1978: The Deer Hunter.

Mike (Robert DeNiro) stalks a deer on his last hunting trip before shipping out to Vietnam.

The Deer Hunter

Release Date: Dec. 8, 1978. Running Time: 184 minutes. Screenplay: Deric Washburn. Story: Deric Washburn, Michael Cimino, Louis A. Garfinkle, Quinn K. Redeker. Producer: Barry Spikings, Michael Deeley, Michael Cimino, John Peverall. Director: Michael Cimino.


THE PLOT:

Clairton, Pennsylvania steel worker Steve (John Savage) is getting married just before he and buddies Mike (Robert DeNiro) and Nick (Christopher Walken) are due to ship out to Vietnam. While Steve spends the weekend with his new bride, Mike and Nick join their other friends on one last hunting trip into the mountains.

Mike returns from the war, physically whole but feeling distant from his old life. He learns that Steve is alive and at a nearby VA hospital, but when he starts to call, he ends up putting the phone down. Meanwhile, a psychologically scarred Nick goes AWOL the day before he's supposed to go back home, vanishing without a trace.

Or so Mike believes, until the day that he finally brings himself to visit Steve. He discovers that his injured friend has been receiving shipments of cash from Saigon. There's only one explanation: Nick is still alive and still in Saigon. With the US soon to withdraw, that leaves only a short window for Mike to go back to Vietnam, to find Nick and bring him home.

Mike, Nick (Christopher Walken), and Steve (John Savage) stage a desperate escape.

CHARACTERS:

Mike: The natural leader of the friend group, Mike takes charge both in the mountains when hunting and during the trio's escape from a Vietcong prison camp. DeNiro conveys the strength of a natural leader. Even more important to the film, he invests Mike with a certain soulfulness. DeNiro makes convincing a taciturn man who is awkward and uncertain in social situations, but absolutely in control in a crisis. He's also able to hint at Mike's psychological pain without a trace of histrionics. It's certainly no crime that Jon Voight won the Best Actor Oscar for his excellent work in Coming Home - but for my money, DeNiro's quiet, introspective performance here is even better.

Stan: In his final acting role, John Cazale is as excellent as ever, playing that member of the friend group who is more tolerated than actually liked. Stan is introduced preening into a mirror, much to his friends' amusement. During the hunting trip, he screams nasally at Mike for refusing to lend him hunting boots after forgetting his own. Despite his general obnoxiousness, there's always a sense of something more beneath the surface. After Mike's return, he seems more aware than some of the others that he isn't as "fine" as he pretends, something Cazale conveys entirely through glances and body language. Also, the night before his friends go off to war, Stan seems absolutely devastated, sitting at the piano of their favorite bar, staring into the distance with a truly stricken expression.

Nick: Mike's best friend and hunting partner. He's the most compassionate of the group, and it falls to him to make peace between Mike and Stan when they have their argument. In Vietnam, he refuses to let Mike abandon Steve when it looks like their friend might not make it. His empathic nature is probably what leads to him being so psychologically broken by their experiences. When a military doctor brusquely asks him to verify basic personal information, he freezes, unable to remember his parents' birthdates and seeming to struggle to even speak. It's a scene that Walken plays perfectly, with no trace of the overacting that he would later become known for.

Steven: The bridegroom is also the most vulnerable member of the group. At the wedding, he nervously confesses to the others that he and Angela have not yet consummated their relationship (though judging from the baby that we see after the return from war, that doesn't pose any problem after the ceremony). When the trio are captured, he fares the worst, literally crying out in terror while Mike and Nick do their best to remain calm. He attempts to hide from Angela after his return, apparently ashamed of his injuries, though he seems entirely mentally sound when Mike visits him.

Linda: Early scenes make it clear that, though she's in a relationship with Nick, there is a mutual if unspoken attraction between her and Mike. When Mike comes home without Nick, it doesn't take long before they are framed as a couple. She remains worried and anxious about Nick, but she does her best to behave normally. There's really only one scene in which she completely lets her guard down, when Mike drops by her work to find her sobbing uncontrollably in the back, even as she insists to him that she's fine. This and television miniseries Holocaust were Meryl Streep's breakthrough roles, and she is quietly excellent, earning emotion by convincingly playing someone who does as much as she can not to show what she's feeling.

John: Speaking of quietly excellent performances, George Dzundza makes memorable a character who, on the page, is one of the more peripheral members of the friend group. He runs the bar where they all hang out, and he comes across as a cheerful presence. He throws himself into dancing at Steve's wedding, and he's just as enthusiastic when bowling. There are two moments that show how affected he is by his friends' departure: the first, when he plays the piano beside Stan just before the trio ship out; and the second, when he's preparing breakfast for everyone and declines offers of help, only to go in the back and sob once he's completely alone.

