Peter Griffin on why he doesnt like the Godfather

faceman

Class!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poqr2BuillY

purplegeko

I totally agree "It insists upon itself" brilliant!!!! i love family guy and also don't get the Godfather.

Captain Smiggy

Sigh.

faceman

purplegeko wrote:

I totally agree "It insists upon itself" brilliant!!!! i love family guy and also don't get the Godfather.

dont start. classic film. [/debate]

Cabaal

faceman wrote:

dont start. classic film.

But it insists upon itself and I just don't like it, plus I've also never seen the ending...

johnny_ultimate

I am also a non-fan of the Godfather for numerous reasons:
For me it was a bloated mess of a film, with the storyline often not possible to follow, and other times not worth following at all. I also completely despised Marlon Brandos performance - I know many people will shout loudly for me for saying that, but I honestly thought it was a borderline pantomine performance.
There are some great, iconic moments in the film (the restaurant, toll booth etc...) but for a film this long, they are few and far between.

hoolio

Heh, on a mild tangent, reminds me of Cartman's opinion of Family Guy:

Cartman: Don't you ever, EVER compare me to Family Guy, you hear me Kyle? Compare me to Family Guy again and so help me, I will kill you where you stand!
Kyle: You unbelievable son of a bitch. You didn't care about the Muslim people at all; you just wanted to get rid of Family Guy.
Cartman: Do you have any idea what it's like? Everywhere I go: Hey Cartman you must like Family Guy, right? Hey, your sense of humor reminds me of Family Guy, Cartman! I am nothing like Family Guy! When I make jokes they are inherent to a story! Deep situational and emotional jokes based on what is relevant and has a point, not just one random interchangeable joke after another!

somewhat true tbh

Cabaal

There not random interchangeable jokes, there just plain random, to be honest its up their with Monty Python

Savman

The 90's needed Homer. The 00's need Peter Griffin.

That said, Godfather are good films if you get into them

Galvasean

The complete randomness is why I love Family Guy so much. You never know whats coming next!

User45701

ive seen the first 2 gotfathers and have not yet had the chance to watch the 3rd, its alright but it is over hyped.
family guy is better than people are saying it is, i dont think its got old at all

faceman

less dissin of the Godfather philistines!! :eek:

Rabies

Great clip

I have never watched the full length of any of the movies. I bought the box set about a year ago. Kinda something you have to have in your collection, never got around to watching them.

Call Me Jimmy

Ah I'm not alone! Felt the godfather was overrated. I did like it, it is obviously better than the most films but it just never really had that wow factor for me.

monkeyfudge

I too dislike the Godfather..

But then I dislike mafia sh*te in general... I just don't get the appeal.

Cabaal

monkeyfudge wrote:

I too dislike the Godfather..

But then I dislike mafia sh*te in general... I just don't get the appeal.

The dislike of it is growing, woohoo

ixoy

I don't care much for it either as it happens. It's well made in terms of production values, etc but it sort of bores me as does that genre in general.

So the mod says it's okay not to like the Godfather series

Eirebear

Rabies wrote:

Great clip

I have never watched the full length of any of the movies. I bought the box set about a year ago. Kinda something you have to have in your collection, never got around to watching them.

I think that this says it all, people are expected to like the godfather, theyre good films, but very overrated for what they are.
They go into the Citizen Kane category for me, watch them, if you like them then cool, but dont go shoving them down my throat every time i mention films..

Retr0gamer

I can't believe there is so much dislike for this film. And to think I thought some of you people actually had taste.

faceman

Eirebear wrote:

I think that this says it all, people are expected to like the godfather, theyre good films, but very overrated for what they are.
They go into the Citizen Kane category for me, watch them, if you like them then cool, but dont go shoving them down my throat every time i mention films..

to help elaborate you're point, what do you mean by "they're good films, but very overrated for what they are"

what do you mean by this?

to me the godfather is fantastic on almost every level.

