Metascore

Generally favorable reviews - based on 7 Critics What's this?

User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 197 Ratings

  • Starring: Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall
  • Summary: The sequel to "The Godfather" continues the saga of two generations of successive power within the Corleone family. Coppola tells two stories in Part II: the roots and rise of a young Don Vito, played with uncanny ability by Robert De Niro, and the ascension of Michael (Al Pacino) as the new Don. [Paramount Pictures] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 7
  2. Negative: 0 out of 7
  1. 100
    As the beginning of Part II echoes the opening of "The Godfather," so too does the end. Because of the manner in which circumstances are handled and considering the people involved, the impact here is more forceful. The tragic flaw has accomplished its poisonous, inevitable designs. Coppola punctuates both movies with a gut-twisting exclamation point.
  2. Reviewed by: Staff (Not Credited)
    100
    Cinematographer Willis superbly captures the turn-of-the-century period, applying a seriographic tint to flashback scenes for a softer, richer look than the sharp image of the ongoing contemporary story.
  3. Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    Aug 14, 2011
    75
    Coppola is unable to draw all this together and make it work on the level of simple, absorbing narrative. The stunning text of "The Godfather" is replaced in Part II with prologues, epilogues, footnotes, and good intentions.
  4. The only remarkable thing about Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather, Part II is the insistent manner in which it recalls how much better his original film was...Even if Part II were a lot more cohesive, revealing, and exciting than it is, it probably would have run the risk of appearing to be the self-parody it now seems.

See all 7 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 55 out of 61
  2. Negative: 3 out of 61
  1. O.K., my first response to this is that it is immensely underrated. As The Godfather's Metascore was a perfect 100, The Godfather Part II deserved at least an 85. It's the Godfather Part III that's the bad one, not II! The acting was about 2/3 as good as the original. Al Pacino took the leading role and made it shine, though not nearly like Marlon Brando did. The supporting cast was very good, although it was Robert DeNiro who swept the movie, winning him his first Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. Expand
  2. I liked it and though it was a good sequel that did well enough to at least live up slightly to the first film. However the parts with Michael are rather boring and dont do enough to keep you interested through out the film. Vito's flashback sequences are amazing though and provide great backstory to his character. Acting is amazing as well. The plot is good too. Expand
  3. Riren
    7
    More brazenly violent, even in its opening, and more sensational in the nature of the mafia's corruption, but hardly a superior film to the original. Where the original had horrible and bloody events, they were earned - here, they just happen. This one really is slow, and many times things just happen, rather than build on each other. Like any good sequel, it takes advantage of the existing plot, and most of the references and allusions are good. The cast isn't quite up to the par set by the original, for while it has all of the menace, it possesses little of the charm, and no one provides a "Brando quality" performance. Even Hagen isn't quite what he used to be. There's also no experience comparable to Pacino's character development in the first picture. It packs several very memorable moments, but it's not up to the task, and is too long to justify what it accomplishes. Expand
  4. I saw it on TV so it was not as violent. They should have never made II and III but they didn't know when to leave well enough alone and I am sure Al Pacino thought he was that good that the story didn't matter. And he wasn't very good in this one. I never bothered to watch III. Expand

See all 61 User Reviews