i've yet to see a sequel surpass its original

Sep 22, 2007 15:51

So yesterday was a big bust (and not in either of the good ways). Vasiliki's camera inexplicably stopped communicating with the computer. Nothing done. But, in sticking around and troubleshooting and trying things, I watched The Godfather and The Godfather Part II back to back. I hadn't seen them in a long time, and I have to say:

I always read and hear about how Godfather is the example of a sequel outshining its original. What the crap are people talking about? Part I is a tightly scripted thematically rich masterpiece, where every scene hums with resonance. Part II is a sprawling, problematically epic story. It's all over the place. It's more like a biographical picture (and in my opinion, biopics almost never work from a dramatic or narrative standpoint: where's the story?), episodic and frankly, without a point.

Don't get me wrong, I liked it. It's good. Every single scene is well-crafted, beautifully undertaken, with solid performances, cinematography, and editing just as tight as the first. But the story! It's too much. It's way, way, way too much. And the bottom line is, I don't see how it even compares to the first Godfather. And it's not The Conversation or Apocalypse Now, either.

Then I watched Woody Allen's musical Everyone Says I Love You, which is good in a silly way, but definitely not great, and apart from some typically good Allen-style performances and dialogue, didn't leave enough of an impression for me to comment on.

But Godfather Part II, man. I don't know what everybody's talking about.

francis ford coppola, rant, woody allen, filmnerd, biopic

Previous post Next post
Up