When I read the book, I always imagined...

That johnny Fontane was blonde...

Who did you picture when you read Michael's or Vito's description? did you inmediatley imagine Al Pacino and Marlon Brando?

The book is excellent.

Ubet the book is excellent, CC!
I think Al Pacino perfectly fits my mental picture of Michael Corleone from the novel. But I always pictured the Don as someone smaller, portlier, perhaps older than Marlon Brando (not that I had any problem with Brando as Don--far from it!). Also, the cover of the first paperback edition had a drawing of Don Corleone that looked nothing like Brando. I guess I would have pictured Danny Aiello, Marc Lawrence or Anthony Quinn as closer to my mental image of the Don as I gathered it from the novel.

That is such a good question because when i first read it-although i had seen the film before-somehow Sonny wasnt so blonde and seemd to me to be older, and Fredo wasnt so dark-in terms of his hair and eyes, etc. I also pictured Kay as being much more sassy and a bit more sophisticated looking than she was portrayed by Diane Keaton.
Good question!

It was hard for me to envision the characters as anything except what they were in the movie, because the paperback version I got had a big picture of Marlon Brando as the Don on the cover, and about a zillion glossy pages inside of the movie. So much for the imagination.

Jeez...I wish I remembered. Read the book for the first time almost 35 years ago

Turnbull,
If you have the 1st edition could you post a picture up? I'm curious.

Thanks
-Puppeteer

Hi!

Actually, judged by any literature standards - bestselling *not* being one of them - the book is awful. It would have been completely and rightly forgotten by now without the films.

Back to the topic. I compared the book and the movies the other way round, for the reason stated above - I don't read pulp fiction, whatever sales it scratches up to. So, I had the brilliant film images in my head and was sometimes astonished by the discrepancies - as well as matches - between the book heroes and their on-screen representation.

Bad news first: James Caan is not Sonny from the book, just like John Casale is not Fredo - both appear much weaker and unserious in the film, to make place for Vito and Mike, apparently.

Kay is certainly less bleak in the novel than she's in Diane Keaton's screen image. I can't believe Mike loving her passionately - unlike Appolonia who can certainly "thunderbolt".

Marlon Brando is quite adequate and nearly undetachable from Don Vito's image - the trademark prying eyes being rather distracting in the movie once you know the true cause.

Al Pacino fits the bill absolutely. He *is* Michael - up to the point of reportedly having ancestry in Corleone, Sicily.

Tom Hagen and old Pete Clemenza are perfect. Young Clemenza is too jolly for my taste. Old Tessio lacks the "viperous" qualities mentioned in the book - the young one is better at that.

Most of the smaller supporting roles, with the notable exception of Luca Brasi and Paulie Gatto, are adequate.

Best regards.

Alexander

I agree the book was awful ....That whole Johnny Fontaine story as well as Lucy Mancini and the doctor were really boring...I found myself comparing Carmella in the book to the movie..am I right that in the movie the only words she spoke in English were" See your children first...I sent the the car for you a week ago!!! " The charaters in the movie were so well formed that herer we are still disecting them years and years later..in the book the characters were totlly forgetable...

Although I agree Diane Keaton wasn't at all sassy, I think the character she played was quite sophisticated.

The book seemed to descibe Vito as being shorter and dumpier than Marlon Brando... that was the biggest contradiction as I was reading. But I just read the book a month ago, after watching the films so many times!

I unfortunately read the book after i saw the movie so I saw everyone as who played them.

I could also see Dean Martin playing Johnny Fontane. That would be really interesting.

I wish I could, Puppeteer. But I've read it so often that the covers are missing. All I've got is the text, held together with spit and tape.

He has but one heart.......



Uncanny....Scary, to say the least.

I read the book 1976 before I saw the movies in 1977. Mama Corleone was quite a shocker. She is very different that I have ever imagined. I always pictured her as a "catherine Scorsee" type, not this very buxom hot movie version of mama. Only Deana showed more cleavage than Mama. Mama Corleone is the orginal "hot mommy"

Uncanny? No I see glaring differences. Dean Martin looks like Mr. Cool. He's hip! Al Martino looks as interesting as a sack of potatos

that's not necessarily correct. as contradictory as it seems, from an academic standpoint the most important thing about a book or other work of art may not be its technical achievement but thematic or historical value. for example consider japanese literature, one of the most "important" books is something called "The Tale of Genji" which is a for lack of a more apt description a comic book. what's significant about ToG is the fact that it portrays with such vividry the courtly life of that period of japanese history. a more acessible example would be shakespere, who although now revered, was in his time considered a hack, a close contemporary analogue for his plays would be what you'd see on UPN these days... quick sets designed for the masses using common gimicks and known gags that now seem intricate and sublime but mainly due to the fact that few extant works exist today from that time. was Casablanca a great movie? was Gatsby a great novel? both were panned critically for techinical merit upon release but have both proved worthy in the eyes of most readers and moviegoers

in the case of TGF, although it's the rare case that the movie is much better than the book, the HEART of what makes the movie great is stolen whole from the book. the themes of family, honor, vengence, loyalty etc that makes TGF the most important movie in history sprang not from Coppola's head but from Puzo's. the breathtakingly daring and plain never-before-done perspective of a humanized mob life from the eyes of the family which proved so influential in both literature and movies also sprang fully formed from the book. it's not a pretty read but Puzo's TGF is undoubtably a great book

i saw the movie first before reading the book. so while reading the book, i always imagined the characters from the movie. and i find them well-fit to their characters. . . in my imagination.

GoodFella

The novel's description of some of the characters is completely different from their screen portrayers. To be true to the novel Clemenza (Richard Castellano) and Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana) would have to change places (ie. in the novel Clemenza was tall, while Brasi was shorter and heavier). Also, in the novel Fredo was much more of an imposing guy; he was described as being much tougher.

Carlo was blond, and well built in the book. James Caan wasn't as big as described in the book, but I can't think of anyone that could play the part better. I think Dean Martin would've been perfect as Johnny. Fredo is described as a pretty muscular guy, not at all like John Cazale. I thought Paulie was perfectly cast, but Lucy should've been better looking. Al Pacino is just as I pictured Michael, and Brando is not exactly as I pictured Vito, but I can't think of anyone that is.

I saw Al and Vito but I too saw Johnny blonde. I think a good book paints a vivid picture. Or at least it should!

It's kind of weird, but Joe Pesci was a lot closer physically to the book's description of Luca Brasi than Lenny Montana, and Pesci ended up carving a out a major career by playing Brasi-like characters over and over.

Jimmy Cagney would have been a good novel Brasi, and I think Richard Attenborough if he could shake the British accent.

Along those lines, why did Puzo describe Clemenza as immensely tall when Italians are not known for their height?

Then, when FFC casts the parts, he doesn't choose the taller Vigoda to play Clemenza.

I think he mentions it because it's unusual. He also mentions that Sonny was unusually tall for an Italian, and that Michael's long legs were unusual for a Sicilian.