Jump to content

Godfather I or II?

TexArcher

By TexArcher
in Movies and TV

 Share

Which is the better film?  

78 members have voted

  1. 1. Which is the better film?

    • The Godfather
      46
    • The Godfather: Part II
      32

Recommended Posts

TexArcher

TexArcher 37854

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I love Part II and it's probably the best sequel ever made.  But I still say that The Godfather is the better film.  It's my all-time favorite movie, in fact.

The dialogue in The Godfather might legitimately be the best in any movie, ever.  Every scene is a classic.  Brando is perfect as Vito.  Sonny, Fredo, and Tom Hagen are all amazing.  And we get to watch Michael devolve from young and idealistic into a man who blasphemes on his nephew's baptism as multiple murders that he ordered are being carried out (and fuck, what a scene that is).

The scene where Vito tells Hagen to tell him what everyone else already seems to know (about Sonny)...

The scene in the mortuary...

The ambush at the toll booth...

The guy who wants a favor on Vito's daughter's wedding day...

The parlay of the family heads to broker peace...

Michael making Carlo confess...

Every scene...

It's just the perfect movie.  I give Part II a 9 to 9.5.  The Godfather is a perfect 10.

Edited by TexArcher
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vito Andolini

Vito Andolini 9126

Posted
Posted

I know this is sacrilege for me to admit, but I think I must have watched The Godfather Saga when it aired, so sometimes it’s hard for me to remember what happened in which film (like I sometimes equate Hyman Roth and Moe Green), but then my brain clears up, and I remember, duh, Green is shot in the eye during the baptism scene at the end of I. 

In case you have no idea what I’m talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godfather_Saga

So much to like in both, Michael taking out the crooked cop and Sollozzo, Appolonia’s smallish but beautiful tits, Sonny beating the shit out of Carlo, the tollbooth, the aforementioned baptism, etc. in Part 1, and in Part 2, young Vito Andolini (yay!) is misnamed at Ellis Island, Vito’s ascent, revenge on Don Ciccio, Michael’s Vegas adventure, the fucknut Senator crying like a bitch, trotting out the brother during the testimony…

I’ll give it to the original by hair on Mama Corleone’s chin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sbbruin

Sbbruin 21858

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

I love Part II and it's probably the best sequel ever made.  But I still say that The Godfather is the better film.  It's my all-time favorite movie, in fact.

The dialogue in The Godfather might legitimately be the best in any movie, ever.  Every scene is a classic.  Brando is perfect as Vito.  Sonny, Fredo, and Tom Hagen are all amazing.  And we get to watch Michael devolve from young and idealistic into a man who blasphemes on his nephew's coronation as multiple murders that he ordered are being carried out (and fuck, what a scene that is).

It's just the perfect movie.  I give Part II a 9 to 9.5.  The Godfather is a perfect 10.

Arch said it perfectly.  Nothing to add.  Godfather 1 is my favorite movie.  The character development was better than any film I can recall.  Brando was so very, very good as Vito.  I absolutely love II.  Love it.  But 1 was movie perfection.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texzilla58

Texzilla58 4738

Posted
Posted

I consider them two halves of the same movie because the book covers both.

However I is a story about a family and life choices, II is more a gangster movie. I is perfect, and ii is as well. I just rewatched both a couple times after watching The Offer.

There are certain scenes and moments in I that are so powerful. The opening scene and monologue is so powerful to start the movie. The family at the table for Vito’s birthday where Michael announces his enlistment. The moment Michael shoots McCluskey and Salazzo, changing his life in a moment from war hero to gangster. Sicily. The assassinations as effortless ballet during the christening. One element left out from the book was how horrible Luca Brazzi was vs the somewhat comical brute in the movie.

In II I love the Little Italy scenes with Vito, so much history. And the late great Bruno Kirby as young Clemenza. I don’t enjoy the Michael scenes as much as he is so different. And this is an unpopular opinion but I think Diane Keaton is the worst part of the films. And what an actor John Cazale was. Tragic loss.

Some hot ladies under the radar: Julie Gregg as Sonny’s wife. Francesca di Seppio as young mama Corleone. Kathleen Beller from the theater.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DalTxHornFan

DalTxHornFan 3102

Posted
Posted

I don't think that you can fully see one without both I and II.  I am obsessed with those movies and notice many little details when I watch them over and over.

