By now you've probably seen the rating. Yes, that's right - I've given what is widely regarded as the best sequal of all time a "7".

This movie had very little of what made the first movie so good. In my book the most interesting part of the first Godfather was the transformation of Michael Corleone from pacifist to head of the family. "2" featured the difficulty of both running the family and trying to legitimize their business. The result, from my perspective, was a mish-mosh. The movie never did have any flow. In fact, when it ended I almost fell off my chair. There were few high points in this movie the ending certainly wasn't one of them.

The worst part of the movie were the flashbacks. I understand that part of the reason to visit Vito Corleone's childhood and early life was to contrast his style of leadership with that of the heavy-handed Michael. Other than that, I really had no interest in seeing a 13 year old future mobster. The result was an already fragmented plot being torn apart that much more to take trips down memory lane (and a 2-disk movie to boot). It seems to me that a prequel would have made more sense. The only positive was that we got a break from Pacino's constant brooding. Quite honestly, I've seen better Sopranos episodes.

follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook page IHateBadMovies.com

Holy shit, what a film! I gave the first one a 9/10 because the story didn't mean much to me on a personal level, but introduce [spoiler] a little mute immigrant boy whose entire family was murdered in cold blood and who still goes on to become one of the most powerful men in the United States and you have my heart. [/spoiler] Vito's background story definitely gave this film an emotional edge the first one didn't have for me, and all my favourite films must make me at least slightly emotional. Michael is such a good character too, completely different from his father, much more ruthless, and yet much more vulnerable as well. His evolution from the first film is incredible to watch, as he becomes this cold, scary in his serenity crime lord, even though you will still catch a moment of weakness and nervousness here and there, which tells you he's not invincible either. The way he ends up [spoiler] completely alone and the way they parallel the ending with that scene with all the brothers at the dinner table discussing Michael's future, which he thought would be brighter and more commendable than that of his brothers', or even his father's, [/spoiler] is so powerful.

Story telling and structure wise, I found this movie more compelling than the first. The time-jumps, the parallels, the origins of the family - all of it makes for a much more complete and immersive watching experience.

Technically, I also found the sequel more beautiful than the first installment, the cinematography was gorgeous.

All in all, I absolutely adored it.

10/10

Worthy sequel to the first movie. In something more meditative and unhurried, in something more philosophically meaningful than its legendary predecessor. Backstage games and backstage talks replaced the dramatic mood swings of the main characters and the exchange of fire.

The second film continues the story of Michael Carleone in the role of the Godfather, and also complements the family story with scenes of the formation of the young Vito Andolini and his escape to America. The difficult choice of being young Don, his sphere of expansion of influence opens up new heights and horizons, but also acquires new enemies. Big money and power always keep pace with great temptation, and therefore you should always keep your ears open. After all, the knife in the back can insert exactly the one from whom you do not expect ...

This Hollywood style formula movie about mobsters isn't as pathetic as the first or third one, simply because it is too dull and poorly directed to stay awake through.
It's basically just a bunch of scenes of people "talking tough" or getting killed, with no point.
If you're looking for a plot or story, forget it. There is none. It's a muddled mess. It appears that by the end, the chief mobster is in anguish over whether or not to kill his brother.
Why? Who knows? None of this makes sense to those of us who aren't born with some super psychic ESP.
It also appears there's some revenge, but we never know why, or who, or what. It's just a poorly directed and poorly written mess.
It does cure Insomnia, though, which is why it gets a 2 rating instead of a 1.

Building on the first volume, this self-adaptation by writer Mario Puzo and director Francis Ford Coppola develops the story of the new Don - "Michael" (Al Pacino). His attempts to expand, and to a certain extent legitimise, the family businesses see him associating with the duplicitous "Hyman Roth" (Lee Strasberg) in Cuba; subject to betrayal, assassination attempts and fighting what may be a losing battle to keep his own family together - all whilst doing plenty of Machiavellian manipulation of his own. There is an equally strong parallel thread depicting how his father "Vito" (Robert de Niro) rose to prominence after fleeing Sicily after the murder of his family at the hands of "Don Ciccio". With the principal characters all now well established, we can hit the ground running with a solid and complex set of inter-connected, character-driven storylines. The superior cast deliver this story really effectively - Robert Duvall and Diane Keaton as the consigliere and wife respectively, standing out. The attention to detail alongside the instantly recognisable Nino Rota score add amply to what is just a great story of Michael's efforts to build upon (and honour) his father's legacy, before he loses all of his own, once prevailing, decency. It is long, and it does miss Brando, but Pacino is on super form as the increasingly ruthless and isolated - even lonely - figure and I reckon this is every bit as good at the "Godfather" (1972).