'The Godfather Part II': Why it's my (probably) favorite of the trilogy

Robert De Niro in The Godfather Part II

It's become something of a hipster affectation to say you prefer The Godfather Part II to the original and I myself have vacillated on the issue over the years. They're both pretty much perfect movies so it's kind of like a cinematic Sophie's Choice.

And yet, I'm going with what might be the best sequel ever made (although The Empire Strikes Back has a very strong argument for that title too). The second film in this grandiose trilogy is darker, richer and I think a little more rewarding than the other Godfather films.

Part of my appreciation for it comes from knowing quite a fair amount about the history of its making.

Coppola was constantly on the chopping block when making the first Godfather film. He was second guessed on everything from casting to cutting. After that film became the biggest box office office hit of the decade he had virtual free reign with its follow-up and it shows.

The movie opens with a bang -- the murder of young Vito Corleone's mother in Sicily -- and traces this act of violence's repercussions across generations.

This beautifully shot, very American story criss-crosses between Vito Corleone's (played by a note-perfect Robert De Niro) ascent into power as a mafia kingpin and Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) descent into madness in the very same position.

Let's put aside for a moment the fact that this film contains two of the best performances of these iconic actors' careers. The film also is a subversive statement on 1970s-era America. This movie came out in 1974 -- the year Richard Nixon resigned from office -- and the theme of corruption (of family, politics, sex) runs just below the surface throughout this movie.

Cazale and Pacino in Godfather Part II

"We both are a part of the same hypocrisy," Michael Corleone icily says to an obnoxious senator looking to manipulate him. And he's right.

The political intrigue is just part of the movie's power. It's the familial relations that make it special. The disintegration of Michael's marriage to Kay (Diane Keaton) is played out in devastating fashion and his complex relationship with his pathetic brother Fredo (the late, great John Cazale) is handled brilliantly.

Cazale should have been nominated for an Oscar for his wholly original and heartbreaking performance as the brother who is perpetually passed over. And his is just one of the show-stopping supporting roles in this engrossing drama.

Michael V. Gazzo, who has one of the greatest voices ever, is funny and unpredictable as the proud Frank Pentangeli. Talia Shire fleshes out the Connie character --who's grown greedy and lost since the death of her husband. And the legendary champion of method acting Lee Strasberg is wonderful as the sly and conniving Hyman Roth.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface.

Pacino is genius in this movie. He does so much with so little. Every gesture, every word is delivered with precision. He's become a shell of a man -- laser beam focused on his ultimate goal: legitimacy for his family, which he will pursue at all costs,  (spoiler alert) even it means the execution of his own brother.

This plot choice is profound even 40 years later. It's so cold and so irreversible. The eerie shot of Fredo alone in a little canoe with his killer and then the final moment of an older, even more isolated Michael peering out into nothingness -- one of the most striking endings of all time.

My Gemini nature always attracts me to films that deal with the duality of man -- and this movie just "gets it."

This is the Godfather film that keeps surprising me every time I see it, that I keep discovering new things to love about. And I think it's the film that holds up as the best of the three. Or, at least that's what I think now. The first movie is a great soap opera but this film is more expansive and ambitious. The third film is under-appreciated, it has its virtues, but it's not in the same league as the first two.

Gotta run -- more wine to drink!