Cristian Tiu

Anglo-American Studies I

The Godfather. Should you read the novel or watch the movies?

Since its beginning, cinema has been inspired by many other art forms but none has had the impact on the
telling of stories on the big screen as literature, the written word, more specifically, books and novels. As source
material, novels have dealt motion pictures huge varieties of topics and stories from which to choose.

Both Mario Puzos novel about the life of the Corleone family and the subsequent films directed by Francis
Ford Coppola have been the subject of much discussion by Hollywood experts and by the millions of fans who
never quite get enough of them. The novels greatest achievement is perhaps the films that it spawned films that
have inspired direction, iconic performances, memorable music and dialogue that have become a part of our
vernacular. In short, films that are unforgettable.

The story of The Godfather as depicted both in the Mario Puzo novel and in the first two installments of the
films of the same name is multi-faceted. On the one hand is the world of organized crime, the Mafia or Cosa
Nostra. A world where ties are strong, loyalties are somewhat flexible and tempers are short, a world full of
revenge, violence and distrust, and a world where the weak cannot survive. Mistakes in this world are lethal and
usually very expensive and friendships are easily bought. On the other hand it is the story about family the blood
family one is born into and the one where you have to prove yourself to belong. Varying degrees of power and
control and the price paid to achieve success surrounds both of these. This is the world we are introduced to, the
world of Vito Corleone. I believe in America

Don Vito Corleone, or simply Godfather as his friends and loyalists call him is a man with no regrets, for
he has succeeded in providing for his family in the only way he knew how. Vito Corleone is at the top, a man who
has proven his strength, who has unquestionable power and yet never forgets a friend. Though he is to be feared, it
is not by brute force alone that he has become the most powerful Don in the world of organized crime. As Mario
Puzo introduces us to this unique man, on the day of his daughters wedding when people come to him for favors, at
the very beginning of his novel we learn that Don Corleone received everyone rich and poor, powerful and
humble with an equal show of love. In turn and rightly so, Don Corleone is loved by his family and friends and
respected by his enemies. He has struggled to make it to where he is and deserves all the accolades bestowed upon
him.

There are many things that occur between the finding of a book source to base a film on and the release of
that film. These things often result in a watering down of the original story so that the final film product barely
resembles the original source material. The exceptions to this are few and far between, relative to how many films
have been completed from previously published books. The Godfather is one of the ones that remain fairly true to
the original source or as close to it as a 175-minute film can. However, the subtleties not included in the films, the
differences that for some reason could not make the transition are in themselves worthy of discussion.

1
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

The differences between Mario Puzos novel and the film versions have to do mostly with character history
where several of the peripheral characters in the films are given more attention in the novel. In some cases extensive
backgrounds are omitted from the films probably due to time constraints. The first character that comes to mind is
Captain McCluskey. In the film version of The Godfather, McCluskey is simply a corrupt police captain, the death
of whom, by Michaels hand turns the tide of the story and forces Michael to fulfill his destiny. In the novel we
learn of McCluskeys upbringing and how it lead to his becoming a corrupt cop. A road to corruption that was
paved by his father and grandfather whod shown him that corruption was the way to make it out in the real world.
It shows why the monetary price of law outweighed the need for order. To him order always came with the greasing
of his palm. None of these details are included in The Godfather film.

Another major difference between the novel and the films comes by way of the attention paid to the
character of Johnny Fontaine in the novel. Though Fontaine plays a small role in Part I, the part he plays in Puzos
book is more substantial. Here we get an in-depth look into his relationships with young starlets, with his wives,
with his daughters and details of the trials and tribulations he lives through related to his career. In both versions,
however, one scene stands out as key and in the film becomes as memorable a scene as ever appears on the big
screen. Though Fontaine is not in the scene, it is because he is the Dons godson and has come to ask a favor of his
godfather that the scene plays out. This scene is the one where movie mogul, Jack Woltz, discovers the head of his
beloved Khartoum in his bed. In the film the scene opens with a glorious, peaceful morning in Hollywood. The
camera pans across the moguls majestic estate while birds chirp happily in the background. Slowly, the camera
ascends toward a small window and that music possibly the greatest of theme songs begins to play ever so softly
as the camera continues to move upward. Through the window we go and upon a slumbering Woltz we come. In an
overly ornate bed he lays on satin sheets, the music swells and the camera now follows him as he discovers blood.
He uncovers the head of the horse and the music dies leaving us in the midst of a gruesome sight and blood-curdling
screams. It is unforgettable.

