So, you've heard everyone raving about "The Godfather." Maybe it popped up on your Netflix recommendations, or your film-buff friend won't shut up about it. Now you're searching "what is the godfather about" and getting vague answers like "mafia," "family," or "Marlon Brando mumbles." Honestly, that drives me nuts. It's like describing a gourmet meal as "food." Those answers miss the soul entirely. Having watched this trilogy more times than I care to admit (blame film school), I can tell you it’s less about the bullets and more about the betrayals, less about the crime and more about the crushing cost of power. Let's peel back the layers.
Think back to your own family gatherings. Awkward conversations, hidden tensions, maybe an uncle who dominates the room. Now, imagine that uncle runs a criminal empire, and refusing his "request" could be deadly. That uncomfortable family dinner vibe? That's the core tension Francis Ford Coppola masterfully captures.
The Core of What The Godfather is About: It's Not What You Think
If you go in expecting just shootouts and Sopranos-style banter, you'll miss the point entirely. Sure, there's violence (that infamous horse head scene still haunts me), but it's a tool, not the purpose. What is "The Godfather" about at its heart? It's a Shakespearean tragedy disguised as a crime saga. It tracks the slow, inevitable corruption of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino, impossibly young here). He starts as the war-hero college boy, the family's hope for legitimacy, looking in from the outside with disdain. Watch his eyes in the opening wedding scene – he's detached, almost embarrassed. Fast forward, and he's becoming the very thing he hated. That chilling transformation? That’s the real story.
I remember arguing with a friend who thought it glorified the mob. Glorify? That feels laughable after seeing Michael sacrifice everything decent in his soul piece by piece. The film exposes the emptiness behind the power. The fancy houses feel like gilded cages. The respect is laced with terror.
The Power Players: Who Really Runs Things?
Understanding the characters is key to grasping what the godfather movie is about. Forget cartoon villains. These are complex, often terrifyingly relatable figures:
| Character | Role & Significance | What They Reveal |
|---|---|---|
| Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) | The aging Patriarch, "The Don." A man of immense power, tradition, and chilling pragmatism. | Represents the "old world" values - loyalty, family above all (even business), a warped sense of honor. His power comes from respect (and fear), but also from understanding human nature ("I'll make him an offer he can't refuse" isn't always a threat; sometimes it's irresistible incentive). |
| Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) | The reluctant heir. The "good son" drawn into darkness. | The tragic core. His arc is what the godfather is truly about - the seduction of power and the destruction of one's humanity in its pursuit. His intelligence and coldness make him a terrifyingly effective Don, but at what cost? Watch him lie to Kay (Diane Keaton) – the mask slipping on is chilling. |
| Sonny Corleone (James Caan) | The hot-headed eldest son. | Raw passion and volatility. His explosive temper is his fatal flaw, contrasting Michael's cold calculation. Shows the danger of emotion in this brutal world. |
| Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) | The adopted son & consigliere (advisor/lawyer). | The voice of reason and legality (ironically). Represents the bridge between the criminal empire and the legitimate world. His non-Italian heritage constantly places him on the edge of the inner circle. |
| Kay Adams (Diane Keaton) | Michael's WASP girlfriend/wife. | The outsider perspective, embodying "normal" American values. Her gradual disillusionment and terror mirror the audience's understanding of Michael's descent. Her final door slam is devastating. |
Not gonna lie, Fredo (John Cazale) breaks my heart every time. The weak brother, desperate for approval he'll never get. His storyline in Part II is pure, heartbreaking tragedy. Coppola doesn't let anyone off the hook.
Key Moments That Define What The Godfather is About
Plot summaries are everywhere. Let's talk about the scenes that *show* you what the godfather is about:
The Opening Wedding (Bonasera's Request): Sunlight, laughter, dancing. Don Vito conducts business in his darkened office. The contrast is jarring. Bonasera begs for vengeance for his assaulted daughter. Vito is offended by the request for murder but grants justice on *his* terms. It instantly establishes his power, code, and the blurred lines between family celebration and criminal enterprise. "We're not murderers," Sonny later claims naively. This scene proves otherwise.
The Hospital Visit: Vito, vulnerable and unprotected in his hospital bed after an assassination attempt. Michael, discovering the plot, steps up. Watch Pacino here – the fear, the quick thinking, the protective fury. This is the first crack in his resolve to stay clean. He saves his father, sealing his own fate. That moment where he lights the cigarette for Enzo? Pure tension. You feel it.
The Restaurant Hit (Louis' Italian Restaurant): The point of no return. Michael, cold as ice, shoots corrupt cop McCluskey and rival Sollozzo. The sound design – the rumbling train building, then deafening silence after the shots – is perfection. This isn't glamorous; it's brutal, sudden, and marks the death of Michael Corleone the honest man. He chooses family over his own soul.
The Baptism Murders: Coppola's masterstroke. Cutting between the sacred sacrament of Michael becoming godfather to his nephew and the systematic, ruthless elimination of all his enemies. The juxtaposition of holy water and bloodshed lays bare the film's central hypocrisy and the complete moral bankruptcy Michael achieves. He becomes the Godfather in both senses. Chills. Every. Single. Time.
And that ending? Michael lying to Kay's face, denying ordering Carlo's death, while his capos kiss his ring and close the door? Pure darkness. That final shot of Kay's horrified realization? That's the bitter pill the film leaves you with.
Beyond Part I: What About the Sequels?
You searched "what is the godfather about," but the story deepens. Ignoring Part II is like reading half a novel.