Mike dances with Linda (Meryl Streep) at Steve's wedding.

THOUGHTS:

For most of the 1970s, American cinema tended to shy away from directly tackling the war in Vietnam. By 1978, filmmakers and studios apparently decided that it was time to pick at the scab. That year saw two major releases, both dealing heavily with the pyschological impact of the war. The first was Coming Home, an antiwar drama that won Oscars for stars Jane Fonda and Jon Voight. The second film, the one which won Best Picture, was The Deer Hunter.

The Deer Hunter isn't overt in its politics the way Coming Home is. Its characters aren't political people. They are working class, mostly second-generation immigrants, working hard and living their lives day by day. Mike, Nick, and Steve don't seem motivated by patriotic fervor. There's not much sense that they're motivated by much. The war is there, and they go because they can't come up with any reason not to.

One of the more interesting qualities in The Deer Hunter is its pacing. Scenes set in Vietnam dominate the middle. This section is tightly-scripted and edited. The trio's imprisonment and escape create roughly thirty minutes of sustained tension, and there's not one wasted second in that extended sequence. This efficiency extends to the immediate aftermath, notably a sequence that follows Nick through what's meant to be his last day before returning home. Particularly on rewatch, this sequence uses a lot of the language of a thriller, with Nick given multiple opportunities to avoid what ends up befalling him.

Both the first and last hour are set mostly in the characters' hometown, Clairton. These scenes are anything but tight. This is particularly true of the first hour, which co-writer/director Michael Cimino allows to meander through their normal lives. The characters enjoy each other's company at a bar, celebrate at Steve's wedding, and go on their last big hunting trip, and this takes more than an hour of screen time.

From a narrative standpoint, this could fairly easily be cut in half. However, I think doing so would reduce the movie. By allowing the day of Steve's wedding to play out organically, the viewer is given a strong sense of the characters' relationships within the group. Critically, this opening Act is all about the characters. Even during the big set piece of Steve's wedding, the camera keeps moving from the activity back to the main characters. There are moments of humor, moments that show Mike's leadership role in the group, moments that foreshadow what these friends will soon suffer... and because it's allowed space to just unfold, even bits such as a veteran giving a succinct, two word answer to questions of what it's like in Vietnam feel not like dramatic scenes, but instead like things that just happen during the day that we observe.

Mike returns to the mountains to hunt, allowing cinematographer
Vilmos Zsigmond to create a moment of ethereal beauty.

The entire film is wonderfully shot. Vilmos Zsigmond's BAFTA winning cinematography captures not only the settings, but their roles in the story. Mike's mountain refuge is beautiful, even ethereal. Clairton is naturalistic. The Vietnam scenes are harsher in their visual look, emphasized by lighting choices and a greater reliance on close-ups than in the rest of the film. When Mike returns to Vietnam to find Nick, that harshness is magnified. When he walks into the underground club that is Nick's refuge, there's a sense that Mike is making a journey into hell.

Given the cast, it's unsurprising that performances are superb from top to bottom. What is notable is how much both the actors and the movie resist any temptation toward histrionics. This extends to the ending, a ten minute epilogue that in some ways mirrors the expansive opening Act.

Like the rest of the film, there are no speeches made. The characters are striving for normality. They aren't indulging their emotions, they're trying to avoid them by focusing on mundane activity. Even the famous final moment, as the characters sing together, builds organically. They don't sing as a political statement. It's just a moment among people, one that's delivered haltingly and with a mix of emotions... which in itself is probably the most effective statement the movie could have chosen for its ending.

Mike and his friends gather at John (George Dzundza)'s bar.

OVERALL:

A nitpick I have is not with the movie itself, but with its Blu-ray presentation. The film looks gorgeous, but its audio is muddled. I was surprised, as I'd seen it before on both VHS and television. I was actually driven to dig out my old videotape, and I can verify that the VHS has much clearer audio than the Blu-ray. I'm guessing an attempt at a Dolby "up-mix" turned into a "down-mix."

That aside, The Deer Hunter holds up as an excellent motion picture. It is not a realistic account of the War in Vietnam, something many others have critiqued at length... but since I don't think it's striving to be one, I find that entirely forgivable. The Vietnam sequence is a superb suspense piece, and the characters' psychological reactions feel realistic, and that's enough for me to believe in the drama.

It falls just short of full marks, mainly because I don't think it's quite at the level of the Best Picture Winners to which I have given the top score. But I'd still rate this as a very fine motion picture.


Rating: 9/10.

