Something’s Gotta Give

Tags

2000's, Amanda Peet, Diane Keaton, Frances McDormand, Jack Nicholson, Keanu Reeves, Nancy Meyers, Romantic Comedy, Something's Gotta Give

I was kindly asked by the wonderful Gill to take part in the Jack Nicholson blogathon. This is to celebrate the great man’s work as he turned 80 yesterday. I’ve always liked Nicholson’s work in a variety of films so it was nice of her to ask me to join in and sing his praises. If you want to be entertained, Nicholson is your man. Anyway back to my review.

Film Title

Something’s Gotta Give

Director

Nancy Meyers

Starring

• Jack Nicholson as Harry Sanborn
• Diane Keaton as Erica Barry
• Keanu Reeves as Dr Julian Mercer
• Amanda Peet as Marin Barry
• Frances McDormand as Zoe

A sprightly romantic comedy about unexpected attraction in middle age, Something’s Gotta Give is an amusing showcase for both Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton. Sure it has its contrivances, but there’s something very amiable and surprisingly touching to this film that makes it stand out from the endless pack of romantic comedies we are assailed with.

Harry Sanborn is a successful man in his 60’s, he owns a music company and his main passion in life is easy relationships with women who are much younger. The old dog has a rule of not dating a woman over 30, which keeps his status as a perennial playboy steady. His latest conquest is the pretty Marin, who invites him to her mother’s beach house in the Hamptons, thinking that her mother Erica is busy somewhere else. To her surprise, Erica, who is a successful divorced playwright, returns with her sister Zoe and is shocked to find her daughter and Harry are something of an item. Zoe talks her round and Erica reluctantly lets Harry stay, despite her immediate dislike for him. The evening gets eventful when Harry has a heart attack when preparing for sex and is subsequently hospitalized. Informed by his doctor that he can’t travel far and must recover nearby, he ends up recuperating in Erica’s house, much to her annoyance. Harry finds Erica to be overly uptight and prickly, while Erica thinks of Harry as just a rude and uncouth womanizer. Yet being forced to take care of Harry has its impressions on Erica, whether she likes it or not. The two start out at complete odds over their ideas of the other, yet quickly these differences start to wilt and an attraction begins to form. Both of them don’t quite know how to react to this unexpected creation, though it definitely makes both take stock of things and possibly open up to welcoming love. Yet as Harry recovers, his stay at Erica’s is cut short as his health improves. As the two have now grown to love the other unexpectedly,  it’s up to Harry to decide whether he can truly change or return to his usual life of being a playboy. Add to this equation, Harry’s young doctor Julian taking a romantic interest in Erica, much too her surprise and things are about to get interesting.

Nancy Meyers provides breezy direction and writing, that still retains substance through how well-crafted the characters are. Meyers supplies a good helping of unpredictable moments to Something’s Gotta Give, that pay off and make it a funny watch. There’s something quite rejuvenating at seeing two people in the middle of their lives find romance, there are too few movies that deal with attraction among mature adults. Now it must be said that the movie does over stay its welcome due to the length of it and how it does dabble in levels of seen it all before. Generally though, Something’s Gotta Give gains major points from the casting, humorous yet moving writing and the tone of the piece. There is a level of genuine heart to things, as Erica’s seemingly comfortable existence is challenged by someone she never though she’d like. Observing the changes the attraction has for them both provides Something’s Gotta Give with a surprising emotional core, coloured with side-splitting comedy( such as Harry walking in on a naked Erica, ensuring much awkward encounters). I appreciate when a comedy has depth to it, as too many comedies forget that you sometimes need drama for the laughs to work.

Jack Nicholson is a devilish yet revealing presence as the ageing playboy, realising that life may be catching up with his lifestyle. I enjoyed how Nicholson sort of sends up the public’s persona of himself( the grinning Lothario who always looks like he’s up to something naughty), yet colours it with a surprising amount of vulnerability too. It’s an unexpected turn from him that has all his wolfish tics and adds a healthy dose of open humanity to the mix. He truly makes the part his own and I can’t imagine anyone else in the role. Diane Keaton gorgeously plays off Nicholson as the self-sufficient playwright, discovering that romance could still be on the cards for her despite her assertion that she’s passed it. A sophistication, humour and convincing clarity can all be seen in Keaton’s work, that makes you enjoy being in her company as her professional attitude makes way for touching revelation. Any romantic comedy largely succeeds or fails on the chemistry between the leads; Something’s Gotta Give joyfully fits into the former. You just get this natural and glowing way that Nicholson and Keaton interact, that really brings out the heart of both people who overcome differences to find that they might be right for each other. Then you have Keanu Reeves as the dashing doctor that could only ever appear in a romantic comedy. Reeves seems to realise this and plays the part amusingly as a sort of spoof of the dishy man in uniform that couldn’t possibly exist in real life. Amanda Peet provides sparkling energy, albeit in an underused capacity along with a wise-cracking but too little seen Frances McDormand.

