The Godfather Thread

[Georgy Zhukov]

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

[wasted]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

Edited October 29, 2013 by wasted

[Gia]

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

Frankie was annoying

why couldn't they get Clemenza again?

[classicrawker]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

[dalsh327]

Having watched Scarface recently, I have enjoyed it for what it was. It was made and released during the Cocaine Cowboy days. When people did not understand why all of a sudden the streets got more bloody Scarface gave the answer. It also was a film about Hollywood.

Goodfellas was great about the associates of Mafia families. The Godfather gives you the stories of the bosses, their capos and advisors. Goodfellas plays it at the POV of the associates who look up to Made Men. But it was more stylized. The Godfather is just an honest film.

Godfather is more of grand narrative like Rebecca meets those old gangster movies, but updating it. It seems more like a job for Coppola than his best work.

Scarface and Goodfellas are the best from those guys. Scorsese is a way better director than Coppola anyway. Again Coppola was kind of caught up Lucas' drive for power. They wanted to be moguls. Scorsese has been banging it for 30-40 years, a master with the camera, always looking for a new way to see with the camera. Godfather shot by shot, honestly if you know what they are doing there, establishing shot, hollywood narrative over the shoulder shots, it's like torture. You get nothing after nothing every scene apart sexy italian looking guys in suits talking. That's all that was needed I think cos of the source material, but it hardly qualifies as a movie. De Palma is another look at all his other movies then look at Scarface again, there's a master at work. It's just about story telling and wine, well that's great, I get it, Godfather is like a lifestyle.

There are cool scenes in Godfather though. I like when Brando dies in the garden. That scene where De Niro runs the roof. Definitely a must see, even if people find it slow, it's worth it if you can stick with it.

Lucas' drive was for control more than anything, and it goes back to his experience making THX-1138.

[wasted]

Having watched Scarface recently, I have enjoyed it for what it was. It was made and released during the Cocaine Cowboy days. When people did not understand why all of a sudden the streets got more bloody Scarface gave the answer. It also was a film about Hollywood.

Goodfellas was great about the associates of Mafia families. The Godfather gives you the stories of the bosses, their capos and advisors. Goodfellas plays it at the POV of the associates who look up to Made Men. But it was more stylized. The Godfather is just an honest film.

Godfather is more of grand narrative like Rebecca meets those old gangster movies, but updating it. It seems more like a job for Coppola than his best work.

Scarface and Goodfellas are the best from those guys. Scorsese is a way better director than Coppola anyway. Again Coppola was kind of caught up Lucas' drive for power. They wanted to be moguls. Scorsese has been banging it for 30-40 years, a master with the camera, always looking for a new way to see with the camera. Godfather shot by shot, honestly if you know what they are doing there, establishing shot, hollywood narrative over the shoulder shots, it's like torture. You get nothing after nothing every scene apart sexy italian looking guys in suits talking. That's all that was needed I think cos of the source material, but it hardly qualifies as a movie. De Palma is another look at all his other movies then look at Scarface again, there's a master at work. It's just about story telling and wine, well that's great, I get it, Godfather is like a lifestyle.

There are cool scenes in Godfather though. I like when Brando dies in the garden. That scene where De Niro runs the roof. Definitely a must see, even if people find it slow, it's worth it if you can stick with it.

Lucas' drive was for control more than anything, and it goes back to his experience making THX-1138.

They were so anti- studio that they wanted to become the studio. Lucas wife divorced him because she "couldn't take the darkness anymore". It seems like is very obsessed with winning and grosses. I think it's more deep seated and personal than just his reaction to THX, which is almost like a demo for Star Wars. I mean he re-released Star Wars so it could out sell Jaws. He really wanted to be a filmmaker/mogul more than Coppola who is more of a director who wanted to have his own studio just to put out movies, which he does through Zoetrope now or did he sell it? But Lucas sold off Pixar? to concentrate on Star Wars special effects and Skywalker Ranch? The parts he added to Star Wars were just cos he wanted to road test some new tech he was working on. He has always seemed more into the toys and effects. And now he sold the rights to Star Wars for billions? While all those shennigans have been going on, Spielberg has been burying them in terms of movies.