In the novel Mario Puzo also goes into much detail about the awesome Luca Brasi. In the film Brasis past
is briefly mentioned during Michaels telling to Kay of the now-famous releasing of Johnnys singing contract and
the Don having made an offer he couldnt refuse to a bandleader, while accompanied by Brasi. Hes a very scary
guy is really all we learn of the massive man. But the extent to which Puzo tells of Luca Brasis crimes is lost in
the film. In the novel Brasi is a one-man cosa nostra unto himself. He alone saved the Corleone familys reputation
when the Don had been injured in the 1930s. Also mentioned in the novel is that Luca Brasi had gotten a young girl
pregnant and arranges for the babys disposal and kills the girl himself. This man is a killing machine and the reason
why Puzo gives him such importance in the novel is that Brasi is the only man the Don himself would have feared if
he were to fear any man. Luckily, in both cases Luca is blindly devoted to his Don but the impact of this strong
character is never felt in the film where clearly, there is no man Don Vito Corleone would come close to fearing.

Lucy Mancini, Connies bridesmaid, who we see in the film as the young girl Sonny is making comedy
with has no bigger purpose than that in Part I (she does appear later in Part III in a small part as Vincents mother).

2
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

In the novel, however, much in the same way we learn about Fontaines life, we learn about Lucys. With the help
of the Corleones she moves out West after Sonnys death. She continues her life in Vegas and becomes involved in
one of the Casinos. She meets and marries a doctor who helps her overcome a sexual defect and they live happily
ever after. Also in the novel Lucy never has children, which of course would leave the Corleones without an heir to
the throne in Part III.

There are other peripheral characters with mere mentions in the films that are fully rounded and detailed in
the novel. Rocco Lampone and Al Neri, who become major players in the new generation that become strongmen
when Michael becomes head of the family, are rarely even referred to by name in the films. Each has a story to tell
and comes with baggage. Of all the characters in both versions, however, the one that makes the biggest change
from one medium to the other is Kay Adams. In the novel we learn about and meet her family and what they feel
about Michael mostly that they are vigilant for their daughter but trust her to make her own decisions. Though in
the film it is obvious that Kay is not the typical mafia wife from the beginning, the fact that she grows
increasingly distrustful of him, his lifestyle and work is a major source of drama in the first two installments of The
Godfather films. In the novel, however, Kay is blindly in love, continues a connection to the family through
Michaels mother during the time he is in hiding in Sicily and in the end becomes the typical woman who would
marry such a man. She not only learns to accept him and what he does, but she converts to Catholicism so that she
can attend church and pray for his soul just as his mother does for his father. This is a major discrepancy between
the novel and the films because Kays growing disdain of Michael in the films is vital to his eventual alienation.

It would be a serious undertaking to note all that makes The Godfather a great film, a masterpiece, because
so much of it is unforgettable. It is simply a staggering film with so many great moments, performances and lines
that one cannot mention them all. So, of all the examples to choose from the following stand out as a mere
sampling. The acting it is phenomenal each actor perfectly personifies the character he/she is playing. Marlon
Brando plays the title character with as much style and grace as he does his many other performances. The man
does not miss a mark or nuance. Playing a man much older than himself, a man in the twilight of his life, he
commands the respect and honor naturally given to all leaders of men. However, despite Brandos great
performance, one he won an Academy Award for, it is not the best in the film. That honor has to go to Al Pacino
whose portrayal of Michael Corleone, the Dons youngest, and smartest son still stands as the best in his career.
Pacinos gradual transition from a young, fresh-faced war hero to the tortured head of the most powerful crime
family is nothing short of amazing. Its all done brilliantly subtle whichever way one looks at it, it works. For
instance, how his shoulders slump and his posture change throughout the film as the weight of the world falls upon
him, is astounding. Although it is clearly more visible in Part II, we can already tell that the Michael Corleone who
is morphing into the next Don in front of our eyes is a different man than he is in Puzos novel. Michael here is
much more introverted, much more tortured by his decisions, which somehow make him more menacing.

