In short
A Film Spotting bonus/archived review of The Godfather Part II (after their 1972 Godfather review), focusing on whether it’s better than the first film and, more centrally, Michael Corleone’s character arc. They argue Part II deepens Michael’s danger and emotional conflict, while also exposing the hypocrisy of “family” as a justification for power.
Guests/hosts
Adam (Josh and Adam are the two speakers). They also reference longtime listener friend Brett Merriman and mention other reviewers (e.g., Rewatchables), but only Adam and Josh speak on the episode.
Key claims
Pacino’s performance makes Michael more compelling and dangerous; Michael’s humanity doesn’t vanish so much as it’s lost/compromised. The film undercuts the idea that the Corleones are truly “about family,” showing Michael’s hypocrisy through how he uses Kay and others as symbols/props.
Notable examples
Michael’s near-only smile in Havana (banana daiquiri moment); “Not in my house” and “I want him alive”; Anthony’s party and the senator’s “masquerade” line; Fredo’s “I’m smart… I want respect” confrontation; Vito’s Ellis Island/Statue of Liberty imagery; the Gordon Willis-lit hallway ambush of Fanucci; Kay’s “at this moment, I feel no love for you at all”; fan-service callbacks (Nino Rota theme at communion, oranges motif, cross-cutting parallels).
Written by AI. May contain mistakes. Listen to the episode to check what was said.
Chapters
Tap a time to open that second in VOContextualizing The Godfather Part II
1:41 to 3:09
Discussion on the significance of reviewing The Godfather Part II.
“If anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it says you can kill anyone.”
Comparing The Godfather Films
3:09 to 6:15
The hosts debate whether The Godfather Part II is superior to the first film.
“If they advance, as we think they very well could, it could come down to The Godfather versus The Godfather Part II to compete in the Madness final.”
Character Analysis of Michael Corleone
6:15 to 10:01
In-depth discussion about Michael Corleone's character development in Part II.
“And how great is Pacino in pulling that off?”
Themes of Humanity and Hypocrisy
10:01 to 14:01
Exploration of themes regarding humanity and hypocrisy in The Godfather Part II.
“And my sense of the Michael we get in Part 2 based on my past viewings was that it really did pick up exactly where it left off in The Godfather 1.”
Exploring the Hypocrisy of Family in The Godfather Part II
14:01 to 16:45
Discuss how The Godfather Part II reveals the hypocrisy behind the family narrative.
“And maybe that's semantics, but it's a little different.”
The Irony of Michael Corleone's Choices
16:46 to 19:56
Analyze Michael Corleone's tragic realization regarding family and power.
“I'm not saying the film is hypocritical.”
The Quest for Legitimacy and Its Costs
19:57 to 22:31
Examine the impact of Michael's quest for legitimacy and the cultural assimilation of the Corleones.
“But that contradiction, that hypocrisy are what really define this character and make him such a fascinating one.”
Imagery and Cinematography in The Godfather Part II
22:32 to 25:36
Explore the recurring motifs and cinematographic techniques in The Godfather Part II.
“Here, that great image of a very young Vito on the ship approaching.”
Fredo's Anger and Michael's Confrontation
25:37 to 28:00
Delve into the emotional confrontation between Michael and Fredo, highlighting family tensions.
“feel tense, suspenseful, dangerous, and morally conflicted.”
Fredo's Struggle for Respect
28:00 to 29:49
Explore Fredo's character as he grapples with his role in the family and seeks respect.
“You're my kid brother and you take care of me.”
Show all 19 chapters
Supporting Characters and Performances
29:50 to 31:38
Discussion on the supporting roles in The Godfather Part II and their impact on the story.
“Is that he somehow is pathetic, is completely out of place, completely incapable, yet somehow manages to capture our sympathy as well.”
The Role of Kay in the Narrative
31:39 to 35:16
Analyze the character of Kay and her evolving significance in the sequel.
“You said that you felt in The Godfather 1, the one thing maybe it was missing is just a little bit more Kay.”
Editing and Symbolism in the Sequel
35:17 to 37:42
Examine the editing choices and symbolism related to female characters in the film.
“And, you know, so Keaton is like so crucial to this.”
Gestures and Character Depth
37:43 to 39:50
Discuss the small gestures and moments that convey deeper character insights.
“That line we were talking about where he says, don't think it ever extends to my family.”
Fan Culture and Sequel Dynamics
39:51 to 42:02
Reflect on how The Godfather Part II relates to modern fan culture and sequel expectations.
“And I think a little gesture like that speaks to the goodness of an ethnic community that could still be independent of all this crime and killing and that sort of stuff.”
Thematic Callbacks and Symbolism in The Godfather Part II
42:02 to 46:02
Explore the recurring themes and symbolism, particularly the significance of oranges, in The Godfather Part II and how they connect to the first film.
“De Niro's veto in one of the flashback sequences, buying oranges on the street, right?”
Character Motivations and Performances
46:02 to 49:12
Discuss the character motivations, especially Michael Corleone's evolution, and the standout performances in The Godfather Part II.
“Two other just quick things that I've got in my notes that I appreciated this time or that stood out to me.”
The Godfather Part II: A Masterpiece?
49:12 to 50:29
Contemplate whether The Godfather Part II is indeed the best film ever made, considering its complexity and emotional depth.
“Well, that's where we're going to end it.”
Final Thoughts and Audience Engagement
50:29 to 52:31
Wrap up the discussion by reflecting on personal preferences between the two films and encouraging audience engagement.
“Sometimes when you're right, you're right.”