[appetite4illusions]

They need to do a Blu Ray release of The Godfather Saga.

[wasted]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

[classicrawker]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

I am not questioning that what was portrayed actually happened back in the 80's just that I thought the script was marginal and the acting was over the top and cheesy. I love Al Pacino but it was not one of his best performances IMHO......thought he was much better in the GF......

[Georgy Zhukov]

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

Frankie was annoying

why couldn't they get Clemenza again?

The actor asked for too much money.

[wasted]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

I am not questioning that what was portrayed actually happened back in the 80's just that I thought the script was marginal and the acting was over the top and cheesy. I love Al Pacino but it was not one of his best performances IMHO......thought he was much better in the GF......

Hes understated in GF, larger than life in Scarface. I think hes doing great service to both scripts. Stone won an Oscar for the Scarface script didnt he?

I think youre confusing taste with the directors abilities. One is subtle, one is excessive.

I just dont think GF is as well made or directed as Scarface. Theres very little to do with Godfather other than film the actors. A lot of movies do that. Tin Men is similar, well filmed, nice period detail, great dialogue, some poignant wisdom.

[classicrawker]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

I am not questioning that what was portrayed actually happened back in the 80's just that I thought the script was marginal and the acting was over the top and cheesy. I love Al Pacino but it was not one of his best performances IMHO......thought he was much better in the GF......

Hes understated in GF, larger than life in Scarface. I think hes doing great service to both scripts. Stone won an Oscar for the Scarface script didnt he?

I think youre confusing taste with the directors abilities. One is subtle, one is excessive.

I just dont think GF is as well made or directed as Scarface. Theres very little to do with Godfather other than film the actors. A lot of movies do that. Tin Men is similar, well filmed, nice period detail, great dialogue, some poignant wisdom.

How a movie is acted is not always related to how the script was written.....IMHO the acting is very dated and Pacino's acting is overblown, hammy and cheesy..........You think it is a masterpiece while I think it is cheesy and can't touch the GF................in this case we will just have to agree to disagree

[wasted]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.

The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.

Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own.............

And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it.

I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into.

Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO.

The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action.............

But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.

I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.

Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.

Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play.

I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win.

I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather.

I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant.

Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though.

Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

I am not questioning that what was portrayed actually happened back in the 80's just that I thought the script was marginal and the acting was over the top and cheesy. I love Al Pacino but it was not one of his best performances IMHO......thought he was much better in the GF......

Hes understated in GF, larger than life in Scarface. I think hes doing great service to both scripts. Stone won an Oscar for the Scarface script didnt he?

I think youre confusing taste with the directors abilities. One is subtle, one is excessive.

I just dont think GF is as well made or directed as Scarface. Theres very little to do with Godfather other than film the actors. A lot of movies do that. Tin Men is similar, well filmed, nice period detail, great dialogue, some poignant wisdom.

How a movie is acted is not always related to how the script was written.....IMHO the acting is very dated and Pacino's acting is overblown, hammy and cheesy..........You think it is a masterpiece while I think it is cheesy and can't touch the GF................in this case we will just have to agree to disagree

I dont think its a masterpiece, I just think its a better made movie than GF. A better script and movie which resolves itself. A satifying experience.

What youre talking about is subjective taste. I think Godfather is quite kitschy in a way. They are pretty trashy paperbacks.

GF isnt a great example of the Hollywood narrative at all. It lacks the focus of the art narrative.

Its a grand narrative, so its hard to compare it to Scarface. Theorists compare it Hitchcocks Rebbecca. Or even East of Eden.

I think best movie should have some hollywood narrative.

Narration in Fiction Film by David Bordwell is an interesting read in these matters. I thinking of getting it for kindle.

Edited November 5, 2013 by wasted

[classicrawker]

If you go through the great paperback books The Godfather is way up there. You could put Paradise City by Calcucertta. They arent lterary works but they sit just ahead of the basic churners.The movies while entertaining are workmanlike from a filmaking point of view. Youve seen the first 20 minutes, thats it cinematically, its basically retelling the book. In a way it was the precusor to dramatic tv weve seen recently. Sopranos, BB, GOT, these long drawn out character oriented series. Same kind of pace.Godfather isnt powerful movie making like Scarface or even Goodfellas.

