The Godfather

Here it is. If you were to ask many a man smarter than myself what the greatest picture of all time is, more likely than not, they would simply say 'The Godfather'. No buts or howevers, simply 'The Godfather'. And there really isn't much else to say in a reply like that, for this film is perfect; not perfect in that one is physically incapable of writing, shooting, editing or directing a better film, but perfect in that it is flawless. Any criticisms one may conceive of The Godfather are mere suggestions of how something great could have been greater. I first saw The Godfather when I was about eleven or twelve. I was just getting into film and thought I had to plough through everything I could possibly see, without any actual understanding as to why it was great. I thought I knew everything to know about film, and that knowledge could simply come through experience, not analysis or reflection. Regardless, I watched it on a rainy day, at a friend of my mother's in Manchester, in a secluded room, on a minute cell phone screen on the floor. Alas, my first experience with the so-called 'greatest film ever made' was not in the least flattering. I found myself hopelessly bored and confused, my ignorance and naivety holding me back from recognising the greatness of this film. A year or two later, I re-visited The Godfather, in the hopes that I could get round to appreciating it. I now had a sound understanding of filmmaking and was better experienced with film in general. Learning from a previous mistake, I watched it on a proper screen and on a chair. On a personal level, I was not blown away by enjoyment. But despite my lack of personal enjoyment, I could not but recognise it as what was surely the greatest film ever made - a conviction that lasted until the very next day when I saw its sequel. Until now, I had not come to truly love The Godfather as most reasonable people do. I could appreciate it, yet never warm to it as I did other films. Well today, I can finally say with a heavily load lifted from my heart, and a satisfaction within, that I love The Godfather. Coppola and Puzo's screenplay may very well be the greatest ever written. The often-called greatest, Chinatown, I do not feel reaches the levels of The Godfather. And so far, what I currently do consider the best, Casablanca, I might have to re-watch to confidently assert. It is the story of the infamous Corleone family; mobsters, murderers, and thieves; yet also just, virtuous, and a loving family. As don, Vito loses strength and influence amongst an ever-changing America, son, Michael transforms from war-hero and husband attempting to disassociate himself from the family business to a cold, aloof and ruthless, violent businessman. It is almost indescribable to explain how well The Godfather is written. Every single character is literally one of the best characters in the history of cinema. Don Vito is a traditional and understanding, though sternly just father to all that know him. And his slow and helpless demise amidst an ever-more corruptive American underground is tragic. He goes from being loved and feared to pathetically losing power and influence, becoming a background character in a modernised American crime scene. He might well have been the greatest character in cinema, had it not been for son, Michael, who fiercely competes alongside such characters as his aforementioned father, Jake LaMotta, Randal McMurphy, Charles Foster Kane and Kikuchiyo, as the greatest character of all time. He has a tragic character arc from the nice young man, a modest war hero who wishes to detach himself from crime to a heartless, vengeful mob boss, his father's comforting nature being non-existent in his cold carrying out of business. Adopted son and peaceful, negotiable businessman and lawyer, Tom Hagen's transformation to Michael's cold puppet, as well as Sonny's tragically outgoing nature make for easily two of the best supporting characters in film. Fredo, Kaye, Connie, Clamenza, Tessio, Bonasera, Sollozzo, Brasi, Carlo and McClusky are also such good side characters. And this is achieved through the excellent writing. The wedding scene at the beginning seamlessly introduces them, uses exposition as a tool for plot development, establishes important character dynamics, and is a perfect opening contrast for family and business. All of these plot points are satisfied further throughout the film. There is no convenience or formulaic plot progression, for everything is layered. Puzo and Coppola make it so that the audience are consistently given the tools throughout to put two and two together and are given subtle hints and implications, as tools for suspense, for irony, or for superstition. This is delivered through the excellent dialogue, which plays a massive role in creating such an engrossing experience. It is used to enhance the natures of characters to make them more compelling, and is used often in an implicatory manner to create, and subsequently take advantage of those aforesaid audience emotions and convictions. The story is timelessly gritty and realistic, yet poetically and tragically beautiful. It is clear how Puzo, having adapted his own novel, and Coppola, having had the artistic and directorial vision for the film, worked in harmonious excellency to create one of the greatest stories ever told. Stylistically, The Godfather is very interesting. Everything about it is very basic. There is one shot throughout the entire film that felt even remotely ambitious (which was saved for a very important moment). There is no ambitious editing either. In fact, most set-ups consist of some basic over-the-shoulders, medium close-ups and a master shot. Therefore, one might wonder how this is considered one of the best-shot films of all time. And that would be because of the sheer amount of substance in the actual important elements of cinematography - framing, movement, lighting, mise en scène etcetera, are applied so excellently. The basic style adds a grit that would be lost on grand, massive movements and experimental shot-selection. The blocking and framing of The Godfather is not clean. It's often deliberately dirty or rugged. Parts of characters and objects are kept out of focus in the foreground to create deeper significance. How characters are blocked in relation to each other can be endlessly observed and studied. You can often