I'm catching part of GFII this morning on AMC. Just an interesting tidbit they have during commercial breaks, that I wasn't aware of.

"After a preview viewing of GFII in San Diego, which received less than great reviews, Coppola went back to work on it, cutting down the flashback scenes from 20 to 12."

I've never counted the flasback scenes, but assume there are now 12. Since, at least for myself, at first viewing, I found the flasbacks to be a little confusing (now of course after so many viewings that's not the case ), I can imagine how maybe 20 flashbacks might have been a bit much.

TIS

The editor then said if they had had two more weeks it would've been great... Imagine that.

I for one appreciate the flashback scenes. They do present an intellectual or cognitive challenge perhaps. But those who find them confusing may be of a genre that retreats from challenges. Such seems to be so characteristic of many people today. The flashbacks add richness to the film. Juxtaposing similar events in the lives of two people separated temporaily by decades is not only informative, but artistic as well. I applaud those flashbacks. The one at the end of GFII is pure genius and a cinematic tour de force.

Yes, I heard the same tidbit just before the commercial break. Though we now appreciate the flashback scenes immensely, I remember being a bit confused by them too when first watching the film.

I guess we just have to imagine how at the time, an overabundance of the flashback scenes might not have been received well by preview audiences.

All I can say is, thank GOD for The Saga ... while also admitting that the latter day Don Michael sequence suffers greatly without the flashback scenes of his father's humble beginnings and rise to power.

Apple

I wonder if FFC was ever tempted to do a director's cut version of GFII.

Why don't they just make a complete version, uncut with all of the edited scenes?


DS

The "Saga" version does it, DS. That's why it's the best version, IMO.

Yeah, but the Saga puts the whole narrative into chronological order, so there are no flashbacks (ie. De Niro comes first, then Brando, then Pacino). This loses the impact of the dramatic irony in Part II's double narrative threads. That's why Part II works as both a sequel and as a stand-alone masterpiece, as it delves deeper into the original while also transcending it and evolving.

Mick

So there is no chronological+deleted scenes version ??