Transcript
Automatic transcript. May contain errors.0:00Josh Larsen:Film Spotting is presented by Regal Unlimited, the all-you-can-watch movie subscription pass that pays for itself in just two visits. See any standard 2D movie, anytime, with no blackout dates or restrictions. Sign up now on the Regal app or at the link in our description and use code FILMSPOT26 to receive 15 % off.
0:24Josh Larsen:What kind of a show are you guys putting on here today? You're not interested in art? No. Well, look, we're going to do this thing. We're going to have a conversation.
0:58Adam Kempenaar:and most critically acclaimed movies. And this is one that we haven't actually shared with the film spotting public ever before, just with family members.
1:09Josh Larsen:Yeah, a bonus bonus is what this is. I mean, we thought of doing this after our Sacred Cow 50th anniversary review of The Godfather. We just thought, how can we talk about The Godfather and then just move on and not reckon with The Godfather Part 2 as well? So we did review Part 2 as a bonus show. For film spotting family members not long after that. And yeah, now we're going to share it with everyone. So from February 2022, here is that review of The Godfather Part 2. If anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it says you can kill anyone.
1:52Adam Kempenaar:Is it worth it? Film spotting bonus content as we discuss The Godfather Part 2 following our recent Sacred Cow review of the first Godfather from 1972. And I'm inclined, Josh, of course, because it's the lowest hanging fruit to start with something along the lines of, is this movie actually better than Godfather 1? and that inclination stems from a few things. One, it's just inevitable when you've got two movies of this stature and reputation coming out within two years of each other. You've got to compare them. The fact that they have, spoiler alert, both stood the test of time and are both masterpieces kind of begs the question.
2:49Adam Kempenaar:We also did just watch these movies almost back to back, So have them very clear in our minds. We also have Film Spotting Madness, the best of the 1970s, coming up, where this decision may actually be forced upon us before the final round. If they advance, as we think they very well could, it could come down to The Godfather versus The Godfather Part II to compete in the Madness final. And there are also things like the once-a-decade sight and sound list that come out. We did our own kind of riff on it back in 2012. Obviously, in a few months, we'll get the 2022 version. And you can't cheat. It's not a film spotting top five list where I want to just combine two movies.
3:41Adam Kempenaar:You got to pick The Godfather or The Godfather Part 2, or, you know, you can put them both in your top 10. I made the decision back in 2012 to go with The Godfather Part 1. After saying all of that, I'm going to resist, and maybe we'll come around to it. I was actually texting with a longtime listener, friend of the show, Brett Merriman, over the weekend after re-watching The Godfather Part 2. and we were dancing around this question and we have initially different answers to the question, but I like where we ended up better or where I should say Brett ended up. He said maybe the question is, after two movies, not which film was better, but is Michael Corleone the greatest character in cinema history?
4:29Adam Kempenaar:Are you willing to go that far?
4:35Josh Larsen:Um, no. I mean, throwing that at me immediately? No. I mean, he's Shakespearean. He's grand. He has as many layers as you would hope for a cinematic character to have. But I'm going to have to do a little more research on that, Adam, before I give him that status. And, yeah, as those who follow me on Letterboxd know, I'm definitely not going to choose a Godfather film in this conversation. I pretty much set that aside as soon as this second film started. I don't, I think doing that does a disservice to both films. And I know there's hypocrisy there. We're going to talk about hypocrisy in this conversation, I think.
5:18Josh Larsen:and there's hypocrisy in me who is part of a show that is built on lists and ranking and all that sort of nonsense to refuse to participate here but I'm just not going to do it I just want to talk about other things so I'm glad you're suggesting a different avenue to do that maybe we'll create another Patreon tier and that tier I will reveal which film I really think is better how much is that worth? for now let's see let's go back to your Michael Corleone question. And wow, what a great character who is given much more depth, much more conflicting. The audience has many more conflicting responses to him, I would say, in part two than they do in part one.
6:08Josh Larsen:And so is Michael a more compelling character in part two? Yes, I will concede that. That is without a doubt inarguable. And how great is Pacino in pulling that off? I mean, the narrative does it, of course. This is his story, fully his story now. It's not, we talked about how that opening wedding sequence in part one set up, I don't know, 10 potential narratives for a movie. And Michaels was one of those. We know from the opening moments, he's in that seat. He's in that chair. The blackness is now behind him. And this is going to be his story. And Pacino, to his credit, steps up to the plate and just knocks it out of the park.
6:52Josh Larsen:There's a further stillness here. There's a further controlled element. There's a dangerousness to Michael Corleone in this movie that despite all the havoc and murder and death he instigated in the first film. He was dangerous there, but there's a further sense of danger to him here that Pacino gives us in how he holds himself. That connects, I should say, we'll get to De Niro, to De Niro, but that connects to the dangerousness that I have always associated more with De Niro in his performances. But somehow he and Pacino, despite not sharing a scene together, are reverberating on that same sort of electricity.
7:33Josh Larsen:They capture that same sort of electricity. How about the fact that Michael Corleone smiles, if I'm correct, just once in this movie? And it's not so much that he smiles, but it's how quickly it's withdrawn and what replaces it. This is in Havana with Fredo and Fredo turns to him, you know, ridiculous, out of place, doesn't know what he's doing Fredo and asks, how do you say banana daiquiri in Spanish? You know, making a fool of himself. Michael chuckles. He can't help but kind of laugh at his brother a little bit. Right. It's instinctive. And he says, you say banana daiquiri. Right. Half an instant later, Fredo turns around and that smile, that genuine smile, just it's like he realizes he made a mistake.
