I watched the whole thing

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

in order to understand his developmnent over all three movies, yes all three movies are relevant
....but his development in part 1 is self contained

Maybe it was contained in the parts that weren't written in the movie?

 

[Bedrockgames]

.

Omerta is like the code of honor? Uh, NO. More like the real code of Chivalry (which is nothing like the popular victorian romantic delusions of gentlemanly conduct--Chivalry allows for rape and murder, so long as the victim is of a lower class).
I suppose it is possible that Omerta is as mis-represented in the movie as the public perception of Chivalry, or the code of Samurai as depicted in martial arts movies.

I am not concerned about the real world history of omerta or chivalry, or trying to defend emrta. Nor am i trying to say the movie depicts the actula honor code of real criminals. Just that there is an honor code present through the film, and it is based on omerta and italian ideas about manliness. No t saying it is a good or bad coce. Just that it is one. Obviously the godfather presents a highly romanticized view of the mafia, the same way many fantasy films romanticize knights and how martial arts films romanticize bushido. I studied history so I understand there is a gap between how things are presented in historical movies and the reality, but when i watch a film, i am interested in entertainment, not history (if i want history i will read history books).

 

[Bedrockgames]

Maybe it was contained in the parts that weren't written in the movie?

No, we just disagree. I have explained the aspects of the movie i feel are important to his development. You feel another way. Totally fine, but it doesn't make your position objectivley true. And i find your arguments very inconvincing. It feels like you already made up your mind anyways.

Have a nice day HS. I have spent way too much time trying to engage in this "discussion"

 

[Bedrockgames]

Good side? What good side? Were we shown a good side? I don't remember any good side. I just remember a spoiled brat playboy. One who enjoyed all the benefits, then whined like a little Hctib when the consequences of his actions came back on him.

Well he starts out as a war hero, expresses interest in being legit, then when he does do the hit, it is to protect his family. By the end he is much more ruthless. I would agree that he is spoiled. I would also agree he is ultimate a very bad guy. i the first movie the impression is that he is basically becoming like his father, a man who does bad things but is admirable in a lot of ways. I feel like in the second movie they turn that on its head, almost saying the thing that made him different from the rest of his family (which in the first movie kind of makes him a good guy at the start of the film), is the thing that ultimately makes him evil in a way his father never was.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Dear Kitten,

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

 

[sabrinathecat]

Funny thing about opinions: they are subjective.
I started watching the movie for entertainment. I didn't find it. I'm guessing HS felt the same, based on his previous posting history.
You seem to have found some enjoyment from the movie.
We didn't.
You assert merits that we didn't find.
Whether they were there are not is a matter of opinion.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Funny thing about opinions: they are subjective.
I started watching the movie for entertainment. I didn't find it. I'm guessing HS felt the same, based on his previous posting history.
You seem to have found some enjoyment from the movie.
We didn't.
You assert merits that we didn't find.
Whether they were there are not is a matter of opinion.

And I actually agree with you. If you didn't like the movie, that is entirely reasonable and fair. And it is fair to express your opinion. Hey, I don't like Citizen Kane and it is regarded as the best movie ever by many. What I objected to was HS claiming it was objectively bad (and that is the claim HS has been making) and his/her followup position that people who like it are stupid. I am not saying you have to share my thoughts on the merits of the film. I was presenting these as a counter point to HS's position that is objectively a bad movie and that people who like it must be incorrect.

 

[sabrinathecat]

That is because Citizen Cane is actually a very boring movie, for all the praise and innovations it presented at the time.

 

[Kramodlog]

That is because Citizen Cane is actually a very boring movie, for all the praise and innovations it presented at the time.

To fully appriciate it, you need to see this documentary first.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

What I objected to was HS claiming it was objectively bad (and that is the claim HS has been making)

Well, to be fair, it is objectively bad. Like I said, it is terrible writing, and none to little character development. Half the things they do make no sense. There isn't a reason to care for any of the characters. There is no moral dilemma for anyone to overcome. Pacing is pretty bad. For a movie that is supposed to take place over five years, there is little to show the passage of time.

and his/her followup position that people who like it are stupid. I am not saying you have to share my thoughts on the merits of the film.

Alright, I'll admit that 'stupid' was the wrong word to use. So I'll amend my previous statement.

[That just proves there are a lot of really stupid people in the world with terrible taste.

So, I apologize for using the word 'stupid.' In fact, I'll readily admit that there are plenty of intelligent people that like really bad movies. It doesn't make them stupid. Better?

I was presenting these as a counter point to HS's position that is objectively a bad movie and that people who like it must be incorrect.

Hmmm... may this is where we are having this confusion. I'm not saying that you are incorrect for liking the movie. I'm just saying you are wrong when you say it is a good movie. Listen, there are plenty of bad movies that a lot of people like. That doesn't make the movies any good, though. But that doesn't mean they are incorrect for liking them.