While Coppola chose to focus on the Don Fanucci part of Vito's epic tale, there is so much more of this brilliant story that is left untold. If an entire movie was centered around this, then the pace this story takes would be perfect. But this is but a part of The Godfather: Part II. You cannot tell two epics in one movie, and there is simply not enough time at this pace to cap off the story satisfyingly. The current model speaks nothing of the war that brought Don Corleone to power.

Not only that, but literally EVERY SINGLE PERSON in this tale is Italian and speaks Italian. I understand how large Little Italy was at this time but are you telling me that Vito in his time does not meet one pure American? Is his life that secluded? Once again, I understand the message that Coppola is getting across just fine, the sense of unity and family the Italians have, much like the first one, but it's done less believably here. It's also a bit harder to relate to Italian dialect.

The majority of my complaints lie on the Vito tale. The tale involving Michael Corleone is absolutely compelling. Emphasize that as much as possible. It's arguably more thought-provoking than its predecessor, and I would say it is more chilling, with a few parts that will absolutely make your jaw drop. That's one thing about the original, it did not have too many of those moments, but this movie has them in abundance. And not to mention Al Pacino makes these scenes come alive, he is just so fearsome and intimidating when provoked. However, surprisingly, many important plot mechanics of this movie are things you might not pick up your first time through. The major plot dynamic of the original was the transition between Vito Corleone as the Don of the Corleone family to Michael Corleone. In this movie the major mechanic is Michael's relationship with Fredo. It is this that represents the film's greatest intellectual stimulation and chill. Especially the ending, which is among the most haunting and memorable scenes you shall ever see, up there with the original's baptism. It has a bit more closure than that of its predecessor. Still, when I think of The Godfather, I think of Marlon Brando rasping out memorable lines, of Don Barzini falling down the steps, of Michael Corleone shooting Virgil Solozzo in a restaurant. It is only after this that I remember the famous aspects of The Godfather: Part II. The most likely reason for this is that it is a sequel, and we always remember what we saw first. Still, something about this movie is not quite as memorable. It lacks that extra something that made The Godfather so unique. Don't get me wrong, I love this movie. It certainly has better cinematography than the original, some of the best I've seen. But it is less than it's original: just barely, but still less. Somehow the plot is just not as large or alive, the scenes not as enjoyable. Don't take this out of context: this movie still has the magic. It has moral considerations and character depth just like the original, this time mostly about the damnation of Michael. Do not let comparisons distract you from the spectacle. 9.4.

""If one thing in life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it's that you can kill anybody.""";2;5;False tt0071562;italstal-1;24/12/2003;Arguably the Best;10;Now you see, I am a lover of all movie genre's, but for some reason The Godfather Trilogy stays close to my heart because of it's sheer brilliance and cinematic excellence. Part Two is probably the most intriguing of all three, basically because it tells the story of a young Vito Corleone is told and is mixed in with the continuation of the first installment.

Im not going to talk about all the interesting plot points and review it, but i want to talk about how a travesty on this site has occurred by allowing a mindless film like Lord of the Rings infest this top ten and even put the latest installment ahead of one of the greatest films of all time.

LOTR is nothing but fantasy, computer enhanced graphics, a couple of midgets and some insignificant ring in a world that is hardly believeable to ever have existed.

Godfather is NOT fantasy, but a harsh look at the rise and fall of a great empire... not about some stupid hobbit that turns into a turncoat and throws his best friend away cause some ugly deformed rat tells him so.

This is my plea to everyone to vote godfather back on top and get this filthy propaganda off the top ten..... other movies, not just godfather need to get the respect they deserve.;2;5;False tt0071562;herr_skugga86;13/04/2003;Didn't get it;;"I was compelled by the storyline & performances therein but at the end of the movie I just didn't get it. It was to much a misch-masch of stuff & I just didn't get much out of it.

Godfather 1 is the definition of a film, a true classic. This is a sequel with mixed-bag emotions. I think it's something of a let-down. Not a huge one, but yeah. It is a let-down.";2;5;False tt0071562;mgirl;30/01/2003;A Good Sequel, but;8;"I really enjoyed watching Part II, but I would not say it was as good or better than Part I. In Part I, there is the story of the descent of Michael into the ""family business"". Part II is more like a good mafia story without much more. Only at the end, does Michael see the consequences of his choices but is so deeply trapped that he no longer cares. I liked the ending of the first story, leaving us only to imagine Michael's future. I was also much more confused by the Hyman conspiracy plot. On the plus side, I appreciated the flashbacks much more. It was a great insight into the man that was to become Don Corleone. I wonder how great the movie would have been if they merely expanded on that storyline.";2;5;False tt0071562;brandon_j_snider;12/07/2004;Bloated, overrated uneven nonsense;7;I used to think this film was great, but then I grew up. Greater sophistication means greater appreciation for the majestic perfection of the original. Unfortunately, it also means the glaring faults of this flick are all the more obvious with each viewing. This film contrasts the rising nationwide fame and influence of Michael Corleone, a more cold-blooded version of his brilliant father Don Vito, with the early life of Don Vito and the beginnings of the Corleone crime family. Problem is, even though Robert De Niro's portrayal of Vito is brilliant, to be honest, we don't care. The current situation in late 1950's Las Vegas is more interesting and faster paced, making the retro turn-of-the-century scenes anti-climactic and an unwelcome break in the real action. More flaws abound. An assassination attempt against Michael is blamed on two different parties at once, and we are left wondering which one Michael really thinks betrayed him. When Michael finally tells Fredo, we are left wondering if he's telling the truth, when I think we're supposed to be fully aware at that point. Michael always knows a lot more than we do, and that's a problem. Hyman Roth could have been a great movie villain, but nothing he does or says in this movie makes any real sense. Again, his motives are murky, and he knows more than we do. Is he motivated by revenge for Michael's killing of Moe Greene? or by greed? we're never sure. His health is so bad, we might believe he should retire, but why he doesn't is left unclear. There are several major choices made by characters in this movie that I didn't buy. One by Michael, one by Fredo, one by Kay. Of them all, I'm most inclined to buy Fredo's, but even then, the flick doesn't explain it properly. At the end of this flick, as a result of Michael's choice, Connie should have a very emotional reaction, similar to her final scene in the first film, but Coppola, inexplicably and unfairly, robs her of that. The film ends before we can see it. I think there was a constant tug-of-war between Coppola and Puzo that resulted in these issues. The first flick was a direct adaptation of the book, but there was no book this time around. The purpose of this flick, which it accomplishes to a certain degree, is to show Don Vito building a family and a life in America, and his cold-blooded heir Michael destroying it. If the plot threads had made more sense, this could have been a great film.;3;10;False tt0071562;TheGodfatherSucks1035;20/04/2009;Terrible movie;;Please do yourself a favor, and don't watch this movie. It was long and very boring, in fact I only got to the part with the kid singing to himself before I had to turn it off. This movie was awful, which is surprising considering the leads were Al Capachino, and John Calzone, both highly regarded actors. But they couldn't save this crap movie.I then woke up to the part with Boby Nero talking about a Roman empire which I found funny, bc Nero was an emperor. Overall this movie was a complete waste of time, and I was jealous of Frank Panini, in the tub killing himself, because that was what I wanted to do during this movie. I thought that the killing of Ross was stupid, as there was no way Rocco could've escaped Horrible 1/10;5;21;True tt0071562;pmtelefon;21/09/2014;Top 10 Most Overrated Movies Ever;6;"This is the weak middle part of a not so hot trilogy. ""The Godfather"" was great, this one was okay and ""Part 3"" was bad. ""Part 2"" is too long and often uninteresting. The scenes between Michael and Kay drag the movie to a halt. The storyline between Michael and brother Fredo plays out in an unbelievable way. Despite all the famous lines, the scenes don't ring true. Michael hates Fredo inside at the ball but wants to save him minutes later on the street. Only to hate him again when they get home. And they constantly refer to Marlon Brando. They must say ""Papa"" or ""Pop"" 40 times. Constantly reminding the audience that the first movie was better is not a good move. When I was a kid I wanted ""The Towering Inferno"" to win Best Picture because I thought it was a better movie. I still do. ""Chinatown"" should have won that year. Coppola's own ""The Conversation"" is also a lot better than ""Part 2"" and was a worthy candidate for the award.";3;11;False tt0071562;L_Copa;14/10/2019;1/3 of the movie was great but the rest was boring for me...;4;I thought this one was gonna be better than the first one but its not. For me they didn't handled correctly Robert De niro, they put unnecessary scenes to Al Pacino's performance and generally the movie is once again way too long. I dont know what is it with mafia movies and they make it 3,5 hours but they dont create the perfect crime, vendetta or the conspiracy for their personal survival, or to create an empire or something or even protect their blood. I think they missed it all. There were good elements inside but they were shadowed by the boring scenes.;2;6;False tt0071562;trminator-35198;17/01/2019;Tremendously underwhelming;5;One of the most pained movie experiences I have ever had. Gives that usual feeling of a movie being made because the first series installment went over so well. Masterpieces can't be done twice. The plot was so drawn out and dry, I recall legitamatley falling asleep at one point and having to rewatch some of it. Wish there was only one Godfather movie.;2;6;False tt0071562;irkybirky;06/02/2018;A let down from the First Installment;6;Been years since i last seen these films and it was time to view them once again. This part 2 i found to be a very long, drawn out affair. Reading the other numerous reviews on this site, one would think this is the movie of all movies. Well, perhaps that may be the case for some. But for the average movie goer to which this movie was made for, it was totally lacking compared to the first, original Godfather. There was not much for character development which made you feel distant to the characters. Too many scenes of unnecessary standing around with poor dialog that really needed a Brando type boost. I could not find that presence here at all. It was indeed a watchable movie with great cinematography and that classic look. Overall this movie seemed to abandon the gangster/mob genre and become more daisy drama. I think in the first half of the movie there was one gun scene and a mild at that. It truly dragged along carrying only the die hard fans of this saga and leaving behind a trail of dissatisfaction for those whom watched the original movie and expected epic type, early mob style composition.;2;6;False tt0071562;TheOneThatYouWanted;12/08/2017;Overrated.;6;There has been an argument raging for year about which is the better movie, Part one or Part two. It isn't even a contest. Part one is a much much muchhhhhh better film. If you took away the Robert De Niro's scenes, you can make the argument that this movie is in fact a bad film. Frankly De Niro saved this movie. Without the flashbacks this film is uninteresting and boring. Even the actors look bored. Sure, some parts of the plot are interesting but overall the execution this good enough to honestly make you give a sh!t. The first Godfather movie is one of the greatest movies of all time. This movie on the other hand is one of the most overrated movies of all time. The next time I watch it I'm just going to save myself time and fast forward to the De Niro parts.;2;6;False tt0071562;videorama-759-859391;27/03/2014;Oh my god, this one's every bit good as the last.;10;From positive things I read about Godfather 2, some people saying it outdoes the original, I finally got around to watching it, this being the longest one, where 1 and 3 have the exact same running time, which would be annoying to some watchers of the third, disappointing instalment. Too here I got to see Deniro, in his award winning performance, every bit brilliant of his truly deserved Oscar. Now really into being an organizer, Michael Corleone has expanded his business into other countries. He too, in still in that falling out with his brother, Fredo (the likable late Cazale) refusing to forgive and forget. Good news, Michael later does, to a fitting tune. What I can say about the Godfather 2, it didn't disappointment me, one iota. I enjoyed it more than I truly thought I would. In some ways it's better than the original, but on the whole it isn't. It's equal. A truly good sequel, but more that that, it's a finely made film, engrossing, with no faults of any kind. I think viewers who haven't seen this, will be quite surprised, while also you have another opportunity to watch two acting greats, truly deliver.;2;6;False tt0071562;davideo-2;21/05/2005;Ummmmmmmmmmm-wah!!! Brilliance!!!!;10;STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

This companion piece to the original Godfather film charts the rise of a young Don Vito (Robert De Niro) as well as the ascension of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) in the 1950s.

Whereas the original just told a straight-out story, this one juxtaposes (brilliantly) two extraordinary tales of the mafia together, from Vito's struggle to over-come an arsehole Don to cement his own position of influence in his Italian-American neighbourhood he occupies to Michael's ascension to power, the personal sacrifices power requires and his testimony before a grand jury of unlawful conduct.People often mention how it was a shock that De Niro and Pacino would have to wait many years before they worked directly together again in Heat, but it's like they're controlling two completely separate movies here (it certainly makes the time fly by quicker if you think of it that way.) Nino Rota's powerful score flies over as absorbingly as it did in the original.

Overall,this is even more an accomplished piece of film-making than the original and a must-see if you want to see the ultimate conclusion to that.*****;2;6;False tt0071562;RiffFan924;14/01/2004;Why does everyone say this II is better than I! It isn't!;;"I loved the first Godfather movie. Who didn't? But I watched Part II, thinking this is going to be much better than Part I. It wasn't. It was a good movie, but it just left me confused in the middle and then when it ended I was like, ""That's it? That's Part II?! GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!"" I am not talking smack on GP2, but I just wish everyone would stop saying that it is better than GP1. Nothing will be better than the first movie. I haven't seen the third one yet, but from what I've heard it doesn't even compare to the first two.

A Disappointed Fan";2;6;False tt0071562;n-mo;24/12/2019;The least-good of the bunch, but still good.;8;"It pains me to give any installment of The Goldfather' only 8 out of 10. The trilogy is definitely one of my leitmotifs and I rewatch all three about every six months or so. Nevertheless, Part II is probably the least enjoyable to watch, though I would never skip over it.

Why exactly is this? The acting is superb; the cinematography is great; thematically, the film furthers and develops all the notes hit in the first. Nevertheless, the story, while ""good"" such as it is, it doesn't quite deliver the gripping goods of the first. The backstory of erstwhile Godfather Vito Corleone and the development of his career was worth telling and artistically interesting to contrast with Michael's own headship of the family. Interspersing the two as the editors did may or may not have been a great choice, as it arguably cuts into the building tension of the younger Don's journey.

Still, it's not clear that that journey would, uninterrupted, have made for a gripping drama on par with that of Part I. The first doled out a lot of lavish character development and courtly intrigue with just the right amount of shocking action punctuated in. Whatever the inaccuracies with respect to the real-world mafia, the first certainly captured the dynamic of real-world diplomacy and warfare (whether conventional or criminal) in bouts of rising pressure and preparation sometimes - usually with little of any warning - giving way to open battle. There isn't a ton of action in this one, certainly not on the level of the first.

Still, it makes for a good evening. I tend nowadays to be doing chores when I have it on - I've seen it often enough - but it's not unpleasant to watch and as with the first there is always a lot of ""new"" stuff to catch or forgotten stuff to rediscover upon rewatch. These are big, dense films, and should leave the real aficionados satisfies in any event.";1;2;False tt0071562;markhellie;27/05/2019;Teutsuugsfuygfs;10;Dbcdoindcoidhvsoisdvjoidsvjrsoihgrsoisrgjiprgsjdhspojhsopjhdspojsafposafjfaspojaspojasfopsfajpofsajpsoaj;1;2;False tt0071562;nf-22226;13/04/2019;Not the best of the trilogy;7;This movie, coming after the first, is a change of pace. The micheal segments of the film are more politcal, strategic, and focused on the sematics of the mafia than the previous film, and because of this it loses its charm from the last film. Aswell as this, because of how uncaring and heartless micheal is, its hard to attach to him as a character, the character isnt interesting enough in other ways to be likeable to me. the main aspect which saves the film is the vito corleone flashbacks, these segments are great insight into vitos past, with great acting from robert de niro, honestly if this was the main part of the film, this would easily be better than pt 1. The ending atleast is nicely thought provoking, and makes you wonder what happened to micheal, but the rest of the micheal segments arent amazing. Pt 1 be better indeed;1;2;False tt0071562;Amyth47;13/09/2018;ONE OF THE GREATEST.;10;My Rating : 10/10 ♠ MASTERPIECE ♠

A lot of people have said Godfather II is the greatest film they've seen. I think so too.;1;2;False tt0071562;MovieManChuck;29/07/2018;The best movie sequel of all time.;;4/4 ESSENTIAL

In typical follow-up movies, there is a certain element from the original that ages, corrodes, or just evaporates. After watching The Godfather, one of the best movies ever made, I found it hard to believe that Part II would improve upon its predecessor despite the critical acclaim. However, The Godfather Part II is truly a phenomenal movie (just as good if not better than the original), and in addition to continuing the story, it compliments The Godfather perfectly.

If The Godfather was taught you to respect the Corleone family's power, then The Godfather Part II gives a broader scope to that power. It alternates the journeys of a younger Don Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), and Don Michael Corleone (Al Pacino). This is to chronicle the rise and fall of the Corleone family. Vito rose to prominence through gaining the favor of the people, and liberating them from Don Fanucci. Michael operates out of self-interest, which causes chaos within the family, and ultimately burns bridges. By the end of the movie, you know full well that the Corleone family dynasty is crumbling, they won't even be legit too much longer. The Corleones are like the Roman Empire.

This movie also features two amazing lead actors. De Niro and Pacino both gave bold performances which both influenced the flow of the movie, and the perception of reality. It was possible to capture the wisdom and of Vito, and the greed of Michael in a way that truly sticks with you. This was also in part to a very well conceived soundtrack, great location shots alive with colors, a very intricate screenplay, and Coppola, a great director who knows how to conduct beautiful cinema.

If there is any statement that The Godfather Part II successfully makes, its that the complexity of the Corleones could not be realized with only one feature film. This movie casts new light on the family you've come to love, and the portrayal gives the movie a darker tone. The Godfather Part II is a winner in all categories: entertaining, brilliant, deep, it flawlessly parallels two stories, and it's brutally realistic in it's demonstration of power.;1;2;False tt0071562;brandinscottlindsey;23/06/2018;A Second Serving of Greatness;9;The Godfather: Part II is just as good as the original. Alternating between the current story of Michael Corleone and his crime enterprise and the roots of the family business, a young Vito Corleone in Italy, the audience is treated to a second-helping of an already fantastic story. Viewers get to see more history behind the beloved characters, while at the same time, the story continues to develop. Michael continues to expand the Corleone family business while faced with betrayal, inner-family conflict, and legal trouble.

The Godfather II continues the themes portrayed in the first film in the series. Loyalty, devotion to family, and defending the down-trodden remain essential to the story and characters, and as before, these features are displayed against a backdrop of vigilantism. There is a duality with helping those in need and putting your family first, while at the same time, using evil or illegal methods against others. The Godfather II walks the line between these opposing ideals perfectly.

Anyone who enjoyed the first film will most likely enjoy the second just as much. It is simply more of a good thing. The running time may be long for some viewers, but the movie is good enough that you'll barely notice.;1;2;False tt0071562;celiamannequin;09/06/2018;best movie;9;Amazing movie! i was so happy to see again this movie;1;2;False tt0071562;uzunmetraj;18/02/2018;The Godfather: Part II (1974);9;A sequel surpasses the original in many regards, The Godfather Part 2 is a haunting tale of betrayal, revenge and deception that is brought to life thanks to Francis Ford Coppala's amazing direction and the fantastic dual lead performances.;1;2;False tt0071562;ramosj-60814;16/02/2018;Coppola at his best!;9;Without a doubt, this is my favorite film from the God Father saga.

A young Vito Corleone played by (Robert Deniro) is perfected acting at an all time high.

I can go on, and on, and on.

I highly recommend you watch the entire series.

But in my opinion, God Father II is the best simply said.

;1;2;False tt0071562;zaidiphone;09/02/2018;amazing;9;One of the best movies ever................................................;1;2;False tt0071562;twinklewahi;07/02/2018;perfect !!!;7;Breathtaking in its scope and tragic grandeur...worth it !!;1;2;False tt0071562;GauravAnandMishra;25/01/2018;awesome casting;7;To me and probably to many other people The Godfather Part II is more of a continuation than sequel to The Godfather. Just look at the IMDb rating and you'll see I'm not the only one who feels this way. To me it as good as the first.;1;2;False tt0071562;mypublicmail-00114;20/12/2017;Nice move;7;This movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original;1;2;False tt0071562;uriel_gutierrez_tapia;07/05/2017;A monumental achievement;10;The Godfather II not only surpasses his predecessor in cinematographic quality, but it becomes the best film of this trilogy. It's just amazing how a story is so well managed in a movie and see the evolution of the characters from the first film. In addition, the parallel between the story of Michael and the young Vio Corleone further reinforces the characters and their purpose in history. Michael is now a worthy successor to his father and is definitely the godfather while showing the network of betrayal and mistrust he is subject to and the brilliant way in which he overcomes the obstacles and gets his purpose.

The film has few details as part of a brilliant subtext to make us understand better, and immerse ourselves in the complexity of its history. The direction is magnificent at all levels, demanding more from the actors and pleasing the audience. Photography and visual complements, as well as lighting, are totally adequate, giving the film an excellent atmosphere that blends perfectly with the story. No doubt, Francis Ford Coppola made us an offer we could not refuse.;1;2;False tt0071562;kriskm-49199;15/04/2017;OK above 3 hours seems very long for a movie right! well give it a try it worth the time.;10;Great movie. I found it more interesting than the first one. Although its a pretty big movie but it Worth the time. proved to be a base for the upcoming gangster movies. the story tells almost everything about the gangsters out in the real world. Work of Francis Ford Coppola at its finest.;1;2;False tt0071562;samnotsob-43670;04/03/2017;God Father Sequel;10;I think Godfather 2 was one of the greatest sequels Hollywood ever made and I thought they could never top the original. there are no spoilers here because I'm not going to mention anything about what went on in the sequel, just that it was great, and the actor that played young Vito was super, direction was like no other film I've ever seen, a lot of gangster movies were made but this was no ordinary gangster movie, absolutely the best mob movie ever made. In this film, there was no need for any suspension of disbelieve because it was so real, I really believe that's the way it actually happened.;1;2;False tt0071562;Arzell;04/03/2017;Godfather done right.;10;This is one of those rare movies that as a sequel that actually makes since and that's simply good. It's outstanding to have both the original and sequel to be brilliant. This sequel fits the prequel like a puzzle. Which most films now-a-days go off track with their sequels. One may argue that this film isn't as good as the first, but better. Which is a job well done.;1;2;False tt0071562;Frosst;23/01/2017;And so the saga continues;10;"Having written a review for The Godfather it feels, when thinking about it, like a travesty not to write a review for the sequel; The Godfather Part II. Especially after having written my first review such a long time ago, however I have to say that I'm not that much into writing reviews hence the reason I've only written one. But I've decided I will give it a fair shot although I'm wondering how many people will even read it.

It should of course go without saying that this isn't as much of a sequel as it is a continuation of the first film, calling it a sequel is to underestimate the importance of this film. As masterfully done as the first one it's for me extremely difficult to actually pick one over the other, the only reason I have The Godfather higher than Part II is not because it's better but because of it being the beginning of the journey, the very introduction to this world, if you'll call it that. (Brando's magnificent performance may also have something to do with this) In The Godfather Part 2 Michael Corleone has, as we all know, become the new Don and the film which takes place in the 50's sees Michael becoming corrupt with greed and power. He pretty much becomes just like his father, it's a transformation so interestingly compelling and grandeur that one can't stop but feel sorry for him in some ways. Meanwhile the story of Vito Corleone from childhood to adulthood is chronicled through the use of flashbacks. We see him arrive to America from Sicily, only a child, and how he creates his Mafia empire. The actor portraying him is of course Robert De Niro whose performance is electrifying. These flashbacks are spoken in Italian which I found to be interesting. But while De Niro captures the mannerisms of Don Vito Corleone it's Al Pacino who gives the best performance as Michael Corleone. He's even better here than in the first film, of course this time Marlon Brando wasn't around who could overshadow everyone, and it's only because of his fantastic performance that you're able to feel sorry for him.

Al Pacino was very good in the first film but here he's even greater. The supporting cast is great too; the ever wonderful Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and of course the late John Cazale. The acting is just as great as in the first film. Francis Ford Coppolas directing is amazing as is the cinematography.

There is really nothing more to be said about this masterpiece. I know I'm late with this review, but being someone who never really wrote reviews this is my second but not last one.

And fitting that it should be about my second favorite film and the second greatest in Cinema...";1;2;True tt0071562;phillipfawcett-92318;05/12/2016;*** Top 10 ***;10;Phillip Fawcett says it is hard to choose which single Godfather movie should go into the top 10 at the expense of the others. The saga really needs to be taken as a whole - even the 3rd installment, generally seen as the weakest, rounds the epic story off in poetic fashion - and as such would go into my personal top 10 of all-time movies as a trilogy.

That said, I single out Godfather II if I must. This is the most self-contained in theme and form, tracking the origins of the Corleone dynasty and the rise to crime of Michael Corleone. It is the ultimate portrayal of a man allowing himself to fall to the corruptions of power , and lose his morality to murderous evil. He is both victim of fate, of forces which seemed to compel him into this monstrous world, and a willful sinner.

The final scene, as he sits alone in his spacious grounds reflecting on his life, encapsulates the true theme of this tale: not 'the mafia', not 'murder', not 'American-Italian culture', but that of a human being losing his soul.;1;2;False tt0071562;DJeddiemarz;21/11/2016;The Best Movie Ever;10;This movie made me want to be an actor in my middle age. I saw the film years ago but never in the same light as I did a few years ago. Al Pacino and Marlon Brando are superior to all others in this film. And Robert Duval is timeless. If you can take time to notice the camera angles and shots. Perfect! Filming in NYC! The best! I always wondered why there not more killing scenes as they were deadly.

The director Francis Ford Coppola is incredible!

This is what film making is all about!

Cant wait until my turn!

It is NEVER TOO LATE TO START!

I am 48 y/o and Salina P is my first movie!

I promise you will see more!;1;2;False tt0071562;PetarNeo;30/10/2016;Brilliance of highest volume;10;After seeing part I, feeling was what can they do to make this one equal or almost as good as the first one but they did it almost perfectly. Movie as time passes kept you on many fronts following everything that Corleone family is doing and then puts you a great deal of excitement with so many great and tense scenes. It provides an amazing experience with story telling point of view but also from character actions that constantly show us how they evolved and became one of the greatest and most dangerous people. Absolutely most memorable scene is when Vito (De Niro) is following Don Fanucci on top of the buildings and jumping from one to another and then finally get to his home and gets a gun goes in hall to wait for him and after he arrived it was absolutely magnificent scene with his killing. Amazing story told by Coppola with fights in family outside family and just beautiful performances by our two men in leading chair. De Niro showed us his passionate and deep characterization of Vito and got us a performance that amazing. Pacino as always gets us a magnificent inside in his character and reminds us that he is one powerful actor. Moving, strong, deep, magnificent, violent, beautiful. 4/4;1;2;True tt0071562;Takethispunch;18/06/2016;Superb film.;10;"The Godfather Part II is a 1974 American epic crime film produced and directed by Francis Ford Coppola from a screenplay co-written with Mario Puzo, starring Al Pacino and Robert De Niro. Partially based on Puzo's 1969 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 crime 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.";1;2;True tt0071562;Blacksickle;17/04/2016;Arguably the greatest movie ever made;10;"The Godfather Part II arguably the greatest movie ever made exceeds in the fields of cinematography, great acting and an excellent screenplay by Puzo and Coppola. Robert De Niro gives his performance as the young Vito Corleone mirroring his son Michael Corleone rise to power.Al Pacino while still remaining human and likable plays a character that stops at nothing to achieve absolute power.Diane Keaton returns as Kay Adams, attempting to hold her family together while her husband changes from the man she once fell in love with.Quoting Michael Corleone

""Do you expect me to let you take my children from me? Don't you know me? Don't you know that that's an impossibility?""

From Vito and Clemenza stealing a carpet and Michael giving the kiss of death Godfather Part II is full of unforgettable moments in cinematic history.A must watch for any fan of film or Italian culture for that matter.";1;2;True tt0071562;orionorbit-34110;08/02/2016;Great Cast;10;The Godfather II(1974)an epic film. Al Pacino is a great, passionate, and jolly good fellow AKA GOOD DUDE no one better not deny. God bless AL!!!! The question is what did you learn? Don't nobody say nothing about the family. Al grew up on camera right before our eyes. Well maybe your eyes. I did not know anything about Mr. Pacino until 1986-1987. I was fortunate enough to be in his presence. That's on another note. It's not about me right now. It's about a film that brought pain, love, happiness, sorrow, greed, maybe a plate of pasta ,garlic bread, some eggplant, and understanding together. Oh! YEAH! Not to mention a glass of some good Port wine in moderation. Let's say Bin 27 or some Sangria....... Made Men know what I'm talking about and real women stand by your man. P.S. THIS FILM HAD TO HAPPEN...... GOD BLESS THE READER......;1;2;False tt0071562;ivo-cobra8;17/10/2015;A classic Epic Masterpiece it's one of the most best sequels of all time;10;"The Godfather Part II (1974) is one of the best sequel's out there! Following the story right from the first film! I love this film as much a is love the first one. Drawing on strong performances by Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, Francis Ford Coppola's continuation of Mario Puzo's Mafia saga set new standards for sequels that have yet to be matched or broken.

Francis Ford Coppola's legendary continuation and sequel to his landmark 1972 film, The Godfather, parallels the young Vito Corleone's rise with his son Michael's spiritual fall, deepening The Godfather's depiction of the dark side of the American dream. In the early 1900s, the child Vito flees his Sicilian village for America after the local Mafia kills his family. Vito (Robert De Niro) struggles to make a living, legally or illegally, for his wife and growing brood in Little Italy, killing the local Black Hand Fanucci (Gastone Moschin) after he demands his customary cut of the tyro's business. With Fanucci gone, Vito's communal stature grows, but it is his family (past and present) who matters most to him -- a familial legacy then upended by Michael's (Al Pacino) business expansion in the 1950s. Now based in Lake Tahoe, Michael conspires to make inroads in Las Vegas and Havana pleasure industries by any means necessary. As he realizes that allies like Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) are trying to kill him, the increasingly paranoid Michael also discovers that his ambition has crippled his marriage to Kay (Diane Keaton) and turned his brother, Fredo (John Cazale), against him. Barely escaping a federal indictment, Michael turns his attention to dealing with his enemies, completing his own corruption.

The Godfather Part II presents two parallel story lines. One involves Mafia chief Michael Corleone in 1958/1959 after the events of the first movie; the other is a series of flashbacks following his father, Vito Corleone from 1917 to 1925, from his youth in Sicily (1901) to the founding of the Corleone family in New York. Al Pacino as Michael Corleone did do a strong lead and a wonderful perfect job he acted in this film superb and strong. Robert De Niro as young Vito Corleone did a brilliant performance I have ever saw. He played an Italian immigrate superb and brilliant, there isn't any connection that he is American at all, his ascent is gone. It is like he was born an Italian by birth.

I love this film Because you get both sides of the story, because you're able to see where De Niro's coming from, just seeing those guys in the movie. Again, I think there's something that, when a sequel can hit it right, to keep pushing, instead of, ""Let's capitalize on what we did the first time."" And for me, maybe one the first movies where I felt like, ""Ooh, we're getting a backstory."" That, to me, was really thrilling. And just to see those guys, that young and hungry. That's it, that is the right thing there. Coppola is at the top of his form in both films.Simply as a story, the Michael scenes in ""The Godfather: Part II"" engage our emotions. I admire the way Coppola and his co-writer Mario Puzo require us to think along with Michael as he handles delicate decisions involving Hyman Roth (Strasberg), the boss of Miami; Fredo (Cazale), his older brother, and the shooting of Sonny (James Caan). Who has done what? Why? Michael floats various narratives past various principals, misleading them all, or nearly. It's like a game of blindfolded chess; he has to envision the moves without seeing them.

But finally it is all about Michael. Even the attack on the night of his son's first communion party is on his bedroom, not our bedroom. His wife, Kay (Keaton), leaves him, and his focus does not waver: He will keep his son. Tom Hagen (Duvall), the most trusted confidant of father and son, considered a brother, is finally even suspected. In Michael's life, paranoia is a useful defense mechanism.Coppola shows Michael breaking down under the pressure. We remember that he was once a proud war hero, a successful college student, building a legitimate lifestyle. But on their wedding day, Kay first began to fully realize what an all-controlling cocoon the Corleone clan was. There would always be things she could not be told about, could not be trusted with. Finally Michael has no one to tell or trust except his elderly mother (Morgana King). Michael's desperation in that intense conversation explains everything about the film's final shot.

The early life and career of Vito Corleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expands and tightens his grip on his crime syndicate stretching from Lake Tahoe, Nevada to pre-revolution 1958 Cuba The Godfather Part II is a 1974 American epic crime film produced and directed by Francis Ford Coppola from a screenplay co-written with Mario Puzo, starring Al Pacino and Robert De Niro. Partially based on Puzo's 1969 novel The Godfather, the film is both sequel and prequel to The Godfather, presenting parallel crime dramas.

The most memorable best epic Francis Ford Coppola's classic masterpiece sequel ever, the film stunned everything for brilliance to superb acting. I love this film to death, I love it!!!!!

Score: Bad-Ass Seal Of Approval Studio: Paramount Pictures Starring: Al Pacino,Robert Duvall,Diane Keaton,Robert De Niro, Talia Shire, Morgana King, John Cazale, Marianna Hill, Lee Strasberg Director: Screenplay: Francis Ford Coppola, Mario Puzo Producer: Francis Ford Coppola Rated: R Running Time: 3 Hrs. 22 Mins. Budget: $57.300.000 Box Office: $57.300.000";1;2;False tt0071562;ramsharma-45853;03/09/2015;Best Movie;;This, perhaps the greatest sequel ever, tells the parallel stories of Michael's struggles as the new Godfather and the rise of the legendary Vito Corleone. The presentation of Vito's story is particularly impressive, with DeNiro in a fine performance. Michael's story tends to bog down at times but never fails to be compelling. Pacino is terrific, as are Duvall, Cazale, and Strasberg. The cinematography is beautiful and Rota builds on his memorable score from the first film. Coppola pushes all the right buttons, letting the stories unfold majestically. Having made the two Godfather films by age 35, the talented director had nowhere to go but down.;1;2;False tt0071562;psdmitriy;25/08/2015;The Best Saga...;10;It is a film about family... It is a film about mans... It is a story about love... It is a true story of life... It is a legendary Vito Corleone... It is a powerful Michael Corleone... It is a nice shot film... It is a melodic music... It is a mafioso style... It is a memory... ~ It is a film about family... It is a film about mans... It is a story about love... It is a true story of life... It is a legendary Vito Corleone... It is a powerful Michael Corleone... It is a nice shot film... It is a melodic music... It is a mafioso style... It is a memory... ~ It is a film about family... It is a film about mans... It is a story about love... It is a true story of life... It is a legendary Vito Corleone... It is a powerful Michael Corleone... It is a nice shot film... It is a melodic music... It is a mafioso style... It is a memory...;1;2;False tt0071562;cuthwy;13/08/2015;Outstanding Sequel;10;The Godfather saga continues as Michael is trying to legitimize the Corleone Family as the new Don and wipes out all of his enemies. You also get to see a backstory of Vito Andolini, Michael's father which is really fantastic. You discover how Vito came into America, how the Corleone Family was formed, how Vito took revenge etc. This movie has several sad scenes - Vito's mother's death, Fredo's death, Kay abandoning Michael and many others. The fans of the first movie in this epic trilogy will definitely enjoy watching the sequel. Robert De Niro does an awesome job by starring as the young Vito on the rise. Returning actors like Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, James Caan, John Cazale, Talia Shire, Gianni Russo and many others also did an amazing job on the movie. Is it better than the original? Maybe, maybe not.;1;2;False tt0071562;mukherjeesubham93;24/05/2015;excellence part 2;10;The godfather part 2 which acts as both a sequel as well as prequel to the 1972 classic, had the same men who had helped that motion picture become what it was....to say the least. But easier said than done, this time the job was tougher, because a sequel or prequel or succeeding film in this case, comes with a certain baggage of expectations, but Coppola had ended the godfather pretty cleverly, now we can't obviously assume that he was planning a sequel because sequels were not a common thing back then....but still Mario puzo and Coppola pack in enough punch to make this 1974 film not only the best follow up ever made but also arguably make one of the most ambitious, innovative and risky film ever undertaken a classic....just like the first one. this film continues right from where the first one ended, right from there, you just don't feel you have ever left the corleones, not for once, it was that effortless....but the masterstroke in this one was the prequel track where we see how don Vito became don Vito in 1930s new york....so the film actually beautifully highlights how Michael and Vito expanded the corleone empire.... Coppola once again manages to make some scenes memorable, which haunt you long after you've left the movie and the cinematography and musical score is also very good. Al pacino plays Michael corleone with outstanding aplomb and maturity. The first movie not only gifted him super stardom overnight but also matured him as an actor. I personally consider this to be the best performance not to get an Oscar. Another time he let's his eyes do the talking and silences speak. Just watch out for a few scenes towards the end...it will surely send a shiver down your spine and give you goosebumps. Robert De niro plays the young don Vito corleone in the parallel track of the movie, almost all his dialouges being in Italian. He had large shoes to fill because a certain Marlon Brando played the same character in the previous one and got an Oscar. But De niro, an icon now but relatively unknown that time, completely nailed the role. Right from the way he speaks to the way he walks and his mannerisms, he is excellent. Not for once you feel he is not Vito's younger self and that is quite a task. The academy jury also thought so, making don Vito the only character in movie history to be awarded Oscar twice. Talia share, Diane Keaton, Robert duvall are all excellent.the only probable issue which people have with this movie is the fact it is three and a half hours long and also some of the scenes could well have been left out. But if you loved the first one, there is no reason you won't love this one. It is not only godfather part 2, it is excellence part 2 also.;1;2;True tt0071562;musautsho;05/03/2015;Nice Movie;10;"Robert De Niro became the only actor to win and Oscar for taking over another actor's Oscar-winning performance. He was not, however, the first or last such actor to be nominated for this. Gérard Depardieu was nominated for Best Actor in Cyrano DE Bergerac (1990), a role that had already won an Oscar for Jose Ferrer. Like Brando, Ferrer had played his role in English. Like DeNiro, Depardieu played the role in the character's native language; in this case French. Years later, Jeff Bridges would be nominated for his performance in True Grit (1969). John Wayne had won his only Oscar for his performance in the original film, which also featured Robert Duva.";1;2;False tt0071562;bryankmc;25/02/2015;"Excellent, but could be in the dictionary under ""sprawl""";10;The second outstanding point, similar to the first film, is the beautiful visuals. Although all of the cinematography and production design is great, what really impressed me were some of the darkly lit scenes. Characters and features of sets emerge from pitch- blackness, and everything is rich, deep shades of burgundy, brown, and orange. Amazingly, nothing gets lost in these scenes. It must be incredibly difficult to achieve without making the shots too dark, because I can't remember another film since that has been able to capture the same look. The flashback scenes are also in similar, but lighter, colors, creating an appropriate sepia-tone feel.

Although the broad perspective problems are unfortunate, a closer focus on most segments of the film provides exemplary artistry. Given that, and the film's importance culturally, The Godfather Part II is a must-see.;1;2;True tt0071562;nazimaman;28/12/2014;It's about one mafia handing over control to the future mafia;10;This movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other . IT is both a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and moral decline of Micheal . Both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino . To say that these two are good actors is like saying that a nuclear bomb makes a loud noise and in this movie they prove why they are at the top of their respective crafts .

Al Pacino is the standout in the ensemble cast and its amazing how his eyes have changed from the first part . They are now cold , ruthless and unemotional and betray the price which Micheal Corleone has paid for power .

Watch this movie and learn why it is the greatest gangster film of all time.i copied bcoz i needed .;1;2;True tt0071562;KingCritic;26/12/2014;KIng Coppolla hits a home run again!;10;People say that The Godfather: Part II is one of the greatest hits in history.And I cannot disagree!It hits exactly what I was looking for in a Godfather sequel.It puts all the other godfather movies to shame,and hits all the marks from the previous movie spot on.The reason I gave it a 9 of 10 was because it went a over the line a couple times with some things, and is a tad bit lengthy but still enjoyable.Although it is not part of the book and just a long extension of it but still incredibly entertaining.I doubt the only other legitimate criticsm is that this movie is freaking awesome!It always keeps the ball rolling and never backtracks you,and always keeps you up and going with famous scenes and unforgettable one liners.This movie was a launching pad for many famous modern day actors to make their mark.For 1970 this was immensely un cheesy and one of my very favorite movies.I highly suggest watching this movie if you have 4 hours of your time to sit back and watch a masterpiece.I suggest to watch the first one just to catch up.I have never seen a better sequel since The Winter Soldier.The only way you cannot enjoy this movie if you're only in to modern day crap!;1;2;False tt0071562;disinterested_spectator;23/12/2014;The Traitor in the Family Is Who?;9;"Although this is a great movie, it is logically flawed, and in such a way that once grasped, it is impossible to ignore. Early in the movie, Michael walks into his bedroom, where Kay is sleeping. She wakes up and asks him why the drapes are open. He looks around at the open drapes, apparently sees something outside, and drops to the floor as machine gun bullets riddle the bedroom. The compound is sealed off, and Michael gives orders that the gunmen be taken alive, but they are found shot dead shortly thereafter.

Michael tells Tom Hagen that there is a traitor in the family, and so he is turning power over to him while he, Michael, disappears for a while. Though Tom is only an adopted brother (and not Sicilian), and though Fredo is Michael's older brother, yet he does not turn temporary control over to Fredo because ""he is weak and stupid."" So far, so good.

But Fredo turns out to be the traitor in the family. Does that mean he is the one who opened the drapes in the bedroom while Kay was sleeping? And does that also mean that Fredo was the one who executed the two hit men before they could talk? If he did all that, I am ready to believe that he was the one who set up his father Vito for the hit in the first ""Godfather"" movie. But given his character, we cannot believe Fredo did any of these things.

But in that case, what was it that Fredo did that was so bad? Fredo says that Johnny Ola enlisted his aid because Michael was being tough in the negotiations about Cuba. So what does that mean, that occasionally Fredo was supposed to say to Michael, ""Don't you think you're being a little tough in the negotiations""? For that he deserves death?

Furthermore, the person who did open the curtains and executed the hit men is the real traitor in the family. There are plenty on the compound who might have done that, and that person, whoever he is, is still a threat to Michael. But Michael seems to be oblivious to this obvious implication.";1;2;True tt0071562;clouds88;20/12/2014;The Epic part 2;9;"As stated in my review of Godfather 1 , There are some movies which cannot be reviewed. We can all have our opinions, but we cannot rate them. These are the movies which go beyond the ratings and awards. The Godfather (1 and 2) is one such movie(s). To give a rating to these two movies would be an insult to its creators and I am not making any attempt to do so. These are two legendary movies, each an epic, a magnum opus for all other 'Don' movies.

Thus, I present here some of my views and scenes from the two movies that touched my heart.

The first scene of the movie, the traditional kissing of the hand of the Don, shows Michael taking over his father's place. Subsequent scenes show you that though he has taken over his father's seat, he is nothing like the old Don. The charismatic supremo is replaced by an angry, impatient man.

The movie touches upon the life of immigrants to the new blooming world America wherein begins our former godfather's story. The story of young Vito Corleone runs parallel to the present day Don. The story of the great man is unfolded beautifully and entwined well with the present.

In one scene, the relationship with present Don and his kid is intercepted by the young Vito Corleone, a young and handsome R. De Niro, playing with his little son, which enhances the contrast lifestyle of the two leading men.

Attention to detail has been given the utmost importance and the scene in which the lead actor watches a play, which though irrelevant to the story is heart touching, is a proof for this.

There are times when you just can't take your eyes off the well chiseled face of Robert De Niro and long for him to come back on screen.

As the movie unfolds, we see how the Don junior tries hard to keep his personal life & business in place, something which the senior had done with ease. In one scene, the new don's anger at his wife for having aborted their to be boy child vis-à-vis the distress troubled look on old don's face while seeing his young son treated by a nurse shows the disparity in the way the two men handled their families.

While Don Vito was as much a family man as he was a Godfather, his son, Michael fails to keep his family together. Like the icy cold winter snow, the relationship between the husband and wife is harsh and dry. True to his words, the ""Times were changing "".

As the movie progresses, we see how the once well built, tightly held family by De Niro is slowly losing its strength and grip under his son.

The love for his wife and kids in Niro's eyes in contrast to the anger in Michael's eyes for his wife underlines the entire movie.

The story ends similar to the first movie, where all the Don's enemies are killed, whether they are part of family or not.

Climax of movie sums up the life of Michael and the drastic changes over the years about his views and relationship he had with his father.";1;2;False tt0071562;bailey33;15/09/2014;Top 5 greatest movie of all time.;10;"The Godfather Part II is one of the top 5 greatest films ever created winning 26 awards and 16 other nominations. This timeless film is one of the best sequels, which equals, if not, surpasses the original film. Part two continues the story of the mafia family, the Corleone's. Michael Corleone played by Al Pacino has come into his own as the new Godfather with the passing of his father Vito Corleone at the end of part one. Marlon Brando played Vito Corleone, in his older years, portrayed in part one. In this film Robert De Niro plays the younger version, shown through flashbacks, of Vito. The beauty of this film is in the flashbacks. The flashbacks give the audience the full back-story of how young Vito became the Godfather and how the Corleone family became one of the most influential and feared mafia families in America.

Unlike, the film Goodfellas, also starring De Niro, a great film in it's own right, this film shows how Michael uses calculated decisions in ""business"" to handle conflict. In Goodfellas the main characters tend to ""fly from the hip"" and the theme is based more on the friendship of the main characters and how corruption tears their friendship apart. Part II of the Godfather's theme is about a young man that never wanted to be apart of the family ""business"" but out of necessity he was thrust into being the Godfather. Michael struggles in this film, because I think he's ultimate goal is to make the family legitimate. The character Michael is very intelligent and sinister; he will do anything to keep his family safe. This makes Michael very relatable to the audience, as most men have that same desire to provide and protect their family. Pacino's portrayal of Michael is nothing less than brilliant.

Throughout the film you have flashbacks of young Vito that correspond with the same conflicts facing Michael in current time that provide a highly specialized mood. Coppola's genius becomes apparent, as the audience is privy to this cycle of corruption and danger that this lifestyle brings. What makes this so compelling is how the same conflicts arise, but are handled differently due to the changes in society. The way Coppola cuts the scenes in to the flashbacks are flawless and makes the story flow in a very unique way.

The film uses an objective camera placement throughout much of the film. The use of this technique, in my opinion, was used to make the audience feel as if they were watching the plot unfold as a spectator, because the audience isn't a member of the Corleone family. The respect and secrecy of the family business requires Michael to keep things within the family. The scene when Michael tells his older brother Fredo, to never speak outside the family again reinforces this key element to the plot. The cinematographer used an array of angles, but the most significant angles come from the mid-to extreme close-up shots of Michal and Vito. The audience can see and almost feel the emotion in the faces of these two characters. In fact, most of the flashback scenes end and begin with a mid-to extreme close-up of these two characters.

Wardrobe and music in this film must be mentioned as well, as both won Oscars in their respective categories. The costume design used in this film was excellent and portrayed a very realistic sense of the time period being told. Each character had a specific wardrobe that fit the year, scene, and the overall plot seamlessly. The music in the film is extraordinary as well, providing chilling and exciting effect in key moments throughout the film. The score of this film rates very high amongst other films. The theme of family, the need to provide and keep them safe, and the desire to elevate your status is relatable to a vast audience; this is why this film is timeless.";1;2;True tt0071562;GeorgeRoots;30/08/2014;"""The Godfather Part II"", Is The Prime Example Of How Sequels Should Be Made.";10;"Mario Puzo's epic ""The Godfather"" novel, has gone on to set high standards in both literature and cinema. Considering how the first one had managed to encapsulate so very well it's ""Welcome to the Family"" ideology. It gives the sequel a chance to now stand on its own two feet, without the necessities of an origin story.

Well it actually turns out we need those origin chapters more than ever. We are shown the past of how Vito Corleone, became the Don, in contrast of his son Micheal (Al Pacino). Usually watching any flashback sequence in a movie feels so hard for me to get into, it happens so abruptly it feels less like an aid to the story but more of a throw in. Francis Ford Coppola's execution is genius, because watching Vito's upbringing is shown and depicted perfectly with the ""Sepia"" feel, murky streets of little Italy and a Oscar winning performance from a then unknown Robert De Niro. Seeing this perfectly executed with Michael's story in comparison, it just instantly draws us in so well there's not many other films that do it this well.

Following the ""current events"" of the movie. Michael is slowly growing distant from the family, and ultimately paranoia is settling in without help from the older, weaker brother Fredo (A truly incredible performance from the late John Cazale). By the time things escalate towards the end of the film, the family is ultimately destroyed. Michael has officially isolated himself from both his own family and the other families, leaving him quiet and reminiscing. It is here we ask: ""Do we see Micheal as a man with a blood lust, or a tragic soul""? Your choice. ""The Godfather Part II"" is a stunning sequel, feeling more like a 7 hour long epic rather than a trilogy. But if you loved the first movie, I would not be hesitant to watch this one. It is one of Coppola's finest pieces of writing and cinematography .

Final Verdict: The American dream is continuously turned on its head, in this more than perfect sequel. 10/10.";1;2;True tt0071562;rajatdahiyax;21/08/2014;A brilliant Sequel!!!!!!!;10;Francis Ford Coppola's legendary continuation and sequel to his landmark 1972 film, The Godfather, parallels the young Vito Corleone's rise with his son Michael's spiritual fall, deepening The Godfather's depiction of the dark side of the American dream. In the early 1900s, the child Vito flees his Sicilian village for America after the local Mafia kills his family. Vito (Robert De Niro) struggles to make a living, legally or illegally, for his wife and growing brood in Little Italy, killing the local Black Hand Fanucci (Gastone Moschin) after he demands his customary cut of the tyro's business. With Fanucci gone, Vito's communal stature grows, but it is his family (past and present) who matters most to him -- a familial legacy then upended by Michael's (Al Pacino) business expansion in the 1950s. Now based in Lake Tahoe, Michael conspires to make inroads in Las Vegas and Havana pleasure industries by any means necessary. As he realizes that allies like Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) are trying to kill him, the increasingly paranoid Michael also discovers that his ambition has crippled his marriage to Kay (Diane Keaton) and turned his brother, Fredo (John Cazale), against him. Barely escaping a federal indictment, Michael turns his attention to dealing with his enemies, completing his own corruption.;1;2;False tt0071562;Hotwok2013;07/08/2014;The greatest movie sequel ever made.;;"""The Godfather Part 2"" is that rarest of movies in that it surpasses a really brilliant first movie. Shown in flashbacks it shows the rise of the young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) in New York City & alternates forward to his son Michael (Al Pacino) who eventually succeeds him as head of the Corleone mafia family. De Niro & Pacino are two of the greatest movie actors of all time but I have to say that, to my mind, De Niro is just fantastic in his role. Great too is Robert Duvall as family lawyer & counsellor Tom Hagen. John Cazale who plays Michael's brother Fredo is also excellent. He had the misfortune to die of cancer at only 42 years of age but the good luck to appear in only five 1970's movies all of which are regarded as classics. For anyone who has never seen this movie do so at the first opportunity because there is no doubt it is one of the greatest, (some say THE greatest), movie ever made. As a piece of celluloid storytelling it remains unsurpassed.";1;2;False tt0071562;jbirks106;27/07/2014;Great acting but distracting structure;9;"The original ""Godfather"" created the template for every mob movie thereafter. Gangsters previously were either celebrated or loathed, but never well understood. Then ""Bonnie and Clyde,"" released five years earlier, attempted to humanize criminals by showing not only the spectacular bank heists and subsequent car chases, but also the mundane, banal and tragic nature of such a lifestyle. But B&C weren't Mafiosi. ""Godfather"" portrayed the Mafia as a unique and fascinating subset of society. Along with the requisite violence, we see the gangsters with their families, at weddings and christenings, or planning a multiple murder over takeout Chinese. Most of all, it is a portrait of Michael Corleone, the war hero and prodigal son, who returns to the fold and ends up running the show.

In ""Godfather II"" Michael is running much more than a crime family. He's a big shot whose son's first communion is celebrated by senators and other luminaries. As Hyman Roth famously tells him, ""Michael, we're bigger than US Steel."" But his personal life is disintegrating. Michael has promised Kay, his wife, that he's ""going legitimate"" but it's clearly not working, and we wonder about the sincerity of the promise. The family narrowly escapes a hit following the communion ceremony, initiating a series of retributions that we know will not stop.

Meanwhile, a series of flashbacks to Sicily show Vito, the paterfamilias, as a young boy who himself survives an assassination attempt (his mother is not so lucky), sails to America and sets himself up as a street hood who through guile and guts takes over the neighborhood rackets. He is respected and feared, but he's not without compassion. When his wife tells him of a friend who's having trouble keeping her apartment, Vito intervenes on her behalf. He didn't have to do it, and there's really nothing in it for him.

This is the central contrast in the film. Vito is undoubtedly a criminal who'll kill anyone in his way, but there's a humanity behind his calculations. Michael, who disdains his criminal family at the beginning of ""Godfather I"" and shows a naïve, even playful side, has lost his humanity by the end of that picture, and that hardness only deepens in ""Godfather II"". The only glimpse we see of that earlier man occurs in a scene with his mother, in which he asks how his father kept the family together. It's a rare example of self-doubt in an otherwise scheming, manipulative and deeply cynical personality. When he learns that his weak older brother, Fredo, helped set up the botched Lake Tahoe hit, he permits him to live, but only while their mother lives. By the end of the movie Michael has lost his family (his natural one), and any remnant of human feeling.

The structure of ""Godfather II"" is problematic for me. The repeated flashbacks to the young Vito, while engaging, interrupt the flow of the film. That this is a strategic error on Coppolla's part was demonstrated when one of the networks aired a miniseries, ""The Godfather Saga"" a few years after the sequel. It took a strictly chronological approach: beginning with scenes of young Vito in Sicily from ""Godfather II"" and then continuing with ""Godfather I"". (Some scenes were edited or omitted entirely, in conformance with network TV standards, while others not appearing in the films were included.) This merging of narratives conveyed all the power of both movies without the distracting flashback device to form a much more coherent whole.

What to say about the cast of ""Godfather II""? It is uniformly excellent. DeNiro's Vito is pitch-perfect. Keaton's performance as Kay is striking in its nuanced disaffection as she grows to realize that her husband has no inclination to go straight. Dominic Chianese gives a strong performance as Johnny Ola, a quarter-century ahead of Junior Soprano. Michael V. Gazzo, as the harried, doomed Frankie Pentangeli, won a supporting-actor nod, and his might be the best performance of the film. Talia Shire, as sister Connie, shines as the floozy who -- like Michael in the first film -- finally returns to the fold.

But it's Pacino and Cazale who really carry this picture. Theirs is a complex, combustible relationship: the strong, ruthless younger brother and the skittish, increasingly resentful older brother share two memorable, but radically different, scenes. In the first, Fredo has just arrived in Havana with Roth's $2 million. They repair to a street cafe for daiquiris as Michael pretends to confide in Fredo -- in fact everything he says is a lie. But Fredo is appreciative of the confidence and regrets that the two never spoke so intimately before. Later, after Fredo stupidly reveals to Michael his association with Roth and Ola, Michael severs their relationship in the harshest terms. Fredo is practically recumbent in his chair, even as he insists that ""I'm smart! Not stupid like everybody says. I want respect!"" But he's not smart: he's a dead man, and everybody knows it but him. Cazale plays the pathos for all it's worth.

The film ends with yet another flashback. It's Christmas, and the brothers have planned a welcome-home for the Don (never seen). Michael announces that he's joining the Army, winning congratulations from Fredo, bewilderment from Tom, and scorn from Sonny. This is evidently Michael's reverie, perhaps driven by the guilt of killing Fredo and his brutal treatment of Kay. Flash to present: Michael is seated outside his Tahoe estate, his only companions the fallen leaves whipping around his feet.

It's a real tour de force, this movie. It is flawed in its conception but brilliant in its execution. I can see why many people think it's the best sequel ever, even better than the original. I just can't take it that far. It may be the best sequel, but it nonetheless suffers by comparison to its predecessor.";1;2;True tt0071562;savannah-jackson;06/08/2009;a complete and utter masterpiece;10;the godfather part 2 is an absolutely flawless film you could even say it is better than the original the story is incredible and the makes sense the screenplay is amazing and realistic and the characters are perfect as well the acting from all the cast is just fantastic and i can't believe Al Pacino didn't win an Oscar for his cold and amazing performance as Michael Corleone and Robert DeNiro is amazing in his role as young Vito John Cazale also delivers an incredible performance as Fredo Corleone the direction is amazing and Frances Ford Coppopla did an incredible job as a director the cinematography is incredible the score is amazing the godfather part 2 is one of the best films ever made and is one of the few that is completely perfect a log with the first godfather 10/10 an masterpiece;1;2;False tt0071562;TheUnknown837-1;12/05/2009;I didn't think it was possible. I honestly didn't think it was possible.;10;"""The Godfather"" (1972) was, and still is, in my eyes as well as the eyes of most people, one of the greatest motion pictures ever made and without any doubts, the one that featured the quintessential cast for a mafia movie. It took me a long time to getting around to it, but at last a few weeks ago, I had the privilege to see director Francis Ford Coppola's continuation of the trilogy. And during that long span of time, I had heard a lot about ""The Godfather: Part II"" and how some have even built up the nerve to call it better than the original. I doubted it would even come close, even if it was great. Boy, was I wrong. ""The Godfather"" (1972) is still great and a true masterpiece, but much to my surprise and delight, Part II is even better. That's what I call a feat.

Perhaps the reason why ""The Godfather: Part II"" matches and overpowers the original is because—at least to me—that it is really not a sequel, but rather a continuation of the first film, which was really just a warm-up for what was to follow. The first film ended with Marlon Brando's Vito Corleone dying and his youngest son Michael (Al Pacino) turning from the weak little college kid who wanted nothing to do with his family, turning out to become the exact image of his father. And in Part II, we still have him as the image of his father only worse. While Don Vito was ruthless, he was also sympathetic and likable. The new Michael Corleone, by contrast, is one of the most bone-chilling villains ever seen. Part II follows his endeavors as he carries on in his father's name and mixed up with this continuation is a flashback sequence. You see, Part II is both a continuation and a prequel to the original. Inter-spliced with the sequel footage is a second story detailing the past of Vito Corleone, now played by a young Robert De Niro in an Oscar-winning performance as the dumb-witted boy from Sicily who became one of the most powerful mobsters alive.

""The Godfather: Part II"", like its predecessor, is a legendary film for many reasons. Apart from being one of the most important and entertaining films ever made, it also set new standards and records that have yet to be matched. It because the first sequel to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards, it started the now-common formula of using roman numerals for sequel titles, it has the irony where it, as well as the original, have an Academy Award win for two different actors playing the same characters (Marlon Brando as an old Vito Corleone in the original and Robert De Niro as a young Vito Corleone in Part II), Michael Corleone is one of the more frightening villains ever realized, and the look of violence and horror of a mafia world is twice as terrifying as what was seen in the first film. And of course, it marked the beginning of Robert De Niro's career.

The irony of the first ""The Godfather"" (1972) was how Michael Corleone was transformed from a ""nice college boy"" to quote his brother into a vicious crime lord who at the end of the first film authorizes the assassinations of all of his competitors without flicking an eyelash. And the irony of ""The Godfather: Part II"" is not only is he now worse than his father ever was, but Michael Corleone is still driving himself down a road to his own relentless destruction and the moral destruction of those around him. His son, his wife, his sister, brother, brother-in-law, and close friends are both brought closer to him and alienated from him at the same time. Alienated because they fear him. Brought closer because they know better than to run away.

In regards to the film's second story, the prequel about Vito Corleone, it's not only brilliant, but necessary and phenomenal. The prequel is one of the few major chapters from Mario Puzo's incredible book that could not be fitted into the original film. That's alright, because to me, the flashback was the only slow and unnecessary part that Puzo wrote. But here, in this film, in this continuation, it not only fits and correlates, but belongs. Again, it's to show how Michael Corleone is more vicious, more dangerous, more terrible than his father, who was at one time brutal and devilish. There was originally a scene that called for Marlon Brando to return as an old Vito Corleone, but I think the magic of this prequel footage would have been lost if it had, for we then compare the Brando performance from the original, the De Niro performance from the sequel, see how they blend perfectly together, and our imaginations become our eyes and ears.

In regards to the film's music score, Nino Rota scores even higher than he did with his soundtrack for the first film. One noticeable thing is how the original theme score was sad and almost depressing, but the music for Part II is even more sad and even more depressing, for it's really a tragic story. Rota knew what Coppola and Puzo were trying to show with their second film and he was dead-on with his somber, almost ironic musical score.

""The Godfather: Part II"" also boasts a great deal of truly shocking moments that at times makes you jump in your seat and at other times, hang your jaws in awe, in a bitter disbelief to accept what has happened and the latter most certainly comes about in the final shots. And that ultimately is the power of Coppola's film and that is why it is considered so terrific, even to the point of surpassing its superb predecessor. I honestly didn't think it was possible for Part II to be better than the original, but it is. This is a compliment of the highest order.";1;2;False tt0071562;ackstasis;12/03/2009;"""Your country ain't your blood. Remember that""";9;"To call 'The Godfather: Part II (1974)' a sequel doesn't quite do it justice. It is more of a companion piece to the original film, serving as both a prequel and a sequel, both expanding and enriching the characters and story presented in 'The Godfather (1972).' This week I was fortunate enough to attend a cinema screening of the second film {each instalment of the trilogy played over three consecutive weeks}, and needless to say it was well worth the late night. When we last left Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), he'd just been ""baptised"" into the world of organised crime. Now, years on, he must accept that his position of corrupt power can only lead to the disintegration of his family, and the loss of everybody he's ever cared about. Michael's plateau of despair, following the impressive rise we witnessed in 'The Godfather,' is here juxtaposed with the historical ascent of his father Vito Corleone (now played by Robert De Niro) from a humble but traumatic childhood in Corleone, Sicily. The comparison delicately suggests the downside of the so-called ""American Dream"" in which Vito believes so passionately.

As with 'The Godfather,' Coppola's film could only have succeeded with interesting and authentic acting performances, and the cast doesn't disappoint. Al Pacino has rarely been better, playing Michael Corleone with a violent intensity that suggests the lasting influence of brother Sonny (James Cann), who was assassinated in the previous film. Pacino's scene with Diane Keaton, in which we learn that she received an abortion for her unborn son, is one of the most traumatic moments of spousal interaction I've ever seen, with Pacino exhibiting a barely-suppressed rage through his severe, almost fearful, eyes, and a quiver in the jaw. An under-appreciated John Cazale brings depth and pathos to weaker brother Fredo, and Robert Duvall is excellent as Tom Hagen. New to the 'Godfather' cast are Lee Strasberg (President of the Actors Studio) and Michael V. Gazzo, as business associates who may be plotting against the Corleone family. De Niro won an Oscar for his portrayal of a younger Don Vito, understatedly evoking the essence of the character without parodying Marlon Brando.

'The Godfather: Part II' is certainly an impressive achievement, but it doesn't quite manage to equal its predecessor. Whereas the original film achieved the bulk of its emotional power through the transformation of its central character, 'Part II' leaves Michael hopelessly stranded in his despair, portraying neither his rise nor his downfall. Having effectively sold his soul for the family in the previous film, Michael must now come to terms with his desolation, alone in his misery, and having long forsaken any opportunity for salvation. He concludes the film still at the height of organised crime in America, and yet receives no reassurance from his position of power. Michael is alone, a dejected and self-loathing soul, without comfort from the family he helped destroy. It's a haunting ending that will remain with you for hours afterwards, but nevertheless doesn't seem like a conclusive ending to the entire Corleone saga. Fortunately, Coppola returned sixteen years later to direct 'The Godfather: Part III (1990),' which charts, I believe, Michael Corleone's inevitable downfall. Hopefully I won't be disappointed.";1;2;True tt0071562;delija84;22/01/2009;"the ""ONE""";10;"Why did i wrote the ""ONE""???

Because this is-BE READY-...THE GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME!!! Does it sounds corny or clichéd? NO! And i will explain later...Enough of searching for the best movie, because The Godfather part II is the ""ONE"".

We can argue about for example The Shawshank redemption is the best, or citizen Kane, or The Godfather, Deer hunter, Taxi driver, Raging bull...and truly indeed they could be the ""ONE"". But for me this is truly the best, and let me tell you why!

First and foremost this is ACTING and DIRECTING at the highest level possible. You got Al Pacino, Robert DOE Niro, Lee Strasberg ( master of acting ), John Cazale and Michael V.Gazzo to be leaded by Francis Ford Coppola.

The movie starts where ""original"" ends with congratulations to the new Godfather and then you are ""transported"" in Sicily 40 and some years in the past, where young Vito is with his mother at the funeral of his father that has been killed by the local Don. At the funeral Vito's older brother also gets killed so logical next one should be Vito, but that would never happened because Vito immigrates to New York. Meanwhile the movie shifts to Nevada where Michael ( Al Pacino ) holds the meetings between his business partners and enemies ( but hey,they don't know that )at his son's party! Then he is tried to be killed in his house, so he leaves everything to Tom's ( Robert Duvall ) hands and goes to Miami to fix this problem with his friend/enemy Hyman Roth ( Lee Strasberg ). At the end he fixes his business life and becomes even stronger as The Godfather but his private life is at rock bottom after his wife,sister,friends leaves him all alone at the top. On the other hand Vito ( Rober DOE Niro ) climbs to the top don in New York and he manages to do that and he is also respected as a person because he is man of his own words. At the end he goes back to Sicily to revenge his mother,father and a brother!

This movie can't be put into words, you gotta watch at least couple of times to understand the meaning of this film. I know that i learned a lot of things that helped me and they still do in the life.

KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE BUT YOUR ENEMY's CLOSER !!!";1;2;False tt0071562;freemantle_uk;07/07/2008;Simiply Brilliant;10;Sequels to Oscar winning films normally don't type out to be that good and end up being flops. Luckily The Godfather: Part II is just as good as the original. It is a bold mix of a sequel and a prequel, showing Michael Corleane's decline in character as he leads the Corleane crime family in the late 1950s/early 1960s, and showing Vito from a poor orphan Silian boy in 1901 and rises up the ranks of the Mafia from 1917 onwards.

Michael Corleane had been running the family for around five years and moved them to Nevanda. Things seem to be going well, he has political influence and is gaining money from legitimate means. But they are turning times ahead, having to deal with a conflict with a Jewish Gangster, Hyman Roth, a traitor within his ranks, the FBI and a Senate committee investigation. He is suffering family problems (both crime and personal) and is around during the Cuban revolution. Vito starts the film as a 9-year-old boy and all the male members of his family have been murdered by Don Cirrio, a powerful local Mafia chief in Silicy. He see his mother beg for mercy before getting killed by Cirrio's men and flees to New York. In 1917 the Italian neighbourhood he lives was run by local gangster, Don Fanucci. He gets tired of his iron fist rule and ends up murdering the man and taking his position. With that he becomes respected in the Italian community and a leading gangster and then looks for revenge for his family.

This a complex, well plotted film, with many aspects of Mafia life being looked at from a board time-period. It is well written, brilliantly directed, Francis Ford Coppala at his best, and some great acting. It also has some good quotes which I think are some of the best in the series, like the 'I know it was you' bit and 'You are not a friend and your are not a brother'.

The Godfather Part II is a great example of a gangster film and I believe that it approach of a sequel/prequel influenced other films like Infernal Affairs Part II and III. This was a very worthy Oscar winning film and I think that this film is just as good as the first. I don't know how it compares to Part III because I haven't watched it, but I haven't heard good think about it.;1;2;True tt0071562;Cody2310;25/05/2008;Breathtaking...;10;I cannot begin to explain the brilliance of this film. It is without a doubt my favorite film and arguably one of the greatest of all time.

In my opinion, Al Pacino gives the best performance of his career, alongside Godfather Part I, Scarface, Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon and Scent of a Woman. Pacino shows us the dark, ruthless and powerful side of Michael Corleone that was only shown for a brief time in the Godfather and delivers it to perfection. The loss of Marlon Brando has absolutely no effect on the film because he is still there in spirit and Pacino more than makes up for the absence.

We are also given a glimpse of Vito Corleones early career as a Mafia figure. Robert DeNiro gives an amazing performance. Through this we are able to make the connection between Vito and Michael. We learn that Michael has, in fact, great reluctance compared to Vito in the process of living and accepting the Mafia way of life, although their motives are exactly the same: family.

This film is more than good acting and plot, it is epic story telling at its best. Although very different in many ways from Godfather Part I, which chronicles family, Part II we realize the entire Godfather saga is more about the epic tragedy that is Michaels life rather than the Corleones.

I have watched this film dozens and dozens of times and I never get bored. It is dramatic, suspenseful, emotional and clever. The script is phenomenal, the story is capturing and engaging and the acting is mind-blowing. If you have not seen this, or any of the Godfathers, WATCH THEM! (in order of course)Best ever. 10/10 would be an understatement for this film and for the Godfathers in general.;1;2;False tt0071562;HelloTexas11;05/01/2008;the saga continues;9;"The first 'Godfather' film was a beautifully rendered, violent and at times even warmhearted look inside a Mafia crime family. It deserved all the accolades it received for direction, cinematography, art direction and of course those wonderful performances by Brando, Pacino, Caan, Duvall and the rest of the cast. I think it's fair to say no one expected the sequel to outshine the original, but to many peoples' minds, somehow it did. It is even more intricate and expansive, presenting two stories at great length, one taking place before the first film and the other, continuing the first's narrative. 'The Godfather Part II' has been called both the greatest sequel of all time and the greatest American film, period. It was nominated for 11 Oscars. The 'sequel' part of the film concerns Michael Corleone's attempts to hold his family and its 'business' together after the death of Vito Corleone. Times are changing and he sees an opportunity to invest in Havana's casinos with the help of Hyman Roth, a former associate of his father's, and the pre-Castro, pro-business government in Cuba. The plot of 'Part II' is difficult to follow at times; there are double-crosses, and perceived double-crosses that really aren't, and it's hard to know who is sincere about what. The only thing that is certain is that everyone looks after their own interests and there is no hesitation in using murder as a final negotiating tool. Killings and attempted killings continue, but in this film, they are more methodical and cold-blooded. Toward the end, Tom Hagen even asks Michael Corleone if he feels the need to kill everyone. No, Michael says, just our enemies. But when one of those 'enemies' turns out to be his own brother, Fredo, it is clear that things have changed in the Corleone family, and not for the better. Francis Ford Coppola spoke of the inevitable decline in the Corleone family and it is very apparent, never more so than when Michael gives the order to have Fredo murdered. The 'prequel' segments are, by contrast, very simple and tell the story of how Vito Corleone arrived in America and began to build his empire. Robert DeNiro does not so much replace Marlon Brando as offer an interpretation of Corleone as a young man. There is wonderful period detail in these scenes; the tenement neighborhoods of the recently arrived Italians, living in their own section of New York, bits of broken English beginning to find their way into the mother tongue. It's all filmed in sepia-tinted color, which creates the feeling of a time passed, like looking at old photographs. Unlike the 1950's plot, the turn-of-the-century story is fairly cut-and-dried. Vito Corleone marries, starts a family, and begins a loose partnership with other young immigrants in what will eventually become the Corleone crime family. He kills the neighborhood crime boss, the one who collected protection money from all the local businesses, and effectively replaces him and the old way, becoming a more benevolent, friendlier version of the Black Hand, if no less lethal when the need arises. He even finds time to travel back to Sicily and visit revenge on the aged crime lord there who had murdered members of his family. 'The Godfather Part II' is filled with memorable performances, all of the continuing characters portrayed by the same actors as the first film. It is an epic undertaking and rewards repeated viewings with new detail unnoticed previously, not to mention better understanding of the labyrinth plot intrigues. It is also ultimately depressing, in a way the first movie wasn't. In spite of everything, the audience was pulling for the Corleone family to succeed and win out over its enemies in 'The Godfather;' I don't think that's the case at the end of 'The Godfather Part II.'";1;2;True tt0071562;jack1141994;08/02/2007;A SO much better movie then its predecessor.;9;The Godfather Part 2 was definitely one of the greatest movies I have ever seen. It is so much better than the first in the trilogy in every way, the effects, the acting, the dialogue, the setting and just everything. It is set over such a WIDE environment. It is a very long movie which might bore the young ones that like action-packed car chases/ explosions (which really p**ses me off) but it is an excellent movie for the REAL movie goers out there. Reasons it better than no.1: The special effects are way more up to scratch, the acting is so much better (it almost seems that all the actors from the previous outing have magically gained skills), and the structure is much more secure. It is a must-see movie that intelligent people will love.;1;2;False tt0071562;dwpeak;20/01/2007;"Redefines ""Sequel""";10;"There is no question; this is the best sequel ever made. ""The Godfather: Part II"" is also among the best films of our time. It is another dark, stunning portrait from a master director. A pitch-perfect screenplay leads the brilliant actors through a world few filmmakers can accurately show. It is a masterful companion piece to ""The Godfather (1972).""

This movie tells us two stories in two different times. One is about Michael Corleone's (Al Pacino) criminal organization, and how he is struggling with opposition, his failing marriage, and his kids that don't understand the truth behind their father's seemingly gentle eyes. Michael is trying to buy ""legitimate businesses"" during the Cuban Revolution with the help of Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), but there may be more to the picture than either of them realize. It is also the story of Michael's adopted brother Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), who feels he is starting to be left out of the picture. Diane Keaton as Kay is ever more strained from her murderous husband, and Connie (Talia Shire) is losing confidence in her brother. John Cazale as Michael's brother, Fredo, is beginning to get confused about what is best for his family. The movie's parallel story is about the immigration and early life of Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), and his rise to power in the early 1900s. The struggles, the love, and the violence that dictate the future of the Don's decisions.

As I have already mentioned, the movie is brilliant, and so are the stories. While Michael's rise in the criminal underworld is fascinating, I found the story of the young Vito Corleone to be even more so. It is the only part of the book that Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola left out in the first one. It is done here magnificently. I still like the first one a little bit better than this one. It is very close, but I think there's a good reason: we were knocked off of our feet by ""The Godfather,"" because we did not know what was coming. It was the first time. This is the second time. Is that a negative? No, this film weaves in perfect acting by Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, John Cazale, and Lee Strasberg with superb storytelling, magnificent direction, beautiful cinematography, a worthy script, and and an overall great production. Robert De Niro, in his Oscar-winning performance, gives one of the shows of his life. He steals our attention with his magnificent acting. One of his best career moves.

Thanks to Francis Ford Coppola, the director/co-writer/producer, who has transformed an amazing book into two movies that will remain is history forever as masterpieces. Thanks to co-writer Mario Puzo, who without his book and screen writing, there would not be this movie. Beautiful.";1;2;False tt0071562;kostasxrysogelos;10/09/2006;"The second best sequel, after ""The New Testament"".";10;"It's rare, almost impossible, but it can happen, and when it does, it puts a smile on our face. Yes, the ""Godfather, part II"" is better than the first one. ANd since the first part of the trilogy is probably the best American movie ever made, this one is nominated as one of the best movies ever made. Am I exaggerating? Check out my arguments please, and then make up your mind.

It's a long and slowly evoking film. I must say that I almost understand the people who say they're bored from it. But to the people who know a thing or two about cinematography, it's an absolute masterpiece.

The plot is great. While we see Pacino's life sinking into a nightmare of uncertainty and solitude -by the end of the movie, he's lost his wife, his mother and his brothers, we are brought in parallel to an early-20th century New York, where young and poor immigrant, Vito Corleone -Pacino's father- makes his first steps into the world of blood and domination. The two figures don't appear ever at the same time on the screen. In that way we can compare the major difference between them: Vito is poor but going up. Michael is rich and powerful, but he's losing each one of the people he loves. Thus, whereas the first movie deals with power, this one's dealing with relationships and feelings.

The acting is outstanding. DeNiro symbolizes the Corleone character, by avoiding showing too much on his face -Brando did the opposite in the first part. Pacino is also splendid. He isn't a young and ambitious man anymore. In this movie he is a man who has lost control.

The cinematography is also magnificent. Starting from where the fist movie ended, Coppola avoids too much general plans and gives weight to the gros plans. The photography is very nice and the music, once more, over the top.

It's OK if you don't like it. It's very long -more than three hours, slow and difficult. But I won't change my mind: It's really one of the very-very best ever made. Humangousely recommended. Cheers.";1;2;False tt0071562;vampi1960;30/07/2006;excellent sequel;10;the godfather part 2 is more of a continuation then a sequel.its also a prequel,showing flashbacks of Vito corleone as a youth,and later as a young man played by Robert DE niro.there's more murder and mayhem.AL pacino takes over as boss of the family,as mob movies go this and the godfather 1 are the best,Mario puzo wrote the story as well as the screenplay.the performances by pacino,Talia shire,Robert duvall,Robert DE niro,Diane Keaton are excellent,look for roger corman playing a small part towards the ending.the connection here is that roger corman gave Francis ford Coppola his first job at directing with the film dementia 13,a black and white horror film.godfather 2 also stars john cazale and lee strasberg.this is a highly recommended film,it must be seen uncensored to be really appreciated.10 out of 10.excellent sequel.;1;2;False tt0071562;qg59;21/07/2006;2nd only to the first;10;Everything about this movie is equal to the first one. In my opinion the only thing that makes the first one better is Marlon Brando. But this one is a close second. Robert Duvall, Al Pacino, and Diane Keaton continue to do an amazing job. What i enjoyed most was the transition of Michael corleone from what seemed to be a good guy in the first movie, to a villain by the end of the 2nd film. Again, another long movie that can be somewhat hard to endure its length. But thats definitely not from a lack of drama. If you like drama, this is the movie for you. Male or female, old or young, this movie should interest you.;1;2;False tt0071562;jldmp1;22/04/2006;The Rise And Fall;10;"This is one of the rare cases of a sequel having more to say than its predecessor. This time a full investment is made in a visual world...here we have depth in addition to the width of the coverage: the proper dimensions of an empire.

The Corleone compound lies in unkempt disarray, like Charles Foster Kane's Xanadu, a museum of memories.

'Part II' is another coup for Willis' lighting and Coppola's ability to capture a world in this fashion; this time, everything, even the outdoor scenery, is defined by light and shadow.

Freed (mostly) from the shackles of the novel, Coppola could explore narrative. We seamlessly jump back and forth in time, following two story arcs with opposite conclusions; a third regression in time completes the equation.

This movie marks several turning points -- DeNiro, hot off of ""Mean Streets"" and ""Bang the Drum..."" would establish his method for good, squarely on top of Brando's method. And Pacino would establish the template for all of his future thunderings.";1;2;False tt0071562;creekin111;12/02/2006;My #4 favorite film of all time (including part 2);10;What more could be said about the Godfather (1+2). The legacy of mafia crime family dramas begins and ends here. The lines of dialogue have been forever embedded into the American culture and film discourse. Pacino, Brando, Dinero, Keaton, Caan, and the whole cast fit the bill with impeccable conviction.

The morals and themes of the pictures have such a profound impact unlike any preceding film. It empathizes with a traditionally antagonistic side of society and shows its varying dimensions. Men who steal, rob, and murder do so for reasons other than their own personal self-indulgence. They believe 'the life' is for the greatest benefit for their family, but then take it too far.

Films up to this point had a narrow view of the motivation of the accomplices in organized crime. The Godfathers enlightened the film going public about the motivations of the mafia, crime and crime families but doesn't defend it. It merely observes the chosen and or inherit ethics of life in the crime family.;1;2;False tt0071562;ebiros2;24/01/2006;A Classic in its own right;10;This is one of the few movies where the sequel is better than the original. Cinematography is better than the original, and story line tighter. The story is about change of guard from the old Corlione (Vito) to the new God father (Michael), and I thought acting by both Marlon Brando and Al Pachino was notch above the original. The unlikely son who went to college and had no interest in the family business now takes over the family as the new Don. Al Pachino shows his maturity as an actor by playing the role of the new Don masterfully, and his transition from his first role to that of the new God father is portrayed naturally.

This is one movie I believe will last till the end days of cinema. A classic in its own right.;1;2;False tt0071562;Aditya_Gokhale;19/12/2005;"Perfect! A Landmark in film-making; Coppola's true masterpiece.";10;"I fell in love with ""The Godfather Part II"" the first time I saw it! And why not? No other movie that runs for a whopping 200 minutes, has held my interest like this one has! There is not a single wasted moment in this long running time. And what's more..it has my most favourite actors Al Pacino and Robert De Niro starring in it! Words are not enough to describe this great film, and as has rightly been said by many: to call it a sequel is an insult! This is yet another movie that gets better each time you see it.

The Godfather Part II tells parallel stories of young Vito Corleone's early life and his son Michael's reign as Don Corleone. The contrast in the two eras has been shown beautifully. The colours used, the sets, the overall feel...everything has been shown to such fine detail, that it becomes impossible to even try and find a flaw in this film! The most important thing to mention here is that the flashback scenes of Vito's life appear at very apt moments! They are not placed haphazardly. Careful attention has been given to their placement, so that they fit beautifully in the present narrative of Michael Corleone.

Robert De Niro delivers a mind-blowing performance as the young Vito. He has uncannily managed to look and behave exactly like the young Vito Corleone would (given Brando's depiction of the same character in the first movie). In some scenes it actually feels as if we are watching a young Brando portraying Vito Corleone! Al Pacino is stunning as the cold, ruthless, brooding Michael Corleone! He manages to express so much through his eyes, its almost eerie! John Cazale as Fredo has a lot to do in this movie and he pulls it off wonderfully. Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen does complete justice to his role yet again! Other performances worth a very special mention include: Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth, Michael V. Gazzo as Frank Pentangeli, Gaston Moschin as Don Fanucci and G.D. Spradlin as Senator Geary.

Diane Keaton is better in this movie than in the first as Kay; Talia Shire as Connie is adequate.

Also, special mention about the choice of actors playing the young Tessio and young Clemenza (John Aprea and Bruno Kirby respectively); they actually bear an uncanny resemblance to the older actors playing these same parts in Part I.

The cinematography, needless to say, is amazing! The sepia tone makes the film appear like a beautiful painting.... The score: once again, a class apart!

This is one ""sequel"" that truly surpasses the original! I try not to call it a sequel as far as possible, because the word ""sequel"" simply doesn't fit! ""The Godfather Part II"" is an offer that no one should/can ever refuse!! To do so would quite simply be a ""crime"".....";1;2;False tt0071562;okazaky;16/12/2005;One of the best films in film history;10;The Godfather saga continues with full momentum in this second installment. Al Pacino and Rober Deniro fit their roles like a glove. Any fan of films should have already seen this masterpiece. If not go rush to the store now. Vito's consolidation of power and the founding of the Corleone Empire is delivered in perfection. Any questions the audience had about the inner workings of the Corleone organization is answered very clearly. One of the best endings also, it really makes you hungry for more, at the same time not disappointed or cheated. Robert Duvall returns again to play the legal representative of the Corleone family as well as Diane Keaton as Michael Corleone's (Pacino) wife. Both fill the roles well, particularly Duvall who plays the character who always plays it safe. Not a common trait among the organization. Only Francis Ford Coppola could have pulled so many complex strings together to create this landmark film.;1;2;False tt0071562;diand_;16/06/2005;Masterclass Method acting;9;With even the former director of the Actors Studio and proponent of method acting Lee Strasberg having one of the key roles this is one of the strongest acted movies ever. With Brando not present there seems to be more space for others. Especially De Niro impresses here because he had to take Brando's Godfather into account (he mimics his eye, head movement, diction and hand gestures). Both Strasberg and De Niro were nominated but De Niro won from the godfather of method acting.

Part 2 is very well structured: Not only is it a great idea to integrate a prequel and a sequel but they enhance each other creating more emotional intensity: death and birth of a child for example. But the greatest achievement in structuring the story comes in the end, when several story lines are intertwining more and more until the short but powerful climax.

Again we see that dark and light is used to separate the inner, godfather world from the outer, ordinary world. Only in the beginning there are more lighter scenes in the godfather world to signify Michael's failed efforts to go legitimate. Once again very effective use of doors, mirrors and windows just as in part 1.

Where part 1 and the prequel are about the rise the sequel in part 2 is about the fall of the Godfather family (not the empire). Whereas Vito stands for traditional, Italian values, Michael stands for modern, New World-values. The core of the story comes in the end, showing Michael both in the prequel and the sequel as a lonely outsider. That's why his efforts as a family man fail so dramatically, and he's in fact only excellent in 'business'.;1;2;False tt0071562;Phreddy;03/02/2004;One of the best all-time, against which other movies should be judged.;10;Probably the best sequel ever, with depth of characters and complexity of plot rarely equaled. You should not live in modern Western society without having seen the first two Godfather movies, and if you can make it through the third you're a better person than I.;1;2;False tt0071562;rossrjensen;15/12/2003;One of the greatest films of all time;10;"I can think of a few ""sequels"" that can be considered great films. Two which I can think of are Aliens and Terminator 2...but I still liked the original to those films more.

I can remember watching the Godfather for the first time. I was young, and although I liked it, it would be years until I really came to realize just how great it is. After actually seeing the Godfather II, I was amazed. An incessant battle ensued inside my soul which continues to rage today, over which is the better movie...and I have to say I generally lean towards the Godfather II. It is the only sequel to win an academy award for best picture, and rightfully so. Many consider the Godfather to be the greatest film of all time, and it's sequel is just as, if not better than its predecessor.

This film could've been broken into two movies, as a prequel to the Godfather, and as a sequel...my favorite aspect of the movie is when it shows how ""the Godfather"", portrayed by Robert De Niro came to be so powerful.";1;2;False tt0071562;rossrjensen;15/12/2003;One of the greatest films of all time;10;"I can think of a few ""sequels"" that can be considered great films. Two which I can think of are Aliens and Terminator 2...but I still liked the original to those films more.

I can remember watching the Godfather for the first time. I was young, and although I liked it, it would be years until I really came to realize just how great it is. After actually seeing the Godfather II, I was amazed. An incessant battle insued inside my soul which continues to rage today, over which is the better movie...and I have to say I generally lean towards the Godfather II. It is the only sequel to win an academy award for best picture, and rightfully so. Many consider the Godfather to be the greatest film of all time, and it's sequel is just as, if not better than its predecessor.

This film could've been broken into two movies, as a prequel to the Godfather, and as a sequel...my favorite aspect of the movie is when it shows how ""the Godfather"", portrayed by Robert De Niro came to be so powerful.";1;2;False tt0071562;cameron_durkin;16/11/2003;Best of the trilogy.;10;"Personally, I believe that ""The Godfather Part II"" is by far the greatest of the trilogy, and therefore the greatest movie ever made. Every aspect of the movie is flawless and no other movie (except the first, and Citizen Kane) comes close to its quality.

This is by far Al Pacino's best role and which he, nor any other actor, will eclipse. The Godfather Part II is also the best acted movie of all time containing career making or establishing roles for Dianne Keaton, Robert De Niro and John Cazale.

Just talking about what an accomplishment this movie was is making me want to put everything I am doing down and watch the movie again.

Easily a perfect 10 out of 10!";1;2;False tt0071562;rossrobinson;03/11/2003;A Fantastic movie;10;The Godfather part II is another one of the brilliant movies of all time. This is at the moment at number 3 on the top 250 best movies. This is a fantastic movie, i really enjoyed it. Robert De Niro as got to be one of the fantastic actors ever. He was brilliant i think in the 2nd godftaher movie. I give this movie 10 out of 10.;1;2;False tt0071562;eamon-hennedy;28/10/2003;THE GREATEST SEQUEL IN THE HISTORY OF FILM.;10;Magnificent from beginning to end, The Godfather Part II is a superb film that betters what was already a perfect film to begin with. Much more epic in scope and retaining a lot of symbolism and Shakespeare like tragedy, Coppola and Puzo have created a work of art once again. Flashing forward a couple of years after the end of the first film, we find that Michael has well and truly amassed himself as the head of the family. Struggling to turn the business into a legitimate empire, the film flashbacks to the early days of his father's building of the family business, in what is the first stroke of genius of this sequel. The flashback sequences make the film a much more epic affair and in doing so we see the differences not only in father and son, which is the main thrust of the story of the second part of this trilogy, but we see how much America has changed and how much the dynasty of the Corleone family has altered from small street business to potential empire. The real joy in the flashbacks here is how different father and son are. Whereas we see the love between them in the first film and how much Vito loved Michael, here we see the vast differences between them. As Michael tries to legitimize the family business, we see how increasingly alien like and withdrawn he becomes from those around him. His wife Kay, his 'brother' Tom, his blood brother Fredo and how it all ends in tragedy and with Michael ordering the death of the brother who betrays him. Coppola successfully integrates the flashbacks of a young Vito into all of this. Enhanced by the wonderful performance of Robert De Niro (very young here), we see how Vito built his own empire and we see how different he was to his own son, how he loved his wife very much, how he treated friends with respect, how he immersed himself into their lives, not only of those of his friends and family, but of the people he tried to help on the streets. It is this comparison that makes The Godfather Part II such a brilliant film.

The screenplay by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo is a masterclass in the art of storytelling. If Shakespeare were alive today, this is the type of film he would be writing. Betrayal plays a big part of this film, as does tragedy. Both the betrayal and the tragedy fall at the hands of the hapless Fredo, betraying his brother and then dying at the hands of a hit organized by Michael himself. John Cazale is a stand out amongst many in this film and the moment where he prays in the boat just before he is killed is one of the most haunting moments ever put on to film. It is both sad in many ways. It reinforces how much Fredo had destroyed the relationship with a brother that he loved and further isolates Michael into his shell, prompting a flashback to happier times and a piece of news that only Fredo reacted warmly to. All of this makes up for a fantastic film. It is truly the greatest sequel ever made. The story is well told, the acting is pure class and the flashback structure is done very well.

This is as perfect as perfection will come.;1;2;False tt0071562;vito-corleone;20/10/2003;the PERFECT sequel;10;What more can anyone ask for? This movie is a sequel yet at no point one feels it is any less than the 1st part in quality or performances(except maybe Marlon Brando's performance which is in my opinion the most charismatic performance of all times).

The movie flows so well, and the way the story shifts from Vito's life then to Michael's life is handled so well.

Beautiful cinematography, and background score is the best ever.

De Niro and Al Pacino gave unforgettable performances, proving they are two of the greatest actors ever.

I recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in watching quality cinema, intelligent dialogues, and great stories.;1;2;False tt0071562;Homeless-Dad;05/03/2003;As Good as the First;10;"When i saw Godfather Part 2 i was kinda skeptical because sequels are normally not as good as the original. But ""The Godfather Part 2"" is an exception to that theory. Godfather Part 2 is as good as the first. I watched it and though my favorite character wasn't in the movie due to a tragic toll booth death (Sonny), i still enjoyed it anyway.";1;2;False tt0071562;The Creeper;31/12/2002;Great Sequel;10;"Godfather II is a great sequel that is almost as good as Part one. If you liked other Godfather or mob movies, then you will love Godfather II. Good Acting and great story. I would recommend this movie to anyone.

10 out of 10

If you liked this movie, I would recommend you check out ""Scarface""";1;2;False tt0071562;Dfredsparks;19/11/2002;best of the best;10;"Must be the best sequel of all times (edging out Empire Strikes Back). Brilliant concept of simultaneously telling the story of a father and son at the same age. The scenes are breathtaking as we go from Sicily to New York to Lake Tahoe to Cuba. The cast members from the original maintain their superb performance level and new castmembers Lee Strasberg and Michael Gazzo turn in outstanding performances as Hyman Roth and Frankie ""Five Angels"" pentangeli. One of my five favorite films of all time (along with Godfather I, Silence of the Lambs, Pulp Fiction, Goodfellas)";1;2;False tt0071562;PSYCHOAD;17/09/2002;what a film;10;this is simply the best film ever it has every thing a good person likes in a film guns blood gore and lots of talking but the talking stands out and when you watch it you say to your self when is the next shoot out going to be people say this better then the first because is longer and it tells two storys at the same micheal al pacino the young vito his father from the 1920s robert de niro stars as vito and they both won oscars for this movie not surpies it brilliant 10 out of 10;1;2;False tt0071562;directjw;12/09/2002;What more can I say?;10;This is one of the best films ever made, and it's flashback structure, intercut with the story set in the present, makes is a more narratively complex, and ambitious, film than the first Godfather. Somehow, the Godfather trilogy has entered the mythology of cinema, and modern history. Perhaps it is because the Corleone family symbolizes the modern capitalist system in America, and how one family rises to the top through vicious means. Most importantly, the Godfather movies question the American dream, and asks whether in the end, is it worth it to obtain the heavens, only to have to end up in Hell?;1;2;False tt0071562;TheMan3051;07/07/2002;Outstanding!;10;This is the sequel/prequel to The Godfather and it is as good as the original or better. I don't know which one is better. While this movie has the better story line, the first has Marlon Brando in his now famous role. Regardless this is much of a masterpiece as the first one and it has better acting and story line then the original. This movie won a well deserved Best Picture Oscar but John Cazael (Fredo)deserved a nomination and a win for Best Supporting Actor.

****out of****stars;1;2;False tt0071562;ajitmahadevan;25/06/2002;The real part I;;"This is the real part I of the movie - and in every way exceeds the original. Stunningly filmed and portrayed - the slower pace of this movie lets one really sink into it.

Pacino has probably never put in a better performance. Some of the truly stand out - the one when Michael Corleone finds out that Freddy betrayed him - and the ""you broke my heart"" scene.

A classic which I would urge anyone who hasn't seen it to never call themselves movie lovers, and those who haven't for some time, to see it again. It gets better each time.";1;2;False tt0071562;paulgrostad;24/05/2002;Quite simply the best movie ever made - Period.;10;This is one of the few sequels that is better than the original movie. And when the original movie is The Godfather... What more can you say? F.F. Coppola must have had a decade of divine inspiration when he made these two movies (1972-1974) and Apocalypse Now (79), because let's be honest: Nothing he has made since then has even come close. Sure, he has made more good movies, but these three reign supreme!;1;2;False tt0071562;Ciuski;22/03/2001;The story of Corleone family, seven years later;10;"""The Godfather"" is simply wonderful, and ""the Godfather - part II"" is not less good. It's the best sequel ever made. It's wonderful to see two great actors as Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro: I don't know who acted better in this film...both are fantastic!";1;2;False tt0071562;Eclipse-6;13/11/1998;Great Movie;10;This was a very well put together movie. It showed no flaws. Incredible performances by Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Lee Strasberg, Diane Keaton, and Michael V Gazzo.;1;2;False tt0071562;chrisow;05/12/1999;Not as good as the original;10;Many people have said that this is better than the first one.I don't agree.The only thing I found that had the spirit of the original was the De Niro sequence,but Pacino's performance makes up for it.I'll not reveal the slightly nasty shock you get in the film;1;2;False tt0071562;sarem;24/11/1999;The Best, Classic, Epic, Scintallating, ADDICTIVE;10;The Godfather II is the best film in the business. Although I'm a great fan of Godfather, I believe that the second part is far more compelling than its former. Two reasons, I believe Mario Puzo, while writing Godfather, wanted to highlight the fact that even mafisios or even Gangsters always, have a good side to them. WITH EVERY EVIL THERE IS GOOD. This message was beautifully portrayed in Godfather II, while Godfather was not as effective. With the brilliance of Al Pacino matching Marlon Brando, and amazing acting by Robert de Niro, this movie is the titanic of all movies...the best sequeal ever made, and better yet, the best movie ever conceived. Should be Number 1!!!;1;2;False tt0071562;bldsimple2;29/10/1999;The Best Film Of All Time (in my humble opinion);10;"Call me biased. For years I thought that the original Godfather was the end-all be-all of films and that there was no way they could ever top it. After years of people crushing me to see Part II (and the heavy weight of the Oscar Gold it had won) I finally caved in, rented it, and came away from it a changed man.

It is difficult in any film to tell two separate stories that co-exist on the same level. They accomplished that. It is near blasphemous to take a heralded character in the original and watch him self-destruct in a sequel. They pulled it off. And it is unthinkable that one brother could possibly betray another. Believe it.

Part II tells the parallel stories of a Young Vito Corleone (Robert DeNiro speaking virtually no English) rising to prominence in New York's Hells Kitchen and his son Michael (Al Pacino in his best performance ever), many years after Vito's death, trying to make sense of the business he never wanted to be a part of. The Rise and The Fall of two very different, but ultimately the same, men.

Vito's inherent goodness bleeds through his performance. Once doing away with the ""Black Hand"" who rules the streets through terror and oppression, Vito takes control of his neighborhood through kindness and compassion. He knows the problems of his people and understands why, in some situations, they can not afford to go to the police for help. He is their Robin Hood.

However, several decades later on the banks of Lake Tahoe, his youngest son Michael has embraced the hypocrisy of his profession. He intimidates his adversaries, yanks power from his father's trusted counselor, and turns his older brother Fredo (the much missed John Cazale) into a glorified errand boy. After an attempt on his life is botched, Michael goes on an international trek to consolidate his potential enemies and turn them against one another. It is on this journey that he learns the true nature of his enemy and realizes that to overcome him, he may lose his soul.

Shakespearean to a fault, emotional as hell and one of the best (tragic) endings I have ever encountered. See this before you attempt to see Godfather Part III (it spoils the ending).";1;2;False tt0071562;FLC;04/10/1998;A sequel which is as good as the original, if not better;9;The Godfather was a hard act to follow. It had an enthralling plot and the acting was second to none. So, when part two was released, you could be forgiven for being sceptical back in the seventies. But this film was and still is pure class. With the death of Don Vito Corleone, Michael had to inherit the title, and he did it well. It covers everything you could think of and Robert De Niro is brilliance as the young Vito. Excellent.;1;2;False tt0071562;bix171;01/04/2002;Special;10;"A masterpiece in its own right, Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo's deepened history of a family's attempted assimilation into an America that increasingly resists them is told by creators that clearly love their people equally as much as they loathe them. Coppola and Puzo juggle two stories, the growth of the Corleone family under the direction of youngest son Michael (Al Pacino) as he grimly tries to take the business legitimate, and the early life of his orphaned father (played here Robert De Niro in a bemused but attentive manner, with dialogue almost entirely in Italian) as he struggles to find his place in the New World. The filmmakers (and this is a collaboration between director and co-scenarist, make no mistake) with the success of the first film have the freedom to relax and tell a thorough story and it unfolds over more than three hours with pinpoint precision and convincing detail. The history it encompasses includes a fascinating foray into Cuba on the eve of revolution and it seems fresh, significant--a subject hitherto unexplored on the big screen; it makes the film seem special, independent of its older sibling. The performances are, again, wonderful and include a startlingly bitter Diane Keaton, a nuanced, graceful Lee Strasberg and a heartbreaking John Cazale. While no film can quite stand alongside its predecessor, this one comes as close as one can come and no film can quite stand alongside this one either.";1;2;False tt0071562;savannah7;26/03/2002;Excellent;10;This movie to me, is even better than the first Godfather movie. It has more heart ache, and even though these men aren't the most admirable, you still feel admiration and pain for them. When they are betrayed, you feel betrayed. I love how this movie makes you feel, and makes you want to be a part of their family. This is an amazing movie, one of the best ever made, a must see!;1;2;False tt0071562;morganlee;07/03/2002;Part II along with Part I IS the reason man was put on Earth...;10;"PERFECTION does not begin to describe this film or it's prequel. Pacino is sensational but it almost pains me to say; multiply his talant by 6,000,000 and a brief picture of DeNiro's little finger may develop, words cannot describe this man and this movie is his defining role. Don't get me wrong, Pacino is beyond words in this picture but DeNiro is Godlike. DeNiro along with Brando have created the greatest character in motion picture history.";1;2;False tt0071562;cocaine_rodeo;08/07/2001;The best sequel ever made!;;This is without a doubt, the best sequel ever made, and it will probably never be topped. Robert De Niro steels the show as a young Vito Corleone, which won him his first oscar.

Al Pacino should have won Best Actor, but he didn't. The Godfather 2 also adds some new sides to it's characters, which is what I liked best(particularly Vito's bloody rise to power). 10/10;1;2;False tt0071562;Gorechild;25/04/2001;A movie you can't refuse. My #1;10;The Godfather of all movies. Incredible the way Robert deNiro and Pacino act. Robert deNiro equals and maybe he's even better then Marlon Brando, Al Pacino is better (a Don the whole time). As an appetizer, we see James Caan in the end. This should be #1 in the IMDB top-250, surely. Watch it, please.;1;2;False tt0071562;Smarty-3;22/08/1998;An EXCELLENT sequel to a great movie;9;The Godfather part II is the only sequel I have seen that is better than the first. It was an amazing movie that kept my attention despite it's 200 minute running time. Fine performances by Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, and Robert De Niro made tis movie one of my all time favorites.;1;2;False tt0071562;riddhimaakaritu;18/06/2020;So yeah it is bit overrated.;6;Too long and too slow. I have to put so much effort to care about the characters. May be because I really don't know any of the actors? If it was not supposed to be the greatest film ever made then perhaps I would not even complete the trilogy. Of course it has many good things but for me there are many more better films than this.;2;7;False tt0071562;DhavalVyas;13/11/2005;A solid sequel, but a little long.;8;"'The Godfather, Part II' is often considered the best sequel ever made. Although it is a powerful and moving story, the film has deep flaws that are not revealed upon initial viewings. First of all, the movie has many of the fine qualities that made the original movie a classic. All the performances are incredible and emotional; Al Pacino give one of the best performances I've ever seen. The complex story is slowly and subtly developed by Coopola's nearly unmatched talent as a director. Certain moments are so haunting and unforgettable, they have become classic moments in the history of film-making. I don't need to tell which sequences these are because so many people are already familiar with them.

With all the great things the movie has going for it, 'Part II' has a lot of flaws that reveal themselves after careful viewings. The flashbacks nearly ruin the movie. Although they explain the beginnings of the Corleone family, they greatly deter the on - going struggle of Michael with his enemies and his own family. The flashbacks also make the movie way too long. The failed murder attempt of Frankie Pentangeli is so confusing I couldn't figure out who was doing what. The film should have done a better job of explaining the pre-Castro Cubian situation to the viewer; the actions of the rebels and the rioting are also confusing. Kay (Michael's wife) and Fredo (Michael's brother) has sudden bursts of anger that come out of nowhere. The film does a poor job of showing beforehand why the two characters were so mad at Michael.

Nonetheless, 'The Godfather, Part II' has many positives that outweigh the negatives. If anything, one should just see the movie for the performance given by Al Pacino. Al Pacino commands the movie by stealing every scene he is in. His character is frightening, untouchable, cold, calculating, and invincible. It is one of the most awesome displays of acting ever put on film.";2;7;False tt0071562;dioriocrimefamily;20/06/2005;8 out of 10;8;The Godfather Part II was a very good movie, very well written and acted, but not my favorite Godfather movie. Let me tell you why.

I didn't like when the movie would cut from one storyline to the other. (I like to focus on one thing at a time) Michael showed a very dark side of him in this movie, I.E hitting Kay, I like that. That's one of the things I liked about the movie, I like seeing a dark side of a character and how well the actor can play that part and Al Pacino portrayed him excellently . But they didn't go deep enough into Michael's emotions, you really didn't get a chance to understand him as well as in the Godfather III.

In all honesty I think that the Godfather and the Godfather III are the best in the series and are a major contribution to the cinema, I just hope they won't make a forth one. That'll ruin the series for sure.;2;7;False tt0071562;m.v.hermanni;10/10/2009;Much to positive regarding the mafia.;6;"In my opinion, ""The Godfather 2"" is much to positive regarding the mafia, even sympathetic to it.

With the two layers of the narrative, the rise of Vito Corleone, caring and with a loving wife, cut against Michael Corleone, struggling and living in disharmony, the movie actually portraits the changes to society that had taken place between the pre-war and post-war society and between Sicily and America as something bad. It follows a ""The Good old times ""cliché, which is in itself already ideology of the mafia.

This motive is already present in the first movie, but more subtle: Michael finds his true love in an uneducated, maybe underage Sicilian women, that is pimped by her parents to this mighty man and he only returns to the educated, working girlfriend in America because a) his true love has been killed and b) after 1 year he found no other option in the USA.

Especially the portrait of Michael's wife shows a huge anger against women, who are not completely obedient to their husband: This women performs an abortion, because she does not want to give another air to her husband.

This is the same kind of stuff the trials against witches of the middle ages are made off: it is pure hatred and an attempt to link independence of a women to wickedness and insanity.

So in my opinion, the movie is poisoned by the material it tries to put on screen - and this is a warning to every cinematographer, that the subject of a movie is not to be taken easy, the subject might dominate. If it is about power like with the mafia, it might taint the whole result.";3;13;True tt0071562;suprez;19/09/2007;How to rate such a movie?;6;After reading a good portion of comments here.I'm truly sorry . This movie was not great enough .It's maybe the high expectation i had from it , seeing that everyone seem to ejaculate when they think about the godfather movie.Have seen some people falling asleep during this movie.But the movie is good!Because it's the GODFATHER! LOL

It's could be because the version i watched had no sub-tittle.With all the Italian conversation in this movie(which is around 30% of the movie) i could barely not fall asleep being i don't understand Italian and i had no sub-tittle.It's sure does not help.

The acting is superb .But the role don't seem to be much complicated to play.Everyone keep telling me that this movie is the best.But what make a movie the best?The acting?The story?The Action?

I'm quite happy godfather 2 for me was boring.I'm an intelligent person that most of the time enjoy great story.But this movie just seem to give retard a reason that they are indeed intelligent and love great movie.I LOVE THE GODFATHER SO I LOVE GOOD MOVIE WOWOWO.

When i watch a movie.I want to have some show and not some chatting during 2 hours and pretend that i love this kind of movie because the *acting is superb*.Give me a freaking break.Ace Venture it's a stupid movie.But at least it's entertaining

The music is also over-used.I was quite tired to hear the same background music each frigging time just because they want to enhance the *emotion*.;3;13;False tt0071562;stamp1;05/09/2002;Better Than The Original, Still Not Great;1;Because the unintelligible duo of Marlon Brando and James Caan were left out of this film, that alone makes this an improved version of the original travesty. As usual, Al Pacino and Diane Keaton had good performances, and the addition of Robert DeNiro strengthened the cast. I still don't like gangster films glorifying crime and terrorism in the streets of America, so I didn't like this film, but at least the screenwriter and director did it better than the first one. I recommend you don't waste your time on this film, there are much better ones around, unless you have this uncontrollable urge to see Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, or Robert DeNiro in anything no matter how bad it is.;13;105;False tt0071562;E-Z-Rider;29/12/2001;Save yourself the 3 hours and 20 minutes;6;Confusing, unfocused, repetitive, predictable and most of all interminable. Coppola here tries to meld two unconnected stories into one movie, largely because neither is interesting enough to stand on its own. Aside from a passable performance by DeNiro, the movie has nothing to commend it. It's astonishing that it rates among the IMDB top 5 while a really top notch movie like The Sting (1973) rates in the 70s.;4;22;False tt0071562;kumarihpx;24/12/2015;Pathetic attempt, with all driven by greed;;Pathetic attempt, like other sequels, with all driven by greed. Compared to the original, this is totally disjointed, made for the masses that heard of the original at the Oscars, and in the end unappealing, unmoving, stupid, and lacking in all atmosphere appropriately constructed in #1. I cant believe anymore was awarded by their fellow academy members for this trash. I cant believe Pathetic attempt, like other sequels, with all driven by greed. Compared to the original, this is totally disjointed, made for the masses that heard of the original at the Oscars, and in the end unappealing, unmoving, stupid, and lacking in all atmosphere appropriately constructed in #1. I cant believe anymore was awarded by their fellow academy members for never get back this tthis trash.;2;8;False tt0071562;luke-a-mcgowan;25/12/2014;Confusing, overlong but powerful;6;The second installment of the Godfather trilogy opens strongly and nails its landing. Unfortunately, the film takes a hard right half an hour in and turns into a convoluted game of Clue that I struggled to understand or care about. Al Pacino, whose transformation was complete at the end of the original masterpiece, does great work and works much of the movie magic where the script allows him to. DeNiro is captivatingly subtle in his role as young Vito Corleone, and the trio of Keaton, Cazale and Duvall, who flew under the radar in the original, do some fantastic work as well. However, the film's plot focuses heavily on a mystery that is too confusing to follow and Francis Ford Coppola falls into the errors of the original by introducing swathes of interchangeable Italian-American men who are impossible to tell apart.

As time goes on I am sure that I'll remember the best moments fondly and will be tempted to bump it up, but that will only be because I forgot how agonising it was to sit through 3 hours and 20 minutes.;2;8;False tt0071562;dr_understands;22/11/2009;the best movie ever;10;i heard about The Godfather series but never tried to see it because i thought it would be old fashioned but yesterday i made my mind to watch this and i couldn't believe its so good. i mean how the hell anyone make such a beautiful movie.

its not only about gangsters but it has something that touches your heart.

it shows value of your relations and your family. and as for acting is concerned its awesome , especially al pacino was really great . i really liked the 2nd part. but 3rd one was just a bit lower than first two.

all i can say is its the best movie series i ever saw even more beautiful than The LOrd Of the Ring series , my previous best movie.;2;8;False tt0071562;Doylenf;31/03/2008;Not quite up to the first Godfather film--but chilling enough...;7;"""I don't feel I have to wipe everybody out. Just my enemies."" So says Michael Corleone (AL PACINO) in THE GODFATHER: PART II.

Pacino plays the part with somber seriousness that becomes a bit one dimensional by the time the film is midway over. Nor is the story as compelling as the first Godfather film. But you have to hand it to director Coppola, he keeps the viewer glued to the screen even when the pauses between dialog is a bit longer than needed. (No wonder the film is so long!!). And with the risk of being politically incorrect, you can almost smell the garlic in every scene, so realistic are the accents and the background flavor of the entire film.

So many plot developments are almost throwaways because the screenplay seems to be deliberately ambiguous about certain plot elements. And yet, the film has a certain holding power and all of the performances are more than competent. Especially poignant--and chilling--is the scene where Fredo's fishing expedition takes place with stormy looking clouds setting the eerie scene to perfection as the expected murder takes place.

With murderous intentions just around the corner in practically every scene, it's a fascinating film to watch, especially since the murders themselves are so deftly handled by the actors involved. DIANE KEATON is especially convincing in the final confrontation with Pacino.

I don't think GODFATHER II compares favorably to the original film with Brando, particularly since it's not always successful in telling two stories--the one involving the young Vito (ROBERT DeNIRO) and the present story--but it still packs a wallop when it gets to the intense moments. The double strand of stories doesn't always mesh well, a weakness of structure that hurts the film. Despite this major flaw, it's a superior piece of film-making.";2;8;False tt0071562;Fire God;13/09/1999;Number6-6, you are not alone.;6;"You are simply one of the few people who have the guts to admit they don't like this movie. While watching The Godfather part II, I kept waiting and waiting for something special to happen, and the closest thing that came was when Pacino gave Keaton a good smack. I think this is a boring movie and way too meandering for my taste. I almost feel ashamed, since this is considered one of the greatest movies of all time by many people whose opinion I respect very much; but honestly folks, this is one of the most over-rated films of all time.

Jeremy Barger http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/firegodsmovieclub";3;15;False tt0071562;wouter_decree;05/10/2019;Better than a sleeping pill;6;I'll have to thank Francis Ford Coppola in person, his movies work better than any sleeping pill ever created! Have to admit, this one is slighty better than the first one but it's still a snoozefest. Why these films are so high in the all time top baffles me. But hey, next time I can't fall asleep, I'll start to watch any of the Godfather movies and I'll be sound asleep in 5 minutes. Thanks Francis!;2;9;False tt0071562;MartinHafer;30/03/2013;My review of this film is pretty unimportant.;10;"""The Godfather: Part II"" is seen, by many, as the greatest sequel in movie history and one of the best films of all time. Some even think it's better than ""The Godfather"". As for me, who am I to argue?! The film IS great--and deserved the Best Picture Award and its placement at #3 on IMDb's Top 100 list! And, since there are over 500 reviews for it on the site, I can't think of why I am even bothering to review it. After all, what's one more review that sings its praises?! The acting, writing, direction and entire production is perfect. What more can you say? If you do see the film (and you MUST), try to watch the version that combines the first two films into one--and adds additional story to make it one huge and perfect epic. You simply can't be a film buff without seeing this picture.";2;9;False tt0071562;factvsfitness;25/02/2020;Nice movie;7;This is a nice movie in holly wood and the role of the joker is soo good;1;3;True tt0071562;rachelrose-87356;09/08/2019;Movie Review Profits;8;Play The Godfather: Part II! It is fast and easy to view! A good way to spend your time. Be the best!;1;3;True tt0071562;studiotriangle;07/05/2018;It's amazing.;9;This movie is so nice movie. I invite to all to see the movie.;1;3;False tt0071562;rachiiyadav;25/10/2016;God Father;7;"The original Godfather is a brilliant work. It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time and Brando created a cultural icon whose influence resonates as strong today as it did in 1972.

As extraordinary an achievement as this is, Part II is even better. It easily receives my nod as the best picture ever made. I have seen it at least 20 times, and each time its 200 minutes fly by.

The movie uses flashbacks to brilliantly weave two tales. The main story is the reign of Michael Corleone as the world's most powerful criminal. Now reaping the benefits of legalized gambling in Las Vegas, Michael is an evident billionaire with an iron fist on a world of treachery.

Behind this, Director Francis Ford Coppola spins the tale of the rise of Michael's father, Vito, to the center of the New York mafia. It is these scenes that make the film a work of art. Without spoiling, I will simply say the Robert DeNiro as the young Vito is the best acting performance of all time, a role for which he won a richly deserved Oscar.

The screenplay is full of delicious little underworld nuggets (""Keep your friends close ....."", ""I don't want to kill everyone, just my enemies""), while it blows a dense, twisted plot past you at a dizzying and merciless pace. The cinematography is depressing and atmospheric. The score continues in the eerie role of its predecessor, foretelling death and evil.

All of this makes the movie great and infinitely watchable. But it's what's deeper inside this film ... what it is really about ... that is its true genius.";1;3;False tt0071562;CinemaClown;05/01/2016;The Greatest Sequel Of All Time, And Certainly The Most Honoured.;;"Making a sequel that can manage to live up to the expectations of the original is an achievement in itself. But when the original film is being universally hailed as the greatest motion picture ever made, measuring up to that same feat is undeniably a near impossible task. But then, that's exactly what The Godfather Part II manages to accomplish by building upon the original in ways most sequels never dare to and is possibly the only film in existence that has the calibre to challenge the reputation of The Godfather. Boasting all the ingredients that made its predecessor one of world cinema's greatest triumphs, The Godfather Part II remains one of the most critically & artistically successful films in cinema history and amongst all sequels, is certainly the most honoured.

The Godfather Part II tells the story of two generations of the Corleone family, thus serving as both a sequel & a prequel to the original, transitioning within the same film. The prequel portion is illustrated in a series of flashbacks and depicts the life of Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in the previous film & by Robert De Niro in this one) and shows his rise from a poor immigrant in 1910s New York to the highly powerful & respected boss of the Corleone crime family. The sequel portion deals with the aftermath of the events of the first film and continues the journey of Michael Corleone as the new Don and shows him tightening his grip on his family business and expanding it into Vegas & Cuba. The two parallel dramas within the same film also serve as antonyms to each other, considering that one part follows Vito Corleone's rise to power through love, fear & respect while the other part represents the fall of Michael Corleone from the ruthless boss of a vast empire to a lonely & empty shell of a human being.

Continuing the saga from where it signed off in the previous part, Francis Ford Coppola & Mario Puzo, this time, bring the origin & evolution of the Corleone crime family on-screen through flashbacks but also carry forward its current legacy in the sequel segment of the story. Francis Ford Coppola's direction is much improved than it was in The Godfather and presents him in complete control of all filmmaking aspects. The screenplay is expertly written by Coppola & Mario Puzo, adapting the prequel part from the novel while envisioning the sequel part from scratch and, just like the previous film, contains some of the most memorable quotes in movie history. Cinematography inherits the same Technicolor print from the original and adds different contrasts to distinguish the two parallel timelines occurring within the film. Editing is equally impressive for it balances the two stories beautifully and keeps the pace in check throughout its 200 minutes of runtime. Art Direction & Set Decoration shows major enhancements over its predecessor. And finally, the music by Nino Rota is even better, building upon the iconic score of The Godfather and exploring newer territories in this one.

One of this saga's biggest strength has been its remarkable cast & splendid performances. The Godfather Part II features Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, John Cazale, Diane Keaton & Talia Shire in their reprising roles while also adding Robert De Niro, Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo & others to its strong ensemble. Al Pacino has given many spectacular performances in his film career but his work in this film remains his best. The cold & ruthless Michael Corleone, played exceptionally well by Al Pacino, returns to screen as more evolved & unforgiving and this performance of Pacino easily ranks among the finest that cinema has to offer. Robert De Niro comes next with an equally magical performance as young Vito Corleone and brilliantly modified his voice & expressions to match the attributes that Marlon Brando brought to this character in the previous film. John Cazale gets more screen time and delivers a heartbreaking performance as Fredo Corleone. Lee Strasberg & Michael V. Gazzo also chip in with strong inputs as Hyman Roth & Frank Pentangeli, respectively. And other impressive contributions come from Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton as Kay Adams-Corleone, Talia Shire as Connie Corleone, & Gastone Moschin as Don Fanucci.

On an overall scale, everything about this sequel just works. It is more star-studded than the first film and all the filmmaking methods introduced in The Godfather appear seamlessly evolved in this second part. Fans will always be divided over which is a superior film but there is no denying that both movies are paramount examples of flawless filmmaking. As for the two stories that are masterfully intertwined within this film, I personally prefer the flashback segment more than Michael's tale for it was much better filmed, more captivating & also added quite an amount of artistic touch to the whole narrative, comparatively. From start to finish, this masterpiece improves upon the original in such impressive ways that not only it succeeds as a successful follow-up to its predecessor but also shares the same class of greatness with it and both films, since their inception, have been highly instrumental in influencing its genre as well as cinema aesthetics. Displaying greatness in all aspects of filmmaking, The Godfather Part II is an ingenious work of expert artistry in both front & behind the camera and serves wonderfully as an epic conclusion to the violent history of the Corleone crime family. Certainly the greatest & most respected sequel of all time and one of the greatest treasures of world cinema, The Godfather Part II comes one hundred percent recommended.";1;3;False tt0071562;yashrajs536;24/07/2015;Falls short from 1st one but at its place a Good movie!!!;8;"I had watched ""The Godfather 2"" last night and i found it good but it was a fall short from the 1st one. The original has its own speciality that i didn't found in this one. The reason that the movie was not good as the 1st one was its ""excessive length"".

It has a long 200 minutes long run that i think should be reduced the film was quite started boring after 3 hours its excessive length makes it a bit Uncomfortable.

But it still a quite drama MASTERPIECE as the acting was good I missed vito corleone but its younger version was also good.

And the story was simple and good to watch the direction by "" Francis D Coppola "" was good. Overall a one time watch movie not proceeding the first one but good at its place and forgettable.";1;3;False tt0071562;slokes;30/05/2015;Family Is Destiny;8;"The rise of a great man is set against the fall of his son in this powerful second installment of the ""Godfather"" franchise. ""The Godfather Part II"" is an eminently worthy successor to the classic first film, not nearly as accessible but entertaining and gripping in its own right.

When we reconnect with Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), he is firmly established as head of the Corleone crime family, now based in Lake Tahoe, Nevada and as lethal as ever. As Michael asserts control over his dominion, we occasionally go back in time to see his father Vito (Robert De Niro) finding his own path to criminal power.

Michael speaks with more authority than honesty, we learn right away. ""Senator, we're both part of the same hypocrisy, but never think it applies to my family,"" he says. The irony and tragedy of ""Godfather Part II"" is how that hypocrisy is in fact never stronger than when it comes to Michael's family, which is all but destroyed by Michael's iron grip in service of evil ends.

As sequels go, few are regarded as measuring up to the magnificence of ""Godfather Part II."" It's everything you expect from the first film, building on the final moments we saw there of Michael accepting his destiny as Mafia don and developing what that all means. Weighing in at over three hours, with lengthy flashbacks, it manages to hold your focus as director-co-writer Francis Ford Coppola plays cards you didn't know were in the deck. The pacing is deliberate, never ponderous.

Like the first ""Godfather,"" I found I enjoyed ""Part II"" more with repeat viewings. Occasionally, as in an opening sequence set in Sicily that is revisited late in the movie, the drama gets a bit strained as the revenge theme is overplayed. Otherwise, the same subtlety that makes the first movie so great is in ample evidence here.

Pacino is fantastic as the older, harder Michael. We don't quite root for him anymore, the way we did in the first film (another weakness of ""Part II"" as I see it), but his command in the role is startling to witness. In the first movie, we saw him get bloody; this time the wounds are more internal as he plays his scenes with dead-eyed calm. ""I've already made my move,"" he tells his brother Fredo (John Cazale), regarding his latest venture in Cuba with a suspect business partner named Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg).

Cazale and Strasberg give the most memorable supporting performances (De Niro is more a co-lead even though he has less screen time than Pacino). Cazale is more of a hot mess than ever, entertainingly so until the stakes get too high. Strasberg is so low-key and charming you almost find yourself trusting him, until a key scene when his mask slips regarding a former associate named Moe Greene.

Other performances, many by returnees from the first film, are accomplished if somewhat superfluous, particularly Robert Duvall as Michael's adopted brother Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton as Michael's wife Kay, and Talia Shire as Michael's sister Connie. All of them have big moments, but are also left in the dust, somewhat by design as the theme of this film is Michael's loss of family ties.

The Vito sections could have been deadly, but Coppola here is at his peak as a director, working from a section of the source novel by co-screenwriter Mario Puzo that was left off the first film. Taking his cues from Marlon Brando's original characterization, but lending his own unmistakable spin, De Niro plays Vito as coy, gentle, but highly dangerous.

I love how Vito speaks almost entirely in his native Sicilian dialect, except at certain key moments when he uses English, depicted here as the language of power. He handles the problem of a don who wants to ""wet my beak"" in Vito's business with cold calculation. It amounts to a power play not only against the don, but his buddies Clemenza and Tessio, who soon find themselves taking orders from their former underling.

The film climaxes, as the first movie did, with a trio of interconnected sequences showing Michael's brutal effectiveness against his enemies. This time, however, there's no sense of triumph. Michael's revenge is too excessive, his ""enemies"" too reduced or ambiguous to merit their ends in our eyes. That of course is the message of ""Godfather Part II.""

Ultimately, ""Godfather Part II"" is a masterful if muted examination of the price of family, how the ties that bind too often strangle. I don't think it packs the same punch as the first film, but hardly any film does. What it does well is bring the themes of the first film into sharper focus, so sharp they leave one feeling the scars.";1;3;True tt0071562;k3700;01/10/2014;this movie is the 1 of my favorite;10;excellent+ i just inspire 1st from a game. then i saw this movie. this is a 1 of the excellent movie. really nice. i invite to my favorite for watch this. i like godfather smoke. also hate. also cigarette . like everything. i need to again see this movie. i liked this historical.so i need to this movie goes to talent list and universal award . i like again if we saw this movie remake this 2k15 version ,some material and gun out show ,when i like this movie.i appreciate to all of my friend for watch again and i go to cinema hall for again show this movie to us . i survey to all of my nearest school for interested to this movie.Loves and best regard's to all .;1;3;True tt0071562;thesouthfamily2-552-707097;04/01/2014;Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer;9;"At the end of ""The Godfather"", we have seen Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) change from a young man who wanted to stand apart from his family to one who did not hesitate to take up the reigns of control. In ""Part II"" , we see him lose his remaining shreds of morality and become an empty shell, insecure and merciless. The devolution of Michael Corleone is counterpointed by flashbacks to the youth and young manhood of his father, Vito (Robert De Niro). These scenes, taking place in Sicily and old New York, follow the conventional pattern of a young man on the rise and show the Mafia code being burned into the Corleone blood. What we have are two compelling narratives, two superb lead performances and lasting images. ""The Godfather: Part II"" then becomes a film that everyone who values movies at all should see.";1;3;True tt0071562;leomirelesortiz;31/12/2013;A great follow-up to the greatest movie of all time.;10;This one of the greatest sequels of all time, being almost as good as the original. So this movie continues the story of Michael Corleone, and his descent into darkness, and as he expands the Corleone Empire into Las Vegas, and just before the Revolution, Cuba, And through flashback how Vito Corleone played by Robert De Niro established the Corleone Family in New York.it also shows what a monster Michael has turned into as he orders the murder of his own brother Fredo, after learning that he had betrayed him.

So this Movie while not as good as the original it's still a great follow up, by raising the stakes, and furthering the characters, and leading up to the sadly disappointing Part III, which I'll Review later, it also shows what a monster Michael has turned into as he orders the murder of his own brother Fredo, after learning that he had betrayed him.;1;3;True tt0071562;blazesnakes9;27/11/2013;One great sequel;10;"In 1972, Francis Ford Coppola directed the film, The Godfather. It told the story of a family that was involved with the mafia. The son that came home from the war was given a job to look after the family after his father died. In the end of that movie, his own son became the new godfather. Now comes The Godfather: Part II. But, before I start my review on The Godfather; Part II, let me tell you about my rule of thumb on sequels. For many years, sequels have been trashed, criticized harshly and been disowned. Audiences do go to see sequels, but they don't understand the concept of a great or good sequel. So, I will turn your attention to my review of The Godfather: Part II. The movie tells us two story lines, one showing us how the original godfather, Vito Corleone, came to America in the beginning of the 20th century and one telling us the story of Michael Corleone, taking over his father's empire. Corleone, in a younger age, is played by Robert De Niro, who won a Best Supporting Actor in 1975 at the Academy Awards, and his journey in New York leads him into becoming the godfather of the original film. But even though this is a sequel, this movie is actually a prequel to the original film. Corleone's story is one of the main points of the movie and how he rose to power over the years before 1958. The other main point involves his son, Michael, played by Al Pacino, coming into play as being the godfather after his father dies in the original and in this movie, he takes on his father's job, where his relationship with his wife, played by Diane Keaton, takes a toll and he begins to experience the life of a matriarch, more specific, a hard-working matriarch. Pacino in this movie give a memorable performance in this movie and also in the original. But, there's something different about Michael Corleone. He's more powerful than the original film. If you remember the first movie, you'll realizes that he didn't want to be with the family, or be involved with the family's business because he wanted to live his own life. But, when his father died, however, he accepts the role of being the new godfather. To me, this movie is ranked pretty much up to the original, but this sequel and some sequels are bad and some sequels are good. The Godfather: Part II is a great sequel, more far-reaching than ever and much more in depth with the original. Why is it that great of a sequel? Well, first of all, the movie takes the characters to a new place and have them go on a different scenario in which they can drawback to the original. The business that Michael gets involved with in Cuba in 1958 is well-told. The drawbacks in this movie relies on flashbacks from Don Vito's early career in the early 1920's and 1930's. The movie features some of the other family members of the Corleone's clan, like Tom Hagen, played by Robert Duvall and Sonny Corleone, one of the Corleone sons, played by James Caan. To me, those flashbacks builds up the supporting parts that made The Godfather great. Not only great, but also revolutionary. If you put all of the pieces together, than you got yourself an epic story of one man, who was poor as a little boy from Italy, grow up and became inventive with his ideas and made himself an empire of his own people and his own family. His actions were direct and his journey was worth watching. It's amazing that audiences will buy a movie like this and see it and go to the movies to see this movie and not understand the supporting backdrop to The Godfather. Coppola directed this movie and amazingly, he won an Oscar for Best Director and the movie itself won Best Picture. The Godfather: Part II was the first sequel to every win an Academy Award. Even though I am not a member of the Academy, my opinion this movie is that it fully deserved the Oscar and does make sense for its story-telling and its magnificent scope of Don Vito's life. The transformation is far more superior than other movie character every to be told or made. The enormous ground-braking history behind the two Godfather movies brings out the American Dream. The two other movies is not about living in the American Dream, where you can pursue happiness and live life. The American Dream in the two Godfather movies is more different than what one's will say. The truth is that the American Dream consists of hard work and dignity. Anyone can pursue the American Dream, but only one will succeed by pursuing their own journey and making the best out of something giant. Giant like the empire Vito build on. It's more than a mob story. The Godfather: Part II is a great movie, with more in depth information amongst the characters and story-telling at its finest. ★★★★ 4 stars.";1;3;False tt0071562;raphaklopper;07/10/2013;Part 2 of the BEST MOVIE EVER MADE, period! (Here are the reviews of parts 1-2-3 together);10;"Does anyone ever asked the question about what is the best movie ever made? The movie that never get wrong in conveying its history and get right on all the points? The film that is very close to the word ""perfection""? Well, ""The Godfather"" parts 1-2-3 are undoubtedly the answer to this question. Separate the 3 movies and judge them separately is easy. Of course the 1st is where we get marveled, and the other two we had already noted some mistakes, but that's why the three movies together are not only a masterpiece from Francis Ford Coppola but also (perhaps) the best story ever told in a movie.

While in the 1st part, we are introduced to the Italian mob-family the Corleone's facing various threats from rival mob-families. That forces Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) tries to push his youngest son Michael (Al Pacino), to be his successor and be the next family's godfather; In part 2, we have the exact continuation of the story of Michael in the power of the family trying to raise the family business to other countries but he ends up making mistakes along the way. And simultaneously, we have the story of the young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) showing how he came to America and started raising his family; And finally the 3rd and last part we see a older Michael Corleone, suffering from mistakes that he committed in the past. But now he tries to redeem himself before his children Anthony (Franc D' Ambrosio) and Mary (Sofia Coppola) and his family trying to finally legalize the family business going into business with the Vatican and elect his nephew Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) as the new family godfather. But the dangers have always followed the Corleone's closely.

As I said, all parts form the masterpiece that Mario Puzo (Screenwriter) and Francis Ford Coppola (director and screenwriter) brought to the world with his vision of the Italian mafia. Many criticize the film by worshiping the Italian Mafia, which it technically does, but the way that both genius explore it is fantastic.

Throughout the history of the Corleone's, Coppola and Puzo explore the life and business of the mafia and how it works, demonstrating the business and the wars between the Mafia families that are shown realistically and terrifying. BUT, it is not just a story of violence and tragedy as many accuse (which is 60 % of it), because as the film progress it raises throughout the history various concepts of honor, justice and family, all revolving around the Corleone. Making the public really feel part of the family and start to worry about each family member in all parts of the story, at the same time with the family business and his honor.

The writing from Puzo and Coppola help much in this regard. The script is extremely ""perfect"" in all parts. The narrative is so superb that it never gets boring or leave loose ends, and always raise the values of honor and family through the best dialogs ever put on film. But Puzo and Coppola can make these long dialogs in simple conversations between human beings facing their problems, putting ourselves in their situations and relating with them, leaving the film more exciting and engaging.

But Coppola not only explores the Italian mafia and their families but also puts at various points in American history: the first part is right after the 2nd World War and Michael is a war hero returning home, but he ends up becoming the godfather from his family; on the 2nd part in the history of young Vito Corleone we see him coming in America at the time of the great Italian immigration meeting the ""American Dream""; on the 3rd part with Michael going into business with the Vatican we see a huge line of corruption and murder within the church .

Both in writing and directing the film is excellent too but the performances are the highlights of the movie: Al Pacino is excellent in every detail with a penetrating gaze and frightening expressions (and still annoys me that in 3 films he didn't get a Oscar for his role); Robert De Niro is a perfect young Vito Corleone in both voice and gestures reminding us of the badass and unforgettable old man from the first part with a simply perfect performance from Marlon Brando.

Many say that the 3rd part should never be connected to the first two for be to horrible. I think the film is still a masterpiece but obviously it has his inconveniences leaving loose ends like: what happened with Tom (Robert Duvall), the family's lawyer, he died or he started his own family as he wanted in part 2? And also adds a lot of plots and little development, at least in the 1st hour of the film. But after a huge chopper scene everything settles superbly and concludes the trilogy or rather the film perfectly.

Simply putted is the best movie ever made, the drawbacks and inconveniences are almost invisible (except in the 3rd part). Concepts of honor and family within the Mafia; full of suspense and drama; criticizes America and the church. All this in a movie with excellent performances, direction and writing simply perfect. All that makes ""The Godfather"", the strongest brand of cinema till today 10/10";1;3;False tt0071562;Christian_Dimartino;24/06/2013;Even better than the original, and the original was flawless.;10;Francis Ford Coppola won three Oscars for his work on the 1974 film The Godfather Part II, the rare sequel that outdoes the original. The original was a masterpiece, and everyone knew it. And I must say that it is pretty difficult to outdo a masterpiece. But Coppola and his screenwriter Mario Puzo really knock it out of the park the second time.

The Godfather Part II tells two stories this time: One is of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) who now has a family with his wife Kay (Diane Keaton), but really nobody, including his sister Connie (Talia Shire) loves him because he has let the power go to his head. After an assassination attempt, Michael goes on the hunt for the bastard who tried to kill him. The second story is the back story of Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), whose family was murdered when he was a boy, and basically he too is seeking vengeance.

What I love about The Godfather Part II, besides the fact that it tells two stories, is that it covers the ground that the original film did, but this one digs deeper. The first film mainly focused on family and betrayal. This one focuses on betrayal in the family, which makes for a much juicier and shocking story. The Godfather Part II is a stunner, mainly because you never know where it's going to go, or how it's going to get there.

The sequel is more interesting than its predecessor. This one feels a little more like a thriller. Pacino gives one of his best performances here. Here he plays such a complex character. You know that he never wanted any of this, and it is terrible just to see how far he will take it. What started off as a nice man slowly turns into a monster, and that is sort of what keeps the film afloat.

The Godfather trilogy is a special one, and this one is the main reason why. This film is a masterpiece, and it is no wonder that it became the first sequel ever to win best picture. It is a difficult decision, because I really do love the first one. But this is a much more interesting and fascinating film than the original. Either way, they are both very amazing movies. I don't know when Francis Ford Coppola will make another movie. But what I do know is that he won't be able to make another one like this again.

A+;1;3;True tt0071562;im2cool4;14/06/2013;Best Sequel of all Time;9;The Godfather part 2 is one of the best movies of all time. In GF1 we are introduced to most of the characters in this second film and GF2 builds on that massively. At this point we as the viewer see Michael Corleone almost as a villain now. Al Pacino really deserved a Oscar for this film he was just brilliant and in my opinion this his best acting on film(big statement because he has many other great films) for example when Kay Adams tells Michael that she got an abortion he flips out. Also in another scene where he is picking up the kids from Kay he gives this look to Kay which such a vicious look without saying a word.These are just some of the examples of Pacino's great acting in this. Another aspect that I love about this movie is John Cazales role as Fredo Corleone. We got a view of Fredo in the first movie and it left us wanting more and we did get more in this second movie Cazale plays his role to a T and he makes you feel sorry for his character during the latter of the film. I can go on and on about this movie and its fascinating characters. A;1;3;False tt0071562;Sonic_Ocean;30/05/2013;Malevelontly chilling;10;In ways, I guess I could say that the first Godfather changed my outlook on film, in that you can enjoy movies for their artistic aspects, and that you don't necessarily have to understand the film inside out, in that you can enjoy for what it offers, and that is basically the experience of it. When I watch a gangster movie, I felt that the element of brutality was something that was lacking in the first Godfather, in that it came off too pretty and sophisticated, but I actually came to appreciate its dynamics in that the brutal scenes come as the plot escalates in that it serves as a contrast to the more sombre, melancholic elements of the film. I have to say that it brought forth something unique with that concept and gave the film a sense of grandeur that made it stick out in the crime genre.

And the things The Godfather did in setting the bar, Part II further expands on its ideas and opts for a darker, malevolent approach that greatly differs from the first film that has more of a sense of warmth. To see Michael's transformation was astounding in the first film, but to see what he has become is gutwrenchingly heavy. What Don Vito Corleone created was a foundation for his family, and to see Michael become corrupted to the point, he would do anything to stay at the top is horrifyingly disturbing. What makes this performance so intense is the lack of any human emotion or empathy coming from Michael, that makes him just pure evil. What is brought to this role is the stuff of legends and I cannot give enough credit to Al Pacino. He deserves every amount praise bestowed upon him, but who I think shines just as much as Al in the film is Robert De Niro and his portrayal of a young Vito Corleone during his rise to power. I would have never thought it would feel natural to have someone other than Marlon Brando portray the original Don, but Robert De Niro actually exceeded my expectations. From his accent to his mannerisms, he got the character down to a hair.

And not only with great performances, we are offered a great character study contrasting a father and son, and what drives these men to kill. We know how Michael came into his position, but as the film progresses we begin to see how Vito and Michael handle their business, as we see both their stories reach a conclusion that is downright brutal. The Godfather Part II shows what is set forth by Michael's rise to power and the movie retains its ambition, but becomes its own film that is gripping and memorable in its own unique character.

I originally preferred the first one, but then I realized how much the second one is dependent on the first film. While the second one is more gripping, the first one is grandiose in that it was the first to bring out these great ideas and execute them in a way that is incomparable, but I like to see the first and the second as one long epic story in that it depicts the rise and fall of an empire and while I prefer the first one, the sequel does something different, adding different angles to the story that are equally as compelling, dramatic and shocking as the first one. To make a sequel that does just that was no easy feat and this is the mark of Francis Ford Coppola's talent as a director. Even if the first Godfather were to never have a sequel, it would still be awesome on its own, but to have a sequel that is this good is more than anyone could ask for from a great director. The Godfather Part II is a film that you should definitely not miss out on.;1;3;False tt0071562;cinefreakdude;26/04/2012;Puts the EQUAL in sequel.;10;The Godfather Part II is truly an amazing film. Absolutely fantastic performances from everyone in the entire cast. I think that Al Pacino should have won best actor at the Oscars. This film is easily one of the greatest sequels ever made. Complex story, amazingly shot, and beautifully scored, The Godfather Part II deserves to be called a true masterpiece of cinema, and a tortured influential saga of crime, family, and corruption. Films like this arn't made anymore. This is just as good a film as The Godfather part I, and possibly a little better. A must-see classic. Every minute in this movie is made with care and every frame bubbles with dramatic tension and amazing cinematography. 100%;1;3;False tt0071562;hall895;23/01/2011;An epic tale. Two epic tales in fact.;9;Remember that young idealist Michael Corleone from the opening wedding scene in The Godfather? That Michael Corleone doesn't exist anymore. His descent began in the original film as he took over the family business. In Part II the now ruthlessly evil Michael bottoms out. He has money, he has power. But at what cost? It is hard to comprehend what he has become, so sad to see him cost himself everything he really holds dear. And, in a stroke of genius, as we watch Michael fall director Francis Ford Coppola at the same time flashes back and allows us to see Michael's father rise. The rise of Vito Corleone, the fall of Michael. Either story on its own would be epic. Interwoven together the two stories combine to make The Godfather: Part II one of the most audacious and most brilliant films ever made.

After a brief introduction to the Vito storyline Part II thrusts us right back into that familiar Godfather world which we left at the end of the first film. It is now 1958 and Michael has moved family operations to Nevada. We open at the family compound in Lake Tahoe with an elaborate party celebrating Michael's son's First Communion. Yes, the parallels with the first film's wedding scene are obvious. Rather than Vito it is now Michael who everyone waits to see. Even his sister Connie will have to get in line and wait her turn for an audience with Michael. The real business of the day, involving a proposed Corleone takeover of another casino to add to their empire, is conducted between Michael and Nevada Senator Pat Geary. We see that Michael is so powerful, and so sure of himself, that he thinks nothing of being totally dismissive and insulting towards a United States Senator. Safe to say this is not the most cordial of business meetings. Nothing seems to be decided and Geary, a true sleaze in his own right, leaves but you know we'll see him again. Michael moves on to his next meeting with Frank Pentangeli, who is now running the old Corleone New York territory. This meeting is bitter and hostile as can be. It's been a long day for Michael Corleone. And it's about to get much, much worse. An attempt is made on Michael's life. Bullets come flying into his bedroom. He and his family emerge unscathed and you know the film is now going to kick into high gear. This is going to get really, really good. And then the film immediately transports you back to 1917 and the story of Vito Corleone.

So is Coppola pulling the rug out from under you by leaving Michael's story just when you can't wait to see what happens next? Not at all. Vito's story will prove to be just as compelling as Michael's. And throughout the film Coppola chooses the absolutely perfect times to jump from one story to the other, at emotional high points, places where the connections between the two stories are the most poignant. It's brave, brilliant film making. The audience is treated to two fabulous stories which fit together absolutely perfectly. As the film plays out we see Vito begin to acquire power and Michael consumed by power. We see the great love Vito has for his family as we watch Michael's family fall apart around him. We know Vito is capable of some evil things but he still has some heart to him. Michael has clearly lost his heart somewhere along the way. Just telling Michael's story would have been enough to make this a great film. Weaving young Vito's story in so seamlessly is what makes the film something truly special.

As with the first film Coppola is helped here by universally brilliant performances from his cast. And as with the first film it is Al Pacino who makes the biggest impression. His performance as Michael is as powerful and captivating as anything you've ever seen. Michael is such a complex character and his journey from the beginning of the first film to the end of this one is something that has to be seen to be believed. And over both films Pacino is spot-on perfect every step of the way. In the parallel story it is Robert De Niro who gets the critical role of young Vito and he does ever so well in giving life to the man who would one day be Brando. We of course have the familiar faces from the first film. Robert Duvall as lawyer Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton as Michael's long-suffering wife Kay. There's Talia Shire and Morgana King. And most memorably of all John Cazale as hapless, hopeless Fredo. Part II also gives us great new characters, making room for new performers to make their mark on The Godfather saga. Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo, G. D. Spradlin, Gastone Moschin, Dominic Chianese...the list could go on and on. Such a huge cast and yet every performer seems to fit their role perfectly. The film tells two great stories and the acting is absolutely wonderful throughout. Some two hour movies seem to drag endlessly. This nearly three and a half hour movie absolutely flies by. A monumental achievement for Coppola, one of the best films of all time.;1;3;False tt0071562;Cali_Dude1;29/11/2010;The sequel that surpasses its predecessor;;These days, any old franchise can spin off a string of Roman numeral sequels. But back in 1974, it was almost unprecedented for the makers of a Best Picture Academy Award-winner to return to the well. It's significant that this is called The Godfather Part II rather than Godfather II, since Coppola and his collaborators did not give us more of the same, but extended the original story of the Corleone family backwards and forwards, while deepening the characterisations.

Darting back and forth in time, this follows Michael (Pacino) through the 1950s, as his would-be legitimate business gets into sleazy deals in Cuba and the US Senate, and he is forced to break the ultimate taboo by having his own brother murdered. Meanwhile, we see his father Vito (De Niro) as a young man, organising a street gang in turn-of-the-century New York. Coppola, steeped in Italian-American myth of the immigrant experience, canonises Vito, who founds the Mafia to protect his people from more predatory dons, while exposing the way Vito's family business harbours the seed of his son's monstrously corrupt empire.

This was the film in which Pacino and De Niro were first teamed, though the exigencies of the narrative mean that they never actually meet. Both are electrifying but Pacino is especially strong, his hollow gaze showing the high price Michael has paid for his position. And with supporting roles from the likes of Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall and Lee Strasberg, to say nothing of Roger Corman and Harry Dean Stanton in bit parts, this is nothing short of magisterial.

Courtesy: Empire magazine;1;3;False tt0071562;g-bodyl;31/10/2010;Amazing!;10;Godfather Part Two is much better than the original. I don't think this can be in the same league as the original. This is one of those breathtaking gangster films I would see over and over again despite its length. I expected this to be similar to the first film but I'm amazed how much better it is.

Al Pacino returns as Michael Corleone. Mike is a different character here. He is seen as cold and calculating. Basically, this movie has two parts to it. A flashback of the young Don Vito and the current Don in Michael.

The acting here is perfect. Robert De Niro really strengthened the cast with his amazing performance. Al Pacino and Diane Keaton delivered strong performances.

I cant describe how much I was amazed. Unlike before, I'm excited to see the third film. I rate this film 10/10.;1;3;False tt0071562;harrycloke;02/09/2010;The best number two.;;"The Godfather Part II was the film that made sequels respectable – a true piece of art that remains quite as powerful now as it was when it was made. The reason for this is simple: Coppola is a master storyteller. Too often a sequel is ruined because it seems obsessed with the mantra: ""bigger is better"" – more action, more explosions, and more special effects. Part II succeeds because it places its focus on its characters and lets the story unravel around them. In some respects however, Part II is a bloated film with many affecting and individual characters spanning two story lines, abundant with plot twists, drama and yes -- plenty of action, all packed into its eye-watering 200 minute runtime. It's a testament to Coppola's ability that he is able to balance all these individual elements and create what is often considered to be one of the greatest films of all time.

Part II follows Michael Corleone's (Al Pacino) efforts to strengthen the family business through expanding his gambling ventures into revolutionary Cuba. After an attempt on his life, he must plot and scheme to ensure that those responsible are punished without derailing his business endeavours. Interweaved with this story we see the life of Vito Corleone, (played by Robert DeNiro) from his tragic upbringing in Sicily at the turn of the 20th Century, to his rise to power in New York. Coppola's decision to include both stories is not just a means to test his audience's endurance abilities – it allows for his viewers to analyse the differences between Michael and Vito - between father and son. Those who have no interest in exercising their critical faculties can simply sit back and enjoy a smartly structured and expertly paced story of ambition and loss in capitalist America.

For a movie that places such an emphasis on family; in particular upon the relationship between father and son, we see surprisingly little of Michael together with his children. Vito was an intelligent man who had genuine love for his children, and knew from his miserable upbringing the effect that the Mafioso lifestyle could have for his family. By placing these two stories together we can better understand decisions Don Vito made in Part I in attempting to avoid bloodshed and compare the frenzied decisions made by Michael in Part II. It's questionable what kind of a man Michael would have been if he had genuine loving relationship with his children, or indeed the rest of his family, who leave him, one by one, over the course of this film. Furthermore one might question whether Michael had genuine love for any of these people – throughout the film there is evidence that he finds value in people and things because they are his brother, his family, his property. Take the scene where Kay confronts Michael about a possible divorce his anger stems from the fact that she is trying to take away his children, who get most of their love and nourishment from their mother and who receive little interest from himself. There's further evidence in his treatment of family consigliere Tom Hagen (a wonderful, understated performance by Duvall) who, not being a blood brother, Michael always seems to give the short stick.

Eventually Michael's choices and lifestyle leaves him safe, but alone, as he slowly alienates everybody who cared for him. This loss is reflected in Coppola's haunting final shot, where we see Michael alone, contemplating his actions. Pacino's performance works because he shows us two sides of Michael – quiet and pensive at one moment, then a raging, scheming monster the next. This is the kind of controlled intensity which a Pacino performance sometimes lacks. Yes, the times where Michael loses his cool are spectacular in their bombast – particularly when his wife Kay confronts him about his children; but these are not the only images I am confronted with when I think about what makes the performance great. For instance, Michael's simmering unrevealed rage at Senator Geary's attack on him, his family and his people. Michael's quiet disbelief and anger as his brother Fredo unwittingly reveals his treachery. Michael alone at the dinner table as his brothers rush away to greet their father in a flashback. These snapshots of an isolated man can serve to humanize a character, who gives us no real cause for sympathy.

Then there's Nino Rota's masterful score, which is of such importance to the film that it is impossible to imagine the two apart. Robert DeNiro's superb Oscar-winning performance – indeed fantastic performances across the board. Spectacular cinematography of Sicily and New York. I could go on, but there's no need – everything that could be said about this film has already been said. The joy is in experiencing it for one's self.";1;3;False tt0071562;The_Depressed_Star_Wars_fan;18/04/2010;One of the few sequels that I like more than the original.;10;This is great. First let's talk about the acting. It is awful.....no I'm just kidding, it's actually f**king great. My favorite actors of all in the movie are Pacino and De Nero. They are just plain off great. They literally could not be better. Now let's talk about the plot. It's both a prequel and a sequel to the first Godfather movie from 1972. I'm not going to tell you how, but lets just say it's really good how they do it. Francis Ford Coppola is a cinematic genius, his directing in this movie is brilliant. Actually brilliant is the wrong word, fantastic now that is a better way of summing up the directing. Well this is on hell of a great movie. I can't even really do it justice it is just a great movie that needs to be seen to be believed.;1;3;True tt0071562;amesmonde;19/03/2010;Seamless sequel, a classic in it's own right;;Told through parallel story lines that features the 1900's, following a young Vito Corleone, played by Robert De Niro, growing up and opening his business. Then in conjunction: the 1950's as Al Pacino as Don Michael Corleone expands his crime empire.

Same cast, director, writers, Gordon Willis'cinematography and music by Nino Rota, Pacino is harder and more ruthless than every before. The acting from a stars studded cast is excellent the Cuban and Vegas scenes are astounding, you can taste the atmosphere. A weaving, compelling and seeming realistic portrayal of the rise of a crime family and it pitfalls along the way. Themes of loss, rejection, and betrayal to name a few, Part to is richer in all respects.

A truly classic film in it's own right, Coppola and Puzo deliver a worthy seamless sequel to the Godfather.;1;3;False tt0071562;Geeky Randy;24/01/2010;The greatest sequel of all-time (and possibly the greatest film of all-time).;10;"Isn't it difficult enough to make a film as good as ""The Godfather""? For Coppola and Puzo, perhaps not. All the surviving characters from the first installment return in this bravura masterpiece, each of them seems to be growing tragically colder as they age. In the first, the plot exercised the relationship of a mobster father (Brando) and his son (Pacino) following in his footsteps; this time, prequel sections of the film exercise the similarities and difference between the two men in seemingly two different worlds. Robert De Niro made his career off of his Oscar-winning role as young Vito Corleone. First sequel to win an Oscar.

**** (out of four)";1;3;False tt0071562;Sanou_san;09/09/2009;Brilliantly excellent sequel;10;Some bickered that Godfather 2 was an insult to be called a sequel, but I don't mind them arguing such. Admittedly I watched the film first before Godfather 1 and was astounded with its beauty even after I watched Godfather 1. I realized well after watching Godfather 2 how the character of Al Pacino as Michael Corleone developed well throughout the film, and I quite grasped as well very well his character after I watched Godfather 1. The film was double layered. Viewers would understand in this film Vito Corleone's origin, how he grew and feared by many. On the other hand shows the present son of Vito: Michael, who is struggling to deal with his father's family business left to him. The characters and atmosphere were simply superb, and you could understand well how the story progresses. How Michael got the similarity of the situation he is experiencing as contrast to his father during the early times. We see Vito Corleone 's life progresses during his early years, and we see Michael, being the youngest of the family, adhere to his father's legacy and lived through defending his family and business. We can see how well the father and son got their similarity of managing their business and tried well not to mix family in it. I was so touched in Godfather 1 concerning Michael's affection to his family, most especially to his father. And I was moved with his affection towards his family now in Godfather 2 after his father died how he held on what was dearly important to him. I got the bleak understanding how crime worlds works except since after I watched Godfather 1. Italian countrymen got their pride, their history, their nature, and Mario Puzo had brilliantly depicted a beautiful story out of it. Funny though after I watched the film I didn't even realized that it was Robert De Niro who plays the part of the early Vito Corleone, how mesmerizing.;1;3;False tt0071562;insomniac_rod;09/08/2009;Darker sequel that focuses more on the Corleon's take on the legal and politics aspects. The best film ever made, probably yes...;10;"This movie can be watched as two different movies that connect masterfully when the actual events are about to reach a climax. ""The Godfather"" plot gets more into the political aspects rather than on mafia wars or vendettas and that brings in consequence more dramatic situations inside the family. Thus the film has a darker, more tense tone.

It focuses more on the personal consequences provoked by the family's criminal empire in the US and in Cuba. Michael's character is explored and taken to a new darker level. We understand that his personal life is falling to pieces as his wife provoked an abortion and plans to leave him, while, at the same time, he faces a betrayal from his older brother and the burdens of his sister's life. Michael, unlike Vito, is more cold hearted but marvelous when playing his cards. Vito made sure to establish his criminal empire before others could consider him as an enemy and with his guts, he decides to take down the mafia leader in the zone, Don Fanucci. Later, Vito starts a huge oil business and executes a long time vendetta. That was Vito Corleone, a brilliant negotiator, persuasion leader, calmed down, and smart Italian-American who started from zero and thanks to his family's support, loyal associates, and leadership; soon started his own empire.

When both character's reach a similar climatic situation; it's up to Michael to learn through his mother how his father would act in order to keep his family safe or how to deal with a certain problem. After plenty of intermissions that show us Vito's start in mafia; we construct in our mind a parallel story that will give us the ""weapons"" to know how Michael is gonna act.