The acting is superb, the story telling and pace is almost perfect. The film is beautifully shot and beautifully illustrated artistic elements. note the parallel horizontal lines running behind brando in his authoritive scenes. The significance of the orange through the first 2 movies.

The scene with pacino and the coppers in the restaurant is probably one of the finest scenes in acting history. Completely subtle and powerful. We find ourselves sympathising with this family in the film the story is so powerful.

maybe the youth of today want more films like goodfellas or casino with overstated charicatures for characters. (They are good films (goodfellas anyway) but not for reasons many people think)

And dont even think about dissin Citizen Kane! I suspect many people here havent seen it though which is fair enough.

Eirebear

faceman wrote:

to help elaborate you're point, what do you mean by "they're good films, but very overrated for what they are"

what do you mean by this?

to me the godfather is fantastic on almost every level.

The acting is superb, the story telling and pace is almost perfect. The film is beautifully shot and beautifully illustrated artistic elements. note the parallel horizontal lines running behind brando in his authoritive scenes. The significance of the orange through the first 2 movies.

The scene with pacino and the coppers in the restaurant is probably one of the finest scenes in acting history. Completely subtle and powerful. We find ourselves sympathising with this family in the film the story is so powerful.

maybe the youth of today want more films like goodfellas or casino with overstated charicatures for characters. (They are good films (goodfellas anyway) but not for reasons many people think)

And dont even think about dissin Citizen Kane! I suspect many people here havent seen it though which is fair enough.

I dont need anyone to point out all the technical aspects of the film, i know what it all is, and if i ever decide to judge a film soley on its technical aspects then its surely up there with the best of them (see citizen kane )

For me though, the pacing of the film, especially the first, is a little too drawn out, and while it doesnt ruin it for me, i can certainly understand why people struggle to get through it.

There is also the snob factor of the series, and youve just shown me that too, we could sit and discuss the technical detail of the film all day, but it wont change the fact that some people simply dont take to it, thats what i mean by "shoving it down my throat"

Smarmore

I don't really get this whole "shoving it down my throat" argument. Who's shoving it down your throat? A lot of people love these films, myself included. They can be hard to watch for certain MTV-generation type people who don't get it but it's not like you see Godfather billboards plastered all over the place. I can understand people not liking though because I think the Beatles are a load of rubbish for example. I wouldn't accuse anyone of shoving them down my throat though. Same as everything else, take it or leave it. Unless you slag off Family Guy of course. That really would be sacrilege!!

Eirebear

Does that the fact that i have said that i actually like the Godfather series, but yet yourself and faceman feel the need to defend it against my comments maybe explain the "shoving it down my throat" argument?

faceman

Eirebear wrote:

Does that the fact that i have said that i actually like the Godfather series, but yet yourself and faceman feel the need to defend it against my comments maybe explain the "shoving it down my throat" argument?

it was your comment "theyre good films, but very overrated for what they are." which implies you dont rate them highly. i wasnt lookin for you to defend yourself (nor was any other poster from what i interpreted) i was merely trying to understand your comment. Everyone has an opinion on every film and that has to be respected.

just in response to your comments, while the film is technically excellent, the acting and story are also excellent which wouldnt be classed as technical IMO ;-)

most of us love to debate film, so dont take offence as none was intended!

Sad Professor

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, hell knows there's some so-called classics that I can't stand, but I'd seriously question the film taste of anyone who doesn't like the first two Godfathers. I can understand people not liking Citizen Kane as there's scarcely a frame of it that hasn't been recycled a million times already so it's hard for people to see what an incredible film it is.

For me The Godfather transcends the crime and Mafia genre becoming something quite extraordinary. At it's heart it's really the story of how a good man becomes a bad man. Michael is a good man in the beginning and like his father all he ever seeks is to protect his family. But in the end he becomes a far greater monster than his father ever was, finding himself alone, a hollow shell of a man who destroyed the very thing he was trying to protect. I've never seen a greater tragedy on film.

The book isn't that great imo. Puzo wrote it for the money and it was just another best-seller to be adapted into a Hollywood movie. Coppola was little more than a hired-hand who was harassed by the suits throughout production, often to the point of tears. Yet somehow he managed to make truly personal movie, casting members of his own family in key roles and picturing himself as Michael. The films are special for all the heart Coppola put into them, something which can never be copied.

Eirebear

faceman wrote:

it was your comment "theyre good films, but very overrated for what they are." which implies you dont rate them highly. i wasnt lookin for you to defend yourself (nor was any other poster from what i interpreted) i was merely trying to understand your comment. Everyone has an opinion on every film and that has to be respected.

just in response to your comments, while the film is technically excellent, the acting and story are also excellent which wouldnt be classed as technical IMO ;-)

most of us love to debate film, so dont take offence as none was intended!

Sorry mate, i wasnt trying to be overly defensive, tbh im dying with the flu so while im quite happy to debate, im probably not clear headed enough to get my point across very well.
And my last comment to smarmore was more tongue in cheek than anything else really.

maybe ill leave this one for another day......in fact its been a couple of years since ive even watched the Godfather....thats my nights viewing sorted out!

Smarmore

Sad Professor wrote:

The book isn't that great imo. Puzo wrote it for the money and it was just another best-seller to be adapted into a Hollywood movie. Coppola was little more than a hired-hand who was harassed by the suits throughout production, often to the point of tears. Yet somehow he managed to make truly personal movie, casting members of his own family in key roles and picturing himself as Michael. The films are special for all the heart Coppola put into them, something which can never be copied.

I have to disagree with your assessment of the book, I thought it was excellent. The actual film varies very little from the book so if you like the storyline and dialogue in the film it's difficult to understand how you wouldn't like the book. Mario Puzo deserves a lot of credit because the film is built around that book. I agree with your comments about Coppolla though, almost every mob film since tries to achieve that deeper level to the Mob boss by portraying how he is behind closed doors with his family. The Sopranos is based around that. As for casting members of his own family though, his daughters acting was the only bad aspect of the film!!

Bounty Hunter

the minority (the people who dont think its a classic) are being given a voice in peter griffen. and because he is so damn funny it is hard not to believe/listen to his point. but he is to quote himself "technically retarded" afterall. The Godfather is genius, which obviously people who dislike the mob/ganster genre arent going to like as its the daddy of said genre.

Dev 17

A lot of the time a movie is so built up and over hyped in magazines and reviews and in the the general public, people often think that something is wrong with them if they don't like the film. People like to hear that they have good taste in film and they feel that they have to like the Godfather if their opinion is to have any weight in a debate on films.

People like to like Hitchcock, appreciate Bach while maintaining educated opinions on Plato and Joyce.

Having certain opinions on classic films, music and books gives the impression that people are sophisticated and classy.

Sad Professor

Smarmore wrote:

I have to disagree with your assessment of the book, I thought it was excellent. The actual film varies very little from the book so if you like the storyline and dialogue in the film it's difficult to understand how you wouldn't like the book. Mario Puzo deserves a lot of credit because the film is built around that book. I agree with your comments about Coppolla though, almost every mob film since tries to achieve that deeper level to the Mob boss by portraying how he is behind closed doors with his family. The Sopranos is based around that. As for casting members of his own family though, his daughters acting was the only bad aspect of the film!!

I didn't mean that the book was bad, just that it's not on the same level as the film but they're very different mediums. It's been years since I've read it but yeah it's almost identical in parts to the first film. Although the second movie was almost entirely written by Coppola with the exception of the young Vito stuff which was taken from the book. My impression is that Puzo didn't do much actual writing for the films but was more of a bouncing board for Coppola's ideas.

The 3rd film was pretty bad overall but Coppola cast a lot of his family in the first two films as well. His sister Talia played Connie and his father contributed to a lot of the music. He made it a very personal film.

Galvasean

Bought the DVD about a year ago. Got 45 minutes in and had to leave for dinner. I do plan to finish it some day...
From what little I did see, I found the characters to be fairly overblown and a little bit cartoonish.

