*Originally Posted April 21, 2008*
DEBATE: GODFATHER PART I vs. PART II
Dave: hey loser
Urban:hi david, what do you want to complain about today?
Dave: alright let's skip the intro and just get to the goods.I'm for Godfather I.Loser Andy is for Godfather II.I'm going to show why he's completely mental, and he's gonna come back with shit.I'll strike first blood.
Dave:When it comes to comparing these movies, great characters are essential criteria, and Part I blows away Part II.The first one has (in order of coolness): Clemenza, Michael, Vito, Sonny, Luca Brasi, Bruno Tattaglia, Sal Tessio, Tom Hagen with hair.Granted, both have Kay (who sucks in all three), loser Connie, etc.But Part I has all the winners..some losers too (moron Carlo), but mostly winners.Part II has an old dying prune-man and a dick senator.
Dave:Genco's pop is cool, I'll give you that.As is Pentangeli's brother.
Urban:dave come on, part 2 has young clemenza and tessio......plus hyman roth, johnny ola, michael's bodyguard, who is probably the coolest character in the entire trilogy, don fanucci, frank pentangeli, part 2 also has sonny and tom hagen in the flashback at the end, which is prob the best 5 minutes in film history, character wise these films are close, probably a wash, not essential to this argument
Urban:doesn’t that news reel scene in part 1 just piss you off?
Dave:Good, so we agree that Part I has cooler characters.Let's move on to criteria #2: Great Scenes.Part I has great scene after great scene after great scene.The wedding reception party at the beginning, the drug business with sullozzo, the attempted hit on vito, the aftermath, michael's involvement, sonny dying, ETC!All the way to the end, there is nothing boring or dumb.That shit in Havanna got kinda boring, Kay was a million times more annoying in II, and the Capos in II were way inferior. Fat Clemenza, Tessio, and Sonny > Al Neri, Rocco.
Urban:ok, i said that characters were a wash, and in my opinion so were the scenes, part II has the big communion party at the beginning, young vito landing at ellis island, michael's kiss of death to fredo, hyman roth's speech, michael's bodyguard "hanger choking" johnny ola, vito's first kill, the flashback scene at the end, etc.Both of these movies are probably in my all-time top five, so characters, as well as scenes, are even in my opinion.With that being said, you have to nitpick.In my opinion, part 2 is more emotional, has a more complete and better michael corleone, the blending of present time and flashback is phenomenal, and is an all-around tighter film.
Urban:i forgot to mention superior cinematography in part 2 as well
Urban:coppola was still a skinny piece of shit in 1972, he became more filled in and fat at the time of 1974
Dave:You want to talk about greatEST scenes, Turban Legend? Huh? How about almost every scene with Vito?His speech in the beginning, his attempted assassination, meeting with the five families, and his death near the end.All are memorable scenes.Throw in Louis' Restaurant in the Bronx, Sonny's death, everything in
Urban:i just told you that characters and scenes are even, both of these movies are in my top 5 of all-time, you have to look beyond the broad categories and take a look deeper, emotion, mystery, look and feel, and al pacino all dominate in part 2, maybe you should stop watching darjeeling limited and sweeney todd (that's right internet, i caught your second favorite columnist watchin a musical) and watch G2 again, it's always on spike
Dave: BOLD LIES!Do not believe those lies.I would never watch crap like Sweeney Todd, that's a desperate attack on my character because you know you're losing this debate.I know for a fact thatyou're too used to watching garbage like Matrix II,Godfather III, and Matrix III!Man you just loooove sequels.Well here's what I love.I love movies that stand on their own.As good as #2 is, it relies too much on what has been built.The whole flashback (while awesome) is only significant because of what we know about Vito in Part 1.2's storyline with Michael is just not as good as the story of the family in 1.I mean my God; if you can't see that I'm gonna send Carlo Rizzi over there with a belt.
Urban:fair points, obviously first movies stand better on their own than sequels, an amateur attempt to save yourself on this debate that i am dominating.Would anybody know who Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader were in Empire without A New Hope?Would anybody know who Frodo and Aragorn were in Return of the King without Fellowship?Probably not, but a lot of people consider these sequels to be better than the originals.Same with the Godfather Part 2, it took the same characters and continued and reaffirmed the family story into a superior film.Sorry Dave, i'd rather be garroted like Carlo Rizzi than watch Harry Potter with you tonight.
Dave:More lies.That's all I get when I debate with you.Now I know how Sean Hannity feels every night.I can see this is going nowhere.We all know that the characters are far better in GF1, and as for scenes, let me just say two words.Horse's. Head.And the best part is that Coppola used a REAL dead horse's head from a local butcher!!Is there anything cooler than that in GF 2?All you're bringing to the table is a skinny, smallpoxed infested Italian boy, two guys kissing, an old man's winded speech with his shirt open, and a couple of fobbled death scenes?Man, we might as well chalk it up to my side.There you have it.Godfather 1 > Godfather 2.I don't think anyone's here to argue that point.
Dave:so I'll leave you with my last bit of evidence:
"Hey, Mikey, why don't you tell that nice girl you love her?
'I love you with all-a my heart! If I don't see you again soon, I'm a-gonna die!'(laughs)Heh, come over here, kid, learn something. You never know, you might have to cook for twenty guys someday. You see, you start out with a little bit of oil. Then you fry some garlic. Then you throw in some tomatoes, tomato paste, you fry it; ya make sure it doesn't stick. You get it to a boil; you shove in all your sausage and your meatballs; heh?... And a little bit o' wine. An' a little bit o' sugar, and that's my trick."