Vito, in his younger years, demonstrated to be very protective of his family and members of his ""other family"". He didn't have to face betrayal or similar situations when he started to build the empire; unlike Michael who is in a very complex situation that not only deals with politics.

The trial that the Corleones face is absolutely brilliant on the political side because Michael moves his cards in such a class act manner that witnesses who have the chance to take the business down suddenly regret on their accusations. Michael is now a brilliant politician who has controls the strings of senators, judges, mafia bosses, etc. His the most powerful criminal in the country.

This makes Michael a true menacing leader with such power that he is feared, respected by everyone, including his close family.

So the movie focuses primarly on Michael and Hyman Roth, making Vito in his young years a supporting character along with Clemenza and Tessio. The supporting characters from the actual events include favorites such as Al Neri (although he was in part 1), Rocco, Fredo once again, Willi Cicci, Frank, Connie, and Mother Corleone. Tom Hagen deserves a special spot for being the equilibrium of the family on the most difficult situations. He's just a splendid sidekick and opposite at the same time for Michael.

Special mention for Michael's extremely creepy and lethal capo-bodyguard who provided some of the most suspenseful scenes in cinema history just by making presence. He must be a role model for the Giallo sub-genre.

The atmosphere in the movie is absolutely amazing, beautiful. The funeral scene is sad and intense, while the Cuban new year's eve party is glamorous, colorful, and nerve tensing. I enjoyed big time the carnival in Vito's younger years.

The movie is excellent, just excellent. It's a mix of classic score executed by orchestras, mixed with creepy piano elements, and classical/popular Italian melodies.

The acting is just wonderful. Al Pacino delivers the acting display of his career. Michael Corleone is a brilliant man, with an admirable temper, excellent knowledge of politics and human behavior. Al Pacino demonstrates he can act in EVERY single possible situation. Robert De Niro's performance is highly regarded because of his masterful display of Marlon Brando's behavior translated translated through the Vito Corleone character. The movie focuses on both actor's characters and that's why you just explore them at full. The acting by Robert Duvall is a glory. The rest of the cast is just wonderful and deserve to be congratulated but let's face it; this is all about Pacino and DeNiro.

To be honest, myself as a die-hard Horror cinema expert, I can say this sequel is amongst the most tense, suspenseful and stressing but pleasant viewing experiences I've ever experienced.

There's plenty of tension, high-quality action sequences (my favorites include Michael's murder attempt which is later spectacular when his gunmen search for the assassin's; Frank's murder attempt when Cicci gets injured; the Cuban citizens rebellion, and the climax when Frank commits suicide, Roth gets killed, Fredo pays for his betrayal, etc.).

I loved the final sequence when the flashback takes place and Michael is left alone, drinking tea or wine I can't remember... he just thinks and plans his future in that moment. It's a brilliant scene.

Please watch this movie because it's a lesson of life through tense situations that happen in real life, for some.

Ford Coppola's delicate, classy direction makes this a great visual experience in all the sense of the word; he creates a whole new world in which we are invited without having to be worried. Now, when a movie is part of your life you can say it's more than a great experience.";1;3;True tt0071562;nkthanksalot;02/12/2008;best film ever seen;10;it is really a wonderful film,and maybe the best sequel i have ever seen.

first,you may think it wins our hearts by the splendid plot.but in fact,when taken into a second thought,you will find it is a great story about growing,the way a boy growing into a man,and the long,long roads he takes in the role transforming.

the two stories ,respectively about the father and the son,are similar but absolutely different,which reflects the excellence of the director and the script.the father,wins by love and make people do what he wants to.while the son,wins by hate and force people do what he wants to.both win the power and statue,but one lost his family and the other not.;1;3;False tt0071562;kyle-cruse;20/08/2008;Almost as good as Part 1;9;"What an impressive film. I rank ""The Godfather: Part II"" as the third greatest sequel I've ever seen, behind ""The Empire Strikes Back"" and ""Toy Story 2."" Like those two films, this sequel does not attempt to use the same structure and style as the original. Godfather II shows Michael Corelone's (Al Pacino) struggle to hold his father's crime empire together as he begins to abuse his power, and this is combined with flashback scenes showing how Vito Corleone (played excellently by Robert DeNiro in an Oscar-winning role here) came to form his empire. I don't even understand why I like the film so much, as it grows more depressing and disheartening as the film goes on. Nevertheless, it is amazingly brilliant nonetheless. At almost three and a half hours long, the film is not slow-paced at all. It moves along smoothly, yet it takes plenty of time to adequately convey both stories in great detail. The flashbacks are the real highlight of this film, and watching Robert DeNiro as he begins to gain power is engaging and very interesting to watch. It's amazing how much different Michael's character is in this film from the first one. This doesn't top the first film for me, probably because Marlon Brando, who made part I so great, is not in it. Nevertheless, this is easily the best picture of 1974, and the performances are some of the best I've ever seen.

***1/2 out of ****";1;3;False tt0071562;emperor_bender;27/02/2008;Not as good as the original, but the original is an 11 on my scale...;10;...so this one will have to settle for 10/10. These movies truly are great if 2/3 of the trilogy are on the top 250, as #1 and #3 (as of 2/27/08). This movie was similar to the first in the basic story within the family, also a lot of the characters from the first are in this movie also. However, there are new challenges that cross the Corleone family. There are also new characters, some the family is familiar with and some not. There are also new enemies and obstacles the family face. One of the main differences is that the story does not take place only in New York. In fact, only a fraction is in New York, most takes place in Nevada, Florida, and even Cuba. There seem to be a few different stories within the main plot of this movie. And they all work quite well. This movie will be loved by fans of the first.;1;3;False tt0071562;dlee7674;28/01/2008;The Greatest sequel ever;10;Well when it comes to movie sequels i am usually very skeptical. Many film sequels leave me disappointed and wanting something better. When i watched this movie i realized that it was as good if not better than the first which is saying a lot. Al Pacino gives yet another Oscar worthy performance and the story continues to keep you interested. This is one of my all time favorite films. The movie progresses the story from where it left off and shows the struggle of the corleone family to stay out of trouble with the law. Michael becomes a darker more evil character than in the first film. The other characters develop into deeper more sophisticated people, and the flashbacks of Vitos childhood ad depth to this film that is a masterpiece in its own right.;1;3;True tt0071562;cameron-burn;09/08/2007;The Godfather is more important. But the Godfather part 2 is better;10;"The Godfather is a more important film, of course it is. But the Godfather part 2 is a better film. It's more ambitious, it's more elegiac, it delves deeper into the soil of Italian-American myth, plus... what were they thinking of, trying to match the critical and commercial dynamite of the first film? The Godfather Part 2 was, from conception upwards, an insane project. But it worked.

When The Godfather premiered in New York on 14 March 1972, co-screenwriter and novelist Mario Puzo had already started work on the sequel. That's how sure Paramount were that they had a monster hit on their hands, despite some exhibitors turning up their noses at a preview screening: too little action, too much talking, and too long - proof that in no way are exhibitors a bunch of popcorn-selling philistines. After two days of release, cinema managers were being offered bribes by punters desperate to get to the front of the queues which busted the proverbial block. There was something of the Mafia about the way in which Paramount doubled ticket prices for weekend shows to squeeze extra revenue from their new cash cow. The sequel, announced on 16 April and working titled Don-Michael, was a commercial inevitability (""When you've got a licence to make Coca-Cola, make Coca-Cola! Said Charlie Bluhdorn, head of Gulf and Western, who owned Paramount). The Godfather grossed $101 million in its first 18 weeks, and nobody was going to stop the studio having another cake and eating it. But Francis Ford Coppola, the young director whom the studio had almost fired from the Godfather but who was now feted by Hollywood and the world, wasn't that interested. So they offered him a million dollars plus a huge 13% of the profits and total artistic control. Altogether now: it was an offer he couldn't refuse.

Thus, out of this sticky climate of money-grabbing corporate opportunism did cinemas greatest part2 emerge. Pub debates about the diminishing returns of the sequel usually collapse at the mention of it's name. So why does it work? Why isn't it Police Academy2:their first assignment? Much of it has to do with the unique power of it's own part one, which established it's family of characters so vividly. Audiences were gagging for more of Michael, Tom, Kay, Fredo and Connie. Bit the Coppola-Puzo masterstroke was to develop the saga in two directions, forwards through the faustian ascendance of Don Michael, and backwards into the early 1900s, tracing Vito Andolini's first steps into mafia hood (he earns the surname Corleone-the name of his home village-through a mix-up at Ellis Island's immigration control).

As with all of Coppola's best work, the casting was inspired.(And as with The Godfather, fans can while away hours mulling over who might have been cast. Try this one: dying Miami mobster Hyman Roth, played with precision by acting coach Lee Strasberg in the film-could have been Laurence Olivier, Ella Kazan, or blacklisted screenwriter Dalton Trumbo!) Robert De Niro, plucked from the rising star racks after Mean Streets, seems born to play the young Marlon Brando, Pacino, Coppolas wildcard in casting the Godfather, grows into the central role of Michael in perfect parallel with his character, and Diane Keaton proves the quiet lynchpin( which is no mean feat in this male-dominated film).

Everything that was majestic and mythic about the First film is more so in Part2,its scenes deliberately matching the original. Author of the essential Godfather book, Peter Cowie, describes the two-part saga in musical terms, as ""Coppolas suite"", with bass lines , motifs and rhyming patterns. (""As a whole, Coppola said, the first film ought to haunt the second like a spectre."") So instead of constantly reminding us that the first film is better, part 2 builds on it's operatic sweep and cranks up the drama, both narratively and visually. Cinematographer Gordon Willis goes into sublime sepia overdrive for the flashbacks. Production designer Dean Tavoularis tops his own evocative 1940s New York streets with a living, breathing Italian immigrant community circa 1912(actually the Ukranian quarter). The epic 26 minute wedding scene that opened part one is echoed in part2 by the altogether tackier confirmation party at the new Corleone compound in Lake Tahoe(the lake itself claiming the life of one of the family in part2s chilling climax.) Actually, claiming that the second is better than the first is like saying Lennon's better than Mcartney. One cannot exist in isolation from the other ; they must be watched by anyone who loves American Film consecutively.

Apparently, they made a part3 too. 10/10";1;3;True tt0071562;ariusmaximus;23/06/2007;Almost...just almost;9;"The Godfather Part II is one of the most disappointing movies I have ever seen. That's not to say I didn't like it; on the contrary, I loved it. The film expands the character and arc of that which is Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino (reprising his role from the first flawless film). It is a saga in all senses of the word.

The most obvious thing to be disappointed by was its comparison to its predecessor. No one can compare ""The Godfather"" to anything else. It's a league of its own. As a stand-alone movie, ""II"" is great. Fantastic. But not flawless.

The one major thing I found was its pacing. If I were the director, I could have ended it 45 minutes earlier. The immediate plot arcs are resolved, and all that is left to tell is Michael's descent into darkness. If that was the story Coppola wanted to tell, fine. I just preferred a more upbeat ending (call me what you will). I almost got up to turn off the DVD, but then there was another scene. And another. They, truthfully, felt like add-ons.

This is not to say, once again, that I didn't love the movie. Easily one of the best ever. It just COULD HAVE been better. Once you have tasted filet mignon, would you go back to hamburger? Perhaps. But you might rather that burger be made out of the filet. This movie was more like a 40 oz. prime rib steak- tasty, juicy, so flavorful, but just too darn big to love.";1;3;False tt0071562;gangstahippie;21/06/2007;One of the greatest sequels of all time;9;Rated R for Violence and Language. Quebec Rating:13+ Canadian Home Video Rating:14A

There are few sequels which come close to being as good as the original.I thought Godfather 1 was the best movie in the trilogy but Godfather 2 comes very close in beating it.If you liked the first film, you will like the second one as well.There is more plot in this one but it is a bit more boring than the first.The flashbacks with a young Don Vito(played by Robert DeNiro) were interesting to watch and they were originally in the novel.There are two story lines in this movie.The first shows a young don Vito and his immigration to America and how he becomes a don.The second plot is about Michael(Al Pacino) running the mafia family in the 1950's.Godfather Part 2 is an excellent sequel which is almost as good as the first film.There is also a flashback scene at the end of the film which happens in the early 1940's.The family is waiting for Don Vito because it is his birthday while Sonny(James Caan returns in this film) argues with Michael about his decision to go to the army.;1;3;False tt0071562;dcldan;28/05/2007;the best 2º part ever;10;Continuing with Corleone's family, now Michael Corleone is the Godfather. While his father was wise and thoughtful (though merciless) Michael is brutal, impetuous and threatening. We are able to see how the power corrupts Michael and he begins to become more lonely and desperate, like in a Shakespeare writing facts makes the character to get close to his fatal destiny. Meanwhile, the director show us, perfectly, how Vito was able to become the first Corleone's Godfather. All the actors are just impressive, with enormous acting for great characters. All of them play their parts with a thrilling strenght and follow a so powerful history that makes it one of the best film ever and, by far, the best second part ever filmed. It is just a perfect masterpiece.;1;3;False tt0071562;hentschellm;07/05/2007;The Godfather Part II: Amazing!;10;The Godfather Part II

Along with The Godfather, The Godfather Part II is second only to Goodfellas as the greatest movie ever. This is equal to The Godfather Part 1 in every way. When there is a superiority in Part 1, Part 2 corrects that.

Plot: The plot is just as good as The Godfather Part 1. There are two stories. If this had not been done right it would have been disastrous. Fortunately it was done right every step of the way. The first story deals with Vito Corleone's (Robert De Niro) rise to power and becoming the Godfather. The other story deals with a bloody war between Michael Corleone and Meyer Lansky based mobster, Hyman Roth.

Acting: The characters are not as interesting as the characters of its predecessor because it is a sequel. However it matches this with its slightly superior and superb acting. Al Pacino gives the greatest performance of his life and one of the greatest performances of all time, reprising his role as Michael Corleone and giving an absolutely chilling performance as a man who slowly and subtly succumbs more and more into the world of crime. This is the movie where he should have won Best Actor. Robert De Niro gave another fantastic performance winning Best Supporting Actor for his performance as the you Vito Corleone. John Cazale gave a nomination worthy performance as Fredo Corleone expanding the character from the Godfather by himself and giving new meaning to the word Fredo. Other great performances include Talia Shire, Morgana King, Robert Duvall, Lee Strasberg, and Michael V. Gazzo.

Genre/Quality: The movie still stays the same with crime but also raises more family issues. While the 1st film appeared to glorify crime, the continued series deals with the dark side in this movie. As with the first movie the music is great. Camera angles are fantastic. Transition between the 50's and early 1900's are also great. They really made the rise of Vito scenes match the world of that time period.

Overall this is a fantastic not to be missed movie which equals The Godfather Part 1 and both are second only to Goodfellas.

10/10;1;3;True tt0071562;freaky_dave;14/04/2006;A very good sequel, but I still prefer the first film;8;Both The Godfather and The Godfather part II are really good films. Both have excellent performances, and both films move at that same leisurely pace that never becomes boring. But the film I prefer is the first, even though the second is more detailed about what the Corleone family does. I guess I prefer it because it was more original, and Marlon Brando, who doesn't appear in the second even though Francis Ford Coppola tried getting him to reprise his role at the end of the movie, isn't there.

With The Godfather part II we have two stories going on. And that is the other weakness of the second film. One involves Michael Corleone (Pacino)as the new Don maintaining his power and pushing to keep his control. The second involves the early life of Vito Corleone and how he became the Godfather of the first film. Robert DeNiro, in an exceptional performance, plays the part of the young Vito Corleone. Both stories are played back and forth, and as big events happen in one the plot shifts to the other, which is a little distracting. I would've preferred that Copolla stuck with one story instead because it would've worked a lot better. Of course I can understand why he did it. He wanted to get two of the biggest stars of their generation together in one film, and both Pacino and DeNiro were up to the challenge even though Brando was still irreplaceable.

DeNiro looks really young, and Al Pacino looks much older than in the first, even though both films were only separated by two years. I don't know if it was clever make-up or just Pacino's phenomenal acting that made it so.

The ending of The Godfather part II is incredibly strong though as it shifts back to a time when Michael was certain he was never going to be part of the family business, only to shift back to the present as he sits by himself in his home after key events have happened. It was like a realization as Pacino's character completely accepts what he has become. Strong movie definitely, but the first film, in my opinion, is still better. However both films still should be seen. You can't just watch one and not the other. Godfather part II may not be the greatest sequel ever, but it is still one incredible experience.;1;3;False tt0071562;brainofj72;19/09/2005;A Perfect Continuation;9;"WARNING: CONTAINS MAJOR SPOILERS FOR PARTS I AND II.

When ""The Godfather"" was released in 1972, it instantly became a classic, and has now gone on to become a cinematic legend. I find it rather surprising that ""The Godfather Part II"" was made at all, as ""The Godfather"" is not exactly a franchise film, but what is more surprising is just how good this sequel is.

""The Godfather"" was the story of the Corleone crime family: Vito (Brando), the Don of the family; Michael (Pacino), his youngest son; Sonny (Caan), his hot-tempered first-born; Tom Hagen (Duvall), his adopted son and legal adviser; Fredo (Cazale), his middle child; Connie (Shire), his daughter; and Kay Adams (Keaton), Michael's girlfriend. Over the course of the film, Vito is seriously injured, causing Sonny to become Don, but due to his temper, he is promptly shot dead, thus causing Michael to take over duties as Don, and he and Kay are married.

""The Godfather Part II"" begins right where ""The Godfather"" left off and continues chronicling the struggles of the Corleone family as they attempt to become a legitimate organization amidst the corruption they are tied to. But the film also switches back and forth between this storyline and that of young Vito (Baldini, De Niro), showing us how he rose to power.

""The Godfather Part II"" has about the same pace as the first film, the same beautiful gold-tinted cinematography, the same operatic approach to the subject matter, and I think it is almost on par as far as quality. But the thing that really makes ""Part II"" amazing is Pacino's mesmerizing performance as Michael. He was spellbinding in Part I, as well, but this film really gives him a lot more opportunity to develop his character. The most compelling moments in the film are not the scenes of confrontation or violence, but the scenes of Pacino's intense brooding. No other actor has ever so effectively developed their character without uttering so much as a single solitary syllable. A perfect example of this is the scene where Michael and Fredo embrace after Michael had told him he never wanted to see him again. The look in Pacino's eyes is just out of this world. Actually, Cazale's performance is notable, as well.

Francis Ford Coppola's direction skill is at its pinnacle with this brilliant piece of celluloid, and this, unfortunately, was to be his second to last great film (his last being ""Apocalypse Now""). Another thing that majorly contributes to not just Part II, but the entire trilogy's greatness is Nino Rota's absolutely beautiful and undeniably memorable score. Not since 1944's ""Laura"" has a composer utilized a repeated theme so well.

Unfortunately, the ""Godfather"" series failed to become a trilogy of masterpieces when the bland Part III put a blemish on its greatness, but the sheer power and remarkable film-making of the first two chapters will be forever remembered as two of the very finest films ever made, and rightfully so.

9/10";1;3;True tt0071562;aharmas;01/08/2005;Towering Achievement by Pacino;8;"This film always manages to lose my interest during its second half. The deterioration of the Corleone family structure is unfortunately a very complex task to portray. With Al Pacino's superb turn as the man who loses his soul, the film hits amazing highs. There are moments in the first half, where we understand the roots of what later became the Corleone empire. Robert De Niro does his best to convey the essence of the young Corleone, but its the reenactment of an era through the loving art direction and touching score that provide the soul of the period.

The story line sets up the decay that destroy Michael Corleone. Sadly, following the road to its devastating resolution can prove to be a rather arduous task. There are unforgettable moments, as the more seasoned performers use subtle gestures and deliver lines that point to the overall tragedy surrounding the different characters.

""Godfather II"" ends with a much darker version of ""Godfather I"". All seems lost because this time, the Don lives on, and manages to keep his dynasty going. The question is at what price?";1;3;False tt0071562;lee_eisenberg;26/07/2005;an equal sequel;10;"Everyone has probably heard that ""The Godfather: Part II"" is as good as the original, and it's true. Perhaps it's better, that's debatable. Picking up where the first film left off, we see the Corleones' control over Las Vegas. Also, Michael (Al Pacino) gets involved with Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), one of his father's former cohorts. Meanwhile, in flashbacks, we see young Vito Andolini immigrate from the town of Corleone, Sicily, to New York City in the early 20th century. As he ages (the adult Vito is played by Robert DeNiro), Vito becomes increasingly involved in Mafia business.

The climax (at least in my opinion, it was the climax) happens in Cuba on New Year's Eve in 1958. You may recall that the Mafia helped prop up Fulgencio Batista and his reign of terror. Anyway, while Michael and Fredo (John Cazale) are at a party at the Presidential Palace, Michael angrily yells at Fredo ""I know it was you, Fredo! You broke my heart!"" At that moment, just as it turns into 1959, the revolutionary forces enter Havana, proclaiming the revolution's victory. The combination of these two events shows that things won't be the same anymore, whether in the Corleone family or in Cuba. To be certain, Kay (Diane Keaton) has some unexpected news for Michael when he returns home.

The point is, this movie disproves the notion that all sequels suck. This sequel is a masterpiece, with splendid performances by Pacino, Keaton, DeNiro, Cazale, Strasberg, Robert Duvall and Talia Shire. But of course, most of all, this movie's superbness owes to director Francis Ford Coppola. He knows exactly how to make a movie, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. 10/10.";1;3;True tt0071562;malkane316;11/11/2004;Quick Reviews!;10;Again, what can be said that hasn't already been said?

The acting and direction are flawless, and we get a clearer view of The Family and their background. I've never felt de Niro's performance was Oscar winning because his part in the movie simply isn't big enough, but he should easily have won several others for other performances over the years.

If anything, the plot is more complex and involving than the first film. Pacino's change from the first film is revolutionary, and Cazale is perfect as the unfortunate Fredo, and the rest of the massive cast are excellent. Don Fanucci is a great addition to the story, and has my favourite line-'just enough to wet my beak'. 10 out of 10;1;3;False tt0071562;sq8188;24/06/2004;Michael Corleone losing his humanity (as if he had one);8;"What's the point here? Michael distrusts everyone and again have most of everyone killed. Michael turned darker and darker as if he wasn't sinister enough already. I like the DeNiro segment much better. At least he demonstrated a person we can empathize with. Not so with Michael. I know of no one (thank God) like him and same for most of us. His is a totally disgusting,inhuman character without redemption. Why should we even watch over half of the movie with him in it if we don't like the character? It was at least interesting in the first movie that we get to witness the transformation of ""that's my family (not me),Kate"" Michael to cold killer mastermind. Since he had become that, what's the point of watching this character losing more of his humanity as if he had some left. Good thing must be said about the production thought, it was even more sumptuously filmed and choreographed than the original. But that's the only credible thing. By the way has anyone notice Diane Keatin never appear again after getting slapped (a single great shot to the cheek) by Michael?";1;3;False tt0071562;canadude;15/02/2004;godfather part II is still the second;10;*spoilers* I recently decided to give Godfather Part II a second try (no pun intended) and I still must say that I like Part I more. There are several reasons for this and normally I would avoid talking about a movie's predecessor in reviewing it, but it is a *sequel*, and it's called Godfather PART II, not Godfather II. This, of course, implies a direct connection not only to the characters, but also to the story of the first one. So - the second part is both a prequel and a sequel merged into one movie. It's a great prequel in that it tells the story of the rise of Vito Carleone so naturally and realistically that the metamorphosis from boy to gangster is seamless. De Niro is phenomenal as Michael's father, a role performed almost entirely in Italian (hardly a handicap for De Niro whose first language [I believe] is English). He has the emotional range that Al Pacino had in the first Godfather. From extreme benevolence, even grief (Fredo gets sick vs. old Don Carleone in the first movie gets sick) he turns to cold-blooded, calculated murder. However, Godfather Part II focuses primarily on Michael, telling his story as both a continuation of the first part's tale and as an antithesis to Vito Carleone's rise to power. In that, Godfather Part II is one of the best sequel's ever made, it fleshes out the original story and it adds more plot and character depth to the original. The movie doesn't serve at all as a money-making scheme, but rather a second part of a book that's already got you hooked. Still, I belong to the group of the purists, those who enjoy the first part more than the second. While Godfather Part I portrays Michael's almost unknowing (definitely subtle) takeover of the family, Godfather Part II already finds him knowing his way around the family, capable of doing anything to his enemies. It's about Michael's complete collapse - he murders or gets rid of virtually every person in the movie, including (most tragically) his own brother, ultimately alienating himself from the family he seeks to protect. The tragedy here, however, is in some sense less subtle and nuanced than the tragedy of Godfather Part I, which is about a deep and complex father-son relationship that foretells its own ending. There exists an element of love and responsibility that naturally leads to and cannot escape from Michael's return to his family. Godfather Part II re-examines these themes (which detracts from some of its originality - but that is hardly a complaint), but Michael's character has somehow shed any notion of mercy or restraint. In fact, he does not change in any significant way, but merely continues down the path the first film set for him. The murder of his brother is simply yet another point of no return, much like the scene with the doors closing on Diane Keaton's character ending the first film. In any case, my point is that the Michael Carleone section of Godfather Part II is mostly an entertainingly told story that expands on what was already introduced in the first film, which I believe is much stronger. The best part of Godfather Part II is De Niro's performance, and its contrasting role in Michael's descent into continuing alienation and violence. (And of course it is remarkably directed by Francis Ford Coppola, with a good performance by Al Pacino, but it remains in the shadow of the first Godfather - inevitably so.);1;3;True tt0071562;Angry_Arguer;19/01/2004;Apocrypha;8;This is when Pacino still tried to be human, though right after 'Serpico'. This is in his pre-DePalma days.

That and the plot itself are needless in this case. As with the original, crime drama plots follow similar story topics. The differences lie in the acting, editing, characters, and camera.

The editing here is less refined, trying to be Kubrick when this is Coppola. It isn't ponderous, but it's a contradictory style--much like 'The Thin Red Line'.

The camera is the same as before, not trying to do anything we haven't seen. Even Frankenheimer's 'Manchurian Candidate' contains more visual fluency than this effort.

The characters/acting are where the giant U-turn occurs this time. This has no basis on Puzo's book, but is completely constructed in Coppola's mind and in the actors' presentation. Are these rational steps being made? Most aren't.

The biggest surprise--DeNiro as Brando. In a context like this (instead of vice-versa), the range is almost unlimited. Coppola is one of few directors to use Brando effectively, as 'Apocalypse' would prove, and here DeNiro does his best work. Everything after this (Scorsese's works, 'Deer Hunter', 'Heat') becomes useless. In those cases he is bored. In 'Untouchables' he's energetic. Here--he's duplicating a master.

For that reason alone you should see this. See 'Apocalypse Now' after this to see Coppola do the real cinematic deal.

Final Analysis = = Midrange Material;1;3;False tt0071562;ssparling;11/01/2004;A Great Movie in its Own Right;8;Sequels are rarely good. Even more scarce is a great sequel. This is one of those special sequels that equals, if not surpasses, the original work. The acting is, of course, superb and Robert De Niro is brilliant in his supporting role as the young Vito. What is perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this great movie is that it is almost entirely fresh. In other words, it was not tied directly to a book like the original and afforded the script writers room to be even more creative. A masterpiece.;1;3;False tt0071562;bogsider;12/06/2003;old men and lots of talk;;I suppose some of the locations were ok. Old buildings and also lots of old men speaking English or Italian you don't really care what they're talking about, nothing of any interest 'trust me', but they have an awful lot to say, and your sitting there voluntarily watching and ...haha...listening to this. Some past DeNiro scenes. Then there are the dance halls ballroom dancing and all that more talk there, and by that time perhaps someone you don't care about gets shot then quite a bit more talk old men and young Paccino a coffee and talk and a couple of old men you've not seen yet are walking and talking - yeah real deep meaning full stuff a real cinematic experience . you've seen the first Godfather and read how good this second part is. Wow! I ought to write a 700 page book about this movie with a title of 'Godfathers and Movie Makers' or something yeah - really stimulating and memorable. An education in fact.;1;3;False tt0071562;becauseiamsmarterthanyou;27/05/2003;Worthy sequel;8;"While I can appreciate its moral complexities, the absolutely brilliant acting, which includes Pacino's most subtle and nuanced performance, and Coppola's fine directorial work, ""The Godfather: Part II"" doesn't have the narrative drive of its predecessor.

Also, the split narrative, bouncing between the history of how the Corleones gained power, and Michael's continuing moral decline, doesn't quite mesh for me. I'm open to the idea that I'm missing something, though I've enjoyed other films with multiple narratives, but Part II seems glued together instead of fitting organically.

It's still a fine film, and though I'd rank it lower than it is currently, it would definitely be in the top seventy-five.";1;3;False tt0071562;Blade_Le_Flambeur;11/05/2003;Sequel to a classic;8;Two years after the original Godfather was released, the Godfather Part II came out. This time, it scored Oscars for Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, Supporting Actor, Best Original Dramatic Score, and Art- set direction. It has been labeled by many fans of film and critics alike to be the only film that actually is superior to the original. It also remains in Oscar history the only film sequel to win best Picture as well as the original. I beg to differ with the critics and fans. The sheer beauty of the Godfather is lost in this film. It plays upon images that have already been seen before instead of catching the eye of the viewer with better photography. The musical score is a stand out job, really adding to the effect of the film. Al Pacino is good here as the now corrupted Micheal, but his acting seems a bit less focused then it should be and it doesn't seem as if he's really acting. In support is Robert De Niro, who took home his first Oscar and didn't even speak a word of english in the movie. He shines in this role as his life leads onto from being a peasant to being a crime lord. The flashback sequences are frustratingly too organized, and instead of giving the viewer something to ponder about it rather just shows them the images. Coppola's direction is arguably a lot more confident and realistic, another thing that adds to the effect. The script is rather good as well, focusing on each character as specifically as possible, but it's not quite as good as the original. The Godfather Part II loses itself in time, making it over three hours and feeling a bit stretched with the entire Cube sequence. Unfortunately, Roman Polanski's Chinatown was released the same year and lost a majority of it's Oscars to this movie. In my opinion, Chinatown should've taken Best Picture and Best Art- Set direction. The Godfather Part II packs in a lot more stuff then the first one, it tries hard to really knock the message in tight. It does, but the movie itself feels too overdone. Good sequel, nowhere near the original however. 8.5/10;1;3;False tt0071562;CharltonBoy;26/01/2001;Pacino and De Niro star in the same film for the first time.;8;The Godfather ll is a great film , although i'm not sure about it being the 7th best of all time as rated by the IMDB revewers. The most striking thing about this film is not really the story line because i'm not sure that is as good as it could be , the thing that stands out is the acting. In my opinion Robert de Niro and Pacino are the world best actors( De Niro just shading it)and this just proves my point. De Niro takes on his first real Major movie part as a young Vito Corleone taking on the characteristics of role that Marlon Brando started in the first film and Al Pacino carry's on his role as the son Michael Corleone therefore the two greats never meet in this film. 3 hours 10 minutes is maybe a little to long but never the less this film is still a great sequel. 8 out of 10.;1;3;False tt0071562;nick-251;15/07/1999;"watch this beacon of an epos in the landscape of normal ""mafia-films""!";8;"nearly a milestone as the first part of the-godfather-trilogy. The lack of OUTSTANDING Marlon Brando is too huge to get compensed by the (extraordinary) appearance of Pacino, Garcia et al. Want to see a breathtaking movie which impresses by the directors courage of ""taking all the time the story needs"" but do not want to see Godfather#1 again? then choose this masterpiece and spend yourself app 3h of real artwork!";1;3;False tt0071562;Paulmcg;08/11/2001;Great film but....;8;I've read many of the comments and agree that the film is one of the best. Having said that there are 2 very poor scenes:





They stand out so much because the film is so good, why they were not edited out is a complete mystery to me.;1;3;False tt0071562;Evolvist;07/07/2003;Revisited;7;"I simply will not be suckered into all the hype surrounding a movie with no plot and as slow as turtle soup. I know this movie is a ""classic,"" but so are Vlasic pickles--and that does not mean they are any less sour. Now, the Robert Deniro segments are nice, but so is ""Once Upon A Time In America."" Along with ""Annie Hall"" (and I love Woody Allen films) & ""Shakespear In Love,"" we see how the best movies for their respective years do not always win the little gold statue. I guess that is all I have to say (besides why did Brando have to die so soon in the trilogy/).";2;10;False tt0071562;StoryCharts;19/07/2013;Protect the family even if it means breaking it apart;5;The Godfather, Part II continues from The Godfather with the idea of protecting the family at all costs. In Part I, Michael's internal change from anti-Family to taking up his father's mantle drove the story. In Part II, Michael is unchanging in his pursuit to protect the Family. And we see this idea, that the family needs to be protected at all cost, taken to its extreme logical conclusion, with Michael killing his own brother.

Part II also adds to the stakes of family by having a parallel story of Vito building the family in the last generation.

In the end, Michael is able to protect the family, but at the cost of having torn it apart: having killed his own family members and casting his wife out.

Part II is a great film that takes the premise to its gut-wrenching extreme but logical conclusion. It makes us question the idea that the ends justify the means that we bought wholesale in Part I.

Redemption would be called for in The Godfather: Part III, but as we shall see, it will not come easily.

My Story Chart of the movie is at storycharts.ca.;2;11;True tt0071562;Beyondtherain;01/08/2020;It NEVER took off like Part 1...;6;"I watched this film for the first time ever with very high expectations after seeing Part 1 last month... Wow Part 1 was way better than this. This film was choppy and badly edited! At one point I seen a ""Dead"" body breathing! Part 1 was like a ride into the Mafia world and was a bit scary, this was just slow and choppy no action! The Godfather Part 1 is so good that this entire review is about it cause I could careless about The Godfather Part 2. There's a reason it's ranked higher than this, and Part 2 shouldn't even be in a Top 250. I suggest you watch The Godfather Part1, then skip this and watch Goodfellas, then watch The Godfather Part 3.";1;4;False tt0071562;SnoopyStyle;28/11/2013;Michael takes over;9;"The saga continues with Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) fully in charge as the unflinching leader. The family drama just gets more and more darker. We are seeing the moral disintegration of Michael. The movie also gets a separate timeline for young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro). While that is interesting at times, it is very disruptive especially since it's all in Italian.

Meanwhile, Michael's story keeps getting better. How could you forget ""I know it was you, Freddo. you broke my heart."" or ""Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."" And John Cazale shines as Fredo. His exchanges with Al Pacino are epic. And the emotional grenade tossed by Kay (Diane Keaton) is absolutely stunning. All in all, it is a great effort for a sequel to a masterpiece.";1;4;False tt0071562;toadervlad222;21/08/2013;this is the kind of movie everyone should watch;10;What can i say, that hasn't been already told? this is the kind of movie no one should miss! When i saw the godfather part 1 i was thinking to myself, there couldn't be other movie better than this masterpiece! Well, i was wrong! The godfather part 2 is even better! yes, even better than part 1.If godfather 1 was that good, the godfather part 2 is even better. From the beginning of the end, you can clearly see that this movie has no flaws! i mean there couldn't be any movie out there without flaws. Well thats wrong, this is the perfect movie! From acting, to directing, from the script to film editing and sound or visual effects, everything is perfect! This is probably one of the greatest achievements in cinema history! Francis Ford Coppola has outdone himself! Coppola made some extraordinary movies such as apocalypse now, the conversation and now the godfather! but with godfather part 2's release, everything changed, i mean i though no movie could surpass godfather, and yet the part 2 did just that! Do me a favor, and if u have the chance to watch this, do it, but after you watched part 1 first! This is Coppola's greatest achievement, and quite possibly the greatest movie in cinema history! 10 out of 10;1;4;True tt0071562;johnsutton88;12/08/2013;Can't Miss This One;10;A great film in its own right, independent of the first. I wasn't particularly fond of Michael Coreleone, especially as his character developed. He became very cold and obsessed with power and respect. What he lacked was the unity and family love of his father, Vito's great empire, one wholly based on love. Michael looses touch with reality and loses control, he sees everything which is real break right in front of him. An epic film with truly great actors.

I think in the scene with Michael and all his brothers near the end shows how he, even back before he was tarnished with greed, wasn't a family orientated man. He wanted to live for himself, be successful on his own accord. Join the Marines. He never had plans to become part of the mafia. The reward of power and greed became too much until it suffocated him.;1;4;True tt0071562;hani_78696;11/08/2013;The best sequel-prequel ever made;10;"This movie is three hours and twenty two minutes long but an hour passes like 15 minutes.It is incredibly entertaining and one of the best gangster movie ever made. The plot is tricky featuring two parallel story lines,one of young Vito Corleone fighting with life's dark events,providing for his family,building a Don status and seeking revenge for the killing of his family while other depicts the Michael Corleone and his falling empire,family and life. Al Pacino is stand out in the movie cast.You just see the expressions and his eyes it can tell you the whole story. He has completely transformed to a ruthless,heartless and cold gangster but never stopped loving his family. The scene where Kay(Diane Keaton) tells him about that she aborted their child,Al is flawless and most realistic how his eyes pops out and how he knocks her down.He deserved the Oscar for best actor. Robert De Niro is impeccable.What do you expect when two of the greatest actors play two of the greatest characters. De Niro portrays the character with similar talent as Marlon Brando did. The way he speaks with same husky voice also his sicilian. His principles,taking care of things,returning the favor and rise to mafia is just marvelous. The best scenes are where he follows Fannuci at Festa to his house and kills him other one ,obviously where he stabs Don Ciccio and says ""My father's name was Antonio Andolini... and this is for you"" is just brilliant. Diane Keaton portrays her character with utter excellence. Robert Duvall is as great as he was in the previous movie,the sophisticated lawyer ,caring brother and a good man. John Cazale character is bigger in this one and he is first class in the scene where he yells his heart out and in the whole movie. Michael Vincente Gazzo's performance is most realistic. The screenplay,style and violence is top notch. Again.Coppola's direction is mesmerizing. Overall,this is one of the best movie and not to be missed.";1;4;True tt0071562;fredberglyle;28/07/2013;Best Se(pre)quel movie ever;9;"""Its like sayin' that you have the recipe of Coca-Cola but you wouldn't make another bottle"" Mario Puzo said this when Francis Coppola refused to make this movie. The initial scene in this movie was inspired by many movies, which I'd refuse to disclose to avoid spoilers. Even these days we find a Part -2 of a movie would feature a similar screenplay but this isn't the case in Godfather 2 movie. It is both a sequel and a prequel of the first . It shows what happens before Godfather part-1 and what happens after. Robert Niro's role as the vibrant young Vito matches Brando's' Don Vito in the first. I would suggest the movie lovers to watch after GF part 1 so as to understand the characters better . Also I highly recommend to watch both completes this epic.";1;4;False tt0071562;Magenta_Bob;27/07/2013;You once told me: 'In five years the Corleone family will be completely legitimate.' That was seven years ago.;8;"The Godfather: Part II is perhaps the most famous example of a sequel generally held in as high regard as its predecessor and it's easy to see why; where part I was about Michael's rise, this is about the fall which I think ceteris paribus makes for a better film. Personally I think it's probably slightly weaker than Part I due to the stories being a tad weaker and less focused. Being 25 minutes longer, one might think that it's grander in scope or more elaborate but it really consists of two less elaborate stories; in present time, we get to follow Michael Corleone's aforementioned fall, while a flashback chronicles his father Vito's rise to power during his formative years.

That being said, the two stories are interwoven and juxtaposed quite elegantly. Michael begins with getting his hand kissed as a newly appointed ""don"", and ends with him symbolically left alone at the kitchen table of a family dinner during a flashback. Vito starts at rock bottom, having been made an orphan and forced to leave Sicily for America, and ends up if not on the top, but then well on his way. As another contrast, we get to see shots of Vito's family (including Michael as a baby) flourishing right after Michael's marriage is falling apart.

Furthermore, Part II does contain some of the best stuff of the trilogy, especially towards the last half hour or so when all story lines come together quite beautifully; the marital breakdown of Michael and Kay. The conversation between Tom Hagen and Frankie Pentangeli followed by the latter's suicide. The visceral and character building scene in which Vito shoots Fanucci. And maybe the most striking of them all – the calamity of Fredo's (John Cazale outplaying everyone in the impeccable ensemble) death, happening off-screen as if it was too cruel to show the viewers. Better or not, this is in all respects a fine continuation and expansion upon the previous film and unmissable for anyone who enjoyed Part I.";1;4;True tt0071562;LLinus;25/07/2013;For the sake of family.;8;There was no way dodging the second part, i had to get it over with to continue my journey through the top list and to get it crossed off my list in overall is a relief. The minutes went by slowly as the movie was in motion, we had to witness these important moments that eventually would be useful information to fill the question marks or speculations.

I didn't realize that this character who was played by Robert De Niro, a quite, hard working, good looking guy but i never thought that it possibly could be De Niro. I wouldn't have imagined that this movie would be half as interesting if it wasn't for De Niros character as a part of this movie, it felt like his part was something that had to be explored eventually. The brutal side of Michael was slightly reduced as of the previous movie, his character was more powerful than he were violent. Although, Pachino keeps on this particular continual troubled face until the very end, he brings this deep and heavy feeling to his character which sets the mode for the whole movie, and the look he express to some individuals, just like he already killed them in his mind 3 times already. I enjoyed the aspect and the quality of this movie, although it was secondary to the first one.;1;4;False tt0071562;donuthaters12;11/07/2013;A Flaw Preventing This Film From Being A Masterpiece;8;"This film is a sequel to one of the most celebrated films of the 70's. A lot of people would give this full marks but I for one did not think this held up along with the first film. I think maybe Chinatown or The Conversation should have maybe won the Academy Award for Best Picture.

This film is a continuation of Michael Corleone's position as the Don and detailing on his goal to make the Corleone family legitimate. At the same time, it also shows the beginnings of Vito Corleone. This is, for me, where the good and the bad side of the film is apparent. I'm going to start with the bad side. What made the film so great was that it was really a focus on family and the culture of the Italian people. This film feels like it just focuses on Michael and the consequences of his actions, the destruction of relationships and the creation of enemies. The business being focused on in this film, in Michael's story, doesn't work a lot for me as I find it a little boring. Hyman Roth is so dull as a villain that I did not care whether or not he succeeds or fails. The good side of the film is the focus on Vito Corleone's rise in New York in the early 20th century. It's very fascinating on how he became who he is as it's supported with an interesting villain, Fannuci. The crumbling of Michael's soul is definitely an aspect that I liked, as we felt that he has definitely changed since the beginning of the first film; but I wish the story behind it was just stronger.

Coppola did not exactly screw this film up, it's definitely strong and the more you watch it the stronger it gets but I felt his work on the first was most definitely his best within the trilogy. It was brilliant on how he decided to have this film edited. Juxtaposing the rise of both father and son and how different in the direction both of them go, gives it much more weight and effect. The man pretty much made a sequel and prequel at the same time and not be a disappointment.

Gordon Willis, like in the first film, creates this feeling of an old photograph due to the image giving off this golden hue. The film really feels like a period film, and it helps us feel like we are watching a film created in that time. I guess Willis didn't really get much from this film compared to the first because it's not something new. Nevertheless the photography is still strong even today.

The music here is a little different and at times a little darker but that's just because of Michael's fall from grace. It still has that iconic music by Nino Nota from the first film and when it appears, you get this feeling of nostalgia.

The acting was excellent as expected. Pacino was able to make this character who was frightening without doing much. There are many moments where this guy feels really ruthless. The supporting cast was also great like the first film but there is a shift in focus on Michael rather than the whole family. In the flashback sequences, Robert De Niro was the only one really focused on and the rest had very little to do. De Niro may have gained more popularity in Scorsese's Mean Streets but I think this is where he really shines and where everybody took notice of him. Lee Strasberg was fine in playing a villain who really doesn't do a lot, he doesn't even feel threatening but Gaston Moschin as Fanuuci was fantastic. The man showed the he owns this side of town and everybody must respect him or else. Overall they are all deserving of credit.

I may be a minority who think this film is not a masterpiece but I just do not find it as strong as the first as Michael's storyline felt flat. The flashback storyline and terrific acting and direction makes this film a must watch.";1;4;False tt0071562;Josh_The_Third;25/06/2013;A great movie that completes it's prequel;8;"A foreword: I watched Part I with my friends three days ago. Now I know it is a classic, but the style of the first movie is really anything but modern - a very long slow sit-through that younger movie goers like me might be perplexed with. Which is why I wanted to watch the second part.

Now that was a good decision! sure I won't say part II is a better movie, but it has a slightly different pace, for example it has more scenes. But the more important thing is that it completes part I brilliantly, and perhaps necessarily;

Because the strength of this movie is how the stories of Michael and the story of Vito reflect each other. Separated, those are simple Mafia-esque plots. But the movie shows us the bigger picture: how these men's lives came to be what they are, how they connect, where they differ, etc. The viewer is overwhelmed by the complex meaning underlying this connection and all it's subtle truths, putting everything into a grand perspective like no other movie has done before.

For me this film hasn't been so much about crime and the ethical questions behind it, but more a story of a family, and perhaps a story about an inevitable connection between people's lives, how are bound by this thread of revenge and violence. I mean, all Michael has ever wanted is to keep his family safe and make the corleone legitimate, but alas, he is of course bound by a things that happened decades before he was born.

It's a dark conclusion but the humanity of it is just portrayed great- Making Mikael a very good anti-hero character, much thanx to the excellent Al Pachino of course. Great movie and I will check out the third part once I get the chance.";1;4;False tt0071562;gcas44-677-689235;05/05/2013;The Greatest Piece of Art to Ever Grace the Earth!;10;"What can I say about this movie that hasn't already been said? I do believe that The Godfather: Part II is an example of cinematic gold... Scratch that... Cinematic platinum. Everything, from the acting, story, script, directing, cinematography, sound, lighting; you name it, is perfect.

Many people agree with me that Part II is a tad bit better than Part I. However, many people also don't, only because the great Marlon Brando was not in Part II (not including flashbacks). However, a young Robert De Niro made up for Brando's absence to give possibly the best performance of his life as the young Vito Corleone. He also did a great job in delivering the Sicilian dialect of Italian (since that consisted of most of his lines).

I cannot go on any further without mentioning spoilers, so I will leave it at this. This movie definitely has to be seen before you die. The length of this movie is actually a good thing, as well. It just draws you into it even more, and time flies without you even noticing. So if you have about 3 1/2 hours of time to watch a great movie, put this on and relive the magic. And if it's your first time watching it (be sure to watch Part I first), then you're in for something magical. There's a reason why this film is preserved in the National Film Registry and the Library of Congress.";1;4;False tt0071562;TStefanov;15/07/2012;A masterpiece of modern cinema;10;The Godfather Part II is arguably the greatest film ever made. Every single bit of it is a model of perfection, it's just amazing. Francis Ford Coppola has managed to do something very difficult - to surpass the first part of The Godfather saga. The cinematography, the dialogue, the script, the acting and every other part of this movie are impeccable and amazing. I strongly believe that Al Pacino's performance in this film is maybe the greatest acting performance of all time. The way he develops his character from a young, innocent boy to a ruthless crime lord is mind-blowing. I cannot believe that he lost the Oscar, since this performance, in my humble opinion, is the best in his career. Robert De Niro is also mesmerizing, less than Pacino though, but nevertheless he won a very well-deserved Oscar. Robert Duvall shines as Tom Hagen and John Cazale is very convincing as Fredo. To sum it all up - this movie is a masterpiece, a must-see, it's literally flawless!;1;4;False tt0071562;xliimiit;30/01/2012;Absolutely Incredible;10;This movie is a complete work of genius. I do not even consider it a sequel just a complete equal to its counterpart being the Godfather. The movie battles between two stories of the past and what is happening in the present day. It shows the corruption of the dark side of the American dream throughout the 1900's with Michael's story going on in the present and the background story of Vito beginning the advancement of his family in the early 1900's. The characters in this movie are very complex and evoke strong emotions throughout the movie. The audience feels the decisions they make as if they are the ones deciding. The work of cinematography is amazing. The camera angles and lighting are the most apparent in making specific scenes timeless. It has won many awards and is considered to be one of the greatest American made movies ever created. This movie is rated R for adult situations/ violence and language. It is also very time consuming coming to three hours and twenty minutes yet it is worth every minute of it.;1;4;False tt0071562;namashi_1;30/10/2011;Astonishing!;10;"'The Godfather' is amongst the Greatest Films of Cinema. It left an haunting impact on it's viewers. It's my favorite film from the 70's.

It's sequel, 'The Godfather: Part II', is Astonishing work, as well. Francis Ford Coppola's Screenplay & Direction, both, are Godly, while the Performances, are Remarkable. It's a film, where everything seems right, there is absolutely nothing wrong about this film. A Flawless Motion-Picture, that is the Greatest Sequel, it's mighty Prequel could've asked for.

'The Godfather: Part II' Synopsis: The early life and career of Vito Corleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expands and tightens his grip on his crime syndicate stretching from Lake Tahoe, Nevada to pre-revolution 1958 Cuba.

'The Godfather: Part II' begins remarkably & culminates, astoundingly. As mentioned, there is absolutely nothing wrong about this film, it's flawless work.

Coppola's Screenplay & Direction, both, are truly Godly. Coppola has a made film, that can never be forgotten. Like it's prequel, it's a film, that will always enjoy a strong fan-base among film-buffs worldwide. Cinematography is picture-perfect. Editing & Art Design, are well-done.

Performance-Wise: Al Pacino is simply INCREDIBLE as Michael Corleone. Pacino, truly, is the Epitome of ""FINE"" Acting. Robert De Niro, on the other-hand as the young Vito Corleone, is hugely impressive. Robert Duvall is outstanding, yet again. Diane Keaton is believable. John Cazale is fabulous & stands out in many scenes. Lee Strasberg leaves a strong impact. Gastone Moschin, Dominic Chianese & Michael V. Gazzo are good, as well. Others lend very good support.

On the whole, 'The Godfather: Part II' is a film that makes Cinema Proud. An Unbeatable & Unforgettable Film.";1;4;False tt0071562;jay_billo123456;07/06/2011;An all round great movie capturing the ups and downs of mob live;10;This is the best out of all three Godfather movies. Political wars, mob wars, where the Corleone family started and great cinematography. Robert De Niro stars as Don Vito Corleone and makes a big impact in the film rising up through the ranks of the tough streets of America and raising his own family and mob. A political war which was evidently true to the Mafia and probley still is to pay for there way of life and to get the cops of there back. Al Pacino plays a great Mafiosi boss which you can imagine if you've ever seen Scarface. I feel he plays with more emotion in this than Scarface and maybe his best film. It is the best Mafia film of all time showing real strength in the gang and uncontrollable losses and downfalls. Altogether its a great watch and for any valid cinema lover its a must watch film.;1;4;False tt0071562;vinodh7888;25/12/2010;Best Sequel ever made!;10;"This is the most beautiful sequel I have ever watched. The movie in itself is filled with scenes, that will leave a long impact in you over the period of time. Especially, if you would have completed reading ""The Godfather"", the novel, and then watch this movie, I bet you will love this one for sure. Scenes like Vito's mother getting shot; Vito's emerging as man to be respected in his neighborhood, outweighing Fanucci; Michael's scenes with the Senator; the review committee scene, which brings in Frank's brother towards the end, and the climax scene; each of them makes the story as interesting as it could. The screenplay goes real good. The story bottom-line is aptly defined. There is no place in this movie which would seem dragging out.Great movie to watch. Will go down in my memory as one of the best ever classics.Ten on Ten for this one.";1;4;False tt0071562;Abir-Xtreme;20/10/2010;There Never Will be a Sequel like this or One This Good;10;"The Brilliant Companion piece to the original "" The Godfather"" continues the saga of two generations of successive power within the Corleone family, Legendary Director Francis Ford Coppola tells two stories in the ""The Godfather Part 2"" , The roots and rise of the young Don Vito Corleone played with uncanny ability by Robert De Niro and The Ascension of Micheal Corleone played with Unreal Ability of AL Pacino. Reassembling many of the talents who helped make the ""The Godfather"" A Legend and the most successful motion picture of its time, Francis Ford Coppola Produced a movie of staggering magnitude and vision like any other. The Godfather 2 is undeniably the best sequel ever made, and maybe even superior to the Original ""The Godfather"" which is considered to be the best movie ever made by many critics and actors. The movie is one of the few movies close to perfection. Francis proved his worth and created the level of greatness when it came to direction in the movie industry through The Godfather Saga. The Acting skills shown in The Godfather 2 by Robert De Niro and AL Pacino are truly something you have to see to believe. Robert De Niro portrayed the character of the young Vito Corleone with such effort that he actually made people believe he was the young Marlon Brando. But AL Pacino even topped De Niro and gave a performance which is one of the few characters to be present on every list of great characters in the film history. AL Pacino's Portrayal of Micheal Corleone was so believable that people forget that they are watching a movie when he was performing. Legendary method actor Lee Strasbourg also made his debut in the film industry with this movie and he proved why he is considered to be such an Icon in the world of Acting. Even the characters which are not that important leave a mark of their own. The Godfather 2 is truly one of the greatest films ever made, and there never will be a sequel like this again or one this good.";1;4;False tt0071562;Thumbs_gt;15/07/2010;Not a Sequel;10;This movie is by far one of the best movies i have ever scene. There is no doubt that Francis Ford Coppola took much time on each aspect of the movie. The cinematography is absolutely stunning, with excellent shots portraying the rich history Sicily has. The acting is, yet again, flawless. Robert De Niro shows his true skill portraying young Vito, growing up in a corrupt and violent world. But who steals every scene is Al Pachino, playing Michael Corleone. Al Pachino portrays a man who is slowly breaking apart. A man who is torn between his family life, and his life of crime. Michael has gone from being an innocent military man, to a cold and bitter monster. Pachino held this role very delicately and with precision. What do you get out of that? An excellent performance which shows that he is truly a master of his craft. The plot is quite literally a roller-coaster of excitement, and surprise. With a sensational mixture of Michael fighting for his sanity being the don of the biggest mob in the US, intricately knitted with flashbacks of how Vito Corleone came to power. This movie is not a sequel, it is a clever brother of the film made two years before. A true masterpiece and will stand the test of time.;1;4;False tt0071562;supernma;13/06/2010;One of the greatest films ever made;10;"""The Godfather Part II"" is Francis Ford Coppola's finest masterpiece. Some may say that title belongs to ""The Godfather"" or ""Apocalypse Now"", which are great films as well, but not quite as astounding as this one.

This is a film about family, about crime, about a marriage, about a father and his son. Spanning from the early 1900s to the 1950s, the scope alone is awe-inspiring. Telling both the story of Vito Corleone and his son Michael, jumping back and forth, a curiously touching, poetic kind of storytelling comes to life. The film is very unconventional in that regard, but it's also a fantastic family crime drama, with moments so intense and devastating that you'll never forget it.

Of course, the film is beautifully photographed and dressed, and the acting is some of the best you will ever see. All around, it's a perfect film. There's not much more one can say about it than that.";1;4;False tt0071562;hemant_balz;20/02/2010;If history has taught us anything - It's that you can kill anybody;10;"WOW!!!was the only word that i said after watching this movie.truly its an epic in grand proportions.I haven't seen yet a better sequel for a movie.If godfather affected us,this would change our lives.The casting was prolific as usual but not to mention the role played by De Niro(Vito Carleone).He played a role that could make us believe that Brando legacy has not been left void in godfather part-2.The direction is quite brilliant from Coppola.He shows simultaneously how one can travel forward with Al Pacino(Michael Carleone) & back with De niro(Vito).He's a master at his work,Coppola.Also the role played by John Cazale(Fredo)touched me.It was such a sophisticated role & he played it perfectly.And what amazed me was that who was Michael V. Gazzo(Frankie Pantangelini)??i never saw him in any other movie but what an accent this guy has.Brilliant actor not to mention.And last but not the least Michael says to tom: "" If history has taught us anything - It's that you can kill anybody"".Yes Michael,you are the true godfather & when it comes to Vito's regime.Vito said to don Ciccio : ""My father's name was Antonio Andolini... and this is for you"".and just for you Vito(Deniro) i give this movie my personal best 10.";1;4;False tt0071562;rmax304823;25/05/2009;Excellent dramatic story.;8;"I suppose everyone already knows the story -- Al Pacino as Michael Corleone rises to power in 1958, with multiple flashbacks to Robert DeNiro as his father Vito in the 1920s -- so we can dispense with a summary. Actually, the story itself is less important than the fact that the film naturally divides itself in two -- its execution and its moral message.

The execution is splendid in every regard. Coppola's direction is deliberately paced. There is a conspicuous absence of unsubtle and dizzying directorial razzle-dazzle, thank God -- a movie that doesn't give you a headache.

The performances are nearly flawless. There isn't a sour note in the entire cast, and especially outstanding is the acting of Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo (author of ""A Hatfull of Rain""), and Gastone Moschin as Don Fanucci, who tackles the role with an understated grandiosity -- what operatic flourishes! But everyone is good.

The photography by Gordon Willis, as in its predecessor, is dominated by a burnished amber except for wintry Lake Tahoe where various shades of blue and a steely gray predominate. The production designer deserves credit. Nino Rota's orchestral score is memorable, a folksy melancholic tune. The script has some neat tag lines. When Strasberg and Pacino meet, they shake hands and exchange warm wishes, then when Pacino admits that he's going to kill a colleague of Strasberg, the latter shrugs, turns to his tuna fish sandwich, and says, ""He's small potatoes."" It's a chilling moment. The avuncular, sentimental old man is a ruthless murderer. That's the execution. The -- I don't know what to call it. I don't like the term ""moral of the movie."" Sounds like a high school term paper. And I'm not sure exactly what ""intentionality"" means in phenomenology, so I'll just say ""intention."" The intention of the film is thoroughly corrupt. Maybe Puzo and Coppola realized it, maybe not.

I think the director did, though. That's why he splices so much carnage into the rituals. Almost every scene of violence takes place during some sort of party or religious festival. I think -- I HOPE -- that Coppola was aware of the irony between the rites of intensification and the fact that the principles they embody are ignored almost at will. It's important to have your baby baptized as soon as possible, just as it's important to shoot a miscreant in the chest.

In a sense all the rituals, all the religion, are fakes. There is no license permitted, unlike Irish wakes, Polish weddings, or Russian parties. If, like Gazzo, you have too much wine and accidentally spill some on the vast tablecloth at an al fresco party, the glances are severe. No sexy dancing either. In a way, despite the faux gaiety, it's something like living in a prison, especially for women.

We're supposed to feel sorry for Michael who, at the end, is seen sitting alone in solemn grandeur, emotionally bankrupt. But Michael is really a rat who deserves everyone's contempt and execution by the state. It doesn't matter that he's young, handsome, well-spoken, powerful and rich. He's broken more laws than anyone can count. He lies, cheats, and murders at will. Those murders include an innocent whore who is horribly butchered simply in order to entrap the Senator from Nevada in Michael's thrall. He betrays his friends. He throws out his wife and prevents her from taking ""his"" children. He murders his own brother for a past mistake for which he's already been punished.

The original Don Corleone, Marlon Brando, had a set of allegiances extending outward from the family at its center -- to his ethnic group, his neighborhood, his co-conspirators in the business, and beyond that to some vague construct called ""the nation."" Al Pacino's Don has whittled it all down. At the center is ego, and beyond that, business. He's become a classical villain, a Richard III who has plucked down that crown, and if he now has buyer's remorse -- well, he should have thought things out earlier.

His tragedy is nothing compared to mine, which has been Shakespearean in its grandeur, really. In my adolescence, the love of my life, Juliet, poisoned herself. And when, in all modesty, I tried to become Emperor of Rome, the treacherous bastards assassinated me.";1;4;True tt0071562;Pedro_H;10/10/2006;Very well made pulp fiction with a fantastic cast - but still a historical whitewash.;8;"A look back and look forward at how the Mafia don Vito Corleone gained his original power and the continuing saga of how a son (Michael) chooses to drive forward the criminal empire of his late father.

As the great American novel has not been written (an opinion just as popular in America as elsewhere) our cousins over the sea have no option but to over praise the work of better-than-average pulp writers. The vastly overrated Ernest Hemmingway, the junk master that was a Peter Benchley and the schlock with snobbery that is Thomas Harris. Don't get me wrong, all very readable - but great art? Great vision? Something you couldn't live a full and happy life without?

As the groundbreaking film maker Spaniard Luis Bunuel once said: ""Today's culture is unfortunately inseparable from economic and military power. A ruling Nation can impose its culture and give a worldwide fame to a second-rate writer like Hemingway. Steinbeck is important due to American guns. Had Dos Passos and Faulkner been born in Paraguay or in Turkey, who'd read them?"" The self-opinions of Mario Puzo (script and book) are probably in line with the above. Until he wrote the Godfather he even worried about keeping food on the table. How can you consider yourself an artist when you are writing rubbish like Earthquake? However, give him credit, he saw Hell's Kitchen for real and it shows.

With the Godfather saga many people mistake a heavy subject for heavy writing. However well done it is (production values are sky high and the casting is a dream) this isn't anything more than a thousand TV writers couldn't knock up. While simultaneously looking back and looking forward can be confusing (one of these things that you need to warned about) it leads you to believe that the ex don is a better person than the future don simply because he had so much pushed on to his plate and had to make tough decisions. However he kills to replace the corrupt and becomes equally corrupt himself. Only on a bigger scale.

Men of honour is nonsense - they beat/killed, threatened and bribed. They never made any money, they simply took money. If you are interested they took just as readily from criminals (like drug dealers) as they did from honest people. While this shows power being taken at the point of a gun - where are the goons beating the grocery store owner because he wouldn't pay the protection money? Such a scene would shatter this movie like it would a 1,000 foot drop would shatter a Chinese Ming vase.

Coppola doesn't like film editors - they want to cut out scenes of people looking in to the middle distance, waiting for people to arrive and generally repeating themselves. The Mafia is male world and the women don't have much of a life - they don't even get to bring in cups of tea. The men are not happy people, but if they paid their electricity bills and had a hobby it would help. The moral is an obvious one - money doesn't buy happiness. But it allows you to be miserable in (Long Island) comfort.

Director Coppola and writer Puzo had no choice but to write this as a tragedy. They lay it on too thick though, as they are trying to bring in higher morals to a story that doesn't have it and (as I said above) it doesn't want to kick over enough rocks. This accepted the cast is amazing - Robert DeNiro is on especially fine form - but the message(s) are uneven and dubious. All cons are full time liars and they even lie to themselves - in this little world the words mean little and we have too many of them.";1;4;False tt0071562;Brooklyn-Boy;11/06/2005;A real classic better than the first part!!!;8;This is a real classic, and i have to say it this godfather 2 was even better than the first Godfather, if the first won an Oscar as the best film, this one should won more than an Oscar.

In this sequel, Al Pacino comes again as Michael Corleone, now as a Don, Pacino did it really great as the new Family boss, maybe one of his better performances ever.

Also John Cazale performing Fredo Corleone, Michael's brother, we did it so well that i think he deserved the Oscar for the best supporting actor.

But who was extraordinary in the Film was Robert De Niro, performing a young Vito Corleone, in his beginning of becoming a Mafia boss, De Niro, is maybe the best actor ever, and in this movie he was outstanding, even talking Sicilian dialect that he didn't talk. So my rates are.

Direction: 9/10. plot:9/10. Adaptation (from book to novel): 7/10. Pacino performance: 8/10. De Niro performance: 10/10. Overall: 8/10.;1;4;False tt0071562;lamontlewis;24/12/2004;Second Best Sequel? What could have been better?;10;"I remember seeing the Godfather, Parts I & II back in the late 70s. I haven't seen since, much less before, any 2-part cinema production that produced a storyline so well enmeshed, that they both could have been just called ""The Godfather"".

My question is, according to a comment I read on the website for the movie, it is only the second best sequel ever made. What was better? In my 58 years of watching movies, I haven't seen anything else to even come close. I find it hard to believe that anyone else might have a different opinion. Of course, I'm not an expert at these things. But then, I wonder if the comments made about it being ""second best"" were the comments of an expert, seeing as I have only heard it described by the critics as the best sequel ever, to which I readily agree.";1;4;False tt0071562;stelero;14/10/2004;"""This is the business we chose""";10;"I love this movie!

Only two years later from the first, they came back and continued the story and they look just as good as when they first started! Its as if the filming just continued without the two years in between, and thats what i loved about this movie.

Carried on from the first, Michael Corleone is now the new 'Don' as he is the only one taking after his father, apart from Fredo who doesn't have the same power as Michael. Michael carries on the family business, but later realises that he has a close traitor in his mist, and an unexpected one too! ""You Broke my heart!"" While telling that side of the story, Coppola and Puzo brilliantly put together the young life of young Don Vito, and thats when Robert De Niro came in the picture and did a magnificent performance!!!

Al Pacino just gets better and Robert De Niro....Brilliant!

A sequel not to be messed with!

IN THE LOVING MEMORY OF:

Carmella Corleone 1897-1959 (died of natural causes, coincidence?)

Alfredo/Frederico (Fredo) Corleone 1919-1959 (killed by Al Neri, from the orders of Fredos beloved brother Michael. Fredo gave information to Hyman Roths henchmen Johnny Ola)";1;4;False tt0071562;Herag;16/04/2004;Masterpiece of a movie.;10;"""The trouble with the Motion-picture Art was is it is too much an Industry and the trouble with the Motion-picture Industry is,it is too much an Art""! Enter,Francis Ford Coppola, the middle name standing for the Ford Hospital in Detroit (or for the Ford Opera) born into an Artistic family, saw Sergie Einstein's ""Ten days that shook the World"" at the age of 17 on a Sunday and on Monday he wanted to make movies! and he not only made movies but Masterpieces. He simulated a ""epileptic like attack""! in front of Ruddy,Jaffe,Yablans and Evans to be selected as the Director and he got his way for Casting which is the secret to the success of the ""Godfather"" series. The Screenplay by Mario Puzo and Coppola is probably the best writing talent since both lived in New York and ""lived the life"". This is a movie that will happen once in a lifetime since there would not be another ""Coppola"",there would not be another Brando,Pacino or De Niro nor the dedicated Film-makers like Evans or studios like Paramount.";1;4;False tt0071562;XXXWILLIAMSXXX;04/04/2004;the best sequel;10;The godfather 2 is the best sequel that hollywood may ever achieve. Good story, heartbreaking, and leaves you thinking about it after its over. Also we get to see Robert Deniro as the wonderful Don Corleone. Also how Micheal transforms into a dark monster over the years running the family business. The best scene is the surprise party for Vito and it was just brillant to add that scene in. I think that is one ingredient that helped this movie pick up best picture. Not to mention the godfather 2 is the first sequel to win best picture. This sequel may be better than the original and if not it is just as entertaining which makes at a good sequel. The godfather 2 is brillantly acted by Robert Deniro and Al Pacino. Al Pacino should have won best actor in this film because he does such a good job as Micheal Corleone. Overall if you haven't seen this picture, what are you waiting for?;1;4;False tt0071562;CalDexter;26/03/2004;The best sequel ever made.;10;You take THAT director, THAT photographer, THAT production designer and THOSE actors, make a massive richly detailed follow up telling two stories in the one film which runs at 200 minutes and you have the greatest sequel of all time (along with the empire strikes back).

Part II tells how the Corleones have progressed in the year 1958,with Michael Corleone now truly in command of his empire at lake Tahoe in Nevada, he is now in business with a dangerous Jewish gangster called Hyman Roth who is secretly in partnership with Michael's weak-willed brother Fredo in an attempt to assassinate Michael and pull off a deal that involves Cuba and gambling casinos in las Vegas.

When Michael learns he has been betrayed, he orders his brother's death and starts issuing threats to relatives and friends alike, slowly becoming warped and paranoid, Michael's face is ravaged and sullen, his eyes are as dark and lifeless as his father's were in part I, thus the circle is complete. like father...like son.

Not only do we learn of Michael's Ascension as emperor of the Corleones but we are shown how the young Don Vito Corleone first came to power in many flashback scenes. A special mention must go to Robert De Niro for his turn as young Vito speaking all his lines in Sicilian dialogue, you really believe this is Don Vito as a young man in 1917 New York city.

The senate hearings on organised crime are brilliantly staged and interesting with Michael's denial on ever running the 'biggest criminal organisation' in the USA. I could go on and on about this amazing film but i will end it on saying that the godfather part II is every bit as majestic and tragically mesmerising as the original.

ten out of ten.;1;4;False tt0071562;jaybabb;11/03/2004;The best in the trilogy;10;"In Part 2, we see more of the same-more revenge, more murders and more conflicts. This is actually two stories in one. We have the story of the Corleone crime family operations in Nevada. Then we have the early life of Vito Corleone told in flashbacks. Robert DeNiro plays young Vito without a flaw!

There are problems for Michael. To begin with, he learns that his brother Freddo may have betrayed the family to Hymann Roth(Lee Strasberg)who has political connections in Washington which prompts a Congressioal investigation of Michael. This leads to more violence of course.

While this is going on, we see young Vito taking revenge on the man who killed his mom & Dad. There is also increased difficulty between Michael and Kay(Diane Keaton). They end up separating.

This is the best of the trilogy IMHO. Crime is an ugly business-this trilogy demonstrates that!";1;4;False tt0071562;jefflittle19;21/06/2003;Topped only by its predecessor!;10;Godfather II is topped only by the original Godfather in cinema history. The Mafia has always fascinated people and Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola have satisfied this fascination with another brilliant 3+ hour installment of the Corleone family. Robert Deniro begins his storied acting career with this breakout performance, much like Al Pacino in the first installment. Pacino is once again magnificent, this time as the Don of the Corleone family. Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen and Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth also give memorable performances. This film is an unforgettable epic that will live in forever in cinema history! A must see!

My rating : @@@@@ (out of five);1;4;False tt0071562;mrbisco;23/01/2003;Much better than the first;8;I like this one waaaay more than the first one. This movie is both the sequel and the prequel to the original. That's a neat trick in itself.

For that reason I highly recommend it. Unfortunately, you have to watch the first one, as well. Darn! It makes it worthwhile, tho.

Robert Deniro is particularly effective in his role.;1;4;False tt0071562;MONSKI88;17/09/2002;PROBABLY THE BEST EVER;10;I saw this movie again last week (probably for the 20th time). I believe this is the greatest movie ever made. I saw the original movie in 1972 and had never had as fantastic a movie experience. For years I thought that movie would never be topped. But then Godfather II came out - I also saw that one the first week out and it was an even better experience than the first!;1;4;False tt0071562;bullochjoseph;22/12/2019;What an absolutely disgraceful film.;1;This somehow manages to be worse than its predecessor. Please never watch this.;3;24;False tt0071562;mafiaman9225;08/04/2014;An Incredible Piece Of Cinema With An Eprience Of A Lifetime!;10;This film Directed by Francis Ford Coppola is a absolute classic! In this film you can really see how much work was put into the film. Every scene is so diligently done that even the hard dialogue scenes are smooth and captivating. All of the acting was phenomenal along with the scenes that take place in Italy. As a viewer you get that authentic feel of the time and place throughout the whole film. Al Pacino as Michael Corleone was a perfect fit for the role, he played each scene with such composure that made it so entertaining. This is overall one of my favorite movies of all time and I highly recommend this to anyone who enjoys mafia movies or cinema in general! I give it a Ten out of Ten!;1;5;True tt0071562;fahad_riaz;07/04/2014;How can you make a perfect sequel? only Coppola knows it how;10;"You must have heard the raves...""the best Sequel of all time"", well, Star Wars Fans may disagree but it is a valid argument. This surpasses a Great Film with an even greater Film. It is certainly broader in Scope and even more lavish in its Production. The Flashback New York Scenes are a standout.

This one moves quite a bit faster than the original because it has much more to say. It says it and then some. Michael's descent into internal Madness is not a pretty sight and the Inheritor to all that is Corleone becomes a very unlikable Tyrant and shows virtually no signs of Humanity as the Modernity of events that take place have no place for that sort of thing.";1;5;False tt0071562;jcbutthead86;31/03/2014;One Of The Greatest Films Ever Made,The Greatest Sequel Of All Time And An Excellent,Brilliant,Powerful And Unforgettable Mastepiece From Francis Coppola.;10;The Godfather Part II is not only one of the greatest films ever mad but is also the greatest sequel of all-time that is an excellent,brilliant and unforgettable masterpiece that combines amazing direction,terrific acting from a great cast,a wonderful script and a haunting score. All of those elements make The Godfather Part II film making and Francis Coppola at their best.

Set in Las Vegas,Nevada in the 1950s and in New York City in the 1910s and 20s,The Godfather Part II tells two parallel rise and fall stories. The rise story depicts the rise of young Vito Corleone(Robert De Niro),showing Vito as an Italian immigrant who gets into a life of Crime and becomes a Don. The fall is the story of Michael Corleone(Al Pacino)who is still running the Corleone family in Las Vegas but has to deal with betrayal and the family falling apart.

The Godfather Part II is simply a masterpiece of cinema and is the greatest and most ambitious sequel of all-time that is not only an instant classic from the moment you watch it but also an amazing and powerful follow-up to the original giving viewers not only a great continuation of The Godfather saga but giving viewers the sequel to end all movie sequels. I won't say which film is better because in my opinion saying Part I or Part II is better than one another would be disrespectful to the two films because both are works of art. With The Godfather Part II Director Francis Ford Coppola has created not only created just a sequel but a film that is more epic with a bigger and larger scope than the first film giving viewers a powerful experience that never lets you go from the opening frame. With The Godfather Part II viewers are not just given a movie about the Mob,Gangsters or the Crime world but a movie about the on going tragedy,sadness and doom that hangs over The Corleone family while showing the rise of a young Vito Corleone. This film is probably more darker than the first film because when we see the fall of Michael Corleone and the rest of the Corleone family is almost like the fall of the Roman Empire. Unlike most sequels The Godfather Part II doesn't make the same story like the original but gives us something new and fresh with a great tale that is on par with the first film. The Godfather Part II is an epic film in the truest sense of the word not just in the way it's film but the length of the film(at 3 hrs and 20 minutes)but the film moves by seamlessly that you forget you are watching a three and half hour film. I think the film moves at a fast pace is because of the amazing storytelling that Coppola does with the film giving the movie a nonlinear style with the movie moving back and forth with the time periods but never getting lost in the narrative. In GFII we are given two tales about Michael's downfall and young Vito's rise. Michael,while still a don and running the Corleone family has become more ruthless and colder then he was in the first film further isolating himself from his other family members and becoming less trusting with the people all around him whether it's business associates or family where everyone was his enemy which leads to Michael's tragic fall. In contrast we see a young Vito Corleone,a man who is about business but is also about his family and friends despite being in the violent world of the Mob and Vito handles things with calm and cool style. When we see Michael and Vito the lighting is different with Michael constantly being surrounded by darkness and Vito is surrounded in bright light showing the contrast in atmosphere. With Michael and Vito we see how complex and different they are not just as Dons but as people. The screenplay by Francis Coppola and Mario Puzo is outstanding with scenes and dialog that is memorable and on par with the first film. While GFII isn't as violent or bloody as the original and doesn't have a huge body count GFII still has a few violent scenes that done with attention to detail and build-up. The ending of The Godfather Part II is one of the best endings in movie history because it's sad,tragic and somber matching the dark tone of the rest of the movie and the ending will punch you in the gut. A powerful ending.

The cast is perfect. Al Pacino is excellent,powerful and at his best as Michael Corleone,with Pacino being cold,intense and ruthless in the performance. Robert De Niro is brilliant in his Oscar winning role as Young Vito Corleone,with De Niro being cool and charismatic. Robert DuVall is wonderful once again as Tom Hagen,The Corleone's lawyer. John Cazale is amazing as Fredo Corleone,Michael's dim-witted older brother. Diane Keaton is outstanding as Kay,Michael's suffering wife. Talia Shire is sensational as Connie Corleone,Michael's sister. Lee Strasberg is terrific as Hyman Roth,an old time gangster and associate of the Corleone's. Michael V. Gazzo is captivating as Frank Pentangelli,a member of the Corleone family. Bruno Kurby and John Aprea are great Young Clemenza and Young Tesso. G.D Sparadin(Senator Pat Geary),Dominic Chianese(Johnny Ola),Frank Sivero(Genco)and Richard Bright(Al Neri)give great performances as well.

The direction by Francis Ford Coppola is amazing and stylish,with Coppola bringing a beautiful and haunting visual style to the film. Terrific direction,Coppola.

The score by Nino Rota is outstanding,powerful,haunting and beautiful matching the main scenes in the film. Great score,Rota.

In final word,if you love Francis Coppola,Gangster films,Mob movies,the first Godfather or movies in general,I highly suggest you see The Godfather Part II,an excellent,brilliant and unforgettable masterpiece of cinema and is one of the greatest films and sequels of all-time and is a movie that you will watch again and again. Highly Recommended. 10/10.;1;5;False tt0071562;nrr817;01/02/2014;Equal to the Perfect Original;10;The Godfather: Part II, along with The Godfather, is the greatest film ever made. In all likelihood, anyone else who appreciates great films that has seen the two would agree that both are absolute masterpieces of film and are as close to perfect as you can get.

Part II maintained the rest of the core cast from the original with Michael (which Pacino deserved an Oscar for his portrayal), Tom, Kay, Fredo, and Connie. While Part II lacks Brando's Don Vito Corleone, Sonny (except for a flashback), Clemenza and Sollozzo, it makes up for it with De Niro's young version of Vito, Hyman Roth, and Frank Pentangeli. The beautiful music also carries over from the original. The two stories of Michael expanding his empire to Nevada and Cuba and how young Vito started his career in New York are perfectly played out.In fact, what many people don't know is that while the original is based on Mario Puzo's novel, Part II, with the exception of the story how Vito's rise to power, is completely original material.

The Godfather: Part II is a must watch for anyone who truly loves film. It is one of those films that you should watch at least once in your lifetime.;1;5;False tt0071562;epibee;17/02/2010;Some touching moments, some over the top;7;The Godfather Part II is an overall better experience than Part I mainly because of Robert De Niro's charismatic presence in the flashback scenes. Otherwise, the film has several unresolved twists and forced situations, which keep lingering even after it ends.

Michael (Pacino) is almost a psychic man who can read tiny almost invisible cues and understands what is in the future from mere observation of other's interactions. He plans ahead of everyone double his age, and removes hurdles from his path often before they are exposed. With the help of Tom (Duvall) he plans murders and defamation (senator in the brothel) and evades legal committees with unusual ease and adeptness which seemed pretty unreal.

Same goes for Vito's first murder, it was rather coincidental that Fanucci's family was absent on that day, and Vito's gunshot noise was exactly timed to be masked by the firecrackers, even when Fanucci clearly saw his assassin and could have counter attacked if the shooting was late by seconds. Or when Vito murders Ciccio, how his knife travels across the ribs, and how can he escape so easily from Ciccio's own house with a wounded gunman on the back of his car.

The movie lacks reality in several places, but there are some touching scenes like the flashback with the brothers during the end, or how baby Sonny cries on the rug that his father robbed for the first time. Or when Vito thanks his employer and refuses the gifts and comes back home to his wife after getting fired, and of course the strong sepia tone all over, which make this film stand out from the rest.

But I am sure, real life gangsters should not be so lucky as Michael or Vito Corleone were in this film.;1;5;True tt0071562;azita_damandan;04/06/2007;The Godfather part II is the best of all.;9;"The first time I saw this movie, it made me up! although I saw the Godfather series not in the order because first I saw part 2 then the last one and after all the first one ""THE GODFATHER"". But when I think, among them part two was something else! The Godfather is a violent movie which is about a mafia family and their story and it is really a good one! Specially because it is from a perfect director and writer ""Francois Ford Capello"". I really recommend you to see all parts. This movie has a very slow theme and if you liked this director's film I recommend you to watch ""Apocalypse Now"" too 'cause that is a good movie as well.";1;5;False tt0071562;gazzo-2;09/10/1999;its good----BUT;;"IT's not as good as the first one. This one is convoluted; some of the plot twists arbitrary(just who ordered Micheal Gazzo's attempted garroting? Who killed Frankie Five Angels? etc.) -it kind of plays like a film with a script that was being revised even while it was being shot.

And face it-no Marlon Brando-that is hard to make up for, you know? His presence in the first film was partially what made it such a classic.

Now-don't get me wrong-I like this film a lot. Micheal V. Gazzo is one of my favorites and anything that used his talent to good effect is alright in my book. Loved Lee Strasberg doing the Meyer Lansky bit, terrific performance. Pacino, Cazale, Keaton, etc. are all great. This film has great suspense and some tragic scenes(Fredo goes fishing)-and I liked the parts showing the Senate's investigation of the Mob. All well and good.

Can't say that about the flashbacks, Deniro is alright and the tone is fine, but it Really does slow things down in a big way-I don't think you'd lose all that much if they just had yanked that chunk right outta the film completely. Allegedly Coppola was thinking of doing just that while making this, but didn't. You decide. It doesn't work as well for me.

Overall, a very good movie, ***1/2 outta ****. Def. better than the 3rd...";1;5;False tt0071562;HotToastyRag;31/01/2019;Another three hours?;3;"Why would anyone, anyone, ever tell Michael Corleone that she aborted her latest pregnancy? Did she not know he's vindictive, violent, and dangerous? Did she not know he's Catholic? Did she not see the first movie?

Diane Keaton's character in The Godfather: Part II is a complete idiot. Diane Keaton's ""I had an abortion!"" monologue is grating on the nerves, in part because of her poor acting and in part because of her character's stupidity. However, in reviewing the second installment of one of the most overrated franchises in film history, I have to mention that scene. The other, much more famous part to the film is Al Pacino's ""kiss of death"". You can take ten seconds and watch that clip, or you can sit down and watch the entire three and a half hours.

Robert De Niro shows up in this movie, in an oddly-lit, hazy saturated, flashback to Vito Coleone's youth. I don't know why anyone cared so much about Marlon Brando that they wanted to watch scene after scene about a younger version of him and why he became bad, how he became worse, and all in Italian. Sure, you can watch a very young Robert De Niro speaking in a foreign language and killing people, but you can also rent any number of other Robert De Niro movies and turn on the subtitles.

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to violence, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.";1;6;False tt0071562;KurtGScott;10/05/2019;Old boring drama, can only possibly be enjoyed by older audience;4;Just like old songs, maybe only older people born in this movie age could enjoy it. I hate everything, culture, colors, style, dressing, sounds, devices... There is too much ordinary boring political talk. Seriously, more boring that listening to those politicians in any country. I gave it few stars because there are funny parts, a bit of action, etc. But most is just boring. And additional complaint is that this movie lasts 3.5 hours! So long, complicated, bad!;1;7;False tt0071562;FilmCriticLalitRao;26/10/2014;The Godfather Part II : American actress Diane Keaton shines in her role as Kay, a lady who would like to prevent the growth of a mafia family.;6;As far as scope and size of a film is concerned, The Godfather Part II is a lot different than The Godfather I. It shows the extent to which a mafia family would go in order to eliminate its enemies. This is just one of several opinions a viewer can have about this film. It is for this reason there is nothing like brotherly love. A brother who has betrayed his brother has to be able to face the brother who has been betrayed. The viewers get to see the games which mafia bosses and politicians play with each other. It is amazing to watch how politicians squeeze gangsters finally in order to make quick money. They are also around when a mafia network decides to extend its operations from USA to Cuba. However, it would be perfectly fine to state that this film is also an extension of the concerns that were raised in The Godfather I. Director Francis Ford Coppola was right in choosing to direct two parallel stories in order to establish the presence of Corleone family in viewers' minds. There is a caveat related to the use of Italian language. The lack of subtitles when Italian is spoken by actors makes the comprehension of the film difficult as not everybody can be expected to know Italian.;1;7;False tt0071562;craig-hopton;13/06/2014;Great performances from De Niro and Pacino but oh so slow;7;Very similar to The Godfather - long (even longer than part 1) and oh so slow. It's just not my cup of tea at all. I don't find the story all that interesting - various criminal masterminds trying to wrestle power off each other.

The only thing that makes this movie OK is the performances of Al Pacino and Robert De Niro. It really is a tour de force from both of them. Al Pacino's character, Michael Corleone, is a nasty piece of work. He tries to emulate his father Vito Corleone, but he is mistrusting and has an evil streak. He's prepared to cut off, in fact kill, close family, and will not be satisfied until he gets his way. Al Pacino plays it brilliantly.

Robert De Niro, playing the young Vito Corleone, makes a great contrast. More relaxed, friendly, but also prepared to commit crime and kill to forward the interests of his family. But you can't help but feel he has a warm heart.

Great performances like this aren't enough to turn a 3 hour plus dull storyline into a great movie though. I still got bored.;1;8;True tt0071562;catcha22;07/08/2003;Never seen it...;9;"I only gave this movie a 9. A gave the first one a 10. I've never seen either of them (read my Godfather part I summary to find out why), but I heard that the first one was good (so I gave it a 10) and that this one was slightly less good (hence, a 9). I'm a real big fan of mobster movies, though (My Blue Heaven {and Steve Martin movies}, The Freshman, etc.) and have seen Jane Austen's ""Mafia"" (a spoof of Godfather) and liked it. 9/10. A must see.";1;8;False tt0071562;staroffice;25/10/2020;Worst movie of all time;1;That second film from the saga didn't age very well. Tedious and boring scenes staging unrealistic situations or worse, not essential stories. This film is empty. Nothing is happening. Poor acting all over, even from our favorite heroes. The only redeeming value, seeing the A list actors when they were young and handsome. Unless you are drinking the Coppola kool-aid, don't bother watching it again. It will be a good waste of 3 hours of your time.;0;1;False tt0071562;ezequielezb;12/10/2020;Overrated. Not terrible, but not even half as good as the first.;5;I'll be short.

1. This movies suffers from the same issue as the first, where you're only tipped about the hows and why's of the murders and the other mob stories that take place, with the agravants that: a- A few scenes go by before an 'explanation' comes up, although it still just doesn't explain everything. b- The first movie at had more compelling acting, plot and action overall managed to get me tuned all the time, despite the hard to understand parts of the plot.

2. This movie could be made a lot better if it was shorter. It drags too much on useless scenes, displaying scenarios and expressions in the faces of characters. Which leads to the third point.

3. The pace is too slow and makes the movie boring.

Overall, it's a a somewhat decent sequel to the first movie, but at the same time it just isn't as exciting and requires some effort to finish watching, not like the first movie, where the movies takes you along with interest from the first minute to the last.

Definitely, I 100% overrated.;0;1;False tt0071562;siontubungbanua;25/08/2020;Yeah;6;Good and nice.......................................;0;1;True tt0071562;lukecon-63436;15/08/2020;"Overrated gangster movie; good performances but aside from that...";6;"This sequel is not as great as the first. Sure the performances are very good, with great deliveries of dialogue and emotion (by Diane Keaton and Al Pacino; both give great performances). However, the story was too intricate and confusing at times. It was difficult to understand sometimes. The script could have been more engaging than I found it to be. Watch the original.";0;3;False tt0071562;yls-39525;22/06/2020;The Godfather: Part II;8;This film is good for photography, lighting and music. Other special plots are really ordinary. In fact, it's just a very common story in the tone of literature and art. There is no more profound description of the gangster system. At last, it turns into a family drama, which makes people blush.;0;1;False tt0071562;sublimineyes;13/06/2020;If only it hadn't had Coppola in charge, Part 2....;;"...there was potential for 8 or 9 stars. But it did.

As with Pt1, I can see and appreciate the subtleties of performance of, this time, De Niro and Pacino in individual scenes but I find the sense of time and place inferior to Pt1. and the production is thinner, less balanced. Back in Pt1. we had Pacino w/Brando or Pacino w/Caan (Caan was too lightweight but at least he was something weight). Here? Nothing. Duvall's character can't play those roles and I don't think would have been the right casting choice if they'd written the character to have nastiness. But the sort of replacement, Strasberg/Roth? No. Not doing it. The De Niro sections are better and De Niro's performance significantly better than Pacino's but he's let down by yet another lightweight supporting cast choice in Kirby. Overall, motivations behind changed attitudes of characters in the film seem even less well supported than they did in Pt1.

I also have 2 ""buts"" the same as with (and my review of) Pt1.

First, it all feels heavy, flattened, less textured, less alive than any top quality production should. I lay that firmly at the hand of Coppola, a director I find uniformly overrated.

Second, I think the material works much better in The Godfather Sage. ""I think"", because that is the way I first watched Pt1 and Pt2 and I thought highly of it at the time. I've seen the theatrical versions now twice since, years apart, first in a cinema, now at home, and neither time thought as highly of each. I wasn't in any hurry to watch either again (this second time) but I hadn't seen the restored version and had access so gave it a go as I never see the Godfather Saga. I also read several reviews which overall tended toward preferring the standalone cinema installments. So gave it a go.

Unlike most 7 star or above productions, I can confidently say I won't be watching The Godfather Pt.2 again. It was also insufficient enough for me to choose not to watch Pt.3, which surprised me.";0;1;True tt0071562;jamesprichard-86652;13/05/2020;Alfa Romeo 6C is too great to blow up;4;Why did Coppola blow up an Alfa 6C 2500 ? Sacrilege! Also, I would have liked it more if Sterling Hayden had rammed Al Pacino 's head up Loko Lava's ass, then repeat with De niro ,and james Caan ,and then the Consigliassho . as for Brando he was funnier in the freshman. For me , I get tired of all the actors acting ,same for Sopranos ,I just don't like the actors,except Sterling Hayden;0;2;False tt0071562;matiasquevedo-80973;03/05/2020;Cool;5;I liked it alot! But it wasn't my type of movie. I still want people to see it ! and the director did an amazing job!;0;1;False tt0071562;alonsoniembrorojas;28/04/2020;10 out of 10;10;Best movie ever made. Everything is perfect in this movie (cast, soundtrack, story...). I have not watched such a brilliant fil in my hole life.;0;1;False tt0071562;reiserdustin;22/04/2020;Say hello to my little friend!;9;Say hello to my little friend! What more is needed...;0;2;False tt0071562;chubarova;14/04/2020;Best sequel.;10;Sometimes sequels had worse quality than original film. But this is not that case. It's one of the best sequel ever. Firstly, the story told in interesting way, actually there are two stories in one film but it had common thing: way of standing as Godfather. I think that the lifeway of Vito is forced one, as for Michael's one - it was his one choice. Secondly, the cast is wonderful, Robert De Niro showed Vitp perfectly, sometimes he looks like Marlon Brando in young age. Of course, Al Pacino's work is great too, his face without any emotions is legendary. Finally, the soundtrack, that was created by Nino Rota, finished the atmosphere of film. So, it's one of the greatest sequel and film ever.;0;2;True tt0071562;reginaldwrighta;19/10/2019;dgdgf;10;I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.;0;1;False tt0071562;antmaesam;03/10/2019;Meh;6;Its a movie i enjoyed but i cant be good after watching The Godfather part 1 because it was to good.;0;3;False tt0071562;ConeyHOP;02/10/2019;Still a Classic;5;Still an all time classic that does not get dated despite the time period. Hard to watch at times. I skip the violence.;0;2;False tt0071562;castrabat;25/09/2019;Not Bad;4;A good film, but loved the first version of The God Father;0;5;False tt0071562;lizagur;29/08/2019;Herat;6;Good and great, very much for me. Thank you very much;0;2;True tt0071562;juliahoeffler-81951;22/06/2019;Its okay;4;The movie is okay the girst one was better i think;0;1;False tt0071562;mohit_sinsniwal;26/05/2019;Breathtaking in its scope and tragic grandeur...;7;"Coppola's masterpiece is rivaled only by ""The Godfather, Part II"" in which the 1940s setting of the first movie is extended backwards and forwards to reveal the corrupting effect of power...The film, breathtaking in its scope and tragic grandeur, shows two parallel stories extending two different time periods: the early career of young Vito Corleone seen first around the turn of the 20th century in Sicily, and then in 1917, building his criminal underworld in the Italian ghettos of New York City, post World War I, plus that of his son, Michael (Al Pacino) desperately trying to keep his family together...

Al Pacino's performance is quiet and solemn... He is cold and ruthless, with a whole contrast from the idealistic innocent war hero we initially met at the beginning of the first film... Here he's a calculating and frightening force, seeking to expand casinos into Pre-Revolutionary Cuba and consolidating an empire surrounded by perfidy and treason, maintaining total confidence in his ability to control the situation whether testifying before enraging Senators or trying to outface his worst enemies...

The film's haunting final shot of a lonely, isolated paranoid Michael in his empty compound, is an unforgettable movie scene, a tragic portrait of a lonely and fully damned person, emotionally empty and finished, far from a waspish wife, more distant from a faithful lawyer...

De Niro's rise, from an orphan child by a family feud back in Italy to a hood in New York and his position as a respected Don, provides a welcome break from Pacino's relentless attitude... Since the people he kills seem to deserve it, Vito comes off better than Michael does, and it was wise of Coppola to shuffle the two stories together despite lengthy flashbacks and the disturbance of continuity...

The entire cast contributes greatly to the success of the film: Lee Strasberg, a fascinating mixture of lust and ruthlessness; G. D. Spradlin, absolutely right as the sinister and corrupt Nevada Senator; Michael V. Gazzo, unforgettable as the troubled gray-haired informer; Gastone Moschin, excellent as the blackmailer in white suit; John Cazale, marvelously timid as the vague, confused, and hesitant Fredo; Diane Keaton, clearly irrational as the long-suffering wife Kay; Talia Shire, too extravagant as the lousy mother; Troy Donahue too ambitious as the fortune-hunting suitor; and Robert Duvall excels as the confidant, and retainer to the all-powerful Corleone family...

Coppola's motion picture is not just a mere supply with new characters and events from the original, it's a far more complex and intimate movie than its predecessor... It is not really a sequel... It's just more... It cleverly shifts in time between two distinct narratives with extreme realistic violence and criminal mentality of gangsters...";0;1;False tt0071562;tavm;01/05/2019;The Godfather: Part II is even better than its predecessor;10;Three years ago, I watched The first Godfather and while I enjoyed it, I didn't think of it as such a great film, partly citing the roles of Diane Keaton and Talia Shire. Here, they're both still being somewhat underused but Ms. Keaton has a great scene when she reveals what really happened to her upcoming baby and Ms. Shire has a nearly as such scene when she mentions Fredo near the end. Speaking of whom, John Cazale is fine in reprising the role as the weak Corleone brother. And Al Pacino was probably at his very best in this, his second feat at portraying Michael Corleone especially during scenes with his mentor Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth. Francis Ford Coppola is aces as both the co-writer (with creator Mario Puzo) and director as he handles scenes from both the late '50s concerning Michael and the early 20th century concerning his father Vito, here played in an Oscar-winning turn by Robert De Niro speaking mostly in Italian. So on that note, I highly recommend The Godfather: Part II.;0;3;False tt0071562;mcdyosa;23/04/2019;the fanatic love;8;This movie is very interesting to watch this is very nice visualization and have a nice plot of the story;0;1;True tt0071562;babacar-53145;06/04/2019;The original Godfather is a brilliant work.;6;The original Godfather is a brilliant work. It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time and Brando created a cultural icon whose influence resonates as strong today as it did in 1972.

As extraordinary an achievement as this is, Part II is even better. It easily receives my nod as the best picture ever made. I have seen it at least 20 times, and each time its 200 minutes fly by.

The movie uses flashbacks to brilliantly weave two tales. The main story is the reign of Michael Corleone as the world's most powerful criminal. Now reaping the benefits of legalized gambling in Las Vegas, Michael is an evident billionaire with an iron fist on a world of treachery.

Behind this, Director Francis Ford Coppola spins the tale of the rise of Michael's father, Vito, to the center of the New York mafia. It is these scenes that make the film a work of art. Without spoiling, I will simply say the Robert DeNiro as the young Vito is the best acting performance of all time, a role for which he won a richly deserved Oscar.;0;2;True tt0071562;thinbeach;05/02/2019;An offer you can refuse;5;If you are going to watch unlikeable characters do unlikeable things, they ought to at least have some charisma. In the original this was provided by Vito and Sonny, whose presence here is sorely missed. Exascerbating the issue is that Michael has no further character development, with his transition from innocent son to murderous mafia overloard already complete, and nothing new added. There is not even any thematic progression - it ends on the exact same note as the original - that this is a bad life to live.

The film attempts to make up for these shortcomings by increasing scope, and we travel all across the us, to Sicily and Cuba, looking for other crooked rich guys to murder - I mean - do business with. With flashbacks to the younger years of Vito Corleone, this film is really two films in one. The flashbacks do nothing to aid the modern story, nor seem very believable, but in location and character are far more interesting, and had the filmmakers focused their sole attention there, might have made a very good prequel. I do love the sets, costumes and colour - not unlike an old oil painting - but it feels truncated. They must have been looking everywhere for scenes to cut, given its run time.;0;3;True tt0071562;josh_lambert1991;26/01/2019;Al pachino leading the line;6;A good solid sequal to a great film. I do think losing marlon Brando does take away from this film but al pachino put in a brilliant performance;0;1;False tt0071562;Ahmed_Magdy96;06/01/2019;Great movie.. but;9;Alpacino is the one who really diserved the Oscar, not Robert Deniro;0;1;False tt0071562;ParisImpressionH-Y-;07/12/2018;The originator of the two-line narrative?;6;Although I don't know if this movie is the pioneer of the two-line narrative, at least, this technique must have been particularly fresh at the time. The film uses a lot of this technique and definitely adds a lot of points. Then... then nothing. In addition to being overused in the two-line narrative technique - to be honest, I have not seen the necessity of doing so. In fact, for this movie, the normal narrative will not be very different - there is no more bright spot , just is ordinary gangster movies.;0;3;False tt0071562;sadelephant;02/12/2018;same as the first movie;5;A must see nice change from the hour wedding in the first movie nice walk back in time;0;4;False tt0071562;sedergun;10/10/2018;it was ordinary or even worse than the current movie.;5;At that time, the rhythm of the movie was too far from the present, and the climax was not prominent. It seems to be outdated now. At that time, it was a good movie, but it was ordinary or even worse than the current movie.;0;5;False tt0071562;Thomas F. Yezerski;17/09/2018;"Tagline: ""In case you didn't get it the first time.""";7;But the 3 hours and 22 minutes is still worth it for Al Pacino, cinematography, and the final scene.;0;1;True tt0071562;edouardmalet;10/08/2018;The god father;9;"The Godfather (original title: The Godfather) is an American film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and produced by Paramount Studios, released on March 15, 1972.

This is an adaptation of Mario Puzo's eponymous novel. The story stretches from 1945 to 1955, and focuses on the rise of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), perceived as not being able to claim the succession of a ruthless mafia family, the family Corleone, dominated by his father, the patriarch Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando).

The Godfather is often considered one of the greatest films in world cinema1 and one of the most influential, especially in the genre of gangster films2. He is listed in the second place of the best American film by the American Film Institute (AFI) (behind Citizen Kane) 3. In 1990, the film was selected by the National Film Registry for preservation at the US Library of Congress for ""cultural, historical, or aesthetic";0;1;True tt0071562;klevent;28/05/2018;best;9;One of the best movies. i love de niro in this movie;0;1;False tt0071562;woodywoody-73916;28/04/2018;Fantastic;9;An oldy now, but a great film to watch. I must have seen this film 3 times now and just love it;0;1;False tt0071562;malikballard;17/03/2018;tyt;7;I dont care fgfuidvfd fd9fsiugfpp8 fdigfsodgf 8isgybio gigfyusg8ifogs iuf7gdgf d89fgig fds idgugfyu g;0;5;False tt0071562;iquine;31/01/2018;Pacino In The Thrown This Time;8;"(Flash Review)

If a duration of 2:55 wasn't enough meat for you in Part I, Part II clocks in at an immense 3:22. This films tells the story Michael Corleone's upbringing in Sicily and into the 1950's as a Don in New York and his ambition to expand the family business into Vegas, Florida and Cuba. Much of this film revolves around family relationships and how hard it is to keep trust with various family members as well as others in his...line of work. It additionally portrays that the more power, respect or control Michael strives for the more he actually loses what matters most; trying to be vague there. That is the 10,000ft overview. This movie flows in from Part I and smoothly matches the tone and atmosphere and brutal violent moments. The absence of Brando is noticeable but of course Pacino has the chops to carry you through. It is a true epic.";0;1;True tt0071562;carlos37andre;30/12/2017;It stills great, but Part I is better;9;The movie is basically perfect in almost all the elements. Acting (Al Pacino is once again destroying on the role, De Niro is also great, well, everybody are great here), Coppola's direction is fantastic. The movie itself is technically perfect.

But, for me, some things make the movie not better as the first one. The first was (for me) straight to the point, it have one thing, and it moves the plot all along. Well, this isn't a rule or something, the movie can make something diferent and also be great (and this movie is great), but, some things dont fit as much for me. The whole young Don plot, at the end, I didn't saw that much that make this whole part of the movie all that relevant. It doesn't show really how Vito grow up on the mafia thing, I don't know, the parts are good, the mix with some scene of the present are really great, but, at the end, if their aren't here, the movie will still works the same. Another thing is the story of the movie itself, seems like they shows somethings, but not much as they should show, seems like that goal was to show 20 years of his life, and this is it.

But dont get me wrong, the movie is fantastic, was the longest movie that I saw and I really was hopping for more at the end, doesn't look like it's more than 3 hours long, and this is fantastic.

In the end of the movie is great to look how diferent Mike has became from Vito, when in the last scenes we see him almost completely alone, he lost all his family, and he has not became a better Don that his ever was.

Well, in short, The Godfather - Part II is a amazing film, but, for me, the masterpiece is the first one.;0;1;True tt0071562;Wuchakk;20/09/2017;The ongoing story of Michael Corleone is mostly one-note drama while the story of young Vito is compelling;7;"RELEASED IN 1974 and directed by Francis Ford Coppola, ""The Godfather: Part II"" is part sequel and part flashback to the first film with the main story focusing on Michael (Al Pacino) in the late 50s as the stalwart Corleone son who has taken over as 'Godfather' with events taking place at Lake Tahoe, Miami, New York City, Havana (during the Cuban Revolution), and a congressional committee in Washington DC. The flashbacks concern Vito Corleone as a kid in Sicily and his arrival to Ellis Island with the story focusing on Vito's life in New York City when he was in his mid-to-late 20s (Robert De Niro) where he cleverly and boldly establishes himself as the formidable new Don.

MAIN CAST: Robert Duvall plays the adopted lawyer son, Tom, while John Cazale appears as the weakest Corleone son, Fredo. Diane Keaton returns as Michael's wife, who tries to put out of her mind her husband's shady business with Talia Shire reprising the role of Corleone sister, Connie.

The good news is that the flashbacks pertaining to Vito (De Niro) are good, starting with the shocking opening scenes. The saga of Michael (Pacino), by contrast, is relatively dull, particularly the first half, which mostly involves overlong scenes of talky drama. Michael's story simply lacks the energy and highlight-every-15-minutes of the prior film. Moreover, Pacino is thoroughly one-note solemn as Michael, lacking the character's interesting story arc in the first installment and the dimension of the third. I'm not blaming Pacino, as he simply played the role as written and does it well. I'm just saying that he's not a very captivating character, particularly compared to Brando or De Niro as Vito. He's just too one-dimensional and therefore uninteresting. Thankfully, things perk up in the second half culminating with an explosive showdown between Michael and Kay, which had to happen in light of the climatic scene of the previous movie.

The moral of the story rings loud and clear: Choosing the life of organized crime will result in a grim life of constant heartache and premature death all around you. Life's hard enough without taking that shady route.

Bottom line: This is a worthwhile crime drama with some highlights, but IMHO it's not in the same league as the first movie in overall entertainment. It's good for what it is, but it's overrated by people who can't see beyond nostalgia-tinged glasses. If you're a fan of the first film it's almost mandatory that you watch this one; just don't expect the same dynamic greatness. I know it's sacrilege to say this, but Part II is on par with Part III in tone and quality, although I personally give Part III the edge in all-around entertainment value.

THE FILM RUNS 3 hours & 22 minutes (overlong) and was shot in Sicily & Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Italy; the New York City area; Lake Tahoe, California; Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic; Acireale, Catania; Las Vegas; and Washington DC. WRITERS: Coppola & Mario Puzo.

GRADE: B";0;2;False tt0071562;maikeliu;31/08/2017;Shop Adidas Yeezy Boost Shoes;;"Running Shoe Fit Tips Foot size: Shoe lasts (which determine shoe sizes) vary by

manufacturer and even from one www.bootsshoppingonline.com shoes shoe model to another.

http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com.sale. You may need a half-size or even a full size

smaller or larger than you think. If you're unsure, have http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com

shoes your feet measured. http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com. Try on shoes at the end of

the day. Your feet normally swell a bit during the day's activities and

http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com will be at their largest then. This helps you avoid

buying that are too small. http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com. Aim for a thumbnail's length

of extra space in the toebox. The width should be snug but allow a bit of room for your

foot to move without rubbing. Laces should be snug but not tight. Barefoot shoes are an

exception: Heel and toes should ""fit like a glove""without any extra

http://www.bootsshoppingonline.com space in the toes.";0;1;True tt0071562;InnerConflict;17/07/2017;(Spoilersreview!) Sure it's great, but seriously? How snobby can a fan base be? (Spoilers);;The movie is great from a story perspective, it has great characters and acting, it's decent in execution but not perfect and it has a great score with a good length which adds sadly only to the mediocre pacing.

While everything is crafted well, some flaws still exist.

One being the child actors performance. His mother is shot in front of him and his facial expressions would make him seem like a facially catatonic schizophrenic. Not a single tear. Born psychopath? Despite him being portrayed as a person with heart for his loved ones, even if he has to go cliché godfather on Alfredo... Ludonarrative dissonance by accident. The prequel part is an average execution at best, with some really cheap text explaining what should have been shown instead of what they kept in it to drag unnecessary scenery and ambiance. A lot of deleted scene worthy material. You could cut time a big amount by not stretching so many moments unnecessarily and instead give me an actual reason to connect to Michael in his early years. The useless time jumping instead going proper with the development in a timeline, because it doesn't matter for understanding the story any way it's presented, so why not just cut to the chase and save the jumpery and just properly go from start to finish? Oh yeah, because people think it makes for some actual understanding of the actions in the present if you blend in the past. Sadly watching the past first and then the present would have had given 1 to 1 the same understanding to the viewer. Also the endless burials and festival scenes. Side character scenes where no one gives a crap 5 secs later, because the effect, the reason the next scene has to be fueled with, with the action of the prior, is not always reasonable to even been shot. Especially so many scenes in the time they show Vito raising Michael. Vito having no job wasn't the reason to become what he did, the reason to bring the streets don down in COMBINATION of needing to care for Michael is a solid reason which could have been boiled down to a more efficient scene. It's draggy and in the good moments. Michael's bodyguard trying to kill Hyman Roth, but he is failing as the regime soldiers march in at the wrong moment. Instead the director decides to shoot the scene so fast you don't know if Hyman AND the bodyguard are dead or just the bodyguard. Instead you anticipate the next scene where it's explained by Michael saying Hyman survived. And it's always happening like that. Not to mention, yes, this tries to be mature as possible but seriously. All the empty threats of striking at the right moment etc, and failing miserably with such cringe worthy scenes such as hyman's assassination... give me a break. Whenever the movie tried a climax, it either dragged it, broke it or failed at it, even if it's intentional, it's not satisfactory. What the movie was best at: good actors, with good dialogue, good acting and good presentation. What it failed at: pacing, climaxes, proper resolutions (best one actually was when it was an abortion and not a stillbirth) and often more than not, some clichés here and there with cringe worthy acting like with the character of Don Fanucci.;0;2;False tt0071562;Mr-Fusion;13/07/2017;Heavy is the crown;8;"The original ""Godfather"" ended with Kay literally being shut out of her husband's business (a deafening statement on her future). The same thing happens again in ""Part II"" but with devastating results. And that's emblematic of the movie as a whole; it marks every box on the sequel checklist (more this, bigger that) but in the context of a profoundly downbeat story. The brilliance of this film is the use of flashbacks to a young Vito Corleone (De Niro). It's contrasting his rise with Michael's fall and moral decay, tracking the various bombshells in each man's life (the hits on Fanucci and Ciccio, an abortion, 'You broke my heart, Fredo.""). It's ideal for showing just how badly Michael is operating under the strain of power. The paranoia is palpable.

""The Godfather: Part II"" is always the movie that's cited when discussing superior sequels. I don't know that I'd go that far, but I think it's a fantastic movie regardless, and certainly warrants any claims to greatness. If anything, it lacks the original's tight and near-perfect packaging, but makes up for that in undeniable ambition. Both are exceptional, but for different reasons.

8/10";0;1;True tt0071562;AdrianoExposito;12/07/2017;Perfect;9;For me one of the best films in the history of cinema. The best Part, next to the first, of this great trilogy that has made history Of the cinema and where Al Pacino shines even more than in the previous one. Perfectly told with both stories and with a Rober De Niro in his Salsa and shining in each sequence. I give it a 10 and I encourage you to Enjoy this great trilogy.;0;1;False tt0071562;miguelneto-74936;25/06/2017;A continuation that maintained the quality of the first.;8;The Godfather: Part II is the continuation of The Godfather, which would continue the story of Michael Corleone, we see in the film a Robert de Niro new at the beginning of his career still, with a great performance, photography is still very good, the soundtrack is The Godfather: Part II of the first level, but unfortunately the Godfather trilogy. The Godfather: Part II of the first level, but unfortunately the Godfather trilogy. I've never been so surprised, I still think of films like Topfaces and Scarface, but it's only a matter of opinion, since The Godfather: Part II is a very award-winning film and acclaimed by the public and criticizes, and its quality is really great, and will always be a reference to Future films. Note 8.7;0;1;False tt0071562;CinematicInceptions;22/06/2017;A disappointing continuation.;7;"Perhaps I just didn't pay enough attention while watching this second installment, but I though there was a lot lacking in this movie compared to the first Godfather. There were some good scenes and a few great lines, but as a whole there was not a lot contained in this story.

I liked the flashback at the end that showed how Michael has isolated himself from the rest of the family; it was a fitting cap to the events leading up to it. But otherwise I thought the story lacked direction. I got that Hyman Roth was an enemy, but the nature of his relationship with Michael and the Corleone empire was unclear to me. The plot as a whole for Michael's story line was just too hard to follow, and maybe that's because I just didn't do a good job watching it, but I paid pretty close attention the whole time and it still lost me at several points.

Vito's story line was more interesting to watch, and I actually would have preferred if the whole movie had centered on his rise to power in New York. DeNiro was well cast as the young Vito, though I don't know that he deserved an Oscar for his performance. I'm not sure if there was supposed to be a parallel between Michael's and Vito's stories, but if there was I couldn't see it. As seen in the first movie, Michael cares about keeping the family together in a very different way than Vito did, but I didn't see a lot of that here.

Overall though, it moved pretty slow and wasn't great to watch. Going back and reading the quotes page, there were scenes, lines, and characters that I had no memory of. There was just a different feel created between this and the first movie, which I did not like. Obviously a lot of people did because it's almost as highly touted as the original, but the characters just didn't seem as smart in this one. People like Fredo, Pentangeli, and even Hyman Roth brought the IQ down even for the more clever and ruthless characters like Michael and Tom Hagen.

It's not bad, it was just disappointing and makes me not want to see Part III. If you haven't seen this yet, I would think of this like a knock-off TV show to the original Godfather. It's the same world and has a lot of the same elements, but the two are loosely connected to the point that this second installment feels almost like a reboot that came out 20 years later as a sort of tribute to the original. Overall Rating: 7.2/10.";0;2;True tt0071562;RossRivero99;12/04/2017;A masterful crime movie;10;"Even though ""The Godfather: Part II"" isn't as good as the first ""Godfather movie it is still one of the best mo movies ever made and is probably one of the best movie sequels ever done in all of movie history. The movie shifts back between the present day in the past but in the present the movie picks up where the first movie left off with Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) in charge of the Corleone crime family while still having his family members along with him, his step brother Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), his older brother Fredo (John Cazale), as well as his younger sister Connie (Talia Shire). Also a new change was that he is married to his girlfriend Kay (Diane Keaton) and had two children. Unlike most directors who have directed mob movies in the past Coppola shows a different side to the people in the mob than others like Michael Curtiz or Martin Scorsese who have also directed masterful mob movies, but the only difference is that Coppola shows a more dramatic side as well as Curtiz, but Scorsese shows a much grittier and evil side. The flashbacks in the movie talk about the early life and the immigration to America of none other than Michael's father Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro, whose dialogue is all Italian.) This movie isn't like any other sequel in any other franchise that I've ever seen because most franchises are for action/adventure type movies, but The Godfather series is the only popular crime franchise. However like the first Godfather movie this one is nearly as flawless as this one with a great story, great cast, excellent and very effective dialogue co-written by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo (who also wrote the novel), as well as excellent performances throughout. In this review i'll try not to spoil anything but some of the most effective scenes in the movie are where Kay divorces Michael, Vito exacts his revenge on the man who did his family harm, and where Michael doesn't love Fredo anymore. This was a great movie and it makes me much more eager to see part 3. Even though there were other great films in 1974 such as Roman Polanski's ""Chinatown"", and ""The Conversation"" which Coppola also directed, but this one tops them all. In other words, this is the best movie of 1974.";0;1;True tt0071562;mitsubishiwarrior;04/04/2017;A grounded yet impactful piece of art.;9;Part II of The Godfather Trilogy banks lavishly on inherent yet subtle tension - a maneuvering sense of distrust and deceit envelops each frame, compromising for the lack of numbing action that was laden throughout the first installment of the trilogy. Michael Corleone, helmed impeccably by Al Pacino, now has a face creased by a mask of implacable hatred – his character arc now much more refined and polished as Francis Ford Coppola explores his newly formed salivation for power.

Once again, Coppola encompasses the sizzling world of Italian Mafia perfectly, but now with much more stunning narrative flourish as the audience delves deeper into the roots of the Corleone family. The transitions into Vito's early life are sublimely entertaining and masterfully executed, especially the opening scene of Vito's mother's death which immaculately sets the tone for a controlled and layered film. Not only this, but the explicitly violent vengeance by Vito towards the end of the film is directorial genius as Coppola presents a complete, impactful and invigorating tale of Vito in the most astute form imaginable.

However, it would be wrong not to mention the contrast in exhilaration between the subplots of Vito compared to Michael, with Al Pacino's story arc being far less entertaining or interesting (although it does have its fair share of enthrallment, including his tantalizing riff with Fredo). The absence of defining action or hard-hitting set pieces in the third act of Part II, with Coppola refraining from grandeur, and focusing more on the characters, is what sets the film apart from perfection, but it would be criminal to deny the brilliance of this film;0;1;True tt0071562;Ronniejbaroi;24/03/2017;Except time taken the movies does great;10;Takes a long time for story build up and character development. However, it is nonetheless an inspiration for criminal gangster movies and people always look up to this movie for its flawless portrayal of USA and criminal family trade. The ascendancy to power is beautifully depicted. Then comes the transfer of power. In gangs, it was always about respect and even at his worst, The Godfather was defended;0;1;True tt0071562;nishant_chaudhary;09/03/2017;Nice Movie;9;"He has come so far from the idealistic young man in ""GODFATHER I, who joined the Marines in World War I to serve his country and die for it if necessary, to a lonely, paranoid tragic man. There are many poignant scenes concerning his wife and children-- the drawing his son leaves for him in his bedroom, the gift that Tom buys the child because Michael is too busy, his wife Kay's being kept a virtual prisoner at his orders in the family compound, etc.";0;1;False tt0071562;CosminAgafitei;02/03/2017;More impressive then first movie;10;Personally, i can't name this a sequel, because it's very good this way almost without the first part. Al Pacino is very great in this role and i think this guy sets some standards in the industry and many actors have learned from his acting role. FF Coppola is a genius, made a great job with this film too, and the fact that this part alongside with the first are in top 10 IMDb is a recognition from the viewers. You can't see the first and not to watch this movie too. Enjoy!;0;1;False tt0071562;vincejtrenton;26/02/2017;Greatest part of all time!;10;The godfather 2 is my opinion the best part of all! Not only because of the playing film length, but also because of the great performance of the actors. This part carries more weight in the narrative compared to the others. Coppola has created a masterpiece of timeless, exciting, interesting and truly one of the best films in film history. I gave the film a rating of 10 stars and that is more than deserved.;0;1;False tt0071562;sivalur;09/01/2017;Good;10;You live only for me I stick medals into your face You are entirely devoted to me You love me because I don't love you

You bleed for my salvation A little cut and you're turned on The body already completely disfigured It doesn't matter, whatever pleases is allowed

I hurt you I'm not sorry It's good for you Hear how it screams

With you I have the choice of torment Barbed wire in the urethral tract Throw your flesh in salt and pus At first you die, but then you live more

Bites, kicks, hard blows Needles, pliers, a blunt saw What you wish, I don't say no And insert rodents into you

I hurt you I'm not sorry It's good for you Hear how it screams

You are the ship, I'm the captain Where should this journey go? I see your face in the mirror;0;1;True tt0071562;marianajb;28/11/2016;The best movie I'll ever see.;10;"I am not lying when I say this is the best movie ever seen. Just as the other movie, everything is excellent, a piece of art; the directing, the acting, the screenplay, the soundtrack, the production, the costume design, the script, the film editing, etc. But, what makes this movie different from the other one? that made me like this one even more.. Simple, that beautiful constant flashback; of when it all started, of how Vito achieve that much power to have the last name Corleone so popular along anyone who is involved in the mafia; and then it takes you back to the present, with Al Pacino's awesome performance of Michael as the new Godfather; that incredible screenplay was what catch me, it made me fall in love with this movie. A classic that is worth watching every minute of it, because each single part of this movie is excellent.";0;1;True tt0071562;cosmin_paul_18;25/11/2016;nice movie;10;All of this makes the movie great and infinitely watchable. But it's what's deeper inside this film ... what it is really about ... that is its true genius.

The Godfather Part II is not really a movie about the mafia, it is a movie about a man's life long struggle. Michael controls a vast empire that is constantly slipping out of his hands. He grows increasingly distrustful and paranoid, and even shows signs that he hates his own life. Michael almost seems to resent the fact that he is a natural born crime lord, a man who puts the family business ahead of everything.

The great Don Michael Corleone can never come to terms with one simple fact.... his father's empire was built on love and respect, Michael's empire is built on fear and violent treachery.

See this movie. It's three-and-a-half hours very well spent.;0;1;False tt0071562;MaxHaydon1994;17/11/2016;Greatest sequel of all time;10;With the perfection of the first Godfather film it would seem impossible that the sequel could match up. But such is the genius of Francis Ford Coppolla that it is considered by many as the greatest sequel of all time and many of those same people even consider it to be better than the first.

I for one do not agree, at least not about it being better then the original, however I find it difficult to dispute the claim that it's the best sequel of all time. The impossible job of proceeding Marlon Brando as the Godfather fell on the shoulders of Robert De Niro. He later went on to win best supporting actor, proving the impossible to be quite possible for someone of De Niro's talents. Brando and De Niro became the first actors to win Oscars for performances of the same character. De Niro's performance as a young Vito Corleone was the highlight of the sequel and it was genius from Copolla to move the story backwards as a pose to moving in a linear fashion.

Another masterstroke from Copolla was the rise of Michael who becomes the Don of the family. We see Michael become a man and bypass all his brothers straight to the top of the family. It's almost a romantic twist in an otherwise pretty gritty and dark story.

I would put the first and second Godfather films right up there with the best of all time, perhaps even in first and second place. You simply can't call yourself a film buff and not watch these films. 10/10;0;1;True tt0071562;sarmedbutcher;29/10/2016;Nice to watch;9;This movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other . IT is both a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and moral decline of Micheal . Both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino . To say that these two are good actors is like saying that a nuclear bomb makes a loud noise and in this movie they prove why they are at the top of their respective crafts .

Al Pacino is the standout in the ensemble cast and its amazing how his eyes have changed from the first part . They are now cold , ruthless and unemotional and betray the price which Micheal Corleone has paid for power .

Watch this movie and learn why it is the greatest gangster film of all time.;0;1;False tt0071562;idody15;25/09/2016;one of the best movies ever made;10;i liked it better then part 1 Because of one scene the one when Kate tells Michael she had an abortion and not a miscarriage i could fell his pain his ture pain it was one of the most strongest feeling i have ever had and this is why it is my favorite scene of all time and one of my favorite films and it deserves even better then just 10 this movie was so head of its time and so perfect thet films still didn't catch up on its level this movie is a 12. i love how the movie contrasts between Vito Kolrion and his grandson. Robert De Niro nailed Vito early ages as good as brano nailed Vito the godfather. this movie is a must watch for any one alive and i will call it one of the greatest piece of art in the 20th century;0;1;True tt0071562;joeubrown;19/09/2016;Greatest Movie of all Time;10;Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather II starring Al Pacino is a movie that I would argue is a perfect movie. I do not think it has any mistakes. And, if one claimed they are going to try to find a mistake, I would doubt that you would. The movie makes you feel like what it would be like to be in the Mafia, and it fully grasps how horrible that would be. The movie is very realistic, and what I mean by that is that it is not a movie where one knows that the protagonist is going to win before the movie begins. The movie takes you on a journey of culture, and makes one very glad that they are not living in this type of world of betrayal and deception.;0;1;False tt0071562;sosoelsabti;09/07/2016;very Nice;10;The film beautiful and wonderful and worth seeing already, actors are great and as especially fuel godfather and Mr. Scar Face and thanks to all representatives who Mthelo crew and directing and publishing to you and I hope everyone watching the movie because he is really great and stronger than wonderful and thank you for all and I hope one day beautiful for everyone and I loved very film and I hope movie playback because Bale I hope to see him again because he Atges for the Mafia and is very large and I lover like Mr. Scar Face and I am grateful to each crew with him and thank them for what Amilo both worked hard on the success of the film and the most and the most prevalent in the Arab world and Majabin The film 'The Godfather' Thank you for all and I wish you health and wellness for each GOOD Bay;0;1;True tt0071562;liamrobson;01/07/2016;A Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy;10;As one Corleone rises, another falls. A tale of two men, told masterfully by Francis Ford Coppola, Al Pacino and Robert De Niro. The Godfather Part II is a darker, more sprawling and perhaps subtler beast than its predecessor. Fewer classic scenes but a ton more character development. You can almost see the fragile psychological mechanics of each character ticking away throughout the film. Al Pacino projects the demise of Michael's soul as if he is personally conjuring the storm cloud that follows his character in every scene. In contrast, De Niro shows Vito climbing the ladder of crime with scene-stealing power, control and charisma. Vito is at peace with himself and with his family. And that's all this film really is at the end. A story about family. Where Vito's family comes together in the cauldron of old Italian America, Michael's shatters into a million pieces. Having these two stories running parallel to one another is a masterstroke because Vito's story of new beginnings and hope for his family gives Michael's descent into cold, lonely crime lord even more tragic. The end scene in the Corleone family dining room where Michael announces that he is joining the marines and Fredo is the only person to give him support is one of the most heartbreaking scenes in cinema.;0;2;True tt0071562;grantss;28/05/2016;Great follow-up to one of the greatest movies ever made;9;The continuation of the Godfather saga with two focuses: the ongoing story of the Corleone family, and Michael in particular, and Vito Corleone's (Michael's father) backstory. Regarding the ongoing Michael Corleone story, it is about seven years since the events that concluded The Godfather. With the murders of the heads of the other four New York / New Jersey families, the Corleone family has unassailable control in New York. The move to Nevada went smoothly and Michael Corleone controls several hotels and casinos in the state. Frank Pentageli, the man who runs Michael's interests in New York, comes to Michael, asking if he can take out the Rosato Brothers as they are infringing on Pentageli's turf and business interests. However, the Rosatos are backed by Hyman Roth, a business partner of Michael's and a long- time ally of Michael's father, Vito Corleone, and Michael refuses. An attempted assassination attempt is then carried out on Michael's life, in his own home. Michael investigates who is trying to kill him, and suspects that there is a traitor in his family. Meanwhile. Michael and Hyman Roth fly to Cuba to finalise some business deals there. The Cuban trip reveals all. In a story interwoven with the present day, we see the backstory to Vito Corleone. From how his parents and brother were murdered by a Don in their home town of Corleone in Sicily, to his escaping, as a boy, to New York, his adult life and his rise to Don Corleone.

A great follow-up to one of the greatest movies ever made. Gritty, solid plot, superb direction by Francis Ford Coppola and excellent performances. The closing scenes are incredibly powerful, showing just how much Michael has changed from the innocent man we met at the start of the first movie.

Six Oscar wins, including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay. Robert De Niro won a Best Supporting Actor for his performance as Vito Corleone, making two Oscar wins for two different actors playing the same character (Marlon Brando got a Best Actor Oscar for his performance in the first Godfather). Al Pacino, Michael V Gazzo, Lee Strasburg (of method acting fame) and Talia Shire also received acting Oscar nominations.

Not quite in the same league as the first movie though. The first one had a much tighter plot and better pacing: this does feel a bit padded and slow at times. Not as enthralling and tension-filled as the first. Then again, we are comparing this movie to one of the greatest films of all time...;0;1;True tt0071562;borinamadeuss;11/05/2016;Very Recommended;9;"Michael Corleone (Pacino), his face now a creased mask of implacable hatred, has exacted vengeance on all his enemies – and then we suddenly cut back 20 years to the fresh-faced young Joe College, still capable of a boyish grin, startling his brothers over the dinner table by announcing he's joined the army, and stoutly defending his patriotism. It's a stunning narrative flourish: mysterious and moving.

The Godfather films have, with some reason, been accused of glamorizing the bullies of organized crime and indeed for being a how-to-behave manual for generations of wannabe wiseguys. But what power, even grandeur there is in these films: a top-down history of political intrigue.

It is commonplace to call Godfather 2 ""Shakespearean""; I find myself remembering the BBC's I, Claudius. After Vito's death, young Michael Corleone is susceptible to a new quasi-father figure, aging Florida boss Hyman Roth, played with quiet style and potency by Lee Strasberg. Michael is persuaded to test family loyalties by expanding his empire with Roth into Cuba: together they will typify the corruption that brought Fidel Castro into being. The action flashes back and forth with the life and career of young Vito Corleone, played by rail-thin Robert De Niro, in 1920s New York. Vito shows his instinctive grasp of how to combine strategic violence with operatic displays of sentimentality and generosity. As a teenager, he first sees how some ganging-up is needed against the florid local Don, who threatens the theater-owner's daughter. (When I was in Sicily, a guide told me the word ""mafia"" was derived from the phrase ""non tocca ma figlia"", ""don't touch my daughter"" – an interesting explanation that I have yet to see confirmed.)

Robert Duvall is brilliant as put-upon consigliere Tom, and Diane Keaton is memorable as Michael's outsider wife Kay, the sole unhappy voice of sanity and modernity";0;2;True tt0071562;jameslinton-75252;10/05/2016;Brilliant film in its own right, but inferior to its predecessor;9;The Godfather Part II is a great film, but definitely not as good as its predecessor. I think it is paced a little more unevenly than the first part. I found that the courtroom scenes were a little dull at times. However, in other places, it was just as good as the original. Although compared to the novel, Fredo Corleone is portrayed as unfairly stupid, I still loved his character. He is just so tragic. All he wants is respect. I also loved the flashback scenes, as I felt that they had a great authenticity to them. De Niro was great as a young Vito Corleone. He was cool and calm, but also a little charismatic and cheeky as well.

Read my full review here: http://goo.gl/oVlpH0;0;1;False tt0071562;sam_smithreview;28/04/2016;Al Pacino vs Robert DeNiro the film that show cases two legendary performance;10;One of my most favorite films ever. Al Pacino on one side and Robert DeNiro on the other, both put on performance of a life time. Seeing the two playing different and yet the same roles. DeNiro steals the show and wins the Academy Awards for best supporting Actor. I couldn't believe that Al Pacino was once again, snubbed for his amazing performance. The original Godfather is a brilliant work. It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time and Brando created a cultural icon whose influence resonates as strong today as it did in 1972.

As extraordinary an achievement as this is, Part II is even better. It easily receives my nod as the best picture ever made. I have seen it at least 20 times, and each time its 200 minutes fly by, and you realize how badly you miss great movies like this from today's Hunger games, Superman and other fast and furious type of films.;0;1;False tt0071562;claudiafunk;15/04/2016;Greatest movies;9;I must say this is a movie all should watch. One of the greatest movies of all time. I can watch this movie over and over. Al Pacino really makes you feel terrified of this lifestyle. I was truly impressed with every action in the movie. After watching the first movie, this made me want to watch all. Watching it time and time again made me fall in love more. I feel really bad for the family. Life could look so great at first until there is realize danger. It has a lot of suspense build up until the end of the movie. I think this movie portrayed that well.I will give this a 9 for this reason. anyone who hasn't seen all movies should go see them.;0;1;False tt0071562;filipemanuelneto;12/04/2016;Maybe one of the best sequels in history of cinema;9;"This film follows the movie ""The Godfather"" and continues the story of the Corleone family, now headed by Michael after the death of Vito. In this film, the audience is confronted with two realities: the rise of the family during Vito's adolescence, and the psychological contradictions of Michael, who want to get out of illegality, but needs it to prevent rival families to put at risk the safety of his family. From Nevada to Cuba, the illegal investment of the Corleone's will bring them a new golden age?

Like the previous film, it was directed by Francis Ford Coppola, based on the novels of Mario Puzo, who collaborated on the script. The cast kept most of the actors from the previous film but introduces new characters as well. The soundtrack continued in the experienced hands of Nino Rota. It won six Oscars in 1974 (best film, best supporting actor, best director, best adapted screenplay, best art direction and best soundtrack).

After the resounding success of ""The Godfather"", any sequel was condemned to fail but, on the contrary, this film has managed to maintain it's level high and the same popularity, which is a rarity when we talk about sequels. I cannot make big negative reviews except, perhaps, the very long duration of the film. Al Pacino had probably one of the greatest performances of his life as actor. Irreproachable, he incorporated Michael with an almost petrifying naturalness. The same can be said of Robert De Niro that, with his performance, opened the way for other important works of his career like ""Goodfellas."" Robert Duvall also had here one his most outstanding works. Those who like action scenes may not like this movie. Its a quieter film, where the deaths are violent but made with almost surgical precision. The Mafia does not kill at random. Tense from start to finish, it has a powerful suspense that holds the audience, but the complexity of the script, full of twists, can confuse the most inattentive, so pay attention.";0;1;False tt0071562;josephtotah;05/04/2016;Great Film;10;"Taking a best-selling novel of more drive than genius (Mario Puzo's The Godfather), about a subject of something less than common experience (the Mafia), involving an isolated portion of one very particular ethnic group (first-generation and second-generation Italian-Americans), Francis Ford Coppola has made one of the most brutal and moving chronicles of American life ever designed within the limits of popular entertainment.

The Godfather, which opened at five theaters here yesterday, is a superb Hollywood movie that was photographed mostly in New York (with locations in Las Vegas, Sicily, and Hollywood). It's the gangster melodrama come of age, truly sorrowful and truly exciting, without the false piety of the films that flourished forty years ago, scaring the delighted hell out of us while cautioning that crime doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't) pay.

It still doesn't, but the punishments suffered by the members of the Corleone Family aren't limited to sudden ambushes on street corners or to the more elaborately choreographed assassinations on thruways. They also include lifelong sentences of ostracism in terrible, bourgeois confinement, of money and power, but of not much more glory than can be obtained by the ability to purchase expensive bedroom suites, the kind that include everything from the rug on the floor to the pictures on the wall with, perhaps, a horrible satin bedspread thrown in.

Yet The Godfather is not quite that simple. It was Mr. Puzo's point, which has been made somehow more ambiguous and more interesting in the film, that the experience of the Corleone Family, as particular as it is, may be the mid-twentieth-century equivalent of the oil and lumber and railroad barons of nineteenth-century America. In the course of the ten years of intra-Mafia gang wars (1945-1955) dramatized by the film, the Corleones are, in fact, inching toward social and financial respectability.

For the Corleones, the land of opportunity is America the Ugly, in which almost everyone who is not Sicilian or, more narrowly, not a Corleone, is a potential enemy. Mr. Coppola captures this feeling of remoteness through the physical look of place and period, and through the narrative's point of view. The Godfather seems to take place entirely inside a huge, smoky, plastic dome, through which the Corleones see our real world only dimly.

Thus, at the crucial meeting of Mafia families, when the decision is made to take over the hard drug market, one old don argues in favor, saying he would keep the trade confined to blacks —""they are animals anyway.""

This is all the more terrifying because, within their isolation, there is such a sense of love and honor, no matter how bizarre.

The film is affecting for many reasons, including the return of Marlon Brando, who has been away only in spirit, as Don Vito Corleone, the magnificent, shrewd old Corleone patriarch. It's not a large role, but he is the key to the film, and to the contributions of all of the other performers, so many actors that it is impossible to give everyone his due.

Some, however, must be cited, especially Al Pacino, as the college-educated son who takes over the family business and becomes, in the process, an actor worthy to have Brando as his father; as well as James Caan, Richard Castellano, Robert Duvall, Al Lettieri, Abe Vigoda, Gianni Russo, Al Martino, and Morgana King. Mr. Coppola has not denied the characters' Italian heritage (as can be gathered by a quick reading of the cast), and by emphasizing it, he has made a movie that transcends its immediate milieu and genre.

The Godfather plays havoc with the emotions as the sweet things of life—marriages, baptisms, family feasts—become an inextricable part of the background for explicitly depicted murders by shotgun, garrote, machine gun, and booby-trapped automobile. The film is about an empire run from a dark, suburban Tudor palace where people, in siege, eat out of cardboard containers while babies cry and get underfoot. It is also more than a little disturbing to realize that characters, who are so moving one minute, are likely, in the next scene, to be blowing out the brains of a competitor over a white tablecloth. It's nothing personal, just their way of doing business as usual.

THE GODFATHER (MOVIE)

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola; written by Mario Puzo and Mr. Coppola, based on the novel by Mr. Puzo; director of photography, Gordon Willis; edited by William Reynolds, Peter Zinner, Marc Laub, and Murray Solomon; music by Nino Rota; production designer, Dean Tavoularis; produced by Albert S. Ruddy; released by Paramount Pictures. Running time: 175 minutes.";0;1;True tt0071562;dina_elzoka96;28/03/2016;Just because it has the same name doesn't mean it's the same character;8;"Micheal Corleone doesn't exactly follow his father's lead, with all the blood shed and shutting people out, we all know Vito Corleone wouldn't handle it that way. Power changes Micheal to someone who isn't afraid to lose anything but family business, Vito Corleone had real influence he puts his family first he played it so well so the family stays as strong as a Roman Empire, but Micheal only controls this with guns, blood and being suspicious and paranoid and this can't hang long! You can see how he changed, in Godfather 1 he looked so pure with a warm heart, a war hero whose father kept him from all the dirt so he can be a senator or a governor with an upper hand, but here his eyes just look empty scary and his face has only one firm impression that doesn't change the whole movie, like how he was so nervous and terrified to kill Mccluskey and Sollozzo but now he's able to pull the trigger in a blink of an eye, Al Pacino definitely done a wonderful job so you can notice that these can't be the same character just because it has the same name! now for Robert De Niro performance that was remarkable! the young Don Vito Corleone couldn't be played better how he speaks, sits and puts his hand on his cheek when he's listening carefully and that ""I'm going to make him an offer he can not refuse"" line it's all just perfect he really earned that Oscar. Connie and Fredo play an important role there too with of course Robert Duvall it all fits. the most thing I loved is how the flashbacks blend with the scenes of the movie and it's not disturbing or distracting you! now I know why this is a movie that people can't forget for more than 40 years.";0;1;False tt0071562;mm-39;23/03/2016;A true movie classic!;9;"A true movie classic. Francis Ford Coppola unfolds two story lines past and present with graceful transitions. The beauty and symmetry of the lighting, sets, mixes with the symbolisms of the Catholic church, America, and family was directed brilliantly. The statue of liberty scene is a classic. Pacino, De Niro, and the rest of the cast creates a film energy which is captive for the audience. Pacino's mod boss role shines with strength, dishonesty, and cleverness. The ""senator we are all part of the same hypocrisy"" resonates what the film is about. De Niro aka Vito brilliants acts out a story of a man pushed into crime who is a ruthless killer, and also plays with his children. De Niro's dualism creates ironic realism of the Vito character. The Godfather Part two sub stories of betrayal, honor, dishonor, corruption, and the damage of the characters' sin is a story which leaves an impact. A long movie, with painful scenes, but worth an Academy award.";0;1;True tt0071562;ajz1881;07/03/2016;The best of all the Godfather films;9;While the Godfather part one was truly a classic and epic, this sequel is the film which sold me on the Godfather films. In fact I believe this is one of the few movie sequels in history which provided that a sequel can actually be better then the original/first part. Without spoiling anything, when Michael says the infamous line to Fredo at the party it made this film the best in my eyes. The acting and story are both superb as well. This was the era when both Pacino and DeNiro were at their best and at their peaks. Nowadays these two sell out for the top dollar, unfortunately, however in the 70's-early 90's they were always bringing the A game and this film is one of the proofs of this.;0;1;False tt0071562;okyanusghoroz;29/01/2016;nice;10;"When I first heard of ""American History X,"" I thought it was going to be ""just another movie."" Man, was I wrong! The first time I watched it, I sat there as it ended, and I was just completely in a state of shock. This movie, more than any other movie I had seen on the subject of racism, really made me think twice about how I treated people of a different race. The way that Derek Vinyard's family was almost completely split apart and destroyed due to his racist beliefs should be a wake-up call to those people who have any racist beliefs whatsoever. I believe that this movie was a whole lot more than just a ground-breaking, controversial drama; it was a portrayal of exactly how much damage can be done to a family and a nation simply because of the hate for a person or people of a different color, for almost no reason at all. The Bible says that ""God created man in his own image."" It also says to, ""Love your neighbor as yourself,"" which, right there, implies that racism is not something people should even consider. I wouldn't recommend that anyone under the age of 16 see this movie due to its graphic content and language; however, I believe that everyone who is over the age of 16, should see this movie at least once.";0;2;True tt0071562;joeybweiss;02/01/2016;A Strong Sequel;9;"The Godfather Part II both continues the story of the first by following Michael, and makes flashbacks to the life of Vito Corleone, showing how he became the Godfather. In the movie Michael is trying to make his family strong, while trying to kill off his enemies. When in attempt is made on Michael's life he tries to root out the traitor in his family, who turn out to be his older, but less capable brother Fredo. The story is well done; Michael tries to hold his family together, and in doing so, resorts to violence. This dynamic is especially present when Micheal is eliminating all his enemies, and in doing so, decides to kill Fredo. The story has intrigue, drama, and violence which makes the movie both intriguing, yet questionable as it portrays the distinct morality of the Corleone family. Al Pacino continues to be a be an exceptional actor; he has the perfect mix of paranoia and fury when faced with certain situations. He asks friends and family questions to test their loyalty, and is shaken when he discovers that his child was aborted. The flashbacks of Vito are a good method to compare Micheal and his father, who he tried to be like. Robert De Niro is also a great actor, capturing the mannerisms that Marlon Brando had in his role as Vito. Though the flashbacks provide an interesting look into the Corleone family, they do take away from the focus of Micheal's story. All-in-all the film is a impressive and fitting sequel to the first movie.";0;2;True tt0071562;onnomanzo;28/12/2015;The Godfather II is the best;9;I know that the first Godfather had Marlon Brando and everything.. But, the second just always seemed to be better to me. The writing, the events, everything that transpires in the movie makes me want to watch. Everything even evolving Kate who sometimes I didn't even need to watch. Michael Corleone gets a much bigger role in this film and steps up more as Don Corleone. He's much more relaxed into the title and therefore demanding and firm. It makes me sad he didn't get an Oscar for it. At the end of the day, this movie was the best out of all of them. I liked the first, the third was pretty bad compared to the first and second. But, second all the way.

If you haven't seen this movie. Which, if you haven't what the... but, believe me people haven't.. The summary should of been 'watch this movie now'.;0;2;True tt0071562;lovesolutiontemple;17/12/2015;Am Gabriel Claude from United State;;Am Gabriel Claude from United State, I really appreciate what dr uduga has done in my life by bringing back my girlfriend to me after all we pass through i was not having it on my mind that my girlfriend will come back to me again because of the situation and little misunderstanding we had, so i was thinking of what to do cause i was very confuse, and i was broke, and also my girlfriend left, so one day i was checking something on internet when i met a comment of testimony on the site how a great man called Uduga help her and solve all her problem, it amazing and i was thinking if this is real, i contacted woman who posted it and i ask her about the man so she told me everything about the great man, that the man is very powerful and also he is a generous person, so i said let me give a try, really i contacted the great man and i told him everything that happened, he just laughed and told me not to worry anymore, and he did everything i told him to do for me, so after two day later i saw Vivian my girlfriend coming in front of me crying and begging me to forgive her that she will live me again, so i was very exacted we are now together and we are going to celebrate the Christmas and New year together in California, i said now, i believe that everybody are not the same this man called uduga is really powerful, thank you very much sir, if you need his contact, call his cell number +2348073688823 contact him through his email. udugatempleofsolution@gmail.com;0;1;True tt0071562;nima_j72;16/11/2015;One of the best films of my life;10;"Still after more than 40 years from making the Goffather it is one of the best films i've ever seen in my life!

Very good actors and attractive scenes that every time convince me to see the whole movie.

The film shows the mafia families very good and the actors in this film are so real that you believe the whole story.

My favorite character in this movie is Michael. What I really like in this film is that the personality of Michael changes, although his father did not wanted it and he had tried his bests to prevent his son to go the same way he did.

The dialogs of this film are also very well known, I had heard many of them before I saw the movie !

I give each actor in this film 10 points; also each scene of this film. I give the whole movie 10 points and if I could give more than 10 points, I would certainly have done it !!";0;2;True tt0071562;Manya086;06/11/2015;A Sequel and Prequel in One;9;"THE GODFATHER: PART II is one of the best sequels I have seen. PART II is like a sequel AND prequel in one. It takes place right where the last film ended. It continues the story of Michael (Al Pacino) and also tells the story of a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) in 1920s New York.

The use of flashbacks to tell Vito Corleone's story is perfectly edited and flawless. Robert De Niro's performance is fantastic and I have a better understanding of Vito Corleone. I really enjoyed the flashbacks in the PART II. Al Pacino's performance is also fantastic in this film; his character's transformation from the first film to the end of PART II is incredible.

Overall, THE GODFATHER: PART II is a great sequel that will not disappoint. The performances are great, the storyline is amazing. As I stated earlier, I really enjoyed Vito Corleone's story. Both Michael and Vito's stories fit very well together. If you liked the first film, you are sure to love PART II.";0;2;False tt0071562;rocci_williams;03/08/2015;The Ultimate in Mafia Movies;;This for me is the greatest Mafia movie of all time, in fact I prefer to all the others. as a 7yr old watching this I wasn't put off by the violence but intrigued on the story, my Mum wasn't too bothered that her young son was taking in the graphic scenes. There was something real about this movie even compared to today's high budget films, it captures a raw but honest look and has you believing you are there in those times, I will be honest I wanted to be Vito, did anyone else? damn sure! It doesn't matter that I have the box set, or that I have seen this movie 100 times, when it comes on the box I don't set record I sit there and take it all in again, its timeless, awesome and the greatest Mafia movie to date!;0;1;False tt0071562;drdinky;03/05/2015;Winter;;Part II, not the second one. Number 3 is the sequel to Part II, which is also known as The Godfather Part III. I don't think there is a part IV unless you count Star Wars A New Hope. But you shouldn't really mix up your films like that because it gets confusing.

What are junk words, and why is my review being blocked in such a fashion. Is it due to the fect that I did not write enough of a review.

Well, it's about gangsters and fighting and maybe some boxing too but it's not exactly Rocky because Sylvester The Cat is not in it.

I think some famous people are in it, including the guy who does the ARE YOU LOOKING AT ME line and stuff like taht. I think he said that in the back of a taxi, and it might even have been in this film, although it might have been the firs one...Jurassic Park;0;5;False tt0071562;RossHammond;26/04/2015;God Father Part 2;9;What can you say that hasn't already been said. Beautiful acting,cinematography,direction,script. This movie has to be one of the all time greats,bar none.

It accomplishes what it set out to do, get inside the head of mafia and show all facets of the business. I was literally on the edge of my seat the entire movie and for a while after wards too. This movie will have a lasting effect on my performances.

If there is one movie that is a must see for beginning actors this is it. All in all the acting by the entire cast is will be studied for decades to come.;0;1;False tt0071562;recebim253;13/02/2015;in my opinion;9;Your review is not yet ready for submission.

By submitting this review you are agreeing to the terms laid out in our Copyright Statement. Your submission must be your own original work. Your review will normally be posted on the site within 2-3 business days. Reviews that do not meet the guidelines will not be posted. Please write in English only. HTML or boards mark-up is not supported though paragraph breaks will be inserted if you leave a blank line between paragraph. Contains spoiler:

If you write a spoiler without warning readers, your name will be added to a blacklist and all your future reviews will be discarded automatically and unread. See the guidelines for more information.;0;2;True tt0071562;petarmatic;06/02/2015;It is not a sequel it is a timeless new classic;8;I agree with many reviewers that this film is not a sequel to the Godfather I but rather whole new film with whole new cast and new, fresh plot. Al Pacino and De Niro shine in this film and it is interesting to watch how the plot writers succeeded in making a whole new and fantastic film out of same theme as the first part.

It is difficult to add more then it is already written about this film by the professional critics and other reviewers. I will just have to refer you to read as much about this film that it has already been written and to watch it over and over again.

Just as in the first part I wonder how much of it could of happen in the real life. I guess some probably, but how much? It is for you to answer...;0;1;False tt0071562;dreyfuss83-720-997072;01/12/2014;Better than the first;8;This film is good, better than the first. The most powerful scene is the very end. James Kahn received the same amount of money from the first film to come back for the flashback/cameo for the second film. You cannot watch thus movie without seeing the first film. Otherwise you can be a bit lost. Robert DiNiro was awesome in this movie. Al Pacino was excellent. We don't see them together in another movie until Heat. Coppola's only work that's worth anything. The only thing that hurst this film is the 3rd film but actually it doesn't because whatever about 3. We're just thankful Sophia Coppola is not in this movie. Did I mention how awesome Pacino is in this movie. It's 3 hours or pure enjoyment nonstop fun. It's the movie that every mod dude wants to be.;0;2;False tt0071562;Rickting;14/11/2014;The godfather of movie sequels;9;"The Godfather is one of the best films ever, so what can we expect when a follow up is attempted? A contender for the best sequel ever of course. This has 2 parallel time lines: Flashbacks showing the young Vito Corleone rising to power and the continuation of the first film showing Michael Corleone handling both business matters and his personal life. It shouldn't have been as good as it is, but it knocks most sequels ever made into a bin liner. It's not quite as brilliant as some say it is. It's a bit too sprawling and tries to pack too much in. While the length in the first was excessive but just bearable, the second one has a bit too much. It can be a bit confusing and dips, but rarely. Otherwise, this sequel has it all: Amazing acting from everyone, even better direction from Francis Ford Coppola than the first and a powerful, moving screenplay. The final hour of the film is perfection and the last shot of Michael sitting alone in isolation, having lost everyone, has more emotional power than most films would squeeze into a ten minute monologue.

Al Pacino gives one of the best movie performances of all time and it is a total outrage that he wasn't nominated for an Oscar. Everyone else is great. Although the script is a bit sprawling, it gets a lot done and is very powerful. Many of the scenes of assassinations are suspenseful and at times genuinely heart breaking. I didn't understand what was so great about Robert De Niro's performance, but you can certainly see Marlon Brando in his acting. Coppola's direction is less subtle this time and he shows even more of his directional brilliance. Some of the scenes, visually, and utterly phenomenal. It's darker, raises the stakes and expands the story like a sequel should. It's a moving, sobering story about power and how corrupting it is. In terms of sequels we could hardly have asked for a better follow up. Aside from the excessive length and the fact that it makes the memory of Al Pacino humiliating himself in Jack & Jill even more painful, this is a sublime sequel and one which set the bench marks for all other sequels.

9/10";0;1;True tt0071562;manitobaman81;23/08/2014;Good;7;"I know that there has to be some justice in this life, so everyone will pay for their sins and crimes someday. I shudder when I think what will happen to these folks for killing the ""Godfather"" franchise. ""Part III"" is a shame of a movie, but NOTHING compared to what this piece of garbage is. The other two movies acknowledged that killing or hurting people was a conscious choice that was painfully taken; in this one it is as if violence was fun and part of life. There are so many wrong things about this film it is useless to count them. What a disgrace of a movie. This doesn't even qualify as ""so bad it is good"". This is merely ""so bad it is bad"". 7/10.";0;4;False tt0071562;axel-koch;01/12/2013;Undeniably excellent.;10;"While I do consider it an outstanding movie, I don't love the original The Godfather and its prequel/sequel is actually a bit of a step back, in my opinion. The 200 minutes are a lot too long and get boring, even as I anticipatorily watched the movie on two consecutive evenings, and neither of the cross-cut story parts was as interesting and thrilling as the one the original movie had to offer. That isn't to say that The Godfather Part II skimps on entertaining and rememberable scenes; in fact, the movie's best moments may even be more rememberable than The Godfather's. However, a lot of the scenes in between are just too long and not really necessary – what would have been needed a lot more were additional explanation scenes as the panoply of characters grows even bigger through the story being set in two different times and the dialogues give more focus to being pointed and quotable instead of making what happens fully clear. This is indubitably important, don't let me be misunderstood, but the huge plot that Mario Puzo has devised for The Godfather is simply too complex and convoluted to be easily grasped without having read the source material. Nevertheless, The Godfather Part II is a cinematic masterpiece that is sovereign and seminal on so many different layers, such as the beautifully picturesque cinematography, the smooth editing, the meticulously conceived set design, the innovative and unforgettable score by Nino Rota, and the tremendous acting cast that is reflected in the five Oscar nominations for acting (a tied record). Thus, The Godfather Part II is an undeniably excellent motion picture that merely suffers from the director's attempt to put too much in just one movie.";0;2;False tt0071562;batex1;16/10/2013;godfather;8;"Popularly viewed as one of the best American films ever made, the multi- generational crime saga The Godfather is a touchstone of cinema: one of the most widely imitated, quoted, and lampooned movies of all time. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino star as Vito Corleone and his youngest son, Michael, respectively. It is the late 1940s in New York and Corleone is, in the parlance of organized crime, a ""godfather"" or ""don,"" the head of a Mafia family. Michael, a free thinker who defied his father by A defining film in the history of cinema, The Godfather introduced a legendary filmmaker and several acting greats in the telling of an Italian American dynasty undone by the tragic circumstances of their criminal exploits.";0;2;True tt0071562;SmileysWorld;30/05/2013;All Time Best Sequel;9;I'm sure any film maker will tell you that if you produce a film widely considered to be great,you are taking quite a risk when you consider a sequel to that film,because you always run the risk of disappointing that audience that you wowed with the first film.Many have taken the risk and did just that.They disappointed the audiences and left a sour taste in their mouths.Not so here.Francis Ford Copolla,in making this follow up to The Godfather,made a genius move.He not only gave us a great follow up story to the one that won us over two years earlier,he interwove it with how the story of the Corleones came to be.Any sequel to a successful film is a risky move,but Copolla took the gamble and it paid off and then some.Easily the best sequel ever made.;0;2;False tt0071562;illbebackreviews;16/04/2013;Masterful in every possible way but is it the greatest sequel of all time?;10;Two years after the masterpiece that is The Godfather, Francis Ford Coppola decided it was time to direct and release Part II of what would become a trilogy. A movie like this is extremely difficult to review and to have expectations for, especially when it is considered by most to be much better than the original and perhaps the greatest sequel ever made. However, is this an over statement or not? Quite simply said, yes and no! Much like The Godfather, everything works amazingly in this film. In my opinion, it isn't the greatest sequel ever made, to that I say The Empire Strikes Back and I much prefer the original over it but that is by no means a way to say I dislike this film in the slightest. I love this film and that's certain and much like The Godfather, it took two viewings before I truly loved it.

*Spoilers contained throughout this review* It has been a few years since the death of Don Vito Corleone and Michael has now become the head of the Corleone Crime family as his business stretches through Nevada. An assassination attempt on his life leads him through a war with Hyman Roth whilst the story of a young Vito Corleone, the to be Don of the family, is portrayed marvellously by an inexperienced actor at the time, Robert De Niro in an Oscar winning performance The major issue I had with this film when its considered to be better than the original is how the absence of Marlon Brando's Vito Corleone really leaves a big and unfinished hole. That was my issue the first time as the word 'godfather' only brings one image into my mind. Not De Niro's Vito but Brando's. Despite amazing and legendary performances by Al Pacino and Robert de Niro, the absence of Marlon Brando still leaves an impact. Luckily this absence doesn't prove too costly for me this time around and most of it is well covered by the two.

