Film or Book

Decide now. If you had to chose between the film "The Godfather" and the book "The Godfather" which one would you pick?



(For the sake of simplicity I exclude here GF2)

I think details make The Godfather(novel) better.For example,Jonny Fontane's life and his problems.
And the other fact is you cannot see or understand the thoughts of the characters in the movie however in the novel you can also read what they think .

I'm one of the many people who read the novel years after become a fan of the movie.

The thing I liked more about the novel:

1. We find out how they got Michael back from Sicily and the whole Bochicchio story.

2. The sub plot about Don Tomassino having problems in Palermo that were the result of Barzini's search for Michael.

3. Michael's revenge against Fabrizio. I could never understand how he let that one go.

4. I liked the Genco figure being brought into the 1940's even if only in the death scene. It tied things together from the grocery business, to the Olive Oil business, to his role as Consiglieri, just briefly alluded to by Sonny in the movie.

5. The Johnny Fontane character was interesting and his relationship with Nino. I liked the building of the whole Hollywood-Las Vegas connection.

6. It was also interesting to understand that the Corleone Family were major participants/owners in several Las Vegas casino businesses including Moe Green's hotel. It gave additional understanding to Michaels stand with Moe Green and the fact that the casino was losing money. Gambling was the backbone of the Corleone Family business.

7. I enjoyed knowing more about the business young Vito and Clemenza were involved in hijacking trucks from the garment district and selling dresses. It made me understand how Fannucci caught on to them and where he got the leverage to demand the money. He was charging them for protection, when in reality he would probably be the one to rat them out to the authorities if they didn't pay.

Yes! It's the best "backstory" in the novel. And there were plenty of other good ones, too: Neri's background, Luca and the Capone gunmen, Sonny and the "boiler inspectors"...


I don't necessarily think Barzini was making trouble for Tomassino. I think he was referring to "the young people." That would be historically accurate: postwar Sicily was urbanizing, and new rackets (and racketeers) were challenging the authority of old-time rural gabbolettos like Don T.


Actually, he didn't. In an (unfortunately) deleted scene from II, Neri finds Fab, and Fab is blown up by a bomb in his car.


I liked it in the novel that, when Nazorine complained to Vito about the furniture dealer taking his money and then declaring bankruptcy, Vito "sent his consigliere Genco to see the man...that wide-awake businessman quickly understood and of course Nazorine was allowed to retrieve his furniture." Tells me that Genco had some of Vito's force.


Sorry, but I hated it. It was Puzo showing off what he had learned in Hollywood. That Hollywood B.S. nearly ruined "The Last Don."


You did a better job of making that clear than Puzo did. Of course the Corleones would be interested in Nevada because their main business was gambling. But all Puzo tells us is that Michael was interested in that one hotel, and not because the Corleones owned a piece of it but because they'd advanced Moe a big chunk of money to help him finish it.


My impression was that the dress robbery was a one-shot deal. Fanucci would have found out about it because they were selling the dresses in the neighborhood, not because he had an ongoing relationship with them by providing "protection."