Best Picture - 1977: Annie Hall
Best Picture - 1979: Kramer vs. Kramer

Review Index

To receive new review updates, follow me:

On BlueSky:

Follow @RandomMusings09 on BlueSky

On Threads:

Follow@randommusings09 on Threads

1974: The Godfather, Part II.

Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) finds it hard to live in
the shadow of his late father, Vito (Robert DeNiro).

Release Date: Dec. 12, 1974. Running Time: 200 minutes. Screenplay by: Francis Ford Coppola, Mario Puzo. Based on the novel, The Godfather, by: Mario Puzo. Producer: Francis Ford Coppola. Director: Francis Ford Coppola.


THE PLOT:

Sicily, 1901. Antonio Andolini is killed after defying Don Ciccio (Giuseppe Sillato) and his 9-year-old son, Vito, is forced to flee the country. Confusion at Ellis Island results in him being renamed "Vito Corleone." He settles in an Italian immigrant community in New York, working an honest job and eventually marrying and starting a family. He is poor but reasonably happy - until local big shot Don Fanucci (Gastone Moschin) costs him his job and then extorts him. Vito sees only one solution that will allow him to protect his family and retain his own dignity, an action that sets in motion his ascent to head of the largest crime family in New York.

Las Vegas, 1958. Vito's son, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), has secured his position as head of the Corleone Family. He has moved his family to Nevada, where he hopes that his financial stake in several hotels and casinos will enable him to make the Family entirely legitimate, fulfilling both his promise to his wife, Kay (Diane Keaton), and his own original intention to stay away from a life of crime.

The centerpiece of his plan is a massive business deal with Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), an old associate of his father's who is attracting investors for development in Havana, Cuba. Keeping this deal on track requires turning a blind eye to the aggression of some of Roth's associates, angering Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo), the successor to Peter Clemenza.

An attempt is made on Michael's life mere hours after he rejects Pentangeli's complaints. Michael knows that the architect of the hit was Hyman Roth. But he also knows that someone inside the Family must be working with him. Michael is left with increasingly few people to trust as he is faced not just with disruption of carefully laid plans, but with the very real prospect that he could lose everything he holds dear!

Michael realizes that he's been betrayed by one of the increasingly few people he trusts.

AL PACINO AS DON MICHAEL CORLEONE:

By the end of the first film, Michael had walled off anything in himself that might be considered "weak" in the process of adopting the mantle of "Don Corleone." This had to pose a challenge for Al Pacino for the sequel, because this movie requires him to start from that end point and carry it even further. The first film saw him suppressing what little warmth remained in him; the second film sees the remaining embers entirely extinguished.

One way both the script and Pacino manage to show this shift is by seizing on moments of warmth in the first half. He apologizes to Kay for having to associate with mafia figures at the initial gathering, promising that he's still trying to legitimize the Family (for the record, I think he's lying to himself more than to her). After the attempt on his life, he makes Tom acting don, calling him a "brother" and expressing full faith and confidence in him. In Havana, he commiserates with Fredo about how hard it is to live in their father's enormous shadow.

After the Roth deal implodes, the second half revisits each of these relationships, and we see that the previous hints of warmth are gone. Michael snaps at Tom, going so far as to directly question his loyalty near the end. He refuses to listen to Kay, shutting her out first figuratively and, eventually, literally. He insists on bringing Fredo back to the compound, only to tell him, "You're nothing to me now."

Pacino is masterful throughout. He shows genuine love for his family, albeit heavily suppressed, in the first half. After Michael is betrayed and after the failure in Cuba, he changes entirely. The coldness remains a surface, his soft and even tones still covering strong emotion - only now the emotion he's suppressing is rage. He is angry at everyone around him, most of all himself.

Vito Corleone prepares to make Don Fanucci "an offer he don't refuse."

ROBERT DE NIRO AS DON VITO CORLEONE:

Vito's rise to power is expanded from one of the few major pieces of Mario Puzo's novel not to have been included in the first film. I think these scenes are the true heart of this movie. Michael's story on its own would be too cold to retain viewer engagement. The cutaways to Vito inject warmth and a hint of humor.

Vito doesn't shy away from violence, but he is a caring man at his core. He disapproves of Fanucci, wondering why an Italian would use his influence to bully other Italians. When he gains power, we see him using it with generosity, such as when he pressures a slumlord to not only revoke a widow's eviction but to lower her rent as well.

Over the course of the movie, Vito gathers a close circle of friends and family, young versions of the same inner circle that surrounded him in the first Godfather, such as Clemenza and Tessio. In the 1950s thread, meanwhile, Michael sheds the people closest to him. Vito's final scene has him departing on a train with his family in tow; Michael's final scene sees him sitting entirely alone.