The strength to the film is a tough one to pick but the acting still stands out. Apart from the acting, the storyline is extremely strong and powerful thanks to amazing De Niro and Al Pacino performances. Even that being said, the film is by no means more iconic or memorable than the first but a perfect continuation to what I believe, the greatest film of all time! The characters in this film are fantastic from a young Vito and his friends to Hyman Roth, Johnny Ola and various other characters such as Frank Pentanjali. Despite not having characters as memorable as Luca Brasi and Sonny and an older Vito, The Godfather Part II is extremely strong in terms of good characters and a fantastic and yet again, an immersive story.

Despite containing only a few words of English, my favourite proportion of the film would have to be the story of Vito Corleone as it provides all necessary background story perfectly. Contributing to a rough estimation of one third of the film's story, this is the stronger part of the film and thus, the more interesting part of it too! Words from De Niro such as 'I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse!' may not be anywhere near as powerful coming from an inexperienced actor at the time but is nevertheless amazing. One of my favourite lines from De Niro would have to be when he talks to a young Michael stating that he loves him! This falls perfectly back in place with everything Vito stood for in the original film when he stated that he never wanted Michael mixed up in the family business. Vito Corleone was a flawless character in Part I but Part II improves upon everything about his character, giving him necessary backstory that ultimately works superbly in such a film.

The iconic soundtrack is yet again, amazing! The first few moments of the film when the soundtrack begins and the title fades in with a beautifully filmed shot of Michael Corleone as the Don was utterly amazing! That has to be my favourite film introduction moment alongside The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. The soundtrack is powerful and moving from moments where Michael displays his love for his son to moments such as a young Vito talking to his son. The soundtrack perfectly adds the necessary amount of emotion to each scene without ever attempting to out do itself. Such perfected soundtrack works extremely powerfully in this film.;0;2;True tt0071562;jfarms1956;05/04/2013;Al Capone, the new Godfather;7;"Al Capone gives a whole different interpretation as the new Godfather. A good adult film to enjoy. Approximated the perfect length. With Al Capone we all learn the lesson which his father taught him. ""My father taught me many things. Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer"" It seems that even the Xfiles used this lesson. Robert Duvall as the family lawyer becomes the ""family legal lion."" In this movie, the fictional history of Al Capone's father's rise as a mafioso is depicted. With this film and its predecessor, The Godfather, we are taught that crime does pay. In fact, it pays well for those who are very smart, very cunning, very rich, and very powerful -- otherwise you die. The music is similar to that of the Godfather. Where Marlon Brando was more of a loving man, Al Capone's godfather portrayal is one of of rigid ruthlessness. However, the ruthlessness is necessary for survival of the family's power.";0;6;False tt0071562;theonewithallthecontacts;25/03/2013;This movie must never be deemed a sequel! It carries on the perfection of the first already perfect movie!;10;"In many ways, ""The Godfather Part II"" was the sequel that either matched or topped the original! It had twice the budget, it got nominated for 11 Oscars like the original and it won twice the Oscars with 6 wins: Best Supporting Actor (Robert De Niro), Best Art Direction - Set Decoration (Dean Travoularis, Angelo P. Graham), Best Music, Original Dramatic Score (Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola), Best Adapted Screenplay (Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo), Best Director (Francis Ford Coppola) and Best Picture (Francis Ford Coppola, Gray Frederickson and Fred Roos). The movie didn't bring in as much money as the original, though. Many people see this as better than the original, and even the best movie of all time. For the time being, I actually prefer this movie over the original. Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, John Gazale and Diane Keaton returned to star, and new actors were brought in, including Michael V. Gazzo and Lee Strassberg.

The Godfather Part 2 would carry on the legacy of perfection that The Godfather presented to the world. One of the reasons being is the second spectacular screenplay by Coppola and Puzo! The movie is straightforward, and even though it's a more complicated plot than the first, it's not THAT hard to follow. Many iconic lines are introduced once again, and the idea of making this movie a prequel as well of a follow-up seems unique.

Al Pacino delivers an even more complex and disturbed performance as the now chilling and psychotic Michael Corleone. The Michael Corleone in the original movie was relaxed and could act human, whereas he (in this movie) coldly kills anyone, and I repeat, ANYONE who stands in his way. Pacinos performance is believable all the way, and the relaxed attitude he expresses on-screen, echoes back to the permanently relaxed Michael we saw in the original. He can talk almost robotic and give a cold stare to a man, and explode with rage in the next second, and Pacino sells it. Pacino delivered one of the greatest, if not the greatest villainous performance of all time, and possibly THE greatest performance of all time. Robert De Niro is one of the other stars in the movie! He plays the part of the young Vito Corleone with finesse and a nice calmness, all the while maintaining the virtues that made Brandos's first performance so special. His performance stands as one of the best supporting ones, and he isn't even my favorite supporting character in the movie. Michael V. Gazzo's aging and hot-headed Frankie Pentangeli is a joy to watch on-screen, although his performance is significantly weaker when compared to some of the other performances in this movie. Lee Strassberg delivers yet another spectacular and moving performance as the long-time gangster Hyman Roth. But the one supporting performance that really shined for me (more than in the original), John Gazale as the brother Fredo Corleone. His performance was delicately layered and moving all the way, and by the end of the film I felt such pity for the guy. Shoulda' been nominated for an Oscar.

The musical score in this movie is very much the same, and therefore as brilliant and as memorable as the first. The cinematography, the sound and the set decoration are spectacular, and makes the movie feel more epic.

I prefer this movie to the original for a number of reasons: For what seemed to be an impossible goal to make the movie better than the first for some, for the stronger characters, the stronger performances, the epic feel to it, the perfection carried on, the more complex plot and the magnificent ending. This movie must never be deemed a sequel! It carries on the perfection of the first already perfect movie. A must-watch for everyone!

10/10";0;2;False tt0071562;kechhh;18/03/2013;Godbetter;;Definitely enjoyed this Godfather more than the first one, as I thought the parallel stories helped add a bit of variation to the movie. I thought the format was great and the pacing throughout the movie helped keep interest.

While the beginning of Vito's story was great, I felt his rise to power occurred too quickly and the assassination of his father's killer was done too easily and without any shown planning.

Michael's story was done well, but I felt the sudden jump to the Senate hearing was rushed and unexplained.

If these flaws were corrected, I feel it could have been a much greater movie.;0;3;True tt0071562;kosmasp;04/02/2013;Back and forth;9;Not only the arguments if this one is better than the first Godfather (Godfather II has been used by many as an example that sequels can be better than the original movie), but also the time line of the movie. So while this is the first movie that includes Al Pacino and Robert De Niro in one movie, the time line constraints did not allow for them to be in the same scene (wouldn't make any sense, you'll understand when and if you have watched the movie). Also De Niro won an Oscar (funny fact, for the same role/character Marlon Brando won one in the first Godfather, must be a first and I don't know if it happened again, doubt it though) while Al Pacino didn't. And while it may seem unfair to Pacino, it was more than well deserved for De Niro, who really merged himself into the character that Brando created. From the way he talked, to gestures to mannerisms. Everything is there!

But the movie won a few Oscars and the acting was really good too. The story continues (though gives us a few flashbacks) from the ending of part 1. So while the first one is conclusive and has a satisfying ending itself, the story could be continued. Especially with the original author on board (Mr. Puzzi). There are new themes introduced in this movie. One big one is loneliness. And it's not only about being alone when you have power or being the Godfather. As with the first movie this explores quite a lot of things in Gang related family living.

A great movie that was even longer than the first one (and the sequel that came after it). But you probably won't mind the length. Especially if you buy into the drama, that really works. And even without it stating the time jumps/leaps it makes, you'll get the (time) change on your own. A great sequel to a great movie;0;3;False tt0071562;richieandsam;25/01/2013;Great story...;7;THE GODFATHER PART II

This was a good sequel... I can understand why there is a lot of debate over which movie is better, part 1 or 2. Personally I am sitting on the fence. Part 1 was a good film... I enjoyed it as you can read below... but part 2 was a better story.

This film has 2 stories in it... the rise of Michael Corleone as the new mafia boss, and the other story is about Don Vito Corleone when he was young making his rise as the Godfather.

The casting as before was brilliant. Al Pacino returned as Michael, and he played the part really well. Robert DeNiro played his father (a younger version) Don Vito Corleone. DeNiro was a fantastic choice to play the Godfather... he looked the part. I could imagine DeNiro growing old to look like Marlon Brando. Excellent stories.

Again though, it was pretty slow paced during parts of the movie... it is such a long film. I don't think it needs to be that long. I know I say that a lot about films, but it's how i fell. I don't think that about all long movies... there are some movies that I love that are over 3 hours long... but these films felt long. It probably didn't help that I had to keep pausing this movie all the way through. I actually watched it in 2 halves because it was taking me so long.

I will give this film a 7 out of 10... I know I gave part 1 the same mark, but they are 2 completely different films.

Great story!

For more of my reviews, please like my Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ordinary-Person-Movie- Reviews/456572047728204?ref=hl;0;4;False tt0071562;Maniac-9;23/01/2013;Greater then great;10;The first Godfather movie is one of the greatest movies ever made, bar none. But someone Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo are able to raise the bar even further with their follow up effort. The story of Michael Corleone, Vito Corleone and the rest of their crime family is expanded in this movie. There is 2 story lines going on at the same time. In what is supposed to be the present day you have Michael taking the family and it's interests to Nevada. In a flashback part of the movie you have Robert DeNiro taking over the Brando role as Don Vito from his roots in Sicily to when he came to America and then eventually rising in power as a young gangster in New York City. Al Pacino as Michael is one of the greatest on screen performances of all time.;0;2;False tt0071562;lagudafuad;25/11/2012;Michael Corleone rise to Don Corleone;9;"The Godfather Part II stands among and will be seen as one of the best sequels out there thanks to the wonderful pairing of two fine actors with Al Pacino as Michael Coeleone, putting up such masterful display of acting that makes you want to hail him from the screen as ""The Godfather"" and the other actor that was exceptional was Robert De Niro who played young Vito Corleone. The movie casting is one that will remain in the mind of film watchers for a long time.

The film depicts the different paths in which the Corleone family took, as Vito took the high road of peace during his regime; Michael took the path of violence and taking all his enemies out the moment they show their face, to the point that no matter whom there were, friend or family you cross Michael you are dead.

Partially based on Mario Puzo's 1969 novel, The Godfather, this 1974 sequel is in part both a sequel and a prequel to The Godfather movie released in 1972. The movie features two parallel dramas, one focusing on Michael Corleone's reign and him trying to gain control of the family business, the other story is based on flash backs of how Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro), rose from his childhood in Sicily Italy in 1901 to his coming to America and the founding of the Corleone family.

The plot shows how Michael was looking into expanding his family business to Las Vegas and Cuba. During the process, an attempt on his life was made, and the person behind it was someone close to him, this led to Michael taking out more people. Michael's ruthless behaviour affected his family and trusted friends.

Being the first film to have part II in its name, The Godfather part II was a box office success and it received critical acclaim as one of the best films ever made. The production had some production problems initially when Pacino not wanting to be part of it because he felt the script wasn't OK enough, so Coppola had to re-write it, before Pacino came on board.

The American Film Institute's 10th anniversary of greatest films has the movie rated number 32, and its ranked 3rd in IMDb's Top 100 Movies of all time, with its predecessor The Godfather ranked 2nd. It also got 11 Academy Awards nominations and it won Best Picture for that year. Out of the 11 nominations it won six Oscars which included Best Director for Francis Ford Coppola, Best Supporting Actor for Robert De Niro and Best Adapted Screenplay for Coppola and Puzo.

Al Pacino got a nomination for Best Actor but didn't win although in the BAFTA Award he won the Best Actor award for the film.

The Godfather part II is a classic sequel to one of the best films ever made, so there is no need to see the first if you are not planning of crowning it with the second.

www.lagsreviews.com";0;2;False tt0071562;Mikkelsen-Frederikke;01/10/2012;Timeless masterpiece;10;This movie is as great as the first, i loved every part of it. The first one sets the life of a mafia family and shows how different father and son is. Vito was always respected and loved whereas Michael leads by fear. This script is written so beautifully and is a perfect sequel/prequel to the first godfather. We learn Michaels true nature and see how it can drive a person out of their assumed character when he gets his fathers power. This movie is a movie where greed is the theme, Michael wants more, but sees in the end he lost his family, and would never could be like Vito.

The acting is amazing, Robert De Niro is fantastic in his role, and carry on the character of Vito perfectly. I love Roberts silent voice and his easy way of controlling everyone. It stunned me. Al does like in the first a great job as Michael. The acting is overall just phenomenal, and the directing is superb.

The lightning and cinematography is perfect, this movie takes you back to the old mafia world, and entertains you all through.;0;2;False tt0071562;huu1210;19/08/2012;this is good movie;7;"very good movie. meaningful movie is great I enjoyed watching this movie meaningful movie is great I enjoyed watching this movie movie very deep through the recent controversy about the couple's divorce English - Vietnamese is the owner of the museum, or visit the ticket sales is allowed or not allowed; visitors can spend less least 1 hour to watch the 500 eyes sized mannequin with real people - wearing their uniforms and beautiful details; movie very deep through the recent controversy about the couple's divorce English - Vietnamese is the owner of the museum, or visit the ticket sales is allowed or not allowed; visitors can spend less least 1 hour to watch the 500 eyes sized mannequin with real people - wearing their uniforms and beautiful details; http://taingheiphone.nhatnghe.org";0;4;False tt0071562;Differcow;15/07/2012;The Greatest Crime Film Ever Made;10;"'The Godfather' is an excellent movie. It displays the flip-side of the American dream, personal struggles to hold onto family values in an ever-changing world, and taps into the ultimate beauty of human relationships, even between the worst people. I saw 'The Godfather' a year ago, and thought it was superb. I do not, however, feel that it was is good as 'Citizen Kane' or '2001'; I just don't feel that it's a pinnacle of American filmmaking, and have always been puzzled by its credit as such. I just finished 'The Godfather, Part II', and now I understand. I enjoyed the first film, but this film left me stunned. The complexity and beauty of the emotions on screen were impeccable. The performances were among the finest ever committed to film, Mr. de Niro deserving special mention. This film doesn't go for easy answers, and doesn't pander to its audience: it is, in my opinion, the ultimate drama film. Perfectly nuanced screen writing and utterly superb direction give the impression of watching real life unfold in a setting designed for drama. The power of Al Pacino's performance didn't sink in until I realized that I'd been watching the credits roll for five minutes, thinking about his enigmatic facial expressions. I won't give anything away, but be ready for shock. People tease around the idea that this film is better than the first. They say it, but then back away, muttering about Marlon Brando. They think it, and then rub their hands together, considering Sonny Corleone. Well, I appreciate all other opinions, but I'll just say it: This is better than 'Goodfellas'. This is better than 'Scarface (both of them)'. And, finally, most controversially, this is better than 'The Godfather' This is the greatest gangster movie ever made, and the quality of this film validates the international acclaim of the duo. PS You may have noticed I haven't mentioned the third film. There is no third film. Seriously. Never happened.";0;2;False tt0071562;werefox08;01/07/2012;A Great Crime Movie;9;"It became fashionable, trendy and hip...around 1978 to say The Godfather Part Two is better than The Godfather. Even today attention seeking personality disordered people still say it. Its not as good as the Godfather....but it is still a great movie. Its very well directed by Francis Ford Coppola, and Al Pacino gives a solid performance as the godfather. We are into the 1950s and organized crime is not quite as brutal as it was. Pacino has a lot on his plate...making deals with the unpredictable Hyman Roth (brilliantly played by Lee Strasberg) and finding the traitor in his family is Fredo. This huge mistake by Fredo will (must) cost him his life. (never go against the family) There are flashback sequences about Pacinos father (played by Robert Di Niro) ...his arrival in New York as a simple boy....and his rise to crime boss as he realizes shooting ""big shots"" makes people respect you. In the end Coppola ties things together with a few killings...as he did in the Godfather. This is never a boring film...there are many things ""going on"". Highly entertaining, intelligent The Godfather Part Two is extremely satisfying.";0;2;True tt0071562;Marc_Israel_365;28/05/2012;the loneliness of absolute power;9;Michael Corleone portion of the film spins the plot and introduces a few new memorable characters, but their main point is to help justify the tactics needed for the Dons' survival. We have the commencement of ideals and the inevitable decay of the foundation they were built on. The second film of the series shows how power affects and how the lack of power can lead to betrayal. I hated the attempt to match the ending of the first movie, yet really felt Al Pacino's characterization of loneliness and lack of accomplishment, quite ironic for such a mighty man. Robert DiNero as young Vito Corleone, passing over rooftops before taking down the Don, and then pacing home against the backdrop of a fiery Little Italy sums up the original spirit of The Godfather.;0;2;True tt0071562;Pierre_D;27/05/2012;No man is an island...excepting Michael Corleone.;9;"The Godfather Part II is a tale of two cities, New York at the turn of the 20th century and mid century Lake Tahoe where Vito and Michael Corleone's stories unfold. Much less violent than its predecessor, Part II focuses on Michael's abandonment by family, friends and eventual retreat into himself.

Our feature starts in Sicily them moves to New York, focusing on young Vito Corleone and his orphaned youth. He's said to be ""dumb"" because he never expresses himself, but you can see his furtive eyes observing everything and his open ears listening to every detail. Vito leaves Sicily orphaned and bereft of siblings, all of them dead at the hands of the local mob boss. He makes a new life for himself in New York, raising a family and overtaking a mob lord with quick wit and a quicker trigger finger. These scenes in 1910ish New York are superb, from the theatre to the grandiosity of the mob to the rigours of health in that area (Fredo is born with Pneumonia, for example) but our future Godfather survives it all, to his credit.

In present day Michael tries to solidify his empire through backroom deals, treachery and the disintegration of his family unit and friends. With Hyman Roth (a Florida mobster), he makes inroads into fertile Cuba but he and his family almost perish in a hit at his own home. Everyone turns on Michael, from a jealous Fredo (older brother given no responsibility) to an estranged Kay (who aborts his second son as she doesn't want to contribute to the mob nightmare any longer) to his mob associates. The only one who comes close to ""redeeming"" himself is Frank Pentangeli , the key witness for a Senate Investigating Committee into the Corleone's business who recants on the stand when a long-lost brother appears at the tribunal.

In the end, Michael is alone with his son Anthony while Kay and their daughter is gone, Fredo dead, the mob dispersed and the Corleone clan expanding from Vegas to Cuba to Tahoe to who knows where...this chapter is excellent, even surpassing the original in some spots in character development and analysis. Recommend highly, but see The Godfather first.";0;2;True tt0071562;salesgab;18/05/2012;The Best Sequel, for The Best Film;10;The second part of Francis Ford Coppola's masterpiece managed to be at least as powerful and moving as the original. All the elements that made the first Godfather great, like the dark filmography and the beautiful music, are present in this film. Coppola, who now had more confidence and therefore, more control, managed to make a more somber film, a very successful approach. As for the cast, Al Pacino is back in his role as Michael Corleone, now head of the family. Marlon Brando gave place to another film legend: Robert De Niro, who gave a performance almost as good as Brando's in the first film. Robert Duvall is back as Tom Hagen, Diane Keaton reprises her role as Kay, and, thanks to Coppola, John Cazale (who had a regretfully short career) and Talia Shire had more screen time and gave brilliant performances. As if all that wasn't enough, master Lee Strasberg came back from retirement as Hyman Roth. The Godfather Part II is a delight to every lover of the first film, but also appeal to everyone else.;0;2;False tt0071562;itszach94;15/12/2011;One of the Greatest of All Time;9;"The Godfather Part Two opens right where the The Godfather left off. Nino Rota's masterful and romantic score whispers off in the distance. The screen fades in from total darkness, pure emptiness. We see a focused man sitting stoically in a leather bound armchair. Darkness expands around him on all sides. This man is Al Pacino as Michael Corleone. Around him his associates kneel, showing their utmost respect. Michael is being crowned the new Don of his family. In the last film, his father, a powerful New York mob boss, had passed away, requiring Michael to now lead his family. With this action, Michael is closing the door on his old life and returning fans are quickly reacquainted with this epic tale.

The Godfather Part Two was left with the task of filling an extremely large pair of shoes, as its predecessor is considered one of, if not the greatest, film of all time. The second film does surprisingly well in accomplishing this enormous undertaking. With its stellar combination of all elements that make a film great, The Godfather Part Two easily works its way into the discussion of the greatest movies of all time.

This film effectively flips back and forth between two different plots in two separate time periods. After being reintroduced to Michael, we are immediately transported to the beautifully recreated island of Sicily at the turn of the century. We are then shown a young Vito Corleone (Andolini), Michael's father. We are also told that Vito's father was recently murdered and that his brother has fled to seek retribution, leaving only young and timid Vito and his mother. Vito's innocence is exemplified by the quietness and minimal dialogue in this opening scene. Quickly after, we are informed that his brother has also been killed by the same man and he and his mother go speak to the mob boss that has committed these acts. In attempting to plead with the local boss, his mother is murdered and Vito flees to New York. Once in New York, the plot documents Vito's exciting rise from a poor Italian peasant into one of New York's most powerful mob bosses. He overthrows the current boss, and he along with his friends, put themselves into power. During this portion of the film we are introduced to younger versions of characters from the first film, such as Peter Clemenza and Mama Corleone, Vito's wife. Throughout this tale, Vito also seeks retribution for the murders of his family. The final words he utters to his families killer are, ""My father's name was Antonio Andolini and this is for you "" This event show Vito's rise to power coming full circle.

Interwoven between this story is also the tale of Michael Corleone's personal struggle. He struggles in keeping control of his family and also trying to legitimize his business ventures, involving such groups as the US Senate. In this plot we see the development of Michael from the timid young man he was in the first movie to the true face of evil he becomes. Al Pacino's beautiful performance, such as his soulless glare and heartlessly delivered dialogue, accent the corruptness in his character. We also see his life slipping away from him in many different ways because of his terrible actions, most specifically the act he commits towards the end of the film. This final scene shows the completion of Michaels's transformation into pure evil. The plot ends with one of the greatest climaxes in modern cinema.

Even without the legendary Marlon Brando at the helm, this film still contains one of the greatest ensemble casts of all time. Al Pacino, now at the fore-front, is supported by the likes of Robert DeNiro as Vito Corleone, Diane Keaton as Kay Corelone and Robert Duval as Tom Hagen, to mention a few. Every character has an added depth due to these talented actors' ranges. This phenomenal cast makes the viewer care about family aspect of the film and believe that all of these actors could truly be related.

Though a long film, totaling over three hours in length, excellent pacing keeps the viewer interested at all times. There is never a truly dull moment in the plot. The expanded run time allows for a more complete tale to be told. Also, exceptional editing mixes both plots together. I disagree with Roger Ebert when he says the two plots, "" provides for itself a structural weakness from which the film never recovers "" I think the two plots strengthen the movie as a whole. Over the course of the movie, the viewer is never confused and the plots never seem to run over into each other.

Francis Ford Coppola and Gordon Willis continue their partnership as director and cinematographer to create one the most visually compelling films of all time. In discussing Willis's cinematography, Vincent Canby of The New York Times said, ""The photography by Gordon Willis, so effective originally, is now comically fancy – the exteriors are too bright and glowy while the interiors are so dark "" He is discussing Willis common use of darkness in his shots. I feel that Willis's continued use of his dark and shadowy style adds a deeper emotion to every scene. Coppola's dynamic choices on shots contribute to the sensation in scenes, even ones with very little dialogue. Together they beautifully recreate settings such as Sicily, Las Vegas, Miami and Cuba.

The Godfather Part Two surpasses all goals that it set out to achieve. Its stellar cast highlights one of the best written tales of family and honor in the history of cinema. It is hard to define The Godfather Part Two as purely just a gangster movie. It is much more easily defined as a masterpiece. Combining all of the elements that produce a great film, the team behind The Godfather Part Two created one of the greatest movies of all time.";0;3;False tt0071562;Kubris;17/08/2011;A continuation of the greatest movie ever made;9;IMDb Top 250: 3 The Godfather Part II has a great distinction: it is the sequel to the greatest film ever. It has a lot to live up to. While the Godfather impresses you before it even starts, with Marlon Brando's iconic face on the poster, Part II has to earn your respect. To most, it equals- and to a few, it betters- the Godfather. But to me, it doesn't. Part II is an exceptional film that outclasses many films, but its predecessor is not one of them.

The Godfather showed the rise- or fall, however you look at it- of Michael Corleone, and Part II shows him at the height of his power, and his descent. The story is sprawling, like it should be. Betrayal, family, and oranges, Godfather staples, are seen throughout. But Part II doesn't have the charisma of Part I. Without Vito and Sonny, much of the famous Italian factor is lost. Like Michael, the story is more heartless than before.

Also in Part II is the origin of Vito Corleone, starring the then small-time Robert de Niro, in one of his best performances. These scenes are so awesome, they steal the show. When we learn about Vito, we don't want it to end, and when we watch Michael, we wish he was Vito instead. There's so much plot in this film, it could've been cut into 2 films, one a continuation and one an origin story, a la the Metal Gear Solid quadrilogy. Who knows the impact that could've had on the quality of Part III.

While the film lacks Sonny or Vito, the characters present are very well played. These actors could be these characters in real life. And when Oscar season came, it showed: 5 nominations. Pacino is at his conflicted peak, shown no better than his confrontation with Kay. He is the tent pole: all the other characters aren't on his level, another factor that makes me like Part I more. Others got the spotlight. But as I mentioned before, De Niro is the best part of this film. He sounds like the Don, looks, and charms the the Don. The sets of the 20's scenes are breathtaking. It's a pity there isn't a whole film about him.

Together, Godfathers I and II are the best films ever made. But separate, I believe the first part stands alone at the top. Mixing the 20's and late 50's, Part II has much to unravel, and in 3 hours and 20 minutes much is revealed. It's a great film, and one of the best sequels ever made. 9.2/10;0;4;False tt0071562;user-987-304641;26/02/2011;I love the godfather 2;10;I love the godfather 2, why? Because I think it first as well as! As exciting! As perfect! The second part of the story respectively tells the young period of the godfather and the second generation of the story, the godfather this family has a certain amount of perfect! The second part on plot agree so affected us, isn't it? When we see young godfather of propriety, when we appreciate the second-generation godfather wisdom and method, when we again and again by the second generation godfather sad tears, whether we have noticed, godfather 2 in film history is a perfect works! A great works of art! Oh, mike's hearts bear how big of pain ah, he was just want to live a simple days, whether we want for this same great applause! Thanks to the director's devotion!;0;2;False tt0071562;otgdd-lololol1;17/02/2011;Even better than the first one. If possible...;10;Don't know what to say that hasn't already been said. I'll try to be original...

This one started out kind of slow and boring. However, the middle and the ending made up for that. But I guess we needed a slow beginning for this movie to have an amazing middle and end.

The acting, amazing. Al Pacino portrayed his character perfectly, and not just Al, everybody.

The plot was more confusing than the first one, and you may have to watch it more than once to get it, but of course I didn't mind watching it again. This one focuses more on Michael's relationship with family and friends rather than business (however, business was still a major part of the plot). We also go back into the old days when the original Godfather was just a young man, and we see how his character developed into the person he was in the first movie.

I didn't pay too much attention to the music in this one, partially because I was too busy trying to figure out what was going on. However I'm sure it's great...

Cinematography and effects. Once again, camera work is out-standing. And like the first movie, the action scenes were in good taste, and the death scenes were relevant to the plot. I explained this in my review of the first movie, so I don't want to repeat myself too much. The balance between dialogue and action was a bit heavier on the dialogue side this time. It bothered me a little at first, but once I payed attention till the end, I can easily conclude this movie was better than the first.;0;2;False tt0071562;Red_Identity;13/02/2011;Extremely well done and intriguing...;;Part II continues the epic crime saga of the Corleone family. This time, we have an amazing performance by Robert De Niro, who shows he can do so much with such limited dialogue. Vito Corleone is a true icon as far as characters go. Pacino is once again great, but I did find his performance in Part 1 more of an achievement. The highlights are the flashbacks of the past life of Don Vito, probably the best scenes in the saga so far. However, I found Part II more inconsistent and ultimately at times less intriguing than Part I. However, it still makes up for a great story. Amazing cinematography, direction, score, and performances.Should I bother with Part III?;0;2;False tt0071562;nchuh2-1;12/02/2011;Michael's soul;9;The Godfather Part II needs a few viewings in order for one to truly grasp the emotional scope of the movie. On the surface it can be classified as a movie about betrayal and revenge. But it's much more than that. The arc that Michael Corleone goes through is the aspect that packs the emotional punch of the movie. What makes this movie so great is that he tries so hard to protect his family and keep them safe, but in the end, he ends up losing those he loves the most. He fails to realize at what cost he sold his soul. The ends don't always justify the means.

I must say it took me a few viewings to understand this all, but it was definitely worth it. As bad as he gets, you still feel sorry for him because you understand why he makes certain decisions. Watching the younger Vito grow into the great mafia don is also a great part of the movie. De Niro's ability to use body movements, facial tics, and expressions is what made his portrayal of Vito one for the ages. Please see the movie if you haven't yet. There's a reason it's been rated as a top-notch movie for the past 37+ years.;0;3;True tt0071562;ochoamanuel21;07/02/2011;The Uprise of an Empire and the Fall of another;10;How do you follow the greatest mobster movie of all time? By contrasting the uprising of Vito along with the fall of Michael at the same time. The scenes at first are subtle, yet powerful. Take for instance, the beginning where you have the humble Don singing in Italian at Ellis Island as a kid and the scene changes to Antony's first communion in Reno which is just a front for the Senator to do business with Michael about the acquaintance of new hotels for double the price of the arranged price in order to milk the family as much as possible. There is hatred for the current family that Michael controls from outsiders such as Senator Geary. The Vito plot flows smoothly of how Vito gains power by meeting Clemenza and killing the current powers in Little Italy in New York and later getting revenge on Don Ciccio in Corleone. He starts by stealing and then running molasses with several partners while doing favors for certain people. Michael's story is about Roth trying to take over Michael's control over the hotels he owns by having a partnership with Cuba, Michael's investment in some new hotels in Cuba, all while trying to overthrow him by having Fredo betray him unintentionally since he knew that everyone in the family stepped over him because he is weak minded. While Vito is becoming the new Don in the 20s, Michael does the unforgivable and orders the hit on his own brother since he never forgave him for his betrayal and the ending is truly the end of this franchise with the haunting comparison of a young Michael with his dad waving goodbye and then it goes back to a cold Michael pondering his brother's death. The irony also is that when Michael joins the Navy and everyone on the table questions his decision, Fredo is the only one who embraces his decision.;0;3;True tt0071562;tanelteder;03/01/2011;from father to son;8;It is by far the greatest sequel ever made to a movie. Francis Ford Coppola has a hit jackpot yet again. The first film of the Mario Puzo's trilogy was a great one. Some agree, some disagree, but in my opinion, part II was even slightly better. The movie is full of same style and originality that the first film. It works for mafia film. There has been done tremendous job on set designing. Especially on scenes which portray life of Vito Corleone at early 20's in New York. That's a wonderful piece of work. You could have no complaints at all. The screenplay is good. It shows how Vito Corleone started his family business, later called mafia. On the other hand, it follows life of his son Michael who tries to enlarge family business to Las Vegas and Havana.

Although there is no original Godfather (Marlon Brando), his son Michael (Al Pacino) shines. That's a statement act which became cornerstone in his career. So cool and fearless, like his father. Al Pacino is a deserved Oscar-winner here. This is the top of the mafia films. It would be very hard to go higher here, presumably only down.;0;3;False tt0071562;ah-andy;06/12/2010;Well, thank god for Al Pacino.;9;I wondered if the sequel would be as great without Marlon Brando, I wasn't sure if Al Pacino could fill in his shoes. And he didn't, nobody could. But, nonetheless, an astounding performance by Al Pacino.

The story is sort of like the first one, with a bunch of guys chasing after the Don, which in this movie is Michael. And he, with his smart attitude, chases them down.

I can't find anybody who didn't perform a terrific, ten over ten role. The cast was perfect and the script was well written. It matched the anticipation I had when I finished the first movie and was popping in the sequel.

Everybody has aged a bit, and the writers did cut off a lot of characters from the first movie, characters that I thought were amazing, but I guess that makes it all the more realistic.

You should all watch this movie, that is of course, if you liked the first one.;0;3;False tt0071562;vikrantyadav88;20/10/2010;Nice movie;7;In 1958, Michael Corleone, Godfather of the Corleone family, deals with various business and family problems at his Lake Tahoe, Nevada compound during an elaborate party celebrating his son's First Communion. He meets with Nevada Senator Pat Geary, who despises the Corleones. Geary, aware that Michael plans to gain control of another Vegas casino, demands a grossly exaggerated price for a new gaming license and a monthly payment of five percent of the gross profits from all of the Corleone family's Nevada gaming interests, all while insulting the Corleones and Italians in general. Michael coldly gives Geary his counter-offer: nothing. http://learnfreelanguages.110mb.com/t.html;0;4;True tt0071562;philthegreatone-786-63058;02/08/2010;The best saga ever made;10;This is the best trilogy of all time. This film The Godfather Part II stands alone as the best continuation of a saga ever created. It is such a flawless script. First of Michael is trying to get a gaming license and the senator of Nevada doesn't allow it. Michael uses his muscle to get what he wants and the senator gives in. Now Fredo, Michael's brother has a relationship with Johnny Ola and Hyman Roth who want to conspire to kill Michael. Michael finds out that there was an attempt on his life and he finds out Fredo was involved. If you are a fan of this film you know what happens. Along the way we get an amazing supporting performance from Robert DeNiro as a young Vito Corleone told in reflection as he built his empire in New York and Sicily. I love this film you should love it as well;0;3;True tt0071562;khanbaliq2;30/06/2010;A legendary continuation and sequel to the landmark 1972 film.;10;I think the film is simply one of the great American films. In 1958, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) reflects on the problems of being a Mafia don, and those of his father (Robert De Niro) before him.

The Godfather Part II is one of those rare sequels that genuinely eclipses the original film - quite an achievement, in this instance. But Part II fleshes out the history of the Corleone clan, showing the rise of young Don Vito and reflecting on the increasingly icy demeanour of his son Michael as he accommodates himself to becoming a ruthless don. The scenes in Sicily, beautifully shot, have a lyrical, almost Edenic quality, tinged with foreboding: we all know this idyll can not last. De Niro is spellbinding as young Vito, while Pacino almost visibly transforms himself into the man Michael Corleone is becoming. It's an astonishing popular masterpiece.;0;3;True tt0071562;rick_7;08/04/2010;A touch below the first film, but still extraordinary;;"The Godfather Part II (Francis Ford Coppola, 1974) is a brilliant film full of unforgettable moments, if marginally less coherent and effective than the original. Set seven years after the events of the first movie, it traces the increasingly alienated don, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), as he expands his criminal empire into Nevada and Havana, while fighting congressional hearings, assassination attempts, and betrayal from within his very family. His cold existence is contrasted with his father Vito's early years, as the future godfather (Robert De Niro leaving an indelible impression) escapes persecution in Sicily and finds a new life in America - where his neighbourhood is dominated by a grasping, merciless small-time Mafioso.

The first half of the movie is slightly disjointed, but lays the groundwork for a final hour that is utterly unimpeachable - much like Michael Corleone himself. The visceral violence and quotable dialogue (""You keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"") are obvious surface pleasures, but once more the film's greatness lies in its more reflective, verbose moments. There's a superb scene between Michael and Fredo (John Cazale) that recalls the apex of the first film (Brando and Pacino's garden two-hander), with Cazale apparently trapped in his chair by rage and regret at being passed over by his father. ""It was the way Pop wanted it,"" Michael says. ""It ain't the way I wanted it,"" Cazale shrieks. ""I can handle things; I'm smart. Not like everybody says like dumb; I'm smart, and I want respect!"" The sequence in which Michael's wife (Diane Keaton) reveals the truth about her 'miscarriage' is also extraordinary to behold. Pacino doesn't just slap Kay across the face, he launches himself at her from across the room - like a coiled spring, or a cat; though really like nothing else on earth. Usually such concessions to melodramatic domestic drama are tawdry, upsetting and unbelievable, but Pacino's remarkable handling of the material makes it chilling, horrifying and impossible to forget.

This is a superbly-scripted, brilliantly-acted study of absolute moral corruption, but just as Michael is colder and more ruthless than his father, so The Godfather Part II is more clinical and less emotionally resonant than the first film, provoking a sense of melancholia in place of tears. That's unquestionably fitting, and it feels like nitpicking to point out shortcomings in a film so intelligent, incisive and compelling, but I am going to reverse a long-held view and contend that the sterility and occasionally haphazard plotting of this sequel makes it inferior to the first movie, if only by a fraction. It's still a masterpiece.";0;1;True tt0071562;sharkey000;24/11/2009;Brilliant sequel to a phenomenal movie!;9;I don't think there was a second during this 3+ hour movie when I got up! Despite having watched it as a child, my memories didn't do it justice.

It covers the history of Vito Corleone through a series of flashbacks artfully juxtaposed with present-day Michael Corleone's struggle to maintain hold on his business and personal life.

I felt such empathy towards Michael! He really is a loner, who kills anyone who gets in his way, who won't bat an eyelid at killing his brother yet is obviously heartbroken by that brother's betrayal.

This is a really brilliant movie, not to be missed!;0;5;True tt0071562;garrettderose;18/08/2009;Dark and Epic. The downfall of kingdom.;9;"The Godfather II surpasses the first film.

Some of the beef I had with the first Godfather, is the fact that we don't get to see or hear very much about Vito Corleone's past. The viewer gets little snippets here and there, like the ""offer he can't refuse"" story at the wedding.

Godfather II is a godsend. Vito's character is the crown jewel of the series, and this film focuses heavily on his journey into becoming ""The Godfather"" Great scenes of betrayal and revenge. The darker side of the film feels more personal and less like the Sicilian dogma which the first film focuses on. The film splits a fair amount of time between Michael and his father's back-story. Much like the ending of the previous film, Michael allows himself to become a monster. He is a mere shadow of his father, and that is the real message of the film. The actions Michael Corleone take throughout this film would've been dismissed as dishonorable and unnecessary by his father.

The cinematography is near perfect. If you want a good story-book depiciton of Tuscany, or turn-of-the-century New York City... there are very few movies that have replicated such craftsmanship.

One of the few sequels that is a LARGE upgrade to the original.";0;2;True tt0071562;DylansFearFiles;13/08/2009;Better Than the Original;10;Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is the Don of the Corleone's now. He has already consolidated his power in New York, now he moves into Nevade. Michael now has his brother Fredo (John Cazale) as his next-in-line and is having trouble making his older brother stronger. Michael is also having tension with his wife Kay (Diane Keaton). Even worse, someone tried to kill him. Michael's suspects are Frankie Pantangelli (Michael Gazzo), his caporegime running the New York division of the Corleone's and Jewish mob boss, Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg).

While telling the story of Michael's rise as the new Don, The Godfather Part II also tells the story of Michael's father, Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro in his first Academy Award-winning role) when he was younger and rising to power. These scenes show Don Vito as a young boy from Corleone, Sicily, escaping another Sicilian Mafia clan leader, Don Ciccio. In New York, Vito gets involved with crime but never loses his sense of honor, he meets Peter Clamenza (Bruno Kirby), Genco Abbandando (Frank Sivero) and Salvatore Tessio (John Aprea) who all become top members in the crime family that Vito builds. After becoming experienced in the ways of the Cosa Nostra, Vito returns to Sicily for revenge on Don Ciccio.

The Godfather Part II is one of the best sequels ever made and also one of the best movies ever made in general. I think that this continuation is better than the first. The movie is a very exciting and well-told story.

10/10;0;2;True tt0071562;Nama_mikenish;13/08/2009;as a sequel, better than the first one;10;In a way though first part is considered as the classic but the second part is better than the first by point difference. the godfather one is more of performances but second becomes interesting as there is something coming inside the family about Fredo as he starts activities against Michael.

since Mario Puzo wrote it to give more importance to Michael's character the acting , the story and the direction, all is at top level as it can go...

so though one will have to see the first pat to enjoy second but its worth waiting and its truly beautiful;0;2;True tt0071562;johnmschofield;11/08/2009;This film is another masterpiece;10;"This film is one of those which grabs you early and never lets you go until its wrung every emotion you have out of you. Normally i wouldn't describe any film in this fashion but this 200 Minutes deserves all the accolades it has ever had. One day not so long ago I watched Godfather Parts 1 & 2 without a break. Yes it may have been a lazy Sunday for me to watch all 375 minutes but it got me thinking about when these films were made. You could describe those minutes as a series of recollections from a sharp elderly person where the memories come out very clearly but not in chronological order. Therefore Part 2 could be a continuation of the original. That isn't taking anything away from either film but because they were made roughly two years apart its one way of looking at it. I think it is unlikely that these films could be made now because of all sorts of 'improvements' in technique due to technological advances. These two films were produced at the time that they should have been made. I am not interested in the politics which apparently surrounded the making of these films the end result is all to me and in this case the result is magnificent. This film is another masterpiece. Enjoy the experience.";0;1;False tt0071562;johnnyboyz;28/06/2009;Two split, and very compelling, stories of men going through their own emotional grinders told amidst a backdrop of honor, family ties and trust.;8;"The second Godfather film kicks off in a similar fashion to the first; with a large and overwhelming gathering of friends and family on a sunny day within the confines of the Corleone family grounds. The event is the Holy Communion for Michael Corleone's (Pacino) son, and much like the wedding with which the first film began, it represents the beginning of a new venture; of a new tale, or of a new chapter in life or in the franchise that is the Godfather films, a new addition to the lives of this collection of Mafia based individuals whom are forever being deconstructed on screen. And what a tale the piece eventually branches out into, giving us the next chapter in the lives of those in the 'present' tense, as well as seamlessly incorporating an interesting mesh of the rising of one gangster twinned with his lust for revenge.

This second strand is, of course, the tale of Vito Corleone (De Niro); an Italian immigrant of the Andolini family based on Scicily and his coming of age in early 20th Century New York. The Godfather Part II is an extremely assured film; a film that is mostly everything a crime film can be, complete with a patient and mature aesthetic which helps in the distinct placing of it in the annuals of contemporary American cinema. The film is split into two equilibriums, one occurring from the late 1950's onwards while predominantly focusing on Michael and his family and friends, where as the other initially unfolds in the very early years of the 20th Century before branching out into the 1920s. This segment sees Vito marry; get involved in petty crime; come up against a local crime kingpin as well as have a son but always retain an eye on a certain larger goal which awaits him back in Scicily.

Each of the two equilibriums offer very different studies of the human condition. The equilibrium in the 'present' tense takes on a certain amount of substance to do with honour and trust; as well as incorporating the notion of expansion and moving on, which ties in with the idea of modernity and branching out in an attempt to keep up with the times. These are ideas Michael brings up in the first Godfather film, mainly through fear of his family's safety that they need to 'go straight' but additionally because he feels real estate and so forth acts as a healthy means, money-wise, to sustain the family for the years to come. The other equilibrium sees a much more simplistic and routine chain of events; a tale of revenge and a certain degree of ruthlessness brought about within one man as this study of this character evolves him from an innocent and frightened child; to a young man who is very much observant of this new world he's in; to cold-blooded killer.

The installation of Vito's story here is simplistic but very well done in both a story telling and character driven sense. Vito becomes aware of the notion of crime in New York and learns of the rules of hierarchy. He observes his initial, more local, nemeses in Don Fanucci (Moschin) in a close to voyeuristic manner; not necessarily gazing at the individual but at what the individual is: feared but additionally respected. Vito is not afraid of Fanucci, but the study of Vito's involvement in crime, which begins with the stealing of someone's rug and the temporary holding of a neighbour's illegal firearms, act as lures into a world within the historically proclaimed 'new world' he has already arrived in. You might view Vito's tale as a tragedy, since it is Vito's entry into this line of work that will propel him into the mindset of a criminal and, ultimately, it is this line of work that develops the attribute of a cold blooded killer which enables him to fulfil his goal of revenge.

The passage of film looking at Vito sees the film revisit one of Vito's ideation from the first edition; the notion of always killing for business and that there is nothing personal behind 'hits' - it is strictly business. Vito and his goal as a young man in New York exist before these rules are drawn up; Vito's hatred of Don Ciccio for the death of his father during the prologue is not business, but very much personal. It might be this that makes Vito's strand of The Godfather Part II the better of the two, and it may well be the reason people have more of a reaction to this edition of the trilogy; in the sense it is a piece establishing ideals and ideation's; before having, what is arguably its strongest character, confront what we already know he believes in and threaten its integrity.

Michael's segment of the film covers broader, more personal issues such as life and family ties and marital relationships. It is about expanding an empire on the outside just as much as it is the narrowing down of an empire on the inside: finding out who is actually who and where they stand. There is one such brilliant scene in which Michael and Fredo (Cazale) confront one another and they fall out of favour. It is an establishing of power as Michael, standing, towers over Fredo who up to this point has become more and more of a loose cannon. Michael's segment of The Godfather Part II isn't so much about the mafia or crime as much as it is the human condition; it uses said setting as a means to explore these conditions within a criminal world, as death and increased pressure to make moves dominate person's lives. Its dedicated and calm approach to psychologically chaotic and unnerving subject matter allows the film to retain a certain juxtaposed sense of dread throughout. Perhaps undoubtedly, The Godfather Part II will remain a somewhat timeless study of emotion, angst and so much more.";0;2;False tt0071562;eddie_olsen;07/06/2009;Was this sequel really necessary?;8;Yes, it was.

Coppola recently stated that part II and III shouldn't be made. I can agree with the latter. But part II is good. The thing impressing me most is how Coppola manages to make it look like the 50's/60's. Like a time machine! I owned this film on VHS and have seen it several times. The intertwined time line is genius. All actors do a good job and particularly de Niro.

This film is slow. Very slow. 200 minutes in a steady pace. Thus, many viewers will fall out from time to time. This makes it difficult to follow the complex story. Unlike part I it's sequel also suffers from not having any dramatic highs and lows. The film balance on the edge between unmatched drama and boredom.

But it's production, acting and realistic presentation of the period is more than enough to give it a good rating. The film will get better the second and third time you watch it.;0;2;False tt0071562;blackasp98;22/03/2009;All round the most fantastic mafioso film ever made;10;Seeing this film after the first one was probably the most classic ever made. Having us see Vito as he was before becoming the beloved godfather as we all know. His role was hailed by nearly all critics as the most powerful he has done. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing Al Pacino as Micheal. Using someone else would have been blasphemous, because i heard someone else was going to take the role because of certain arguments in the high ups department. But when the air cleared, it was back in business as usual. Francis ford Coppola has been in my view a very exacting director and screen writer to bring us such wonderful films. Like the godfather series and also apocalypse now which in my view had to be the greatest war film since Ben hur. Coppola hasn't done much lately these days but it would be nice if he could direct another film soon. One that has his time and critical notions to get him some more Oscars. And who ever gave this film a point of one out of ten really does not know how to appreciate great artwork in film that Coppola has given us in these past years. This person sounds to me like the usual gore in mafioso flicks like departed or good fellas or other films. not that i don't mind these films themselves, i do. But there are more ways to express art than just using guns in every frame of a mafia movie.;0;1;True tt0071562;RobertStern212;11/01/2009;One of our greats;8;"Now don't get me wrong - I loved this movie.

Francis Ford Coppolla, again, delivered a gripping drama.

Al Pacino is real, honest and we are always wondering about what he's thinking about.

Robert Duval plays it straight and honest. Until I saw Mr. Duval's other works, I didn't realize what a great job he did in this.

John Cazale delivers a really fine performance. It was a great loss when this great actor passed away.

The rest of the cast were just great!

I do feel that it sort of followed the formula of the first Godfather (one of my all time favorites). Especiaily in the end where everything is ""wrapped up.""

Maybe, because it didn't have the novelty of Godfather 1, that is why I wasn't as taken in by it.

As usual the music and production design and camera work were all fantastic.

All of this said, Godfather II is one of our great movies. I have been waiting for Mr. Coppola to give us more films like the movies he made in the 70s, such as the first two Godfathers, the Conversation, Appocolypse, etc.";0;1;False tt0071562;mrmoviefreak261-1;29/11/2008;Best sequel ever made;10;Godfather Part: II, I think, beats Godfather I. Reason why? Because it's genius, and it puts a great story in a more higher and crazier level, and it's not corny or disappointing. Michael Corleone is taking over his mob family, making drastic decisions and changes, that's pretty much defined, completely reckless. Godfather Part II is like a completely different story, because it's the new Godfather, who's more cruel that his father. Genius making itself more genius and smart. Godfather Part II is definitely, in my eyes, the best sequel ever made, and will probably be the greatest sequel. It's a wonder how such two great, and nearly perfect films could be ended with Godfather Part III, which was a complete letdown. Watch Part II, and don't watch Part III. Don't ruin a perfect sequel by watching an imperfect sequel.;0;2;False tt0071562;mr_popcorn;17/10/2008;The Godfather: Part II;9;"Michael Corleone: ""There are many things my father taught me here in this room. He taught me: keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.""

Francis Ford Coppola's legendary continuation and sequel to his landmark 1972 film, The Godfather, parallels the young Vito Corleone's rise with his son Michael's spiritual fall, deepening The Godfather's depiction of the dark side of the American dream. In the early 1900s, the child Vito flees his Sicilian village for America after the local Mafia kills his family. Vito (Robert De Niro) struggles to make a living, legally or illegally, for his wife and growing brood in Little Italy, killing the local Black Hand Fanucci (Gastone Moschin) after he demands his customary cut of the tyro's business. With Fanucci gone, Vito's communal stature grows, but it is his family (past and present) who matters most to him -- a familial legacy then upended by Michael's (Al Pacino) business expansion in the 1950s. Now based in Lake Tahoe, Michael conspires to make inroads in Las Vegas and Havana pleasure industries by any means necessary. As he realizes that allies like Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) are trying to kill him, the increasingly paranoid Michael also discovers that his ambition has crippled his marriage to Kay (Diane Keaton) and turned his brother, Fredo (John Cazale), against him. Barely escaping a federal indictment, Michael turns his attention to dealing with his enemies, completing his own corruption.

Review Although not as good as the first Godfather but a masterpiece nonetheless. The second chapter of the Corleone crime family is part prequel and part sequel as it chronicles the rise of a young Vito Corleone, played by a very young Robert De Niro, to Godfather status. The sequel part on the other hand tells of Michael's growing power over the Corleone crime organisation as he expands his grip from Nevada to 1950's Cuba.

A lot of people claims that this film is superior to the first Godfather but I beg to differ. I still find Godfather the best ever and this one coming in at a close second. With the absence of the movie magic that is Marlon Brando as the titular gangster, the backbone and spirit of Part II is just lost but at the least a very young and then unknown Robert De Niro gave justice to the Vito Corleone character and quite possibly one of his greatest performances of all time. What tops this cinematic milestone is Al Pacino as he leads a power house cast to greatness. From Robert Duvall to Diane Keaton and a terrific John Cazale, the powerhouse acting is one of the finest I've seen. The plot is more complex and involving the second time around as it delves deeper into the Corleone's family origins and it never gets boring and overly long as some people have suggested.

The Godfather II is a cinematic milestone. Highly recommended.";0;2;True tt0071562;movieguttx95;09/08/2008;Not Nearly as good as the first;8;I honestly didn't care for this movie much because of the switches between Don Corleone's child hood and what was going on with Michael, but i love the story, and I'm looking forward to the upcoming video game that was announced yesterday based on this movie. I bet the game would be fun, but the Movie of this is a good film to watch if you want to hear a story, but not if you want to just go in and have fun with action packed excitement, The ending was pretty well done, honestly, i really liked the ending, when fredo gets shot, (that's not the part i like) But the part where Michael has that flash back was pretty neat,

8/10;0;1;True tt0071562;m8;29/07/2008;The Godfather: Part II;;"The Godfather: Part II is filled with symbolic and powerful images.

A young Vito Corleone singing hymns while quarantined at Ellis Island; Vito executing his first hit with a towel-wrapped pistol; Michael bestowing a kiss of death on his brother Fredo; Michael gazing out his boathouse window as he awaits the fate of his brother.

The movie is shot artfully, though at times is lit a bit dimly. The location selection and set decoration are attentively and evocatively rendered as we follow Vito's rise.

It is easy to forget that the segments showing Michael's fall are also period shots, set about twenty-five years prior to filming, as they are unforced and ring true.";0;1;True tt0071562;zjdjc_24;12/07/2008;Fantastic.;10;The Godfather Part II is one of the most amazing films of all time. Al Pacino does a magnificent job of portraying the fading Michael Corleone, and cements the character into the memory of all. The whole concept of the movie is just perfect. Michael Corleone's decline from power is interlaced with the tale of his father's rise, and it is capped off with superb acting and screenplay.

The most powerful scenes come towards the end of the film. John Cazale does a great job of creating the Fredo character, and his relationship with Michael is heartbreaking. As the end of the movie approaches, Michael has become a ruthless man. He has killed men for business, he has killed his own brother. And he is alone because of it. The second last scene takes us back to an earlier time. Everybody is happy and laughing, but Michael is again alone. The last scene is back in present time, and depicts Michael sitting on a bench alone, contemplating what he has done. This ending captures what the film is about, the human element in a violent story.;0;1;True tt0071562;RiffRaffMcKinley;20/01/2008;Let's Do the Kiss of Death Again!;10;"At 200 minutes, the second installment in the timeless ""Godfather"" saga is the longest. And it just isn't quite as good as the delectable original. That being said, it definitely ranks right up there. With a broader, more epic storyline showing the parallels between father Vito (Robert De Niro in his best performance yet) and son Michael (the always, in these films, spot-on Al Pacino), GP2 fascinates audiences with its ingeniously undetectable staging and darker story (Kiss of Death and all).

It looks and feels only slightly different from the original, but the difference is good. This is not an attempt to capitalize on its predecessor. Nor is it an effort to repeat that classic. It is simply an expansion of the saga, another bookmark in the great tome of American cinema. And nothing any nay-sayer can... well, say, can change that.";0;1;False tt0071562;vovazhd;14/01/2008;More than worthy continuation of the Godfather saga;10;"The Godfather is considered to be among the greatest films ever made, both critically and publicly. Its sequel, The Godfather: Part II is a continuation of Michael Corleone's goal to create a powerful and respectable family empire. At the same time, the film gives a history of his father, Vito Corleone (played brilliantly by Robert De Niro), and his rise to power at a young age. Both of these plot lines are excellent parallels, although Michael's is much more depressing because of the internal conflict with his brother, Fredo.

The plot is much more widespread this time, but still packs a punch. There are so many classic scenes that you'll be left much influenced far after the film is over. Some of the technical aspects are taken directly from the first film, such as the music score (although it feels even more refined). The acting is also comparable to the first film; although Marlon Brando is lost, Robert De Niro completely makes up for this. The returning characters give performances that are worthy of the first film.

It is also longer than the already lengthy first film. All the time is used well, so thats not too big of a problem. The tension and suspense from the first film is lacking, but a new mood of uncertainty is produced. The conflict is based more on the characters than the plot itself.

The Godfather: Part II is as good as a sequel can get. Like its predecessor, it is worthy of a place among the all time great films. I would probably give the first one a nod because it was more fresh and original. But if you get yourself situated to watch this film, you cannot go wrong.";0;1;False tt0071562;dead47548;09/01/2008;Sensational.;9;Keeps the authentic, beautiful and rich feeling of the first film, while adding a level of intensity and interest throughout. The idea of producing parallel stories depicting the rise of a young Vito Corleone (played to perfection by Robert De Niro) and the loneliness and betrayal of Michael Corleone (the subtle and frighteningly intense Al Pacino) was a brilliant one. However, this is where the majority of the film's flaws lie. In creating these two separate stories, they made one much more interesting than the other. When watching the slow turn of paranoia and danger in Michael's life, all I can manage to think about is what will happen next in Vito Corleone's rise to becoming the Godfather. Either way, these are two of the strongest and most complex characters of all time. Vito loses his father, brother and mother to the same man who he luckily escapes from. He gains a family and rises to power, murdering another Don in the process in one of the most intensely suspenseful scenes of all time, and returns to confront this now bitter and alone man.

The death of Don Ciccio is one of the strongest scenes of the film, and certainly portrays how much more brilliant De Niro is when he's playing quiet strength instead of shouting at the top of his lungs. In the late Don Ciccio, we also see a parallel to the story of Michael Corleone throughout the film. A man who is simply trying to keep his family in tact, while remaining at the same level of respect and power as his late father. Instead, he falls into a world of betrayal on all fronts and the constant paranoia of being at the top of the food chain. He begins to feel as though he is the strongest man, waiting for the inevitable opportunity for another to bring him to the grave (just like what Vito had previously done many years ago). This leads to a life of utter alienation, even from his family. Three images in this film portray the most sympathetic form of isolation in cinematic history (Michael looking out the window as Fredo sails away, Michael sitting in the park bench alone at the end, and Michael sitting alone at the dinner table while everyone else joyously surprises Vito on his birthday). We see the loneliness and rejection of a man who lives his life for his family, but eventually loses them all. The final dinner scene has so much complexity it left me stunned well after the credits rolled. Definitely a film that has earned it's iconic status, featuring two performances that rightfully lit the fuel for the two most acclaimed careers the film industry has ever seen.;0;1;True tt0071562;johno1100;24/12/2007;His love controls his evil.;10;Francis Ford Coppola's sequel to his original Godfather movie continues with the themes of greed, family and corruption whilst telling the tale of how an infamous mob lord's son handles the huge burden on his shoulders. (Don) Michael Corleone has changed vastly from when we first saw him at his sisters wedding in the original godfather. He no longer has the will to make a name for himself without having to rely on his background. He is still calm and calculating but with a more sinister feel and the feel of a man so powerful and brutal that he is feared by most people up to the point were his own family are frightened by his potential and he is left alone in his life which the ending symbolises. With the scenes of his father's past to give us an insight into the rise of the Corleone family and a further insight into the character of the original Godfather Vito Corleone. Michael makes wise investments in pre revolutionary Havana Whilst continuing with his business in the U.S some may argue the movie is giving a almost propaganda style view at communist Cuba. But if that was the case the American senators would be portrayed as straight politicians and not corrupt businessmen. So the movie ends with Michael delving into a brutal but yet cunning mindset up until the point were he kills his brother. There is no secret that he loves his family but the lengths he would go for them are terrifying. Michael ends the movie with his wife having left him taking his children. The ending shows how a young innocent men has turned to a point where he has alienated his wife and killed his brother. Fantastic film.;0;1;True tt0071562;Batkid1;28/10/2007;One of the few sequels thats just as good as the last!;10;This movie succeeds in both quality and follow-up. The first one is, no doubt, a masterpiece that had literally no flaws, with the exception of being very one, but a lot of older films are like that so might as well get over it.

This sequel is a couple of years after the original where young Michael Corleone just took over his late father's crime organization and, while, progressing, is also having some personal problems that interfere with his business. He has nearly been killed by a traitor within his organization, his wife is tired of living this way and ends up wanting a divorce, his sister wants to move back in, he is trying to take over a Las Vegas casino forcefully, etc.

While some people might think this is all pointless killings and depressing tragedies, it's really all about Michael and his actions which cause consequences around him. He had originally sworn not to be part of his father's illegal business and he ended up being like his dad anyway.

What's also cool about this film is it also explains his late father's background, which is explained through flashbacks. It consists of Vito coming to America, adopting henchmen and stopping another Don from ruining his and his town's life.

It's once again full of a full-star cast, excellent cinematography and scenery, courtroom drama, top-notch acting and good writing/directing.;0;1;True tt0071562;valadas;29/09/2007;The Corleone Saga goes on;7;If you have not seen the first movie you won't understand this one fully. In fact it continues the Corleone story almost without break, with Don Vito's son taking brilliantly the role of his father. A few well inserted flashbacks will help you to understand better the biography of Don Vito thus completing a few aspects the first movie had left in the obscurity. The rest is the usual story of the struggle for power among mafia families but very well told in a captivating way. Which doesn't prevent the director to go on presenting those gangsters like human beings with their family problems interfering sometimes with their criminal activities. Murder is an ordinary event normally used to punish a betrayal but also to attain the gangsters' purposes in the attainment of their businesses. Although the acting lacks the superb performance of a sacred monster like Marlon Brando in the first part of this saga, it's good enough and all players do their parts convincingly well with special prominence to Al Pacino and Diane Keaton.;0;3;False tt0071562;RainDogJr;23/09/2007;Robert De Niro is great;8;And that part is the only part that i really love about this film. I'm a big fan of Mario Puzo's novel and The Godfather is my favorite film of all times but i was very disappointed about this film. I mean if you make a perfect film, won 3 Oscars,became a success director ,why do you have the need to create a new history and make another film. Coppola could be one of my all time favorite director because of the Godfather,Apocalypse Now,The Conversation and Rumble Fish but whit this film, jack and of course The Godfather part III he disappointed me very much. I wish he only do 1 film of the Godfather trilogy, the one that contains all the parts of the novel and maybe this could be the perfect film.

This film is a little boring because now you don't have Brando and now you don't have the essence of the novel, now is like more of the same whit out the charisma of Sonny and whit Pacino more mature and more boring. I don't say that this is a bad film because Robert De Niro always save the day (I really love the part of young Vito) but what i don't like is the fact that Coppola wants to make more films from a perfect beginning so 7.6/10.

And please don't watch the Godfather III.;0;3;True tt0071562;pinkliz41;25/03/2007;Not as good as the first, but still CLASSIC;9;This was not as good as the first, but still a really great film. With its ultra violent execution scenes and well deserved credited acting marks the second film in the ultimate gangster franchise. Director Francis Ford Coppola thought of the need to only make two films, this one and the first, but he didn't really intend to make a third but in the end did. Truly though, the first two were the best, i think there was no apparent reason for making the third one, which is supposed to be the worst/not as good one, compared to the first two classics. Number two follows Michael Corleones early life. It flash backs every now and then to his father Don Corleone played by Robert De Niro who does some dirty deals and some killings. So there are two parts to the story, these are: Michael, in present form and Don Corleone, so you can see what Don Corleone did to become Don.

The acting is top quality, most probably one of Al Pacinos greatest moments to shine and Robert De Niro, who also ma not be leading actor but still acts like he is. Diana Keaton, who plays Michael wife also demonstrates that she can bring to life the suffering and shocking conclusion of Michael and her splitting up, as you will see in the third one.

This film including the acting and direction all made this film worth wild, because of the extreme enthusiasm and dedication from both the cast and film crew.;0;4;True tt0071562;durd;09/02/2007;Synopsis;10;The Godfather Part 2 is a work of cinematic genius.

It is the longest of the three and is both a sequel and a prequel to The Godfather.

Al Pacino is very good as Michael Corleone and Robert DeNiro is fantastic as a young Vito Corleone.

This film sees friendships break and families split.

The most tragic part of the film is when Don Corleone orders for his own brother Fredo to be killed.

He is killed on a boat whilst fishing for his nephew.

Although it is very good, it is the weakest of the trilogy and i found it just a tad too long.;0;2;True tt0071562;paul2001sw-1;02/02/2007;More family business;8;"Marlon Brando plays no part in this sequel to 'The Godfather', but Al Pacino is still on hand, playing his son, and Robert de Nero joins the cast playing the Godfather's younger self. The two films together can thus be seen as representing the passing of a torch from the best actor of one generation to two of the best of the next. And it's amazing to see how fully the two youngsters come to inhabit their roles, and how fresh their portrayals are. The chronology of the story means they share no screen time; but when they eventually did come together on celluloid, over twenty years later in Michael Mann's 'Heat', they appeared as clapped-out, over-acting, stereotypes of themselves - whereas here they simply play their parts, to perfection. Pacino especially is good (while de Nero attempts to impersonate Brando); while among the supporting cast John Cazale (who also co-starred with Pacino in 'Dog Day Afternoon') is also exceptional . The film shares other virtues with its predecessor: a stately pace, but masterful directing ensuring that the film never bores; and a great, haunting score. However, I don't quite find this film the equal of its predecessor: it lacks a bit of focus in comparison. The two stories (of the Godfather's early years, and his son's later ones), do not fit seamlessly and the second, major story is too political, lacking the visceral impact of the story told in 'The Godfather Part One'; while the other story is simpler, but almost not political enough. A third story, maybe more interesting (how the Corleones got rich, presumably under prohibition) is not covered at all. In summary, for all the plaudits given to this film, I don't feel it adds that much to its predecessor; but it's still a film of the highest quality, and another reminder (if needed) of quite how good an actor the young Pacino was.";0;1;False tt0071562;hmas_doug;30/01/2007;Coppola has once again achieved perfection;10;This is an absolutely brilliant movie. The outstanding acting and complex storyline will definitely keep you hooked until the last minute. Even though this movie is over 3 hours, i wished that it could have gone on for longer because it was just so brilliant that i couldn't get enough of it.

I have discovered that it is impossible to sum up this movie in a short space, as there are so many complex intertwining plot lines going on all at once.

I really do think that it is tough to decide between this and the first Godfather film but i do think that the first one does have a slight edge just because of Marlon Brando's brilliance which is almost but not quite paralleled by Al Pacino's outstanding effort in this movie. Also an extremely good performance by Robert de Niro as young Vito because Robert de Niro is a genius and i just loved it when he sliced the chest of Don Ciccio.

All in all this is without doubt one of the greatest films ever made, with some of the best acting ever, which i will never grow tired of watching.;0;1;True tt0071562;Dr_Coulardeau;09/01/2007;La Vegas is out, Cuba too, so what's left for the mafia?;9;"Times go on a-changing. The second generation, with a few flashbacks to the very origins of the Corleone family, how the last male survivor of the family is smuggled out of Sicily to the USA where he can start a new line, by changing his name circumstantially since it is a not too wise customs officer that gives him unknowingly a new family name, and without forgetting the vengeance he will have to achieve later rather than sooner for the killing of his father and brothers by the local Don in his village in Sicily. We see him establish his business in the 1920s by killing the local mafia boss in his neighborhood and taking over in a more humane and just way. But this is a flashback. We are interested in the next generation and what they can do in the 1950s. The takeover has already been dealt with in the first part. The appointed son for this takeover has already asserted his power over the five families that could challenge him in the previous film. Now he tries to develop his business. Drugs had been allowed but he remains rather distant from that trafficking. He develops his business in gambling, hotels, entertainment, in one word luxury industry or commerce. He tries to get into Las Vegas but is rebuffed by a local Senator, so he forgets about it. Then he tries to move into Cuba and take over some business there but too late it is the arrival of Castro. So he goes back to New York and Nevada, back to his traditional activities. But these attempts enable Coppola to show some new problematics that are coming up in the second half of the 20th century. First of all the strong sectarianism Italians have to face from politicians who declare they support Italian-Americans as good patriots in front, and behind try to make them pay twice a service or to ostracize them out of their constituencies. At the same time they have to face congressional and judicial complications with hearings about their businesses and business practices that are accused of being too criminal to be accepted. In other words we are beyond the time of Al Capone and Prohibition. And the world is also changing. Cuba of course is a big change. But women are no longer what they used to be in this Sicilian culture. Women do not want to be simple ancillary appendices to men they do not see any more. This second generation Godfather is confronted to the abortion of his third child and second son by his wife while he is in Cuba witnessing Castro's conquest of the island. Then she tries to take his children away and eventually get a divorce. She will get nothing except a separation but not the children. He also has to fight against some remnants of the old world that are handicaps and obstacles to his projects, such as the fact that he is the head of the family business and yet he is not the eldest son : hence he has to face his elder brothers, and that has been going on for a long time. The world is changing his way this time and he has to fight against the survival of what the world used to be. At this point this trilogy is becoming a vast fresco about the history of Italian-Americans or should I say Sicilian-Americans ? When the fresco is too vast we can wonder if it does not lose some of its possible meaning by diluting it into too many elements, periods and events. But it is certainly interesting to follow this intricate family history that verges onto a sitcom at times.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne";0;1;True tt0071562;wereuat06-1;22/11/2006;If not the finest sequel ever made.;9;When i first saw this movie I had just seen the God Father 1 which blew my breath away i didn't expect much out of sequel especially one that had to compare to that. So i watched it and i was speechless a sequel that arguably could have been better then the first one. It is without a doubt the greatest sequel ever made. It proves that if u put Al Pacino in a crime movie there can be no wrong doing. Francis Ford Cappola comes back with another great classic to be put into the movie books. This one had a little more aggressiveness and anger which i liked and brought me back into the world of the God Father. I can not think of a better sequel then this. This will always be a classic in my mind.9out10.;0;1;False tt0071562;Faisal_Flamingo;03/11/2006;The Best Sequel Ever;10;"I still like the original more but this sequel comes just right after the original .. usually sequels sucks but this one is amazing .. it is almost like if The Godfather is one movie divided in two and this is the 2nd three hours. The thing that bugs about this movie that it is a little bit lengthy and a bit complicated which makes it a little bit boring sometimes. Al Pacino did a great job and he gave us a performance we can't refuse.. I still prefer his performance in the original but it was also awesome in this one too.

Allow to quote a critics opinion that truly speaks my mind .. it is (Steve Rhodes, Internet Reviews)

"" Is it true that most sequels pale in significance to the original? Absolutely. The BATMAN series is one of many such examples. But is THE GODFATHER: PART II an exception? Yes and no. I am a big fan of both pictures, but prefer the original slightly for its originally and the intensity of the character's emotions. The sequel is more cerebral which is not bad, but it lacks some of the punch of the original. But, these are two great movies""";0;1;False tt0071562;ReelCheese;09/10/2006;A Smart, Enduring Classic;9;"This smart, enduring classic isn't quite as good as THE GODFATHER, but then again, few films are. A young Al Pacino returns as Michael Corleone, head of a major crime family eager to expand into new territory. His trials and tribulations -- business and personal -- are spliced with flashback sequences detailing his infamous father's journey to America and rise to mob power.

THE GODFATHER PART II is magnificent in so many ways. The acting is impeccable, with Pacino outdoing himself and an unrecognizable Robert De Niro, as young Vito Corleone, stealing the show. They're surrounded by arguably one of the strongest supporting casts ever assembled, highlighted by Robert Duvall, Talia Shire, G.D. Spradlin and Diane Keaton. Despite a screen time of well over three hours, the film doesn't need a grand soundtrack or flashy editing to help hold our interest. The actors do that just fine.

Of course the performers don't do it alone. The direction by Francis Ford Coppola is inspired, allowing the film fill out its lengthy running time in superior fashion. The writing and plot are absorbing, allowing this sequel to stay true to its predecessor while bringing something new and different to the screen. In fact it would seem everyone involved, both behind and in front of the camera, worked in perfect accord. We come away with the sense that had just one cog in the wheel been less than superb, the end result would not have been so monumental.

THE GODFATHER PART II requires a substantial investment of time, but it's more than worth it. Movies like this aren't just handed their outstanding reputations; they earn them.";0;1;False tt0071562;mighty_red;27/09/2006;The Greatest;10;"It has become rather clichéd to say the Godfather II is a person's favourite film. It's not my absolute favourite but certainly up there. It has everything and nothing is overdone. There is no ""bad acting"" and the dialogue is intriguingly calm for the often very fiery situations.

There is an episode of the Soprano's where the lads are discussing their favourite scene in the film. Tony claims his is the scenery in Sicily when Vito goes back to visit. I would have to agree to an extent, but when Vito scales the roofs in Little Italy, stalking Don Fanucci is simply magnificent.

The Godfather II is not so much a sequel. It can stand alone as a story. I actually teach the film in high school and connect it with Steinbeck's text, Of Mice and Men.

This film is simply a masterstroke and gets better with age and repeated viewing.";0;2;True tt0071562;MrBiddle;23/08/2006;I'll make him an offer he can't refuse;10;THE GODFATHER PART II, Very well-made. Excellent juxtapousition, notice the part when the graphic match between Pacino's face and DeNiro's is seamless when he switches periods. (During the scene when Michael learns about upset news, and younger Vito sorrowful over his ailing baby).

The ending is a study of how Michael Corleone can plunge into darkness, and a meditation of the decline on the family. You will also see a lot of goodness and generosity (and also brutal ruthlessness) of the young Vito Corleone, portrayed amazingly by Robert DeNiro. All other players around, competent in their parts.;0;1;True tt0071562;Spuzzlightyear;30/06/2006;1 then 3 then 2?;7;I took a curious path heading towards this movie. I saw Part I, for the first time, a couple of months ago, saw part III about a month ago, and finally Part II just this past week. The Godfather Part II is of course better than Part III in so many ways, but the first one will always be the superior. Now, I have to say though, that I really didn't find the movie as strong as the original, and I'm surprised that so many people think they're both equal when clearly they're not. II starts to suffer from over-bloatedness (which III had in spades). I wasn't involved in the Robert Deniro backstory as some people, I was somewhat groaning when we were going back in time.. But in the present time, like when Al Pacino is on the screen, THAT I enjoyed. I think Pacino is at his best here, since he knows the character so well. Keaton and all the rest of them are great too. Oh and Robert Duvall. Can't get enough of Duvall either as Tom Hagen, who actually, by far, is my favorite of all the characters in the Godfather movies.;0;5;False tt0071562;theshadow908;29/05/2006;Superior to the original.;9;The Godfather Part II is a complicated film. In its 3 hour run time it manages to pull off telling two stories. One that takes place in the 1950s, and one that takes place in the 1920s. In the 1920s we see Vito Corleone arriving in New York City and making a name for himself among the wealthy gangsters, starting a family, and eventually becoming Don of the Corleone crime family. The exact parallel is the 1950s story, where we see Vito's son Michael in his new role as Don of the Corleone family as he starts his own family. The Godfather Part II is a superior film to the original because it tells a much more interesting story, and it does a better job at portraying what an organized crime family is really like.

All of the great actors from the original are back including James Caan in a flashback sequence. Al Pacino comes across as a great bad guy, and he seems to be ten times more cold hearted than his father ever was. He's a changed man. He started off a legitimate man who wanted nothing to do with his family's business, but now he's more into it than ever before. This movie features Al Pacino's second best performance in a film (second to Dog Day Afternoon), and it shows what kind of actor he truly is. This is the film that made Robert De Niro a star, and rightly so. Robert De Niro portrays young Vito Corleone on his rise to power in New York. This is Robert De Niro's first big role and he plays it like he's been doing it for years. The best thing about it is that just about every line of his dialogue is in Italian, and yet you still enjoy his performance.

The Godfather Part II contains the most realistic view of the mafia ever portrayed in film. In fact it's so realistic that the central characters don't even refer to it as the mafia. The Godfather Part II tells a more interesting story than the original, and it's more fun to sit through. The Godfather Part II is a great film that is both dramatic and epic as well as entertaining. Great movie.

9/10;0;2;False tt0071562;hgieldavies;21/05/2006;outstanding!;10;Possibly the greatest movie ever made? I would have thought so. The fact that people of 13 years of age still dress up as them at parties pretty much says it all. The whole show kept me hooked from the beginning right through till the final moment.

The music was amazing and instantly recognisable to anyone who has seen the film. I was a seduced by it and i would imagine most people are. The acting was superb and the people were relatable unlike some of the rubbish that has come out of the movie industry lately. If anyone has not seen this film, i suggest you find it now! Whether it be in a rent-a-video shop or actually buying it.;0;1;True tt0071562;DJAkin;05/05/2006;Great sequel;10;This movie was great!! Just as good as part 1. I was amazed at how long this movie was and how good it was. The GODFATHER is now Al Pacino's character. He was menacing. It's amazing how innocent he was at the beginning of part 1 and then he became more dark and ruthless toward the end. He even did unspeakable things. That dude who played Fredo was also in DOG DAY AFTERNOON. I am sure that he and Al were friends. Nobody can make movies like Francis. The best parts of this were the flashbacks to Bobby DeNiro as Vito Corleone. That was just amazing. I have seldom seen a movie as good as the GODFATHER. Way to go Francis. Way to go everybody!;0;1;False tt0071562;guster-1;28/04/2006;best film of the three godfather movies;9;I love this movie not only because I'm half Italian, but also because I liked the history of the Corleone family and how the film flips from Michael's story to his father's story. The cinematography in the film is fantastic, especially the scenes in Sicily, but that should not take anything away from the stirring and very moving sound track as well. The reason why I think this is better than the first Godfather film is the fact that we get to learn more about why Vito, michael's father, came to America, and how difficult it was to scrape a living in the era, especially for southern Italians who thought they would escape the mafia and poverty by emmigrating to America, only to find they had both already got there before them. Every time I see the scene when the ship arrives in New York, with the fantastic and very emotive score accompanying it, I can't help but cry my heart out, it just struck a chord. Please, don't just watch this film because of it's mafia content, because it has so much more to offer, not only with it's fantastic performances(De Niro particularly, as it's hard to speak Sicilian dialect at the best of times), but also because it gives us an insight in to why a group of people would want to leave their homeland.;0;1;True tt0071562;Im_your_Papi;06/01/2006;De Niro excellent...bad Italian speaker though.;10;I'm of Hispanic descent, but happen to have picked up the Italian language to a point, that I can hold a conversation with a native speaker in most any subject, but I didn't understand almost nothing of what Deniro was talking about. He said a few ramblings that I understood, but the rest a nothing but a made up language made up to be Italian...then again, since I do have Sicilian friends, agreed with me. Sicily, a part of Italy, has its own dialect, but I never have heard it though. Since I have two close Sicilian friends, they really don't talk about their dialect. But if you ask me...if young Vito spoke a dialect, how come the children didn't speak the same dialect, especially in the Sollozo/McCluskey meeting Michael scene. Sollozo di speak the Italian I know, and Michael also spoke it well enough and understood it well enough to understand Sollozo so McCluskey wouldn't understand what they were talking about. Also an addition to Michael in Sicily when meeting Apollonia's father that he wanted to meet his daughter. He could have used the Sicilian dialect. Because according to on of my buddies, they are taught in reality two languages: Italian and Sicilian. In this case, Deniro could have practiced Italian a bit harder, the language itself is not difficult to speak and pronounce. But what irks me the most is butchering a beautiful language like Italian.;0;2;False tt0071562;soxfan6978;29/11/2005;One of the Best Films of the 20th Century;10;"Moving through the deep shadows and heavy glooms of his vast estate, Michael Corleone presides over the destruction of his own spirit in ""The Godfather, Part II."" The character we recall from ""The Godfather"" as the best and brightest of Don Vito's sons, the one who went to college and enlisted in the Marines, grows into a cold and ruthless man, obsessed with power. The film's closing scenes give us first a memory of a long-ago family dinner, and then Michael at mid-life, cruel, closed, and lonely. He's clearly intended as a tragic figure.

The Corleone saga, as painted by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo in two films totaling nearly seven hours, has been a sort of success story in reverse. In a crazy way, ""The Godfather"" and its sequel belong in the same category with those other epics of immigrant achievement in America, ""The Emigrants"" and ""The New Land."" The Corleone family worked hard, was ambitious, remembered friends, never forgave disloyalty, and started from humble beginnings to become the most powerful Mafia organization in the country. If it were not that the family business was crime, these films could be an inspiration for us all.

Coppola seems to hold a certain ambivalence toward his material. Don Vito Corleone as portrayed by Marlon Brando in ""The Godfather"" was a man of honor and dignity, and it was difficult not to sympathize with him, playing with his grandchild in the garden, at peace after a long lifetime of murder, extortion, and the rackets. What exactly were we supposed to think about him? How did Coppola feel toward the Godfather? ""The Godfather, Part II"" moves both forward and backward in time from the events in ""The Godfather,"" in an attempt to resolve our feelings about the Corleones. In doing so, it provides for itself a structural weakness from which the film never recovers, but it does something even more disappointing: It reveals a certain simplicity in Coppola's notions of motivation and characterization that wasn't there in the elegant masterpiece of his earlier film.

He gives us, first of all, the opening chapters in Don Vito's life. His family is killed by a Mafia don in Sicily, he comes to America at the age of nine, he grows up (to be played by Robert De Niro), and edges into a career of crime, first as a penny-ante crook and then as a neighborhood arranger and power broker: a man, as the movie never tires of reminding us, of respect.";0;1;False tt0071562;jjdeagle;12/11/2005;The Godfather Part 2 continues the Corleone saga.;10;The Godfather Part begins with Michael as the King of the Corleone crime family. Michael is nearly assassinated by Hyman Roth played by Oscar nominee Lee Strasberg. Michael sets up a partnership with Roth in Cuba but they are ousted during Castro's overthrow of Batista. Michael finds out that his older brother Fredo had betrayed him. Meanwhile, young Vto Corleone is rising to power. Rober De Niro won his first Academy Award as the young Don. As Deniro rises, the story flips back to Michael's fall. Michael is investigated by a crime commission. G D Spradlin is excellent in the role as a a politician who is blackmailed into supporting Michael. Michael V Gazzo is excellent as Frankie 5 Angels.;0;1;True tt0071562;leperish;10/08/2005;Certinly the best sequel ever made, and arguably the best film ever.;10;"As a huge fan of the Godfather series, (yes I even like part three) I have to say that part two is my personal favorite. Part one shows us the title of Godfather being passed from Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) to his son Michael (Al Pacino).

The second film begins with Vito as a young boy being smuggled out of Sicily after his entire family was murdered by the local mafia. Then the story re-joins Michael in his now powerful position as mafia Don, and head of the Corleone family.

The film is divided into sections of the present-day story of Michael trying to gear the family to bigger deals in Cuba with his fathers old partner Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) while also dealing with the uprising of the Cuban rebels; and the betrayal of his brother Fredo (John Cazale). One of the great scenes is when he gives Fredo the ""kiss of death"" at the New Year's party.

The other section of the film is comprised of a young Vito (as played by Robert De Niro) making his way in old town New York. It shows his way up the organized crime ladder, making friends and connections that would later (and earlier) carry the story.

Francis Ford Coppola delivers masterful genius in this epic reprisal of a gangster classic. He uses soft, brown textures and dull sepia tones to perfection. The lighting has yet to be duplicated in any film. The way some of these shots are framed have been studied in film schools the world over. In short, if your looking for the epitamy of cinematic enjoyment mixed with that good ole' classic gangster violence, this is the movie for you. I would recommend it to anyone.";0;1;True tt0071562;noorur;21/07/2005;The only sequel that surpasses the original;10;"This film is one of the best films I have ever been, with the best actors ever cast; from Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton to ROBERT DE NIRO! Both megastars, Pacino and DeNiro do not out do each other, and play their roles really well, as their Oscar nominations reflect this, with DeNiro actually winning one! Deniro played young Vito Corleone, and the film showed how the Vito Corleone became so powerful, from a peasant in Sicily to a big-time Godfather! Deniro's part was a prequel to the original film. From my point of view, Rober De Niro wasn't trying to play as young Vito Corleone, but tried to play as young Marlon Brando (RIP). He played it so well, that the Deniro scenes were more enjoyable to watch than Pacino's scenes. The directing was great in this film, and how the camera angles taken, the lightening, and how well the movie flowed.

This film is probably the best film of the 19th century, with the best actors, the best directing and a great storyline. This is easily a MUST-SEE!!";0;2;False tt0071562;ian-smith;06/07/2005;A Very Close Call;10;"When I first saw Godfather Part I, I was a little skeptical about the sequel. There really didn't seem to be a lot to build on. Now, a couple of years later, and far wiser, I must say that in my humble opinion, that Godfather Part II is just a little bit better than the first. Again, the same cast is here, save for the characters who passed away in the first chapter. Once again, I believe that the actors gave unscrupulous performances, some far better than they gave in the first Godfather. Talia Shire, for example: sure her character gets a lot more screen time in this one, however she seemed much more grounded and into character in this sequel. Al Pacino completely takes Michael Corleone to a completely new and fantastic level, completely making a 360 degree turn from the Michael we first met as a Marine Corps Captain who wanted nothing to do with the family business. He actually becomes a feared and somewhat hated character in these movies. In this sense, hated is not a bad thing. You want to hate him for killing his brother. You want to hate him for the way he treats his wife. The dramatic turn of events between Michael and Kay is so powerful it is awe-inspiring. And how can you not love the story that is also being told at the same time of a young Vito Corleone? A marvelous performance by a young Robert De Niro, who brings to life the beginnings of who would become the unquestioned lord of legalized crime. De Niro is marvelous, and the only actor who could have possibly pulled it off better is Marlon Brando himself, but for obvious reasons could not play this role. You see a young Vito witness the deaths of his mother, father, and older brother and escape from the local crime boss in Corleone, Italy on a ship bound for America. You see him as a young man, graciously losing his job because he had to be let go, and then gaining friends and earning respect whenever he himself kills the ""Black Hand"", a figure in the New York slums who took full advantage of his high position. The reason I believe this movie is better than the first is only because of the more complex story and the dramatic, bittersweet climax of the characters. This movie is truly brilliant, and it is a very close call between this one and the first which one is the best. Truly beautiful.";0;2;True tt0071562;danmcn61;06/06/2005;Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer;;"I have a question for all you GF experts:(SPOILER) When Michael is talking to Frank Pantangeli at his old house, he tells Frank that his father (Don Vito) taught him to ""keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"". In the 40+ times I have seen this movie, I still don't understand that line at all. I know it is a Corleone family trait to make nice with a potential enemy and then kill him when he least expects it, Ir Pauly the driver and Sollozzo, but there has to be more to it than that.

Also, another line from GFII has always bothered me, when Michael is eating an orange (of course) and talking about killing Hyman Roth, he says to Rocco, ""If history has taught us anything, it's that anyone can be assassinated"", which in my (admittedly, mediocre) mind is nonsense. If ""anyone"" can be assassinated, then I think Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Khomeini, Saddam, Bin Laden, etc... easily disprove that theory. All were worthy of assassination by any definition, yet none died from outside assistance.";0;2;True tt0071562;tylerdurden111111;31/05/2005;Few if any sequels live up to the original, but this one does!;10;"This movie is every bit as good as the original. Perhaps a bit less entertaining, but surely the more intelligent of the two movies. The plot line is far more complex and may be difficult to follow for those folks with less than ideal intellectual capacities. The plot line takes us back and forth from the present in Las Vegas, New York, Miami and Havana, Cuba to the past in Sicily where it traces the early life of the father Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in the original and brought back to life by Robert Deniro in the flashback scenes) as he struggles to survive in Sicily as a child, eventually making his way to America. For those of you, like myself, of Italian-American heritage, the scene where the young boy arrives in Ellis Island is especially poignant.

I don't want to give away too much of the plot, but the central theme of the movie is that Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) must come to grips with the fact that despite all his efforts, he cannot escape becoming the same kind of man as his father, perhaps even worse. And in the end he must deal with betrayal and confront the ironic ends to which he will go to ""protect his family"" at all costs. The lessons in this blown up morality play are profound and timeless.

Like the original movie, the acting is brilliant, perhaps even better than the first movie thanks to a stunning turn by Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth (very loosely based on real life mob figure Meyer Lansky) and a typically awesome performance by Robert Deniro as the young Vito.

10 out 10";0;1;False tt0071562;dencar_1;21/04/2005;A Superior Sequel;;"GODFATHER II simply destroys the myth that most sequels to major films are usually inferior products and rather bad ideas. The film easily ranks as one of the finest sequels in movie history and, in fact, may be preferred by audiences to the original! While GODFATHER I is unquestionably a classic film and makes virtually every critic's all-time top 10 movie list, GODFATHER II stands right beside it combining the three mighty elements of movie making: engrossing script, brilliant direction, and powerful performances from every actor who steps in front of the camera.

The sequel simply has so many watchable and engrossing scenes in the Corleone family saga that audiences never seem to tire of them even after viewing them over and over for years. The opening sequence at the Corleone First Communion celebration along the blue waters of Lake Tahoe is a fresh and welcome juxtaposition to the grim, New York Depression years of GODFATHER I. The story moves intriguingly along as the confrontation between Michael Corleone and Nevada Senator Geary serve as the impetus for the family's new business interests: establishing a foothold in the Las Vegas hotel empire. Geary refuses to assist Corleone's attempt to acquire a liquor license; Michael's sister Connie (Talia Shire) asking for money so she can marry her beau Merle (Troy Donahue); the shift to Las Vegas where weak Fredo's buddy-buddy relationship with Hyman Roth (Lee Strassberg) seals his doom; the attempted Michael Corleone assassination attempt at the compound; senate racketeering hearings; the brilliant performance of acting maestro Lee Strasberg as Corleone antagonist Hyman Roth; the bitterly unforgiving retribution Michael delivers to his brother Freddo and wife Kay (Diane Keaton); and, of course, the entire flashback to the early Vito Corleone days in early 1900's New York where we witness Michael Corleone relieving the Italian community of the ""The Black Hand"" and thereby establishing the roots of the family syndicate.

Not to be overlooked, is the memorable performance of gravel-voiced Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo) who plays one of the Corleone's most loyal lieutenants. Pentangeli's wrath over not being able to wipe out the competing Rosario Brothes spills over to his betrayal of the Corleone's which ultimately seals his own doom. After being placed in the Witness Protection Program and delivering a deposition, Pentangeli sits at the senate committee table ready to sing--until he glimpses the sudden appearance of his brother from Italy being escorted into the courtroom ominously by Michael. Pentangeli reverses himself and refuses to incriminate Corleone.

If there's a lesson that comes through just about every frame of all three GODFATHER films, it's that trusted disciples almost always become a Judas. Virtually every loyal Corleone lieutenant, it seems, eventually betrays the family and is doomed to be crushed under the Michael Corleone boot. Even poor Abe Vigoda goes over to the competition and ends up taken for a ride.

What comes through most effectively in the Corleone character--as it must come through--is Al Pacino's portrayal of the Godfather's iron fist and harsh retribution. Pacino's performance as the Don is a masterpiece in film history for its brilliant economy and understatement. Everything that needs to be stated or conveyed is done so with either a few sentences, harsh glare, or nod. Corleone's single, and most memorable verbal outburst, comes at his wife when she reveals she aborted the child he wanted. The vengeance Corleone exacts against those he feels betrayed him are conveyed with a sense of unswerving and inevitable doom: for when one double-crosses a Corleone, one pays the ultimate price.

Al Pacino's performance as Micahel Corleone is movie legend. And GODFATHER II should make everyone must-see list, especially those who were enthralled by GODFATHER I and the tale of the Corleone's.

Trivia: A woman I currently work with appears briefly in the Lake Tahoe celebration scene at the beginning of the film. She said she was vacationing near Homewood (east Lake Tahoe) during the filming of GODFATHER II when Coppola pulled her and many other extras off the street saying he needed ""a lot of people."" She received nothing for appearing.....Troy Donahue made a cameo as Connie's beau in GODFATHER II playing Merle--which was Donahue's first real name...

Dennis Caracciolo";0;1;False tt0071562;Tashtago;14/03/2005;as good as the first;;It's hard to decide which is the better Godfather movie. The brilliant stroke here is that Coppola does not present a typical sequel. Events move both forward and backward. Roberto De Niro is at his best as the young Vito Corleone. The assassination of the local mafia don is a particularly effective moment. In a way this movie is a reference to the American dream of success but in this case it is the success of the gangster. Coppola is so great at making this a simple human drama that we forget that it is a film about a criminal element of our society. Older movies, like those with Humphrey Bogart and James Cagney showed us the gangster as cool but with no family ties. Here we see these immigrant people as family people but with a decidedly twisted morality. That morality is explained early in the Godfather 2 when we learn about Vito's past. The combination of this element with the more recent problems of power tha t Michael Corleone has to deal with make this a great and unusual film.;0;2;False tt0071562;i_v_o_;12/01/2005;Al Pacino - Greatest Actor Alive!!!;10;"Great screenplay, great music, fantastic performance by Al Pacino, whose character is very impressive; I like the idea very much - somebody, who puts the family above everything and tries his best to protect it, loses it in the end: Michael has his brother killed, his other brothers are killed as well, loses his wife... He is ruined, has lost his main purpose in life, for which he has fought.

De Niro is very good too!

I love the music as well!

I still keep in mind some of the most famous quotes! ;) ""Fredo, you are my older brother and I love ya. But don't ever take side with anyone against the family again, ever...!""";0;2;False tt0071562;JBSdude;04/01/2005;more great work by Puzo;;The Godfather II starts where part I left off. Michael has arranged for the hits of all the heads of the Corleones' rival families. He has now taken over as Godfather since his father passed of a heart attack playing in the garden with his grandson. Although it seemed Mike once wanted nothing to do with the family business he has since had a change of heart.

The film is nearly equal to it's predecessor. They both won best picture. The second film saw more actors nominated for Academy Awards. Included is Pacino, Caan, and Michael V. Pazzo. Definitely a must see for anyone.;0;2;False tt0071562;journalismpro;01/01/2005;Brilliant Hyman Roth speech;10;"Having seen this movie, oh, 100 or so times, and having frequented many of the associated worship sites, I am always amazed that fans make such little mention of that incomparable Hyman Roth soliloquy about Moe Green, after Roth confronts Michael on the issue of the missing money. From a purely aesthetic standpoint, it brings tears to my eyes every time I see it...that's how beautifully it is structured, set, and rendered (right down to that little emphysemic tic or ""cardiac cough"" that Strassberg, playing Roth, elected to use in his delivery). For my money, it encapsulates the entire film--indeed, the entire trilogy and its complex themes--with its electric juxtaposition of nostalgia and regret, glibness and guilt, pathos and pragmatism--""business and personal."" For my money, I doubt that in all of film history, a more powerful minute-or-so has ever been shot.";0;2;True tt0071562;joliet-jake;08/12/2004;a great sequel;9;This is definitely worth your while to see if you enjoyed the first movie. It is a very good sequel to the first chapter. We see Vito Corleone's (DeNiro) past and entry into organized crime and go into the future where Michael is trying to get the family legitimate. This movie is great. Just as strong as the first movie. I think that Coppola did a great job following up on the first part. the acting is great. DeNiro does a great job portreying the character Brando created in part I. If you like mob movies go for this series. It is all about respect with this family. go for this movie after you check out the first. then after this movie get part three. all of these movies are great but this one gets 9 out of 10;0;2;False tt0071562;sepulturaboy2002;04/12/2004;A tragic story...;;"In the Godfather, we saw Michael Corleone transform from idealistic youngest child to all-powerful mafia don. He successfully protected his family and led its resurrection. Part II is a roller-coaster in theme: Vito Corleone in his younger days(another one of De Niro's classic roles)rises from poverty, personal tragedy, and personal weakness to become the Godfather, a man whose family is healthy, safe, and affluent. He is a moral man, but does not rule out murder and crime as an option. He only uses it to help his family, however. The downward slope of this roller coaster is the story of Michael. I can't think of any tragedies I have seen in film that matches this one. Coppola does excellent at making us both sympathies and lament with a man who is evil, cruel, and destructive. Michael Corleone is now in firm control of the family. All seems well: his wife Kay is pregnant, they have two children already, Anthony and Mary. But these scenes early in the movie only serve as the diving board into the abyss. The night of his son's communion, an assassination is attempted against Michael. This is the beginning of the end. Michael trusts no one, save for Tom Hagen(Robert Duvall where were you for Part III? Save us from George Harrison please!!). But by the end, Michael trusts no one, especially after he finds out that his brother Fredo(another tragic character) was connected to his near assassination. Michael does some business in Cuba that only aids in the destruction of his soul. By the end, Kay and the children have left him, Fredo has been killed by him, and Michael is left alone. The end of the movie is a series of the best shots ever put into film(with the exception of some in Apocalypse Now). The dinner conversation summarizes the tragedy of Michael. He says he's joining the Marines and Tom and Sonny scold him. ""I have my own plan's for my future."" It is Don Vito's birthday and the family is there to greet him at the door for a song, but Michael sits alone at the table thinking. The final two images are of a train ride with Vito and Michael, showing a happy and successful Vito and young Michael and then the next, the most powerful shot of all time, is of Michael, sitting alone at his Nevada home. He sits there, broken, alone, invincible to his enemies but dead on the inside, a man whose sins will haunt him forever. Then the picture fades to black and in that instant will see what was wasted. Michael and Vito both were great men, but fate put them in their roles. Wasted greatness is the ultimate theme of the Godfather Trilogy and the tragedy of Michael Corleone is epic. Like Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet, destiny was against Michael. That is what ultimately makes us sympathetic.";0;2;False tt0071562;the_godfather424;08/11/2004;The Greatest Sequel Ever Made;10;The Godfather:Part II is probably the greatest sequel ever made. It is very interesting. It is very compelling. It is also the first sequel to win an Oscar for best picture. Unique in its idea of two different times. New don of the Corleone family Michael(Al Pacino) is dealing with Hyman Roth(Lee Strasberg) but Roth seems to be luring him into a trap and somebody else betrays Michael unsuspectingly and another story is the rise of his dead father Vito(Robert De Niro). De Niro won his first Oscar. His last movie that made him a star would have to be Mean Streets. Pacino should of won for best actor of 1974. This is his better performance than in The Godfather. The reason why because it is the best sequel of all time would be because of the film-making, acting, the set, and its thoughtful score by Nino Rota. A 10.;0;2;False tt0071562;ameer;15/10/2004;my opinion and brief description of the movie;;In this Fantastic sequel to The Godfather, it attempts to answer the two questions usually presented by a sequel: what lead up to the events depicted in the original film, and what happens afterwards. In 1901, a young Vito Corlione is taken from sicily after the death of his mother, father, and older brother by the local Mafia don. At the same time, Michael is trying to expand the family business in Vagus, New York, and Cuba. An assassination attempt leaves Michael searching for the traitor in his Family, while his father is attempting to make a name for himself.;0;2;False tt0071562;jcanettis;29/08/2004;One of the Greatest Sequels of All Time;10;"It is difficult to have a sequel which is of equal quality as compared to the original movie. This becomes nearly impossible when the original movie is an all-time classic. However, ""Godfather II"" achieved just that: Both movies are 10/10, and it is absolutely difficult (and subjective) for someone to decide which of the two he/she enjoyed the most.

Continuing the ""Godfather"" tradition, ""Godfather II"" comes with stellar performances by most of the top-notch actors we saw in the first film, with Al Pacino being first among equals. Marlon Brando is unfortunately not appearing in this one (he does not show up even in the brief flashback where James Caan does a cameo), but Robert De Niro takes his place immaculately. Do not miss ""Godafather II"" (and ""Godfather I"" as well) as these films have left their eternal mark in the history of cinematography.";0;3;False tt0071562;dspiewak2634;02/06/2004;Astonishing, lush film;;Godfather Part II is one of the real highlights of all film literature. Coppola manages to take a great original and somehow add to it in a way that elevates it from simply a good movie into true art.

The story of Michael Corleone is dramatic in that it explores very seriously some themes that, by comparison, the first film only touches upon. Sure, it explains that Michael had a strong chance to make something of himself very far away from his father, and that he threw it all away. But in Part II we finally see the real reason why Michael's path was doomed to failure: He and his father were very different men with very different lives.

The finality and veracity of that message is so effectively transmitted in film that it comes off looking like an adaptation of ancient Greek drama. And like Greek drama often does, Godfather II dramatizes a particular moral idea by taking it to extremes. The simple version of the message: Tradition itself is worthless. You can try to hold the same values from generation to generation, but times change and those values don't guide you through every new situation. Vito Corleone's experiences as a Sicilian immigrant to New York are one thing, but Michael learns some dramatically different lessons in Batista's exploited Cuba.

The storytelling is so great, and so effective with the cast (especially with regard to Robert de Niro's historical reconstruction), that you can almost feel yourself walking down the streets of the Lower East Side around the turn of the century, and the memories evoked seem to erupt from your own head rather than from the screen. Great script and an even better cast make this one a must-own for true movie fanatics.;0;3;False tt0071562;linnet100;03/05/2004;A second Masterpiece;10;I'm not sure that I agree with some people that this film is even better than the first, but that is rather like saying is Beethoven 'better' than Mozart: both are geniuses. There are two towering, brilliant, outstanding performances from Al Pacino and Robert de Niro. I cannot think of two greater performances on screen - and ironically they didn't meet!

They seemed to make movies differently once: this is about 'atmosphere'. And the atmosphere generated is truly astonishing. It's such a contrast to today's cinematography which has to ladle on the obvious because, one assumes, people are too stupid to follow. One can only laugh at the notion that Jackson's Rings trilogy could find its way into a comparative top 10 with the Godfather. The latter belongs to a universe of brilliance and sophistication that Jackson's work won't achieve even if he goes through 100 successive re-incarnations trying to get there.

(Spoiler alert)

I love the contrasting way in which Vito builds friends out of nothing, but by careful and adept people-working, whereas Michael starts out with a clan, and ends up staring in loneliness across the lake. Pacino develops this aspect quite superbly, as de Niro does the converse.

It's outstanding stuff. And the two taken together may never be matched.;0;3;True tt0071562;kieranjnolan;09/04/2004;Godfather II a reappraisal;;The Godfather part two is as exceptional if not better than the original. It is true that the theme of soul corruption had been explored to great length by the end of the first film however through the genius of Coppola this is re-investigated albeit in greater depth. Michael's transition follows it's natural devastating conclusion, and his relationship aswell as his desire to emulate his father is far more prevalent. Michael's motives for becoming head of the family were like his father's, the protection and consolidation of his family, however he loses sight of this and loses most of that foundation and solidarity through death and divorce and is left with no-one, this arguably becomes the greatest irony of the series with the perpetual insistence on the importance and virtues of the family.The second film is vital in charting this trajectory more clearly and the importance of family becomes secondary to that of survival and power. Coppola intelligently looks at the situation in Cuba in the 1950s and the wealth and corruption in abundance under the direction of what would have been Battista's regime. From Cuba Michael learns that although money is power the determination of one individual to sacrifice his life for a cause is infinitely more powerful, in this instance Coppola offers us hope rather than nihilism.The story of Vito Corleone's rise to power adds a rich subtext to the film and the two are interwoven throughout highlighting the contradictions between Michael and his father who's life he so covets by the end of the film. Both part one and two in the Godfather series inspire thought provoking analysis into the human condition and the sense of of catharsis at the end is more reminiscent of King Lear than a gangster flick. Coppola's achievement was to produce two entirely different films and with the genial masterpiece that is the Godfather as its backdrop part two is extremely accomplished and no simple task for any director.;0;2;False tt0071562;igm;05/03/2004;A fine film that ages gracefully;9;"I have just watched <The Godfather: Part II> again. It is an ambitious story, spanning more than fifty years. It is a story of the first half of the twentieth century in America, as the country coped with waves of immigration, prohibition, war in Europe, the post-war boom, and rebellion in Cuba.

The first part of the Godfather trilogy offers only a foretaste of the heart of the Godfather story arc: the genesis of the Corleone family business with young Vito Corleone, played with easy confidence by Robert De Niro; and the hardening of Michael Corleone, played with mesmerizing intensity by Al Pacino.

* spoilers from here onward *

The movie is peppered with iconic and powerful images: a young Vito Corleone (Andolini) singing hymns while quarantined at Ellis Island, Vito executing his first hit with a towel-wrapped pistol, Michael bestowing a kiss of death on his brother Fredo, Michael gazing out his boathouse window as he awaits the fate of his brother, Hyman Roth's Lee-Harvey-Oswald-style assassination in a scrum of press and security.

The movie is shot artfully, though at times is lit a bit dimly. The location selection and set decoration are attentively and evocatively rendered as we follow Vito's rise. It is easy to forget that the segements showing Michael's fall are also period shots, set about twenty-five years prior to filming, as they are unforced and ring true.

The vengeful, unforgiving Sicilian code depicted in the film undoes all that is good in Vito and Michael. They are devoted family men, loyal to their sympathizers, supportive of their community, and admired for their wisdom. But they kill to win their independence from authority, to secure their power, to eliminate dissenters, and to settle decades-old vendettas. Michael's obsession with securing his power causes him to imprison then estrange his wife, order the death of his own brother, betray his old friends, and embrace his rivals. He is left with an empire and no one to share it with: his parents and brothers are dead, wife gone, children afraid, and so on. His only solace is the brow-beaten sister who returns to live with him in the family compound, and his similarly brow-beaten adoptive brother, Tim Hagen.

The supporting cast is excellent, particularly Diane Keaton and Robert Duvall, as well as Talia Shire, Lee Strasberg, and Bruno Kirby.

I had previously recorded my vote for this movie as an eight, but have now revised it to a nine of ten.

igm";0;1;True tt0071562;Ali709;13/02/2004;Just the sequel needed;;This is the best sequel I've ever seen for a movie. You won't feel at all that it's just a money-maker. It makes you stay in the movie and love it till the last moment. Great dialogs, GREAT acting, music from the first one which is still great. Both stories (Michael's and Vito's) are told very well. Robert De Niro acts very well. The story is long, but never gets boring or tiring, you will want to watch it to the end, and believe me, you'll be happy that it's so long, you want it to never end. The ending is like the first one. You'll feel that it's been cut, like it's ending too soon. But I really like it, a great ending with a great look on Pacino's face which means too much. I personally liked it more than the first movie, more entertaining. 10/10.;0;1;False tt0071562;svetaaniston;10/02/2004;Great sequel, an even more profound Godfather;10;Perhaps I liked this movie even better than the first part, although of course the originality was partly gone. That aside, I'm pretty sure this is one of the best sequels that were ever written. It's a movie in itself, and I feel it goes much deeper than Godfather part I. The movie explores the dark side of being involved in crime, it's clearly more melancholy, it's again very atmospheric, especially New York in the yearly years of the 20th century. De Niro and Pacino are, as always, fantastic. They portray profound characters, scary and touching at the same time. It's 3.5 hours of sheer delight.;0;1;False tt0071562;agmoldham;23/12/2003;The greatest movie sequel;9;It must have seemed like a recipe for disaster. Following on from one of the most acclaimed films of all time a follow up without the principal character from the first film. But this film confounds the expectations by being the greatest sequel of all time.

This film is told in two strands. One strand continues from where the first finished with Michael now head of the family. Al Pacino puts in another outstanding performance and it is quite amazing that he didn't get an Oscar for either his performance in this or the original Godfather. Michael has a plan to make the Corleone family a legitimate business, but is thwarted by the code of conduct.

The other strand tells the story of Vito's early life and features Robert De Nero in the part of Vito. Vito is packed off to America as a young boy to escape certain death at the hands of the local Don. He takes on a new identity and soon kills Don Fanucci because he thinks he is not looking after his own kin.

The greatest sequel of all time with another fantastic script. If only films could be this good all the time.;0;1;False tt0071562;thl2k1;18/11/2003;Powerful Sequel;10;Francis Ford Coppola was in his prime as a director in the 1970s with GFI and II, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now. This is probably one of the best sequels ever made because like all good sequels (Empire Strikes Back, Rocky II, etc.) it borrows from the original but has its own unique story that is more than the recycling of former themes, structures and philosophies.

Spoiler Warning.

GFII tells parallel stories of the young Vito Corleone and of his son Michael. Coppola does a good job of knowing when to flash back and flash foward. We see Vito as an orphan coming to America, establishing his influence by killing the local Don, building up his business and getting his revenge on the Don who ordered the death of his father, brother and mother. Michael tries to legitimize the family business by buying casinos, creating ties to political figures and investing in the Cuban government which will become communist at the beginning of 1959. We see his personal life deteriorating as there is an assassination attempt that his brother, Fredo, was somewhat responsible for.

The lighting and music is great in this film. I liked the acting by Al Pacino, Robert De Niro and especially Lee Strasburg as Hyman Roth. It's a movie that could stand on its own.

Most memorable scenes: The images of the Statue of Liberty, the young Vito stalking Don Fanucci before killing him, Pacino's reaction to finding out Fredo is the traitor and later finding out his wife had an abortion, and the sequence that sees the death of Pentangeli, Roth and Fredo leading to a flashback that features men who have been murdered or alienated by Michael, except for Sonny. Michael talked about not becoming a man like his father and years later we see he has become a much worser being. He sits on a lawn chair and reflects upon the decisions and their consequences as the film fades darkly to the credits.;0;1;True tt0071562;elefzonot;08/11/2003;Great acting, Great Story, Great movie!!;9;Coppola had done it again!! Great movie, I especially liked the jump between the Al Pacino story and the De Niro story... A film that teach u an important lesson about how power, money and respect can destroy a whole family. De Niro does a wonderful job playing The young Godfather, and how he rose to fame and power.. excellent movie!!! 9.5/10;0;1;False tt0071562;ae7641;30/09/2003;An important film;;"There is one thing I feel sure about: the people who dislike ""The Godfather part 2"" or say ""Goodfellas"" is better, didn't understand the movie. The Godfather movies,like the book, are not to be taken as typical gangster stories or gangster stories at all. The first movie was how capitalism, the Catholic Church, big business and the goverment are all the same as organized crime. The second movie with a Marxist theme, is an expansion of that idea and tells how destructive capitalism is to three different types of Families. The movie did not intend to totally portray how the mafia works, but goes beyond that. With this in mind, The Godfather is a great movie and the violence is used to make a point.

Furthermore, if you do a little research, you will find out everything I said about the movie is true.";0;3;False tt0071562;quixoboy;28/09/2003;An enjoyable, and grandly epic, sequel...one of the best;;"Over the years, I have had an unusual history of often seeing important movie sequels before their predecessors. This is by no means intentional - merely bad timing. For a long time, this viewing pattern has occurred, oddly enough, with a few films that are considered among the greatest sequels ever made (""Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back"", ""Terminator 2: Judgment Day""). I can add a new title to that list: ""The Godfather - Part II"". Yes, I must confess, I STILL have not yet seen the original 1972 crime classic about the beloved mafia family - but I'm sure I'll get around to it someday soon. I've seen PARTS of it here and there, anyway...and this epic, Oscar-winning sequel didn't surprise me in making me think of it as most likely superior to the first one (and certainly FAR superior to the third one in 1990, which I heard was a bit of a clunker, unfortunately).

In any case, this is truly one of the finest FILMS, not just sequels, I have ever seen, with a scope and power that very few other pictures can rival, quite frankly. I was blown away by much of the virtuoso performances from most of the actors - of course singling out Al Pacino and Robert De Niro as the most amazing ones, especially De Niro.

A masterpiece of storytelling, beautifully directed and told. Unforgettable.";0;1;False tt0071562;r-mcharg;17/09/2003;The Best......?;10;There are only really three serious contenders for the prestigous title of bets gangster movie ever. Things like Tarantino's PULP FICTION and RESERVOIR DOGS (both on my Top Ten Ever list) don't count as they are comedic. Those three contenders then. THE GODFATHER, THE GODFATHER PART II or GOODFELLAS? Well, GOODFELLAS, in my opinion blows THE GODFATHER out of the water because it gets so close to the way gangsters actually lived and ultimately, died. However, THE GODFATHER PART II is better than GOODFELLAS. I won't spoil the plot but I will say it is a powerful, extraordinary, haunting epic picture. It is quite simply, the best gangster movie ever made.;0;1;False tt0071562;jaesboxer;11/09/2003;The beautiful completion of a wondrous film arc **** (out of ****);10;The Godfather, Part II, The Two Towers and The Empire Strikes Back: these are the only sequels to match the original. What do thesee have in common? They are all continuations of a saga, rather than just additional stories. I do not distinguish necessarily between the greatness of the Godfather Parts I and II. It is the same story, and both movies are ten times as good when viewed together in a 6 and a half hour marathon. In Part II, an incredibly slow first hour concerning Michael's trying to find the people who want him killed, this returns to the compelling family drama that is truly the essence of the Godfather. In the meantime, the story of young Vito, played by a young but still brilliant Robert De Niro, unfolds, intertwining his rise with the moral fall of Michael. At the end, the arc is complete, and the final shot of MIchael sitting amongst the falling leaves, a man who has lost his family and his soul, a man totally alone, so unlike the innocent at the beginning of Part I, is the greatest end shot in history.;0;1;False tt0071562;NoArrow;19/08/2003;"De Niro makes ""The Godfather: Part II"" better than the original...";;"...""The Godfather: Part II"" is probably the best sequel ever made. As you all probably know, the story is cut in two: one half focuses on Michael Corleone's (Al Pacino) battle to keep his power in the crime syndicate and the second focuses on Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) - the character played by Marlon Brando in the original - and his rise to power in America. Both stories are done very well, but in the end the latter is more interesting. As everyone knows, Brando did a great performance and created a memorable character in the original, and it is very entertaining to watch De Niro give it a try. Except after watching this film some may agree that De Niro did a better job.

Unfortunately, Michael's story suffers from the loss of James Caan's character, Sonny Corleone. He spiced up the first very much, and it truly is disappointing to see him disappear from the second. Of course, Pacino still does an amazingly memorable (and villainous) performance. The supporting players, consisting of Tom (Robert Duvall), Clemenza (Bruno Kirby), Kay (Diane Keaton), Frankie (Michael V. Gazzo) and Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg) also do well.

Coppola scored big on this one, and De Niro and Pacino make it even better, 9/10.";0;1;False tt0071562;TolucaGuy;11/08/2003;Better than the first?;;"I am one of those Godfather junkies (well at least the first two) who not only owns the DVD, but will stop to watch the movies every time I come across them while channel surfing. To be honest though, recently I am not as enthralled with The Godfather. Over time, Part II has become a much better, richer movie going experience. Not that there's anything wrong with The Godfather, I just happen to prefer this one. I think that it paint a broader canvas thanks in part to jumping between the two stories.

There are just so many wonderful scenes. The film starts off with the story of how Vito Corleone came to America. This part of the movie is in Sicilian and even shot on location in Sicily. Then we jump to the 50's and the confirmation of Anthony, Vito's grandson. Like the wedding in the first one, we get an idea of who the main players are going to be. One of my favorite shots in this part is when Fredo's tramp wife meets Connie's gigolo fiance. Coppola cuts to a shot Mama Corleone saying something to Consigliori Tom Hagen in Sicilian. it is a brief shot, not more than 2 or 3 seconds but you get an idea of the relationship between them. This is of interest to me as a Godfather obsessive since in the original novel, it is noted that the adopted Hagen never thought of Mama Corleone as a mother nor were they particularly close. This shot shows how in the enusing years since her husband's death how they developed a bond.

There is so much good in this movie to rave about. Coppola apparently loves commerative events: the wedding reception in the first movie, the aforementioned confimation party (which of course has little to do with the confirmation and everything to do with Michael's power) and New Year's in Cuba.

While we may remember the big scenes, there are also some wonderful simple scens just between two characters: Michael's visit to Hyman Roth in Miami, his drink with Fredo (a banana daquiri?) in Cuba, Kaye's leaving Michael (""this Sicilian thing"") and Tom's final meeting with Frankie Pantangelo. All these scenes are written with wonderful, intelligent dialogue accompanied by solid acting.";0;1;False tt0071562;Sfpsycho415;03/08/2003;Excellence: Part II----9/10;9;The Godfather Part II continues the story of Michael Corleone and fills the background of Vito Corleone. Robert De Niro shines as Vito from his days in old New York. In some ways, I like Godfather better than Part II, but Robert De Niro's performance makes me rethink that. Al Pacino does great again as Michael and the same with John Cazale's Fredo, and Francis Ford Coppola shows why he is one of the best directors ever. In this second chapter, Michael gains complete control of the family and must find a traitor in their midsts. And we go back to the early 1900's New York and follow a young Vito's childhood and early adulthood. I think this is where the movie really picks up. Vito has always been my favorite (besides Sonny) so it was amazing to see his past. The movie does go on a little long and it slows up once in a while, but that is the only minor flaw. This is cinema at it's best. 9/10;0;1;True tt0071562;silentium;30/07/2003;"""Everytime I said a hail Mary I caught a fish.""";10;"Oh what an act Francis Ford had to follow! Seriously, under-taking a project such as this must've been extremely daunting. After all, the first Godfather film is no easy act to follow. But, Coppola continued to pay attention to his characters and the locations in which he staged them.

Without comparing this to its predecessor it's close to being without flaw. The prequel segments are beautifully done, shot, and staged. The pace is quicker and a lot more happens in this film, but in being the minority -- I don't think it's better than the first film. The parts with young Vito are certainly brilliant and Robert DeNiro gives a powerful performance of an emotionally restrained Vito Corleone.

The music is still good, although not as good as the score from the first. The main theme has changed, and I -- for one, miss it and think there's something seriously wanting about it. Yes, it's beautiful; but I don't believe it compares.

Al Pacino's performance here is un-rivaled, in almost any film. There are 4 pivotal performances I commend ahead of everything -- and that's: Marlon Brando and Al Pacino in The Godfather, Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange, and Robert DeNiro in The Godfather II.

There are so many great moments in this film. Michael confronting Fredo in Cuba, on New Years eve, is my favorite film of the sequel continuation. Otherwise it'd probably be Vito Corleone following Don Fanucci through the roof tops and then waits for him at his apartment. The light flickers on and off lighting up Vito's face and all you see is ice cold menace.

Some film fans like this film without even liking the first one, but I say the first is slightly superior, and only because Marlon Brando's missing and it just doesn't seem like ""The Godfather"" without him.

A+: A memorable experience.";0;1;False tt0071562;Dragonsouls;23/07/2003;"The true meaning of ""part 2""";9;"Certain sequels have the same movie title with ""Part 2"" after it. However some of these movies are completely different films than their predecessors. I beleive the Godfather and Godfather part 2 is the same movie. I read Puzo's book, and the majority of The Godfather pt. 2 is in the book The Godfather. Therefore, it is just a continuation of the story. Pt.2 also used the same exact sets that they used in the original film, (some of the ones used in the streets of sicily) it might of been shot on location, I think they were sets.

So as far as the ""second half"" of this film goes, I just can't find a film out there that I saw over 20 times, that still gives me goose bumps whenever I watch it over and over. The Godfather flicks still do that. The acting is uncomparable to anything, and Al Pacino and Robert Deniero are just phenomenal in this film. Pacino is just so cold hearted and emotionless in this movie that it boggles me. It is a movie that still puts me on the edge of my seat even though I know Fredo will never see the morning sun after that forgiving hug. **** 4stars out of 4

Classic!";0;3;False tt0071562;doberman101;03/07/2003;The second part of greatest piece of art put on screen;;Godfather part II is the classic great movie of all time. It is movie perfection. It is the most incredible masterpiece. Its like watching magic on screen, it like viewing your first baby being born. It flows like butter. it never gets tired, I've watched at least 20 times and I'm still amazed. Infact I might just go watch it right now. You should too and if don't have the Godfather Collection DVD go buy it. And keep it under your pillow when you sleep.

10 out of 10.;0;1;False tt0071562;LeThAlWeApOn389;26/06/2003;Fantastic;10;The classic Italian mafia movie comes to life again as the new Don comes in. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now the head man in this great Corleone family. This was a genious idea to make another film on this family because the history of this family is so special. Now, Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone when he was young, was a fantastic idea. It worked out so good and seeing the real Italian area was also a great part in this Godfather film. I did not think this movie was as good as the first, but I still think this movie deserved all the awards they received. It was a fantastic movie and I recommend it to all Godfather fans. It was simply a classic.;0;3;False tt0071562;manuel-pestalozzi;26/06/2003;Pass on that golden telephone;;"The story has the quality of an average soap opera. Nonetheless, it's excellent filmmaking. I like the voyage in time and space that the viewer is allowed to take here: From the arid hinterland of Sicily to the stuffy brownstones in Hell's Kitchen to the grandeur of Lake Tahoe, to the elegant beachfront hotel in Cuba. In two occasions the meeting of crooks (that's more ore less what The Godfather in all parts is about) takes on the guise of a true art house movie: Hyman Roth's little birthday party on the roof terrace of a ritzy hotel in the Caribbeans and – above all – the passing around of an immensely tasteless golden telephone in the conference room of a Cuban ministry. Here it becomes more manifest than in any bloody murder scene: These guys are genuine carnivores!

I loved the outstanding performances of actors Lee Strasberg and John Cazale, both long gone now. Strasberg gives the sly, but old and exhausted schemer Hyman Roth a striking image. Amazing how much of a personality you can convey with moving so little! His difficult breathing, the faltering yet firm voice are just perfect. Cazale's portrayal of the Don's older, frustrated brother also left a lasting impression. You can almost grasp his unhappiness with your hands. The final conversation between him and the Don is a fantastic piece of acting. Slumped utterly dejected in a deck chair, he tries for the last time to stand up to his brother. ""I'm smart!"" he shouts, and his voice cracks miserably. I feel acting can't get better than that.";0;3;False tt0071562;jmm509;23/06/2003;Better than its predescor!;9;GODFATHER PART TWO-*** Godfather part is opening and the introductory that started the first mafia movies off. Now that Vito Corleone is dead, his son Michael (Al Pacino) runs the family business such as casinos in Vegas and numerous hits for the family. We saw Diane Keaton who plays Michaels wife Kay. While they battle courts and also a man called Roth who Michael plans on going in business with. The other story of the film and the better story is to the past world of Vito Corleone ( Robert De Niro) travels to Ellis Island and grows the business for the family, 40 years earlier. Although, I did quite enjoy this film, I can say that it still can't compete with other films such as Goodfellas or Casino. Coppolas adaptation of this film is historic and is just a film that will just stay with you forever.;0;1;False tt0071562;MF210;01/05/2003;Slightly below the Original but theres not much below.;10;My favorite movie of all time is the Godfather. My second favorite is The Godfather II. It took me awhile to separate them but I did. Part II is the Best Sequel Ever Made, no doubt about that. Fantastic directing, Acting, Script, and just about everything.

The Acting of course is top notch. Al Pacino is brilliant, and in my opinion even better as Don Michael Corleone. He can yell without overacting, every scene he yells at Kay, he makes me scared. The look on his face when Kay tells him she had an abortion is so memorable. Diane Keaton isn't bad as Kay but she is easily the weakest of everybody but she doesnt degrade the movie in anyway. John Cazale is good as Fredo (that never changes). Michael V. Gazzo and Lee Strasberg were nominated for their roles and they were great.

The thing that makes Godfather II different from any other sequel is the fact that its a half sequel half prequel. Its what I admire most about Godfather II. And what makes it the best is that we get the standout supporting performance from none other than my favorite actor Robert De Niro. He is excellent as the young Vito Corleone. Though Brando is better as Vito you have to remember that this was one of De Niro's first acting roles.

10 out of 10. #2 on my top list.;0;1;False tt0071562;dadynasty;08/03/2003;The American Movie;;The Godfather movies define America. What makes the second part of the Godfather movies the greatest of the series, and ultimately the greatest movie of all time is the way it contrast and compares the America of the present (the 70's) with the America of of then. It shows the family rising to power under the dominance of Vito Corleone, while also showing the family's power and control crumbling as Michael struggles to live up to the legacy that was his father. While watching the movie, you can't help but be swept up by the history. Just the ambience of the movie is enough to make it great. Then you add in the tremedous cast, firm directing, and moving script, and you have the movie that surpasses all others to become the greatest of all time.;0;1;False tt0071562;east_coast_kid;05/03/2003;BEST FOLLOW-UP IN FILM HISTORY 10/10;10;I feel that this is the greatest sequel in film history sometimes better than the first. You have a great intro to Vito's life leaving Sicily making a name for himself by killing fanucci. Michael is so powerful in this one, taking over as the 'Don'. Robert De Niro plays a terrific role as the young Vito Corleone, in my eyes he didn't over act, knowing he had to fill a big pair of shoes following Marlon Brando. In all it's not a sequel only out to make money, It's a great screenplay, terrific acting, and what can i say that you haven't heard about the directing. A 10/10 in my book I'll watch this movie till im an old man, and show my kids this piece of film making history.;0;1;False tt0071562;grahamsj3;02/02/2003;A *great* sequel!;10;I've never seen a sequel that was as good as the original...until now. This film is every bit as good as The Godfather and it's because it features nearly everyone from the original film. Obviously, since their characters died, neither Marlon Brando nor James Caan are back (except a little in flashbacks), but Al Pacino reprises Michael Corleone, James Cazale is Fredo, Robert Duvall is Tom, Diane Keaton is Kay and Talia Shire is still Connie. Very importantly, also back is Francis Ford Coppola as director! The acting is again first-rate as is the direction from Coppola. The script is again powerfully written and that power comes through on screen. This film goes back into the Corleone family background in Sicily and has a bit less action than the first film. There isn't as much violence, but if you've seen the first film, you know all about that already, so it's not really as necessary. I believe that this film more or less presupposes that you've seen the first film. However, this one never drags! It's a great film and I intend to own a copy as long as I live!;0;1;True tt0071562;MrWhite2;31/01/2003;Slightly, not as good as the first! (spoilers);10;"""The Godfather Part II"" is probably the best sequel ever made in the history and probably future of movies. In my opinion the second chapter of the extraordinary 1930's Mafia saga has better acting than the original ""The Godfather"", but it doesn't have as good as fluency as the original Godfather had. Probably the stand out performance in this movie is Robert DeNiro's breathtaking portrayal as young Vito Corleone (young Marlon Brando) and how he struggled in crime in America. Definetly more violent than the first, but sort of drags for a minute or two. Too bad James Caan isn't in this one, I liked his character! Marlon Brando is not in this one (because he died at the end of the first one). If you look very closely you will see the actor that plays Johnny Ola is none other than Dominic Chianse (the actor who portrays the role as the funny, bitter, and mean moboss Uncle Junior, in the hit television program on HBO ""The Sopranos""). If you haven't already, watch this!!! Don't watch it untill you've seen the first one. Grade: A";0;1;True tt0071562;smla02;30/12/2002;Solid sequel;;"*** 1/2

Starring: Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Lee Strasberg, and Robert DeNiro.

The story follows Michael Corleone taking over the ""family business"" and going to Las Vegas. You meet some new and interesting characters, more fun with Michale ""college boy"" Corleone as the Don, and plenty of thrills. I recommend that you see this movie along with all the others, because this is one of the greatest trilogys ever.";0;1;False tt0071562;ks4;25/12/2002;Al Pacino shines above all.. again!;9;The Godfather was great, maybe one of the best movies in cinematic history, and part 2 doesn't fail, more the other way.. another great movie and especially i think Al Pacino shines again..

The Godfather continues, of course now the focus is how Mike Corleone (pacino) rules the corleone family, but also this story goes back and show Vito Corleone as young (magnificent Robert De Niro), ti's very interesting and should be one of the greatest sequals ever.;0;1;False tt0071562;professor__xavier;07/12/2002;Great movie, possibly better that GFI;10;Coppola was hesitant to make a sequel to his original Godfather masterpiece, but when he did he wrote a script that was so well written, it rivals the first installment.

We see the darker side to Micheal's personality, and the stupidity in Fredo. Pacino took the role and made himself an instant icon. Not many sequel are as good as the first, this is one huge exception.;0;1;False tt0099674;MR_Heraclius;24/02/2020;Not as good as the first 2;8;Definitely not my favorite of the 3 but it's hard when the first 2 were just that good. It still portrays well, from my historical knowledge, much of the struggle of the mob families to legitimize their business dealings and try to enjoy life in the later age of the mafia in America. Al Pacino performs brilliantly and I enjoyed Joe Mantegna in his roll. Definitely worth the watch if you were a fan of the previous 2 films.;71;82;False tt0099674;tfrizzell;13/10/2001;Outstanding, But Sadly Forgotten and Somewhat Misunderstood by Many;;"Many believed that the series was complete in 1974. Even Francis Ford Coppola thought that another installment was unlikely. However in 1990, some 16 years later, ""The Godfather, Part III"" was released with results that few could have perceived. The film was not very successful at the box office and many who did see the movie said ""ho-hum"". The critics were also indifferent to an extent. A Christmas release would create enough steam for the film to achieve a best picture nomination and seven nominations in all from the Academy (it failed to win any though). Of course ""Dances With Wolves"" dominated the night and that film along with ""GoodFellas"" are considered the class acts of that year. Why has ""The Godfather, Part III"" failed to achieve a following like its two predecessors (parts I & II)? I am not sure I can answer that question. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is becoming an old man and his health is slowly worsening. He wants the family to become 100% legitimate and even makes a deal to link his finances to the Vatican. However Michael has become a bit naive and everyone double-crosses him. Now it appears that the only answer is to get back to the old ways. Younger sister Connie (Talia Shire) believes that Michael has grown soft and that Santino's (James Caan from the first film) illegitimate son should take control (Andy Garcia, in his Oscar-nominated performanece). He is ambitious and has the short fuse that his late father had and this is going to lead to fireworks for the family. He also starts seeing Michael's teenaged daughter (Sofia Coppola, Francis Ford's real-life daughter) and a romance blossoms. Meanwhile crime bosses Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna pose threats to the Corleones. Kaye (Diane Keaton) has divorced herself from Michael and their son (Franc D'Ambrosio) has somewhat sided with her. Michael's health takes a turn for the worse as he actually goes into a diabetic coma for a time during the film and when he does recover (not completely though) he starts to reflect on a life of loss. The ordering of Fredo's death (John Cazale) in the second installment and his Sicilian wife's murder in the original haunt Michael and he tries to come to terms with his life, but learns from a Catholic cardinal while in Sicily that he deserves all the suffering he experiences and realizes that his suffering will be even greater in the future. In fact there will be a finale that will be the ""fatal nail in the coffin"" for Michael. ""The Godfather, Part III"" is focused on Michael and that is why it is unique to the series. The first two sported so many rich characters that it was impossible to focus on just one. This film could be best described as ""Reflections of a Life of Loss"". The film is excellent and even though it is likely the weakest of the three when you compare them, it is somewhat unfair to put the three ""Godfather"" movies together because they can all stand on their own. Great movies stand on their own and ""The Godfather, Part III"" does just that. 5 stars out of 5.";519;652;True tt0099674;tazamaster;11/12/2004;It really isn't that bad..;10;"Having heard the endless amount of critique and insults that the last part of the Godfather saga carries.. I have to disagree. Although people seem to love to hate Sophie Coppola and say she ruined the film, I think her part alone wasn't that frail it'd ruin the entire cinematic experience. Saying that is just humorous. Also, the absence of Tom Hagen played by Robert Duvall is really a loss and even I think this film would've been a lot better if there was him in it.. but he got too greedy and couldn't make it into the movie, and that's that. I'm not going to judge a movie by what it could have been, but what it is and how good it ends up being.

Despite some shortcomings, Godfather Part 3 is a decent ending to the trilogy. While it may have been an attempt to cash off the audience, they still have Coppola bring us his finest directing. I found Al Pacino's performance extremely satisfying and even terrifyingly so. He embodies the mistakes and losses of his life with excellent skill, showing us a don that has lost his health, the loved ones of his life and even the respect for himself. While I never found Diane Keaton's performances in the saga that good, she still fills the spot required, same goes for Talia Shire, whose role in the ending finale of the film really came as a surprise to me - which was a good thing. I didn't find her role in Part 2 too appealing but in this one she has more character, more importance. Sophie Coppola was OK, like I said a lot of people have complained about her acting skills and I gotta admit she was a little ""stiff"" or sorts in some scenes but it's not notable all the time and it didn't spoil any moods for me. Andy Carcia was just excellent, my favorite add to the saga cast, playing the son of his father with excellence.

So, umm.. this film is perfectly fine. The ending finale was tremendously well shot and very climatic, filled with a lot of excitement. I'm telling you this movie is a great ending to the saga even because of that one particular scene so just go see it, despite what a lot of people have said about, badmouthing it for faulty reasons.. it brought a tear into my eye. It did.";459;611;False tt0099674;ccthemovieman-1;06/01/2006;Unjustily Criticized;7;"I stayed away from this film for a long time, doing a dumb thing: listening to the well-known film critics.

When I finally got around to it, I was very surprised. It was a good film. Not great, not intense as the first two Godfather flicks, but definitely a lot better than advertised.

Many people said this was filled with anti-Roman Catholic propaganda, but I didn't it find that way. Yes, the ""Vatican bank,"" whatever that is, was portrayed as not on the up-and-up, but it was a little confusing to follow, maybe too confusing to get offended! Actually, there were some positive things, religious-wise, with Al Pacino's character, who sought forgiveness for his past sins and made a few very profound statements such as, ""What good is confession if it isn't followed by repentance?""

Anyway, Pacino's acting talents are the main attraction in the lower-key, more cerebral Godfather film. There isn't that much action but when it occurs, it's pretty violent. As with the other two films in the series, it's nicely photographed with a lot of nice brown tints.

Finally, director-writer Francis Ford Coppola took a lot of flak for putting his daughter in such an important role but I thought she (Sofia Coppola) was fine and - like this film - unfairly criticized.";290;389;False tt0099674;Nazi_Fighter_David;28/03/2001;Visually wonderful and of great importance!;8;"""The Godfather III"" is a beautiful film, visually wonderful, and of great importance, completing the tragic saga of the Corleone family... They are so tempting these Byzantine intrigues: Alliances betrayed with violence; assassins dressing up as priests; knives and poison invading the opera house; someone, in the deepest shadows, always whispering devious means...

Coppola's intention was clearly aimed at offering a story of redemption... Nominated for 7 Academy Awards, the motion picture reflects Coppola's masterful film-making...

Fascinating threads of continuity support this illusion: The bridesmaid (Jeannie Linero) who had a hurried meeting with Sonny in the first film, now makes a significant appearance as the mother of a vibrant new character, a suitable successor of Michael, the Godfather of the future Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia).

Vincent, strong, focused and loyal, shares his father's hot temper... He is the most suitable heir to the family business... His desire for a life of crime is driven by his greater desire to destroy a vile thug named Joey Zasa beautifully played by Joe Mantegna...

Connie (Talia Shire), tries to push her brother to take Vincent under his tutelage... Eventually Michael—a man haunted by the death of Fredo, his separation from his wife, his estrangement from his children—realizes that he can never truly leave his life of crime... We feel his frustration when he says, ""Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in.""

Worried about his children and the fate of his empire, Michael is torn between two characters: his warm-hearted daughter Mary (Sophia Coppola), whom he loves very much, and Vincent, who sees the death of his enemies as the only answer to every question...

There is also Kay (Diana Keaton), still the woman he loves, and the mother of his dear children... Family is crucial to Michael... His children are his reason for living... In his words: ""The only wealth in this word is children... They are my treasure.""

Michael wants Anthony to be a lawyer... Kay defends their son's aspiration to be an opera singer... The best scenes in the movie are between this lovely couple, passionately fastened in a struggle that started a time ago at that wedding party where an innocent officer and a gentleman told his non Italian girlfriend, he was not part of his family business...

The film has a great ensemble of supporting actors: Talia Shire, deliciously evil, and always counseling her nephew on how to get in Michael's good graces; Eli Wallach, the talented peacemaker with a stone in his shoe; Raf Vallone, the wise true priest; Franc D'Ambrosio, the artist, the voice in ""Cavalleria Rusticana;"" Donal Donnelly, the fallen archbishop; George Hamilton, the family attorney; Helmut Berger, the missing God's Banker; Richard Bright who heads to Rome to ""light a candle for the archbishop;"" Franco Citti, the old bodyguard; Mario Donatone, the ""Ace in the hole;"" Bridget Fonda, the sexy reporter; Al Martino, the Hollywood singing idol; and John Savage, the priest with an assignment in Italy...

Brilliant shots and unforgettable sequences:



















Coppola's first two Godfather-films are a work of art... More famous for their superb acting and deep character studies, beautiful photography and choreography, authentic recreation of the period, and rich score...

""The Godfather III"" is a mesmerizing film worthy to be taken on its own terms... It lays the seeds for a complex financial scandal involving the Vatican Bank as well as the mysterious death of Pope John Paul I in 1978...";195;261;True tt0099674;bob the moo;25/07/2002;Not as bad as everyone says – but suffers from the pressure of the first two;;Michael Corleone has sold his illegal business in an attempt to win back his family. However he must still contend with up and coming mobsters such as Vincent, who wants to work for him and Joey Zasa, who wants to fully take over the Corleone family's territory. When the Corleone family begin to deal with the Vatican and plan to buy out their share of an multinational corporation he finds that the Vatican is just as corrupt as his illegal operations were. Despite his best efforts he finds himself sucked back into the world he has tried to leave behind.

Easily one of the most hated films ever made – or at least you'd think it was by the critical mauling it got for a raft of reasons. However watching it now it isn't that bad and really it only suffers from comparison with the two films before it. But lets be fair, Coppola has made 3 or 4 of the best films ever made – did we really expect another one from him?

The film has a reasonable plot and brings the trilogy to a logical end. The plot however does have it's weaknesses – for example it starts well with Michael's attempt to `get out' being hampered by other families on their way up. But when it starts to get involved with money laundering through the Vatican and the corruption therein, it starts to lose it's way and it's focus on Michael.

The main weakness comes in the characters. Would Michael really go straight just to get his family back – and how come he managed to do it so easily up till the time of the film? Worse still is Connie who seems to have become some sort of Mafia widow when that was not part of her character in the previous films – would she really have got that twisted or influential? Little problems like these just bugged me and they also fed into the performances.

For such a great cast the acting was very average. Pacino is good but I sensed he didn't see Michael turning out this way and he didn't convince occasionally. Keaton has little to do and again I felt that her approach to Michael was too forgiving, although maybe I'm not allowing for time. As I Siad before Shire was doing some sort of `Bride of Frankenstein' act as Connie and I didn't buy it for a moment. Garcia was OK and faces like Wallach, Hamilton and the like helped. The two worst performances were sadly two of the main ones. First Joe Mantegna ..now it wasn't that it was bad – it was more that I've seen him do so much better. Here all I could think of when I watched him was how his character and his acting was very like his Simpsons' character of ` Fat Tony'. Bare in mind Fat Tony is meant to be a spoof of the Mafioso characters and you'll see why I didn't like it.

The worse performance was Sofia Coppola. Now she was vilified at the time for her role – a bit unfairly and cruelly but she was still bad. She has this strange scowl on her face for most of the film and she acts like a spoil little girl. She also has no realism in her voice and speaks in the same constant tone – that Vincent would fall for her was just a leap of faith too far to accept. The cast does have others who are unused or underused – Fonda being the best example. Why did she bother with that role!?

Overall, this is miles behind the other two Godfathers and it has plenty of weaknesses. However at it's heart it's a good try as the concluding part and the story is watchable. It's not bad, it just is average and it feels like the director and large sections of the cast felt they just had to turn up to make a third classic film.;140;189;False tt0099674;Brunokid;04/01/2004;This movie is greatly misunderstood and it has become popular opinion to say it is bad.;10;The Godfather Part three is a great movie but many would contest. This final installment of the greatest trilogy ever made is misunderstood by most because they do not see what this film is really about. G3 is not about hits and gangland killings, but rather, G3 is about the end of Michael Corleone's legacy of crime in America. This movie shows him stepping out of the gambling and the other rackets because they have hurt him so badly. This movie is a masterpiece because it shows the conclusion to an incredible story. There had to be an end to this trilogy and this thoughtful way to do it exemplified the trilogy as an unbeatable one. Just because it doesn't end with a violent scene like the murder of the heads of the 5 families does not make it a bad movie, but in this case, a beautiful one. Please, don't feel you have to agree with the common view by proxy, but think on your own about what this movie really means and how it concludes and consequences the first two.;131;180;False tt0099674;dvkatzprod-74759;16/07/2018;A Passionate Requiem;8;I finally saw it ! As a total devotee of the two previous installments, I avoided seeing the third one, on purpose, people I respect had told me about the disappointment and, quite honestly, I didn't go there. Last night I did and surprise, surprise, it moved me no end. Maybe because I haven't seen the other two in four years. Yes at times is more Ken Russell than Francis Ford Coppola and in my book that's not a bad thing. I was, however, a bit taken aback by the healing in Pacino's Michael as far as Keaton's Kay is concerned. As it nothing had ever happened, while in Diane Keaton the memory of that pain is always present. Talia Shire is a lot of fun as a sort of Madame Sin. Raf Vallone, superb as the doomed Pope John Paul I and then a bit puzzling casting choices that I think they me code for something. George Hamilton, for instance, takes over from where Rubert Duvall left off. Helmut Berger plays the head of the Vatican Bank. Helmut Berger! Just as curious as to find Troy Donahue in The Godfather Part II - All in all, I'm really glad I've seen it and I'm sure I'll see it again.;57;76;False tt0099674;revival05;23/12/2011;It simply doesn't work very well;6;"Being an optimistic fellow I wanted to enjoy The Godfather Part III the first time I saw it - this was easy, since its a competent piece of film making, generally well paced, acted, it's coherent, Al Pacino's in it, Coppola has made this film from A to Z and on its own terms the film doesn't have any inexcusable flaws. (Not even, I might add, the notorious Sofia Coppola; she's bad, but her performance is benefited by the character she's playing, which is also weak). So for a long time I was one of those guys going ""Hey, Godfather part III isn't as bad as everyone says. Sure, its not as good as the first two but not many movies are!"" Later in life, presumably with heightened standards and a better sense of criticism, I started to suspect that the opposite could be true - that part III was really nowhere near as good as I'd recall - and after seeing all three films pretty much back to back I have to be honest (an approach I think wouldn't hurt the more enthusiastic defenders of this film) and conclude that The Godfather Part III, despite certain qualities, simply doesn't work.

(Excluded passage due to word limit; concerning how Coppola did the film for the money, and that it actually makes the film a little easier to appreciate)

I think the film really, on a whole, is perhaps not 'bad', certainly not horrible, but definitely a failure. The plot is underdeveloped and not engaging - Michael Corleone suffers from guilt. Its not unreasonable to say he did that at the end of Part II already. Where does his search for redemption lead him? Do ""they"" really pull him in again? Does his character do or say anything really memorable? Once or twice. But the script really is a long filler-session. And while everybody seems to just automatically praise Pacino because, well, he's Pacino I don't think his performance in this film is particularly good either, at least not by his merits. He's a great actor, and this is as fine a performance as any other he's made, but when you consider how truly versatile Pacino can be (compare Godfather part II with Scarface, with Serpico, Devil's Advocate, you name it, he's right there in character) its a disappointment that the aged Michael Corleone has turned into... well, Al Pacino. Obviously the character is not the same man that he used to be, but I never once really believed that I was watching Michael Corleone. He looked, and acted, too much like Al Pacino.

Not to mention Andy Garcia being nothing more than Andy Garcia, Joe Pantanglio, Eli Wallach, Talia Shire in a strangely awful performance (she's not a bad actress at all, but whatever happened here?). And of course Sofia Coppola; she isn't the crucial problem, but in the end she does become responsible for a lot of misfiring. The only one still doing a prime job is Diane Keaton as Kay - truly an unsung hero in these films, and to me one of the main reasons the drama work - and the film's best scenes were the one's she shared with Pacino. Why? Because then I felt like I was even watching a Godfather movie.

Much of everything else simply doesn't work. Whereas the original films were subtle and ambiguous, part III filters the story with melodramatic punches that are un-inspired and obvious. Michael's son, played by Franc D'Ambrosio, seems taken from Days of Our Lives and so many of the questions we ask ourselves - what does he remember from his childhood? What does any of the characters feel about Michael's marriage in Sicily? Did Tom Hagen ever move to Las Vegas? etc - are left completely by the road, as if Coppola truly isn't interested in telling this story. There are instead near-insulting reminders to the audience that the other two movies still exist (like the pointless scene where Michael have kept the drawing Anthony left at his pillow when he was nine or so; ""I remember this"" he smiles, though I'm not sure if we are to understand this as ""I also remember they shot up the bedroom that same night""; once again, it seems Coppola simply forgets his own story). There are also awkward attempts at creating dramatic highlights in line with the horse-head scene and that very shooting in the beginning of Part II, involving a shooting during a parade in Little Italy and a stupid and ugly scene involving a helicopter. Making a Godfather sequel formulaic is truly a depressing insult to the originality of the first two films. The attempts Coppola takes on the Vatican are also pretty flat when you think about how Italian cinema has been doing this for half a century.

There's no reason to watch this film have you not seen the first two. And there's really no reason to watch it if you have seen them either. When you think about it, I don't see why the film's few merits are worth talking about. Movie newbies having seen Part I and II will naturally see III too, and I think many of them will come to the same conclusion. It's not all bad, but so what. It simply doesn't work very well.";69;94;False tt0099674;BigDog-18;05/10/1999;No Comparison;;"I recently watched all three Godfather films again in sequence and was surprised at how bad GF III is when closely compared to the other two fims. There are characters in the film whose presence is never made clear (i.e. George Hamilton, Brigette Fonda and Don Novello - Father Guido Sarducci??) The major characters bear little resemblance to themselves from the previous films. Connie Corleone is now a major supporter of Michael even though she knows he had her husband killed? Michael now has a change of heart and tries to go ""legit"" even though he so eagerly immersed himself into the power and control of the Corleone family. And Kay continues to ""hang around"" even though she dreads Michael and all that he stands for. Why?? The movie drags on in parts and never really gains it's true identity untill the end of the film during the opera scene. Not even Winona Ryder who was scheduled to be cast in the part of Mary could have helped. It only serves to give us an appetite for the earlier two films. Both of which I consider masterpieces.";42;55;False tt0099674;BrandtSponseller;16/05/2005;Bucking the conventional wisdom;9;"Series note: It is almost unthinkable to watch this film without having seen The Godfather (1972) and The Godfather, Part II (1974) first. This is a direct continuation of that story.

I suppose that if I do not love being a contrarian, I do not love anything, but it's not that I set out to be contrarian for its own sake. It just happens when I'm honest about my tastes and views. My latest flourish of contrarianism is that I think The Godfather, Part III is just as good as The Godfather, Part II, even though it's a quite different film, loaded with conspicuously different messages. And although most of Part III's scenes, except the extended climax, never quite reach the sublime excellence of much of Part II, Part III doesn't have near the flaws, either. Both films ended up being a 9 out of 10 for me, or a low ""A"".

Part III is all about Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) seeking redemption and forgiveness. We see him haunted by one of the stronger, more shocking moments from Part II. And so he has decided to sincerely go ""legit"", while getting back to his roots, trying to regain what he has lost and maybe even ""redo"" the mistakes he has made. Thus he heads back to New York and eventually back to Sicily. In the opening party scene we see him even trying to make amends with his ex-wife Kay (Diane Keaton). The most important plot points all have to do with Michael learning to compromise and even let go of some control. The most tragic elements of the film are rooted in the things for which he has difficulty relinquishing control, and we feel a much more ""real"" threat to Michael's safety because of the unintentional losses of control that he experiences.

Of course, the irony ends up being that the ""legit"" world is just as corrupt, if not more so, as the world he's trying to redeem himself from. Michael is ""forced"" to resort to his old modus operandi if he wants to participate, survive and succeed. Coppola and co-writer Mario Puzo thus create something of a classical tragedy, with a pessimistic message about human relations; one that also suggests a reinterpretation of the previous two Godfather films as metaphors for socio-economic machinations in general--not just a soap-operatic tale of a powerful Mafia family.

Unlike The Godfather and Part II, Coppola remains tightly focused on his principal themes here. Even though the film seems almost as sprawling as the previous two on first glance, and it suffers slightly from also having a bloated cast, in retrospect, there is nothing present in Part III that isn't meant to be tied in with the subtexts. Even seemingly inconsequential scenes, such as Michael and Kay encountering the marionette show, provide artistic, literary connections to significant plot points. In this case the scene provides both foreshadowing and metaphor for the most substantial element of the climax.

By the way, it's interesting to note that Coppola introduces somewhat erotic (though very tame) scenes for the first time here (that's not to say that past Godfather films didn't suggest romances or sex, but they weren't really erotic). Surprisingly, perhaps, the chief erotic scenes involve his daughter, Sofia, who is shown in a relationship as close to incestuous as possible without being incestuous, and who also has an unpleasant fate in the film. When we also remind ourselves of the filmic treatment that director Dario Argento subjected his daughter, Asia, and his significant other, Daria Nicolodi, to over the years, it might make us want to psychoanalyze Italian filmmakers, but it's helpful to remember that initially, Sofia Coppola's role was to be played by Winona Ryder, who was too sick at the time to begin shooting.

The cast in Part III is sometimes cited as one of the reasons for its inferiority, but despite the relative shortage of megastars, I think the cast, including Sofia, is fantastic here. Godfather newcomer Andy Garcia was particularly impressive.

Coppola again uses Part I for a structural template, just as he did in Part II, but he tries to throw in subtle variations and even red herrings. Like its predecessors, Part III begins with a party celebrating an important familial event related to religious ceremonies wherein we meet the principal players, the middle section deals with similar business dilemmas mixed with betrayals, double crossings and their consequences, and the ending parallels a major shakedown involving multiple parties with some other important familial event imbued with ritual/ceremony (the parallel was slightly different in Part II).

The subtle variations here involve what could be called ""tags"". For example, the beginning puts us in a more formal religious ceremony before we move to the party, and the ending has a tag that could be one of the most ingenious transitions/scenes that Coppola has written. We move from a profoundly tragic event to a point much later in time. Not one word of dialogue is spoken. Through mere appearance of character and setting, plus the final, sad event, there is as much ""said"" or implied in one elegant minute as there was in the entire film up to that point--although what preceded was necessary for the pithy implicature.

The technical elements, though good here, cannot quite match those of Parts I and II. This may be more surprising when we realize that the same people worked on both films in many capacities, but it just underscores that elements such as the intense, unusual, deeply lit scenes of Part II, for example, happened as much by a ""magic"" confluence of events as they happened intentionally, which may be why no one has quite been able to capture that look again, including here. On the other hand, even though the music is excellent in all three films, for my money, it might be best integrated in Part III, especially the melancholy theme that periodically recurs.";73;106;True tt0099674;MovieAddict2016;15/09/2003;Another Offer You Can't Refuse!;8;"""The Godfather Part III"" isn't really a necessary sequel, and to be truthful it's not really one of the best sequels in recent memory, but is it a bad film? No. In fact, had it not been for the extraordinary first two films, I firmly believe this movie would have been hailed as an epic; but due to such a broad expanse of years from the second film (1974) to this one (1990), audiences were given too much time to work up extreme expectations, especially with the major success of the first sequel. Many people just expected another equal sequel. It's just a good sequel.

Al Pacino returns to his role of Don Michael Corleone, much older since we last saw him and with a daughter (Sofia Coppola, Francis' daughter). He is still split from his (ex)-wife, Kay (Diane Keaton), and Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) has since passed to the other side, though rumors have it his character was originally in Ford and Mario Puzo's script, only to be dumped when Duvall turned down the script because he believed Pacino was getting too much attention. (Though I have my doubts over the accuracy of that rumor.)

Michael wants out of the Mafia. He wants to work legitimate. He's been trying to turn his business into legit dealings for a while now, and he realizes that the sins of his past will never completely go away. He decides to hand the reigns of power over to his ex-brother Fredo's son (Andy Garcia), a young, eager soul with energy and excitement. But things do not go so well. Michael tries to be a mentor to his trainee but it is a difficult task. Michael goes through turbulent times, not to mention that he must deal with his daughter falling in love with the future head of the family (they're cousins, which, when you think about it, is just plain nasty).

Michael tries to get his son interested in becoming the head of the family, but he will have no part of it. He is bent on becoming an opera singer, to turn from his family's past and ignore his father's pleads. Michael is left with some difficult choices, and we see that all the power in the world can't control the inevitable.

""The Godfather Part III"" has its flaws. One of them is the casting of Michael's daughter with Coppola's daughter - she has, one might say, no acting ability whatsoever. Garcia is bright and talented, and fits the part he is playing. Pacino isn't quite as energetic and powerful as he was in the first two films, in fact he looks pretty tired here, but I believe that's the point.

Some people really hate this film. I thought it was quite good. It's a good continuation, though I do not hesitate to admit it could have been much better. The film seems a bit corny at times, and there are some bad casting choices, one of which I have already mentioned above. But it is an entertaining film, one that no ""Godfather"" fan should go without seeing. It's a worthy (hopefully) last installment, one that gives more of the same but still manages to hold the audience's interest.

There are rumors flying everywhere of yet another ""Godfather"" entry, but quite honestly I think it's a bad decision. They should leave the series as it is and move on to other projects. Puzo is dead. Coppola hasn't made a good film in years - heck, he hasn't even produced a good film in years. Al Pacino's character would be hard to bring back, and if you've seen this film you know what I'm talking about. A prequel would just be messy and unexplained, not to mention confusing. To follow Andy Garcia's character would seem pointless - some things should be left to our imagination. I doubt as to the importance of another sequel, as it would, at this point, just be a cash-in.

The script by Coppola and Puzo is interesting, but it seems too try a bit too hard to be an epic at times. It just serves as a reminder that this film was not needed as an intallment in the series. ""The Godfather Part"" was great, ""The Godfather Part II"" was superb, ""The Godfather Part III"" is probably the best film of 1990. Which, looking back at twenty years from now, probably won't amount to a hill of beans. But it's a start.

