Independent film criticism — 31 reviews and counting Film index A–Z  ·  Contact  ·  Editorial policy

Crime 1970s R 175 min

The Godfather (1972) review

Coppola turned a pulp bestseller into an American tragedy about the price of inheritance. Fifty years on, the lighting alone still teaches cinematography.

97out of 100
★★★★★  5.0 out of 5 An editor’s score, argued in full below. How we rate →

Every gangster film made since has been in conversation with this one, and most of them have been losing. What they miss is that Coppola was never really making a crime film — he was making a film about a family business, and the crime is just the industry it happens to be in.

A Family Story Wearing a Crime Story's Clothes

The Godfather opens on a wedding and ends on a baptism, and the entire arc of the film lives in the gap between those two ceremonies. Connie's wedding introduces the Corleone family as a social organism: the hierarchy, the obligations, the way outsiders are handled, the way daughters are treated as diplomatic instruments. It is nearly thirty minutes of exposition delivered as celebration, and it is one of the most efficient openings in American cinema.

Coppola and Puzo understood that the mafia material was never the point. The point was a specific kind of American success story — the immigrant enterprise that becomes legitimate by acquiring the trappings of legitimacy, and the moral cost of that acquisition. Vito Corleone is not a monster in the film's framing. He is a patriarch with a code, and the tragedy is that the code does not survive contact with the son who inherits it.

Read more about crime cinema in our Drama genre hub, explore the work of Francis Ford Coppola in our directors section, or see where this film lands in our ranked film lists.

Michael's Transformation

The film's real subject is Michael, and the transformation is engineered with almost surgical precision. He begins as the one Corleone who chose a different life — Dartmouth, the Marines, Kay, a girlfriend who finds the family stories charming because she does not understand them. He tells Kay at the wedding, 'That's my family, Kay, it's not me.' The film then spends three hours proving him wrong.

Pacino plays the shift physically before he plays it psychologically. Watch his face in the restaurant scene: the decision registers in his eyes several seconds before his hand moves. By the final act, the same features have hardened into something that resembles his father but is colder, and the film is careful to show that this is not an improvement. Vito was feared and, in his own way, loved. Michael is only feared.

Craft: Light, Sound, Structure

Gordon Willis' cinematography is the film's most imitated element and its least reproducible. He deliberately underexposed the interiors so that faces emerge from shadow rather than sitting in light, which gives the film a moral texture that a conventionally lit version would lack. The famous orange-gold tone of the wedding sequences contrasts with the near-black of the office scenes, and the palette quietly signals which world is the real one.

Nino Rota's score is doing something more interesting than period atmosphere. The main theme is a waltz, and the film repeatedly sets it against violence, which forces the audience to associate elegance with brutality. The baptism sequence — intercutting sacred ritual with the execution of the other families — is the clearest statement of the film's thesis: that these are not separate systems but the same one, run by the same man.

What It Gets Wrong, and Why It Still Works

The film is male to the point of claustrophobia. Kay and Connie exist to register what the men are doing to them, and Apollonia exists for roughly ten minutes before being removed to make Michael suffer. That is arguably the point — the Corleone world is one in which women have no standing — but the film does not interrogate it so much as illustrate it, and a modern viewer will notice the absence of any female interiority.

It also romanticises its subject in ways that Puzo's novel did not. The film is much more willing to grant Vito dignity than the book, which is considerably more sordid. That choice is what made it a classic rather than a genre exercise, and it is also the reason the film has been accused, fairly, of making organised crime look like a matter of taste and etiquette. Both things are true at once.

Verdict

A film that earns its canonical status through craft rather than through novelty. Every element — the structure, the lighting, the score, the casting — is doing more work than it appears to be, and the result rewards a fifth viewing as much as a first. It is a story about inheritance and the impossibility of refusing one. Its blind spots are real and worth naming, but they do not diminish what Coppola built: the definitive American film about the cost of getting what your father wanted.

What works

  • Willis' lighting sets a standard that is still being copied
  • Pacino's transformation is played physically, not announced
  • Structure turns exposition into drama without a wasted scene

What doesn’t

  • Women exist almost entirely as consequences of male decisions
  • Romanticises its subject more than the source novel does

Themes and ideas

  • Inheritance
  • American capitalism
  • Family as institution
  • The corruption of the reluctant heir

Frequently asked questions

Is The Godfather faithful to the novel?

It is selective rather than faithful. Coppola and Puzo cut large subplots — most notably the Lucy Mancini and Johnny Fontane material — and elevated the Michael arc into the film's spine, which the novel treats more diffusely.

Why was Marlon Brando's performance so influential?

He played Vito as a man in decline rather than a titan. The mumbled diction, the physical frailty, and the way he uses his hands all communicate a patriarch whose power is now mostly ceremonial — which makes his successors' ruthlessness feel inevitable.

What does the baptism scene mean?

It establishes that Michael's assumption of power and his spiritual sponsorship of his nephew are the same act. The film cuts between the ritual renunciation of Satan and the murders, collapsing the distinction between the sacred and the criminal.

Should I watch the sequels?

Part II is a legitimate equal and arguably the more ambitious film. Part III is a significant step down and is best approached as an epilogue rather than a conclusion.

More drama films we have reviewed

Every review is scored and argued. These are the closest films in our collection to The Godfather.

The Drama hub →
  • Goodfellas (1990) review cover art — crime film directed by Martin Scorsese 96

    1990 · Crime

    Goodfellas review

    Thirty years inside the mob, told at a pace that never lets you catch your breath. Scorsese's most complete film and the one that made every other gan…

    ★★★★½ 4.9/5

  • The Departed (2006) review cover art — crime film directed by Martin Scorsese 88

    2006 · Crime

    The Departed review

    An undercover cop and a mob mole race to unmask each other inside the Massachusetts State Police. Scorsese's most propulsive late film.

    ★★★★½ 4.6/5

  • The Shawshank Redemption (1994) review cover art — drama film directed by Frank Darabont 98

    1994 · Drama

    The Shawshank Redemption review

    A banker sentenced to life finds a way to stay human inside a system built to strip that away. Darabont's adaptation is patient, unfashionably sincere…

    ★★★★★ 5.0/5

  • The Shawshank Redemption (1994) review cover art — drama film directed by Frank Darabont 98

    1994 · Drama

    The Shawshank Redemption review

    A banker sentenced to life finds a way to stay human inside a system built to strip that away. Darabont's adaptation is patient, unfashionably sincere…

    ★★★★★ 5.0/5

  • Joker (2019) review cover art — drama film directed by Todd Phillips 84

    2019 · Drama

    Joker review

    A failed comedian in a decaying Gotham slides into violence. Phoenix is extraordinary; the film around him is derivative and uncertain about what it i…

    ★★★★½ 4.4/5

  • Fight Club (1999) review cover art — drama film directed by David Fincher 89

    1999 · Drama

    Fight Club review

    An insomniac office worker and a soap salesman start a fight club that becomes a movement. The most misread film of its era, and deliberately so.

    ★★★★½ 4.6/5

About the reviewer

A. J. Whitlock founded AJ Movie Reviews after a decade of writing about film for regional publications and a film society newsletter that nobody else wanted to run. He holds a degree in Film Studies and has worked as a projectionist, a cinema duty manager, and a very bad film festival volu…

Full profile and all reviews by A. J. Whitlock →

A note on this review

This review is based on a full viewing of the film and contains no spoilers beyond what the marketing material reveals. We do not accept payment, gifts, or press trips in exchange for coverage.

Read our editorial policy →