8:25Josh Larsen:He let emotion in. He let emotion into someone he knows he's going to have to cut out. And immediately we get the killer shark eyes back. So I think Pacino is, you know, just doing all time work here. I think we also see the birthing of maybe big Pacino. How about the delivery of not in my home? Like you can see where he's going to go in later years. But this is this is just a supreme performance.
8:51Adam Kempenaar:Yeah, it really is. And I knew that that question or Brett's question was probably a bit much to start the conversation off, certainly without any warning whatsoever. So ever, it's a big thing to tackle as you think about the entire history of cinema and all of your favorite characters. But I like the question for many reasons. One is that I think it's a conversation that you can actually have about this character and about this performance. But also because it gets at what for me was, I suppose I'll say, the surprise of The Godfather 2. When we talked about The Godfather, we got into some of the things that maybe we weren't expecting or we had a certain image in our mind based on previous viewings.
9:39Adam Kempenaar:And this time we keyed in on something else. Last time it was just the structure and how sound and how tight it was. here it was the arc of Michael's character and what it builds on from The Godfather Part 1. And my sense of the Michael we get in Part 2 based on my past viewings was that it really did pick up exactly where it left off in The Godfather 1. And what I mean is we mostly see, despite how touching some of those scenes are between him and his father and even early on how warm and gentle he is with Kay. Once he joins his father, once he says, I'm with you, and those wheels get set in motion of him becoming the Don, we see that humanity just sort of vacate Michael.
10:45Adam Kempenaar:And he is that shark by the end of it. And where this movie starts, that's definitely still the Michael we see, right? In all of the conversations with the senator, he's even colder and more ruthless than anything we saw in The Godfather Part One. But over the course of this film, what makes it again so tragic? I talked about how effective the arc was in Part One as well. he says to Kay it's not me it's my family and then of course by the end not only is he in he's all the way in the Godfather part two really does build off of that but it doesn't just keep Michael as this kind of villainous character or someone who may have good intentions but can't stop himself from taking out all of his enemies and killing people even if it means it's his brother we see the humanity fighting through.
11:43Adam Kempenaar:And you joked about Big Pacino, but those moments where he actually lets out his emotion, when he says, in my house, you know, and he says to one of his heads of security, I want him alive. We see how angry he is. You know, this is a Michael who we've seen be completely still and be unaffected no matter how intense a situation is. and in that moment when his wife and kids were almost killed along with him we actually see the emotion that stirs in him and then when you get to some of those scenes with his family with Fredo even though he knows it that moment where Fredo finally confirms that he did betray him and we see Michael sink, there is a level of emotion to this performance that is constantly reminding us that despite all the terrible things he's doing, all of the ways that he is distancing himself from the family he seems to care so much about, Kay and his kids, he nevertheless is still a figure who's trying to do the right thing.
12:57Adam Kempenaar:he is trying to keep both of his families together and the costs of doing both of those things make it so that he's going to compromise at least one of them but he senses that you see that in Pacino's performance you see that in his Michael the toll it takes on him over the course of this film and if it was just him being the I knew it was you Fredo and I'm going to whack my own brother guy there would be some fun in that but it wouldn't take on the tragic proportions that this movie does. And this character wouldn't be in the running for greatest character in cinema history if it wasn't for the full scope of that arc.
13:38Josh Larsen:Can I offer a less sympathetic viewpoint on that, which is not to take away from anything regarding the performance and what you've said about the performance, because I think it all still works for this as well. But I see this less as a man whose humanity is still trying to claw its way back than a man who realizes slowly he's lost his humanity. And maybe that's semantics, but it's a little different. It's coming at it from a little different direction. And this connects with that idea of hypocrisy that I was kind of touching on, because I do think that both of these movies, they are not only critical favorites and end up on sight and sound lists, but these are huge popular hits.
14:22Josh Larsen:These are movies people watch together as families. on Thanksgiving, right? And have traditions. And I think that's because we like to think that the Godfather films are about family, above all, that this is really a family story. And even Michael is a guy who has found himself in this situation, but because he values his family so much, he has to go to these lengths. I think part two, what stood out to me about it is that it very purposefully exposes the hypocrisy of that. And it does it very sneakily because we're set up at the beginning, that party that he throws for his son, Anthony, I think, right?
15:01Josh Larsen:Anthony's first communion. The senator comes up and says to him in that tough meeting, I despise your masquerade, you know? And what does Pacino say back? We're both part of the same hypocrisy. He's right, but never think it applies to my family. And that's where I think Michael Corleone and the film diverge. Is that understanding? Because this whole family thing to me in watching this movie, and this relates to why I see it's Michael coming to the slow awareness of this. The whole family thing is a hypocrisy. It's a way for Michael to justify his own greed and his own power and retaining that power.
15:38Josh Larsen:Think about the fact that he puts Tom in charge of buying his son a Christmas present, right? Right. Think about the fact, let's stick with Anthony here a minute. Consider this exchange with Anthony when they're talking about this party. Michael says, did you like your party? Anthony says, I got lots of presents. Michael says, did you like them? And Anthony says, I don't know the people who gave them to me. That's not family. That party had nothing to do with family. It's about greed, status, and power. It's about what he thought he was turning away from at the beginning of the first film, but has completely succumbed to.
16:14Josh Larsen:And I think this is why Fredo is so key. Fredo is the proof of this. Why would you kill your brother if it's really about family? Sure, he's the goofball, but that is the ultimate sentence in like, that's the choice. You make the choice. Do you want your status? Do you want your wealth? Do you want your power or do you want your family? Stop telling me it's about family when you're going to knock off Fredo. And again, I want to be clear. I just want to be clear. I'm not saying the film is hypocritical. I'm saying the film is exposing Michael's hypocrisy. And also the trajectory of the character to me is the slow, tragic awareness he comes to that he always claimed to like his family.