The best scene ever is in Godfather I when all of the limo drivers open the doors simultaneously at Don Corleone's funeral at the NY cemetery.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14487

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, TexArcher said:

I love Part II and it's probably the best sequel ever made.  But I still say that The Godfather is the better film.  It's my all-time favorite movie, in fact.

The dialogue in The Godfather might legitimately be the best in any movie, ever.  Every scene is a classic.  Brando is perfect as Vito.  Sonny, Fredo, and Tom Hagen are all amazing.  And we get to watch Michael devolve from young and idealistic into a man who blasphemes on his nephew's baptism as multiple murders that he ordered are being carried out (and fuck, what a scene that is).

The scene where Vito tells Hagen to tell him what everyone else already seems to know (about Sonny)...

The scene in the mortuary...

The ambush at the toll booth...

The guy who wants a favor on Vito's daughter's wedding day...

The parlay of the family heads to broker peace...

Michael making Carlo confess...

Every scene...

It's just the perfect movie.  I give Part II a 9 to 9.5.  The Godfather is a perfect 10.

homer-simpson-don.gif

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14487

Posted
Posted (edited)

I first watched it on the 7 VHS tape Godfather Saga.  So I watched it sequentially, with the flashbacks fron-tloaded and Godfather I starting about a third of the way through.  It was amazing.  But I go with Part 1.  It's got everything.  2 is great too.  But in 1, you watch the house's being built and lived in.  But 2 is a great continuation of the story with wonderful flashbacks and all.  They're really best as one movie.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hate

Hate 20108

Posted
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Texzilla58 said:

 And this is an unpopular opinion but I think Diane Keaton is the worst part of the films.
 

See, I disagree with this so much.  She is the perfect juxtaposition of what his life could have been had he married a Sicilian woman like his mother vs the somewhat typical American woman.  If Apollonia lives and comes back to the US with Michael, they likely have a marriage like what his parents had.  Instead, he ended up choosing someone that really didn't want tlead that life and was always more a thorn in his side than anything. 

Edited by Hate
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DalTxHornFan

DalTxHornFan 3102

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hate said:

See, I disagree with this so much.  She is the perfect juxtaposition of what his life could have been had he married a Sicilian woman like his mother vs the somewhat typical American woman.  If Apollonia lives and comes back to the US with Michael, they like have a marriage like what his parents had.  Instead, he ended up choosing someone that really didn't want tlead that life and was always more a thorn in his side than anything. 

Interesting take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beantown Express 2.0

Beantown Express 2.0 6559

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Texzilla58 said:


 And what an actor John Cazale was. Tragic loss.
 

Which actor has a better resume in such a small amount of time?  He only did 5 films; The Godfather, The Conversation, The Godfather Part II, Dog Day Afternoon and The Deer Hunter and all 5 were nominated for Best Picture plus he was engaged to Meryl Streep and then he dies of lung cancer.

As far as the OP's question these movies are my 1A and 1B for best ever.  I give a slight advantage to Part II just because it seemed so original in the way it went back and forth with Michael's timeline and young Vito's timeline.  To me one of the most iconic scenes in any movie ever is Michael giving Fredo the "kiss of death" and saying, "I know it was you Fredo, you broke my heart".  In Part II you also get the Young Vito murder of Don Fanucci scene which is perfect and the Fredo scene of him saying, "I'm smart and I want respect" which would have been even better if he was wearing an Aggie t-shirt while he says that.  That being said I could probably change my mind over and over and pick part I based on my mood but tonight it's Part II.   

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey3216

Trey3216 15346

Posted
Posted

This one is hard for me.   I grew up watching them both anytime they were on.   Having seen my great-grandad’s signature in the books at Ellis Island, II always resonated with me as a younger man because of things like that.   It was like a window into my GGpa’s move here from Italy.   But damn, they’re both such incredible films that as I’ve grown older, I’ve resigned to the fact that they’re inseparable.  Anytime 1 is on, I’m watching 2 right behind it.   Doesn’t matter if it comes on at 10pm, I’m fucked the next day because I’m spending 5 hours watching 2 of the greatest ever made back to back.   

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32395

Posted
Posted

What?  No love for III?

(ducks)

Honestly, III had too high a bar to cross compared to I & II, so anything that fell short was going to be perceived as a disaster. But at the same time, I enjoyed it.   Despite Coppola's daughter.

Oh, and for me, II > I.  But only by the slightest of slight margins.  

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nole-4-Life

Nole-4-Life 804

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's like trying to pick a favorite child. Both are masterpieces.

I've never seen Saga, but seems like that would sorta ruin it for me. Someone convince me otherwise.