4.5/5 stars -

John Ulmer";118;178;True tt0099674;franco-10;26/12/1998;Underrated;10;"Godfather III is generally underrated because because it is more intellectual, subtle, and psychological than the first two. There's lots more Italian language, operatic venues, references to subtleties like the P2 masonic lodge, and there is the inner revelation of Michael Corleone's soul. Pacino should have won an Oscar for his performance. The movie would be a good staging point for a Godfather IV, with ""Vincenzo Corleone"" and Connie Corleone running things, while developing further the relationship between Michael, and his wife and son.";326;520;False tt0099674;rbarnes-1;04/07/2010;Worst of the three. By far.;3;"Many of the reviews of this seem too positive. The movie was deeply flawed and love for the early Godfather films should not blind us to the fiasco that was number 3.

Casting problems: Diane Keaton said all she needed to say in part 2. Her presence in the part 3 added nothing whatsoever. We learn from her dialog that she will always love Michael but that she will never accept his gangster ways. Yeah. We learned that in part 2. George Hamilton as the lawyer/confident. Lame. Sophia Coppola as Mary. She comes across like a dull-witted 16-year-old that doesn't know a thing about acting but thinks it is fun to be able to stand in front of a camera. (spoiler alert) the primary dramatic event of the movie involved her death. By that time I was hoping that she would be killed off (or at least get no more screen time), so my ability to feel any emotional impact at the death of this air-headed monstrosity.

Dialog problems: The dialog in Michael's study in the initial scene is painful to hear. The movie gets better, but very awkward dialog pops up every 20 minutes or so throughout the movie. Part of the problem is the screen play and part of the problem is that at times the actors don't know how to effectively deliver their lines.

Plot problems: Awkward casting & dialog aside, I think this is the biggest problem. when you get to be one of the wealthiest business men in the world, wacking people no longer makes any sense. When you have untold millions at your disposal, you find that you a wide range of tools to accomplish your aims, and most of these tools work better than bullets (anyone remember the last time a Fortune 500 CEO was taken out in a mob hit?). (spoiler alert) There is a scene in which one of the baddies flies a helicopter outside a penthouse ballroom in a high rise building and then occupants of the helicopter riddle the ballroom with machine gun fire killing dozens of wealthy business men. This would be par for the course in the Matrix, or True Lies, or Commando, but this type of violence is not part of the real world we live in. It's cartoonishness is at odds with the other Godfather films and makes it difficult to take this film seriously. As well paced and tense as the final opera house scene was, it was also in the category of cartooney violence. Did the best assassin in all of Italy really think the cleverest way to kill one of the richest men on the planet was to slip into a well guarded public place, kill off a bunch of hired body guards and then shoot a man in front of 1000 witnesses? Well, I guess the screenwriter thought so. The end result was a complete mess. The narrative flow of the final film was a train wreck. The plot elements went back from somewhat believable to overblown Hollywood insanity and back again.";74;114;True tt0099674;rmax304823;28/05/2015;Dead End.;5;Coppola really didn't want to make this movie but the studio prodded him and provided a lavish budget so he took another stab at it. However, he was now unable to get the cast he wanted. Duvall asked for too much money, so the role of consiglieri was reduced to that of George Hamilton's infrequent appearance as a plain legal adviser. Coppola could now shoot on various locations without fear of being fired but it was no longer The Family he'd been so proud of.

I don't really have too much to say about this venture. It's a little sad. Coppola is a sensitive family man. He loves babies. And he blames critics for condemning the movie because he cast his daughter. I don't know whether he's right or not. She looks proper for the part of the virginal Italian girl, not exotic or spectacularly beautiful but innocent. Her performance is hard to judge from one role. She comes across as natural rather than as a seasoned actress. It fits her role but it's hard to tell what her range might be. Diane Keaton was available, probably because not many parts were coming her way, but there is no spark between her and Pacino, just a wan regret without moment.

But Coppola is wrong in believing that the movie failed because of Sofia. The movie failed because it was a watered-down and meandering story that seemed without point. The material -- Al Pacino, his family relationships and his intrigues -- is no longer fresh. There is no novelty in it.

And sometimes it seems as if the elements that are important to the director are more personal than portentous. He may find it shocking that a newly elected Pope could be assassinated. I doubt that most people care as much as he does, especially since we hardly get to know Raf Vallone. The whole Vatican provides not much more than a backdrop for colorfully robed figures having business meetings and enacting rituals.

I'm happy for Coppola that he was able to cast his father as the local band leader in Sicily. And I like Coppola's personality. He's growing wine now in Napa or somewhere. And when I lived in San Francisco he owned a small underground restaurant, Tomasso's, where the customers waiting for a table could tap the wine barrel in the dark, tiny room as often as they liked and get half lit during their wait. The wait was worth while. The clams cuscus were a rarely encountered treat.

I wish I could recommend the movie as highly as the restaurant.;48;72;True tt0099674;johnmichael-2;22/03/2009;I'll stay at the opera!;3;"Near the beginning of ""The Godfather: Part III,"" Michael Corleone's son wants to drop out of law school and become a musician. Michael Corleone does not want this. But his estranged ex-wife, Kay, manages to convince him to let Anthony Corleone pursue music as he wishes. So he does.

That seems like an odd way to start a review, as it is a minor plot point and has nothing really to do with the major action. Just bear with me here; you'll see where I'm going with this eventually. Now let me tell you about the major plot. It is about Michael Corleone wanting to quit crime for good (he has largely abandoned all criminal elements in his family business). But then along comes Vincent Mancini, an illegitimate nephew, who is involved in a feud. So of course Michael must endure yet another brush with criminality and gun violence and all that good gangster stuff. Meanwhile, Vincent has a semi-incestuous affair with Michael's daughter Mary. Oh, and Michael and Kay are trying to patch up all the horrid things that happened at the end of Part II.

It is like a soap opera. One horrid, awful, 169-minute soap opera. Gone is any sort of the sophistication, romance, and emotional relevance that made the first two movies hit home so hard. After a 16-year break in the franchise, Francis Ford Coppola delivered a mess of sop and pretentiousness entirely incongruous with the first two films, once again proving his last great work was ""Apocalypse Now"" back in the 1970's.

What's worse, ""The Godfather: Part III"" isn't even a logical follow-up of ""The Godfather: Part II."" Michael is a completely different person. He hasn't just gone to seed (which might be legitimate, even if it'd be no fun to watch). He's become a goody-goody that's trying to fix all the tragedy that made Part II such a devastating masterpiece. His confession to the priest was bad enough, but that little diabetes attack in the middle pushed it over to nauseating. He also gets back together with Kay! For heaven's sakes, there is absolutely no way that should happen, as the 2nd movie made abundantly clear! She aborted his baby, and his Sicilian upbringing made him despise her for it. Didn't Francis Ford Coppola even think of these things?

And don't even get me started on Mary and Vincent's affair! For a romance so forbidden, it was shockingly unengaging. Sofia Coppola's acting did nothing to help. She made the smartest move of her life when she switched from in front of the camera to behind it, because she was possibly THE worst actress I have ever seen in a Best Picture nominee. Every line she delivered was painfully memorized, and every time the drama rested on her acting abilities, all she elicited was inappropriate giggles. In the climactic scene--I won't go into detail, but you'll know which scene I'm talking about when/if you watch it--she looks at Michael and says, ""......Daddy?"" I think I was meant to cry, but the line was delivered so poorly I burst out into long, loud laughter!

Now we get to the climax, and now you will also realize why I took time to start the review with a description of Anthony Corleone's musical ambitions. After 140 minutes of petty drama and irrelevant happenstances, Anthony Corleone returns... with an opera! So Michael, Kay, Mary, and Vincent go to see it, and for about 10-15 minutes a couple killers walk around trying to assassinate Michael. About this climactic sequence, I must say one thing: It was really good! But not because of the killers--they were pretty boring. I just really liked the opera. It had some great music and real great set pieces. And, from what little it showed us, it seemed that the story had echoes of the Corleone family's origin. I'll bet it was one swell opera, and I'll bet Michael Corleone was glad he let his son switch from law school to music.

My biggest wish is this: that Francis Ford Coppola had merely filmed Anthony Corleone's opera for 169 minutes and ditched the rest of the soggy melodrama. Better yet, I wish he hadn't made ""The Godfather: Part III"" at all. Part II gave us the perfect ending. This spin off was self-indulgent and unnecessary.

P.S. This is not a gut reaction to the film. I watched all 3 Godfather films over a month ago (though I was rewatching the first one). Not only does this mean that my expectations for Part III weren't screwed (in fact, I had set the bar rather low for it after what I heard), but it also means I've had a good time to think about all three films. While I was a bit disappointed with Part II at first, the more I thought about it, the better it seemed. But with Part III, it was bad to begin with, then got worse the more I thought about it. The sad thing is that many people will stop with Part I, but if they watch Part II as well, they will most likely go on to Part III. If you have the will, watch Parts I & II and pretend like Part III never existed.";73;114;True tt0099674;bkoganbing;22/03/2008;Mother Of Mercy, Is This The End Of The Corleones?;10;"The Godfather Trilogy may have reached its end with The Godfather: Part III. But was there enough room to allow for yet another film based on another generation of the Corleones? Time and public demand will only tell.

I liked The Godfather: Part III right up to and including Sofia Coppola's much maligned performance as Mary Corleone daughter of Don Michael Corleone, the one and only Al Pacino. I think she was unjustly criticized. In her performance she set out to play one of the innocent children of Al Pacino.

There's a moving scene in The Godfather where we saw Al Pacino and Marlon Brando talking for the last time. Brando's hopes were for his son to become Governor Corleone, Senator Corleone to attain that level of respectability that was out of the Don's reach. Pacino tells him, maybe the next generation.

Flash forward to the late seventies where Pacino has slowly divested himself of the illegal interests of the Corleone family. But the other crime bosses don't like the idea of him going completely legitimate. He also has some opposition within his own family. His surviving sibling Talia Shire thinks he ought to keep a hand in and his illegitimate nephew, Andy Garcia is having a running feud with another family head, Joe Mantegna.

Andy Garcia got the only acting nomination for The Godfather: Part III as Sonny's son out of wedlock. And he's every bit as wild and hot tempered as Sonny was from The Godfather. Garcia brings a lot of passion to the part. But he does prove able to learn from his uncle and eventually not repeat the mistakes of his father. Garcia lost to another hoodlum portrayal, Joe Pesci for Goodfellas for Best Suppporting Actor.

Probably Al Pacino has gotten all he could out of the character of Michael Corleone. He's gotten real respectability now, he's been conferred with a Papal Knightship for the good works of the Corleone Foundation now. He's high up the criminal world too. But people and circumstances won't let those worlds mix and as he ruefully remarks, ""just when I think I'm out, they drag me back in again.""

Only four characters made it through the three Godfather films, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Richard Bright as Al Neri. All except Neri seem to grow in character, Neri is still button man in chief since Lucabrazzi started sleeping with the fishes in The Godfather. Keaton's character is still the outsider. Separated from Pacino in The Godfather: Part II, she still loves him and regrets as much as he has the outside forces that caused their separation.

Although Talia Shire got an Oscar Nomination for Best Supporting Actress in The Godfather: Part II, I think she really comes into her own in this one. Had it not been for male chauvinism implicit in the Sicilian culture, she'd be taking over the family business from Pacino. She's changed so dramatically over the course of the three films. In The Godfather she's the innocent daughter about to embark on marriage to a wife beater. In The Godfather: Part II, she's now entering middle age, overindulging in excesses, unhappy as a many time married widow, her first husband being killed in the original Godfather. She lives on the sufferance and tolerance of her brother. Now in The Godfather: Part III she takes an active interest in the family business and the family legacy. She realizes more than Pacino there's no escaping the Corleone roots. She champions Garcia as the new Don, she knows he's got the chops for the job, she hopes he can develop the smarts as does Pacino.

Eli Wallach contributes a fine performance as another aging crime Don who's got a lot more to him than when we first meet him. Raf Vallone plays Pope John Paul I and the urban legend of his sudden demise after a one month papacy is woven into the Corleone story. As is Joe Mantegna who plays an undisguised version of Brooklyn mob boss Joe Columbo.

I'm sure if the money's right and a workable screenplay is developed we may not have seen the last of the Corleones. There was one talked about a few years ago. Still if it never develops, The Godfather: Part III is a fine film to end the saga.";53;83;False tt0099674;nuferjer;14/06/2001;This cliched film corrupts the meaning of the first two Godfather films;1;The Godfather Part I was a stunning look inside the fictional Corleone family and how an innocent young man was all but forced into circumstances he never wanted to have a part of. The Godfather Part II shows that young man's acceptance of his new role, his desensitization of character, as well as his complete loss of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The first two parts of this saga of this transformation of Michael Corleone make for one of the greatest tragedies in cinematic history.

Then, along came The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex character that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather Part II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the unbelievably tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and abandoning the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the meaning of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible mess of a film that never should have been made. The only solution to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather movies is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's shockingly horrible act of having a member of his own family killed.;127;214;True tt0099674;gsoares;10/05/2002;"As Al Pacino has said, ""part III was a mistake"".";;"Attention: if you have not seen the movie, do not read on. I don´t suppose I put spoilers in, but I might for this is such a classic.

I spent heavy bucks on the recent DVD box and I´m proud of it. But there´s no way to avoid noticing the gap between second and third parts. Not the time gap, because that was of course well taken care of by the brilliant producing and directing. The same cast is there, and with the great addition of 15 years. That makes Michael and Kay controversial, loveXhate relationship even more appealing and dramatic, for now they are mature and have all the wrinkles to prove.

But as Al Pacino said in a recent interview, the attempt for redemption doesn´t fit with Don Corleone. That is a fact. That may be a flaw in Mario Puzo´s story, but that is greatly expectable. As long as you have read ""Omerttà"" or ""The Last Don"" you do understand me: not all of his stories are as perfect as the Godfather.

Think of the cold stare Michael gave the Cop that punched him on part one just before and moments after killing him point blank. And also of the look in his face when he shows up unexpectedly at the house and finds Kay secretly visiting their children: he never says a word. Walks towards her, gets real close and, when she starts wondering ""is this forgiving time?"" he closes the door - we glance at the desperate look Diane Keaton throws at him for a second, but he doesn´t. To me this shot is specially revealing of how cold and stone hearted a Don has to be. The woman aborted his son on purpose. She is let to live, but to him she is dead.

And, as part three goes on, he befriends her again after what, fifteen years? Too human for a Don. Specially Michael, who got appointed by Vitto as the greatest Don ever. What about the scene beside the coffin? That is lame, and is the only part I don´t like in the whole series. Even Pacino did not pull that one off, and the extra disc on the DVD Edition shows it clearly: Coppola tries to guide him through the dialog and the sobbing. It just doesn´t work.

And on a final note, I stick with the majority regarding Sofia Coppola: she is terrible. The theater scene is the climax of the film and she could easily have made it flop. Still, as a director, she has proven herself worthy of the Coppola name. Good thing Nicholas Cage did not stick to it.";16;22;True tt0099674;Don-146;14/01/2000;zzzzzz;;"This film came out about the same time as Goodfellas, and pales in comparison with the Martin Scorsese effort. I know the two shouldn't be compared, but the fact that they are both gangster films begs some sort of comparison.

Does Godfather III ""complete"" Coppola's Godfather series? Only in the sense that we see what happens to Michael when he is an old man. In my opinion, we didn't really need to know that. To me, the Godfather films ended with Michael Corleone as a shell of a man after losing his wife and murdering his brother.

Besides, I'm of the view that the best American films of the 20th century were made in the 1970s.";31;47;False tt0099674;mackler;27/11/2003;this movie blows (spoilers);;A story that has nothing to do with anything. Interminable wedding and opera scenes with no dramatic progression. Al Pacino doesn't seem like a mob boss. The first movie was based on the book (and so well done). The second movie was half based on the book. This movie seems to have been based on what actors were available. By the end I was wishing Mary Corleone had been killed at the beginning.

Suggestion for those who loved the first movie: read the book and then go watch the first movie again. It's like putting on 3d glasses or switching from a black-and-white to color TV. But save yourself the anger of being duped and avoid GF3.;34;53;True tt0099674;MartinTeller;04/01/2012;The Godfather: Part III (1990);5;"This is my third time watching GF3, with about 8-9 years between each viewing. I probably won't watch it again. It's not just that it pales in comparison to the first two movies. Watching it now, completely separated from its predecessors, makes that clear. In fact, for a while I was thinking ""eh, this isn't so bad"". But it really is. Slow and boring, with a complicated web of Vatican blah blah that is too hard to follow, and yet all the major emotional themes are presented in a wretchedly blunt fashion. Everyone pretty much blurts out exactly what they're feeling. I think Eli Wallach and Talia Shire might be the only decent performances in the movie. And speaking of performances... you know where I'm going with this. Sofia Coppola has taken a lot of crap for her role in this film (and Francis for casting her), and deserves every bit of it. She's awful, awful, awful. There are a few lyrical sequences and intriguing elements, but overall it's a dull, muddled, heavy-handed mess.";20;30;False tt0099674;Duck II;10/10/1999;Terribly disappointed;;In some ways it was wonderful seeing some of the original cast members (Pacino, Keaton, Shire) reprising their memorable roles. But in a lot of ways this third installment was just not necessary. If it was all about revealing Michael's wounded mind, and ensuring that he was 'punished for his sins', that was done (quite well, and in a much less graphic way) in Part II: You could tell he was undone in the very last scene. Part III was just overkill.

There were a few casting problems, as well. Sofia Coppola was just terrible, absolutely painful to watch. George Hamilton made the film look like a made-for-TV movie every time he appeared: What was he doing there?? I sure did miss Robert Duvall! The saving graces were Talia Shire as Connie getting her chance to dominate. Andy Garcia, though he didn't have the opportunity to really take off, was a lot of fun to watch.;20;30;False tt0099674;fadeout;22/06/1999;The horror, the horror;1;On its own, this film would be merely mediocre. But in contrast to Godfather I and II, and as a film marketed as part of a trilogy, it is a travesty. From the vanity casting of Sophia Coppola, to the stupefyingly boring subplot of the Vatican banking scandal, to the all-sunshiney cinematography, to the sophomoric references to King Lear, it is on a much lower plane than Coppola's earlier films. The boxed set is like getting Citizen Kane, Chinatown and Porky's III as a trilogy. Not to mention the fact that the beginning of Godfather III is inconsistent with the ending of Godfather II. The recent news story that a Godfather IV is in the offing is, after the invasion of Kosovo, the worst news I've heard this year.;66;115;False tt0099674;ntvnyr30;08/05/2006;Embarrassingly bad in some respects;4;"The flaws in this picture are well-known but I'll start with some other noticeable, less mentioned incongruities: why does Talia Shire's character Connie all of a sudden has a heavy Brooklyn accent in contrast to the first 2 films? Her accent sounded terribly out of place and was a distraction. Coppola should have corrected this. Also, I noticed a lot of double-breasted suits and longish hair on some male characters. I don't remember this style as being popular in the late 70's---more like the time around when the film was made. One more: the gratuitously violent ""hit"" scene in Atlantic City. That was something more akin to an B-movie action director rather than a great auteur like Coppola who I consider to be a modern-day Orson Welles in many respects. Coppola's body of work (i.e. ""Tucker"" and ""The Cotton Club"") will one day be appreciated just like Welles' work is finally getting its recognition. Unfortunately the appreciation usually happens when you're dead. Another misstep, in my opinion, were the constant flashback scenes from the previous films. I mean--everyone knows these by heart by now. There was no need to show these flashbacks--unless they were meant as filler.

Now for the major mistakes: Robert Duvall's absence hurt badly. Duvall allegedly told Coppola: ""Let's be honest, this is not about art. It's about money,"" which was obviously true. Why didn't they just pay Duvall the money? Because of Duvall's absence, the script was overhauled. I am curious what the film would have been like had Duvall accepted. Despite his absence, George Hamilton did a very nice job as the Corleone's WASP lawyer (an interesting side note: maybe Coppola thought that the final product would be better since Robert Castellano was supposed to be in Part II, but asked for too much money and was written out of the script. A fascinating tidbit was that Castellano was the highest paid actor in ""The Godfather"").

My apologies to Coppola about the flack he tolerated about his daughter's inclusion in this film and her ""performance."" But let's be real, Andy Garcia falling for her? And speaking of bad acting, Eli Wallach should be tried in court for the most egregious crime of overacting. I think the long layoff after Godfather Part II made Coppola's casting skills atrophy a bit, not unlike George Lucas's casting mistakes a few years later in the Star Wars prequels.

Even more painful than Soffia's addition was the lousy dialogue, especially between Michael and Kay. Every attempt was made to ""hit the home run"" and give her the one-line zingers that were quite frankly painfully embarrassing to watch.

I think it's a shame because the nucleus of the film--about corruption in the Vatican and the possible murder of a pope was very intriguing and done properly, this could have been a great film. Unfortunately it could only be called fair at best.";31;50;False tt0099674;JoshtheGiant;27/11/2005;Why the Heck Did They Even Make This?;3;Why did they even make this? It completely ruined what was before the best film series ever, Robert Duvall was right to have gotten out of this film as was Winona Rider, I still can't believe Al Pacino didn't join them. Not to mention Francis Ford Coppola who should have also known better than the make this. I must say this may not be one of the worst movies I have ever seen but it is for sure one of the most disappointing films ever, and also the biggest drop from one film to it's sequel, there usually big but from the second best film ever to this piece of crap? Not usually that big. The story and script are heavy handed and filled with clichés and bad dialogue. The performances are good by Talia Shire and Diane Keaton, and great by Al Pacino and Andy Garcia, but Soffia Coppola is amazingly horrible, she should have gone straight to directing. The direction is horrible what was Francis Ford Coppola asleep? Or did he just let the actors direct themselves? The visual effects are crap and just don't work, they are even worse than the other films made twenty years before. A heavy handed and lumbering sequel that wallows in cliché and should be tossed to the dogs.;18;27;False tt0099674;anonreviewer;13/12/2004;Most movies are overrated in IMDb, but this one is underrated;10;"This movie is Rated a 7.2 here by IMDb voters; I feel it should be rated higher. Perhaps a 7.9, which might move it into the top 250 of all, and perhaps it deserves that.

The ending of this movie is sterling, of the highest quality. Pacino really lets rip.

The other actors? Sofia Coppola is, as others have pointed out, not all that great. Talia Shire? She was never that good, and she does an ""OK"" job here. Both of those actresses got into movies via their relative, Francis Ford Coppola, who directed this film. Nepotism....it shows. How Talia Shire ever got as much work as she has, I will never know....

Keaton is held back a bit in this movie, perhaps so as not to overshadow Pacino. Not one of her best performances.

Andy Garcia? I am not all that big a fan. I think his performance here is overrated a little bit. He is a ham. And Pacino is, too. But he has something Garcia will never have.

But many other rather good roles for a lot of great character actors, who perform well. Those character actors, along with Pacino, are the heart of this movie. That, and a very good script and production values and direction. Seamless direction!

A high quality film. Almost as good a script as parts 1 and 2.

I give it a 7.9.";158;298;False tt0099674;smaybee;27/11/2001;If you enjoyed the first two, spare yourself the agony of this one;1;"-This movie is awful on two counts: as a finale to the trilogy and as a stand-alone film. This shows in the poor character development, the abundance of meaningless shots, and lastly, and most importantly in my mind, the meaninglessness of the dialogue. -All of the integrity of the characters from the first two Godfathers is completely done away with in the first sequence. -Michael, a taciturn, introverted, calculating megalomaniac in the first two films is lavish, loose-lipped, pathetic in his control over his family, and careless as he never was and never would have been by the first two movies. -Constanza is all of a sudden involved in the family affairs. Joe Mantegna plays a terribly thin enemy of the family, Joey Zasa, but can't be blamed as an actor with such a flimsy script. Andy Garcia overacts every one of Vincent Corleone's lines and every step--he practically goosesteps. Tom Hagan is missing and leaves a giant hole. It doesn't matter that Sofia Coppola can't act, because she had nothing to work with anyway--she plays a whinging, incestuous brat poorly, but convincingly (!). -The first dramatic sequence involves a conflict between Joey Zasa and Vincent mediated by Michael, who is trying to go legit, but can't seem to do it. Vincent tries to convince Michael that Zasa is ""an enemy"" in a very un-Godfatherly manner: a) he does it right in front of Zasa, b) he does so simply because Zasa supposedly says, ""F*ck Michael Corleone,"" behind his back, and c) he disobeys Michael right in the room by biting Zasa's ear off. -This is juvenile drama. There is no tension that lasts longer than a sequence. There is no reason motivating the characters. There is no real respect for anything--all the subtleties of the family traditions are stomped on, which makes the highly visual sequences, loaded with symbols, cheap because the symbols mean nothing to the characters. -The haughty diction is only pretension void of any understanding of respect and the values that drive the family and Michael in particular. Michael, a very chiseled character in the first two movies, becomes paper thin, with no real idea that is central to his action. All his actions in the first movie and the facades he puts on as Don in the second movie show an aspiration to an ideal or, at least, an aspiration to appear as this ideal. He has none of this in the third film and this change of character doesn't happen on screen, nor is it explained. We're left only to believe that Coppola and Puzo tore this one off in a frenzied weekend when the purse got light. -The story lacks direction, focus, has nothing in particular to say, but that's not condemnable unto itself. The dialogue, however, is worthy of a pair of misguided high school kids who watched the first two movies and figured they knew what respect was because they saw one guy shoot another and a bunch of people get scared. None of the dialogue is loaded with the layers of meaning and subtlety that exist in the first two. All the characters are brash and stereotypical, or, in the case of a few, like Enzo the Baker and Bridget Fonda's character, tokens and a waste of celluloid. -Though Godfather III isn't worth its score in Scrabble, it is, however, a testament to Pacino as an actor, that with such flimsy stuff he still manages to act compellingly.";95;174;False tt0099674;ciaony;09/12/2014;This movie is a embarrassing.;;"Awful, awful movie that doesn't warrant the time it would take to point out all that makes it suck.

Some key points: The movie tries desperately in every single scene without exception to be...I don't know...cool...in the way the first two movies are. The amber lighting...people sitting around eating cannoli...the raspy voices...""Joey ZAZA"", really??, etc. And how many times can the cast say the name Joey Zaza? It should be a drinking game. The dialogue most often borders on absurd. After Michael's ""confession"" to the priest, why is Connie bringing up 'Fredo? Where did that even come from except for a cheap gratuitous explanation of her understanding of his death.

Why does the movie end with the same music used throughout Raging Bull?

Why is GEORGE HAMILTON in this movie?

Why did Coppola insist on using his daughter then dubbing in someone else's voice? How is that OK?

The plot is absurd. The Vatican wouldn't come to a NY organized crime family for money. Every scene with Talia Shire is unnecessarily dramatic and out of character for Connie.

The list goes on. It's unwatchable.

But you should watch it anyway. Because according to these reviews, there's something about it that doesn't suck. After watching it 4 times and wanting to love it, I have no idea what that is. This movie is a mistake.";21;33;True tt0099674;Kyddwest;05/04/2006;Godfather III;3;"I was so excited to watch the third installment of The Godfather after watching the first two. I was horribly disappointed. The first two Godfathers were truly works of art. The acting and directing were excellent. Pacino and DeNiro were wonderful. The writers and directors wisely kept Keaton to a minimum in the first two. The first two were intriguing and really told the story of the Corleone family well. However, The Godfather III should not have been made. The acting was terrible. Even Pacino (i am a huge fan) came off as forced acting. Sofia Coppola was absolutely awful. Keaton was such a drag throughout the entire movie. The plot was weak and did not hold my attention. It also seemed like such a ""recycled"" movie from material from the first two. The first 15 minutes of the movie were clips from the first two (and definitely the highlight of III). There was too much Italian opera singing and repetition of the first soundtrack of The Godfather. This movie reminded me of the new Star Wars movies that came out in the 90's and later. Both The Godfather and Star Wars were created in the 1970's were classics and should not have sequels or prequels added to them. Really, if you enjoyed the first two Godfathers, don't watch the third one...it will spoil the experience for you.";21;33;False tt0099674;mftuchman;13/04/2015;Unwatchable;1;This movie is way too facile in the way it attempts to resurrect Michael . The whole thing felt like a giant backpedal, and it was just a self serving tour guide with some pretty scenes. In my view, the glossing over of difficult or destroyed relationships actually undoes (not in plot but in spirit) the entire second movie. The acting is second rate, and by the time the plot got rolling, I didn't care.

The love scenes were awkward. Andy Garcia seemed plastic and unbelievable, and Sophia should have stayed behind the camera.

There was some suffering all right, but no Godfather could ever undo the movie goers agony at having to sit through this mess, not even at a daughter''s wedding.;17;26;False tt0099674;Bob-562;16/01/2006;A Complete Abomination;1;"Part III is dead in the water in every way. It's derivative in plot outline from the first two films; it has some awful acting stints by Pacino, Sophia Coppola, & Talia Shire, among others; and it insults the Catholic Church by positing as truth the murder of a pope. Critics have been way too indulgent with this dog! The Godfather saga seemed appropriately concluded at the end of Part II, when we're left with a heartless Michael aging alone in his blustery Tahoe home. That haunting scene is jettisoned in Part III when we're re-introduced to a redeemed, conscience-stricken Michael. Also, Pacino was the master of understatement in the first two films, so that when he exploded, you took notice. In Part III, alas, he's still stuck in his shouting, out-of-control acting schtick (see ""Heat"" for more of that).

Supposedly the future shoplifting Winona Ryder bowed out of III: but why, oh why would Coppola replace her with his talentless daughter? It's a key role, and her non-performance further taints the film. Stick to the first two!";41;72;False tt0099674;smerph;05/07/2002;Part three : The Anti- Climax;;You wouldn't think it was possible to make a three hour film in which very little happens, but Francis Ford Coppola succeeded with this decidedly average and woeful anti-climax to his Mafia saga.

The flaws are glaringly obvious : a lack of characters from the first two parts (Robert Duvall being a prime example) looses the whole family feel of the trilogy. Andy Garcia (as Vincenzo) is brought in to bolster up the development of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) but the character never develops past an awkward romantic sub-plot involving his cousin... ..which brings us onto Sofia Coppola. Much has been written about her acting ability, or lack of, and this reviewer will only comment that if you don't know what she looks like - or which character she plays, you'll be able to work it out pretty quickly.

The film starts promisingly enough, but loses it's way in the middle, which is overly-complicated. However it is the finale that lets the film - and the trilogy down. The murder of a principal character would be effective, but for the fact that the principal character is only principal to THIS film, and not parts 1 or 2

Seemingly aware of this, Coppola jumps several years into the future for the supposedly dramatic death of Michael. But, there is little spectacle surrounding this either.

In conclusion, if you have sat through Parts 1 and 2, this is pretty essential viewing. Just don't get your hopes up.;7;9;True tt0099674;MattB-5;07/01/1999;Atrocious;1;So bad that it tarnishes the whole series. Seems like a rip off of the previous two, as if some other film maker had tried to copy Coppola's style. Cliche-ridden, poor story, poor acting, passionless film-making, uses the same dramatic devices and dialog of first 2 movies, complete lack of originality, a movie that should not have been made, Coppola's cupboard is bare. He over-mined this theme.;34;60;False tt0099674;ElMaruecan82;20/05/2011;"The ""Fredo"" of the Godfather Trilogy ...";8;"It's funny how some personal circumstances are the key elements that influence our judgment. In my case, ""The Godfather Part III"", was not the last opus of a magnificent saga, but the first film I watched from the trilogy, my first encounter with the Corleone Family, a cinematic love story that would never end.

Speaking of love, I always wondered how a movie like ""The Godfather Part III"" had crystallized so much hatred and disdain. The unforgettable ""Never hate your enemies, because it clouds your judgment"" is like a self-defense cry, from a film that wanted so much to be respected like its glorious predecessors, but apparently failed to, for even the fans will always concede after they say how the movie is great ""but not as great as the two others""

So, as a fourteen-year old kid, I loved ""The Godfather Part III"", I couldn't complain about the absence of Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. I wasn't mature enough to judge Sofia Coppola's acting abilities though I found something physically odd in her. From Michael's relationship with Kay to his haircut, ""Part III"" was my reference. And I guess I loved the movie for what it was: a great story with an unforgettable climax.

Till now, I can't watch the ending, even the clip, without crying, it broke my heart the first time, and it always does, even after so many viewings. It was like I felt the devastation of a man whose life's only meaning was incarnated by his children, his only inspiration in his quest of redemption. And it's ironically the very part that kind of redeems the film, even for the non fans. The others deserving to be mentioned are Michael Corleone's sadness while hearing the 'Brucia La Terra' song played by his son, and his heart-breaking confession of Fredo's murder

The film is about the redemption of a man who sinned so many times. Many would argue that his sins were necessary because they were the only ways to maintain the interests of his family, but hell is paved with many good intentions, and the way Michael ended at ""The Godfather Part II"", a ruthless cold-blooded zombie-like figure was demanding a sequel. The last shot of him, sitting alone in the park plunged viewers in a lot of interrogations and interpretations. What was he thinking? Probably, how he got in such a situation, and how this would end. And it's like Coppola, tortured by his own demons, felt there was more to do with Michael Corleone.

And the character's arc was concluded, with nothing I would reproach in Michael's portrayal, he's tired, sick as he had carried the weight of a lifelong guilt that ravaged his soul. He may be too pathetic, too different from the Michael we know,his use of profanity was quite out-of character, but who knows how killing his own brother could affect someone. Michael is still respected and feared, but is more melancholic, explaining how the movie needed to be driven by more active supporting characters. And after I finally watched the two other films, one year later my opinions were mixed.

First, I was fascinated by the sight of young War hero, Michael Corleone, in Connie's wedding, it was so contrasting with the pitiful diabetic Mike of the third opus, watching Part I was an extraordinary discovery, a refreshing experience. Besides, the gallery of new characters, Sonny, Tom, Clemenza, Tessio, enriched the film and made it even more entertaining, Part II confirmed my fascination. And step by step, when I started to watch the first two a little more and while I was sharing my opinions on the Net and learning about Part III's reputation, flaws were becoming more visible: Sofia, Duvall's absence and replacement by that Hamilton guy who was certainly not to Hagen what Pentangelli was to Clemenza, the helicopter scene etc. And the reading of the book made me wonder why they chose as the successor, Sonny's illegitimate son.

But if the film could have been better, it also could have been worse. And when I watch it, I'm more generous, as I see the tragic ending of one of the most fascinating character's story, a man who's always been ""pulled back in"". The movie respects the spirit of Part I, with a succession on the Corleone's throne, true historical events as back-stories, and so many unforgettable lines. In fact, we can make a parallel between the trilogy and the Corleone brothers:





And of course ...



I'm sure those who prefer the first film also appreciate the last one and those who love the second film and think it's the best one, identify so much with Michael that they hate ""Part III"", with the same intensity and severity Michael expressed towards Fredo. They don't forgive any mistake ... and consider the last film a disgrace for the trilogy, and symbolically disown it.";12;18;True tt0099674;cruvinel;17/02/2001;Should not have been made;3;"I dislike this movie a lot. If you've read the Puzo's books, or at least have watched very closely the two first movies (specially the first one), you're going to agree with me.

Compared with the Corleone's saga presented by Puzo's novel, the script of this film is, sometimes, even ridiculous. The characters and the relationships among them are distorted. The story ends up reaching nowhere, although it appears to go to some direction during the movie.

It is understandable that different times should be expected for the Corleone's saga in the 90's, and that we would not gonna find things the way they were before. But, in the other hand, I don't know why they had to copy some dialogues from the other movies, in contexts when they didn't fit. Why this? It sounds like those poorly made sequels that just try to copy the original film's qualities.

What will never be understandable is the fact that Mario Puzo, Coppola and Al Pacino joined together to make this. A man who directed pieces like Apocalypse Now and Godfather has to be forgiven for almost anything he does in cinema until he dies. So does Al Pacino, for being the actor he is. But Mario Puzo shouldn't have written this. How come? He damaged all his previous work. What a shame, my friend. The Puzo's novel ""The Last Don"" is a 90's story about the mob, and it is great. We can never tell the same about the plot for the Godfather III.";21;35;False tt0099674;rblayer;01/11/2002;My Vote of 1 was generous....;1;"As a person who is able to practically recite the entire script of the first two Godfathers, and has yet to tire of watching either one or both, my disappointment in III was near fatal. This disaster approaches biblical proportions...one plague after another. Contrary to popular thought, I found Sophie Coppula to be a breath of fresh air in this stinker. Katherine Hepburn, Meryl Streep and Glenda Jackson in their prime would have failed in this part as the daughter of Michael Corleone...so give Francis Ford's kid a break...Also, I loved Andy Garcia, but alas, even he could not save this sequel. Al Pacino has not aged well, and those of us who remembered Michael as the handsome, strong silent type, as displayed when he slammed the door on his ex-wife. His bad-hair and sunken cheeked ranting and raving, made me think that he was attempting to resurrect the snarling, spitting Scarface. The plot of this show was also way too convoluted and boring to keep my attention long enough to care who was wacking who. The Consumer Protection people ought to investigate the usage of the ""Godfather"" packaging. So, this is my story and I'm sticking to it.....";40;73;False tt0099674;GusF;30/05/2015;A dull and pointless sequel;;"After its two excellent predecessors, this is bitterly disappointing. None of the various story lines are terribly interesting and I think that the kissing cousins plot was a dreadful idea. The best parts of the film are the scenes between Al Pacino and Diane Keaton, who play the tense relationship between Michael and Kay very well, but their performances are not on the same level as in the first two films. This would not have been a major problem if the film had been better but it places far too much reliance on the previous films to the point that it is difficult to fully understand or even care about the characters and events if you are not familiar with them.

I wasn't very interested in the idea of Michael's quest for redemption but could have been handled far better. The film was nominated for Best Picture but I don't think that it deserved to be. It felt more like someone else trying to emulate the ""Godfather"" films than a true ""Godfather"" film itself. For instance, the intertwining of the killings with the opera performance was a failed attempt to recreate the brilliant baptism scene of the first film. At 2 hours and 50 minutes, it was far too long and very badly paced. Honestly, my favourite line in the film is when Joey Zasa says, ""And we got Don Ameche, who played the guy that invented the telephone"" since Ameche is one of my all time favourite actors.

The best newcomers are the always brilliant Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna and Donal Donnelly. George Hamilton and Bridget Fonda are wasted. Robert Duvall's absence is extremely noticeable and Andy Garcia, who is not a very good actor, is just forgettable as Vincent. Sofia Coppola's performance as Mary Corleone is pretty horrific but much of the blame has to be attributed to her father Francis Ford Coppola for casting her. He should have been able to see that she could not act to save her life. One of her lines - delivered atrociously - is ""Dad, why are you doing this to me?"" I'd have said the same thing in real life if I were her. Coppola's well known propensity for nepotism proved successful in the casting of his sister Talia Shire in this trilogy - she has more screen time in this film than the first two combined but far less interesting material, incidentally - and his nephew Nicolas Cage in ""Peggy Sue Got Married"". However, after Winona Ryder dropped out of this film, it would have probably been a good idea if he looked for an actress outside of his immediate family to replace her.

Overall, this is not a dreadful or even a particularly bad one. It's just dull. However, I don't think that this is a film that needed to be made. This is the weakest final entry in a film trilogy that I have ever seen. It's certainly for the best that ""The Godfather Part IV"" was never made.";9;13;True tt0099674;mrmclaugh7-1;24/04/2006;Extremely Disappointing;2;"I realize this had very little hope of measuring up to the 1st two GFs, but I never imagined III would be SUCH a disappointingly off-the-mark failure. Difficult to believe it even could've been made by the same people.

This movie had absolutely none of the fascinating believability of the 1st two: NO gangsters would actually use the pretentious empty (and annoying) dialogue that pre-dominated here; NOR would they conduct hits in the extravagant Hollywood-concocted manner here (Helicopter/parade scenes etc.)that seem more appropriate for Batman type movies whereas the whole vatican/immobilario plot base seems more at home in a James Bond flick; characters react throughout as their counterparts in I and II never would have; and entire plot lines (especially the incestuous cousin-love angle) needed to be thrown out entirely. An average Sopranos episode gives a far more interesting and realistic Cosa Nostra portrayal.

And the performances only made it worse. Sophia Coppola was justifiably panned for being dreadful--it looked as if she was reading her lines for the 1st time off cue-cards. But even Pacino seems to have lost track of his character. Michael was so compelling in I and II because of the introverted, extraordinarily controlled, always-calculating way he conducted the ""family business"", but none of that was apparent in Pacino's III overacted portrayal of an almost-whiny Michael prone to regular emotional outbursts.

You get the idea, I didn't like it. Coppola appears to have grown terribly pretentious and uninspired, and has thoroughly lost touch with the creative vision that made the 1st two GFs so great. If you haven't seen it, I suggest you don't. Re-watch I and II, pretend this never happened.";20;34;False tt0099674;brendan-821-654855;18/07/2015;This is not a Godfather movie, nor is it good;4;Okay, so I've just finished yet another Godfather trilogy marathon.

Part I and Part II are cinematic masterpieces that rightly deserve high praise heaped upon them from now until forever - but Part III simply doesn't hold a candle to either of its predecessors.

I suspect that the only reason this movie got the green light was because studio execs. thought that the renewed public interest in the American Mafia in the late 1980's would translate into box office gold for a Godfather sequel.

The problem is that this movie is not the same type of film as its predecessors - which are powerful character-driven tragedies that happen to centre around a crime family, whereas this is a gangster/political conspiracy movie that happens to feature Michael Corleone.

The fact that the plot of this movie features a (now discredited) conspiracy theory about papal assassination lifted straight from the pages of another book should tell you everything you need to know about its originality.

Sofia Coppola's acting was simply not up to the standard of the previous films, or of the other cast members in this film, and as a result there is a major audience disconnect with her character - which all but destroys the impact of her 'romance' with Vincent, and her eventual death, both of which are supposed to be central to the emotional heart and climax of this movie.

While the previous two films featured intricate storytelling involving an ensemble cast, this one felt like a patchwork that was thrown together and ran far too long - the final assassination scenes are so convoluted that it's no longer even clear who is killing who... and to make matters worse, as an audience member, and Godfather fan, I no longer even cared anyway.

The emotional depth of the first two films is missing from this one, and instead it is replaced with contrived sentimentality and clichéd dialogue that often doesn't even make any sense in light of the previous character development (like when Kay tells Michael that she has always loved him, and always will - yet her actions in Part II, and even the start of this film are completely at odds with such a suggestion).

At the end of the day, this feels like little more than hollow cinematic reminiscing (consider the way that Sicily is forcefully thrown into the plot of this movie, compared to the natural and obvious way that it features in the first two films - it's almost like this film is being made to a formula, where the filmmakers are adding concepts and plot developments based on what they think the audience liked in the first two films).

Godfather III simply did not need to be made, as all it does is rehash the plot of the first two films, except in a far less convincing and skillful way - the movie even ends the same as Part II does: with Michael all alone, having attained all he fought so hard to achieve, but also forced to accept all of the unforeseen and tragic consequences that go along with the life he has embraced.;11;17;True tt0099674;Coxer99;17/06/1999;The Godfather Part III;;Well done finale to the fantastic saga of the Corleone family with Coppola's daughter Sofia being the only weak link in the acting area. Garcia is brilliant and carries the same vigor and power as Caan before him. Pacino still has that touch as Michael, now in his later years. The film moves along briskly and features great support from Mantegna, Wallach and a surprisingly well used George Hamilton. Wasn't as big a hit at the Oscars as the first two installments, but the saga is still one of the most important series of films ever made.;44;85;False tt0099674;maidmere;08/10/2017;The acting is horrid;1;I watched The Godfather Part 2 again after not having seen it for a number of years. I fell in love with it for the first time, especially the acting and the cinematography. I felt compelled to see 3 right after that, mainly because I was feeling the glow of the excellence of 2. I was hoping that that 3 was actually better than I had remembered from past viewing, and I was wrong. I've read lots of reviews about the plot and Sophia Coppola's wooden acting and still my major complaint from the get-go is the god-awful acting. Every one in the movie appears false! I just couldn't get beyond how forced each line appeared. Maybe the story was effective yet I couldn't get through enough of the film to understand the plot because of how painful it was to watch each actor deliver his/her lines. It's so excruciatingly obvious that Francis Ford Coppola was not inspired nor were his actors. All in all, the message this film conveys to me is that it was made under duress. It has no artistic connection whatsoever to the previous masterpieces of the same name.;12;19;False tt0099674;Howlin Wolf;15/05/2001;Focuses more on who we all know is the TRUE main character of the series, and that's why it's my favourite.;8;"Castigate me if you will for saying this, but I believe part 3 to be the best of the series. It's a very close run thing, with each film receiving the same rating from me (8), but it benefits from being a more intense study of ONE character rather than trying to divide its time between several, as the other two did. That character of course is Michael Corleone; and when he's played by an actor of such class as Pacino, the movie can't fail. Michael has always been the most interesting character of the series for me, and is the fulcrum around which the entire series revolves; more so than Marlon Brando, who was nevertheless the first to essay the character of 'the Don'. It's fascinating to watch events unfold now that he is finally a willing head of the 'family', trying to emulate his father.

I did as is recommended and watched all 3 consecutively, so my ultimate preference for this one can't be explained by having forgotten how good the other two were. IMO, this is a superior film on its own merits, which have nothing to do with the 15yr (I think) gap between sequels.

Andy Garcia is a great addition to the cast as the cocksure Vincent, and Sophia Coppola, despite what you may have heard, is fine here too as Mary.

She is also very beautiful.

The entire trilogy is a series which demands to be seen by all those who call themselves film fans, and the third is not a blight on the other two, but rather a quality addition that enriches far more than it detracts.";88;183;False tt0099674;rhaath;23/04/2000;A lukewarm finale to the Godfather saga.;4;"Francis Ford Coppola was obviously blinded by paternal instinct when he decided to cast his daughter (Sophia Coppola) in the role of Mary Corleone. While the acting in G3 was passionate for the most part (especially by Pacino and Andy Garcia), Coppola comes across as a dead fish in comparison. I found myself fully distracted every time her face ""graced"" the screen. Sadly, Coppola was not the only problem with this movie. The utterly contrived plot, as well as the notable absence of Robert Duvall, sink what should be an unsinkable movie franchise. Truly, not a fitting ending to the Godfather trilogy.";21;37;False tt0099674;mavelous-784-275167;17/06/2014;Yuck;3;I've read most of the favorable reviews citing mainly that this film was 'underrated'. Well. I don't know what to say other than that is an insult to the thousands of TRULY underrated films...

Weak story lines, ridiculous clichés, bad makeup, Eli Wallach.......... I mean,really, I have nothing against Mr Wallach, but the scene when he leaves the circle jerk meeting while pleading with Michael at the door is just ridiculous,laughable, crappy.

That alone is enough to slam the film, yet there are hundreds of overacted and then UNDERACTED scenes too numerous to mention.

Painful, Incongruous, and worst yet..........dull;13;21;False tt0099674;mea2214;27/08/2006;I want my 170 minutes back;1;"I just rented this from Netflix even though I heard it was a bad film and it even has a bad rating from Netflix (3 stars). I thought the first two Godfathers should be in the list of best films ever so I figured it was about time to see the wrap up. I didn't expect to see one of the worst movies ever, produced and written by the same people too. This movie was so overacted and had so many funny lines that I started laughing about 1/3 into the movie. Am I supposed to get all teary eyed because two first cousins can't fall in love? And what made me laugh the loudest was when Pacino keeps saying over and over that's ""it's dangerous."" Incest is not dangerous, it creates offspring with screwed up genes. Go see ""Deliverance"" which came out when the first Godfather did to see what happens when cousins marry. And the number of plot points that didn't make sense are too numerous to mention. I wondered if they wrote this movie while drunk.

Perhaps if they didn't wait 16 years after the Godfather II to make this film they might have continued the inspiration. I rated this 1 star on Netflix too.";19;33;False tt0099674;walkerus;22/11/2004;The Poor Relation;3;"Years ago I saw The Godfather and it made a lasting impression on me, the atmosphere of the movie was first class, the acting memorable and the storyline a classic. Recently I bought the Trilogy and after watching Part 1 again I looked eagerly to viewing Part 2...... I was so pleased to realize early on into Part 2 that here was a fitting follow on to the great Godfather movie, again everything was just about perfect and I could not wait to see Godfather III ........ WRONG!, I wish I'd stopped at II. The storyline was not good, it seemed to me like a story made up just to have a story, the characters were weak especially the daughter. Pacino's protege was a weak character that would have been eaten alive in Godfather 1 or 2. Then scenes such as, Corleone being invested with all the trappings of the Catholic Church with full choir, the assassin on horseback riding away into the sunset, the unseen helicopter machine gunning of the meeting (where the 'goodies' get away and everyone else is shot),daughter and 1st cousin rolling bits of pasta across a board, the pathetic shooting on the steps ..... Corleone stuffing sweets down him with orange juice for diabetes (a man of his intelligence and guile isn't ready for an emergency?)... NO it was not good and with the best will in the world I wont be able to watch it again. But I'll watch 1 & 2 many times down the years.";19;33;False tt0099674;stallone-9;25/03/2008;Criminally Underrated;10;What is wrong with some people?This is without a doubt the most underrated movie of all time no question.Al Pacino's performance alone makes this an unforgettable classic but for some reason the movie was quickly forgotten and overlooked.In my opinion Pacino was stunning and did an incredible job portraying a tormented and tortured soul bearing the weight of his many sins mainly the killing of his brother Fredo.Michael Corleone in this movie confesses for all his crimes and the viewer feels for him despite all he has done.The supporting cast is also most impressive.Joe Mantegna as Joey Zasa is a memorable villain who proves to be danger for the Corleone family and wants to be in charge of business himself.Andy Garcia as the Don's nephew and Sonny Corleone's son gives an awesome performance and shows the audience he is indeed a kid of wild Sonny played with a passion by James Caan in the original.Many people considered that director Francis Ford Coppola's daughter Sofia was wrongly cast as Michael's daughter in the film but I think she did great and added dept to her character.The movie is amazing and powerful all the way but nothing tops the final scene in which Mary is shot and dies in her father's arms.It is truly magical and is sure to put a tear in your eye or at least grab you for a while.The way Pacino and Diane Keaton act during the scene alone makes it phenomenal.In conclusion I advice you not to ignore this wonderful piece of film-making.Be sure to watch it.It is worthy of being the final chapter in the Godfather saga and will impress you I'm sure.;19;36;True tt0099674;StoryCharts;19/07/2013;Crime will never let you escape;1;"The Godfather: Part III continues the theme of Family from the first two movies. In The Godfather, Michael had undergone an internal arc to go from outsider to Don of the family, dropping most of his morals along the way in order to protect the family. In The Godfather: Part II, this idea of the ends justify the means is taken to its logical extreme as Michael tears the family apart in order to protect it.

In Part III, Michael tries to make the family legitimate in order to redeem himself. Unlike the first movie, where Michael's internal change happens on screen, and unlike the second movie, where Michael's does not change at all, this movie has Michael shifting gears to try to pay for his past sins. But this change does not take place on screen. Michael starts the movie regretting his distance from his children and spends the whole movie trying to make up, his internal compass does not change through the movie.

So all we are left are two external plot lines: Michael's efforts to legitimize being constantly thwarted and his failure to protect his family because of his past sins keep catching up to him.

The movie seems to be about something like ""Crime will never let you escape"". But the movie doesn't really prove this because so much of what Michael is paying for is offscreen and in the past two movies. The whole movie just feels like a confession for past sins and the filmmakers showing us that bad deeds will always catch up to us. The idea is not proved by action and choice of the characters on screen. This movie is a necessary but not a worthy tribute to the first two films, it probably shouldn't have been made at all.

My Story Chart of the movie is at storycharts.ca.";12;21;True tt0099674;Desertman84;19/10/2011;The Godfather Part III: The Greatest Underrated Film Ever Made;10;"Many have trashed the third part of The Godfather.Many fans of the first two movies have called it that the movie should have not been made.Some have said that this movie does not hold a candle to the first two movies as Parts I and II are considered American masterpieces as both have established a standard for cinema excellence.While others have coldly stated,""This movie is simply an offer you can refuse"".LOL

Anyway,The Godfather Part III stars Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García, and it features Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola.It is about an aging Don Michael Corleone,who seeks to legitimize his crime family's interests and remove himself from the violent underworld. Unfortunately,he is kept back by the ambitions of the young namely Joey Zaza and hungrier gangsters. While he attempts to link the Corleone's finances with the Vatican, Michael must deal with the machinations of a hungrier gangster in both Don Licio Lucchesi and Don Altobello,who are seeking to upset the existing mob order.Aside from that,it also involves Vincent Mancini,a young protégé of Michael who gets involved with a love affair with his daughter,Mary.The movie also weaves into its plot a fictionalized account of real-life events—the 1978 death of Pope John Paul I and the Papal banking scandal of 1981–1982—and links them with each other.

Director Francis Ford Copolla said the first two films had told the complete Corleone saga. In his audio commentary for Part II, he stated that only a dire financial situation caused by the failure of New York Stories compelled him to take up Paramount's long-standing offer to make a third installment.Coppola and Mario Puzo,author of The Godfather, requested six months to complete a first draft of the script with a release date of Easter 1991. Paramount agreed to give them six weeks for the script and, lacking a holiday movie, a release date of Christmas Day 1990. Given the conditions together with the casting of neophyte actress and the director's daughter,Sofia Copolla,whom many fans have vehemently criticized for her poor portrayal of Mary Corleone,I still believe that Part III is still a great film.

Part III still has great acting from the cast except from Sofia Copolla,whom I must really say deserved the Razzies he got from this film.Worthy of mention is of course,Al Pacino,Andy Garcia and Eli Wallach.Also,the movie's story still works despite missing Robert Duvall and his character,Tom Hagen,whom I believe was really essential in story as he plays an important role in the family. The screenplay was also good BUT one cannot fully comprehend this movie without watching the first two.And of course,other great features from the previous Godfather movies are still present in this movie like the great writing of Copolla and Puzo,the music of Carmine Copolla and Nino Rota and the direction of Copolla.Overall,it is still a great movie although not a masterpiece as compared to the first two.

After viewing The Godfather Part III once again after so many years before writing this review,I would say that if The Godfather is the greatest film ever made and The Godfather Part II is the greatest sequel ever made,this movie is definitely the greatest underrated film ever made.It is a great movie although it may not be comparable to the first two in terms of critical and commercial success.The Academy Award nominations it got attest to that.";12;21;True tt0099674;johnnycandle;01/09/2009;Love the Godfather & II? Do NOT watch this;2;"Like, I suspect, many others, I saw this when it came out and years later rewatched it thinking "" it's a probably better film than I remember. I was probably expecting too much"" .

Indeed, many great films would suffer by comparison to the Godfather. It is sad then, that a sequel to what is generally lauded as one of the 5 best films of all time, should suffer by comparison to Adam Sandler movies.

And don't believe the popular myth that Sofia Coppola ruins this movie, it's so bad on so many levels that her performance is irrelevant. So bad is it, that like the Matrix sequels, it seeks to infect its illustrious predecessors with its shiteness.

Mostly the problem seems to be the writing, I double checked to see if Puzo was involved, unbelievably, he was. Here's an example:

Do you remember the ""you'll never take my children"" scene in II? Did you want to know that shortly after the credits have rolled, Michael has a rethink and sends the kids off with mummy?

Oh the horror! This, and so many other torments lie in store for you should you watch this movie.

But, maybe it's not all bad, Pacino shows amazing versatility by looking, sounding and acting nothing like the Michael. And, if you're the kind of person who thought the first two lacked exploding helicopters, horseback gangsters and martial arts, then you may find it a welcome improvement on the originals.";12;21;True tt0099674;jlacerra;16/12/2001;Not in the same class...;4;This movie is not in the same class as the first two, and this is not because of poor Sophia Coppola, who actually does a decent job as a naive Mafia princess in denial. One of the strengths of the first two movies is that they stuck to events that actually could have happened. The helicopter machine-gunning of the penthouse meeting of Dons would never happen. Especially in Atlantic, where mobsters are at pains to be inconspicuous. The very public struggle of Michael for control of the Vatican-owned conglomerate would have been carried out by WASPy proxies, not a Corleone.

George Hamilton is surprisingly good as the mob mouthpiece. Diane Keaton is surprisingly irritating as the liberated Kay. Eli Wallach is absolutely awful as the deceitfully fawning Don Altobello. Coppola ought to be horse-whipped for allowing this veteran character actor to become a huge and unbelievable HAM in this picture.

Had there not been a I and II, this movie would have been mildly tolerable, but even the great performance by Pacino here cannot save this film from suffering severely by comparison to its two excellent ancestor films.;10;17;False tt0099674;fandango1111;24/02/2008;A very good conclusion to an excellent trilogy;10;I watched all tree movies in one weekend. If you have time, do it and you'll get a very good sense of continuity of the story of one family spanning over many generations. You'll get a very deep thought and emotion provoking experience.

All three films are very good and I don't see why the third one has been discredited as the weaker one. In my opinion it is as strong and valiant as the first two. Perhaps people who had seen the first two films made in short proximity of 72' and 74', after 16 years of waiting had their expectations lifted to almost unattainable levels? Another mystery for me is the assault of critic's attacks Sofia Coppola received for her portrayal of the part of Mary Corleone. I thought she was excellent. I thought her casting in the role has been a brilliant idea. She comes across as a young, innocent, well-protected girl- just right for the part she is playing.

Watch this film and judge it for yourselves.;19;37;False tt0099674;Petr_4;05/09/2008;They made a crime;1;Hm, they made a crime not because Al Pacino or Andy Garcia are not good actors,they made a crime because they shot the legend of the strong character of Michael Corleone (the Godfather). How they dare to make the fearless man of the two first Godfathers,to a spiritually weak old man we watched in the third Godfather?

Why they done that after 16 years? I think only for money!And is sad to watch the creators of a masterpiece you loved and inspired,not to respect their selfs,you and their creation. Al Pacino said that:Godfather 3 was a big mistake.As an honest man he told the truth!

I wish never watched that film.If you are a fun of the Godfather don't watch that film or even you do just tell your self that the real end was Godfather 2.;14;26;True tt0099674;qormi;26/12/2007;Oddfather;1;Okay, this could have been great except for the plot, the cast, etc. Godfather I and II were classics on anyone's list. This one stank. Andy Garcia was capable as Sonny's tough guy son. But what is this incest stuff? In one scene, he's in bed with an incredibly hot chick. Then, we see him go ga-ga for his first cousin, Mary Corleone, played by Sofia Coppola. Gee, I wonder how she got the role. How can any man look at her twice? I'm sorry, but she has features that would render Viagra useless, even if you swallowed the whole bottle. I'm straight, but I'd rather make out with Al Pacino. And she's his first cousin??!! Andy Garcia is that hard up? I've heard of taking your cousin to the prom, but ----NOOO!!! Now, if my cousin was Charlese Therone, I just might go for it and get my birth certificate changed...but Sofia Coppola??? The Pope thing was a little weird. So was the big Knights of Malta Cross on Michael Corleone's cake. And once again -Andy- if you're gonna go the incest route, hit on your Aunt, played by Talia Shire. She may be older, but she's much hotter. Close knit Italian families don't tolerate incest anyway, except maybe the West Virginia Corleones.;13;24;True tt0099674;educallejero;07/08/2020;The end of a Tragedy;7;"We reach the end of the Michael Corleone tragedy. His attempts to become ""legitimate"", his attempts to bring his family back together, and his attempts to bring peace to himself for past sins.

The story is as complex and detailed as ever, with the same quality. The only problem is that the secondary characters in this one (Michael's daughter Mary, Vincent, son of Sonny Corleone, and ascending mob soldier and Connie Corleone) aren't as interesting nor entertaining as the ones in the previous movies.

The emotional ending is there, but the way is done makes it a bit boring in my opinion. If you love those 30 minutes, then you would fairly love this movie. I liked it a lot, but I didn't love it.";2;2;False tt0099674;Timbo_Watching;13/04/2020;Decent, but had way more potential;6;The bar was set very very high because of the first two parts, and this let me to be pretty disappointed by this third installment in the Godfather series. It had more potential than it used, which was a shame. There were definitely scenes that were powerful, but could've been even better if used better. It was still an alright film in general, but it does not compare with the other two parts. All in all the Godfather series is one of the best, and will stay one of the best.;2;2;False tt0099674;one9eighty;31/01/2019;Completing the trilogy of the best family films made;9;"In the final instalment of the Godfather trilogy, Michael Corleone is trying to legitimize the family business - but the past dealings and history of the family business keep pulling him back into the shadows of the crime world. It's about 22 years since what happened in Godfather 2; Michael is older, and as are the people around him, and his kids. In fact, its children from the generations of the films past that play a major part in this film, almost making them as important an entity as children were in the first Godfather film which saw Michael emerge from the shadows.

Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) has a feud with Joey Zasa who's now the face of the Corleone business in New York, while at the same time falling in love with Michael's daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola), the face of Michael's charity business. Michael is less than impressed with Mancini, especially the fact that he has his eye on Michael's daughter, but he begrudgingly takes him under his wing - Michael also sees Sonny's traits in Mancini and feels he could be moulded. Unfortunately life has taken a toll on Michael and we see a frail side to him as his health slowly deteriorates. After a diabetic coma, Michael has plenty of time to reflect on life - in fact reflection becomes a major part of the film - Reflection of moments and people lost, of the finality of death and the legacy that is left when the body is no longer there. I think the misconception about this film, and possibly the reason for mixed reviews and low ratings is this - it isn't truly and out-and-out gangster movie like the previous two instalments have been. This film is about the conclusion of a character that, despite being a young man in the first film, wasn't really born until his father was attacked. We see the birth of Michael's darker side in Godfather 1, we see what he has the power to become in Godfather 2, and we see the results and conclusion of Michael in Godfather 3. This is more a fictional biopic than a gangster film. Sure it has Mafioso and Gangsters in it, but there is an underlying and unspoken narrative driving it forward, and when that clicks into place it's all about stories and reflections.

Another reason why this film was panned in comparison to its predecessors is the casting choice and some of the dialogue - I don't see a massive problem myself though. Some of the dialogue when the issue was to do with the crime family were cliché and expectable - but that's because the other films set it up. The dialogue to do with Michael's real character, that's what was more unexpected - with how Michael built himself up in the first two, you wouldn't expect the frailty from him. At the final conclusion, it could be argued that a broken heart is what ultimately kills him - not bullets, not words - loss, unspoken emotion, feelings.

My rating for this will match the previous two Godfather films. The other films were more obvious, this is more subtle and clever. I have read the books by Mario Puzo, I have read the books in-between the books (Mark Winegardner) and in-between the movies. I still can't not like this film - it's feels like a tragic opera, almost like it's a commentary of itself and the legacies that are paved the way for it. My rating for this, like the previous Godfather films is 9 out of 10.";2;2;True tt0099674;tiger-garcia;03/02/2008;A masterpiece!;;"When i saw the godfather i saw them all in one day .And although i had already been told of the quality of this magnificent trilogy i was really impressed by some of the performances.Brando was Brando what else is to say about this unique actor,Garcia was a revelation to me but Pacino went beyond that line.I'll never forget that scene in the steps when his daughter die in his arms with him screaming in sheer agony but was the very last frame that really got me!So symbolic ,so bitter sweet ,back in Sicily as he always wanted realising that he failed to protect the ones that he loved the most. That scene contains no words but it really speaks volumes.He looks so fragile ,so defeated,utterly alone ...The fall of a great man who firstly wanted nothing to do with his dad's ""business""but ultimately couldn't escape his legacy. It really moved me to tears and for the profound effect that had on me i'll always remember it as the best mob film that was ever done .A masterpiece!";11;20;True tt0099674;dbongiorni;08/05/2006;I wish I had known what a great movie this was years ago!;10;I had always heard that part III sucked, so I had never seen it until this year (2006). What a treat! So many profound scenes as Michael loses his last chance for the redemption of his soul and everyone he loves.

I never realized Andy Garcia was so handsome! He's so charismatic in this film. He is up to Pacino's level, and, what a great thing for an actor to play Don Corleone! Wow! The scene in the opera is fantastic - the anti-baptism/assassination.

I didn't think Sofia was that bad. And I thought Keaton was fantastic during the scene on the steps after Mary's death - I was quite amazed at how she totally lost it - never saw her do that before! Thank you, Francis Ford Copola, for writing and directing the best movies of all time. Apocalypse now is still my rank for #1 of all time - but this movie was really great to watch after all these years. I should remember not to listen to critics and public opinion about great movies - they are so often wrong!;11;20;True tt0099674;paultd;22/05/2006;Disappointing addition to the Godfather legacy;3;"Just saw it again without seeing the first two in years, and it's even worse than I remember. I don't feel any connection to the characters, some scenes are nonsensical, and I leave with a taste of ""what was the point of that."" Compare Al Pacino here with Al Pacino in DONNIE BRASCO, and you can see he wasn't crappy here because he got old. It's not his fault. The whole project is simply a massive failure.

All the dialogue that seemed so slick and smart in the first two films has disappeared, replaced with monotonous 3-liners. Don't even get me started about assassination by glasses. You don't have to compare this movie with its namesakes either. Just see how it matches up with GOODFELLAS, a movie released around the same time.

So in essence, what makes this movie good? Is it the worn out tried and tested formula being (mis)used? Is it the complete lack of wit? Is it the amateur quality flashback methods? Is it the fact that none of the actors really seem interested? Is it Sofia Coppola? None of those are part of my good movie criteria.

The film does work better than it should, and it's all because of the help it gets from the previous two. If this were considered as a stand-alone product, it would appear much, much, much worse.";10;18;False tt0099674;path4play;04/11/2003;Don't Bother;2;"Godfather III, like so many sequels, simply fails to deliver on the promise of the series. Godfather I & II, while essentially soap operas, both deliver brilliantly. They are well acted, well written beautifully filmed and engaging. But why else would they package III in the Godfather box set and with a bonus DVD? On its own it wouldn't sell. I found myself wanting to fast forward through scenes and wishing I would have rented instead of bought. Many situations (the parties, parades, disguised cop etc.,) are copied from the first two episodes, but just don't seem as convincing. Why did Joey Zasa have the helicopter wipe out the mob bosses before he knew the outcome of the meeting? Many actors are cardboard and George Hamilton is positively wooden. Is he an actor? I thought he was just on Hollywood squares? Diane Keaton seems out of place, like she walked in from the set of a Woody Allen film and landed in a gangster picture. Despite its 2&1/2 hours, you don't `feel' the relationship between Vinnie and Michael. How did he grow or `learn' the ropes to become a Godfather? He just changes from a leather jacket to a suit. Many scenes and dialog are laughable or cliché, The spinning newspaper that freezes on the headline, the assassin lurking in front of the opera poster etc., The only reason to watch this film is to see Andy Garcia steal scenes (he's the only actor who seems he really wants to be in the film) and a few good one liners. Otherwise the movie falls off the chair like the aged Al Pacino at the end of the movie, a dead, dried up shell of its former self.";9;16;False tt0099674;sit_UBU_sit;03/01/2005;One of the worst films ever made;1;"Let me preface by saying 'The Godfather' and 'The Godfather Part II' are two of the greatest films ever made. Francis Ford Coppola had a lot to live up to when he made 'The Godfather Part III.' First off, I fault the casting department for casting Sofia ""the only reason I'm here is cause daddy's the director"" Coppola. Baby, stick to screen writing. YOU CANNOT ACT!!! Her performance as Connie and Carlo's baby in 'The Godfather' was more convincing than her performance in this rubbish-fest as Michael and Kay's daughter. Secondly, Andy Garcia was terrible in this. What was he supposed to be? Italian or Mexican? He couldn't get an accent down to save his life. This simply does not have the magic or the fire of the first two films. It has poor writing and very poor acting. Even the great Al Pacino or Tuco from 'The Good, The Bad and The Ugly' (Eli Wallach) could not save this pile of rubbish. These reasons are why I deny the existence of 'The Godfather Part III.' The Godfather saga ends with Michael Corleone sitting in his chair of his Lake Tahoe home contemplating why he just had his brother murdered. End of story.";14;28;True tt0099674;barryhomework04;12/08/2018;Stop Defending part 3;1;It. has become vogue to defend Godather part 3 as not that bad. If anyone tells you that, never ever listen to their opinions about movies again. The writing is corny, the acting is stiff, the music is melodramatic and the action is amateurish.;8;14;False tt0099674;helltopo;03/01/2003;It shouldn't have been titled 'Godfather';3;"Though the unbelievably bad Sofia Coppola received the bulk of the criticism, the main fault with this hugely disappointing epic is the plot. The concept of a known gangster being embraced by the Vatican just didn't seem plausible & the direction compared to the previous two instalments is lifeless and formulaic. Coppola states in the DVD commentary from the first movie, that it's strength came from the quality of the cast - not just the big names like Marlon Brando & James Caan, but also people like Abe Vigoda in smaller roles. In Godfather 3, that kind of ensemble performance is missing as the whole enterprise degenerates into a tacky star vehicle for Al Pacino & Andy Garcia. I personally thought Garcia was dreadful, but again it wasn't all his own fault. At the start of the movie he's an uncontrollable psycho who chomps off ears - a trait which he miraculously loses by the end of the movie. Bridget Fonda makes a fleeting appearance and one wonders why she could not have been cast in the role of Mary instead of Sofia Coppola. In terms of talent, Sofia is obviously the 'Fredo' of the family and Don Coppola should have made her an offer she couldn't refuse!. Even when levelled against other lesser films of this genre I feel Godfather 3 is a poor movie, but compared to the previous two it's an unforgivable disaster.";8;14;False tt0099674;ericolsen1953;02/01/2005;About as necessary as diarrhea;3;"And, finally, old, old Michael Corleone falls over and goes 'THUMP!' Who REALLY did the writing for this last installment of the Godfather saga? Probably the same staff who does ""As the World Turns."" This flick doesn't deserve the title ""Godfather"" at all. Let's call this one ""The Cosas of Our Nostras"" or ""All My Capos"". As someone who's encountered a number of Mafia people in my business life, I can say without exception, that I've never met any mobster as inwardly-conflicted and contemplative as Michael Corleone. Let's face it, these guys are in the Mafia solely because they're greedy, nothing more. In this film, Don Corleone spends lots of time pondering his past deeds and his bleak future, perhaps even the Afterlife, then recovers remarkably fast in order to pull off some fantastic business deal or order the death of this one or that one like the big time operator he is, deep down. Then, there's his failed marriage. After the break-up scenes in G2, we may hope that Michael & Kay will reunite as man and wife, but here they seem to just become very good, platonic friends who can laugh & cry & share intimate thoughts about their lives. It's as if the screenwriters try to make Michael into a woman. It's bizarre behavior for two people who shared the passion of the marriage bed for 9 years. There's some miscasting here and there, or perhaps they're sins of authorship. Poor, old-country-beautiful Sophia Coppola is saddled with a hopeless role, with too many short lines in the film that don't fit what a young woman would say in casual conversations - was given ""remarks"" rather than ""lines"" to emote. Her 'passionate' lovemaking scene with Andy Garcia looks like something from a bad teen sex comedy as they chew their open-mouthed kisses and fondle each others backsides on the kitchen drainboard like marionettes...scullery sex was brought off wonderfully by Glenn Close and Michael Douglas, but it's just laughable here. Then, there's Andy's character, Vinnie Mancini, who's also given a difficult & thankless role to play. He's expected, I guess, to be the new, new Don Corleone, but he's almost handed the job on a silver platter and has to do little to strengthen his position, unlike Michael's simultaneous hits on all 5 Families in G1. This hand-me-down process may be an authentic way of transferring power in a Mafia Family, but why is so much made of this boring routine? Certainly, Don Vincent may earn the respect of his fellow gangsters someday, but there's little character revelations in the script to give us a portrait of this young man, sadly. Puzo did such a fine job of quickly & concisely developing Michael's character in G1. But, G3 has no economy in it's story-telling and we suffer through drawn out expositories until we just want to take a snooze. Thirdly, George Hamilton was also handed a thankless task, in taking over as family lawyer after Robt Duvall reportedly turned down a 3rd installment as Tom Hagen. George wisely underplayed his role, so it came off without damage to the actor. The development of Connie Corleone's character is interesting, but it goes too far when she takes murderous matters into her own hands (she could well end up sleeping with the Fredos, if this were the real world). But, it's not all bad. The assassination scene in the hotel penthouse is nifty! Also, ""they keep pulling me back in"" or words to that effect is a great line. And, we recover some old-country feel as we get to go back to Sicily, even if it's all done in 1989 and they've got modern cars & haircuts. The plot lines involving the corrupt hierarchy of the Catholic Church are pretty interesting, since it's based on some actual financial shenanigans at Banco Vaticani in the 1980's, but it's brought too far, again, with the too-spectacular death scenes, etc. The Grand Opera scenes are very dramatic and well photographed. But, the death scene of Mary toward the end is an unbalanced attempt of emotional-manipulation, at best. All screenwriters need to learn that we don't always need more and more death in order to bring a mafia movie to a successful conclusion. You feel sorry for Kay that her daughter is dead, she plays her grief so well, but Michael's reaction is hammy, hammy, hammy. Then, Michael dies sometime in the 21st Century, in Sicily, alone on a grand estate, of heart-failure...no grandson to play with before his demise, no wife to grieve for him. What SHOULD have happened in the last 1/2 of this movie is Michael being tracked down by someone like Rudy Guilliani, put on trial, all his dirty family's sleazy little enterprises and bloodthirsty indulgences brought into the light of day, Michael then convicted under RICO statutes and sent to Federal Prison for life...then he can keel over dead from heart-failure while mopping a floor IN LEAVENWORTH. That's how mafia dons were ending their careers in the late 80's and early 90's and they got much better treatment than what they deserved.";13;26;True tt0099674;DonBrasco;23/02/2002;A Very Good Ending To the Trilogy...;9;... and OBVIOUSLY, also third best of the trilogy.

******** SPOILER AHEAD ***********

Those who say this is a terrible movie, should never have been done etc etc are just exaggerating. I Think that the plot for this movie is excellent and I also really liked how a real life event like the death of the Pope just after a month in 1979 is linked to the story.

The plot and the acting of Al Pacino and Andy Garcia are in my opinion the three great plus's in the movie. What fails to upgrade this from a 'very good' to an 'excellent' movie is one main element: The atmosphere, the set and 'fashion' surrounding the actors did not look like 1979 at all! It looked more like the present day or at least the early 90's. This is a big shame, when considering how 'devoted', Coppola was to such details in the first two movies.

Another thing that could have been improved was the music to the movie. Not that it wasn't good, but I feel that in this department, this movie is more detached from the other two. More use of the main Godfather Theme could have given it a more 'familiar' touch.

My Opinion about why many people are OVER-Critical about this movie is because their brain works inversely proportional after seeing the first two movies. Let me explain myself - The first two movies simply cannot be more perfect and after seeing them it is like having a cup, filled to the brim with water. This makes the slightest imperfection in the third movie 'spill a lot of water'.

Continuing on this analogy, I think that a forth movie would simply 'Empty the cup'!;7;12;True tt0099674;ebo_germany;20/12/2004;God Father III;10;I think that the third part of this series is just as good as the previous two parts, And ANDY GARCIA's character was so interesting that it would make you feel like that he's been acting in this movie since form the very first moment of the 1st part, and I think that Al Pacino's character doesn't need any comment because it was just perfect and he did very well just like the 1st and 2nd part. Any way i just wanted to say that Francis Ford Coppola's talent in directing was so clear in the first and second parts , but in this part we discover the other talent, it's writing , I think he was very successful in writing with Mario Puzzo.;14;29;False tt0099674;kenvandenbussche-2;15/10/2007;The perfect end to the perfect trilogy ...;10;"16 years after the last of two brilliant godfather-films, director Francis Ford Coppola returns to complete his thus far unfinished mafia saga. Despite rumours that the final godfather-film is a blemish on an otherwise magnificent tale of organized crime, it is in fact one of the most beautiful films ever made and a story that's just as riveting as any of its predecessors. It once again deals with familiar themes such as corruption, misuse of power, love, respect, remorse and of course the most inevitable of all death! The endless amount of critique and insults that this film received must have something to do with the many years dividing part II and part III. In those many years the face of American cinema has changed radically. Back in the '70s method-actors like Jack Nicholson, Al Pacino and Robert De Niro were the true kings of the movie industry, but after a couple of years special effects started playing a bigger role in cinema and fantasy figures such as Indiana Jones, Darth Vader, aliens, terminators, gremlins and horror icon Freddy Krueger all became immensely popular and just as important.

Amazing is that ""The godfather part III"" didn't change one bit amidst this massive update of modern cinema. Surely: it takes place a few dozen years later, but it seems as though time has stood still. Even so: there are some significant changes to be had. The biggest change of all is how Michael Corleone has transformed from a strong and confident leader to a weak and aging Don desperately trying to deal with his tragic past. At the same time he wants to legitimize his crime family's interests and remove himself from the violent underworld. Method-actor Al Pacino does exceptionally well at acting out emotions with his voice in this final instalment. The last time I watched this film, I actually cried on two different occasions. That's how powerful and genuine his acting really is. The first moment that got to me was the confession of Al Pacino to a priest. Having never shown repent for any of his sins, he suddenly realizes the vast magnitude of his wrong-doings and ultimately breaks down in tears. Even more compelling is the ending of the godfather-trilogy.

But Al Pacino isn't the only great actor in this film. Andy Garcia plays his role of a lifetime as Vincent Mancini – the ferocious son of Michael's oldest brother Sonny and unfortunately for anyone involved he shares his father's hot temper. Especially small-time enforcer Joey Zasa seems to enrage him beyond all reason. This character is played by actor Joe Mantegna and he does a very good job. Mantegna would still get the chance to play an actual mob boss but only as the voice of Fat Tony in the highly successful television series ""The Simpsons.""

The one person who was attacked the most for her performance was Sofia Coppola; daughter of director Francis Ford. She evidently plays the part of the daughter of Michael Corleone. I have to agree that Sofia is much better behind the camera than in front of it, but to say that her acting was terrible is an overstatement. Diane Keaton and Talia Shire are still around playing their eminent characters, but not everybody returns for this third film. Robert Duvall got a little too greedy on his part and that's why his character consigliere Tom Hagen does not return. This is a real pity, but the film has found a very clever way to work around it so this change is more than satisfactory; I think. Bridget Fonda is also present as a reporter but her role is of no real consequence. Suffice to say, ""The godfather: part III"" has a fabulous cast.

In short: Sequels simply don't get any better than this! This masterpiece is just as grand as part I and part II ... everything falls into place - from its wonderful actors to the delightful cinematography - ""The godfather part III"" truly is ... the perfect end to the perfect trilogy!!";11;22;False tt0099674;tostinati;19/09/2005;Exquisite Coppola;;"It is in Coppola that I think we see the direction and spin Welles put on American cinema in it's most vivid survival. The multi-layering, the richness of texture. What Welles says about his films could go for Coppola's too. When someone called Welles' films 'baroque', he explained that for him when the texture of film becomes too thin, it becomes dead. Coppola must feel this way too. And when the still moments occur in Coppola, and there are many treasurable moments of stillness and reflection, there is still much going on in the frame, much to watch, subtexts and contexts to let wash over you. In other words, stillness, but not emptiness.

I think they are all wrong about Sofia Coppola's part in this. If she had played her character in a higher key, a more ""real life"" key, she would have been written off as a stridently irritating valley girl. She plays a self-conscious young woman in development somewhere between awkward wall-flower and blossoming social butterfly, and she plays it to a T, I believe. Low key. Why not? I guarantee you, three hours of anything else would have been too much. Her performance may have come out of talks with the director, or it may have been her good-sense intuitive playing. But whichever, I think the word ""shrewd"" can be applied accurately to the way she acts and is used here.

I prefer this third installment to the second, by the way. The third film achieves and sustains an overwhelming crescendo and haunting coda for the series. Taken as a unit, these 3 films form one of the stunning achievements of the American cinema. 10 stars for each Godfather film, this one no exception.";11;22;False tt0099674;eric262003;20/07/2015;A Sequel That was Not Needed;6;"I'm not going to say it was an entire awful movie, but after the success of the first two ""Godfather"" franchises, there was no necessity in making a third sequel. Even director Francis Ford Coppola admitted that the sagas come from ""Parts I and II"" and that ""The Godfather Part III"" was nothing more than a glorified epilogue. The only purpose as to why he made this third installment was because his bravado was going down plus he was in a financial crunch and was lured in by Paramount to make a third movie as a key to his financial comeback. He could've resisted the temptation, but he decided to give it the old college try. I just wished that he made another flop than to make ""The Godfather III"". At least with the flop it would've been an honest one and less manipulative.

The flaws in this movie are by the bundles, where to begin we can say that the plot does not have the same bite that its predecessor's have in their grasp. Even though at 2 hours and 42 minutes long it feels a lot longer and some scenes tend to drag on for too long, especially the scenes that take place in Sicily. Michael and Kay's (Al Pacino and Diane Keaton) quiet time together should have been axed out entirely. This movie is not a romantic tale, so therefore Coppola unless he was trying to get more female audience members to see this film, there was no need for any kind of dragged out romantic interludes to this story.

For those who wish to use Sofia Coppola as the main poison to this this film may have crossed the line a bit here. Yes I agree she couldn't act worth a nickel, but she was only on for a very short time and her contribution to the film is quite minimal. Granted if they would've casted either Julia Roberts of Winona Ryder for the part of Mary Corleone, they could've made the character all the more compelling. But Mary is only very minor role so it really would not have made much of a difference.

Another key factor to why this film is inferior to the other two ""Godfathers"" is the absence of Robert Duvall's character Tom Hagen. Duvall was interested in reprising his role and demanded to Mr. Coppola an equal salary like Pacino, but he was rebuffed at his request and backed out of the project. With that in mind Coppola edited out that Hagen died and that George Hamilton's B.J. Harrison was cast as the new attorney to the Corleone's estate. The only living relative to the Hagen name was Father Andrew Hagen played by John Savage whose role was absolutely useless.

If there was any newbie that holds any kind of interest was Andy Garcia's performance as Vincent Corleone, the son of James Caan's character the late Sonny Corleone and Michael's nephew. The first of the trilogy had young Michael trying to take over the family empire after Sonny and Fredo were not eligible for such as task. Michael wanted legitimacy within his family's legacy. It would've been better if Vincent became the successor and to bring the family back to conducting illegal tactics to bring back their old ways again. The script gets within those parameters, but the distractions are way too abundant.

Another note to point out is that the change in Michael is way to obvious and at time can be unnatural. After the second film Michael was raging force to be reckoned with, but now a lot older and more gravely ill, he is now begging for forgiveness for all the things he's done. I understand that as you get older you look back and think of all the things you've done. In Michael's case, he's like he's been resurrected from the first film, feeling a bit ashamed he's from a Mafia family and wants no part of it, but in family honour, he'll attack when his family needs him when no one else will intervene. I have no problem with this change, but the process is never fully clarified due to the lacklustre script. It just gives me the impression he's scared of dying and just wants one last breath of redemption before the coffin closes.

I did like what they did with script by adding some real events that happened in the Roman Catholic Church during the late 1970's when the majority of the film takes place. Such events like the banking scandal of the Vatican and the unfortunate mysterious death of the Pope John Paul I after becoming the pope 33 days before.

It wasn't an awful movie, but with a much tighter editing job and a more revised script, then ""The Godfather Part III"" would have been a much better film. And sure people have panned this film horribly, it doesn't deserve that much lambasting. However, it was very poorly executed and it still stands as a very inferior film from the other two chapters.";5;8;True tt0099674;garcia-esther78;27/12/2018;Am I the only one who...;1;Cheered when Mary died??? After 10 minutes I was so sick of looking at her face and her poor attempt at acting...Nepotism at it's worst...;8;15;True tt0099674;t_atzmueller;14/12/2011;An open letter to Francis Ford Coppola;3;"""Dear Francis, The two of us go way back. Back as far as ""The Terror"" and ""Dementia 13"". Then, ""Apocalypse Now"" and ""The Cotton Club"" – the term cult-movies must have been invented for those two! ""The Ousiders"" is still one of my wife's' favourite films and the underrated ""Finian's Rainbow"" remains one of my childhood favourites. I even went and watched ""Captain EO"" – not because I'm a Michael Jackson fan but because I was a believer in the Coppola magic. And of course ""The Godfather"", part 1 and 2, that defined not only the mafia-genre but cinema as we know it today.

But then, one night while watching ""The Sopranos"", having Chianti and homemade cannelloni, I had to think about something that I had tried to suppress for years: the time when I went to the cinema to watch ""Godfather 3"". Didn't even bother to watch the trailer, didn't noticing that there was no Robert Duval; I just ran off and bought a ticket. Sure, there was no way you could have cast John Cazale, him being as dead as the character Fredo; but replacing the Tom Hagen character with George Hamilton, now that ads insult to injury. Was neither Ed O'Neill nor Ted Danson available? You could have just cast Pee-Vee Herman and make it obvious that this is a farce!

Perhaps you wanted to teach us something about ""famiglia italiani"" (and/or the structure of the mafia); perhaps you wanted to teach us a lesson about nepotism. There most have been a reason for casting your daughter Sophia in one of the leading roles but I just could never figure out what it was. If anything, her presence excuses Andy Garcia's ham-acting – nothing but silent-movie grimacing could have prevailed against Sophia's proboscis that constantly permeates the picture.

""Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder"", like they say and I'm not so hard-hearted as to call your daughter ugly like a blind horse – nor would I dare to compare her lips to overcooked blood-sausage or her nose to a bulbous potato but I dare say that her acting stinks to high heaven. What made you put her next to actors like Al Pacino or Eli Wallach and couldn't you have rather made them wear red clown noses? Perhaps you had a point about incest and cousin-relationships – however, I never got them since a) I didn't care, expecting the third part of ""Godfather"" and not an incestuous soap-opera and b) well, like I said: Sophia's performance made me think about many things – a stacked ham-sandwich was among them but sex wasn't.

Here, now I've said it: it wasn't only general miscasting or dour, convoluted and essentially boring story lines that killed the movie beyond hope for resurrection – it was Sophia! You went on to direct ""Dracula"" and like a dying bull in Pamplona, you seemed to have risen one final, forceful time – yes, ""Dracula"" would remain one of the last good vampire flicks until today. Then came films like ""Jack"" (best left uncommented) and ""Supernova"", which you wanted to direct under the moniker 'Alan Smithee' but Walter Hill had already adopted it for the same pile of manure.

Francis, I'd like to thank you for all the great movies prior to ""Godfather 3"" and wish you a long, happy life. May the Californian sun help you produce the choicest Cabernet Sauvignon that will forever keep your table filled with Italian delicacies.

Just please, Francis, stop directing movies!"" Three noses excuse me, I meant three points from ten.";8;15;False tt0099674;Pan-12;02/03/2000;They screwed up the whole series with this installment;2;"I believe that this movie is bordering on disgraceful. Sometimes when you make a movie that is meant to be tragic, metaphorical, profound and/or moving, it only makes it worse when the movie is a failure. To be honest, while I quite like the first two movies in the series I think they're somewhat overrated. Trying to glorify the mob is an immoral and futile cause. The good thing about the first two movies is that they manage to encompass all of the sins humans are commonly affiliated with- anger, pride,greed etc, and put them in an emphatically harsh context. Namely, that of a life and death situation. Sins that are normally unimportant domestically, ironically become a major problem because of domesticity - ""the family."" This particular installment attempts to recreate this sentiment, but gets it all wrong. I actually laughed at the ending. It was a poor attempt at trying to move the audience and blatantly duplicates the endings of the last two movies for the sake of it(i.e. all the enemies being wiped out). The difference being, this time perhaps karma has brought about the emotional downfall of Michael, then, it is exemplified in a physical context-that of the accidental assassination of his daughter. My biggest gripe outside of the ending is quite simply the build up. It is somewhat confused and misdirected yet almost lacking in complexity. You feel nothing at all by the time we reach the climax which is then a rampant anti climax in itself. I can't believe they focused also, on an incestuous relationship as the chief romance. There is something very unnatural about the whole film. All due respect should go to the actors who give a reasonable performance despite the poor script. I think though, that it was a matter of misinterpretation of how good the script really was for actors such as Pacino and Keaton which is why they were forced to be associated with this movie. As well as this the dialogue is very ordinary. Coppola has misfired here, but of course we can't forget some of his other achievements and as such can afford to forgive.";8;15;False tt0099674;joseesrocha;07/05/2020;MASTERPIECE;10;Do not mind the negative comments, in my opinion this film is a masterpiece, of course it is not better than the first one but I liked this one more than the second one. This film has the best performance of Al Pachino in the trilogy and so it is which is more dramatic and unique. In conclusion I advise everyone to see this film if they really like films about Italian mafia.;3;4;False tt0099674;Diablo1616;21/04/2020;The Godfather 3 is not a terrible movie.;8;This movie is by far the weakest of the 3 movies, but if you watch Godfather 1 and 2, before Godfather 3 the movie plotline for Godfather 3 will make sense. I do feel however waiting 16 years to finally finish the trilogy was bit excessive, if I had to speculate, I believe Francis Ford Coppola never intended to make a third Godfather movie, also casting his daughter Sofia as Mary, Michael Corleone's daughter was a travesty, Sofia Coppola cannot act or for that matter direct, the only reason she has gotten as far as she has is because she is Coppola's daughter. What I did really enjoy was the interaction between the character's Michael and Kate, and the evolving of Connie as a strong, capable, fierce woman who could become head of the Corleone family if she wanted to, that I enjoyed. Overall, I did enjoy watching this film.;3;4;False tt0099674;DMB22684;26/08/1999;Out With A (Comparative) Whimper;;"Why did Coppolla make this film? What possessed him to, sixteen years later, ""conclude"" the greatest movie saga ever told? It's a shame that this film will always be attatched to the first two masterpieces. Kind of like how Yoko will always be attatched to John, Debbie Matanoupolis to The View and Roseanne Barr to the human race. Although, while watching it, it can at select times, be engrossing, looking back however, chunks start to rise in your throat. What are the problem with this? Here goes:

1) A lack of atmosphere. The Godfather II was also a bit weak in this department, but Godfather III tops the cake. Transporting it to a modern setting simply doesn't work. It gives the film a lack of identity. Sure, Corleone is pretty to look at, but it looks like the Corleone we knew in I after some mysterious force came down with a needle and sucked the beauty out of it. Part I used reds and blues to give the film a rare beauty and sense of the time in which it took place. It seemed lik an epic, brilliant comic book. Part II was shot depressively in dark colors (not a flaw it all, it matched the sad story of the film). I guess that since III doesn't have a theme, there's no way for a cinematographer to bring one out. Which leads me to the next flaw

2) Part I is Michaels ascention to the top. Is the mob glorified? To a point. Part II, the mob is anything but glorified, as Michael, loses and/or kills almost all that is dear to him. Part III is SUPPOSED to be about redemption, but unless I fell asleep during the film, I didn't seen any taking place (Perhaps I just found the answere my problem). He dies a miserable man, even more lonely than he was after II.

3) The plot is too muddled. Godfather II was successful in telling two stories because they were completely isolated from eachother. In this case, they aren't. The Vatican, and the troubles inside the F(f)amily don't mesh-at all. The characters from these two different tales never interact and I didn't feel like I got to know any of the new cast members (except for Vincent). This leads to a heinous, confusing and overblown finale where, to be honest, I didn't know who was being killed or where the killing was taking place AT ALL.

As for the good parts...Well, of course there were some. The performances by Pacino, Keaton and especially Garcia were top-notch. Sofia Coppolla has taken enough abuse here, so I won't complain. As I said before, the film is watchable. At points, when you actually DO understand what's going on, it can get very interesting. But the characters provoking you interest don't last long enough. Overall, an alright film in it's own right (with several flaws) fails to follow the example of it's two flawless counterparts.";3;4;False tt0099674;waynegavin1;21/01/2020;HE DIPS HIS BULLETS IN STRYCHNINE;8;The third installment of a world class trilogy sees MICHAEL on the tail end of his reign,MICHAEL wants out and to be 100% legit but this world he created has different ideas,tortured by the very nature of his habitat MICHAEL looks to pass the reigns but although there is a significant other he is far to undignified to portray the head.and so with the siblings grown and the gangster modernized MICHAEL is now a fish out of water and his money does the talking.this installment is considered the worst of the 3 but only as a part this is true,if you consider this trilogy as a chronological 1 piece then this episode is pivotal to the conclusion and therefore is equally justified,I am giving this an 8 as a stand alone episode.;4;6;False tt0099674;mrbluto;24/07/2000;Stop while he was ahead;;"Francis Ford Coppola turned Godfather 1&2 into two of the best movies ever to bad he dident put as much effort into 3. I did not believe for one single second that after all those years of being a ruthless killer Mike has turned into a kitty cat, I did not believe for one second that after being abused by Mike that his wife would forgive him so fast. The worst part was the acting of Francis Ford Coppola's daughter , I guess her father never relized she coudent act till the movie bombed at the box office. Now we know why Robert De Niro and Robert Robert Duvall refused to be in 3. 5 out of 10";4;6;False tt0099674;dimeless;15/07/2007;How on earth did this movie's user rating ever get up 7.5 from more than 43,000 votes?!?;1;Godfather: Part III is one of the top 3 worst movies I have ever seen. It is unpredictably awful, and gets progressively worse from scene to scene. It's like watching a really bad made-for-television movie. Pacino hams it up like no other (except for maybe Talia Shire), but even he couldn't save it. Innumerable uninteresting and undeveloped characters, George freaking Hamilton!, sprawling plot lines and shallow subplots, utterly incredible romance times two. The only suspense I experienced during the viewing of this movie was from wanting to find out how much more laughable it could get. It really felt like it was written to showcase Sofia Coppola. What was Coppola Sr. thinking? What was anyone who signed on for this movie thinking? How were their careers not ruined? And how on earth did this movie's user rating ever get up 7.5 from more than 43,000 votes?!? What are the viewers thinking? Is it the end of the world and nobody told me?;10;20;False tt0099674;D8Player;26/01/2007;Bolted on sequels rarely work;4;"This is another in a long line of after the event sequels that seemed to be made purely to capitalize on the success of the original versions rather than from any desire to further the story. Godfather 2 was made because Puzo and Coppola felt they had much more to do with the character of Michael. When it was done so were they and it should have been left so. Like the ""Color of Money"" did to ""The Hustler"", Godfather 3 harms rather than helps the legacy of the original.

I am, like many, a huge fan of the first two films. The true masterpiece of them was the brilliant character of Michael Corleone, brilliantly written and brilliantly portrayed. This was the first place where #3 goes wrong. In this part Michael is a shadow of his former self. He is weak and indecisive, a character who lets events overtake him. Little is given in the way of explanation as to what happened to change him. Pacino himself seems to be only half interested in the role.

Furthermore the cast of surrounding characters are much weaker this time out. Talia Shire's performance is pure embarrassment. She shrieks and hollers her way thru the film like a day time soap actress. Andy Garcia who showed such promise early in his career is good but nothing extraordinary. Sophia Coppola should never have been added to the film, she is not an actress and was really dropped in it by her Dad. Bridget Fonda too is weak as is Joe Matenga. Eli Wallach's character is woefully under developed. Compare this with the character of ""Hyman Roth"" in part 2.

If this film really wanted to be judged on its own merits and not look pale in comparison to parts one and two it should not have used the word Godfather in its title. In reality it should never have been made.";7;13;False tt0099674;yenlo;11/10/1999;May have been better if made earlier.;;After watching this film the first time all I could think of was that Francis Ford Coppola waited too long to make it. It's not a bad film but it seems detached from the original and Part II. The actors seemed to be out of touch with their characters but clearly did the best they could considering the time frame between Part II and III. I came away with the feeling that had he made this motion picture four or five years after Part II it would have been a better film. Of course the story may have been different but who knows. However it's still a Godfather film by Francis Ford Coppola and still worth watching.;6;11;False tt0099674;horty98;23/07/2006;Horrible;1;"If you enjoyed or respect part 1 & 2 don't watch this piece of crap. It has a horrible storyline, with cousins having sexual relations. This movie single-handedly made the other two movies worse, it was that bad. It would of been a better hillbilly movie than mob movie. The plot is absolutely ridiculous and not even close to believable. Micheal goes soft and apparently finds it OK that his daughter is sleeping with his Sonny's son. If this crap happened in the first one Sonny would of killed his own kid, let alone Micheal. The WORST movie ever added to what could of been the trilogy ever. Not even Al & Andy could save this one.";11;24;True tt0099674;dcldan;30/07/2007;A perfect conclusion;10;Years have passed and Michael Corleone is now an old man. HE has become THE GODFATHER, everything that happens in US passes by his hands, he puts and quits presidents, governors... But he lacks the most important for him: his family. In a latest attempt to recover them, he tries to abandon and crime and become a gentlemen, but the past will not let him do it. The best of the three? It is stupid to say it, all are just perfect. Al Pacino is as superb as the other two, and the inclusion of an extremely inspired Andy Garcia (bad luck he wasn't ever able to repeat such a good part) and the rest of the cast are just wonderful. The development of the drama, almost following a Shakespeare's drama, the strength of the scenes, it is a movie that deserves to be in the Olimp of the cinema. It is just a masterpiece. Unfrotunately, the Oscars were not in its favour (0/7 no way!);9;19;False tt0099674;billcody;02/09/2002;Like watching paint dry.;3;Whoa. It took me years to watch this film because so many people told me to avoid it. I should have taken their advice.

Pacino should have been forced to watch the original Godfather films 100 times each to remind him what he was like when he was a real actor. The original Michael Corleone was scary because he was so controlled and introverted. His rage boiled inside. In Part III, Michael is a mugging scenary chewer who wears his emotions on his sleeves and screams at the drop of a hat.

And the Francis Ford Coppola directing Part III isn't the visionary of the 70's, but instead the bored hack of the 80's and 90's. The script is a lazy B-movie script with large chunks of unnecessary expository dialogue. The actors seem to be left to their own devices, especially Sofia who seems to be either reading off cue cards or merely reciting her lines. She's so bad. I honestly think her performance her might be the worst acting I've ever seen, and I'm including school plays and community theater I've seen over the years. Diane Keaton looks like she just dropped in from her real daughter's PTA meeting (which isn't so terrible considering the role she has in the film) and Talia Shire shows the rust of a woman who really hasn't acted much outside her thankless turns in the later Rocky flicks.

This film could have used a fresh idea or two, another couple of passes at the screenplay and whole lot less of the Coppola family. (Hell, even Nicholas Coppola er Cage got a friggen Exec Producer credit - what's up with that?);7;14;False tt0099674;magnumpi82;02/10/2000;SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE;;"SPOILER ALERT while i don't think that this movie deserves to be panned as much as it has been (critics and fans both) it fails to live up to the greatness of the first two. over the past week i have watch the entire trilogy. and you know the drill: part I, one of the greatest of all time; part II a notch below, but still a spectacular film; and part III the one everybody hates (including me).

the fact is part III should not have been made. it seems to me that coppola was struggling after being forced to make a lot of throwaway c**p in the 80s (peggy sue, tucker, blah...blah...) after apocalypse now disaster pretty much ruined him. he wanted to revive his career with the franchise that made him a legend of the cinema.

everything that worked in the first two (de niro, brando, du vall, even john cazale) is just not there in the third installment. tom hagen, one of the most important people the family, was just discarded (robert duvall knew part III was a bad idea). who do they replace him with? george hamilton? what the hell is george hamilton doing in a godfather film? for god sakes, he should be off woking on that tan. ridiculous. and casting his daughter sofia coppola as mary. she was god awful in the role. i mean she butchered every scene she was in. and mary's whole incestuous relationship with vinny. i could not understand her character at all. thats your cousin for god sakes. (also how did she get that huge nose? michael nor kay have a huge nose). i did enjoy andy garcia who plays hot headed heir very nicely. pacino is pacino, spectacular as always. but i could not understand they did not kill him in the end. its a gangser movie for god sakes, (damn you, coppola!), and in the end the gangster is supposed to die, not his nasty, big nosed daughter who we do not care about at all.

i really dont even consider this part of the franchise. it's showing daily down in sequel hell (say hi to speed 2 for me). i mean really. the fact is that this was really a bad movie by itself, and a disgrace if viewed as part of the franchise. im finished trashing this movie.

5/10, only for those who love pacino ""i thought i was out, but THEY PULLED ME BACK IN!""";7;14;True tt0099674;Dr_Kruger;02/05/2008;The Godfather Part III - A fitting end to the trilogy;9;I liked it. Yes, it's a slightly different tone to the first two, but then it is set 25 years into the future, so if it had exactly the same feel as the first two it would have seemed false. However, it still has the deception, music, style and dialogue of the first two. Those things make it pretty special in my opinion.

Yes, Sofia Coppola seems out of place even moreso in scenes with Garcia who is so good in this it makes Coppola look even more amateurish. It makes me wonder how good it could have been with a better actress playing Mary.

The final hour or so of the film from where Michael speaks to the soon to be Pope is just superb though and matches anything that has gone before. As I said, the ending fits the whole theme of the Godfather movies perfectly. They're all about power, deception, loss, regret and family and in that sense I was ultimately content at the outcome.;5;9;False tt0099674;MattD12027;15/02/2006;Highly Underrated and Under-appreciated.;10;Whenever conversations about the Godfather movies come up, most people are so surprised that I regard this, the third of the trilogy, the best of them all. They all automatically assume that anyone who has seen the entire trilogy likes the first one the best. The first one is spectacular film-making, there's no denying that, but the Godfather Part III is not only more epic, but also more emotional, more resonating, and more poignant.

The entire Godfather saga, in my mind, is not about crime or the Mafia - at the heart of these movies lies one major conflict: Michael Corleone is trying desperately to keep his family from disintegrating around him. At some points, he perpetuates it out of some misplaced pride (such as with Fredo), and at other points, he does in fact hold it together, such as with his children. The first movie is all about how he's drawn into the web of lies and corruption, and how he sees that his family is slowly dying because of it. He enters the business because he feels like he has to in order to preserve the sacred honor of his family. The second movie is perhaps the worst (if any of them could be called 'worst'), simply because it meanders when it should be propelling the story along. The second movie is about how, over everything that he's done, he still can't stop the ball from rolling over his family. The end of Part II - that single shot of Michael sitting in the chair - is one of the best single shots in film history.

That brings me to Godfather, Part III, which probably has some immediate (and rather shallow) detractors because from the outset it feels like an epilogue. That's just the initial impression, though, and then we, the moviegoers, realize that a lot has happened since we last saw Michael. He's guilty over what he's done, especially how he's been unable to save his most precious possessions, and he's trying to change his ways. This Michael is older, more mature, and not as naive about the machinations of worldly men. The fact that the setting changes so much in this film is showing that he has sins to atone for all over the world, and that subconsciously he's maybe reaching out to these past grievances and trying for some closure.

What makes Part III so good, though, is that underlying all of that is a sense of desperation. He knows his time is running out - we all know it as well. It's with morbid fascination that one looks at the running time, especially toward the end, because he hasn't achieved his personal atonement yet. And then...and then the final twenty minutes comes, and we see what Michael's life has been leading up to. All of it - all of his greed, murders, passion - have been futile. His atonement is naught but a passing gesture, because it comes back and haunts him at the end of it all. His family, or what's left of it, is shattered and fragmented in the final scenes.

And where does that leave him? Alone. Absolutely alone. The final scene, in which Michael simply falls over, dead, is the perfect post-script to a brilliant movie, and the end of a truly exquisite saga. Part's I and II are excellent, but they feel incomplete without Part III, and that is because the entire story hasn't been told.

10/10 - Most underrated movie of the 90's.;8;17;True tt0099674;roland-27;05/09/1999;An Inspiring Film;;This film is often shadowed by the other two classics, Part 1 and 2, but this movie is, in its own right, an amazing film with incredible performances by Al Pacino and Andy Garcia in particular.

Francis Ford Coppola directs this underrated film with family member Sofia putting in a worthy performance as Mary, daughter of Pacino and lover/cousin of Garcia.

Having watched all three, I have to say this is the one that hits me the most. The other two were fine, but they were too cheery. The end two scenes of Part 3 are both touching, and memorable. The one flaw about this great film is the inconclusive end to Sonny Corleone's(James Caan) son Vinnie(Garcia). We neither see whether he lives or not. He disappears near the end with no indication about what happens to him.

Despite this one flaw, Part 3 is a superb conclusion to one of Hollywood's greatest trilogies. But with talk of Leonardo Di Caprio taking on a prequel, I think Ford Coppola should quit while he is ahead.

The Godfather Series has made stars of James Caan(Godfather Part 1), Andy Garcia(Part 3), Sofia Coppola(Parts 1,2,3), John Savage(Part 3), Robert DuVall(Parts 1,2), Joe Mategna(Part 3) and, of course, Al Pacino(Parts 1,2,3). They will never be forgotten by all who have watched any of them. Rating=5/5;8;17;False tt0099674;LT56Simms11;06/06/2005;An idea that should never have left Coppola's head!;1;This movie is so bad I don't even know where to begin. The best way I can describe Godfather3 is that it seems like Frances Ford Coppola had the perfect recipe for making great movies, and what came out of the oven was Godfather and Godfather Part 2. He obviously lost the recipe for good movies and tried to copy the recipe from memory, and like most cooks who try that,ended up with a lot of missing ingredients resulting in a tasteless mess! Al Pacino is so bad in this movie, that it is hard to believe he was the actor who portrayed Michael in the first 2 films! From his new wave spiked hair(unbelievable because the Michael from 1 and 2 would have been too old fashioned for a new doo) to the recycled dialogue(re inserted ver batem to fit scenes in this movie). A lame story, miscasting, and god awful acting pretty much sums up this rancid piece of garbage! Sophia Coppola was truly bad in this movie, but at least she can say she had never acted before! What is Pacino's excuse, because he was equally bad! My advice would be to definitely rent 1 and 2 and forget 3 was ever made!;10;23;True tt0099674;HotToastyRag;31/01/2019;Does anybody care about all these new faces?;1;"Was it supposed to be funny that the main storyline in The Godfather: Part III took ""keep it in the family"" to an entirely new level? It's a love story between Andy Garcia and Sofia Coppola, who play first cousins. Andy is James Caan's son, and Sofia is Al Pacino's daughter. Does anyone really care about these people, or would you rather send them to a therapist and save yourself three hours? Since only three of the original cast has made it to the last installment, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, and Talia Shire, the movie banks on audiences caring about all the new faces and plot points. Instead of all the old faithfuls from the 1970s, there's Andy Garcia, Sofia Coppola, George Hamilton, Joe Mantegna, Bridget Fonda, and Eli Wallach. It doesn't really feel like as much of a classic, does it?

In this one, you can look forward to tons of violence, lots of new faces, old grudges, and the infamous-and once again, continually spoofed-silent scream from Al Pacino. Maybe the only reason why The Godfather franchise is so famous is because people keep making fun of them and mimicking them-or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part. I didn't enjoy these movies, even though I watched it with my own family, most of whom are Sicilian. At least I didn't watch this last one with any cousins.

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to violence, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.";6;12;False tt0099674;mark_joy;15/04/2008;A worthy and fitting conclusion;9;Not a perfect movie like the first two, but a worthy and appropriate conclusion to the saga. Sophia Coppola's performance is not the disaster that many people have proclaimed it to be, but it diminishes the impact of the character she plays. Part III serves to underscore and complete the great theme of the trilogy: Michael's fatal flaw in not being able to escape the criminal world into which he was born. The women are stronger presences in Part III, compared to the other two, and a more accomplished actress in the role of Mary would have made those presences have even more of an impact. Andy Garcia does a great job, combining the strength of Vito and Michael with the rage of Sonny.;6;12;False tt0099674;chip-heads;03/09/2019;Not the strongest but better than people give it credit for;7;Saw this when it came out and it was ok. After years the film has grown on me, especially after watching the amazing HBO series Borgias and how the mob and the vatican were intertwined. Watching Part 3 now is almost a documentary on all the things they were up to. It's a decent end to a great series of films. A shame that Duvall was not given a decent salary to appear as he was the counter to Michael and I think the film would have been even better.;4;7;False tt0099674;jared-25331;23/08/2019;What a disappointment!;8;While, I enjoyed Part 3, it suffers from the pressure from the first two films and a horrible performance by Sofia Coppola.;4;7;False tt0099674;noahharlen-13380;17/07/2018;Strange but fascinating;7;"No, it's not as good as the other two by any stretch, and some scenes are downright strange. It suffers seriously from a lack of DUvall/Hagen. Why it's about accounting in the Vatican I really don't know. But the relationships between the core characters and young lovers feel like a natural evolution from where we left them, and that quotable line, ""JUST WHEN I THINK IM OUT, THEY PULL ME BACK IN"" is from this one, and don't you forget it. Coppola wanted to call this ""the death of michael corleone"" and sell it as an EPILOGUE to the first two masterpieces. Viewed with that understanding, its faults are much more forgivable and its pace appropriate. And listen, I am just not here for Sofia-bashing. She was young and inexperienced. She gave a somewhat stiff but in many scenes quite lovely performance. She talks and acts like a real rich teenager, not like a trained actress. And she never did anything to hurt you, so don't be mean.";4;7;True tt0099674;petra_ste;23/03/2014;Never hate your enemies;7;"Much of the blame for The Godfather: Part III not being on par with previous chapters is usually laid on the shoulders of poor Sofia Coppola, whose scowling, blatantly inadequate performance (her father cast her after the last minute departure of Winona Ryder) weakens the movie and stands out in a trilogy otherwise enriched by sublime acting.

Still, the original sin of Part III lies in its concept: having Michael Corleone ""pay for his sins"". Guess what? It had already happened. That particular brand of Pyrrhic villainy had been masterfully explored in the last act of Part II, with Michael, previously all about family, ordering the murder of his brother, and with his wife choosing an abortion rather than having another son by him, an utter display of hatred and distance if ever there was one. The whole point of Part II was Michael emerging triumphant in his power struggle but utterly alone on his throne, his hands soaked in blood - something which was executed so perfectly, this sequel was essentially born redundant.

This isn't to say Part III is worthless. Pacino brings a world-weary desperation to the part, while Garcia and Wallach convince in significant roles. Robert Duvall is sorely missed as Tom Hagen - his character was originally supposed to play a key role, but was cut because his monetary requests were deemed excessive by the studio. His absence leaves an obvious void, the calm and collected legal consigliere providing balance to the more emotional world of the Corleones.

The last act set in Sicily lacks urgency and focus but, Coppola being who he is, Part III still provides moments of exhilarating cinematic craft, culminating with a superb set-piece in an opera theater and a bitter coda sealing off Michael's saga.

7/10";4;7;True tt0099674;SenseiSeagal77;28/11/2011;An Underrated Film (Review May Contain Spoilers);8;I recently saw The Godfather Trilogy back-to-back for the umpteenth time in years. Mostly everyone agrees that parts I and II are a couple of the best films ever made, but part III always gets dumped on. Why? With the exception of Robert Duvall's absence (watching it, you get the sense that something is missing, it's Duvall), Sofia Coppola's acting (she is a far better director) and George Hamilton looking like he took a wrong turn and got lost going to the tanning salon (what the eff was he doing in this film?), this is actually a great film that happens to be an emotional conclusion to the Godfather epic.

The Godfather films are about Michael Corleone. They show us the evolution of his character, and by part III Michael is full of regret for all of the sins he has committed over the years that were covered in parts I and II. With Al Pacino's excellent performance, you feel sorry for him as he suffers over what he did to his brother Fredo, then how he desperately tries to salvage anything he can with Kay, and watching him trying to rebuild a relationship with his son, who wants no part of the family business.

The critics crapped on The Godfather Part III and everyone else jumped on the bandwagon. Watch it with the other two films. It's not in the same league as the first two, but it's a great film nevertheless.;4;7;True tt0099674;hpburfitt;20/11/2018;Worst movie by an Oscar winning director;1;Atrocious movie, not film, movie. Not good enough to be considered a film. Horrible script, terrible staging, terrible casting (Coppola's daughter is awful). Perhaps watchable if you've never seen the first 2 but if you have this movie is unwatchable, I couldn't even get halfway through. Between Pacino's 4 packs a day gravel voice and Garcia's tough guy cringe worthy overacting, I couldn't stop the DVD player fast enough to end my misery. Anyone want it?? I'll mail it to you free! LOL;5;10;False tt0099674;insomniac_rod;16/08/2009;Redemption is the only way... but crime never pays.;10;"The most popular in terms of quality film trilogy ever made ends in such a haunting, unforgettable manner.

""The Godfather"" films are that good that make you comment about it's most important scenes and makes you forget about the production values which are perfect anyways.

In this last chapter of the trilogy, we find a more mature but ill Michael who finally decides to take the family's direction into legality. But crime never pays. The consequences are deadly and now Michael, who always tried to protect his family, will understand too late about crime's consequences.

Francis Ford Coppola's masterful direction does it again. He creates a parallel world filled with beautiful Italian exteriors, classy camera angles such as in the infamous helicopter attack, and the never tensing opera climax. His directing skills never went away and he gives a unique looking style to the trilogy. The soundtrack is as beautiful, haunting, and dark at the same time. It's just as good as in the previous movies.

The acting is glorious. Al Pacino delivers a dramatic performance and takes Michael to a whole new level that we didn't see in previous films. He displays regret, sadness, fury, and even a diabetes attack. All his emotions are powerful and demonstrates why he is the spinal cord of the trilogy. I will never forget the scene where he gets a first diabetes attack and curses against his enemies, and figures out what was going on. Also, when he is in the need to eat a candy or drink orange juice; that's acting. Also, it broke my heart his last crying and how he screamed after his daughter's murder. Diane Keaton is just fine but do not add anything special to the movie, that's my take. Andy García is one good looking guy and delivers a brave performance in the likes of James Caan's Sonny in the original. Joe Mantegna is an actor you have to love, he's charming and plays his part perfectly. I didn't care for Talia Shire's acting, it was wooden in my opinion. The same goes for Sofia Coppola who delivers an extremely wooden performance. She didn't display the most powerful feelings correctly. I always wonder, ""how would Winona Ryder be in that part?"". Richard Bright plays Neri in such a class act that you just don't forget him. The rest of the cast is excellent.

The cinematography and art direction is just fine and displays the early 90's artistic techniques.

The plot is complex but easy to follow and deals with politics, religious authorities immersed with crime, betrayal, loyalty, power, but in the end, everything is summed up with a single word ""business"".

But getting out crime has it's deadly consequences. Crime never pays. The consequences derive in assassinations, conspiracies, church's dark interests, and more.

The addition of Vincenzo Corleone added fresh air to the series mainly because he is very different from Michael. It was like bringing back Sonny but in a younger and more clever version. It was also a manner to connect the last chapter with the previous films.

Important events from previous films play an important part in Michael's fate. He feels guilty and regrets for Fredo's murder. Anytime he listens to a Hail Mary, dark memories invade his mind. Also, he knows how to deal with Vincent because he perfectly handled Sonny's impulses and raging reactions. It was nice for the fans to hear constantly the name of Vito Corleone, Sonny, and more. Plus, it's always a pleasure to see Al Neri and the rest of the Corleone allies such as Don Tomassino, Calo, and more. Heck, even Johnny Fontaine returns for a last singing! Plus, Michael's children now grown up play an important and vital part. Anthony and Mary are Michael's most appreciated treasure. Special mention for Bridget Fonda's super sexy appearance. I love blondes with long legs and beautiful face.

This time, the Corleone's enemies do not represent such a big menace in terms of menacing looks or violent ways. The new enemies are more clever and cold blooded. Except for the thrilling and spectacular helicopter attack; we don't get much shootings as in previous films. That's when we learn that crime is more dangerous through briefcases, tables, and church. Don Altobello was the perfect nemesis for Michael; he is wise, knows who to convince, and pulls the strings masterfully. Joey Zasa is a regular gangster in the likes of Don Fanucci and do not represent a threat for the Corleones. The Vatican Bishop and Lucchetti, a strict-right moralist who is against the Corleone's immersion into ""religious business"". He's by far the most menacing enemy. But we also need to remember about Mosca, a Sicilian capo that is widely known for not failing an attack.

There are memorable scenes in this movie, beautiful, haunting moments. The family photo at the beginning of the movie displays that family means union and it's Michael's treasure. Michael dancing with Mary, Vincent counterattacking an assassination attempt, the infamous and sad opera attack, the helicopter attack, the filling of Zasa, Tommassino's sad murder, Mary's murder, Al Neri's final display of his skills, Vito's childhood home visit, and of course, the top three Godfather moments: Michael's last thoughts that deal with the important women of his life, then, he dies alone. It's just as haunting as the flashback in part II which features him eating alone, thinking, planning his future.

The last Godfather finds death in such a sad but poetic manner.";5;10;True tt0099674;dr_oetker;18/04/2007;It was an abortion...;2;"Watchable, but ridiculous. The whole saga should have been stopped at just one movie.

It kept getting more annoying and less believable. Pacino was overacting at times, the whole incestuous plot is superficial and unnecessary. The dying scene at the end was the only memorable one.

If you wanna see action, watch ""Mission Impossible"". For drama, watch ""Times of endearment"". For a decent picture of mobster life, ""Goodfellas"" or even ""Bugsy"".

In Part I he killed an enemy. In the second, his own brother. In this part, he allegedly killed Pope. Thanks god Corleone died in part III, otherwise he would have to kill Mother Teresa or Dalai Lama to make Part IV meaningful.";5;10;False tt0099674;mc_bez86;08/12/2004;Very underrated;10;"The third installment of Mario Puzo's The Godfather...

Now playing...

(Spoiler included)

I think this movie deserves to be in the Top 250 of the database primarily because of the acting talents of most of the characters here. To start off with, Al Pacino displays yet another staggering amount of acting, complete with his now famous ""owl-eyes"". He perfectly delivered his role of an aging Don Michael Corleone here. Chills went up my spine when he delivered my favorite line of the film: ""I command this Family. Right or wrong. It was not what I wanted--""

Next comes Andy Garcia. A clap-deserving performance as Santino Corleone's son. Nice temper and nice acting...he really is convincing as a good nephew to Michael.

Finally, bind together the talents of Diane Keaton and Talia Shire...good women actresses. Keaton really knows how to act, and Shire is the perfect sister for Pacino.

The spoiler, I noticed, is Sofia Coppola. I must say her act is a bit lame and isn't right to be paired with such talents as Pacino. They could've chosen anybody else.

Anyway, perfect sounds, perfect plot (next to Godfather 2) and perfect villains. 9 stars out of 10.";5;10;True tt0099674;jon_spish;21/02/2006;great watch;10;"Proboby known as the least recognized or liked of the trilogy, all you have to do is separate it from the first two(which of course are classics) and you will get a lot out of this film,it doesn't have the same feeling or passion of the first two, but it has something else, Andy Garcia gives the performance of his life as Sunny's bastard son, and pacino playing a withering and somewhat matured Michael corlione finally shows that family really is the most important thing and maybe questions some of te decisions he has made in the past thinking he is doing the best thing for his""FAMILY"" but really it was just a power trip. I am a huge godfather fan and not taking anything away from the first two masterpieces, godfather three i would have to say is my favorite, it is a movie i can pull out and watch often, where the first two are movies you pull out as an occasion with friends. If you haven't seen it and have heard bad things from idiot so called ""godfather fans"" forget what you have heard and give it a go............U WILL LOVE IT.";6;13;False tt0099674;mike2004-1;08/01/2005;I didn't like it, because I didn't understand it.;5;I didn't like it, because I didn't understand it. A business deal involving a 6 billion dollar company was central to the plot. What exactly was the deal? Was he trying to buy the company or become its CEO? The Catholic Church owns 25% now. Would they continue to own 25%? If they were planning to sell their shares, why would they care if scandal broke out after they sold? They could treat it the same as any other business deal. Was Michael offering $6 billion in cash, or would he have to borrow money to make the deal work? Maybe he could offer shares. Instead of depositing $600,000,000 in the Vatican bank, he could have upped his offer by $600,000,000. Michael threw an awful lot of money around, but that bothered me. If he was a billionaire before the movie started, then what's his problem?

Who was the bad guy and what was his motivation? Would he have lost money if the deal went through and how much? Why was the bad guy against the deal?

SPOILERS - Did the guy who killed with eyeglasses end up dying and why was he willing to do that? Did the assassin kill the girl on purpose or accidentally? There was comment earlier in the movie that she controlled the money now.;6;13;True tt0099674;Quinoa1984;17/09/2004;like the Star Wars prequels, this film is marked by some as a 'never should have been made'. I wouldn't agree with that;9;"In giving a wrap-up, a conclusion to two of the most powerful crime and family stories to come out of the seventies, Francis Ford Coppola took a risk that many feel didn't pay off. I almost wish I didn't know what criticisms people had before viewing it again recently (I had seen the film when I was in my early teens, but forgot most of it). Some of them, such as the mis-casting of Sofia Coppola, the long, drawn-out scenes, the heavy-handed dialog, are not entirely un-founded. And I would agree that this is my least favorite of the trilogy. But I do not feel that it is a failure, or a mis-calculation by Coppola and co-author Mario Puzo.

In fact, right from the get-go and throughout the film, I was very intrigued by the direction of the story that was being taken, as well as with the characters. At the core, Coppola cares deeply about the Corleone family, in particular Michael (Al Pacino, his most infamous crime performance alongside Tony Montana), despite the sins that have been committed. It's a tale of redemption, of loss, and of what matters in a life dominated by greed and corruption in the legitimate as well as illegitimate places. Coppola understands this world, or at least the dynamics of it, and that's what makes Godfather 3 at the least a fascinating character study.

Not to mention, much of the assembled cast (with the loss of Robert Duvall being the only set-back) is still highly dependable- Pacino is great at being tragic, and his subtleties in some scenes rank with his best work (one scene that stuck with me was his confession to the priest about Fredo). Keaton, for her scenes, is alright considering her dialog. Andy Garcia makes an impression fast in one of his early performances. Eli Wallach is an interesting choice for the Don (once again, like with Tuco, an effective take on a clichéd character). And Sofia Coppola, while understandably forced in some of her emotions (or, indeed, under-cooked), is not as bad as some have made her out to be. After all, she is supposed to be just a regular girl, not within the overly dramatic landscape of the criminals and politicians.

And the story, which follows Michael's chances at achieving legitimacy at the turn of the end of the seventies while his nephew tries to find the line of a ""good"" made guy, keeps a viewer on edge with the style too. To put it as such, Gordon Willis keeps a consistency with his masterful work in the first two films (at least, all three in the trilogies are masterpieces of lighting and compositions, and Willis was reportedly more responsible for the look of the films than Coppola, who focused on the actors and theatrics). And such a wonderful, operatic music score by Carmine Coppola is a fitting swan song, if missing the Nina Rota touch. For me, The Godfather: part 3 (a.k.a. The Death of Michael Corleone, Coppola's original title) is only a disappointment in how there isn't (arguably) the level of ambition in regards to the others. And the violent content, although original in its tactics, may not pack the wallop one might expect. But as a film by itself, this is a drama of considerable merit, and wouldn't spoil the flow if watched right after the first two in one sitting.";6;13;False tt0099674;malthenielsen;08/07/2020;The Borefather;2;It has, obviously, great actors, decent direction and good music.

But to me, all that got lost as the movie at no point managed to engage me in the characters, to the point where I would care if they got murdered or became rich and happy. They were simply all so dull and boring. To me they're like the kind of people you get seated next to at a family celebration dinner, and you immediately start working on excuses to get away from them and find some interesting people to hang put with.

If a movie is about bad guys, make them interesting in some way. Humourous or dark and menacing or colourfull. It doesn't work to give them all uninteresting personalities.

I liked two scenes in the movie, so I gave it two stars for those.;3;5;False tt0099674;Kirpianuscus;19/03/2020;admirable work;;I admitt, for me remains the best part of serie. For the realistic portrait of near reality. For decent job of Sofia Coppola and for Raf Vallone as Pope John Paul I. And, no doubts, for Al Pacino admirable work. An impressive part, more profound and more dedicated to explore, in not comfortable - only precise way- the life of Romano - Catholic Church.;3;5;False tt0099674;Ceredon1;08/02/2020;A travesty or a parody;4;I watched this as a kind and remember thinking it was so bad. Recently a rewatched parts 1 and 2 and was as impressed as before. I decided to give part 3 a chance again. My memories or how bad it was paled time how bad it actually is.

The writing, the storyline, the acting, all horrid. I forgot how bad the daughter character was. It was like she was reading all of her lines. She was one of the worst actors I've ever seen.

This movie could easily have been a parody of parts 1 and 2. If someone told be that Coppola made it to thumb his nose at his previous success and that it was intentionally horrible, I would completely believe that.;3;5;False tt0099674;aydenjenkins;25/03/2019;Not as bad as everyone says it is...;9;Although it does have notible flaws, The Godfather Part III is an incredible film. It continues the story of Michael Corleone and takes it to an all time high. Al Pacino is brilliant. It might be his best performance. The problems this film has are really just pacing issues in the first half of the film, and some dialogue that isn't great. Especially between Vincent and Mary. But these problems don't take a lot away from the movie. Now, is it as good as the first two films? No. Heck no. But that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. It's a worthy final installment that I think is severely underrated.;3;5;False tt0099674;webwanderer;02/12/2017;Time made sure Godfather III would never get the ratings of the first 2;8;The Godfather part III as a stand alone movie was great. I enjoyed it immensely. Not as great as the first two movies but definitely very watchable and a fitting ending to the trilogy.

One reason why it's ratings are not as high as the first two is in my opinion due to the 16 year gap between the making of the first two movies and this one. That's a generation skip. You can see the same ratings decline with the Star Wars movies.

Movie audiences crave something new all the time and movie studios try to make what they believe the audience want. You can plainly see the cycle of the genres. Right now we're in the middle of super hero cycle, but when was the last time you saw a Western blockbuster? In my opinion it hasn't been since 1992 with Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven.

If Godfather III was made a few years after the first two while the buzz of the first two was still strong and in the zeitgeist of the populace I believe it would be scoring much higher in IMDb as it does now.;3;5;False tt0099674;MaxHaydon1994;17/11/2016;8/10;8;Sadly the third Godfather film is very detached from the two greatest films probably ever made. It suffers in comparison to The Godfather and The Godfather II. That being said, it's still a very well made film If you ignore the roman catholic scenes that slightly plague the film.

Perhaps the biggest fault of the making of this film was the time it took them to find an idea for the film. The detachment from the originals came down to time... the characters have inevitably aged in the 16 years between the films. The story has moved on considerably, many things we've missed, that needed explaining in a subtle but continuous manor.

Al Pacino perhaps for the first time was the stand alone actor that gripped my interest in this film. The first and second films had Brando and De Niro respectively. An ageing Michael has been The Don of the family for nearly 20 years, following in his fathers footsteps. Although my review may sound mainly negative, I can assure you it's only because i'm focusing on the comparison. The first 2 films are a perfect 10/10, the third is in my opinion an 8/10 at best. it works well as a stand alone film but in regards to its place in the trilogy it lets the side down.;3;5;True tt0099674;grantss;29/05/2016;Unnecessary and overwrought but reasonably interesting and entertaining;6;It is 1979, about 22 years since the events of The Godfather II. For Michael Corleone, the move to legitimacy is complete: the New York crime business has been handed over to Joey Zasa and all elements of the Corleone business empire are legal, non-criminal enterprises. Michael, approaching 60, is now thinking about his legacy. His charity, run by his daughter Mary, has just handed over $100 million to the Catholic Church. Michael also intends buying a large stake in International Immobiliari, a Vatican-run property company. Things are peaceful and stable but then Vincent Mancini, Sonny Corleone's illegitimate son, starts a feud with Joey Zasa. This has far- reaching, deadly consequences, including for Michael's deal with the Vatican.

Unnecessary, as The Godfather II didn't need a sequel. Francis Ford Coppola has stated that he only did it for the money.

The product itself is a bit hit-and-miss. Plot has some intrigue, with a Robert Ludlum-like Vatican conspiracy woven into a more conventional mafia story. This does mean a departure from the feel of the first two movies, and I'm note sure it's a good departure. The plot becomes unnecessarily complex and overwrought, making it less tight than the first two movies. Coppola also unnecessarily draws out the movie - every scene gets stretched to the limit and there's a lot of padding. He could easily have lopped 40 minutes (at least) off the movie without us losing any information or engagement.

Then there's the performances, which are mostly good, with two notable exceptions. The old guard - Al Pacino, Dianne Keaton, Talia Shire - put in solid performances. The change in Connie, from passive to assertive and decisive, was one of the positive features of this movie and Talia Shire is great in that role.

The new faces include some pretty big names: Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, Andy Garcia, George Hamilton, John Savage, Bridget Fonda. Andy Garcia is great as Vincent Mancini, a worthy (potential) successor to Michael. Bridget Fonda is great but criminally underused, especially as it appeared that she would have a bigger role. Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna are solid as Don Altobello and Joey Zasa, respectively, and John Savage has little screen time.

George Hamilton is badly miscast as BJ Harrison, Michael's attorney. He really didn't fit the part and comes off as somewhat unconvincing. He was stepping into Robert Duvall's shoes - Tom Hagen was meant to continue into The Godfather III but the character was dropped when Robert Duvall pulled out over a pay dispute - so he does suffer due to the comparison with Duvall.

Then we have the performance which almost single-handedly wrecks this movie: Sofia Coppola. She is absolutely atrocious as Mary Corleone, well deserving her 1991 Razzie wins for Worst Supporting Actress and Worst New Star. Her dialogue delivery is incredibly flat and unconvincing and even when she has no dialogue she seems awkward, like she doesn't know what to do with herself when she's on camera.

Her flat delivery results in lack of engagement with her character, and this ruins the climax of the movie. So, there are greater consequences to her terrible performance.

It's a good thing she took up directing - she's clearly better at that.

Apparently she wasn't first choice for the part, as Julia Roberts and then Winona Ryder were cast for the role but then had to pull out. So at least Francis Ford Coppola could say she was hired more out of desperation than being his daughter. Still, he really should have kept looking...

(Aside: Winona Ryder as Mary - how awesome would that have been? The mind boggles. And yes, I am a big Winona Ryder fan.)

Overall: not bad, but not that good either.;3;5;False tt0099674;jackasstrange;10/01/2014;The weakest of the trilogy, but still good;8;I came to watch this film with the lowest expectations. I knew beforehand that it wasn't as good as the previous(masterpieces) installments, and some said it wasn't even a good film at all. Well, I enjoyed it. Not as much as the first two, much less actually, but still a good film. I admit, I don't think it was necessary at all, but hey, neither the second installment was necessary after all. The Godfather could've been finished in the way the first film ended, because after all, it was an excellent ending. But the second still turned to be a masterpiece, so why not right? And anyways, no film is necessary by this logic.

But lets go back to the main subject. The Godfather part III is a good film, that shows the old stage of Michael Corleone's life. Well, there is a fundamental difference in this film. Michael has much less screen time than in the previous The Godfather film, and almost as much screen time as the first Installment (that was no much more than one hour or so). His 'bastard' son, interpreted by Andy Garcia, is the one who shares screen time with Pacino. Unfortunately I don't find his character charismatic at all, what seems to be the intention. I just find him harmless my opinion, obviously. Those who watched The Godfather will find that his behavior looks a lot like Sonny, no wonder, is his son, so the behavior must be something hereditary yeah, it wasn't impactive at all.

And anyways, it shows much more about the tragic side of being in the mob than anything else. Michael in that film is not the same Michael as the previous installments, worthy noting. He is full penitence here, and is a totally different person. Not the cold gangster that we met. He don't wants to be a 'sinner' anymore. Well, I do understand why some fans of the first two film wont like it at all. It basically kills the irony that was all around the story.

Technically, it's a great film, almost on par with the other films. Story wise, nowhere near. 7.8/10;3;5;True tt0099674;Boba_Fett1138;21/10/2009;Definitely the least one out of the series but still a more than great movie.;8;"It all isn't quite good enough to considering this movie a true classic, especially when you compare this one to its previous two predecessors. Out of the Godfather-trilogy this movie is also definitely the least great one but that of course really does not mean that this is a bad movie. Far from it of course really.

I still see ""The Godfather: Part III"" as a great movie to end the saga. It ties up the loose ends and shows how the characters from the first two movies end up eventually, in the more modern world and age of the late '70's.

It's quite amazing that this movie got made 14 years after the previous Godfather movie but it still manages to maintain the same type of atmosphere and overall cinematic style, even when this movie is set in an entirely different time frame as well, as from the previous two movies. I think that's also way there is simply no way hating this movie when you've already loved watching the previous two movies, even though when this still remains a much hated and criticized movie, which just seems to be simply because of the fact that this movie isn't quite as good as the previous two masterpieces out of the series.

It was also great to see that after 14 years basically every actor was willing to reprise his role again from the previous- or the first two movies. Even persons who played some very small roles return in this movie again, except for Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, who was demanding too much to reprise his role again. His character is being replaced by a new one, played by George Hamilton. Hamilton is of course not the only new big name in this movie. Andy Garcia, Joe Mantegna and Eli Wallach are all some welcomed new additions to the cast. Garcia even earned his, so far, only Oscar nomination for his role in this movie. And yes well about Sofia Coppola. She simply is no actress and there should had been no way that she should had been in this movie but her character and her plot line with the Garcia character all play a fairly small part, considering that the story is build up out of many different story lines, which all brilliantly come together in the final sequence.

""The Godfather: Part III"" is well written and it has a great main premise of the Corleone family trying to legitimize their business. But just when they thought they were out, they get pulled back right in, when different characters from different corners try to take advantage of the situation, business and money-wise. Perhaps it's due to the fact that this is the first Godfather movie that is not being based on a Mario Puzo novel but I feel that out of the three Godfather movies the story in this one works out the best, from a cinematic perspective. It's definitely really a movie written for the screen, which had still Mario Puzo involved as the writer of the screenplay, along with the director Francis Ford Coppola.

Just like the previous the previous two movies, this movie as well as some great memorable sequences in it, which not in the least are due thanks to the great acting in the movie. It's a movie that got nominated for 7 Oscar's, including best picture, but eventually it won none. It was up against movies like ""Dances with Wolves"", ""Goodfellas"", ""Ghost"" and ""Awekenings"" that year, so it's no big shame that it won none. It at least says nothing about the great qualities of this movie.

A great fitting movie to end the Godfather trilogy.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/";3;5;False tt0099674;laursene;26/10/2004;Yes, a travesty;;"Critics cut this movie a lot of slack when it came out, because of its pedigree. The other commentators here are doing it the same favor, I think. In fact, Godfather III is a complete travesty. All the crime family saga clichés that the first two movies sidestepped, but that subsequently became encrusted on the genre, are sadly present in this misguided cash-in.

The greatest shame of all is Al Pacino's performance. Watching the first two movies today, it's hard to imagine how the powerfully subtle, minimal Michael Corleone he created in the early '70s could turn into the garrulous, scenery-chewing troll of 1990. His ""tour guide"" scene with Keaton in Sicily is the worst: Pacino seems to have completely forgotten what kind of a person he had played 16 years earlier. Andy Garcia does an OK job of channeling the young James Caan, but that's about it for acting honors. The rest of the cast come across as an over-the-hill ensemble of Acting 101 rejects, including Wallach, Keaton, Shire, Hamilton (no surprise), etc.

SPOILER: Even worse: As proud Italian Americans, how could Coppola and Puzo descend to concocting a plot that climaxes with the eating of a poison canole? The whole mishmash ends with a church-steps death scene that's like a parody of the most over-the-top-operatic Puccini rip-off you ever saw. The first two Godfathers were a milestone in depicting the American ethnic experience on screen, in all its ambiguities. The third turns it all to grotesque self-parody.

For relief, I suggest picking up The Freshman with the late Marlon Brando. Brando's slyly humorous take on Don Corleone in Andrew Bergman's film is a gentle send-up that respects its point of reference and even adds some grace notes to it. The scene of Brando, in pin-striped suit, just strolling through the streets of 1990s Little Italy is the closest we'll get to a real Godfather III.";3;5;True tt0099674;abcpc;22/08/2004;"""Joey ZA-SA""! BANG!";;"This THIRD installment of The Godfather is quite a TRAVESTY! Starting with the casting. ""Father Quido Sarduci"" from SNL?? George Hamilton?? JEEZ! What kinda ""Cracky"" crack casting sessions went on here?! Diane Keaton shows up in all her ""Annie Hall"" glory and looks RIDICULOUS! And the ""Coincidence"" of having the DIRECTORS daughter playing a key part, well, that's the TOPPER! Scenes from the much GREATER Godfather's 1 & 2 are more or less, ripped off. If it's possible to ""rip off"" from YOURSELF! Nearly 20 years went by from the original in the 70's until this JOKE of a film was made. This ""version"" of the series PALES in comparison, don't waste your time.";3;5;False tt0099674;laursene;26/12/2000;A travesty - just awful;;Let me be a bit more precise: If you were to see this movie without having seen or known much about the first two (and why would you do that, pray tell?), you might find it a mildly entertaining Hollywood production, marred by ham acting, a script that covers a lot of ground to no good effect, and egregious Italianamerican stereotypes. Coming to it with a knowledge of the first two films, what I saw was a travesty - a totally unnecessary film that unintentionally parodied most of what was great about its predecessors.

The critics were pretty kind to Godfather III when it came out, no doubt out of the respect for I and II. But the truth is quite dismal.

Where to even begin? In place of the powerfully minimal, understated performances he gave in I and II, Al Pacino gives yet another of the scenery-chewing exhibitions he's been prone to of late. The part where he chauffeurs Diane Keaton around Sicily looks like it was accidentally thrown in from a bad cable-TV travelogue. Talia Shire's performance is a kitsch-fest of Italianamerican cliches. Although perversely entertaining, it has nothing to do with the character she created in the first two films. George Hamilton as the consigliere instead of Robert Duvall? What were they thinking??? The only reason Sofia Coppola isn't laughed off the screen is because all the other performances here are so broadly awful that she actually comes across as somewhat understated (although her Valley Girl intonations are pretty hopeless).

One of the great things about Godfathers I and II was the way they avoided cliches and gave dignity to Italian American characters in a setting that's usually been used to stereotype them, and in fact used them to comment not on mafia corruption but on the corruption of America itself. Not here! The penultimate scenes with the poison canoli at the opera are Italianamerican kitsch to the Nth, and the killing on the opera house steps that follows is just bad Verdi.

It's clear this movie was made entirely for the bucks. Coppola and Puzo had nothing left to say about these characters. Let's just pretend it doesn't exist, shall we?;3;5;False tt0099674;EW-3;26/01/1999;"The word ""bomb"" is an understatement.";;"This was one of the biggest disappointments ever to hit the silver screen, and please don't blame Sofia - she was the least of its troubles. It was almost like the creators intentionally set out to make this movie bad, for a number of reasons:

1) No plot: What exactly was this film about? Something to do with the Vatican banking scandal, I think. (Yawn) Wake me when it's over.

2) Lack of continuity with the first two films: Parts I and II told interesting and believable stories. I have no idea what this film was trying to say. Even though you had all the familiar faces, the story didn't really fit with the last images we saw of Michael sitting on the shores of Lake Tahoe in the 1974 film. There were a few places in which this film looked like it was trying to make a weak attempt at borrowing from Goodfellas - which came out the same year. Why? Goodfellas was a completely different kind of film. There was no need to steal from it (and no pun intended).

3) Spending all that money to get back Diane Keaton: Again, why? Her character was basically written out in Part II. A rekindling of their romance, however mild, was not only a distraction but also not credible.

4) Not spending the money to get back Robert Duvall: On the other hand, the Tom Hagen character was still important to the saga, and could have been used in interesting ways (e.g., suppose Tom had betrayed Michael as well, only in a more complex manner?). Duvall should have been in this film. Instead, they used...

5) George Hamilton: They had to be kidding on this one.

6) Changes to the Talia Shire character: Connie as a Sicilian Ma Barker was an even bigger joke. By the way, if she was so sinister, wouldn't she have had enough brains to figure out what really happened to Fredo?

7) Underdeveloped Andy Garcia, Joe Mantegna, Eli Wallach, and John Savage characters: Especially Savage as Tom Hagen's son, whose brief appearances were a total mystery (was his character originally conceived as having a more critical role in the story?). All around, there was just too much wasted talent in this film.

8) Lack of original music - It borrowed too much from the first two films. The stroll down ""Michael's Memory Lane"" while the son performed a rendition of ""Speak Softly, Love"" almost made me want to stroll out of the theater. The use of the Intermezzo during the credits was stolen (pun intended this time) from Raging Bull, which further suggests that Coppola had Scorsese on his mind.

9) The End: The creators should have had the ""guts"" to kill off Michael by means of a climactic ambush, not an anticlimactic stroke or heart attack (that last scene reminded me of Artie Johnson's routine in Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In). The death of the daughter meant nothing to the audience.

10) Laying the seeds for Godfather IV - Lord help us; I think I would be more intrigued by Rocky XVIII.

* * *

When they were making this film, I remember reading somewhere that its plot was supposed to be a modern-day, organized crime version of the Cataline Conspiracy. That, intertwined perhaps with the story of the fall of a real-life mobster for Pacino's character, would have made for a fascinating film, even better than the first two. Instead, we were left with a movie so bad, it even tarnishes the reputation of the first two films to some degree. Alas, whatever Coppolla had back in the 70s, he no longer had it when he made this film.";3;5;False tt0099674;MI$ gUy;22/10/2001;Not necessary to see Godfather III;6;I just watched Godfather III for the first time. Godfather I and II were two of the greatest films of all time. However, although the third is a decent film, it is nowhere near the level of the others.

Michael Corleone, as the Don, is supposed to be a powerful man. In no point in this movie does Michael actually look like a Don. This is a far cry from the strong character he was in the second movie. This may well be showing the fall of organized crime, but I don't think that was Coppola's intention, and if it was he did a bad job of conveying that message. Also, Connie is suddenly a powerful character. Apparently all of Coppola's strong characters were dead so he had to take the only recognizable character that was left and make her some sort of family business matriarch. In the first two movies she had nothing to do with the family business. The plot in this movie is also disjointed and confusing. At the beginning of the movie it seems like Michael barely recognizes Vincent Mancini, but throughout the film Vincent is his right hand man. This made no sense at all.

******6 out of 10******;3;5;False tt0099674;ONMeany;20/08/1998;Ugh;1;The Godfather Part III is so bad you'd think James Cameron directed it.;11;29;False tt0099674;Marian20;31/08/2017;Is The Godfather Part III an offer you can refuse?;10;"Many have thrashed ""The Godfather Part III"" with one familiar quote from the first two ""The Godfather"" films by saying that this movie is ""An offer you can refuse"".No question that many movie fans have shown lack of respect and appreciation for this film by saying that it ruined the legacy of the two film which many - including myself - considered as both classics and each one a masterpiece.But the question remains,""Is The Godfather Part III an offer you can refuse?""

The Godfather Part III was released 16 years after the sequel - The Godfather Part II - was show in theaters.It acts as the epilogue of the story of Don Michael Corleone,portrayed by Al Pacino, after he reluctantly replaced his father - Don Vito - into becoming the Godfather or primary leader of the Corleone organized crime family in the first part and how he turned into a ruthless and soulless Don during his protection of the business interests of the Corleone family in casinos and gambling after an attempt was made on his life in the second part.

In the third part,we get to see Michael finally closing into his objective of the finally making the Corleone criminal empire into becoming a legitimate business operation with the participation of the Catholic Church particularly the Vatican Bank.In addition to that,we also get to witness the succession of the Godfather from Michael to the illegitimate son of his brother Sonny in Vincent Mancini,portrayed by Andy Garcia.Finally,we also get to see how Michael has to overcome the obstacles presented by the other gangsters like Joey Zaza as well as Don Licio Lucchesi and Don Altobello,both whom want to take part in Michael's legitimate business and to upset his goal of leaving the mob for good.

No question that the third part still presents a great story.The plot was based on Pope John Paul I,who was only pope for 33 days, and the Papal banking scandal that occurred back in the early 1980's.The obstacles presented by the other members of the mob to Michael's legitimacy remains interesting as well as the corruption that the members of the clergy of the Catholic Church that could be capable of doing.In addition to the great story,there was a lot of great performances like Al Pacino,Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Andy García, Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna.Too bad that many saw the poor and much maligned performance of Francis Ford Coppola's daughter,Sofia Coppola.

Despite of these great qualities that I have mentioned,I still must admit that it is not at level with the first two films.No question that the reunion of ex-spouses Kay and Michael as well as the romance between first cousins - Vincent Mancini and Mary Corleone - were somewhat not given much thought and I felt that these romantic stories proved as a distraction.Also,the sudden change of Michael from a ruthless and soulless character into becoming a benevolent person lacked better development. Added to that,familiar elements from the first two films remain present in this film.Finally,one must be really familiar with the first two parts of ""The Godfather"" to have better appreciation of this film.Evidently,it will not be a good stand alone film for one should watch the other films.

But nevertheless,I must conclude that the third film remains ""an offer one cannot refuse"" for it is a great film despite being far from being a classic and a masterpiece unlike the first two films.";4;8;True tt0099674;Sober-Friend;01/08/2017;Worth Watching Once;4;"After 26 years people were waiting for another ""Godfather"" film. In Late 1988 people were celebrating that the Saga of The Corleone was to continue when Paramount Pictures Announced ""The Godfather Part III"" was coming in 1990.

Now when ""The Godfather Part 2"" was released at first that was a head scratchier for many people because the film was told in two different time periods. It was the rise of the the father (Told in flashbacks) and the fall of the son. Then the reviews turned around quickly and :The Godfather Part 2"" went on to win Best Picture of the year just like its predecessor. When Francis Ford Coppola decided to make ""The Godfather II"" he told this story in much different way as he did the other two films however this time he failed. However the casting of Sofia Coppola wan't the films on flaw. The story itself is confusing and not well told.

Another Problem is the character of Michael Corleone. By the time ""The Godfather II"" he was cold & alone. In this film he is trying to redeem himself. The other story is about the Vatican bank. This is really poorly told. I am sure most of the audience could not really tell you what really happened! By the end of the movie nobody could tell you what exactly what the story was and what was the point?

A major problem also with the film is that of Connie. She has new become vicious! It was established at the end of ""Godfather II"" that she was now ""Taking Care"" of her brother.

This film would of have been more better served if Connie had orchestrated the assassination of her brother Michael. After all he ordered her husbands death and their own brother. Her seeking revenge would of been a better story.

What we got here was a huge mess. If you loved the first two movies you will want to see this but you will be very disappointed!";4;8;False tt0099674;n-mo;08/10/2008;Worthy of its place;9;"Detractors of The Godfather part III have two main gripes: the most obvious is Sofia Coppola's acting skills as Mary Corleone, and the second is the character of Michael Corleone, who bears less resemblance to the cold, calculating criminal mastermind of the first two films. Regarding the first point, I have to agree that Sofia Coppola is insufferable in this film. Thankfully, she had little screen time. However, she looked wonderful: she was convincing enough as a ""cute little lovestruck innocent daughter"" that I could believe she meant a lot to her family and her father in particular.

As to the second point, some things need to be born in mind. The Michael Corleone of the first two films had descended into the lowest possible place, yes, murdering his own brother (among others) by the end. He had become everything he did not want to be and worse: his reign over his family's criminal empire was Machiavellian on a level his father had never dreamed of nor would ever have allowed.

But by the beginning of this film, a decade and a half had passed since he had crossed the terrible trough of fratricide. Michael's parents and brothers were all dead during this time, Tom Hagan passed away (although the loss of the character was a tragedy, it served the story very well to accent Michael's sense of isolation) and Connie was clearly far too unstable and too much of a yes-woman to ever provide true companionship. Michael was not a man easily resigned to being alone and he had a fierce protective instinct--even if it could be overrode by his jealous vengeful nature--for ""his own."" Remember that in Part I, he always hoped to return to the States as soon as possible and when this seemed a tenebrous goal, he sought a marriage and a new life in Sicily. Throughout Part II, he lost two more members of his family and his wife left him. It is not hard to imagine that the murder of Freddo would in fact be his moral trough, that the pent-up guilt could have spilt over into guilt at having deprived his young children of their mother and perhaps even a fear that they would grow up in his shadow, so he gave them up, even though he knew it meant further isolation.

But he knew all along that his cold, calculating criminality had taken him to this horrible place, and so he has spent the years since sloughing through the long marsh out while yet keeping his own person intact and out of prison. Obviously, given how much he aged from Part II to Part III, such a task has taken its toll, both physically and psychologically, and this is portrayed brilliantly. And what of Michael's sudden lavishness? I can tell you from personal experience that when you experience extreme isolation from those you love, you often cling as never before to the greatest treasures of your ethnic and religious heritage, cultivating them with the utmost sincerity partly because these are reminders that you are a real human connected with others and that you belong somewhere. The need to belong somewhere and to something and someone more concrete than the ""global citizenry"" is universal, and I don't know how either Puzo or Coppola could have known about this, but they did an amazing job.

""What good is Confession if you don't repent?"" Good question. Michael longs for redemption and forgiveness, but almost to the end he seeks legitimacy on his own terms, a quiet retirement from the Mafia. The result is a subtle illustration of the observation of the Curé d'Ambricourt in Robert Bresson's Le journal d'un Curé de campagne: ""You can't bargain with God. You must give yourself up to Him, all at once, as you are."" Michael's sins live on apart from him, and by the end are visited full circle on the people he loves.

But the ending is cryptic enough that we have to ask: was Michael redeemed? Did truth and justice ultimately prevail at the Vatican? Will they ever prevail anywhere, even imperfectly, before the next life?

When Anthony Corleone asks of Sicily, ""Why is such a beautiful country so violent?"" he opens up yet another flood of mysteries. How to resign ourselves to living in a world of so much beautiful treasure and yet so much of it born in great crime (think, for example, of the great Deicide, of Christ redeeming mankind, nailed to the Cross)--and how and in what circumstances can they be ours for the legitimate taking and cherishing? The Godfather part III provokes such difficult questions in all those willing to see and ponder them.

If the acting and cinematography are not as polished as in the second installment, a film set anywhere in Italy needs little visual embellishment, and the music sets the mood for each scene perfectly. The Godfather part III reminds us of the world ever-present outside the closed sphere of Cosa Nostra and captures the struggle of one man teetering on the high-current edge. If you are unwilling to expand your mind beyond criminal exploits and into the personal anguish of their effects on real human beings, stay away. If, however, you have even a slight appreciation for psychology and/or Roman Catholic moral theology, you will welcome this rounding out of one of the greatest sagas ever invented.";4;8;True tt0099674;tom-darwin;05/04/2006;Overlong, overblown, overwrought, over-hyped;5;"While the first two films were allegories of the development of modern organized crime in New York, Las Vegas and Sicily, ""Godfather III"" moves into the realm of spy thrillers while at the same time being a sort of reunion, comeback effort for the old Godfather band. The once cool and assured Michael Corleone, now humanized by age and the torment of his guilty memories, contrasts with over-the-top violence that would have fitted into a ""Die Hard"" movie. Perhaps Pacino should have played two roles, like Peter Sellers--one as Michael, the other reprising Tony Montana from ""Scarface."" Still, if anyone makes this film work it is the always-fine Pacino, as well as the overlooked Joe Mantegna. Diane Keaton, who so effectively gave us an ""average American"" perspective of the Mafia in the first two films, has little to do in this film except accompany us on a tour of Sicily--which we already had in the second film. A striking, effective surprise ending didn't quite pick me up because I had pretty much lost interest a half hour earlier.";4;8;False tt0099674;hank65;01/10/2001;As bad as you've heard, if not worse;2;"It's funny--photograph a film well, do a good set design and images, hire good actors, but have nothing to say, no story to tell--and a lot of people will be fooled into thinking they've seen something worthwhile. Look at every positive or even vaguely positive review for this film.

Despite what anyone says, this is a long, annoying, silly film, with nothing to say. Yes, Sofia Coppola wasn't up to playing the lead role, but Al Pacino was just as uninteresting, due to his character's poor conception.

Hell, even the boys at the Bada Bing club in ""The Sopranos"" know that part III is crap. Discount thoroughly the deluded movie geeks that write otherwise.";4;8;False tt0099674;inkslave;03/07/2001;Francis hasn't been the same since he crawled out of the Philippine jungle;4;What the hell happened to Francis Coppola? How could the man who made I and II be the same guy who dropped this stinkbomb? Every movie he's made since Apocalypse Now has reeked of a guy who has lost his grip on reality and who is so powerful, and surrounded by so many people who kiss his butt all day, that he is doomed. It's the same thing that happened to Oliver Stone and George Lucas.

