Something in Part I that always bothered me

Hello ,

Something that 's always bothered me in part I is that the filmlength from the point when Michael visits Kay for the first time after his excile in Sicilly and ask her to marry him, to the point when they (apearantly) are married and have children is about 10 minutes (2 scenes). You never see a marriage never witness a birth or even notice a belly on kay. All you see in between of the two scenes is the visit to las vegas (Fredo). Doesnt this bother anyone else? And were there scenes on that topic included perhaps in an earlier/different version??

PEace

CCDevlin

Nope, it's never bothered me. There are alot of leaps in time like that in The Godfather. We simply have to assume several months or years have gone by between on scene and another.

I don't see what the problem is ... we know Michael & Kay got married & had their son, why see it depicted in detail I'd rather they got on with the relevant parts of the story.

Apple

if the movie wasn't so damn long (i enjoy long movies though).....they probably could have put it in. they had SO much story to tell....it would be wasted time to put in the wedding scene and the birth....they couldn't do it....even with only the more important parts of the story people still think it's very long. i wouldn't have minded extending it ten hours though, because i love the godfather so much.

It did bother me when I couldn't figure out exactly what was going on. Now that I know I don't think that is a flaw of the movie, but maybe for people who watch it for the first time it is not easily understood.
You can only notice that some years have passed because we see Anthony as a baby in the car with Michael and Kay and later he is biggger in Vito's death scene. Somebody who's watching it for the first time might not notice it.

Yes I agree that the leaps are ok but this leap is so sudden. IN the movie he asks her to marry him and ten minutes later they step out of a car with their first child :S. It just seems sloppy from a directing point of view. Ofcourse I understand the time limit and the big load of storylines though.

CCDevlin

what's to tell? they got married, they got kids. you wanted to see how little Anthony was made?


I don't know if you ever saw another movie in your whole life, but usually time lapses in them and only significant parts of the story are presented to us. Seeing them with children makes us automatically aware we have made a jump in time, at least a year or two/three. I think it was a brilliantly used movie-element, so often used in films, since we don't need text to appear on screen to tell us we are a few years further.

it never bothered me either


what bothered me most is the total plot duration of The Godfather, which is almost 10 years!

I've seen alot of movies, dont worry. My point in here is that the 'real time' is very short between alot of steps in time. It was not possible to do it differently perhaps, but thats another thing.

Peace

CCDevlin

Blame it on Mario, he was the one who originally made the story and had nothing to say about the intertwining years

i have to agree. those parts are irrelivent. we really dont need to see what every character does every second

I agree with this post 100%

Yeaah ui know you couldn't put EVRYTHIONG in the movie, it's all ready aklmost 3 hoiurs long, but i must admit it surprised me yhe first time i saw it-