Why do you think it is that Coppola and Puzo left the whole Vegas plotline out of the movie. Johnny Fontaine, Nino, Jules Segal and Lucy Mancini made for a great story. Any ideas?
2007-02-22 10:55:24 · 2 answers · asked by Matthew P 4 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
I would guess maybe time. As great as that side-story is, it's not absolutely necessary for the film to be great too. However, the movie's already roughly 3 hours, so it's not really something that needs to be fleshed out in the movie as much as it was in the book. As it was the movie, despite being terriffic, left out a bunch from the book and was still really long. I'd guess they probably felt they had enough.
They did kind of touch on the Las Vegas story though, so maybe it wasn't time but a restriction on budget in some way that they couldn't film in Vegas or build a set to do justice to the book. Maybe they couldn't pay for more actors to play the extra roles.
Or maybe Coppola just didn't like that part.
Good question.
2007-02-22 11:27:30 · answer #1 · answered by legsmckenzie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
a million. The Godfather area 2 2. Scarface (1933) 3. Miller's Crossing 4. highway to Peredition 5. on-line casino 6. The Departed 7. once Upon a Time in u.s. 8. White warmth BQ Dr. Strangelove or How I discovered to renounce irritating and Love the Bomb between the acceptable comedies ever made (I rank it the third correct comedy of all time) with biting satire on the most severe subject conventional to mankind: nuclear warfare.
2016-12-04 19:44:46 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