I hate this movie, because it tries to change the way we think about characters from the first two films, because it resorts to weird '90s crap like the helicopter attack, because the ending plays like it was written in 15 minutes and filmed in 20, and because, worst of all, it's boring.

So much could have been done with this. Michael's son an opera star, who berates his dad with corny speeches? C'mon, in II the kid was practically a clone of Vito, the sins of the father being visited on the son. George Hamilton? Puh-leeze. The pope? Who exactly was Coppola trying to impress?

Almost the only thing I like about this movie is Sofia Coppola. She can't act, but she's gorgeous. And Andy Garcia proving whose son he is by wiping out the two hit men, that's at least entertaining. Otherwise, as Roger Ebert once said about another clunker, this film should be cut up and distributed to the poor for use as ukelele picks.;4;8;False tt0099674;paul sloan;22/05/2000;The Big Sleep;3;The first time I saw this movie, I fell asleep in the cinema and woke up with a half hour to go not having a clue what was happening. I later saw the movie on video and when it came to the original part where I woke up,I still did not have much of an idea as to the proceedings despite being totally awake.This movie is nearly a Turkey and is only saved from being so by high production values and a mostly good cast. Not on a par with the first two Godfather movies. Made solely for the money and it shows. When will Francis Coppolla make another good movie? We can only wait and hope that he gets motivated. There is no doubt he is capable;4;8;False tt0099674;Predator-11;07/01/2002;Not even close to the first two, but probably not as bad as you've heard.;7;I recently picked up The Godfather DVD Collection, having seen (and loved) the first two films. I proceeded to watch the first two over again, enjoying every minute almost as much as the first time around. Then I watched the third one, which I had never seen before. I'd heard how bad it was, and how Coppola ruined the series with Part III, so my hopes were less than high, even though the brilliance of the first two films was still fresh in my mind. So I watched it all the way through, trying to keep an unbiased oppinion.

Well, it's not great, that's for sure. But I wouldn't call it horrible either. It certainly lacks the wonderful mood and appeal of the first two films, and it doesn't hold together nearly as well. The first two are so masterful that it takes a very keen eye and many repeated viewings to find even the most minute flaws in them. In Part III, there's plenty of cheesy scenes, forced acting and hammy lines. On the other hand, a lot of the scenes were really good. I liked most of the time spent in Rome, especially the confession scene with Michael and the soon-to-be Pope. The construction of the story itself was pretty decent as well, although it's ruined a little bit by some bad acting.

The main problem with the story of Part III was that it wasn't about anything the audience really cared about, and it certainly wasn't anything new. Part I gave us the story of an aging Mafia crime boss, who's family goes into chaos when he's shot. And Michael, the moral son who doesn't want to get involved with his families business, but feels it's his duty when he sees the corruption in the law and the government. Part II gave us the continuing story of Michael Corleone, trying to vanquish his enemies, and it also had the side story of Vito Corleone as a young man coming to America and his rise to power. To me the scenes with De Niro as Vito was the best part of Part II, and I don't think the film would've been nearly as great without them. Part III was the story of the aging Michael Corleone, but we'd already seen the same type of thing in Part I. So we start looking for parallels between Parts I and III, but they're just not there. So we start looking for originality and redeeming qualities of Part III on it's own, but we have a hard time looking past some of the flaws.

Frankly I just didn't really give a damn about any of the characters in Part III. Michael was an old man, and I could guess he would be dead by the end of the film. Connie had suddenly turned into this hard Mafia consultant, which didn't seem to fit her character from the originals at all. Vincent was basically James Caan's character, Sonny, from the original, only Andy Garcia isn't as good an actor and didn't pull it off as believably. Also it seems hard to believe that Michael would leave the family in the hands of someone so brash and forward as Vincent. The character we were really supposed to care about, Mary, was completely blown by a terrible acting performance by Sofia Coppola, that has to be one of the worst casting calls I've ever seen. I literally laughed at the end (you all know what scene I'm talking about), her acting was just so canned and cheesy it was really pathetic.

On an up note, the cinematography was great once again. Although the film didn't have the same play on light and shadowing that the first two had, it did have some amazing shots of Rome and Sicily. The film was very pleasent to look at throughout. The music was also very good, although I think they used Nino Rota's original theme a bit too much.

Of course, if you compare Part III to the first two films, your going to come up with tons of problems with it and probably won't like it very much. But on it's own it's a pretty decent movie, there have been tons of better Mafia films (Goodfellas, Casino, Donnie Brasco etc..) but it's still alright. What's so disappointing is that the first two are amazing, and the third one is just pretty good. But it says a lot about a series when the worst of the bunch is still a good movie. On a scale of 1 to 10, I give The Godfather Part III, 6 stars.;4;8;False tt0099674;eszynaka;04/06/2008;Not up to par;1;I only have one comment. Sofia Copalla is the worst actor ever. The movie is ruined by her performance. The story line is sadly more like a TV soap opera. This could have been a great sequel but it is just a formula film bound to make lots of money. This clearly ends the Godfather legend. For viewers accustom to good character development you will be very sad for paying good money to see this film. Goodfellers is much better. Francis Ford Copalla can do much better. I suggest that a alternative plot paced around the character of Tom Hagan or his son would have been interesting. Another possibility would have been in the area of the other five families. Or perhaps it would have been interesting to go even further backward to the start of the Mafia. But most of all the romance in the movie serves no purpose.;6;14;False tt0099674;jacobhenrytucker-1;20/02/2007;This is the worst crime drama I have ever seen!;1;The first Godfather was absolutely world class. The second Godfather wasn't as good but still very entertaining but like after every successful film, the director gets the idea of a sequel and it all goes horribly wrong. This is a classic example of this. First of all, the movie is slow and boring, the plot is just pointless and don't get me started on the violence. There was barely any of it, hardly like the original masterpiece that dominated the box office and still is the best-selling UK movie! This movie is rubbish and I regret seeing it, I knew the reviews were bad but they said that about the Godfather 2 and it was amazing so I saw it and it was terrible. I really thought the director would have known it. Thank God the director took in the criticism and did not make a sequel which he was planning to do. So that's it, before you watch it DON'T WATCH IT;6;14;False tt0099674;davideo-2;12/02/2006;Easily the runt of the litter;4;STAR RATING: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits

It is the late 1970s and Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now the aging head of the Corleone empire. All is flowing smoothly until a younger relative of his, Vincent (Andy Garcia) arrives on the scene. Vincent is hot-headed, acting without thinking and Michael can see this as a problem that may affect the Corleone family. Then he decides to buy a major corporation's share in the church, cutting off his ties with the casinos and soforth. This rubs some other prominent gangsters up the wrong way and from here we watch Michael's dramatic fall from power in a devastating event of power games.

In 1990, Martin Scorsese brought us a gangster movie to herald a new era in the shape of Goodfellas that many, both artistically and casually, would want to emulate. One can only get the impression Francis Ford Coppola wanted to cling to his title as the maker of the most memorable gangster epic of all time by reminding us of it by dealing us The Godfather Part III, which can hold claim to being possibly the most unnecessary and even damaging prequel of all time.

Right from the very beginning, it is clear how transparent the film is, as possibly without even realizing it, it is copying the first film by having a long family gathering sequence where Pacino (stepping in for Brando) cuts away to have some behind the scenes discussions right up to the scene where his character is rushed to hospital, again like the original. This may well have been the mark of Coppola's career freefall, starting the chart of a sad decline in a once brilliant director.

You've lost interest in the story long before the ending, leaving it to just ramble on towards it's eventual conclusion. The story's fairly interesting and there is one scene of brilliant emotional acting by Pacino (even with this sort of material, you gotta admire the guy!) but the whole film cannot help but feel like a big, embarrassing dirty stain on the two unforgettable films made two decades earlier. With the flashy, trend-setting new film Goodfellas on the scene, I can't imagine cinema-goers in 1990 would have much time for this unneeded drag. **;6;14;False tt0099674;kingbad;18/10/2001;Extremely disappointing;4;"After the first two classic installments of the series, I was hoping

that the third chapter would wrap up all the narrative threads, while

continuing the gripping performances and wonderful direction.

Instead, this movie was 2 1/2 hours of bad direction, leaden

acting, and boring storytelling. Al Pacino's Michael Corleone

replaced the quiet menace of his earlier performances with

hammy overacting- proving that ""The Devil's Advocate"" wasn't just

a fluke, and further marring the reputation of a great American

actor. Sofia Coppola was simply terrible in a pivotal role- the worst

example of nepotism and directorial hubris ever. Nearly all the

surviving stars of the first two movies wisely steered clear of this

stinker, and Andy Garcia proved that he's no James Caan. Very

disappointing way to end a great series of movies.";6;14;False tt0099674;mobix;23/04/2006;ugh what a huge let-down;3;"one day, i decided to watch all 3 godfather flicks in a row with my cousin and by the time we got to the 3rd one we were hooked

don't get me wrong -- i never listen to critics -- i may agree after I see a movie myself, but never go in with a bias against a film godfather3 was just completely astray from what the other films had

maybe i hated it so much because the other 2 were amazing before it, but this movie was just so bad. I mean, there were parts of the movie that were good (and i'm not someone that judges a film based on the action or fight scenes if that's what you're thinking) but godfather 3 really paled in comparison to it's two older brothers

kind of ironic how Michael, the youngest son, was the best, yet the third 'brother' of the series was the worst ;p";5;11;False tt0099674;elliotjeory;10/06/2020;Frustratingly average;6;This film had a lot to live up to and it is very good in some parts but ultimately the story doesn't meet expectations. If the film was made in the early 1980's it would of been better because being made in 1990 it had a modern feel to it with the music and the corny dialogue. ( my lucky coat, it's my lucky coat) also the final act in Sicily wasn't great and the worst part was Michael Corleone having a change of heart. It's not the character we know. Part IV should happen.;2;3;False tt0099674;erentuna-97421;17/04/2020;Great;8;A presumable ending compared to the first two masterpieces but still has that old feel of great crime drama which is the main interest of the trilogy.;2;3;False tt0099674;alshamari-marwa;13/04/2020;Amazing movie;8;"One of the greatest movies ever maid about the organized crime and there leader ship, the movie is a great classic that you have to watch acting directing story is just perfect, one thing to say the 3rd pat wasn't as good as the two before. Best line: ""all the power on earth can't change destiny""";2;3;False tt0099674;carolynh2;29/12/2019;My favorite of the three.;10;A love story for the ages...infused with truism. I know there was a lot of criticism regarding Sophia Copolla as Mary. I thought she was absolutely perfect and had great chemo with Andy Garcia.;2;3;False tt0099674;amdhq;03/11/2019;Most underrated;9;People who have no issues abouy this movie they started comparison Between godfater 1,2 and 3 But the novel speaks what to take as the sequels need to speak actually;2;3;False tt0099674;dpg-87522;08/08/2019;The best trilogy ever.;7;In most trilogies, the third part is bad or is the worst of the three, and let's be honest, this is no exception, of the three this is the worst, because the movie simply doesn´t stand out in any way,the only good performances in this movie are those of Al Pacino and Diane Keaton, the others are passable,well some because the performance of Sofia Copola is horrible. Well maybe i´m talking as if the movie didn´t like me, and that´s not the case, i like this movie because Michael tries to fix his past mistakes with the help of the Catholic Church that's something realistic in a way, but does the movie sometimes have meaningless lacks like someone can explain to me why they want to kill the Pope?With this i mean the movie doesn't bother explaining these things to you. What if the movie has the best end of the three parts, an emotional ending that reminds us of this path we traveled together in these movies, giving an end to the best trilogy in history.;2;3;True tt0099674;sauravjoshi85;18/03/2019;Fades in comparison of first 2;8;I is the third and the last instalment of highly appreciated and highly successful Godfather series. This movie shouldn't be compared with the first two but still holds it's beauty and somewhat is underrated. Al Pacino has as usual done a wonderful job, Andy Garcia was surprisingly good. Talia Shire and Diana Keaton doesn't have much scope to perform but still played their part with beauty. Screenplay is good, location is something compromised and is not as spectacular as in the previous two. Support cast is good and could've been better. A good and underrated movie.;2;3;False tt0099674;sarabagi;13/03/2019;Sad ending;9;A great but very sad ending to this amazing story of the godfather. Never getting tired of this trilogy;2;3;False tt0099674;sdmarylou;31/12/2018;All over the place, but not THAT bad!;7;I think the problem here is that the direction of the movie is all over the place. At times the music seems to be right on point, and others it's underutilized. New characters are introduced, and the story is a little confusing. Al Pacino wasn't given enough dramatic scenes that showcase his acting ability. Scenes are short and kinda jump around a lot. No character in the movie is given a lot of screen time, so you don't get to like them or hate them, they're just kind of there. That said, the story is fairly straightforward even if it is a little confusing you can still guess and will probably be right in who's trying to do what in the movie. Some of the actors don't have the acting chops to do their character right, so that's a little annoying. The scenes in Italy are beautiful and capture that Godfather 1 and 2 feel. I do recommend you watch this one if you're a Godfather fan just to close out the series. The movie is entertaining enough and there are even a couple really good shocking scenes. If you've got an afternoon, why not?;2;3;False tt0099674;Amyth47;15/12/2018;Part III - Misunderstood and sadly forgotten.;9;My Rating : 9/10

I'm sure to watch this again and again - it's become a favourite. A lot of people don't like it however I simply love it.

Give it a chance and perhaps you might convert. A worthy ending to what is one of the greatest movie trilogies ever made.;2;3;False tt0099674;RussHog;21/07/2018;Solid final chapter int he Godfather Saga;9;I am glad this movie exists. Glad they went back to see Michael Corleone years after the devastation he endures at the end of Godfather 2. How his empire grew. His sister is still at his side. His ex-wife returns and has to deal with is own children. He becomes a surrogate father for his late brother, Sonny's child. There are a lot of full circle elements to this film. The exterior shots are beautiful. The action is the most of any in the series. It is a very different film from the first two. Less of a masterpiece and more of a love letter to those who loves the franchise. A nice finish.;2;3;False tt0099674;krisdimoski;27/03/2018;Did you all watch the same movie i did?;10;Honestly, I am baffled with all the negative reviews that I have read for the final part of this timeless classic. The story picks up couple of years later after the second part ended. Michael's kids are all grown up now and they have different visions and ambitions for their lives that not necessarily correspond with their father's plan. Michael is doing everything in his power to finally turn a new page in his family's life and leave the dark past behind, but soon figures out that things are not as simple as he wishes them to be. We are introduced to a new character, Vincent (Sonny's illegitimate son), who has his father's temper but still menages to find the patience to listen to his wise uncle. The only thing that i really missed in this movie was Robert Duvall's character. Also i have to say that i strongly disagree with the critics who argue that Francis Coppola made a wrong decision by casting his daughter as Michael Corleone's daughter. I think Sofia Coppola played her role perfectly. And when it comes to the ending.. i never cried to any movie's ending (I was really close while watching the ending of One flew over the Cuckoo's nest) but man this ending left me speechless.

If you are a movie fan do yourself a favor and watch all three movies because they are a piece of movie history that will be remembered for generations.;2;3;False tt0099674;aloole-80;09/07/2016;not as good as the first 2, but still a satisfying movie.;7;Yeah - definitely flawed - but still really great. Not so much a godfather film.

Everybody says this is a huge letdown, I say, I don't even care, I just want to watch Michael Corleone for the last time. But still, I've seen a lot of issues with how this film became a crushing disappointment to the Godfather trilogy. I've seen a lot of good and bad actors, but damn, when I saw Sofia Coppola acts in a role of Mary Corleone. That is one of the worst I've seen, I'm not hating on her or whatsoever, but obviously she's pretty damn nervous the whole time. I love the cast and the whole characterization. All I see is an old Al Pacino, who tries hard this time around. He is a brilliant actor that's for sure. The Godfather part lll. Undoubtedly falling short of its predecessors, the conclusion to this beautiful trilogy still ends on a well written note. No blame is given though since the role this film played was crucial and judged with such intensity that it may have been impossible to reach. Al Pacino stays true til the end and the story of Michael's reign over the Sicilian crime family finally comes to a satisfying end.;2;3;True tt0099674;GTeixeira;25/06/2014;Weaker than the first two, but that's hardly a fault;8;"'The Godfather' and its first sequel, 'The Godfather: Part II', are both hailed as two of the best films ever made (with the first sometimes considered the very best). A couple decades after them, it was given a proper ending/'epilogue' with 'The Godfather: Part III'.

While the first two dealt with the rise of Michael Corleone, this deals with his fall. Wrecked by guilt at all his wrongdoings and his strained relationship with his ex-wife and children, he attempts to repent for his sins while also taking in his illegitimate nephew as his successor within the mafia business.

As one can expect, things don't go right. A tale of betrayal, murder and power hunger unfolds.

The movie retains much of the great cast of the first two. Al Pacino is great as ever playing Michael Corleone, now in a much more emotionally pained and fragile vision than the ruthless kingpin he was in the second. Diane Keaton and Talia Shire also return well (Keaton more so, while Shire does get annoying at times), and the entire supporting cast (where Eli Wallach in special shines) is great. Andy Garcia is also good, though he doesn't shine (which is made worse by the fact Robert Duvall didn't return).

The film also retains the sophisticated atmosphere of the first two. And their excellent soundtrack, excellent directing and pacing, and dialogues.

On the other hand, it still falls short of living up to the expectations. It ends up too continuity based; it is almost impossible to understand it well without knowledge of the first two films. A good deal of what made 'The Godfather: Part II' such a masterpiece was exactly the fact it didn't rely on the first; it could stand on its own.

'The Godfather: Part III' would be a mess if you take it for itself.

Another problem was Coppola's usual nepotistic tendencies. It is common of his to cast his relatives in his films, though usually in minor roles (he did that in the first two). This time he went overboard: rather than search for a new actress once Wynona Rider withdrew, he decided to cast his own daughter for the major role of Mary Corleone (Michael's daughter). She is an amateur, no wonder her acting career didn't pick up; she is still watchable, yes, but her scenes lose so much of intensity and believability she could have single-handedly sunk a lesser film.

So, despite not being the masterpiece 'The Godfather' and 'The Godfather: Part II' were, 'The Godfather: Part III' is still a terrific film. It just suffers from the absurd expectations the first two generated.";2;3;False tt0099674;connmoore;10/12/2008;Boring, pointless sequel to movie greatness;4;If ever you need proof that Francis Ford Coppola lost his ability to make great movies sometime back in the 1970's, here is the living proof.

Coppola decides to create a movie centered around family, by using way too many members of his own, woefully untalented family.

Talia Shire, a minor character in the first two movies, is now brought front and center in this film. The fact that she is Coppola's sister cannot overcome her weakness as an actress. For a serious drama like this, her complete lack of gravity and presence weakens the film.

The biggest issue with the actors in the film, is Coppola's own daughter, Sofia Coppola, in the part of Mary Corleone. A large part of the movie centers around her character, and the younger Coppola is completely out of her league trying to act the part. Never once do you believe the character she tries to create.

Other lightweight actors populate the film. Instead of the WASPish Robert Duval, as the family adviser, we instead get the even more WASPish George Hamilton, the very definition of lightweight actor.

The only part of the movie that is in any way compelling, is the relationship between Micheal Corleone, played by Al Pacino, and his illegitimate nephew Vincent, played by a very good Andy Garcia. Unfortunately this aspect of the film is not the centerpiece of it, and everything around it is pointless. overlong, and poorly written.

If you have not seen this movie, but have enjoyed the first two films, do yourself a favor and just skip it.;2;3;False tt0099674;richard-mason;09/08/2002;sad end to a great trilogy;4;While not without its great set-pieces, and providing a satisfying emotional conclusion to the Corleone saga, this film is a pale reflection of its predecessors.

The continuity is bad -- we jump from scene to scene and get the feeling that connecting scenes have been junked -- and some of the acting is quite woeful. And what is Bridget Fonda's character all about?

It's the work of a master, but far from his masterwork.;2;3;False tt0099674;jamie-rowlands1;19/07/2020;Third time unlucky - but still stuff to admire...;7;"I'd always heard about the third Godfather film. ""It doesn't even come close"", some would say. ""It's rubbish"", others would add. So naturally I was tentative about watching it, given how I felt about the first two films. So often a sequel can ruin your perfect image of the film (or films) that have come before it, and I didn't want that to happen here.

The first thing to say is, yes, it's true, it's not as good as the first two, arguably it doesn't even come close. But there's still a lot to admire. The cinematography is gorgeous - not as intimate and lurking here as it's previously been, but nonetheless. Talia Shire, I'd say, also gives her best performance as Connie in this film - it's less animated, there's a stillness to her, she's slightly hardened now and almost like Michael's consligiere in the absense of Tom Hagen. Andy Garcia brings a level of charisma to the role of Vincent that's sorely needed, the very thing that James Caan brought to the first film. The music, as ever, is brilliant - that haunting and operatic score returns and creeps around you like a sinister figure spying on you in the darkness. And the story, for the most part, works, although the execution of it falls short. Michael's older now, haunted by his actions in the previous two films, his family disbanded and his relationships with those around him deeply fractured - they all know what he's done. So he looks for redemption, a man who felt like he had no choice in the first film to go to that restaurant and shoot McCluskey and Sollozzo, because he cared so deeply about his father, starting the chain of events that led him to where he is now. Fredo's murder, in particular, understandably and rightly so, haunts him. He ordered the killing of his own brother, and nothing can justify that.

A big problem I have with the third film is Al Pacino's performance. It's hammier here than it ever was before. What made Michael so intriguing, and almost scary, to watch was his stillness, his cold and dangerous eyes, how he moved slowly but with purpose. Here, he's a wounded animal just waiting to die, he's slouched over and gruff, and although that's where the character should be after everything he's done and experienced, Pacino goes big and generally misfires. It doesn't feel like he's Michael anymore. Sofia Coppola, too, as Mary Corleone, is miscast - it's not because she doesn't look the part, but she can't just act it. The relationship between Michael and Mary is often the focus, making some scenes difficult to get through. Although the power of Mary's murder, and Michael's silent scream, is the best scene in the film, a shocking yet inevitable way to end the saga.

Then we go forward in time even further. Michael's alone, Pacino plastered with some dodgy looking make-up, very old now, with nothing and no one, only a lifetime of regret to fill his mind. He slumps over, falls off the chair and dies. And so bringing the story to an end. A decent way to bring the story to a final close, yet it could have been so much better. I wouldn't say I'm disappointed the third film exists, there's enough in it for me to defend it, but it fell too short of the quality of the first two. It lacked the power those films eminated, the structure that made them so watchable, and the performances that made them so riveting. A good film, all in all, but far, far from perfect.";1;1;True tt0099674;skepticskeptical;26/06/2020;A Desecration;4;The Godfather: Part III should not exist. Look at the long list of laughable, in some cases embarrassing scenes. Take the gnocchi scene. Or the diabetes fit. Or any of the histrionic scenes involving Andy Garcia or Joe Mantegna. Just awful. I waited a long time before rating this film because I wanted to give it a second chance. So I rewatched parts I and II, and then dived into part III. Ugh. No, just no.;1;1;False tt0099674;kelvinselimor;20/05/2020;The end.;9;The Godfather: Part III. The end. What I want to say about the final film and the trilogy as a whole. The third film is not so boring as the second part was and not as terrific as the first film was. If the first part of The Godfather caught on to the characters with their plot, then unfortunately in the final film this is practically nonexistent. As a result, Godfather 3 is just a good movie.;1;1;False tt0099674;geob_007;07/05/2020;The soul of the Godfather was Mario Puzo;8;Okay it's the weakest of the Godfather films as Mario Puzo died before it would be produced, but I am also againist all those who claim that it's bad. It's a nice epilogue to Michael Corleone's story, paying tribute to his character who finally understands Vito's teachings. But the film itself proves that the soul of the Godfather was Mario Puzo. They were his characters and only he himself could trully understand them. Coppola created a fine third installment, but I believe that if Puzo was around to write the film and not only contribute the story, scenes like the love scenes or Michael's turn of character would have been done in a better, more fitting to the Godfather's atmosphere themes. Finally, even though I watched the film with an open mind, it is true that Sofia Coppola being cast was a terrible move... A great ending to the Godfather that could be better....;1;1;False tt0099674;swaney-91327;30/04/2020;Underwhelming;7;This is a perfectly good mafia movie, and all would be fine if it wasn't associated with the two greatest movies of all time. It is still a fun watch, but The Godfather part three should be viewed separately from the other two movies.;1;1;False tt0099674;rameshwar-d;18/01/2020;Very good! Human side of don...;8;Firstly let's get comparison out of way with first two. It's like comparing your wife to your first girlfriend, not same! Secondly movie shows human side of don, who has young kids. Tried to do legit business but his past drags him back up. Very entertaining, good story, loved the Sicilian way of life. Enjoyed the movie.;1;1;False tt0099674;dhruv198620;18/01/2020;Best for the end;10;The turn and twists in acting of Al Pacino And Andy Garica is something to keep watching this legendary end again and again;1;1;False tt0099674;lucasvigor;02/01/2020;Not near as bad as people say;8;It's an interesting movie. My only complaint is that it seems pacino is playing a different character. That is not michael corleone. The voice is wrong, the mannerisms wrong. Pacino is playing himself this time. In the first two movies, michael was a dour, mournful and serious guy with a cultured voice....not someone who would use the F word. Other than that, i liked it and have seen it repeatedly.;1;1;False tt0099674;suicidea;14/09/2018;Works very well on its own, but...;9;As many other people have mentioned, the 3rd part of the Godfather saga falls short in comparison to what it follows, but as the concluding chapter, it does fairly well. The worst thing about it is that it feels rushed. It lacks the extremely meticulous workmanship of Coppola in the first two chapters.

Money was a big issue during production (in Hollywood, when isn't it?) which ended in Robert Duvall not being in part 3. His replacement, George Hamilton (not the same character, of course) does a good job, but his role is rather limited here. Apparently, an even bigger issue was time, which may be why the film feels rushed in certain aspects.

The plot involves Michael Corleone in his 60s, trying to completely legitimize his work and retire. Problem is, he doesn't have anyone to pass on the torch. His son isn't the least bit interested in following his footsteps, but his nephew, Sonny's son (who has the same anger issues as his father) catches his attention. He also has to deal with the corrupt Vatican businessmen who, at the last minute, backtrack from their mega business deal.

The usual elements of the Godfather saga are all here: Masterful visuals, costumes and sets, a grand opening scene of celebration, a great score, and wonderful performances by all the cast... well, almost all the cast. And no, my issue is not with Sophia Coppola, who accepted and performed her role under pressure. She does what she can. No, my issue is with Andy Garcia'a character, Vince. Or rather, the way the character is written: He is like a poor caricature of an Italian mob guy. Did they think making him angry and yelling all the time would resemble Sonny? He looks like he was transferred from the set of another film. There is no way Michael Corleone would pass on his empire to this kind of guy. Not because he's a hothead, but because he lacks any kind of brains and judgment.

The centerpiece is once again Al Pacino, who masterfully portrays an old man slowly beginning to crush under the weight of his past. The supporting cast is equally great: Eli Wallach is chillingly scary behind his sweet old man exterior, and Talia Shire (who plays a very different Conny), Joe Mantegna, Diane Keaton, Richard Bright, Don Novello and Enzo Robutti all give wonderful performances. The great Raf Vallone's role is small but memorable, as always.

If only the studio heads had given enough time to work on the story and the script, and a few bucks to retain the original cast, this would've been a much more memorable film. As it is, it stands on its own very well. But if you watch the three movies back to back, this is the one that sticks out like a sore thumb (mainly because of the love story between Michael's daughter and Vince, which bogs down the story, and the haphazard way the Vince character is written). It's still a good movie, but not great like its predecessors. Although quite clearly, it could've been.;1;1;False tt0099674;Reidal80;10/09/2018;A perfect conclusion.;10;"Is beyond my mind how anybody could rate this movie that low , this is a perfect conclusion , a dramatic finale , the right end for Corleone; in loneliness . Sophia was not that bad , she is very atractive and looks italian a lot , there is an aura of innocense around her hard to beat. Al Pacino ...well, he is always good, imposible to forget his screams for fredo and the last scream for her daughter , one of his best performance. The music is a 10 The change of Corleone sister a plus Andy a great Sony 's son Robert Duvall really piss me off , that was the loss of perfection for The Godfather 3 ...but what can we do ?";1;1;False tt0099674;aboodeebrahim;07/09/2018;Amazing film;10;I love the godfather please make a 2019 version.and the film is completely amazing i can watch it everyday and every time i watch i see a new thing i learn a new thing;1;1;True tt0099674;richardwalmsley;04/09/2018;Unjustly Underrated!;10;"The first two films were for most part, historical in nature. They did not place as many demands on the viewer to be aware of anything beyond basic common knowledge of the eras in which the stories took place. The stories told in these first two films are interwoven around the reality of their respective time periods; many American immigrants received new names at Ellis Island, that little desert town in Nevada truly evolved out of vice and corruption, the drug trade began in earnest after WWII and so on... Part three, at the time of its release required an understanding of real world recent events as the story was set in the time of its release and weaved the plot though some very real and controversial events of the time. Lest you forgot, Roberto Calvi, a banker with close Vatican ties, truly was found hanging under Blackfriar's Bridge in London England in 1982. The only real fault one could claim was that the story could not be told in one film if it had to spend extra effort explaining the links between recent events and the ""family business"". Personally, I enjoy being challenged by a film in this manner and found the continuation of the story and its conclusion very effective and satisfying.";1;1;True tt0099674;gbheron;14/11/1998;An extremely disappointing film.;3;An extremely disappointing film, which didn't make any sense. It lacked direction, moral, everything. I can't imagine what Coppola was thinking.;6;15;False tt0099674;CovertEquation;25/07/2002;An offer you can refuse;1;"(May Contain spoilers)

Even though, I loved the godfather movies, I have to say this movie

stunk. Usually sequels are very dry and very annoying and this is a perfect example of why not to make a part 3 of a movie. (Here's where I get into detail. May contain possible spoilers)

First off, is the love scenes between the cousins. I really believe that incest is icky so I couldn't sympathize for the characters at all when they said they were ""In love."" The acting Pachino was a good as ever, but you can only do so much for a plot that stinks.

The ending, I thought was good because I really didn't want to see Pachino's daughter getting hooked up with her cousin because of reasons stated before.

As stated before, this part is an offer you can refuse.";7;19;True tt0099674;thelmastein;12/08/2017;Sofia Coppola is only part of the problem;5;"The Godfather Part III was a huge disappointment. The film has major flaws. The story is very convoluted. There is a comic vibe to some of the mafia names. Joey Zaza sounds like a stand-up. As for other problems.

Kay becoming friendly with Michael was very stupid. Michael was a monster by the time ""The Godfather II"" was over.

Connie becoming ""Michael's Protector"" and somewhat a low lever boss. Andy Garcia and Al Pacino are too over the top.

I think the film could have been better had the film focused on Michael not trying to redeem himself but how everyone (Connie Kay and his Children) are doing everything they can to bring him to justice.

The final scene if the film would have been Connie killing Michael. After all Michael had her husband and brother killed. Connie finally getting revenge would have been a much better angle to pursue.

As for the casting of Sofia Coppola! She was so bad that she never recovered as an actress! She has gone on to write and direct films. However I have a feeling that the Oscar she won for Best Screenplay for ""Lost in Translation"" should have been given to her husband (at the time) Spike Jonze. The films she has made since ""Lost"" have been as good as her acting

The plot of this is Michael get roped into becoming the owner of the Vatican bank. Other mobsters are mad because they think they should be part owners as well. That's the story! And it takes 3 hours to get through it. Time not well spent. If you want never seen the film you can fast forward any scene Sophia is in (Beyond the opening party scene and the final 10 minutes) because they add nothing to the story. Her scenes will give you a headache.";4;9;False tt0099674;prudhoeboy;20/05/2010;Casting Coup;10;I've read a lot of the bad reviews about this film and couldn't disagree more. In my opinion, this is a brilliant film that relies mainly on casting for its success. While the plot is a bit disjointed in places, the gaps make the viewer think more. I thought the Vatican scenes were a bit of a yawn and seemed to stray a bit from the main Hamlet-like theme (i.e., torment, guilt from the past). (Too bad, could have been a perfect setting to spook Michael with Fredo's ghost or Jesus on the cross or something. I could have seen him do a collapse routine overcome with guilt.) Michael's carefully chosen words clearly speak louder than the violent actions of his younger days as an ambitious mobster. Likewise, his restraint in dealing with enemies contrast with the hubris of his younger days. All the other characters revolve in his world and react to him. Everyone in the film looked Sicilian or Italian and were very believable. Eli The Ugly did not disappoint, reprising his role as the villainous worm he was in the spaghetti western genre. Perhaps he represents the mobster in grotesque, what Michael could have become if he did not have his family. I'm also amazed that Sofia Coppola was so good in this film! I think the criticism of her was off base and maybe just a little envious that a director's daughter could step in and do so well. I guess sometimes talent does run in the family. This movie is all about the journey of life and fragility of human existence, where a life can end in an instant and a tough guy can be brought to tears. It is a classic film evoking primal elements not unlike 2001. Part III completes the trilogy in a big way. It is a must see film.;4;9;False tt0099674;mafioso67;16/04/2008;excellent godfather movie, just in a different way;10;"I see that many people have posted comments admitting their dislike of this film, with the most common reason being the manner in which it derives from the former two. I too agree in part with this statement, for the story does differ in the way it is told, but I feel that this is for the better. In the previous two films, whilst fantastic in their storyline too, they were exactly that; a story being told to us, where we merely observe the series of events and part of the manipulation and thought process that goes into creating them. There is no deep emotional connection between audience and character, where sure, on occasion we may feel sorry for a character, but it is short lived, and in reality, we are not that deeply engaged, because our attention is stretched and focused upon the complexity of these events. The third Godfather admittedly strays from this; however I would argue that this is for the better, for that connection between character and audience is so much stronger, and if you are seriously watching it, you can do no more that empathise and feel for Michael, and the pain his life has caused to both him and the others around him. Yes, in part, the story is a little clichéd, and a little thinner, but this is not at the loss of the film, it merely changes the nature of the film, from one of action and thought, to one of an emotional exploration of the character of Michael Corleone. Furthermore, to the argument that it strays too far from the original two, overall, it does in fact fit in with the general story. It is a story about Michael's going legitimate, a goal that he has outlined and carried right from the earliest scenes of Connie's wedding, where he courts Kay. I ask, to close such a trilogy, where else should one go with the story? It needed closure, and this film achieves it.

I must further advocate the brilliance of the final scenes, in the montage of Michael's life, and death. I feel that these are the most powerful scenes of the entire trilogy, for they encapsulate the meaning of the story; 'that crime is wrong doesn't pay'. Although subtle in the first two films, it can be seen through the paradoxical transformation of Michael as a character, where he commits crime for good, not evil. His nobility in going into the criminal business, is maintained by his motivations, first in protecting his family, and secondly, in turning his family away from crime, into the legitimate world. In the final scenes of the third movie, the power shows where we can do nothing but feel for Michael, for he is a martyr. He does the right thing, in trying to protect and save his family, and yet, as shown in the montage, of his loss of Appolina, Kay, his daughter, his brothers, and nearly his father, crime, the one thing he has been forced into to do good, has cost him everything he has ever held dear to him. This price he has paid is further accentuated by his modest, sad and lonely death, where, despite being in Sicily, the country he loves, he is alone, and dies without any grandeur - which I guess in part is also symbolic of his character's nature; modest and quiet - I understand that this is somewhat open to interpretation, however, I myself, have not yet seen a scene or moment of such power and meaning in either of the two previous films, and I challenge those who argue that the third Godfather is a poor film compared to the other two, to find me a moment of such concentrated greatness and gravity, because not only do these final scenes encapsulate the entire meaning, motivation, and central idea of the Godfather trilogy, the clever writing of this scene also changes the entire contextual nature of this 9 hour journey, from one where we believe that we, as the audience are sitting in the present, watching the turn of events as they occur, to one where we realise that we were actually witnessing and privy to Michael's reminiscence, of his life, crime, what it has cost him, and subsequently the cruelty of the world before him. Again, I understand that this is somewhat opinion based, however, I feel that this shows the true value and power of the film, where it, in effect, despite being about 9 hours into the story, the scene actually changes the entire meaning of all that precedes it (i.e. both the Godfather part 1 and 2). To reiterate my point, I would argue that the third godfather is just as great if not greater than the former two, the only thing is that it is written differently, so that the greatness of it, is aimed at a more academic, and inquisitive audience, rather than the general populus, because lets face it, as fantastic as the movies are, the storyline of 1 and 2 is nothing overly spectacular; and it primarily gains its status as a 'modern classic' from the performances within it. This is because at least in my eyes, there is no underlying theme, or hidden message or motif; it is just a straightforward story, (and there is nothing wrong with that), but the third does have a little more of this intellectuality behind it, and so for the audiences that are, shall we say more accustomed to the simplistic structure, they find themselves unable to be stimulated by the subverted themes, thus I argue that the third Godfather is worth a 10, if not something very close to it, because it is an excellent Godfather movie, just in a different way.";4;9;True tt0099674;lee_eisenberg;01/12/2005;Not as bad as most people would have you believe.;8;"With many years having passed since ""Part 2"", Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now divorced from Kay (Diane Keaton), and is still trying to hold his mafia empire together. The new characters in this installment are Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent (Andy Garcia), Michael's daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola), lawyer J.B. Harrison (George Hamilton), and some others. Michael is going to the Vatican to repent, but he gets the shock of a lifetime when he arrives.

""The Godfather: Part III"" has been regarded by apparently most people as the worst installment in the trilogy, but I actually didn't find it so bad. Granted, it might not reach the quality established by its predecessors, but it was a good end to one of filmdom's most famous trilogies. And also, I didn't think that Sofia Coppola was such a bad actress; I've certainly admired her work as a director.";4;9;False tt0099674;Serpico-3;10/09/1998;Very Good;8;It's an excellent film which neatly ties up the series.

It shows Michael's development and his redemption.

Sofia Coppola is not great but she brings a sense of family to the film.

It's problem is it is eclipsed by the other two films and if judged independently is a cracking good film.;4;9;False tt0099674;RealChristian14;03/09/2017;The Conclusion of the Story of Michael Corleone;10;"""The Godfather Part III"" tells the epilogue of the story of Don Michael Corleone as he moves his criminal empire into legitimate business operations with an international real estate company known as Internazionale Immobiliare together with the involvement of the Catholic Church and its business enterprise known as the Vatican Bank. Al Pacino returns for the third film to reprise his role as Michael together with Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García as Vincent Mancini,who is going to replace Michael as the new Don, together with Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola.Francis Ford Coppola returns as director and the co- screenwriter of the film that was based on the story of Pope John Paul I,who became pope for only 33 days,and the Papal Bank scandal that occurred in the 1980's, together with novel's author Mario Puzo.

No question that it provides us an interesting story of how Don Michael Corleone moves away from the mob with his involvement in legitimate business operations as well as the corruption in the Catholic Church after we have seen a reluctant son assume leadership of the Corleone crime family in the after his father - Don Vito Corleone - died in first film and how he expanded his criminal empire that ultimately cost his family and become more of a ruthless person in the second film.

We are also treated to great performances from the cast particularly Al Pacino,Diane Keaton,Talia Shire,Eli Wallach and Andy Garcia,who received an Oscar nomination.Too bad that many saw the poor performance of the director's daughter Sophia Coppola,who obviously isn't at par with the talent of the rest of the cast members.That somehow hurt the film a lot and somehow Sofia's terrible acting overshadowed the great acting performances of the cast.

Another thing working against it is the fact that the viewer should have seen the first two films to have better appreciation of the third film.It is definitely not a stand-alone film for it is a continuation of the first two films.

Other elements working against it are the familiar plots used in the first two films do exist in the third film like upsetting the mob order and succession of the mob leadership from Michael to his nephew,Vincent. Also,the film misses Robert Duvall as Michael's lawyer Tom Hagen,who could have been a strong presence for Michael in the decisions that he makes.Finally,we also see interesting character developments that lack explanations like Michael's sister Connie,who develops from being a weak woman into becoming a member of the mob that is involved in killing; and that of Michael,who became benevolent after attaining a high degree of ruthlessness after the second film.I felt that these character developments should have been made and explained in the third film instead of just happening in the story.

But in spite of these things I have mentioned,I still see it as a great film despite not being a classic unlike the first two films.It was still a nice conclusion to the story of Michael Corleone.";3;6;True tt0099674;oldgoldtop;27/01/2014;Unnecessary Sequel;3;"There was a Godfather Marathon on TV this weekend so I finally had a chance to see the final sequel. I give this a 3 because it seemed a pointless addition to the first two films that were so good. I really had expected something more. I am surprised this disappointing screenplay was selected.

Michael's search for redemption seems conflicted, insincere and ultimately unsuccessful. He continues to choose revenge and wreak destruction that damages his family and his soul. So why bother except maybe to cash in? The ending to GF2 was sufficient. There really is nothing new...except he dies (physically). The final shot in GF2 says it all. Perhaps that is how the final shot in GF3 should be interpreted. It almost is as if the last shot of Michael from GF2 could have dissolved into the last shot from GF3 and we would not have to have GF3 at all!

We all have choices on how to live our lives. Michael could have easily changed but instead chose to involve himself in an underhanded business deal with the Church. It makes his claim of seeking redemption and protecting his family seem insincere when contrasted with his desire to profit via the tainted Imobilare deal.

The scene where the bosses are killed in Atlanta is ridiculous and illogical. Don Altobelo's poisoning seemed comical and far fetched as do the Arch Bishops and Leichesi's murders. ""I need to whisper in your ear."" LOL!!! Many scenes seem stiff and forced. The plot involving the Church complicates viewing and seems a contrived attempt to incorporate real events. It seems cliché to bring in stereotypes of big business/religion and equate them to organized crime and murder. We are left seeing Michael die alone in Sicily yet he had finally opened a connection to Kay and had taken steps to remove their daughter from the former family business. It seems they should have been able to find some common ground and comfort. The ending implies otherwise. Perhaps some things are too unforgivable to ever escape. Here I am referring especially to Fredo's murder in GF2. Mary's death was indirect and is one more nail in his coffin. Nothing in this film really adds anything of substance to the first two.

It almost seems fitting that Coppalas daughter plays Mary. Mafia type nepotism and destruction to the ones you love. Just kidding!";3;6;True tt0099674;crawlspaceuk;28/03/2013;absolutely abysmal;3;I so wanted to give this film 1/10 as its so bad, but had i not seen the first two i probably would have thought it an OK film.

But, i have seen the first two, and based on those cinema master-pieces, who wouldn't watch III? Right from the start of III i couldn't believe how bad this film was - the acting, almost comedic at times, the settings, the clothes - the film is supposed to be 1979, yet it looks 1990 to me when the film is made. Absolutely appalling film and i cannot believe it has the same director.

Those of you have rated this film highly, or say its the best of the trilogy, are very very misguided people.;3;6;False tt0099674;g-bodyl;19/12/2011;Vastly Underrated!;9;People may bash me for this, but the third and final entry into the well-respected Godfather trilogy is the second best film in the series right behind Part Two. I was really hooked into the movie for the entire running time of 170 minutes. I don't know why people hate this film, but I love it.

Michael Coreleone is now in his 60's and he is trying to bring his corporation out of the gangster realm and into the world of legitimacy and respectability.

The acting, as with the first two, is just amazing. Pacino should have been at least nominated by the Academy. I don't care how many people bash Sofie's performance, but I liked her. Also just to see Connie Corelone played beautifully by Talia Shire turn into the scheming sister really made my day.

The cinematography and the score were just amazing. I still run the theme over and over in my head.

Overall, this is an epic conclusion to one of the best trilogies of all time. There is not one bad thing to say except it may be a little long. I rate this film a 9/10.;3;6;False tt0099674;Steffi_P;03/05/2011;"""Beyond redemption""";5;"Any series of movies, no matter how excellent it's beginnings, can easily descend into mediocre sequel hell. This is even the case when many of the original cast and crew members remain the same. The first Godfather movie was an exemplary classic, the second a little weaker but still largely deserving of the honours it received. Their director Francis Ford Coppola became a respected and influential man about Hollywood, although he was never quite able to recapture that success. It was almost inevitable that, after a series of disappointing features in the 1980s, he would begin flogging dead horses' heads again.

Al Pacino's 80s career had been somewhat paltry as well. Not that he lost his touch - there just simply hadn't been the right roles available to him. And sadly a return to the character he portrayed in two of his finest performances isn't the much-needed booster one might expect. Aged up somewhat, he piles on the weary, decrepit mannerisms just a little too thickly. It basically looks as if Michael Corleone has got a bit of a bad back, and sounds like he has a cough. Fortunately his younger co-stars are a little more up to the game. Andy Garcia plays a hot-headed mafia scion with a degree of subtlety not normally seen in such parts. Sofia Coppola, the directors daughter, received a lot of bad press for her performance (including a Razzie), but she is really not that bad.

And her father is still showing all his usual prowess as a director. Those early scenes after the award ceremony show Coppola's superb handling of mood and rhythm. His camera typically hangs back from the action – a passive observer. There are few movements or close-ups and the editing all soft cuts from one similar shot to another. Even business within the frame is fairly restrained, carefully orchestrated bits of movement, no character too animated. Eventually it becomes apparent that the whole thing is set to the languid pace of the aging Pacino. Compare this to scenes where Andy Garcia is in control, in which the action is far more jumpy, the dialogue snapped out and the players closer to the camera. The rhythmic control is carried through in the neat sequencing of events to the music of Cavalleria Rusticana and the final revenge sequence, which is almost as good as the one in The Godfather, even if it is no longer original.

And a lack of originality is really what brings this movie down. Coppola's motivation for re-opening the Godfather series - supposedly he felt Michael Corleone hadn't suffered enough - is itself rather a dubious reason to make a motion picture. The Godfather Part III doesn't really make much sense if you aren't familiar with the previous instalments, and is filled with blunt references to the original that don't really add much except nod to fans of the series. This even carries as far as the shot compositions and staging. For example Pacino's meeting with the corrupt cardinal is an obvious redoing of The Godfather's famous opening. It seems Coppola and his co-writer Mario Puzo were so intent on working in this sort of business, they forgot to put in the intriguing plot and strong characterisation that made the originals what they are. And by sacrificing his real-life daughter in the role of Mary Corleone it even looks as if Coppola is trying to make some dreary statement about his ""art"". Coppola's formal style may be modest and tasteful, but his symbolic point-making isn't.";3;6;False tt0099674;lylewins;11/01/2011;Feels largely like a made-for-TV sequel;5;This film is without any of the magic of the first two installments in the series. Where the first two Godfather films are absolutely brilliant in their understatement, this film is exaggeratedly bold, over the top, and often just plain ridiculous.

My reasoning:

1. The film exhibits far too much reliance on melodrama.

Clear examples include much of Pacino's representation of regret, the entire episode where Kay and Michael travel together through Sicily, Vincent and Mary's whole relationship, Michael's diabetic attack and hospitalization, etc. The first films are dramatic, but they were never melodramatic. Even the most over the top emotional scene of the first films (Kay confronting Michael with her intention to leave him) never feels as cheesy or unnecessary as all of the romance does in this film. The texture and tone of the first films was created in their subtle communication of a deep love for family, an ubiquitous and totally seamless presentation of a world that revolves around respect, and both Michael and Vito's hidden mastery in every moment, and extreme astuteness for observation, reason and judgement. All of this is lost here, and traded in for bad, often very forced-feeling, dramatics.

2. There is a lack of the same brilliant cinematography.

The entire palette here is too brightly coloured, there are no equivalent remarkable or truly memorable compositions of frame, and overall the look of the film (not the sets, or the costumes, but the film itself) feels quite low (like it was shot for TV or something).

3. There are very uneven performances.

Examples include parts of Andy Garcia's and Pacino's, almost all of Sophia Coppola's, Talia Shire's, etc. The first two films, on the other, portray some of the most memorable ensemble casting of any film ever made.

4. Several scenes feel weak and altogether unnecessary.

Take as an example any of the melodrama mentioned earlier.

5. Many aspects of the plot are exceptionally far-fetched.

I could have used a little more exposition on how these gangsters got their hands on a military issue helicopter, not to mention how in the hell they managed to fly it around US airspace unimpeded. The whole centralization of the plot around a Papal-Vatican Bank conspiracy is a little much too. As political as the previous Godfather's were, they nonetheless felt grounded in realism. This story- line ends up feeling less historical, and more just crack pot (which I would consider to be true even if this telling of the premature death of John Paul 1 turned out to be more historically accurate than the official version.)

6. The score is redundant and far less powerful.

Thinking of it now, all I can remember of the score is the repetition of the same themes from the previous two movies. (And to none of the same powerful effect.)

In summation:

This movie does have some good qualities, though I haven't bothered to list them. Mainly that's because all of the top reviews I've read seem to try way too hard to justify how this isn't a terrible film.

Everything that made the original installments in the series so remarkable is left out here. Mostly this is due to the inclusion of far too much melo-drama, and generally what feels to me like fairly uninspired film making.;3;6;True tt0099674;TheLittleSongbird;24/11/2010;Disppointing, but not as bad as it made out to be;6;"First off, I adore the first two Godfather films. They were wonderfully made, scored, directed and acted with compelling elegiac stories. However, while I do not think it is as bad as it is made out to be, The Godfather Part III is a disappointment. I did like it in general, but in comparison to the first two it is like a distant relative.

Starting with the good things, it does look splendid. The cinematography is beautiful and the settings are superb. The music is also outstanding, and the direction is good. The acting is uneven, but not all of it is bad. Al Pacino does have a lot of fine moments as a more gentler Michael, while Andy Garcia is electrifying too.

However, I didn't like the story as much here. It lacked the elegiac feel of the first two, it has a lot of loose ends and there was a number of times I didn't know what was going on. The script isn't as thoughtful, intelligent or as sophisticated here, instead some of it is quite stilted. As much as I do love Diane Keaton I personally don't think she was necessary here, she served her purpose perfectly in the first two. Finally I have to concur about Sophia Coppola. She never convinces as the ""symbol of innocence"", and just comes across sometimes as embarrassing. Much has been said about the climax in the opera house, some loved it, others didn't. I think it was a mixed bag. I had no problem with Pacino, the way it was shot and the music but it did come across as very protracted.

So all in all, not awful, not great. 6/10 Bethany Cox";3;6;False tt0099674;zofos;30/08/2008;An Offer You CAN Refuse;3;"While this movie is called ""Part III,"" it's really not on a par with the first two movies which are awesome cinematic achievements and among the best movies ever made. ""The Godfather Part III"" is a major disappointment. It was really only made because writer/director/producer Francis Ford Coppola went bankrupt in the 1980s and so, he cashed in the chip of the Godfather sequel that he'd been holding onto since 1974. The result is this movie.

The main problem is that it's a movie with nothing to say. If you look at the ""Making Of"" documentary on the DVD, you see Coppola struggling to figure out what the movie is about and he never really does. He just wanted the money from it to get himself out of financial difficulties, it would never have been made otherwise and some think it never should have been.

In ""The Godfather Part III,"" we're expected to believe that Michael Corleone, a vicious Mafia boss who has broken every law there is and had dozens of people executed, is suddenly wracked with guilt about what he's done. We know from real-life gangsters that that just isn't so. Real gangsters have no conscience to begin with and they certainly don't develop one by murdering over and over again. They will kill anyone to stay in power until the end and will sell out anyone to avoid prison. Not only is Michael's sudden turn to goodness not believable, it's just not very interesting either. We're not watching a Godfather movie to see righteousness, we want to see the ruthless dark side of power. Michael should have gone out like Hitler in his bunker, the problem is that Pacino had already done that ending in ""Scarface.""

Andy Garcia is the best thing about this film, he's excellent in it as Sonny Corleone's (James Caan's) illegitimate son and he rightly got an Oscar nomination for his part. He brings the passion and commitment that the other performances lack here, especially Sofia Coppola's (Coppola's daughter). She was a last-minute replacement for Winona Ryder, but even if Ryder had been in this, it wouldn't have made much difference. The script is the problem. (Coppola wanted six months to write the script with Mario Puzo, the studio gave him six weeks and it shows. Ironically, Andy Garcia was suggested to Coppola by Paramount and he immediately agreed, a far cry from the first film where everything great about it was a result of Coppola fighting the studio tooth and nail every step of the way, even down to the casting of Marlon Brando and Al Pacino)

It's well shot by Gordon Willis, but it does fall back on a formula that had been established in the first two movies (party at the start, finish off enemies at end).

Pacino is given way too much dialogue to say. It's all sentimental, mumbling meanderings. Where are the silences and shark-like stare that Michael used with such menacing effect in the first movies? His thunderous silences spoke volumes, far more than the lumps of text he speaks here. He's an old, sick man in this one and it was a mistake to do that as, again, that's just not very interesting compared to the brutal, paranoid demagogue he had become in ""The Godfather Part II."" Pacino wasn't that old in 1989/90 when this was being made, Coppola could have set it when Michael was still healthy and it would have been better.

You might enjoy this if you haven't seen Parts I and II, but it was a major disappointment for me when I saw it in the cinema and it still is. There has been a revisionist attempt to say it's not a bad movie, but it's flaws far outweigh the good things in it. This is one for completists only.";3;6;True tt0099674;aharmas;24/06/2008;Heartbreak;9;"In the saga of ""The Godfather"" it became unimaginable to believe Coppola could top his two previous achievements. Part I and Part II shine because of their terrific performances, but the films as a whole needed some serious editing, and there were problems with the pacing. Most of those aspects were fixed in the third installment, and the performances continued to be pretty flawless, with the exception of Sofia Coppola, a last minute replacement for the I wonder what she could have done with the role Winona Ryder. Coppola is not bad, but she can't match the sterling work by Paccino, Hamilton, Keaton, a magnificent supporting cast, and especially the dark turn by Talia Shire, who takes a role that would have made Lady Macbeth a serious attack of paranoia.

This film is a visual stunner, and it brings together the best of the previous two movies, as musical themes are revived, key plot points are revisited in order to explore the dynamics of the present time drama. The audience knows Michael Corleone will never be able to achieve respectability because of his previous dealings. It is impossible to him to repair the familial bonds as Kate (Keaton) returns in a dashing performance to advocate for the future of her son against the will of her ex-husband. She still hesitates and fears him, but she is willing to confront him. To add an explosive touch to the mix, enter Andy Garcia, the soon to be heir to the Corleone empire, and whose ties to the family are already problematic to begin with.

""III"" shines in more ways than one, with its traditional first act, presenting the players, the series of turning points in the middle that set up the grandiose last act, where dialog is kept to a minimum and events keep unfolding to the tragic end, a scene that will break more than a few hearts in the audience, as Michael, an ruthless icon of power discovers that his world has been shattered in a way he will be unable to manipulate.

""Godfather III"" is just the right way to end a great story.";3;6;False tt0099674;coldwaterpdh;12/04/2008;Michael Corleone turned into Frank Slade.;4;"Let me start off by saying this: I think most movies are underrated on IMDb. Maybe it's just the stuff I like; Italian horror, American slashers, giallos of the 1970's, and classic westerns. But it seems like a lot of my favorites get slammed on here.

I love ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather Part 2,"" but part 3 is really something to behold...

As many times as I've watched this film, I can't get over the fact that Michael Corleone has disappeared. In fact, he morphed into a mix between himself and Lt. Colonel Frank Slade from ""Scent of a Woman."" I kept waiting for him to stand up and say 'HOO-AHH!'... Yes, I think Pacino overacted this one. As did almost everyone in ""The Godfather Part 3."" Joe Mantegna? I liked him better in that movie about the chess-player kid. He is about as believable as a gangster as Jessica Tandy would be. Eli Wallach? Excellent in ""The Good, The Bad and The Ugly."" But as an aging mafioso? Not good.

This movie is cheeseball. It is as overacted as anything out there. The storyline is ridiculous: a mobster trying to go straight with legitimate business in unison with the Vatican. Come on now... They should have let ""The Godfather"" series have a solid ending with Part 2. Part 3 is more funny than anything else.

4 out of 10, kids.";3;6;False tt0099674;alfie-sunshine;27/06/2006;Should have stopped with Part Two;4;"I stood in line for this film when it first came out. I had great expectations for this film. After watching it, and years later; on DVD, my conclusion remains as it did that evening I walked out of the theaters in 1990. They should have let the story of the Corleone family end with the second installment of this series. The Godfather part one and two, had a great a intrigue about them. The stories unfolded like crisp linen. There was a great mastery at work with these two films. Each character played an integral part in the progression of the stories. The Godfather part three lacks in this great story telling. The omission of key characters; namely Robert Duvall, hinders the story. Without Duvall there really is nothing to tie Michael Corleone to the past and the Corleone legacy. He was the family's conscience. The film seemed to have been made in a rush, to appease studio heads, perhaps. In the end all it did was cripple the allure and legacy of The Godfather.";3;6;True tt0099674;TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews;23/07/2004;Not as good as the first two parts, but a good enough film;8;"While I loved the first, thought the second was equally as good, though a bit redundant and unnecessary(apart from Vito's back-story, and possibly the further development of Kay and Michael's relationship), this one just didn't reach the high level of the first two. It obviously tries, but I don't really think there was that much left to tell of the Corleone family. The cast members who were in the previous two films(that don't appear in this one) are sorely missed; the first had Marlon Brando himself, the second had Robert De Niro... what does this one have going for it, really? Only a few new characters, none of them particularly memorable, and only a few of them well-acted. I'll say it right now; I do not consider Sofia Coppola an actress. I've heard she did a great job directing Lost in Translation(which I haven't seen yet, but will see as soon as possible), but she can't act. Luckily, there aren't that many scenes that require her to, but still, the ones that do require her to put some emotion into it she totally screws up with her lack of acting capability. The few actors who reprise their old roles give as great performances as they did in the first two, Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Richard Bright; all great. I liked the addition of Andy Garcia, he did a great job as well. So did Bridget Fonda, but she didn't have very much screen time to prove her talent. The script is decent enough, I just found myself questioning it a little too much; it seemed like they were running out of ideas for starting mob wars, and just figured they'd put a lot of characters in the film, have them interact, and finally kill them off. I'm not saying it's downright bad, the script(or the film, for that matter), I'm just saying it's not at all as good as the scripts of the first two parts. The plot is decent, but it halted too much, especially the last half hour; I had almost entirely lost interest by then, and the climax was just slightly anti-climactic, at best. The actual end was good, but the entire climax sequence was far too long and confusing to be genuinely exciting or thrilling. The acting was mostly good, with the four leads being great(Pacino, Keaton, Shire and Garcia). The characters were reasonably well-written. All in all, the film is worth watching, I guess, but only for those who want closure to the Godfather story. I recommend it pretty much only to the biggest fans of Godfather, as it can be easily ignored with no big loss. Also, you could watch it and just consider it a stand-alone film, with no relation to the far superior first two parts. 8/10";3;6;False tt0099674;Aidan McGuinness;13/05/2002;All the power on earth can't save some performances in this reasonable closing chapter;;Most of what you can say about the previous instalments in the trilogy, apply here. It's generally well acted - with one exception - and looks nice. This time there's the theme of striving for redemption, as Michael Corleone looks to atone with others, and - most importantly - with himself, for the crimes he has committed in the past. All well and grand then - we're having a more character-focused movie here. There's one extremely low bit to this movie. Other reviewers have mentioned it too - the dreaded performance of Sofia Coppola, as Michael's daughter. And yes, it is that bad. Her scenes, especially put against her peers, are liking having a drill boring into your brain - they're flat, with poor delivery, and no emotional resonance. However I can overlook it and focus on the movie, which should otherwise please fans of the series (which I am not particularly). The story does have a fairly fitting sense of resolution, and believable with what has gone before. It's a fine enough piece of film making but again fails to fully engage me. So therefore a 6/10.;3;6;False tt0099674;nconrau;01/03/2002;A lot better than people say it is;8;This is a really good movie. You have to pay attention so you know what the story line is exactly, which is difficult when it gets slightly boring in the middle. I really like how Pacino's voice is sounding heaps more like Marlon Brando did in Part I. He most likely did that on purpose, but I can't be sure, because his voice is naturally like that. Andy Garcia was the perfect choice for Sonny's illegitimate son, because he acts exactly like Sonny did - self confident, acting without thinking of the repercussions, and taking everything personally. I particularly like the scene that flashes back to when Michael decided to enlist in the marines.

I gave this 8/10, taking off 2 because Sophia Coppolla can't act. It was quite painful to watch her.;3;6;False tt0099674;atzimo;16/06/2002;Coppola IS the Godfather;5;This movie isn't as bad as some say, but it proves that the 'Godfather' trilogy is nothing more than the Coppola story wrapped in a Mario puzzo novel. The dvd commentary by Francis Ford explains the numerous elements of the director's family story that were inserted in the movies.

Furthermore he got all his relatives to take part in the making of the films and even play in them. Of course he didn't care if they were lacking talent, he only wanted to make it a Coppola family business.

His sister Talia was bad in the first movie, but she got better in the next films. In Part III his daughter Sophia was the worst actress ever. How did he do this to her and to the movie! Just to make himself feel better, by knowing that he does the story of his family.

I have no respect for Coppola's work in the 90's (his Dracula was the worst Dracula interpretation ever) and Part III is no gem either. It's got the new over-the-top Al Pacino though, that makes the movie's ending shine, so I give him that.

Robert Duvall made a smart move and refused to play in the last film, but Coppola had the nerve to put the blame on him for the disaster of the movie.

'The Godfather, Part III' isn't a lot worse than the first 2 movies, instead of what others seem to believe. In the first 'Godfather', it was Marlon Brando's performance that made the movie what it is (Al Pacino could hardly talk), Part II is the biggest soap opera movie ever and the third is just the natural conclusion to the story. Nothing too bad or too different.

6/10;6;16;False tt0099674;irq5;14/09/1998;Not as bad as you hear;8;What's the problem? The imagery is excellent, and the continuity flows well with the previous two in the series. I think it would have been better if both the church characters and assassins would have been better developed or more integral to the overall workings. The musical score could have been stronger, which I think greatly influenced the previous two. Still overall, a very moving story and solid ending to the trilogy.;4;10;False tt0099674;Dan1863Sickles;06/02/2019;Plan 9 From Sicily -- But Not Quite So Bad;4;"For years I heard legends about how awful this movie was, and then finally I bought all three GODFATHER movies on Blu Ray from TARGET.

This movie is bad, all right, but not that bad. People always knock the younger stars in the cast, Andy Garcia, Bridget Fonda, and especially Sophia Coppola, but really I thought they were all fairly attractive and sympathetic. The tragic love affair between Vincent and Mary would have been so much more powerful and moving if sexy, wisecracking modern girl Grace Hamilton hadn't just vanished without explanation half an hour into the picture! (Is that a spoiler? Trust me, you won't have to waste the next two and a half hours hoping to see Bridget again. That drove me nuts!)

So what kills the movie isn't the (weak) attempt to build new characters, but the horrifically ugly and stupid way the older characters are stripped of all human dignity, human emotion, and all reality. Al Pacino yells, he screams, he twitches, he drools, and instead of making Michael more human, he makes him less human every time he opens his mouth. And its just the same with the background characters. In the first two movies just a single shot of some old Sicilian's face would show you how dangerous he was and what kind of world he came from. Here even the minor dons are treated as clowns. (""My lucky coat!"" shouts an old Mustache Pete, caught in the middle of an inadvertently hilarious gangland massacre.)

People talk a lot about how the plot makes no sense in this movie. It doesn't. But there's a larger problem. The movie is set in 1979. A lot has happened in the world since the last Godfather ended. The Vietnam War, race riots, feminism, the total destruction of many old values and prejudices. But the Corleone family is still operating like the world has never changed. The plots about drug trafficking and corruption in the church are so unsatisfying precisely because they don't show the Corleone world being challenged or threatened by outsiders. We hear about blacks but we don't see them. We hear about Colombians but don't see them either. And Mary Corleone for all her headstrong passion seems to have no life outside the home.

In the first two movies, the outside world was a threat, but that threat was made credible and dramatic by the conflict with formidable outside villains -- Jack Woltz, the movie producer. Police Captain McCluskey, Hyman Roth. Fidel Castro! But this movie has a lifeless, incestuous feel -- even the villains are insiders, family members. Coppola hints at the venal corruption of the Vatican, but he settles for trivial stuff like embezzlement and fraud and never even hints at the real horrors -- and you know what I'm talking about!";3;7;False tt0099674;TheUnknown837-1;15/04/2011;"Yes, it does feel more like a coda to a big orchestra rather than a third act to one of the grandest stories ever told, but ""The Godfather: Part III"" does work as a whole";7;"What definitely personifies best the separation of the first two films in Francis Ford Coppola's ""The Godfather"" trilogy and the third and final entry is the Hollywood Greed Syndrome, which was spawned in 1977 following the release of ""Star Wars."" The first two movies were made before this event, in which Hollywood allowed ambitious directors to go after making the next big American movie. But ""The Godfather: Part III"" was released post-""Star Wars,"" from which the movie industry has yet to escape, in which the sole concern is making the next big American hit. Nevertheless, even though it is a lackluster companion piece to its predecessors, ""The Godfather: Part III"" does work as a crime drama. Its dicey and uneven, but it does work.

Quite some time has passed since the end of the second movie. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino, still great) is now an old man, his family's empire has lost a lot of power, many of his old friends have gone, and a lot of his own family has distanced themselves from him. As he attempts to mend fences in his personal life, Michael also tries to control his temperamental nephew (Andy Garcia) and prevent another mafia war from erupting.

The strongest aspect of ""The Godfather: Part III,"" I think its general function as a nostalgia trip. It almost seems as if Coppola realized that he wasn't going to be able to make a third masterpiece and the best way to preserve as much of the original power is to remind us of the first two movies, but in a way that isn't shoddy or consumed by (too many) flashbacks. It is fascinating to see how the remaining principal characters have changed since the last two movies. How Michael has become worn down by his age and personal life. How his sister Connie (Talia Shire, very good in this movie) is still attempting to maintain a good relationship with the brother she once hated. We see some of the supporting faces, such as Al Neri (Richard Bright) and it becomes very fascinating, even though it is really more of like a history lesson than a character study.

There are also some good story elements, too. For example, the relationship between Michael and his ex-wife Kay (Diane Keaton). First of all, seeing how they've changed physically and psychically is fascinating and uncovering the fact that they still love each other is a powerful element. Most interesting however is the doomed relationship between Andy Garcia as the aspiring new don and Sofia Coppola as Michael's spunky, independent daughter. Director Coppola and his two young performers take a relationship that is, without giving too much away, sort of taboo or unnerving, and makes it quite moving in its own unique way. They are interesting. Much more interesting than the villains.

That is the core flaw of this movie, I think. There are no interesting antagonists. Nobody here is quite menacing or developed enough to really leave an impact. Great as Eli Wallach is in the movie (and let's admit, he was destined to be in one of the Godfather movies sooner or later) he frankly doesn't have much material to work with. Joe Mantegna, who overacts his part, is also dull. It does sound paradoxical for a movie that clocks around three hours in length to seem rushed. But it does. There is even a moment where Coppola's craft breaks in a scene where Michael suffers a stroke and we get a horrendous jump cut that stands out quite painfully, like a sore thumb. And a massacre scene in the middle of the story only reminds us how much better the climaxes of the first two movies were. Whereas those seemed brutal and terrifying, this one really seems staged with an overuse of cartoonishly-lit blood and rapid cuts between camera angles.

And then there comes the problem with the ending. The emotional climax of the movie works quite well. Without giving it away, I'll just say it reminded me of a great scene from an Alfred Hitchcock movie from 1956 in terms of dramatic tension and suspense. At this point, I was almost willing to forgive the movie for all of its flaws. It was going to be a great ending to a magnificent saga. Then came those two final, unforgivably awful shots and a poor decision to finalize the story with a cut to black as opposed to a slow, dramatic fade.

Yes, it does feel more like a coda to a big musical orchestra rather than a third act to one of the grandest stories ever told, but ""The Godfather: Part III"" does work as a whole. There are some great dynamics here, even if they aren't fully realized, and the movie does, again work primarily as a nostalgia trip. No, lightning did not strike a third time. This time it just brushed it and some sparks made contact. Well, those sparks were strong enough. ""The Godfather: Part III"" takes a while to get started, but it did leave me satisfied, if a little empty.";3;7;False tt0099674;downtown_pony;11/05/2009;totally underrated;10;"To be honest the only reason i watched the final part was because i bought the DVD box-set,if i were to buy the individuals i would have stopped after part 2, as I've heard the hype and apparently its generally accepted that the first 2 are brilliant and this basically ties up loose ends. In truth it does that, but in a memorable way, Al Pacino is astonishing, it is truly tragic how the character just disintegrates from this youthful prodigy into this withered and battered old man, whose soul is in constant torment. I do feel that this is the best of the three, but that doesn't disregard the other two, they were influential, but i do feel that is a shame that this isn't spoken about in the same way. I have never really been a fan of gangster films, i feel there samely and overrated, but i do respect the quality of the first two, but this final part i feel is truly remarkable, and every time you watch it it gets better. The psychology of the characters is so well played and the ending, is similar to the first two with its killing montage but it plays on your emotion so much more, and it may sound a little ""girly"", but I've always felt that is the point of cinema, to play on ones emotions and i feel this film does it perfectly, so in short, and this may to many be controversial, but i feel this film is head and shoulders above the first two and to not be in the top 250 is a shame.";3;7;True tt0099674;custserv-3;18/05/2008;Feels very detached from the first 2;2;"Upon me recently buying the DVD box set of the Godfather Trilogy I enjoyed the first two very much so, but seeing Godfather Part 3 made me feel very disappointed. I have not read the book, but the third installment felt very detached from the first two. Like an add-on to a story that was already somewhat complete, where you made your own mind up on what happens. My issues with this movie are; it feels dated. Compared with the other two, which are set in the 40's and 50's this one is supposed to be set on the turn of the decade, but for some reason it feels like present day, in fact it feels like it was shot at some awful party in the 1993. The Acting; Diane Keaton's characters in G1 and G2 are very weak, which suits someone who cannot act, in G3 she is supposed to be 'strong' against Michael but Keaton cannot pull this off, it also looks like she has been dressed by Celine Dion and had her done by Barbra Streisand in a Star is Born. Garcia looks like he stepped off the set of Greece and acts like Julio Iglesias would in a movie, like god's gift to woman, but for no reason, and also where the hell did he come from? Despite a lot of complaints about Sofia, I don't think her acting is her fault, she is given terrible material. D'Ambrosio who plays Anthony is a joke, when he was saying he wants to be a musician not a lawyer I cringed at the way he acted. Pacino is fine, he usually is, but like in Oceans 13 give him some good material and you will get your actor! And I am not going to talk about Cage. I didn't have too many problems with the story, despite it feeling like a Citizen Kane rip-off, the acting and dated feel of the film detracted too much for me to take it seriously. It is a shame when sequels don't work; it detracts from the first good ones. You watch and you ask WHY?";3;7;False tt0099674;j-f-coleman;12/04/2008;Andy Garcia & Al Pacino are great;8;A pity this film was so bashed this was the role of a lifetime for Andy Garcia, and he should have been critically acclaimed. He has all the best lines, he is electric whenever he is on the screen, like a young Al Pacino, he plays the role of a very dangerous man and he gets his head around the violence so well. He is not just committing violence on screen for no reason it seems to me as if he understands the reasons that his character is committing the violent acts. As good as Pesci in GoodFellas, he should have been in it even more I cant remember how long he is on screen for but regardless it is his best role in my opinion.

Another brilliant role for Al Pacino playing a character he must know inside out one of his more subtle roles. A man who is losing his grip, a lot less yelling than a lot of his roles. But it stands up at least in terms of Pacinos performance to the two previous godfathers.

One of the most underrated movies of all time with some outstanding performances. I can see though why it wouldn't have been well received at the time considering the other excellent gangster movies that were released around that time (Good Fellas, Casino although I cant remember the exact years now). It was an old school style of film, a lot different from what was being released at the time.;3;7;False tt0099674;ibsmiester;04/08/2006;A disgrace to the series;7;"Is this is the worst movie ever? No, far from it. Is it unwatchable? No. But is it a worthy conclusion to the series? NO. I have been going through an watching all of the Godfather films, and this one just does not match the level of the other two. One could argue that it would be near impossible as those two are undoubtedly some of the best films ever made, period. BUT, in that case, it would have been better if this film was never made. Coppola made a drastic mistake in doing this.

There are some pros about this film. Al Pacino gives a mighty performance, arguably his best post-Scarface. Scratchy voice and all, he portrays and aging Michael Corleone with depth, sensitivity and emotion. When he calls out about how he ""murdered my father's son"" it is heartbreaking. Also, the final shot of this film is one of the most beautiful ever made. It's like a photograph that shows the aged Michael, the man once of so much power, weak, and finally, dead. It is the perfect ending for the series, capping off the movies as large tragedy they are, in the purist, classical sense. We see a great man go from being noble and brave, to being evil and blinded by ambition, then trying to regain his nobility and innocence, but ultimately succumbing to evil.

Here are the problems. Francis Ford Coppola, quite frankly, lost his touch after Apocalypse Now. Gone are all the stunning, moving crane shots, the stark, emotional canvases, and what we are left with is a bunch of cut up close ups, straight outta the late-80's/early-90's. Each shot is framed around a bunch people, and provides no feeling of grandeur, tragedy or affection that I always found in the first two. Then there's the acting, besides Pacino, everyone seems to overdo it. Especially Andy Garcia, an actor who I respect, who seems to be a caricature of James Caan's character from the first film. Diane Keaton (the only one I wasn't fond of in the first two) is as cold as ever, and even Talia Shire seems to be out of place. The venerable Eli Wallach tries, but he doesn't with the mood of the movie for me. Joe Mantegna is in typical Fat Tony form, over the top stereotypical mobster; he's an insult to mob movies. I won't say anything regarding Sofia Coppola, because I think enough has already been said apart from the fact that her scenes with Garcia make me cringe. Speaking of which, the whole 'kissing cousins' thing has to be one of the worst plot ideas I've ever heard. It tarnishes the entire film, which should have focused on the struggles of Michael trying to legitimize his family while retaining the honor of his father. Not this pathetic incestuous relationship and the whole Vatican thing.

This movie is worth 7/10, it is watchable, and it has its good points, but overall, it is very, very disappointing. I may be nitpicking here, but this is the Godfather we're talking about here. As Goethe said, ""In art the best is good enough.""";3;7;True tt0099674;Persia 27;17/09/2004;The Best Film in the Series;10;"""The Godfather, Part III"" is clearly the best film in the trilogy, as well as a great and beautiful film on its own. It is brilliant both as a crime drama and a love story. It surpasses the first two films in both acting and directing, with a more interesting and touching story that finally endears Michael Corleone to the audience as a human being haunted by the sins of the past.

Al Pacino is haunting, indeed, as he delivers the best and most Oscar worthy performance of his career since ""Scarface."" This performance is far greater than anything accomplished by Brando and DeNiro, who both acted well, but failed to reach the audience emotionally. Pacino's portrayal of Michael as a regretful old man conveys so much more depth compared to the young wooden killer that no one could relate to in the first two films. Here, we literally feel his pain and guilt, as well as his desire to reconnect with those whom he loved and lost. (Possible Spoilers Follow).

In the opening, we see a reflective young Michael sitting at the old family residence, as Coppola left him at the end of the second film. We also hear an excerpt of Michael's voice, as an older man, explaining that he did what he felt necessary to protect his family. ""What could I do? ... And now I'm losing you. I've lost you anyway. You're gone ... and it was all for nothing. You must understand that I had a completely different destiny planned."" When Michael finally delivers these lines to Kay in Sicily so many years later, near the end of the film, we are brought to tears. The scene where Michael makes confession to the Cardinal in the garden is equally powerful and filmed beautifully. The audience comes to love this character in a special way, despite his evil doings in the past and this film had to be made to paint a complete picture of him.

Dianne Keaton, as an older Kay, has more chemistry with Pacino than in the previous films. Robert Duvale is missed, but his absence does not subtract from the story centered around Michael and his children. The side plot involving the Pope is historically significant and interesting in this context, probably explaining why some die hard Catholic fans were not very pleased when the film was released in those days.

Andy Garcia also delivers his career best performance as Vincent and exudes more charisma than Sonny (James Caan)and all the other prominent male characters in the trilogy. Vincent is so unique, as he embodies the most interesting traits of his relatives, including Sonny's temper and playboy appeal, Fredo's warmth and charm, and the calculating intelligence of both Vito and Michael. It is intriguing the way in which Vincent ascends from a hot tempered hood to a wise, calculating man after Michael intructs him to keep his mouth shut and his eyes open. A different epic film could be based on this character alone, with the handsome Garcia playing the role he was born to play.

With a genuine Italian look, Sophia Coppola graces the screen as Michael's daughter, Mary, and the romantic relationship between her and Garcia is moving. Casting a mega-star as Mary would have ruined this film and it is a shame that Sophia, who came across naturally, decided not to take on other acting roles.

Finally, the climax at the opera house in the last half hour stands out as the most suspenseful and brilliantly filmed sequence ever made. This film is literally beautiful from the first frame to the last and deserves the highest praise it was denied when first released, under the shadow of the other two films so many years prior. However, a modern classic in its own right that makes films like ""Goodfellas"" and ""Casino"" look like cheap, ridiculous B pictures, ""The Godfather, Part III"" provides fulfilling closure to the trilogy while it leaves you wanting more. Its lone broadcast on AMC is vindication that its place has been reevaluated over time and that the first two films were made to precede this amazing final entry, in which Al Pacino and Francis Coppola are at their absolute best.";3;7;True tt0099674;susurrus-1;08/09/2004;Why Part III is the best episode;;Part III is the best episode of the Godfather trilogy in that it comes full circle and brings Michael Corleone to where his modus operandi has been leading him (Hell). Like Faust, Macbeth, and other great tragedies, it's about the price one pays for the life he has led. Al Pacino endows his character with Shakespearean awareness. The sinner is haunted but can no longer turn the tables. When he meets the Cardinal, and the Cardinal asks for his confession - what a crossroads between God and man. LOOKING FOR RICHARD III and THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE come to mind. I thought Sophia Coppola played what her character represented - the last shred of innocence and beauty to which her father clings.;3;7;False tt0099674;gomulkaa;22/08/2004;What's with all the complaints??;10;"I've always avoided seeing the third part of the Godfather Trilogy, fearing that it will ruin the Godfather ""experience"" for me. However, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to finally watch it today. After sitting in my chair for 4 hours, I can conclude that this is one of the best movies I have seen. The score is taken almost note-for-note from the previous two films, but it fits the story perfectly.

I can see why some had criticized Sofia Coppola's acting, but that is completely overshadowed by the performances of the rest of the cast, especially that of Andy Garcia. I really have to admit that this is probably the best film in this trilogy. I regret the fact that I had not seen this film until today; I really missed out on what should be regarded as a classic.";3;7;False tt0099674;george.schmidt;14/07/2003;Unnecessary chapter to a fine franchise;;"THE GODFATHER, PART III (1990) ***1/2 Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Andy Garcia, Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, Bridget Fonda, George Hamilton, Sofia Coppola, John Savage, Richard Bright, Don Novello, Al Martino. In my view an unnecessary third chapter to what was a brilliant one-two punch, but never-the-less an interesting take on the familia Corleone with a faded Michael (Pacino {""Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!""} a decidedly Shakespearean turn on his iconic role) facing retribution, redemption and ultimately tragedy the likes the Greeks have never seen as he wheels and deals by trying to by salvation with The Vatican (!) Garcia (Best Supporting Actor nominee) breathes life into the series as the bastard son of Sonny Corleone, Vincent Mancini whose bloodthirst for family acceptance is the film's shining star. However there are indeed vital flaws, including perpetual sun-tan/skin cancer candidate Hamilton filling in for consigliere Tom Hayden(!) {incidently Robert Duvall wanted more dough; can't blame him} and what the hell is Novello, aka Father Guido Sarducci (!) doing in this film!! But two words best sums up the harsh reality : Sofia Coppola!!! Arguably the worst acting ever in recent history. {The sad fact is Winona Ryder was originally tapped but had to begrudgingly drop out when she passed out during a rehearsal from exhaustion and ordered by her doctor to rest} Best sequence: the homage to the first chapter's baptism of fire with similar results during the opera/Vatican killings at the film's climax (ok I admit I was glad Sofia gets killed off) and without a doubt the worst final scene in any film; Pacino old and alone doing a Benny Hill-ish death! Nominated for six Oscars including Best Picture and Director, this version contains 9 minutes of footage never shown in its theatrical release.";3;7;False tt0099674;smla02;30/12/2002;Great ending to the trilogy;;"***

Starring: Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Talia Shire, and Diane Keaton.

Everyone's favorite Mafia don is back, this time trying to get out of the ""family business"" (I got to stop using that term). But many obstacles interrupt him from leaving the bloody job. The ending in the Opera is magnificent. Garcia, in my opinion, should've gotten the Oscar because his performance is flawless. Great end to a great trilogy.";3;7;False tt0099674;thechosen1;29/06/2002;I liked it.;10;Well, this movie was good. I think it was a good ending to a great saga, with one of the saddest endings I've seen. Al Pacino was brilliant as always, Andy Garcia did a fine job,(and looked great, I might add), Diane Keaton was great too and everyone else was well cast. EXCEPT Sofia Coppolla. I don't even know how to describe how terrible her performance was. It was a major let down of the movie. Besides that, it was really well directed and didn't bore for a minute.;3;7;False tt0099674;jbirtel;21/06/2002;Rehash, Retread! Oh, to be at the 1st Script Reading!;6;"Coppola is very gifted. That said, place some blame where it belongs and that's Paramount. Puzo took over 3 years to research and write The Godfather; then several months with Coppola to write the screenplay, ..it shows. In Godfather PART II, Coppola had only 3 months, but had obviously wanted to make some statements with the 1st movie, so some of those ideas had been simmering for 2 years (plus Puzo already had the background story written of Vito's rise to power) and that high quality shows too. Now Part III! Coppola and Puzo wanted 6 months to write, and release at the end of 1991. Paramount allowed only 6 WEEKS, and demanded a release for the 1990 year-end holiday season. So...the writing team had to take a ""if it ain't broke don't change it"" attitude, and THAT shows too.

One can only speculate (humorously) how that 1st script reading went when they gathered all the principles together: (SPOILERS from all 3 movies)

COPPOLA: ""Welcome everybody to our first reading of The Godfather Part III. (Applause) Now during this run-thru, I'd like everyone to stay in character, so I'll be referring to everyone by their character names. Ready??? This is how Part III will be fresh and different. First off, this movie is going to begin...With a Celebration!"" MICHAEL: ""But I thought that's how we started 1 & 2? "" COPPOLA: ""That's right! But in the first one I was trying to show the family warmth under Vito's regime and in the second one I was showing how it was getting colder under Michael's regime."" MICHAEL: ""So what's different?"" COPPOLA: ""Well this time we're going back to the warmth, cause last time it was cold."" MICHAEL: ""Oh!"" COPPOLA: ""Then we're going to do a family portrait with everyone posing. And just before the photographer clicks..."" KAY: ""I know! I know! Michael's going to say 'Wait a minute', walk over to where I'm standing, grab me and walk me back so I can be in the photo too."" COPPOLA: ""No-ooo... I said this was going to be different! This time Michael will say 'HOLD IT!', grab Vincent so HE can be in the photo."" KAY: ""Oh!"" COPPOLA: Then we're going to have Tom Hagen say to Michael that Luca Brasi wants to see him and Michael will be kinda nervous and sort of stammer 'Is this necessary?'"" MICHAEL: ""I just talked to Tom yesterday and he says he can't be in the movie cause the pay ain't high enough. And Luca's dead! And do I have to say that line cause Vito already said that in the first movie when Tom told HIM about Luca being at the wedding."" COPPOLA: ""Alright! then we'll have Al Neri say that Joey Zaza wants to see you and you say, 'Do I have to see him?' Is that better?"" KAY: ""A Dance! We gotta have a Dance!"" COPPOLA: ""That's right! And in this one the Don is going to dance with his daughter."" CONNIE: ""But Vito already danced with me at the end of my wedding in the first one. And we danced to the 'Godfather Waltz'. Remember??"" COPPOLA: ""That's right! But in this one, Don Michael, not Don Vito, will dance with his daughter Mary."" MICHAEL: ""Are we going to play the same waltz that was played 35 years ago?...cause they've had some good dance tunes during the past few years you can really danc..."" COPPOLA: ""No-ooo...we're going to play the same waltz because it will remind the audience of what a great time they had watching the first movie. And we're going to stretch it by playing the waltz over and over while I show the chandelier."" MARY: ""Why do we need to show the chandelier?"" COPPOLA: ""Because this movie has STYLE and I want to show that Mary is the light of Michael's life."" MARY: ""Oh!"" COPPOLA: ""And I want all the guys to wear black suits and all the girls to wear deep red or gold gowns."" CONNIE: ""But Francis, this is 1979, nobody wears all the same colors anymore. In fact, they didn't even wear the same colors in the two other movies. There's this word I saw in the dictionary called 'variety'; I read it, and it means..."" COPPOLA: ""Anyone not wearing their assigned colors will not be allowed in the party. We already had variety in the other movies and I said this would be different."" CONNIE: ""Oh!"" COPPOLA: "" Now, later on Michael will send Vincent to go undercover to visit Don Altobella because he wants to find out what he's got under his toes."" MICHAEL: ""WAA-AAI-IT A MINUTE! Didn't Vito try that little trick when he sent Luca over to the Tattaglias to find out more about the turk Sollozo? And they figured that scheme out kinda quick because, correct me if I'm wrong, Luca ain't with us today because of that little stunt. And besides! The proper term is to find out what he's got under his fingernails, not toes. Why would you have me send Vincent to check out the guy's toes for????"" COPPOLA: ""Alright...FINGERNAILS!! Ya happy?? Then we're going to have Vincent 'make his bones' on Joey Zaza, and it will be during a Catholic parade and there'll be a police officer involved and..."" MICHAEL: ""Hold up Francis! If I remember right, Vito 'made his bones' on Fanucci during a Catholic parade; and I 'made my bones' on Capt McCluskey who was a police officer. Am I right or am I right? COPPOLA: ""That's right! But this time 'Vincent' is the police officer and the last time the parade was going east and this time it will be coming from the west."" MICHAEL: ""But if the parade is coming from the west, then it's STILL going east"" COPPOLA: ""Then we'll shoot it so people will think it's going west, but they'll be reminded of the parade from the second movie and remember what a good time they had watching it."" B J HARRISON: ""Jeeszee Francis...sounds like we're going over familiar ground here"" COPPOLA: ""What's YOUR beef? What have you been in the last 10 years? If we paid Tom the money he asked for, you wouldn't even be sitting here. Oh! That reminds me! Vincent... can you ride a horse? VINCENT: A Horse???? In Brooklyn?? Why would I have wanted to take the time to learn how to ride a horse for??? I'm a Corleone outcast! I grew up in a concrete jungle in a tough neighborhood...not out west! They've got some modern inventions in New York called subways and taxis and cars, and they can get me to wherever I want to go faster than any horse I know. And where do I find a poopie scooper big enough to pick up the kind of mess THEY leave behind? And besides... I don't remember you asking Michael to jump on a horse and go chasing after Sollozo. And what about Sonny? I think my dad would've looked kind of assinine gallopping after Carlo and telling HIM to get out of town. And what's with this 'Yippee-kai-yea'? I gotta say 'Yippee-kai-yea' while I'm shooting Joey Zaza?? COPPOLA: ""Alright! Just say his name once or twice...then shoot him."" KAY: ""But the new stuff? When do we get to the new stuff?"" VINCENT: (under his breath) ""This horse thing sounds kinda new to me."" CONNIE: ""But we had a horse in the first movie."" COPPOLA: ""Nooo...we had PART of a horse in the first movie. This is different!"" VINCENT: (still under his breath) ""Yeah...REAL different!"" KAY: ""But some GOOD new stuff! When do we get to the GOOD new stuff? And what about me? What do I get to do?"" COPPOLA: ""Well I was coming to that...but first we've got to have a scene in Italy with Don Tommasino inside the villa."" MICHAEL: ""The same villa where the car blew up?"" COPPOLA: ""That's right! And in this scene we'll give Vincent an orange."" VINCENT: (irritably) ""What for??"" COPPOLA: ""Because the orange is a symbol of evil and we need to show it to the audience."" VINCENT: ""So what do I do with it?"" COPPOLA: ""I don't know! Sniff it!"" VINCENT: ""But I KNOW what an orange smells like."" COPPOLA: ""Well after you sniff it, bounce it up in the air a couple of times and catch it one handed."" VINCENT: ""Com-on Francis! It's gonna be hot. I'll be hungry. Why don't I just eat it."" COPPOLA: ""That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. Do you want the audience to look at a mutilated half-eaten orange? The whole symbolic evil thing will go right out the window."" VINCENT: ""But oranges can be slippery. When I catch it, can't I use two hands?"" COPPOLA: ""Now I've heard everything! You want to be the new Don? You want to learn underworld business, double crosses, billions of dollars of legal and illegal revenue?...and you don't want to take 10 minutes to learn how to catch an orange one handed. VINCENT: ""Well I don't remember Michael or even Vito having to learn to catch an orange one handed. How come I'm getting all this new stuff?"" COPPOLA: ""Alright, we'll get you a kitten. Vito had to handle a kitten in the first movie at Connie's wedding. And a kitten moves. And it makes noise. And it has claws. Is that what you want? You want to be bouncing a kitten up in the air while you're talking to Don Tommasino? Cause if you catch it wrong I don't want to be within a hundred yards of you and some teed off kitten."" VINCENT: ""Alright, I'll learn this orange thing, but I gotta tell you, all this new stuff keeps getting worse."" KAY: ""Me!!What about me!! COPPOLA: ""I'm getting to that. Now Michael, I've been watching you rehearse your last scene. You're falling out of the chair okay, but you're not dropping the orange right."" MICHAEL: ""That's cause I don't want to hit the puppy."" COPPOLA: ""Then keep one eye open so you miss the puppy."" MICHAEL: ""You want me to gasp my last, drop the orange, slump over, fall out AND keep one eye open. Won't the audience see I have one eye open?"" COPPOLA: ""No, because just before you slump, put your sunglasses on."" KAY: ""But me!! How about me?? What do I get to do?"" COPPOLA: ""Well Kay, when you go to visit Michael at the hospital, I want you to walk DRAMATICALLY into his room."" KAY: ""You mean walk dramatically up to his bed??"" COPPOLA: ""No...pretend you're walking around the block to get to your next door neighbors' house, because I'm trying to show that there's still some distance between you and Michael."" KAY: ""Like this?? You want me to walk dramatically like this???"" COPPOLA: ""Let's keep it down everybody! People in the back...no more snickering out loud while Kay works on her dramatic walk."" MICHAEL: (from the back) ""Hey Francis! I hear Johnny Fontaine is coming to the party to sing another love song like he sang at my sister's wedding."" COPPOLA: ""That's right!"" MICHAEL: ""Who is he going to sing to this time?""

For me, the end of the story will always be the last scene in Godfather PART II that shows Michael contemplating the consequences of his actions. That haunting image says more in 10 seconds than anything that followed in Part III.

Conclusion: They tried! Vatican sequences was intriging. But you can't take a pint to fill a gallon container. The Godfather and The Godfather PART II will always be a milestone in movie history and Part III will never take that away. I'll wait till they put the uncensored Godfather Novel For Television in chronological order on DVD (without Part III) before I buy it...or not buy it at all!";3;7;True tt0099674;l_demaria;07/08/2000;Why?;1;"During the part of the movie I managed to resist and see, I kept asking to myself ""Why?"". Why after the beautiful first and second parts there was this horrible third part? Nonsense screenplay, very bad performances, nepotism ... Maybe someone out there can explain to me why did they came up with this?";4;11;False tt0099674;miaharpr;31/07/2019;I'm just gonna forget this installment happened;4;"Watched all three within 24hrs. First one is incomparable, but pt.2 put up a good fight and had a more memorable ending imo. Third movie...is where everything went wrong. I loved Pacino in the first two movies, but he was hamming it up here. That stroke scene made me laugh so hard. Outside the movie's unintentional attempts to make it a comedy, It just doesn't have the essence of the first two. I actually didn't mind Sophia's acting. Maybe I expected the worst reading people's reviews, but she did alright. She just had too much air time and lines. I felt pt.3 dumbed down everything down for the audience, like repeating so many times that Fredo was killed by Michael and how Enzo was the family baker. I liked the first two because they didn't have to talk so much; they left the viewer to fill in the gaps and make inferences. The thing about these movies is they always leave you wanting more. After pt.1 I was having Vito Corleone withdrawals. The second movie, I was longing for Sonny, Fredo and pre-Don Michael. This movie makes me long for the days before it existed. I need a cleanse now.";2;4;True tt0099674;garymathe-76173;04/02/2019;Worst Godfather, but not bad;6;It's a decent wrap for the franchise, but the story line is too similar to the first two movies, without providing enough new material. Pacino is good as always, Garcia decent, but Sophia Coppola's acting is downright amateurish.;2;4;False tt0099674;eagandersongil;12/09/2016;The constable closure;9;"Waxing of what is possibly the greatest movie trilogy, closing this is not very dignified, but convincing, ""Godfather, Part III"" is a great film, but IE Part II are brilliant, emblematic and unique, so the comparison is difficult and unfair, but with a lower route to the ancient but regular to good, great photography and unique soundtrack, this film has all the features of previous, perhaps the point here is the acting, the first we have Al Pacino and Marlon Brando at its peak, the second time Al Pacino and Robert De Niro in full swing, now in the third, we only have Al Pacino (already slightly below those of the 70s), not to mention that Sofia Coppola and especially Andy Garcia unconvincing, the best moments of movies are the flashbacks of the previous films, like the great scene of his children singing the song that makes Michael remember his time in Sicily, not to mention at the end that is a little weak, and the motivations that at certain times are silly, the film loses that truth of the previous ones, but ""Godfather, Part III"" is a good movie, touches on important points of the corruption in the church, the inversion of values ​​and the criminal monopoly of large organizations, as well as dealing with the decline of ""Family"" and the death of organized crime in the classic mold, he tries to pass a lesson water with sugar that crime does not pay. The film does not deserve to be so criticized, and although it is the weakest of the trilogy, has its merits and deserves our respect.";2;4;False tt0099674;p_linhlinh;14/06/2014;An expected tragedy;9;I really don't understand why this part of the trilogy is underrated. I supposed people don't like how it ends so they put out their anger in the ratings. Well that could happen.

I personally love this part the most. The whole movie is a masterpiece of art. And just when i thought about how art had soften the roughness of the story, there goes the tragedy.

I have to say the ending is even worse than i imagine. Sure Micheal should be punished for all the thing he has done, but this is far more than just punishment. And i have always feel so sorry for him. Poor man for the sake of his family could not live the way he wanted and all he got in return is a broken heart, dying alone.

The dog in the last scene really worsen his loneliness. Such an art of expression.;2;4;True tt0099674;jcbutthead86;01/04/2014;A Wonderful,Underrated And Overlooked Finale To The Godfather Trilogy.;10;The Godfather Part III is a wonderful,underrated and overlooked finale to The Godfather Trilogy that is filled with great direction,terrific acting and a fine score. While it's not as good as the first two films,The Godfather Part III is a nice conclusion to The Godfather Saga.

Set twenty years after the events in Part II,The Godfather Part III depicts Michael Corleone(Al Pacino)who is now older and has finally made the Corleone Family legitimate and on the straight and narrow. But,unfortunately for Michael his past and thoughts of guilt have come back to haunt him and his enemies have lured but into the criminal world while worrying about his family including his nephew Vincent Mancini(Andy Garcia)and daughter Mary(Sofia Coppola).

Released in 1990,The Godfather Part III is a sequel that despite being nominated for 7 Academy Awards and being a modest Box Office success sharply divided Godfather fans and movie critics. Some fans and movie critics felt the movie should not have been made and is a bad film compared to the first two films and disliked the casting of Sofia Coppola. Despite the film's flaws it's a really good film in my opinion and is a powerful conclusion to this great trilogy. I don't think Director Francis Coppola was trying to top the first two I think he just wanted to make a satisfying conclusion and he does so here. Francis Coppola has said that the first two films is the series and part III is the epilogue and that is very true with this film because what makes The Godfather Part III so effective is that we have seen what happen to some of the characters in the first two films and we see some of their fates which adds to the tragedy and sadness of this film because we see most of the characters haunted by their past demons and there is a sense of doom that hangs over the film and you will feel like there will be no happy outcome and Francis Coppola shows this to viewers in stylish way. The themes of violence,betrayal and death were in the first two films and it's also in Part III as well and with the Corleone family trying to distance themselves from the Gangster world but what GF III tells us is that while a person can get out of the Gangster world it never leaves any person no matter what they do. When we see the character Michael Corleone in Part III we see a man who has aged and that being the don and leader of the Corleone family has not only taken a mental toll on Michael but a physical toll as well. Where it was kind of tough to have sympathy for Michael in Part II,in this film we finally start to feel terrible for Michael because he is disturbed by his evil deeds and what he has done and realize he never wanted to be a the head of The Corleone family or be a gangster he felt like he had no choice. Throughout GF III we see Michael trying to reclaim his tortured soul that was pretty damaged after the events in Part II and it's not a sinner trying to become a saint but a man trying to bring some goodness into his life. The Godfather films are in their own way morality tales about people and the things that they do and the unfortunate consequences of people's Actions. The Godfather films are known for their violent scenes and Part III doesn't hold anything back giving viewers a few scenes that are shocking and horrific. The screenplay by Francis Coppola and Mario Puzo is good and memorable even though the script lacks the greatness of the first two films. The ending of The Godfather Part III is amazing and is one of the saddest and most heartbreaking endings in film history and no matter how many times I see the ending it still gets to me. A powerful and fitting end to The Godfather Trilogy.

The cast is wonderful. Al Pacino is excellent as Michael Corleone,with Pacino bringing emotion,power and depth to role. Diane Keaton is wonderful as Kay Adams,Michael's former wife. Talia Shire is terrific as Connie Corleone,Michael's sister. Andy Garcia is outstanding as Vincent Mancini,Sonny Corleone's illegitimate son and Michael's nephew. Eli Wallach is amazing as Don Atobello,an old-time Gangster. Joe Mantegna is great and clever as Joey Zasa,a smooth talking Gangster. Sophia Coppola does an O.K job as Mary Corleone and is not as bad as everyone says. Richard bright is sensational as Al Neri,Michael's old bodyguard. Bridget Fonda(Grace Hamilton),George Hamilton(B.J Harrison)Donal Donnelly(Archbishop Gilday)and Franc D'Ambrosio(Anthony Vito Corleone) give good performances as well.

The direction Francis Coppola is fantastic and stylish,with Coppola a beautiful and amazing visual style to the film. Great direction,Coppola.

The score by Carmine Coppola is wonderful,epic and matches the tone of the film. Outstanding score,Carmine.

In final word,if you love Francis Coppola,the first two Godfather films,Gangster Films or Crime Dramas,I highly suggest you see The Godfather Part III,a wonderful,underrated sequel that deserves a second chance. Highly Recommended. 9.5/10.;2;4;False tt0099674;AaronCapenBanner;31/08/2013;Good, Not Great Sequel.;7;"Francis Ford Coppola returns as director to complete his crime saga of the Corleones. Film begins many years after Part II, where an aging Michael is determined to legitimize the family business, to finally remove it from the violent setting that has dogged them for so long, but unfortunately his dealings with the Vatican, and challenges from a rival Mafia family once again pull him back into that world, and his attempts to make amends for his past, and find a worthy successor, do not go according to plan.

Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, & Talia Shire return, joined by Andy Garcia(very good as Sonny's son) Eli Wallach, and Joe Mantegna. Not a masterpiece like the first two, this does feel overly-stylized and confusing, but nonetheless is still superbly acted, with an interesting story, and fine direction, all leading to a memorable end.";2;4;False tt0099674;communionsong;20/02/2010;OK Movie...But Compared to the Other Two;4;It really didn't hold up. However, Al Pacino was very good as the aging Michael and I was glad to see Diane Keaton's role as Kay expanded a bit. Their scenes together were very touching. I am confused by all the negative comments about Sofia Coppola's role as Mary. I thought she did very well.

The movie was choppy in some parts and I was very dissatisfied with the ending. SPOILER AHEAD: After the massacre at the opera and after Michale's tormented screams...it then cut to an aged Michael before he dies. What happened between the death of Mary and his death of old age? What did Kay do? Anthony? Vincent? Connie? I guess I will never know the answers.

Talia Shire sure changed from the submissive Italian wife in Part I to a murderess in Part III.

Whoda thunk?;2;4;False tt0099674;Alfriend;12/03/2009;Could Have Been as Good as the First Two Parts of the Trilogy;;"The idea of basing Godfather III around the conspiracy of the assassination of a Pope was a powerful choice and one that would have brought the trilogy to an even more amazing close had all things worked out. This is especially exciting when given the long held real-life suspicions about the death of the ""30-day Pope"".

I'm assuming that the original storyline with Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) was more potent and up to the standards of the prior Godfather films. Apparently Coppola himself was not very happy with the last minute changes he had to make when Paramount refused Duvall's salary demands. The storyline as is moved quite slowly in parts. This was especially so with the scenes involving Michael's re-courting of Kay. Both Pacino and Keaton are amazing actors; but they suffered with rather trite dialogue and a difficult circumstance to make believable. It seemed like filler dialogue to me. The same scenes rewritten more believably might have worked with these two fine actors; but they came off like bad soap opera scenes. Also the scenes with Vincent (Andy Garcia)and Mary (Sofia Coppola)this was also in part due to writing but also because of Sofia's lack of experience as an actress. Being the daughter of the director, she was raked over the coals for her performance. This was a bit unfair as the final choice rested with her father, not her. I can't believe that there were not a large number of very good actresses out there known and unknown that could have pulled the part off. Sofia as we know is not without talent. She has become quite an amazing filmmaker herself. Bridget Fonda, who's part was pretty much gratuitous, would have made a fine Mary.

The other problem with the film are the lack of layers of excellent supporting players. Instead of the likes of actors of the caliber of Duvall, Sterling Hayden, Richard Castellano, Joe Spinell and Richard Conte in supporting roles, we have the likes of George Hamilton and Don Novello who are talented actors. who although were capable in their roles were not up to the gold standard of the previous films.

I think had more time been spent on the central plot of Michael Corleone's desire to finally go straight through the recognition and partnership with the church and the resulting conspiracies this would have made for a better film even with the existing cast and script changes. However such are the ways of Studio filmaking where deadlines ended up putting too much pressure on Coppola to come up with last minute changes that would have perhaps preserved the greatness of the film.";2;4;True tt0099674;jzappa;02/10/2008;Coppola Must Run on Frantic Drama, Frustration, Violence and Seemingly Nothing Else In His Life To Make a Great Film;8;The third chapter in this everlasting series of films is certainly the saddest of the trilogy, because as well as being an impression of characterizations and events from mob history, such as mob-related conspiracy behind the death of Pope John Paul I and Joey Zasa (played entertainingly by Joe Mantegna) being a creatively ironic amalgam of two real-life gangsters who hated each other, it is also a study of Michael Corleone, now a middle-aged man who did not foresee such regret and remorse for his ruthless conquests in the previous films. In his attempts to use the wealth and power he has gained from those bloody triumphs, he tries to cleanse his family name, under the quietly desperate delusion that it is not an exercise in futility. For if it were not, there would be no opposition for his extensive criminal history to the landmark international real estate deal he works to seal. Nor would his old New York partners want in on the deal, an affair that tips the first domino in a succession of violence, betrayal, and scandal amongst the highest of statuses (stati?).

Though there was great reluctance from Coppola to make a third installment, which was greenlit for the sake of understandably anticipated box office returns, it becomes an important part of the story of the Corleone family, even if it does not measure up to its two immortal predecessors. We see the modern effects of the conservation of the preceding generations. Michael suffers for his father's legacy, and Michael's stubbornness to preserve his own, though it has grown weather-beaten by the time during which the film takes place, has created a barrier of communication between himself and his wife and children, a classic senior having planned a much different future than he's received. Even Talia Shire's character, Connie, Michael's sister, is a completely different person in this movie than she was in the last. It is not a poor characterization but a very realistic one, as a woman from that generation who has resigned herself to the life into which she was born. There is no mention from her of Michael's order of her husband's death, for instance. She is not the meek, vulnerable soul she was before but astonishingly transformed into a highly competent adviser to her brother.

However, even despite Mascagni's Cavalleria Rusticana being a cherry on top of the most beautiful musical theme in the history of film, the movie is inarguably the weakest of the three Godfather films. There is hardly a way of defending the idea that it surpasses or even equals its predecessors, which in the case of both had such a distinctly powerful touch not only at the helm but in the case of all departments. Here, the dialogue is weak with typical final-chapter-in-American-trilogy visibly scripted wisdom. I also have a hard time understanding why Andy Garcia, a Cuban, was cast as an Italian when so many hot-blooded young Italian actors could have played that role just as well as he did. Those are flaws some can accept and others have a difficult time accepting, and one cannot complain directly about Garcia's performance. (Besides, his father Sonny was played by James Caan and his grandfather by Marlon Brando, neither of whom are Italian.) The inextricable misnomer is one of the most well-known in contemporary cinema history, the casting of Sofia Coppola as Mary, Michael's daughter. I will not plunge into criticism because I know the poor girl suffered quite enough at the time, what with the Razzie awards, countless notices, and other such humiliating things. I am glad she was able to redeem herself by becoming a director like her father, a completely different style all her own, not plainly influenced by Francis, an unaffected subtlety as opposed to his inherent need to outdo himself, which brings me to another thought on this film's weakness.

The Godfather Part III, now that I've rewatched it as a grown person and refreshed my memory and understanding of it, has supplied me with a theory as to the striking inconsistency in Coppola's filmography. In the 1970s, he made the first two Godfathers and Apocalypse Now, showered with giant personal, political, and artistic obstacles that in some cases almost literally destroyed him. The Conversation was made entirely from scratch. These films are his great works. After Apocalypse Now, the quality of his films took a major nosedive and even now, as he has recently returned to the director's chair with Youth Without Youth, he cannot seem to regain his aim. Godfather III is very telling. In comparison to the danger, conflicts and drama throughout the first two productions, Part III was a walk in the park. He had to fight for those films and that passion is what made them so incredible. Part III was handed to him, and because it was the other way around entirely, he had a hard time committing to the project, thus the film is clearly made with much less ardor and feeling, though the set design and atmosphere are still not one ounce short of top-notch. Coppola must run on frantic drama, frustration, violence and seemingly nothing else to make a great film. However, considering the relatively peaceful circumstances of Part III's production, he succeeded to a good extent.;2;4;False tt0099674;najobskalf;30/12/2005;An excellent film - Sofia Coppola played her part well.;10;I have seen this film several times since its release, in the cinema and on DVD. I have also read numerous adverse comments from some film critics and cannot believe that they saw the same film. It was actually a worthy follow-up to the first two Godfather films and is still worth viewing after all these years: Al Pacino playing his part magnificently. Some critics poured out volumes of abuse about Sofia Coppola at the time and this has been repeated by others until it seems to be accepted generally - sadly, many critics are unoriginal and trot out others' clichés. I find myself totally unable to agree - she played her part well, in my estimation, and her character was believable - certainly did not merit the denigration she received from some. (I have even seen comments (on this site) disparaging her looks - I can only conjecture about the writers' gender preferences and/or stage of development.) If you have not seen this film, forget the sour criticisms, watch it and you may be pleasantly surprised.;2;4;False tt0099674;tomdrazen;08/11/2005;Not good enough to be part of the godfather series.;5;This movie is somewhat an enigma to me. Theoretically, Copolla had the tools to make this a great film but instead, he messed up big time. The plot has potential, but the screenplay is not well constructed. It just keeps treading water without really giving the viewer a sense of narrative development. The directing isn't anywhere as good as it was in the first two films. The cast, aside from Al Pacino is not the way it should be. If they had a chance to bring in somebody like Robert Duval to play Tom Hagen why didn't they do it? Normally I wouldn't care, but if you can't make a proper third installment for a series as powerful and as cinematically significant as the godfather, it's better not to make it at all. The only reason I gave it a 5 and not less is because I still like seeing Al Pacino, but that's about it.;2;4;False tt0099674;nigee690;06/09/2005;Misunderstood? Not at all;4;No wonder this film is not in the top 250 of IMDb. It seems to do what most other trilogies do and never live up to the expectations of it's predecessors. Unlike the previous two films there are only two well known actors/actresses in Al Pacino and Talia Shire. Why could Francis Ford Coppola not pull other top notch personnel in as he did with Marlon Brando, Robert De Niro and Robert Duvall? Also the plot seems a mirror image to the first instalment. No spoilers here, see for yourself. It drags you along with no real conviction and nowhere to go apart from the predictable ending. No way to make millions of fans wait 16 years for a somewhat let down experience. To be honest, it would be difficult for anyone to reach the level of the first two films but it seems that Coppola instilled his own image in the form of Michael Corleone: a failing great. Do not be put off though, get this trilogy in your DVD collection now!;2;4;False tt0099674;OHHLA;21/10/2001;Pacino, Pacino, Pacino;5;"If you're a fan of Al Pacino's work as an actor, or fond of the first two installments of ""The Godfather"", this movie is worth seeing on either basis. Unfortunately for both the series and the actor this is not a GREAT movie. It suffers more by comparison to it's preceding chapters, but even as a stand alone film it would still be weak. It seems ironic that this is the movie that Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola supposedly collaborated on the most closely; but being over 10+ years removed from the success of Part II ultimately has as much or more to do with why this film suffers. A great cast is assembled, a great director is at work, and a great writer collaborated on it - and yet instead of being hot the film can only best be called tepid. The one driving force that keeps it interesting is Pacino's dilemma as Michael - can he save his soul and his family at the same time? It serves as a rather poignant contrast to his role in ""The Devil's Advocate"" so if you've only seen one I recommend renting the other.";2;4;False tt0099674;kenandraf;14/10/2001;More soapy this time;;Good drama that is vastly inferior in comparison to the first two GODFATHER films due to weaker story and below average screenplay.The directing is also average which is weird because we expect much more from such a top notch director.Coppolla seems to have lost a lot of his directorial instincts since APOCALYPSE NOW for some reason.Good performances from the actors here and I still recomend this movie for all GODFATHER fans,drama/action fans and big fans of the lead actors........;2;4;False tt0099674;benjamincepeda;16/10/2020;Not bad. But not good.;7;The godfater III lost the essence of The Godfather I and II. Good ending, but the film isn't like the other two films. Obviusly the actors very good. Good ending for the history. The Godfather will always be in my heart;0;0;False tt0099674;anuraagti;16/10/2020;Ok, so not really a five, but the movie definitely isn't a 7.6;5;Considering the cast, the material, the director's abundant talent, it's hard not to see this is a purely for the numbers sort of movie, made to cash out. By Coppola and Puzo. Every note rang hollow, even the dialogue felt stilted, the scenes looked staged, and Sofia Coppola's casting is just unforgivable. She alone dragged the entire movie down, and the screen time she got was just ridiculous. So absurdly nepotistic and unfair. Horrible! Just that one decision, had it not been taken, would have made a big difference.;0;0;False tt0099674;sicmunduscreatusst;04/10/2020;Unnecessary and Bad;4;"If Godfather 1 is a 10/10, Godfather 2 is a 9/10 AND Godfather 3 is a 4/10. Al Pacino bears no resemblance to the character he portrayed in 1&2. There is no real buildup in the movie, even the tense scenes aren't that tense, the story lacks a direction nor carries any messages like 1&2 had to offer. It wasn't all that boring but I wish it wasn't made.";0;0;False tt0099674;ines_fr;21/09/2020;It's nice but it has an heavy legacy to keep up with.;8;The movie is good, it has outstanding performances and brilliant direction/cinematography. The storyline is also interesting because it's more or less the closing of a circle with Vicent Corleone becoming the head of the family.

However, it's impossible not to compare it with the two previous movies and it has an heavy legacy to keep up with. I won't say it was a disappointment but it was certainly not as good the previous two but still worth watching.;0;0;True tt0099674;OguzhanDorul;10/09/2020;an outcast movie;10;The final link in the grand trilogy, which I don't understand why he was excluded. It was a beautiful movie. Although it was sad to see Michael's regretful world, the investments he made to clear the family and the sequence in which vincenzo took over the seat of the father was magnificent. It was a nice detail that all the actors in the trilogy, except Robert Duvall, took part in the film, and lastly, especially the last 30 minutes, the film is a very different place in the series.;0;0;True tt0099674;nicorip22;28/08/2020;Not as good as the previous movies;7;Unfortunately this film could not follow the line of the previous 2 which I consider the 2 best films ever made. The bar was too high. But this is a great film, and if you liked the previous ones you need to see this one because it provides a closure of an almost perfect trilogy.;0;0;False tt0099674;osamabinmasood;08/08/2020;Outstanding movie with a beautiful ending;10;If I could summarize the whole series I would describe it as the loss and dread of a man who has lost everything in his life and is only left with pain and sorrow.;0;0;True tt0099674;myz14;03/08/2020;Very good but not as great as the first two;8;Good acting and solid story but got a bit boring, could have been better;0;0;False tt0099674;agvg-15110;26/07/2020;Not so bad as people say!!!;10;This movie is the worst of the three, but it still is a very good movie, better than some 90's movies in my opinion. The romance through Mary and Vincent is maybe the worst thing of the movie (the Sofia Coppola's performance too) but the rest of the movie is pure gangster and italian mood. The final 40 minutes are wonderful and the final, is the best final the trilogy can had.

That's my opinion. 10/10;0;0;True tt0099674;boshunaarama;15/07/2020;personally I don't like mafia movies;8;But you should give this saga a shot, especially if you love to know people more.;0;0;False tt0099674;adeckofcards;28/06/2020;Death;8;With two absolute masterpieces behind, it was difficult to get a good result with a third and final part in the 'The Godfather' trilogy. Certainly this third installment does not go as expected, but it is still a remarkable film. Through the almost three hours of footage we see how Michael Corleone tries to clear his family's name and deal with the ghosts of his past. It's frustrating how much wasted potential this film has, which could have been the best in the trilogy or at least lived up to it. Seeing an elderly Michael carrying his sins is the best thing about the film and what was able to raise the film to the level of its predecessors. That is why the last act of the film is the best, because it falls squarely on this topic. Although we must not neglect family relationships, which were an important part in the previous parts and here continues with a totally remarkable development. Perhaps the legacy of this last part is the death of Michael Corleone, not physically, but totally and as Coppola shows it on screen in such a human and direct way. Perhaps the best this last part could deliver.;0;0;False tt0099674;underspell;27/06/2020;something's not right;7;"I finally watched The Godfather tirlogy, and I have to say that the third film is the ""weakest"" one. The story doesn't feel as thrilling as the other two, some of the characters remain a mystery and create sort of confusion. But I have to say, Al Pacino is great.";0;0;False tt0099674;hams_hatem111;27/06/2020;Deserves more love;9;This last one is very warm and you see everyone grown up. You really can't help but smile..the movie is about micheal trying to redeem himself. It's just a masterpiece and as good as the rest, if not warmer and closer to the heart;0;0;False tt0099674;rassezeus;23/06/2020;This is how you end a trilogy!;9;I've said it once in the past and I'll say it once more. Movies don't make me cry.

BUT, the ending made me tear up a little bit.

Anyone who knows me, I have a soft spot for children and don't want anything bad happening to them - that's why Travis Bickle wasn't THAT bad of a person :D. Even if the kid might be 20 years-old they're still someone's children. Seeing your own daughter murdered in front of you was just too much for me.

The Godfather III is just a masterpiece and should be watched by every film enthusiast.;0;0;True tt0099674;l-59417;20/06/2020;a brief evaluation;9;"I like What Mike says about Sicily in Godfather III. ""Why is it so violent in such a beautiful place?"" ""It's historical. I love it here. For generations, people here have suffered all kinds of injustice. But they still expect good things to happen."" We know that Coppola himself was Sicilian, and he perfectly expresses the ""quiet one second, blood the next"" feeling of the Godfather series.";0;0;True tt0099674;griffithsmichael-69090;13/06/2020;Not as good as the first two, but still great;8;It's not better than the first two, but could definitely win best movie of the year awards if it was release in the current era of cinema. It's better than 95% of movies released today and people giving it a 1/10 are not to be taken seriously. Watch it you'll not love it like Part 1 and 2, but you'll still like it. I'd give it a 8.5 if IMDB allowed.;0;0;False tt0099674;wrightjr-28649;07/06/2020;The End of MC;8;Michael Corleone's final years. The film begins with a complete sham of a ritual and ends with the realization he can never escape who he is. Why Sofia Coppola is so ridiculed is beyond me. I found her performance understated and realistic. I think over time it has become a knee jerk response. A great movie.;0;0;False tt0099674;hhenshiri;03/10/2019;Best cinema productions;9;A series of films of the strongest productions of the world cinema wonderful in every sense of the drama in particular;0;0;False tt0099674;gundappahavalakod;15/12/2018;Not bad;7;Last 30 minutes of the movie was so irritating, and awful climax, what was director thinking?;0;0;True tt0099674;jeffreygwilliams;10/09/2018;Coulda been a contender....;7;It took me 18 years since I saw G2 to bring myself to see G3.

The press and the overall sentiment towards the movie made me think this was the Rocky V of the Godfather trilogy.

This is not Rocky V, and it's really not Part 3. As the director said, this is an epilogue to the Godfather story. If you view G3 through that prism, I believe that will enhance your experience and adjust your expectations accordingly.

It doesn't contain the visual richness of the first two, and the story is more dialogue driven than previous installments. With Michael C., you are seeing progression in his character and morals for the first time. Sofia C. gets much hate for her role.

Where the story falls short for me is the ending. I thought taking out Michael C.'s daughter is a cruel, cruel twist that I certainly did not see coming. It seems even Michael C., for all his sins, didn't deserve that.;0;0;True tt0099674;deram-77963;26/08/2018;Still great;10;Not as great as Godfather and Godfather 2 but far better than the garbage on the screens today;0;0;False tt0099674;antonyturbo98;24/01/2014;A satisfying conclusion.;7;An underrated and unjustifiably criticized conclusion to the Godfather trilogy. This movie is not in the ''elite'' category of its predecessors, however it deserves acknowledgment and appreciation. Centred on Michael Corleone, the film explores the cost his lifestyle has inflicted upon his own existence. We see that he has been weakened by the pressure and barbarism of being the ''Don'' of the Corleone family. This is shown throughout the film, as he comes to the heartbreaking and miserable conclusion that he has damaged everyone he was meant to care for. He is unable to escape the cold darkness of crime, and it eventually engulfs him in a fascinating, beautiful and emotional way. What truly is this films' saving grace, and what changes it from a good film to a great one, is the epic finale, in which Michael witnesses the death of his daughter, and reflects upon his life of misery. The ending is perhaps one of the most powerful in the history of cinema, as Michael, an old and decrepit man, due to the emotional agony he has been exposed to over his life, slowly and sadly passes away with not one loved one near him to witness his death.

Perhaps what let this movie down, and what lowers it below the standards of it's flawless predecessors is that the other characters displayed are either victims of poor acting (Mary Corleone), or under development. Certain scenes are victims of mediocre script writing, which is a disappointment for the higher standard displayed in the previous installments of the trilogy.

Despite these weaknesses, the Godfather Part 3 is a satisfying conclusion with areas of absolute perfection, but blatant weaknesses which remove it from it's flawless predecessors.

8.3/10;0;0;True tt0099674;SnoopyStyle;27/12/2013;Ghost of great movies past;7;"This starts with a recap of the previous two movies. It's an opening montage indicative of this movie. It's a shadow living off the ghosts of past greatness.

It's 1979, the new characters include Mary (Sofia Coppola) daughter of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), and Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) the illegitimate son of Sonny Corleone. Michael is trying to go legit, but the Corleone family crime partner Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna) is disrespecting Michael. All out fighting breaks out between Vincent and Joey. ""Just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in."" It is the only quote worth quoting.

The third generation doesn't have it. Only Andy Garcia has any acting prowess. He has the cockiness of a street punk. Sofia Coppola is just a symbol of the lack of depth in the cast. It's shocking since I would expect that all of Hollywood would be jumping through hoops to get a bit part or some background work in this iconic franchise. Francis Ford Coppola doesn't have anything left in this franchise. Even Pacino looks dried up. Instead of muscle and threats, Michael does business deals. It doesn't have the same power and menace.";0;0;False tt0099674;Imay_37;04/03/2006;Over - Rated!!!;1;"You got to be honest to yourself, just because the first 2 are brilliant that doesn;t make this great....

Compared to the first two which kept you on the edge of your seat, with action and story balanced perfectly, number 3 is just a dull story that could be told way less than 3 hours.

As far as i'm concerned there is no godfather trilogy, just 1 and 2.

When you have seen the first 2 you're gonna wanna watch the 3rd, just make sure you watch it when you have nothing else you could watch.

Over - all its a rubbish film and for some reason no'one wants to be honest about it.....

Although the last half an hour did try to push the film up 3/10, the 2 hours before was useless......";4;12;False tt0099674;stephenpaultaylor;28/10/2004;sophia should have won an Oscar;5;"awful awful awful slow and dull and lacking everything that made the first two great. the ending just seemed a pale hark back to the powerful ending to the first one, the acting was very very transparent, including pacino and keaton. Sophia, well, her acting at least made me laugh, which was the smallest ounce of enjoyment i got out of this film. Truly disappointed with this movie.

Music was great, some of the cinematography was mildly interesting if not dull, conventional and uninspired. And the story, overall, was way too soapy. The number of times characters say ""I will always love you"" is ridiculous.

But the first two were great. I'd say the second was the best. It's a real pity.";4;12;False tt0099674;jacobhenrytucker-1;20/02/2007;This is the worst crime drama I have ever seen!;1;The first Godfather was absolutely world class. The second Godfather wasn't as good but still very entertaining but like after every successful film, the director gets the idea of a sequel and it all goes horribly wrong. This is a classic example of this. First of all, the movie is slow and boring, the plot is just pointless and don't get me started on the violence. There was barely any of it, hardly like the original masterpiece that dominated the box office and still is the best-selling UK movie! This movie is rubbish and I regret seeing it, I knew the reviews were bad but they said that about the Godfather 2 and it was amazing so I saw it and it was terrible. I really thought the director would have known it. Thank God the director took in the criticism and did not make a sequel which he was planning to do. So that's it, before you watch it DON'T WATCH IT;3;9;False tt0099674;partnerfrance;04/01/2006;A Made-For-TV-like Grade B sequel, redeemed by a sublime ending;4;"Well, I've read a lot of comments reacting to the initial bad reviews, but having watched the film on DVD last night I think I need to turn the tide back again. Right up until the end, the whole film plays out like some awful made-for-TV sequel, or even worse the pilot film for a new TV series ""based on the characters in The Godfather"". If you look closely you can even tell where the commercials will be! The acting is either wooden (not just Sofia Coppola, who had the unenviable task of filling in for Winona Ryder at the last minute, but even the marvelous Diane Keaton, who makes her single set-piece speech about how she is so frightened of Michael that it clouds her still-surviving love for him, then repeats it about ten times during the film) or alternatively entirely over the top (Andy Garcia), the same point is bludgeoned into the viewer over and over again (the ""legitimate"" business world is even more ruthless and dishonest than the Mob), and some of the plot lines are simply ludicrous (Andy Garcia, who has grown up in the city, can ride a police horse like a champion, and by the single act of killing a rival mobster and penetrating a rival gang has somehow metamorphosed from a street punk into a successor worthy of inheriting the mantle of Don Corleone).

And yet...and yet...the entire film is almost redeemed by the last five minutes or so and by a single actor. Al Pacino's silent scream on the steps of the opera house, and even more the final single minute of footage of him as a tired old man struggling to put his glasses on as he reminisces over his past life, then crumpling into death as he strokes one of the dogs who are probably his last compassionate companions on Earth : the film suddenly fast-forwards from the utterly ridiculous to the superbly sublime, triggering a groundswell of emotions. Pacino's performance at the end almost, just almost, saves the rest of the film.";3;9;False tt0099674;tstromsn;29/07/2019;Not believable;4;This third part of the trilogy just felt lazy, poorly slapped together and not believable.

The Michael Corleone we got to know in part 1 and 2 is not the same in part 3. Here you just get Al Pacino's lazy acting (just being himself) just shouting and raising his voice where it's not appropriate. It just feels he went into this movie without any heart and soul and care for the character just to make a quick buck.

The rest of the cast too doesn't belong either. The girl who plays his daughter simply can't act (I know she got the part just because she is the daughter of the director. What a shame).

We also get some pretty silly action scenes that just looks stupid: Drive by on a horse? Come on. Also the way they lured a gangster into the trap by calling him names just felt unbelievable: Nobody would have fell for that.

The movie is too long, too boring and have some pretty cringy moments here and there. Compared to Godfather part 1, this one stinks.;2;5;False tt0099674;Yaywalter;10/05/2018;Not terrible, but not impressive...;5;"Not as bad as some make it out to be, but definitely falls well short of the first two movies.

Provides decent (albeit somewhat unnecessary) closure to Michael's story, but almost everything else about it is fairly dull and uninteresting... whereas how Godfather parts 1 and 2 had a time dilation effect that made 90 minutes fly by in what felt like only 30, part 3 unfortunately had the inverse effect on me.

I will say that Sofia Coppola's performance, while certainly bad, wasn't as horrible or as detrimental to the film as I was led to believe.

I rate movies either ""awful"", ""bad"", ""so-so"", ""good"", or ""great"". My rating for The Godfather Part III is ""so-so"", which I've decided equates to 5/10 on IMDb's rating scale.";2;5;False tt0099674;iftikharkhokher;04/06/2011;Godfather3;7;This is the last of the trilogy and the weakest!Pacino is superb as he was a from the start but two character casting ,that of Vincent and Mary,hold back the film.Garcia is clearly apeing De Niro in his body language but his talking with eyes sinks him.Coppola's daughter is all innocence but a matured actress was required here.The plot is nothing new and flashbacks to the other films reveal a lack of originality.Besides Pacino,Eli Wallach is very good as well as the others from movie no.2 but the urgency,the violent romance of it all is completely missing.The best film is the always the original,sequels just cash on its success.Godfather1 was as we call it the 'real thing' the others were copies.;2;5;False tt0099674;lribeirinhu;13/09/2008;Overwhelming and over-underrated;10;"... its really a shame to see this movie as a sequel, if there was no previous godfather movies, this one could standalone as one of most magnificent movies i've ever seen...

but, there's always a ""but"", there are previous conditions! we have godfather I and godfather II. i love all the three parts, and thats why people rate this movie so poorly. the first two were outstanding in every levels, it really transports you into that family, you become a part of it too! At a certain point i look into yourself asking whats best for the ""familia"" and what should they do. Whit brilliant performances by Marlon Brando and De Niro, Al Pacinos character seems a bit far for the movie and in a certain part you wish he didn't show up anymore in the film, you just want to see Brando in part I and the same in part II played by De Niro. Its like we forget Michael Corleone. But I now see that its the most important person in all three parts, Pacino managed to show us such a growth in its character thats difficult not to see right in the first movie!

In part III you will experience something you've never experienced in the others... i feel sorry for the misunderstanding of this great movie. i hope you feel so powerless in the end as i did... its the most beautiful ending i've ever seen, surpasses gladiator. from this moment on i'll love Al Pacino. take care";2;5;False tt0099674;gregmovies;28/08/2008;Should've left it at two films...;2;The Godfather Part III must be the worst film ever nominated for best picture. The film doesn't have the characters, brilliant performances, great direction, and atmosphere that the first two films had. Part III is simply boring, and above all, unnecessary. It seems this film was just an attempt to capitalize on the success of the first two Godfathers. The acting is average at best, with Pacino putting in a decent performance and Sophie Coppola an atrociously terrible one. The plot is overcomplicated and at times illogical. For me, there weren't really any redeeming qualities. I prefer to think of the Godfather as two films instead of three.

All in all, I give this film a 2/10. My least favorite Mafia film ever made.;2;5;False tt0099674;emperor_bender;28/02/2008;Different than the first 2 but deserves the same respect;9;"The Godfather Part III is, what I think; one of the most underrated movies ever made. It is definitely on my own personal ""Top 10 Most Underrated Movies"" list. My question is: why? The possible answer: It is too different than the first 2. And this is very true, as different as Part II was from the first, they were still in the same league. This movie is almost in an entirely different league. One reason could be that the first movie was made in 1972, the second in 1974, then this one waited until 1990. But I don't see why that's a problem. We have all of the basic (surviving) cast and crew: Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, Al Pacino starring as Michael Corleone, Talia Shire as Connie, Diane Keaton as Kay, Richard Bright as Al Neri the enforcer. We also have a number or more modern big name actors here, such as "" Andy Garcia (Vinnie Mancini), Eli Wallach (Altobello), Joe Mantegna (Joey Zasa), George Hamilton (BJ Harrison), Bridget Fonda (Grace Hamilton), Sophia Coppola (Mary Corleone, and John Savage (Father Andrew Hagen). The setting is back in New York, and also in Sicily (as in the original, we also see Don Tommasino from the first 2 here as an elderly man), and also the Vatican. The storyline here is very different than in the first 2 movies, here the Corleone family is a legitimate family with all the connections they need, and several foundations to their name. Michael is now an elderly man and therefore does not have the physical authority he had in the first 2 movies, but of course Al Neri, his senior enforcer is still with him. I liked this movie a lot. Very well written. The cast was well picked and everyone played their part well. I just hope that people will watch this movie before deciding to outcast it from the first 2. It's very different but still very good, you will like it. Maybe not as much as the first 2 but I guarantee it will be an enjoyable piece. I give this a 9/10, the only reasons it doesn't get a 10 is because of some plot holes left from the second movie that weren't carried to this one, and some things were left unanswered here. Also the ending was a little dry, but wasn't terrible. But fans will enjoy this film, I know I did.";2;5;False tt0099674;durd;09/02/2007;Synopsis;10;The Godfather Part 3 is for me the best in the trilogy. It is much more realistic and has religious issues attached. The new Pope is elected and dies...the Archbishop is murdered and Don Corleone's nephew Vinnie becomes Don when Michael suffers from a stroke.

This film has to have the greatest ending ever. Michael and his daughter Mary are walking down the steps of the Opera House in Sicily and are shot at. Mary is shot through the chest and dies on the scene. Michael is sobbing and crying and screaming and shouting. It then cuts to a scene of Michael Corleone many years later when he is very very old and sitting by himself in a chair outside. He put on his shades. His head drops into his chest and he falls out of the chair...he is dead. The End

Brilliant;2;5;True tt0099674;theshadow908;31/05/2006;What happened?;6;After the immense success of the first two Godfather films, it was only right that there should be a third one. This entry takes place in New York during the 1970s. Michael Corleone is older now, and he's struggling to go legitimate and leave the Corleone crime empire to somebody else. Sonny Corleone's son Vincent is struggling to become the Don, but Michael doesn't trust him. As Michael tries to get out, a series of events causes him to be sucked back in. You'd think this entry would be just as good as the last two, but it's not. It's just not the same. You don't get the same feeling watching it.

It's a given that Al Pacino is older and Michael Corleone is older as well, but Al just doesn't play him the same. Michael Corleone had a certain style from the way he talked to the way he acted. In this movie, Al Pacino plays him differently, like a character from one of his more recent movies. All of the actors from the first film are gone except for Diane Keaton and Talia Shire, but they're not important enough for the audience to care. Sofia Coppola is in the role of Michael's daughter Mary showing some of the worst acting I've ever seen. The only new actor that deserves praise is Andy Garcia as the cocky Vincent Corleone.

This entry in the Godfather series has the obligatory 3 hour running length, but unlike the first two films, you'll be checking your watch to see when it ends. Even less happens in this movie than the first one. It's long and boring, and it doesn't even have the same style as the first two films. Overall, it's good to watch if you've seen the first two, and it's not terrible, but it just doesn't have the classic quality of the first two films.

6.5/10;2;5;False tt0099674;PhattyMatty42;26/03/2006;Not bad at all...;8;"This isn't nearly as bad as people say it is. The acting is pretty good all around, though I wish we could of gotten more out of the newcomers... Andy Garcia is really the only one that makes them worthwhile while Sofia Coppola acts really stiff. I hate the whole Vatican angle, I don't see why this film needed it. Alas it does and the middle of this movie you tend to start to get bored. But Part 3 has such a good last 45 mins that the boring parts start to fade away fast.

Pacino's performance is everything it had to be and you really sense the loss he embodies the whole film. I did miss Robert Duvall as Tom Hagan, I do feel we could of gotten a much better movie with him in it (it would of been a great addition). But for all of the film's faults they're some great parts. Like I said the whole climax in the opera house, spilling out onto the steps, was tremendous. It was extremely well shot. Some very memorable lines: ""Just when I thought that I was out, they pull me back in."" and ending with one of the greatest scenes in film history.

Yes this movie isn't as good as it's predecessors, but when you boil down to it what film is?";2;5;False tt0099674;Fedaykin324;16/06/2005;The best of the three;10;"The Godfather Part III is, in my opinion, the best out of all three movies. The Godfather is my second favorite, and Part II a distant third.

This movie was definitely the most complex out of the three. It really details Michael's struggle for the legitimacy of the Corleone family and that he's definitely haunted by ordering the death of his brother Fredo. I think one of the reasons why his character is developed so well over the course of this movie is the fact that it's set in his older years, and he's doing a lot of reflecting on his life, especially after he suffers a diabetic stroke. He's hell-bent on jumping the gap and taking the Corleone family into legitimacy. You see that he really doesn't want to start another war, but in the end it's necessary.

However, Michael is not the one to actually plan everything out. That's taken care of by his nephew, Vincent Mancini (and later on Vincent Corleone). Vincent is the (illegitimate) son of Santino Corleone. In the end Vincent becomes ""Don Corleone"" and handles everything. At the beginning of the movie, Vincent was raucous, and rowdy like Sonny, but after he's appointed Don, he becomes much more like Michael: Quiet, reserved, and level-headed.

The outstanding storyline is topped only by the SUPERB acting of Al Pacino and the rest of the cast. Al Pacino is one of THE BEST actors of all time and definitely my favorite. He's just absolutely amazing to watch on screen. The final two scenes of this movie are probably the best scenes he's ever done.";2;5;False tt0099674;jacqgary;11/04/2005;Very Disappointing;5;"I have to say I am a Godfather Fan-aticc ...Parts 1 & 2 are Wonderful!

They were really getting down to the real nitty gritty, and I was very excited to hear that they were doing a Godfather part 3 .But sadly it was a very weak story line and I was very disappointed in the fact that there was no REAL thought put into the ending.I felt that the fans were a little let down.I think he should have left the movie ALONE and let the fans work out their own endings...Thats why we have IMAGINATION!!Some Saga's should never have an ending (ESPECIALLY IF IT'S GOOD)Anyways I heard something very interesting recently..That they are thinking of continuing the Andy Garcia(Vincent) storyline..I don't know about that idea (everyones dead except Connie,Anthony,Kay,)WHAT DOES THAT TELL YA!";2;5;False tt0099674;maffilms13;19/02/2003;The bastard child for a reason.;5;"Imagine, if you will your oldest brother becomes Pope... your second oldest brother then cures cancer... and you, the baby, are an accountant.

This is the fate of Godfather III. It follows in the footsteps of what could be two of the greatest films of all time. Add to that; casting, set and script problems, and you have your explanation why very few people acknowledge its existence.

Sophia Coppola belongs behind the camera and not in front of it, we all know that. But you can't just write that off as a small detail. She is supposed to be one of the driving forces in this film, and she is horrible. Imagine I & II with a young Chevy Chase trying to play Sonny ... (shivers!). The spectacular supporting cast of mob characters is missing as well. Replaced with bland filler rolls.

Having just watched III, for the first time in a long time, I also find that this film, unlike the last two, lacks the charm and flavors of its supposed time period, 1979. When you watch I & II you can't just tell the time period, you feel it. It was a character, especially in II where we are jumping back and forth. In III it could take place in the 70's, 80's even the 90's. Coppola never places us in the era. Lord knows the costumes are not circa '79.

Finally the script. It has two great actors in Pacino and Garcia (who should be a huge star), but it lacks key aspects which make I & II great writing and cultural icons. The classic one liners (`leave the gun, take the canolli's' or `I'll make him an offer he can't refuse') are gone. All anyone remember is Pacino's pull me back in line. Also it strays too far from the gangster genre, instead getting buried in random acts of blasphemy and Catholic guilt. It's one thing to walk in with a gun and knock off a few high placed gangsters, but the Vatican is probably a bit more strict on firearms. And can you even really stab someone with plastic glasses.

Over all, Godfather III is a beautifully shot film, which provides and end to Michael's story. And for fans of the first two, it was fun in a way to travel down memory lane. But in the end that is what you are left with... a film trying to reminisce and rekindle the magic of the past, that winds up constantly reminding you that it is not as good, tight or original as its predecessors. Godfather III is the bastard child, and deservedly so.";2;5;False tt0099674;tributarystu;11/01/2003;"If it only hadn't had that ""III""";7;"There are few movie series that were as successful as The Godfather series. Maybe, in the opinion of some, the 3 Lord of The Rings films will be better...anything can happen, and it is all a matter of opinion.

This here is the third and last movie in the series, I consider most successful(the series, not this film). A variety of great actors, great ideas and one great director made such a feast possible. When I hear the Godfather I can not think of only one movie...the Godfather means Francis Ford Coppola. It means Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Diane Keaton, and most of all, it means Marlon Brando. You might well enough conclude, that I liked the first movie in the series most, as it probably is considered the best by most viewers. But this review is about the third part of the trilogy.

The whole movie is similarly structured as the first two. It really reminded me of the first part though, maybe a little too much. Probably, the, let's say, lack of success of this movie is also based on that. Most of the ideas that appear in the first movie, and in the second, can also be seen here. The family has it's part, business it's part and love it's part.

Michael Corleone is the character we will follow through out this movie. I consider that some changes have taken place in time, and that Michael, as time passed by, desires to get rid of the life he actually never wanted, but then embraced. After his, what I consider, degeneration as a human being in the second movie, he tries to redeem himself in this one. Yet, we get to see a world that is shattered by the hatred of men, and consequently by evil. Many morals are being ignored in this world: forbidden love and terrible crimes take place. The meaning of ""family"" is actually being played with, by the two lovers who ignore the fact that they are relatives. People can never be trusted in this world, and revenge is always bitter sweet...is it really our world? Well, not our whole world, but still part of it.

There are the scenes that are similar in the first and this movie: the films start with a party, ends as both the others, trusted people betray, nobody is safe, Michael(like his father) gets to the hospital and a new don appears. This don is none other, but Sonny's son, who, probably for the worst, is very alike his father...the short temper. Also he gets attached to Michael, and protects him when he is unable to protect himself, and he does have a strong will. Vincent, that is his name, falls in love though with Mary, his cousin and also Michaels daughter...Michael does not agree with this combination, and he succeeds to unbind them too, using the lust for power that Vincent feels. Sadly, few real stories have happy endings, and this one couldn't be one of these. The fact that we get to also see Michael die at the end underlines the idea that everyone has his turn...no one escapes.

The involvement of the church in this story is a little incredible...the fact that such things can happen at the Vatican is slightly disturbed. can people really do such terrible things? I hope not...still, what can you expect from those who have no other reason to live, but money? The Archbishop is an evil character...I considered him so from the beginning...I think the fact that he smoked was a sign. Still, I could not imagine that anyone would be so ill minded to kill the pope. Frightening story...

Kay and Michael rejoin through their children...partly at least, the relations between them get better. This was to be expected, as Michael's was was to be redeemed, and he was practically preparing himself for the end of his life. Some might think this is normal, that many people suddenly turn to God and start to regret, the wrong things they have done, at an old age. I'd tell them just to think of the 80 years old Altobello. He, the one who calls himself ""peace maker"" is actually the one who causes the death of a beautiful young lady...peace is rarely achieved through murders, and if it is, then I really would not trust such a ""cease-fire"". Cardinal Lomberto is honest and good hearted...all that is good in that world of evil...well, maybe together with Anthony. But Lomberto is also going to show that goodness does not prevail in our world...honesty is not welcome in some places, and some personal interests are more important than the interest of the human race.

I really enjoyed this film, more than other movies with higher marks...I stick to my idea, that if this had been a stand-alone movie it would've been more successful. Peace is hard to find on earth...and when you decide to do something you better think twice. Sometimes, you can not turn around.

The actors are good...yet, I really felt the missing of a Marlon Brando. I fear Al Pacion isn't enough...that might be why I considered the second Godfather part a small disappointment...but that's another story. Andy Garcia plays the role of Vincent smoothly, and he has also got the aspect I would think of for such a character. He is a useful addition, that did give this film a little more taste. I did miss though some of the great actors that appeared in the first two movies. I guess, as I said, Pacino wasn't enough for me...and Garcia could not complement for a Brando, or even for a De Niro. This movie is generally good and if there hadn't been the two things I mentioned earlier it would've been great. But in this case, an 8/10 are enough for the performance seen. Still think it's worthy for an applause.";2;5;False tt0099674;Idocamstuf;19/08/2002;Easier to follow than the first two, but has a few flaws;;I finally saw this the other day, and I did find it much easier to follow than the first two, but one problem with this movie was Coppola's choice to put his daughter(Sofia Coppola) in the film, she's not bad looking, but she had hardly any prior acting experience, and her bad acting took away from the films quality. Everything else about the movie is great. ***1/2 out of *****;2;5;False tt0099674;jedinite-9;17/02/2001;A disgrace to the Godfather legacy.;6;"If you watched the first two movies, you will know that the story for part 3 is totally implausible and disgraceful. In the first two movies, the story revolved around the ""family"" and relationship between the father and his sons and then the brothers relationships. Why is Mary Corleone a central figure? Why is Anthony an opera singer??! In part 2, Michael never talked to Mary or acknowledged her existence. Michael comforts Anthony after the shooting incident but doesn't do anything for Mary. Mary just sort of ""appeared"" after the shooting incident in part2. Michael focused on his son in the first two movies, therefore, why does Michael pay all of his attention to Mary in part 3??!

The main reason this story flopped is that Anthony isn't a central character. Do you think Michael Corleone would allow his son to grow up to become an opera singer?!! The story should have been Michael introducing his son to the business and Anthony's refusal or acceptance or maybe his death. If you've seen the movie Donnie Brasco, the chemistry between Pacino and Johnny Depp was great. Why wasn't Depp cast as Anthony?

Another insane character development was that of Connie being involved in the family business. Connie wasn't involved in any way with the business in the first two movies. Why is she now giving orders to Michael's button men? How did Kay become so forgiving of Michael? How could she not now the ""truth"" behind Fredo's death??!

Lastly, Michael wasn't the same character as the end of part 2. No reason was given for his change. He was twisted and evil at the end of 2 and now he is like a kitten. The most insane moment was when Michael was hiding in the limousine and surprised Kay by being the limo driver. That was totally un-Corleone. Tom Hagen (Duvall) was greatly missed from this movie. He couldn't have saved it though. A great saga ending would have been Kay ending the Corleone curse by taking out Michael herself.";2;5;False tt0099674;JW-27;22/09/1999;A painful disappointment;5;"It is impossible for me to believe that this movie was in the same hands of the director who gave us the near-flawless previous films of the GF trilogy--not that there was much of a script with which to work. Al Pacino is dry and mechanical as the exhausted Don and it is excruciatingly obvious that he is trying to mimic the exact mannerisms of his late father, Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando). Fans of the first two will pick up on this immediately. To end the saga with that foolish keeling over (hmmm, where have we seen that before?) was preposterous. The finale in the opera house was also tough to tolerate as it was clearly an (ineffective) attempt to recreate the breath-taking baptism sequence in Part I.

Andrew Garcia was good but a bit too flashy for his role. The love affair he develops with Mary (Sofia Coppola) is an annoying distraction. I have much preferred him in his subsequent roles (especially in ""When a Man Loves a Woman""). Diane Keaton does her best as Kate Corleone, but, again, the script she had to work with left her character flat and shallow.";2;5;False tt0099674;glgioia;19/12/2001;Vendetta!!!!;3;-Hollywood editor is mysteriously whacked thereby allowing delusional self important director to run amok and release a completely bloated un-edited nightmare, that is nothing short of epic badness.

FF Coppola immortalized himself by making arguably 2 of the greatest films ever, Godfather and Godfather II. But like many of us, he then got old, fat and a lot less brilliant. The result was the release of this unsought and completely superfluous 3rd film, which is remarkable only as a testament to bad film-making, bad judgment and the fleeting quality of genius. Godfather 3 has indeed become nearly as famous for its badness as its 2 predecessors were for their excellence. What i will say on its behalf, is that it probably could have been salvaged and but for a horrible non-existent editing job, might have been OK. Much could be repaired by merely chopping the more idiotic dialog exchanges that infect nearly every scene. Only in some instances i think are the scenes themselves wholly idiotic enough to just be omitted completely. It would be challenging but interesting to re-edit, because the movie for all of its deserved bad press, has a lot of good stuff within and the story I have found after repeated viewings that the story is interesting. Its just weighed down utterly by too many scenes containing horrendous acting with actual laugh inducing moronic dialog, that never should have left the cutting room, if a cutting room actually existed. I think I finally see exactly what Coppola was trying to do, and the idea was a good one. Yet I also see how fine the line is between a good film maybe even a better than average film, and a joke like this one. We all know how many 'takes' go into each and every scene before one is selected for the final print. Now imagine taking all the Worst takes, and this is what you would get. Completely baffling.;3;11;False tt0099674;fmeeser-242-731082;24/05/2020;Too many flaws to count;1;"This film has absolutely no right to be considered ""underrated"" ""misunderstood"" or ""a masterpiece"".

The plot is fine in most respects, but everything from the direction, scripting and especially the casting could not be worse. Too many compromises to list pose more questions than answers from the conclusion of this ""trilogy"".

Considering the extremely high level of excellence set by the Godfather and Part II, this movie just does measure up, despite the many retro refrences meant to legitimize it.

Out of respect to the true masterpieces that precede, it would be best to not watch this film or even consider it as part of the legacy.";2;6;False tt0099674;heinigrunbaum-786-20424;23/04/2011;How part III totally destroyed two masterpieces :(;4;"There are two outstanding scenes in Godfather II (which I think is better than the first Godfather) and they are both very melancholic. Francis Ford Coppola used to be ""THE"" master of creating melancholic scenes in many of his films! I wish he would go back to do that a few times more before he parts with us one day in the distant future. In Godfather Part II there is a FLASHBACK scene to Godfather part I. I don't know if this scene is a original ""cut out"" from Godfather part I, but even James Caan is in this one shot scene where the family is about to have dinner and James Caan starts having a fight with his little brother played by Al Pacino. The scene ends with Al Pacino sitting alone after announcing that he has joined the army during 2nd world war as the rest of the family has rushed off to greet the Godfather who OFF-SCREEN is coming home. Very melancholic scene. The second melancholic scene in Godfather II is the end shot of the film where Al Pacino, the new Godfather, is sitting alone in solitude on a bench in his garden. GREAT, GREAT, GREAT !!! I always loved that scene and it was the end scene of two fantastic masterpieces. HOWEVER, I maid the mistake of watching Godfather part III and that has totally destroyed the memory of that end shot in Godfather part II. So Mr. Coppola that was a dumb move making Godfather III - just my own personal honest opinion. Add to that Sofia Coppola who is not a great actor (a much better director if you ask me) especially in the end scene where she gets shot. It doesn't look real. She acts very badly in that scene. Another mistake by Coppola letting his own daughter act in his film. Would had been OKAY if she was a good actress!!! Over and out for the Godfather films!!!";2;6;True tt0099674;macz;01/10/2010;Lost the plot?;2;Many people will ask why this franchise was resurrected after 16 years. The film displays none of the hallmarks of the original film such as a proper storyline, for example. Whereas the slow, unhurried pace of the character and plot development worked well in the original, here the story seems to constantly delve into unconnected cul-de-sacs, leaving an impression of unfinished business, of loose ends. The nonsense with the Pope and the obvious parallels the scriptwriters were trying to draw was a limp and ineffective contrivance. At times, one felt that Mr Pacino struggled to make the most out of some of the corniest lines I've ever hear him utter. And the overacting by both Mr Pacino and Miss Keaton in the final scene was truly awful. A great disappointment.;2;6;True tt0099674;rossrobinson;03/11/2003;Good, but not as good as the 1st;10;I think The Godfather part III was a good movie, but i think the Orignal was the best one out of the other godfather movies. The 1st defiently i think would take some beating as it is such a fantastic movie. I think it would be very hard to make such a good movie that has all the actors and actresses that can peform the characters well and for the writers who try and come up with fantastic ideas to make a movie like this and others. I give this movie 10 out 10. I'm not right sure if i think that there should be a 4th godfather movie because i think the orignals are always the best, but some movies can do better but if the writers of the godfather movies decide to make a part 4 of the godfather, then i think they should work hard on this to come up with another fantastic lots of ideas.;2;6;False tt0099674;Chancey30-1;17/10/2003;I'm watching it right now;7;I have been watching it on USA and analyzing during the comercial break. God Father III is extremely mediocre compared to the first 2. If it were not a sequel to the previous 2, it would be just a great movie. But since being the final chapter of the series. It must needs be much better than great. So by comparision to its predessors, it is an unbelievably crappy movie.;2;6;False tt0099674;bleazardsmith-206-419188;30/06/2020;Very Very Underrated;10;I never quite got why part 3 of The Godfather trilogy was panned by the critics as it's an excellent movie and a fitting end to a wonderful 3 movies..;1;2;False tt0099674;uurcauur;11/06/2020;Watch it;9;I regret to wait long time to watch it. After first two parts i always thought it didn't work to watch. But now I see that i wasted my years without this movie.;1;2;False tt0099674;rzaaeeff;10/05/2020;Brilliant ending to the sequel;10;"This movie is definitely underrated and criticized harshly. I can empathize with people who expected more action, thriller especially after watching the first two members of the sequel. But the viewers need to understand one thing: ""Bigger crimes are political by nature"".

The ending could not be pictured better than this. If you climb the criminal ladder, you eventually hit the rock of the politics and you have to deal with it. Given the fact that Michelle Corleone had a great power, he was a big threat to the political mafia, and he had to deal with it. If the main character is the big player himself, why bother showing small crimes in a limited time? It would be a waste of time. Also no matter who you are, no matter how powerful you are, there is always battle inside you aside from your external ones and this battle inside you is harder than any other external battle. I loved the movie and I strongly recommend watching it without any expectations, just enjoy this masterpiece!

Belissima ragazzi, auguri!";1;2;False tt0099674;mr-moeeni10;16/04/2020;WHY Coppola, WHY???;9;This movie is one of the most underrated movies in IMDB I think, everything in this movie is high class, directing, acting, scenario, music and ... . Al Pacino acting is masterpiece again in this role, music is phenomenal, Andy Garcia is like a new born star, even scenario is more fascinated than two previous Godfathers and Coppola's directing is the best again. Last episode of the movie in the theater was very well directed and breathtaking, and the whole story has a great meaning. Any way I think there are some weaknesses about this movie that I should say (because of these its 9): 1. Although Pacino, Garcia and Keaton very well played in this movie, but other actors and actresses weren't good enough for this great movie, specially the Pope and Mary (Sofia Coppola) , I have to say Sofia Coppola ruined the character of Mary and I think if his father wasn't the director of the movie she never ever had any chance to get this job, her acting is the blind spot of the movie, WHY Coppola, WHY??? 2. Some point of the movie you understand that some characters didn't well defined and its a little hazy, I think it was better that director take more time to define some of the characters. Totally I have to say this movie is a masterpiece and enjoyable but many people in IMDB because of comparing this one to two others rated it very bad such as 1 from 10, are you kidding me? If you don't like it as those 2 previous versions you have to rated 1? I think its very unfair.;1;2;False tt0099674;francobulgheoz;07/04/2020;The Godfather: A Masterclass.;10;"This review is intended to go as a full closure to the 3 chapters that contain the story and history of The Godfather. This meaning, I asume if you went all the way to The Godfather Pt. III is because you've watched the two previous ones.

Anyways, how to describe a trilogy such as this one? Nevermind if it's the first, second, third or even fourth time you've watched, it always stays close in your mind for a few days. And every once in a while, a line or a scene pops-up from nowhere to my mind. That is the response to cleverly crafted cinema.

These are not just movies. These are lectures. The Godfather is incredibly crafted to show mainly, the essence of life above all; family.