pause the film and tell exactly what the dynamics of a scene are. Where on the location they are positioned, where in the frame they are positioned, how they are positioned in relation to other subjects and the significance these ideas carry deepens every scene and the supposedly formulaic cinematography. The shot selections and sizes themselves are impressive too. In over-the-shoulder set-ups, character and power dynamics are still shown through whose perspective the shot is shown from, if both characters have an over-the-shoulder or not, the angles and the distance between subjects. Though a lot of the time, the framing seems merely a technical convenience, it is how the components of the frame relate which brings the substance. Camera and lens movements also add a great deal to the film. Slow, subtle zooms in or out, implore the viewer to observe intently, or either pull away from or reveal new information. The opening shot is a perfect example of this, Bonasera's close-up showing his disturbing lust for vengeance zooming out into Vito's over-the-shoulder, engulfing the frame and adding reason to Bonasera's request. Though the camera usually stays still, the movements tend to be handheld, in consistency with the film's gritty nature. The Godfather doesn't try to trip over itself, doing stylistic ridiculousness to take away from substantial quality. Movements make sense, and carry importance. Whether being pans to remove the need for a jarring cut or simple tracking shots, it is once again the framing which supplies their significance. The mise en scène is also a determining factor in the quality. Vito's styling and makeup is incredible, the costumes, sets and props ranging from glamourous to gritty to depressing, depending on necessity. Once more, there are no lavish, expensive sets, for the cinematography exists to do its job effectively, not gracefully. - Though touches of grace and class, when relevant, are present. The lighting is perhaps another category that The Godfather succeeds in being the greatest of all time at. The subtle shadowing of locations and characters, contrasts between light and dark and their subsequent implications; the entire thing is just lit so well. Michael's character arc, Vito's balance of business and family, and Michael's lack of balance - all of this is conveyed through the lighting. It makes characters look conflicted or evil, and it's impossible to deny its sheer excellence. The editing, quite like everything else is simple, but here it is also incredible. It's not just that inter-cut scene at the end, its the efficiency, both technically and artistically. The exchange from shot-to-shot conveys ideas and meanings in such a seemingly simplistic, but theoretically rich manner. It's used as a tool for irony in the horse's head scene and christening scene, it's used as a tool for tension in the dinner scene. But the hundreds of cuts in-between these most famous parts is the crux of the editing and its most important element. And here, its perfect. Contrasts and dynamics are explained in single cuts from image to image. This is a serious run for the money of Raging Bull, which I will have to re-watch. Walter Murch is the greatest sound designer of all time; I don't even think that's a question. And The Godfather has easily some of the best sound in the history of film. Things like the train roaring at the dinner scene add so much more to scenes in such a subtle manner. But the sound editing too is great. The contrast from Corleone's silent office to the bustling party is just excellent. The way in which sound is carried from scene to scene to imply a connection or irony, and the manner in which volume is utilised make this a film of great audial enrichment. I don't believe it's the best sound designed film of all time. Coppola's underrated The Conversation, Tarkovsky's Stalker and Bresson's A Man Escaped, I find narrowly better, but once again: the sound isn't flashy or flamboyant, but appropriately nuanced and subtly effective. Nino Rota (being easily the most underrated composer of all time) has a great score. But great music doesn't make great films. Great music applied correctly to a great picture does; and this is. All of these stylistic elements combine into some of the greatest scenes in cinematic history: the opening scene, the wedding scene, the Liberty Statue assassination, the dinner scene, the christening scene, that Tessio scene, the final scene. And I know I'm missing plenty. Here is the pure embodiment of substance over style. Logic over experimentation. It finds its beauty in its grounded nature, which is in itself beautiful. Four of the greatest performances in cinematic history appear in this one film - four. Them being Marlon Brando as Vito Corleone, Al Pacino as Michael Corleone, James Caan as Santino 'Sonny' Corleone, and Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. Many will argue for any four of these as the greatest performance of all time. You can write a character as well as you want, but you must rely on your actors to portray that convincingly and compellingly. The Godfather achieves that. There are in fact, no performances in The Godfather that aren't even good. Most of the actors give the best performances of their lives here. So, for many, many paragraphs now, I have been raving over how great this film is - I've used the word perfect plenty of times. So why doesn't The Godfather get 100/100? Well, simply for the reason I stated at the beginning: some great things could have been greater; not whole scenes or plot elements, but shots or editing choices which just could have been greater. I don't believe I am completely incapable of one day, giving a film 100/100, but it will be a mighty, mighty feat to achieve that. So, it's been a few years, my rocky relationship with this film, and I regret not having come to adore this sooner. I was once ignorant, I was less ignorant, and in two years I will find myself today, just as ignorant as I do today find myself of two years ago. But I cannot recognise this as anything but flawless. There is a rightful reason that The Godfather is considered 'the film of all films', and that is because it is the ultimate example of great cinema; of great screenwriting, great cinematography, great editing, great sound and great acting. It is sheer greatness personified on a 170 minute roll of celluloid. 97/100