The Godfather Thread

..and why not?
Stirling Moss

Postby Stirling Moss » 02 Feb 2007, 19:57

MICHAEL
(pause)
...tell me, when Pop had troubles...did he ever think, even to himself, that he had gone the wrong way; that maybe by trying to be strong and trying to protect his family,that he could... that he could... lose it instead?

MAMA
(Sicilian)
You talk about the baby. She can have another baby.

MICHAEL
(Sicilian)
No, I meant lose his family.

MAMA
(confused)
Your family? How can you ever lose your family?

MICHAEL
(half spoken)
But times are different...

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 20:00

I think the key to michael might be what happens to him in Sicily. a part of him dies - maybe most of him.

Stirling Moss

Postby Stirling Moss » 02 Feb 2007, 20:01

Matt Wilson wrote:

EDIT: Has anyone ever noticed that the actor who plays the bodyguard "Al Neri" (I think he's in all three films) is also with Pacino in the earlier Panic in Needle Park? He has a much bigger role as Al's brother and he speaks with a thick, New Yawk accent. I wonder if Pacino was instrumental in getting that guy the (non-speaking) reoccuring role in the Godfathers.


Didn't he die recently in strange circumstances?

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23785
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 02 Feb 2007, 20:04

Wolfie the Jackal wrote:MICHAEL
(pause)
...tell me, when Pop had troubles...did he ever think, even to himself, that he had gone the wrong way; that maybe by trying to be strong and trying to protect his family,that he could... that he could... lose it instead?

MAMA
(Sicilian)
You talk about the baby. She can have another baby.

MICHAEL
(Sicilian)
No, I meant lose his family.

MAMA
(confused)
Your family? How can you ever lose your family?

MICHAEL
(half spoken)
But times are different...


Nice job Wolfie.

That's what I consider to be the most important bit of dialogue in the whole saga. I always wondered if anyone else found it as moving.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
nathan
submitted for your approval
Posts: 8035
Joined: 18 Nov 2003, 23:32
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Postby nathan » 02 Feb 2007, 20:08

Matt Wilson wrote:Your accusation of a lack of a strong female is beside the point. It's a male-driven story. If you hold the lack of female characters thing against it then you're going to have a problem with a lot of art--not just films but novels, paintings, etc.

When you watch a movie like Steel Magnolias do you bemoan the lack of a strong male lead? How about certain Bible stories? The list could go on and on...

Hmmm... now you got me thinking. damnit.

It's weird that a film like Lawrence of Arabia had not one female in it and yet it's probably my favorite film. Maybe it's the sense of accomplishment, self-consciousness and atheistic morality that can make me forgive the shallowness of the male ego. One thing about me though is that the male species of humans for the most part disgusts me. It can be argued that most of the world problems are created by men.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I have a hard time watching a film glorifying and wallowing in some of the more disgusting traits men at times project and usually seem to find so damn fascinating. It's always been an ongoing struggle of mine in objectively watching stuff like this and finding entertainment value for myself. Some say I need to 'lighten up' and maybe I do.

Anywhoo, I'll let you gents get back to worshipping all the maleness. :)

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 20:12

I'll bet I've seen 'Steel Magnolias' as much as anybody here!!!
I like different swear words and I like different movies. female crime movies and male weepies are fun but rare. most crime movies I like could be accused of being 'male' that's the way it goes.

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 20:13

you either think that the art raises these things above their genre or you don't. I do. no biggie.

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 20:14

well.. "The Godfather" anyway. just because I've watched 'Stell Magnolias' doesn't mean I'm going to defend it!

User avatar
nathan
submitted for your approval
Posts: 8035
Joined: 18 Nov 2003, 23:32
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Postby nathan » 02 Feb 2007, 20:18

Sneelock wrote:I'll bet I've seen 'Steel Magnolias' as much as anybody here!!!
I like different swear words and I like different movies. female crime movies and male weepies are fun but rare. most crime movies I like could be accused of being 'male' that's the way it goes.

The thing that keeps popping into my head since my last post is 'atheistic morality'. I always have a hard time taking any religious redemption theme seriously in anything.

Crime movies are interesting because the good ones have characters that know what they are doing is bad. They don't project their anger or fear of judgement on anyone but themselves and they certainly don't ask God for forgiveness or to be 'shown the way'. That seems foreign to me. I don't get it. And when I see it in films, I have a hard time empathizing with the protagonist.

But whatever. I should probably leave this topic alone, but I do realize it's a reason why I don't like a lot of movies that many people seem to love.

User avatar
Moleskin
Posts: 14589
Joined: 18 Feb 2004, 12:38
Location: We began to notice that we could be free, And we moved together to the West.

Postby Moleskin » 02 Feb 2007, 20:35

davey the fat boy wrote:
Jeemo wrote:Michael has no heart to balance his actions. Vito looked after the local people, Michael ignored the problems that Frankie P and Willie Chi Chi were having in Godfather ll because it didnt tie in with his plans.

In fact Michael was a sell out to money and power. Although in 3 he did try to redeem himself


Hmmm... I imagine Vito could be pretty ruthless to get where he was. He advises Michael to do much of what happens. Besides - I think Michael has heart in his way. He is always motivated by the desire to protect those he loves and cleanse the family name. On the other hand, both you and the RGP made a similar observation about Vito helping the local people (or 'building his empire from the ground up") - this seems important. Vito built up a profound resevoir of loyalty around himself. He was part of a community. Michael was profoundly isolated.

In the opening scene, just after the monologue above - Vito refuses to take money from the guy. All he asks is friendship and the promise of a service he may never even collect on. Vito may have been a crook, but he likely stole from everyone but his community. He lived the ethos of "don't shit where you eat." Michael wasn't even part of his community. Just as most of us don't know our neighbors any more.

I'm not sure that "community" provides the entire answer, but it seems to be a huge part of it. The natural question that follows is: Could Michael have done things any different and survived, or was he forced into his isolation?


Don't forget, Michael was effectively born into the isolation. Sometime during his childhood the family moved into the compound. He probably never had the same links to the community his father did.
@hewsim
-the artist formerly known as comrade moleskin-
-the unforgettable waldo jeffers-

Jug Band Music
my own music

User avatar
Stille Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43111
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: The Godfather Thread

Postby Stille Baron » 02 Feb 2007, 21:02

davey the fat boy wrote:Vito Corleone was feared but loved. Michael Corleone was hated.


I suppose this is true. But is it?
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 21:05

I hate him! that son of a bitch!!!

User avatar
Stille Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43111
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Postby Stille Baron » 02 Feb 2007, 21:06

Sneelock wrote:I hate him! that son of a bitch!!!


Yeah, but you also love the Yardbirds and everybody knows they aren't great.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29693
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Postby Matt Wilson » 02 Feb 2007, 21:14

Baron wrote:
Sneelock wrote:I hate him! that son of a bitch!!!


Yeah, but you also love the Yardbirds and everybody knows they aren't great.


---goes to put Baron's name on his shitlist and realizes it's already there near the top
John Coan wrote:I've lived in many different countries in Europe and whenever I come home I think 'England is the best'

User avatar
Stille Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43111
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Postby Stille Baron » 02 Feb 2007, 21:19

The Godfather might've been elevated above its status as a stunted male circle jerk had a real director taken it. To wit: TERRENCE MALICK.
Last edited by Stille Baron on 02 Feb 2007, 21:25, edited 2 times in total.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
nathan
submitted for your approval
Posts: 8035
Joined: 18 Nov 2003, 23:32
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Postby nathan » 02 Feb 2007, 21:23

il Baron wrote:The Godfather might've been elevated above its status as a stunted male's, homoerotic wankfest had a real director taken it. To wit: TERRENCE MALICK.

Well it certainly would have been longer. :)

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 21:23

I'll see your dare and, in a slight breach of protocol, proceed directly to the double dog dare!
http://www.blackcatbone.34sp.com/phpBB2 ... 29#1480629
Last edited by Sneelock on 02 Feb 2007, 21:25, edited 1 time in total.

Stirling Moss

Postby Stirling Moss » 02 Feb 2007, 21:25

...is anyone out there going to try and defend Part III?

User avatar
Stille Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43111
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Postby Stille Baron » 02 Feb 2007, 21:26

Wolfie the Jackal wrote:...is anyone out there going to try and defend Part III?


Paging Cedric!
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

Sneelock

Postby Sneelock » 02 Feb 2007, 21:26

you know, I keep trying to avoid discussing it and it keeps pulling me back!!!!!