17:02Josh Larsen:And he doesn't. Not Kay, not Fredo, not his kids.
17:06Adam Kempenaar:Yeah, I mean, what you're describing is the reason why we talk about these films as Shakespearean and as Greek tragedies, because that is the tragic irony of the character, that very contradiction that you're describing. And no matter what your best intentions are or what you claim your best intentions to be, your actions actually suggest something else. That said, and I don't think we're really diverging from each other, I am reading it a little bit more charitably in terms of Michael because I think there is a difference in, to use your words, succumbing to the greed and power. And there's even a difference in succumbing to something that you are ostensibly actually the cause of and actually wanting that.
17:51Adam Kempenaar:In other words, you not being part of some larger trajectory that you are somewhat powerless to totally avoid. I think that's what we see to some extent in The Godfather Part 1, right, where he makes a choice ultimately. The choices are his to do what he does. But at the same time, what choice does he have? That's how he sees it. That's how his family even ultimately sees it. He's got to protect his father. He doesn't have a choice. If that means taking out some bad guys, a cop and a drug dealer, he's going to take them out because protecting his father is all he really cares about. If it means basically coming over to the dark side in that moment at the hospital, well, he's going to do it because he's going to do whatever he has to do to protect his father.
18:33Adam Kempenaar:I really do think that the hypocrisy you're describing and everything that makes that amazing Lake Tahoe sequence at the beginning so incredible is what supports what I'm arguing, which is that, yes, he ultimately is in some ways a victim to the very thing he is propelling forward. forward. And that is this goal of legitimacy, this goal at the end of The Godfather 1, he says to Kay in five years will be totally legitimate. I do believe that Michael actually still wants that. I think the Michael we see in The Godfather 2. But why does he want it? Well, I think he wants it because I give Michael the credit as a human being.
19:19Adam Kempenaar:Maybe this is where we diverge, Josh. I think that Michael Corleone still deep down wants to be happy with his family, that family is the thing he values most. But juggling the responsibilities of both families as he sees the responsibilities, as he sees the burden on him, that's not something he can actually navigate. But I do believe that he thinks it. I do believe he cares about, you know yeah of course he's gone doing business this is the point and that means that tom hagan is going to buy his son a gift but that doesn't mean he doesn't care about his son i mean that doesn't mean that it's what you do it's not what you say i mean that's that's right the proof is on the screen and i guess but but is the the burden of all those other things the weight on him to take care of the family business such yeah we can have a little bit of a little bit of sympathy for someone who I'm not saying necessarily you need to feel sympathetically about.
20:18Adam Kempenaar:He does things that make him a monster. But that contradiction, that hypocrisy are what really define this character and make him such a fascinating one. And I just want to go back and clarify where I was going with the Lake Tahoe sequence. He says we're going to be legitimate. And with that legitimacy comes this complete sort of refutation of your family heritage. We go from the Italian wedding at the beginning of The Godfather I to this completely impersonal, nobody knows each other, senators, all these people there just completely for appearances. The food being served. The food being served.
21:00Adam Kempenaar:They can't play Italian music. They play Pop Goes the Weasel. They defy all that. You've got that senator actually saying, and I love that it's deliberate. I love that the movie makes it clear that his mispronunciation is deliberate. Yeah. He says, Vito. He says, Vito Corleone. And later we hear him say Corleone perfectly fine. It is a reflection of his distaste for the family, that even when he's putting on airs and he's acting like he's happy to be there, he's still going to get a little dig in on them. But it goes back to what I was saying during the Godfather One discussion and kind of tapping into sort of the 70s sensibility and sense of alienation, if you will, in this Vietnam era where Michael says to Kay, you know, who's who's naive?
21:46Adam Kempenaar:Who's being naive? The U.S. government, really. Politicians are no different than the Corleone family. Well, we really see how true that is when we see the costs of that attempt at legitimacy. It actually is even more corrupt. The family only goes into a darker place and a more sinister place in this world where now they're actually closer to accomplishing the thing they always wanted, the thing immigrants long for, which is actually being assimilated into culture. The more they get assimilated into this culture, the worse it gets.
22:26Josh Larsen:Well, and along those lines, how about the recurring use of the Statue of Liberty in the imagery? We talked about that with the first film. Here, that great image of a very young Vito on the ship approaching. I think he's on the ship at this point, but he's looking out a window, sees the Statue of Liberty, which is beautifully reflected in that window. So we get.
22:47Adam Kempenaar:Can I just add to this real quick, Josh? I'm sorry, because I think the moment you're talking about what's even better about it, he's not on the ship yet. The moment you're referring to is the reflection. He's actually in that he's in that isolation cell. Yeah, that could be Ellis Island. So it's that isolation cell and that dichotomy of the land of freedom and opportunity. He's not there yet. There it is. And it's right there. You can almost touch it. Yeah. He's stuck behind the barrier.
23:13Josh Larsen:Yeah. It's a great image. And we see the Statue of Liberty again in a much more throwaway subtle image, which is this is where Vito, older now, has established himself as much as he can. young man in New York City, and he goes to a music hall performance. And there the backdrop of the production going on is this curtain, and you see the Statue of Liberty painted on there. So I just like how they're using this recurring motif to express that continual yearning of becoming legit, finding your place in this new place, and what the sacrifices that takes, and the moral and personal sacrifice it takes.
