The Godfather Part II (1974)

Written by Francis Ford Coppola & Mario Puzo

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola

Well, it’s taken 47 years, but the first sequel to win Best Picture is here. A couple films ago, I reviewed The Godfather, a film many, many, MANY people were excited for me to watch, along with this one. American Classics, I was told they were. And while I’m not big on the genre, I did enjoy what The Godfather brought to the table. So, last night, I sat down to watch the next installment, wearily of the 3+ hour running time, but excited to see why this film was just as great as its predecessor.

So, if you know these reviews at all, you probably know that this is where I say I didn’t like it. And I’m pleased to tell you that you are right.

I disliked this film a lot. To say nothing of the overall genre, the movie itself is just bad. The second half does get marginally more interesting, but still doesn’t really go anywhere. I know I’m gonna be tarred and feathered, but I was extremely disappointed.

Look at just how dour this film looks

First, the technical stuff. This film has an atrocious color palette. I didn’t notice it as much in the first film, but this film is just saturated in blacks, browns, tans, and creams. There are rarely any shots with “true-life” color, in that even a white shirt on someone has a cream or sepia tint to it. It makes the film just look dirty. I know it’s a period piece (two period pieces, really), but I don’t need the murkiness of the film to tell me that. Especially when Coppola has put the dates for the two storylines right at the beginning of each.

The structure of the film is also problematic. I have no problem with films that intercut storylines. I actually enjoy the playing around of time and linear storytelling. The problem is, I just don’t see a reason for the dual stories. Michael’s is the straightforward sequel to the original, while Vito’s is a prequel that, really, was anyone asking for? It’s also a thematic rehashing of the first movie’s plot: a good guy is sucked into the dark side. I already saw that movie, and while Robert DeNiro does a great job taking over the role from Marlon Brando, I don’t think there’s too many ways to tell that story, especially within the same universe (Star Wars being a slight exception, but the argument could be made there too).

Robert DeNiro as a young Marlon Brando

And then there’s the overall pacing. The film is long and boring, to put it mildly. The flashback stuff is interesting, but those sequences are so short that they almost seem like sorbets to the main story. Which, would be fine, were anything happening in the main story that needed a palette cleanse. The main story features a lot of people sitting around and talking about the plot. Or, sometimes, they stand around and talk about the plot. Every once in a while, they even walk around...and discuss the plot. There’s occasional violence, but I felt like it was toned down from the first film (but then, it’s hard to top a horse head in someone’s bed).

The senate inquiry in the second half was marginally interesting, and the scene of Kay revealing the truth of her miscarriage to Michael had a great performance by Pacino (who I’m still somewhat judging for his behavior about his nomination in the first film). It all still just doesn’t do enough to save this bloated, plodding mess of a film. I’m really glad that Part III isn’t on the list, but I do know that one day I’ll watch it, just to say I’ve completed the saga. But, after sitting through this, it’s probably gonna be awhile before I commit to it.

FINAL GRADE: C-