So while it runs too long and isn’t above being slightly formulaic, Something’s Gotta Give has enough sharp writing and cracking performances, particularly Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton, to make it a delight.

Marvin’s Room

Tags

1990's, Diane Keaton, Drama, Gwen Verdon, Hal Scardino, Hume Cronyn, Jerry Zaks, Leonardo DiCaprio, Marvin's Room, Meryl Streep, Robert De Niro

Film Title

Marvin’s Room

Director

Jerry Zaks

Starring

• Diane Keaton as Bessie
• Meryl Streep as Lee
• Leonardo DiCaprio as Hank
• Hal Scardino as Charlie
• Robert De Niro as Dr Wally
• Hume Cronyn as Marvin
• Gwen Verdon as Aunt Ruth

A film based on a play that covers themes of family, illness and forgiveness, Marvin’s Room is a beautifully affecting movie that earns the laughs and tears it elicits in the audience through the natural work from an accomplished cast.

Marvin’s Room revolves around two estranged sisters; sweet and sensitive Bessie and driven Lee. Bessie lives in Florida, where she takes care of her bedridden father Marvin and dizzy Aunt Ruth. She has been doing this for twenty years now, yet hasn’t taken the time to really think of herself once. Lee is the more rebellious sister, who has worked hard and wants to get her life into a sense of order, complete with her two sons Hank and Charlie. Just as she appears to be, her troubled son Hank burns the house down and is institutionalized. His increasingly erratic and antagonistic behaviour towards his mother who he blames for divorcing his absent father does nothing to help, with Lee really hitting breaking point over what to do. It is around this time that Bessie discovers that she has leukaemia and that she needs a bone marrow transplant. Despite not having spoken to her sister in over twenty years, Bessie implores Lee to come and visit her. She hopes that she can find a match for the operation and hopefully bury the hatchet with her sister. Lee, even though she still has her differences with her sister, packs up her kids from Ohio and heads to Florida. The reunion is far from what you’d call an easy one for everyone involved. Bessie feels resentment towards Lee for not helping take care of their father, while Lee feels that Bessie is judging her for not being as sensitive a person as she is and thinks that Bessie has given too much of her life to caring for her family. Hank is also still troubled and distant from everyone, though he finds comfort in the form of Bessie who he believes listens to him more than his mother. Old wounds are opened as Bessie and Lee try to reconnect and Hank starts to mature in the presence of his Aunt. Reconciliation and understanding could be on their way, if everyone can finally accept the others and unearth a kinship that has long been missing.

Jerry Zaks may not have much of a cinematic finesse in his approach to the film, yet his eye is more focused on character and development( at which he scores points.) the natural and quietly emotional way that it tells the story that truly makes Marvin’s Room a moving experience. What is most surprising about Marvin’s Room is that it has a welcome dose of humour in it. It has you laughing one minute, then in tears in a heartbeat. And while this could have turned out to be a bad thing, it is actually one of the biggest successes of the film. It really brings you into the piece and highlights the naturalism and summarizes how unpredictable life can be for all of us. Dysfunctional family and the ways in which they can falter, but ultimately be reunited in unexpected circumstances is played out in accomplished fashion. Sure there are confrontations between characters, but they thankfully don’t go over the top and remain within the context of the film to its benefit. Some could argue that it is a sentimental movie, but it stays just on the right side of that to make a film that celebrates life and connection with people we never thought we’d understand. The odd mawkish moment here and there can be swept under the carpet when the film is as affecting and nuanced as Marvin’s Room. Don’t let the seemingly made-for-TV sounding plot detract you from the film, as it traverses well above manipulative manhandling of the audience in favour of soulful observation. In fact while illness forms the main crux of the story, it is the nature of family and that is most effective and compliments the scenes of disease and possible death. Marvin’s Room isn’t flawless by any means as some of the pacing is off and I might have liked it if the film ran a bit longer. But all in all, it’s a very accomplished and emotion driven story that gets your attention through the laughs, tears and smiles. Rachel Portman supplies the evolving music of this piece; splendidly supporting the quietly stirring and bittersweet parts of the film through rising rhythms and emotive piano.

