godfather part II is still the second

Rating: 10/10 (15 February 2004)

*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.)