|
The Godfather Trilogy: Remastered Collection - Limited Edition Steelbook [1971] (Exclusive to Amazon.co.uk) | ![The Godfather Trilogy: Remastered Collection - Limited Edition Steelbook [1971] (Exclusive to Amazon.co.uk)](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41F-p1XcXLL._SL75_.jpg)
 enlarge | Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Actors: Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton
Studio: Paramount Home Entertainment
Category: DVD
List Price: £29.99
Buy New: £17.99
You Save: £12.00 (40%)
Avg. Customer Rating:  2 reviews
Sales Rank: 440
Format: Colour, Dts Surround Sound, Pal, Subtitled, Surround Sound
Language: English (Original Language)
Rating: Suitable for 18 years and over
Number Of Items: 5
EAN: 5014437961631
ASIN: B0017KL6Z0
Release Date: June 2, 2008 (In 17 Days)
Shipping: Eligible for Super Saver Shipping
Availability: Not yet released
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.co.uk Review
Throughout his long, wandering, often distinguished career Francis Ford Coppola has made many films that are good and fine, many more that are flawed but undeniably interesting, and a handful of duds that are worth viewing if only because his personality is so flagrantly absent. Yet he is and always shall be known as the man who directed the Godfather films, a series that has dominated and defined their creator in a way perhaps no other director can understand. Coppola has never been able to leave them alone, whether returning after 15 years to make a trilogy of the diptych, or re-editing the first two films into chronological order for a separate video release as The Godfather Saga. The films are America's very own Shakespearean cycle: they tell a tale of a vicious mobster and his extended personal and professional families (once the stuff of righteous moral comeuppance), and they dared to present themselves with an epic sweep and an unapologetically tragic tone. Murder, it turned out, was a serious business. The first film remains a towering achievement, brilliantly cast and conceived. The entry of Michael Corleone into the family business, the transition of power from his father, the ruthless dispatch of his enemies--all this is told with an assurance that is breathtaking to behold. And it turned out to be merely prologue; two years later The Godfather, Part II balanced Michael's ever-greater acquisition of power and influence during the fall of Cuba with the story of his father's own youthful rise from immigrant slums. The stakes were higher, the story's construction more elaborate, and the isolated despair at the end wholly earned. (Has there ever been a cinematic performance greater than Al Pacino's Michael, so smart and ambitious, marching through the years into what he knows is his own doom with eyes open and hungry?) The Godfather, Part III was mostly written off as an attempted cash-in, but it is a wholly worthy conclusion, less slow than autumnally patient and almost merciless in the way it brings Michael's past sins crashing down around him even as he tries to redeem himself. --Bruce Reid, Amazon.com
|
| Customer Reviews:
 The Godfather I & II - No 6 - All Time List 2008 May 13, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
There is not a lot to be said about this film that hasn't been already said.
The Godfather has the word classic written all over, it is many a peoples lists of top five movies of all time; IMBD has it at no 1 of all time - that in itself is some accolade. When you watch it, and it stands up to repeated viewings, you can understand why it is rated so highly.
The actual story is first rate, Coppola and Puzo have done a fine job in adapting the book, the acting and cast is superb, the score adds to the atmospheric mood of the film and without being a film student of any type -the direction is fantastic.
There are many a famous scene in this movie - the infamous horse scene being just one - and without giving a synopsis of the movie and ruining plot before viewing all I'd say as an initial statement is - find three hours to sit down and watch this movie. You will not regret it and you will not get bored - instead you'll want to move directly onto Godfather Part II.
Al Pacino gives an amazing performance as Michael Corleone as the Military brother who initially wants nothing to do with his family and what they stand for, and of course the much heralded performance by Marlon Brando as Don Corleone.
It might be at a slower pace than a more modern mafia film, but its better for that, you can to know the characters, and have a bigger sense of what is to come instead of spending your whole time trying to work out what's going on and who the hell the guy who's just come in the screen actual is and the violence is more than graphic enough and touches the heights that it is meant to.
Ignore cretins who publically state they only watched the film for 20 minutes and then rate it one star, by 20 minutes of the film you aren't even properly introduced to the family - it's called an introduction - for which the next 150 minutes are better with the added insight to the family.
The Godfather has justified its reputation, it's truly magnificent.
Part II can be seen as both a continuation and a prequel - De Niro (who won an Oscar for the part) plays Don Corleone some 40 years previous - he shares no screen time with the continuation story and the parts are cut throughout the film. Without ruining plot lines / stories both are interesting enough - De Niro's concerning the arrival of Corleone in American and the struggles he goes through initially etc. Pacino's screen time magnifies the changes in Michael from the start of Part I, as he, now Don of the family, seeks to expand the Corleone Empire into areas he would not have dreamt about during the first movie.
It would be incomprehensible to watch Part II without seeing The Godfather first so please do these films in order.
Everything you got in the first film you get again, Part II is certainly on par with the first film and again is essential viewing, epic, violent and wonderful.
