The Godfather: Part II

Paramount Pictures | Release Date: December 12, 1974

9.0	USER SCORE Universal acclaim based on 1272 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

gzayas91May 3, 2019

I have mixed thoughts of Part 2. It plays both prequel and the sequel and I don't think it works. I like part 3 better because it much more of a sequel. Part 2 is good but not great.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

YorkManMay 5, 2016

The Godfather part II is hailed as the greatest sequel of all time..... But it isn't. It is a remarkable movie, but has some big problems... Problems which you can't simply overlook, and which manifest themselves more and more with repeatedThe Godfather part II is hailed as the greatest sequel of all time..... But it isn't. It is a remarkable movie, but has some big problems... Problems which you can't simply overlook, and which manifest themselves more and more with repeated viewings.

The film struggles to maintain the narrative and characters as defined in the first film. It's understandable that Michael has become embittered and has difficulty balancing the life as the 'Don', and that of a loving husband and father. But that element only exists because the movie insists on keeping Kay away from the actual truth about who Michael really is. When, towards the end of the movie, she discovers his duplicity and hard-edge, she is actually shocked..... Even though throughout the movie she clearly doesn't believe Michael's assurances about what he does for a 'living'. It's not enough to wonder where their family's wealth comes from, and it just makes no sense.

The other major problem is from a Direction point of view. De Palma won an Oscar for this movie (he didn't win for The Godfather, which is a far, far better film!) but the narrative structure is pretty awful. Jumping between Vito (in 1920's New York) to Michael (in the late 50's/early 60's) isn't handled well. The popping back and forth, and the parallels in the two storylines is well crafted, but there are massive pockets in the movie where the pace just falls off. There is a need in the 'Vito' era to introduce the characters who appeared in The Godfather, just as there is a need in the 'Michael' era to tie it into contemporary 'big' events..... (in this case the build up to, and subsequent take-over, of Cuba by the Communist rebels).

The bottom line is that the film falls well short of the brilliance of the original. Even so it's still a masterpiece compared to the truly awful Part III!!!
You don't need to see part II, if you've seen part I.... In fact I'd recommend reading the book, it's far more compelling!… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

SamMJan 7, 2012

After hearing all the hype surrounding this film, many labelling it as a classic, I was disappointed when I finally watched it. The acting was very good and the rise of Vito Corleone was very interesting to watch. However, the plot regardingAfter hearing all the hype surrounding this film, many labelling it as a classic, I was disappointed when I finally watched it. The acting was very good and the rise of Vito Corleone was very interesting to watch. However, the plot regarding Michael is fairly dull and overall far too little happens to spread the film over three hours. I am a fan of longer films in general, however I think the same story could have been told in 2 hours. The important parts of the plot are given far too little attention, while the film dedicates far longer periods of time to dull scenes. Worst of all was the ending, which was a non-event. Although it is far from the worst film I have seen, it is definitely overrated.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

robertoiglesiasJan 15, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Godfather Part II is another film that I consider to be a bit overrated, but people like it, so um, cool.
I like this more than the first film because the plot is more than just: the Mafia does things. It's about Michael becoming mentally unstable during a period of time, and the Mafia doing things. However, that doesn't stop this film from having some filler padding like the original.
This film is 3 and a half hours long! Why?! The whole Cuba segment could be taken out, some scenes here and there can be removed, I'm just baffled by these decisions. I understand wanting to show your entire vision, but it doesn't work as well when it's so long!
The prequel part is great, but even that could be trimmed a bit. The sequel part drags on in my opinion.