I think what a few people have been getting at is the whole trend of 'film snobbery' that surrounds the Godfather. A lot of people are of the opinion that if you don't like certain movies you either a) didn't get it, b) have bad taste in films or c) you're just plain stupid. The Godfather seems to fall into this category. Its definitely well made. No one can deny that but its not everyones cup of tea.

_Kaiser_

Goodfellas ftw

faceman

Galvasean wrote:

From what little I did see, I found the characters to be fairly overblown and a little bit cartoonish.

that is the most bizarre comment i have ever heard about the Godfather!!

Dev 17 wrote:

A lot of the time a movie is so built up and over hyped in magazines and reviews and in the the general public, people often think that something is wrong with them if they don't like the film.

i understand your point here in many ways. i didnt watch Pulp fiction for about a year after it came out on video because of all the hype about it. i didnt enjoy it though but never the hype.

difference between pulp fiction and the Godfather is the GF is about 30 years old. theres hasnt been hype over it in decades!

Galvasean

faceman wrote:

that is the most bizarre comment i have ever heard about the Godfather!!

Am I alone in thinking Brando's performance was way over the top?

johnny_ultimate

Galvasean wrote:

Am I alone in thinking Brando's performance was way over the top?

Nope. As I mentioned earlier thought it was an embarrasingly overblown performance. Really confused me when I watched it that the performance is viewed as one of the greatest of all time and Oscar worthy.

Retr0gamer

johnny_ultimate wrote:

Nope. As I mentioned earlier thought it was an embarrasingly overblown performance. Really confused me when I watched it that the performance is viewed as one of the greatest of all time and Oscar worthy.

Probably because it's been parodied so much that it has become cliche. I thought it was a wonderful performance myself.

Galvasean

Retr0gamer wrote:

Probably because it's been parodied so much that it has become cliche. I thought it was a wonderful performance myself.

That could be it. Maybe because the Godfather is such an iconic film with so many pop culture references attributed to it, its hard to get into it now without preconceptions.

faceman

Galvasean wrote:

That could be it. Maybe because the Godfather is such an iconic film with so many pop culture references attributed to it, its hard to get into it now without preconceptions.

thats a very good point. its like watching someone in their early 20's watchin "once upon a time in the west" or "high noon" and saying they're crap westerna when in fact it set the bar for westerns and has been imitated in form or another ever since.

when people are submersed in popular culture which puts homages, nods, winks, imitations etc to a piece of work, its hard not to be prejudice.

johnny_ultimate

OK I have the boxset upstairs and have decided to watch all three of them through based on this thread to see if a second watch of the first and first watch of 2 and 3 change my mind on the film. I shall report back on my findings. I will go in with an open mind, and hopefully emerged with an enlarged one.

Sad Professor

I wouldn't bother with the third, at least not for now. Coppola was in a weak position when he made it so the suits at Paramount had their way on most things. He didn't even want to call it The Godfather and considered it a separate story focusing just on Michael. It has it's moments but it's best to see it as a rough cut of what might have been.

Part II is brilliant though and even better than the first imo. Certainly the greatest sequel ever made. The amazing thing is that it was an afterthought but it still feels like a natural continuation of the first film.

faceman

Sad Professor wrote:

Part II is brilliant though and even better than the first imo. Certainly the greatest sequel ever made. The amazing thing is that it was an afterthought but it still feels like a natural continuation of the first film.

for me its hard to prefer one of the other as they have such excellent qualities. i do love the ending to part II tho. right up to the last shot. in fact that shot says a thousand words.

Running Bing

really wish I had not read the replies because I knew it would just get me riled up.

Films are all about opinion, some people like a film some dont, but the godfather is beyond opinion, if you dont like the godfather you dont like film and you have no place on a film message board.

Either that or you have A) Not watched the whole thing a la Peter Griffin(which I would not put past some of the posters with the comments made) or You were disapointed that you actually had to make an effort and use your head to watch it and that there were no jokes about redneck NASCAR drivers or metrosexual figure skaters in it.:rolleyes:

aidan_walsh

Babybing wrote:

the godfather is beyond opinion, if you dont like the godfather you dont like film and you have no place on a film message board.