You seem to like movies for the filmmaking art of it while I want a good story and to be entertained which the Godfather movies do in spades.....IMHO if you have to think too hard to like a movie it most likely is not that entertaining but too each his own............. And I don't agree The Godfather is not as powerful as Goodfellas or Scarface............ more subtle and realistic yes but less powerful no............in fact IMHO Scareface is one of the cheesiest movies I have ever seen and I think it is vastly overrated........

Yes, I came to just say that. That The Godfather leans more heavily towards telling the story, and that's fine because books are interesting enough and entertaining enough. I'm not saying it's not great entertainment and that it's not enjoyable. It leans more towards dramatic tv like Sopranos or Breaking bad etc. We all enjoy it. I just think film has more to offer. So in terms of greatest movie of all time category, which is kind of stupid idea but, it's not enough. Like I said if the Aliens came down and said take me to your Movie. I wouldn't pick The Godfather to impress them or show them how we do it here on earth. It's shot basically in one style. I would put in Natural Born Killers, it has a bunch of different things going on, lots of editing, it's vast, entertaining. I could almost see it coming down to taste. Godfather is very middle brow. And there is a strand running through cinema history of it. The Shawshank Redemption, Dead Poets Society, The King's Speech, the Oscar movies which keep it classy, while entertaining the world. But that is far from being representative of popular cinema or the talent in movies over the years, I'd want to rep that that's all. Even in The Godfather, Coppola is held back by the studio to make the product they need. De Palma is a gangbusters director, he's a little trashy, exploitative, a voyeur of his subject but showing how it really is, while taking the audience on a ride. I don't want want to hate on Godfather, but after 3 movies you never get that excitement or rush that movies can give, it has other qualities though, it means a lot to people, there's a lot to find and get into. Sorry, this isn't really what this thread is meant to be about. Sort of went on a bit tldr i know

But see that is why I think the Godfather is so great as it does not need the continuous action to hold your interest like Scarface or Goodfellas. I loved Goodfellas but to me Scareface did not age well and was cheesy IMHO. The Godfather is timeless and while it may not be artsy, like some of the movies you mentionoed, it tells a story, has great character development and does not need over the top action to hold your interest............that is one of the main problems I have with modern movies. The directors seem to rely on shock and awe to hold an audiences attention and character and story devlopment gets lost in the action............. But then again I prefer older movies like Papillon, Cool Hand Luke etc., as they told a story and developed the characters......today's movies are like junk food...empty calories

Those are movies about trash though, not cheesy. Movies are in large part trashy. Youre talking more about the middle brow tasteful subset.I think Coppola was good cos he has those middle class pretensions, the romantic notions of italian vineyards, the renaissance landscapes. To me that is deeply kitsch. The books are much tougher.Movie making is more a craft, the masters keep it popping in the hood. David Mamet, Sydney Lumet.Godfather is like a romance novel for the corrupt. Its almost like the half way between an opera and a play. I think the "Timeless" thing isn't a great argument, because it's a reductive argument in that it's saying filming things in an elegant way is the only way, whereas it should match the subject matter. And that's what Godfather does, it's the right option for that movie. NBK is about the Media so it's has different stocks, cutting, etc. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. Godfather plays more to the common denominator tastes, people like soap operas. They don't mind if it's filmed like Sesame Street, it's almost like moving wallpaper. Godfather leans too far one way, not for some, but in an objective way. NBK leans the other way too much maybe. Godfather is Oscar friendly, made by the studio to win. I agree on the OTT special effects, like look at the Top 10 gross movies in 2013. Almost shockingly bad. I don't mind some of it, they are improving those aspects of it, it's kind of breath taking what they can do. But it wold be nice to see a Soderberg, Sophia Coppola in there. Robots, Superheroes and bland action movies. I don't think NBK is one of those. At first it seems a bit cluttered but it's not, and there's a intelligent points, as there are in Godfather. I say Apocalypse Now cos it has some of Godfather elements, characters, plot, elegant, beautiful to look at but a more universal theme, it doesn't have the italian slant, some of the existentialism of the books rubs on it. Plus it has action scenes, Ride of Valkyries, Napalm in the Morning, the whole The End finale. It has blockbuster elements before they got too grotesque. It all hinges on whether Apoc Now is profound as the book, or whether The Deer Hunter beats it on that. Gadfather isn't profound, and Americans obviously suspicious of art, so this isn't a problem at the Oscars but world wide it matters. The central point is that the mafia went legit, they dress up in smart, charming dialogue to great hilarity. But it's still just killing people that get in your way. It's great big soap opera that romanticizes crime and deals with the complexities of the American family. That's all very comforting and relatable.