23:52Josh Larsen:So while we're talking imagery, You know, we kind of tagged on Gordon Willis, cinematographer, at the end of our conversation last time. Let's foreground him here. I'm wondering if there is a shot, a use of the camera, a use of lighting that is perhaps a favorite or one of your favorites from the film. The one, you know, you could maybe choose Back to Ellis Island, that tracking shot along all of those faces, the waiting faces until we arrive at the young veto. And you just think, because of the expansiveness of both of these movies, how each of those faces holds a story as rich and layered of a family story as the one we're getting, right?
24:31Josh Larsen:I love the time the camera takes to let us actually look at each of those faces. But for me, the Gordon Willis shot is when Vito, De Niro's Vito now, is waiting, lying in wait to kill Fanucci. played by Gaspar Basha. That's just where I was going.
24:48Adam Kempenaar:When he steps out of the darkness there in the hallway.
24:51Josh Larsen:The use of that hallway lamp, you know, and how Finucci, Vito turns, takes out the lamp, the light bulb, so that it's dark in the hall. Finucci notices it, flicks it a little bit to get it to flash. And it flashes on and off, cut to De Niro, hiding in the corner of the hallway, and he's exposed with each flash. And just how the use of lighting amps up the tension. Is he going to be seen, what's going to happen. And it's just, you know, I think, I think we can glamorize the violence and the killings in a lot of these movies in a way that maybe we should take a step back and consider when is it being, um, you know, yeah.
25:34Josh Larsen:When is it being glamorized and is that such a good thing? But there is also artistry at work in making each of these moments feel tense, suspenseful, dangerous, and morally conflicted. I think when it's presented with this much care and craft and technique, it gives you the time and space to think about what you're watching rather than a quick kill shot. And that's what the lighting in particular in this sequence does. So for me, that's the Gordon Willis shot.
Read the full transcript
26:02Adam Kempenaar:Yeah, I think it probably is for me too. And I think that it portends so much. And the other shot I'd mentioned is the one I interrupted you about. It's seeing Vito looking at the Statue of Liberty through the glass. But when you think about that scene in the hallway, you're right. It could have been handled so many different ways. And it suggests that as stealthy, as smooth, as seemingly sort of uncaring, if you will, that Vito seems to be in terms of at least being able or being willing to carry out some of these tasks. In that moment, there's just enough hesitation and there's just enough kind of fear in De Niro's face that I think it suggests that he's willing to do it, obviously.
26:54Adam Kempenaar:He's planned to do it and he is going to do it, but it's something that he has not done before. And he knows that he's crossing a certain threshold when he does it. And it's all captured there just in that cinematography and in De Niro's performance. I'm thinking about all the supporting performances here, but especially John Cazale as Fredo. And another touch I loved, and I'd love to know whether or not this was a Coppola staging thing, the production designer, whether it was a Cazale idea or just the alchemy of all of these different talents coming together. The scene that we get out at the house that leads to Fredo's death, where Michael confronts him.
27:50Adam Kempenaar:And Fredo explains how angry he is at Michael and how he's mad about being passed over. I've always taken care of you, Fredo. Taken care of me? You're my kid brother and you take care of me.
28:09Josh Larsen:Did you ever think about that? Did you ever once think about that? Send Fredo off to do this, send Fredo off to do that.
28:19Adam Kempenaar:Let Fredo take care of some Mickey Mouse nightclub somewhere. Send Fredo to pick somebody up at the airport.
28:26Josh Larsen:I'm your older brother, Mike, and I was stepped over. That's the way Pop wanted it. It ain't the way I wanted it! I can handle things. I'm smart. Not like everybody says. Like dumb, I'm smart and I want respect.
28:43Adam Kempenaar:The fact that we see Cazale that entire time, the more agitated he gets, the angrier he gets, the more force he tries to exert, that is all completely hampered by the chair that he is sitting in. He's sitting in that kind of reclining chair where his entire body is sunk into it. And it just seems such a perfect encapsulation of who Fredo is, that in this moment, when he's trying to assert himself on the world and and assert himself above his brother he's still physically struggling he's going against gravity just trying to almost get up out of the chair that that moment is one i had never really paid attention to josh i don't know if it caught you as well where he almost looks silly in a way fredo usually kind of looks silly but he's trying so hard to be so serious and to be so powerful and all we can do is kind of shake our heads because he comes off as so ineffectual just by the way that he's sitting in that chair.
29:49Josh Larsen:Yeah. I mean, that's the wonder of Cazale's performance, right? Is that he somehow is pathetic, is completely out of place, completely incapable, yet somehow manages to capture our sympathy as well. And Fredo is really like the second most important character in this story, you could argue, I think, in terms of tracing some of these themes we've actually been talking about. other supporting performances i mean lee strasberg famed acting teacher is hyman roth somehow the miami mobster who is seems more in control and um merciless than michael with but somehow at the same time being friendlier that's the magic of that performance right like you you kind of know where you stand with michael even if he's saying a polite thing with uh hyman roth you're just never quite sure so slippery and come on we talked about richard castellano as clemenza in the first film how much we love that relatively small supporting part okay if you're going to cast a young clemenza get someone to do justice to castellano's clemenza you got to get that right and i i don't know about you but bruno kirby who i had completely forgotten have seen this film you know a couple of times spent a long time completely forgot that kirby was the younger
31:05Adam Kempenaar:clemenza and he's great he's so great he's great he's always got food in his mouth and i'm pretty sure you actually watch him grow as the movie goes on i really think you do because he's he's a lot
31:17Josh Larsen:he's a smaller guy here than clemenza grew up to be yeah but yeah you completely buy them as as uh one and the same and you know we talked a little bit differed a little bit on um dian Keaton and the use of Kay in the first film. Oh, I've got a thought here. Yeah, I'd love to hear it. I think, you know, well, go ahead. Tell me what you got.