It is amazing to see how many characters are explored, and in such depth, over the three movies. You feel so close or so real to their situations, you know everything and everyone around them, and that makes it possible for a clear judgement on their characters and further arcs or downfalls.

The Godfather can absolutely work as a lesson of how to be in this life. It teaches behaviour, when to talk, when not to. Who plays you a fool? Who is loyal? What matters. What does'nt.

Ultimately, wiping the cinematic exaggerations and the constant violence, these are situations and decissions that can happen and affect common lives of any common citizen, of course, within the boundaries of each ones own reality.

When it comes to acting, not much casts follow up or pair The Godfather's. Al Pacino moved me to tears many times. Marlon Brando is so sincere and pure. Robert Duvall is amazingly beliavable and talented. Robert De Niro, the usual. Diane Keaton, John Cazale, Andy Garcia, etc... Only disappointed with two particular choices and that was both of Michael's grown-up children in TGIII.

Directing is explicit from FFC, leaving things very certain when they must, and dropping clues and mystery over time, only to recieve a closure in a near future. The constant swapping of contexts is so easily handled it clearly proves a tight connection between Director and Editor.

Anyways, I would finally like to comment on what I feel is the ultimate message of the film:

Lies don't go far. You can lie and feel relieved or saved for times, but lies kill you in the end. Be loyal to those who will always be loyal, family. But don't underestimate loyalty, family will always be loyal when they're expecting your loyalty back. Ultimately, no matter the money, the wipes, the tales, the legacy, that's nothing. Love and family should be the priority.";1;2;True tt0099674;adam_traynor;22/03/2020;Wasn't as good as parts 1&2;7;"I found this film to be quite boring I think they should have just stuck with Parts 1&2.";1;2;False tt0099674;marmar-69780;14/03/2020;godfather 3;6;So i heard that this film isnt very weak compared to first two which both are brilliant,so i have given this one chance to impress me,but it didnt,this film by miles isnt close to two previous one and this one doesnt feel like it was made by same director and actors,but it isnt also completly bad ,film has some redeeming qualities like some performances and new characters like vincent were goodly interduced and represanted,sofia honestly wasnt good in this film and she was weakest part of film,plot with church and its entire thing didnt for me belonged in godfather film and i felt bored in that moments,if you compare godfather 3 to first two you will see that it lacks quality of them,but it is at least good for one time watch;1;2;False tt0099674;Anitaingame;20/02/2020;A great trilogy;7;Many feelings left me this last part of the saga that I want to see again. There are good performances but not excellent (with respect to the first and second), although my intention is not to compare, The Godfather 3 is good, loaded with content that for those who are not informed with what is behind this world, they are not It will make it so easy to understand, but it also has its ups and downs.

The final minutes in the opera did not like me so much, however the end of this work was impeccable. A trilogy of 10 that should not have waited so long to perform it.;1;2;False tt0099674;legotodd;09/04/2019;Stick with the first two;;If you are ready to get bored out of your mind, then watch this part three. A lead up to two perfectly made movies fails to gain my attention. This movie is a joke. I was ok with just watching the first two and not worrying about what happens to the new godfather;1;2;True tt0099674;jaythor70;18/02/2019;Highs and Lows;8;"I enjoyed this movie the first time and every time I've watched it. There are some negatives, which I will get ride of first- Tom Hagen/Robert Duvall is missing, and George Hamilton is no Robert Duvall. Not greedy, but feeling underpaid, he chose to skip this one, and it hurts the finished product.And second- Sofia Coppola is awful. That said- I loved Garcia as Sonny's son and the heir to the mafia throne. I liked Talia Shire's growth as a character into a true ""Corleone"". And I like how Michael Corleone's life of crime didn't end with a happy retirement. While I disagree with the cardinal's assessment (or at least, his blaming God) there are certainly consequences for actions, and Michael is certainly reaping his criminal harvest. It is dark and depressing, as his life of crime should be, and that is when he should seek redemption. But this shows that redemption isn't something you can earn, but is a gift from God. The scenery is beautiful, the interplays of the characters (minus Sofia) are well done, and though not up to the first 2 installments, very few movies are.";1;2;False tt0099674;alfvega-03572;05/01/2019;The greatest underrated picture of all time;10;I sincerely think that this film is as great as the first two. I really do. I have seen this film (and the first two, too) more than 80,000,000,000,000 times, and I still can't understand why everyone says it's bad. Yes, Sofia Coppola is not a good actress, and that aspect affects the film in comparison to its predecessors. But, come on, it still has other performances that are great (Al Pacino, Andy García, Eli Wallach), great script, great cinematography, great soundtrack..... If we see it without focusing much in Sofia Coppola's performance, then we have a perfect movie, like the rest of the saga. I personally love how this movie shows us how the mafia interferes with the catholic church (and that happens in real life, I know it's hard to acknowledge but it is true), and I love how it also shows the last years of Michael Corleone. I don't know what else to say, this is not a bad movie at all.;1;2;False tt0099674;mardalsfossen01;29/12/2018;They should've ended Part II with a bang instead of dragging the story out;8;The way they narrate The Godfather I-III the story can just go on forever and forever.

Again in Part III like in Part II new people get introduced and I stop caring about most of them.

I think they should've just ended Part II with a bang instead of making Part III just a waiting for it to end.

All they do in Part II and III is talking about business, the viewer has no idea about and throwing around large sums of millions and billions and at one point someone is the traitor or bad guy or antagonist of the Corleones.

Part III wasn't too bad and had good parts, I can accept the way they narrate it, but I don't feel like they made the best out of the whole story.;1;2;False tt0099674;rzwnhbb;14/12/2018;Don't listen to those nonsense critics.;8;This is a very good continuation of god father 2. It shows how a crime family don ages and become physically weaker, regret his past, try to bring his family back and try to be close to his children. You know everything can be achieved by power but not the love. You have to gain it. Michael Corleone is one of the victim of this. He abandoned his wife only for the power and even murdered his brother for his own safety though it was not necessary as Fredo was just like a kid and his immaturity was the reason for the hatred of Michael. We've seen he apologized in God father 2 to Michael and he was really unaware of what he did to kill Michael and it was just a complete set up where Fredo was just a victim. In god father part 3, finally aging Michael has already figured that he was wrong and did a terrible sin by killing Fredo. Not only fredo he also did so much crime in previous GoD Fathers that at the last stage of his life he is actually trying to be just a little bit better and this is the main Theme of God Father 3. One thing to mention, God father is a religious term and Michael Corleone was a god father of his sister's child. So it can be easily said that he was a religious person and every religious man atleast once in his life will try to make all his sins forgive and Michael Corleone is just the perfect character to show this in drama.;1;2;False tt0099674;Bored_Dragon;17/10/2018;My favorite part;8;This is my favorite part of the trilogy. In the previous movies Pacino lost the race for an Academy Award, but it is really disgraceful that this time he wasn't even nominated.

8/10;1;2;False tt0099674;derrick-09925;04/03/2017;The Price;10;The price paid by Michael Corleone was too high. Should I call this a trade between his sins and his gains? Firstly I thought this movie will not impress me as 1st and 2nd episode did due to the reviews by others. But it is quite interesting. Especially the scenes where the Corleone family had prepared to kill their enemies and the assassins planed to kill Michael Corleone. This are always the best scene from 1st episode until 3rd episode. I rate 3 of them 10 as my respect to the actors and the stories. Grazie!;1;2;False tt0099674;GabrielMarinho1;16/09/2016;The masterpiece;10;Maybe it has some spoilers but let's agree, this is the godfather, so feel free to read without ruining your experience. I always thought Coppola made this one with a different intention from the first ones, that are as beautiful as this one by the way. If you check all the technical elements of this movie, you will see a tired, hopeless, and sad construction, all of it converging to Michael, who's already sick of the family business and can't wait to finish the illegal stuff, but it keeps coming towards him, creating an atmosphere of anger and anxiety. At the same time, softly rhyming with the first two ones, representing the part that will never come out of Michael, the Don he was and all the empire he kept from his father. A nice work Coppola does here is the relationship with religion, we see a more devoted, and supportive Don, creating a whole different mark. Altogether with the new rising member Vincent, whose actions remember a lot of his father Sonny, and Michael's relationship with Kay, that is treated in a trivial, but heavy way by Coppola. A touch that i always thought made people feel uncertain about this one, is the unattachment of everything with the first two ones, witch is the whole point of the movie, creating this feeling that is something different. For me this is certainly the best one from the trilogy, independent, all of them are great, the only thing is that this one feels for me like a redemption for all that happened in those years for Michael, brilliantly shaped, messing with all the feelings almost twenty years after the release of the last movie.;1;2;True tt0099674;jameslinton-75252;10/05/2016;Gotten an unfair rap;6;I feel that this film has gotten an unfair treatment. It certainly is the weakest in the Godfather trilogy, but definitely isn't as bad as everyone says it is. Sure, Sophia Coppola is AWFUL, I hated the smug smile she had on her face throughout the film, but this film had plenty of redeemable features. Most notably, Connie Corleone. I loved how this film gave her a much bigger role. She is a fascinating character and seeing her gain more agency was brilliant to watch. I also liked how Part III hearkened back enough to its previous films. Coppola described it as an epilogue and I think that that's an accurate description. It was similar enough to the originals, but had enough new material to keep it interesting.

Read my full review here: http://goo.gl/R3r4mY;1;2;False tt0099674;applejosh1991;09/05/2016;a good sequel, just don't compare it to the other two;7;"i saw this film, right after the first two since Part II did end on somewhat of a bitter ending.

i thought i was a pretty OK sequel if not looking on the other 2, Francis Ford Coppola's directing, Mario Puzo writing, most of the original cast are back, what can possibly go wrong? it took them 16 years. let's star with the positives: actor Andy Garcia as ""vincet"" gives the best performance in the entire film which give him an Oscar nomination, Sofia Coppola at least try's but she didn't bother me unlike the critics, the main storyline is pretty decent, mostly about michael's redemption from his dark ruthless past, finding a successor to become ""The Don"" not from his family, and tries to rebuild his relationship with his ex-wife, a really good storyline for a sequel. cinematography and music are just as amazing as the originals.

the 3 things i didn't like about this film: 1. the michael/bishop business conspiracy plot-line is kinda boring and drags-on because of the pacing and lacks the raw mafia conflict from the previous two. 2. weaker performances. already mentioned Sofia's dry delivery, but Al Pachino (who has some great moment in the film) also felt kinda dry and looks tired, his makeup wasn't convincing, some of the other cast members are just there for plot convenience and nothing more. 3. The weak ending to the godfather saga. it was rushed, pointless and almost makes you feel completely betrayed. it's only saving grace was the beautiful music score. it's clear that Puzo had a deadline from paramount to finish the script, and it shows.";1;2;True tt0099674;BA_Harrison;11/03/2016;Easily the worst of the trilogy.;4;In this, the third (and hopefully final) Godfather film, mafia boss Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), wracked with guilt over his past sins, is one step closer to becoming a legitimate businessman. He's already earned respectability in the eyes of the church, who award him the holy order of St. Sebastian, but, to paraphrase Michael himself, just when he thought he was out, 'they' pull him back in.

Sofia Coppola cops a lot o' the blame for the failure of The Godfather Part III, but it's not all her fault: sure, her emotionless delivery of her lines is painful to endure, but no more so than Pacino's uncharacteristic performance, Andy Garcia's smug face, Diane Keaton's horrible hair, and the dreary script that forces the viewer to sit through hours of boring business deals, an unconvincing romance between first cousins Vincent (Garcia) and Mary (Coppola), several crushingly dull Catholic ceremonies, and lots of operatic singing, with only the faintest hint of mafia shenanigans to still qualify it as a Godfather film.;1;2;False tt0099674;Sergeant_Tibbs;23/06/2015;A mixed bag, but you can't ignore what its highlights add to the saga.;7;With its present reputation, it takes a long time to get around to The Godfather Part III, unless of course you're already a big fan of Coppola's saga. I only ever wanted to watch it after refreshing myself with the first two parts, but that's a long investment. You've seen over 6 hours worth of film before you get around to the third, usually I'm burnt out by then. However, this time I really came around on Part II. While I'm still hot and cold on Part I, mostly admiring it more than enjoying it, I found a deep and consistent appreciation of Part II that really spoke to me on a personal level. I'd finally found motivation for Part III and I don't intend to revisit it anytime soon. It's good, not great - but you can't take away the things it does right.

Most of the acting is stellar, the production is top notch as always and it closes arcs on poignant notes. It's at its best when it's low key. The weakest moments are when Coppola tries too hard. The violence is sudden, but unmeasured. It feels like he's just nudging you for your attention but moments like these fatally break the flow. I hate to agree with the consensus of hating Sofia Coppola, but yes, she is a dire sore thumb in need of a bandage. A surprisingly welcome addition to the saga is Andy Garcia, who's the one exception to the rule of the film's best moments being the low-key ones. It really needed Tom Hagen, his absence illustrates how this was just a film made for the money but the studio wasn't keen to spread that love. Part III is a mixed bag with some worthy highlights.

7/10;1;2;False tt0099674;slightlymad22;01/02/2015;Not As Good As First Two, But Not As Bad As Some People Say;7;"There is a lot wrong with ""The Godfather Part 3"" but it's not the fault of the cast, or really the fault of writer/director Francis Ford Coppola as it is not an all together bad movie. It's just not on par with with the first two movies.

Plot In A Paragraph: In the final instalment of the Godfather Trilogy, an aging Don Michael Corleone seeks to legitimise his crime family's interests and remove himself from the violent underworld.

Al Pacino is as watchable as always, Talia Shire puts in another brilliant performance, Bridget Fonda Joe Mantegna and George Hamilton all offer superb support, but while Sofia Coppola is universally panned for her work here, it's Andy Garcia (so good in ""The Untouchables"" and ""When A Man Loves A Woman"") that I find unwatchable.

I feel Francis Ford Coppola (who has admitted he did this movie as part of dealing with his personal problems) was hamstrung by a decision made by the struggling studio. According to him, he wanted $6 million, producer, director fee with six months work on the scriptwriting. The studio instead gave him only $1 million in fees and 6 weeks to work on the script in order to meet the Christmas 1990 release. Paramount did approve this movie with a $56 million budget under strict conditions that the final cut of the film must not be less than 140 minutes (to get more screenings per day in cinemas) and any additional expenses would not be covered by the studio.

Another problem that was the studio's fault was that the character of Tom Hagen had to be written out of the script because the studio refused to meet Robert Duvall's financial demands when Duvall asked for pay in line with what everyone else was getting. With Hagen gone, an essential character and counterpart for Michael Corleone was missing from the movie.";1;2;False tt0099674;JaydoDre;16/11/2014;Underwhelming but not bad;7;I can see why.

I can see why some people who watched the first 2 movies were severely disappointed after seeing this one.

Watching this third movie right after the first two felt like somebody had dug up bits and pieces of Godfather I and II at some archaeological site and then tried to create the third movie based on the style of the found artifacts. All the aging actors are now trying to remember whom they were playing in the original movies and the director is standing in the corner trying to remember how to direct and the writers got pens in their mouth and their eyes on the ceiling trying to recall how the story ended.

While the 2nd Godfather film had flown almost seamlessly out of the first, much about this third film is different. The tone has changed, with Al Pacino as Michael Corleone giving a much more subdued and humorous performance with those rising eyebrows that started dominating his later career. The people act contrary to their characters established by the first two movies. They try to make the gangster Michael Corleone some sort of anti-hero in this one, which is missing the point of the series.

But at the same time the creators expect you to have watched the first two, because right from the start references are made to characters from the first two films without much explanation.

Al Pacino is still good. But some of the other people are not as good. There is a certain Sofia Coppola who plays Corleone's daughter. Maybe the problem is that English was not her native language or she just had a bad year, but this lady really phones in her performance. Something goes wrong in the intonation at the end of every sentence she utters. And it doesn't help when the text she is given is not very good.

In fact, the movie takes a number of dips in the quality of the dialogue. I got flashbacks about Star Wars prequels while listening to some of it. It is trying to be dramatic or poetic but often comes off as fake. It's not all bad though.

The story centers on one of Corleone relatives played by Andy Garcia and that guy is always good, especially in gangster roles.

Godfather III has its good and its bad times. It is unfortunately overshadowed by the greatness of its predecessors. Therefore, the best I can suggest is to for the viewers to do the same as what the movies did: watch the first and the second movie and then wait a while. Watch the third movie a few weeks or even years later. That way the contrast will not be as startling.;1;2;False tt0099674;zetes;14/09/2014;Not bad, but unnecessary third part of the series;7;I've seen the first two parts a few times each, but never got around to the much-maligned third installment until now. Not that everyone hates it. It was well reviewed and was nominated for Best Picture. It's that one element that garners most of the hate. You know which one. And, I have to say, Ms. Coppola's performance deserves the derision. It's a rare performance - a supporting one, at that - that drags the whole film down a level. She just has no business being in front of a camera. The film after her is hardly perfect, either. Pacino has entered his hammy phase. Keaton is mostly a non-entity. Frankly, the reason to watch, acting-wise, is Andy Garcia, who was the only actor in the film who earned an Oscar nomination. He's usually a bore, but he's excellent here. Talia Shire and Eli Wallach are both pretty good, as well. The film also lacks the focus of the first two films. With all that, though, it's still pretty good. Beautifully produced, of course, and Coppola's directing talent had yet to leave him (by my account, he had one more great film in him, Dracula, before he became worthless).;1;2;False tt0099674;jwpeel-1;25/06/2014;Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna make this worth watching.;7;"I was fortunate to have been given a copy of this film before its release so I knew the story beforehand. Like the two films that preceded it, the story is based on real events and people. In this case, the Vatican and the mysterious death of Pope John Paul I. At this point, Michael Corleone is striving for a clean life in business as a philanthropist but it seems that they pull him back in. Eli Wallach is a.competing Godfather who Connie wants to deal with personally, Michael suddenly gas a half brother with his own violent agenda who is the collegiate son of Sonny Corleone and just as hotheaded. On top of this, he has it in for Joey Zaza, played expertly by Joe Montegna. Unfortunately, Sofia Coppola is absolutely amateurish and dull as Michael's daughter.

The problems in this movie really.get in the way towards the end which.seems to go on forever. But, as I have mentioned, Eli Wallach (whom we just lost at 98) and Joe Mantegna make it all worth the price of admission. That, and a stunningly heartbreaking end scene are the high points of this epic.

Al Pacino actually gives a measured performance as well. So to those who say this film ""sucked"" your less than objective criticism is what sucks.";1;2;False tt0099674;Leofwine_draca;14/04/2014;Fitting conclusion to the series;6;THE GODFATHER: PART III may not be the best film in the world, but it does serve as a fitting conclusion to the Oscar-winning series. The story (as well as the director and actors) have now moved on 20 years, allowing the narrative a change to explore the differences that age and time have had upon them, making a story that in some aspects feels superior to the second film, which didn't really add much that we didn't know from the original.

Coppola's direction is assured as ever, and there are enough returning actors from the original series to make this a joy to watch. The newcomers are also pretty interesting, in particular Andy Garcia, who seems to be channelling Pacino's spirit from the first two movies. I didn't find Sofia Coppola to be distracting in the least, only that the camera is clearly in love with her, which you'd expect given that the director's her father.

What I enjoyed most is that the film gets back to the series origins: this one's about corruption in high places, religion, betrayal and violent murder. The characters visit some dark places, which is what we the viewer wish to watch, and the extended opera set-piece works nicely along with the helicopter assault. It also doesn't feel as slow as the admittedly superior second part, which is also a point in its favour.;1;2;False tt0099674;thesouthfamily2-552-707097;05/01/2014;Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment.;8;Few sequels can match the charge of anticipation you feel before watching the third part of Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather series. The first two parts – released in 1972 and 1974 – won Oscars as Best Picture and rank as the twin peaks of Mob movies.

So when it sinks in that this nearly three-hour sequel is not up to the level of its predecessors, the disappointment runs deep. Is Part III worth your time? Of course. It's still The Godfather, and some of it is deeply affecting.

The positive aspects of the film is the acting (for the most part). Al Pacino gives some his greatest emotional ranges in this film, and Andy Garcia as newcomer Vincent is astounding. Everyone else is still very good, including Talia Shire and Diane Keaton and the new cast members of this movie.

The negative aspects are as follows: Sofia Coppola, though not as bad as everyone says, definitely needed to retake a few of her scenes because she wasn't giving her A+ material like everyone else. Also the editing in this film is not on par with the first two. It either fades into the next scene, or it fades to black. There is hardly any consistency in the editing.

However, I do think it's a very satisfying ending to the Godfather trilogy. It had an interesting story, a great and suspenseful climax, and Michael's story arc comes full circle in this film. Had they fixed the inconsistencies mentioned above, this could've been on par with the first two movies. But as is, it's a great movie.;1;2;True tt0099674;axel-koch;15/12/2013;Clearly the worst film in the trilogy, but nevertheless very good!;7;The last installment in the Godfather trilogy, The Godfather Part III, has some obvious flaws. Including real life events out of the time of the Vatican's crisis in the late 70's and early 80's, for one, let the whole plot seem a bit weird and didn't work all the time. Even more crucial, the casting of Sofia Coppola as Michael's grown-up daughter Mary. Although we've come to experience her directing qualities a decade later, she just didn't succeed in her role and was utterly unconvincing throughout the film. And, as in the two first films, it's also more than a tad too long, which makes for some rather dreary moments. Nevertheless, The Godfather Part III is a very good film and can very well compete with the rest of the series, despite being yet another step back from The Godfather's initial quality. Not only can the audience still enjoy fabulous cinematography, set design, and score work (all of these securing the film's respectable amount of Oscar nominations), but also some final 20 minutes that will keep The Godfather Part III in your memory. As we can relish in the insanely well-made shots of all the people that have just died under most unnatural circumstances, the crew concocts what are, in my opinion, the three best shots of all three films: Frederick Keinszig, hanging dead from a bridge, Calò stabbing Don Lucchesi with his own glasses, and Archbishop Gilday falling to his dead. It may be just a bit too little of everything to establish Part III's place on the same shelf as the first two films in the series, but it's still the great Francis Ford Coppola that directed it and made the most out of a story significantly less interesting than I had expected.;1;2;False tt0099674;lesleyharris30;31/07/2013;Stands out On its Own, Weak in Comparison to its Predecessor,;7;The Godfather: Part III is a good movie with a reasonably well developed plot and a terrific cast. It certainly stands out on its own, Al Pacino shines as Michael Corleone here, being his first time playing the character in 16 years, it is as if he never left the role. Francis Ford Coppola's direction is still on point, though the writing may not feel as passionate, he still manages to bring the world to life in s splendid manner, the only way he knows how.

The dialogue and overall story is far less inspired than the previous two, it never manages to make much of an impact. Having no Vito Corleone in this one was a big loss, I understand that his story came to a close in the second film, but he was the heart and soul, as well as the highlight, of these movies, there was a gaping whole without him. I was not a fan of Andy Garcia's character, merely a repeat of the same type of role Pacino had in the first Godfather, but never as effective. While its flawed and certainly not a pleasing finale to the trilogy, The Godfather: Part III is still a must watch for fans of the first two, you might as well form your own opinion of it.

Michael Corleone confesses his sins while trying to legitimize his business to keep his family safe as he ages.

Best Performance: Al Pacino / Worst Performance: Sofia Coppola;1;2;False tt0099674;cinephilez250;29/07/2012;So Underrated it's Unbelievable;10;This film does NOT have the calm perfection of the first two parts. It doesn't flow effortlessly, and there are certain little hitches. That said, it's perfect. It validates the first two films by adding an emotional depth rarely seen. I like to look at it this way: the first film was the body of the trilogy. It set the precedent and built a cracking narrative. The second film was the brain and heart of the trilogy. It developed the intellectual intensity of the films, as well as inspiring true care for the characters on screen. The third film was the soul of the trilogy. In watching it, we understand and love the characters of the entire series. Some people would see the emotional additions as cliché, but I feel that they are intentional. Michael is an old man now, obsessed with his troubled past, trying to live his life legitimately. The three films together form the greatest trilogy in cinematic history, and to ignore this film is an utter tragedy. What rating should this have? I say at LEAST 8.5, because this is an integral part of the trilogy, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.;1;2;False tt0099674;namashi_1;31/10/2011;An Under-Rated Masterpiece!;10;"'The Godfather: Part III' is An Under-Rated Masterpiece! A Terrificly Written, Wonderfully Directed & Outstandingly Acted, Motion-Picture, that has not gotten the respect it truly deserves. Is it better than it's Legendary Prequels? No, but it's still a Great Watch.

'The Godfather: Part III' Synopsis: In the midst of trying to legitimize his business dealings in 1979 New York and Italy, aging mafia don Michael Corleone seeks to vow for his sins while taking a young protégé under his wing.

In comparison to it's Prequels, the third installment, isn't all that meaty or heavy. BUT, It's still a Masterpiece! It gives a proper end to the legend of Michael Corleone. It culminates beautifully.

Mario Puzo & Francis Ford Coppola's Screenplay is Terrific & matches up-to the expectations. Also, it gives a proper end to it's Powerful Protaganiost. Coppola's Direction, is Wonderful. Cinematography by Gordon Willis, is sharp. Editing, Art Design & Sound-Mixing, are impressive.

Performance-Wise: Al Pacino is GODLY as an aging Michael Corleone. He left me awe-struck with his performance in here. Pacino, TRULY, is the among the Greatest Film-Actors of All-Times. Words fail to describe how talented & blessed Pacino, actually is. Andy Garcia is excellent. Diane Keaton gets it right. Sofia Coppola is passable, while Talia Shire is amazing. Eli Wallach is first-rate. George Hamilton & Joe Mantegna leave a mark. Bridget Fonda, in a brief role, is effective. Others lend good support.

On the whole, 'The Godfather: Part III' is amongst the finest films of all-times. It leaves a Strong impact! Highly Recommended!";1;2;False tt0099674;ildimo1877;31/08/2010;A splendid finale;10;Occasionally marred by certain technical imperfections (such as problematic dubbing or, at least in one instance, unacceptably bad editing) and an unfortunate casting choice, the third part of the Godfather saga is the ill masterpiece that never got the recognition it deserved. Few directors possess the Promethean touch to spark atmosphere in their master shot, the feel for historical detail, the breath for a period saga, the skill to narrate a layered plot or the demonic ability to translate the operatic passion to a crime story. Mr. Coppola is this Viscontian descendant and the Godfather is his three-part Gatopardo. Godfather III is a film of almost serene beauty, toned perfectly in its operatic fatalism, shot (surprisingly for such a fluid picture) in mainly steady shots, baptized in the blessed air of Sicily for the better half of it and forever haunted by the probably deserved but certainly emotionally devastating fall of its protagonist.;1;2;False tt0099674;phd_travel;22/08/2010;The weakest of the 3 but watch it for completeness;3;If you are a Godfather fan you of course have to see this to end the saga but be prepared to be let down.

This movie has a different feel from the first 2. And not in a good way.

Pacino has become more gruff and is less attractive with time.

The casting is weak. Andy Garcia comes across as being not that Italian - why did they choose him? Much has been said about Sophia Coppola's acting. The only good thing about casting her is that you don't feel sad when she gets killed.

There are too many rub outs. Overkill. At the end with all the security why take the exposed way out of the Opera? It's a bit silly.;1;2;True tt0099674;beatlemania909;06/08/2010;It ties it all together;7;The Godfather parts 1 and 2 are complete works of art. They have originality, brilliant acting and writing. The third may not be amazing, but it certainly was good, maybe even great. As usual, Pacino gives a great performance, Andy Garcia is a good touch to give the story a darker edge then it already has, and the directing by Cappola is stunning, beautiful images and cinematography. At times the writing seems strained, the dialogue, awkward to hear, and some of the characters stereotypical, where as the first two made them original characteristics. Now lets get to the part we have all been waiting for, Sophia Cappola. We all are not watching the film to see her, but I tell you, I would watch her a thousand times a day instead of Winona Ryder. Cappola isn't very good at acting, her directing is far better, however that works out, but she is at times watchable, maybe even humorous to see force out the lines. I'm sorry Sophie but I'm sure you've heard it all a thousand times, never the less, don't let her get in the way of seeing this picture. It's interesting, smart, and hey, it's the end, you can't close the book before reading that last chapter right? In my opinion, it's not the best of the three, but a fitting end to a great saga.;1;2;False tt0099674;khanbaliq2;17/05/2010;After a break of more than 15 years, Coppola and writer Mario Puzo returned to the well for this third and final story of the fictional Corleone crime family.;8;While attempting to conclude a real-estate deal with the Vatican that might confer legitimacy on his business affairs, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is distracted by the behaviour of his violent and ambitious nephew (Andy Garcia).

The Godfather Part III is the greatest anti-climax in American cinema: a plodding third installment that makes mistakes and poor choices from the word go, compounded by director Francis Ford Coppola's sudden lack of confidence around set-pieces and actors. Some small pleasure can be taken from seeing the loose ends tied up, but if this was a Corleone brother, it'd be the sickly Fredo, the one you want to see put out of his misery as soon as possible. Part III has received mixed reviews and receptions, but nevertheless grossed $136,766,062 and was nominated for seven Academy Awards.;1;2;True tt0099674;disdressed12;11/04/2010;fine conclusion to the saga;10;in my mind the final installment in the Godfather series is as good as the previous two,yet most people don't seem to think so.i think the story is great.this is a more subtle movie,and more cerebral than the other two.it's very well written,in my opinion.AL Pacino Is back as Michael Corleone,and is great once again,but Andy Garcia is outstanding as Vincent,as is Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone.it was made sixteen years after part two,so it probably wasn't originally intended as part of the series,(which is probably why many purists don't like it)but i'm glad it was made .i think it's a fitting end to the saga.for the purists that won't watch on principle,it's their loss.for me,The Godfather: Part III is a 10/10;1;2;False tt0099674;jtebrett;26/06/2009;Fitting end to a magical trilogy;10;A fitting end to a magical trilogy. So sad to see the Goidfather films come to an end but if they have to then this is the way to go. I know a lot of people were disappointed by the third Godfather but I genuinely can't understand why. It gives tasteful, appropriate hints of what has gone before in a nostalgic, almost wistful way. I think the acting is amazing but6 what really stands out for me in this film is the cinematography: the way ion which the colours used throughout the film are consistently of an autumnal hue, lulling us often without knowing it into the feeling of the end drawing near. It continues the intricate political and criminal plot with great delicacy and gusto. Francis Ford Coppola can be proud of this contribution to fine films.;1;2;False tt0099674;stumpmee77;27/02/2009;Im-mo-bi-li-are-reeee!;3;"I heard the word over and over and over until I got sick. Kept wanting to scream in the theater: ""So what the heck is Immobiliare???"" The film never explains coherently it's use in G3's storyline. It's just thrown out there like everything else and other than the common factor of a falling body at a given sub-plot's climax, nothing fits. And no exception, all corpses fallings are outrageously funny–especially... erhm, was that the Pope? There was one cleric bearing a strong resemblance to John Paul I–Hey does it matter it was the Pope? The fall was a hoot. I should be repelled by the callousness these people were killed but all I can do was laugh–this never happened when I watched 1st 2 Godfather Movies, Goodfellas, Bugsy. Except for the most moving scene in the film, Michael talking about his guilt over whacking Fredo with a priest–what do priests have to do with what's going on? Also stomach turning...It wasn't so much Sofia's amateurish acting but her smile. Every time seeing it why was I reminded of someone struggling keeping a big piece of snot in the nose? Distracting as was the Immobiliare cow moo. But what shocked me most of all was Connie–Was she on drugs or booze or wanted have a relationship with only surviving brother Mike she didn't put two and two together about what happened to Fredo? She sure knew who was responsible for 1st hubby Carlo's getting whacked. Where was G1 and G2's character who was shrewish but smart when it came to being a woman in a mafia family. When she yapped about Fredo being drowned that started my down slide thinking this film muddled tripe. The incest subplot was icky but it and Michael remembering his first wife and guilt-ridden over Fredo half way made sense. The passing of mantle to Sonny's son was just not developed, the Zaza friction thing had one scene-one that was worth watching and like the Sonny's son story sloppily written. The whole thing was poorly done, disjointed and jumpy. New York, Sicily, Vatican--Immobiliare! Rate it 3 for the funny falling corpses.";1;2;True tt0099674;leplatypus;13/01/2009;Less God, More Father! Godfather Marathon – 28/12/08 – 21H00 (Screen);10;"This final part was projected after a short pause of 30 min and closed my marathon.

A lot of people dislike it: it's even not among the IMDb top 100. In addition, the movie failed for Oscar and paid his dues to the Hollywood life, with a missing Robert Duvall!

Nevertheless, for me it's the best! I have already seen it years ago at its release and the spell is always there!

All the great thing that makes the Godftaher are here and updated for the 90's: the family, the desire for clean business, the unforgiven criminal roots, Sicilia, the Christian faith, the scandals and the music: Coppola chooses to close his trilogy with an opera and he has fine taste: ""Cavalleria Rusticana"" by Mascagni! Really, really great music and closely tied with the frames

It took 2 movies for Al to be under the flashlight with his acting, but this time, it's really him who steals the show: You see that he has gained a lot of experience under his belt: amused and serious with his affairs, lovestruck for his ex-wife, and deeply caring for his children.

His reaction on the red carpet after the show is my most moving scene of all time: never seen a pain so big in another movie! Just for that single moment, Al deserves my eternal gratitude!

Right after, you have the biggest love montage on the opera Intermezzo and you finish with a deep lesson of philosophy: In 2 minutes, Coppola said it all about life and it's an amazing feat!

Thanks!";1;2;False tt0099674;TheTeh;27/10/2008;Doesn't deserve to be bashed;8;"As other reviewers have discussed, this movie opened to a fairly unenthusiastic response upon release in 1990. Perhaps this is due to the fact that it takes more time to grow on you than the first two films; I actually didn't react very strongly to this one the first time, it was only on a second viewing that I saw it as the great film it was.

Sophia Coppola's performance as Micheal Corleone's daughter IS slightly underwhelming, but in the end she gets the job done, and her screen time isn't enough to make that big an impact on the overall quality of the film. Aside from a few weakly delivered lines by Miss Coppola and a plot that can be a bit tough to grasp on the first viewing, this movie is excellent. Vincent is a fantastic addition to the series and Al Pacino is compelling as usual as Micheal Corleone. The film's plot is perhaps the most emotionally captivating of the series--especially the devastating ending. Give this movie a chance--it's a worthy conclusion to the series.";1;2;False tt0099674;randycoates;20/02/2008;Godfather III;;This is an okay movie as part of the trilogy because it wraps up the three-part story. But on its own it is not that great of a film. The performances aren't nearly as good as in the first two films, and especially the first one. The new characters are who I am mostly referring to here.

On its own this movie also drags a little bit sometimes. Unlike the first two movies which are probably just as long, part three gets a little bit boring in places. There are some good scenes and Al Pacino is still a pretty good actor but over all it just doesn't compare to parts one and two.

And the ending is a little bit predictable which takes some of the emotion out of that scene.;1;2;True tt0099674;lescamer;18/02/2008;A beautiful, elegant look back at The Godfather and The Godfather Part II;10;"The reason for which The Godfather Part III has such a nasty reputation and is underrated is not that it is inferior, not even that it is too different from the other too, it I that it came out too late. Since it took so long to make it, people had created their own expectations for a third Godfather. If it had taken so long to make The Godfather Part II, it probably would have met with as little success.

I do not know if The Godfather Part III is the best of the trilogy- I think they are all three to different to compare them- but it is certainly the one that leaves me most satisfied. It is an elegant, nostalgic, operatic, Shakespearian epilogue to The Godfather. It possesses an irresistible, inexpressible, and personal charm.

One of the things I like best about The Godfather Part III is that it is an old man's film in every sense. It has the calm, relaxed feel of many films made by aging people- Bergman's Fanny and Alexander, Lean's A Passage to India, Renoir's Le Caporal Epingle. It is a meditation on the passage of times. Michael, Connie, and Kay have all changed but there remains a distant feel of how they were the last time we saw them. There are also these little moments that remind of us of ""the old days"" (Vincent's way of saying ""I'll take care of it"" like his grandfather Vito in the second Godfather, how Joey Zasa faintly reminds us of Don Michael in the first two film). It is a look back at the first two films through the eyes of an old Michael.";1;2;False tt0099674;Victover;29/01/2008;It isn't GF- nor 2, but still...Coppola and Pacino were there.;5;Out of the whole lot, to me GF-2 is the best, although the first one was the real ground breaker for a totally new style for mafia movies. Having that said: It would have been too much to keep up the torch and not dropping a few pieces here and there. The Robert Duval thing probably wasn't Coppola's doing but he could've easily found something a lot better than Mr. Suntan almost anywhere. The sudden transformation of Andy Garcia's Vincent from a formerly outsider and almost ignored ear biting wacko into the Don's right hand and successor after messing up with the boss daughter and his own close blood relative is a huge no-no in any Italian family let alone this so particular one. And a couple more of unforgivable licenses like the Terminator kind of hit-man going after Michael, or the silly lethal eyeglasses solution and the poor Anthony's lyric performance, well, they take away a lot of the oh-my-gosh so dramatic atmosphere that the whole saga had built over before this part. And, one more thing: Whatever happened to Michael's poker face?...;1;2;False tt0099674;RiffRaffMcKinley;20/01/2008;What Did You Want After Sixteen Years?;10;"I've barely been alive longer than that and can already appreciate the fact that, even though it is considered by many to be the worst of them all, GP3 is *well* worth whatever wait there was.

Despite its numerous shortcomings (Sofia Coppola, Bridget Fonda, Sofia Coppola, Sofia Coppola, etc.), it is able to rank almost in the high esteem of its predecessors because it is a story that is more about redemption. As it should be after two films of Michael's (Al Pacino) continuing descent into crime, both legal and spiritual.

And GP3 is a more spiritual film, focusing most of the movie's attention on the Vatican and corruption therein. So the intended message of the movie may have been lost in all the stabbings, shootings, and lynchings (that's right, there is a lynching). But it doesn't matter because one message still remains. A message echoed when Michael tells his children, ""More than all the money and power on Earth, you are my treasure."" Not a great line, but it reminds us of why we love these movies.

Family above all else.";1;2;False tt0099674;santegeezhe;21/11/2007;There was no reason to make this movie;3;There was really no reason to make this movie. The Godfather parts I and II are classic films which hold up amazingly well to this very day, and are both excellent movies which are well executed and fun to watch. This movie is not.

The fact that it was made so long after the other two makes it seem like a cynical cash grab. The fact that it's also pretty boring and pointless also makes it seem like a cynical cash grab. In essence, this movie does a huge disservice to the first two by concluding the trilogy on such a lame note. In my opinion, the ending of part II was a fitting end to the saga and should have remained so.

The movie seems awfully contrived. The George Hamilton and Andy Garcia characters are probably the worst of the bunch. In fact, the Andy Garcia character alone ruins this movie for me. There's also the convoluted and ultimately pointless Vatican subplot...Suffice it to say that there are a lot of both stupid and pointless things about this movie.

The only moment in the film which has any dramatic weight at all is the confession scene between Michael Corleone and Cardinal Lamberto.

Basically, I like to pretend that this movie doesn't exist. I've watched it once and I can guarantee I won't be watching it again.;1;2;True tt0099674;eddie-mcfadden;17/09/2007;Coppola unable to escape his own shadow,;8;"There has been a lot of nonsense written about this film. I think we can all agree that it doesn't compare to the original classics, which are really a complete work - from another time & place. They look down from a heady pedestal as the most perfect achievement in modern American film. So, there are lots of reasons why GF3 isn't as good as the first movies; NONE of those reasons have to do with Francis Coppola's talent. He's actually been rather dismissive of the film himself - just listen to the DVD commentary. But he made it because he needed the money. And he didn't have much luck in production, either. According to Al Pacino & Walter Murch, the original script was ""all there"". Again - it was about the death of a brother, Tom Hagen. When Duvall pulled out - it knocked the structure from underneath the piece. So he tried something different, improvising & revising on set. It didn't work. The scripts for the first two are world class. But he & Puzo had almost a year to write both of them - compared to the 6 weeks for GF3. Winona Ryder pulling out was a big blow. Choosing Sofia was stress induced folly - even then I don't think she is the main flaw. Eli Wallach's performance is quite frankly worse, wildly OTT. And by all accounts post-production was rushed & panicked. Why wasn't Walter Murch involved from the start, instead of being drafted in at the 11th hour? Coppola made some bad decisions and never quite managed to establish his rhythm or tone. But there is still so much to enjoy in this film. Brilliant sets from Dean Tavoularis, gorgeous autumnal photography & costume design from Gordon Willis & Milena Canonero. Pacino is once again magnificent - even if his characterisation seems a million miles from GF2. Also, Andy Garcia, given the confinements of the script is superb. And for all it's flaws, I have a lot of affection for this film. Francis Coppola is unable to make a film without genuine emotion - and compared to 90% of the crap we get forced fed today, GF3 is really rather good thanks. I always thought this film was the perfect metaphor for Coppola's career; flawed & brilliant in equal measure - unable to escape the shadow cast by his own initial burst of genius. A bit like Michael Corleone, really.

*** I've just finished watching the trilogy on the new re-mastered DVDs. Have to say the films look just incredibly beautiful. Not only the oily browns, blacks & yellows, but also the blues, greens & reds - my God - the REDS! Just glorious. Along with a brilliantly enhanced sound /score, Part 3 has benefited enormously. No kidding - the whole piece has been lifted - plays much better, with a lovely ""cathedral"" quality, I didn't appreciate before. Overall, the films look much more a like. Really, Gordon Willis should get a Noble Prize for photography. Paramount & Dreamworks - thank you - if the DVDs are this good, I can only imagine the eventual Blu-Ray release will be a miracle of image & sound. ***";1;2;False tt0099674;picturetaker;04/12/2006;Third time is not the charm in this case.;4;For me this is not about the other Godfather movies. The first one was a great movie. The second one was even better but this last one was the one they should have never made. Some movies are better off not becoming a trilogy and this one for sure is one that fits the bill. It was so not needed that it is an insult to the Corleone name.

Why I dislike this movie so much was the way it was done. The second Godfather movie did not need to really tie into the first one at all and stood alone with its own story. This one insisted on leaching onto the second story and further explaining it like the audience that saw the second one was too stupid to figure out the plot. It had nonstop flash backs, explaining and so on over mainly the second movie that it really should not be called Godfather three rather Godfather Two and a half.

The only redeeming quality of this movie was Al Pacino. It seemed like he was the ONLY one who really showed up for this movie, which includes the directors and writing staff. I only recently saw the Godfather trilogy so I base this review on fresh eyes but the third one absolutely ruined the Godfather movies for me.

I only give it a 4 out of 10 because of Al Pacino. If no Al then it would be a 1 (probably -5 if it was possible).;1;2;True tt0099674;johnphilo1;10/08/2005;Ehh O.k.;6;"Movie worth seeing if for no other reason than to close out the trilogy, the first two parts of which are among the greatest movies every made. This movie has its moments, but does not hang together real well. The highs include some of the early scenes, the Vatican scenes, and some of the scenes in Sicily, but the story is too inflated/overblown and unrealistic to fit with the other movies in the trilogy, which artfully walked a line between myth and reality. The helicopter assassination attempt treads into Bruce Willis terrain, Joe Mantegna (uncharacteristically) does not do well in this movie - his dialog is terrible at points (see the meeting of the commission), ditto Andy Garcia (blurting out ""I want Joey Zaza dead"" like someone suffering from Tourettes syndrome at various points). Talia Shire is uncharacteristically good in this movie, but her new found role in the family is jarringly out of place in the trilogy. Pacino does great with limited material. Overall worth seeing once, but if it weren't for its predecessors would stand out as one of Coppola's poorer efforts.";1;2;True tt0099674;rpniew;04/11/2004;The Problem;;"The problem with the film is not with what is included; Michael's last attempt at salvation is certainly a worthwhile theme for the movie and a completely logical one. Personally (SPOILER) I believe he actually attains that salvation: Keeping in mind that the trilogy is immersed in Catholic imagery and doctrine, I will put my neck out and say that the death of his daughter is the penance he pays for his sins, and this is realized in the long, drawn out scream he gives at the end. It seems that even Kay realizes this as she watches him. I would also say that in the concluding scene of the film, with Michael in Sicily as an old man, there is a serene look on his face just before he dies. He has (in terms of the film) come to peace with himself and God. His daughter was the price he paid. I find this a fitting way to end the trilogy. (By the way, I don't think the choice of Sofia Coppola was a bad one. She has a waifish quality and an innocence that Winona Ryder would not have brought to the film.)

However, it is what goes on before that makes this film disjointed. We are to accept this as a continuation of the story, but there are too many things missing. First, and most obviously, the film suffers from Coppola's inability to snag Robert Duvall to play Tom Hagen. George Hamilton is a poor replacement, although to his credit he tries valiantly. Second, although much is made of Vinnie's claim to the family as Sonny's illegitimate son, what about Sonny's multitude of legitimate kids? His widow? What are their positions in the Corleone family? And if they have no positions in the family, at least mention it. Do not pretend that they don't exist. This leads into another problem: Why is Connie so much Vinnie's champion? What about her own kids, who again don't receive as much as a reference in the screenplay. In fact, it is Connie's own son who is the center of the baptism scene in the first film. Wouldn't the irony of her own son now being ""baptized"" as the new Don make for more interesting fodder? What happened to them? Basically, the film cuts too many ties with the first two films and suffers as a result.

Although it wouldn't happen, I would like to see Coppola treat this film as Pam Ewing's dream and start over.";1;2;True tt0099674;jc1305us;24/05/2004;A film that didn't have to be made;;"In ""The Godfather III"" we are once again treated to the workings of the Corleone family vis a vis Michael (Pacino). The setting is 1979, (although you wouldn't know it looking at the costumes and hairstyles) Michael, contemplating his past sins, is about to divest his interests in the illegal operations which have made him wealthy (and many enemies), by going into business with the vatican, as the owner of a church owned corporation. Its a bit of a stretch, to say the least.

The main problem with The Godfather III lies in the script. Written by Mario Puzo, and F. F. Coppola, it feels forced. The superb and iconic Godfather and Godfather 2 really gave us all we need to know about this perfectly evil man, Michael. At the end of GF 2 we see michael all alone, having just ordered the death of his brother Fredo. His wife is gone along with his children, his friends murdered, his family in ruins, Michael is left alone. The wages of sin as my father would say...GF 2 shows the end of this man without even getting into detail about his final years, we can safely assume that Michael led the rest of his life in solitude and dies a broken man, as the ending alludes. However, Paramount pictures, wanting to milk some more dough from this cash cow, had Coppola and Puzo resurrect the series with this wasted effort. Almost redundant in the fact that many of the scenes are rehashed from the prior godfather installments. Less than stellar acting performances from several key characters, not including the villified Sophia Coppola, who was not great, but of minor consequence. I doubt a bravura performances would have saved the script.

Andy Garcia was serviceable as Sonny's love child, but I didn't really care about him. Eli Wallach did not really strike me as an Italian mafioso, where Lee Strasberg really BECAME Jewish gangster Hyman Roth in GF 2. A missing Robert Duvall did not help the situation either. All told, GF3 is the weak link in this chain. Stick with GF and GF2.";1;2;False tt0099674;Louie-34;28/04/2004;Would Ryder and Duvall have saved this flick?;;"Winona Ryder was supposed to play the part of Mary, and Robert Duvall was supposed to come back as Michael's consiglieri, or at least as his attorney in place of George Hamilton. But Ryder left because of illness and fatigue, and Duvall held out because he wanted as much money as Pacino( a fact that has always really bothered me, being that Coppola pretty much gave Robert Duvall a forty year career by casting him in I). I think they would have made this movie much better; think about it, no Sofia Coppola who sticks out like a soar thumb, and could have had a genuinely provocative relationship with Vincent, and no George Hamilton, fresh out of the Mark of Zorro. But do you think they would have put it on par with the other two?";1;2;False tt0099674;jaybabb;12/03/2004;There is no way out;;The third installment is not as good as the other two. I've always had mixed feelings about Part 3. On the one hand we have Michael wanting out only to be pulled back in. On the other hand, we have the new don-Vincent(Andy Garcia)who wants to strike back on thier enemies-some things never change.

I don't understand this Vatican bank stuff, so I won't go into that. There is also some miscasting here. The girl who played Mary is Sofia Coppola-the Daughter of Director of this film. I don't know how she got into this film, but she just doesn't have any life here at all.

There's more violence here-of course. Violence begets violence. This is a good movie, but not great-it could have been better.;1;2;False tt0099674;NoArrow;06/02/2004;A good movie, despite a few bad elements...;;"...""The Godfather: Part III"" is the last movie in one of the best (or the best) dramatic trilogies of all time. As many already know, this one focuses solely on Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) and his struggles for the Corleone family to become legitimate (he's been longing for so since the first film). Many bad things happen, including a corrupt Archbishop (Donal Donelly) and hotshot enemy Joey Zasa (Joe Mentegna). Helping Michael is Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia, in what may be his best performance) and sister Connie (Talia Shire).

Of course, this isn't on the same level as the first two. There are many bad elements in the writing and some in the acting. For one thing, Puzo and Coppola really seemed to love making references to the first two films, most of which are unnecessary. Example: at one point Michael shows his son (Franc D'Ambrosio) the very same picture that he drew as a child in Part II. This had very little relevance to the plot, and put it this way, if this small part hadn't been included in Part II, do you think a similar scene would be written for III? I think no.

The acting, well, it has it's ups and downs. Pacino does well as always, but it's his worst performance of the trilogy. As many say, Sophia Coppola is ""terrible"" and ""awful"". Now, she's not by any means good, but I'd say the worst performance comes from both Mentegna (who never changes his facial expression or the tone of his voice) and D'Ambrosio. What was with D'Ambrosio's song? It was like ""The Godfather: The Music Video"".

There is some very good acting too though. As I said, Garcia does incredibly well. The way he acts, he sells the character perfectly. Also, Donnelly does a creepily good job. An underrated and very well-done performance is Eli Wallach's as the cunning Don Altobella. The man was seventy-five when he did this film, and yet he has so much energy and life. If Strasberg and Gazzo can be nominated for Part II, Wallach sure as hell can be for this one (not to mention he's been deserving since ""The Good, the Bad and the Ugly"").

The direction is also fine. Coppola's use of still cam and tan shading is admirable. The ending shots are flawless.

So, not the greatest film of the trilogy, far from it, but still quite enjoyable, 8/10.";1;2;False tt0099674;emptypocketpictures;01/03/2003;So much wasted potential.;;It is worth noting that although I consider THE GODFATHER saga as the greatest film of all time (yes, I consider all three to be one film), this film made me wish at its worst moments that the whole project, from 1972 on, had been taken out of Francis Ford Coppola's hands (perhaps Martin Scorsese wouldn't have littered the trilogy with nepotist talent vacuums like Talia Shire) and that at its best make me wish he had been given the artistic freedom and time that he asked for to make the final installment. The film's many flaws begin with the script. There are no less than five different stories within the world of the Corleones that are being told, and none of them are given the tender loving care that was so obvious in the effectiveness of the complexity of the two preceding epics. Problems plague each individual plot enough that the glaring lack of integration is one of the least critical issues. Had Puzo and Coppola been given the time they would have liked, I am confident their overhaul efforts likely would have been sufficient, and furthermore, Mary Corleone's character might have been tolerable played by a rested Winona Ryder rather than her wooden replacement Sofia Coppola. While in this stage, both the studio and writers might have also considered that while the exclusion of Tom Hagen's character was a crucial mistake, the exclusion or reduction of Kay's character might not have been. While Paramount's impatience certainly rushed writing and casting decisions, the acting, from Al Pacino's tragic loss of subtlety to a performance by Eli Wallach so caricatured it bordered on the offensive, falls at the feet of Coppola and the performers themselves. I wonder if the over-the-top rage and suffering displayed by Pacino is at all related to frustration over having to scramble to rise above material this mediocre. Production values for the most part are still solid -- Gordon Willis' cinematography is as beautiful as ever, and my only complaint is that while a superimposed title at the beginning of the film tells us it is 1979, it is next to impossible to tell from the production design. It might have been better to use a period design, and lose the title, particularly since the Vatican events chronicled happened in 1978. Still, this film has fine moments -- the opening and closing sequences are memorable, if seemingly haphazard in comparison to the touch of the earlier films. The sad truth, however is, that, as it was made, this film never should have been released to add a disappointing coda to in all likelihood the greatest American story ever told. A final thought on THE GODFATHER saga. I have thought that the best format for the saga might have been a two-part sequential chronicle: 1) Vito's story, up to his abdication of power to Michael and 2) Michael's downward spiral from the top, with a lot of trimming from the second and third films involved. No relatives allowed, cast Joe Pesci (Luca Brasi perhaps?), let Martin Scorsese direct the entire film, written by Paul Schrader, Coppola, and Puzo. Just one fan's dream.;1;2;False tt0099674;paulclucas;23/02/2003;The Godfather is not a single film;;I bought the box set not having seen any of the Godfather films. I must admit that I can't pick out an individual film in the series and say, that's the best ever. What I can do however is look at all three films and see that it is all three films together that makes it great. How anyone can say that 'The Godfather' for them is Brando rather than Pacino baffles me. I think some critics may be getting a little over excited when it comes to Marlon Brando. Al Pacino is so much better than Brando in this story that it can only be some kind of blind idolisation that is generating these ideas. The development of Pacino's character over the three films must be unique in cinema, and must therefore be the true greatness of 'The Godfather'. It's a shame that they waited so long before the third film was made, the time jump feels a little alienating, and it's also a great pity Robert Duvall wasn't able to be a part of it either. However, the story is Pacino's and his performance in the final film is so good that its lack of popularity is a shame. It may be that people are more interested in the gangster genre than in witnessing a moving performance of one of our finest actors.;1;2;False tt0099674;grahamsj3;02/02/2003;Falls short of the other two;8;"This film, however, would have been considered a very good film were it not for it's two older siblings, both of which were fantastic! This film MUST be judged against the other two (duh!) and it falls short. Not too far, but still short. This film just lacks the power that the other two films exude. This film just doesn't ""grab"" the viewer like the other two did. Francis Ford Coppola did a great job, as did the cast, but they couldn't make a story that is just a little bit weaker than the other Godfather stories into a great film. Thankfully, this was the last of the Godfather trilogy. Al Pacino returns as Michael Corleone, Talia Shire as Connie and Diane Keaton as Kay. Robert Duvall bailed out. Sofia Coppola (yes, his daughter!) is in this as Michael's daughter. She's a much better director than she is an actress. So the acting suffers just a little in this one also. Pacino's performance was OK but not up to his usual standards. Diane Keaton gets a deeper part in this than any of the other films. Andy Garcia joins the cast in this one and steals the show, in my opinion. As I said, standing on it's own, it would have been judged a better film. This film suffers from the company it keeps. I own it and will always own it. But I'll probably watch this one a bit less than the other two.";1;2;True tt0099674;jbels;30/01/2003;I have seen this 3 times and feel like I haven't seen it;;What is it about Godfather III? It's kind of like the cousin at a party no one will talk to. I was impressed with the look of the film--it looks like it was shot in the 70's. I liked the performances, especially Andy Garcia. I just felt like I haven't soaked it into my psyche like I have with the previous Godfathers. It just doesn't seem to fit in, though I am willing to give it another try.;1;2;False tt0099674;The Creeper;31/12/2002;The weakest of the three;8;"Godfather Part III is the weakest of the Godfather trilogy. It lacks the story and direction of the other two. Still, if you like the Godfather series, it becomes a must have. Rent Part I or II before or instead of this one.

7 out of 10

If you liked this movie, I would recommend ""Scarface""";1;2;False tt0099674;tayster12-5;18/12/2002;Not Like I & II...and that's the problem;;I've read most of the reviews for 'The Godfather Part III' and for those of you who hated this movie, I have something to make you think about.

Pretend that this movie was released with a totally different name, like 'Mobsters Inc.' Could you honestly say that it was the worst movie you've ever seen and just plain dull?

The reason it was such a disappointing show was because it contained the word 'Godfather' in the title, so we all assumed that this would be another Oscar-winning movie like it's predecessors.

'Part III' is not a bad show in any sense of the word. It's a great story. It has great acting. It's just not a 'Godfather'.

If you go into this movie thinking that way, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.;1;2;False tt0099674;DonCicco;07/12/2002;You have to look closer...;10;"First of all, I'd like to excuse my poor english, I hope you will understand me anyway..

In my opinion it's not a surprise to see so many people disappointed by the third part but I guess some people just liked the film because of it's thrilling parts and the murder scenes. Part III is not ment to be a sequal to the first two parts (in fact they were simply too good to do just another sequal). Michael isn't the Don we know, he has changed. And that's what the whole movie is about. The other actors (Andy Garcia does a great job!) are just there to explain what Michael is worried about. Coppola's title for the movie was ""The death of Michael Corleone"" but Paramount changed the title. The original title explains what the movie is about, not about the family, it's about life, it's about things you did in your life and how you might think about them later. Michael doesn't care about the ""business"" anymore, he wants to be a good man. But in the end, there's no way out and for the first time, Michael is the victim. It's a fantastic movie. If you don't care about dialogs then go and watch something else. This movie wants you to think about what life is about, what's really important and what's not.

I know my english is poor but this is an offer you can't refuse :)";1;2;False tt0099674;mlidforsrobinson;22/11/2002;Unredeemable;;Absolutely inexcusable. Does anybody remember that this film actually was nominated for Best Picture of the Year? So blatantly crafted not to entertain but rather to leech a few more dollars off the audience. Utterly shameless. Andy Garcia tries to infuse some energy into the production, but how can he succeed when he has to battle the script, the uninspired efforts of every other actor on the set (who are merely there to cash in on the film's inevitable box office success) and, of course, ahem, Sophia.;1;2;False tt0099674;Sonatine97;03/07/2002;Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit;;"One of the great benefits of buying DVD is that in most cases you not only get the film itself but also loads of extras that can only add to the overall feel & premise of the movie itself.

I recently bought the DVD Collectors pack of The Godfather saga which not only included the three original cinema versions but also the usual extras such as picture galleries, the Corleone family tree, biographies and additional scenes that only appeared in the TV versions.

But the two best features of all were the Director's commentary overlaid for each film and also a separate documentary focusing on the rather difficult productions of all three Godfather films from inception in 1970 to the conclusion in 1990.

When I viewed the video version of GIII some years ago I was rather disappointed by the rather bloated & totally unbelievable story concerning corruption and murder within the Vatican by the Mafia.

Not only was a I disappointed by the story but also I felt the acting was weak compared to its two predecessors, with the film solely dependent on Al Pacino carrying the torch throughout the saga, while the supporting cast drifted in and out like passing ships in the night.

However, now that I have viewed the DVD version along with the behind-the-scenes documentary I can begin to appreciate some of the problems director Coppola faced during the making of GIII.

For years Paramount were very keen for GIII to be made, with or without Coppola behind the lens. So desperate were they that up to 15 initial drafts were put forward from different screenwriters but none ever saw the light of day.

But on top of this Paramount were not even bothered whether Coppola directed or not since they felt confident that nearly any competent director could carry on the Saga Coppola had so successfully conceived during the 70s with I and II.

There are many good directors who could have done this but when one reads that Sylvestor Stallone had been pencilled in by Paramount not only to direct but also to star, one has to consider the sanity of the studio execs at the time.

And even when Coppola & Puzo were roped in they had to rush the scripts through in weeks rather than in months so it is not wholly surprising the screenplay looks half-baked.

And then of course there is the inclusion of Coppola daughter Sofia as a last minute replacement to more accomplished actress Winona Ryder. It wouldn't have been so bad had her character been no more than a supporting role. But Sofia was asked to play Mary Corleone, daughter to Michael and heir to the entire Corleone business empire.

Regrettably the task was to great for someone so young and with so little major acting experience and as a consequence was one of the major faults within the film with poor Sofia panned by both critics and fans alike. It seems strange that Francis cast his daughter for such a major role at such short notice but cast her he did and I guess his decision will forever haunt him.

Another omission was that of Robert Duvell as Tom Hagen. GIII was in desperate need of some familiar faces from the previous movies to make the saga complete. However, with the exception of Pacino himself the only significant stars who reprised their roles were Diane Keaton & Talia Shire.

Both Keaton & Shire give good solid performances with the latter having a far more significant role than before. But all the same I felt Pacino was very much on his own now that Duvell had been left out due to contract disagreements. I felt the inclusion of Tom (at any cost) would have added more gravitas to the movie. Duvell's character was very prominent & stong in the previous two movies and this was emphasised all too clearly by his absence in III.

I liked the story; at least in part. Pacino was excellent as the elderly Don trying to shake off the ghosts & horrors of his past and his determination to go ""legit"" not only for himself but for his family (not his Mafia family on this occasion but his true family - his wife and children)

This part of the story was well done & very moving but was let down badly with the main storyline of corruption and murder within the Vatican by Mafia henchmen over big business dealings & power sharing. This was so unbelievable that any passion & feeling I had for Pacino's wish to be a decent man again went right out of the window by this overblown and frankly stupid premise.

However, putting this film in the context of what I have learnt from the documentary I have to say that Coppola shouldn't be blamed completely for this relative flop. The execs at Paramount should hang their heads in shame for trying to rush the screenplay through too quickly and not trusting Coppola's own judgement. I could understand their anxiety if they were dealing with an unknown director but to undermine Coppola with his own movie legacy is a disgrace.

GIII is not a bad film by any standards. If one takes a huge pinch of salt then the Vatican storyline can be tolerated. But for the Godfather purists GIII ended up as a wasted opportunity and will always be consigned as the weakest of the three films. In addition one has to feel sympathy for Sofia Coppola for no matter what she does now or in the future she will always be remembered for her rather poor performance in Godfather III.

***SPOILER*** I loved the ending, it was so underplayed and yet so moving that for a moment I completely forgot about the utter farce that had gone on minutes before. But to see Pacino sitting in his orange grove an elderly man, crippled & blind and subsequently dying was well done and very open to suggestion. For we are not told whether he died a free man or whether the guilt of his past misdemeanours went with him. But it was very touching of Coppola to continue the ""orange fruit"" symbolism significant throughout the entire saga ***END OF SPOILER***

***/*****";1;2;True tt0099674;rdorsey;27/05/2002;Disappointing that it is not a classic;;"For most die hard Godfather fanatics, Pacino could have staged a musical revival of Gilligan's Island and they would have loved it as long as the word ""Godfather"" was in the title. For me, personally, I rank the first two Godfather movies among my top five all-time. But any expectation you have that Godfather III will match those lofty hopes are quickly dashed. The screenplay is so awkward and contrived it seems at times that it is an improv skit set to Italian music. There are no surprises, no suspense and no single character captures your imagination or attention - it is almost a farce. Pacino gives a decent reprisal of his most famed role but everyone else is just plain bad including Garcia and, most noticeably, Sofia Coppola. I was so surprised by my disappointment, I went back and watched it again recently in hopes that I would change my opinion. Nope. Still bad. Four out of ten stars.";1;2;False tt0099674;the don-15;08/07/2001;eh not bad;8;this movie is underrated cause well if you think about it is a good movie as its own it doesnt live up to the first two but it has some good points in it. i like how michael is depicted in this one he is nearing death and he wants to clean his sins with holy water, and andy garcia has the qualitys of sonny and sometimes as an early michael.the plot is good but..here comes the but..there are flaws ..first robert duvall should have been in it.. he should have..second sofia coppola...god bless her should have been replaced by wynonna rider.and second the movie is missing one thing all of the movies or the first two have been father to son and in this one it is father to daughter? i mean she shouldnt have been givin that much screen time in it...but overall this movie is pretty good in its own ways. but it is a wonderfull ending to the corleone saga. 8/10;1;2;False tt0099674;oldbollweevil;02/07/2001;not a sequel;10;"**Warning: contains spoilers.**

I don't consider Godfather 3 to be a sequel except in the strict, literal sense of the word: it came after the earlier movie. In the pejorative sense in which the word is usually used of movies--i.e., something that was thought up later to cash in on the success of the first one--this is definitely not a sequel.

Godfather 3 is, instead, just what it says it is: part three of a single, unified story.

I see the Godfather trilogy--stay with me now, stop rolling your eyes--as a tragedy along Greek or Elizabethan lines. Remember how they taught you in high school about the structure of the Elizabethan 5-act tragedy? The climax was in the third act, in the sense that in the middle the tragic hero did something that sealed his fate, and everything after that was just the relentless playing out of the consequences of that single deed.

Looked at in this way, Michael Corleone is the tragic hero of the Godfather movies. And as a tragic hero he's up there with the best of them--just as archetypal in his own way as Oedipus or Hamlet.

Michael is the man who can't live down his heritage, the man who can't escape his upbringing, or, ultimately, himself. Like all good tragic heroes, he has enough potential for good to make him a sympathetic figure--he wanted so badly to get out; even in part three, decades into a life of crime, Michael can make you believe he has always wanted out. But it's his own weaknesses, his own ambition--his own virtue, in a way--that ruins him.

His tragic act, the one which sealed his fate, was (SPOILER) ordering Fredo's death at the end of part two. One might say that it came earlier, with the kiss of death he gave Fredo in Havana (""I know it was you, Fredo""), but still, up until the point that he actually ordered the execution, Michael could have turned back. But after that point, his own fate was sealed. He had destroyed, symbolically, the very thing that he had been fighting to protect all his life: his family.

So why make part three? Isn't this all understood at the end of part two?

Coppola had to make part three for the same reason the Elizabethans had to write the last two acts of their tragedies: the cathartic, morally instructive, and dramatically satisfying part was in watching what came after the turning point. You know, in act three, that the hero is doomed, but you have to watch his doom played out. That's emotionally satisfying, it's morally necessary, it's artistically beautiful.

And that's what Godfather Part III is all about. You know, if you paid attention to part two, that Michael is not going to live happily ever after. He can't: in the moral universe of the movie, but more importantly in the moral universe he has created for himself, he has committed an unforgivable sin, and he must pay. But he doesn't know it yet: being human, he can always convince himself that he'll be able to escape culpability for his actions--until, that is, his guilt is driven home to him.

Thus, when critics complain that Godfather 3 is anticlimactic, they're more right than they realize--it's not the climax of the trilogy. It's the long, tragically necessary playing-out of Michael's doom.

We know how it will end, thematically at least: but there's great beauty and pathos in watching Michael be utterly destroyed. We watch his grandiose plans to save the Church!), knowing all the time that his hopes are in vain. He cannot be forgiven. Just like the cardinal his confessor says (SPOILER): he could be forgiven, but he himself does not believe it. This is great tragedy, folks. It's entirely appropriate that the last third of the movie be acted out to the backdrop of an opera, because that's what this is.

And this is how the movie's climactic scene should be seen.

(SPOILER) When Michael's daughter is killed, he suddenly loses that which is most precious to him--and he realizes, you can see it in his eyes, that it's all his fault. This is a divine retribution upon him for killing Fredo. He wanted to protect his family, and only ended up ensuring their destruction. Michael's scream on the steps of the opera house is one of the great cathartic moments in movie history--moves me to tears every time I see it. You can just see the man's whole life melt there into one sustained cry of anguish. (A brilliant stroke of Coppola's directorial brush, the decision to make the first breath of his scream silent, only music-- it makes it that much more intense, and private.)

Performances: uniformly excellent. Pacino's style, in the intervening fifteen years, had become much more demonstrative, but it fits the character, as the steely control of the young Michael Corleone relaxes into the benign self-confidence of the older man.

Diane Keaton, as she did before, gives unbelievable depth to what is still a fairly minor role--somehow managing to conjure up the entire non-Sicilian world in the single character of Kaye. Andy Garcia is fantastic as Sonny's son. Everybody, in fact, gives perfectly nuanced performances, except, of course, poor Sophia, and hers is the most important role!

Perfect conclusion to the best movie ever made. 10/10";1;2;True tt0099674;DanB-4;21/05/2001;Works Better Than It Should;;Godfather II and I are number I and II on my all-time movie list respectively. There are timeless, awesome, skillful films worthy of their Oscars and accolades. GIII does not make my top 25.

That's not to say it is a bad film. It is quite good. But take away these rich, wonderful characters and links to the previous classics and you have a long and confusing film.

The plot is well known - patriarch Michael Corleone's attempts to buy his way out of the criminal empire he built and ruthlessly ruled, thwarted by his enemies and his bloodthirsty, power-hungry nephew Vincent(brilliantly played by Andy Garcia), who is poised to take command of the family business. There is also the strong theme of Michael's guilt for his past offenses, most notably the murder of his brother.

It is a sad a grim tale, with what I thought was a very satisfying ending. Without spoiling, lets just ask this question - does a life long criminal and murderer deserve any better?

The movie's best scene takes place when Michael sees the wise and powerful Cardinal Lamberto and receives a reluctant absolution of his sins. I love this scene because the Cardinal understands him so well, and knows that he can be more than he is, but won't.

The movie has a flaw which comes very close to ruining it completely - and that is of course the infamous casting of Soffia Coppola in the pivotal role of Michael's daughter, Mary. A great deal of this plot revolves around the passionate, dangerous love of Vincent and Mary and it simply does not work. She lumbers around on the screen like an amateur and destroys every scene she has. I never bought in for a second that Vicent cared at all about her as anything more than a trick.

All that said, Diane Keaton, Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna all offer wonderful supporting roles. Talia Shire shines again as Connie. The script is great and the theme of the trilogy is very clear - don't take sides against the family. I value this film a great deal primarily because it does a great job of winding up the story of Michael. Do not see this first, see the three in order.

***1/2 out of ****.;1;2;False tt0099674;ssjohnq;11/10/2000;A disappointing finale to a great saga.;7;As a huge fan of the first 2 movies, I was disappointed with Francis Ford Coppola's final chapter. Events surrounding the production of the movie doomed this picture to be a letdown from the start. Director Francis Ford Coppola cast his own daughter, Sofia, to play the part of Michael Corleone's daughter since Winona Ryder had backed out due to an illness. Ms. Coppola's performance was laughable at best. You would think that Mr. Coppola would have at least paid for some acting lessons. My other problem with this movie is that Robert Duvall was missing in his role as Tom Hagen, family consigliere. Mr. Duvall wanted way too much money which was rightly deserved. I couldn't get used to seeing a sun-baked George Hamilton advise the family. It's a shame that all this overshadowed great performances by Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, and Joe Mantegna as Joey Zaza, but it did. I would've enjoyed seeing Andy Garcia reprise his role as Don Vincenzo Corleone in a fourth installment but now that screenwriter/author Mario Puzo has so dearly departed us, we may be stuck with this disappointing third and final picture as our only memory of his legacy.;1;2;False tt0099674;The_North_Wind;09/08/2000;This movie sucked.;;This movie was a major disappointment. The first film in the trilogy is by far one of the best movies ever made, and the sequel almost lived up to that title. But this third installment uses the name to ruin everything. The first hour and a half is incredibly slow. The opposing families are killed off in an unrealistic action movie fashion. Once the scene changes to Italy, the film picks up a bit, but not enough to save it entirely. Granted, the attempted assassination was intense (although stolen from the first film). The best part was the end, where Michael truly gets his.;1;2;False tt0099674;magnie;21/04/2000;Weakest Godfather film (which isn't saying much);7;After the first two, classic instalments of the Godfather saga, and over sixteen years later, there was no way that this would be able to live up to the hype, in the same way as we've seen recently with The Phantom Menace. Sure enough it's not as good and it drags a bit in places but there are still some amazing moments, such as the break-in in Andy Garcia's apartment and the powerful finale. The acting is great particularly from Garcia and Pacino, and Sofia Coppola isn't as bad in this as she's been made out to be. The weakest Godfather film but the best Coppola film since Apocalypse Now.;1;2;False tt0099674;vox-sane;06/03/2000;Not as Bad as You've Heard;;Though no fan of gangster movies, I find the Corleones keep pulling me back in. The Godfather, of course, is the best free-standing movie of Coppola's series, and no sequels were necessary in Puzo's and Coppola's extremely well done near-parody, where a gangster story is raised to the levels of Shakespearean tragedy. Once Part 2 was made, Part 3 was an eventual necessity, as a coda. Taken together, the series raises the gangster story to Homeric proportions and makes all other mob flicks glitter like glass compared to Coppola's diamond.

Welcome in this movie were the Byzantine Vatican intrigues -- and the portrayal of at least one true man of faith (perhaps the last ever to appear in a mainstream movie). Eli Wallach made a fine addition to the series. The cinematography, as always, was gorgeous.

Less than welcome: the fact that Robert Duvall turned it down (it would've been nice for him to have a respectable death scene), and the fact that, good though the film is, the typical bloodbath at the end is confusing. The very very very end scene is cheapened the movie and the series.

The major problem is focus. There are simply too many loose strands in this yarn, and it was understandably difficult to tie the ragged ends together. Then, this movie is simply too dependent on what came before, which gives it nary a chance to stand on its own.;1;2;False tt0099674;genius-15;12/11/1999;Don't Blame Puzo;;"This had nothing to do with his brilliant book. Most of the plot was taken right from Rupert Cornwell's ""God's Banker"", the true story of vatican banker Roberto Calvi (Frederick Keinszig in this movie), who helped sicilian mob leaders (including the sinister P-2 fraternal society) defraud the church of hundreds of millions of dollars (and was found hanging beneath Blackfriar's Bridge in London in 1982). The rest of the film was Francis Ford Copolla's hastily thrown-together distortion of Puzo's epic, one of the finest novels in history. I was so repulsed by the awful plot that I barely noticed the often cited incompetence of Sofia Copolla, Diane Keaton, and Al Pacino (as well as the incomprehensible casting of Bridget Fonda, Eli Wallach, and George Harrison). Connie, the weak, dimwitted housewife is now the Godmother??? I really feel bad that Copolla's several hundred million dollar salary and royalties was too little for him to avoid tainting his own name with such a disaster.";1;2;False tt0099674;resistor;14/10/1999;Not as bad but please don't compare it to the prequels...;7;The movie was not altogether that bad, but the prequels are in a class of their own. I felt most of the movie was built around nostalgia from the other movies. For example, many references to Fredo's death, and Sonny, and Kay talking about the past with Michael. How many times did we even here Sonny's name in the Godfather part 2. I think Coppola knew he didn't have the same atmosphere as the previous ones so built this one around to remind the viewer of the past.

Why on earth did Coppola have his daughter play such a critical character. Her character grows on the audience like a thorn stinging you, she leaves you wishing that she never appears again in any of the scenes. Andy Garcia was good, and I swear I saw James Caan in Garcia's character more than once. Al Pacino was Al Pacino. Overall, I'd see it just for the fact that it is a part of the Godfather, just don't expect the movie to blow you away.;1;2;False tt0099674;gazzo-2;09/10/1999;alright;;This was pretty good for what it was, and did well at the box office(66M in 1990-91). I liked the performances for the most part, enjoyed the bow to John Gotti(Joey Zasa?) and the cinematic skill Coppola used throughout.

His kid can't act.

Pacino was good, so was Mrs. Rocky(sorry) and Garcia. I can't say that I was impressed with the last half hour though-just WHO killed the Pope, the Italian Mob or Pacino? The dead guy hanging from the bridge, who did him? Why? And where did Garcia go to at the end?

Roger Ebert made the observation that many of these scenes were shot from afar, and bore the looks of being over-dubbed in post production: i.e. even Coppola didn't really know 'til afterwards, flipping a coin, more like.

But I think they got it right more than wrong, and it is worth watching.

*** outta ****;1;2;False tt0099674;billt-3;09/09/1999;Tarnishes the Series;;This movie was acceptable over-all, but nowhere near the class of the first two, and somewhat tarnishes the series as a whole. The problem is mainly with casting. Obviously, Coppola casting his daughter was a huge mistake. Not only isn't she good, but she is less than amateurish. A good high-school actor could have played the part better. For that matter, I though George Hamilton was wrong for his part. I think his reputation is too light-weight for a serious movie like this. Even Joe Mantegna was too hammy for his part, and made the movie seem cartoonish. Having said that, I liked the intrigue concerning the Vatican. Mixing the evil of the Mafia with the Church creates an eerie setting. Overall, an engrossing movie that falls short.;1;2;False tt0099674;gdetroit;30/08/1999;Some flaws but better than most;;First off, I should probably say what I thought of Sofia. She's not a very good actress but she fit. Had she been a sophisticated character it wouldn't have worked. But she wasn't and she did pretty good under the cirumstances - could you have imagined Julia Roberts (another choice)? Be thankful for Sofia and leave her alone - she's getting enough crticism.

Now for the movie. Al Pacino turns in another great performance in phase three of a familiar character and the most rounded in cinema history. I won't dwell because at this point in his career it's assumed that he'll be good. Instead, there are two people who were a pleasant surprise.

The first is Diane Keaton. Let's face it. Her roles in the first two were not exactly a great step for women's lib which was bad because she was the strongest female character in those movies. The third time around she is independent from the family and acts instead of reacting. The best scenes in the movie are those between her and Pacino because they're both sweet and sad. They show the Kay and Michael we saw at the beginning of the first movie plus a lifetime in between. They are now closer than they've been since Michael's dad was shot.

The second surprise should be obvious. Andy Garcia - he even LOOKS like Pacino. His character is both charming and dangerous and that combination is the kind that audiences adore. And he is absolutely perfect.

So, I liked the movie maybe even more than the other two because the relationship between Kay and Michael which I always thought was the center of the movie. The first movie was the beginning of their deterioration, the second completely ended their marriage, and the third was a reconciliation. I have the feeling however, that I was the only one who saw the movie that way.;1;2;False tt0099674;Pat-88;20/07/1999;The Worst Of The Godfather movies, but not as nearly as everyone says it is.;;This film is pretty good, if you don't compare this movie with the last two movies. Okay, the plot in this Godfather movie isn't great. But some of the acting is. Come on people! Give this movie a chance.

***;1;2;False tt0099674;Asterios;19/05/1999;Not bad,not good;;The bad thing about sequels is that inevitably they are compared with the previous parts.Godfather ofcourse could not be the exception , especially after the success of the second movie.I think in Godfather III we have an attempt to show that everybody gets what he deserves in life.Michael has sinned(especially by killing his brother) and god has punished him for that.This kind of relates with the plot as we had a Vatikan conspiracy ,which in my opinion was a mickey mouse story.You just cannot kill the pope like that ! I wonder whose idea was that. The actor really missed here is Robert Dyvall.;1;2;False tt0099674;NChri;16/04/1999;Did anyone involved see the first two??;;Michael Corleone is one of the greatest characters in the history of cinema, but here all we get is a completely over-the-top Al Pacino--his characterization of the aging don simply does not work and it is impossible to believe that this is supposed to be the same person that ruled the mafia with an iron fist in the second film. (And yes, what WAS that haircut? I do not think an aging Italian man in the late 1970s would sport a skater's buzzcut.)

But I did think Andy Garcia was pretty good in what was an embarrassment to two of the best films in history.;1;2;False tt0099674;mibond;01/04/2003;Disappointing;;This movie is so disappointing compared to its predecessors. There is not nearly enough tie-in to the original movies. There are many names in this installment that would mean nothing to the viewer had they not been knowledgeable Godfather fans from the earlier releases. I'm not sure what the author/screenplay writer was thinking when this was written. It all seems a little too outlandish. Perhaps I should read the book to get a full understanding of this picture, although that was not necessary in the first two of this trilogy.;1;2;False tt0099674;Lord Daemon;24/02/2002;Unbelievable that part 3 is the lowest on the IMDB ranking, since it is the best by far. This is the best movie I've ever seen.;10;The Godfather is a great movie. Truly great. I've given it 10/10, and I don't generally do that. The Godfather 2 is a very good movie. Yet The Godfather 3 goes beyond both its predecessors, and is easily the best of the three. It might well be the best movie I've ever seen.

It combines all the strengths of the past godfathers (great acting, great scenes, thrilling story, etcetera), but it adds something to it. What is new is subtlety and true tragedy. This last part has the main character really think about what he has done in his life - ethics finally catch up with him. This makes for interesting psychological and ethical questions not seen in the previous two movies. There is another storyline going through all this - the difficulty to get out of a criminal position once you are in it is demonstrated beautifully by the difficulties the Corleones have with becoming legal.

I won't spoilt the end of the movie by telling what happens, but this is another great point. No 'victorious' ending like part 1, no bleak ending like part 2, but the purest tragedy. Truly beautiful. I commend this movie to anyone, though you should watch the previous two movies first.;1;2;False tt0099674;jerk1483;15/01/2002;A lot like Fredo...unfortunately;;"I have watched all three Godfather films in a row, and this final installment leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's almost amazing how it fails to emulate and of the strengths of the first two films. The biggest strength of the first two films has always, in my opinion, been the characters and their relationships with each other. Michael and Kay's moral battle, Fredo's battered ego in relation to his family of strong individuals, Connie's innocence and awareness of her family's business, Sonny's passion and those effected by it, Tom's honor among thieves, and Vito's protection of his family.

It was always intriguing to see how Michael reluctantly inherited his ""kingdom"" from his flawed but honorable father, and how he wanted so thoroughly to give Kay a life she could be proud of. This was great stuff, a tale of a family to rival the greatest of stories.

Then Francis Ford Coppola moves on, forgets about his masterpieces, and so does everybody else. Sure, we all wanted to know what happens after the somewhat ambiguous ending of the second film, so why not make a third? There's nothing wrong there. Where Coppola, Puzo, and for that matter, Pacino, strayed was in the way they wrapped it up.

Despite what people will tell you, Sophia Coppola and Talia Shire are not talented actresses. They were in this film for one reason; They're in F F Coppola's family. Suddenly Connie has a more potent role than ever before. When once she was a smaller character poorly performed, she suddenly becomes her brother's Consigliere! Connie almost ruins this movie. So does Andy Garcia, despite his best efforts, his character makes no sense, and is not very intelligent. Robert Duval is sorely missed, replaced by a lesser acter playing his priest son, who is a needless character only present in scenes where family members are gathering. In fact, not one character makes sense or has any depth. Even Kay and Michael have dummy dialogue and no wit. The whole thing really stinks of too many writers trying and not succeeding to write a good follow up to two of the greatest films ever made.";1;2;False tt0099674;dverdejo;07/11/2001;Weakest of the trilogy...;8;By far does not match the greatness of the the previous two Godfather movies. I feel the movie suffered as a result of inferior acting jobs, primarily on the behalf of Sofia Coppola, Mr.George Hamilton. Andy Garcia was outstanding and the making of a Godfather IV with Andy as the Don is absolutely mouth watering.;1;2;False tt0099674;anton-6;20/10/2001;Good,but can´t compare with the first two films!!!;7;First I must say that Al Pacino´s acting is brilliant as Michael Corleone.The film focuses more on the main character of the films and that´s interesting but the film is not at all as powerful as the first two films.And it´s also true that Sofia Coppola´s acting is not good. So I was almost sure that I would give it a 3/5 but when the shocking good ending came I coulden´t give it less then a weak four.I can´t recommend the godfather DVD collection enough.4-/5;1;2;False tt0099674;unclealan;03/10/2001;A good story ruined by one bad apple;8;"I found Godfather Part III to be a plausible, but somewhat flawed, ending to the Godfather saga. The story of Immobiliare and corruption within the church was riveting. Most of the parts were acted well, especially Pacino's and Garcia's. The notable exception, as many have pointed out, was Sofia Coppola - she was definitely miscast for the central and crucial role of Maria. The woman just cannot act, at least in this film. A good film would have been a much better one had Winona Ryder stayed on.

Other shortcomings: the hit scene in Atlantic City was just not believable. More people would have fled that room than what was shown. Also, the final scene in which Mary is killed is overly melodramatic, while it defies the law of physics. I don't know of anyone who could take a shot in the chest from a 9mm at close range, then have enough strength to keep standing and say ""Daddy"" before collapsing (OK, maybe the guy from Halloween could).

Also, what happens to Connie, and Vinnie after the hit at the opera? A short glimpse of their lives after would have been good.

Despite the flaws, it is still a good film. It could have been much, much better, perhaps even one of the best in the saga, with better writing and casting.";1;2;False tt0099674;jboothmillard;13/03/2005;The Godfather Part III;3;"I had spent a few years believing that this third film in the most famous gangster series and trilogy was one of the worst films I'd ever seen, so I had to confirm this with a second viewing, from Oscar and Golden Globe nominated director Francis Ford Coppola (Apocalypse Now, Bram Stoker's Dracula). Basically ageing Don Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) wants to settle family differences, having pretty much retired from the Mafia, putting all crime to rest and seemingly giving up the underworld for good. He is still doing business with close people, but he wants to concentrate more on spending time with his family, daughter Mary (twice Razzie winning Sofia Coppola), and a little bit of time in the Vatican. Obviously Michael still has his enemies who want to finish him for good so he cannot have any power, this includes an assassination attempt with some machine gun fire blasting through a building from a helicopter, killing many but him and Sonny's son Vincent Mancini (Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Andy Garcia). At one point at the Vatican we see him finally confess his biggest sin to a holy man, that he has his own brother Fredo killed, and not long after this we see him suffer diabetic stroke putting him in hospital. Recuperated and covered Michael returns to spending time with all around him, family or not, business and non business, and he enjoys the debut of his son Anthony Vito (Franc D'Ambrosio) in the opera. Of course this is where we see the last assassination attempt, a rifle man is hiding in the box ready to fire, but he does not manage to shoot until afterwards on the stairs. Michael is hit with one of the bullets, but the one who actually dies is daughter Mary, and years later he is much older we see Michael die naturally in his chair and collapsing on the floor. Also starring Diane Keaton as Kay Adams Michelson, Rocky's Talia Shire as Connie Corleone Rizzi, Eli Wallach as Don Altobello, The Simpsons' Joe Mantegna as Joey Zasa; I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here! star George Hamilton as B.J. Harrison, Bridget Fonda as Grace Hamilton, Raf Vallone as Cardinal Lamberto and John Savage as Father Andrew Hagen. Pacino does get his many good scenes, and may of the supporting members, especially Garcia, do equally well too, there are some reasonably good moments, obviously standing out are the helicopter and opera scenes. The only embarrassment is indeed Coppola's daughter Sofia, who did much better as director of Lost in Translation, she replaced Winona Ryder who left to concentrate on Edward Scissorhands, I don't think it would have made any difference if she hadn't. It is obvious that all the years without a third instalment didn't do any favours as all the best ideas were used up, and it does seem like it was made purely to complete the trilogy, and not even the same feel as the two much superior predecessors, I do still think this follow up is a little dull and boring, but it's not an absolutely terrible crime drama. It was nominated the Oscars for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing and Best Song for ""Promise Me You'll Remember"" (also nominated the Golden Globe), and it was nominated the Golden Globes for Best Motion Picture - Drama, Best Original Score for Carmine Coppola and Best Screenplay. Adequate!";4;18;True tt0099674;tiaexception;21/01/2012;"God Please let me forget ""the god father 3""";1;"Awwww. Sad story, sad scenes, sad themes and it will make you awful entire the movie. I just hated this movie. I can give 10 out of 10 for the God father 1 & 2. But this 3rd part... let Jesus Christ make at least one person to read my review and not watch the movie. I promise guys. Please please don't watch this, if u watch this u will lost all the impression of Godfather 1 & 2.

By the way.. if u don't like Godfather 1& 2 and if u hate Al Pacino then this movie is made for you guys.

My Heart filled with millions and billions of sorrow while writing this review be cause just now i watched it.. me crying .. . . . .";2;7;True tt0099674;GoUSN;25/09/2018;One of only two movies I've walked out on;1;"It's neen 27 years and I haven't forgotten. This was a stinker, and one of only two films I've walked out on - the other being The Big Easy. I guess there's a third I SHOULD have walked out on: Star Wars I, whatever it was called.

This movie has the name ""Godfather"" in it, but that was the last similarity between this and the masterpieces I and II. No gripping story - barely a story at all. And Miss Coppola, wow. It was like Anjelica Huston's first efforts: hollow, wooden, monotonous.

A stinker.

So bad it's good? No, worse than that.";2;8;False tt0099674;Aliyen;03/07/2018;Bad film even when not compared to the first two;3;"There are some generous reviewers on here who claim that if not compared to the two ""Godfather"" movies that came before, this movie is not so bad. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Although the begining of the movie is promising, with Michael Corleone now a much older man with fully grown kids, the introduction of Vincent quickly brings the film downhill into a structureless plot full of nonsense conspiracies and assassinations, which unfortunately have very little connection to anything that made the first two ""Godfather"" movies great (and that's not even the main reason why it's bad).

As mentioned by numerous reviewers--even by those who gave this a high score--the acting is truly horrendous. But it's not just Sofia Coppola. Even though her scenes really stand as some of the most amateurish, even Al Pacino isn't good in this. Take the scene where he's repenting for all of his murders in the first two movies. There's really no indication in this scene that the real Al Pacino is thinking about anything else except his paycheck. I didn't believe for a second that this was the real Michael Corleone feeling bad for killing his brother. What's even more horrific is that I couldn't even believe that this was an actor trying to play Michael Corleone. I had no idea what was going through Pacino's head when he was doing this movie.

Coppola clearly needed the money, otherwise he wouldn't have agreed to make a third 'Godfather.' I think the historical context on which this was based would have made for a very interesting Vatican movie outside of the ""Godfather"" timeline. Coppola probably could have released this film with the same title, ""The Godfather: Part III,"" without Al Pacino, but then almost nobody would have went to see it.

The only reason this gets three stars is because we at least get a small insight into what could have happened to Michael Corleone years after the events of the second movie. Unfortunately, when he does finally tip over as an old man and dies, it's figuratively not the first time we see his death.";2;8;True tt0099674;Loulou-8;06/08/1999;Good film, shame about the awful, awful ending;5;"I am a huge fan of the first two Godfather films and give them both full marks however, this film suffers dreadfully from the unfortunate casting of Sofia Coppola as one of the principal characters.

The film is good on the whole, and Sofia Coppola's acting was bearable, if appalling, right up until that death scene. I am usually in tears at this sort of thing, but when Sofia Coppola turns to Al Pacino, says ""Dad"" and then collapses to the ground, I can not resist from laughing incredibly loudly. The scene would have been fine and very moving - Al Pacino was very effective and I could have cried at his emotion if I wasn't laughing so hard by that point - if another actress had been cast. This just ruined the whole film for me and although everything else about the film was generally very good, this hideous performance just mars the whole thing. I am unable to watch the film now and properly enjoy it as I am always waiting for the dreadful scene outside the opera. I can't emphasise enough how this scene completely overshadows the rest of the film. It is such a shame but then again who cares?";2;8;False tt0099674;jacobjohntaylor1;02/07/2014;stinky pooh;1;Don't get me wrong the first 2 movies were piles of pooh pooh. This is a much fresher pile of pooh pooh then the first 2. That not good because fresh pooh pooh is worst then manure. All the Godfather movies stinky. This one is the worst. Later they are the worst they are. The first one is the beast one and that does not stink has mush. All these movie are the same no good guys just bad guy killing each other. That is just pointless. All these movies are pointless there was no resin to make them. They suck. I used think that the worst gangster movie ever was the Godfather II now I stand corrected. This is worst gangster movie ever. Do not wast time and money on any of the Godfather movies they all stink. And life is to short.;3;15;False tt0099674;tangle70;23/01/2020;This was a terrible movie;3;First of all, would Micheal really put up with his daughter having sex with her first cousin? Really? Then would he have his sister be his consigliere? Really? In case you missed it, Micheal knows his daughter is having sex with her cousin. Really? This is a disgrace compared to the other 2 movies.;1;3;False tt0099674;tavm;01/05/2019;Despite some possible flaws, I highly enjoyed The Godfather Part III;8;Having previously watched The Godfather, Part I and II, I had to eventually watch this, Part III. It was great to see Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and even Al Martino again, here once again playing singer Johnny Fontane. Too bad Robert Duvall declined to reprise his role as Tom Hagen but I thought George Hamilton was as good a replacement as possible. And Andy Garcia was also aces as the son of James Caan's role from the first one and deserved his eventual Oscar nom for the role. As for Sofia Coppola, well, at least her role didn't have too many scenes which meant whatever her deficiencies as an actress, her father didn't make her look too bad. I still was shocked by her final scene. And if I didn't know when the very last one is supposed to take place, I might have been puzzled by it. In summary, The Godfather Part III was as good a final take on the series as it possibly could be.;1;3;False tt0099674;ma_iq;15/01/2018;My Review;7;Very good great first film for me forever the best;1;3;True tt0099674;chanakyakautilyanand;04/10/2017;Amazing movie. Surprising it missed from winning Oscars.;10;I watched it completely for the first time today. Simply outstanding movie. High on emotions. It's sad some movie goers like to see the same thing every time and can't manage to see logical ending. It can't be nothing less than a 9 out of 10. I gave it a 10. Al Pacino is outstanding.;1;3;False tt0099674;Wuchakk;20/09/2017;Michael Corleone seeks redemption while a young buck takes over the shady business;7;"RELEASED IN 1990 and directed by Francis Ford Coppola, ""The Godfather: Part III"" stars Al Pacino as aging Mafia don Michael Corleone in 1979, who seeks to legitimize his work in New York and Italy and avow for his sins. He mentors his bastard nephew, Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia), while trying to steer his teenage daughter, Mary, away from him (Sofia Coppola).

MAIN CAST: Diane Keaton returns as Michael's ex-wife, Kay, while Talia Shire reprises the role of sister, Connie. Franc D'Ambrosio is on hand as Michael's son, Antonio, who wants to leave law school and become an opera singer. George Hamilton co-stars as B.J. Harrison, essentially taking the place of Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) as Michael's chief financial adviser and attorney. Eli Wallach plays an aged don and Joe Mantegna the gangster Michael put in charge of Little Italy after semi-retiring. Raf Vallone plays a dubious Cardinal and Bridget Fonda a fornicating reporter in a small role.

Part III is on par with Part II in tone and quality, but I give this one the edge in overall entertainment value. Michael (Pacino) has much more human dimension here as opposed to his one-note grim depiction in Part II. His scenes confessing his sins to a priest in a Vatican City garden and, later, with Kay in Sicily are good examples. There are several other highlights amidst the drama, like the break-in scene at Vincent's abode, the Atlantic City massacre, the street festival hit, the entire closing opera sequence that juxtaposes the performances of the play with various violent attacks and the aftermath.

Andy Garcia brings fresh blood and vitality to the trilogy in a pretty significant role, as does Sofia in a relatively small part. Winona Ryder was originally cast for the part, but she was too sick to perform and so Francis chose his daughter at the last minute and she's fine in the role. Does anyone seriously think Winona Ryder would have taken this peripheral part and done it any better? I heard all the ridiculous criticism over Sofia's performance before viewing the film and therefore kept waiting for a serious train wreck, but it never happened. She did a fine job for a side character who's an unseasoned, slightly self-conscious (i.e. wooden), flirty teen. To those sheeple who have joined the idiotic critical feeding frenzy: Shut the fudge up and get a life!

The moral of the story rings loud and clear: Choosing the life of organized crime will result in a grim life of constant heartache and premature death all around you. Needless to say, Life's hard enough without taking that foolish route.

Bottom line: This is a worthwhile crime drama with several highlights, but it doesn't rank up there with the first movie, which stands alone. If you're a fan of the first two films it's almost mandatory that you watch this one. It lacks the thrilling greatness of the first film, but it's about equal to the second, although I favor this one a little.

THE FILM RUNS 2 hours & 42 minutes (or 2 hours 50 minutes, the longer version) and was shot in Sicily and numerous places on mainland Italy, including Vatican City; the New York City area; Atlantic City, NJ; and Lake Tahoe, California. WRITERS: Coppola & Mario Puzo.

GRADE: B+";1;3;False tt0099674;IMDBcooper1971;16/04/2017;"""When they come… they come at what you love"": A Partial Defence of The Godfather Part III";7;"This review, while not glowing, comes somewhat to the defense of GFIII. I think it's a pretty good film that finds itself in the impossible position of living up to two legendary predecessors.

A few problems include the absence of Tom Hagen (Duvall wanted more money) and severe editing problems in the film's third act (it's impossible to know what's going on).

Another issue is Sofia Coppola as Michael's daughter, Mary. While a talented director, her acting isn't great. She's received much grief already for her performance so I won't beat a dead horse; I'll just say that, for a character as important as Mary, this miscast is a terrible blow to the overall film.

However, I think there's lots good about the film, its main strength being Michael (played with dependable excellence by Al Pacino). Michael's chilled out a little in old age. Time's passed, making for an interesting dynamic between him and Kay. The passionate anger from GFII has faded away. They understand themselves a little better making for some sweet but melancholic exchanges:

Michael: I feel I'm getting wiser now.

Kay: The sicker you get, the wiser you get, huh?

Michael: When I'm dead, I'm gonna be really smart.

It's only as Michael's life deteriorates that he sees clearer, the terrible irony being by that stage it's too late to get back what's been lost.

The films most interesting dimension is the weird triangle between Michael and his heirs (one biological, one surrogate). His daughter, Mary, and his bastard nephew, Vincent, represent two different lives. In one, Michael is a family man, sustained by the love of his children, maybe even his wife again. The other sees Michael as a mentor, ready to pass on all the tricks he's learned over his long life, beginning the cycle of his existence anew. One is the end of the course of his life, the other is just the beginning. Like King Lear, he must choose between his children and what they represent. Unlike King Lear, he doesn't make the choice rashly. He spends most of the movie unsure of which path to take and, as the film nears its end, we realise he'd likely never have chosen, he'd try to have it all and both versions of himself would suffer.

A romantic relationship blossoms between Mary and Vincent, inciting Michael's disgust. Partly because Mary is his child and Vincent's cousin. But it's also due to what they both represent. One's his child, connoting family and affection, being a good person. The other represents Michael's youth: slick and violent with boundless (albeit illegitimate) opportunities ahead. They're two opposite worlds.

But who is Michael Corleone if not the physical embodiment of those two differing philosophies brought together? He's tried all his life to be both a family man and a gangster. However, the two don't go hand in hand and the union within Michael is an unnatural one, often coming with a price. Michael's now somewhat wiser; on some level he realises trying to be a husband/father as well as a Don is what has lost him his family. He realises he should've picked one life, keeping the two worlds separate. And yet now he's seeing it again. Vincent the mafia protégé and Mary the loving daughter. Crime and family in unholy matrimony. He despises the relationship between them for the obvious reasons, but also because he sees in it his own weakness, as well as the seeds for destruction and unhappiness. Michael is a something of a hypocrite; he keeps them from forming a relationship because he knows now it's wrong to have those two lifestyles together and yet he nurses the union within himself with his indecision to pick what sort of man he is. Michael can recognise these flaws externally in others but, unfortunately, not in himself.

The ending is another big strongpoint; everything comes to a head. An assassin's gun goes off. Michael checks himself for bullet wounds but somehow, remarkably, he's still standing. His fate was about to catch up with him, the natural end to the lifestyle he chose. If he had been shot as a result of his criminal dealings which stemmed from his insatiable hunger for the family business, it would have been a fitting end, a sad one, but the one he worked towards his whole life. There'd be a sense of narrative completeness, a neat little roof to be placed on top of the story that started way back with Michael's first kills. But here stands Michael Corleone, against all odds. Still alive. His fate seemingly avoided. But the audience, alongside Michael, quickly realise his fate wasn't actually avoided, just redirected. The bullet meant for Michael, the fate meant for Michael, sailed past him and instead inflicted his daughter. The sins of the father paid for in the daughter's blood.

When Michael lets out that horrible cry at the end, it's a lamentation for a lot more than Mary. It's a release, for the first time in his life, for all the pain. It's a wail in mourning for anything else he could have been had he had the strength and had fate not been so firmly against him.

Vito died in his home in the garden he tended, with his grandson present. Michael dies alone, in a relic of the old legend of the Sicily mafia. He worked so hard to sit on a throne, a seat of power, and now the final scene is him falling from that seat and onto the dirt. And, in the end, it's a very short journey.

The Godfather series chronicles what happens when these ""Men of Honour"" leave their native land and go out and make their fortunes in America, the land of opportunity. It's fitting that the trilogy concludes with Michael retreating to Sicily, the place where it all started, and now, where it ends.";1;3;True tt0099674;derekap;21/02/2017;One of the best disappointments ever - only contains minor spoilers;7;"This movie is surprisingly flawed when compared to its predecessors. First off, there's the acting, which was once the staple of what made the series so great. Joe Mantegna gives a sub-par performance, Eli Wallach is just wrong for this movie, and Sofia Coppola is downright awful; had it not been for her performance alone I would have given it a 9/10. And when did the mafia start using helicopters for hits? But these flaws are, for the most part, saved by strong performances as usual from Al Pacino, Talia Shire, and Diane Keaton and an excellent addition of Andy Garcia as Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent. The greatest part of this movie is that it's still The Godfather, and as a result, the character depth, plot complexity, and sociopolitical analysis are all FANTASTIC. While the first movie dealt with a relatively minor war between mafia groups and the second expanded the plot to revolve around the politics of both the US Senate and the Batista regime in Cuba, the third expands the plot even further, now dealing with politics of the Catholic Church. The soul of this movie lies in its examination of Michael Corleone's final efforts to achieve redemption for his past crimes. This movie is arguably the edgiest - it includes a shockingly casual portrayal of incest to go along with all the bloody violence. Many people think that this movie wasn't necessary, that the first two movies told the full story of the Corleone Family, but I disagree. Part II still left much unresolved, and this movie is nearly as necessary of an addition to the story as the Godfather Part II was. And as one final plus, there's an unforgettable scene involving a bitten ear.";1;3;True tt0099674;suganthanm;24/10/2016;Wonderful;7;movie blows (spoilers) Adam Mackler | 27 Nov 2003 A story that has nothing to do with anything. Interminable wedding and opera scenes with no dramatic progression. Al Pacino doesn't seem like a mob boss. The first movie was based on the book (and so well done). The second movie was half based on the book. This movie seems to have been based on what actors were available. By the end I was wishing Mary Corleone had been killed at the beginning. Suggestion for those who loved the first movie: read the book and then go watch the first movie again. It's like putting on 3d glasses or switching from a black-and-white to color TV. But save yourself the anger of being duped and avoid GF3.;1;3;True tt0099674;Manya086;07/11/2015;Unfairly Criticized and Underrated;9;"This final installment of ""The Godfather"" trilogy, THE GODFATHER: PART III really is unfairly criticized and underrated. Though it lacks the intensity of the first two films, it's still rather enjoyable.

Al Pacino's final performance as an aging Michael Corleone is incredible and again, his character's transformation from beginning to end is very well done. I am very impressed by Andy Garcia's performance as Vincent Mancini, the role fits him perfectly. Though I do think Sofia Coppola's performance as Mary Corleone is a bit weak compared to the other actors, but it was not that bad. Diane Keaton's performance surprised me, especially in one particular scene; this is a side of her I have never seen before.

Overall, THE GODFATHER: PART III is a great ending to the trilogy and I enjoyed it very much. The story held my attention from beginning to end. Not being much of a fan of ""The Godfather"" at first, I can now say watching PART: III, Francis Ford Coppola won me over.";1;3;False tt0099674;utgard14;16/08/2014;For the Love of Money;5;"Let's be honest: this movie wasn't needed. It doesn't detract from the first two movies but it wasn't something Coppola should have made. It's not a terrible movie but obviously in the shadow of the first two, it looks like a complete turd. It doesn't have any of the iconic scenes those movies did. There's really only one remotely memorable line and that's Pacino's ""Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in"" line. The acting is mostly fine but nothing to write home about. The worst is Sofia Coppola, in a textbook case of nepotism in casting. She's terrible and doesn't ""look"" like she belongs. It's like taking somebody off the street and sticking them in a Hollywood production. Even if they are attractive, they just don't fit somehow. It's a watchable enough movie but not a great one by any stretch. Like I said, it didn't need to be made. Why was it? Well The O'Jays had a song called ""For the Love of Money"" that pretty well covers that.";1;3;False tt0099674;dartleyk;26/01/2014;sequel disaster;2;"amazing that this gets a 7.6 overall- maybe ion homage to the first two, and the strange idea that coppola could make probably the best sequel ever made (godfather 2) and then one of the worst; and to be fair, public word is that the director was experiencing some very difficult times, but still, among the problems; the plot is basically ludicrous; some of the acting as well; shire has decided to act with hand movements, two out here, two out there as no one you have ever scene gesticulate as they talk; the son has no stage presence; the daughter is about as non photogenic as you can get yet playing the most desirable girl; and think of the family taken over by michael, now taken over by a loudmouth, wiseass, leather jacket andy garcia? hello? the best parts, of course, are flashbacks; advice is watch 1+2, which are stunners, and make up your own conclusion to the sage; it will be more interesting";1;3;False tt0099674;kyle-sherry97;19/02/2014;Hugely underrated film;8;The third installment of the Godfather franchise is not given the credit it truly deserves. Although the first and second films are outstanding,arguably the two greatest movies of all time the third deserves more credit. A fantastic story line and incredible acting, particularly from Al Pacino. The third installment is critical in the series and finishes the story of Michael Corleone and his life. The film has been put down and this really is not fair on the movie. The Godfather Part 3 is a brilliant movie that should be watched with an open mind. 8/10 for the excellent acting and the way that Francis Coppola brings the story together.;1;3;True tt0099674;kosmasp;04/02/2013;Aftermath;8;16 years after the second Godfather came out, finally the long awaited sequel arrived. And it was received well by the academy, when it comes to the nominations. It didn't win anything, but just the sheer amount of nominations are proof, that they must have done something right. And the movie is good. Al Pacino returning again and playing exceptional as he did in the other movies too. You do wonder why he never won an Oscar for the character of Michael Corleone.

Andy Garcia is a welcome addition (even if he mirrors his father Sonny) and not the only thing that reminds or is supposed to be a throwback to the first Godfather. There are many hints at what Pacino does or where he goes that connect this movie to the other movies (even the second one, with the oil company mentioned by Garcias character). So if you have been following the movies, there are many treats for you to be found here.

It still concludes the sage that started with the first movie, for better or worse. So while people wanted another movie (and maybe still urge for that), I would tell them to watch the Sopranos. The fact that it's a TV show works for it, because it has more time to develop characters and show you stuff that is tough to put in a movie (even a long one as this here, with almost 3 hours running time). The ending might not be to everyones taste, but I think it suits the trilogy to go out like that ... Whatever that means to you;1;3;False tt0099674;richieandsam;25/01/2013;Such a disappointing ending to the trilogy!;5;THE GODFATHER PART III

Oh dear... i really didn't like this one. I was so disappointed. The first 2 were good, but this really let the trilogy down.

I was actually bored through parts of the movie.

I can see why people think this is the worst one of the trilogy... personally i think it should be wiped out of the trilogy and we should all pretend it doesn't exist.

There are a few bits in the movie which are good. I didn't hate it all, in fact to be honest I didn't hate it... I just was hoping for so much more that i felt let down. As a movie, it is average... but it is nowhere in the same league as the other 2 movies.

The story lacked something... and the characters were not as good in this one as the others. Even Al Pacino wasn't as good in this one as the other 2. I know his character was trying to go straight and leave the Mafia life behind, but still... it was like a whole new character. It didn't feel like the same Michael from the first 2 movies.

And just to top things off, it was on for 2 hours 45 minutes! :(

I will give this film 5 out of 10.

Very very disappointed. I was hoping for a much better end to the trilogy.

For more reviews, please like my Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ordinary-Person-Movie- Reviews/456572047728204?ref=hl;1;3;False tt0099674;ahmed_a-r-malik;11/06/2012;The best in the series.;;The GODFATHER PART III keeps you all jumped up from the very moment you hear Micheal Corleone writing to his children to the moment you see him sitting on the chair in the end. In fact, this is the movie that contains all the right ingredients in the right amount.

The movie has been able to touch the apex of perfection through its engrossing plot. Micheal Corleone is old and wise enough to legitimize his business. His son does not want to take over his business and he gets a not so enthusiastic permission from his father. On the other hand, Micheal's nephew and Sonnie's illegitimate child shows interest in the business and Micheal keeps him near himself for the business.

The end however leaves a deep imprint on the lives of the subjects and has kept me wondering about the movie for at least 3-4 hours. A must watch.;1;3;False tt0099674;tonyenglish91;27/09/2011;The Godfather part 3;8;"""this review may contain spoilers""

There is a bit of a story that led to the creation of this third film back in 1990.After the huge success of Godfathers 1 and 2,which both managed to win nine academy awards in total including best picture of 1972 and 1974, Coppola decided to call it a day.For 16 years Paramount pictures approached Coppola on numerous occasions with an offer to make a third chapter,but he always refused as he felt that the first two films had told the complete story of the Corleone family.It was for his delicate financial situation that compelled him to embark on a final trip with the mafioso family.So he accepted the offer.

the film is set in 1979 with an aging Michael Corleone(Al Pacino) now in his late 60's,wrecked with guilt for his past deeds,who is trying to legitimize the family.the movie sees Michaels involvement with the Vatican bank which has suffered a big loss of 700 million dollars.He decides to help by investing 600 million and by taking control of the Vaticans 25 percent interest in the Internazionale Immobiliare,the worlds biggest real estate company.Vincent Mancini(Andy Garcia),Michaels nephew and son of the late Santino Corleone,is one of the main characters in the movie.He starts off being his uncles bodyguard,gets slowly involved with the family business and then eventually becomes the new Godfather.There is also a love affair that takes place between Vincent and Michaels daughter Mary(Sophia Coppola).

The film didn't do so well at the box office and was considered by many a failure and a massive disappointment.It has to be said it wasn't Coppolas fault on how this film turned out.For a start Coppola and Puzo,wanted six months to write the script,but Paramount refused by giving them only six WEEKS. Now that is not much time to write a proper story for this kind of FILM. Paramount,at every cost, wanted this movie to be released on Christmas day 1990,Coppola was forced to rush in to production without a complete script.. so that explains the immense pressure that He and Puzo had on their shoulders to bring this long-awaited film to the big screen.

Godfather part 3 is not a bad film but it is neither a great one, it's just a good film nothing more.One of the main issues that is quite frustrating is the excessive use of the "" black screen"" that appears quite often in the first half of the movie. The black screen is a technique used at the end of a long cinematic sequence to notify the viewer that we are moving to a new topic or ""better"" material. Here this technique brings away the power of the scene because they already don't last long and then when it starts to generate momentum the screen goes black. This is a result of what you call a rush job.

Secondly another main problem is the Editing!! Scenes don't flow naturally together and we often jump from one topic to another far to quickly. The viewer can never properly get engaged with the movie!!!

Finally the script., in the first two Godfather movies the plot primarily focused upon the businesses in which the characters were involved in and how they managed to find a way out through violence, set ups, betrayal and convincing smart dialog. But most importantly they were constructed upon the strong atmosphere and well written scenes that made the first two pictures monumental. Here in part 3 the Vatican affairs and corruption world play second fiddle to the main theme which is Michael's seek for Redemption for his past deeds.It's not really a problem but the slow pace and the not so convincing overlooked dealings of Michael with the dons drag the film down a little.

Though the movie is flawed it still has some strengths that are worth discussing, the music is very good and and is one of the strong points of the movie,the production design and photography are nice and can't be faulted , Michaels confession with cardinale Lamberto and the Atlantic city wipe out leave an impression, the climatic ending that leads to Michael's scream over his daughter's death a very emotional finale that manages to put a tear in your eye and definitely is worth watching.

Does the Godfather part 3 bring the hole story to a satisfactory conclusion? Yes and no. We see what happens to Michael as that is the most important thing because at the end of the day this is a one man's trilogy. It's Michaels story, about his rise and fall. On the other hand though we don't know what happens to all the other characters such as Kay,Conny, Anthony but most importantly to the new boss of the Corleone family don Vincenzo Corleone. What happens after that tragic night, what happens to the family under his guidance? Does he do good or not? Is he the right man for the job? In what kind of activities does he drag the family into? All these points mentioned remain unfortunately in complete mystery and left to the viewers imagination. A fourth movie is necessary because it would bring the story to a conclusion Once and for all.

The Godfather part 3 is weak in comparison to its big brothers no doubt, but in its own right it does deliver.the movie should of turned out better with the kind of ambitious script it had and If Coppola had more time It would of been certainly a ""Masterpiece"". (Don't blame Coppola, blame paramount that denied the movie From being a classic)!!!!

I definitely recommend it because despite its shortcomings it does feel a godfather movie plus there are periods when It touches moments of brilliance and mostly it's part of the best trilogy ever made in Cinematic history.

""Just when you thought you was out,they pull you back in"".

my vote:8/10";1;3;True tt0099674;gavin6942;20/05/2011;Great Sequel, Retains the Look and Feel;8;"In the midst of trying to legitimize his business dealings in 1979 New York and Italy, aging mafia don Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) seeks to vow for his sins while taking a young protégé under his wing.

As difficult as it might be to have a good sequel, and harder still to have a good follow-up to that, I think this film has succeeded. By retaining the look, feel and cast -- while introducing strong new actors -- we have the ""Godfather"" story continued on even further. Perhaps even a fourth might have worked?

There is something about redemption that takes the gangster story and makes it real, and especially in the third act of an epic series. Does Michael Corleone repent? Is he faking? Can he buy his way into Heaven? I am not the one to judge, but if a mafioso can go legit, Michael will try his best to do it.";1;3;False tt0099674;hall895;05/03/2011;OK, so it's not as good as the first two;7;Judged on its own merits The Godfather: Part III would probably be remembered as a pretty good film. But this film was never going to be judged on its own merits. It was always going to be compared to the first two Godfather films. And, not surprisingly considering the first two are among the most acclaimed and revered films of all time, Part III doesn't measure up. That doesn't make this a bad film though. Yes it has some notable flaws but there are certainly enough good things here to make this final journey into the world of the Corleone family worthwhile.

The most obvious and most often repeated criticism of Part III regards Sofia Coppola's performance as Mary Corleone. And the performance is indeed rather terrible. But all the criticism of Sofia Coppola is more than a bit overblown. She was bad but she didn't deserve all the vitriol she received. On a first viewing of the film she certainly sticks out like a sore thumb, especially considering all the quality performers around her. But when you go back and watch the film again you realize that while her character was an important one in the story she's really not on the screen all that much. She's certainly not front and center to the point her presence could possibly sink the whole film. The criticism she received is way out of proportion with her actual impact on the film. And while she has some truly terrible moments there are some times where she's at least passable. The legend of the awful Sofia Coppola Godfather: Part III performance has far outstripped reality.

Sofia Coppola's awkward performance may get the most attention but it is not the only flaw with the film, certainly not the most important one. The biggest flaws deal with the story which is rather convoluted. So many shadowy figures lurking in the background, so many different strands of the plot which need to be tied together. The first two Godfather films were grand and epic. That sense of grandeur is missing here. The story is big, director Francis Ford Coppola is clearly aiming for epic. But this film falls short of that mark. Where the first two films built momentum all the way through this film is saddled with a story which only moves forward in fits and starts. With so much going on some important characters are never really properly developed. Who exactly is Don Lucchesi anyway and what strings is he pulling in the Vatican? What exactly is Archbishop Gilday's role in all this? Not really sure. Don Altobello, with the Corleone family or against them? And why? By the time some of these questions are answered, and some of them are never really answered satisfactorily, it's too late. The story seems to have gotten away from Francis Ford Coppola a bit and when he tries to bring it all together in the end, as he did so well in the first two films, the payoff isn't nearly as great this time around.

Viewed through the prism of the first two films Part III is certainly a bit of a letdown. But rather than bemoan what it isn't, namely one of the greatest movies of all time like its predecessors, you can still enjoy and appreciate this film for what it is. If you can get your head around the story there are a lot of things to like about the film. Al Pacino is terrific as ever as a now beaten-down, worn-out Michael Corleone. Old reliables Diane Keaton and Talia Shire are back for another go although Robert Duvall is sorely missed, his replacement George Hamilton making no real impact at all. There are some good new characters. Andy Garcia does a very good job in portraying Sonny's hotheaded illegitimate son Vincent Mancini, newly welcomed into the Corleone family business. Eli Wallach is excellent as old Don Altobello even if the script doesn't provide us with much insight into the character. Donal Donnelly does very well with the role of the nervous Archbishop Gilday, a man with the weight of the Vatican bearing down on his shoulders. Unfortunately Gilday is another somewhat undeveloped character. Amongst other new characters Don Lucchesi is woefully undeveloped, Joey Zasa is an underwhelming antagonist and Mary Corleone has the aforementioned, if overblown, Sofia Coppola problem. The flaws with this film are plain to see. But the good outweighs the bad. This film was always going to be held to an impossible standard. It falls short of greatness but it still manages to pack quite a punch. Michael Corleone's journey is at an end, the saga is complete. History may deem The Godfather: Part III to be a disappointment. But that is really not fair. It is a good film and a worthy conclusion to one of film's most epic tales.;1;3;False tt0099674;rana_tuheed;19/02/2011;couldn't be a better end to this GREATEST TRILOGY;10;first of all i didn't expect what i got in this movie. i had the feelings that after first two classics it wouldn't be a good decision to make another one. but boy they wronged me with wondrous movie. Francis Ford Coppola did a marvelous job in this movie to giving it a perfect end which it really deserved. Sofia and Garcia were two refreshing entries in this movie which really added to the movie. and who can dare to talk on AL PACIONO's acting he is just out of the world. after the the films end i felt like already missing the movie and its character. It was mesmerizing experience to watch this trilogy. and no wonder this is the greatest trilogy of all time. and AL Pacino is the greatest actor .

so those who haven't watched this go other wise you haven't seen anything called movie. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED;1;3;False tt0099674;nick_beatrice;02/04/2009;Hold on a minute;9;Awesome movie to take a great trilogy to a close. Excellent acting, excellent directing, and themes, motifs, and symbols that are really intriguing. (Look in the Godfathers for murder directly following the scenes of someone eating an orange- it foreshadows death) And in the Godfather III, it shows Michael being served OJ which displays the fact that Michael is having other people taking care of his problems because he is slowly breaking down.

Anyway plenty of people will go into great detail with movies like this so ill just say this:

The women in this one tick me off. Talia Shire. She's innocent, soft spoken, and angelic in both Godfathers 1 and 2. Not only that but she's always a very strongly against the family business. All of a sudden she's making hits and acting like a big shot in this cosa nostra. Talia, go back inside and come back out when you need one of your brothers to beat some culo.

And for the other one, Sonny's daughter, get off your cousin! I'm Italian your disgracing the family values here come on. You know why I really didn't like her though? Because Godfather to me is set in a generation that I link to the traditional Italian-American family values. Sonny's daughter is a more modern generation breed and I don't like the new generation mixed in with the old, it seems too...too..today. Kids are much more free these days and don't really place their family first. When i was a kid it was always Sundays with the family, pasta and meatballs from 2 till everyones done talking. And if i argued i got a smack. Granted, I'm 19, but i grew up in East Boston. Kids today suck which is why i didn't like her.

ANYWAY, still, needed to the collection to show Micheal's decline and still an instant classic.;1;3;False tt0099674;ackstasis;17/03/2009;"""Your enemies always get strong on what you leave behind""";9;"My three-week engagement with Francis Ford Coppola's 'Godfather' trilogy came to a close this week, and, contrary to the prevailing public opinion, I find myself satisfied. 'The Godfather: Part III (1990)' has always been the Fredo of the 'Godfather' family – frequently disparaged, resented or otherwise ignored. Certainly, there was considerable risk in returning to the Corleone family after a sixteen-year absence, especially given the mixed critical and commercial reception towards much of Coppola's 1980s output {indeed, the director only accepted the studio offer to recoup his past financial losses}. Nevertheless, that a second sequel wasn't produced sooner demonstrates Coppola's dedication towards getting everything right, and the result is a picture that successfully expands upon the two previous instalments, respectfully and solemnly drawing the saga to a close. Any film is liable to suffer in comparison with two of the great gangster pictures of our time, but, despite a few issues – which I'll get to shortly – 'The Godfather: Part III' is a more than worthy addition to the family.

Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) has spent the last two decades trying to legitimise his operations, perhaps a last futile attempt at reconstructing his shattered family. However, still tormented by the memory of brother Fredo, Michael knows that he can never truly wash his hands of organised crime (""just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in!""). Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent (Andy Garcia) offers his services to Michael, proving his dedication towards the family, even if he shares his father's recklessness. Michael's two children have since grown up. Anthony (Franc D'Ambrosio) has defied his father's wishing by becoming an opera singer, and Mary (Sofia Coppola) begins a worrying incestuous relationship with Vincent. Meanwhile, in a further bid to improve his reputation and importance, Michael moves to purchase the Vatican's shares in real-estate company Immobiliare, a bid that ultimately reveals corruption and treachery in the highest echelons of the Catholic Church, a group traditionally regarded as pure and virtuous. Here, Coppola shows that policemen, judges, and even priests, can readily be bought.

For the most part, 'The Godfather: Part III' is a wonderful film. Gordon Willis' return as cinematographer ensured that the film remained aesthetically consistent with its predecessors, and Coppola's film-making is, for the most part, handsome and professional. The screenplay, co-written by Coppola and Mario Puzo, is just as convoluted as the original film, but I'm confident that a second viewing will substantially improve my understanding of each character and their motives. Though the first few dialogue scenes seem strained, as though the actors are easing into their roles, the performances are generally excellent. Only Sofia Coppola – and I don't want to labour the point, since she's been lambasted enough – fails to construct a well-defined screen persona. She wears a peculiar scowl for most of the film, and her role in the story is vague and superficial. Nevertheless, any of the picture's weaknesses are quickly forgotten in lieu of an unforgettable climax, set amid an operatic performance of ""Cavalleria Rusticana,"" perhaps the finest instance of super-prolonged suspense since the Albert Hall sequence in 'The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956).'";1;3;False tt0099674;desi_dhakan;02/12/2008;Man's struggle to keep out;9;"The movie shows the struggle of a man, the god father trying to get out of the dirty work... It is so well portrayed by Al Pacino. I gave a 9 and not 10 because some of the supporting actor were not up to the mark, unlike Al Pacino. The movie was just up there with God Father I, II. God Father Trilogy is a must see for everyone. Brando, Caan, Pacino, DeNiro have displayed the art of acting that is top notch. The trilogy shows that movies can also be a great display of art & life, and that it is not just in theater... Enjoy the trilogy, Enjoy the movies.

Why does IMDb require 10 lines to submit a comment? May be they don't realize that a comments don't necessarily need quantity.";1;3;False tt0099674;agsconnolly;31/07/2007;SPOILER: A two-part masterpiece sadly tarnished by the third instalment;5;It is difficult to know where to start when commenting on this film, owing to its many points for discussion, but I will try to address the points in turn.

Firstly, the casting of this film, in contrast with the first two parts, is generally awful. Robert Duvall was sorely missed and Francis Ford Coppola and his cohorts must surely regret not meeting his pay demands. Talia Shire reprises her role, completely pointlessly, and is totally unconvincing as the matriarch of the family. Of the newcomers, George Hamilton appears not to have an actual character beyond reading the lines of Michael Corleone's lawyer, Bridget Fonda is equally meaningless and Andy Garcia is hackneyed, if willing, as Vinnie Mancini. Sofia Coppola is a disgrace. The film stalls every time she is on screen and she is not capable or attractive enough to fulfil her role.

Secondly, Al Pacino had changed so much since part II that he almost appears a different person. At times he is so far removed from his persona in the first two films that he seems to be playing another character. And whilst his performance is easily the film's best, his better moments are offset by a couple of cringe-worthy incidents, such as his hammed-up stroke in the kitchen scene.

The film itself does entertain at times - but at nowhere near the level of the first two. Much of the story is lifted and turned around from the previous films and consequently is not as interesting. The script, much like some of the cast, simply does not possess the hunger of the originals.

But the worst moment of the film is how it chooses to end the trilogy, moving as it does from the awful, to the excellent and plummeting back to the diabolical. Firstly, we are treated to a final turn from Ms. Coppola as she dies unconvincingly on the opera house steps. We then see Pacino's finest moment of the film as he expresses initially silent agony at her side - a truly great few frames. But then, for some unfathomable reason, we are transported forward 20 or 30 years to Sicily, where Pacino is wearing some of the worst make-up in movie history, and he falls out of his chair and dies. To call this final scene rushed, crass, unimaginative, comical, insulting, lazy, pathetic or arrogant would be to understate things greatly. There simply could not have been a worse ending to the trilogy.

All this said, the film is watchable if you are able to put all of these points out of your mind and simply let it wash over you. There a lot worse films. But I awarded it five stars owing to the unbelievable mess made by the men that created the two original masterpieces. My advice is to watch this once, but in future only bother with Parts I and II, as they were intended.;1;3;True tt0099674;dagthedude;03/02/2007;best movie in the world;10;this movie was the best movie in the world. i enjoyed watching this more than any other movie. the godfather part 3 will always stay at the top of my list. the godfather part 3 has the best actors and actresses that they make you believe they are really the person their acting. the music is the best. if u haven't seen it, i feel bad for you. so if i were you i would leave right now and go to your nearest movie store and rent or buy it. but i don't doubt it might be sold out or rented already. you won't regret it. make sure to share the movie with your friends and they will make you their best friends. this movie will easily be your favorite movie.;1;3;True tt0099674;buschenlightened;29/01/2007;not that bad...;8;This is not a bad movie at all. But there are some glaring flaws. Sophia Coppola being the largest, who at the worst times comes off as flat and lost. The story itself meanders a bit, and doesn't really differentiate itself from the first two the way it should. Joey Zasa's character was humorously villainous. The helicopter scene was a poorly executed idea. Michael Corleone's character was muddled and i had a hard time connecting this Michael to the Michael in the first two. Robert Duvall's Tom Hagen was tragically absent. But Michael's character needed resolution, and that part was done well. It's hard to watch as Michael seeks forgiveness for the evil things he's done, and i applaud Coppola for going a different route with Michael. He could have just given what everyone expected, a Michael from part II, barely sane and zombified and still bent on wiping out his enemies. But he made Michael human again, and i appreciate what he tried to do. Andy Garcia really stole the show for me. His performance was more than worthy of an Oscar. He really saved the film in a lot of ways. Diane Keaton does great, as does Talia Shire. The climax of the film really moved me, despite Sophia's awful effort during the scene. Any fan of the first two should see this, it is a great film with equally great flaws. But sadly doesn't compare to the first two.;1;3;True tt0099674;Jsimpson5;26/01/2007;Highly Underrated;8;When you talk to a lot of people who saw this movie, they will tell you that this is a horrible movie. I beg to differ.

Basically this movie jumps ahead to the late 1970's, as Michael is still in charge of the Corleone family. Michael is now trying to make the Corleone business dealings legit. At the same time he takes a young protégé under his wing, so that when he retires, someone else can take command of the family.

The acting for the most part is pretty good. A lot of people will tell you that Sofia Coppola did a horrible job as Mary Corleone. I mean she wasn't that bad as the role in my opinion, but she probably would have been the better choice then Winona Ryder who is a bad actress.

Don't listen to the bad hype that people give this movie. It's a good movie in it's own right, so do yourself a favor and watch the last movie in the Godfather Saga.;1;3;True tt0099674;John_Q_Citizen;03/08/2006;A Great Conclusion To One of the Best Film Franchises In Cinematic History;;Michael Corleone has gotten old. He wants to go straight--given a slightly liberal definition of that term. He's gotta get out. And he almost does. He sells his illegal business to win back his family, but most importantly, his wife and son. But he still has things to deal with, such as Vincent, Sonny's bastard son, and Joey Zasa, the rival clan leader who purchased Mike's territory. Mike also has to deal with a corrupt priest turns to him for help. He will donate a large sum of money to the Catholic Church, and in return, he will own the majority of the 'International Immobilarie', a company whose shares lie in the protection of the Catholic Church. But this is a setup.

This was the least-well received of the Godfather films, and I can guess why. The fans did not have their Michael Corleone. Yeah, they had a guy named Al Pacino playing someone named Michael Corleone, but it was not the same Michael from the first two films. This Michael was straightened out. He did not resort to revenge. He did not do to his enemies what the fans wanted him to do. He was the Marlon Brando of the third movie, only not quite as memorable.

Another reason I know this movie was bashed was for its acting--particularly from Sofia Coppola (other than that, the movie was fine in terms of performances). I did not like her acting, but it didn't ruin the movie for me. It didn't distract me from the story. I noticed the flaws in her performance at first, but then got used to it. I sympathized with her when people bashed. I realized that this was her first real role in a film. You can't expect Oscar-material out of a first-time actress. I felt even more sympathy towards her when I turned on the audio commentary by Francis Ford Coppola. I'm sure even if the bashers heard what he had to say...well, Coppola does evoke sympathy for his daughter.

Now that that's out of the way, I'll move on to the technical side of the movie. Gordon Willis' dark cinematography fits in for the dark mood of the film. His yellowish hue so present in the previous films has faded, gone now into a sort of nineteen seventies vibe. And I will stand by the fact that you can have a lot of static camera, and still evoke emotion.

Nino Rota, sadly, had passed on by the time this film was underway. But not all hope was lost, for Carmine Coppola had worked on the previous two pictures behind the scenes in the music department, and now stepped up to the enormous task of scoring the movie. While he did not come up with the iconic themes, he did some wonderful orchestrations that I still love to listen to.

Francis Coppola's direction is in the same vein as Part I and II, which is not a bad thing. There is a fair amount of violence, but there is also some great acting. Pacino shines, as always. Talia Shire also deserves some recognition for the role she plays--quite different to that of the first two. Sadly though, the absence of Robert Duvall also hurt the movie. But the real star here is the obvious Andy Garcia--the bastard son of Sonny Corleone, Vincent. His Oscar nod for this was well deserved.

Without giving that much away, I will say that this had one of the most emotional climaxes I've seen in any movie in the past few years. So, overall, this is a great conclusion to one of the best film franchises in cinematic history.;1;3;False tt0099674;MaxBorg89;16/03/2006;Flawed but compelling epilogue;8;Let's get this straight: The Godfather: Part III is not as good as the first two outings, and wasn't really necessary. But then again, neither was Terminator 3, which can't match James Cameron's original cyborg opuses, yet people think it's a good film if considered necessary to know how the whole story ends. It's the same for the third Godfather chapter. On its own, apart from one flaw, it could be a great picture, but compared to its much superior predecessors, it's just an interesting conclusion of the epic Corleone saga.

Many years have passed since Part II, and Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is getting tired: he decides to hand over the business to his nephew, Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia), put an end to all illegal activities he's had a hand in, and seek reconciliation with his wife (Diane Keaton), who still fears him for what the mafioso patriarch did to his own brother. In fact, Fredo's death, shown in flashback at the beginning of the film, is probably the main reason Michael wants to retire: he has realized what a terrible man absolute power has turned him into, and he doesn't that to happen to his children. Unfortunately, though, he still has enemies, and they're going to strike pretty hard, maybe through Vincent, who has inherited his dad's quick temper (remember Sonny Corleone?), or Michael's daughter, Mary (Sofia Coppola), whose friendship with the new boss is blossoming into a passionate, and incestuous, love affair...

While the first two Godfathers dealt with power and its effects on people, Part III's main theme is redemption, which is desperately sought for by the aging Michael, a man so repulsed by his own crimes he even confesses his evil deeds to a priest. Al Pacino still makes a believable Corleone, although I have to say I preferred the determined, ambitious, ruthless Michael from the '70s. Nevertheless, his performance is respectable, a thing I can't say of Sofia Coppola. With all due respect, she's an excellent writer and director (Lost in Translation is one of my favorite movies), but her acting is very bad, and you notice it even more when she shares the screen with the show-stealing Garcia, who's having the time of his life as the Don's nephew. He's terrific, but his performance alone can't fill the huge charisma hole left open by Marlon Brando, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall and James Caan. Still, he and Pacino make the third chapter of Francis Ford Coppola's Mafia epic worth a look.

So, ultimately, I must say I've seen better franchise conclusions, but I've also seen much, much worse.;1;3;False tt0099674;itamarscomix;17/02/2006;Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in;8;"Frequently attacked and constantly under-appreciated, The Godfather, Part III is often, and unfairly, referred to as one of the biggest disappointments in the history of cinema. When comparing – and I suppose a comparison is inevitable – The Godfather, Part III is certainly not quite as strong as the first two films, both of which are classic masterpieces, practically flawless, to be found in any respectful list of all-time best movies. It was largely a failure both commercially and critically (being nominated for seven Oscars but receiving none). Nevertheless, Part III is a fantastic drama, as good a crime drama as Scorsese's 'Goodfellas', which was released that same year and received much more critical acclaim; certainly the last great film Francis Ford Coppola had directed yet (hopes for 'Youth Without Youth', which has a late 2006 release date). Just like The Godfather, Part II achieved greatness by not trying to recapture the original but being an entirely separate and unique creation, so Part III is a separate creation that stands by its own right, and while it's a continuation of the first two films, it does nothing to subtract from their greatness as some sequels do. The Godfather can work perfectly as a single film, as a two-parter, or as a trilogy; it's a wonderful saga either way.

In many ways, The Godfather, Part III, is closer in its spirit to the first film than to the second. International affairs take second place to character development and human insight. Part III, however, focuses on the character of Michael Corleone deeper than any of the other films. It's debatable whether or not Al Pacino's performance here is stronger here than in Part II – it's clear that he's more experienced and mature an actor than he was in 1974, though he may have lost just a bit of his edge. But while in Part II we saw Michael as a decent man gradually turning into a monster, all the while focusing on his life in comparison with his father, Part III delves more deeply into his soul; the influences of Shakespeare and Sophocles are stronger than ever before, as Michael turns into a tragic hero in the classic Greek sense of the words, a man with, ultimately, good intentions, brought down to his tragic end by fate and by his own flaws. Michael is more human and more pitiable in Part III than ever before, and Pacino is certainly up to the task. Comparisons to Vito are certainly there (watch Michael talk some sense into Vincent, just like Vito did to Sonny in the first film) but they're no longer the focus of the film; this film is about Michael, and so Pacino's performance here is more impressive than in the first two parts.

The rest of the cast is fantastic (although there aren't any actors in the caliber of Brando, De Niro, Caan or Duvall – who was supposed to be in the film but backed out), but other than Diane Keaton and Talia Shire, who reprise their roles from the previous films excellently, the real revelation here is Andy Garcia, who plays Vincent, illegitimate son of Michael's eldest brother Sonny, and friend-of-the-family Lucy Mancini (the affair between Lucy and Sonny is referred to very briefly in the first film, although it plays a large and important part in the original novel). The role of Vincent Corleone is certainly the strongest in Garcia's career, and his only Oscar-nominated one; Vincent is wonderfully reminiscent of his father (played by James Caan in the first film), and he plays an important part of shedding light on the character of Michael Corleone, while never quite stealing the show from Pacino, clearly the center of the story. Also commendable are performances by George Hamilton, Joe Mantegna, Bridget Fonda and Eli Wallach.

There has been much debate about Sofia Coppola's performance as Michael's daughter Mary, so here's my angle on it: it's quite bad indeed, and Sofia proves beyond doubt that she's not an actress. With a lesser cast around her, it wouldn't seem as bad, but next to actors like Pacino, Garcia and Keaton, Coppola seems totally out of place. However, it does little to hurt the film; Mary's part in the film is quite big, but she's mainly there to shed light on Michael and Vincent, and Sofia's less than mediocre performance is ignorable. Thankfully, she quit acting afterwords, and moved on to directing, a field in which she shows much more promise; in fact, the young Miss Coppola shows signs of being one of the most promising young directors of the new millennium.

The Godfather, Part III is a fascinating and thrilling tale, and the last forty five minutes are as gripping as any scene in the first two films; Coppola's directing is as inspired and sensitive as it ever was before, and the dialog is all spotless, believable and captivating. The reference to the death of Pope John Paul I, who died only 33 days after being indicted and whose death remains something of a mystery, is a nice touch, which helps create the sense of realism that was an important aspect of the first two films. It's not as timeless a masterpiece as The Godfather and The Godfather, Part II, but if you loved the first two films, you should by all means watch this third installment, too.";1;3;False tt0099674;630west;11/12/2005;Why does everyone dislike this movie?;10;The Godfather Part III I saw this on TV a little while back and finally got around to review it. I loved the first one and also liked the second one, except it was too long! Well, anyway it takes place like thirty years after the Godfather Part II. Michael is trying to legitimize his business and get out of the gangster business. He meets his nephew and future godfather Vincent, who falls in love with his daughter Mary.(But they're cousins?) I'm not going to tell you all the stuff, but I'll tell you that the ending is absolutely heartbreaking. Michael is walking out of an opera with his whole family. Then suddenly a guy shoots at him, but instead kills Mary. As a crowd almost covers him, Vincent pulls out a pistol and shoots him. Its heartbreaking because it shows past images of Michael dancing with Kay in Los Vegas and him dancing with Mary. In the end, he falls over dead, alone. A great film and is so underrated.;1;3;True tt0099674;Hancock_the_Superb;05/09/2005;"Flawed But Entertaining Conclusion To The ""Godfather"" Saga";7;"If you become a mob boss, there's no way to get out and stay out. That's the lesson that Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) learns in this third ""Godfather"" film, which isn't up to the great creative heights of the first two films but is reasonably entertaining in its own right. Michael has tried to go legitimate, attempting to buy a holding company in Europe which is effectively owned by the Vatican, but finds the Catholic church is up to its own neck in corrupt. Meanwhile, Vincent (Andy Garcia), the hotheaded bastard son of Sonny Corleone, shows up, starting a war with hood Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna), which gets Michael sucked back into the ""business"", along with flirting with his young daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola). And another friend-turned-rival of Michael's, Don Altobello (Eli Wallach) turns up, trying to knock off Michael so he can take over his empire. It all comes together in a trademark ""Godfather"" montage sequence, but tragedy comes as the result of that, as well.

The movie is very, very flawed in many ways, and it's easy to see why a lot of people think it's crap. One problem is the supporting cast. While most of the actors do a very good job, there are also many problems. Sofia Coppola has been bashed enough and I don't feel the need to add mine to the din of voices attacking her. The other actors aren't so much miscast as given poor material. Mantegna is great to watch but his character is killed off an hour into the film. Wallach is perfectly cast as Altobello but he's eventually done in by poor characterization and bad writing (not to mention getting one hell of a lame death). Same with Helmut Berger as a slimy Swiss banker. George Hamilton is adequate as Michael's new consigliere, but he won't make anyone forget Robert Duvall. And Bridget Fonda is just annoying, though thankfully she's only in all of two scenes.

There are a number of great memorable scenes (the helicopter hit and Michael's confession coming to mind instantly), but the set-pieces of the movie just aren't up to snuff. The assassin characters are introduced way too late in the movie, and the ending montage is overly drawn-out and lame compared to the baptism scene of the first and the Hyman Roth/Pentagelli/Fredo montage of the second. The Roman Catholic plot was interesting (attempting to tie in the death of Pope John Paul I rather awkwardly) but again, poorly done.

But what saves the movie are two things: some great performances by the leads, and a heartbreaking ending. Al Pacino gives one of his two or three best performances here, showing Michael to have suffered greatly from his time as ""Godfather"" and willing but still unable to go straight. Diane Keaton continues her great work as Kay, with considerably more poignancy here. Talia Shire and Richard Bright have considerably larger parts than in the first two and it's nice to see these two fine actors strut their stuff. Raf Valone is wonderful as the Cardinal who hears Michael's confession and later becomes a reluctant (and ill-fated) Pope. And Andy Garcia steals the show as Vincent, the explosive, hotheaded wannabe Mafia don who causes this whole mess.

But for all of the movie's many flaws, what saves it is the positively heartbreaking ending, when Mary takes a bullet for her father. No matter what may think of Sofia or her character, that scene is heartbreaking, and Al Pacino's muted screams make the scene even more tragic. And the very ending - with a eighty-plus year old Michael Corleone dropping over dead in Sicily - is beautifully and simply done.

""The Godfather Part III"" is a very, very flawed movie, but it isn't as bad as its reputation would suggest. If you can get past the somewhat convoluted story and the fact that it isn't in the league of the first two (and Sofia), then you should be able to enjoy this movie. 7/10";1;3;True tt0099674;leighratiner;23/07/2005;Sometimes movies score lower when the audience is dumber than the director;8;This was an extraordinary film. It is to be judged on its own merits and not compared to the more violent GF I and GF. Is it possible that the viewing audience just didn't get it. Perhaps the dialog was too difficult (I watched it with the subtitles). Perhaps much of it went over the heads of the viewers. After all 51% of the people voted for George Bush in the last election. We certainly don't have any claim to braininess.Maybe people didn't like the aging characteristics of the man who used to hold up banks and play a clean cop against the odds. Maybe people are getting tired of Coppola's daughter. Who knows why the public rates movies as they do. I found the story and script to be exceptional, the acting was excellent and the photograpahy was first rate. The editors did an excellent job and the movie was very well directed. What more are people looking for? Singing in the Rain?;1;3;False tt0099674;tlboud;18/07/2005;Bad Writing, Worse Acting;5;"The plot is basically silly, but nothing can be worse than Sofia Coppola's acting, though Joe Montegna gives it a shot. How's this for a line, ""My lucky coat, my lucky coat, ahh"" (riddled with bullets). The Godfather and the Godfather Part II are two of my all-time favorite movies. That this schlock is lumped with the first two works of art broke my heart. The legend of Michael Corleone certainly needed to be continued, if not finalized. After a 16 year wait, one would think Puzo and Coppola would have done better. Every high school auditorium in America regularly sees better performances by 10th graders than Sofia Coppola gives here. To say I was disappointed doesn't begin to describe my feelings. Can you tell?";1;3;False tt0099674;arthurclay;02/07/2005;Probably shouldn't have been made;8;And the amazing thing about that is that it's better than most of the stuff being made today. I think the reason why it doesn't have the acclaim accorded to the first two is that it was made too late and doesn't have the powerhouse actors the first two did. Notably missing is Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall wasn't offered enough money) and Sofia Coppola should not have been cast as she wasn't an actress (Winona Ryder backed out of the project at the last minute). The funny part of trivia about this film was Coppola's visit to Duvall's house in which Duvall thought he was wanting the recipe to his crab cakes not offering him a part in this next film and the fact that Coppola threatened to start the film with Michael's funeral because Pacino wanted so much money. Again real life situations are part of this movie and are obvious to the semi-trained eye. Garcia isn't bad he just isn't enough to make it truly great which in and of itself isn't his fault the movie was just too contemporary for it's own good. The ending goes for a real slam dunk and it achieves it as far as ending the trilogy. The best part is the mob meeting that was good and so was the action following it. You need to watch this for closure and that's about all.;1;3;False tt0099674;asalem182-1;18/04/2005;I Was Wrong;6;The first time I watched this movie, I thought it was as good as part 2, and not as good as part 1, my initial rating for it was an eight. When I saw it for a second ( and third time ), I began knowing why almost everyone doesn't like this movie. While parts 1 and 2 can be watched hundreds of times, without being bored for one second ( especially part 2, which is now my favorite movie of the trilogy ), i felt VERY bored watching part 3 again. I actually fell asleep during the movie, and woke up only to watch the final 15 minutes, which are definitely the highlight of the movie.

Let's start with the good things, Al Pacino was excellent as always, Andie Garcia, Diane Keaton, and Talia Shore were very good in their parts. I also think the storyline is good, despite being a bit surprising. After all the power Micheal Corleone had in part 2, i felt he was too weak in part 3.

Now let's move on the bad things. Sofia Coppola's acting wasn't the best, but i don't think she ruined the movie as everyone says. I felt the movie was a little slow, especially in the second half, and it could have been about 20 minutes shorter. The movie's main flaw, in my opinion, is that it gets weaker with every time you watch it, while the other parts get stronger with repeated viewings.

So I recommend watching The Godfather part 3, but only once, so you could know how the story ends, but don't watch it again.;1;3;False tt0099674;TheNorthernMonkee;03/03/2005;superb conclusion to an amazing series;10;"SPOILERS Released 16 years after the previous part, it is not difficult to see why people were sceptical of ""The Godfather: Part III"". Doing badly at the Box Office and loosing out on awards due to ""Dances With Wolves"" and ""Goodfellas"", the film has always been viewed as an inferior film in comparison to it's predecessors. Whilst perhaps more inconsistent than the original two films, it is still however an amazing story with solid acting throughout.

Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is getting old. Beginning to become burdened by the events of his life, this Godfather has plans to make his family's finances legitimate. Helped by his sister Connie (Talia Shire) and protégé Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia), Michael begins his progression to becoming a law abiding member of society. As he begins to realise though, the more you try to leave the old life behind, the more you get dragged back in.

Released so long after the previous part, this film smacks of a next generation. Old faces like Michael and Connie are grown old, some are dead (Tom Hagen a notable absentee due to an argument over Robert Duvall's fee), and all the children of the previous films are grown up. In a way however, this does aid the film drastically. With absolutely mind blowing performances by some of the elder cast (Pacino in particular is jaw dropping good), the film becomes a chance for new blood to show their skill. Some do it well (for example Andy Garcia), some do it not so well (stand up Sofia Coppola).

Ultimately though, like the two films before it, the key about this film is it's script. With a story involving the Vatican and corruption, it tells an interesting story, albeit not as riveting as in the first film.

Perhaps there is one key flaw with this part of the series. In ""The Godfather"" we are given two magnetic performances by Pacino and Marlon Brando. Both thrive with a plot which suits them to the ground, and they work well together. Then in the second chapter, we have Pacino and Robert De Niro. Whilst never actually meeting during the film, these two actors again put in amazing performances. However, in this final part, the only main star is Pacino. He manages to once more put in a performance of true genius, but he is very much alone in this film. He is helped by a fine cast, but it is Pacino's film and his alone.

It is a confusing truth that so many people condemn ""The Godfather: Part III"". Whilst it might not have the charisma of the first part and it may focus on one genius actor rather than two, it is still a stunning film and a worthy conclusion to the series. We have witnessed the finest Trilogy to have been made so far, and it will take a very long time to be beaten.";1;3;True tt0099674;wrcong;10/02/2005;Went to the well once too often;6;This film is a poor shadow of its two monumental predecessors. It is more a run-of-the-mill sequel (read: pale imitation of the predecessor) than another film in the great tradition of the first two Godfather films.

Admittedly, this film had gigantic footsteps in which to follow. Sadly, it doesn't come remotely close to following them. Al Pacino gives a solid if uninspired performance as the aging Michael Corleone. (He was saving his intensity for Scarface, I suppose.) The other performances are flat. Worse, the story lines seem generally less plausible. Part of what made the first two films so effective was the more or less close parallels to actual underworld events. This story did not succeed at that project.

I suppose that seeing this version completed the full circle, but I did not need to see Michael's daughter (Sophia Coppola) take a bullet intended for him to get the idea that the gangster life had cost Michael everything he held dear. Part II completed that part of the saga with tremendous insight and subtle power. I did not need to be hit over the head with the idea in Part III.

The movie is not a total dog, but it is not in the same league as the first two -- not by a long shot.;1;3;True tt0099674;rightwing_redcoat;19/01/2005;Much better than most people seem to think;8;"The Godfather Trilogy is one of the richest cinema experiences ever, and many people think that the Godfather Part III is the worst of them all, with justification. However, this is only in comparison to the other 2 which were as close to flawless as movies come. If this was a single movie, released on its own, it would be called a masterpiece. This movie delves deeper into the character of Michael Corleone than any of the other 2 films. It has one of the most haunting and powerful endings that I've ever seen. Andy Garcia was phenomenal in this, and the Atlantic City massacre scene has got to be one of the trilogy's most memorable; that caught me completely off guard. And come on, I dare you to say that the part where Don Lucchesi gets his glasses stabbed through his throat was not cool! The only major downfall in this movie was the performance of Sofia Coppola. That really made me wince, especially compared to such great actors like Al Pacino or Andy Garcia. I swear J Lo could have done a better job on the character... In all, however, this is a fine movie, one that is unfortunately overlooked in respect to the other two. Despite this, though, the Godfather III is a masterpiece, and the fact that it is not on the IMDb Top 250 is a crime. However, be aware that this film is not meant for children. Many people are shot, often with pretty bloody results. As well, there is a hanging, and a man is stabbed through the throat with glasses (as mentioned above). Language is bad with almost 20 f words, and there is an incestuous relationship. However, if you can handle all of this, then this is the film for you. Intriguing, violent, and powerful, the Godfather Part III is a must see.";1;3;True tt0099674;malkane316;16/05/2004;quick reviews;8;Whether you love or hate this movie mainly comes down to whether you love or hate Sophia's acting, but I've always felt she did a half decent job. Others could have done better, but there is not point in moaning about what's been done. It is a great movie. The ending is one of the most tragic, moving scenes ever filmed, perhaps Pacino's greatest moment. It moves at a slower pace than its predecessors, echoing Michael's tired descent, and the message that family life cannot be separated from The Business is never clearer.fine, it is not as good as the first two, perhaps it should have been made 5 or ten years earlier. 9 out of ten;1;3;False tt0099674;agmoldham;23/12/2003;A good film, but not great;5;Whilst never really reaching the heights of the first two films this nevertheless still has its moments. A lot of the critics dislike this due to Sofia Coppola and I suspect that has more to do with her parentage than it does with her acting. Personally I think her acting is fair enough, but I think the film is rather let down by the Vatican plot line.

Michael is still trying to achieve is goal by legitimising the organisation. This time it's the younger members of the family that are frustrated and their actions deny Michael's ultimate goal. Al Pacino puts in another fine performance that sees him become increasingly imprisoned in his position. Overall a good movie, but not a classic.;1;3;False tt0099674;boito;09/09/2003;why?;2;Simply put, this movie has no reason to exist (other than making money which we should all know is reason enough). Artistically, it's no where near the quality of the first two movies. Even without judging it by those hight standards, it's simply not good. Bad script, uneven and hard to follow plot, and poor performances across the board. I'm looking in your direction Pacino.;1;3;False tt0099674;Homeless-Dad;05/03/2003;Disappointment;;"I truly loved ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather Part 2"". I was really disappointed with ""The Godfather Part 3"". Here is a list of reasons

1) Weak plot 2) Strange character relationships 3) Bad acting from a few 4) Some cheezy/predictable parts

1) The plot was Michael trying to legitamitize his business. Somehow, attending his son's Opera Debut, getting named a Saint, a feud between some guy name Joey Zaza, and feuds with other mob heads mixes into that mess. The difference from ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather Part 2"" is that the sub plots were in the general vecinity of the main plot. Part 3 is just a giant mess.

2) Who would make out and date their 1st cousin? (enough said) 3) Sofia Coppola (enough said yet again) 4) I sooooo predicted Michael to be in the car when Kay was going out into Sicily and almost everything was predictable, like the climactic killings in the end. The Godfather Part 3 was trying too hard to be like the original (the ending at least) because they have everyone in a peaceful setting (Baptism in the first, Opera in part 3) and then it cuts to all these killings happening at the same time.

I did not like The Godfather Part 3 much because it was a huge disappointment";1;3;False tt0099674;Mafiosi_turnip;14/08/2002;The horror...the horror;;"part 3 should have never been made. I dont like this movie for a very simple reasons, very little of the original story carries over to this installment. made up characters like vincent and marie and inconsistent ones like Kate, who after disaproving of michael's chosen career in the first 2 installments is now so accepting of the mob wife role. And what is with the whole Vatican issue, sounds more like international politics than the underworld power struggle of the two first movies were. Also gone are the mentions of real life famous characters with names changed from the first movies , for example famous singer and actor Johnie Fontaine,that gave the fictional story of the godfather a non fictional touch, i loved that. The only character from this movie that i liked was Joe Montagnia's; the only character that kept true to the original mafioso persona of the first installments. if you love the godfather like i do stick to the first 2 movies, you wont be sorry .";1;3;False tt0099674;TheMan3051;07/07/2002;A letdown;7;This movie has some powerful scenes especially at the end but overall it was a letdown. I think the reason it was a letdown was because it was too predictable. After what happened at the end of 'Godfather II' everyone knew what was going to happen to Michael. So since the focus was mostly on Michael it was pretty predictable at times. It would have been a better movie if they would have combined the Michael scenes with Sonny's early days.

**1/2 out of **** Stars;1;3;False tt0099674;Ciuski;22/03/2001;The story of Corleone family ends;10;"A lot of people said that this film isn't as good as the other two, and it isn't ranked even in the IMDb top 250 (instead ""the Godfather"" and ""the Godfather - part II"" are in the #1 and #6). That's on right! Ok, maybe it's true that ""the Godfather - part III"" is less thrilling and not original, but it completes marvellously ""the Godfather Trilogy"". Certainly the end of ""the Godfather - part III"" (which corresponds at the end of the saga) is so sad that I cried a lot when I first saw it (and I still cry everytime I see it). It's the best end I've ever seen. If you have seen the first and the second film of the saga, you can't feel satisfied without have seen the part III. It's marvellous, sad, strong,...great!";1;3;False tt0099674;The Big Lebowski;07/02/2001;Oh dear;;Why was this film made? It has nothing to add at all to the saga. By this moving most of the origianl cast have either been killed off or have left. So there are many new actors and characters in this film, none of them as good as in the first two.

