Puzo's novel "Horrifically Awful"(IMO)

I finally decided that I should go buy the novel "The Godfather" to get the back story on some of the main (and lesser) characters of the film that I so love, OH MY GOD! what a piece of crap.Compared to the classic American "Pulp" novels of the fifties written by greatly under appreciated American novelists like Jim Thompson,or the James Bond novels of Ian Fleming, Puzo's prose comes off as ham-handed pornography, Though he did an amazing job turning this sow's ear into a silk purse (with the help of Mr.Coppola,no doubt)by producing two extrordinary screenplays.

(Moving this to the "Novel" forum).

maybe the genre doesnt suit your taste...
i love puzo's direct approach and no nonsense flowery story telling. i guess thats why its so loved by male readers

...i was shocked at some of the more graphic sexually explicit stuff in the novel, especially the material surrounding the "reconstructive" work done to sonny's widow in vegas, boy did puzo really get into the details. hell, puzo even has an infant thrown into an oven! i expected heavy, boring literature. turned out it's trashy, fun, pulp. very fun. he went all the way with it. then i started thinking about when it was written, '69, and the entertainment from that era was pretty over the top. there were no ground balls with puzo's writing in the godfather. every hit, every passage of prose, he'd whack the ball out of the park. i got the impression the book was a direct love letter to hollywood, so salaciously and gruesomely written, he was begging someone to make it into a movie. if i had read it BEFORE the movie came out, i'd have been really looking forward to the film. it would have been a quite a task to adapt that book into a motion picture. and the interesting thing is, coppola made a pretty classy move, way more classy than the book (if the book i read is truly what came out in '69?). coppola took out all the overtly explicit stuff, toned it down and took away some of the more exploitative material...

CHECK OUT MY MOVIE IDEAS: http://www.callumhouston.com/

He definitely was writing for Hollywood. Per Harlan Lebo's definitive "The Godfather Legacy," Paramount gave him a stipend while he was writing the novel because they were looking for a new Mafia movie. The stipend didn't constitute a commitment to buy his novel, but it sustained Puzo while he wrote.
As for Lucy's operation:
Like Ian Fleming, the James Bond author, Puzo couldn't resist throwing in every bit of erudite or off-the-wall info he'd accumulated. Evedently a female close to him had had that operation and Puzo had interested himself in the procedure. So he threw it in the novel ad nauseum. I was annoyed to have to read through all that Lucy/Jules crap, only to learn that the purpose was for Puzo to show off what he learned about the operation. At that, most of the later Johnny/Nino stuff was to show off what he learned about Hollywood. Bad as it was in "The Godfather," the Hollywood stuff practically ruined "The Last Don."

I think her operation represents technology allowing her to break from her old-fashioned beliefs and her 'medieval' (Jule's words) world that caused her to believe that her 'problem' was actually a heaven-sent curse. Thanks to Jules and technology her philosophy on life shits from the old to the new and she gains new hope in life w/ the relief of her 'problem'.

People moving into Western America and into the 'light' and warmer temperatures has often been used to signify new hope, better days and even a new and better life.

The Corleones also move out west and into the 'light' with their break from the old into the new, legit business of legalized gambling.

I call the Lucy/Jules chapter 'New dreams out West' as it is a new way of life and new way of thinking for Lucy and the Corleones in the bright Western sun.

evry one have his opiniio but if you dont like novel you dont want to gRAB more informations from book and became a great fan of The godfather!

Personally,i love the novel.Some parts are tedious and,i believe not needed,but overall a great read so far.Puzo is a great storyteller.So what if the book isn't written to some critic's taste.As long as the story is brilliant then what does it matter?

And what do we call it when Michael moves back to NY and becomes "like the Supreme Court?" How about "Retro dreams back in the Big Apple?'

I hated the Mancini and Fontane parts. Some of it was fine, good actually. But then it went on and on and on...

FONTANE was in book because Mario Puzo wnted to make a good picture of HOLYWOOD in that time!
Mancini was there to show what kond of realy AMER-ITALY girl was there!!

I think the movies kill the book, the book has too many boring parts that dont have a lot to do eith the mafia, although some stuff is good overall the book is just average.

Ha, I label those chapters as such when I give the book as a gift - which I often do.

Anyway, lets look at "new" Fredo. Does he NOT undergo SIGNIFICANT change when he moves out West and becomes a man of Vegas-Baby-Vegas?

And come on...the American "migration" across the West is a HUGE theme in our culture - ya know.. California Dreamin', Louis & Clark, Roy Rodgers, Home on the Range, Hippies & the "Children of the Sun" making the trip to a newer and BRIGHTER life out West - do any of these "themes" sound familiar to you, youngster? I'm not saying that these "side stories/themes" - the ones that don't appear in the movie - are ORIGINAL on Puzo's part, but I DO think that they are interesting.

BTW-I DON'T think that anyone on these boards really believes that Puzo wrote a "Horrifically Awful" novel. Puzo did however write a very "sloppy" novel, yes! It has some ridiculously conspicuous "errors" b/c he probably wrote it on the toilet in about one weekend's time. But I don't really care if it's not a model-example of lit. I think it's a pretty darn good book, the WHOLE of it.

Btw2-Puzo's editor didn't receive any promotions, either.

Btw3- I especially like following Johnny's life at the wild, Hollywood sex-parties as well as Lucy's over sized vagina. But that's just meeee..

Here's a nice example in music. Plzzz listen.

Led Zeppelin-Going to California
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15srNF5f2v8&mode=related&search=

Well I loved the book and sometimes much more than the movies. I thought it was and still is the best mafia book I have ever read although i was also a big fan of The Last Don and I liked Omerta, but not as much as his first two mafia books. I think anyone who lists it as "Horifically Awful" should try re-reading the book and thinking it over and if they still feel that way they need to shoot themselves in the head and thats all I'm saying on the matter lol.

The book has sold millions of copies and was the inspiration for the three films. That alone speaks volumes of how successful the novel really is.

But without francis ford coppala the movies would not have been that great, he was the backbone of the movies not puzo in my opnion.

The book was average and sold many copies as you said, it doesnt mean its a great book.

I've never found the book particularly well written but that doesn't mean it wasn't wildly entertaining.

Puzo was more gifted as a story teller than as a writer.

And no one has said otherwise.

True my mistake