Diane Keaton beautifully heads the cast with a quietly and movingly acted role of the caregiver sister finding out she herself is ill. A nuanced and sincere amount of feeling is embodied by Keaton as Bessie sensitively attempts to be brave. Genuine decency can often be difficult play without going into overt politeness, luckily Diane Keaton manages to portray goodness stunningly. There is no slipping into overly saintly or martyr like here, just a heartfelt delivery. There is just something very warm and soulful about Diane Keaton here that makes it stand out as one of her best performances. Meryl Streep is on fine form as the chain-smoking, fiercely independent sister who is trying to keep her life together, yet has to come to terms with responsibility for probably the first time. The part of Lee is a flawed woman who can be self-interested and impatient(not to mention at the end of her tether), but with Streep in the part, we get to observe how her brash outer shell has been made by her own experiences and how she really is more than a little vulnerable underneath it all. Streep works wonderfully alongside the luminous Keaton, genuinely conveying the distance and eventual closeness the siblings acquire over the course of the film. A young Leonardo DiCaprio holds his own against his older co-stars with a performance of anger, damage and eventually reflection. DiCaprio nails the troubled persona of teenager Hank and finds a feeling of loneliness and wanting for attention in there, which makes him hit it off with Bessie as he feels she gets him. DiCaprio brings layers and forceful feeling to the part which benefits from it considerably. Hal Scardino has the more modest part of the younger brother whose often buried in a book, but Scardino makes the most of it to play off DiCaprio’s intensity well. Providing amusing support is a genial Robert De Niro, portraying the yet often inelegant doctor who gives Bessie her diagnosis and whose attempts at being positive are sometimes anything but. Hume Cronyn, without uttering a word, conveys the helpless feeling of illness in old age, while Gwen Verdon is funny and sweetly touching as the scatterbrained Aunt.

Heartwarming and sincere, plus sporting a great cast of actors doing some lovely work, Marvin’s Room is a successful and touching testament to the themes of redeeming oneself and appreciating life.

The First Wives Club

Tags

1990's, Bette Midler, Comedy, Dan Hedaya, Diane Keaton, Goldie Hawn, Hugh Wilson, Maggie Smith, Sarah Jessica Parker, Stephen Collins, The First Wives Club, Victor Garber

Film Title

The First Wives Club

Director

Hugh Wilson

Starring

• Goldie Hawn as Elise Elliot
• Bette Midler as Brenda Morelli
• Diane Keaton as Annie MacDuggan
• Sarah Jessica Parker as Shelly
• Maggie Smith as Gunilla Garson Goldberg
• Dan Hedaya as Morty
• Victor Garber as Bill
• Stephen Collins as Aaron

An utterly devilish and fun comedy that follows three women getting back at their menfolk in mischievous ways, The First Wives knows how to be terrific entertainment and a sparkling showcase for Goldie Hawn, Bette Midler and Diane Keaton.

We begin in the late 60’s when four young women; Elise, Brenda, Annie and Cynthia are graduating college and promising to be in touch regularly no matter what. Decades later and the ladies have hardly been in contact with each other, through a variety of reasons despite the fact they all live in New York. Elise is an actress, who at one point had popularity but is trying to be younger as there is more demand for it in Hollywood and has turned to booze. She has also split from her producer husband Bill after he was caught fooling about with a younger actress and is now asking for alimony. Brenda has a young son and is now separated from her husband Morty;who also played away from home with a younger lady, in this case the bimbo social climber Shelley(even though Brenda was the one who helped him set up his business.) Annie is still technically married to louse Aaron though they are trying a temporary separation. It is through Cynthia that everyone is brought together, as she commits suicide following her husband leaving her and marrying someone else. Elise, Brenda and Annie meet at the funeral and spill their own problems to each other. Although both Elise and Brenda feel anguished, Annie thinks she is getting her marriage back on track, due to her ability to see the good and not confront decisions. That however goes out the window when she learns that he is actually leaving her for her therapist. Getting closer again after so many years apart, the trio decides that they aren’t just going to take this treatment and slowly they band together to formulate a plan. Three heads are better than one as they plot an amusing series of revenge schemes directed at the men in their lives. Much hilarity ensures along the way, showing that revenge can be quite fun and extremely sweet when you know what to do.

Hugh Wilson’s energetic direction moves events with a kinetic drive and humour, yet never sacrifices any of the sympathy or seriousness that The First Wives Club has to offer. There are those that will accuse this movie of man bashing from the start, but I find that to think that is missing some of the point. Sure the men depicted are not dactyl model citizens but the main focus is on the ladies getting perceived justice after being wronged. Everything is mainly done with a sprightly and at times acidic humour that makes the film very funny and not just one that ridicules men. After all it is just a film and I do t think the intention is to alienate men at all, I didn’t feel slighted by the film at all. I had an absolute ball with its mix of comedy and drama, that really got you to feel for these ladies and then take pleasure as they took back control over their lives. And talking of what made the film great, the script of arch one liners and a bundle of hilarious scenes is sufficient enough to pique anyone’s interest. Take for instance, when the ladies sneak into Morty’s apartment to search for papers that prove he’s a crook and must exit when he returns, using a window cleaner lift. If you’re not laughing by the end of that outrageous scene, you clearly have no humour. And that late rendition of ‘You Don’t Own Me’ is a showstopper if ever there was one. The music score provided is one of lively intent and dynamic jumps in tempo, which suits the film down to the ground.

