What happened to the nice mafia story that was being told?


Don Cardi

We do seem to have drifted. Perhaps we need to get back to poor Fredo's funeral...

Yes. A sexual scene with Kay just doesn't do it for me.


Don Cardi

Wake up people!

Put those cheap dime store sex novels back under your desks!


You all think you are masters in the sex department. The truth being you are really "Fredo" when it comes to the real thing.

Are you talkin about Fabbio (sp?) Big chest, long blonde hair, open white shirt with an accent?

No, I don't know anything about him.

FS - YES!! Thank you! It was driving me nuts, because I couldn't remember.

The funeral apparently has been postponed. Something about Father Carmello being unavailable.

DC didnt you see the sex scene in Something's Gotta Give?

I didn't say Diane Keaton, I said KAY .


Don Cardi

I didn't say Diane Keaton, I said KAY .


Point taken DC. Here's my idea of Kay "seducing" Michael.
KAY - Oh Michael, what do you mean you are already finished? Whats the matter with you anyway? You promise me you would care for me and all you do is this perfunctory sex and then go and talk to Al Neri. What's so important about him anyway?

MICHAEL - Don't ask me about my businesss, Kay.

KAY - You just don't find me attractive anymore. Maybe your father was right when he said a man who doesnt spent enough time with his family can never be a real man. You're not a real man Michael.

MICHAEL - Kay thats hardly the way to get me to...

KAY - So now you are telling me what I am thinkking too? Is there no end to this Michael?

EARTHQUAKE ROCKS NEW YORK!

Boy was it a big one! Cars drove off the roads, little kids where knocked off their feet, cans fell from store shelves! All subway travel has been halted.


Seems it's center turned out to be in a local Cemetery.

After further investigation......
Turns out it was Mario Puzo turning over in his grave.

FS I thought you might be describing War of the Worlds

FS, what have these people ever done to you to make you disrespect them this way?


Don Cardi

Sheesh.....

I write almost 10,000 words and get a handful of comments from one or two steady readers.

Then I write about the mere possibility of a sex scene, and look what happens

I guess it does go to prove that sex sells.

Here we go again

No wonder you haven't done the First Half stats yet -- you're too busy writing sex scenes (with one hand?)...

Okay, JG, there's a picture in my head that's never going to go away - Mario Puzo writing one-handed about Lucy Mancini!!

Good point. Scratch that from the record!

Mario Puzo writing sex scenes with one hand? Now THAT's a gross vision

Plaw I've got it!

When you write your sex scene, there has to be some kind of back story about the difference between ---how should I say this --- the comparative sizes of Michael's masculine organ and Sonny's. Mike should have this inferiority complex because of the tiny size of his member, all of which explains his violent streak and love of guns....

Very nice, Plaw! I finally read the first two chapters.

I sure hope you like criticism, as I'm not one to hold it in if I feel it would be helpful to the other person to improve himself.

[And upon reading what I had written below, it seems I'm only pointing out the bad things. I actually like it more than it may seem by my comments! You are doing much better than most other fan fiction I've read.]


Okay, here goes...

As of yet, IMHO, it's not a sequel at all so far, but just extensions of the story as we know it. Such things, in sequels, are usually included as flashbacks. I can see what you're trying to do -- as Puzo did -- and I like the back and forth a lot. But so far, I'm reading these mini-chapters more as ideas than as a finished work.

I think you have some great ideas here, and successfully (most of the time) fill in many of the gaps we've wondered about all this time! I think your dialogue is actually pretty good, and I like your style, when it's clean.

I really think you would benefit from a plot outline. You should have some idea of where the story is going to head, and basically how it's going to end. After the outline is when you fill in the details. Think of the story arc, the protagonist, antagonist, climax, etc. All the shit I don't know about because I never took creative writing. But I'm sure that info is out there.

Your ideas are awesome, and there are many spots of brilliance mixed in there. But at this point, I'd like to see more character development. I know that we already know most of these people, but take note of how Puzo describes his characters -- enough so we can picture them in our minds. You need to do more of that.

I like to hear your casino expertise shine through in here, and I know you know it! But that blackjack explanation is too drawn out. I would think that a math prodigy would already know the basics of blackjack since he was 4 years old. And I think we readers know them, too. All of that explanation led up to card counting? I think we all know how that works. Also - did they only use one deck of cards back then as you imply?

Although I still haven't finished Winegardner's book, I'm one of the few here who doesn't think it's a total piece of crap. Winegardner is a professional writer with many years of experience honing his craft. While I admire your effort greatly, I will be honest and say that you have some more practice to do until you reach that point. Not just you -- any and all of us here!

And FS, of all people, is right: You have way too many run-on sentences -- full paragraphs containing just one sentence -- that at times makes it difficult to follow.

I know this is just a rough draft, and a first attempt at writing prose, but at some point you'll have to go back and check your: spelling (e.g., "Out side", "lurative"); typos (e.g., "make a clean breast of things"

But again, I think you're doing a great job overall. I, for one, am just not someone who calls a novice an expert before he's evolved into one. I'm certain you can, and will. And my comments are meant to help. So stop crying.

Now do my stats, bastid!

Most of your criticsm is well founded.

Just off the top of my head--

The Throop character is based on a real person, a math professor from (I think) M.I.T. by the name of Edward Thorpe, who was the first to really study the game of Blackjack, and wrote the seminal book on card counting, called "Beat The Dealer"

Up until that time (early 1960s), nothing provable was known about blackjack, basic strategy, or card counting.