31:36Adam Kempenaar:I think that you will appreciate this, though it would be ironic if you disagreed with me. You said that you felt in The Godfather 1, the one thing maybe it was missing is just a little bit more Kay. We needed one more scene, maybe even one more scene where she wasn't with Michael just to a little bit more deeply understand that character. You were, and I don't mean this in a flip way, essentially applying the Bechdel test to it, you know, sort of like give us a little bit more with that character. And I am not suggesting that another scene with Kay would have ruined the whole movie or wouldn't have made her character more interesting.
32:17Adam Kempenaar:But I also feel that movie is so perfectly constructed that I just don't know what an extra scene would do. I'd want to know what that scene is and what its function is before I'd be like, yeah, let's definitely give Kay more scenes. But in The Godfather Part 2, Josh, I really did feel the absence of one more Kay scene. And the reason is because we go so long between scenes with Kay. It's kind of like The Godfather 1, and there's a long absence when Michael is dealing with business, basically, right? Or when he's off because of the family business, he's hiding out in Italy. And I think even just like The Godfather 1, we get one scene with her where she interacts with Tom Hagen.
33:02Adam Kempenaar:In Godfather 1, she comes to try to see Michael. He says, he's not here. I don't know anything about him. In this one, she tries to leave the compound with the kids. And he says, no, for your safety, you got to stay here. You can't. But otherwise, it goes basically from the scene at the beginning where they're almost killed and maybe something after that, him leaving, and more or less the whole movie transpiring until we get near the end and we get that big, dramatic, emotional reveal of her saying what happened to the baby that she lost. and even though I'm sure someone's going to argue this and I get it even though we see enough kind of icy tension between them at the beginning and then everything we see Michael doing in between shows us just how distanced he is from his family and how much humanity he seems to be losing there still was an absence to me or a gap between where Kay and Michael are at the beginning of this film to then where she is when she is not only throwing in the towel on their marriage, but she's doing the most hurtful thing she could possibly do to him.
34:13I felt like I needed maybe just one more scene.
34:17Adam Kempenaar:And again, maybe even not another scene with Michael, but I needed to just a little bit better understand just how distanced and isolated she felt from him. And not only that, how angry she really was towards him. I don't know that we get quite enough.
34:33Josh Larsen:Yeah. Well, I think that's maybe because in this film, she's actually more instrumental to how we feel about Michael than she was in the first film. You know, she was kind of, for lack of a better phrase, along for the ride in this family saga. And in this film, she is now officially, really officially part of the family. So that might be it. I will say I did not, you know, go into this viewing with that at the top of my mind at all, like counting scenes of K or anything like that. I came out of it really feeling like Keaton made more of an impression on me, but still thinking like, yeah, she didn't get a ton of scenes, did she?
35:11Josh Larsen:In part two either. But all that being said, she nails the scene she gets even more so. And that line reading of, at this moment, I feel no love for you at all, is just not only delivered perfectly in the context of those two people being together in that particular 10 seconds, but instructive of the entire arc for him and the film. And, you know, so Keaton is like so crucial to this. I also thought, you know, just talking about how her character is used in terms of some of the more formal elements. There is so much incisive editing going on in both of these films. And how about the cut from the sequence where the senator has been set up with the prostitute who is dead.
36:03Josh Larsen:And at this point, the senator is just standing or sitting distraught in the bedroom with the dead prostitute. And we cut to Kay pulling up at the estate. Both women absolutely used as props by these men, the senator and the prostitute, Michael and using Kay the same way. Obviously, more personally, at some point had more personal attachment, emotional attachment. But still, she has become essentially a prop, a symbol for what he wants the family to look like.
36:35Adam Kempenaar:that scene with tom and the senator also of course informs in hindsight the dialogue that the senator has with michael where he couldn't be more forceful with michael and act like he has the upper hand and yet michael seems completely unfazed by it yeah and throws it back at him and says that he's expecting him to put up the gaming license money himself it's totally absurd And of course, only then later do you understand why Michael has that confidence, because he knows something that the senator doesn't, which is that his brother runs that brothel that he frequents, and he's going to have a way to expose his hypocrisy.
37:18Adam Kempenaar:He is going to be able to take advantage of his frailties and his vices. So as terrible as that scene is, thinking about how willing they are to use that sex worker in that way, basically as a prop, as a means to their end, it is one that makes us understand what Michael is willing to do and, again, why he is so confident early in that conversation with him. I even love, and this is a movie that just is full of these types of moments, The Godfather is too, the moment where the senator rejects what Michael says. That line we were talking about where he says, don't think it ever extends to my family.
37:53Adam Kempenaar:And it feels like such a major pronouncement and Michael's being so serious and thoughtful. And the senator basically just says, yeah, yeah, whatever. And the way that actor, we got to look it up so I make sure we give him credit, he's so good here. The way he dismisses that is such fun. And it reminds me of what might be my other favorite gesture in this film. I can't even fully explain it when movie moments like this just just do something to you and kind of make you make you giggle. But the sequence near the end where the landlord figures out who Vito is and he comes in to the olive oil shop and he's talking to him and he says, she can stay.
38:43Adam Kempenaar:And and I think Vito kind of smiles, Deira kind of smiles. And then he says, and I'm going to lower the rent, five dollars. And Vito just kind of leans back in his chair and looks at the other guy. He just looks at him. He doesn't do anything, but just look at him.
38:59Josh Larsen:It's such a De Niro movement.