SPOILERS Godfather 2 end son the ultimate low note and a magnificent end. While the Godfather 3 also ends on a low note, so you haven't really progressed anywhere. Not only that but the hammy acting from micheal when the daughter is killed is terrible. Oh and the final shot of him falling off his chair just seemed like a real cop out.

So what does this film offer the series i ask? Nothing, the plot is another rehash of the same old back stabbing and unoriginal family antics. The acting has degraded. The cinematography isn't up to that of the first or second. I just don't know what they were thinking apart from getting some money out of it.;1;3;True tt0099674;lionesss;23/12/1998;Not a masterpiece as the other two were, but an effective end to the saga;7;This movie is, the consensus seems to be, great as movies go, but not quite up to par of Part I and Part II. I should have to agree. Sofia Coppola really truly should not have gotten the part as Mary. The only positive thing I can say about her is that she has nice hair, which is not much, is it? Andy Garcia, well, he was not bad but could have been much better. There are a couple of moments when he seems to have forgotten his lines. Is this Coppola's fault for letting us see it? And is he (Garcia) really strong enough to continue the Corleone empire? The movie doesn't quite let you make your mind up. Pacino is, as always, faultless, this time as the ageing Michael. Talia Shire is better in this movie than she was in the other two, though maybe this is because she is more involved in the actual plot.;1;3;False tt0099674;stills-6;01/10/2000;Ponderous and self-indulgent;6;"Extremely disappointing given that it's supposed to be a ""III"" for the first two. Taken by itself, it's just not a good movie.

While the first two episodes are entertaining and spontaneous self-contained tragedies, this one is a ponderous epilogue for the entire story. Instead of a separate story to tell, this movie tries to fill in the previous stories with post-70s psychological motivations, like a middle-aged man looking back on his life and career when he should be focusing on his present life. It's not fun to watch.";1;3;False tt0099674;Yuko-4;09/12/1998;If only...;;No doubt a beautiful piece of art, heart-aching movie, spectacular romance, filled with family love, if Winona Ryder had been in it.;1;3;False tt0099674;abettertomorrow;06/06/2000;The most subtle, intellectual of the trilogy;9;I am very disappointed to hear all the negative comments and the jokes aimed at the final installment in The Godfather trilogy. But I guess it isn't that surprising for the third installment takes a long time jump over the second and is less violent. If the first movie was an introduction to power and a very powerful family, the second was about using that power as protection for the future, the third is about the cost of using power to secure your future, how you may change yourself but can't change your past.

This is Al Pacino's best work of the 90s and probably his final subtle performance. Andy Garcia (the Pacino of his generation) steals the show and is the perfect actor to play James Caan's son. Sofia Coppola isn't as bad as most people think but I really regret that Winona Ryder wasn't in her place. Director Francis Ford Coppola takes a different approach in his direction, shooting much longer scenes with Michael Corleone and much more Italian language. The final climax and final image is haunting and is the inevitable, masterful end to America's greatest saga.;1;3;False tt0099674;fishnet;04/10/1999;Please don't complain;10;"All the comments that I've read about this movie lead me to the conclusion that people are ungrateful. It makes me think of the one episode of the Simpsons where the comic book store guy is complaining about the Poochy episode of Itchy + Scratchy. Bart ask him what he is complaining about since the show has provided him with countless hours of entertainment and all he can respond with is, ""Worst episode ever."" I mean, movies are made for the audience, but if a writer/director makes a movie the way he does, that's his business. It's called artistic license. I for one think that whatever someone puts in a movie is fine and if I don't like it so what? When I watched Part III I liked Sophia, I liked Vincent, and I even liked the way Michael died. Once you take a movie for what it is, entertainment, and just sit back and relax, you might discover that a once ""flawed"" movie is pretty darn entertaining. So please, dislike it if you must, but don't complain because some of us actually enjoyed it. Thank you.";1;3;False tt0099674;andy-332;19/06/1999;Yama Yama Yama;;Hmmm, me thinks after reading the other reviews that Sophia was tragically miscast. Well, after watching it for myself, I agree. You know, someone like Joey from Dawsons creek would have been ideal playing Mary. When a girl that cute dies at the end, you cry, not weep for joy, as I did when Sophia left us. I feel safe knowing that if there were to be another addition to the saga, there wouldn't be a Mary Corleone. Unless there is some kind of weird resurrection,where I'm sure Cher would be suitable.;1;3;False tt0099674;Mudflap;20/02/1999;Sophia Coppola ruined this movie!;6;I feel that this movie had moments of greatness, but other than the fact that her dad directed it how did Sophia Coppola get on screen? She is totally outclassed by an otherwise excellent cast. Maybe it's just me but she makes me want to put my foot through the screen! Well, at least she only ruins her dad's films - I can imagine why anyone else would have reason to hire her...;1;3;False tt0099674;morganlee;07/03/2002;I gave each film in the trilogy 10/10 but this film lacks something...;10;This is a great movie but lacks 2 things:

Tom Hagen and most importantly Vito, the greatest character in motion picture history.

However this movie did not spoil the other 2 and is a brilliant ending people who dislike it are unfairly comparing it to the other 2.

On its own worth 10/10, I only gave the other 2 films 10 because the scale doesn't reach 6,000,000,000.;1;3;False tt0099674;stevojaxon;24/02/2020;You have to see this after parts 1 and 2;8;In what universe would you not watch this after watching the first 2 movies? It adds context and ties up loose ends. It's a masterwork but I can understand people not feeling this way, as there were preceding movies it had to live up to. And yes;1;4;False tt0099674;sirtelly;05/06/2017;An offer I CAN refuse.;5;"** Spoiler Alert **

Considering this movie's reputation, I went in with lowered expectations with the intent of giving it a fair shot as a stand- alone movie. It still disappointed.

Though I generally agree with many of the points made in other reviews -- poor casting, convoluted or non-relevant plot lines, etc -- its biggest flaw lies in its predictability. The moment Michael Corleone declares ""I would burn in hell to keep you safe"" to his daughter (which happens quite early on), I knew how it was going to end. This filled the rest of an already bloated film with the wrong kind of dread, exposing each emotionally manipulative scene to ill effect. Also, an abundance of unconvincing or even unnecessary ""hits"" in the movie is more exhausting than anything else, and robs the climactic, drawn out scene at the opera house of any emotional impact that might have remained. Lastly, the final scene of Michael's pitiful death years later as an old man, alone and unloved, unfortunately serves as a symbol of the movie itself rather than the character.";1;4;False tt0099674;RossRivero99;15/04/2017;A good movie but not as good as the first two;8;Compared to the first two Godfather movies which were masterpieces, even though this third and final installment in the franchise is a disappointment even though I did happen to like this movie. This movie wasn't adapted from the Mario Puzo novel but it obviously did use mostly the same characters with some new additions. The movie is set roughly 20 years after which part II ended beginning in 1979 and Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is still the head of the Corleone crime family but now he is using his power before retirement to do good with founding the Vito Andolini Corleone foundation (which is obviously named after his father) with his daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola) who happens to have a crush on her cousin Vincent (Andy Garcia). With that relationship Michael is very reluctant to let it continue. Also during this time Michael and his ex-wife Kay (Diane Keaton) are still divorced, he has only one sibling left which is his sister Connie (Talia Shire), and he wants his son Anthony (Franc D'Ambrosio)to join his foundation, but his son refuses and then goes on the path to his own career. Before and during Vincent and Mary flirting Vincent had a girlfriend named Grace Hamilton (Bridget Fonda). Francis Ford Coppola is no question a great director and a fantastic screenwriter but this movie not only flops compared to the first two films, but it also pales in comparison to every great mob movie that I have ever seen, which is why I think that it's a good movie not by any means a great one. The problems that I had with this movie are that, Coppola could have gotten deeper into the story like he did with the first two, and one of the positives is that the acting is very good with standout performances from Pacino, Keaton, Garcia (who got an Oscar nomination), Fonda, Shire, and the great Eli Wallach as an aging mobster named Altobello. But the only performance that was really embarrassing to watch was Sofia Coppola's because I got the impression that when she was filming her scenes her dad was probably telling her to improve and she didn't every time and then pretended to like it with in the next several takes, and that she was cast all because she is Francis Ford Coppola's daughter, but then again that's just me. This was a beautiful movie to look at and to watch but if Sofia Coppola had improved on her performance the movie would have been better than I currently perceive it to be, but it's still an honorable conclusion to follow two masterpieces.;1;4;True tt0099674;classicsoncall;12/01/2013;"""Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.""";8;"I didn't care much for this film when I first saw it, but I watched it today from a different perspective. I put the continuity of the first two pictures out of my mind as best as possible, and tried to watch ""Godfather III"" as a stand alone movie. Not entirely possible of course, but you get what I'm saying. After all this time, the film holds up pretty well, as the aging Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) tries to take the family business legitimate by cashing out the casinos and racketeering ventures. The business with the European conglomerate Immobiliare got a bit too intricate, but the tie-in with the Roman Catholic Church and the historical reference to the death of Pope John Paul I was an interesting story element.

What I liked about Michael Corleone was the way he kept his character subdued while plotting his next move. The contrast Andy Garcia provides as nephew Vincent Manicini is a polar opposite to Michael, just like his hot headed father Sonny who's quick temper got him killed in the first installment of the franchise. Vincent watches and learns, and capably fills in as the new head of the Corleone Family when Michael takes ill.

If there's an issue I would take with the picture, it would be the drawn out opera scene that drags the resolution of the story in the final act. I think back to the brilliant revenge sequence of the original Godfather, and this one was somewhat anti-climactic in comparison, though for shock value, the death of Mary Corleone (Sofia Coppola) was a twist I think most viewers wouldn't have expected.

As an aside, and basically unrelated to the story per se, the opening scene with that shot of the World Trade Center had me doing some quick math, and while this film came out in 1990, the Twin Towers would only survive the picture by a mere decade, and now another decade has gone by since then. Putting things all in perspective, it really boggles the mind.";1;4;True tt0099674;silent_orpheus;01/07/2012;Some say underrated, some say shouldn't have been released;6;Being somebody who loved Godfather I and II, this movie truly changed the way I will remember Don Michael Corleone. But that's not even the problem. Not only did this movie undo what was done in the first two movies, it had a major flaw in the casting of Mary Corleone. Although some may not agree, the majority of this movie's storyline is dependent on the much loved Mary. When Sofia Coppola played Mary (honestly she sounded half-asleep throughout the movie, idk if she's trying to sound seductive but it wasn't working for me), the entire plot comes crashing down. The way Mary Corleone was portrayed did not allow the viewers to become attached to her character, much less understand why the characters around her adored her so. If Mary had been portrayed with a stronger presence, it would've been an acceptable closing to the Godfather series. If I could make erase my memory of this third movie, I would. The way Godfather part II ended was perfect. With Michael Corleone making the stone-cold decision to kill anyone who poses a harm to his family, it made his character rock-solid, respected, and most of all, a legend. But being a huge fan of the first two, I had to see the final installment for myself, and man did Sofia Coppola disappoint. I'm not saying I'm 100% happy with the other characters' acting and the overall plot. But if Mary's casting had more character, it would've made the movie a LOT more formidable. Al Pacino's acting was all that saved this movie from being a horrible one.;1;4;False tt0099674;paul2001sw-1;21/07/2011;Overlong and unnecessary;;"One thing everyone knows about each of the three 'Godfather' films (even if they haven't seen them): that the first is the classiest piece of soap opera ever made, that the second is the most successful sequel ever made, and that the third is spoilt by the poor performance of Sofia Coppola, the director's daughter (who, of course, subsequently gave up acting altogether for a career as a director herself). For once, all of these pieces of conventional wisdom are true; moreover, all (and not just the last) are pertinent when answering the question, why isn't the third film (made after a long interval) as good as the other two? Because the complete answer isn't just Sofia's fault: it's fair to say that, after two epic movies, the whole idea has started to run out of gas, and the plot (based on the short reign of Pope John Paul I, and the death of Roberto Calvi), which appears tangential at best to the overall story of the American mafia, is itself one indicator of this. In effect, the central story has been told already, and it feels as if Coppola is cranking out one more episode of a soap, and no longer in a good way.

The movie isn't all bad, but it loses further points for its bizarre ending, a lengthy sequence set during a night at the opera during which almost every character appears to be killed, including many whose particular role in the plot is not at all clear to the audience. Indeed, at times, the symbolism almost appears comically obvious - opera singer picks up a knife, man in the audience gets stabbed, opera singer picks up a rifle, man in the audience gets shot, etc. - and it's impossible to argue that less grandiosity, and more editing, would have benefited the whole finale. Ultimately, there's a reason why sequels aren't usually very good (if a story is told well, it is told and then it is done); and while Coppola managed to defy this rule in making 'The Godfather Part II', sixteen years later he came decidedly down to earth.";1;4;False tt0099674;garissonangel;19/04/2009;A watchable, 3rd shot, but ultimately unmemorable;6;"Watching this film many years after its release for the second time, I have to say if the power had gone half-way through I'd have been pretty annoyed, and yet as the end titles rolled I felt much like after the first viewing that there was nothing really outstanding or memorable about this film.

Rather than packing a final jaw-shattering punch, (like the 1st installment), or confronting us with bleak immorality, (part 2), the film is like one long second act without any of the set-pieces that made me sit up and take note in the previous movies, (horses head, murder of the five families, motel hooker mutilation, Easter parade, domestic violence, etc.), although some attempts are made to include many of these ideas, (eg. the assassination of Joey Zasa).

The cast try their hardest. Andy Garcia, initially very annoying, settles down to a more natural performance after a ludicrous establishing scene at the Corleone party, biting an ear off - (come off it Francis)! Sofia Copplola mostly carries the part, (unless she speaks); Diane Keaton leaps in and out from the wings saying the same old things, and George Hamilton does rather well in the unenviable task of filling Robert Duval's role as consigliari. Vatcian politics is portrayed bleakly and the theme of honour killing is dealt with quite well, making some nice references to motifs in the previous installments, (eg explaining the curious operetta seen in part 2 by a young Vito). John Savage, however, is utterly wasted in the superfluous character of Tom Hagen's son, and Franc D' Abrosio seems hopelessly miscast as Pacino's son.

All in all though this is a cynical film made purely to capitalise on the franchise and made to line Coppola's pockets after the commercial failure of Tucker. The script was also over-laboured and subject to major changes, some a result of financial constraints. The direction is less assured than the previous films, Michael's 'dread' is imperceptible and, curiously for a film of this genre, there is nothing adult enough to elevate it from a melodrama; - it's pretty much family viewing! All in all I enjoyed watching this film, and it does close the story for good, but considering the power & legacy of the first two movies it is ironic that the series should end on such a wimper, rather than a bang.";1;4;False tt0099674;Hassard1994;17/07/2008;A disappointing end to an otherwise fantastic trilogy;;"I didn't have high expectations for The Godfather Part III. After hearing that it ""wrecked"" the trilogy and the many jokes aimed at it through TV shows. But i'm still disappointed with this film, it's a real poor effort to capitalise on the success of the first two godfather films, it doesn't really fit in well with the rest of the trilogy. It's a real let down to be honest.

Francias Ford Coppola really should've toned down on the amount of talking in this film. There's way too much of it, seriously. I found myself loosing concentration and letting my mind drift away and think about other things.

Another criticism about this film is it's length. I probably would've rated this film higher if it was about an hour shorter. And it's not only The Godfather Part III that was too long, the whole trilogy is too long in my opinion! They should've made these films shorter in my opinion.

I don't want a Godfather Part IV, three is enough and it would be hard to continue the saga without Michael Corleone...

6/10";1;4;True tt0099674;galileo3;31/07/2007;"""Part III is solid, fine, even breathtaking film-making, but unquestionably inferior to Part I + II";8;"The Godfather Part III (1990)

Top 5 - 1990

Top 50 - 1990s

The third part to Francis Ford Coppola's groundbreaking, stunning trilogy of the mafia and its derivatives. It could have ended in 1974 with the exceptional Part II. The second film perhaps could have been even longer to give us an encapsulation of what happened to the Corleone family in the following decades.

Part III, is in no way a bad film, in fact it is a very good, solid piece of film-making, but when compared to the towering first two parts of the trilogy, it is inferior. This is a further study of the Corleone family and the Italian mafia with a greying Don Michael struggling to make deals with the Vatican and legitimise his empire.

Francis Ford Coppola assembled a cast for the ages again and writes another superb screenplay to assist Godfather Part III and cement it as a very good film.

""A fine film. III is very good""

""A solid conclusion to a masterful trilogy""

8/10";1;4;True tt0099674;iuliastoianovici;10/07/2007;A very Good ending;9;Everyone told me The Godfather is the best film ever made , but when I saw the first and the second part of this movie , although the story was very well built the director's cut was kind of shaky on some parts.

However, the third part shows maturity , directory speaking . It's great , it kind of flows , something that I didn't see in the parts preceding this one.

But Francis Ford Coppola it's a great director nobody can deny that.And accepting doing this after Sergio Leone rejected , I think takes a lot of guts!

And if you watched the first and the second part with pleasure - believe me you will not be disappointed by this one!;1;4;False tt0099674;gangstahippie;01/07/2007;Definitely not as good as Godfather 1 and 2 but still a great mafia film and a great conclusion;9;Rated R for Violence and Language. Quebec Rating:13+ Canadian Home Video Rating:14A

The Godfather and The Godfather Part II are the two greatest mafia epics ever! Both had great acting, a great storyline, great characters, an all star cast and were just overall great movies.Sixteen years after Godfather 2, Godfather 3 was released.This one was not as well received as the first two but was still nominated for Best Picture of 1990 academy awards.However Goodfellas came out that same year and it was much much better than Godfather 3.Both films lost to Dances With Wolves.I have not seen that film.Godfather III isn't as good as the first two because it is not as interesting and the acting of Sofia Coppola is not very good.However Al Pacino as usual steals the show.He is in fact an excellent actor.Most of the cast of the first two godfather films are in this such as Al Pacino,Diane Keaton,Talia Shire etc.However there are some new actors in the third film such as Andy Garcia and Bridget Fonda.Also the first two films took place in the 40's and 50's(well half of Godfather 2 took place in the 10's and 20's).This film takes place in 1979-1980.Michael Corleone is now older and is still running his mafia family.His son does not want to work for him so he takes Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent under his wing.While Godfather 3 wasn't as good as the first two, it had an excellent ending! The ending was simply amazing and I will not spoil it here.Godfather III is a very underrated and great mafia film though it is not as good as the first two.;1;4;False tt0099674;borjaml_90;10/02/2007;A perfect final for a perfect story. Totally underrated;9;I heard and read lots of comments about this movie and how it was awful compared to the first two of the trilogy. Many people seemed not to like it because it completely destroyed the line in which the first two moved. But that was until I saw it.

I didn't expect too much from it, because of all the things that people used to say. But as I was watching it I realised how wrong all those people were. This movie reflects the end of one of the most tragical stories ever told, it shows another vision from the main character, Michael Corleone, who is wonderfully performed by Al Pacino. His life has been all full of something he never wanted. But he carried on with it until the end because it was kind of his responsibility after his father and brother death. But in this film, He appears to really want redemption for all what he has done.

This is one of the things that people like the least from the Godfather III. And I can't understand it. Of course, it would have been easier for Francis Ford Coppola to film another movie with the remaining bad acts from Michael, full of violence and similar to the other two. But this movie gets into the mind of Michael, and shows his inner feelings, that have stayed there forever, ever since he killed his brother. It is one of the most powerful films ever psychologically speaking.

If The Godfather part III had been a continuation of the other two, the trilogy would have been open for more, and it wouldn't have been as perfect as it is, as the three are, all together.

And to talk about the performances, this may be one of the best performed movies ever. Al Pacino offers a masterwork in a grown up moment of his career, with solid speeches, and powerful acting full of emotion and expression, totally one of the best in his career. He amazed me in the final scenes, with the killing of his daughter, he really showed a Shakespearean dramatical performance. Awesome. And Diane Keaton gives the perfect answer to him as the unforgiving ex-wife of Michael Corleone, Kay. Then there is the young actors, such as Andy Garcia, in his early career, sums up with this movie the essence of the Corleone family in just one character, and Sofia Coppola acts really well too, despite all the people who say the opposite.

The story of this movie is so touching that it could make you cry, because it's about a person who has suffered a degeneration because of some external circumstances and after all his life, he apologises for everything, because he wants to die in peace.

Maybe it's not the best one of the trilogy, and maybe the two first were more impacting, specially for that time, and of course I think that The Godfather I or II is the best movie ever, but let's not think that's a good reason to say this isn't a great one too. It's the closing to the story of Michael Corleone.

So, to sum up, I can understand that it didn't won any Oscar and all that stuff, but no one should think this is a bad movie, cause it's a must-see for everyone interested and it's probably one of the most underrated films in history (obviously it had a hard work to do, due to the quality of the first ones). It's unthinkable from my point of view, to see the two first parts of the Godfather without seeing this one, just to complete them, as totally perfect as they are.;1;4;True tt0099674;critical-escapist;07/02/2006;The 70's vs. the 90's: Different time, different motion picture;9;"Before I saw The Godfather: Part III, I read many negative reviews (except for Roger Ebert's) about it and I had my mind set on watching a horrid movie because I was such a fan of the first two. But I was surprised: It wasn't as bad as everyone said it was and just because it wasn't good as the first two (The Godfather was made in the 1972 and The Godfather: Part II was made in 1974) this last installment of the ""trilogy"" serves the whole saga some justice because it gives a nice deliverable ending to two cinematic masterpieces.

The film begins with a haunting memory of the Tahoe estate. Then cuts into Michael being honored by his church and mirroring a celebration of the first two parts. (but held indoors!)

When Anthony (D'Ambrosio) tells Michael he wants no part in the family business and wants to pursue a life in music, Michael reluctantly agrees.

But then pops the alternative: Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) comes in with the support of his own of Connie, Michael's sister (Talia Shire) to meet Michael. He is the illegitimate son of Sonny, Michael's brother and he tells Michael that Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna) has been bad-mouthing him behind his back. Vincent, like his father, has a temper and is prone to doing things without thinking. He wants to join Michael and leaves Zasa so Michael takes Vincent in, reluctantly.

The main plot in the film is actually quite confusing and I don't know if I'll fully explain it in the correct terms: Michael wants to buy a company called Immobiliare, which is controlled by the Vatican. Don Altobello, who becomes furious that his mafia would not be included into the deal because of Michael's hunger of being legitimate - he wants to keep the company as legitimate as possible because that has been his ultimate Americanized dream.

There are a few ""subplots"", including the rather disturbing but at the same time I must admit as rather sweet incest romance between Mary (Coppola) and Vincent (Garcia). When Mary approaches Vincent and he tells her to ""Love somebody else"" just breaks my heart for some reason.

Another one that I thought was fantastically written was probably the dialog between Michael (Pacino) and Kay (Keaton). Why? Even though it seemed misplaced (since it was written in later) I thought it would of had been terrific in another film. But too bad, it's already in this film: When Kay comes to Sicily for their son's debut in an opera and Michael is there to finish off the Vatican deal, he shows her around the city and those moments are priceless. These are great actors doing great dialog and the scene where Michael and Kay are both in that room and he tells her he still loves her and she starts breaking down - I think I was going to cry as well. But after thinking about it a while: What happened to the abortion in Part II? (Goodness, he started yelling her and then later slapped her ...) Did it just disappear out of Michael's mind or is this a very different film? And yes, it is a very different film - with flaws that we can just forget and move on with our lives.

The man is suffering – he even has a diabetic stroke in the course of the film. But this is a man who has done evilness.

The acting isn't all as bad people say it is. I want to start off with Sofia Coppola who has received two Razzies for her performance - if it wasn't for those bad reviews I would never had noticed that her acting sucked. My mind just paid attention to her acting - and other than how her voice sounded so unnatural and strange, she wasn't as bad as people say she was. And there's Andy Garcia, who beat out quite a number of people for the role of Vincent and even though he wasn't really deserving of his Oscar-nom, he did quite well adjusting to his character when his character had no development whatsoever (I mean, he became Don in just uh - 2 weeks?). There is Talia Shire, who is probably one of the best gems in the film. She is malicious and as sweet as poison and that's why I loved her here. Keaton turns in a mustered-up performance of a Oscar-winner (Annie Hall). And for all the love/hate comments for Al Pacino - he's on top of his game and you know what? He may be the best thing in the whole entire film. The silent scream scene in unforgettable.

So my critique of the film? I think this is *the* film I would be willing to watch again if I was to choose between the three. Why? Because this is my favorite film even though it wasn't the best film (Part II is the best if you asked me). This film is a nostalgic surprise (with one too many flashbacks from the first two) and Francis Ford Coppola (who has admitted he made the film for financial reasons) does a fantastic job. I thought the shots looked more ""modern"" because sixteen years is a lot of time to improvise on skills of film-making which makes a very different motion picture. I think Part III felt more like a Hollywood blockbuster/wannabe Oscar bait. But all in all, it's a very entertaining film (yeah, it may be confusing but still enjoyable).

The Godfather: Part III is also surprisingly funny (""When I'm dead, I'm gonna be really smart""). I didn't expect that coming!";1;4;True tt0099674;Aditya_Gokhale;20/12/2005;The Death of Michael Corleone;6;"After hearing about all the bad reports, I still wanted to see ""The Godfather Part III"", since the great feeling of having watched Part II still lingered! When I started watching, I felt it was kind of disconnected from its predecessors, as is inevitable because of a gap of over 15 years between Part II and Part III.

The story revolves around an aging Michael Corleone making a deal with the Archbishop and others in the Vatican as a step towards going completely legitimate. But as it turns out, they have plans of their own (along with some other people) to swindle him instead. Michael realizes that the more he tries to get rid of his old ways, the more he seems to be sucked right back in!

This is one review which will have to start with its minuses rather than its pluses!

1. It is appalling to see an old, tired, ill Michael Corleone gone all ""soft""! Also, he is no more the brooding, cold, calculating, heartless Michael we've come to know from the later half of Part I and the whole of Part II. Here's a guy who we have always known to not break into a hysterical fit over the death of someone close to him (e.g.'s deaths of Sonny, The Godfather himself and Mama Corleone). He always expressed his grief through his eyes; and always maintained a calm demeanor. Yet, in this movie, he goes completely over the top, insane with grief and screams like hell when his daughter is killed in the end! Not that he is not good in the scene; he is of course, great! But it is rather sad to see a regretful Michael, weeping every now and then! He just seems so weak and helpless.

2. Most of the characters I'd come to love after Part II are missing. One most important character is Tom Hagen! He is sorely missed and I cursed the film-maker for not giving Robert Duvall the salary he wanted and casting him in the role of Hagen again! Instead, Hagen's son makes a small appearance!

3. Andy Garcia has been introduced as Vincent, Sonny's illegitimate son! Personally, I have nothing against Garcia, and he has been good in all his other movies I've seen. But he just didn't seem a good fit here! He tries too hard, is short tempered like his father Sonny, but the whole thing just doesn't work for him! I am surprised he got an Oscar nomination!

4. And about Sofia Coppola as Michael's daughter Mary...the less said the better!

5. This is a sequel that rips some scenes off from the first and second movies.

For example, there is a function in the beginning and Johnny Fontane makes an appearance to sing a song!

Then there is Michael telling Santino's illegitimate son Vincent, ""Never let anyone else know what you're thinking"" (reminds one of the same thing said to Santino by Don Vito in Part I).

The scene of the killing of Joe Zasa looks like a cheaper imitation of the killing of Don Fanucci from Part II! Both killings take place during a festival.

Then the arrangement of a meeting with the members of other families, ""to make peace"": again a reminder of the powerful meeting scene where Don Vito makes peace with the heads of the other families, from Part I.

Now the few pluses:

1. Acting from Al Pacino. He is now old, weak and sick, so he doesn't appear to be anything like the Michael we have known from Part II. Still, a great actor that he is, he does justice to what the script demands of him; although I would still have loved to see his ruthless old self! Acting from Talia Shire: she is good as the old Connie who is always by Michael's side.

2. The climax scene at the Opera. This is one scene that is reminiscent of the brilliance of the first two parts. Wonderfully directed!

3. The final scene of the death of Michael Corleone. I have to admit, it was very sad to see him die alone. That is a very powerful scene indeed.

This movie is actually quite watchable and a fairly decent film, if watched as a stand-alone after possibly changing its name! But as a part of The Godfather series, it appears highly pale in comparison to the first two parts, and hence loses points.

If only Coppola would've at least tried to come close to the greatness of Part II...

6.5/10";1;4;True tt0099674;rclark07;05/12/2005;good movie;9;God Father III had a lot different style then the first two. Probably because it was set twenty years later. I really loved the insight and thought put into it. There was a lot more music and a softer dialog. I think what made the movie was Michael getting older he actually looked more like a mobster. He was more reasonable in this move then the last two, he seemed wiser. He was looking for redemption in his life. I'm not sure if Andy Garcia was a good replacement to take over. I think he fit in well though. The daughter wasn't a very good actress. She didn't seem like she fit in this move. All in all I think it was a really good ending to an awesome trilogy. The music was awesome. I especially liked Brucia La Terra. I recommend this move to anyone but you have to see the I and II first. Michael dressed incredible in this part.;1;4;False tt0099674;suvadeep81;07/11/2005;watch out for pacino;9;This is one of the most underrated movies of all times.if one can get credit for a movie such as Scaeface,one deserves a lot more for 'Godfather 3'.forget the storyline,forget everything else,what grabs you is Al Pacino's performance.if i had two choose 2 of my favourite scenes they would be,one where pacino confesses all his sins including the fact that he killed his brother to the priest.the other scene that stands out is where sofia takes the bullet meant for the godfather n he's cruising over her dead body.he screams but no sound comes out.that one scene clearly takes the cake,at par with some of his scenes in 'scent of a woman'.truly worth watching.;1;4;True tt0099674;gws-2;25/09/2005;Underrated;8;"I agree with the sentiment expressed by others that ""The Godfather III"" is an underrated film. I suggest that the primary reason for its having been underrated was Francis Ford Coppola's unfortunate decision to cast his then 19-year-old daughter, Sophia, in the pivotal role of Mary Corleone. Sophia Coppola had neither the charisma nor the acting chops for such a role, which made her scenes painful to watch. Nevertheless, the movie was outstanding in most other respects, I believe.

The closing scenes are mostly cuts between an opera and a series of assassinations. This was a good choice, because the story, written by Coppola and Mario Puzo, is highly operatic – and it works. Although ""The Godfather III"" is certainly not in a class with the first two films of the Godfather Trilogy, which were two of the best films ever made, it is still a fine movie.

The film was made at an early enough stage in Al Pacino's career that he did not consistently overact as he has done to his detriment in too many roles since. There is nobody better than Pacino when he exercises restraint, as he did here in his portrayal of Michael Corleone. The other members of the large cast, other than Sophia Coppola, were uniformly effective, too, particularly Diane Keaton, as Michael's long suffering ex-wife and the mother of his children.

""The Godfather III"" is a worthy concluding entry in the Godfather Trilogy. Highly recommended, 8 out of 10.";1;4;False tt0099674;hutchinson_3;23/09/2005;Not as great as the first two, yet still a profound movie.;7;The Gofather series is of course arguably one of the most influential and captivating works of contemporary art. The first two in the series hardly need to be spoken for with regard to their magnificence. The third one however, I feel, needs someone to stand up for it. It is the younger brother who only played college ball while its brother played professional, for lack of a better analogy.

The Godfather part 3, at first glance, is just a poor sequel which was meant to appease hardcore fans, make money, and start off some careers. Yet, if you really look at the 'summary' of all the Godfather conflicts that were put into this movie, you will see that it is just as artistic as the first two.

Michael is a hero. A hero whose life ends in tragedy. His fatal flaw is the ability to understand the nature of good versus evil. To elaborate on that further, Michael understands that he must sacrifice his peace and plans for the future to save his family. This of course will take sacrifice, what he fails to understand is, that good conquering evil will always come with a price, and that sometimes it is hard to distinguish the two. That will seal his doom.

Michael cannot differentiate between what is right and what is wrong while he doing the right thing. Telling God that he will sin no more if he is let out of the business, then handing the wheel over to a man who he knows will commit great acts of violence, is, I'm afraid to say, committing a sin. He also fails to realize that killing your brother who was just stupid, is probably not gonna look good on God's account. Many other instances of synonymous circumstances occur throughout the movies and I doubt I have to elaborate for anyone who has seen them.

Michael fails to see, that after many of his loved ones death, he still did his job well, he saved his family, but doomed himself for not listening. And it is understood in the end that he dies alone, hating God, hating life, hating all that he did for he thinks he failed.

All in all, the Godfather 3 is actually a damn good movie, which sums up all of the points the first two did not make emphatically clear. I suggest that if you find this movie to be bad and your a fan of the series , to watch it again and look for all the summaries.;1;4;False tt0099674;viewtifuljoe1010;14/07/2005;Very well done;9;I am not a huge fan of the Godfather trilogy (but I do enjoy them), but I must admit that this is quite a good film. I wanted to see why everyone always beats this movie down. There is absolutely no reason to do so! (Save for Sofia's acting...) I can understand why people wouldn't like this movie though, in this film, you are cheering for a completely different Micheal. In parts I and II you are cheering for the guy who's breaking his way to the top, in III he's at the top, and has seen the errors of his ways, so he wants to make things better. It's because he wants to make things better that people don't like this film.

If you liked parts I and II you probably won't enjoy this as much. BUT if you simply enjoy good film, then this is a very excellent view that I would definitely recommend.;1;4;False tt0099674;joliet-jake;08/12/2004;the price you pay for the life you choose;9;This is the greatest ending chapter of a trilogy that i have ever seen. I really enjoy this trilogy. We find our Don Michael Corleone trying to get the family business legitamte and also trying to teach his nephew Vinne to become the head of the family. He also tries to get his family life back together. Lots of great [lot development in this series that is all wrapped up in this film. Great movie. Definitely check this movie out after viewing the others. This is an amazing series that is strong from the first movie all the way to the end. This movie is great i honestly do not know what else to say about it. If you were a fan of the others and have not seen this one what are you waiting for go and see this movie it is fantastic 10 out of 10;1;4;False tt0099674;Thrashman88;02/11/2004;Better with Each Viewing;9;"I remember seeing THE GODFATHER III a couple of months after it was released on VHS and being completely mesmerized by it. I actually had my reserveations, thinking what many of us here though at the time:""How can Coppola TOP the previous installments?"" He did not top them, but he certainly was VERY close. Several years passed and I bought the DVD trilogy, but before I could get to watch GODFATHER III, some local TV channel aired it, and I couldn't help but watching it, albeit, not totally focused and incomplete. Somehow, the movie didn't grasp me this time around. A couple of days later I decided to watch it with my wife, on DVD and give it another chance. How wrong was I! The magic that unfolded when I first saw it came back like a hammer blow. I remembered something that I already knew: You have to watch these films with total attention to fully appreciate them. The lack of continuous action packed scenes may discourage some people, but then again, when the action scenes appear, they are over the top. THE GODFATHER III is set some 16 years after the ending of GODFATHER II. Michael Corleone is still trying to make his empire, ""Legit"" and his desire to shed the blood of his enemies has greatly diminished. We get to see most of the original cast, although Tom hagan's character (played wonderfully in the first movies by Robert Duvall) is sadly absent. It's never mentioned, but it appears that he died during the 70's. Michaels two children are now young adults. Andy Garcia is introduced as Sonny Corleone's bastard son, Vincent Mancini. His performance has yet to be outdone by himself! He is simply superb as the future heir to the Corleone Empire. Michael, in his attempt to go legit, strikes a deal with ""immobiliare"", the Vatican Bank. This deal will make the Corleones as respectable as the Rockefellers. As Michael tries to get this deal done, he faces new enemies who don't want him to run ""immobiliare"". The circumstances force Michael to adopt his old ""Mafia Warfare"" tactics, although he does it hesitantly. THE GODFATHER III is just as complex and richly textured as the other two movies...even the film quality has that ""grainy"" aspect that makes you think it was really filmed fight after last picture. Al Pacino's performance is more subdued in this one, but that's because his character is an Old Mafioso looking to redeem himself. The anger and fury of young Michael is present in Vincent (Andy Garcia). The ending is tragic and while it not may please everyone (it leaves many lose ends in the air)it's decent finale to what's possibly the most highly revered film trilogy in history.";1;4;False tt0099674;jangir99;18/03/2003;BoredFather Not GodFather;;How can anyone recommend The Godfather Part Three? It is absolute pants. The Party Scene at the very beginning of the Movie is so long winded I had to fast forward with my Samsung DVD remote. Also, why make Michael Corleone appear so weak (both physically and psychologically)? It hurt to see this once great Character deteriorate in such a way. Al Pacino's 'oh lets use violence as a last resort' Character is baloney, pathetic and annoying. And why is almost half the film (I'm obviously exaggerating) spent on trying to make Opera seem appealing to the masses? It's so boring (the Opera and the Film). The last major scene of the Movie drained the life out of me - it was that bad. The only part of the film which made me emotional was the very last scene. I hope Godfather 4 goes back to the roots of the first two Godfather Movies i.e ruthless Empire building with a touch of character development.;1;4;False tt0099674;Steeldealer;31/01/2002;Ultimate letdown...;5;"People often criticize Sofia Coppola when discussing this film. Rightly so. She goes from mediocre to terrible depending on the scene.

However, this film could still be great if that was it's only flaw. I just watched all three nearly consecutively in about a 24 hour period.

First, the cast. Robert Duvall is gone. His character is gone for reasons possibly unexplained, although I think there was a hint that he had died of a heart attack. His role as the consiglierie taken by...George Hamilton. He's actually not bad but he just looks and seem out of place, probably through no fault of his own. Sofia Coppola, a beautiful girl if she would give Karl Malden his nose back, is just incapable of pulling the emotionally complex scenes off. She's fine in the less demanding scenes, making previous claims that hers is the worst performance in cinema history invalid. Crispin Glover couldn't handle ANY scene in ""Rivers Edge""...but I digress... Replacing 1970s Al Pacino is the modern Al, incapable of subtle, nuanced performances. So, he sets to shouting...often. Then you have Diane Keaton. A pretty woman who still has never been attractive a day in her life. While watching this movie, I finally solved this enigma. She finds the worst hairdos any woman could possibly wear. Dear God, help this woman. She's fine though, doing what she can with the one-note character of Kay who was poorly written even in the first two Godfather movies. Then you have Andy Garcia. He has two facial expressions and two tones of voice. The expressions are ""ridiculously goofy grin"" and ""deadpan"". The tones of voice are ""screaming"" and ""deadpan"". I was always impressed with him in ""When A Man Loves A Woman""...now that I think of it, I was impressed with Meg Ryan. Joining George Hamilton in the category of decent actor looking hopelessly out of place is Eli Wallach and Joe Mantegna. Neither is very convincing either, though seemingly through no fault of their own.

Then you have the plot. Some mumbo-jumbo about double crosses and triple crosses with the only original or fresh concept being the involvement of the Catholic Church and the Vatican. There's a ridiculous part where a helicopter attacks a room filled to the brim with mob bosses. I asked myself why it wouldn't have been much easier in every way to just plant a bomb. Then I realized that Andy and Al couldn't have escaped from that. The scene looks like it was shot for about twelve dollars. You only see one shot of a portion of the helicopter for a second. There's also the trouble with Talia Shire. She does do a credible job. But her character is VERY different from the Connie we knew from the first two films. Plus her make-up is bad. She has age make-up and her neck always looked perfectly smooth...except for three wrinkles that were all perfectly straight. They looked like gills...

There are a lot of great things about this film. The music is terrific, the locations and cinematography are beautiful, and the hitman in the opera house sequence is riveting. If it was being graded strictly on its own merits, I would probably think more highly of it. But the fact remains that this film falls victim to its own legacy.

I think the worst thing about the film is the frequent flashbacks to the first two films. Possibly the producers were hoping to cash in on any good will we feel towards those two masterpieces. All it succeeds on doing is reminding me how inferior the film really is to it's two superior predecessors.

The best thing about the film is Martin Scorsese's mom. She's adorable for the fifteen seconds she was in the film. Of course, all that did was remind me I could be watching ""Goodfellas""...

Scale of 1 to 10...? It's a 6...";1;4;False tt0099674;GreenHornet69;17/06/2018;Unfortunate;5;"As much as it pains me to say so, given this is one of ""The Godfather"" titles, this film is an unfortunate bookend to an otherwise timelessly classic, beautifully written, impeccably acted, and hauntingly filmed saga. The storyline should have ended with the time-jumping, prequel flashbacks which filled in the rich backstory of the Corleone family in The Godfather: Part II. I rated The Godfather: Part III a six (6) star rating based on the films lineage. Also, I gave the film an additional rating star for each of the actors reprising their respective roles and given their acting linage. (This is not a one to ten rating of the actors themselves--only additional start ratings for them film itself): one (1) star for Al Pacino, one (1) star for Diane Keaton, and one (1) star for Talia Shire. For the storyline a negative two (-2), and for associating itself with the first two films a negative two (-2); it fell far short of earning the privilege of being one of ""The Godfather"" films. Alas, it receives a 5/10 rating...a generous gift.";1;5;False tt0099674;Pjtaylor-96-138044;09/02/2018;The overall effect of the piece is one of total disappointment, with an aftertaste of poor writing, bad acting and an utter lack of subtlety.;5;'The Godfather: Part III (1990)' feels like a total betrayal of character, a backtrack of immense proportions tacked onto the end of two terrific cinematic achievements. Only the incredibly brave or incredibly foolish would even attempt to touch this series with a ten-foot pole for fear of besmirching either its legacy or their reputation, though this unnecessary epilogue was surely only even attempted for monetary reasons. The insatiable studio was determined to milk this cash-cow with or without the talent that could make it even close to something worthy of its moniker, so perhaps it was best that Coppola and co came on board. Sadly, while it is perhaps better than it could have been and the picture does indeed have a few interestingly inspired moments, the overall effect of the piece is one of total disappointment, leading to an aftertaste of poor writing, bad acting and an utter lack of subtlety that makes you yearn for the first two features again. It almost seems like it's from a different franchise and, while it doesn't quite ruin what came before, you're probably better off not knowing what happens to our mafia-man protagonist once the credits roll on 'Part II (1974)'. 5/10;1;5;False tt0099674;Rahal97;29/12/2016;Disappointing;6;Sure, the movie is pressured because the first two movies are legendary, but let's face it, part III is not nearly as good as the first two movies, it is even a bad movie. This movie ruined The Godfather Trilogy for most viewers and I can understand why. The directing and acting are below average unlike the first two and the plot is not that good. In my opinion Andy Garcia was terrible in his performance so was Sofia Coppola. The Godfather Part III exited the principle concept and idea of The first two movies. It is far from being a movie that emphasizes on the gangster life of the Corleone family.

In conclusion it is bad movie, Al Pacino saved it a little. 5.5/10;1;5;False tt0099674;DarthVoorhees;26/07/2007;Despite the horrific miscasting of Mary the movie is as chilling as it's predecessors.;9;The Godfather films were all morality tales but this chapter is by far the one rooted most in Michael Corleone's perception of good and evil. The Godfather III is more of a psychological thriller than the previous chapters. The story here isn't the Corleones fighting another gang to expand their criminal empire, It's Michael Corleone versus himself. Al Pacino is a master and he delivers a really underrated performance here. This Michael is a tragic character, a man who has felt his sins weigh him down throughout the years and he seeks redemption. Puzo and Coppola put together a brilliant screenplay. It's actually really clever that they tied corruption in the vatican with the mafia. And showing the Church the organization which should be the centerpiece of morality and ethics deal with the evil Mafia is brilliant satire on what the definition of being a good person is.

Andy Garcia is brilliant as Vincent Mancini, the bastard son of Sonny. The Godfather movies have great characters and Mancini is overlooked when compared to the colorful cast of characters from the previous chapters. Mancini like his father is violent and impulsive but when he is teamed with Michael he learns the lessons of deception Michael used to become the man who all most out shined his father.

I all most think Godfather III would have gotten the Best Picture Oscar hadn't Sofia Coppola been cast in it. She's ugly as sin and she reads dialouge like a first time actor. The scenes between her and the great cast are like putting Da Vinci next to a paint by numbers kit. Every cast member in III is excellent except for her. She takes away the fourth star from this movie for me. Winona Ryder wouldn't have been much better but she could at least hold her head above water with Pacino.;1;5;True tt0099674;evanston_dad;26/07/2006;Oh, Those Corleones...;5;"No American filmmaker has had a more disappointing trajectory to his film career than Francis Ford Coppola. To have directed four of the most influential films of the 70's (the first two ""Godfather"" films, ""The Conversation,"" and ""Apocalypse Now"") and then to spend the last two decades churning out one stinky product after another (""Peggy Sue Got Married,"" ""Bram Stoker's Dracula"", the third ""Godfather"") earns Coppola my award for Most Promising Director Who Most Miserably Failed at Establishing Himself as an Important Figure of American Cinema. But before ""Jack"" there was ""The Godfather."" While I feel the whole ""Godfather"" trilogy has been lauded into oblivion and is somewhat overrated, who am I to argue with the majority? People think these are great movies, and they've certainly implanted themselves permanently in our cultural consciousness.

And don't get me wrong: these films have moments of greatness (at least the first two installments do). But I think ""The Conversation"" and ""Apocalypse Now"" are ultimately more interesting films, and I think Coppola stretched himself more artistically in those two films than he did in the entire ""Godfather"" trilogy combined.

Of the trilogy, the first film is by far the best. It shows Coppola's flair for being able to craft a story with extreme mainstream appeal while staying faithful to his artistic vision. ""The Godfather"" doesn't look or sound quite like any gangster film before it, with it's muddy lighting and sound. It's also much more ambiguous morally than the usual Hollywood gangster film, at least any produced up to that point. The line between crime and justice is blurred sometimes beyond distinction, and the Corleone family at times acts with more honor (in its own way) than the institutions charged with upholding freedom, justice and morality. In this way, ""The Godfather"" offered a scathing critique of the foundations on which America as a country was built.

Coppola, however, drives this point into the ground over the course of three films. There's really not much more to say after the first film (it's already apparent that Michael Corleone's style of rule is different from his father's, his coldness and ruthlessness necessitated by a changing time), but we have to sit through a nearly 3 1/2 hour second installment that does nothing but reiterate this point again and again. Part II at least is saved by the back story of Vito Corleone (played by Marlon Brando in Part I and Robert De Niro in Part II), and that story alone keeps Part II afloat. But Part III is wholly unnecessary and mars the whole enterprise, turning the franchise into the stuff of parody and camp.

Al Pacino is the glue that holds the trilogy together, though his character really isn't as complex as a first viewing would have you believe. The major conflict facing him is resolved in the first film, and the second and third films give him nothing to do but replay what are essentially the same scenes over and over again.

Other standouts in the cast include Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton and Talia Shire (who alone makes the third chapter worth watching).

Obviously a must see for cinema buffs, or even casual fans, but don't feel you have to label this trilogy as great just because of the reputation that precedes it.

My Grade: Part I: A Part II: B Part III: C-";1;5;False tt0099674;Spuzzlightyear;21/05/2006;The Odd Father;6;Well this is interesting, I've seen he first GF, (haven't reviewed it yet), haven't seen the 2nd one, and here I am, writing a review for the III. The Godfather Part III of course, continues Don Corleone's adventures as being a Mob boss. But he wants to venture out of crime and into more business ventures. His main focus, and one which threads this movie, is the acquisition of a huge energy company from the controlling hands of the Vatican. Meanwhile, an up and comer, Vinnie wants in on the action, but believes that Violence is the answer, Don however, wants to veer away from it, but soon has no choice when things heat up..

This would have been a good movie, if it weren't for some weird casting choices.. OK.. fine, I'll jump on the Sofia Coppola bandwagon.. She looks.. strange. And Andy Garcia looks like he's on speed for half the movie! And Diane Keaton... well, let's not discuss that please.

I recall Robert Evans saying that one of the reasons he wouldn't work with Francis Ford Coppola again is that he doesn't know how to edit his films, and when he saw this, he said it was 'pure Francis'. I think I know what he means here, scenes start halfway into conversations, there are awkward cuts, and all sorts of head scratching things going on.

BUT! I DID love the ending.. Well not the END END, with every single actor emoting emoting emoting, but the opera assassination motif was very fun to watch.

And the END END, with Pacino as an old man, sucked.;1;5;False tt0099674;MF210;05/06/2003;Good but nothing compared to the other two;7;Godfather III had a bunch to live up too and it didnt really deliver that much. Its a good movie but pretty flawed, when the first two were pretty flawless. Godfather III has some good things about it that if the bad hadnt been so noticable I could outweigh the bad with the good.

The acting is good with ONE exception. Al Pacino is solid as Don Corleone, but this is his weakest performance in the trilogy. Diane Keaton is passable as Kay. Andy Garcia is excellent. Talia Shire is good. But Soffia Coppola was absolutely awful. Coppola must have been desparate to put her in.

Godfather III's strengths are in some of its scenes, which it has two excellent scenes. The Atlantic City Massacre and the Opera Scene, both flawlessly shot. The movie is pretty well shot, though the other two were superiorly directed. Its well written, though the dialogue isnt as memorable in this one. The Sets and Cinematography were fantastic.

7 out of 10.;1;5;False tt0099674;Blade_Le_Flambeur;15/05/2003;Good movie - not as good Godfather movie;;"Sixteen years after Godfather Part II came out, the third one came out to wrap up the storylines. What ends up happening is a solid movie, but not quite as good as Godfather movie. It doesn't seem like it was the intent of Francis Ford Coppola or Mario Puzo to make this one great, but rather just to complete things. Coppola's direction is strong, but he treats this just like a movie. The script is solid, not exactly as original or brilliant as the first two but relatively strong. Al Pacino offers possibly his best performance as Micheal, a man troubled by his life and a man trying to go legitimate. Unfortunately, things don't quite work out as well and even he says ""Every time I try to get out, they suck me back in."" Diane Keaton is again, miscast as always. To replace Robert Duvall from the first film, and Robert De Niro from the second, Andy Garcia plays a supporting role of major importance to the plot. His unerving performance as the violent and angry Tony earned him an Oscar nomination, which was somewhat deserved. He feels a bit too over- the- top though and doesn't do the key emotional moments as well as James Cann in Part I did. The technical aspects of this movie don't give it quite the glossy feel of the first two, but rather just a gritty normal crime drama. However, the plots sometimes feels a bit jumpy, the connections between characters still unclear and the violence too overdone. It's a solid movie, but not really that good of a Godfather movie. 7.5/10";1;5;False tt0099674;nefets;02/07/1999;Better than II but both are far worse than I.;;"I don't quite understand why everybody is so praising of Godfather II and so down on Godfather III. It seems obvious that II and III are not nearly the classic I is, I don't see how Godfather II can be rated so far higher. Both have similarly convoluted plots, both have across the board great acting exept for Diane Keaton in II and Francis Ford's Daughter in III, and III has a beautiful overall plot movement towards the devastating final scene. The Vatican stuff is clearer and more interesting than the cuba stuff from II. Diane Keaton is markedly stronger in this one than in the first two. They are all worth seeing, but only Godfather One belongs in the ranks of ""best films of all time.""";1;5;False tt0099674;johnnymonsarrat;11/08/2006;Jon Monsarrat review: boring, too much remembrances;5;"The first two Godfather movies kept you guessing and there was enormous tension and interaction between the players. This time, with Godfather III, the film is slow and the plot feels devoid of imagination.

Don Corleone is a mobster who wants ""out"" of the business and to live a legitimate lifestyle. We're supposed to feel sorry for him. My thought on this is first off, no, I don't feel sorry for murderers, and secondly, so what? You can't base an entire film on saying over and over again how sorry you are. It's boring. Every scene is melodramatic, as though it's going to have more impact if the film is twice as long as it should be. Again, boring.

I think what's happening here is that this film is only for fans, people who loved the first two movies, and know all the characters. It's been a few years for me so I was seeing Godfather III fresh, and it didn't strike me.

Who should see this movie:

-- Fans of the first two, but save it for a rainy day, and you are safe to skip it. But see Lost in Translation.

-- People who toss oranges around right before dying I'll give The Godfather: Part III a let's-let-it-slide-into-history 5 out of 10.";1;6;False tt0099674;ultimateweapon200;06/06/2006;THIS MOVIE ROCKS neck to neck with first;10;1972. Francis Ford Coppola brought us a movie called Mario Puzo's The Godfather Part I. This movie brought us the mafia style genre and ended up on IMDb top 250 list as number 1. 2 years later he brought us Part II which I think just sucked. 16 years later he brought us the ending of the Godfather with part III. Now this movie just TOTALLY ROCKED I mean it has just about everything a mafia movie has. Murder, dealings...murder. From the scene with the helicopter to the murder of Mary Corleone (which was sad cried :().This movie which I think is the best should be neck to neck with The Godfather Part I on IMDb top 250 list as number 1. And anyone who disagrees should go straight to heck.;1;6;True tt0099674;braco;02/08/1998;not perfect but good;;Godfather:part III was a little disappointment to me when I first saw it. Nevertheless it was a good conclusion of this great epic about Corleone family despite some big flaws such in giving the role of Mary Corleone to Sofia Coppola who isn't all that really.;1;6;False tt0099674;Smells_Like_Cheese;04/10/2004;An offer I can refuse;7;"I just completed the Godfather trilogy. Now I'm not saying that the 3rd installment was bad. By no means, I thought it was a good attempt. But the conclusion to the trilogy bothered me. But this was my least favorite of the 3. Because my favorite character was Vito Corleone. And even though Michael does have a lot of interest in his character, I just can't get too into it. I do like how they reunited Kay and Michael. And the story was more about family than anything. But the love story between Vincent and Mary was too disturbing. Actually sick. I would suggest watching the 3rd ""Godfather"" just to see the conclusion. But afterwards I did feel empty inside. Like this was not good enough for me. But I feel though as if they made a decent attempt.

7/10";1;7;False tt0099674;dawn-nixon;11/08/2020;A fitting end to a brilliant trilogy;9;Al Pacino is magnificent in the final instalment of this epic trilogy. The film continues the story of The Corleone family and Michael's desire to legitimise their business. The character development is excellent and draws you in, keeps you wanting to see more. Michael is tormented by his past but driven for the future he desires for his children. Will he succeed? Or will the criminal ties he seeks to sever prove too difficult to cut?;0;1;False tt0099674;riddhimaakaritu;27/06/2020;Finally I care about Corleone family.;6;Enjoyed it more than first 2 parts. May be cause it took me more than 6 hours to get invested in characters. 😁;0;2;False tt0099674;theforager;14/06/2020;Hail Mary ... Sofoa Coppola;10;Mary, the gorgeous, was the highlight of this part. This part was released quite after a long time. All actors looked graceful especially, Michael, his sister and children.

The lesson learned from this movie all along three parts is that no matter the power, position and money you acquire, everything has a fall. People seem to have luxuries that no one can afford but still there is something they cannot afford to lose.;0;2;False tt0099674;yobreezy-45179;13/06/2020;I don't understand the hate. This is really a Godfather movie. Ignorantly misunderstood.;10;You can easily figure out that most people here giving it bad reviews didn't even watch the movie. Their opinion are depended on ignorance and critics' reviews. People expected this to be like the first two (two of greatest movies of all time) and failed to see the big picture. While we were put into Michael's shoes and grasp into his tragic tale at least when he thought he was out, we delve into the inevitability of the saga thus bringing a conclusion to our much beloved crime saga. And it was satisfying. It deals with the aftermath of Godfather II maturely and gives us a whole new perspective into The Godfather universe. You can say, this was a different kind of Godfather movie. Ignore both good and bad reviews and decide for yourself when you watch it. Do not judge a movie by critics' reviews. They still think Star Wars The Last Jedi is a masterpiece.;0;1;False tt0099674;gardnerkeith;20/05/2020;Strange reviews;;I never understood why Sofia Coppola received such ridicule for her acting. Frankly, I thought she was very natural and appropriate for her part - sweet, rather innocent, certainly very pretty.;0;5;False tt0099674;graemepepper;06/04/2020;Under rated.;8;"The only problem this film has is it's title. It suffers as a result of being part of arguably the greatest trilogy ever. If it were called ""Cosa Nostra Vaticano"" it would be better received Imo. Andy Garcia bringing freshness to the franchise and thoroughly good movie. Not as good as part 1&2. But if you go in with an open mind then you'll def not be disappointed.";0;1;False tt0099674;bevo-13678;29/03/2020;Brilliant trilogy;10;I fell asleep and missed most of it but if the first two are anything to go by, both brilliant, this must be the best one of the lot;0;3;True tt0099674;timirex1322;28/03/2020;A fitting end;10;The finale could have gone so many ways, of which many may have involved micheal corleone dying before his time. I think of all of it, this was the best option. After his daughter died, he'd have to live with the pain and regret toppled on top his previous sins which included his murder of his brother Fredo. I think the movie is terrific, though the new godfather Vincenza might not be the right pick, but Micheal has washed his hands of his old ways and is tired of the Mafia life. Overall, 8 out of 10;0;1;True tt0099674;r-48240;21/03/2020;The same excellent finish as the previous one;9;"""Godfather"" series of the end of the work, expression and depth is no less than the first two! Al Pacino is still charming when he is old, not to mention his acting skills. There are still a lot of right to the point maxims in the film. In addition, compared with the previous two films, the film has more emotional and family scenes. The soundtrack of the film is so beautiful. The opera performance in the climax part and the scene of parallel editing of the bloodbath are really beautiful!";0;1;False tt0099674;keirjosephwilson;14/02/2020;It's not that bad;7;"Honestly, it wasn't as bad as I had been warned. I have to admit, in comparison to the first two, the film's reputation is not without any merit; but those are two of the greatest films ever made, and 99% of films are going to look terrible if you compare them to parts I and II. But as its own film? It's actually pretty good. Quite a bit of what was so great about the first two installments is still there but toned down, and there are a lot of new problems I and II didn't have, so like I said it's definitely a downgrade from its predecessors but it's still a good film in its own right.";0;2;False tt0099674;tomronning50;19/12/2019;it tries a little;7;There are a LOT of preposterous scenes which would not pass muster in I and II;0;1;False tt0099674;wouter_decree;06/10/2019;Sucks (meat)balls;6;"After seeing parts 1 & 2 yesterday and the day before that, my expectations weren't very high. And guess what, this one couldn't live up to the hype neither. I seriously don't understand why real classics like Schindler's List, Pulp Fiction or The Dark Knight don't get better ratings than all the Godfather films put together, that's something I will never get. Those are REAL classics! Adding the religious aspect to this installment is a bold and boring element. This day & age, no one cares. And given the low rating for this one, it never has been. After seeing all 3 films in the last 3 days, I can safely say that these films are not for me. And I enjoy a good maffia movie once and a while, these were just boring as hell! Pacino's abilities as a great actor are never shown in these films, he just sits there with the same blank face in all 3 films. Where are the ingenious acting capabilities we loved in Devil's Advocate or Heat? Nothing more to say but these 3 movies suck the Italian meatballs. Signing off.";0;13;False tt0099674;mamawhoban;15/09/2019;Fitting conclusion to this trilogy;7;Although fans of this saga would have loved to seen the continuation with the same actors, the conclusion was consistent with the previous stories. Still too violent and graphic for my tastes and certainly inappropriate for non-adults, yet the move was well done.;0;3;False tt0099674;tigasninja;24/08/2019;Its not that bad...;8;If you compare this movie to Godfather and Godfather part II, it will look really weak. I recommend to watch it without any expectations... I can't say that it is a bad movie, it just cant be comparable to the other ones. They are absolute masterpieces. If you saw the first two movies, part III is a must watch to end the trilogy!;0;3;False tt0099674;bourgmichael;15/04/2019;A great film in its own right;7;So I don't know why but I had gone 28 years without seeing Part 3 after having seen Part's 1 and 2 numerous times. I think I allowed some of the negativity from reviews I heard when this film first came out to deter me from viewing it all these years. After finally sitting down to watch it, I was glad I did because it was a fitting end to the saga and a fine film in its own right. Now, I do not feel this film is the same caliber as the first 2. There is a lot missing from this film, but it tells a different story from those movies that I thought was well done. The biggest drawbacks for me are the actors, either some of the roles cast or the lack of characters from the first 2. Robert Duvall is sorely missed (I read somewhere there was a contract dispute and that's why he wasn't involved). Sophia Coppola's performance is not as bad as I heard it was, but it was still no a highlight of the film. I thought Andy Garcia was fine for the role he was cast in, but I wasn't too impressed with Diane Keaton in this movie. I didn't really think she was at the top of her game and felt there was more that could be done with that character, personally.;0;1;False tt0099674;burak-07301;01/04/2019;OVERRATED;5;Worst in the trilogy and doesn't feel like part of the godfather;0;5;False tt0099674;ghostfiendghost;20/01/2019;bad for Godfather films but a good film none the less;6;God father why can't you stop stupid stuff from happening seriously Al Pacino is always itching for trouble even when he doesnt ask for it;0;1;False tt0099674;jameshoran8;30/12/2018;Al Pacino playing Al Pacino;6;The problem with the movie is Michael Corleone is not in it. Al brought Al to the character and he and Francis should have known better. Al also went soft on the character and that was a disappointment. There you have it. The main problem with the film.;0;1;False tt0099674;VAndolini;23/11/2018;Unfairly maligned, try not to compare it to the first two;8;The Godfather 1and 2 are two of the best films ever made. Revolutionary in storytelling, truly epic, masterful performances. That said, I can understand why some people dislike the third film. It is very different, but is that bad? Not in this case. Now, three is not even close to capturing the magic of the first two. So try not to compare, and I think this film has many things going for it. Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, the wonderful Talia Shire, Eli Wallach, Andy Garcia, etc. Great performances, and the way the story unfolds against majestic and historical background. I thought the inclusion of the controversial death of Pope John Paul I was fascinating and very well done. The opera at the end was also really well done, and the person who actually dies was quite shocking at the time. I was very surprised. Okay. Sofia Coppolla was not good, but was not that bad. For the record, she said she hated acting and did not want the part, but did it for her dad. Good to see now that Sofia has really found her niche in directing. All in all, a good film, judged unfairly.;0;1;True tt0099674;alansabljakovic-39044;06/10/2018;What a trilogy;8;"""Just when I thought I was out,they pull me back in!""

My thoughts when I saw that third one is coming after 16 years. Wow, amazing end of the incredible trilogy. Michael Corleone died just the right way (same as Vito).";0;1;False tt0099674;joker-scar;17/09/2018;the much dreaded let-down scenerio;7;Like many people I anticipated the arrival of Godfather 3 but was left cold by it. At the time I zeroed my dislike to the universally accepted scapegoat, Sofia Coppola's stale performance, after the talented Winona Ryder bailed on the project. After multiple viewings I suddenly realized that, for me anyway, Al Pacino's performance is what turned me off. He was not the younger, subtle and starving artist Pacino of the early 1970's as in the first two films, but the older super-star whose strong acting style had already by 1990, become a parody of itself.;0;1;False tt0099674;Sulla-2;18/08/2018;I admit that I liked it.;9;OK it's not as good as the first two films but it's still a great movie. Those who trash it are just being silly. We have to consider that MIchael Corleone never wanted to be a gangster and throughout his leadership of the family he strove to be legitimate. Yes he did kill people when he had to and I can't forgive him for the unnecessary killing of Fredo.

The main plot here is a bit complicated and you have to follow it closely. Pacino was excellent as usual and deserved an oscar nomination. Carcia was an excellent choice for his part but was still playing a gangster rather than the head of the family.

So we get to Sophia Coppolla. Yes we know why she got the part. Never the less she is perfect for the part. I was very sad at the end;0;1;False tt0099674;stephi_dio;09/08/2018;Just to finish the trilogy;5;Had to watch to finish the trilogy. Not greatly impressed;0;1;False tt0099674;brandinscottlindsey;24/06/2018;Godfather III: A New Pope;8;"The Godfather III serves as the final chapter in the series, showing the viewers the beginning of the next generation of the Corleone family dynasty. The themes of the series are continued in this film, namely the duality of doing the wrong things for the right reasons. The values of loyalty and family are contrasted with crime and evil acts.

In the final film of the series, Michael Corleone has grown older and the actions of his past begin to haunt him with guilt. Along with losing his family in the previous films, Michael's unhappiness drives him to atone for his sins. Despite his charitable actions, his nephew, Vincent, begins to follow in his uncle's footsteps. This is a different form of the vigilante philosophy that usually drives the protagonists of the series, as the head of the family desires to ""go clean"", while others participate in the older, more violent, methods.

Like the previous installments in the series, the film does have a long running time. Unfortunately, unlike the other films in the series, Godfather III doesn't stand on its own. The third film serves as a bookend to the other films, or as Coppola said himself, an epilogue to the story. Part III may not hold up as well as the first two films, but that only speaks to how good The Godfather I and II are. The Godfather III is still a great movie and worth watching.";0;2;False tt0099674;bryangary65;29/03/2018;Understand the need for 111;7;Not a patch on one or two,but still worth a watch.

Script a bit far fetched and pace of film hit and miss. However still enjoyed it and Al Pacino is always good. Despite what a lot of critics at the time of film release said, thought Sofia Coppola was ok and she looked stunning.;0;2;False tt0099674;leftbanker-1;05/08/2017;Most of the Film Is Forgettable, Fly-Over Country;6;"Old Francis Ford must have really been off his meds when he made this film. He's lucky they didn't take away his director's chair for good. First of all the three leading women were absolutely an embarrassment to the art of film and I blame terrible acting on the director. It's his project and he can either get what he wants on film or get new actors. I think that just about any three other actresses would have done a better job than his daughter, his cousin, and Diane Keaton. Talia Shire gives an absolutely cringe-worthy performance at every step and Sofia Coppola is just no one's idea of an actress. What was he thinking? Eli Wallach was also completely horrible. Joe Mantegna plays a silly caricature of a gangster which works well in parody form on The Simpsons but is ridiculous in this movie. Even Al Pacino phones this one in.

Andy Garcia carries about 90% of this movie and without him it would have been completely awful.

""He dips his bullets in cyanide,"" it is said of one of the gangsters which is just stupid because bullets are pretty much lethal all on their own.

The story is a convoluted mess that tries to wow us with its intricacies but all of the Vatican shenanigans just come across as desperation because they didn't have much of a story to sell.

The only saving grace of the movie are the few well-done action sequences and a couple of other scenes that add tension. The meeting between Al, Andy, and Joe in the office, the hit scene in the apartment, the execution of Joey Zaza, to name a few. The helicopter shootout of the casino was way, way over-the-top and stupid.

Most of the movie is the film equivalent of fly-over country, or fast-forward country.";0;4;True tt0099674;askeland89;02/08/2017;Misunderstood? Don't think so;7;Not saying it's bad, far from it. I think the rating is actually fair. It could have worked as a stand-alone movie, but it simply did not work as the final installment to an already perfect franchise. The acting ( tho believable ) is nowhere near as good as the originals. It's just lacking the realistic touch that the first two movies had. At times it felt like I was watching a musical rather than a gangster flick. It's obvious that they wanted to try something different with this movie

The Godfather could have been the greatest trilogy in movie history, but this one simply did not live up to the standard set by the originals. Shame it carries the same title, it truly is;0;2;False tt0099674;miguelneto-74936;25/06/2017;Unfortunately did not close the trilogy with a golden key.;6;The Godfather: Part III had everything to close the trilogy with a golden key, but it's a much smaller film than the previous one, The Godfather could have had. The Godfather I and II are great films, this is undeniable, even though I'm not very fan, Was the best trilogy in the history of cinema if it was not just OK The Godfather: Part III, the pace is slow, the performances taking off from Al Pacino, are very medium, the participation of Sofia Coppola (who is a very good director) Is very weak, the dialogues are good, and the soundtrack too, great photography, and a competent script, but probably Coppola was not inspired when he made The Godfather: Part III, which is not just a totally forgettable film because of the previous ones. Note 6.5;0;2;False tt0099674;filipemanuelneto;12/04/2016;A good movie, which loses by comparison to the previous.;6;"This film follows the story of ""The Godfather,"" which chronicles the journey of the Corleone family through the violent world of organized crime. In this film, an elderly Michael Corleone lives haunted by the crimes he committed and looking desperately, but unsuccessfully, to clean his family of any taint through its legitimation and links to the Vatican.

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, based on the novels of Mario Puzo, who collaborated in the writing of the script, it kept most of the cast of the previous films, made in the seventies, and bring new and important characters. The soundtrack goes from Nino Rota to Carmine Coppola, father of director and Talia Shire, actress who also enters this film. It didn't won any Academy Award but was nominated for seven statuettes.

More than fifteen years after ""The Godfather II"", this film is, almost, the black sheep of the ""family"". Criticized, misunderstood, even somewhat ridiculed, will always live in the shadow of the two films that preceded it, and which are undoubtedly two giants of cinema. And if we want to compare them, this is the loser because it can no longer surprise us, despite maintaining excellent action scenes and a Michael Corleone much more paternalistic, living threatened by his ghosts (in particular his brother, which is a very smart way to explore the cruelest act of the criminal life of this mobster). I didn't quite understand his position on the daughter's romance with Vincent, her cousin. The connection to the Catholic Church also seemed a bit forced, as if it had been snapped on in the script. Al Pacino has remained up to the challenge and managed to perfectly display the psychological contradictions of his character. Andy Garcia also had a great performance and Joe Mantegna can say that this, probably, it was the best performance he did. This is a film that is worth seeing, mostly if we didn't compare it to the previous two films.";0;1;False tt0099674;peraveen;23/01/2016;Excellent Movie;10;"This movie is really good contrary to the comman belief that this is not the good film. Just omit and see the movie... This is the best end of the trilogy.... Don't go for negative review... Cheers

Excerpt from Wikipedia:

The Godfather Part III is a 1990 American crime film written by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola, and directed by Coppola. It completes the story of Michael Corleone, a Mafia kingpin who attempts to legitimize his criminal empire. The film also interweaves a fictionalized account of two real-life events into its plot: the 1978 death of Pope John Paul I and the Papal banking scandal of 1981–1982; both are linked to Michael Corleone's business affairs. The film stars Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García, and features Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola.

Coppola and Puzo originally wanted the title to be The Death of Michael Corleone, but Paramount Pictures found that unacceptable. Coppola subsequently stated that The Godfather series is two films, and Part III is the epilogue. Part III received mixed to positive reviews compared to the critical acclaim that the first two films received. It grossed $136,766,062 and was nominated for seven Academy Awards including the Academy Award for Best Picture.";0;1;False tt0099674;CinemaClown;05/01/2016;Somewhat Underrated Yet Unworthy Of Its Title.;;"The violent history of the Corleone crime family did conclude on an ideal note in The Godfather Part II but thanks to the unquenchable greed of studio executives plus the dire circumstances director Francis Ford Coppola found himself in during that time, what was until then a perfectly flawless motion picture saga ultimately got tainted by a highly inferior third instalment, which wasn't even needed in the first place.

Continuing the story of Michael Corleone, The Godfather Part III finds the aging & guild-ridden Mafia kingpin seeking ways to legitimise his criminal empire and has slowly distanced himself & his family from the underworld, over the years. But his efforts to come out clean is thwarted when an assassination attempt made on his life begins a new era of bad blood between different families. Meanwhile, the Don takes a young protégé under his wing.

Co-written, produced & directed by Francis Ford Coppola, who unfortunately lost every single creative brain cell of his during the making of Apocalypse Now, The Godfather Part III packs in a pretty weak story and while it manages to replicate the look of its predecessors, it lacks the precision care, passion & dedication with which the first two instalments were brought to life for the screenplay that Coppola co-wrote with Mario Puzo simply lacks the same level of intensity, tenaciousness & quality.

The technical aspects are finely executed to match the ambiance of the previous two films, as evident in its gorgeously detailed set pieces, shooting style, colour tones as well as numerous references to earlier chapters. At 162 minutes, it has the shortest runtime of the three yet is the most difficult to sit through for much of its plot is nothing but plodding and could've benefited from a bit more trimming in the editing room. And the soundtrack by Carmine Coppola only makes use of the previously used tracks and for the most part, stays within its realms.

Coming to the performances, the cast comprises of Al Pacino, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Andy Garcia, Eli Wallach, Sofia Coppola & others and while the reprising cast is able to impress once again, the new members fail to leave a lasting mark. Pacino does amazingly well for the most part and he's brilliantly supported by the well-balanced inputs from Shire & Keaton. Garcia is the best of the new cast yet he's easily overshadowed by the mere presence of the veterans. Wallach chips in with welcome contribution, And the director's daughter commits career-suicide by delivering an awfully terrible performance.

On an overall scale, The Godfather Part III gets a lot of flak for leaving a dent on what could've been an unblemished cinematic legacy but it's not really as bad as it is made out to be. In fact, it's quite an underrated cinema for it has its share of interesting moments but then, none of it was ever required. Coppola has himself stated that The Godfather series is two films with this one serving as an epilogue, and that pretty much sums up his opinion about this chapter. Lacking commitment in direction, severely marred by lack of depth & refinement in its screenplay, and further brought down by underwhelming work from its cast, The Godfather Part III is somewhat under-appreciated but it's also unworthy of its title.";0;1;False tt0099674;troyputland;10/12/2015;Lacks the intensity part I and II have, but still not bad as a stand alone film.;8;The Godfather: Part III takes place many years after Part II. Al Pacino's Michael Corleone a.k.a The Godfather is older, wiser and better than before. His nephew Vincent (Andy Garcia), who he takes under his wing, is irrational and short-tempered, just like his father (Sonny Corleone, as played by James Caan in Part I). Part III sees Michael trying to correct the wrongs and wipe away his sins. III should've been filmed shortly after II. Time has sapped The Godfather's intensity. Pacino and Garcia are on top form. This film's success is partly down to the others. A fine film in its own right but one that will never reach the heights of its predecessors.;0;1;False tt0099674;ivo-cobra8;17/10/2015;The Third Entry of the Godfather Trilogy isn't that great but it still good and it has some moments;7;"The Godfather Part III (1990) isn't the best film in the series like were the first two. This film should be release in 70's like the first two were, but it was released in 90's. This film still has some moments but is not that good just like the first two films were.

Real Power Can't Be Given, It Must Be Taken.

Some 16 years after Part II, The Godfather Part III brings us into the 1970's as an aging Michael Corleone has had enough of the family business as it was and wants to go legit. But other heads of New York families don't see it that way and he is forced to deal with his nephew, Vincent (Andy Garcia) who like his father (the late Sonny) wants to shoot first and ask questions later. Meanwhile Connie supports Vincent in his old school ways as she tries to sway Michael to stay firm on the old ways of the family. The subplot of the Vatican's interest in the Corleone family and the trails & tribulations of such offer a glimmer of purity for Michael or better yet his darkest fears. Godfather III never basked in the glory of Parts I & II, simply because it tried to hard to be just as perfect. Part III does have a solid story and great performances, but it just doesn't quite live up to expectations. Bottom line not quite the best swan song to the legacy of this series, but nonetheless a good effort by all involved.

The third act isn't the greatest film like, were his predecessors but it is still a good film. People: It's not that bad. In fact, it's really good. Okay, it isn't a classic like the first two, and it suffers further by comparison to ""Goodfellas,"" which came out just a few weeks before it. But ""Part III,"" was still one of the best movies of its year (1990), thanks in large part to a devastating and necessary ending: Up to this point, Michael Corleone's evil had never been repaid with adequate suffering. And the King Lear-like climax on the steps of the opera house in Sicily, punctuated by Michael's mostly silent scream, provides a legitimately Shakespearean finish to the saga.

What everyone knows about the film is that, at the last minute, Winona Ryder dropped out of playing the key role of Michael's daughter Mary Corleone and director Francis Ford Coppola unwisely replaced her with his own daughter, Sofia, who wasn't a trained actress. It showed. As an actress, Sofia is bland and whiny, though in her favor, it must be said that she seems much like the spoiled princess that Mary is supposed to be.

Part III"" has much else to recommend it: A thrillingly chaotic, completely unexpected shootout in a rooftop meeting room in Atlantic City, an equally well-staged bloodbath at the Little Italy street fair the Feast of San Gennaro, an intriguing conspiracist take on the events at the Vatican in 1979 (when three popes presided within a span of two months) and several more classic lines of dialogue added to the canon.

The Godfather Part III is a 1990 American crime film written by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola, and directed by Coppola. It completes the story of Michael Corleone, a Mafia kingpin who attempts to legitimize his criminal empire.The film also interweaves a fictionalized account of two real-life events into its plot: the 1978 death of Pope John Paul I and the Papal banking scandal of 1981 – 1982; both are linked to Michael Corleone's business affairs. The film stars Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García, and features Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola.

The story is set in 1979 when, before retiring, an aging Michael Corleone tries to go legitimate by entering respectable real estate and communications deals, but is slowly drawn back into the world of organized crime against his will.

7.5/10 Grade: B Studio: Paramount Pictures Starring: Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García, and features Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola. Director: Francis Ford Coppola Producers: Francis Ford Coppola Screenplay: Mario Puzo, Francis Ford Coppola Rated: R Running Time: 2 Hrs. 50 Mins. Budget: $54.000.000 Box Office: $66.676.062";0;1;False tt0099674;nekoinesto;23/09/2015;A bit UN-decent ending for the trilogy, but as a standalone movie, wasting some time ain't gonna hurt;5;I rated both first and second installment of the godfather series a 10/10. This is half the goods, which is 5/10. You see, when making movies like this, shaw shank redemption, green mile, you don't make a recipe for a movie style, the director just makes it happen, looks like godfather tried to make a special recipe and use it, and these movies don't have a recipe, but it is not the director to blame, he had a limited budget and a limited amount of time, to be honest, i didn't watch this a long time ago, but i remember it, it is a movie that you will remember, not maybe like part one and two, but OK. i say watch it, give it a try, there are some people who really liked it, so it is worth going to the cinema or buying a copy to re-watch it;0;1;False tt0099674;vicentesobral;30/08/2015;Very underrated. Great movie!;9;Very underrated. I read the book and for me this one is as good as the 2nd one. Of course... they forgot to tell us about Tom Hagen, and I find some characters not very interesting, and Sofia Coppola wasn't good. The only thing I disliked was the way they've ended the trilogy... in the stairs of the opera. The end was a bit forced, but is great at the same time. Al Pacino did a good job, as well as Andy Garcia- Vincent is a great character! As we all know, Copolla is a genius, but I felt the story was a strange continuation, unnecessary. But it still good! Everything is great: The soundtrack (the godfather waltz, the theme song - same for all the movies) and the actings make this the best trilogy ever!! (Sorry for my English);0;1;False tt0099674;murtazaawsome;28/08/2015;As an individual, the film holds its own but as a sequel. It lost its identity.;6;The Godfather Part 3 coming out in 1990, starring the likes of Al Pacino, Andy Garcia and Talia Shire is a commendable effort by the director legend Francis Ford Coppola. The film undoubtedly delivers a strong punch with exceptional acting, direction and screenplay scoring not one but seven academy award nominations. But as a huge Godfather franchise fan I can't help but feel disappointed. The first two films in the series are the hallmarks of the golden era of Hollywood. Especially The Godfather part II in my opinion is one of, if the not the Best cinematic wonders ever achieved. But then comes the part III in the sequence. There are so many points on which comparison can be drawn but let's just focus on the biggest one. The character of Don Michael Corleone. Michael Corleone the youngest of three sons of Don Vito Corleone succeeds his father's Huge underworld empire to become the next Mafioso Don of the entire States. He leads a dual life, one as the head of an immense empire and the other of a family man. His character is shown (in the first two films at least) as a very intelligent yet quite man who has an obvious aura of unquestionable power and authority. He seldom raises his voice or displays extremes of emotion e.g. anger or sadness. But when he does, you can not help but be awed. This completely changes or rather, Disappears in the third installment of the series. Michael Corleone who have aged considerably since, and is a father of two grown up teens, also divorced, is an unrecognizable man. The same person who once was a stone hearted, cold blooded killer and the head of a ruthless gigantic empire is now.. reduced, to an old man. Who can not seem to get a grip on his own family and ever slowly crumbling empire. The personality of this man is now utterly different, he openly celebrates with his comrades, dances around, laughing/crying publicly and even confessing to his previous sins! This to me was the most disappointing point of the entire film as I can not seem to find a single shard of similarity between the character of Don Michael Corleone of the first two Godfather films and the Don Michael Corleone of the Godfather Part III. The man who was so reserved and self-contained now seems to me to be the precise opposite. And let me clarify that age CAN NOT be an excuse in this case as such a huge change in personality does not occur in a lifetime let alone 20/30 years. As stated earlier that people watching part III of the installment without prior knowledge of the other two will enjoy it immensely, but die-hard fans like me can't help but be saddened. Thank you.;0;1;True tt0099674;cuthwy;13/08/2015;Fantastic Ending;10;The final movie of one of the best trilogies in the world is as good as the first two. Aging Michael Corleone tries to legitimize the Corleone Family by selling all casinos and going into legit business. Michael's kids are already grown up, Kay is not living with him and most of his old friends are dead. The movie also introduces the new Don, Vincent, Michael's nephew who takes on the role of the boss. Vincent also falls in love with Michael's daughter, Mary, but has to give up on her due to his position as the Don. Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and Al Martino return in this amazing ending. This movie has a lot of sad and heartbreaking moments that could make you cry - Mary's tragic death and Michael's all of a sudden death. I suggest everyone to watch it.;0;1;True tt0099674;Maladjusted_1;09/07/2015;A nostalgic but insufficient send-off for the Corleone Family.;7;"I watched 'The Godfather: Part III' the day after watching the preceding film, and anticipated a disaster given the poor reception of the title. As a standalone film it isn't so bad, but it is constantly loomed over by the two colossal previous instalments. From the first scene, the nostalgia is palpable: the social mingling and musical accompaniment (by Al Martino's Johnny Fontane, even) is characteristic of the 'Godfather' films, but is neither as grandiose nor as well-performed in this title. The wedding scene at the beginning of 'The Godfather' is probably one of the best-constructed scenes in film history, but the get-together in 'Part III' is a hollow piece of retrospection. This ""exhausted nostalgia"" may have been in part intentional, reflecting the passage of time between the second and third films, and the tolls exacted on the understandably exhausted characters. This passage of time feeds into another of my criticisms of 'The Godfather: Part III': I'm not keen on the very modern setting. I'm aware that if Michael Corleone is seen in 1959 in adulthood, logic dictates that by 1979 – when 'Part III' occurs – he'll be in his fifties or sixties. Therefore, Coppola couldn't escape setting it in the late seventies, I guess, but it just doesn't seem right for 'The Godfather'. The post-war setting of the first film which smoothly carried into the late fifties setting in the second film seems natural and appropriate; the portrayal of young Vito in the second film, set largely in the 1920s, is excellent. Michael Corleone's arrival at 1980 just seems anachronistic, bizarrely. I wonder if the producers tried to steer away from the late seventies in this title, for I noticed that the heavy focus on settings such as Sicilian villages, grandiose Vatican complexes and luxurious dining halls removed many of cultural traits of the 1970s. The timeframe of the film isn't enough to deter a fan, though, as there are scenes in 'Part III' that stand competently in their own right: one such scene was an exchange between Pacino and Eli Wallach in the back of a car, and this carried the atmosphere and profoundness that defined the earlier films. Wallach is one of the highlights of this film, but I can't say that I enjoyed the cast half as much as I enjoyed the first two films'. 'Part II' survived without Marlon Brando: Robert De Niro excellently took care of that. But without Duvall, Brando, Cazale and De Niro, 'The Godfather: Part III' really does seem disembodied and hollow. There are some enjoyable additions in this film, including Andy Garcia and the aforesaid star of 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly', but the spirit imbued in the characters of the first two films seems to have stayed away here. I won't address the plot in great detail, as there are many synopses and summaries available, but it is largely framed around Michael Corleone's attempts to legitimise his business by acquiring the Vatican's lucrative shares in a European real estate company, International Immobilare. Of course, in the world of Francis Ford Coppola, nothing is simple, and Corleone finds himself unenthusiastically thrown into the mix with shady Vatican officials, swindling businessmen and rival gangsters. Whilst the main plot was decent enough (if a little underwhelming for a grand finale), it's the subplot that I take particular issue with. It comes in the form of a romance between the characters of Andy Garcia and Sofia Coppola, and it simply cheapens the film. Think ""Anakin and Padmé"" ('Star Wars') instead of ""Romeo and Juliet"", and you'll get why I'm cynical of its inclusion. This subplot starkly contrasts with the relationship of Michael and Kay in 'The Godfather', as this latter romance scarcely dominated the screen, for there were much more riveting things happening. This perceptive selection of what to include and what to leave as implicit helped to distinguish 'The Godfather' as one of the greatest films of all time; unfortunately, Coppola seemed to have partially forgotten his masterpiece-creating formula. To conclude, 'The Godfather: Part III' is a necessary conclusion for anyone who appreciates the unparalleled intrigue of Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola, but this third instalment largely serves as a protracted piece of nostalgia: where the final flashback in 'The Godfather: Part II' asks, ""Remember the good times?"" this film simply asks, ""Remember?"" I've read criticisms that the film was released as a cash cow, but I'm not so cynical. There would have undoubtedly been a financial incentive, but I think that 'Part III' was largely a conclusive goodbye to the Corleone Family, designed with good intentions. Coppola seemed to be aiming for the effect that Eastwood would more successfully create with 'Unforgiven', orchestrating a dignified send-off for an iconic but now aged character/series.";0;1;False tt0099674;powermandan;05/12/2014;Not At The Level of the First Two, But Still Brilliant.;8;"The Godfather is raved as being the best movie ever made. It's sequel is arguably better. Sixteen years after Pacino made his biggest captivation in The Godfather Part II, Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo reunite to create a third instalment of the two greatest mob movies ever filmed. The Godfather Part III is raved as being one of those movies that's the worst in the series. That's true, just because the first two are better. Coppola has not done a true masterpiece since Apocalypse Now in 1979. Instead, he has done what I like to call ""near masterpieces."" This is is one of them. Even if this was a real masterpiece, I doubt this would have surpassed or been at the level of the first two. The very first one was adapted from Puzo's novel and the second one was half an adaptation and half new work. The main reason why the non-adapted stuff in Part II was because it was so close and fresh off from the first. If they did not wait almost twenty years for a third instalment, then Part III probably would have been better. But honestly, who expected it to be at the level of the first two?

Twenty years after splitting with is wife Kay (Keaton), a soon-to-be retired Michael Corleone (Pacino) is being honoured by the Catholic Church for his great contribution. Right before retiring, he wants to legitimize his family by making it non-mob related. Right as the family starts to become normal, Michael is sucked back by his nephew (Garcia) who wants to be the new Don where they must deal with a massive conspiracy by the Vatican.

Pretty much the only flaws I found were Pacino's hairdo (just kidding) and Andy Garcia romancing with cousin, Sofia Coppola. Other than that, the movie is great. After almost twenty years, Coppola and Puzo put together a 3-hour work of excellence. The story is great, acting is top-notch thrills are massive. This may not be as good as the first two, but I think it still stands well by their side.

4/4";0;1;True tt0099674;beauzee;07/11/2014;worth seeing 3-4 times (not 800 times like its' predecessors);6;"film works beautifully for about 40 minutes then goes off in many directions. the scenes at the Vatican are quite compelling and in a way the Director should be commended for showing the guts to express, artistically, how many people feel about Religion in general. It is ""the God business"" and its' conceivable that it has had some bad associations.

acting is excellent, all around, and yes, I thought Director's daughter did okay.

I said above the story goes off too far, geographically *and* dramatically. I won't give away the very unsatisfying ending but will say a much smaller concentration on the Godfather's new, terrible scenario to work through, his ""bastard"" nephew's (Father was Sonny) obvious attraction to his daughter, would have made this strong ""9"".";0;1;False tt0099674;asaadmerie;16/06/2014;The greatest movie ever made......;10;the godfather is not just a movie to learn from it doing illegal business or unleashing a mob war and let the blood run stale in the streets its a life way, don Vito learn you how to act in the all circumstances and survive in the worst conditions to me i learned how to treat people and make a good deals and know who to be a fried with or not i wish all people take The significance from this great movie that had been written by great writer (Mario Puzo) a talented director (Francis Ford Coppola) and at last the best actor on the planet wish how will never be a better actor than him (AL PACINO) a golden name........ its my first review i hope who read it to like it......;0;1;True tt0099674;leomirelesortiz;31/12/2013;A Disappointing Conclusion to the Godfather Trilogy;8;This movie is not terrible, I mean it has it's flaws, and doesn't live up to the high standards the first two movies established, it's plot is messy, most of the actors (especially Sofia Coppola) are bland, and boring, but Al Pacino is great, and the directing work is just as great in the last two installments, but it is still not as good as them. Overall it's pretty weak, and it's just doesn't live up to it's predecessors, but it is still pretty good movie, with some flaws here, and there, but also some strong points, so I wouldn't recommend to skip it because it gives good closure to Michael Corleone's story, and it is not a happy one.;0;1;True tt0099674;raphaklopper;19/10/2013;Part 3 of the BEST movie ever made (here is the review from parts 1-2-3 together)!;10;"Does anyone ever asked the question about what is the best movie ever made? The movie that never get wrong in conveying its history and get right on all the points? The film that is very close to the word ""perfection""? Well, ""The Godfather"" parts 1-2-3 are undoubtedly the answer to this question. Separate the 3 movies and judge them separately is easy. Of course the 1st is where we get marveled, and the other two we had already noted some mistakes, but that's why the three movies together are not only a masterpiece from Francis Ford Coppola but also (perhaps) the best story ever told in a movie.

While in the 1st part, we are introduced to the Italian mob-family the Corleone's facing various threats from rival mob-families. That forces Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) tries to push his youngest son Michael (Al Pacino), to be his successor and be the next family's godfather; In part 2, we have the exact continuation of the story of Michael in the power of the family trying to raise the family business to other countries but he ends up making mistakes along the way. And simultaneously, we have the story of the young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) showing how he came to America and started raising his family; And finally the 3rd and last part we see a older Michael Corleone, suffering from mistakes that he committed in the past. But now he tries to redeem himself before his children Anthony (Franc D' Ambrosio) and Mary (Sofia Coppola) and his family trying to finally legalize the family business going into business with the Vatican and elect his nephew Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) as the new family godfather. But the dangers have always followed the Corleone's closely.

As I said, all parts form the masterpiece that Mario Puzo (Screenwriter) and Francis Ford Coppola (director and screenwriter) brought to the world with his vision of the Italian mafia. Many criticize the film by worshiping the Italian Mafia, which it technically does, but the way that both genius explore it is fantastic.

Throughout the history of the Corleone's, Coppola and Puzo explore the life and business of the mafia and how it works, demonstrating the business and the wars between the Mafia families that are shown realistically and terrifying. BUT, it is not just a story of violence and tragedy as many accuse (which is 60 % of it), because as the film progress it raises throughout the history various concepts of honor, justice and family, all revolving around the Corleone. Making the public really feel part of the family and start to worry about each family member in all parts of the story, at the same time with the family business and his honor.

The writing from Puzo and Coppola help much in this regard. The script is extremely ""perfect"" in all parts. The narrative is so superb that it never gets boring or leave loose ends, and always raise the values of honor and family through the best dialogs ever put on film. But Puzo and Coppola can make these long dialogs in simple conversations between human beings facing their problems, putting ourselves in their situations and relating with them, leaving the film more exciting and engaging.

But Coppola not only explores the Italian mafia and their families but also puts at various points in American history: the first part is right after the 2nd World War and Michael is a war hero returning home, but he ends up becoming the godfather from his family; on the 2nd part in the history of young Vito Corleone we see him coming in America at the time of the great Italian immigration meeting the ""American Dream""; on the 3rd part with Michael going into business with the Vatican we see a huge line of corruption and murder within the church .

Both in writing and directing the film is excellent too but the performances are the highlights of the movie: Al Pacino is excellent in every detail with a penetrating gaze and frightening expressions (and still annoys me that in 3 films he didn't get a Oscar for his role); Robert De Niro is a perfect young Vito Corleone in both voice and gestures reminding us of the badass and unforgettable old man from the first part with a simply perfect performance from Marlon Brando.

Many say that the 3rd part should never be connected to the first two for be to horrible. I think the film is still a masterpiece but obviously it has his inconveniences leaving loose ends like: what happened with Tom (Robert Duvall), the family's lawyer, he died or he started his own family as he wanted in part 2? And also adds a lot of plots and little development, at least in the 1st hour of the film. But after a huge chopper scene everything settles superbly and concludes the trilogy or rather the film perfectly.

Simply putted is the best movie ever made, the drawbacks and inconveniences are almost invisible (except in the 3rd part). Concepts of honor and family within the Mafia; full of suspense and drama; criticizes America and the church. All this in a movie with excellent performances, direction and writing simply perfect. All that makes ""The Godfather"", the strongest brand of cinema till today 10/10";0;1;False tt0099674;yang-768-524416;17/08/2013;Is there anybody who considers Vincent a little strange ?;;what i want to say is that Vincent is so complicated a man that i can't understand. because sometimes he behaves like a very intelligent man(for example,the night that he was nearly murdered, what he showed us is his intelligence of handling a complex problem with power great patience and courage.) while sometimes like an idiot with hot temper(for example he and Konnie decided to kill Al for revenge) is he a very smart person? from what he's done facing the murder and how he behaving after he took over the power from Micheal, the answer is yes ,but from his self control ,especially in temper,the answer is no .who can explain to me?;0;2;False tt0099674;LLinus;03/08/2013;The Corleone gene;9;This third and last was by far the most stimulating part of The Godfather trilogy, you watch in the manner of a dog does while someone is eating that piece of meat at the dinner table, you just couldn't take your eye off the screen. I imagine the communication between the cast members and the director was energetic, by observing the interaction between the actors you can't help but to think about how organized and coordinated this has been made by the Coppola. The screenwriters introducing a character that hasn't appeared on screen until this third part, its Sonny Corleones son, Vincent Mancini, Vincent is a ill-tempered, emotionless character who wants nothing else than to work with Michael, as his father, he is very impulsive which mostly leads to trouble. I'm not sure if either Vincent was written like this or if the actor himself created this version of him, however, i didn't feel like Andy Garcia could live up to his role, he extremely violent at the start but later as he climbs to the throne he becomes this calm and careful individual which to me didn't seem so imaginable.

The ongoing events towards the end that sync up with the music from the orchestra fits perfectly along with the situations that we observe, to me it felt like using all different kinds of puzzles that didn't come from the same box but still fits elegantly. Brilliant and creatively done by the editors.

From what i have noted, it is that the further in we follow Michael throughout the trilogy the dark it gets for him, he is accepting more and more responsibility which puts everyone he cares for in danger, his violence and decisions is affected by his age, but he only does what he thinks is best for his family which could very well be the worst. You could speculate if there is any moral of the whole story, because of all the bad things he has ever done in his life, he had to grow old and outlive most of his young family members, maybe the moral of the story is, that crime never pays and you reap what you sow. It could be a lesser percentage that would agree that Michael becomes more entertaining to observe the older he becomes, he open up his tough exterior and we stumble on a regretful old man who just wish he could take it all back just to keep his family safe, or, even burn.. in hell.;0;1;True tt0099674;donuthaters12;11/07/2013;Definitely Belongs With The Other Coppola Masterpieces;9;"The third and final film of Coppola's Godfather series ends with a bang. It holds up really strong within the trilogy and I feel currently is underrated. Before seeing this film I thought this film wouldn't hold up as everybody seems to say that The Godfather Part III is horrible or lackluster. I completely disagree as I feel this film is incredibly strong. Yes the film doesn't have that feeling of a period film because it isn't. It's more contemporary and I think it's a great way of seeing these characters in a new era.

The point of the film is to show that Michael is trying to become a better person and trying to make his business legitimate leaving the ways of corruption and murder behind. But just when he thought he was out, they pull him back in; I just couldn't resist. The reason the old film felt a bit lackluster for me is that there are too many new characters introduced and those characters aren't as interesting as the ones in this film. The characters in this film do feel new but most are just older versions of themselves from the first film or second film. The main focus, even though there are other things going on like romance and revenge, is Michael looking for redemption as he has regretted everything that he has done. There is a lot of reflecting of the past in this film, like about Fredo or what Vincent and Mary's discussion about their fathers or when Kay and Michael was in Sicily. These moments were enjoyable. In comparison to the second film, I preferred this one as I found it to be more entertaining to follow.

Coppola returning for a third film is risky as for years people have seen Michael Corleone as a horrible man. So the decision of restoring his image to the public and family is very risky but I think it paid off as I think it gives the saga a better closing. The film goes back to the strengths of the first one and keeping it linear. Coppola did a great job in concluding the saga and will be regarded, at least by me, as a classic.

Gordon Willis did the photography for the Godfather trilogy but since this film is set in a more contemporary era then that style that was found in previous films is now gone. The film is still shot well with moments that are beautiful, in particular Sicily, but this really is more about the characters rather than capturing something unique and daring. The film's photography definitely isn't as strong as the original but it's appropriate to the film's setting and story.

Instead of Nino Rota being the composer of the film, it's now Carmine Coppola. Carmine has worked on the first two of the Godfather films but his role was minor. Nino Rota died a few years after the second Godfather film, but his work is still found in this film. I felt that Carmine Coppola did not deliver that same level as Nino Rota did as it was a little underwhelming and never creates a sense of presence but his score does fit well with the film and does his best to fill in Rota's shoes.

Acting again like the previous films is top notch. Another brilliant performance from Al Pacino showing off vulnerability that was rarely shown in previous films. Andy Garcia felt like a reminder of James Caan's Sonny but making it his own and adding a more unique personality to it. It was great to see Eli Wallach in films, as the films I have seen him in were always vicious, here he is a little more soft but still retains that viciousness in a subtle way. Keaton and Shire were great in playing stronger women in a time where Michael is vulnerable. Sofia Coppola was not spectacular but she did her part fine, chemistry between her and Garcia wasn't at the level of Pacino and Keaton but passable. Good thing that she chose to be a director rather than an actress.

Great ending to the trilogy supported by a strong script, great direction, decent photography and score and fantastic performances. It is definitely along with Coppola's finest work and should not be dismissed.";0;1;False tt0099674;LeonLouisRicci;08/07/2013;The Sins of the (God)Father;7;"Payback is a Bitch. Or to put it another way, the Sins of Father. In this case The Godfather. He pays dearly for his past as this Movie is want to present, and it does so in a way that is the Third Act of a tragic and epic Saga.

The charm and allure of Mafia Life are abandon here, much to the chagrin of Movie Audiences and Critics, for Corporate Intrigue run by Crooks more deadly than Street Thugs, and this is a far more difficult thing to present as Entertainment. Nothing here is attractive or appealing to Gangsta Wannabes or those looking for some sort of Pulp presentation.

This is an unwelcome but necessary conclusion if anything remotely resembling Reality is to be part of its conceit. All the Money and Power in the World cannot sanitize the corruption that is the foundation of the ""Family"" and the Church.

An underrated Movie with a willing Cast and sumptuous Production. This was not an easy thing to pull off and it works on the level of Conclusion. Nothing happens here that could be considered a Fairy Tale ending. It is an ending to a Film Trilogy and as Entertainment cannot compete with the first two Movies. As a stand alone it would be unbearably gloomy and sardonic, but as a Final Act to the Opera that is The Godfather it is not only satisfying it was inevitable.";0;1;False tt0099674;barryrd;29/06/2013;Satisfying Finale;8;"Watching this movie for the first time turned out to be an unexpected treat. The main cast consisted of Michael and Kay--Al Pacino and Diane Keaton returning some 16 years later as a middle aged couple who are now divorced. Keaton has had it with the Corleone family and Michael, now suffering from severe diabetes and heart trouble, wants to wind up his bloody days and make peace with his rivals. Talia Shire, as Michael's sister Connie, has become Michael's personal assistant and care-giver. Eli Wallach performs the role of family elder who encourages Michael to let go of the fighting and gang war bloodshed. Andy Garcia gives a superb performance as Vince, the son of brother Sonny and the heir apparent to the ""family business"". Pacino tries to tame the irascible nephew who has learned the family's criminal behaviour all too well. Michael's own son has abandoned his father's wish for him to become a lawyer in favour of becoming an opera star. This career choice takes the whole family on a trip to Sicily for the son's debut. Michael meets the future pope, whose plans for the Vatican Bank are somewhat at odds with the past. Michael hoped to clean up his image by aligning himself with the Vatican Bank. I like how the Vatican intrigue is woven into the movie along with the death of a pope and the election of the new reform cardinal. The locations in both Italy and America are stunning. I found that Keaton and Pacino made an fitting transition as they become the older generation to the children and their cousins. The opera music and the final location in Italy all contributed to the overall pleasure and effect of this very satisfying movie.";0;2;False tt0099674;Christian_Dimartino;24/06/2013;A very good end to one of the best trilogies of them all.;9;"Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather trilogy is one of the most beloved trilogies of all time. Well, at least two-thirds of it is. Most love the first two, and granted, they are works of art. But it's the third one that has many split. I have read that some people have tried to forget about it all together. I will admit that it has its fair share of flaws. But I definitely won't forget about it.

The Godfather Part III takes place some time after its predecessor. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is still stuck in the life that he never wanted. But now, the past has sort of caught up with him. He's tired of the business, and it's time for a change. Change appears in the form of Vincent (Andy Garcia), Michael's nephew (the bastard son of his brother, Sonny). Vincent is a confident and angry young man, and he seems perfect for the job. But problems arise when Vincent begins dating Michael's daughter, Mary (Sofia Coppola). Yes, kissing cousins.

There is a side-story involving the pope or something, and I don't quite understand the story there. But there is another side-story involving Michael's son Anthony not wanting to take over the family business. Instead, Anthony wants to be an Opera singer, which sort of ties in with the climax of the film. Diane Keaton is wonderful as Michael's ex-wife Kay, and Talia Shire finally gets to do something as Michael's sister Connie.

It is nice to see some of these characters again, but yet, something doesn't quite feel the same with The Godfather Part III. Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) is m.i.a. (he is actually dead in the movie, but the character's replacement doesn't get to do anything). The acting isn't quite the same either. With the exception of Keaton and Garcia (who was nominated for an Oscar), nobody seems to be doing their best. Everyone (besides Coppola, will get to that in a second) is good, but they are not up to the standards that they once reached.

My favorite scenes are the ones between Michael and Kay. I think that those are really nice, especially since Michael is trying to turn over a new leaf in this one. Also, there wasn't really a second where I was bored throughout. Also, it does tie the series together nicely. Yes, of course it's too long. It's as if it was FFC's goal for the whole trilogy to make each of them long. He nailed it.

Now, to the real flaws. Again, I don't quite understand the plot with the pope and stuff. But what really makes The Godfather Part III suffer is Sofia Coppola. Now, I'm sure that by now, this is probably what stirred up the most buzz about this movie, and you've probably heard about it anyway. Francis Ford Coppola directed a film called Tucker: A Man and His Dream. It was a box office flop, and so he was told that he had to make a commercial hit to make his production company, ""American Zoetrope"". So, he was forced to make a movie he never dreamed of: The Godfather Part III.

Winona Ryder was initially cast in the role of Mary Corleone, but was forced to drop out at the last second. He was sort of running out of time, so he had confidence that his daughter could do the role. Well, she did the role, and it won her two Razzies. Now, here's what's wrong with casting her: For one thing, she isn't an actress. The only movies that were on her resume prior to TG3 was FFC's movies, and they were cameos. But what doesn't help about her lack of experience though is the fact that the character is just annoying. Mary is sort of slutty, naive, and, well, she's supposed to be smart but actually she just comes across as dumb and sort of desperate.

Another thing that bothers me about The Godfather Part III is the fact that Mary and her cousin are dating, and nobody really seems to care. I was expecting Michael to freak out and sort of try and murder Vincent, and it doesn't happen. Instead, he calmly tells Vincent to end it. It just shouldn't have gone down like that. I know that if I was Mary's father I would slap her like Cher did in Moonstruck and tell her to snap out of it.

In the end, The Godfather Part III was nominated for 7 Oscars, including Best Picture, Director, and supporting actor. So, who had the last laugh, TG3 haters? But, that said, it did go home empty handed, and it was the only one in the series not to win Best Picture. Also, despite all of the negative publicity, Sofia Coppola eventually won an Oscar for writing 2003's Lost in Translation. Who really had the last laugh? She sure couldn't act, but at least she found her niche.

The Godfather Part III may have been better had Coppola spent more time on it. But I am still happy for what it is. I still think, all flaws aside, that it really is a good movie. With more time, he may have reached potential. Instead, we have a flawed, but very good, movie with great moments. It was nice to see the family in business again. It isn't as good as the first two, but really, what were you expecting? This is a very good conclusion to one of the best trilogies of them all.

A-";0;2;True tt0099674;kechhh;18/03/2013;Godbest;;This one was actually my favorite, and I don't know why the other two are rated so highly while this one was hated.

While the daughter's acting could have been better, I feel it was sufficient for it to get things across.

This one was my favorite, as I felt that it portrayed Michael's tragic downfall incredibly. Here, you also see that nothing went according to plan, as in the end he was even unable to get his son to take over his business. Finally, when he decides to give up the title of Don, his daughter is killed.

I believe the most beautiful yet sad part of the movie was the ending sequence where it flashes all the women he lost in his life and shows him dying alone with his dog. A fitting end of a life a crime. Sad, but a perfect ending to the trilogy.;0;1;True tt0099674;Maniac-9;23/01/2013;Sofia Coppola ruined what otherwise was a really good movie;7;The Godfather Part III gets a bad rap it's actually a pretty good movie but people just focus on Sofia Coppola's terrible performance as Mary Corleone. While you still have great performances by Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Talia Shire, Eli Wallash and what not. Even with her bad performance if you actually pay attention to the movie it's a way better movie then your average gangster flick put out there. Andy Garcia puts on a great performance as the newest Don of the family. Vincent Mancini was a bastard child of Michael Corleone's older brother Sonny, so he didn't grow up with the Corleone name. But when he's ready to take over the head of the family when Michael's health starts to fail him he takes the last name Vincent Corleone.;0;2;False tt0099674;officiallynatalia;14/01/2013;Unfortunate;7;Before I watched this, I read the bad and good reviews so I know I won't be expecting a great movie. So I didn't. But...

I did not expect it to be horrible. I painfully have to agree that this is really bad. How unfortunate. I did not expect anything great out of this, but at least I expected it to be good or okay. But no, it's terribly frustrating. There wasn't a single great moment. I waited 2 and a half hours for at least a moment that would make an impact. But there wasn't any. Even the ending is just terrible. Sofia is the most horrible of all.

But I'm still rating it 7 because I know Al and the rest worked hard for this. It's just unfortunate that wasn't given much thought.;0;1;False tt0099674;lagudafuad;05/12/2012;an okay ending to a wonderful trilogy;7;"The Godfather Part 3 to me should have been named ""the fall of Michael Corleone"" reason being the movie centered on the fall of Michael himself, and how he gained it all but lost everything in the end. The movie is a nice addition to the classic two that came before it in 1972 and 74, but it does not give you the satisfaction of a classic like the others.

Done 16 years after The Godfather part II (1974), this movie is popular for starring Sofia Coppola, whose father Francis Ford Coppola directed this and the first two prequels. Her performance was so captivatingly bad that it was difficult for you not to notice. The good thing is that you will probably be watching it on DVD so you can skip forward any scene she is in, because her presence in the movie and all her lines could have been deleted and the movie will still be good to watch.

The movie stars Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, and Talia Shire who reprise their roles from the first two films as Michael, Kay and Connie. Robert Duvall however refuses to be in the movie due to a salary dispute.

The movie plot takes off in 1979 like 20 years after the end of the second part, with Michael (Al Pacino) old and nearing retirement.

His Children Anthony and Mary grew up with his wife after she got custody when she and Michael divorced. Tony his son did not want to have anything to do with his father's business, this withdrawal by Tony left a gap in the Corleone family and Michael had to mentor his brother's son Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) for a role he would have preferably given to Tony. Vincent like his father Sonny was hot tempered and acted before thinking, this led to a dispute between him and Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna) who handles some of the Corleone family business interest.

With Michael's life nearing an end he trains his new successor Vincent to take his place but Michael was not prepared for the tragic end to his era as the Godfather, an end that left him alone and with nothing.

The movie was a commercial success, and received mixed reviews. It however didn't win any Academy awards unlike its predecessors who won the Academy Awards of Best Picture during their release and also other notable Academy Awards. This part III got seven nominations among which were Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor in a Supporting Role (Andy Garcia), Best Cinematography and others.

Al Pacino did well in his acting in this movie but his performance was not as grand as the ones we witnessed in 1972 and 74 were Pacino got a nomination for Best Supporting Actor for The Godfather and nominated for Best Actor for The Godfather Part II.

The Godfather trilogy is a nice collection for anyone to own and enjoy. Plans were being made to make a fourth part that will focus on Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) reign as the Godfather and Don of the Corleone family, but such plans never materialized.

www.lagsreviews.com";0;1;False tt0099674;pranav-srivatsav;24/11/2012;The trilogy ends with an instant classic... a pinch of intensity in a sea of emotions;8;The ratings obviously deprives this classic from the gloss THE GODFATHER I AND II enjoys. After a gap of 16 years... director Francis Ford Coppola and writer Mario Puzo join hands to deliver the trilogy its fitting end.

The movie from frame one grabs you into the Carleone legacy , But this time the script weighs less on intensity and packs more on emotions. Michael Corleone is ever closer to his dream of making his family a legitimate ground to run business.... but as friends from the past turn foes ,with fluctuating times in his family life and with sins from the past surfacing guilt into his life , Things get a lot harder and uglier for him.

The Mafia life of his past, desperately tries to pull him back.... Trying to resolve his problems in a more peaceful manner, he lands in the radar of his foes who are aching to wash him away.... and all through this time he has an young apprentice under his wing.

The drama drifts through the emotions and intensity deployed in the script and with brilliant screenplay and yet another awe inspiring performance from Al Pacino , the trilogy completes with an instant classic.;0;1;False tt0099674;BatStarIndyFreak;21/08/2012;A serving of sirloin after 2 previous helpings of prime rib;8;It helped that I saw this, understanding that it was a major disappointment for those with high expectations after the first 2. It was interesting backtracking to this and seeing Andy Garcia as a young buck, much in the same vein as Al Pacino was in GF I, while Pacino is still his own man, out of Brando's shadow. It draws well from the previous 2, leaving you understanding why it waited 16 years to be made. I loved how it rounded out Michael's destiny after showing how much the years wore on him. Talia Shire shows herself as being more than capable of playing a tough mafia woman after her character had previously been so feeble. Overall, a more than decent end to the this epic film series.;0;1;False tt0099674;The-Sarkologist;03/03/2012;Once a Criminal, Always a Criminal;5;Like the first two, this movie had a few moments, but as with all sequels, it tends to start to lack. Like the second one, it was difficult to work out the plot, though the characters and their development is quite well done. Also, as with the previous two, the plot is wound up very quickly, with the antagonists all being killed within the final minutes of the movie. It wouldn't be a problem, except that the antagonists were scattered across the world. Also, I really did not understand why they killed the Catholic priest at the end.

Anyway, in this movie, Michael Corleone has moved out of the crime business and is trying to go straight. Unfortunately, pressures from his sister and his nephew, and his enemies, are trying to push him back into it. I guess the theme here is that once you are a criminal, you are always a criminal. In fact, the final ending is quite tragic, but I will not go into too much details.

The interesting thing I found in this movie is how the characters have finally developed. Michael Corleone is trying to redeem himself in the eyes of the world and the eyes of his wife. It opens with him gaining the highest honour that a lay person can receive from the Catholic Church, and this sets the theme for the entire movie. His sister though, who was an innocent housewife in the movie, a promiscuous woman in the second, has become a crime queen. In fact she assassinates somebody in the final moments of the movie, though we are not sure as to why this happens.

Then we have Michael Corleone's son, who has gone the way of his father in the early parts of the first movie. In this scene he refuses to have anything to do with the family business, and in fact, like his father, he drops out of college to pursue what he wants to do. Michael is actually trying to redeem himself in the eyes of his ex-wife, though this never comes through, because even though redemption is there, it is too far for him to get. His pride refuses to let him take it, and pressures from enemies also prevent him from getting there.;0;1;True tt0099674;Sandcooler;16/11/2011;Not on par with the first two, but hardly a waste of time;8;"Ah, ""Godfather III"", the ultimate black sheep. So often criticized, so often ridiculed, so consistently beaten into the ground that I was actually pretty reluctant to see it. When two of your favorite movies of all time are followed by some sort of popular running gag it's pretty off-putting, and you fear it will ruin the character's mystique. Unjustly though, because ""Godfather III"" is a very worthy end to this trilogy. Most of what you may have heard is true, but it isn't as bothersome as I thought it would be. Yes, Sofia Coppola couldn't do a decent line delivery to save her life, but at least she isn't really in this thing much. Yes, some returning characters have become completely redundant , but if you leave them out you're stuck with about two original actors (and I'm counting Richard ""Al Neri"" Bright, which is already a stretch). It's flaws just don't weigh up to its merits, that's all I'm saying. ""Godfather III"" carries all the ingredients I loved about its predecessors, it's chock full of memorable scenes and feature some of the best lines in the entire trilogy. The scene where Michael utters the now legendary ""Just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in"" is absolutely magnificent, and there's plenty more where that came from. The finale is pretty mediocre compared to the rest, but the movie immediately wins you back with an incredibly powerful ending scene. No better way to end this trilogy, I'm actually talking about both that scene and the entire movie. Don't believe the hype, this final chapter is definitely worth seeing.";0;1;False tt0099674;leo-pontinen;19/09/2011;Not a waste of time, but not necessary;;This film suffers when you compare it to the previous two Godfather films. After all, when it is about a sequel, you immediately have expectations of it feeling the same as the previous one(s).

In the case of Godfather and Godfather II, their tone is exactly identical. With only two years between their filming, it is easy to understand that Coppola, Puzo and actors had that same energy going on.

Godfather III was made over 15 years later, so there really is a great gap this time. The actors are older, some of the old faces are gone and new ones have stepped in.

What is the problem of this film? Primarily it is the fact, that it doesn't have that same tone or amount of content that the previous two had. They were frighteningly subtle and documenting. This one is more based on drama and it has more straight-forward storytelling. It really didn't tell you anything you needed to know after the brilliant and wrap-up at the end of Godfather II.

So, is it a bad film? No. But it certainly isn't near as good as the first two ones. It doesn't insult your intelligence or anything and it is made with heart, but, still, if this film vanished, I wouldn't miss it that much.;0;1;False tt0099674;dadeaux;23/02/2011;Underrated, yet still lacking the force of its predecessors;7;I saw this film upon its release, and there was something missing. Throughout the years, I continued to watch The Godfather, Parts I and II relentlessly. Last week I saw the third installment again, and liked it better than before. It would be a masterpiece, if we didn't have to compare it to parts I and II.

What I realized is that the force of the original Godfather films came out of their understatement. You can hardly see a moment of excitement in Vito Andolini's face (Marlon Brando in the original Godfather). He plays it chillingly cool, and I think that's the secret ingredient. Al Pacino did the same in the first two parts, but the third installment got out of control somehow, and there is a lot of overacting. It's a pity, because the story is really good, but a tighter direction could have gone a long way further.

I still recommend The Godfather, Part III. It does work, with its music, with its emotions, with the final dagger in the evil heart of the beast we have loved for so long, for reasons unknown.;0;1;False tt0099674;tanelteder;07/01/2011;the end of the saga;8;I was a little skeptical before seeing Part:III. I mean the first two films are rated #2 and #3 in IMDb and the third film is not even close to being in the top250. Still it has same director, screenwriter and major part of the cast who were in the first two films too. After seeing this one, I have to admit. Part:III is underrated. It definitely should be at least in the top250. It isn't that intense than the first two parts. There are not such a shining performances but hey, it still is very good. Good story and quite similar to the first two films in my opinion.

Al Pacino steals the show for me here as well. Although Andy Garcia is quite challenging. The supporting cast is quite good but it's the lead characters who shine the most. And they should be. They accomplish that and they should be recognized for that.

This is the third and final part of the famous mafia saga. Don't leave it to watch this because of the low rating. You regret that. This is the end of the saga, the perfect end of the trilogy.;0;1;False tt0099674;ah-andy;07/12/2010;Not as good as the first two.;8;"...and I sadly removed the last sequel of ""The Godfather"" from my DVD player.

It was a ""good"" sequel, it contained all the elements that we look for when watching a movie related to the mafia. However, it wasn't as good as the first and second parts. It somehow the lacked the Godfather-ish atmosphere.

I think that Andy Garcia plays a beautiful role, his temper and charm really adds to the feel of the movie.

And of course, another terrific portrayal by Al Pacino. In this part, he has aged quite a bit, but that did not make his performance any worse. If anything, it made it harder since more acting was required.

The story is well, another great Godfather one. The ending was, however, different. It was more emotional. But I liked it.

What are you looking at me for? Go watch the movie.";0;1;False tt0099674;mjneu59;22/11/2010;better with age, but not by much;5;"It shouldn't surprise anyone to learn that the long-awaited end (hopefully) to The Godfather saga doesn't measure up to its predecessors. Francis Coppola accomplished everything he set out to do and, under the circumstances, produced as good a Part III as anyone possibly could, but the fact remains that the movie didn't need to be made in the first place, except of course to help revitalize the sagging career of its director. The new film does nothing to enrich the earlier episodes; too much of it is simply a carbon copy of what worked (because it was fresh) the first (and second) time around. That terrible sense of Mafia ritual is still vivid, but Coppola takes the operatic elements of the story much too literally (especially during the protracted climax), and the metamorphosis of Michael Corleone into a kinder, gentler padrone was a major miscalculation. The film at least provides one memorable performance (a fiery Andy Garcia, playing Sonny Corleone's ambitious bastard son), but the script reads as if it were written under duress, with plenty of incidental plotting but not anywhere near enough momentum.";0;1;False tt0099674;ONEastSider;22/04/2010;A masterpiece;10;This is really one of my best movies I ever seen . The Godfather trilogy was, honestly : the best . For me, the best part of this trilogy was these . Why ? Because this people did the best job that a cast can do . The last song played by Anthony was the icing on the cake . That song reminds me a lot of past good things that I forget . This movie is not for everyone, this movie is for people who has feelings, because a man without them can't understand the message . I just wanna please the people who rate this movie bad to re-watch the movie and give another rating, because in our days movies like these are a rarity .;0;1;False tt0099674;rick_7;20/04/2010;"""I would burn in hell to keep you safe.""";;"The Godfather Part III (Francis Ford Coppola, 1990) is an unnecessary follow-up to the devastating gangster epics that defined the '70s. Al Pacino, who in the intervening 14 years had begun shouting a very lot, returns as Michael Corleone, the mafia don who's going legit - with a little help from the Catholic Church. Also along for the ride is his brother Sonny's non-legit offspring, Andy Garcia, whose unquestioning loyalty just about makes up for his appalling temper - and the fact he's got the hots for his cousin, Michael's daughter (Sofia Coppola). The film begins with a set of sumptuous tracking shots around various unpopulated ruins that suggest this is going to be ""Terence Davies' The Godfather"". Alas, no. Instead, we're pitched into an overambitious story concerning high finance, Papal assassination and moral absolution that dwarfs the curiously uninvolving Garcia-Coppola romance.

Screenwriters Coppola and Mario Puzo strain to make each line a killer - when they're not penning exposition - meaning that the script is clunky and often lacking insight. Take the scene between Corleone and estranged wife Kay (Diane Keaton). ""I don't hate you, Michael"" she says. ""I dread you."" So far, so agreeably unexpected, but they won't shut up - and the resulting exchanges are first over-dramatic and then superfluous. ""I did what I could, Kay, to protect all of you from the horrors of this world,"" he says. Her reply? ""But you became my horror. The children still love you, though. Especially Mary."" Err, great. Mary, for her part, has come in for a bit of flak - some of it deserved. Though the director's daughter has an interesting face and excels during one heartbroken exchange (the ""I'll always love you"" bit), her delivery is often distressingly wooden in a way you rarely see on screen. And while her beau Garcia is unquestionably charismatic, he's also clichéd and dull: if he's his generation's answer to James Caan, perhaps we should rephrase the question. Robert DeNiro was turned down for that part, while Robert Duvall's character was killed off after he asked for $5m and Coppola threatened to write Pacino out of the series unless he settled for $2m less than he wanted. That wrangling - and the director's threat therein - betrays the poverty of vision here, with use of footage from the earlier films suggesting desperation rather than an epic sweep, as well as showing exactly how far Coppola had fallen.

The film isn't a complete write-off, though, boasting a hit-by-helicopter that's utterly unexpected and thus entirely great, some fine individual scenes - like Pacino's confession at the Vatican and his son's performance of the series' famous love song - and that certain brown wood-panelled glossy look unique to these films. It's also rarely dull, moving at a fair clip and balancing plot, action and character drama in the traditional manner. But it's rarely special - and within the context of this trilogy, that's pretty damning.";0;1;True tt0099674;amesmonde;19/03/2010;1950's remnants in the 70's;;Misjudged due to its truthfulness, filmed in 1991, this Godfather is a fitting third film.

It's now the 70's and times have changed since the 1950's hay days of the first two films. Pacino portrays an aged, mellower, ill and haunted man, gone is the steeliness of his youth. Michael Corleone's hair changes colour after his stroke, and there are plenty of character touches added to the older Don, as well as to Talia Shire's Connie Corleone.

Many of the original cast appear which adds to the continuity, a great touch for die hard fans. You can argue that Sofia Coppola was miscast but it may just be because she's not authentically beautiful, sorry, you can't pick your family. Missing is Tom Hagan and George Hamilton as B.J. Harrison fills the gap tolerably. Andy Garcia is excellent as Vincent Mancini, Sonny's illegitimate son.

Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo take the rounded characters on journey of self realisation. It's a pleasant character study that reflects how we change as we get older. The film gains momentum, building great tension and shock in the third act. However, don't watch expecting the atmosphere, vitality or vigour first two.

These are 1950's remnants in the 70's and all the power on earth can't change destiny.;0;1;False tt0099674;jedi10-682-101769;10/03/2010;A Good End not a Perfect End to the Great American Saga;8;For years, people have bashed this film without really understanding it. After watching all three the last few days, this is the logical end to the Michael Carleno story. A lot of the problems with this film have more to do with Paramount playing hard ball on a film they knew would save their year. Why you don't pay Robert Duvall $5 million is beyond stupid. Even with Godfather III being a financial and critical hit, Paramount still had a shake-up not long after that.

People bang on Coppola for casting his daughter in the film. He did cast his sister to play Connie and she turned pretty good. The real problem with the role is how naive the daughter is and no actress was going to be able to salvage the same criticism people had about Kay in the first two films. Expect in Godfather I, Michael told her everything early on what the family business was all about. I think she realized it by the end of the first Godfather that Michael wasn't joking. I guess if the character was more like Michael, it could work, but Connie already filled that part in the film. Knowing the cousins thing was based on Coppola's grandparents lessens the yuck factor, but not by much. It would have been better for Anthony not Vincent to take over and maybe screw some distance cousin by marriage. The reality is the movie needed a love story and a way for Michael to pay for his crimes at the end and this was it.

If anything, the movie does a good job of exploring the many corruptions of the Vatican during this time and giving its own account of what happened to Pope John Paul the First. Coppola can still move the pieces on the chessboard better then anyone else in the game. The other plus is Pacino as Michael. I wish we would have seen more actions that lead to him being wanting redemption and a lot calmer then in part II. Yet, it doesn't take away from him once again owning this role and putting a final dramatic end to one of the greatest villains in cinema. Keaton is again awesome as Kay and the best scenes maybe between her and Pacino. They bring their A games all the time in their scenes and makes you want to see more of them.

All in all, its not the perfect end to the saga, but its still good. Of course, like the Star Wars prequels it suffers from fanboy interpretations of what they wanted and not the reality of how films get made or where the story needs to go. I wouldn't mind seeing a fourth film since Coppola hinted that that Micheal's death is such an long time later then Mary's death, he could be inserted at any time. Still, it might be better to end it here and another crap sequel that Paramount would make without Coppola or the original cast.;0;1;True tt0099674;kkitt;06/02/2010;From the sublime... to the merely OK;6;"It was never going to be easy for anyone - even the original cast and creative team - to come up with a worthy epilogue to the Godfather saga. What disappoints me most about this film is that there were too many missed opportunities, resulting in a stylish but meandering melodrama that is a far from satisfactory final act.

Inevitably, where established characters have to be played by the same actors, there will be the odd crack to paper over - most regrettably, Tom Hagen's absence due to the failed negotiations over Robert Duvall's fee. Yet even where characters are retained, they bear curiously little resemblance to their younger selves. One of the most compelling aspects of the first instalment was Michael's slow transformation from squeaky-clean war hero into ruthless Mafia don; his reversion to 'good guy' status might have been equally fascinating but is never really explored. Meanwhile, his sister Connie seems to have assumed an uncompromising, matriarchal role quite at odds with the revulsion she displayed at Michael's earlier behaviour. Again, the intervening years alone are all that is offered by way of explanation.

Also, although one can accept that new characters are inevitable, the introduction of Vincent seems both contrived and unnecessary - adjectives that sadly are equally appropriate in describing this film's plot, which takes a great deal of time to unfold into very little. A far more intriguing storyline would have seen Mary murdered earlier in the film (and not just because of Sofia Coppola's lamentable acting) and then focused on a profound dilemma for Michael: whether to turn the other cheek and accept this karmic punishment for his transgressions, or to avenge his daughter's death by plunging back into the shady world from which he is so desperate to escape.

This could have been a truly poignant and morally ambiguous conclusion to the series but as it turned out, The Godfather III is neither sufficiently consistent with its predecessors to be a convincing sequel, nor engaging enough to be anywhere near as remarkable a film in its own right. Admittedly, it could have been far worse - but the sad thing is that it really should have been better.";0;1;True tt0099674;Geeky Randy;24/01/2010;A Terribly Misunderstood Film;9;Don Michael Corleone (Pacino) seems to have mellowed down in his later years, and he wishes to keep it that way. But just when things start going the way Michael wants, he's pulled back into the life of a mobster. The brilliantly eerie similarities between an old Michael and Brando's elderly Don Vito is what makes this film a must-see. Many fans were disappointed at its tameness and the incestuous subplot. The film does an excellent job of earning its keep by not mimicking the previous two films and moving the story forward as opposed to a full circle. The bias casting of Sophia Coppola is the film's only downfall.

***½ (out of four);0;2;False tt0099674;freemantle_uk;13/01/2010;Just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in.;7;My friends were really divided about the Godfather Part III: no whether it was good or bad, but if I should see it or not. Some said I may as well complete the trilogy, whilst others said it would ruin the first two masterpieces. In the end I decided to watch it to judge for myself after watching The Godfather Part I and Part II again.

Set 20 years after the events of The Godfather Part II, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) has made moved back to New York and is made a Commander of St. Sebastain by the Catholic Church for his charity work. He has been a legitimate business man, with a few a links to the Mafia. He is suffering guilt from his ruthless raise to power, the murder of brother and the death of his first wife in Silicy. His daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola) is still close to him, running the Vito Corleone Foundation for him, whilst his son Anthony (Franc D'Ambrosio) has turned his back on the family business to focus on a music career. In the middle of a ceremony to celebrate Michael's deels to the church, Sonny's illegitimate son Vincent Mancini (Andy Garica) shows his face. He is a low-level hood who is in the middle of conflict with a Mafia Don, Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna (Fat Tony from the Simpsons)). Michael offers to show the young hot the ropes of the business. After a devastating hit that wipes out most of the Mafia Dons, a power vacuum happens the world of crime. Michael is forced back into the Mafia because of it. The second plot involves Michael attempting to buy Immobiliare, the real estate sector of the Vactican Bank. The deal is meant to save the Vactican's troubled finances and Michael is encouraged by Archbishop Gilday (Donal Donnelly), the head of the Vactican bank to invest $600 Million in Bonds. But this ends up being a scam by dodgy elements of the Bank and forces Michael into Vactican politics.

The Godfather Part III has often been derided by fans for being inferior and insulting to the first two films. But there is a sector who do still like this film. They is a long gap between this film and the preceder, which is never a good sign. It means that a lot of chances are forced appond the film and gaps have to be expanded. It is also normally a sign of cashing in on a popular title. There are problems with characterisation in the film. The first two films are about Michael's moral decline and becoming a ruthless and cunning Mafia boss. But in this film the filmmakers are trying to make him a good guy and forced back into the business. It weakens the message. The rise of Vincent also felt unrealistic and less organic compared to the rise of Vito and Michael. However, I do like that Connie (Talia Shire) as an adviser.

The plot itself should have been really interesting, dealings between the Mafia and the Vactican. That in itself could have made a really good thriller/drama, and showing the international nature of both organisations. As well the power vacuum in the Mafia, and forced change could have lead to a good film, particularly more in the context of the first two. But the Godfather Part III seem to be trying to put too much in one film which was shorten, because it also has the added family drama that was key to all three films. As a stand alone film it could have worked, but as a Godfather film, not so much.

Acting wise, it was hit and miss. Of course Al Pacino was excellent, Michael Corleone was the role that made him into a star. Andy Garcia is also a good actor, and most of the actors returning were good. The big problem was the casting of Francis Ford Coppola's daughter. Sofia has a good look, and lovely long hair, but she was so wooden and weak that it was a struggle for the other actors. Her expression on her face was so distance that it looked like she wasn't really interested. Luckily she moved into directing where she shows her real talent.

Francis Ford Coppola does a fine job directing, having some good set-pieces like the hit on the Mafia (even though it could have been simpler). He keeps the tone the same as with the first two films, have the slow burning atmosphere that made the first two films great. But this film did feels a little too slow and distance compared to the first two. Some of the music also did not fit as well as the first two films. However there are good scenes, like the intercutting between the opera and the outside events.

Overall, its no where near as good as the first two films and should have been a stand alone film. But it still has entertaining moments. 3 out of 5.;0;1;False tt0099674;bobsgrock;07/12/2009;Lightning hardly strikes thrice.;7;"To be frank and obvious, The Godfather Part III fails on many levels so that it cannot hold a candle to the first two. And should we really have expected it to be as good as Part I and II? The reason it was even made was because Coppola was strapped for money and felt he could give closure to this epic saga. More on that later, but first to focus on what went wrong in this continuation of the Corleone crime family.

In this third story, Michael has aged considerably over the years and is now starting to decline not only in health but in his mindset of how to run the family. Mob activities are becoming more and more violent, something he is not necessarily ready for. He becomes involved with Vincent (Andy Garcia) who is the illegitimate son of Michael's brother Sonny from the first film. He has inherited his father's temper and ambition and hopes to help the Corleone family take on Joey Zusa (Joe Mantegna), a mob boss now running their New York business. Michael also gets involved in the Vatican and their running if large sums of money. This plot thread I thought was fairly ridiculous and uninteresting. Of course, the best things of the story are the family arcs and the relationships between these people.

For the positive, the acting is good but not on par with what it was before. Al Pacino and Diane Keaton are both wonderful as Michael and Kay, two people with a lot of history but much to connect with each other. I do wish we could have seen more of the history of them and Michael explaining his actions in Sicily from the first film. Garcia is quite strong as is Talia Shire and Eli Wallach but Sofia Coppola brings everything to a halt with her very wooden and stiff performance of Mary, Michael's daughter. She speaks in one tone, has little chemistry with Garcia and has a weird contortion with her mouth that is distracting. Is it the worst thing of this movie? No, that would be the screenplay by Coppola and Mario Puzo, who seem to go out of their way to avoid doing what they did in the first two films. Those focused much on the family and the internal conflicts within. This part has a global span, going from Rome to New York to Sicily; it all seems too much for one movie.

The burning question is: was this a necessary production? I think it was, for now we know there never will nor can there ever be a fourth film as well as the closure we do receive on these people. The best part of the film is the family itself and we continue to see development in many of the characters, especially Michael and his sister Connie. For me, Connie's arc was the best of this film as we watch this beautiful woman, who got married in the first film, seem to lose her way. She is conflicted with the fact that she loves her family but is appalled by the violence associated with them. What happens to her in this movie is shocking but also understandable as it was with Michael's transformation. That, of course, is the main theme of this saga. Pacino seems to ham it up a little here but is still very effective in his role as a man filled with demons of his past and trying to do anything he can to exorcise them.

Why does this fail? Probably because we expected too much of Coppola. He hardly expected the first film to be so widely revered as it is, let alone the second film. Could he have known people wanted that same quality for this one. I am glad I saw it for now the story is complete to one of the greatest cinematic achievements.";0;1;False tt0099674;sharkey000;25/11/2009;Disturbing finale to a brilliant trilogy;7;I was not happy with how they aged Al Pacino for this role. But that is the besides the point, it doesn't take away from what is a very good ending to the trilogy.

Although some complain that Coppola's direction is vastly contrasted to the previous two movies, I didn't feel that affected the movie in a negative way.

Michael Corleone is now old and his business is finally 'legitimate'. However, there are obstacles in his path to purging himself of past sins, and his confession to a priest about how he murdered his brother is highly symbolic of how that one act has haunted him till now and is something he will always regret.

I loved how this movie picked up from the devastating murder of Fredo in part II and emphasized how Michael wishes to seek repentance for this act. However, a negative in this movie is the character of Kay and how she reappears in Michael's life and he seems eager to seek her forgiveness and profess how he has always cared for her. What I found even more incredulous was how she claims she has always loved him! After her murder of his child in part II I found this not in-keeping with her character development by the end of that movie. Equally ludicrous is how Michael has changed towards her and seeks her approval even now. It is sad because it shows us how alone he really is yet it isn't in-keeping with the Michael we saw in part II.

The devastatingly poignant ending where Mary is shot is the final bullet to Michael's heart and he dies alone. I wasn't happy with this ending but somehow I suppose it fit. Mary couldn't have the love of the cousin who loved her back because his destiny is to take over from Michael as the new Don. So her death seems the only solution as we know she will not be able to live without her cousin reciprocating her love. Vincent, her cousin, is the bastard child of Michael's elder brother Sonny and somehow I doubt his ability to succeed Michael successfully. But we will never know how that turned out...

All in all a must-see for die-hard Godfather fans. This movie includes flashbacks to Fredo's murder and Michael's first marriage. Yet the real story here is about Michael's relationship with his family and in true movie-hero-villain style his downfall into a lonely broken-hearted death, in much the way as Tony Montana in Scarface ended up.;0;1;True tt0099674;redryan64;14/10/2009;"Is it ""Third Time's A Charm"" or maybe ""Called Third Strike?"" Paging GODFATHER, Party of Three!";7;"THERE IS an old, time worn bit of conventional wisdom that goes something like:

""They"" say that a sequel to a movie is never as good as the original!""

WELL, WHOEVER ""They"" are, and ""They"" are eternally making these absolute truisms, always have and always do so. ""They"" would certainly done themselves well to dial it down a bit, remembering what ""They"" said about absolutes; namely that:

""They say that there are no absolutes!"" (Except of course the absolute truth that there are no absolutes. Did ""they"" say that? Absolutely!

WELL, SCHULTZ, you certainly do get the point; being that most of the many sequels that are made, do not measure up to the first entry into what mostly always spawns a veritable series of motion pictures. (Just consider for a moment, if you please, the likes of JAWS II, ROCKY II, DEATH WISH II, BATMAN II, TOPPER TAKES A TRIP, HALLOWEEN 2 and even APPOLLO 13!*

AND WHAT about perhaps the all time cheapie, spin off in SON OF KONG; which could exist to cheaply recoup some of the exce$$I've budgetary buck$ of Pop's story in KING KONG (RKO Radio Pictures, 1933).

THERE HAVE been a few notable exceptions to the rule, though. The first that pops into my fatigued mind is FRANKENSTEIN (Universal, 1931) being followed a full four years later by BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (Universal, 1935). (Notice that back in the ""Good Olde Days"", Hollywood seems to be a little more trusting of us, the great, unwashed masses and actually did make variation on titles. They didn't think they necessarily needed something like DONDI II; in order to convey the message that a picture is a sequel.)

AND SO too, that THE GODFATHER's being followed by THE GODFATHER: Part 2, represented only the second time in our memory that the sequel actually was better than the original; following these two James Whale FRANKENSTEIN Pictures, was a delightful continuation and fulfillment of the originals' story line.

SO NOW let's f-a-s-t f-o-r-w-a-r-d a trifle. Hey, many more $how Bu$ine$$ Mega Buck$ could we 'possibly' extricate with more actors being present. The wild one of idea were, that falsely reasoned that there should be continued success with the sequels. BBUUZZZZT! (Our game show buzzer) WRONG!!

THE LUCK ran out as Puzo, Coppola and Paramount went with GF#3! Why, you asked? What went wrong?

FIRST OF ALL, 1990 take away 1974=16 years between numbers two and three. (Sounds a little like toilet training.) A lot had changed in Hollywood; as well as in the Real World. Finding clever ways to bump-off the enemies was taking some inventive, albeit strange twists. For example, we gotta go to tie in the Catholic Church with a contrived storyline involving the murder of the Popntif! Connie Corleone (Miss Tallia Shire) becomes a combination Hit Man & Lucritia Borgia! People get to hear Opera performed in their own language; being Italian (in Italy, yet)!

THIS IS not to say that the movie doesn't offer anything; for many of its sequences are interesting, but somehow don't seem to mesh very well into a smooth running gangland saga. Youmg Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) is well cast as the illegitimate prince and pretender to the Corleone Family throne; but his character seems to be almost cut from the same cloth as an Agent 007. His skills at pulling off the hit of the really 'Bad Guy' Gangster, Joey Zasa (Joe Montenga) are really well developed for a young guy; with his tactics being similar to those being studied at West Point.

IT HAS been said that the Godfather author, the late Mr. Mario Puzo, was working on a fourth installment of the Corleone Family story when he passed away in 1999. If so, we have no doubt that we will see how the Family Business runs with young Don Vincenzo (Mr. Garcia) calling the shots.

THEN MAYBE Director Coppala can take a new road and bring us a GODFATHER TV Series; perhaps a Sitcom. How about Charlie Sheehan as the wisecracking Don Corleone with Rip Taylor as a Funny Consiglieri; just for Comic Relief!

FOR Remember, Schultz, we Americans, that is all real, right thinking Americans love our Gangster Pictures, even the lesser ones.

NOTE * Me friend Schultz and meself still haven't seen APPOLLO 13. We've strong feelings that we should see APPOLLO 1 to 12 before hand.";0;1;True tt0099674;thegodmaker;24/08/2009;Underrated;8;Hi this is my first comment just my reactions . pls don't overreact :)

I like this movie much than Part 2 but part 1 has a special place always

people don like i bcoz of the way Mike is subdued but what else can we expect from him

He is actually not brutal but became one to protect his family The only one thing that i din like was him killing fredo in Part 2 .

so it was natural that he repents for it in his old age . He lost his family he had longed for coz of his ruthlessness though it was understandable .

Compare the way he and his father died

Vito playing with his grandchild Mike lonely

Thts what the directors wanted to drive home Vito and mike were the best but Vito was reasonable and patient than mike which was greatly emphasized in part two (also the vito was more patient with tom hagen)

Also the way they both react to deaths . Mike wasn't affected till his daughters death the most important scene where his sis Connie and wife Kay watch mike with astonishment .

Another point is people make is Vincent reacts poorly to mikes daughter He never actually loved her . He gave her up for Becoming DON which is obvious . and its fitting that he is sonny's son bcoz i missed sonny in part 2 .;0;1;True tt0099674;DylansFearFiles;13/08/2009;A Great Conclusion To the Series;8;Don Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now in his 60s, divorced, and very close to becoming legitimate. Now he must find a successor, and that person might be his nephew Vincent (Andy Garcia), who is just as violent as his father Sonny (James Caan, who only appeared in the first two films). Michael is also trying to reconcile his relationship with his ex-wife, Kay (Diane Keaton) and protect his daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola) from the Mafia business.

The Godfather Part III is the most misunderstood of the trilogy. I feel that Sofia Coppola gave an underrated performance, but I'd like to see what Winona Rider could have done with the character. Sofia Coppola portrays the innocence that Michael wants to preserve. Andy Garcia also received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his performance as Vincent Mancini-Corleone. The movie also includes a good supporting cast including Joe Mantegna (Criminal Minds) as rival mobster Joey Zaza and Eli Watch as Don Altobello.

I found the third entry in the series to be a great movie, but not as good as the first two. This one is more tragic than the rest. This movie is very underrated and deserves more recognition.

9/10;0;1;False tt0099674;max7891;30/07/2009;An Honourable End;10;"After seeing the legendary Godfather Part 1&2, I was a bit reluctant to view the third installment on account of it's unfortunate gross underrating. But on experiencing the movie I came to realize that it was the most important part of the undisputed trilogy Coppola & Puzo.

The ground reality of the true underworld lay somewhat hidden which was rightly exposed by this movie. The glamorous side of Mafia underworld met with a man's struggle to unite his family under torturous circumstances was made possible by the masterly performance of ""Sir"" Al Pacino in his epic portrayal of Don Michael Corleone.

The film's fantastic screenplay and storyline met with heart throbbing music never compromises the the respect and Honor of the trilogy. Masterly performances by Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and of course Andy Garcia maintain the dignity of this classic.

In all A BIG 10/10.

Kudos to AL PACINO!";0;1;False tt0099674;sjl2007;20/07/2009;near classic..!;9;"Just watched this movie..i'd seen the previous 2 parts way back..those were CLASSICS in every sense of the word. I was pretty reluctant to watch the 3rd part though, after having heard the comments and having read the reviews. Somehow i gathered the energy to watch this one,and i wasn't disappointed at all. The weaker side of Michael Corleone is portrayed beautifully here. The scene where he gets the diabetes attack..yelling out..""FREDO,FREDO.."", his confession , moments with Kay..all of those scenes were quite touching. okay Sophie coppola's dialog delivery was poor..agreed..but the whole movie was an apt ending to the trilogy. Andy Garcia..for me..did a stellar job. He really looked like sonny's offspring..not by looks but by his way of talking,his behavior. There's a strong plot alongside too. All in all ..i'd say this movie is under-rated..comparisons to previous 2 editions are unjust. I am not a pro critic ..but these are my honest comments about the movie..Those of you all who are still reluctant to watch this one should give it a go..";0;1;False tt0099674;DKosty123;11/05/2009;The Death of Michael Cordileone;7;I have an advantage here of watching the official restoration in 2008 by the director. He states in his comments that he wanted to title this film the death of Michael. It is more than that in the restoration. It is the tragic death of Michael Cordileone.

Acting in this is not outstanding with the exception of Copola's daughter and Michael's daughter, Mary. She steals the show from the other women in the cast even though she is not a professional actress. This isn't easy but she does it.

The film is over long at well over 3 hours and it does end with Michaels death which happens briefly in the end sequence. His end is not as well staged/framed or told as Brando was in the first film. In fact it is pitifully short of the rich details. The main problem with this film is besides being late, it really does not break any new ground in telling the story. This is a shame as this classic series deserves a better conclusion.

The restoration is visually very exciting. It is the story that is a strange vacuum.;0;1;True tt0099674;marcusfranke;30/03/2009;I haven't cried like this since I paid to see Godfather III;6;"Of Course this movie isn't such bad as everyone wants to say, but that is only if there weren't the Prequels.Especially the first part is as excellent as only a few movies will ever get. In the second part it is everything a little too much, except the flashbacks with the young Vito Corleone (Great Appearance from the young de Niro, in my Opinion this the Quality like the first part. Pacino isn't that good even in the second part and now in the third part he performs his ritual (like in every ""new"" movie, not that bad in Insomnia and Any Given Sunday but still not really a change in it). I liked Garcia, but still this is far away from a Masterpiece. Especially if you think about Goodfellas which was the movie Godfather III had to be compared with. So overall, Coppola better had not done this movie 16 years after creating a cinematic legend.";0;1;False tt0099674;Agnelin;26/03/2009;Not bad, but definitely not good either;;"I have mixed feelings about ""The Godfather III"". While I reckon it's a well-done film, with forceful performances by almost all of the cast -Al Pacino is always a good actor, although he certainly overacts quite a few times here; for me, the supporting actors, with the exception of Sophia Coppola, were the best part- and a good directing job, if looked at as what it is, the finale of the Godfather trilogy, I have to say that it is a completely unnecessary film, and that the saga would have been much better off if it had ended with the second movie.

My main problem with this movie is that it practically denies all that we had learned about the character of Michael Corleone, which this movie is entirely about. We find him aging and declining, together with his empire, and the turn that he takes at a point in the film, and from then onwards, is just out of character.

However, the film is flawed even if we put aside the fact that it should be coherent with the previous two ""Godfather"" installments. For example, I feel that Coppola was trying too hard to keep up with the previous two movies, and it shows -he tries to replace actual interesting content and a well devised plot with sequences that are perhaps spectacular and entertaining, but oftentimes too long and not always necessary -see, for example, the never-ending opera sequence toward the end. In other words, ""The Godfather III"" is too packed with artifice and directorial tricks where there should have been more substance and a really interesting, well-woven story to tell.

As to the story itself, while it does not lack interest, it is too full of subplots that are tackled on but left unfinished, and aren't always pertinent, or don't add any interest or meaning to the whole film. This makes the movie sometimes too messy and even boring.

All in all, it is a movie that Godfather fans will probably enjoy for what it's worth, but definitely nothing too special.";0;1;False tt0099674;mail-4230;26/03/2009;Disappointing, clichés and no story;6;"I'm incredibly disappointed with the Godfather III, it has in no way kept any of the dramatic strength, the intensity nor the atmosphere of its predecessors. Many critics concentrated on the weak side parts, which is true compared to the long line of top actors in the first two episodes. There is no replacement for Robert Duvall, a John Cazale or a De Niro at all. Garcia is not bad, he plays the reincarnation of Sonny quite convincingly. But the part itself is not big enough to fill the movie nor is his love relationship to Corleones daughter. It was one of the key strenghts of the Godfather to integrate story lines of many characters in that ""Family"" environment and bind them well together. In Part III we see a scarcity of that, on top of it is blends the clichés of Mafia guys cooking pasta when they are at war, machine gun shootings when there is a reputation at stake and now the ""evil church"". There is no surprise in it and hell, how boring is it to have a real estate fund as a new ship for the Family - it's no way as interesting as a Casino.

I had hoped for more, the script fails behind and if I look at it objectively, Al Pacino seems not have had any significant new idea on how he could evolve the character of Don Corleone. Sorry, Mr. Coppola, this is below your standard.";0;1;True tt0099674;HelloTexas11;07/10/2008;overly reverential follow-up;6;"'The Godfather Part III' suffers from a bad case of wishing it was either 'The Godfather' or 'The Godfather Pt. II'. You'll lose count of all the situations, scenes, ideas, and lines of dialogue that are lifted either in part or in whole from the two earlier films. It's almost as if Francis Ford Coppola feels it necessary to constantly remind the audience that this is in fact a 'Godfather' film, rather than just getting on with it. The film is generally good enough to stand on its own, though it does suffer in comparison in many ways. Al Pacino has a hard time getting inside the character of Michael Corleone again. He makes a half-hearted attempt to act old, but it's never terribly convincing. His supporting cast is much weaker than in either of the other two, partially because of new faces brought in, such as (usually) reliable Eli Wallach as an aged Mafia boss. His performance is only adequate, and then there is Sofia Coppola as Michael's daughter, Mary. Her acting is more on a level with your average teen flick and at times is hard to watch. For reasons that never seem very clear or worthwhile, Diane Keaton is brought back as Kay in what could be called an extended cameo. Her scenes with Pacino are not satisfying either; Michael is courteous and flattering, suggesting they could be together again. Kay basically tells him what a slimeball he is and that she loathes him. Speaking of lifted scenes, there's one in 'Part III' that could almost be considered a 'response' to one in the original movie, where Kay watches Michael assuming the role of the Don and sees the door shut, symbolizing her being shut out of that part of his life. Here, in 'Godfather III', there is a scene where Michael and Kay almost achieve a kind of rapprochement when Michael is suddenly called into the next room to handle some dirty Mafia business. In what might be called 'Kay's Revenge', this time it is she who walks slowly out of camera view, in effect 'closing the door' behind her. Most of their exchanges though are simply rehashes of things said in the second film. There are so many lines lifted from the first two Godfathers, the effect borders on parody at times. ""Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking."" ""Today, all Corleone family business will be settled."" 'Part III' is so reverential and referential to those works, it's almost like one long homage to them. Another character from them, Connie, appears at odd moments like a ghost from the past, long enough to express concern for Michael and the family, a kind of melancholy loyalty, then she disappears again. Sonny Corleone's son, Vincent, is played by Andy Garcia and is the one character to bring some urgently needed kick and vitality to the film. Like his father, Vincent is a hot-head, a 'shoot first and ask questions later' kind of guy. He wants to solve the family's problems the way they USED to and of course Michael has spent almost his whole life moving away from the mob style of doing things and making the Corleone family legitimate. The plot itself has to do with various intrigues, financial and otherwise, at the Vatican and Michael becoming involved with some unsavory types who, shall we say, do not have his best interests at heart. 'The Godfather, Pt. III' is a good film, not a great one, one that certainly goes out of its way to remind us what masterpieces the first and second 'Godfather' films were.";0;1;True tt0099674;ninchi;30/09/2008;Payback, for real;;Michael died a very sad, lonely man. The difference between him and his father was that his father died happily, enjoying life, while in the comfort of his grandson. See the movie, then understand why Michael paid the ultimate price (twice). I shall have to go on, for nothing less than the purpose of fulfilling the requirements of submission would permit me to explain the real meaning of the story. I could comment on all of the attributes that the actors have shown in their respective performances, and agree, or disagree, with comments made about Sofia, the daughter of the director, but my real reason for writing is to convey how a person might have to pay for the errors of his ways by losing the most important want in his life. Michael's biggest joy in life was his daughter.;0;1;False tt0099674;dawj1677;11/09/2008;Great film but ,I don't like it!;7;This film succeeds in many terms like superb acting and good directing but something unknown to me makes me don't like it , may be because i expected something different when i first saw it.The film in itself emphases very much on understanding and justifying the human nature of the main character trying to make us sympathies with him once again after the tragic end of last part of the trilogy (the murder of his brother by his orders)and that made the film like a one guy show and that may be one of the reasons it didn t appeal to many people when they compare it with the tow other films ,aside with its gloomy atmosphere and the sad end for its hero. The developing of the characters is believable and consistent with the previous prats.There are some things not important but felt bet odd for me like Konnys (Michels sister) reaction to her older brother death and believing he is drown contrary to her reaction to her husband death in the first part and i didn't understand one scene in which the assassin using glasses in the office because he was in a suicidal situation ,I mean how was he suppose to escape .The curt end Michel's death alone and old in his home town could v been done much better .Yet this film has its many strong points especially his dealing with sociological issues for man with power and responsibility feeling the end closing and trying to redeem his self yet the circumstances surround him make him fail with the greater loss of all .;0;1;False tt0099674;kyle-cruse;22/08/2008;Fair sequel with good moments;7;The first two films of the Godfather saga were close to perfection, some of the most masterful movies ever made. Although part three is a big step down from those films, it has redeeming qualities that allow me to give it a passing grade. This sequel involves Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) trying to at last free his family from the world of crime and find someone to take over leading the family business. Michael's most likely successor is his nephew Vincent (Andy Garcia), the son of Michael's brother Sonny (James Caan's character from the first film). This is the area of the film that proves to be interesting, as these two characters expand on the details of events and people in the first two films and give us information we did not really go into in those movies. For example, they discuss Michael and Sonny's relationship and Michael's short-lived marriage before Kay. These discussions are truly fascinating. I disagree that the film is too long, as I think this movie, as well as the first two, move along at a fairly quick pace. It proves to be interesting enough to sit through without really getting bored. My first problem with this film, however, is casting the director's real-life daughter Sofia Coppola as Michael's daughter in the film. Her acting was pretty unrealistic and did not fit with the brilliance the rest of the cast seemed to have. Also, I dislike how the film chose to end. It felt as though the whole of the saga was not really resolved, that all three films were building up to nothing. It's truly not a bad film, but it doesn't have the masterful work the first two had. It still proves to be worthwhile, and hey, who really expects the third film to be the best anyway.