So it's not like that stuff was out there in the first place. He really developed it all, including computer programs that played millions of hands to prove his theories.

As far as the plot goes--

I think there are a few obvious developments coming here--

--Throop taking Micke's casino for millions
--Some type of early planning for the later treachery of Don Altobello & Joey Zasa
--The Kay & Douglas relationship (see Chapter 3)
--Development of the Lucy & Vincent & Jules story
--Possible revenge of Willi Cicci

So far, though, I've been mostly just trying to answer some of the unanswered questions remaining from the novel and the trilogy, which I think have to be resolved before moving forward.

As far as the grammar goes, I don't think there are any legitimate run-on sentences. There are certain rules of grammar which make a sentence run-on or not, none of which I believe I've violated, although I will confess to not knowing exactly what they are.

But a sentence that is very long or the only sentence in a paragraph is not necessarily a run-on. Possibly difficult to read and a matter of style which the reader may not care for however, but not, as I say, necessarily grammatically incorrect.

Okay, perhaps not technically run-on sentences grammatically, but I use that term in the sense that they run on and on and on (and on).

That's my windbag style.

Try reading something by Theodore Dreiser some day.

Although I tremble to disagree with the great Don, I must side with Plaw here. While much of what you said is quite true, such as the typos and/or spelling errors (for example, is it Michelson or Michaelson?), but I have to stop you at the run-on sentences. I think that writing style is quite personal, and that creative writing is just that - creative. It doesn't always follow the very strict rules of grammar. For example, can you imagine an editor making a call, "EE, what is with the lowercase? It's just WRONG, and unless you start applying the rules of capitalization, you can shop these poems somewhere else!"

Now, Plaw, don't get your head in the clouds, I'm not comparing you to ee cummings, but I think that the hardest part of writing is finding your own voice. While PL's structure and style so far is evocative of Puzo's style, t's not imitation. And that's a hard line to straddle. I think that perhaps your sentence structure is your style and shoule be respected.

Spelling and typos are the least of my worries.

According to Harlan Lebo, BTW, it's "Michelson:.

SB, my fellow grammar queen! That's not at all my issue. Hell, I use dashes -- all the time! -- and run sentences on over and over myself. But that's here, on a message board. My style is TOTALLY conversational. I write that way, too, even at the expense of some grammar and syntax rules sometimes. In conversation, it's not necessary all the time to be "proper"; in fact, it's discouraged.

But in writing prose -- and while a conversational tone is essential -- you need to have the words flow smoothly without straining the reader. That's my point.

It's like watching a movie: If you can tell there was an edit, it was a bad edit. Same thing in writing: if you can tell there's something awkward, there's probably something wrong.

That doesn't make it a bad movie or book; but, it's something that's just not right. And what's the opposite of that? Something better.

When it comes down to it, it's not a problem with the words themselves, but more about punctuation. 300 words with only commas -- while not necessarily incorrect, technically -- will not be conversational tone. Nor will it be easy to read or follow.

Any distraction noticed while you're reading is a bad thing. I'd rather have some poor grammar (albeit distracting enough!) than an awkward flow that makes you pay attention to the WRITING and NOT to what is being said.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for any author who can commit some 200,000 words to paper while developing characters and a somewhat coherent plot.

And after trying it myself I can respect it even more, and would never dream of calling GFR a "total piece of crap".

That said, however, I think that the most legitimate criticsm that can be leveled at the book aside from the factual errors and some of the ridiculous actions attributed to the characters is that it just wasn't what we Godfather fans wanted.

I think we wanted a sequel that picked up the story where we left off and answered the questions which we wanted answered.

Believe me, I was the last one in the world who wanted to see the book fail.

I rushed out to buy it (along with many others here) the first day it came out, and read it just about straight through in as close to one sitting as I could.

I wanted nothing more than a satisfying and compelling sequel, and, along with most other readers, felt horribly short-changed and disappointed.

I also think that GF III, despite its many flaws, was a far better film sequel than GFR was as a book sequel. At least there was a certain continuity which Weingardner's book, for me at least, largely lacked.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Partagas:
[QB] It seems as if everyone knew it would fail (if not wanted it to do so). [QUOTE]


Actually I had anticipated that it would be much better than it was. While I didn't expect a blockbuster like the original, I did expect a decent story. Unfortunately it did not even live up to a decent sequel. I was very dissapointed.

But in fairness to the author, critique from people like us is very tough on him. We here are basically Godfather "experts" and because we consistantly discuss the depth and the details of the movies we are pretty familiar with the timelines, etc. So when people like ourselves read Wiengardners GF Returns, we tend to pay a LOT more attention to detail, and that is why many of us here were somewhat dissapointed in his work.

Now take an average person from outside these boards who is just a regular GF fan, and ask them how they felt about the GF Returns and I'll bet that most would say that it was a pretty good read. They will probably feel that way because they, unlike us, are not paying attention to the little details and timelines, as the average reader would not be aware of the many details that we are aware of.

So in a nutshell people like us may have been too critical of him because of our continuing love for the Godfather and our continued pursuit of knowledge of the many inside details, while the average person not as knowledgable as us ( in regards to The Godfather ) would probably enjoy the book and be less critical.


Don Cardi