A Review & Analysis The Godfather
Priceless Film
There is little argument among film buffs that The Godfather is a classic masterpiece of film making. However, it seems it has now become slightly assumed that this perception is the norm, and it doesn't hurt to re-assess our view of the movie to refresh our understanding of what makes it great.
I think the first aspect that pops in mind is the authenticity of it. There is very little dramatization within the acting, and though I was not alive when it was released, I can only assume method acting was still something underrated among the movie going crowd.
Then we have this film which, from the ground up is stuffed with actors who seem to be pursuing it from a method standpoint. Everything, from Michael to the Don, to Sonny and even Luca wreaks of something old and authentically Italian.
Then we have the actual plot and how it evolves. Non-formulaic to the core, few movies before or after have even tried to copy it. That, in itself is a testament to how unique and special it is. Michael, the hero and anti-hero, takes the reins from his father, the beloved and somewhat heroic Godfather.
To state that Marlon Brando carried this film is an understatement. It's almost as if even after he is no longer present in the movie his aura echoes throughout, as if his actions or presence was felt even after he no longer had any scenes and everyone and everything that happened afterwards was still in tune with his plans.
Many people compare this movie to Part II and are at odds when it comes to determining the better movie - I am not. To me Part II was good, but no where as great, I would say primarily because Marlon Brando was absent from it. I do not believe Al Pacino, believe it or not, did very well in these two movies, and it was only in the third where some authentic three dimensional acting comes into play.
I think the first aspect that pops in mind is the authenticity of it. There is very little dramatization within the acting, and though I was not alive when it was released, I can only assume method acting was still something underrated among the movie going crowd.
Then we have this film which, from the ground up is stuffed with actors who seem to be pursuing it from a method standpoint. Everything, from Michael to the Don, to Sonny and even Luca wreaks of something old and authentically Italian.
Then we have the actual plot and how it evolves. Non-formulaic to the core, few movies before or after have even tried to copy it. That, in itself is a testament to how unique and special it is. Michael, the hero and anti-hero, takes the reins from his father, the beloved and somewhat heroic Godfather.
To state that Marlon Brando carried this film is an understatement. It's almost as if even after he is no longer present in the movie his aura echoes throughout, as if his actions or presence was felt even after he no longer had any scenes and everyone and everything that happened afterwards was still in tune with his plans.
Many people compare this movie to Part II and are at odds when it comes to determining the better movie - I am not. To me Part II was good, but no where as great, I would say primarily because Marlon Brando was absent from it. I do not believe Al Pacino, believe it or not, did very well in these two movies, and it was only in the third where some authentic three dimensional acting comes into play.
|
Post CommentEarn QUA for FREE by contributing to MovieQUA!
Earn QUA for FREE by contributing to MovieQUA!
Login required. Please keep your comments courteous and constructive. Thanks!
There is no looking back for Vinay Sehgal and the Sehgal Group of Industries when their candidate is selected as the ...
|
A Polish contractor, Nowak, leads a group of workmen to London so they can provide cheap labor for a government offic...
|
An unlabelled crate from an unknown source is delivered to a house in the woods. The homeowner unwisely accepts the d...
|
A new kid moves into school, making enemies with the affluent societies and joining the beleaguered Science Club. But...
|