the godfather 1 and 2 are the gifts that keep on givin'. godfather 1 and 2 appreciation thread

Tommy Gibbs

Superstar
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
6,343
Reputation
1,413
Daps
16,890
When I first saw the Godfather, I was about 20 years old. I thought it was one of the most overrated pieces of shyt ever. Didn't understand why anyone would like it. So a few years later, I had to read the book for an ethnic cultural studies class at ECU. After reading the book, I realized I was wrong and it made me understand it more. I THEN bought the dvd box set and watched the movie again and it was great. I watched part 2 and thought that was even better. I never liked part 3 though.
 

Peter Popoff

Black uptowns and a chess board nıgga
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
32,823
Reputation
17,913
Daps
94,985
Reppin
BRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKLLLLLYYYYYNNNN
One of the things that hurt the most is that Paramount refused to pay Robert Duvall more money, so he chose not to be in the movie. They had to write him out of the script.

3 was sorely missing Tom Hagen.
Yea, the original plot was suppose to put Tom Hagen against Michael Corleone. They should've gave him Diane Keatons bag since I think all he asked for was like 3 mil and they paid her more while he had a much more pivotal role as a main character. I would've dropped out too.
 

Erratic415

Superstar
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
6,724
Reputation
2,786
Daps
19,864
Godfather 1 & 2 were classics

but 3??? I mean wtf was that shıt, so ass and Sophia Coppola's terrible expressionless face in acting.... :mjlol:

This movie should've received terrible ratings.

My friend told me he saw it in the theater and some people in the audience cheered when she got shot
 

Piff Perkins

Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
53,817
Reputation
20,490
Daps
294,635
Yea, the original plot was suppose to put Tom Hagen against Michael Corleone. They should've gave him Diane Keatons bag since I think all he asked for was like 3 mil and they paid her more while he had a much more pivotal role as a main character. I would've dropped out too.

Yup, and it also was gonna involve their sons. The original idea was that the CIA came to Michael Corleone to collaborate in assassinating a South American dictator, things go badly etc etc. Then it shifted to Michael's son being a CIA agent involved in the assassination before ultimately taking over the family (and being influenced/compromised by the CIA). Tom Hagen was involved in both ideas and was trying to wrestle control of the family away due to the CIA shyt.
 

Peter Popoff

Black uptowns and a chess board nıgga
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
32,823
Reputation
17,913
Daps
94,985
Reppin
BRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKLLLLLYYYYYNNNN
Yup, and it also was gonna involve their sons. The original idea was that the CIA came to Michael Corleone to collaborate in assassinating a South American dictator, things go badly etc etc. Then it shifted to Michael's son being a CIA agent involved in the assassination before ultimately taking over the family (and being influenced/compromised by the CIA). Tom Hagen was involved in both ideas and was trying to wrestle control of the family away due to the CIA shyt.
They should've never made this movie and just stopped at 2. The story was very convoluted with pope assassination. It was disingenuous to put Sophia in it at all. They could've killed her in the first 30 min and had Vincent go to war against Michael.
 
Top