Pacinos performance in this film alone is enough to make it memorable, but there is much more. James
Caans portrayal of Vitos oldest son, Sonny, with the live wire temper is also great. It is in this role one that

3
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

differs from the novel in that Sonny seems less capable in the film due to the fact that the film doesnt make mention
of his past accomplishments and experiences during a previous war between the families that we see the brilliance
of characterization come alive. Sonny is an extremely violent man, prone to losing his temper at the drop of a hat.
Hes impulsive, reckless, shoots off his mouth all the time and yet when we see the nasty way he is murdered we
mourn for him. How is it that we come to care for a man such as that?

John Cazale plays Vitos second son. The runt in the clan, Fredo. A weak man who sticks out like a
wounded fish amongst the sharks in the few scenes hes in. As the only male character in the family with absolutely
no power and no strength of character he becomes a quiet force for attention.

The last major performance Ill mention here is Robert Duvalls as Tom Hagen. The way Duvall plays the
smart, needy, vulnerable man who does much of the Dons dirty work comes across beautifully. His need to belong
is ever-present.

During the casting process filmmakers can do a great service to a film by matching actors to the characters
of an original book source so that at least that part of the visual realization is done prior to the beginning of filming.
And due to much of what was mentioned above the casting in the first two installments of The Godfather on film
was inspired. However, it is not the only aspect of Part I that matters in a historical sense, nor is it even the best. It
is the other choices made by Francis Ford Coppola to bring this film to life that make it his crowning achievement as
a director. That crowning achievement is the look and feel of this film.

Coppola seems to know the intricacies of these people, the times and the places like the back of his hand.
This is why much of this film feels like a home movie, in a sense. The mood of the film is constant, a definite power
and as palpable as any one of the characters. The film has perfect setting, period costuming, sound; music one never
tires of (including the theme music, which is often manipulated for mood from romance to warning of impending
doom) and on and on. This film would simply be a completely different film if it didnt have the orange hue
lighting, the lights and shadows and the feel of a film shot during the golden age of Hollywood, despite its color.
The lighting remains intimate throughout a single lamp in the hospital room, eyes kept in shadows to enhance the
menace of a person, the warm lighting that makes a home feel like a home despite the goings on, etc. we are privy
to the most intimate moments of these people. This is where the film betters Puzos novel. Puzo introduces us to
the story, settings and characters but Coppola brings us into their world. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand
words and the pictures within this picture all memorable, all outstanding are too numerous to count.

The Godfather, Part II, released in 1974, continues the story of the Corleone family as originally written by
Mario Puzo, for about one-half of the film. Michael, now the most feared man in organized crime becomes more
and more alienated from everyone who surrounds him. By the time this part of the story begins Michael needs not
prove to anyone he can lead his family and/or defeat his foes. Now the task to be conquered is within him. The

4
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

power hes attained and killed for wears on him. He no longer trusts even those closest to him and soon loses the
sense of where enemies end and family starts. Incidentally, this is a line that never blurred for his father.

Al Pacino continues his bravura performance as Michael. His growing bitterness and loneliness grow from
deep within and engulf his every step. The coldness of this man is set deep in his eyes and make this character one
of the most menacing ever to be portrayed on film. It is difficult to think of another actor in another role that can
simply with a flick of his eyes say so much, or be so scary. When hes hugging Fredo at his mothers wake, all it
takes is a flick of his eyes toward Neri and we know the doom that is to come. When Kay is at the door after
visiting her children behind Michaels back and he happens to walk in on her the look in his eyes as he closes the
door in her face chills one down to the bone. No other man but Pacino could have played Michael Corleone in this
manner.

Throughout Puzos novel there is mention of destiny. The Don believes heavily in destiny, and there is no
doubt in him, or in us, that he was where he was supposed to be at all times. His life and his work were the destiny
that he brought to fruition for himself. This is pertinent because although destiny is not necessarily a spoken theme
in the films one cannot ignore that it is the reason Michael ends up as Don instead of one of his brothers, and it is
also where he differs most from his father. Michaels destiny to become the head of the family trickled down to him,
was handed to him. Yes, it is his destiny but to a large extent he felt obliged to do what he had to do. While it came
naturally to him he would always be at war with himself and always present is the why me? aspect to this man.
The life he leads is not the one he would have chosen. This Michael is in contrast to Vito but also to the character of
Michael in the novel. In Puzos book Michael is surer of his role as Don and in the world that surrounds him.