The three main ladies of this comedy are sensational and their chemistry is a highlight. Goldie Hawn is side-splittingly hilarious as the vain and shallow Elise, who is desperately trying to be young through cosmetic surgery and is at times very highly strung. The energy of Hawn is superbly suited to the often manic but creative character, who emerges as quite decisive in the plans to ruin the man who wronged her. Really capturing the attention is Bette Midler; the most vindictively amusing and loud of the club. You can’t fault Midler and her knack for comedic zingers, which are dispensed with vigorous style and attitude. Diane Keaton completes the triangle of great ladies by playing the repressed Annie as a bottle of jangled nerves, waiting to explode. Keaton is a dab hand at humour but also gets the right notes of sympathy for the character too as her strength slowly reveals itself. As aforementioned, these three ladies work beautifully together and it is clear as day that they had a good time making this comedy. Sarah Jessica Parker elicits plenty of laughs playing the trashy girlfriend of Morty with an eye on getting to the top, while an amusingly tart Maggie Smith rocks it as the much widowed society lady with significant tricks up her sleeve and resources to burn. Dan Hedaya, Victor Garber and Stephen Collins are the men of the film who find out just how much revenge can hurt. Hedaya is the clear standout of the guys with his constant attempts to explain away his actions quite funny.

Funny yet knowing when to be serious, The First Wives Club is great viewing as a comedy and to watch three great actresses working together with gusto.

Manhattan Murder Mystery

Tags

1990's, Alan Alda, Anjelica Huston, Comedy, Diane Keaton, Jerry Adler, Manhattan Murder Mystery, Murder Mystery, Woody Allen

Film Title

Manhattan Murder Mystery

Director

Woody Allen

Starring

• Woody Allen as Larry Lipton
• Diane Keaton as Carol Lipton
• Alan Alda as Ted
• Anjelica Huston as Marcia Fox
• Jerry Adler as Paul House

Something of an underrated movie in the scope of Woody Allen’s prolific filmography, Manhattan Murder Mystery has a rapid fire humour and playfulness that is hard to resist. If it’s a light but still amusing comedy, crossed with a murder mystery, this could be the film for you. It isn’t going to be seen as one of his masterpieces, but in my book it deserves a lot more recognition.

Larry and Carol Lipton are a middle-aged married couple who are anything but similar. Larry is a nervous, cynical man stuck in a cycle, while Carol is adventurous and loves a sense of excitement. The couple have settled into a period of normalcy that is more or less dullness and complacency. Larry works as a publisher, while Carol dreams of opening a restaurant some day. The repetitive nature of their lives is suddenly changed when their elderly neighbour’s(an elderly couple named Paul and Lillian House) invite them to have a nightcap. Lillian is a remarkably healthy woman for her age, her husband Paul is a stamp collector, who proceeds to bore Larry to tears as he waxes lyrical about his hobby. The next day, Larry and Carol are shocked when is found dead of a heart attack. Feeling strange since they only just met the couple and because seemed so healthy, Carol in particular becomes a little suspicious of Paul. For one, he doesn’t seem at all to be an emotional wreck at his wife’s death, rather he appears to be rejuvenated and overly genial. Certain other things arouse Carol’s interest and she comes to suspect Paul of murdering his wife. Nebbish Larry dismisses her claims as fanciful but Carol sees it as an opportunity to do some sleuthing. Her good friend and recently divorced charmer Ted joins her in this amateur investigation, which makes Larry a little jealous because it is obvious Paul has feelings for Paul and she could possibly reciprocate. After being caught in many close shaves investigating the mysterious Paul, Carol manages to coerce Larry into helping, albeit reluctantly. Also of help is the sexy Marcia Fox, a mystery author and one of Larry’s clients who he plans to set up with Ted. Carol though begins to think that Marcia is more interested in making a move on her husband than his literature. As a sort of flirting rectangle forms, the quartet join forces to discover the truth. Was the neighbour really murdered by he relatively unassuming and apparently good-hearted husband? Or is Carol’s imagination getting the better of her? And what will become of these romantic entanglements between the group? To spoil all of that would be a sin.

Woody Allen brings a whole lot of energy to Manhattan Murder Mystery, blending together romantic issues with a mystery to good effect. The two things shouldn’t really work together but Allen makes it move along in an almost harmonious fashion. In a sense there are two mysteries going on, the one revolving around suspicion of murder and the other of will any of the flirtations in the quadrangle amount to anything more. There are times when the movie goes on a bit, but this can be seen as a minor flaw in an underrated entry into his movies. There is a definite ring of familiarity with the film and the characters that makes us know it’s a Woody Allen movie, and yet it still works well because the audience at least you know the kind of madcap humour you will get and the types of character personas. Allen playfully alludes to Hitchcock not some cracking sequences, mixing his trademark humour with some tension filled touches that add up to a good little package. With the use of a roving camera, everything is always moving, including the story. This unusual camera trick is employed very well to give the sense of adventure and rejuvenation Carol finds while playing Nancy Drew and the technique only occasionally becomes overbearing. A lovely jazz soundtrack is utilised in Manhattan Murder Mystery that supplies lots of fun to the amusing story.

