Truly Dreadful Film

Simply Perfect

Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Mario Puzo's continuing saga of the Clericuzio family continues with The Last Don II which has Godfather Danny Aiello passing on, but before that bringing back his grand nephew Jason Gedrick and proclaiming him his successor as head of the crime family. At the same time Michelle Burke, Gedrick's sister has taken over a film studio as part of the family enterprises and things are looking good for both.But as Joe Mantegna said to his son, trust no one really. Ironically the same advice that Herod gave to the Emperor Claudius in I Claudius. And I did say Mantegna who if you remember the original series was killed. He comes back as a ghost for Gedrick and Gedrick listens because Mantegna is the only one who has no interests of his own on this earthly plane.Both Gedrick and Burke deal with some attempted power plays to get them out. In the case of Burke it comes from former studio head Robert Wuhl who was fine in the first film, but really comes into his own in the sequel. He steals the film whenever he's on the screen and he's so incredibly arrogant and hateful that you will cheer when he gets his just desserts.As for Gedrick his being betrayed by someone very close whom I will not reveal except to say jealousy can strike us all.Also outstanding in this one as in the first film is David Marciano who is Aiello's son and passed over for succession, but quite content apparently in his role as consigliere.The Godfather was a period piece and The Last Don takes us into more modern times, but some things never change in the culture Clericuzios operate in.If we're lucky there might be a third installment.

I re watched this recently, and just shook my head. Putting aside the overacting that border-lined on caricature, and many poor attempts at creating "atmosphere", The Last Don II made the unforgivable omission of having little to no focus on eating! This is a crucial element to any mob movie, any movie about Italian-American culture in general for that matter.Where were the sausage and peppers,the spaghetti with the "Sunday gravy"? How could this be omitted. Meals are also an important element of setting someone up to be whacked. In movies, and historically, wise guys are often "hit" while sitting down to dinner. This is part of the reason so much gusto goes into eating; because a wise guy knows that any meal may be his last, so, one may as well enjoy that meal to its fullest!On another note, I found it amusing just how Canadian this production was. I didn't need to see the CN Tower in the background, or to read the credits. As a Canadian who has grown up watching many lukewarm tax credited productions, you can just tell!

How can I justify a good review on this movie? Let's see...I can't. There should have never been a sequel in the first place. Though this movie was a big disappointment, it was way better than Mario Puzo's Omerta TV mini-series. Why, you ask. Because there was no Omerta TV mini-series based on the Mario Puzo novel. If you read the novel and watch the Omerta TV mini-series, you will understand. Anyway, if you decide to watch this movie(though I do not recommend it) I advise you to read novel first (if you have the time and patience), then watch the first part, and then the sequel. It should be more enjoyable that way...if that is possible.

"The Last Don (Part I)" is not a spectacle but at least it's a very decent gangster film. Part II is a complete disaster, filled with a ridiculous plot, shallow (and highly unconvincing) characters, and poor acting from the likes of Miss Patsy Kensit.The plot is nothing new: the head of the mafia family dies, the good nephew Cross, whose wife is murdered, comes back to the family and takes control of the family business. The film tries to make Cross a tragic hero being haunted by the past (his dreaming of his dead father), and portrays him as an angel being forced to become a mafia boss. We repeatedly see him showing "mercy" at those who betray him, yet as soon as he walks away, his henchmen always finish the job for him. Is the film trying to tell us that Cross is, after all, innocent of (some of) the crimes, that it's his henchmen, but not him, who are truly evil? Give us a break.It is easy for Kristie Alley's character to gain our sympathy. After all, her husband and son are killed by her own family members. Her hatred towards her family (she spits and attacks the Don's dead body) is perfectly understandable, but one really wonders why she never leaves them. Instead, she cries every day, curses every one, and has no problem living on the expenses of her family which she detests, and retires to her little bedroom in the family house every night. She seeks consolation in the priest and falls in love with him, and when her family intervenes and uses the bishop to persuade the priest to give her up, she goes home and returns to her normal life of crying and cursing. Perhaps she is meant to be a doomed woman, unable to break away from the "evil clutches", but it is naive to assume that she's a totally innocent victim. There is no way that she can get away from the responsibility for causing her own sufferings.The most incredibly pathetic character in the film must be the Austrian film star Dirk von Schelberg, obviously modelled on "Arnold". Dirk, with his very blond hair, fake German accent and unnecessary affection (to Claudia) in the public, is meant to be a contrast to his scheming, black-haired and cold-blooded Italian family-in-law. His character is completely hollow, and his presence (making a film called "The Fumigator" in which he kills giant insects) is a sad joke. It's even more pathetic to see Claudia genuinely mourns over his betrayal (his casual affairs), and her efforts to revive her studio from the Fumigator crisis.Last but not least, is of course, Miss Patsy Kensit, who plays an undercover cop in Cross' family (as the teacher of Cross' "autistic" adopted daughter -- and no, the girl is not autistic, but mentally-challenged, and the film fails to tell the difference between the two) and suffers from a tremendous conflict when she genuinely falls in love with Cross. Her character lacks substance (it's embarrassing to see her trying to prove her loyalty to Cross) and Kensit's performance is poor beyond words, which is, as a matter of fact, up to her usual standard.