Robert DeNiro's performance respects Marlon Brando's original, but it isn't an imitation. He borrows the vocal rasp and a few mannerisms, but DeNiro otherwise creates his own interpretation of Vito, one that brings the character to life.

Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) pays a visit to Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo).

OTHER CHARACTERS:

Tom Hagen: He is unwavering in his loyalty to Michael, and he's genuinely touched when Michael refers to him as his brother. This twists the knife all the harder when Michael becomes increasingly short with him in the second half. Tom argues against Michael's ending orders as being vindictive and, worse, pointless. He remains loyal, as he has always been, but he's left to feel less like "Family" and more like a simple employee. When he talks with Pentangeli, the other man compares the Corleone Family to the Roman Empire. Tom agrees that "it was once," his phrasing showing recognition of a decline.

Kay Adams Corleone: As the movie opens, she's still a loving wife trying to accept her husband's less savory qualities and to believe him when he promises change. After the assassination attempt, she stops believing. As she and their children sit, waiting as the compound is searched, she directs a glare at Michael. I think that glare marks the moment that she begins emotionally disengaging from him. On this viewing, I find myself questioning whether she's telling the truth when she makes the declaration that repels Michael. She only says it after it's clear that he has no intention of letting her leave him. I'm not saying this was the intent - but I could see it being possible that she chooses a lie that would kill his feelings for her just so that he'll let her go.

Fredo Corleone: The first half stresses a closeness between him and Michael that was mostly unseen in the first movie. In a rare human moment, Michael lends emotional support as Fredo mulls living in their father's shadow, and he entrusts Fredo with bringing a cash payment to Hyman Roth. Later, Fredo lets show his resentment at being passed over in favor of Michael: "You're my kid brother, and you take care of me. Did you ever think about that? ...I can handle things. I'm smart. Not like everyone says, not dumb, smart! And I want respect!" John Cazale briefly out-acts Al Pacino in this moment, shaking with impotent rage, his gestures uncontrolled spasms that show his weakness even as he vents the frustration of wanting to be seen as strong.

Frank Pentangeli: Richard Castellano declined to return as Clemenza, whether because of salary or a desire for control over his dialogue or a reluctance to regain lost weight. Whatever the case, while young Clemenza (a spot-on Bruno Kirby) plays a major role in the story of Vito's rise, in the movie's present Clemenza has had a suspicious heart attack, leaving Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo) in charge of his territory. Pentangeli fills the role that would have been Clemenza's, clashing loudly with Michael only to be left to fear that Michael has now turned on him. There's no question this would be more effective with Clemenza, not least because of the younger Clemenza's prominence in the flashbacks, but Michael V. Gazzo plays the role well and his scenes work.

Hyman Roth: Roth never passes up an opportunity to compliment Michael, and he makes a public show of making the younger man his successor - but the more he talks about his own ill health, the more Michael realizes that the old man intends to live forever. "He's been dying of the same heart attack for twenty years." Roth clings to the same refrain about "business" that pervaded the first movie, and it's still a lie. His motives for acting against Michael are entirely personal, as he reveals in a scene in which actor Lee Strasberg allows the genial front to drop away, revealing white hot fury. He outplays Michael, using a Senate hearing as a backup plan to strike against him if assassination fails, and is in general the embodiment of the saying, "Beware of an old man in a profession where men usually die young."

Sonny Corleone: James Caan appears in a single flashback, for which he received the same salary as the entirety of the first film. He just about earns that payday, seemingly effortlessly recreating the character while cranking up his screen presence to cover for the absence of an originally-intended Marlon Brando cameo. The scene shows the final family celebration before the war. The interactions as Sonny holds court strike another contrast against Michael's reign. Sonny argues with multiple people around the table, but everyone's relaxed, the people around the table feeling like a family. It's the one way in which Sonny actually would have been a better leader than Michael, if only he was less impulsive; he draws people to him, while Michael can only keep them in line through fear.

"I want respect!" Fredo (John Cazale) lashes out at his brother.

THOUGHTS:

"All our people are businessmen. Their loyalty's based on that. One thing I learned from Pop was to try to think as people around you think, and on that basis, anything is possible."
-Michael speculates about an attempt on his life as he cedes control of the Family to Tom.

There's an ongoing argument as to which is the better Godfather movie. It's a meaningless question, because while the two movies are stylistically similar, they are starkly different works. The first Godfather tells a perfectly structured story that ends with a satisfying climax. The second Godfather is messier and less intrinsically satisfying, growing more emotionally remote as it approaches its end. As a movie to watch, the first one is a lot more engaging; as a movie to think about, the second one is a larger work that offers more to chew on after its end.