 

My favorite scene in either one is in II where Michael is in the boathouse and Connie want to book passage on the Queen Mary and tells him she's marrying Merle. When he tells her if she marries that guy it will disappoint him is just chilling. The way he says it, the lighting (the lighting in those movies is just perfect) the whole thing is just a great understated scene.

Edited by Nole-4-Life
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32395

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Yeah, I've never seen III and I never will.  It doesn't exist in my world.

 

You should see it, especially since Coppola cleaned up some things in the late 2020 recut of it.

It didn't distort my view of the first of the two movies, and it's not bad.  It's just not as good as the first 2, but sequels rarely are.

 

https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/the-godfather-coda-the-death-of-michael-corleone/

 

Spoiler

So, how did Ford Coppola and Puzo follow up two masterpieces? With the appropriately titled The Godfather Part III. Before we go any further, let me say this: The Godfather Part III is not, nor ever was a bad film. 

Was it as good as its predecessors? No. Could it have been better? Yes. Was it cursed from the get-go? Almost definitely. The Godfather Part III faced enormous challenges at every step of production, but it ultimately persevered. That being said, there were some noticeable shortcomings.

Francis Ford Coppola received a lot of flack for casting his daughter, Sofia Coppola, in the incredibly important role of Mary Corleone.

I won’t rag on Sofia Coppola’s performance because a) that’s been done to death and b) she was never supposed to be in the film in the first place. Here are all of the people who were linked to play the part before Coppola:

Julia Roberts (dropped out due to scheduling conflicts)

Madonna (Ford Coppola ultimately decided she was too old for the role)

Rebecca Schaeffer (was murdered before her formal audition)

Winona Ryder (suffered nervous exhaustion when she arrived to shoot in Rome)

So, the entire cast and crew was in Rome, behind in production, and in desperate need of somebody to play Mary Corleone; why not have Sofia Coppola play the role? She was the right age, and she was familiar with the cast/crew/script. 

Unfortunately, Sofia Coppola’s performance proved that acting is anything but easy, especially when compared to the performances of legendary actors like Andy Garcia, Diane Keaton, and Al Pacino. 

Sofia Coppola’s performance was panned by critics, as was the film’s convoluted structure and recycled themes. It was a gut-punch for Coppola and Puzo – who had enjoyed endless praise for their previous collaborations together. But even the film’s cynics knew there was a kernel of greatness in 


The Godfather Part III. Enter The Godfather Coda The Death of Michael Corleone – a recut that set out to write the wrongs of the original.

The Godfather Part III was not the film Coppola wanted it to be. That’s no secret. With The Godfather Coda, Coppola was given the chance to renovate and restructure the original so it would more closely align with his vision. Let’s listen to Coppola explain how (and why) he made The Godfather Coda:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GhostOfTomJoad

GhostOfTomJoad 9327

Posted
Posted

I don't know if there's a better transformation sequence in film history than De Niro as young Vito tracking Fanucci from the tenement rooftops, then lying in the dark shadows of the stairwell to assassinate Fanucci outside of his apartment.

The build up as Vito stalks his prey--and new life--as Fanucci winds his way through the parade. Vito being absorbed by the dark as he wraps his arm holding the pistol with the towel. Fanucci examining the light bulb, then tapping it until it blinks back to life. Fanucci recognizing Vito as he emerges from his hiding spot, "what have you got there?" The unvarnished violence of the shooting to the heart, the face, and a final shot through Fanucci's gaping mouth. And of course the flaming towel-a literal baptism of fire-as Vito emerges as the new Don.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey3216

Trey3216 15346

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

You should see it, especially since Coppola cleaned up some things in the late 2020 recut of it.

It didn't distort my view of the first of the two movies, and it's not bad.  It's just not as good as the first 2, but sequels rarely are.

 

https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/the-godfather-coda-the-death-of-michael-corleone/

 

  Hide contents

So, how did Ford Coppola and Puzo follow up two masterpieces? With the appropriately titled The Godfather Part III. Before we go any further, let me say this: The Godfather Part III is not, nor ever was a bad film. 

Was it as good as its predecessors? No. Could it have been better? Yes. Was it cursed from the get-go? Almost definitely. The Godfather Part III faced enormous challenges at every step of production, but it ultimately persevered. That being said, there were some noticeable shortcomings.

Francis Ford Coppola received a lot of flack for casting his daughter, Sofia Coppola, in the incredibly important role of Mary Corleone.