39:00Adam Kempenaar:Oh, it's such a De Niro move. And that's enough for the landlord to go,$10. Like, he just needs to see him react like that, not even to him directly. And he's like, OK, I'll give you more. This movie has so many of those just wonderful acting touches in it.
39:16Josh Larsen:That's the dangerousness of De Niro. That's just right there, you know, under the skin that I was talking about. So, yeah, I looked it up while you were talking. Senator Pat Geary played by G.D. Spradlin, and he is indeed so good. Another throwaway gesture like that, not funny, but touching, actually, I found involving De Niro's veto, is after he has been working at this point at a grocer's, and De Niro gets fired because Fanucci comes in and lays the pressure on the grocer and says, I think it's like, hire my nephew or something like that, you know, and fire this guy. and um de niro takes it you know calm walks out the door and the grocer chases him down the street with a box of food to give to his family and just kind of it just kind of counters the sense of i don't know you know i i know these films at the time got some pushback from italian americans about the depiction of what um that meant to be someone from italy in the u.s and are we kind of relying on stereotypes here.
40:19Josh Larsen:And I think a little gesture like that speaks to the goodness of an ethnic community that could still be independent of all this crime and killing and that sort of stuff. So that was kind of like a throwaway moment that I really did appreciate. Can I throw one thing at you before we kind of wrap up here that did strike me? Kind of like a new, not revelation, but just a new thought in revisiting this, going back to how we started our conversation about the Godfather, but it was really interesting to watch The Godfather Part II now that we are more than ever awash in a cinematic landscape of sequels and reheats and rehashes and legacy quills and whatever you want to call them, because that's what The Godfather Part II was, right?
41:05Josh Larsen:And it made me think about how does The Godfather Part II fit within fanboy culture? And I do not mean at all to put this on the same level of something like the MCU or Star Wars, but it did occur to me that this movie is kind of functioning for fans, somewhat in the same way that fans of those franchises watch them. It's a sequel that knows exactly what its audience wants, and it gives them that. I already alluded to this when I talked about how it does feed us that it's all about the family at the beginning before, to my mind, subverting that. This is a movie full of Easter eggs and callbacks.
41:43Josh Larsen:I noticed for the first time Nina Rota's theme being played on the church organ during Michael's son's first communion in 58. There's no reason that would happen in that church ceremony, but that's what you get. And of course, that's for the fans to geek out on that. How about De Niro's veto in one of the flashback sequences, buying oranges on the street, right?
42:07Adam Kempenaar:Yeah. And And real quick, there's a bunch of oranges in this film. Just like the oranges mean death a couple times in The Godfather Part 1. Johnny Ola comes in with oranges at the beginning of the film. Johnny Ola, who is Hyman Roth's representative, and they're, of course, going to try to kill Michael. Don Fanucci buys oranges just before he is killed. There's at least one more orange reference in The Godfather Part 2.
42:31Josh Larsen:And then you get callbacks, of course, like Michael saying, I'll make him an offer he can't refuse. Like this is this is what was made me kind of laugh a little bit is this is all the sort of stuff that fans would eat up. But some critics would kind of point to nowadays and say and what they'd call a fan service. Right. So it's it's a sequel full of fan service. Again, don't mean to put these two. Yeah. These two things on the same level. But it was just interesting to watch the movies function in somewhat similar ways.
43:02Adam Kempenaar:Sure. I mean, Coppola uses some of the same techniques and they are callbacks. You're absolutely right. There's a bunch of them. And I did note all of the ones that I saw. I'll mention a few, even just the cross cutting of the gunshots when Vito kills Don Fanucci, of course, corresponding with this parade festival that's going on in the streets, which mirrors the baptism sequence at the end of The Godfather Part One and the cross cutting there. The baptism being equal to that in terms of the family really starting in some ways, the reign of Vito Corleone starting in that moment when he kills Don Fanucci, and the reign of Michael Corleone starting his part of the family business starting in that moment during the baptism.
43:52Adam Kempenaar:How about the fact, and we've already touched on this, the movie opens with this big family sequence, the first communion mirroring the wedding at the beginning, though very different. Assassinations ending both of the films and the use of doors that shot. And I think I alluded in our Godfather One discussion to the moment in The Godfather Two where it's an even more famous door closing. But that final shot of The Godfather 1, Kay outside the office and the door closing and the new Michael forming in that moment, him officially taking over as the Don and that distance between them. In The Godfather Part II, that door closed on her when she comes back, when she's visiting the kids.
44:38Adam Kempenaar:We not only get that, but there's a moment earlier in the movie where Vito gets exposed to kind of his first moment of crime, I think. And it's when Clemenza knocks on his window. Isn't it Clemenza? Yeah, the guns.
44:55Josh Larsen:He gives them the guns. He gives them the sack.
44:58Adam Kempenaar:I'm pretty sure it's the moment where De Niro, either in that exact scene or later with Clemenza, I think it's there, though. He takes it and he goes into the bathroom and he closes the door while his wife is in the kitchen. He leaves her out while he closes the door so he can do business. He can see what's in that bag. You're right. There are a ton of touches and kind of throwbacks or callbacks to the first film. I kind of love how this movie ends, too, where it actually almost in like a memento type fashion. The last scene of this movie feels like it could have been in some ways, not literally, but chronologically.
45:39Adam Kempenaar:Yes, it's the beginning of The Godfather One, that family sit down where they're about to honor Pop on his birthday. And Michael's about to reveal that he's going off to fight in the war that he that he enlisted. Think back to The Godfather One starting just after he's come back from the war and it it ending The Godfather Part Two ending exactly where The Godfather One eventually would pick up. Two other just quick things that I've got in my notes that I appreciated this time or that stood out to me. Hyman Roth, like King Lear, talking about dividing up his kingdom as he's carving up pieces of the cake, carving up Cuba.