The Godfather, Part II opens with a recreation of the first film's final scene, as petitioners pay homage to the new "Don Corleone." We see a close-up of Michael's face. Then the movie cuts to his father's empty chair. It is over that chair that the title finally comes up, emphasizing the absence of the man who actually deserved the monicker, "Godfather."

Michael's story, particularly after the Intermission, seems deliberately designed to push viewers away from him as he grows colder and more isolated. The first movie ended in a masterstroke as Michael consolidated his power. There's nothing comparable here, with Michael's final orders amounting to petty revenge that no longer serves any purpose. There's no sense of a climax - Just ugly incidents that clear Michael's board of a few remaining opposing pieces after the game has already been won.

In the first movie, Vito bristled at the undertaker thinking they were murderers. Vito insisted on using only the amount of violence that a given situation called for. By the end of the second movie, Michael has all but claimed the moniker of "murderer," telling Tom: "I don't feel I have to wipe everyone out. Just my enemies, that's all."

Vito and his family celebrate Fourth of July.

Francis Ford Coppola was at the height of his powers as a filmmaker, and The Godfather, Part II was the second of two masterpieces he released in 1974 (after The Conversation, a low-key thriller that is every bit as brilliant as this). I already discussed his mastery of frame composition and camera movements in my review of the first Godfather, and that remains just as true of the sequel.

The flashbacks to Vito are slightly but visibly sepia-tinted, which lends the impression of historical photographs come to life. Vito is frequently framed surrounded by either his direct family or his friends, like Clemenza, who will become Family. By contrast, even early in the film, Michael is shown wearing cold colors and is frequently framed alone. After Cuba, he almost exclusively dresses in black. His office is dimly lit, leaving him draped in shadows. He has few outside scenes after the Intermission and, by the end, he's frequently shot either through or against windows, as if to erect a barrier between him and the world and even between him and the viewer.

In the first Godfather, Michael tried to avoid involvement in the Corleone Family, only getting drawn in to save his father from those who would have killed him. He turned to crime to protect his family, just as we see Vito doing in the past. In the second film, Michael becomes ever more powerful... but in so doing, he fulfills the very worry he expresses to his mother: "By being strong for his family, could he lose it? ...Lose his family?" Alone and feeling betrayed by everyone, he surrenders the reasons that he sought power for the sake of power itself.

It's a haunting story, beautifully told... but if not for the Vito segments, I suspect it might be too bleak. It's ironic that Francis Ford Coppola would later reissue the final film in the trilogy as, "The Death of Michael Corleone"; to all intents, Michael the person dies here, leaving behind only the husk that is "Don Corleone."

Sonny Corleone (James Caan) holds court at the last family celebration before World War II.

SEQUEL AND ALTERNATE VERSION:

In 1990, Francis Ford Coppola directed The Godfather, Part III. Though its reputation has nose-dived, it was reasonably well-received at the time. Reviewers didn't pretend that it was a patch on the first two movies, but they acknowledged it as a well-made film in its own right. I haven't seen it since the 1990s, so I will withhold judgment until I rewatch it - and I will be taking a sidestep from Best Picture Winners to round out the trilogy with The Godfather, Part III, as a supplemental post.

When I covered the first Godfather, I noted the television mini-series version of the first two movies that was titled, The Godfather Saga. This version recuts the entire narrative into strict chronological order, restoring many deleted scenes in the process. This means the first "episode" of the mini-series is mostly made up of the DeNiro footage from this movie, which is not the optimal way to watch it. There is a continuous arc in Vito's tale, so it just about works as a narrative piece in its own right. However, the re-editing destroys the contrast between Vito's rise and Michael's moral fall, and it renders the final "episode" into a grim death march as Michael becomes ever more alone, without the Vito scenes to counteract that.

I would label the mini-series as interesting and worth viewing after seeing both movies in their original form - but even more so than with the first movie, I think the original release is by far the best way to watch The Godfather, Part II.


OVERALL:

The Godfather was an American masterpiece. Remarkably, co-writer/director Francis Ford Coppola manages to repeat that with the sequel. It's an emotionally colder work, matching its remote protagonist, and it's less immediately satisfying than its predecessor - but it's also a rich and compelling work, one that lingers in the mind long after viewing.


Rating: 10/10.

Preceded by: The Godfather
Followed by: The Godfather, Part III

Best Picture - 1973: The Sting
Best Picture - 1975: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Review Index

To receive new review updates, follow me:

On BlueSky:

Follow @RandomMusings09 on BlueSky

On Threads:

Follow@randommusings09 on Threads