Part III is written off as the bad part by many, and yes it is nowhere near the standard of the first two films - but if you ask me it's still a good film and well worth seeing. Don't expect a classic but it's a good mafia movie.
The films do look a little dated now, but do not let that deter you - this is compelling, scintillating viewing and a must see for any film lover.
Apparently these are new versions for 2008 - I imagine just digitally remastered and without too many extra features that only someone with better ears/eyes then myself would notice the difference from the release a few years ago, but issues aside, this trilogy is magnificent. A must buy.
 An offer you cannot refuse May 5, 2008
1 out of 10 found this review helpful
Throughout his long career Francis Ford Coppola has made many films that are great (Apocalypse Now, The Conversation); good (Rumble Fish) and fine (Rain Maker), many more that are flawed but undeniably interesting, and a handful of duds that are worth viewing if only because his personality is so flagrantly absent. Yet he is and always shall be known as the man who directed the Godfather films.
The first movie of the trilogy broke many records when it was released in 1972: it was, for example, the top grossing movie (a record broken in 1975 by "Jaws"); that year it also won three Academy Awards. It is also very highly rated by critics; the American Film Institute ranked it the third greatest movie of all time.
But in my opinion, "The Godfather" was a very good movie, not a great movie. It's sequels were even worse (but still much better than the garbage that Hollywood churns out today). The Godfather had quite poor plot development. In particular, I object to the way in which the putative master of crime was depicted conducting a vendetta; invariably an assassin would suddenly appear in proximity to the victim, plug him several times, or strangle him. There was never any evidence of skill or foresight on the part of the gangsters. Hitmen simply would appear at arbitrary intervals, and bump off a character the moment the screenwriter had no use for him. The single most egregious case of this is the assassination of Sonny Corleone by a horde of gunmen that appear as if by magic. Ambushes do occur in the real world, of course, and they often do employ massive overkill; but the planner has to know when and where to hit the target.
This is a common problem of action movies, especially when the protagonist is also a figure of the underworld. It is usually overcome by the writer focusing on fewer conflicts (e.g., the incomparably superior "Chinatown"), or by much greater research of the subject. Since the movie was adapted from The Godfather, it would have been possible to focus on fewer threads of the novel than Coppola chose. Or, had Coppola wanted to focus on the development of Michael Corleone's personality over time, then he could allocated more screen time to, say, the planning and decision-making. Of course, if he had, then he would have not made his gore quota.
The Godfather 2 is a very good movie, but not a classic. It is slow moving and it tries to cover too much ground. Much of the power of this second film comes from the contrast between the two stories. As Vito Corleone grows in power, he also grows as a family man, in both the sense of a father with children and a wife and in the extended sense in his role as Godfather. He becomes the center of a community, drawing others around him. But the other story, of the decay of all that Vito had built up through the leadership of Michael, betrays all the realities undergirding the delusions riddling Vito Corleone's Family. The rot and decay that characterizes Michael's reign are shown as the natural and inescapable result of the greed that drove the lives of those in the crime organization. Nonetheless, the contrast between Vito, surrounded by friends and family and associates, and Michael, killing friends and associates and even family members, alienating even his most loyal friends, sitting inside his armed compound alone couldn't be starker. There is a reverse symmetry between the two stories: Vito starts off alone and ends surrounded by family and friends, while Michael starts off surrounded with family and friends, and ends up alone. This is symbolized perfectly in the final scene in the film, in a flashback to December 7, 1941, when Michael reveals to his brothers that he has enlisted in the Army. They hear their father arrive elsewhere in the house and rush off to meet him, only Michael sitting at the table alone as the film ends.
As with the first film, the acting is beyond reproach. As great as Al Pacino has been in his career, Michael Corleone has been his greatest achievement. He and Robert De Niro excel in the two key roles in the film. Lee Strasberg came out of retirement to play Hyman Roth, and he was extraordinarily effective in the role. The late, great John Cazale was marvelously timid as the dim, confused, and indecisive Fredo, who both adored and resented his brother Michael. Michael Gazzo is unforgettable as Frank Pentangeli, who thinks he has been betrayed by Michael and turns government witness, and received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his performance (he was beaten out by Robert De Niro), as was Lee Strasberg. Robert Duvall returns as Tom Hagen, who is more loyal to Michael than anyone else but who Michael distrusts nonetheless. Bizarrely, Al Pacino lost out to Art Carney, who was excellent in the rather minor film HARRY AND TONTO. It is hard today to understand how Pacino failed to win.
Winner of six Academy Awards, including Best Picture. "The Godfather, Part III" (1990, 170 min.) - Now in his 60's, Michael Corleone is dominated by two passions: freeing his family from crime, and finding a suitable successor. That successor could be fiery Vincent (Andy Garcia), but he may also be the spark that turns Michael's hope of business legitimacy into an inferno of mob violence. This special collection also includes an additional disc containing over 3 hours of bonus material.
This effort is worth watching but it is the weakest of the three. Watch out for the talentless Sophia Coppola; she would have been better off on the other side of the camera.
|
|
|
| |