I won’t rag on Sofia Coppola’s performance because a) that’s been done to death and b) she was never supposed to be in the film in the first place. Here are all of the people who were linked to play the part before Coppola:

Julia Roberts (dropped out due to scheduling conflicts)

Madonna (Ford Coppola ultimately decided she was too old for the role)

Rebecca Schaeffer (was murdered before her formal audition)

Winona Ryder (suffered nervous exhaustion when she arrived to shoot in Rome)

So, the entire cast and crew was in Rome, behind in production, and in desperate need of somebody to play Mary Corleone; why not have Sofia Coppola play the role? She was the right age, and she was familiar with the cast/crew/script. 

Unfortunately, Sofia Coppola’s performance proved that acting is anything but easy, especially when compared to the performances of legendary actors like Andy Garcia, Diane Keaton, and Al Pacino. 

Sofia Coppola’s performance was panned by critics, as was the film’s convoluted structure and recycled themes. It was a gut-punch for Coppola and Puzo – who had enjoyed endless praise for their previous collaborations together. But even the film’s cynics knew there was a kernel of greatness in 


The Godfather Part III. Enter The Godfather Coda The Death of Michael Corleone – a recut that set out to write the wrongs of the original.

The Godfather Part III was not the film Coppola wanted it to be. That’s no secret. With The Godfather Coda, Coppola was given the chance to renovate and restructure the original so it would more closely align with his vision. Let’s listen to Coppola explain how (and why) he made The Godfather Coda:

 

 

Yep. It's really not a bad movie.  I've gone back and watched it and kind of had the Alonzo Mourning reaction to it.  I liken it to how terribly vilified the SW prequel trilogy is, and upon re-watch, Revenge of the Sith is actually a pretty damn good movie.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texzilla58

Texzilla58 4738

Posted
Posted
See, I disagree with this so much.  She is the perfect juxtaposition of what his life could have been had he married a Sicilian woman like his mother vs the somewhat typical American woman.  If Apollonia lives and comes back to the US with Michael, they likely have a marriage like what his parents had.  Instead, he ended up choosing someone that really didn't want tlead that life and was always more a thorn in his side than anything. 

Let me clarify. My issue is with Diane Keaton and her acting, not the character of Kay. She doesn’t come across to me as the Kay of the book. Kay was a New Englander and was a different persona than what I see in DK’s portrayal. Maybe it’s I really am annoyed with her voice and style in everything.

You are correct that Kay symbolizes before Michael goes to Sicily his vision of total escape to American assimilation and acceptance. Apollonia seals his total move into the traditional Sicilian life and his new life as a mobster. On his return he was a totally different person and the marriage was built on a different foundation. In the book Kay embodies the conflict of mainstream; she lives a rich lifestyle and pushes the corruption that fuels it out of her head. Just as society accepts the encapsulated violence and crime to enjoy gambling, whores, and loandharking.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BehoId, The Underminer!

BehoId, The Underminer! 11669

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Texzilla58 said:


Let me clarify. My issue is with Diane Keaton and her acting, not the character of Kay. She doesn’t come across to me as the Kay of the book. Kay was a New Englander and was a different persona than what I see in DK’s portrayal. Maybe it’s I really am annoyed with her voice and style in everything.
 

counterpoint: the book sucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oSuJeff97

oSuJeff97 3435

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Brandywine said:

II is perfect, start to finish. Story, acting, photography, music, directing. Just perfect. It’s the greatest movie ever made in my opinion. But that’s just my opinion. 

Same here.

It took everything that was great about about I and somehow made it even better.

 

F055439C-7FE0-4CB3-AE23-3E100D78AFFD.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oSuJeff97

oSuJeff97 3435

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

You should see it, especially since Coppola cleaned up some things in the late 2020 recut of it.

It didn't distort my view of the first of the two movies, and it's not bad.  It's just not as good as the first 2, but sequels rarely are.

 

https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/the-godfather-coda-the-death-of-michael-corleone/

 

  Hide contents

So, how did Ford Coppola and Puzo follow up two masterpieces? With the appropriately titled The Godfather Part III. Before we go any further, let me say this: The Godfather Part III is not, nor ever was a bad film. 

Was it as good as its predecessors? No. Could it have been better? Yes. Was it cursed from the get-go? Almost definitely. The Godfather Part III faced enormous challenges at every step of production, but it ultimately persevered. That being said, there were some noticeable shortcomings.

Francis Ford Coppola received a lot of flack for casting his daughter, Sofia Coppola, in the incredibly important role of Mary Corleone.