The Godfather Part II: The Tragedy Deepens
Often hailed as better than the original (I go back and forth), Part II brilliantly uses parallel storylines. We see young Vito (Robert De Niro, stunningly) fleeing Sicily and building his empire in early 1900s New York. Gritty, almost hopeful in its struggle. Juxtaposed with Michael in the 1950s, expanding his empire to Nevada and Cuba, richer and more powerful than ever, yet utterly isolated, paranoid, and morally hollow. The Lake Tahoe scenes feel sterile and cold. His attempts at legitimacy (gambling licenses, Senate hearings) are a facade. What is the godfather part ii about? It's about the rot setting in. The corruption of the American Dream. The cost of maintaining power versus the struggle to attain it. And Fredo's betrayal... "I know it was you, Fredo. You broke my heart." Devastating.
Vito's rise shows community, necessity, a warped sense of providing. Michael's reign is about control, suspicion, and annihilation. The contrast is the point.
The Godfather Part III: The Coda (Flawed but Necessary)
Look, it gets flak. Sofia Coppola's casting was distracting, the plot is convoluted. But thematically? It completes Michael's arc. Old, guilt-ridden, desperate for redemption and legitimacy through the Vatican bank. What is the godfather part iii about? Consequences. The sins of the father visited upon the daughter (Mary, played by Sofia Coppola). Michael's final cry of anguish? Pure, unadulterated grief for the life and family he destroyed. It ends the saga not with a bang, but with a lonely whimper. Necessary? For Michael's story, yes. Perfect? Sadly, no.
Legacy and Why It Resonates (Beyond Just Being "Good")
Why does this 50-year-old movie still dominate "best of" lists? It’s not just the quotes (though "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli" is perfection).
Cinematic Craft: Gordon Willis's shadowy cinematography ("The Prince of Darkness" style), Nino Rota's haunting score, Coppola's meticulous pacing – it creates a mood, a world. It feels lived-in and real, not like a movie set. You smell the cigars, feel the tension.
Universal Themes: Family bonds vs. personal ambition. Loyalty vs. betrayal. The corrupting nature of power. The immigrant experience. The failure of the American Dream. Protecting what's yours. These aren't mob issues; they're human issues dialed up to eleven.
Cultural DNA: Countless parodies, references, homages. Business books use "Godfather" tactics. The structure is endlessly imitated. It redefined how we see crime dramas and complex characters. It showed villains could be protagonists, layered and tragic. It made audiences complicit.
I once watched it with someone who only saw the violence. They missed everything. It's like watching a symphony and only hearing the drums.
Your Burning Questions Answered (Stuff People Really Ask)
Is The Godfather based on a true story?
No, it's fiction, adapted from Mario Puzo's novel. BUT... Puzo heavily researched real-life mob figures (like Frank Costello, Joe Profaci, Vito Genovese) and events. Certain elements echo real mob lore (e.g., the Five Families concept, Havana Conference). The feel is authentic, even if the specifics are imagined.
What's the deal with the oranges? I keep seeing them...
Notice that? Oranges appear subtly throughout the film, often preceding death or misfortune. Vito buys oranges before getting shot. He plays with an orange peel before dying peacefully. Johnny Ola offers one to Michael before trouble in Cuba. It's never explicitly stated, but it's a brilliant visual motif symbolizing looming danger or death. Coincidence? In Coppola's hands? Doubt it.
Should I watch them in order? What about the chronological cut?
FIRST TIME? ABSOLUTELY watch in release order: The Godfather (1972), The Godfather Part II (1974), then Part III (1990). The narrative power relies on the contrast between Vito's past and Michael's present in Part II. Chronological order (starting with young Vito's story from Part II, then Part I, then Michael's Part II story, then Part III) is interesting for rewatches, but ruins the intended reveals and thematic impact. Trust me on this.
The Godfather vs. Goodfellas: What's the difference?
Both masterpieces, but VERY different. What is the godfather about? It's a grand OPERA, a dynastic tragedy about power, family, and corruption across generations. Slow-burn, deliberate, mythic. Goodfellas (1990) is a wild, fast-paced ROCK CONCERT. It's about the adrenaline rush, the wild life, and the ugly crash landing of low-level gangsters. First-person, frenetic, visceral. Think Shakespeare vs. Punk Rock. Both brilliant, different flavors.
Is it really that violent? Will I be traumatized?
It's not a gore-fest by modern standards. The violence is brutal but often implied or quick. The impact comes from the context and consequences, not the graphic detail. The horse head is psychologically disturbing, the restaurant hit is sudden and jarring, Sonny's fate is chaotic and horrific. It's more about the dread and aftermath than splatter. Still packs a punch though.
Why does Brando sound like that?
Marlon Brando stuffed his cheeks with cotton wool to create Vito's iconic muffled, gravelly voice. He wanted the Don to sound like a "bulldog," suggesting power came from presence and intelligence, not shouting. It also obscured his lines slightly, making Vito seem more enigmatic and calculating. It wasn't just mumbling; it was a deliberate, brilliant character choice that became legendary.
Forget the "mob movie" label. If you take one thing away from understanding what the godfather is about, remember this: It's a devastatingly human story about how the choices we make to protect the ones we love can ultimately destroy the very things we cherish most. It asks if power is worth the price of your soul. Michael Corleone’s journey is the bleakest possible answer. Go watch it. Then watch it again. You’ll spot new layers every time. Just maybe skip Part III until you're a completist.
Comment