46:24Adam Kempenaar:also Michael talking with Tom earlier in the film and saying that the loyalty of all the men that work for the family extends as far as business they're just businessmen like anybody else and how that actually informs his understanding of the rebels in Cuba right the rebels aren't businessmen the rebels they they're in it because they actually care they mean it right so it's not about being bought. They can't be bought. They are willing to die for their cause.
46:57Josh Larsen:Yeah. And going back quickly to the final scene, you know, with Michael announcing he's going to enlist, that's why I do still feel sympathy for him. We may diverge a little bit in our reading of how the movie presents him overall, but I would agree you never lose that sympathy. And I don't think the movie wants you to. And that's proof of it, that that's where we end, where we see who Michael was before this whole incredible tragic journey began.
47:27Adam Kempenaar:And we could spend an entire podcast and do another 50 minutes probably on the Frank Pantangeli character and some of the questions that still exist to this day around some motivations and whether or not all the plotting is completely sound in this movie. I'll just say for now that I think Michael V. Gatso is brilliant as Frankie Pantangeli. I think every supporting performer in this film is pretty amazing, and three of them did get Oscar nominations. De Niro won it. De Niro, Gatso, and Strasburg for Hyman Roth. Fredo, John Cazale somehow left off of that, and of course, infamously, Al Pacino, despite this performance as Michael Corleone losing to Art Carney in the Best Actor race in 75.
48:15Josh Larsen:Yeah, I mean, can't speak to our carny, but that does seem pretty ridiculous. And just to put this in the context of, you know, De Niro's career, which most people already know, but you're looking at just before this, a year before this Mean Streets. And before that, you know, pretty minor stuff. I mean, bang the drum slowly, also in 73 with Mean Streets, the gang that couldn't shoot straight in 71. but I mean talk about a presence talk about an energy fully formed if not an actor but an energy fully formed to come on and take a role like this and just hold it so fully absolutely incredible
48:54Adam Kempenaar:it is the godfather part two a movie I want to go re-watch right now it's not too late is it Josh it's only three hours and 20 minutes I mean feels like an hour and 20 minutes depends hey that
49:07Josh Larsen:That goes back to what we talked about with the first film, you know, the patience and how it's a different way of using your running time than the two and a half plus hour movies mostly we seem to be getting these days.
49:21Adam Kempenaar:Well, that's where we're going to end it. We would love to hear from you on The Godfather Part 2, including maybe you'll answer for us definitively. Do you have a favorite? Do you have a preference? is The Godfather Part II, the movie that a lot of people think it is. I heard a little bit of the Rewatchables podcast they did on The Godfather Part II. Now, it was, in fairness, four people talking, but Josh, their discussion of The Godfather Part II, and no, I did not listen to most of it, is two and a half hours. So our 55-minute review of The Godfather kind of pales in comparison to that two and a half hour conversation.
49:57Adam Kempenaar:But all four of the commentators start off by saying that The Godfather Part II is not only the better Godfather film, and they love the first Godfather film, it's the best film ever made. They all four, I believe, feel that way, and they basically say that it's just riskier, it's more complex, and the shorthand is kind of, you know, The Godfather is a perfectly constructed pop song, and The Godfather Part II is the jazz odyssey, or the opera. it's just deeper and maybe a little bit more confusing but also more emotionally complex or resonant that's the conventional wisdom on The Godfather 2 and I think I always held it until I watched the movies back to back but we don't want to go there
50:46Josh Larsen:no no I mean as I said I'm not going to but I will say didn't listen to that episode respect that show but if you've got four people and they all pick Godfather Part 2 as the best film of all time you got to shake up your panel a little bit there, boys.
51:01Adam Kempenaar:You know what? Sometimes when you're right, you're right. You know, it's, it's, it is that good. It needs to be thought of in those terms, Josh. But we don't disagree about The Godfather Part II. Maybe I'm just a little more emphatic in my love. I mean, I don't know how you're measuring that, but sure. Well, I'm measuring about the fact that you didn't put either in your Sight and Sound Top Ten and I put The Godfather part one in my site.
51:27Josh Larsen:That's true. That's fair. Yeah. If I'm remembering, do I have either in my top 20? I don't know. We'll have to research. We'll save that for another time. I mean, you've won. You want to wipe everybody out? I don't feel I have to wipe everybody out, Tom.
51:47Adam Kempenaar:Just my enemies. I will confess, I didn't re-listen to this review. I feel like I might have come out somewhere saying that I ultimately feel like you have to go with The Godfather 1 because it's the original if you're forced to choose between the two. But historically, I've always said, Josh, that I think The Godfather Part 2 is maybe the better film. I don't know how you choose between the two of them. They're both so good.
52:16Josh Larsen:You can't bring it up now. We're on the record. We just have to let that be.
52:20Adam Kempenaar:Okay, I'll let it be. Hope you enjoyed that conversation and we'll remind you that access to the Film Spotting Archive is just one of the benefits of joining the Film Spotting family. You can learn about those benefits at filmspottingfamily.com. Thanks for listening. This conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.
From the publisher
After reviewing The Godfather in 2022 for the film's 50th anniversary, Adam and Josh devoted a bonus show to its - arguably - even greater sequel. For the first time, we're sharing that review in the main Filmspotting feed.
Unlock the full archive, Filmspotting Discord, ad‑free + bonus episodes, and more when you join the Filmspotting Family.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