Starring as he often does in his movies, Woody Allen reprises his worrisome, talkative and cynical persona audiences know and love to good effect here, complete with an array of hysterical one liners as his character Larry becomes concerned that his wife is concocting a fantasy.  With Diane Keaton returning to Woody Allen movies, it’s an added bonus watching them play off each other. Having been his one time muse, Keaton knows exactly how to deliver his brand of comedy with ease and it shine through here in her performance as the free-spirited and offbeat Carol. Giving the part a whole lot of energy, exact comic timing and warmth, it is a triumph for Keaton that catches the eye almost immediately. And nothing is quite like watching these two bounce off each playing the bickering married couple. Providing reliable support is Alan Alda and Anjelica Huston in delightful performances. Alda has a likable persona and cheeky grin that is used well to play the open-minded and eager Ted. There is certain twinkle in Alda’s eye that is unmistakable and adds a lot to his character. Anjelica Huston relishes the role of the vampy authoress Marcia, whose expertise in the mystery genre prove very helpful during the sleuthing that takes place. Combining sassy confidence and ample sex appeal with a quick talking intellect, Huston is the perfect actress for the part. As the suspected murderer and neighbour, Jerry Adler displays a geniality that could very well belie something else and entirely different.

Peppered with humour as well as quite a bit of tension woven in, Manhattan Murder Mystery may have that ring of been there done that in a few instances, but the overall product is a delightfully funny trifle of a movie.

The Godfather Part III

Tags

1990's, Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Crime, Diane Keaton, Eli Wallach, Francis Ford Coppola, Joe Mantegna, Sofia Coppola, Talia Shire, The Godfather Part III, The Godfather Trilogy

Film Title

The Godfather Part III

Director

Francis Ford Coppola

Starring:

• Al Pacino as Michael Corleone
• Diane Keaton as Kay Adams
• Andy Garcia as Vincent Mancini-Corleone
• Talia Shire as Connie Corleone
• Eli Wallach as Don Altobello
• Joe Mantegna as Joey Zasa
• Sofia Coppola as Mary Corleone

The third and final entry into the epic Godfather Saga, Part III is commonly seen as the weakest. It is true that it doesn’t live up to the incredibly high standard of the two films before it, but taken as a film by itself and as the conclusion of the saga it isn’t as bad as some make it out to be.

The year is 1979 , Michael Corleone is ageing and a shadow of his former self. He is haunted by decisions he has made in the past, most prominently ordering the death of his brother Fredo, and has been trying to make family as legit as possible as a way of redemption. But no matter how hard he tries to distance himself from the business, the more it keeps coming back to him. The first instance of this is the presence of Mafia boss Joey Zasa, a cunning, double-crossing man who has a bone to pick with a member of Michael’s family. The family member is Vincent, the illegitimate son of the late Sonny, whose temper and volatile actions are clearly are inherited from his father. Michael takes Vincent under his wing and sees potential in his young nephew to inherit the position as Don. The other instance that pulls Michael back into the crime game, is a deal with the Vatican Bank, that is in actual fact a concealed swindle of Michael’s money. Whilst having to cope with all of these events, the guilt-ridden Michael tries to patch up old wounds with his ex-wife Kay, and is further troubled by Vincent’s relationship with his naive, young daughter Mary.

As I’ve mentioned earlier there are flaws within the last part of Francis Ford Coppola’s film. For one, the plot involving the Vatican Bank Scandal is sometimes to hard to follow and certainly outlandish. Also, although I respect Sofia Coppola as a director, she is unfortunately miscast in the role of Mary, a  fact that many critics pointed out at the time. Sofia Coppola, despite this criticism has established herself as a respected director since this and good for her. Now I’ve spoken about the negatives, I will proceed to the positives.

Al Pacino effectively conveys Michael’s remorse for his past misdeeds and his reluctance to get involved in any further crime. His scene with Diane Keaton as the long-suffering Kay, in which both characters admit that the still care for each other is certainly a touching moment. Admirably supporting him is Andy Garcia, who is frequently electrifying as Vincent, capturing the violent nature of him but showing an undying loyalty and humanity when it comes to protecting his uncle from opposition. Talia Shire is equally as good, showing Connie’s metamorphosis from downtrodden, abused wife to master manipulator and right hand woman to her reluctant older brother. It is Shire’s best performance in the series in my opinion. As always, the music and stunning cinematography are up to an impeccable standard, showing the nostalgic glow of family ties and the savage brutality of the crime lifestyle. All of this builds up to a bullet-ridden and devastating climax to Coppola’s unbeatable trilogy.

This may be one of my most controversial reviews, but I personally think the film, because of the reputation of the other’s has been neglected to the sidelines.

The Godfather Part II

Tags

1970's, Al Pacino, Crime, Diane Keaton, Francis Ford Coppola, John Cazale, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall, Talia Shire, The Godfather Part II, The Godfather Trilogy

Film Title

The Godfather Part II

Director

Francis Ford Coppola

Cast

• Al Pacino as Michael Corleone
• Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen
• Diane Keaton as Kay Adams-Corleone
• Robert De Niro as Young Vito Corleone
• John Cazale as Fredo Corleone
• Talia Shire as Connie Corleone
• Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth
• Michael V.Gazzo as Frank Pentageli

Synopsis: The continuing saga of the Corleone crime family. The film centres on the business of Michael Corleone, as he becomes the new Don and shown in flashback is the rise to power of his father before him. The film couples the stories together to show Michael’s dilemmas and doubt and his father’s gradual ascent to becoming the all-powerful Don.

Many people thought that it was going to be hard to surpass a masterpiece like The Godfather, but all naysayers were silenced when this sequel was released and many declared it equal to its iconic prequel. Rarely has a sequel been quite as well received as The Godfather Part II. It also doubled the first film’s Oscar wins by collecting six including Best Picture, the film remained the only sequel to win this award until Lord of the rings: The Return of the King won in 2003.  Whilst the first film is justly seen as the best, I personally think that Part II is just as good and actually reveals more on the history of the Corleone family and how it became an organized crime family.

Whilst the first film is well-known for the iconic scenes that abound, Part II has some justly famous moments that linger long in the memory.  The main thing that I like about the film is the cross cutting between Michael’s eventual downfall and the ascent of his father, this gives the film a profound and darker quality as we witness two stories running parallel to each other. Another aspect that makes the film intriguing is its expansion on certain characters, most notably Fredo, Connie and Kay, whose roles become more important and significant to this epic ongoing saga of the Corleone family.

Corleone Origins

One specific scene that has resonance with me is the flashback scene in which a nine-year-old Vito arrives in New York an orphan after his mother was murdered by the local Don.After escaping Sicily with the help from the local peasants, Vito climbs aboard a ship and sails for freedom. As you know what he later becomes it is interesting to see him has a young child and how certain aspects of his early life influenced his life in later stages.  His wide-eyed look at the Statue of Liberty is significant as I can relate to the experience of moving to a new place and not knowing anyone or what is going to happen.  The music in the background adds to the feeling of being in a foreign place and the journey endured for it.  The cinematography is outstanding as the sepia tones clearly highlight the period feel of the film and give it a nostalgic edge.

The rise of the Don

The other scene in my opinion is the turning point of the young Vito, here brilliantly portrayed by a young Robert De Niro, is when after witnessing the power wielded by Don Fanucci and after he tries to extort money from him, he secretly follows him and kills him. People may think that it sounds shocking but Vito doesn’t kill him for the fun of it, he kills him because of the things he has done to other people close to Vito and to Vito himself. The masterful sequence starts with the quiet Vito scaling the roofs of various buildings like a predator silently stalking its prey, following Fanucci as he makes his way through the parade, people falling on their feet to show respect as they know what consequences can happen if they get on the wrong side of him.  Vito then enters Fanucci’s apartment and silently waits for him to appear armed with a gun Clemenza told him to mind for him. After Fanucci enters his apartment he sees Vito and doesn’t expect anything, but then Vito emerges and shoots Fanucci in the chest, his gun silenced by a towel and the celebrations outside. He then retrieves money from him and destroys evidence of the gun. What I find so interesting in the scene is the gradual transformation of Vito who realises the importance of power and honour and how it can be used. By killing Fanucci he takes over as the more respected Don of the neighbourhood who by his own admission “knows how to repay a favour”, but who everyone knows not to cross with their lives. I like the way in which Coppola captures the two sides of the new Don as he is seen after killing Fanucci, calmly going back to see his wife and young children on the steps of their apartment. Coppola also helps elaborate on the central themes in the movie as Vito tells a baby Michael that he loves him, further foreshadowing the feeling of honour. It is also a sly reference to the fact that Michael in the future becomes completely different to what he originally was.

Beyond redemption

The most lasting moment of the film comes at the very end of it. This moment is haunting as we see Michael, older than he really is sitting outside on a chair with an expressionless look on his face. In my opinion he has realised what it means to be the Don and that he is beyond redemption for the things he has done.  Even though Michael is someone who has done bad things, I still have some sympathy with him, as I don’t see him as a villain but more of tragic hero.

