This article, focused specifically on Mario Puzo’s book, The Godfather, on which the film is based, and Puzo, who also did the screenplay for the film version, addresses the concerns and criticisms of the book.  Firstly, the article states that the greatest criticism of the book is that it is too realistic, but it is argued in the article that this is in fact its best quality.  Puzo should be praised for “making the outrageous plausible.”  The trick, as described, in making Don Vito a likeable character is a strength, for example, because it creates a depth and complexity to the character.

The article continues with an extensive discussion as to whether or not Don Corleone is a barbarian where barbarian is a place between nature and civilization.  He is not completely wild, and yet he is closer to his emotions and basic instincts than others.  Yet he is still capable of complete reason, particularly when he is in the process of making a decision, as this stands out as a time when he clearly thinks things through.

Further, there follows a discussion as to whether the American dream, and American justice are dead within the movie.  The article questions if this is one of the very bases of the movie considering certain symbols.  They use the example of a character’s name to suggest it as a symbol that these are dying and something or someone will eventually have to come and fill their place.

This article seeks to describe a new breed of films that emerged in the 1970’s.  Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather was one of the films that epitomized and exemplified this type of film, which was the epic melodrama.  The article describes this type of film as pessimistic and theatrical, with heavy political and social influences such as Vietnam and Watergate, as well as formal European influences, which fit well with the heavy emphasis in this film on Italian-Americans.

The films that fall into this category are characterized by the larger than life characters, the intense emotions, and most importantly the great battle between good and evil.  In the case of The Godfather, this battle became an inner moral one, but nonetheless capable of creating just as much drama.  As the article continues, this film, as a direct result of the melodrama, strikes a chord within audiences.  It is suggested that perhaps this is simply because of the time during which it was released, and the political and social emotions that were still in the air as a result of Vietnam.  Thus, ultimately the historical and political events of the time become “a springboard” through which these movies become about much larger issues.  The Godfather, as claimed in the article is not simply about an Italian family linked to the mob, but also one of “greed, vengeance, and power.”

One of the symbolic manifestations in these films are the ways in which theater itself is brought into the script.  In The Godfather, specifically, there are various instances before turning points in the film, or bits that are used to foreshadow, where Italian melodrama is viewed. Another important aspect to these films are the manner in which they are rooted in particular genres already, gangster films in the case of The Godfather, and thus particular scenes, such as the wedding, further place the film in this context as well as providing another layer, emphasizing the family and Italian heritage of the Corleones.

In this original New York Times review of Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather, published on March 16, 1972, columnist Vincent Canby describes specifically the plot and themes of the film.  He then proceeds to sing the praises of Coppola’s efforts.  Ultimately, we can see how this popular film was well-received even upon its initial release, given that Canby’s article was nothing short of glowing.

Canby begins the article by introducing Mario Puzo’s bestselling novel The Godfather first.  More often than not adapted screenplays from novels aren’t well liked, partly because there is a great deal of expectation surrounding them, but also because creating what many people have envisioned differently is a daunting task.  Still, Canby begins his series of compliments by praising Coppola for being able to stand up to the task and really make the film as good as if not better than the novel, while still remaining true to the characters and plotline.

He continues by turning to the complexities of both the characters as well as story difficulties, describing how characters that are very well liked may very well act out in later scenes, making it difficult to establish whom to vote for.  For instance, the typical mafia wars here are not particularly glorified, nor does Coppola hide the brutality of the family business.  Instead, despite the rather small portion of a community that has actually experienced it, he gives us a full and true sense of both the violence as well as the love and respect present within the Corleone family.

Finally, Canby attempts to make a brief mention of the superb acting in the film, but with so many incredible people, most of whom would go on to lead very successful careers if they weren’t already, he struggles and only specifically calls out Marlon Brando for his incredible return to film, and Al Pacino, who starred.  Coppola receives many compliments for his rather lengthy feature film, 175 minutes in fact, all of which are of course well deserved.

The Godfather, a film directed by Francis Ford Coppola, released in 1972 is a story of an Italian American family, who has immigrated to America.  It depicts the struggles in their family relationships as well as the brutality of organized crime.