Normally, movie sequels aren't very good. They are usually just rushed cash-grabs to make money off of a successful property, but occasionally they can be just as good, if not better, than the original film, as rare as this is. ("The Empire Strikes Back," "Terminator 2," "Aliens," "The Dark Knight," and "Spider-Man 2" are examples of these.) Prequels are not so different, and are even harder to pull off. So, normally, the 1974 follow-up to Francis Ford Coppola's 1972 masterpiece "The Godfather" would have a lot to do in order to top the original. But, despite this, "The Godfather Part II," is, in my opinion, not only better than the original, but also the best movie of all time. (I take back what I said in my review of the original about it being the best ever made, I hadn't seen this one yet.)

"The Godfather Part II" is actually two films in one. Expertly presenting two story lines, one sequel and one prequel to the original, half of the film follows late-1950s Michael Corleone, now as the head of the Corleone crime family, expanding his power and picking off his enemies, becoming less and less like the man at the beginning of the previous film. The other half follows his father, Vito, in 1920s New York as he creates the empire that later gets passed down to Michael. Both stand out on their own, but the two story lines, brilliantly put together, create a masterpiece that is yet to be matched.

Like the first movie, the best element of this movie is the acting. Al Pacino returns as Michael, in what is undoubtedly his best performance of the two films. (I can't say the best of his career, because these two are the only movies of his I have seen. Sorry, "Scarface" fans.) He is perfect as a man who, through gaining power, loses his humanity. If you have read my review for "Lawrence of Arabia," you'll remember I named some performances that would be on a list of the Top 10 Best Movie Performances. I have no doubts that Pacino in this film would be right on there.

Before watching this, I had doubts as to how the movie would make do without screen legend Marlon Brando, as his character is twenty-five years younger, and so played by Robert De Niro. (I haven't yet seen "Taxi Driver" or "Raging Bull.") But after watching it, I feel that he is just as good, and he really deserved his Oscar win for Best Supporting Actor. He is so good that I can't decide who did a better job, him or Brando. Good thing he wasn't cast in the first film, otherwise the world wouldn't have this terrific performance.

Although Pacino and De Niro are the highlights in this movie's cast, the others are excellent as well. Robert Duvall as Michael's stepbrother, Tom Hagen, really sells his conflicted loyalty/fear of his changing stepbrother. Lee Strasberg as Hyman Roth, a man who Michael is trying to kill, is excellent. Diane Keaton as Kay, Michael's wife, really shows how she is frightened at what he has now become. And, of course, there is John Cazale as Michael's brother Fredo, the weakling who tries to be stronger than everyone says,but things don't go according to plan. (I won't go into specifics.)

Just like the first film, another great aspect is the script. Doing one story line would be hard enough, but the fact that the movie does both so well, so flawlessly, is just amazing. It reintroduces the characters we already know, and take them to further places and develop them more, and also introduces more. It features parallels to the first movie, with similar scenes that show how things have changed. This installment also feels more epic than the first one, as things get bigger and darker.

The film is also marvelous in its technical aspects as well. The score by Nino Rota, once again, is beautifully haunting, and even better than in the previous film. The cinematography by Gordon Willis continues to shine. (Even though, ironically, he himself has regretted some scenes that he felt were too dark.) The production design is fantastic, and it helps with the epic scope I mentioned previously. The violence is more realistic, and somewhat more graphic, which gives it a better impact. The editing is also good, as the two story lines are connected beautifully. If I have one problem with the movie, it is that it is slower than the previous film, as it's longer by twenty-five minutes, and 3.3 hours makes for a pretty long movie. But, taking into account how brilliant the rest of the movie is, that can be forgiven.

This film is so amazing, it astonishes on every level. I may have been disappointed that the first film only won three Oscars, but fortunately this one managed to get six, including a second Best Picture, which were all well deserved. (I have no idea how Pacino didn't get Best Actor, but, according to "Some Like It Hot," "Nobody's perfect.") Clearly topping the original, "The Godfather Part II" is the Best Film of All Time, so of course, I have to give it a 10/10 rating.