The Godfather Part II (1974)

You already remember the first part by heart, there are scenes that you will remember for a lifetime. I watched this part and after a month I can no longer remember the main storylines.

The best role of Robert de Niro for me. The atmosphere of the film is divine.

There is nothing funnier than a white American who believes that his ancestors are the real Americans, and others are aliens. 😂
Is it possible to assume that Michael faked the death of his mistress?

Oh, Michael - he achieved absolute power, destroyed his enemies, but was left alone, without a family. But if they were all kind and respectful to each other, everything would be different.

Шедевр 👍

This part is also good, I liked it. At first it seemed more boring, weaker and more confusing than the first one. But then the plot gained momentum and dragged on. The inserts with the young Vito Corleone were interesting, in some places even more interesting than the main plot. The young Robert De Niro also turned out to be interesting.)

The second part is as brilliant as the first.

Oscar 1975

Legend

Legend

Honestly, I watched this three-hour picture on rewind, it doesn't reach the first part at all.

The Godfather is associated specifically with Marlon Brando, although he starred in only one part and that is not the full running time. Michael (Al Pacino) falls short of him, not by acting, but by the character himself. It's like he's been sidelined here.

The film has a lot of locations, a lot of characters, a lot of "empty" scenes. It's also funny to watch the characters die, I always yell at them.

I wouldn't call this part a masterpiece, a legend, it's just a three-hour film of some kind of film franchise. Let's see what happens in the third part.

I was pleasantly impressed by the first film.
The second one caused a twofold feeling.
On the one hand, the division into two narrative lines raises the question: why? I'll explain why later.
On the other hand, it looks kosher!
Robert has just joined the story perfectly, and Michael continues his fall with incredible force, destroying the Corleone family.
That's the explanation for the two parallel lines.

While Vito is creating a family and a reputation for himself from scratch, gradually and continuously continuing his ascent to the top, independently approaching the American dream and revenge on the murderer of all his relatives from an early age, not being afraid to personally dirty his hands, his son Michael, having received the reins of government, gradually embraces spheres of influence like an octopus, not skimping on funds, but without doing anything on your own.

He executes traitors without sparing his relatives and friends, his subordinates go to their deaths for him, while he only accuses and punishes by other people's hands, and his family gradually disintegrates and is destroyed. Vito never harms his loved ones, and Michael is looking for a peaceful solution... the only thing he does himself is beat his wife because of her decision. He's a weak scorpio who ends up all alone. Could something have gone differently? They showed us in a flashback, but we can't find the answer there.

It's also a great movie. But it can't be the same. He's different. And he's good.

It's a great movie, not much inferior to the first part, but maybe even surpasses it in some places. A great closed arc of Michael and Don Vito's characters, while one exalts himself in his world, avenges his parents, gains respect by his actions, the other, Michael, slides into a steep dive, kills his brother, loses his family and becomes the unscrupulous mobster they never wanted to become.

The Roman Empire of Corleone, where Vito is Octavin and Michael is Tiberius. I liked the split narrative, which shows the characteristic difference between a father and son, not only in business management, but also in family terms: Vito sincerely loves his wife and children, his line is touching and warm in its own way, while Michael is cold.