Posted By: DeathByClotheshanger
Is Part II better than Part I? - 04/18/06 04:43 PM
There has been endless discussion about which is better, Part I or Part II? I intend to continue that discussion.
For me, I personally love Part I because it is the beginning and for some reason I love the beginnings of stories. I love to see where people came from and who they were before the plot thrusts them into a new life. So for me, Part I has more sentimental value.
But part of me also appreciates Part II for being the bolder movie, with more themes and details to delve into. The juxtaposition between Michael's downfall and Vito's rise could quite possibly be the most brilliant storytelling strategy in the history of cinema -- and I mean better than "Rosebud" in Citizen Kane.
We all know Part III isn't close to being as good as Part I or Part II... so which one is really the better film?
For me, I personally love Part I because it is the beginning and for some reason I love the beginnings of stories. I love to see where people came from and who they were before the plot thrusts them into a new life. So for me, Part I has more sentimental value.
But part of me also appreciates Part II for being the bolder movie, with more themes and details to delve into. The juxtaposition between Michael's downfall and Vito's rise could quite possibly be the most brilliant storytelling strategy in the history of cinema -- and I mean better than "Rosebud" in Citizen Kane.
We all know Part III isn't close to being as good as Part I or Part II... so which one is really the better film?