|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 29, 2020 0:28:47 GMT
I'm in the middle of watching the 1974 movie. I'm really into it. I do have one question about what I just saw. Right around the half way point... During the Robert DeNiro segment, when big balled young Vito decides to branch out and claim territory, he kills the current leader of the neighborhood. Okay, that part I got. But then he goes over and puts his pistol in his mouth and fires a final shot. It seemed significant somehow. I have one theory, but it seems far-fetched. Can anybody explain why the director had the Vito character do this? Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Sept 29, 2020 0:31:21 GMT
I think he just did it to make sure he was dead. Plus, Vito wasn’t a fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Sept 29, 2020 0:41:19 GMT
It's like a little extra "fuck you" to someone after you kill them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dramatic Look Gopher on Sept 29, 2020 1:13:56 GMT
I agree with Popeye; it was an added precaution to make sure he was dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Sept 29, 2020 1:23:31 GMT
A related question is, why were there no repercussions to killing the Black Hand figure - Fanucci? The book points out that Fanucci told everyone he was with the Black Hand, extorted money on that basis, but in fact had no such ties. No connections, no repercussions. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 29, 2020 1:36:46 GMT
He just wanted to wet his beak just a little.
Fari vagnari a pizzu.
|
|
|
|
Post by OrsonSwelles on Sept 29, 2020 1:48:13 GMT
He did it so they couldn't have an open casket.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 29, 2020 1:58:39 GMT
A related question is, why were there no repercussions to killing the Black Hand figure - Fanucci? The book points out that Fanucci told everyone he was with the Black Hand, extorted money on that basis, but in fact had no such ties. No connections, no repercussions. First idea to that is maybe the donger was now top dong. Second idea is that it would taken a movie, 202 minutes in length, and made it even longer. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 29, 2020 10:42:33 GMT
I have seen The Godfather a few times and the The Godfather II only once. GFII knocked my socks off with its elegant and quietly epic storytelling and it is exceptional film-making at the top of its game. The first Godfather has more raw gritty style I feel. I haven't re-visited to second one again, because I want to savour that first time experience which was perhaps several yrs ago when I saw it on dvd. Part III is the least of the series, which I have seen a few times, but rounds out the saga.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 29, 2020 14:27:12 GMT
I have seen The Godfather a few times and the The Godfather II only once. GFII knocked my socks off with its elegant and quietly epic storytelling and it is exceptional film-making at the top of its game. The first Godfather has more raw gritty style I feel. I haven't re-visited to second one again, because I want to savour that first time experience which was perhaps several yrs ago when I saw it on dvd. Part III is the least of the series, which I have seen a few times, but rounds out the saga. Yes. When I watched the movie last night, I realized that I had actually never seen the movie before. I had mistakenly believed that I had seen it many years ago, but none of the scenes or images were familiar to me. I was blown away with how great the film was. I know it's on everybody's best film lists, so I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was. I loved it. It was absolutely absorbing and exciting and quite elegant with its pacing and feel, with no boring moments despite the extreme length. I would give it **** for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Sept 29, 2020 14:32:13 GMT
The grosser the scenes the greater the "entertainment" value.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 29, 2020 14:58:08 GMT
I have seen The Godfather a few times and the The Godfather II only once. GFII knocked my socks off with its elegant and quietly epic storytelling and it is exceptional film-making at the top of its game. The first Godfather has more raw gritty style I feel. I haven't re-visited to second one again, because I want to savour that first time experience which was perhaps several yrs ago when I saw it on dvd. Part III is the least of the series, which I have seen a few times, but rounds out the saga. Yes. When I watched the movie last night, I realized that I had actually never seen the movie before. I had mistakenly believed that I had seen it many years ago, but none of the scenes or images were familiar to me. I was blown away with how great the film was. I know it's on everybody's best film lists, so I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was. I loved it. It was absolutely absorbing and exciting and quite elegant with its pacing and feel, with no boring moments despite the extreme length. I would give it **** for sure. What the first one did so well, it elevated its technique to a more profound and pronounced echelon. These are characters that one wouldn’t want to know, or even be a part of their milieu, but they sure are fascinating to watch. First class production all the way. Danny Peary chose Chinatown for his picture of 74’, I feel the Academy got it right with GFII. Polanski’s film is very good, GFII is terrific.
|
|
