Mommy, what's an internet?

[lettered]

1) I think sometimes we all forget the internet is for porn. It's a sad state of affairs. I hope one day our youth will grow up with the truth, instead of these lies about the internets being SRS BIZNESS. On that note:

2) Where is the Spike/Giles? Flist, I friended you for a reason. Don't let me down in my new housemate's time of need.

3) Have you seen the movie, The Godfather? Did you like it? Why? I understand that this movie is cleverly shot and superbly acted, but why is it so well-loved and famous? I mean, I know why I love it, but they do not seem to be reasons of the masses, forgive my gross stereotype. And why doesn't The Godfather have fandom? Why is it all these . . . non-fannish fans who don't write fanfiction and think no one in the stories can be gay? For that matter, why am I so fannish about it? I'd think it was a fluke, but turns out I was this obsessed before (in 2005 I wrote fic for it. I never forgot it, but I was kinda surprised when I thought about it when I started getting excited about reseeing the first movie). Lastly: WHERE IS THE TOM HAGEN LOVE?

Please, even if you've only just seen the first one in passing, lemme know what you think about it.

Comments

[a2zmom.livejournal.com]

Re; The Godfather - this is one of those things where you are just too young. You look at the movie now, and it obviously well made, but it is also one big cliche.

You have to understand - this movie invented those cliches. The whole mafia being this incredibly loyal family where the code comes first. And if you break the code, you pay for it no matter who you are. This was all new back then, plus the absolute lushness of the story and epic downfall and corruption of Michael.

I personally liked The Conversation better, although Deniro/Brando's acting in the second Godfather movie is superb.

[tkp.livejournal.com]

Hopefully I'm going to watch the Conversation again. I realized it was very clever, but I got bored while watching it. I think now I know what I'm getting into I'll like it better.

Hm! What you say re: The Godfather makes a LOT of sense. I love the movie because I read a whole lot into Michael's story, and bring a lot to it that might be hinted at in the movie, but I'm really creating it myself, in the end. It's why I love Harry Potter so much too, but I understand why everyone else likes Harry Potter.

I guess it's all these people obsessed with the Mafia and mobs and stuff, and I just don't really get that. I don't really find them interesting unless there's a character(s) I can really get into and relate to (in my own weird way of relating. Hey, I relate to Angel, so I guess anything goes)--but the same is true with any story so Mafia or vampire or space aliens really makes no difference to me. But I guess different people are . . . different.

Thanks for the insight ;o) I don't like the second Godfather movie nearly as much. I think it's quite well done, but it doesn't give me many new ideas than the first, and doesn't stand alone for me at all, which for me is sign of nice fan matter but not a great work of fiction.

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

Also, The Godfather is the first movie to make a montage in that specific manner. When The Five Families are taken out and there's all the Catholic Church symbolism over everything? That's the first time that's ever been done and it's STILL fantastic film work.

This movie was also made in the Golden Era of film making, too, the decade of 69-79. Movies moved away from the old style of acting and filmmaking (perfectly shown in Streetcar Named Desire - watch Vivian Leigh vs. Marlon Brando: old and new, right there.) The Godfather was raw and brutal - again, that hadn't been seen before.

This was also the first time tough men were depicted as having a wide range of emotions, and not just the 40's Noirish "Yeah, see?" The acting,t he editing, the direction, the cinematography... It doesn't get much better than in this movie (unless you consider The Godfather 2, which is even better.)

[my_daroga]

The Godfather is the first movie to make a montage in that specific manner.

How do you mean this, exactly? Do you mean with the elements working against one another within the montage? I'm curious.

And I'm not arguing against what you say about the acting style being impressive and influential, but this was sort of the second generation of "Method"-inspired acting, as you point out by referencing Brando 20 years before. Maybe it all solidified then, as I believe filmmaking did in the "film school" generation of the late 60's/early 70's. It definitely was a heady time.