As with the first movie, Part II has an exceptionally good cast. Pacino again delivers an outstanding performance, but the person who stood out for me was Cazale as his role as Fredo is expanded on. This time he gets more of a story as he begins to resent Michael for being one of his father’s favourite kids. This ultimately leads to Fredo’s downfall as he goes against the family.  Diane Keaton is good as well, her character of Kay now becoming embittered and tired of her husband’s lies. The scene in which she tells Michael that she has aborted her baby and he viciously strikes her is very effective; the acting by Pacino and Keaton is amazing. Pacino’s eyes say everything without him speaking as they begin to bulge with anger at Kay’s confession.

The other member of the cast that I thought did a fantastic job was De Niro as the young Vito. It must have been a hard act to follow on from the pivotal and extremely memorable Brando, but De Niro gives a revealing quality to his performance as the man before he was the Don. The uncanny likeness between De Niro and Brando is what makes the performance so good. Talia Shire reprises her role as Connie, but her character has significantly changed morphing from down-trodden wife to loose, hard-drinking girl who has had many loveless and empty marriages. Shire is great as Connie and brings a rebellious quality to her character as she constantly tries to get and Michael and get money off him.

In my opinion, Part II is equally as good as the first part. Part II is more profound and revelatory than its predecessor, tracing the origins of one of cinema’s most memorable families. In my view, Part II achieved a rare feat; it is a sequel that will be remembered as more than just the second part of a series but as a cinematic achievement.

The Godfather

Tags

1970's, Al Pacino, Crime, Diane Keaton, Francis Ford Coppola, James Caan, John Cazale, Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Talia Shire, The Godfather, The Godfather Trilogy

Film Title

The Godfather

Director

Francis Ford Coppola

Cast

• Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone
• Al Pacino as Michael Corleone
• James Caan as Sonny Corleone
• Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen
• John Cazale as Fredo Corleone
• Diane Keaton as Kay Adams
• Talia Shire as Connie Corleone

Synopsis: The story of an Italian-American family involved in organized crime in post-war New York. The head of the family has three sons, one daughter and an “adopted” son. One of the sons will eventually take the reins of power from the ageing Don; volatile Sonny, weak-willed Fredo or war hero Michael.  The story concerns the passing of power from one generation to another and the effect that it has on the family.

I know that many people will take one look at this review and think, “Why does The Godfather need to be reviewed?” After all it is common knowledge to many that it is one of the most acclaimed films in the history of cinema. But before people judge it too quickly, please listen, read my review and see what I have to say about this movie that changed my life.

The Godfather is the epic, operatic and masterful story of the Corleone crime family, directed by a young Francis Ford Coppola whose name will forever be associated with this hugely influential and iconic film. It is often seen as one of the most influential movies and also one of the best ever made. No other film has entered into popular culture quite like The Godfather, words from the script are now embedded in the minds of moviegoers and who knows how many people have attempted an impression of Marlon Brando’s ever present and pivotal Don. One need only look at The Soprano’s or Scorsese’s later work to see how much of an impact the film has made. It is hard to imagine a world without The Godfather. Unlike the typical gangster films of the 1930’s and beyond that featured gangsters against FBI or police such as The Public Enemy , The Godfather examines the more personal side of the business portraying the Corleone’s as a family who believe in a sense of honour and duty no matter the cost or bloodshed. It is essentially a family drama that happens to be about organized crime.

There are three specific scenes in the film that are important to me for different reasons; the wedding scene, the death of one of the sons and the baptism scene.

What I find so interesting in the opening  scene of the Don’s only daughter Connie’s wedding , is the clear dichotomy that is shown between family and business, which is emphasised by the dimly lit court that the Don is holding indoors and the jovial, sunny and celebratory atmosphere occurring outside.  
Whilst the multitudes of guests gather outside in the sunny heat, the family patriarch Don Vito Corleone is listening to various stories of people who require his “assistance”. The Don is an ageing man whose raspy voice and deliberate movements belie an exceptional intelligence and sense of judgment. Outside whilst the celebrations are taking place, Coppola takes the time to introduce the other members of the family. Vito’s eldest child Sonny is a hot-headed, bullish and arrogant man with a temper that knows no boundaries, Fredo is the second eldest son and the weakest member of the family, Tom Hagen is the Don’s “adopted” child and lawyer with an extremely level head who often acts as the voice of reason and Connie as the only girl amongst four boys is a spoiled young woman. Then one of the most important characters is introduced, the white sheep of the family and war hero Michael. Michael is one of the only members of the family who does not want to be involved in the business .Out of all of the Don’s children; Michael is by far the most interesting and most complex character in the film. At the wedding he brings along Kay Adams, his all-American WASP girlfriend who has no idea of the family’s business. I think that the introduction of Kay is used so that the audience can see what she is seeing as she is not Italian-American and the customs between her upbringing and the family’s culture is varied. When I watched the film, I saw its examination of the family from two points of view; as a family that will do anything to uphold honour and loyalty and like Kay, unsure of the dynasty and their way of life. The examination of the family even though they are involved in organized crime is presented like any other family celebrating a significant event. This helps back up the point that they are just like any other family, they just happen to do bad things usually for good reasons. It presents the character of Don Vito as a man who by his own admission would do anything for his family. He is just like every other father who cares a great deal about his relatives and would go to any limits to protect them.

