"The Godfather Part II" is both a prequel and a sequel.
In the prequel we see how Vito Corleone, this time played by Robert de Niro, becomes the Don Vito from part I.
In the sequel we follow Michael Corleone, again played by Al Pacino, after he has succeeded his father.
Sequels and prequels got a bad name in the '80s with the Rocky and Rambo films being commercially exploited leading to an ever lower quality. This is however not the case in "The Godfather Part II". According to some people this film is even better than the original "Godfather" (1972). There are a number of reasons for this.
In the first place cinematographer Gordon Willis, Prince of darkness. His dark images fit perfectly with the shady dealings the Corleone family is involved in.
In the second place the melancholic music of Nino Rota, making you identify with even these criminal characters.
But last and not least the two leading actors Robert de Niro and Al Pacino, at that time still at the beginning of their careers. It would last until 1995 before we could admire them together again in a film ("Heat", Michael Mann).
In the sequel, in my opinion the strongest part of the film, we see Michael Corleone becoming more and more paranoia. He trusts nobody and, as a result, is eventually trusted by nobody. In the final scene, just as brilliant as the final scene of the original "The Godfather", he sits in his luxurious, well-guarded house by Lake Tahoe, all on his own.
The prequel is in my opinion of lesser quality. In some scenes the young Vito Corleone is portrayed as some kind of Robin Hood. Maybe this is done to make the contrast with the cynical Michael Corleone even greater, but from the first part of the movie we know it isn't true.
In the prequel we see how Vito Corleone, this time played by Robert de Niro, becomes the Don Vito from part I.
In the sequel we follow Michael Corleone, again played by Al Pacino, after he has succeeded his father.
Sequels and prequels got a bad name in the '80s with the Rocky and Rambo films being commercially exploited leading to an ever lower quality. This is however not the case in "The Godfather Part II". According to some people this film is even better than the original "Godfather" (1972). There are a number of reasons for this.
In the first place cinematographer Gordon Willis, Prince of darkness. His dark images fit perfectly with the shady dealings the Corleone family is involved in.
In the second place the melancholic music of Nino Rota, making you identify with even these criminal characters.
But last and not least the two leading actors Robert de Niro and Al Pacino, at that time still at the beginning of their careers. It would last until 1995 before we could admire them together again in a film ("Heat", Michael Mann).
In the sequel, in my opinion the strongest part of the film, we see Michael Corleone becoming more and more paranoia. He trusts nobody and, as a result, is eventually trusted by nobody. In the final scene, just as brilliant as the final scene of the original "The Godfather", he sits in his luxurious, well-guarded house by Lake Tahoe, all on his own.
The prequel is in my opinion of lesser quality. In some scenes the young Vito Corleone is portrayed as some kind of Robin Hood. Maybe this is done to make the contrast with the cynical Michael Corleone even greater, but from the first part of the movie we know it isn't true.