Here we see not only the development of all the familiar characters in the present time (the late 1950s),
but also the story of how the Don came to be through flashbacks of the Don, Genco, young Clemenza and Tessio in
the old neighborhood as they began their business association in the Genco Olive Oil business and beyond. The
flashbacks are straight from the Puzo novel as he covers Vitos rise to power as well as Michaels. But there is much
in the plot of The Godfather, Part II that is new to the Corleone story and not covered in the novel. The first thing is
the major plotline having to do with Hyman Roth, the Jewish boss who is Michaels main foe in this film. Another
is the senate investigation that plagues Michael and threatens his empire. Fredos betrayal, which leads to the
descent of Michaels soul into a place from which there is no return and all that results from that are all also native
to the film. And finally there is the increasing unhappiness of Kay in her marriage and her subsequent breakup with
Michael. As mentioned above, this is something the Kay in the novel would never have even considered.

The Godfather, Part II is a much more complex film than the first. The style of storytelling is very similar
to that of the novel in that Mario Puzo also uses flashbacks to tell the story of Vitos rise to power contrasting it to
Michaels. Again, the contrast between the two is much more severe in the film because Michaels growing

5
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

bitterness is not present at all in his father and the going back and forth between the two parallel stories emphasizes
their differences beautifully and more profoundly. Vito is a calm, confident and fair man from the very beginning.
He is never conflicted and always seems sure of what his next step should be. This man is definitely doing what he
was born to do. To his son, however, fate has dealt a mighty blow, a blow from which any number of people may
not recover.

As in Part I, Part II features the same brilliance in setting, cinematography, period costuming and music
in short, all the things that made Part I a special film are again present here so that there is no need to go into detail
about these things again. Suffice it to say that the mood is always perfectly established to whatever time and place
the story takes us. The acting is also astounding in this film and it is clearly evident that these actors and directors
are in their prime. Much of what comes through in this film will never be bettered by many of the players. Details
of Pacinos performance are mentioned above but some of the other players, a larger supporting cast than in the first
film, cannot be ignored. Robert DeNiro as the young Vito Corleone is magnificent and again, John Cazale as Fredo
is a favorite and deserves another mention here such a brilliant actor. Cazale brings the heart-breaking, often
pathetic Fredo to new depths and one cannot help but feel for this man and the fact that fate may have actually
mistakenly brought him into the wrong world and the wrong family. His Im smartI was passed over scene is
wonderful. Its terrible. Its heart wrenching.

Many people consider The Godfather, Part II the superior of the first film, and in many aspects it may well
be. It is complex and long and yet never boring and never stumbles on its way to telling a very compelling story.
There is no way around the fact that this is an extraordinary film and an absolutely incredible accomplishment.
However, there is a certain affection that this holds for Part I that is not replicated here. Though difficult to put into
words one has to attribute it to the family dynamics that simplicity and comfort of home that is not present in this
second film, with one small, joyous exception. At the end of Part II, as Michael sits outside contemplating about
how far he has gone, how he has reached a place from which there is no return, he thinks of the old days and in a
flashback we are taken to a day when the family celebrated the Dons birthday, a surprise party. All the young
Corleones are around the table and things are as they should be. Sonny is animated and hotheaded. We hear one of
his small daughters in the background say mommy, daddy is fighting again. Fredo is innocent and nave, Connie
and Carlo have just met, Tom is the spokesman, trying to keep the peace and Michael is the outsider, having just
joined the Marines because Pearl Harbor has just been bombed. We hear Sonny say What do you think, the nerve
of them Japs, them slanty-eyed bastards? Dropping bombs on our own backyard. On Pops birthday, you know?
The world revolved around them then and who wouldnt have wanted to be a fly on that wall? It is in that time and
place that we seem to be at home and it is with much regret that we let go and admit those times are gone forever.

The Godfather, Part III continues the Corleone family story as of 1979. Michael, still the head of the
family, has tried since last we saw him to bring legitimacy to the family. Since he is being bestowed an honor by the
Catholic Church at the films onset we think for a moment he may have succeeded, but we know what hes done to
get to where he is. And we know what weighs on his soul.

6
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

The screenplay for this film, like the other two, was co-written by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo.
The story here falls well outside the one covered in Puzos novel. In the sense that these two men know these
people better than anyone else there is closure to these peoples story and the movie feels like an homage, in many
instances, to the fact that we need to know what happens to them. Aside from that, there was no need to make this
film. Although Part III is good enough to stand on its own merits a lot is lost if one is not familiar with the first two
films, which somehow manage to fill in the gaps left by this one. In many instances, the dialogue, which seems
forcibly written to sound like that of the other two, seems awkward and often stumbles along a fact that is that
much more obvious if one happens to watch this film in close succession to the other two.