So I will say it's better than the original based on plot and characters (less characters to deal with and the characters have more development in this film). However, the first film was at least under 3 hours and had more of a unique vision (it felt more artistic).… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

Kylenine1Aug 5, 2014

This film isn't terrible, but it doesn't compare to the first film. We go back and forth in this film between Michael being the Godfather and his father being younger and when he was alive. I wanted to see more of Michael and less of hisThis film isn't terrible, but it doesn't compare to the first film. We go back and forth in this film between Michael being the Godfather and his father being younger and when he was alive. I wanted to see more of Michael and less of his father. I hope the Godfather Part: III is all about Michael. I'm just glade I didn't pay for this movie. I can't believe people liked the Godfather Part: II, the first one is terrific is easily in my top 5 best movies ever made. But for me the acting was okay in this one, the special effects were good and the storyline is decent, but there's really no special moments or anything that would make me say that this is the best movie ever made. This film disappointed me and I just hope that when I watch the rest of The Godfather films that they'll bounce back and surprise me.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

BroyaxJan 6, 2017

Une grande partie du charme du premier film a disparu dans ce second volet, sans doute parce que Vito Corleone n'est plus et partant, l'incroyable prestation de Marlon Brando... Revenir sur les origines et le début de parcours du Don auxUne grande partie du charme du premier film a disparu dans ce second volet, sans doute parce que Vito Corleone n'est plus et partant, l'incroyable prestation de Marlon Brando... Revenir sur les origines et le début de parcours du Don aux Etats-Unis est une idée assez dispensable en définitive, bien que ce soit l'occasion pour un jeunot plein de talent de s'illustrer, à savoir Robert De Niro dont les rôles à venir de mauvais garçon et/ou de gangster feront la gloire... parce qu'il le vaut bien !

Bien sûr, Al Pacino reprend les rênes de la Famille avec aplomb et talent, se fait des ennemis, puis éventuellement finit par liquider tout le monde, ainsi va Cosa Nostra. La vie familiale et sentimentale de notre mafieux va de pair ou parfois à contre-courant des aléas des "affaires" mais tourne un peu trop souvent au psychodrame, tandis que le rythme faiblit considérablement au fil des trois plombes qui sont allègrement dépassées...

Cela reste loin d'être inintéressant ou même ennuyeux et cette saga sait encore captiver l'attention malgré une intrigue principale plus fouillis que jamais, pour ne pas dire confuse sur bien des aspects... malgré (encore !) son pourtant très long métrage qui aurait dû et pu fournir davantage de lumière aux évènements.

L'ambiance demeure inimitable, toujours accompagnée de la belle musique de Nino Rota mais décidément, il y a quelque chose de pourri au royaume de Mafialand qui ne parvient plus à nous électriser et nous émouvoir comme jadis.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

CritiqueGirlMar 4, 2011

I saw it on TV so it was not as violent. They should have never made II and III but they didn't know when to leave well enough alone and I am sure Al Pacino thought he was that good that the story didn't matter. And he wasn't very good inI saw it on TV so it was not as violent. They should have never made II and III but they didn't know when to leave well enough alone and I am sure Al Pacino thought he was that good that the story didn't matter. And he wasn't very good in this one. I never bothered to watch III.… Expand

3 of 17 users found this helpful314

All this user's reviews

RonD.Dec 13, 2005

Good movie, a bit too choppy to be considered great. not even close to the original but very good.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

AndrewRMar 22, 2008

Vastly overrated. The plot is identical to both other movies in the series (there's a party, someone tries to kill the Don, the Don tricks the real culprit into revealing himself, a short interlude for some random marital melodrama, and Vastly overrated. The plot is identical to both other movies in the series (there's a party, someone tries to kill the Don, the Don tricks the real culprit into revealing himself, a short interlude for some random marital melodrama, and then the Don has all the bad guys simultaneously murdered. Fin.), the themes are shallow and largely inapplicable to anybody not involved in organized crime (violence begets violence, huh? YOU DON'T SAY.), the characters are flat (Michael is the grim Zen hardass, Fredo is the blubbering idiot, Kay is the shrill square, etc.), the two "halves" of the movie don't inform each other at all, so that the entire production is ultimately just remaindered bits of the book that they couldn't fit into the first film, and ultimately none of the characters do anything worthy of praise or emulation, and none of the conflicts are worth caring about. The plot meanders wildly over the punishing 200-minute running time, and when it comes time to wrap up they just have Michael give a little speech where he says "oh, by the way, we can just kill all those people who've been bothering us," and then they go do that. I will never understand why they had to make 10 hours worth of movies just to point out that organized crime is not a suitable environment in which to raise and preserve a well-adjusted family, let alone why that's considered a rare and notable achievement.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful