I ask this because I recently finished reading The Godfather, and I found it to be absolutely everything that has been said about it. A great read.
So tonight I watched the move for the first time.
Two things struck me: first, the movie followed the book far more faithfully than many movies do, and that was neat. Second, the movie seemed to have plenty of jumps and gaps where fresh knowledge of the book made it easy to follow.
It’s this second point that I am wondering about. For example, almost all of the scenes in Sicily were spoken in Italian with no subtitles, but I knew what was going on from the book. Likewise, many subtle details were alluded to, but possibly stood out to me only because I had the back story–Fredo compliments Michael on his facial surgery when they meet in Vegas, but it only stood out to me because Michael’s facial disfiguration was emphasized more in the book.
So there it is: Does the movie stand on its own in such a way that the whole story is understood without difficulty?
Same as the others. I appreciate movies that drop you into the middle of the story without feeling the need to explain absolutely everything being discussed by the characters, every bit of subtext. I don’t mind taking the effort to infer meaning from somewhat vague dialogue and find myself drawn out of a scenes when the filmmaker’s attempt at expository is obvious.
This was my experience, other than some confusion about the various crime families and who is scheming with whom. Which I guess is the whole point. It doesn’t help that I am not good with faces and they all dress the same .
After I watched the movie, my brother filled me in with some tidbits from the book, like Sonny’s big dick and his relationship with his mistress. And like leahcim, I was a bit hazy on who the different mobsters were. But it still was an entertaining film.
The book was hugely popular in its day and saved Mario Puzo from bankruptcy. So many initial viewers of the movie would have been familiar with the book. I’m not even sure anymore which I did first; probably the movie. So the book helped understand things better, such as at the pow wow with all the Mafia chiefs present except Chicago (too uncivilized) why it was surprising that Barzini spoke instead of Tattaglia (although I don’t think Tom even noticed the significance but Vito did).
Or various small details like why Vito didn’t do anything to stop Carlo from beating up Connie.
One thing I did notice, is that the mobsters at the toolbooth seemed to be from a totally different movie than the rest of them. Does the book give any insight into that, or was it just something I’m imagining?
I never read the book, and had no problem following the movie. The writers knew what to cut out that wouldn’t hurt the narrative of the movie (that’s what all screenplay writers do).
Much like how Baz Lurhmann’s Romeo + Juliet would have been much better if they had used FedEx.
Saw the movie first. Had no problem understanding it. Didn’t like the book as much as the movie. I think the story was better suited to a movie. I was pretty young when I read the book, not long after the movie came out, my tastes have changed and matured since then so I might think differently if I read the book again.
That’s in both the book and the movie. Mama Corleone says something at some point on the matter. Husband is the master of the wife. It wasn’t his business to get involved. They were able to provoke hot headed brother Sonny to fatal retaliation.
they cut most of the side characters out was my problem with the movie… that and I think kay was so miscast… she was supposed to be blonde blue eyes all American girl …
they did add in a version of the don’s rise that was in the second movie
its funny tho how supposedly Chicago was portrayed as hicks in the sticks when they were the dominate crew in vegas and out west until the mid 80s
And for some reason when I read the book I think of Michael douglas as mike…
A little confusing, and more so in the second part, but I’m a little slow like that.
Anyone notice that when Tessio (Abe Vigoda) has to acknowledge for the first time that Michael is the Don, he extends his *left *hand to shake hands with him?
.