One of the most effective scenes in the film and the one that had an impact on me was the brutal slaughter of bullish eldest son Sonny. It had a huge impact on me because I could see that something bad was going to eventually happen to him because of his volatile behaviour and actions, but I just didn’t know what. Even though it is obvious that something is going happen to Sonny because if his temper, his death is still one of the most emotional and shocking moments to grace the screen. For its time, the murder of Sonny was shocking. But it hasn’t lost any of its original impact on the viewer or the events that follow on from his demise.  Before this scene, Sonny has found out that Carlo has been beating his sister up.  Although he promises his terrified sister that he won’t do anything, he takes revenge on Carlo by viscously beating him up in the middle of a street. Just before he leaves the barely conscious Carlo, he warns him that if he touches his sister again he will kill him. Carlo ignores this and after a pregnant Connie finds out he has been having an affair and berates him about it, he mercifully attacks her. The build-up to Sonny’s demise then starts with him receiving a phone call from his sister. In a barely audible voice she explains that her husband Carlo has beat her, Sonny clearly angered by this sets out to kill Carlo. This unfortunately leads to his demise which is set up by Carlo himself. Whilst driving to Connie’s house, the car in front of Sonny on the highway by a station stops. At this moment, you know that something bad is going to occur. It turns out there are more people at the station than Sonny thought. As he tries to escape after sensing that something is wrong,  Carlo’s henchman pop up from the station and the car in front. Then the bullets start to fire at Sonny in a fast paced motion, throwing his body about in a particularly unsettling fashion.  This graphic depiction of death was clearly influenced by the famous finale of “Bonnie and Clyde” in which the two eponymous lovers are violently gunned down in slow and fast motion.  I think that Coppola references “Bonnie and Clyde” because it was one of the first films to feature extreme violence and also because it broke new ground as to what was seen as acceptable in film. The demise of Sonny made me think about how I would feel if it was a member of my family and what I would do. I felt sympathy for Sonny because even though he has done bad things he did them for the honour and values of his family.

The penultimate scene of the film is the brilliantly edited sequence that intercuts the baptism of Connie’s child with the killing of the heads of The Five Crime Families. The juxtaposition between the beginning of life and the end is mesmerising to watch.  I remember watching this sequence and being amazed at how technically and cinematically effective it was. I also remember the scene for the sight of a now changed Michael being asked if he renounces Satan and at that exact moment his hit men take out the family enemies. The scene is a clear indication of how Michael has now become the cold and calculating Don he wasn’t expected to become. Twinning the holy presence of religion and the brutal massacre of others was a stroke of genius.

The turning point for the family and the film is the arrival of Sollozzo, a gangster with the backing of another family who wants to import narcotics but requires the assistance of Vito. When Vito refuses, Sollozo’s men gun him down but the ageing Don doesn’t die.  What follows on from these events is what makes the film so compelling especially the slow-building metamorphosis of Michael from reluctant youngest son to ruthless and calculating Don. The film is more than just an average crime movie; it is an insightful and almost Shakespearean family saga, in the model of King Lear. Even though The Godfather is justly famous for the showier and exciting parts that occupy the film, it is the elegiac and personal study of family values and ties that gives the film its edge.  The film’s cinematography is outstanding in the way that it captures the emotions and creates atmosphere onscreen; a classic example is the opening scene in the Don’s office that is low-lit to give a sense of shadiness. Also in the various scenes of Michael hiding out in Sicily, the lighting and mise-en-scene give the film an old-fashioned and sweeping quality. The music featured throughout the film is haunting and clearly suits the languid and thoughtful pace at which the movie runs.

One of the most successful aspects of the film is the cast that Coppola assembled. It goes without saying that no one else could be as good a Don as the legendary Brando, but the real revelation of the film is the young then almost unknown Al Pacino. His performance is amazing as Michael changes from bystander to ruthless boss; this performance clearly shows that risky casting does pay off. Equally as good are Caan and Duvall as two very different characters, the volatile Sonny and the level headed Tom. Out the few women in the film, Kay is the most rounded character and Diane Keaton makes her an interesting female presence in a male-dominated movie. She is at first naïve of the family business but she gradually begins to realize what is happening. Despite this, she dearly loves Michael and the final shot of the film in which the door is closed metaphorically and literally on her dejected face as Michael becomes the new Don is heart breaking to watch

.

If I had to summarise what The Godfather was about in three words they would be family, honour and power. If anyone out there has not seen it please watch it, I promise you it will change your life. After all it is in the words of the Don ,simply an offer you can’t refuse.