*** out of ****;0;1;False tt0099674;pdlaker34;15/06/2008;so close, but not quite;10;I think this movie is very close to being a great film, but it fails in a few places. first of all, what was Coppola thinking when he gave his daughter the role of Michael's daughter and then he gave her all those lines. Normally I don't like to be so tough on actors, but man was she bad, it's a good thing she changed her mind and decided to be a director because she's made some really good films except for one (Lost in Translation and Virgin suicides, hated Marie Antoinette). Another thing is that i wish Robert Duvall would have been the concillere and then I if that would of happened the concillere would've had more lines. I thought Pacino was great, Garcia was close to being like Sunny, and having Eli Wallach in it was excellent. This film was more interesting then the second one and if there would have been a better cast it would have been better then the second one. in conclusion, no Sofia Coppola and no George Hamilton, have a little different casting in other places and have Robert duvall, and then you have a film just as good as the second one, none of them could be as good as the first. I give it 8.5/10, but I do not think this deserves to be on the top 250 and round down instead of up because there are problems with it.;0;1;False tt0099674;jdkraus;06/05/2008;"It isn't a bad nor is it ""an offer that can't be refused""";7;"I love the first two ""Godfathers"", but this one did not have the caliber of the first two. There are things that make this movie feel like a ""Godfather"" but there are also things that don't.

Starting with the good, I found the plot to be very interesting. More than twenty years after where the second Godfather left off, Michael Corleone seeks to make his family legitimate by buying up part of the organizations in the Vatican. Things don't go as he had planned and once again he is pulled back in to fight off new foes and reinstate his family in the mafia with the help of a young protégé that loves his daughter.

It sounds pretty good, but much of the old cast is gone from the original two films. It would make sense for some of their characters to die off over more than a twenty year range, but many of the new faces aren't competent, particularly Sofia Coppola. I can understand Francis Ford Coppola would want his daughter in production to start her career. She's good-looking but she is bland and uneventful.

Eli Wallach seemed to enjoy himself as Don Altobello, the clever backstabber. Joe Mantgena as Joey Zasa was all right, I guess, but he gets killed off before he even gets a chance to develop his character. I have to add that, none of the Corleone family's enemies are developed, nor are their motives clear for why they want to kill Michael. This may have been intended since greed is a common thing that drives many people, but is there anything else? The film seemed to focus on what gruesome death the other mob bosses get rather than explain their characters' motives.

Talia Shire was a nice addition to the film. Her character has changed from the abused wife in Part I, to the pitiful widow in Part II, and to a cunning mastermind in this one. She's one of the few well-developed characters.

Of all the Godfathers, this one has my favorite performance by Al Pacino. His character was youthful and cunning in the first two but now he is an old man that is haunted by his past demons and wants forgiveness from the things he has done as a mob boss. His silent scream at the end of the film is priceless and moving. I'm surprised he did not an Oscar nom for his performance.

Andy Garcia was also great as Sonny's hotheaded son Vincent, who later becomes Michael's protégé. But what disturbed me was the unwanted development of his lust for Michael's daughter. Incest is something I don't look forward to in a mob film, particularly a Godfather.

Like the first two films, it has beautiful production design, costumes, and grim cinematography. It has the original score that Nino Rota composed wonderfully for the Godfather Part I & II but unfortunately Nino died before this one was in the making. So a new composer takes his place and adds some music to it that makes the film feel hokey. The music reminds me of something that would be in a cheap soap opera. It gets too dramatic in a scene of suspense and too melancholy at an emotional part.

It isn't a bad nor is it ""an offer that can't be refused"". 7/10";0;1;True tt0099674;philomerce;13/03/2008;Black Spot Sofia;7;After reviewing this movie I got angry again and again as soon as this absolutely non talented Sofia Coppola appeared on the screen. It was like as if someone pukes while you are eating in a first class restaurant, or uses a vacuum-cleaner while you are assisting to an opera-show, or talks of sexual diseases while you are watching a person you really desire.

I cannot understand Francis Ford Coppolas sense of family, which ruins the art he has created. He is like Vito and Michael Corleone, who wanted to do good but destroyed their own families they wanted to protect.

How can it be, that there was no one strong enough to prevent that this spoiled girl with the attraction of an unripe lemon in the botanical garden of Oslo is put in a row with such really huge actors like Al Pacino, Eli Wallach and Diane Keaton?;0;2;True tt0099674;knuckles_and_sonic;04/01/2008;Could Have Been So Much More;7;Lets get one thing straight....sequels are usually worse than the previous entry before it. Not so with the Godfather Part 2. However THIS film could have been so much more. I didn't feel that it held that Epic quality that the first two had. The acting was fine but I felt there was too much singing and the plot wasn't quite as interesting as it could have been. Two films would have been enough but we got three. It's still a good film, just not much more than that. I think they waited too long to make this and that because of that the quality of the film suffered a little bit. I mean especially when the guy asks the other guy to act like a donkey...that was a weird moment for me. Still if you have seen the first two then you should finish watching the trilogy....just don't expect to be blown away with this one.;0;1;True tt0099674;george_edwards505;20/11/2007;Amazing Drama;10;i have just finished watching the entire series of Godfather. and what a fantastic trip it has been! having heard so much about then films i have always put it off, but now i can understand what all the furore is about. all three are fantastic cinema and all deserve 1o.

when one thinks of all the other rubbish, films claiming to be masterpieces. i cant understand how anyone could give anything less than a 10 for each one of these movies. Part 3 in particular, deserves a much much higher score. it took my breath away.

out of all the films i cannot point to one bad performance.

I would happily watch them all again. i will watch them all again, and this time pay extra special attention to Pachino, who sneaks up on you again and again and again with his subtly masterful control over Corleone. knock you down, stun gun, head spinning, stupendous drama.;0;1;False tt0099674;RichardKleiner;18/11/2007;Better than part II, though never as part I;8;"Having slept the way through watching ""The Godfather"" part II, I saw part III, expecting it to be as boring and heavy. However, I was better satisfied. However, there were still many flaws I encountered while watching that made me think of it as lesser than the original. The story isn't bad. It has a better setting and is simpler to follow. However, the dialogs were what failed. They just sounded too false, too rehearsed. Although it still has the quotable potential like in the original, there are some lines that sound a little out of place. Michael Corleone's character finally redeems himself, now acting as Don Vito would. He's likable and lukewarm, although with a dark past, but still, noble with people. I was at first puzzled with Vincent's presence in the story. Now, real ""Godfather"" fans might know that Lucy Mancini never bore a baby with Sonny in the novel, and so Vincent shouldn't even exist. When the story came along together, he grew on me. Yet, I thought his romance with Mary was useless and not very realistic. Joey Zasa was a great character. He should have had more development and not just put as a traitor and have him whacked. I actually felt sympathetic for him. This was one of the reasons I disliked Vincent at the beginning. Connie was what I hated the most from the whole story. Women weren't supposed to tangle with the business in the Family. Puzo specifically explains this in his novel. I regret Tom Hagen's absence. He was the character that, although part of the Family, explained everything to you as a civilian and whom you could feel identified. He was my favorite.

Okay, after detailing what I hated, let's move on. Coppola's directing was great. He masterfully uses visual elements from the original and creates new ones that mesh together perfectly. The perfect example was the Archibishop's interview, identical to Bonasera's. The music was great, coming almost on its entirety from Nino Rota. Unlike part II, this one has the most action. There's shooting and blood in almost every scene. However, there was one thing I thought was the greatest mistake of them all. Corleone dies alone, with his daughter shot (something completely cruel and sad) and with no one else around him but a dog. This is not possible within the Mafia world. A Don never dies alone, nor in the streets. Yet, Al Pacino's performance was the best in the trilogy. The way he cries and screams after his daughter's death is so beautifully done, he makes the viewer cry with him, even though Mary wasn't a very appealing character.

So, I liked part III over II, yet, it not nearly as great as ""The Godfather"", which is, till this day, the best movie ever.";0;1;True tt0099674;anderu22487;01/11/2007;Okay finish to a great set of films;7;I enjoyed the first two the most. I think the writing and direction of this one is good. But the acting is awful. Andy Garcia seems to have watched the first two films to many times and he seems to try and consume the screen but does not succeed. His dialogue especially with Sophie Coppola is dry and not godfather worthy. The major difference between this and the other films is that there is no character development. You are kind of given the characters from the previous films and that is how they stay throughout the film. Also I think not having Robert Duvall kills the family. Michael is the only character we really know and it makes it difficult to relate to all the new people. If you are a fan of the first two you need to finish the series with this but don't expect much until the end.;0;2;False tt0099674;nice1024805;13/08/2007;The Godfather Directors Comments.;10;"It has taken me years to finally watch the Bonus DVD, and ask everyone to watch it AFTER watching all three films.

I must say that Michael was the ""Tiger Woods"" of the family. His eyes really told how he felt, had people really studied them. He was like a master chess player and he never ""whacked "" anyone that did not deserve it. He had the REACTION for every ACTION and the way he carried it off gave me the highest respect for the man. If you are truthful and honest with Mike, you are a friend for life, but start digging your own grave, if you cross him. I feel Kay was the only ""pass"" he gave, when she told him about how she lost the third child. He paid her back big time, but she kept on breathing. I was very sad when bad things happen in his family, but as I said, for every action, there is a reaction. Roots, The Color Purple, and The godfather are my favorite movies. I love all of them and the talent of the actors, sets, costumes, and the morals taught, as well as what you should do and what you should never do in life.";0;1;False tt0099674;dkncd;09/08/2007;The final offer;8;"I was skeptical whether the third installment of the ""Godfather"" trilogy, shot 16 years after the second installment, could be on par with the first two. While it is not as good as the first two films, it is still a good film in itself and remains faithful to the look and spirit of the first two films. I had no complaints with the cinematography or score.

The script is well-written and the ending was a very memorable and appropriate way to end the trilogy. I enjoyed all of the performances, particularly Al Pacino reprising his role as Michael Corleone, save one. The one is Sofia Coppola, who is awkward as Mary Corleone. Overall, this film is a satisfactory conclusion to the much-praised ""Godfather"" trilogy.";0;1;False tt0099674;xman1974;18/07/2007;The Return of the Jedi of the Godfather trilogy...;6;"Remember everyone's high hopes after seeing Star Wars and Empire Strikes back for the third movie in that trilogy? Return of the Jedi hits the theaters - everyone sees it ready for a great finale to that series and...everyone comes out with mixed feelings. The great scenes of Jabbas palace, Bobba Fett, and the speeder bike chases are offset by the annoying toy marketing of the Ewoks and the reused plot device of the Death Star resulting in a film that doesn't end things up on a really satisfying note.

Godfather III is the Return of the Jedi of the Gfather series without a doubt. There are hints of greatness there - Al Pacino, Andy Garica, Talia Shire, Eli Walich are all outstanding. Some memorable lines too that rank up with the best of the Godfather quotes - ""Everytime I think I am out they pull me back in!""...A handful of really outstanding dramatic scenes too. However, mixed in with all of that is ""Ewoks"" and ""Death Star 2"" crap as well that bring the movie down. Sophia Copolla, God bless her heart, is awful...the whole Vatican plot gets overly confusing and boring to the point where the viewer is just praying to God to make it stop...Robert Duvall's Tom Hagan is deeply missed in this movie... Ah well, you get the point.

Don't see it expecting the greatness of the first two Gfather films and don't see it expecting to marvel at everything that goes on. It is what it is - a flawed ending to a great saga.";0;6;False tt0099674;acidrefluxer-1;09/06/2007;Mentioning All Godfather Movies;;I am a fan of all 3 Godfather movies...I just wish there was MORE. I can't possibly write the prolific comments that everyone else has. I'm just an everyman (woman actually) and I find these (all 3) movies visually, musically and everything else so entertaining and also educating, if this Mafia stuff actually happened, which I believe it did, as horrific as it is. The scene about Mary in the end. I almost cry thinking about her sinking to her knees..excellent acting...and Pacino...probably the MOST terrific acting of his career. I am currently reading the book (the first Godfather) which I have read in the past, and I have watched the movie at least 10 times... the movie is close to the book, but there is a big Johnny Fontaine chapter that I'm pretty sure the movie kinda skipped over. Anyway...one of the absolute classics of our time!;0;1;False tt0099674;Mr_White101;31/05/2007;A worthy finale..;6;"The Godfather: Part III has met rigorous criticism, and although far from the colossal standard of it's predecessors, it remains a decent finale to the finest saga ever made. The final sequence is near-flawless, and Pacino's performance is superb. Add this to a bold plot, rich cinematography and a fine score, you get a creditable movie, which is certainly not brilliant but vastly underrated. The film packs a strong emotional punch and is a worthy ending to the tale of Michael Corleone.

The real problem with the picture, if I had to pick out one of the many reasons it doesn't match the earlier flicks, is that is lacks the significant images and lines that make the others not only great stories but profound and wise fables. There are less representations, and it is a less philosophical and bold narrative. Furthermore, in terms of practically every cinematic aspect, it is way behind that of Parts I and II, and doesn't have the effect they do.

However, it is still a good film; it tells us of an adequate ending to the Corleone chronicles, and it tells it well. The last minutes are surprisingly moving, and the movie as a whole would stand up strong on its own, should its high expectations be lifted.";0;1;False tt0099674;russjohnson-1;03/05/2007;just a quick slice...;10;Probably one of the best in the trilogy (although, they're all excellent in everyway) You've never seen it? CHECK IT OUT!! just make sure that you watch them all in order. Just that bit near the end, when michael's daughter gets shot and he cries out in frustration, anger and sadness against the futility of everything he's tried to do for his family and the business.

Very moving, especially if you know Micheal's thru story.

An excellent edition and a perfect way to end the trilogy. and the greatest story ever told in the history of cinema.

Russ;0;1;True tt0099674;dwpeak;21/01/2007;Great...but not as great;8;"The general consensus about ""The Godfather: Part III"" is that it is nothing compared to the first two films. I agree with that statement. I do, however, disagree with those who say the film is horrible. The film is quite good, and shares with us some important lessons. While we may want a better end to the saga, we still got a great one. Yes, it is not without its flaws, but they are few.

Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is now in his sixties. Age and wear have lead him to one thing; he knows and wants his corrupt business to become legitimate. He has lost his wife. His son wants nothing of the business, and he rarely sees his children anyway. While Michael is fighting for the legitimacy of his business, others are fighting against it. Vincent (Andy Garcia) is Michael's nephew. He is a very violent person; a person that is the main candidate to replace Michael as the future Don of the family. This is the sad story of one man's fight to redeem what he has taken, or lose it all over again in the process. The film co-stars Dian Keaton as Kay, who remains close to Michael for her children, but nothing more. Sofia Coppola plays Michael and Kay's daughter, Mary.

Al Pacino is nothing short of brilliant in his final role as Michael Corleone. He is emotionally powerful. This was one of his best performances. Diane Keaton gives one of her best performances, as well. She loves Michael, but hates what he does. Andy Garcia does pretty good as Vincent. I'm sure he's done better, but here he's good, so it doesn't matter.

As I said, the film is not without its problems. The film has an opera scene that is both effective and entertaining. However, it lasts too long. It almost seems stressed. I, and others, don't feel that Sofia Coppola was the right fit for Mary. Her performance, well...isn't the best of the movie. This is no reflection on Sofia, who is the talented director and writer of films such as ""Lost in Translation."" Yes, she is Coppola's daughter, but something isn't working out here. The camera work, while much the same, isn't as dark or attractive.

Back to the film's strengths. This movie is a very successful human story. About how the decisions we make will effect the rest of our life forever. It is a great study. Francis Ford Coppola's talent had not left him, and his directing could still be described as breathtaking. The screenplay by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola is rich and effective.

Overall, the acting is good. The directing is fabulous. The screenplay; well-written. It succeeds in what it tries to do. Therefore, it is a good movie, and worth seeing. It's not perfect, and doesn't even come close to the level of ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather: Part II."" Those films are masterpieces. This movie is great.";0;1;False tt0099674;ZildjianDFW;21/01/2007;Better Than You've Heard;9;First of all, I must admit that this is movie is not AS good as the first two Godfather movies...it's not as intense, not as multi-layered...and it's a little too retrospective sometimes.

However, this I really enjoyed this movie the first time I saw, which surprised me, considering things I've heard about it from the pretentious movie critics. I found myself wrapped up in it. The acting, Sofia Coppola aside, was top notch. The story and dialog: excellent. This movie is way underrated, another case of people buying into what they hear.

Once again, this movie may not be as good as the first two, but it deserves more credit than it gets. In fact, I'd say that the movie deserves an 8.0 to a 8.2;0;1;False tt0099674;possumopossum;14/01/2007;Don Vincenzio;6;After sixteen years, a third GODFATHER movie is in our midst. I think the whole Coppola family had a hand in making this movie. They probably should have changed the Corleone family to the Coppola family.

This movie isn't as good as the other two, but it still isn't bad. Michael is trying to redeem himself by going into legitimate business and making generous contributions to the church. However, he finds out that the hierarchy of the church is just as crooked and dangerous as the Mafia. Did this movie perhaps foresee the scandal problems of the Catholic church? Who knows? There is even some suggestions that some Mafia members had moles inside the church who possibly assassinated Pope John Paul I. How's that for stirring up a hornet's nest of controversy? Now, the bad part. The ending sucked wind. I mean, what the hell was that all about? In the next to the last scene, Michael's daughter Mary is murdered by a hired assassin. In the next, Michael is sitting outside a little house in Sicily and falls out of a chair. Then the screen goes dark and the credits roll. WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT? I know he died in that scene, but the ending looked like something that was cut and pasted on the last scene. There is no transition to this scene, just a montage of scenes from the other two movies to the accompaniment of CAVALIERA RUSTICANA. Then, BOOM! An aged Michael Corleone is just barely able to put his glasses on before he falls dead out of his chair. Was this whole movie supposed to be a flashback or something? The ending really ruined it I thought. Sad ending to a great saga. 6 out of 10 for that lousy tacked on ending.;0;1;True tt0099674;luiandrew;12/01/2007;Worthy sequel to the first films. Slows down towards the end;8;Hardly anyone credits the third film. To be fair, it was never intended to be the 'end' of the saga, but more of tying up Michael Corleone's ends.

Many scenes, notably the action sequences keep the flow of the movie going. The only problem the film has, is its tendency to rely heavily on Michael's story of wanting redemption etc.

Perhaps if more depth was given to Al Neri (a sub-character throughout the saga) or if the scenes with Kay and Michael were shortened to maintain the suspense.

Godfather Part 3 is a good film within its own right. The only problem was it had a hard act to follow from the earlier films.;0;1;True tt0099674;Dr_Coulardeau;09/01/2007;By far the best: how to be good in the mafia;10;"The third part is nearly the most interesting because we finally have these Corleones in the modern world. They have sold their casinos and gambling institutions, they have never been in drugs or prostitution and the new Godfather, Michael Corleone, wants to get respectable, recognized by the catholic church and world influential. So he tries to donate big quantities of money to the Vatican bank in exchange of a majority share in the Vatican's real estate institution. He fails at first but goes on and tries to find the invisible ways into the labyrinth. So he makes friends with as many people as possible in the financial, religious and political circles around the church. He finds out he has to go to Sicilia to get in touch with an important cardinal who is actually elected Pope, but does not last more than a few months. They have special teas that make you sleep very long in the Vatican. But this third part shows a great evolution of the Sicilian-American and Italian-American communities in the US. Violence is becoming less and less easy in the US. They have to respect the law and law-enforcing institutions are too strong and powerful for them to be neglected or under-evaluated. Then there is a shift in that mafia violence. The Corleones going to Sicilia, among other things to take part in the first operatic production of Michael's own son who is an opera tenor, violence catches them up and Sicilia becomes the theatre of what they can't do in the US any more. And once again Michael goes through and is well protected by the men of his nephew who he has just appointed his successor, and also by chance. The final gun directed at him cannot be prevented from firing, though the assassin will be shot back on the spot by the new Don Corleone, but Michael is once again lucky and the bullet does not reach him. For more details rush to the DVD. Thus the third part ends in drama, even melodrama. But it is definitely clearer than the second that is too long and too complex and entangled. We seem though to be living the last powerful years of this family that has to accept the challenge of becoming legal and respectable. In other words the world is changing and the mafia along with it.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne";0;2;True tt0099674;razvan_merisescu;21/12/2006;excellent movie with perfect story;10;I do not understand how can this part of the movie be separated from the others 2 and be under-evaluated. The III series of the godfather is absolutely brilliant. perfect role-playing, perfect story and perfect directing. This movie moves me in the way not a lot of movies did. Is a movie about life that leads you to many conclusions. you can find yourself in the movie indifferent who you are and what you are it is impossible to not relate something with your life. A movie is really great in the moment that makes you cry and you remain with at least one great idea from it. This one is GREAT. Is the grand finale of a story of a man that had everything :love, money, family and power but not happiness.;0;1;False tt0099674;Freantzu;16/11/2006;The third part of the trilogy is the perfect end;10;"It's a perfect end to this outstanding story.I do agree with the fact that the first two parts were better,but like I said,it's the perfect end.It's similar with the first part;I find this very interesting.The interpretation of the actors is amazing.Al Pacino is more expressive in this part,Andy Garcia doesn't disappoint at all,in fact he is a very charismatic actor.I also think that the fact that Coppola didn't replaced the actors that were playing in the first two parts,is perfect.I mean,Michael has to be Al Pacino,Kay has to be Diane Keaton,Connie has to be Talia Shire,and so on... The story of the third part is excellent,and is not below the first two parts.The conclusion is that the third part of The Godfather trilogy is the perfect end,and there is no need for the fourth,it will ruin the Trilogy:))";0;1;False tt0099674;coco007;23/10/2006;"a nostaglic compelation of all the attributes from the previous two films which conforms to make a; not a classic conclusion; but a conformed one.";7;"The Godfather Part 3 is a film which comprises most of the same events from the original film, but does it in such a manner, which makes the film stand in it's own right. In the films there is so many similar scenes, although visually differiental, which are used in the first. It is so hard to criticise this because in reality the life cycles of mafia members reflect so much similarity. It starts of with the basic reintroduction of the don; Micheal Corleone; similar to the first where the first compelation of scenes where inevitably focused on the main character; Marlon Brando. But as with the first a foreclosed and unintroduced character becomes involved in the film; in the first, Al pacino and the third Andy Garcia. As I perceive it, Coppola latched on to the filimarity of the original and integrated some individual conflicts between the two characters. This is apparent when u look at Micheals introverted personality and projected unwillingness to enter the family business whereas Garcia embraces the underworld of the mafia and wants to be a part of it. No matter how they became embrolied in such a world, they faced the same events, were that Brando didn't want Micheal involved and that later on Micheal didn't want Vincent to become involved, but as the first an murder attempt on both father (Brando) and Micheal (uncle) forced both Pacino, in the first, and Garcia into a higher level of the mafia, when the Turk and Sassa, were killed. Another similarity to the first was that Micheal lost his wife and in the third Garcia lost Mary.

In conclusion, Coppla didn't have much to worked with in this concluding part of the story, due to the fact that life comes full circle and that events do repeat themselves, but he did try to combat, the transparency of his repetition by those little character diferentials between Al Pacino and Andy Garcia.";0;1;True tt0099674;kimsman-1;05/09/2006;Decent Ending To A Classic Trilogy;8;Not half as bad as people make out. Sofia is very good as the daughter, Pacino et al act consummately, and the storyline moves on at just the right pace.

The film as a whole - whilst not as good as the previous two - is a fine conclusion of a 'family' story like no other. I think sometimes these things can be taken too seriously, and as it stands this is a fine piece of cinema.

I think this can be taken on it's own, as much as one third of a whole. Sure it helps to see the previous two films, but as a film of someone seeking redemption and trying - but failing - to escape his past the film is a huge success.

Very good, and recommended. Think for yourself, not what the critics want you to think.;0;1;False tt0099674;heatherofilm;04/09/2006;Perhaps it's like Marmite?;9;I've just re-watched Part III after having read some of the reviews on this site that trash it. Obviously, everyone's opinion of a film is shaped by their expectations, their preferences and probably a million other things but I think expectations are what ruin this film for a lot of people.

For me it's an incredibly powerful, tense and moving film of a different genre to the first two. If you come to this film expecting more of the same from the first film and classic mafia violence and plotting then yes, you'll be very disappointed. For me this film is about the consequences of the actions we take and the unavoidable paths we take through life. Michael feels that he cannot ever convert to the legitimate life and yet we see his son, who is so much like him make the conscious decisions that take him away from it all. He constantly questions why he can never escape his past but what it comes down to is the fact that he just can't let it go and forever feels he must live up to the reputation (of which he's constantly reminded) of his father.

The end is incredibly sad when we see Michael as a broken man, all of the women in his life that he truly loved lost to him or and yet Vincent is there, ready to take up where he has left off and make all of the same mistakes all over again.

Not only that but the tension in the film is incredible. How can people say they got bored?!! But I guess it's not the same tension you feel in the first two films and if you're not into looking for the deeper meaning behind the consequences of living your life as a wealthy gangster who profits from crime and violence then it probably is dull. Mind you, I defy anyone to find the opera scenes boring - I've never been so much on the edge of my seat at a film! And I've definitely never cried so much at the end of a film ever!!! An excellent ending to the trilogy and in my opinion, far better then the second film.;0;1;True tt0099674;moviemaker73;13/07/2006;Part one and two are a lot better than part three;;This movie, in my opinion, was a waste of film. The movie did not bring you into the corleone family like the other two did. This movie lacked a good script. The actors were in place but they had no direction. Al Pacino's character really didn't do it for me in this one. In part part one and two, Micheal corleone was a man that everyone feared. In part three it looked like if he didn't belong. It couldn't be because of the age he plays in the movie because Don Corleone in the first Godfather was still the man. This movie made a mockery of what Micheal Corleone should of been. Talia Shire's character had more guts than that of Al Pacinos. Andy Garcia over acted in some scenes. Other scenes he did good. Sofia Coppola was not a big help in the movie either. The only time she didn't seem to whine and act like a baby was when she was not in the scene. This movie could of been a lot better if they would of taken their time and had the same passion that they had for the first two Godfather's. Its a shame that this film has to be mentioned with the first two which were masterpieces of cinema.;0;1;False tt0099674;tatz32000;10/07/2006;bad acting by Wallach, not Sofia;7;"Yes, I know it was stylish at the time of the film's release to pan Sofia Coppola's performance, but it was Wallach, not Sofia, who almost singlehandedly ruined the film. His mannered, fussy, grotesquely overacted portrayal of an elderly Don stands out among so many fine performances like (to paraphrase Raymond Chandler) a tarantula on a slice of angel food cake.

Sofia Coppola played the role of a sheltered, shy, naive rich girl, & her restraint--perhaps bordering on gawkiness--fits the character perfectly. She uses her beautiful brown eyes to perfect effect in her more emotional moments. And, her talent in general has been more than proved by her creative work on ""Lost in Translation"".

I read a rumor that Frank Sinatra turned down the role Wallach ended up playing.....what a shame as Frank would have been so much better than Wallach!";0;1;False tt0099674;jansen-aui;29/06/2006;Undeservedly vilified;7;"""When they come they'll come at what you love""

How prophetic Michael Corleone (Al Pacino)'s words would prove to be. In Francis Ford Coppola's hugely anticipated follow up to The Godfather: Part II, almost twenty years have passed since the final moments of the previous picture, where Michael ordered the death of his own older brother, Fredo.

It's 1979. Michael Corleone is one step away from fulfilling the promise he made to his estranged ex-wife Kay Adams (Diane Keaton) in the idealism of his youth in The Godfather – if he secures a deal with the Vatican to take majority shareholdings in the international conglomerate Immobliare for a hefty $600 million, the Corleone family will take it's final step into the world of complete legitimacy. The deal requires the Pope himself to approve, however, and forces conspire to prevent exactly that – forces from deep within the corrupt Vatican, and from criminal underworld Michael has been battling for a quarter of a century to escape.

Michael's life as a Mafia chieftain has etched a deep tire into him that is channeled through his body language. He no longer sits cross-legged in a supreme position of power: his shoulders droop, his face is drained. He seeks only for his family to be together again, for forgiveness and redemption – for his whole life spent in devotion to protecting his family to not have gone to waste. He seeks youth to pass on the burden he bears. His daughter, Mary (Sofia Coppola) is naïve and unknowing of who her father is, but loves him deeply. His son Anthony (Franc D'Ambroiso) is more perceptive and is determined to never be involved in his father's business. Michael's nephew, Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) – the illegitimate son of his older brother Sonny – is just as hotheaded and volatile as his father was, but is eager to change to work for his uncle.

More than any complex plot, the picture's best moments come with the exchanges between Michael and Vincent, once Michael agrees to take him under his wing at the behest of his hardened younger sister Connie (Talia Shire). Watching Andy Garcia's transformation is remarkable, drawing parallels with Pacino's own in The Godfather, of course, and perhaps Coppola's ability to capture the spirit of Part I, if not Part II with these moments is what saves The Godfather: Part III.

The distinctive elements of a Godfather picture are all present for the third reprisal: from excellent acting bar the already scathingly criticized Sofia Coppola (a dead horse that doesn't need beating), to Willis's cinematography and the famous score, to Coppola's eye for majestic scope in his direction. If anything, Part III is let down by an overly convoluted plot, and the glaring absence of Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, who brought a personality to the business dealings. Nevertheless, The Godfather: Part III is not a bad picture. It could never hope to be on the same level of the first two (the 16 years between films would only serve to heighten that pedestal), but Part III, with it's climactic Opera sequence that showcases Coppola at his virtuoso best – gut-wrenchingly tragic ending and all – provides an apt finale to the Corleone Saga that has been undeservedly vilified for the shortcomings its older brothers expose.";0;1;False tt0099674;DJAkin;09/06/2006;This is not what I WANTED!!!;7;But it IS what I wanted. What I wanted was a good GODFATHER movie and as usual, the genius, Francis Ford Coppola delivered the goods. The breakthru of his daughter was a great performance. I was amazed at how good Andy Garcia was. That man is a true actor and a credit to his profession. I was surprised at his amazing performance and how cruel he was as Nick. This was not as good as the first two but much more different. This is the movie that brought an end to the saga. This movie will forever be in my heart. I am a TRUE FAN of these three movies and will watch them all again and again. I loved that part in this movie when Garcia is riding a horse.;0;1;False tt0099674;thcrown;08/06/2006;The Best Way To End Trilogy;10;"Being almost twenty years after Godfather 2, the third Godfather movie still lives up to the same potential after Godfathers 1 and 2, although not as much by just a little bit. Although, I still thought the movie was excellent because it still had the wonderful action and drama of the first two Godfathers.

Taking place years and years after the setting of 'The Godfather: Part II' we see Michael Corleone(Al Pacino), now aged and divorced from his wife Kay(Diane Keaton). His children are now full-grown adults and finds out he has a nephew named Vincent(Andy Garcia) who is the illegitimate son of Michael's brother Sonny. Michael takes Vincent under his wing to replace him as Don while he goes out to Vatican City to repent for all of his sins, but then gets the shock of a lifetime when he finds out that his daughter Mary(Sofia Coppola) and Vincent are seeing each other... even though they're cousins! Now, the whole incest thing between Coppola and Garcia was a little shocking to me, but (and this is coming from a teen who's not an incest fan), I didn't mind it. In fact, I liked it (although this will be the only time I accept incest). It was a nice little twist to the final film.

Filled with an all-star cast, including Pacino, Keaton, Garcia, Coppola, Joe Mantegna, Talia Shire, and others, the final film to the Godfather series gives us the same amount of quality and potential that the first two movies had. I don't know why people bash it so much, because I thought it was really good. I think it deserves to be in the Top 250 Movies along with its two predecessors. It really was great; a true classic sequel to a sequel to an excellent movie.";0;1;False tt0099674;ncharpil;25/10/2005;A lazy attempt;6;"Godfather Part III is on the whole a rather good movie, but it is nothing compared to the first two episodes. This is due to the laziness and lack of inspiration in the movie, which have produced this Hollywood movie filled with shortcuts and stereotypes. It completely lacks the subtlety of the first episodes, in particular the script is at some moments completely awful. Some chosen moments :

""-Why is this country (Sicily) so violent? - History.""

""Que pane! Ah! Olio di Olivo! Como solo se (i forgot the Italian word for make) in Sicilia!"" (Come on! He might as well be saying yeeeeha! i likes a good ole' cheeseburger with fries - the guy sounds as sicilian as Kevin Kline looks french in French kiss...)

A lot of people have said that Sofia Coppola's acting was terrible, but quite frankly I think it's a bit unfair to put all the blame on her. The script is the real culprit here. Coppola had nothing left to prove : his legacy includes three of the greatest movies of all time (the two first episodes and Apocalypse Now). It's just a shame that he didn't find a way of giving the same strength and atmosphere there was in parts I and II. Pacino's acting is alright but not great. The last scene on the opera steps and the close up on Michael screaming is very good though. By the way, I thought the end (when Michael dies an old man in Sicily) is very disappointing : michael should have died there on the steps : his screaming could be seen as his soul bursting out of his body, the final redemption, it would have been a great ending. Also the plot is quite good, with the corruption of the Vatican under Pi IV (and not P2... that's in Perminator) and the mysterious death of John-Paul I. But with such a plot the movie should have been much better. So to sum this up, it's still an OK movie, but it just doesn't come anywhere near the first two episodes.";0;1;True tt0099674;johnkeons;15/10/2005;Learned to appreciate;9;"I guess that the fact that part III is less appreciated lies in the fact that is more theatrical and political, hence more difficult that part I & II. The first time I saw it when it came out. I thought it was a nice movie but nowhere near its predecessors.

Since then I watched again about 4 times. And every time I appreciate it more for two reasons: 1. It's more theatrical and metaphoric (like the 'indirect' or as some call it unnecessary scenes of the puppet plays foreboding the events ahead in the movie). The opera finale is great because it mixes the the roots of the family (Sicily) with the big world of politics.

I think this is the biggest difference from the other two movies. Seeing the trilogy evolve it changes from a magnificent Maffia_Family epic where we 'learn' about the mores, rites and language of this world to a the development of the don who didn't want to be a don who grows cynical of his incapability (despite his power and intelligence) to control his surroundings, finally to a great finale where he finds out that nothing has really changed and he has not reached his goal and in the end lost everything he fought for (the/his family). He has learned that the 'legit' world is as corrupt (if not more) as the world he wants to get out of. This brings me to my 2nd point.

2. Politics After having seen a documentary about 'God's banker' and the Vatican I understood and appreciated the second layer in the movie much better. Especially when having in mind the last conversation Michael and Don Corleone had in part I about that he never wanted to be a puppet of the 'big shots', I realized that now Michael having reached the goal of being a 'big shot' on a global scale it is for him empty and the family is all he did it for, but there is no family left to fight for.

I agree with the people who say that the cast isn't as brilliant as in the other two (Hyman Roth being one of my favorites), this being the fact that I rate this movie slightly lower that part I and II. But still it is a must see movie.

Most gripping scene is off course Michael's cry on the stairs. Dead and empty eyes when he realizes that the last person he cared for is gone.

Enjoy and see it more often ;-) to appreciate it.";0;1;True tt0099674;bczech;06/10/2005;Good but not great....;7;This is a beautifully filmed motion picture. The settings and the sounds are perfect for sitting the mood, but what makes this film only good and not great (like its 2 predecessors) is the distractions of of 2 actors, 2 roles and a plot that, while logical, is somewhat unbelievable.

The actors, lets get them out of of the way, were Sofia Coppola and George Hamilton. Neither was believable, but I do not blame the actors, that error falls to the director for even allowing such casting. Sofia and George do not fit the mold. Their mannerism, dialects and mannerisms fail to compare to the outstanding acting of the other cast members.

The roles..The first is Vincent (played skillfully by Andy Garcia) For me to believe that Michael is so willing to accept the bastard son of his dead brother is ridiculous. This role should have been handled by Michael's or Connie's son. And the whole incest thing should have been nixed also.

The second role was one where the the scenes would have better fit on the cutting room floor. Grace Hamilton serves no real purpose. Appears out of no where and then is gone in a flash. It only adds to the distraction.

The other role was one that was missing. Tom Hagen was sorely missed, and his absence and lame explanation were horribly gaping holes in the Godfather fabric.

Lastly is the plot, while overall I found it very in intriguing, I still felt that so much was contrived. The idea has always been that Micahel had become what he had not wanted to be. He admired his father but never wanted to do what his father wanted to do. He bowed to the needs and desires of his families. But this chapter does not show that conflict, that coolness or that rage within.

One last note: While I will watch the film again I cannot help but wish that it never existed.;0;1;False tt0099674;bandit4789;04/10/2005;not as good as the first two but still good;8;I am a big fan of the first two Godfathers. i knew there was a third godfather made but it was never on television. I bought the godfather collection and the first one I watched was part 3. I had always thought it was one of those sequels they wished they never made, kind of like a grease 2. But the film wasn't that bad though. one of the reasons it might not have been successful was of all the new characters that were put in. I even found it difficult to keep track of the storyline and all the characters. sure its not as good as the first two movies but it is still a film I would recommend to any big fans of the series. it is still a good movie;0;1;False tt0099674;jingwei_chow;11/08/2005;"An ""ok-movie""";;Lets be frank. It really wasn't easy for Coppola and Puzo to write a story that was as good as the two previous movies. This is not like the lord of the rings, were a great story was already written down. No, they had to invent a totally new story. And they did a good job. The story alone was good, but not at the same league as the others.

But is was a good ending for the trilogie.

The ending of this movie is in my eyes one of the best endings ever made in movie history.

The acting was great. And of course Pacino carried the movie. He was just perfect.

The movie would have been a lot better if Tom Hagen was still in the picture. Michael really needed his concilliery.

The acting of Sofia Coppola? Well, it was just plain awful. She is better behind the camera then in front of it.;0;1;False tt0099674;robertbrizel;02/07/2005;Fine Acting Performances, World Class Production;10;I watched the Godfather series in its entirety in the last 3 days, and I found all three productions well done. Godfather I showcases Marlon Brando's unique talents, as well as Al Pacino's emotional intensity. It is this intensity, I feel, that carries Pacino through all 3 phases of the Godfather trilogy.

Godfather II, which also features a young Robert DeNiro as the Godfather, is most unusual through its use of flashbacks of young Don Corleone in Sicily and Manhattan's Little Italy. The outstanding performance DeNiro gives enables the production to work itself into the modern era. And as Pacino ages as the Don's son Michael, we learn from both Corleones the meaning of betrayal from within in all 3 parts of the trilogy. Microcosm of life, one might put it, and the elements of greed and deceit, figure most prominently.

The third part of the trilogy ends as Michael Corleone lives through triumph and tragedy at the highest levels of his own family and the Vatican-of interest due do the great publicity the Vatican has had in recent months due to the changes in pope.

Incidentally, I found the girl who played Appolonia in Godfather I, as well as Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone is Godfather III, both strikingly beautiful and quite charming in their portrayals of ordinary good Italian girls. In contrast to other reviews, I was quite charmed with young Sofia,and feel she still has promise as a world class actress rather than moving into movie director (like her father).

Winona Rider, who Sofia replaced, was not appropriate for this role. As Sofia was just plain ordinary, so much the better, so it doesn't distract from the focus and tempo of the production. Bridget Fonda is cast out of character in a brief cameo-she gets away with it only because she doesn't reappear.

As Pacino falls over in his chair and dies in Sicily as an old man as Godfather III ends, the potential for rising the last Don's opera-singing son for a Godfather IV remains. Like sequeling Scarface, it's just a movie subject of eternal interest worth money.

Francis Coppola is a fine director but will forever be known for the three Godfather movies-not necessarily for his best works. That's life.;0;2;False tt0099674;Surecure;24/05/2005;Not as brilliant as the first two films, but excellent nonetheless;9;"The Godfather Part III was likely destined for failure for the simple fact that it had arguably the highest expectations to surpass. With the first two parts of the Godfather trilogy being defining moments in cinematic history, it would seem that anything less than perfection would ultimately doom this film in the public mind. As it would happen, this is exactly what came to pass.

The Godfather Part III received near universal praise for being the magnificent work it is. In fact, it went on to be nominated for seven Oscars including Best Director for Coppola and Best Picture. However, with it not equaling the previous critical success of Part I and II, it was uniformly dismissed as a ""bad"" film by the public. This is in fact unfortunate as Part III is so much better than most people give it credit for.

The only truly distracting element of this film would be the wooden performance of Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone (a part originally offered to both Julia Roberts and Winona Ryder). Time of course has allowed film lovers the chance to forgive Sofia the actor as she has more than proved her value as a writer and director in her own right. But apart from this one fault, the remainder of the film's elements are above-par.

The Godfather Part III explores the wages of sin with great mastery and show that, aside from whatever appearance is given, we are all human and all suffer from our mistakes. Michael (Al Pacino) continues his quest to legitimize the family business with greater zeal, somewhat of an act of penitence for having ordered the execution of his own brother. However, it becomes more and more apparent that he simply cannot escape the darker nature of the life he has lived and is constantly dragged under the waves by his past actions. Things are further complicated by the fact that his children want nothing to do with the family business, while the actions of his extended family -- who have come to desire the darker nature of 'the family' -- only serve to undo the work Michael has done to clear his family name and his own conscience.

The transformation of Connie (Talia Shire) throughout this series comes to a perfect conclusion as we see the maternal instincts she hesitantly came to accept in Part II twist into a mothering of the darker side of the family's power and influence to violent conclusions. Andy Garcia's Supporting Actor Oscar nomination in playing the ever-volatile but brilliantly cunning Vincent is well earned and stands out as one of the best elements of the film overall. His ability to hold his own on screen with Pacino at all times speaks volumes to his talent and skill.

It is unfortunate that the Godfather Part III was unable to live up to the public expectations placed before it. But it remains a beautifully tragic finale to the Godfather saga that is still a must-see for all movie lovers.";0;1;False tt0099674;growbotham;16/04/2005;Always in the shadow of the first two Films;7;"Powerful performances across the whole cast cannot light up a film that will always be in the shadow of the previous two Godfather movies. You cannot watch this film without comparing to the previous two, and when the previous work is to such a high standard, the task set by the film makers in attempting a third film is just too great.

The storytelling and script offer nothing new, and just re-tread old ground as we build to the conclusion on the steps of the Opera House.

Al Pacino and Diane Keaton are especially good in their roles as ageing husband and wife caught between each other and events of the world around them. Andy Garcia also weighs in with a substantial performance as the son of Sonny Corleone.

But ultimately the cast are let down by a disappointing story line that just meanders lamely around, trying too hard to evoke the tension of the first two films whilst ultimately ending as more of a pastiche. Considering the fact that this was made 16 years after the 2nd film, director Francis Ford Coppalo and co-writer Mario Puzu have just had too long to think about it, and should have left the original two films to stand alone.";0;1;True tt0099674;Tashtago;21/03/2005;worth a look;6;"I can't help but think that this Godfather was made for purely financial reasons and had nothing to do with an attempt to further elaborate the story presented in the first Godfather movies which are among the greatest movies ever made. The biggest problem with this Godfather is that it is missing the great characters of the previous two films. The first was an ensemble cast with Brando as its center. The second ,divided between the De Niro and Pacino episodes ,created a compelling dynamic. Here, Pacino has to carry the whole movie. Although Dianne Keaton tries her best, she has become too bitter to be anything but nagging to Pacino. And we know by this time he is already tortured enough. The rest of the cast just doesn't measure up to the earlier versions . It would have been nice to have Robert Duvall return as Tom Hagen rather than suffer through the ""Lady Macbeth"" histrionics of Talia Shire. The Godfather 3 is definitely worth taking a look at even if it doesn't measure up to the other two films. The talents of the principals still shine through to make this at least worth a look.";0;1;False tt0099674;ctrout;21/02/2005;The Most Underrated Film of All Time;10;The final chapter in The Godfather Saga is regarded by many people today as something that pales in comparison to the first two Godfather films. This is probably because of the acting of Sofia Coppola. But the first time I saw the film, I noticed nothing wrong with her. Even with further viewings, she seemed to be a fine actress. Now she's not the best in the film, but she's not bad at all.

With that out of the way, I can get into the plot of this film. Michael Corleone (Pacino) wants to get out of his business in crime. He even goes as far as to confess to a priest about what he did at the end of the second film. This doesn't work as well as he planned. The young Vincent (Andy Garcia) now wants to follow in his Uncle Michael's footsteps. But he can only do this if Michael is there to guide him.

Another reason why he can't get out is the fact that a younger mafia man, Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna), wants to destroy the order of the old mafia. To stop this, Michael must reluctantly give in to his nephew and also deal with the rest of his family in the process.

Every character in the film, like the first two, has its purpose. And everyone provides something that the film needs to become the great movie that it is. With this, Francis Ford Coppola gives us his final, excellent part in the masterpiece that is The Godfather Saga. Without this one, there's no real closure. That's why it was necessary to make this brilliant film.;0;1;False tt0099674;double_l69;21/02/2005;What Exactly is The Godfather Without 'Vito Corleone'?;7;Godfather one was excellent, best movie of all time in my opinion, par 2 was still great and part 3 did disappoint me. I think this was because of the absence of Vito Corleone, every part on Part 1 was great, on part 2 the flashbacks to Vito's early career and life where the highlight of the movie and the Michael Corleone parts where boring, But number 3 was so boring i started playing phone games during it. It still had the ability to touch me in the end when Michael Corleone was reduced to tears as he witnessed his daughter die, very sad ending for a very sad and low par film. The dramatic effect of the 'Love Theme' Played on the violin is used frequently on part three where as on number one it is only used rarely on rather powerful scenes, but in this part of The Godfather it i used to much, which makes it predictable and have a less effect on the audience.;0;1;True tt0099674;awade0012;07/01/2005;How to Make Godfather Three Enjoyable!;7;Godfather III is a terrible movie. Its one of the most painful movies ever released... If... you have seen parts I and II prior to watching it.

Had Godfather III been a stand alone movie, there would not have been such great expectation for it and rather then being a big let down it might have been embraced by the public.

But, after watching some of the highest caliber acting, cinematography, direction, music, set design, costume design etc. The movie will make your stomach turn.

So my suggestion is: If you haven't seen the trilogy, watch Godfather III first. Then watch I and II. If you do it this way then III will probably be a delight and the first two will blow you away.

Save your self the heart break of what could have been the greatest trilogy of all time, bar none, and watch the third installment first.

7 of 10;0;1;False tt0099674;JBSdude;04/01/2005;The third installment;7;The Godfather Part III is the weakest of the trilogy but a strong movie nevertheless. It is definitely the best Pacino performance of the three. Actually, you can see a change in Pacino's acting style following this movie. I think that this film definitely had a huge impact on him as an actor.

By this time, the Corleone family is in Europe where Michael is aging and his children have grown. He is trying to keep his family and himself away from the business in order to have some peace of mind. His son is now an opera singer and his beautiful daughter, played by Sofia Coppola, is falling in love with the family bodyguard.;0;1;False tt0099674;amf_duarte;28/12/2004;Bad acting, I didn't recognize Al Pacino;7;"I thing that everyone agrees that this was the worse movie of the Godfather's sequel.

What was wrong? It wasn't the directing neither the writing, it was the acting.

It seams that Al Pacino was doing something against is will; never convince me in the entire movie. It was sad to see Pacino doing this performance; in Godfather 1 and 2 he was fantastic.

Andy Garcia: This actor couldn't give the support Al Pacino needed, well I thing that no one could have done a support to the poor Pacino performance.

Sofia Coppola: Surprising I really like her role, of course she isn't a professional actor but because of that she could give a naif touch to the personage.

Directing: 8/10 Writing: 9/10 Acting: 5/10

Overall: 7/10";0;1;False tt0099674;mc_bez86;18/11/2004;Very underrated;10;"The third installment of Mario Puzo's The Godfather...

Now playing...

(Spoiler included)

I think this movie deserves to be in the Top 250 of the database primarily because of the acting talents of most of the characters here. To start off with, Al Pacino displays yet another staggering amount of acting, complete with his now famous ""owl-eyes"". He perfectly delivered his role of an aging Don Michael Corleone here. Chills went up my spine when he delivered my favorite line of the film: ""I command this Family. Right or wrong. It was not what I wanted--""

Next comes Andy Garcia. A clap-deserving performance as Santino Corleone's son. Nice temper and nice acting...he really is convincing as a good nephew to Michael.

Finally, bind together the talents of Diane Keaton and Talia Shire...good women actresses. Keaton really knows how to act, and Shire is the perfect sister for Pacino.

The spoiler, I noticed, is Sofia Coppola. I must say her act is a bit lame and isn't right to be paired with such talents as Pacino. They could've chosen anybody else.

Anyway, perfect sounds, perfect plot (next to Godfather 1) and perfect villains. 9 stars out of 10.";0;2;True tt0099674;a-moss;08/11/2004;Not perfect, but still good.;7;My journey into the Godfather saga has been quite a surprise. I expected not to like them at all. But I ended up thinking The Godfather was extremely good, and Godfather 2 even better.. You don't have to be into mafia-stuff to like these movies at all!

Now for number 3 I kind of expected to like it just as much as the other twos. I thought the bad critics was mainly cynical. But, in some ways I found them to be quite right indeed. Sophia Coppola is today a great director in my opinion. I loved both of her present movies. In this movie she's playing Michael Corleone's daughter, and she really doesn't suit the character. The movie also suffers from a bit of a loose grip. I had to watch this movie over three days because I found myself too impatient to watch it. The other two movies are also slow in a sense, but they kind of held a grip on you all the way. On the better side the movie does bring a lot of completing segments into the saga. It shows a lot of the afterlife of the mafia affairs which Michael Corleone is trying to stop once and for all now. Andy Garcia plays his part good as well. The confession scene is one of the best scenes of the saga even maybe. Its a good movie. And its a good closing of the saga. Very slow though. NOT a bumpy ride.;0;1;False tt0099674;lspaiser;15/10/2004;As a whole - The Godfather trilogy is a lot like an Italian opera - one that should tear at your heart.;10;"First of all these movies span a period of almost 20 years between the first and the last. Too bad they were not all produced as a series (in close order). Unfortunately I saw Godfather (1) a week ago but did view all three DVDs of II and III together today. It is a saga - like Gabriel Garcia Marquez' ""100 Years of Solitude"" - a story spanning several lifetimes.

Probably the most powerful images are those of the leading characters (which is almost an oxymoron)who play roles that are easily characterized as stunning. But especially Pachino, who is truly frightening but pathetic at the same time.

The movies themselves are gripping. I thought part III was the jewel, to which the entire three movies (less the first - more the 2nd) - was building up to.

The finale was classic and I'm sure any serious opera lovers will agree, very much a classic ""Italian Opera."" It is no coincidence that that finale takes place, in fact, at the opera - of course an Italian opera.

Glad I managed to see them all within a short time span.

Again - Bravo - (especially to Pachino).

LHS";0;2;False tt0099674;peter9016;12/10/2004;Better then u think it is.;;I saw the two first godfathermovies and thought they were great so i wanted to buy the trilogy on DVD but i had not seen the third. I bought it anyway and expected it to be totally awful but this movie has been blamed to much and it is not even close to the first and the second one but anyway i think it is good and worth to have on DVD. No one else then Coppola has suceeded with a trilogy so great(perhaps George Lucas with Star wars)then with this one. Al Pacino is still god not as good as before but good and i heard that Sofia Coppola should be terrible but she was pretty good. I think that the critics owe this movie an apologize and all the people who thinks it is not good enough,i mean this is a late continuer which had every possibility to fail but Coppola actually did it. So give it a chance. It is so much better then you think.;0;1;False tt0099674;Deusvolt;10/10/2004;It's worth seeing if only for the performance of Raf Vallone.;7;"Al Pacino is, well....Al Pacino. He delivers his usual exemplary performance in this one. George Hamilton, despite the fact that he is often savaged by critics as an ageing pretty boy, is quite credible in this film as the urbane topnotch corporate lawyer helping Michael get out of the bloody Mafia business by acquiring legitimate and respectable holdings.

But the real gem in the movie is the Italian actor, Raf Vallone. Often cast as a ""heavy,"" a Mafia enforcer in countless gangster movies such as in the original Italian Job (with Michael Caine), it is refreshing to see him cast in a sympathetic role. As the Catholic Bishop of the diocese covering Sicily, he becomes father confessor to Don Michael Corleone and offers him saintly advice. His character is based loosely on the short-reigned John Paul I (Albini), a theologian, philosopher, essayist and poet of high caliber.

I will never forget his observation on why the corrupt Mafia culture persists in Sicily. He pointed out the stones in a stream/fountain in his courtyard. Then seizing one, he smashes it open to reveal that its core is dry. These people (the Mafia), he says, are like the stones immersed in water for centuries. They have been Christians for hundreds of years but they have never absorbed the true essence of the faith.

I liked III better than II which I found ponderous and filled with sympathetic yet corny details especially on how Corleone Sr. rose from petty mulcter to a leading Mafia Don. He was just evil, period.";0;1;False tt0099674;mtrupe;27/09/2004;Part III was not just great- it was necessary.;;"People really rip on The Godfather III, but I really thought it was an excellent movie. The ending was great. You have to think about it a while, but the lesson told by the story is profound and well stated. People say it wasn't a necessary part, but I think it was- we have to see how miserable Michael Corleone's life has become- his pursuit of money and greed got him misery and the worst kind of suffering and loneliness. He killed his own brother! It could be argued that he killed his own daughter too! Andy Garcia is excellent. We also realize that, essentially, Michael Corleone was a respected and feared coward. 'Vinnie' Mancini-Corleone, Vito Corleone, and Sonny Corleone could confront people. Michael had trouble with this. Vito rose to power on his own accord; Michael rose to power through inheritance and fueled by anger. He tells his understudy, Vinnie, never to hate his enemies, but this is exactly what Michael was guilty of- the major turning point in Michaels life came from hatred of his father's enemies.

Its fitting that Michael's greed should lead to the misery that is so profoundly communicated in the final see (collapsing dead as an old man) in The Godfather III. In a few seconds we learn the lesson: Greed and hatred can only lead to sorrow and loneliness. Alone in a chair, Michael collapses. We see that he lived the rest of his days (after his daughter's murder) wasting away in Italy, probably unable to gather himself and head back to the United States. We feel sorry for him, but when you think about it, this is the fate that he unwittingly chose. He dies a pathetic shadow of the powerful man that he once was. Despite all his former power and prestige, he dies alone- did he ever truly have any friends, or did he simply surround himself by loyal servants who feared him?";0;1;False tt0099674;senorita_belle;19/09/2004;Lot of shoots, lot of bloods, lot of violence, I like it.;8;Who said that this movie is a not really good sequel? I didn't! It was a cool movie, with a lot of tensions. This movie played my adrenalin. Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, they are all good. Never underestimate the power of Corleone family. They can do everything.

Andy Garcia looked very emotional on this movie. But, it makes him look like a great actor (he is!). He used that gun like he used a toy. Shoot there, shoot here, shoot everywhere. Woah!!!! Made me sturdy.

Al Pacino, Al Pacino, Al Pacino. Don't ever say NO! Yeah, he's the one and only. He can plays any character. Definitely adore him. As Don Michael Corleone, he played like a king (mafia in this movie) to rule the world. He used Vincent to help him and believe Vincent. I think, Vincent will be a good godfather for the next part of The Godfather movie. Maybe, The Godfather 4 or 5. We'll find out.;0;1;False tt0099674;kvkk;17/09/2004;This is a Great Movie... Why expect more???;9;Thank You very much for all the criticism, it ruined the Magic everyone expected of the movie... why blame the movie for it!!!

All the criticism for this movie, I think, is because of too high expectations, which should not be the case. If you see all the three movies at a time... this is the best sequel ever made...

The three movies, according to me, The Godfather - Don Vito Corleone, The Second Godfather - Don Michael Corleone, and The Third Godfather - Don Vincent Corleone (I can give him that last name right), are pictured in tandem with the pace of Al Pacino's Mike's life although Marlon Brando (GODFATHER) as vito has highly influenced the foremost one.

Yes, this movie is real slow, but the same is the case with mike's life... he is old, experienced and that accounts for it.

Forget Sophia, she is not the one on whom the movie should be relied on, everyone makes a mistake, so did Francis. The only thing I missed in this part was Robert Duvall's Tom Hagen... Robert, your career was not complete without this movie and you missed the chance, that too for money... good god, the prequel made your career (40+ years of it)... and that is the thing The Godfather Trilogy is gonna teach us... don't forget a favour done to you...

OK, this is not the best movie... GF and GF2 are... but this is a very good movie... and one good thing I did was to watch them continuously at the same time even it was a bit late to do so... 9/10 for the movie...

GF 10/10, GF2 10/10, GF3 9/10

My ratings say that this movie can be better... but, IMDb's ratings say that the viewers are highly influenced by OTHERS, free your mind of all those thoughts and any high expectations and you can feel the MAGIC called

The Godfather Part III...;0;2;False tt0099674;jcanettis;05/09/2004;Very Good, But Lacks The Magic of I & II;8;"Viewed in isolation, ""Godfather III"" is a very good film. The plot is interesting: The Corleone empire tries expand into legitimate business via its connections with the Vatican, as Don Michael Corleone (Pacino) wants to convert into a clean life, something he always promised but never managed; in his quest, he is assisted by Sonny's illegitimate child Vinni (Garcia), who is in love with his cousin Mary (Coppola), Michael's daughter. However things turn sour as there are powerful enemies who also want a share of the pricey spoils originating from this grand deal.

The film manages to keep the mystifying atmosphere and intrigue that we are used to in the ""Godfather"" saga. Moreover, the overall acting ranges from superb (Pacino) to very good (Garcia), with Sophia Coppola being the only unsatisfactory exception. So far, so good.

Yet, ""Godfather III"" can by no means be treated equally as ""G1"" and ""G2"": Although ""G3"" is a very good, 8/10 film, the first two parts were movies with a special magic for which even the 10/10 grade seemed insufficient.

Somebody in this site suggested that the Godfather epic should finish with the touching last scene in ""G2"", in which we watch Michael, who after ordering Fredo's death, he stands lonely and miserably, pondering a family flashback. I have to admit that up to a point I could subscribe to this point of view; Perhaps the ""Godfather"" saga could have finished there. Still, I am not so sure: After all, it is fair to say that ""G3"" connects nicely to the previous parts, and although it lacks their magic, it is still a very good movie. After all, the last scene of ""G3"" is quite touching as well...";0;1;False tt0099674;nyygirl62674;03/07/2004;the worst of the trilogy;;"I am an avid fan of the Godfather and its sequel. They are 2 of the best movies ever made. Notice I don't say the ""trilogy""...thats because I REFUSE to recognize part three as having any association with the first 2 masterpieces. The performances by Andy Garcia and Sofia Coppola are lackluster at best, and the fact that 'Connie' ends up taking over the family is absolutely maddening. There are no redeeming qualities to this film, and neither the portrayal of Michael Corleone by Al Pacino or the return of some of the main players of the movie can rescue it from it being one of the worst gangster films. Why couldn't they just stop at 2?? No need to beat a dead horse as they say.";0;1;False tt0099674;sonny30;15/05/2004;A few good scenes, but overall quite poor.;6;Disappointing last part in the Godfather-trilogy. I don't know why this third part is so weak, but it may be because of a number of factors. The story may not be interesting and/or it is not worked out properly and/or the actors are not convincing and/or God knows what.

The only interesting story-line is that of Vincent's. He reminds me of the way that Michael and Vito used to be. There are some good scenes with Andy Garcia (e.g. when he's lying in bed with Bridget Fonda, and later when he takes care of the Joey Zasa-situation). Sadly enough, Vincenzo is the only one who holds my attention and he can't save the whole movie on his own.

6/10;0;1;False tt0099674;Poker-Guru;16/04/2004;Not as bad as everyone makes it out to be.;10;Although The Godfather: Part 3 is not as good as the first two lets face it, it is hard to compete with arguably two of the greatest films of all time. Part 3 is still a good movie. It has great story lines and plots and you still have Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Andy Garcia,and Joe Mantegna starring in the film and Francis Ford Coppola directing it. People, these are stars who know how to make a great movie and that is exactly what they did. Just because it is not as good as the #1 and #3 movies on the IMDb 250 doesn't mean it is not a great film. The film had so much to compete with that people got carried away in their reactions to the film. If you would study and rate it without comparing it to the first 2 you would realize how great the film is. A wonderful ending to the greatest cinematic story of all time. I would definitely recommend this film as well as the first two. 3.5*/4;0;1;False tt0099674;gotham23;06/03/2004;Just give it a shot;;Yes, yes, yes...we all know that Sophia Coppola is lousy here. But while her part was an important one, the movie doesn't revolve around her. If you allow one of the supporting actors to ruin an entire film for you, I pity you.

There's a complex, captivating story going on here. Of course it doesn't capture the same magic that the first two films did, but that would be impossible. This is a story about a tortured soul, a man desperate to escape his past but who never will. It's fascinating because Michael is overwhelmed by guilt and remorse for the decisions he's made over the decades, but even with the benefit of hindsight he doesn't see how he could have done anything different (and the audience needs to contemplate whether or not this is true). Meanwhile, this character study is all wrapped up in a riveting story of political intrigue, corruption, and deception.

Pacino is his usual brilliant self. Garcia puts in a great performance and really does remind you of Sonny. Talia Shire (nepotism isn't all bad!) does a wonderful job as well, showing us a Connie who's evolved into a frighteningly cold and vicious woman. Probably the most underrated actor here is Eli Wallach as Don Altobello, a worthy foe for a criminal mind like Michael's. Yes, it was a mistake for Coppola to cast his daughter, who was a complete amateur at that time. And in an obvious attempt to replicate the assassinations/baptism scene from the original, Puzo and Coppola tried too hard and the result was an overly complicated and slightly confusing finale. But overall, this is one fantastic movie.

A final thought (MINOR SPOILER HERE): Pacino's performance in the final scene, on the steps of the opera house, is one of the most incredible acting displays I've ever seen. Never in my life have I seen such believable anguish and pain.;0;1;True tt0099674;stodmyk;05/03/2004;Overwritten, overacted, and largely overcriticized;8;Despite all its shortcomings, this was still better than 99% of the movies that came out in the 90s. It deserved its Best Picture nomination, but the series was rightly denied its third Best Picture Oscar. Sophia Coppola has since proved herself as a darned fine writer and director -- a good thing, since she's an abysmally bad actor. The young Anthony Garcia doesn't have half the chops, or a quarter of the charisma, as the young Pacino or the young DeNiro did, and THAT's why we're not likely to see a Godfather, Part IV anytime soon. Trading Robert Duvall for George Hamilton as the family consigliare ain't no small downsizing, either. Still, worthwhile just to see Pacino gnaw on the gorgeous sets in that gorgeous sweater vest.;0;1;False tt0099674;Troubleboy;24/02/2004;Magnificent Finale to the Series;;"Actually, I don't see what the big deal is with Sofia's performance in this film - I thought it was as good as anyone else. Considering they looked at Winnona R and Madonna prior to Sofia taking on the role . . . excuse me, outside of her videos when did Madonna ever turn in a good performance? Oh well, to each their own. Frankly, I didn't think any given actor was that great (certainly not Oscar-worthy), although Mantegna was pretty good in his usual David Mamet-sort-of-way.

The scene in the Vatican courtyard was almost embarrassing from the priests perspective - way too many ""go on, my son""(s) during Michael's confession.

Having said that, the build-up on opera night was impressive and the death of Mary was one for the ages and guaranteed to make any parent suffer.

As usual, the music was fantastic (with a little Elvis C thrown in for toe-tapping).

Not the best of the three, but it's had legs.";0;1;False tt0099674;Ali709;13/02/2004;Still enjoyable...;;"Most people think that this is a bad sequel and a money-maker only.

At the beginning, it does look that way, even to me. Where they're dancing, bringing old characters and remembering old memories from the old movies (this is what I hate most in bad sequels). But after a while, when the real story gets started, it's again as good as the old ones.

<Spoilers> The movie shows very well what some call ""The fall of Michael Corleone"". How he tries to save everything, fails, loses everything and dies miserably. Great acting, music and scenes. The ending is very well made specially the little dog if you understand it. The only problem I see in the ending, it just happens to fast, Michael's scream and then right after that the death scene. Although, IMO, it couldn't have been done any better. </Spoilers>

The movie is worth watching if you have seen the other two. Just forgive Coppola for the first scenes and SPECIALLY for bringing in ""Sofia Coppola"" for such an important role. I know it's very lame ;)

8.7/10";0;1;True tt0099674;RiffFan924;15/01/2004;The worst of the trilogy but along with matrix revolutions not a bad movie at all!;;I agree with many that this wasn't the strongpoint of the trilogy but it held its own through the 170 minute running time. It often confused me, but I got through it and lived! I liked this movie because it showed the end of Michael Corleone because if they had left it with the second one, we would have all wondered what happened to MC! At least that's what I would have wondered. I admit this was probably a way to cash in on a good name, but I'm glad they made it. I just wish that they would have killed MC off in a better way. Like maybe shooting him and Mary. That would have been good. But I guess this ending was good anyway. Now who here was grossed out about the relationship between Vincent and Mary. I was totally grossed out! That is incest! Hello?! What is that doing in such a great movie like GPIII? Anyway, this is a good movie and I will be owning the whole trilogy!;0;1;False tt0099674;carloscn73;16/01/2004;Wardrobe from the 70's;;I don't know if it's just me but it seems that the Producers of Godfather Part III didn't spend a single dime on wardrobe for this movie!!

Isn't it supposed to be 1979?!? Where are the wide collars (and genereally awful clothes)?

I think they weren't self conscious about detailing this flick.

I agree with most of you - Godfather should have ended at Part II.;0;1;False tt0099674;napalm-6;17/01/2004;A Very Good Film;9;"This final installment of the ""Godfather"" trilogy has been, since its release in 1990, heckled and regarded as a terrible movie that puts the other two Godfather films to shame.

Untrue.

I would argue, as many movie-lovers would, that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to match the greatness of the first two films. However, ""The Godfather Part III"" is a very decent film and, although Robert Duvall is not in it, the story is solid, the acting is terrific (except for Sophia Coppolla), and the ending is subtly powerful and moving.

I hope that everyone who enjoys the ""Godfather Part I and Part II"" sees the ""Godfather Part III."" It is a very, very good film.";0;1;False tt0099674;DerBarenJude;16/11/2003;Mediocre movie, fantastic ending;7;If not for the brilliance of the ending, I would have rated this move a 5 instead of a 7.

Spoiler--

The ending with Sofia getting shot was kind of subpar, but what came after it was breathtaking. Pacino's silent scream and the expression on Diane Keaton's face was great, but the true artistry came afterwards. The flashbacks of Pacino dancing with Appolonia, Kay, and Mary suggest that Michael, for all his strength and self-sacrifice to ensure the safety of his family, has lost all the women in his life. Essentially, his whole life has meant nothing because he has lost everything he has ever loved. Then, the death scene was shattering. Michael, great man that he was, ends up dying alone and blind with only a small animal to witness his passing. And the music playing throughout this last scene, magnifico!

Possibly the greatest and most moving ending I have ever seen in any movie. Just a shame that the film itself couldn't live up to it.;0;2;True tt0099674;eamon-hennedy;28/10/2003;Weakest of the three, but still brilliant.;8;It really says something about a film when, even when it's the weakest of a trilogy, still manages to be a fantastic film too. While The Godfather Part III doesn't manage to scale the heights of the first two films, this still manages to be a powerful film and brings the story of the Corleone dynasty to a gut wrenching conclusion. The continuation of Michael's story, this time as an older man whose life has moved on to new areas since the second film has a lot to recommend it and it is truly not the disaster that many claimed it was when first released. The central performance of Al Pacino is extraordinary. Filmed in 1990, just when every other Pacino performance was all about screaming and shouting dialog, here he manages restraint as a man burdened with the guilty conscious of ordering the execution of his own brother, a piece of character development that leads to a brilliant moment where Pacino confesses his sins. Pacino's performance here is one of his best in his latter day career when every line of dialog he utters in any other film tends to be said with the volume turned up, but here he brings back that wonderful quality he had during the first two films as well as his career in the 70's.

The rest of the cast is a highly mixed affair. Andy Garcia joins the cast as Vincent Corleone, the illegitimate son of Sonny and is superb. How his acting career floundered after this film is quite strange, but he settles into his character fantastically here. Good looking in the same way Pacino and De Niro were (sun tanned skin and thick dark hair), he looks the part and plays it fantastically. Being the son of Sonny the character has a fiery temper and Garcia plays it with the relish you would expect. When it comes to the romance with Michael's daughter, Garcia brings more of a Pacino/De Niro sensitivity to part, making it a wonderful hybrid of a performance that is fantastic to watch. Diane Keaton, once again, is superb as Kay and her scenes with Pacino are once again some of the highlights of the film. So, what makes the casting more mixed this time around? Well Sofia Coppola is the biggest weak link here. Looks wise she doesn't look like Pacino or Keaton and her acting ability is adequate at best. Original choice was Winona Ryder and it makes one quick to point out she would have been a better choice. Then there's George Hamilton as Michael's new lawyer, Tom Hagen having died off screen at some point. His performance is not bad, but he looks out of place in a film like this.

In saying that, the script from Coppola and Puzo is once again marvelous, Coppola's direction is as assured as one would expect and the conclusion is shocking and downbeat. The fact that Michael dies alone gives the ending to the trilogy a very poignant and sad tone, more or less confirming that he was doomed to failure no matter what he tried to do with his life, his family and his business.

This is still a fantastic film and makes this, overall, a superb trilogy.;0;2;False tt0099674;thl2k1;27/10/2003;Least of the trilogy because it cannot stand on its own;8;I have watched this film about 5 times and the other two about 10 times each. It is an exceptional movie overall despite some critical flaws with the casting and some of its themes. I didn't like Sofia Coppola's performance because she seemed arrogant and stuck up. The romance between Mary and Vincent feels forced and so does the rekindled one with Michael and Kay. There is also a horribly edited scene were Michael has a stroke and the cut between frames moves some of the products around in the kitchen. Probably the most disappointing thing about the film is that it depends upon the prior two movies to explain itself. A person could watch GFI or GFII and appreciate them independently. This film requires you to be fans of the first two and forgive its shortfalls and recycled philosophy. Knowledge of King Lear might also help you to be stirred up by this film.;0;1;False tt0099674;MafiaJesus;21/10/2003;I can't say it was bad... (spoilers);;"Actors have aged, things have changed, but that doesn't mean this is a bad movie or even a bad ending-sequel. On the contrary, this 3rd episode, shows a different Michael Corleone, witch is tired of his own dirty work, and seeks to leggitimate all the business in his family. But he carries his own burdens from the 2 previous movies, what we see in this third movie, is how a person can learn that their treasure are around them and even the big bosses are still, mortals... bound to the same fate as anyone else. Michael, who killed his brother Fredo on the 2nd part, now pays for his sins with the life of who loved him most, his daughter, his ""treasure"". By all means a must have sequel for those who enjoyed the first two movies, and in my own opinion ""not the best, but not the worst..."", with exception of Carmine Coppola (Mary Corleone), i couldn't have better actors (Can't say i didn't missed Duvall as Hagen). But after watch that movie, consider the plot and ask yourself: Can't a man learn from sins? Just because he was a murderer does that mean he is always going to kill? Just because he is redeemed from his sins does that makes this movie bad? I think not, just consider the steps of Michael's father and you will see how to incorporate the true character of Michael.";0;1;True tt0099674;harder;09/10/2003;A waste of talent;8;This movie felt like it was written and directed by different people. The writing was poor and the direction did not seem like Coppola's. It seemed like an immitation Godfather movie. All the power this movie has is drawn from the first two. It does nothing on it's own. The only thing I truly enjoyed about this movie was Eli Wallach's performance. I love that guy.;0;1;False tt0099674;coco007;24/09/2003;complete replica of the first;7;When people say that the first Godfather movie is the best overall, concerning the trilogy, I have to argue the fact that even though it was the first, the unorigionality which has transcened into the final part is just a relaying of Godfafther Part One, which leads me to the conclusion on the basis of pure foundation and and self-defining that Godfather part two was the finest of the trilogy, individually, of course.

Clearly in the third and final part of the corleone story it is visible in some parts that, the third invisages aspects of the first. Coppola's transparency and inability to do anything origional with the conclusion, even with his relunctance to do a third, was clearly visible.

For example some uncanny comparsions between 1and3, is the basic parallels which they have, such as there's a party at the start, (the wedding, part 1, the church's recog. of michael, part 3), michael is a mirror image of his father, vito, in terms of morals etc, michael like his dad, is hospitalised, by the consquences of his buisness, there, like barzini, is a young, celebrity gangster, Joey Sasa is backed by a close friend and business partner of michael, and similar to part 1, an assanation plot is carried out. A new don comes to power in Vinny, like michael.;0;1;False tt0099674;mzygel;01/09/2003;Great ending;10;Despite some comments you may read, this movie is as good as the first two and in some ways is better. Al Pacino is superb as Michael Corleone as is Andy Garcia as Vincent Mancini. The only thing that I miss from the other films is Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen.;0;1;False tt0099674;Sfpsycho415;03/08/2003;Very underrated;7;Sure it's not better than the first two, but it still beats a lot of the crap out there now. Al Pacino is great in this movie and Andy Garcia's character Vincent is a refreshing addition. Lots of violence and emotion are packed into this movie that should have been more recognized than it was. My only complaint was Sofia Coppola's sometimes wooden acting, but she did OK. I would recommend it to anyone who loved the first two.;0;1;False tt0099674;huthut85;05/08/2003;Unjustly maligned...;8;Having rewatched this film last night I thought I would post my feelings on it after revaluation.

I would now rate it as being a better film than its 7.2 rating reflects, but I can see why people are so hard on it because all of this films problems were completely self inflicted.

Firstly, skimping on the 2m dollars extra it would have cost to cast Robert Duval as Hagen is just an unforgivable blunder and a horrible example of greed over art. Duval's character would have given the movie a depth and a link to the first two that was sorely missing. Connie and Kay had the emotional family aspect

covered but every scene that involved business was almost sucked into the void left by Hagen.

Secondly the casting. Gee-whiz. I think enough has been said about Sofia's casting as Mary - its essentially

pointless to elaborate other than to say it was horrible. Also the actor playing Vicent just didn't do it for me. He displayed no depth whatsoever...that may have been deliberate but if so it was a mistake.

BUT...on the positive side, I thought the writing was again excellent, the story was intricate and bloody in keeping with the Godfather tradition and the

directing was again visually plush and rich and always moved at the right pace.

And then there's Pacino. *moment of speechless awe* One of his last great performances before the 'Scent of a Women' Oscar ruined his career.

Lastly, the ending was the best ending of any of the The Godfather films. When Kay and Connie look over at Michael as he screams in anguish they both have

an expression of shocked understanding as if all his actions are finally

explained - as if after all of the years they are truly seeing him for the very first time. Its a beautiful ending.

I'd give it, in IMDB ratings 8.0/10.;0;1;False tt0099674;torquemama2002;02/08/2003;About as good as J.Lo in an 8mm porno film;;"And that may be worth losing! The Godfather, Part III should have never been made. It only shows that nepotism is alive and well in Hollywood. Sofia Coppola had all the charisma of a headless corpse. No offense to the corpse, but when she mumbled the line ""I don't know how to cook"" to Andy Garcia, Mama Celeste turned in grave. Hello! You're Italian and you don't know how to cook?! Mary Corleone is the reason why so many 3rd world chefs are cooking in many metropolitan Italian restraunts today!!!

Another reason this moving stinks of Gigli is Al Pacino. He still hasn't let the screaming general die from ""Scent of a Woman"". I don't know if Scent of a Woman came before or after GF3 BUT WHO CARES!

In short, this movie is an abomination. Much like the aborted child of Michael and Kay Corleone. FFC, please, give it a rest!";0;1;False tt0099674;LeThAlWeApOn389;18/07/2003;The perfect ending to a perfect series (SPOILERS);9;I'll tell you the truth. This was without a doubt, the worst Godfather film ever made. But you were shown how Michael Corleone ends up at the end. If you think all the way back to the first, he wasn't even supposed to be the Godfather. He was going to live a fruitful life with his great wife but then his brother died who was supposed to take the job as the Don when his father died. Michael never saw this coming. And he ended up doing the best he could yet the job and pressure got to him. His wife hates him, he had to kill his other brother and his wife killed his son soon to be. In this movie you see how incredibly exhausted, angry and sad of what he had done. He wonders and asks God how well he did as the Godfather. He questins his fate. In my opinion, I thought he did great as the Godfather. All he had to do was listen to Tom Hagen. Robert Duvall was fantastic in the Godfather movies. Tom Hagen was the backbone of the family and if he didn't listen to him the whole family goes down and since he did listen to him the family didn't turn out as bad as it did. But the first and second movie was better but this was definitely the perfect ending for these movies.;0;1;True tt0099674;gibsoncraig;14/07/2003;"""Once you go in you'll never be able to go back""";8;"How do you top two of the most acclaimed films of all time? If you are writing a sequel to them, the answer is likely...you don't. But in 1990 Francis Ford Coppola gave it his best shot in his collaborative work with Mario Puzo to create the third (and last) part of the God Father trilogy.

This third film brings with it a very different atmosphere from the previous two, but a large part of that is that due to the lapse of nearly two decades between the previous sequel. ""God Father III"" is a film of tremendous worth though it does suffer several weaknesses. First I think Coppola lost a lot of series momentum by waiting 16 years to film the concluding episode (A mistake duplicated by George Lucas with his ""Star Wars"" prequels). The returning cast (though a joy to see again) struggled to recapture their old personas with a script over- burdened in very complex Byzantine politics. Another weakness is Coppola's over zealous attempt to underline Michael's quest for redemption. Yes redemption is an appropriate theme for a person such Michael's character, but every screen moment for Pacino is weighed down by his Coppola-imposed ""obligation"" to show his continuous, undying contrition. A scene I think Coppola thought was one of the best (Michael's speech to Dom Tominsino's casket) is actually one of most pointless moments of the film. The screen play is also plagued by a number of very awkward lines (very disappointing given the pedigree of the cast)..Kay's ""You became my nightmare"" was bad,and Connie's ""They will fear you now"" to Michael was very awkwardly delivered, but Mary's calm,proclaimed ""Dad?"" with 9mm gunshot wounds to the chest may have needed the most serious review by the screen editors. The other weakness, pointed out in several IMDB reviews, was Coppola's decision to make Godfather III a ""family affair"". Obviously sister Talia Shire is part of the ""God Father"" institution, and Sophia Coppola tired her best, but a film of this magnitude can't afford to play favorites in it's casting and production. (It's ironic that incest plays a role in the script!) Despite it's flaws, God Father III is certainly a worth while piece. Coppola was able to bring back most of the characters (those who hadn't been killed in the series) while introducing a new protagonist in the character of Vinny Corleone, played brilliantly by a young Andy Garcia. The over all theme of redemption for Michael was also an interesting study, (His garden confession being the most substantive), but again how much further could a man who had his brother killed fall? Even though Michael in his heart may have wanted redemption, he really never does much to ""get out"" of the World he entered as a young man. But again that is what Coppola wanted to emphasize in this coup' de grace of the Coreleone dynasty.";0;1;False tt0099674;SuperDaveMader;04/07/2003;Lacks the magic of the first two films;7;I enjoyed the film, I thought parts of it were unrealistic and unconsistent with the Godfather theme. The whole cousin incest thing was very weird. I still beleived that this film was good and a unique way to end the story, but they could have done without it.;0;1;False tt0099674;JohnnyCNote;21/05/2003;Initially intriguing, ultimately disappointing...;6;"I was unsure of what to expect of Godfather III. For me, the last great movie Coppola made was Apocalypse Now. His subsequent works, while as technically flawless as any living director's work today, have lacked importance and impact.

I long ago realized the essentially mythological nature of the Godfather movies, but the first two were at least entertaining and featured great ""Coppola"" look. (If you want to see something authentic, watch Goodfellas or Casino, or even the Sopranos.) But the Michael Corleone of Godfather III seemed like a different character. He was a lot more like Tony Montana from Scarface than the Michael from Godfather I and II. He had lost his refined, understated manner and gotten gruffer and craggy. Some of this might be attributed to the aging process, but not to this degree.

The idea of a Mafia don occupying a position analogous to royalty or a statesman is ludicrous, but it can make for an entertaining movie. Unfortunately, this does not carry through the entirety of the film. Up until the time Michael and his family travel to Sicily it kept my interest, but during the final, overly long opera scene I simply wished it would end.

There were other problems too, particularly with the film's timing. If we are to believe that this takes place in the time it was actually made, 1990, Michael would have to be about 70 years old (look at the cars, which are all of that time frame). I arrive at this by estimating his age in the Godfather I, which took place around 1945, as 25, meaning he was born around 1920. When he dies, he looks a LOT older than 70, or even 80, yet the movie does not indicate that 10 or 20 years have passed.

Perhaps I'm being a bit too picky, and with most any other director I'd agree. But this is Francis Ford Coppola, one of the best directors living today, so I find it not unreasonable to put his work under the microscope.

We are left with the clear impression that Andy Garcia was being set up as the next don, and I'm sure that there will eventually be a Godfather IV. I can only hope that it's not as disappointing as this I found the third installment to be. As far as Coppola goes, I once had the occasion to communicate with a close associate of his. He claimed that Coppola had been very deeply affected by the death of his son, which would explain a lot. Let us hope that he can find a way to overcome his grief and give us a movie truly representative of his immense talents.....";0;1;False tt0099674;mechbacan;19/05/2003;The End;10;May be is not as great as the other two parts, but for me is the only way to understand what really happen with Michael. I think that these part is more and more a human part of the trilogy and it doesn't have that big family Mafia thing, we learn that revenge can turn against us (almost every time). May be is all these that people doesn't like that much. I liked. for me is the only possible end, The End.;0;1;False tt0099674;sungwon444;21/03/2003;I'm tired of all these bad reviews. Godfather Part III is a worthy end to the sequel!!;9;"I'm going to be short with my comments...

I would just like to say that I'm tired of hearing all these horrible, negative reviews about The Godfather part III. While I respect everyone's opinions, It's just hard to comprehend how people could trash this beatiful and high-drama movie.

Is there that much of a difference and deviation with this movie and Godfather Part I, and II? Francis Ford coppola stays genuine to his style of directing, and the writing for this script was great, while the cinemotography was amazing, and the storyline was intruiging. There isn't too much of a difference between The Godfather Part III and the other ones, so I don't see why critics find this one conspiciously different from the first two.

I actually thought The Godfather Part III was better than Godfather Part II.

Godfather Part I was the best by far. It's a perfect, beautiful movie that astounds me every time i watch it. I love the storyline that Michael Corleoni evaded the family's ""business affairs"" in the beginning, but then as the family was dwindling, he assumed responsibility and the RISE of Michael Corleoni begun. AL Pacino is amazing in this movie and so is Marlon Brando's. ****

Godfather Part II- A worthy sequel, but fell short for several reasons. The storyline is complex and obscure. The ""business"" references are odd and almost nonexistent. And most of all, the suspense and the tension is not there, unlike Godfather Part I. Nevertheless, i liked this movie. I thought the flashbacks to the young Veto Corleoni was awesome. While Veto Corleoni was justful and on the rise....Michael Corleoni was suspiciosly unmerciful and on the DECLINE...as he lost Fredo, Kay....***

Godfather Part III- definitely a good end to the trilogy. The suspense and tension is back in this one. It is interesting how Michael Corleoni has matured since his days in the Godfather Part II. He is reconnecting with his family and searching deep within his soul. He repents for his wrongdoings (very powerful scene)...and concedes his trust in Andy garcia, the new godfather in case anything happens. ***1/2";0;1;False tt0099674;djo_9897;05/03/2003;Suffering From Expectations;7;"A writer and a producer/director combine to create a story that produces not one, but two of the greatest movies ever made, both legendary cinematic classics, and the only movie and its sequel to both win the Oscar for best picture. Then, 16 years later, it is announced that a final movie, the last chapter in the trilogy, is being released to complete the story. Of course, the expectations for this movie will be tremendously high, so high that anything less than a spectacular film will be written off as a disappointment. This is the atmosphere that ""The Godfather: Part III"" was introduced into, an almost impossible situation that even a good movie was destined to fail in. Which is exactly what ""Part III"" is: a good movie. Taken on it's own, this a good film, with some fantastic actors (Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Diane Keaton), a compelling story, and well directed. Of course, the problem this movie suffers from is it can't be taken on its own. Presented using most of the same characters, and as the final chapter in one of the most loved film story lines of all time, comparisons to ""The Godfather"" and ""The Godfather: Part II"" are inevitable, and this is where ""Part III"" suffers. It is not the equal of either of the first two movies; not that this would normally be a tragic sin, as 99.9% of all films are not the equal of the first two movies. But the buildup of 16 years since ""Part II"" had been released, plus the general expectations surrounding anything to do with ""The Godfather"" saga, are too much for this film to overcome. ***1/2 out of *****";0;1;False tt0099674;courty61;19/01/2003;It Isn't THAT bad! (minor spoilers- i think);;The fact that people always state- oh godfather part 3 , that was bad, all because of sofia coppola- is wrong. Ok, shes not the best actor in the world nor is she the worst.

Anyway- the story is good, it shows that Michael must try to live his life knowing of what he has done. Its more about redemption of him, for him knowing the fact that HE 'killed' his brother.

This movie is good. Vastly over-rated, ok its not as good as part 1 or 2, but that is down to the fact that those two films along with the shawshank redemption are the best films ever made! On its own it's a great movie but as a Godfather movie it's only good. This is because mainly of the people who couldn't work on this picture. For example if Robert Duvall was in it as Tom Hagen, the picture would have been a lot better. And if Winona Ryder was in it as she should have been, then it would have been much better.

However, they are not (sadly), but we still have a great movie. A fitting end in my opinion to the greatest story of all time. And thats what the 3 films are together as a story.;0;1;True tt0099674;GuitarGod75;05/01/2003;Unbelievably underrated...;;"I finally broke down and bought the godfather trilogy. I don't know why it took me so long to get to it, but i always knew i would love it. However...everyone always says ""1 and 2 are great....but 3 sucks"".. ....what the hell....I thought the third installment in the trilogy was amazing. Other than the casting of Sofia Coppola, I don't think it could have been any better.

It may be a very different film from 1 and 2, but it is supposed to be. It is set in a completely different time, with the values of the previous movies clashing against the newer times. but with all it's differences, it still holds true to the reoccurring themes of the previous 2. I think that people should be a little more open minded towards this movie. it is, in my opinion, the best third installment in any trilogy to date.";0;1;False tt0099674;steppenwolf1980;10/12/2002;Miguelotto, tu me capiscio?;;I've seen recently the film, and I have to say that is not so good than the first, cause that's a classical one(with an incredible Brando),but I think it's better than the godfather II, which was very slow in it's rhythm, and the only thing I liked from that one was when de Niro appeared. I just wanna say one more thing, my best favourite scenes of the three films are: 1.When Michael is in the bar with Mckluskey and Sollozo.(THE GODFATHER)

2.Michael's shout at the end of the Godfather III.;0;1;False tt0099674;dnasstrom;25/11/2002;End of an era;;It might not be a masterpiece like the first two movies, but still it´s a great movie. A nice portrait of the Corleone family. The ending might be the best thing about this movie, directed by Coppola in a dramatic and painful way...(Spoiler);0;1;True tt0099674;ricostrower;27/10/2002;Much better than part II;9;I had the opportunity of seeing the Godfather trilogy in a roll, and it became clear to me that Part I was a masterpiece, Part II missed the chemistry and pace the former had, and finally, Part III became a grand finale for the trilogy.

Of course, at the end of Part III, we see this trilogy could go on with the adventures of Vincent Corleone (Andy Garcia) heading the business in the family as the new Don. I doubt Francis would like to film it, but maybe Sofia Coppola will direct it someday. Who knows?

Anyway, this third effort was much better than Part II, especially cause it brought back the rhythm, and suspense lost on the second episode. Plus, on Part I we had a man transformed against his principles to protect his family, Part II is how he lost his family and himself over power and greed, and on Part III he tries to come back to his inner wills and mend all the mistakes he had done in his life. Of course, there's a price to pay...

The funniest thing is, if you listen to Coppola's comments in the DVD's extra audio band, you'll learn that on Part I he was being terribly pressured by the producers who even thought of firing him after the first week of shootings. On the other hand, on Part II, he had complete control of production, and maybe that lack of pressure tamed his direction. Also funny is the fact that Part II was the one that received more Oscars in tre trilogy. That's Hollywood! Or better, that's the way Awards are...;0;1;False tt0099674;leeftr;08/10/2002;A good movie;8;I enjoyed this movie, and liked the way it was linked to real-life events and the second Godfather movie.

*Possible spoiler Sofia Coppola is attacked for her performance in this movie. I didn't know whom the actress who played Mary was until AFTER I saw the movie, so I didn't have any preconceived notions about her performance. I thought she did an acceptable job, and brought an innocence to the part of Mary that made the ending even more tragic.;0;2;True tt0099674;Hannan1988;04/10/2002;Blew me away;;I will keep this short, but this film has been doubted my a lot of people who say it was a dissapointing end to two great classics, but i thought this film was fantastic, it had everything to become the classic end to a great story, the finale kept me on the edge of my seat and i think it deserves a place in our collection (it did in mine!!);0;1;False tt0099674;kevhol2000;23/09/2002;Somewhere, there is a great movie in here...;6;"*Attention Spoilers*





""The Godfather: Part III"" is quite simply, one of the most misconceived films ever made. Its incredible the amount of love and effort put into a film that's so mediocre. It is like the black sheep of the family, much like the Fredo in the Corleone family. There is a lot to like about this movie, but it just doesn't jell together.

So, what's wrong? Well, I think one problem is that Coppola should have trusted his original instincts when it came to approaching this film. Coppola originally didn't even want to make this film have ""The Godfather"" in the title. All he wanted, was something conoctating that this was a film about Michael Corleone and his redemption. That's it. While this film is epic in scale, with elaborate set pieces and beautiful scenes, it would have been better to make this film a lot smaller, more personal. Just about all the scenes where Michael deals with his enemies, although they are entertaining, have a been there/done that feel to them. They all feel like Coppola was trying to make an epic even greater than the first two films. Instead, he made a film that seemed strangely impersonal and distant (even though the true subject matter of this film is far from it).

Case in point, take the first long scene, where we meet all the characters again in Michael's party celebrating his charity donations. In the first two films, the long opening scenes had a symbolic significance. The first film's wedding, demonstrated the great Italian cultural heiritage present in the Corleone life. The second film's party, showed Michael's continuing distance from his heiritage, through his acceptance and approval of typical American norms and behaviors. So, my question is, what significance does this first long scene in the third film have? It seems to me, that the only reason this was done, was just because it was done in the last two films. There's no need for a scene like this, it was well established in the last film that Michael destroyed his relationships in order to achieve absolute power. This film should have been about Michael trying to rekindle these fragile relationships (which, in a way it is). Therefore, the introduction of all these new characters, just get in the way of what the film is truly about.

At least though, this first party scene is well filmed and entertaining. The final sequence, the typical montage of violent events that occurs in all these films, is so confusing and inept, that you kind of wonder if Coppola even cared about it.

There are though, very many things to like about this film. It is pretty entertaining on a visceral level. I liked the villians of this film, they were well played, even though I feel that they were unnecessary to the story. Andy Garcia is wonderful as Sonny's bastard son, and Al Pacino and Diane Keaton are great together, and both give great performances. But...

Man, Sophia Coppola is BAD. She is awful. Its strange, because she is such an important character. You have to give Coppola credit though, because she was a risk. By casting a nonactress in this role, Coppola was trying (I think) to show a person of complete innocence and their relationship with a father who they think the best of (which is far from the truth). She is like Jar Jar Binks in this way, a failure that is noble just because it was a risk, though misconceived she was. But, I wish I could say she was a bad actress, at least then there would be something to analyze. But she almost seems like an extra even when doing emotional lines. She doesn't even act, which is the worst thing you could ever say about a performance. I heard that Wyona Ryder was originally cast in this role. Obviously, that choice was a lot better, but what are you gonna do?

Also, the actor that plays Michael's son fares little better. Its not really his fault though. The idea that he would become the star of an Italian opera, just getting out of school, is really ridiculous. Also, for a guy who's so important to the story, he sure has a small part! I wish there was some way they could have gotten Robert Duvall to come back, because Tom Hagen, really my favorite character in the whole Godfather saga, is sorely missed.

Still, I'm giving this film a 6. I think its because it is entertaining, and the scenes where Michael comes into grips with his sins, and tries for reconciliation, are powerful moments overwise sorely missing in this film.

Score: 6 Grade: B-";0;1;True tt0099674;iris_dews;16/08/2002;A redemption for Michael Corelone;9;"Although I understand there were many people out there thinking that the third Godfather movie was nothing compare to the first and second ones, I still think the third one really got to me. The Godfather III is a good conclusion for Michael Corelone's descent to an endless life of Mofia and his attempt for redemption. His famous quote:""Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in!"" is my favourite. I thought the death of Mary was a very cruel punishment for Michael who cherishes his daughter. It's as if it is a punishment for his guilt of killing his own brother. The all-mighty Don Michael Corelone fell with absolute anguish and sorrow seeing his own daughter dying in his arms. Al Pacino protrayed the desperate Michael right on target. Sofia Coppola is a lovely Mary, and Andy Garcia is a great addition to the cast as the bastard son of Sonny. I especially love the part when Michael was yelling at Vincent that he was just like his own father Sonny because of their temper. The third part of Godfather wrapped up everything and left us all with a hanging heart hoping for a Godfather IV...";0;1;False tt0099674;dirx;14/08/2002;That final scene! (SPOILERS!);;"!!! SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS !!!

Yes, this is a typical Part-3-Movie: The characters are hollow and mere shadows of Part I and II. BUT THIS FINAL SCENE!!! Michael's daughter dies, and his outcry will not leave his chest for what seems an endless time; everybody is paralysed with terror, not only because of the murder, but because Michael's soul is being ripped into pieces before their eyes; finally he is able to scream with his last ounce of strength and collapses... This overwhelming, terrifying expression of unbearable pain on his face! If this were the only scene with Pacino I know I would call him an immortal genius. It is equal even to Marlon Brando's performance in ""L'ultimo tango"" and, to me, the peak of Pacino's career. This scene alone is able to make Part III a worthy ending for the saga.";0;1;True tt0099674;plsj;17/07/2002;Overall, I enjoyed it but.............;8;there are two problems with this movie and its the same two most everyone here has mentioned. I was hoping Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen would reprise his role, and Sofia Coppola, despite being very beautiful, gives an extremely poor performance. She would not have had the chance to play in this movie if it was made 3 or 4 years after the 2nd one. The ending was very dramatic. 8/10;0;1;False tt0099674;wisDOM87;29/06/2002;An unfairly treated film;;After having read so many negative things about this movie, I was a bit worried that it might ruin the Godfather saga. How wrong I was. Part III is a worthy addition to the saga and has being unfairly treated by various film critics and fans.You really feel for Michael Corleone as he tries to completly eradicate the shadows of his criminal past and move on to be respectable.The film interweaves this with a shady conspiracy dealing with the Vatican and the murder of the reformist Pope John Paul I.However unbelievable this may sound, it has it's roots in real life.As the film goes on, you see how Michael has changed from a murderous near-tyrant to a older more human person.***MINOR SPOILERS FOLLOW***A very beautiful and emotional part in part III is when Michael's son, Anthony, plays a love song in Italian on an acoustic guitar.The scene is mixed in with footage from part I at Michael's wedding.It's a very poignant scene and is not only the best in the film, but one of the best in the saga.***END SPOLERS*** The film is not without it's faults, however.Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone is awful in all her scenes.I cringed every time she appeared and she would of ruined the movie had it not been for the excellence to be found elsewhere. All in all, The Godfather Part III is a brilliant film.Don't listen to the critics and watch the film.You won't be disappointed.;0;1;True tt0099674;bo-selecta;25/06/2002;a sense of closure in the evolution of Michael Corleone;;"Ok, so it doesn't quite compare to the first two films in the trilogy. But then again what third movie instalment ever has (eg Return of the Jedi, Alien3, Back to the Future Pt 3, etc)? So yes, it is a bit of a let-down. But in terms of narrative scope, mis-en-scene, music, cinematography & design, it is almost flawless.

I say almost, because there are a few obvious problems: 1. The non-inclusion of Tom Hagen, a crucial character who was killed off when Robert Duvall turned the film down. 2. The ""kissing cousins"" sub-plot - unnecessary, and as Don Michael Coreleone says himself: ""its wrong...and its dangerous."" 3. Remember the line: ""Hey cuzz...""? Does it send a shudder up your spine? Because its a reminder of how Sophia Coppolas sub-par performance almost wrecked the film. Actually, she was a last minute replacement for Winona Ryder, who at the time had suffered a nervous breakdown - perhaps she needed some ""retail therapy"" to recover? heheheh....

Anyway,the film does tie together the Corleone saga together quite nicely, bringing the viewer a sense of and closure and finality. Pacino - as per usual - is superlative as he chronicles Michael's search for redemption. The scene in the Sicilian dining room with his wary ex-wife Kay (an understated and underrated performance from Diane Keaton) really evokes a sense of regret, and ultimately forgiveness. It is quite emotionally draining whilst simultaneously profound, as is the scene in the picturesque garden as Michael confesses his sins to the priest.

Part 1 saw Michael as a sensitive, obedient young man who was initially unwilling to carry on his father's mantle. Part 2 sees him as a cold, omnipotent leader who shuts himself off from both his enemies and his loved ones. By Part 3 he has become vulnerable, falliable and all too human, as he tries to change both his professional and family lives.. but as in most crime films, your past indiscretions always come back to haunt you...

In a nutshell, not as superb as the first two, but a damn fine film nonetheless, 8/10. If you've seen the first two - you must complete the set!";0;1;False tt0099674;amrieu;14/06/2002;"a feeling of ""déjà vu"".";6;I have nothing special to reproach this film with because it is quite entertaining but not as vibrant as the previous ones. Everything is built so that we remember the previous parts of the Godfather and the real pleasure is only to find again people we have already seen. Some of the scenes, especially the one at the Italian feast with the procession which really reminds us with Vito's story is too close to the one previously seen. When you saw the three parts quite closely in time you really have a feeling of `déjà vu' which suppresses the suspense. Things here seems too superficial and put together only to answer all the questions we could have had in the previous films : how it was possible to act like that with Fredo, how Michael was feeling with his first wife and then with Kay. But, any of us could have made nearly the same answers and while in part II things seemed a bit too hard, here things seem a bit too nice – with respect to people feeling. For me, the only good part of the film is the enigma around the Vatican, which is inspired by a real life fact. The film gives its own interpretation of it and it is rather pleasant. Michael's daughter is a bit empty and the relationship between Michael and his children sounds more or less queer.;0;1;False tt0099674;superboy478;02/06/2002;The Trilogy of the 20th Century;6;From Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola, The Godfather Part III was what declared the couple into a trilogy. This time, the story is even more intense and dramatic than the other two movies.

A dying Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) decides that he is tired of business and wants to spend the rest of his remaining days at his fathers home in Italy. So he and his family move from New York to Italy while Michael hands the business over to his nephew (Andy Garcia).

Produced by Mario Puzo (Superman), and directed by Francis Ford Coppola (Jack, The Outsiders). The Godfather Part III marks the end of a great era of filmmaking and movies.

Starring: Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Diane Keaton, Sofia Coppola, Eli Wallache, Talia Shire, George Dzunda.;0;2;False tt0099674;kiran_bahl;03/08/2001;Okay, Now I'm In Love...;10;Can you believe the 3rd part in a trilogy can be BETTER than the first two!?! Godfather: Part III proves this with ease. I could watch the three parts anytime, and always notice something different and new. Al Pacino is of course the central, main character, and no one could've done a better job. I have bought all Godfather memoribilia now and am loyal to this epic!!;0;1;False tt0099674;mrjoojoobean;31/07/2001;The story comes full circle;;"Just to get this out of my system, i'm going to yuk it up about the Sophia casting call by suggesting they should have replaced Andy Garcia with Nicholas Cage. Har! But seriously, I understood the fact that Coppola was trying to capture a photo gallery of her progression by casting Sophia a part in all three movies. But uhhhhh, with all close feelings aside, did you really think she was the most appropriate person to take up such a vital role?

Quick note about the movie- Obviously what people have been coming around to realize is that the Godfather III is a last act in a complete parable about the consequences of taking such a destructive path in life. It comes full circle in the end, consuming Micheal Corleonne and everything he knows. If you reference back to the Godfather part one, Vito's face fell in silent agony when he learned that Micheal had taken up the mafia mantle. He wanted Micheal to stay clean and run a be a legitimate leader; to provide a link for which Vito could break free of his past. But he also knew that Micheal was the best suited of his sons to be successful in carrying on family affairs (much to his impending feeling of doom). Vito knew the consequences of his lifestyle. It consumed his sons, his family, and the grandchildren that would follow. The sins of the fathers were visited down upon the coming generations. And it consumed and destroyed them. The whole thing plays out like a modern day Shakespearean. Bravo.";0;1;False tt0099674;ilkercatak;19/06/2001;I don't understand why...;;I really have no idea why Godfather Part 3 is rated that bad? To my mind part 3 is even better than part 2. Maybe it is because of the date the film was made: 1990...it is possible that people are sick of Mafia-Films and don't like that kind of film anymore. I think Andy Garcia actually was the best choice that could be made as THE NEW DON! He is handsome, courageous and dynamic. But I cannot say that part 3 can be compared to part 1. The mafia ambiance is still there but Al Pacino is trying to become legal with his business. This may be the only point to critic the movie. All in all I think it is a movie that should be watched if you are a fan of mafiafilms. My personal rating: 8.5/10;0;1;False tt0099674;jambuba;04/05/2001;Just as good, if not better;10;Contains one small spoiler

Earlier this year, I had decided I had lived enough of my life not to see the Godfather trilogy (since I was not even a thought when they first came out!) so over the span of a month I watched all three. They are all AWESOME films. And I have to say, the third one is the best. It finished the movies up and gave a much closer look into what Michael (AL Pacino) was thinking.

Yes the third is very different from the first two but that is how it should be. Unlike the first two Michael is trying to truly come clean. The one thing that hurt this movie was the weak sub-plot about the Vatican funds etc. They didn't really explain it well enough and so me as the viewer could care less about what was happening and it was a big part of the movie.

The biggest part of the movie though is definintly the view on the family, just as the first two were. The family evolved in each and every movie. I wish they would make a fourth one with Vincent as the new Don. But sadly that wont ever be happening. Don't just see this movie. See the entire trilogy, even if you have seen it before. And don't expect it to be just like the first to, because it is not, a different message is being conveyed in the third one. The message of forgivness and repentance and how the evils of the past come back to haunt you.;0;1;True tt0099674;sehguhc19;07/04/2001;A great film with some minor, yet pivotal flaws.;;`Just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in,' exclaims an exasperated Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) after learning that his family was lured back into the tangled web of the mafia. It was now 1979 and the Corleone family had been legitimate for several years until they were forced to regain their status as an active mafia family, due to the fear of Michael being assassinated. Director Francis Ford Coppola's saga of the Corleone crime family is brought to a close in this film, The Godfather Part III. In this final installment, Coppola explores an aging Michael, who comes to terms with the wrong he has incurred upon his loved ones and even himself. It also profiles how Michael steps down as the Godfather and hands his reign to Sonny's illegitimate son, Vincent (Andy Garcia). The film also contrasts with the others in terms of Michael and his wife, Kay (Diane Keaton) renewing their relationship and Michael giving up his role as Godfather .

In The Godfather Part II, the once strong bond between Michael and Kay was shattered. Michael had alienated her from his personal life and Kay had rebelled against everything that he had stood for. He took their children away and completely (both emotionally and literally) shut her out of his life. In Part III, they slowly regained some of their bond after they had been divorced (and Kay remarried) for several years. For example, when their son Anthony decided that he wants nothing to do with `the family' and that he wants to quit law school and become an opera singer, Kay goes to Michael to discuss that she wants to let him do this. Michael initially disagrees, but then gives his support because he sees how promising his career is (he was invited to sing at a prestigious Sicilian opera house), that he is very passionate about singing and that his not wanting to be in the family echoed what Michael's original plan was. Kay thanked him profusely for this, and strengthened their bond. Also, after learning that his family was once again involved in the mob, Michael had a diabetic stroke and was ultimately hospitalized. When Kay visited him, she remarked that that was the only time when he appeared helpless to her, and less of a threat as he was in the other parts of the saga. They identified more with each other at this time, and it made Kay realize that he wasn't as bad as she had originally thought. Lastly, their bond was strengthened when they united in Sicily to see their son perform. As Kay got into a cab, Michael, disguised as a cab driver, turned around with a friendly `Bonjourno' and gave Kay an insider's tour of his homeland, Sicily. He did this without his usual entourage of bodyguards, and at a time when his life was on the line, this was a great risk made merely to pleasure Kay. Later in his room, they revealed to each other that they always loved each other and Michael revealed that the worst mistake he made in life was letting her go. He came to terms with his existence and tried to mend what was still salvageable in their relationship.

The Godfather told the story of Michael's ascension into the role of Godfather after his father Vito died. Directly parallel was the story told in the third installment, when Michael gave up his role as Godfather. He was growing older and was a diabetic, and was also disgusted with the life that he had led for a great deal of years. He saw Vincent as a vital and loyal member of his family who was able to run the family. The story told in part three, in my opinion, was a too obvious vehicle of making Michael's position parallel to Vito's and did not have the emotional impact equal to that in part one. Vincent was a one-dimensional character, a combination of the best aspects of Michael and his brother Sonny, who, I think, did not prove himself worthy of being Michael's successor. However, Michael appreciated Vincent's undying loyalty to him and that he had the capacity to care for his family. Vincent's future position was way too obvious from the minute he walked onto the screen because he had no other purpose at Michael's party.

So was The Godfather Part III a mediocre end the perfect saga? I happen to think so. The basic plot line of Michael getting pulled back into the harsh world of the mafia was an intriguing one, but the details were hazy and the supporting characters were vague and one-dimensional. I consider myself to be an observant film viewer, but I found myself at times getting lost to why some of the details were taking place. The film lost a lot of integrity via the actors cast in pivotal roles. The worst actor in the film (possibly ever) was Sofia Coppola, who played Michael's daughter Mary Corelone. She had a very important role and basically deadpanned all of her lines. In her death scene, she simply flat-lined, `Daddy?' and collapsed. I felt bad for Michael, but couldn't help laughing at her horrifically bad performance. Another example of a bad actor in a pivotal role is George Hamilton, who played Michael's new lawyer, B.J. Harrison. He tried to replace Robert Duval's excellent performance as Tom Hagan, but failed miserably. Instead of being the rock that Michael could depend on, he ultimately became `the boring guy'. My least favorite part of the film was Mary's affair with her cousin, Vincent. Besides being poorly acted by Sofia, this was a pointless vehicle for Vincent to give her up to show his allegiance to Michael. Coppola (Francis Ford ) should have found a better way to prove this because it was, quite frankly, sickening. There were many good points to the film as well. I found it satisfying that Michael came to terms with all of the crimes he had executed and that he was conscious of all the lives he had affected. I loved the way he patched his issues up with Kay and ultimately confessed that he never wanted to be Godfather in the first place. In part two, Coppola portrayed him as being relatively cold and unfeeling, but I enjoyed that in part three, we were reminded of his emotional core as portrayed in part one. I also liked that uncovered aspects of the previous films were touched upon, and that they were all cohesive. The third installment was created merely to bring closure to Godfather buffs. When compared to the other two, The Godfather Part III was in fact a mediocre movie and that fans and critics alike expected another brilliant masterpiece. When compared to any other film, it would be better than the rest.;0;1;False tt0099674;noledge;10/03/2001;ALTHOUGH IT HAD A LOT TO LIVE UP TO.....;10;....I have just finished watching the final chapter in my favorite film trilogy of all time. The Godfather. After watching the first two films, and bathing in there brilliance, I read some very negative comments on The Godfather P:III. These were mainly in the shape of Sophia Coppola's bad acting, but to be honest, I found her acting to be realistic and convincing. The plot of the third film centers around the aging Michael Corleone and his attempts to legitimise his bussiness and find a successor to his empire. This successor comes in the from of Vincent Mancini (Lucy Mancini's and Sonny Corleone's son) portrayed wonderfully by Andy Garcia. But Vincents violent ways of doing things soon pull Michael back into the dark and violent world of the mafia.

This film is a brilliant conclusion to an epic saga. Puzo's and Coppola's script holds the viewer for all 163 minutes. The acting, like all Godfather films, is top notch. Especially Al Pacino, who should have won an oscar for his preformance. It's also nice to see old faces such as Kay, Johnny Fontain, Connie and Al Neary. All though the film is long, you really don't notice it at all, and I thought that the film could have been twice as long. I read elsewhere on the site from a comment that said 'This would be a good staging for The Godfather P:IV, with Vincent running things, while further developing the relationships between Michael, his wife and their son'. But I veiwed the special directors cut version, and from the ending I saw, how could this be possible?

With incredible directing, brilliant acting and an unforgettable ending, The Godfather P:III, all though not a good as its predecesors, is a marvellous film, which beautifully ends an epic saga and is an absolute must for all Godfather and Al Pacino fans alike.

My Rating: 8/10;0;1;False tt0099674;osano187;23/02/2001;America's favorite bad guy turns good;7;This movie is a must see for all Pacino fans. The Godfather Part III has a good plot but it doesn't follow the other two Godfather stories. You must see the first two Godfather movies first to get the most out of the third one. Good movie, but not up to godfather standards.;0;1;False tt0099674;markwilson;24/02/2001;By far Pacino's greatest performance;9;I have had a luxury that few people have. I have never been exposed to The Godfather series until this past week, when I have rented and watched all three of films. While I feel Godfather I is the best of the 3, and number 2 is also a very strong movie, Godfather III was by far the most intriguing of the trilogy. There is something very special about this film. The contrast of Catholic redemption and Michael's attempts to better himself is enthralling. The use of opera to bring about the tragic end of the movie and the Corleone empire. The then 18 year old actress Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone, who brings about a sweet innocence to the film, who frankly I fell in love with from the moment I saw that scene with Michael dancing with her. Lastly, the tragic Shakespeareanesque ending brings the Corleone family to its final end. Yes, Coppola and Puzo impressed me in their third outing. I have seen the negative comments about this film, and it's the same old garbage you always see concerning sequels. People always try to compare them to the original movie, and in the process they miss out on the great work of art that the sequel is. Lastly, I must say that Pacino was at his greatest in this film. I never thought of him as in the same league as people like DeNiro or Brando, even after watching the first 2 films. But this film changed my mind forever. He brought Michael Corleone to a level rarely achieved by any actor in any movie, much less a sequel, and he has my utmost respect, and I agree with another reviewer who said it was a shame he was passed for an Oscar. But there's nothing new under the sun there, as the Academy hasn't learned anything about rewarding truly great performances.;0;2;False tt0099674;Badra Films;13/01/2001;The very best and renewed Godfather;;"It was a huge mistake to watch Kevin Costner getting all the Oscars racing against this movie. Maybe 3 or 4 of the winning categories were just given to Dances with Wolves, even knowing that Godfather III was so much better. Although I´m a Godfather fan, this last movie was simply the best of them. Getting the best things from the past and adding some new twists, characters and more individual conflicts. It was not only ""mafia"" or criminals, it was a personal drama. It was the fighting of one man´s soul to get out of the dirt. Returning to the family values and searching for forgiveness on the church. Without noticing that even the church is in the same crime business. Are you looking for quality films?...this one is for you.";0;1;False tt0099674;jamee89;07/01/2001;Thriller over Musicals!;;"I have always been one who enjoys the `less violent' films of my generation and of course I can't forget the favorites of my grandparents and I, the infamous musicals. The films that you knew what was going to happen before it happened. The ones where you know who will end up together and the whole movie pertained to trying to win that special girls heart. Yes, those kinds of movies have always been my favorites. The choreography; singing and dancing. Tapping your foot along with the beat always made my day a little brighter. These kinds of movies I have always watched until The Godfather movie was placed before me. I was not asked to view this movie for pleasure but instead I was forced to watch it for a class, my grade depended on it. I must say that I have never seen anything like this before. The intense action, not knowing which way to turn, who to trust, who would betray next, made this movie one of my all time favorites. Not only do I get the love scenes but I get a thriller. A spine tingling action-packed movie. Couldn't ask for anything better. The performance of Al Pacino was magnificent. The way he brought out his character; the evil, deceitful deeds he preformed all in the name of his family, left me with an exact definition of what a Godfather, a Don, is like. Robert Duvall put on a fantastic show as the part of Tom Hagen. Tom was the faithful lawyer and a brother to the Corleone family. Robert helped to create the sense of suspicion in his character. Robert De Niro played an important role as Vito Corleone. His splendid job of letting the viewers have the ability to see the similarities between Michael and his father Vito, left me with a specific idea to how and why Michael was the way he was. The ability to see this, tied the family together in an formal way. The use of flashbacks into Michael's fathers life helped for me to see how this illegal institution arose and helped to make the certain connections that were not provided in The Godfather (1972). This movie is a fascinating piece to analyze and should be highly judged according to this affiliation. I need not mention the lighting styles that were chosen for this particular film. Very clever. The way the light reflected off of certain objects like the red rose upon Vito Corleone's chest, left me with the vision of blood. This film was dirty. It was a film where many killed, but they killed as if the individuals never existed in the first place. The darkness of the film left me with the sense that these people are evil. Either you are in the shadow of the Don, only the outline of your figure is visible, or you are a more important person in the life of the Don, in which you were `lighted' when it became necessary to deliver important information. I enjoyed both the Godfather movies, part one and two, but part two still continues to make the hair rise on my arms. I can watch it over and over and the effect that the movie has on me never changes. Even though I am not tapping my feet and singing along I definitely think that this is the greatest sequel ever made.";0;1;False tt0099674;djb8;01/12/2000;Entertaining, but...;6;I'm not breaking any new ground by saying that this one doesn't compare with the others. Taken on its own, it's an entertaining movie that, while not that well done, kept me engrossed enough to sit through nearly three hours.

Still, neither the acting, the directing, nor the writing matches up with Godfather I or II. There's no need to go into detailed complaints, but all told, this movie is fun but nothing special.;0;1;False tt0099674;matzucker;23/10/2000;Grand, yet underrated conclusion to a magnificent saga;8;"You might call this film redundant, after what the second part showed us in the end, but then, I guess, you'd also have to call the second part redundant, because the developments in ""The Godfather Part II"" were already alluded to at the end of the original. Therefore, Part III isn't bad at all.

It's not quite as successful as the first two, but that's simply because, throughout the movie, we get a sense of déja vu: ""I've seen that before!"" And you did, alright... But it still works, that formula of blood and gore, family traditions, shady meetings behind closed doors, politics and business... you know the routine. It's captivating, thrilling and suspenseful throughout, especially the opera sequence at the end, which can definitely measure up to the legendary baptism scene in the original. This is as good as directing gets. Period.

Sure, there are a few weak points in this film, one of which is Sofia Coppola, who simply can't carry the weight of the part she's given. But well, that's what happens when you cast your daughter (who happens to be a mediocre actress) in your movies. Ask Aaron Spelling!

Al Pacino shines as always in the part of his life, as does Diane Keaton, and several others. I would've wished for someone else than Andy Garcia, who's nothing like Pacino in the original, to play Vincent, but it's an OK choice, though.

Especially beautiful about this third part is that now the whole Corleone saga comes full circle with Michael's realization that crime just isn't the way to protect a family. The same thing his father realized before he chose Michael, his calmest, most considerate son, as his successor. Both learned their lesson the hard way and entrusted their empire to someone who'll most likely destroy it in the long run. Even Michael's final scene mirrors Vito's exit in the original.

Overall, a very fine film that, although not exactly in the league of its predecessors, is severely underrated and makes for a satisfying conclusion to the saga.

9 out of 10.";0;1;False tt0099674;Ash-127;27/06/2000;I really enjoyed this film;;I watched The Godfather III the other day and after reading and hearing all the negative comments I really wasn't expecting much but I felt compelled to watch it because I love the first two films in the trilogy and I needed to know what happened in the final installment.My god, was I blown away.....I thought this was a completely brilliant film and more than worthy to stand up to comparison between I and II. Andy Garcia WAS Sonny's son.I could actually see flashes of Caan in Garcia's performance.Ignore all that you hear about Sofia Coppolla, she really was fine and very well suited to the part.Pacino and Keaton also worked really well together.The story-line was very different and inventive and I thought the ending was heart breaking...........Watch this, it's very, very good;0;1;False tt0099674;DATo-2;24/06/2000;Aw Man , I've had it !!!;;I try not to spill my guts too often but when I do .... well....

I have read in these comments with gaping jaw how people actually think Winona Rider would have played a better daughter to the Don in 'Godfather III' than Sophia Coppola. I mean common are you guys kidding ? I love Winona Rider as an actress but ..... gimme a break here PUH-LEEEEASE !

Sofia Coppola got a bad rap in GodfatherIII from day one. I happen to be an American of Secilian parents and Secilian upbringing. I think she was PERFECTLY cast as the don's daughter. Since she is Francis Ford Coppola's daughter we are to assume that she was placed in the movie as a result of blatant nepotism .... WELL I DON'T AGREE ... I think F. F. Coppola has a pretty good idea of what he is doing and has proven that with his track record. He brought many many personal idea's to the filming of the original Godfather movie which enriched Puzo's story tremendously without altering it one iota. As I recall Coppola's wife designed the entire wedding segment in 'The Godfather' ... I have been to a LOT of Italian weddings and I challenge ANYONE to tell me that those scenes weren't PERFECT representations. I think F.F. Coppola hit a home run by casting his daughter in this film !

Sofia Coppola played that part in Godfather III and represented her character as well as it could have been presented. To give you an example of how stupidly other's would cast a film ... did you know that people in the industry actually argued that Robert Redford and Charles Bronson be considered for the role of Michael in Godfather I ???

If you MUST knock something then knock the Connie Carleone character. In the first two movies Connie Carleone Rizzi was an Italian American. In 'Godfather III' she becomes an American Italian. Talia Shire's acting was, as always, superb but she was way out of character (script knock here not knocking Talia) in Godfather III when you compare this character to the same character in first two movies.;0;1;False tt0099674;dust-7;31/05/2000;Good in part - but not necessarily as The Godfather;;"SPOILERS!

A good film, in two parts. If this had been the only Godfather ever released, it might have been up for the academy award. That's all on its own; particularly as it was a 1990 film, and films were starting to get a tad weaker, in general, by that point.

But it a) must not necessarily be seen as a sequel to the Godfather, and b) it might be seen as the most 'operatic' or Shakespearian of the bunch. It's not the sequel because it's no longer really the Puzo series, and the characters seem a bit different. The Godfather characters are sort of borrowed for this film, you could say. And I thought of classic drama and opera as soon as the assassin was introduced. He's sort of Shakespeare's simultaneously clumsy and comical competent killer.

What gets weird is the Vatican Bank story leeching into the election of JP I. We are to believe that Don Corleone has a private confession with the cardinal before he is elected Pope; and of course, the Don in short order goes ahead and orders the purge of assorted gangsters, just like he did in the previous film. But . . . And we are further to believe that an archbishop conspirator in the scandal literally poisoned the tea of JP I, and killed him. Now the poison in the drink is also the stuff of classic drama. And I'd take it for that. But as history, it seems laughable. Don Michael's order in the movie end purge literally includes this evil renegade archbishop, to the point of having some gunman lurking in the shadows shoot him, in the Vatican, as he walks up a winding staircase. The cardinal is seen plummeting over the side and falling down onto the worm's eye camera in the gallery below. Again - operatic, yes. Metaphorical fiction, sure. Characters as types even more than characters - yes. A Godfather I and II, not really. The play is the almost comical (yes, that's right) who gets 'hit' first, almost Shakespearian black comedy, as Ma Corleone goes for the other Don, the other Don goes for Don Michael, maybe the Pope, and the other Corleones hit the hitters, and so on. It all happens simultaneously, as the bunch sit there watching the opera. You have the quick cut to the action happening elsewhere (which is a Godfather trademark technic, to be fair).

I said two parts because the best part seems all these scenes when the family goes to Italy. I think it might have been much better if they'd gone easy on the old mob stuff, frankly, cut out much of the first part, and gone quicker to Italy, stayed with the story there longer, and developed the estrangment and reconciling of father and son - which brought the cast to Italy, to the opera. That part not only isn't developed, it's pretty much not even present - which is a little startling. The final revenge is just sort of dashed off, even after a private confession with the man soon to become Pope. That's just forgotten. That's hard to believe. It might have benefitted from a little of the emoting of the Don's final scream as dear Mary is accidentally shot by the goofy but dangerous assassin, rather than just a calm - hey, let's get revenge.

Of course, such a suggested movie would be even more of a departure from Godfather I and II than this film was. But it seems that's the direction 'Francis' wanted to go, but didn't have the guts, perhaps, to go all the way. As for his daughter in the role, she obv. had trouble with the acting. But it wasn't that bad. As for Keaton, she just didn't seem all there, like she was just reading her lines. As for Shire, I thought she was good - same for Garcia. I thought the cameo by now SF Mayor Willie Brown was appropriate, trying to line up crooked judges. As for Pacino, himself, I kept flashing on Dick Tracy given his delivery of some of those lines. But again . . hey. As for a comparison with the contemporaneous Goodfellas, this film shows more the uselessness of gangsterism than the off and on glorification found in Scorsese's somewhat less than epic film. The best scene in this regard might be the final scene. Long shot of the 90ish (?) near death husk of the great Don Michael, who 'never wanted to be Don', sitting next to a dilapidated Italian villa on a folding chair or something, reading the paper, just going limp and falling off the chair - dead. End of story, cut to credits. That's it. That's what his life amounted to. Regrets and remorse of his daughter's murder filling his thoughts. Maybe even a life never really even lived. Seemed more telling than anything in Scorsese's film.";0;1;True tt0099674;dave fitz;07/05/2000;end of a great story;8;The Godfather III is not as good as the first 2, but is still a very good film and a nice ending to a great movie saga. III takes place many years after II ends. Michael is an old man, his children are grown. He is trying to get out of the mafia life, but they keep pulling him back in.

Sofia Coppola is not a great actress, but doesn't do too bad of a job playing Mary Corleone. (I've seen much worse from established actresses) Bridget Fonda, Andy Garcia and Joe Mantegna are among the many new characters. Robert Duvall, who was great as Tom Hayden in the first 2 films, does not appear here. Diane Keaton and Talia Shire are back again.

Part III does not measure up to the first 2, but then what films do? This is a very enjoyable movie which completes the best movie series ever made.;0;1;False tt0099674;krumski;11/03/2000;Fully worthy of the Godfather name;8;"What's the deal with the slagging this film has taken? Ok, so it's not as good as the first one (few films are), but it's a more than worthy wrap-up to the series, teeming with all the elements that make the Godfather saga so engrossing: strong characters, shadowy back-room negotiations, elaborate plotting and double crossing, shocking yet fantastically orchestrated violence and, finally and most memorably, an operatic finale which is a masterpiece of cross-cutting between ritual and acts of murder. If the film sags around the edges, well - that's entirely appropriate too, since Michael Corleone, its lead character, is himself now aging and frail. It is as if each of the Godfather films takes its cue from Michael's metabolism: the first is full of zest and youthful exuberance, the second is cold, hard and opaque, and the third is creaky and totters on the brink of collapse. Many take this as a fault of the film, when really it is the perfect mirror of the soul of Michael himself. As such, the weariness which pervades the entire story is poignant and heartbreaking, not the result of bad filmmaking.

The acting is all first rate, as is expected by now in a Godfather film. As Sonny Corleone's bastard son Vincent Mancini, Andy Garcia makes a strong impression and the push-pull between he and Pacino - the young hothead vs. the wisened and calculating veteran - gives the film its edge, and its unique place in the Godfather canon. It is slightly unbelievable that Michael would have no one else to turn over the running of the family to besides Vincent, a tangential relation at best, but since it works dramatically you tend to overlook the flaw in logic. Likewise, the scenes between Michael and Kay carry a special charge; though written near the level of soap opera, the fact that it is actually Pacino and Diane Keaton sitting across from each other, and that we feel we have shared so deeply in their history together, breathes a curious kind of nobility and sadness into them. Like everyone else, I missed Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, but even his absence serves, in an ironic way, to underline the theme of Michael drifting toward the end of his life, losing all his associations along the way; the loneliness and solitariness which enveloped him by the end of the second movie have not gone away, and his attempts to fight against and deny this fact is what gives his character real tragic dimension here.

Ok, just a word on Sofia Coppola as Michael's daughter Mary. No, she's obviously not a trained actress and her readings are a little flat, but you know what? It doesn't make that much difference. Her character exists more as a symbol to Michael of innocence and incorruptibility than as a true three-dimensional personage. As such, she at least has the right look and feel - I can imagine her as Pacino's daughter in a way I don't think I ever could have bought Winona Ryder (who was originally to play this role). What I'm saying here is that, while she's not great, she does what she needs to do and she in no way sinks the film - if for no other reason than that her screen time isn't large enough to do so. And for those of you who laughed at her in the climactic scene, I can only point out that this is *Pacino's* dramatic moment, not hers; if you can look upon his soul-chilling reaction and still not be moved, then I think there must be something fundamentally dead inside you.

All in all, this is a great film, with a plot line that is at times admittedly hard to follow, but not nearly as much as the one in Part II. And this one has a better cast of characters - just think of it, the Corleones getting into business dealings with the Vatican! The audacity of this storyline alone should make it beloved to all true Godfather fans. And some of the violence here - including the helicopter assault in Atlantic City, the murder of Joey Zasa on the streets of Little Italy, and most notably the new and wildly unexpected use found for a pair of reading glasses - is as brilliant and memorable as anything in the first film, and supersede the second one entirely. In short, Godfather III makes a great wrap up to the entire saga, and earns its full place in the family history; it's no mere footnote, but a great and satisfying film all its own.";0;1;False tt0099674;telos-2;10/01/2000;Not a sequel. Better.;;"Alright, already. Coppola himself says he would have given the picture another name, but calling it the Godfather sells tickets (and everyone would've called it a sequel anyway). Look, filmmaking is a business, like any other ... he can't sit around and think up ways to satisfy a handful of Puzo puristas.

About the movie? BRILLIANT! My god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me? This isn't even a gangster movie and, heaven forbid, from a humanist point-of-view it is a much better film than I or II (which may as well be the same movie, the pace just picks up near the end of the 6 hour saga). Even those who have never seen the original will bask in the glow.

The personal redemption of on-again-off-again Don Michael Corleone is almost secondary to the cultural tragedy in a story of well-to-do Italian-American family (the Coppolas) and their struggle with maintaining influence in a business and legal world more corrupt than the Sicily their grandparents left behind (Hollywood) -- and in the role of the spoiled-rich daughter with human longings, who better than the original article (Sofia)? I almost cried during her performance (and I'm a guy). What other actress could possibly have brought to the role the same authenticity?

Power struggles among men never cease, and the higher one rises in this world the thinner the air gets. The air is cleaner and purer, no doubt, but it can also make the subject dizzy and exhausted. Look at Talia Shire and Andy Garcia's characters -- Connie is finally in love with life after 45 years of being an airhead and ready to kick some ass. And the ""God's Banker"" saga merely illustrates the ridiculousness of attempting to buy salvation, since men of the cloth are last one's you should trust with your money because they have the least experience managing it. Incest is there because (as the operetta says) the power-hungry are fated to desire (and suffer for) that which they cannot possess (esp. rich cousins).

In conlusion, the Corleones in III are _any_ of your families that have busted their balls to be something, only to find that the more they possess, the harder they have to fight to keep it. Maybe even some of the younger generations got sacrificed along the way. The elements of Greek tragedy planted by colonists 2500 years ago in Sicily became cultural cliches because they were the truth; they speak to us today because we wish they were not.";0;1;False tt0099674;dvdbn;15/12/1999;Underrated? Bigtime.;;"I read a lot of comments about this movie being a disaster and whatnot - that's simply not true. Is it as good as the first two? No. But it's not like the first two. It's not even *supposed* to be like the first two. This film was originally not even going to be part of The Godfather Trilogy but rather titled ""The Death of Michael Corleone.""

That having been said, this is a pretty good film. I find that it closes up The Godfather Trilogy quite well, and I feel satisfied after watching it. My only real complaint is Sofia Coppola - ugh. I understand wanting to give your daughter a role, but such an important one? Father's love blinded good taste in choosing someone to take that role. Otherwise, a good film. 8/10";0;1;False tt0099674;GOB-2;17/11/1999;Not great or even necessary, but still pretty good;;I realise that many people don't like this film. It is probably due to them comparing it to the other two. This isn't really fair since the first two are two of the greatest movies in history. Taken by itself it really isn't that bad. I was glad to see how the Corleone family would continue after Michael died. And I also think the final shot of Michael on the chair was a very powerful shot. I saw Michael's life flash before my eyes at that moment.;0;1;False tt0099674;D.C.-2;12/10/1999;A fitting end to a great trilogy;;"I loved this film, the final stage of the saga. The only thing missing was Robert Duvall. Other than that all the things that made I & II so great are all here. Wonderful performances especially Al Pacino and Andy Garcia. If Sophia's last name wasn't Coppola people would appreciate her performance more. Not a perfect film but still great!!! 8/10";0;1;False tt0099674;connie-26;10/10/1999;Favorable Review of Part III--Similar to Reading a Good Book;;It's amazing to me that so many people trash Godfather: Part III. The movie was the perfect sequel--until they write the sequel starring Andy Garcia and Tailia Shire.

Everything that happened in I and II finds its rightful culmination in Part III. Sins of the fathers...reconciliation between ex-spouses...the flesh bearing the results of sinful living...the incest that often occurs in family dynasties...the corruption of all facets of organized religion...the fact that life imitates art and vice-versa...remembering Vincent's father, Sonny, having sex with the bridesmaid up against a door on Connie's wedding day...the wonderful advice for life about never hating your enemies because it affects your judgement...the killing scenes that occurred during the opera were properly suspenseful...the director's daughter was the only one who could have played Michael's daughter as she was naturally the wonderfully spoiled daughter of an influential Italian family...the back and forth scenes are not hard to follow if you study the movie intellectually--as you would a great piece of literary fiction.

I want another sequel. I've seen all of the videos at least 30 times.;0;1;False tt0099674;drake-22;23/08/1999;Much better than usually given credit for.......;8;but pales in comparison to the first two.......the story itself is flawed.....why not Andy Garcia as Michael Corleone's son? Any additional link to the first two films would have helped...even Robert Duvall would have made this a much better picture....and Al Pacino could have chewed on the scenery slightly less......;0;2;False tt0099674;Nicky86;23/08/1999;Every bit as good as the first two;;"Okay, I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but here goes. First off, there are in fact, two flaws that hurt the film: casting of Sofia Coppola and the missing Robert Duvall. If you can look past these things, you will discover this movie is a masterpiece. For so many years, I would watch Part II and lament that Michael killed Fredo, that he lost his wife, and allowed the power to consume him. Part III addresses all of that. It is Michael's story again that one needs to watch and forget the things going on around him. I also liked the way the movie continued to borrow from reality with the Vatican plot. The movie is about guilt and redemption. Michael's confession, the meeting of all the mafiosos, the final scene on the steps, and the horribly tragic epilogue are all easily as memorable as anything in the others. Perhaps because it wasn't as much as a period film as the first two and so much time passed between II and III that it didn't feel like a ""real"" Godfather movie to some. I say the music, direction and themes of the movie are right in there. After all, Puzo and Coppola wrote this one as well. The scenes with Diane Keaton are sad and full of regret. Andy Garcia is excellent and a worthy addition to the characters. I was moved by this one more than the others. Part I is entertaining in a cartoonish way, Part II takes about 10 viewings to get everything, but Part III settled down and addressed Michael and his real feelings of loss. Forget the obvious flaws and look a little deeper. The irony is delicious.";0;2;False tt0099674;realist;18/08/1999;The powerful completion to the classic saga.;;I really don't care what anybody else wants to say...this is the completion of the trilogy. Sophia Copolla did a decent job acting in this for her first main role and I actually felt the ending scene. I wasn't laughing my head off like other people were talking about. In fact, it took me 10 minutes to get up after the credits were over and I rarely remember a movie after it's over. I think the original Godfather and Godfather Part II are still the best, but Part III, is just a few down. I just hope that if Part IV comes out (heard something about it) that it won't ruin this classic trilogy.;0;2;False tt0099674;Wilson W;02/07/1999;A Pretty good closure of the saga but with a lot of flaws.;;I am a big fan of the first two movies. This one I don't enjoy as much as the first two but there are great things and bad things of the film. I really liked Al Pacino's role as Michael, now in his latter years still haunted by his actions from his past...example ordering the murder of his brother Fredo. Andy Garcia played excellent as Sonny's Son Vincent who has so much similarities of the character James Caan played.

Now for what i hate about it. First of all the story isn't as compelling as the first two and the casting of Sophia Coppola the daughter of the director.

Overall score: 7/10;0;1;False tt0099674;Mike-696;21/05/1999;This Completes the Corleone Saga;;"""The Godfather III"" (1990) is no cinematic masterpiece as its two predecessors are, but it is definitely worth watching. The acting is brilliant, especially the scenes with Al Pacino and Diane Keaton. Have you ever had a friend, relative or lover you were so close to for years but now only see them every so often, maybe every two years? If so I think ""The Godfather III"" will have that kind of emotional effect on you. Andy Garcia gives an excellent performance as Vincent, a well-deserved Oscar Nomination for Best Supporting Actor. I've liked him since I first saw him in Brian De Palma's ""The Untouchables"" (1987). He has this slick coolness about him. He plays Sonny Corleone's kid, and displays some of the same mannerisms.

So much has already been said of Sofia Coppola's poor screen presence. I feel bad for the poor thing really, hope she didn't take all the criticism personally. Let me just say this about the fatal casting of Sofia Coppola (Francis' daughter): Francis Ford Coppola was almost forced into making this movie; he was millions of dollars in debt so it wasn't made out of passion like the earlier two 'Godfathers'. The film is very disoriented in some parts and the characters' dialogue unintelligible in others. ""The Godfather"" movies are about a powerful mafia family, made by an Italian-American family. Francis and Talia Shire are brother and sister; Carmine Coppola is their Dad; and Nicolas Cage, Francis' nephew executive produced this film. And now we have Sofia. It's a shame about her casting really. The final scene in the film would've played much better if she hadn't been such a paper-cut character.

But the set pieces, cinematography and art-direction are all wonderful. I loved the locales in both Sicily and Rome. And this film does have the same feel of the previous two, its own language so to speak, so you can enjoy it on that level despite its major flaws.

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Music by Carmine Coppola (who died the following year movie was released). 170 minutes (Final Director's Cut).";0;1;False tt0099674;Moe-25;10/04/1999;Thank goodness for Francis Ford Coppola;10;The third movie in the Godfather Trilogy has less violence but just as compelling. It's important when seeing this one to have seen the first two to fully understand it. Loved it. Andy Garcia was a natural and was awesome in the movie.;0;2;False tt0099674;AllenD;24/03/1999;"The ""worst"" of the series, but not bad";7;"This movie only commits two cardinal errors (pun intended)

1) It follows perhaps the two best movies ever 2) The casting for Mary Corleone

Other than that, GFIII is a good film in its own right. It isn't great, but it's very good. The plot is right up there with the other two predecessors. The development of characters isn't as good, but hey, these characters are already developed. The ending is somewhat anti-clamactic and unfortunately, leaves you wanting for more. There should never be another in this series, leave well enough alone.

Now, back to the Mary casting: I cannot *believe* that a man as brilliant and intelligent as F.F. Coppola would be so arrogant as to nepotistically cast an unproven, ineffective actress in a central role like Mary. Unbelievable. It's the only taint on the entire series of films.

One of the best moments of the film: when Vincent is brought into the room with Zasa and is trying (unsuccesfully) to control himself, as he says, ""What am I gonna do with this guy, eh?"" he does a body movement that makes you swear James Caan is back playing Sonny. Gives you chills to watch it.";0;1;False tt0099674;heckles;16/03/1999;The Last Scene;;"Many people have been critical of the last scene, more than one comment comparing it to Arte Johnson's routine on ""Laugh In"". I for one appreciated it--the point was, that Michael pretty much died when his beloved daughter was killed, and his actual expiration was a mere technicality.

This movie had its pluses--a very strong performance by Pacino, Andy Garcia's fiery Vincent, the changing of Connie from a hapless shrew to an Empress Livia-type killer, and some good cinematography. And it has its minuses--an irrelevant subplot concerning the Vatican, the annoying George Hamilton, and of course the miscasting of Coppola's daughter in the small but key role of Mary. (Note: was I the only one who noticed that Sofia Coppola does not look even remotely like Diane Keaton, her presumptive mother?)

To end on a positive note, I would still like to see a Godfather IV, if only to watch a power struggle between Vincent and Connie. Just leave out George Hamilton.";0;2;False tt0099674;yipekci;28/04/2002;A good film that doesn't go as a sequel;6;"Godfather III is a good movie compared to other movies that we watch nowadays. However, it has nothing to do with the legendary ""Godfather"" If I did not know, I'd never be able to guess that, Francis Ford Coppola has directed this film, as well.

This film is a film of 90's. And, therefore, like most of the holywood films, its main focus is its budget, not the art. This film has been shot only for the reason of having more profit over the godfather. It's entirely a new film. Al Pacino is old and ""VERY"" different. He has his own character, and he doesn't act for the film. He rather plays a part of his life, in the way of the script. It's no good.

I have rated this film 6. It may indeed deserve 7, but I was so dissappointed to see such a different film that, I felt like to decrease its average.

I can say, at the end that, If you like cliché holywood films, and the new and old al pacino, you may watch this film. But if you wathched The godfather I and Godfather II, and liked them (you should LOVE them), don't ruin the taste, and don't ever watch this film. Trust me. Read the book, but don't watch it.";0;1;False tt0099674;oldsheriff;16/04/2002;All in all, flawed but still enjoyable;;I just watched G3 for the first time ever after re-living parts I and II on DVD recently, and while I agree with most comments about (a) that it was worse than the others, (b) that Sofia problem (although she wasn't the moral equivalent of Jar Jar Binks as some people seem to think), (c) that Connie metamorphosis and (d) that Tom Hagen absence, I still think it was a decent movie. Pacino's performance was absolutely awesome, and it is hard to believe why someone as talentless as Kevin Costner was nominated for Best Actor that year, and Pacino wasn't. Andy Garcia was surprisingly good, and Diane Keaton unsurprisingly.

Unlike some others, I also like the idea of using the Vatican banking scandal as a story line, along with the rapid death of Pope John Paul I. The movie may have come too late for people to remember the events, but they are still definitely mysterious enough to form the stuff of hundreds of films. If anything, public knowledge about what happened barely scratched the surface, and why shouldn't an American Mafia family have been involved in the financial dealings? What spoiled it for me slightly is that I constantly kept asking myself why the movie is expressly set in 1979 - the actual events including the deaths of the popes were in 1978. If you interweave fictional and real events, there shouldn't be such an anachronism.

Still, in my opinion somewhere around 7.5/10.;0;1;False tt0099674;yakikorosu;04/04/2002;A great movie, far better than what I expected;7;"I must admit I came into this movie expecting the worst, as person after person has told me that this movie, while decent, doesn't compare to the first two. So I was pleasantly surprised to find myself disagreeing with them.

I enjoyed this movie even more than Godfather II, although I admit it doesn't approach the first film... but then again, so few things do. I thought that both Vincent and Anthony Corleone were superbly cast, not only for their acting, but for the fact that Vincent looks SO much like a young Michael and Anthony looks even more like Sonny.

*Spoiler Start*

The movie includes many great scenes, such as when Michael tells Vincent that he may now call himself a Corleone, and his men gather around a sitting Vincent, kissing his hand and calling him ""Don Corleone"", the same way they did to Michael at the end of the first film. I particularly loved the scene where Michael, seeking to repent for his sins, swears on the lives of his children that if God gives him the chance, he will not sin again... yet no more than 5 minutes later, he gives Vincent the order to carry out the murder of several men. He swore on the lives of his children.. and that's what he ends up losing.

*Spoiler End*

It's a true shame that Sofia Coppola had to be in this movie. I am not a person that likes to nitpick the nuances of every acting performance, but she is simply a horrible actress. It's particularly a shame because she does a lot to spoil the climax scene of the movie, which should be particularly dramatic. Thankfully, she doesn't have all that many lines, and at least looks good.

Unlike Godfather II, which, while a very good film, I found to be rather disjointed and difficult to follow (the Young Vito storyline seemed too slow and drawn out, while the Michael storyline moved so quickly that I, at times, wasn't sure what exactly was going on), this installment follows a similar plot line to the first movie, right down to the multiple executions at the end, set to a Sicilian opera instead of the words of an Italian priest. The simplicity and flow of the stories in I and III made them all the more engrossing to me.";0;2;True tt0099674;ericjg623;23/03/2002;"A more personal ""Godfather"" movie";8;"As with ""Star Wars - The Phantom Menace"", this film took a lot of hits for not being a worthy successor to the original series, but in both cases I disagree. I'm certainly not going to argue that G-III is the best, but it is nonetheless a worthwhile film in its own right.

For starters, it is different from the first two, and not just because of the time difference. Just as the real life actors had aged nearly two decades since G-II, so does the setting of the film, which takes place in 1979. I think one aspect that hardcore fans really missed was the lack of a stellar supporting cast, it's interesting to note in both earlier films the large number of nominations for Best Supporting Actor & Actress Awards, whereas in this film the only nomination was Andy Garcia (who, incidentally, did not win). For the most part, this is Al Pacino's movie, and it is also the first time we really get to see him (or the rest of the Family, for that matter) as real human beings. In the first two films, the Family is almost like a machine – ruthless, ambitious, and able to crush anyone who gets in the way. Vito Corleone and his sons and lieutenants operate in a world of cold rationality, when the Godfather wants to put the squeeze on someone he `reasons' with them and if that fails to persuade he makes `an offer they can't refuse'. In the first film Mike decides to kill the Turk and the crooked cop because it's the logical, rational solution to the problem of protecting his father from a rival. Later, Mike has his brother-in-law, and later still, his actual brother, killed, all in the name of protecting the Family.

This film is quite different. The point where this hit me was about halfway through when Mike, back in Sicily, is making his confession to a priest. Initially, I thought, it's just a scam, he's only doing it to set someone up or get valuable information. That's what we'd expect of a Corleone, the sort of ruthless cynicism that allows you to manipulate anything, even a solemn religious ritual, for nefarious ends. But it's not that at all, Michael is genuinely remorseful for much of what he's done, most notably Fredo's murder. In another scene, he addresses the corpse of Don Tommasino (the guy who protected him when he was a fugitive in Sicily years earlier) and asks, `Why were you so loved, when I was so feared?' He's also trying to heal rifts with both his kids and his ex-wife. The whole tone of the movie is much more up to date. The women are much more prominent. Kay, his ex, still has feelings for Mike, but she's also managed to run her own life with the kids separate from him. This would have been unthinkable to a Mafia wife a generation earlier. And Connie, who in the original was little more than a whiny human punching bag for her husband, is now as cold and dangerous as her brother. In short, their lives are a far cry from that of Mama Corleone, whose job it was to shut up, take care of the kids, and keep food on the table for the boys. It must be noted, however, that none of the feminism or `touchy-feely' stuff gets in the way of some good old fashioned Corleone style violence, most notably at the end, when, in a move that is reminiscent of the end of G-1, Mike arranges to wrap up all the `loose ends' in the span of just a few hours.

Anyway, the plot is somewhat convoluted. There's a big business deal going between the Corleone family and the Vatican and of course the usual corruption and payoffs. Trying to keep track of the various characters and their machinations was difficult at times, but that's really not all that important. What this movie really is about is Michael Corleone having to finally come to terms with the life he's lead and what it's done to his family. It is less a story than a look at the personal side of both him and his family and, most importantly, what all the power, money, and `respect' has cost all of them.

8/10";0;1;False tt0099674;monalisa-1;28/01/2002;So it's different than Godfather Part I and II;;***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** I am one of the people who think this is the perfect ending to the Godfather Saga and I would hate to see a continuation of it. I love the Godfather Part III, especially because it is so different from the other two movies. I would have bored to see it go on in the same fashion as the Part I and II, because it already has been done.

It is like my husband says a chick flick, because it involves a lot of feelings and it does not concentrate so much on the action as the other two. It is the story about how Michael Corleone realises that money and power isn't everything, if you don't have the right people to back you up (Kay and the children).

As an audience it is a relief to see that the old Michael now realises that he failed something terribly to run the family business that his father established and that it now troubles him that he had his own brother killed. (the scene where the line `Just as I thought I was out, they pulled me back in', when Michael called out Fredo's name when he has the diabetes attack, you realised that the old man does not has a lot of time left and he is changing).

Yes, Sophia Coppola was terrible as the role as Mary (Michael's daughter) even if she hadn't been the Directors daughter, but her co-actors made up for it, so it wasn't that bad. Some people laughed when Mary died (because of Sophia's acting), I didn't even see her reaction the first time I saw the movie, because I was so focused on Michael. I think this scene is very moving and it breaks your heart to see the old Don suffer like that over the loss of what he had tried so hard to protect since the first Godfather film.

I liked the idea of not having Michael's own son take the place of the new Don, it would had been too obvious, so having the b**tard nephew come in trying to impress Michael was great, because in the beginning I didn't know if Vince wanted the Corleone's blessing or revenge for not being accepted in the past. I also liked the idea of having Connie having more say in the family business, as a woman, was a good twist to the usual Corleone family tradition where it is run by the males.

I think that Robert Duvall was missed in the film as Tom Hagan, but the character George Hamilton played was pretty good, because you didn't really know his character well enough to get the feeling that you could trust him as one of Michael's people, which made a little more mysterious.

Eli Wallach's character is one of my favourite, I think he should have a lot of credit to this movie, he did a great performance.

Some say that Michael should have been killed in the scene where Mary dies. For me that would have ruined it, because seeing Michael die peacefully (kind of like his own father did) is great, because it makes him suffer more for his sins, to die old when his child died young, perfect punishment.

To grade this movie, I would give it 8 out of 10.;0;1;True tt0099674;flicklover;21/01/2002;Unfairly panned third installment.;7;When The Godfather Part 3 came out in 1990, all lovers of the two other films were anxious, waiting for another classic in what many regard as two of the greatest American films. Alas what came was a good film, but not in the same league as its predecessors. It has been rumored that Coppola did this project only because he was in financial problems. It does show that his passion for the project dwindled. The movie does not have the freshness and detail of the other 2. But that being said it is not the total loss that many people make it out to be. The story is basically similar to Godfather 1, set in 1979, Michael Corleone is in his 60's and is trying to realize his dream of legitimizing his family business,of course he is naive in thinking that he could wash away his past and his sins, this film presents Michael as a tired man, a man that is so guilt ridden that he could hardly smile, those who know that series will understand what I'm referring to. Al Pacino plays it close to perfect, he is a man beaten, weary of all his mistakes, his heart is broken. I feel that the time that was spent in between the making of the second one and this was too long, the film doesn't achieve greatness, it does give a fitting end to the Corleon saga. Give the film a chance, lower your expectations, and you will see that it is ultimately worthwhile.

Grade: B;0;2;False tt0099674;konover;09/01/2002;Give me a break;;"I'm tired of reading and hearing people bashing Godfather III. I don't consider it as good as the first two, which are both a 10+ on a scale from 1 to 10, making I & II a hard act to follow.

Godfather III was a really good sequel. The acting was great if not solid all the way around. I only think Sofia Coppola was miscast and it would've been awesome to have Winona Ryder as planned. Andy Garcia did a really good job as Vincent. George Hamilton was solid as BJ Harrison, Tom Hagen's replacement.

My problem with III is that it seems to much time has passed. I would've preferred a storyline, like part 1, that goes on for several years simply because the character of Michael seems to be Michael only in name. I would've preferred more of a transition from the ""evil"" Michael in II to the one we see in III. I did enjoy that Michael was busting his butt trying to go legit because it was what he wanted in Part 1 and time was running out.

Someone mentioned that it was hard to believe that Michael would leave the family in the hands of a hot-head like Vincent, which I can understand. However, I think they did a fairly decent job of showing scenes in which Michael was teaching Vincent the ropes. It also didn't help that Anthony, Michael's son, didn't want anything to do with the family business.

About the only thing that really bothered me about III is the lack of closure it gave the very important character of Tom Hagen. I missed Robert Duvall big time. All in all, I think III is a well-crafted sequel that is extremely good in its own right. Never mind that pretentious notion that true Godfather fans pretend III doesn't exist. If III is hard to watch, it's only because it's sad that there probably won't be more Godfather films coming and the film shows the characters we loved so much in the twilight of their years.";0;1;False tt0099674;pure_waves;10/12/2001;Good movie, but could have been much better.;6;I enjoyed this movie, even though there was no way it could live up to inevitable expectations I had after seeing the first two installments. I think it was a certainty that I was going to be a bit disappointed.

Pacino was magnificent as the elder Don, haunted by the past (especially the murder of his brother Fredo). I thought it was a shame that Robert Duvall couldnt be convinced to play Tom Hagan again. His presence would have been a clear upgrade over George Hamilton (howd he get cast in this?) and would have given some breadth to the overall quality of the movie. I had some problems with another casting choice: what was Briget Fonda doing in this?

Andy Garcia was really good in the part of Vincent Mancini, and Richard Bright was solid as Al Neri, a hold over from the earlier Godfather films. There are some really good actors in lesser roles like John Savage (from the Deer Hunter and Salvador). Cast as Tom Hagans son Andrew, Savage plays a preist who is thus removed (unfortunately) from the family business. His talents arent utilized nearly enough in this flick.

Overall its a good movie, and an interesting look at the Corleone family 20 years later. But anyone expecting something along the lines of Godfather 1 quality will be let down.;0;1;False tt0099674;SeanValen;17/11/2001;Themes of Redemption, Pacino's performance, movie magic;10;Part one and two were masterpieces, part three, although not completely having the power of the first two movies, does have something that sets it apart, the focus on one character, Pacino's Michael, the themes of redemption are powerfully acted, Oscar worthy, in my opinion Pacino's all time best performance, people are quick to look at some flaws like Coppola' daughters' acting, but its a small hole to complain about, a excuse to not praise the performance of Pacino and a character so richly put on screen.;0;2;False tt0099674;Shervin1982;02/11/2001;An old family head faces the question to let a family member of his marry his daughter who wants to become the head of the family.;10;Godfather Part III is the turning point of michael corleone's life, as he faces the question to go on with his sins and brutality of his family or to choose the next head as he goes down on retirement. The theme of this movie's changed a lot since part II, in which Corleone family was a powerful mob family. Here the Corleone family's been shown as the absolute power and dominating force. The culminating is quite sad which with the enormous play of Al Pacino becomes one of the best emotional scenes in the history of Cinema.;0;2;False tt0099674;ttbrowne;18/10/2001;Somebody make me an offer for this film;;Weakest sequel of the three. I couldn't help thinking how Michael, who's supposed to be a man in charge, let's things get out of control. Can you imagine the scene where Garcia bites his enemy's ear off happening in the presence of Marlon's Don. Never! He was in control and you were too if you were near him. It's as if Michael never learned anything from his father.

Everyone is talking about Sophia's casting...Garcia's casting is an affront to Italians. He's a Cuban for Pete's sake! He was nominated because of the name of the film. He didn't win and look what he's done since...nothing. He plays the shallow version of Sonny. This film tries to think too much. Tries to be too intriguing. It's neither. Too bad I had to pay for it in the DVD Godfather package, I would have left it in the store.;0;1;False tt0099674;taimur74;13/10/2001;One of the great performances of the decade;;"Yeah yeah everyone knows the gf3 is not as great as the first 2 but dont see this and you're missing out on one of the best performances by any actor in the 90's . I'm talking about Al PAcino reprising his legendary role of Micheal Corleone .He is absolutely magnificent in this role . Hunched over and seemingly defeated but still emanating that intensity and power that was in part 2 . This is surely micheal corleone's saga and pacino does full justice to his role even if the movie does not serve him well . It also has one of the greatest delivered lines in movie history

""Just when i thought i was out they pull me back in """;0;1;False tt0099674;Joel-23;03/01/1999;Pretty much the same as everybody;;"The first time I saw the series of Godfather movies, I saw them all in the same weekend. To move from Michael's innocence to his corruption to his redemption/consequences (anybody think Mary died for Michael's sins?) in such a short time was deeply affecting to me. No, Godfather III is not a ""great"" work on its own -- but it shouldn't be viewed on its own. Mary's death, then Michael's death are fitting conclusions to THE American film masterpiece.";0;2;False