In your opinion.

johnny_ultimate

Babybing wrote:

really wish I had not read the replies because I knew it would just get me riled up.

Films are all about opinion, some people like a film some dont, but the godfather is beyond opinion, if you dont like the godfather you dont like film and you have no place on a film message board.

Either that or you have A) Not watched the whole thing a la Peter Griffin(which I would not put past some of the posters with the comments made) or You were disapointed that you actually had to make an effort and use your head to watch it and that there were no jokes about redneck NASCAR drivers or metrosexual figure skaters in it.:rolleyes:

I wasnt going to bother retorting that nonsense, but you have summed up exactly what is wrong with a number of film snobs. So what if I dont like the Godfather? I love many other so-called classics, and the fact is a) I have watched the whole thing and b) no, I wasnt disapointed it wasnt a Will Ferrel film (and what is wrong with the occasional Will Ferrell movie? Nothing).

A film message board is about airing alternate views. Not coming on just to put down people who dont like a film you do. Its that kind of arguement that makes me angry. How can a film possibly be above criticism? If I liked a film others didnt, I may argue with them over why, but I wouldnt out and out insult them like you just did.

Babybing

Babybing wrote:

really wish I had not read the replies because I knew it would just get me riled up.

Films are all about opinion, some people like a film some dont, but the godfather is beyond opinion, if you dont like the godfather you dont like film and you have no place on a film message board.

Either that or you have A) Not watched the whole thing a la Peter Griffin(which I would not put past some of the posters with the comments made) or You were disapointed that you actually had to make an effort and use your head to watch it and that there were no jokes about redneck NASCAR drivers or metrosexual figure skaters in it.:rolleyes:

You sir know nothing of cinema.

faceman

johnny_ultimate wrote:

A film message board is about airing alternate views. Not coming on just to put down people who dont like a film you do. Its that kind of arguement that makes me angry. How can a film possibly be above criticism? If I liked a film others didnt, I may argue with them over why, but I wouldnt out and out insult them like you just did.

exactly, wouldnt be much fun if we all had the same opinion!

Running Bing

aidan_walsh wrote:

In your opinion.

Naturally;)

MooseJam

both brilliant films, but I prefer the one with Robert Duvall

Galvasean

Babybing wrote:

really wish I had not read the replies because I knew it would just get me riled up.

Films are all about opinion, some people like a film some dont, but the godfather is beyond opinion, if you dont like the godfather you dont like film and you have no place on a film message board.

Either that or you have A) Not watched the whole thing a la Peter Griffin(which I would not put past some of the posters with the comments made) or You were disapointed that you actually had to make an effort and use your head to watch it and that there were no jokes about redneck NASCAR drivers or metrosexual figure skaters in it.:rolleyes:

As per my point about 'film snobbery'
And now to make my post 50 times more facetious... :rolleyes:

GhostInTheRuins

Sad Professor wrote:

The book isn't that great imo. Puzo wrote it for the money and it was just another best-seller to be adapted into a Hollywood movie.

I kind of have to disagree with you on that point. I'm torn between which I prefer, the book or the film. In some ways I think that the book is better than the film. You get a much better insight into the characters and their history in the book than in the film. Luca Brasi for example, in the film all you're told is that he is a "very scary man", you'll never know how much of a cold bastard he is, burning his new-born child alive because it's of Irish decent for example :eek:. The same with Al Neri, In the film he has about 10 seconds screen time, but theres a whole chapter about him in the novel.

Reading the book had added so much to my enjoyment of the film. I'd recommend anybody that likes the Godfather to read it and I certainly wouldn't say that it's not a great book. Infact, I've started reading some more of Puzo's novels and they too are excellent

JohnK

Speaking of the Godfather, what was the deal with the Godfather lines in Oceans 13? Seemed to be a few of them.