The plot involves the Catholic Church as one of the greatest evils in the world and how Michaels efforts to
bring the family into the right side of law and order fail. Michael is tired, old and trying to make amends for his sins
but no matter how hard he tries they keep pulling him back in his fact is compounded by Vincent Mancini,
Sonys illegitimate son whos eager to lead the family and avenge any and all enemies. The fact that Vincent
eventually becomes heir to the Corleone throne is bothersome, at best. This does not feel like destiny and perhaps it
is Michaels loss of will, his exhaustion that lead him to appoint Vincent Don of course Michaels only son has no
interest in family affairs. But still. Vincent just has not made his bones and on some level it is a slap in the face to
the memory of Vito Corleone, a man we so loved and respected, that this should happen. The rite of passage seems
unfulfilled, at least to this viewer

As far as The Godfather, Part III being a film worth watching, it is. All that is right about this film is all
that is familiar. The mood here is not as consistently rich as it is in the first two films but we are, to a great extent,
back to the familiarly lit rooms inhabited by this family. Rooms filled with shadows and memories that we enter
with great ease. And why not? Weve been here before. Back again is the theme of religion versus evil, a theme so
prevalent in the first two films scenes that intercut a religious theme with gruesome violence. The importance of
familiarity is clearly not lost on the filmmakers in this case, as what they have to bank on is a return of all those
Corleones. And in keeping with the feelings of familiarity is Kay Adams, back again as the only person who
would/could ever tell Michael the truth to his face. Kay appears still angry at the fact he could have been a different
man, but is now again a part of his life. It should be noted also that the scenes between these two characters are the
best in the film. They alone tie much of this film to the others as Kay constantly reminds Michael, and us, that in
reality he hasnt changed all that much, hes still a gangster, a common Mafia hood, despite all the titles and honors
bestowed upon him.

As far as the acting in The Godfather, Part III, it is adequate in comparison to the other two Godfather
films. Still, many of the key players are still worth watching. Al Pacino loses some of the subtlety that made his
performance in the others great. It must be noted that now Michael feels a need for redemption and confesses
several times in the film to the Cardinal and later to Don Tommasino as the old man lies in his casket. This is
understandable as the need to absolve himself of sin, clear his conscience, becomes ever present as the end of his life
nears. Al Pacino does have his great moments in this film, however, as in the scene on the Opera house steps when

7
 Cristian Tiu
Anglo-American Studies I

his daughter Mary is shot. If the audience is not moved by that silent scream of a man in pure agony then it is
unfeeling.

Another significant change is seen in Connie Corleone. Finally, at the end of the entire Corleone saga, do
we see a woman making some bones of her own. Connie, now Michaels companion and caregiver is in complete
support of her brother. She pushes Vincent to be ruthless and act like what she perceives a Don to be, often stirring
him to act out vengeance against Michaels enemies. But Connie plays a larger role in the familys dynamic than
any other woman has ever done for her brother she commits murder herself by killing her own godfather by
poison. Connie, the spoiled guinea brat that only caused problems for her brothers as a younger woman is now a
force to be reckoned with and would have made her father proud (if her father had believed women had a place in
business, which he didnt). Without other siblings, Michael, the Don, is now lucky to have her by his side

Finally the manner in which Michael Corleone leaves this world, closure to his story. Here is a man who
has seen and caused much heartache and violence. He has experienced the death of those closest to him, in most
instances long before nature would have dictated, including that of his beloved daughter during a botched
assassination attempt against him. There is something evil, though ironic, that he should die alone and simply by
slumping over while eating an orange in old age. Destiny never offered to take him out of his misery, though there
were attempts against him. Instead, it dealt him a long life during which hed be forced to ponder and suffer in
silence about the sins he committed on this Earth. This seems abnormally cruel and seeing this man, whom weve
come to love despite his sins, slump over never ceases to stir.

The trilogy is now over. Whether one prefers the novel or the films is a personal matter. Regardless of the
form, the fact remains that the story of the Corleones is a powerful and affecting one. It is timeless and it is
relatable. In a real sense it is a story about every family everywhere their feelings, loves, joys, sorrows. We all
become participants in these peoples lives, and their crimes.