The Godfather II: the FLASHBACK scene (1941)
 

What’s up with this scene from 1941? Essentially, there are obvious continuities:

1) Robert Duvall’s (Tom Hagan) hairpiece. This scene was supposed to take place before the original Godfather movie, yet his hairline is much receded. Couldn’t they obtain the same or similar hairpiece?

2) Gianno Russo (Carlo). His face is much fatter. Couldn’t he have lost the fat for this scene in a week with a special diet?

3) James Caan (Santino). His hair was very rough in this scene, like it was badly permed or something. It didn’t look at all like it did in the original GF.

4) Talia Shire (Connie). Same thing with the hair. In this scene it had more body than in the original. Her hair resembled how it was in GFII and they didn’t bother to dress her hair down.

Did anybody else notice these things?

I sure hope someone got fired for that!

Keep in mind that this movie was made in the early 70s - the director had no way of knowing that Internet geeks would one day arise to nitpick every minute detail of his films. :)

Re: The Godfather II: the FLASHBACK scene (1941)
 

No.

these are exactly the reasons that i have yet to purchase this set. well, that and i don't want to pay fifty bucks for three movies.

why even bother picking apart this film? give it up munker.

Haha. Gee-whiz, everyone's on the defensive. Hey, I love the scene, I really do, but I just...well, you know.

Someone named buttmunker is a little anal about details. Ha, I can't make this shit up people. It writes itself! :p

Looks like someone just saw the trilogy for the first time.

I can't wait until Coppola goes back and digitally fixes these problems and re-issues "The Godfather Special Edition."

Nah, if I just saw it the one time, I'd never notice. I watched it over and over and over and over and over again and that's when I noticed!

Just get over it. You watch any sequel you're going to find continuity errors. Even Lord of the Rings you could probably spot a few. So like...enjoy the movies, and quit worrying about Robert Duvall's receding hairline. That's worse than nitpicking about special effects!

This is a funny thread- thanks for the laugh! That re-issue thing seems like a great idea.

This wasn't a thread, it was a damn lynching!

This reminds of the last episode of Star Trek the next generation. They did a good job, but some of the actors looked funny because they aged or have gotten fatter (ie Will Riker).

Anyway Buttmunker, I support ya :thumbsup:

With a better hairpiece, Duvall's baldness would've been censored

That's the point! In 1941, he looks more bald than he did in 1945!

(Why am I still trying?)

Actually, I always noticed that Duvall's hairline recedes DURING the scene. Look closely when he says "Mikey, he has high hopes for you" and the hairpiece is on further back on his head.

My biggest gripe with the scene though is something that Coppola really couldn't do anything about. If you go by the Godfather timeline, Connie would've been 14 years old in December 1941. Talia Shire is a little too old to be playing someone that age in the flashback. Not to mention how inappropriate it would be for Sonny to be trying to hook up his best buddy with her.

My only gripe is that it's so painfully obvious that they're compensating for an absent Marlon Brando.

Now that's an appropiate beef, and one in which I concur.