I would go to the local deli to get their Italian sandwiches or my favorite Italian restaurant. Clemenza was a fun guy to watch, too bad they couldn't get that actor to come back. I liked Frankie though. Did you watch the deleted scenes or television version? Clemenza goes to an apartment and he tries to sell the dress to a woman, $5 each which is like $300. He gives her two for one with a alternative payment (he bangs her off screen) and he comes out and Tessio was like "What took you so long?"

I take that tip from Gigli. Always eat steak with ketchup. I make meatballs and get a 3 litre bottle of val pol. Some of worst hangovers are Godfather related. Eat two tiramisu from 7/11 and your queasy breezy.

One man's cheesy is another man's trash.........

The weird thing about Scarface is they did cut up people with chainsaws at that time. Is a Columbian neck tie in that movie. I definitely think you can make a good movie about trashy people. Godfather is kinda classy though, even though it's just about people that kill each other. There's a code.

I am not questioning that what was portrayed actually happened back in the 80's just that I thought the script was marginal and the acting was over the top and cheesy. I love Al Pacino but it was not one of his best performances IMHO......thought he was much better in the GF......

Hes understated in GF, larger than life in Scarface. I think hes doing great service to both scripts. Stone won an Oscar for the Scarface script didnt he?I think youre confusing taste with the directors abilities. One is subtle, one is excessive.I just dont think GF is as well made or directed as Scarface. Theres very little to do with Godfather other than film the actors. A lot of movies do that. Tin Men is similar, well filmed, nice period detail, great dialogue, some poignant wisdom.

How a movie is acted is not always related to how the script was written.....IMHO the acting is very dated and Pacino's acting is overblown, hammy and cheesy..........You think it is a masterpiece while I think it is cheesy and can't touch the GF................in this case we will just have to agree to disagree

I dont think its a masterpiece, I just think its a better made movie than GF. A better script and movie which resolves itself. A satifying experience. What youre talking about is subjective taste. I think Godfather is quite kitschy in a way. They are pretty trashy paperbacks. GF isnt a great example of the Hollywood narrative at all. It lacks the focus of the art narrative. Its a grand narrative, so its hard to compare it to Scarface. Theorists compare it Hitchcocks Rebbecca. Or even East of Eden. I think best movie should have some hollywood narrative.

You lost me mate...me thinks you are over analyzing things here...everything you said about Scareface could easily describe The GF.........

[wasted]

Im not at all, if anything Im simplyfying it. Scarface is Hollywood narrative, Godfather is a grand Narrative. Which are about looking at a system of values or society.

Scarface is a text book Hollywood narrative, its the foundations of movie making.

Narration in Fiction Film by David Bordwell lays out pretty well.

Maltese Falcon one of the best hollywood navs.

Rebecca the best grand narrative.

[wasted]

I think thats why people find GF slow, because they dont get what it is. Its looking more the inner workings, not adhering to the hollywood nav, action driven by characters.

My point from beginning was that imo the hollywood nav is the most important, its brass tacks. So thats where the moviemakers roll.

Grand nav isvway more niche. Art nav has crept into Hollywood slowly. Thats Apocalypse Now, hollywood nav meets a bit of art nav. Theres bits of each.

[Snake-Pit]

Saw yesterday's (Thursday's) printed edition of the London Evening Standard, and an add I've never seen before, coming to The Royal Albert Hall

Tickets as follow -> http://www.royalalberthall.com/tickets/godfather-live/default.aspx

The Godfather Live!

Film with live orchestra.

Hmmm... Could be fun.