The godfather 2 rating4/1/2024 Sometimes it is simply cited as proof of my worthlessness. Roger later added this to his Great Movies series, but in that review ( click here) said, “Of all of the reviews I have ever written, my three-star review of ‘Part II’ has stirred the most disagreement. The stunning text of ‘The Godfather’ is replaced in ‘Part II’ with prologues, epilogues, footnotes, and good intentions.” He finishes by saying, “But Coppola is unable to draw all this together and make it work on the level of simple, absorbing narrative. Some scenes seem oddly pointless (why do we get almost no sense of Michael’s actual dealings in Cuba, but lots of expensive footage about the night of Castro’s takeover?), and others seem not completely explained (I am still not quite sure who really did order that attempted garroting in the Brooklyn saloon).” There’s also some evidence in the film that Coppola never completely mastered the chaotic mass of material in his screenplay. Coppola was reportedly advised by friends to forget the Don Vito material and stick with Michael, and that was good advice. The flashbacks to New York in the early 1900s have a different, a nostalgic tone, and the audience has to keep shifting gears. The story of Michael, told chronologically and without the other material, would have had really substantial impact, but Coppola prevents our complete involvement by breaking the tension. “The flashbacks give Coppola the greatest difficulty in maintaining his pace and narrative force.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |