The Godfather - Part 2(in Hollywood Movies) The Godfather - Part 2 (1974) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream The Godfather - Part 2 on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: The early life and career of Vito Corleone in 1920s New York is portrayed while his son, Michael, expands and tightens his grip on the family crime syndicate.
Runtime: 202 mins Release Date: 20 Dec 1974
This movie is way to be good to be labelled a sequel to The Godfather . Rather it is more of a companion piece to the original and the two perfectly compliment each other . IT is both a sequel and prequel showing the rise of the young vito and moral decline of Micheal . Both characters are brought to life with uncanny ability by Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino . To say that these two are good actors is like saying that a nuclear bomb makes a loud noise and in this movie they prove why they are at the top of their respective crafts .Al Pacino is the standout in the ensemble cast and its amazing <more>
how his eyes have changed from the first part . They are now cold , ruthless and unemotional and betray the price which Micheal Corleone has paid for power .Watch this movie and learn why it is the greatest gangster film of all time.
The original Godfather is a brilliant work. It is in a sense a voyeuristic delight, allowing us to see the mafia from the inside - we become part of the family. It single-handedly change the world's view of organized crime, and created a cast of sympathetic characters, none of whom have a shred of common morality. It was the highest grossing movie of its time and Brando created a cultural icon whose influence resonates as strong today as it did in 1972.As extraordinary an achievement as this is, Part II is even better. It easily receives my nod as the best picture ever made. I have seen <more>
it at least 20 times, and each time its 200 minutes fly by.The movie uses flashbacks to brilliantly weave two tales. The main story is the reign of Michael Corleone as the world's most powerful criminal. Now reaping the benefits of legalized gambling in Las Vegas, Michael is an evident billionaire with an iron fist on a world of treachery. Behind this, Director Francis Ford Coppola spins the tale of the rise of Michael's father, Vito, to the center of the New York mafia. It is these scenes that make the film a work of art. Without spoiling, I will simply say the Robert DeNiro as the young Vito is the best acting performance of all time, a role for which he won a richly deserved Oscar.The screenplay is full of delicious little underworld nuggets "Keep your friends close .....", "I don't want to kill everyone, just my enemies" , while it blows a dense, twisted plot past you at a dizzying and merciless pace. The cinematography is depressing and atmospheric. The score continues in the eerie role of its predecessor, foretelling death and evil.All of this makes the movie great and infinitely watchable. But it's what's deeper inside this film ... what it is really about ... that is its true genius.The Godfather Part II is not really a movie about the mafia, it is a movie about a man's life long struggle. Michael controls a vast empire that is constantly slipping out of his hands. He grows increasingly distrustful and paranoid, and even shows signs that he hates his own life. Michael almost seems to resent the fact that he is a natural born crime lord, a man who puts the family business ahead of everything.The great Don Michael Corleone can never come to terms with one simple fact.... his father's empire was built on love and respect, Michael's empire is built on fear and violent treachery.See this movie. It's three-and-a-half hours very well spent.
Great ensemble acting, great story, greatest sequel ever made. (by ballen8)
The Godfather Part 2 is the finest sequel ever made and is arguably a finer film than the original Godfather. The film is divided into two main parts - the story of a young Vito Corleone flawlessly acted by Robert De Niro and a worthy Oscar winner and the rise to power of Michael as the head of the family. Francis Coppola recollaborated with many of the crew members of the first film and again achieves a quite superb period piece thanks to the cinematography of Gordon Willis and set design of Dean Tavoularis. The acting performances are outstanding, hence three supporting oscar nominations <more>
for acting guru Lee Strasberg Hyman Roth , Michael Gazzo Frank Pentangeli and Robert De Niro young Vito Corleone . Duvall, Keaton, Cazale and Shire all provided first rate performances but it is the performance of Al Pacino which steals the show, expertly portraying Michael as a cool, calculating, suspicious Don Corleone. The film expands upon the original movie and brings us into the family's activities in Nevada, Florida and Havana. Arguably the finest movie of the 70s, a cinematic masterpiece with the greatest ensemble acting you will probably see.
Excellent, but could be in the dictionary under "sprawl" (by BrandtSponseller)
Series note: It is almost unthinkable to watch this film without having seen The Godfather 1972 first. This is a direct continuation of that story.The good news is that The Godfather Part II has many amazing qualities, including fantastic performances from a superb cast, sublime, unprecedented visuals that no one else has been able to capture since, and very engaging stories. The bad news is that this should have easily been a 10, but overall, it is so sprawling and unfocused that I can't possibly give it more than a 9, which it only earns because the assets transcend what's <more>
basically a mess overall. Because it should have been a 10, and most other reviews will tell you about the positive points at length, I may pick on more things in my review than you would think I would for a 9, but rest assured that even with the flaws, The Godfather Part II is still essential viewing.Director/co-writer Francis Ford Coppola cleverly begins the film with parallels to The Godfather. We see Michael Corleone Al Pacino "in the role" of his father, Vito Marlon Brando , from the first film, accepting prostrating guests while a party is going on outside. Like the first film, the party consumes a lot of time while we get to know some of the principal characters. Perhaps during this segment, perhaps a bit after, we realize that maybe the beginning wasn't so clever after all, because the structure of The Godfather Part II parallels The Godfather from a broad perspective, as if Coppola and co-writer Mario Puzo used the first film as something of a template to create this one.After the party is over, there is an attempted hit on Michael, and we quickly learn that not everything is rosy in the Corleone's mafia world. Michael believes that someone on the "inside" was involved with the hit. This launches a complicated sequence of events that has Michael, who is now living in Nevada, traveling to Miami, Cuba, New York, and so on. He accuses different people of involvement in the attempted hit depending on whom he is talking to. This may have all been part of a grand scheme to set up the responsible parties, but one of the flaws of the film is that Coppola doesn't convey Michael's underlying thoughts about this very well, not even later, and not through his actions. Rather than feeling like a clever set-up, it starts to feel like slightly muddled writing.During the middle section of the film, which goes on for hours, we also have a hint of a problem that plagued The Godfather--a bloated cast. There are bit too many characters who aren't well enough presented or explained. You may need to keep a scorecard.Coppola and Puzo also treat us to many extended "flashback" segments, and I mean way back, to Vito as a boy and young man, played by Robert De Niro. For my money, these were the best scenes of the film, although maybe that's a bit of my bias creeping in, as I'm a huge De Niro fan.But let's talk about the main plague of the film--sprawl. This is maybe first evident in the flashbacks. As good as they are, they go on far too long, and happen far too frequently, to sustain the momentum of either the Michael story or the Vito-as-a-youngster story. It begins to feel like we're toggling back and forth between two films, which is the track that should have been taken. The prequel, at least, would have been a solid 10.There's also a lot of sprawl in the Michael Corleone segments. Coppola appears to have been suffering from what I'd now call "J.K. Rowling Syndrome". That happens when an artist becomes successful enough that they can fire or ignore their editor s . Instead of taking good advice about where to trim fat, the artist decides to just leave much of it in, and they now have the clout to override any dissenting and more sensible opinions. The Michael Corleone story has a lot of fat, including much of the Cuba material for example, sitting around the table with the President, laboriously passing around a solid gold telephone , the Senate hearings which go on far too long to make and provide the dramatic points , and so on.The film begins to feel more like a couple seasons of a television show that Coppola tried to cram into a 3 and a half hour film, or worse, a collection of deleted scenes. The scenes, except for the fat that needed to be trimmed, are excellent in isolation. But by the time the climax rolls around, the whole has more of an arbitrary feeling--this is especially clear in the dénouement, which seems to just end.I've barely left myself room to talk about the good points. The first one, which most people mention, is the acting. There isn't a bad performance in the film, but Pacino, De Niro, and some relatively minor characters, like those played by Diane Keaton, Talia Shire and John Cazale, really stand out.The second outstanding point, similar to the first film, is the beautiful visuals. Although all of the cinematography and production design is great, what really impressed me were some of the darkly lit scenes. Characters and features of sets emerge from pitch-blackness, and everything is rich, deep shades of burgundy, brown, and orange. Amazingly, nothing gets lost in these scenes. It must be incredibly difficult to achieve without making the shots too dark, because I can't remember another film since that has been able to capture the same look. The flashback scenes are also in similar, but lighter, colors, creating an appropriate sepia-tone feel.Although the broad perspective problems are unfortunate, a closer focus on most segments of the film provides exemplary artistry. Given that, and the film's importance culturally, The Godfather Part II is a must-see.
Not Far Behind The First Film (by ccthemovieman-1)
This isn't quite as powerful as the first Godfather, done two years earlier, but it isn't far behind. It's another magnificently filmed effort, wonderfully acted and a hard film to stop once you've put it in your tape or DVD player.What makes this a notch below the first Godfather is the absence of Marlon Brando and a little too much disjointedness with flashbacks. Also missing from this film was the volatile James Caan. He was shown in a flashback scene near the end, and that was it.One thing was just as good if not better than the first film, and that was the cinematography. <more>
The browns, blacks, greens and yellows are just great treats for the eyes. I especially love the Italian houses and scenery. Why this was not even nominated for an Academy Award in cinematography is mind-boggling.The story centers around the brutal vengeance of youngest brother Michael Al Pacino . It also gives a good demonstration of how the gangster lifestyle may look attractive on the outside but really is an unhappy one despite the wealth.There are some excellent supporting performances in this film, too. I especially would cite the roles played by Michael Gazzo and Lee Strassburg.
Sequel to the original Godfather is slower moving than the original but maybe better. The first was fresh material and Brando's presence was a huge plus. But this one digs into the blood and guts of the two main characters, provoking more thought, as well as introducing us to one of the most prolific actors today.Michael's descent into darkness is terrible to behold. Tragedy surrounds him as he struggles to maintain his empire but alienates himself in the process. Hey, it's not easy holding a crime empire together. I think this film sets out to make Michael a tragic figure but how <more>
do you feel sympathy for a guy who murders family members? It's a cold world obviously, and takes a strong man to stay on top. Very interesting final scene, grim and stark, as Michael sits contemplating on a chair watching the dead leaves blow around him.Pacino's performance is magnificent. Some great scenes, especially when Michael realizes Fredo betrayed him. That simple movement of covering his forehead in shock and despair conveys so much. Michael becomes a three dimensional character in this film as opposed to the first. Pacino just nails the part.The secondary story is the rise of Michael's father, Vito Corleone and we watch the birth of a star. DeNiro even surpasses Pacino in his part, if that is possible. The calculating Vito as he calmly stalks Don Fanucci from the rooftops is classic film. DeNiro plays the role of Death himself: knife thin, pale yet slick and immaculate in appearance. How many other hit men in the movies borrowed DeNiro's look? What the Godfather does, unlike so many other films of it's generation is convey thought in simple movements. Watch DeNiro as he pales visibly, staring at an old Italian remedy of his sick baby. We know right then that Vito Corleone will do whatever it takes to protect and save his family. Watch him as Don Fanucci boards his car and leans on him. By DeNiro's expression, we know Fanucci is already a dead man. That's unsurpassed acting.The sets are beautiful to behold and this is probably the best cinematography I have seen in any movie. Early 1900's New York, in the Italian neighborhood is unreal. Watch the pedestrians and background movement while the focus of the scene is occurring. That's sheer magic. Once again, watch Hyman Roth in Cuba lie on the couch, shirtless and a gentle wind moving the drapes. We can practically feel the heat and hear and smell the city of Havana. It made me think how much care and calculation was put into this movie.Some weak points: Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth was not on par with the other actors. Gazzo as Pentangeli just grated on my nerves, especially in the first hour. I was hoping he would get whacked so he would not appear in the rest of the film. The rest of the cast is great as usual, especially Duvall and Kirby. Not much to complain about.The second Godfather, tries to do what the first does, a study of Vito vs. Michael. They both have different motivations for ruling their empire. Whereas Vito tries to do whatever it takes to rise from poverty and provide for his family out of love, Michael rules out of ruthlessness and a need to succeed to maintain his empire. You can see where the results have taken both.One of the greatest films of all time.
The second part of the family crime saga about the mafia of the Corleone clan was an event that was widely celebrated in the cinema. In particular, six Oscar awards and a recommendation of prestigious cinematographic universities where our VGIK enters, but the main thing is not this, but that after forty years this film is watched and is still being revised, and in terms of staging a frame and accents, many contemporaries have much to learn from the maestro The Corypoles. As far as I heard, the director was not going to be engaged in the second film and the studio had to make concessions, in <more>
particular in the history of Vittorio it was partly to address the source, and the story of Michael's becoming as Godfather had to be fully compiled. I finally looked at the second film and I want to share my impressions and thoughts on this matter.The second film was no less a legend than the original, not only having earned a well-deserved viewer's success and recognition of the members of the American Film Academy, but also entering the history of cinema as the best "sequel" of all time, in a number of polls - even bypassing the brilliant first picture. It was with the "Godfather, Part II" began the general fashion of assigning continuations in the headings of serial numbers written in Latin or Arabic numerals.Coppola and Puzo deliberately sacrificed the dynamic development of the plot, placing a stake on "epic breathing", amazingly conveys the scale of personalities - a special kind of titans, from each decision whose lives depend. Even the Griffith principle of the "cross" installation comparison of the vicissitudes of the fate of the founder of a powerful family who fled from his native Sicily and with great difficulty conquering authority in America, and his heir does not contribute to an increase, so to speak, the speed of rotation of the flywheel of History. The denouement is constructed in such a way that, inevitably recalling the final frames of the original, holds, rather, the opposite thought. The next cycle does not end, when you almost physically feel the change of the "spiral coil", which knocks everyone: from the exiled Coroleone rivals to the last close person, eliminated for the committed treachery. On the contrary, everything returns to its own place, as if an unperformed prophecy is being fulfilled, or the Fate enters into rights, allowing for the time being to be illusions about free will. The final turns into a start, the ghosts of the past briefly come to life at a festive family table, and Michael's strong words sound even more dramatic and naive, outraged by his father's agreement with Tom Hagen: "I have my own plans for my future." Further - silence ...At the same time, the first and second as well as the third, released after a decade and a half parts are not so much refuted as complement one another. The authors, as if expanding the initial socio-philosophical premises, are no longer limited to analyzing the actual functioning of the mechanism of the mafia "family", even significantly increasing the scale: forcing Michael to defend honor at hearings in the Senate and acquainting himself with the international interests of Corleone, as if it is a full-fledged transnational corporation. The opening of the sources of the power of Vito Andolini, on the one hand, based on the centuries-old patriarchal traditions of Sicily, proved to be stronger and more effective than modern state institutions, and on the other hand acting under pressure of circumstances, adapting to the brutal realities of the poor New York quarter. However, it can not be considered a coincidence that a memorable musical leitmotif permeates inexpressibly disturbing notes, accurately warning of the omnipotence of Rock. From the interesting is also the concept of unfolding two plot layers, where in parallel with Michael is shown also the history of the formation of Witto, in order to better show us the father's features in the son, and the son could show the paternal character. The evolution of the mafia is visible in a huge conglomerate that has engulfed the whole of America and many infrastructures are in their hands, these people have a huge influence on politicians and other power-holders. From the philosophical point of view, this film is about how difficult it is to become an independent leader, how to show that you do not attach yourself to the glory of the Father, but you yourself are able to make weighted and complicated decisions. In this respect, the drama of Michael Corleone, whose marital status at first was shaky, and the other clans conceived the evil, worked well ...Actor's works leave no doubt that before you the screen life, when the human pain is reflected on the faces of the actors. Al Pacino is great in the role of Michael, the warm heart gives way to the pragmatism inherent in the Head of the Mafia clan. Young Vittorio performed by Robert de Niro was able to show charm and become the future of Don with him, too, there were many events that change character. All the actors here are in unity and show how it is necessary to plunge into the role, in all to see a lot of work for what each of the actors thank you very much.Verifying: A great movie that is recommended to watch everyone as an example of clear, competent and well-coordinated work of the creators' team, the whole mechanism works like a clock and as a result of hard work we get no less legendary film, somewhere even ahead of the original. Timing mastodon 202 minutes does not interfere with perceiving history and imbued with the content of the saga. Such films are not at once to understand their greatness and strength to be reviewed and analyzed, but this film like the whole trilogy should not pass you by. All good and pleasant viewing!
A few historic flaws, but one of the best glimpses into turn-of-century NYC (by Mafia-Walking-Tour)
What else can be said about The Godfather series? One small gripe: The storyline shows young Vito Corleone Robert Deniro murder the local boss, then basically take control of the neighborhood. Historically, there would have been a dozen other guys in line to take the boss's spot -- young Vito, with no real connections outside of his petty thief neighbor, would have been disposed of immediately. In real life, bosses were bred into the position or it was taken hostilely from the inside. By the era that this movie portrays, Sicilian black handers and Neapolitan Camorra among others were <more>
An excellent follow up to the original, The Godfather Part II continues where the first film left off and explores the rise of Vito Corleone in a series of flashbacks that, for the most part, correlate with what is presently happening to Michael Corleone Pacino his son and successor. This is a beautifully produced piece of film, and while I still prefer the first installment, simply because of the story content, it is every bit as good. This film is best when watched together with the first film if your body can stand it. Even better, watch the third one as well for a little closure and <more>
so you can argue over whether it's a good film or not. I myself personally like the third film, but not as much as the first two. --Shelly