I won’t rag on Sofia Coppola’s performance because a) that’s been done to death and b) she was never supposed to be in the film in the first place. Here are all of the people who were linked to play the part before Coppola:

Julia Roberts (dropped out due to scheduling conflicts)

Madonna (Ford Coppola ultimately decided she was too old for the role)

Rebecca Schaeffer (was murdered before her formal audition)

Winona Ryder (suffered nervous exhaustion when she arrived to shoot in Rome)

So, the entire cast and crew was in Rome, behind in production, and in desperate need of somebody to play Mary Corleone; why not have Sofia Coppola play the role? She was the right age, and she was familiar with the cast/crew/script. 

Unfortunately, Sofia Coppola’s performance proved that acting is anything but easy, especially when compared to the performances of legendary actors like Andy Garcia, Diane Keaton, and Al Pacino. 

Sofia Coppola’s performance was panned by critics, as was the film’s convoluted structure and recycled themes. It was a gut-punch for Coppola and Puzo – who had enjoyed endless praise for their previous collaborations together. But even the film’s cynics knew there was a kernel of greatness in 


The Godfather Part III. Enter The Godfather Coda The Death of Michael Corleone – a recut that set out to write the wrongs of the original.

The Godfather Part III was not the film Coppola wanted it to be. That’s no secret. With The Godfather Coda, Coppola was given the chance to renovate and restructure the original so it would more closely align with his vision. Let’s listen to Coppola explain how (and why) he made The Godfather Coda:

 

 

Yeah this weird idea that has evolved over the years that Godfather III is utter trash is pretty bizarre, considering it was nominated for 7 Academy Awards, including Best Picture.  I know that’s not always the best barometer of what makes movies great, but still.

It’s not as good as I and II (how many movies are?!) but it’s not this terrible piece of shit that it’s made out to be online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14487

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Nole-4-Life said:

I've never seen Saga, but seems like that would sorta ruin it for me. Someone convince me otherwise.

It's an interesting way to watch it, especially if it was the way you first saw it.  Totally sequential.  Opening scene is the funeral scene in Sicily, where Vito's brother is killed.  The transition from all of the flashbacks to Part I is also very good.  You have them hanging the Genko sign and yelling as the car as it passes, which preceded, with great ominous music, the transition back to some scene with Michael in Part II (can't remember), but instead, it transitions to the Don in his office with the cat at Connie's wedding listening to Bonasera.

 

So side story.  I tried to sit down and watch Part I in college for the first time.  I had a lot going on and got distracted and didn't finish it.  I went home that summer and popped in the GF Saga, which started when he was a kid.  I had no idea those were flashbacks from Part II and figured I must have got a tape of Pt1 that hadn't been rewound.  The story made so much more sense.  I loved it.  It was only later I realized how it had been structured vs. Pts. 1 &2.  I haven't watched the Saga cut in years and don't need to at this point. 

 

Another side story.  I got to see Part 1 on the big screen in the late 90s with a few additional scenes.  Among them, (I think it's an addition) is the scene after Luca Brasi is killed where the Turk gives Tom the terms of his offer in the shed by the Christmas tree lot.  I did not remember that from earlier viewings and, for me, it really tied the underlying reasons for the hit together a bit more.  I've never seen Pt2 on the big screen, which may be why I lean Pt1.  Another extra scene that appears in the trilogy dvd set is Genco's deathbed scene right after the wedding.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Augustus

Augustus 3061

Posted
Posted

The first one's my favorite.  The second is a masterpiece.  I don't begin to know how to pick one over the other.

One of the things I found amazing is that the movie's impact results from every aspect of its production, and one of the biggest is undoubtedly the score.  I wonder how different the movie would feel if it had a different score.  Those haunting melodies created the atmosphere in which we're perceiving everything happening on the screen and for me it's as much a part of the emotions you move through as the dialogue and the characters.

As others have mentioned, the lighting, the sets, the direction and the acting etc... it's all perfect.  

What's most astonishing to me is they were able to create a second film that not only built upon that world (and told its history) while maintaining that level of perfection, even growing it larger.

It's so amazingly well done, and the characters so real, you feel like you could walk into one of those scenes in the dining room, sit down and start conversing with the characters like you've known them forever.

And talk about audience subversion...  We love Don Vito.  Absolutely love him.  We love his family.  But these are not good people.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14487

Posted
Posted

I just started Part 1.  The wedding scene and the way they lay everything out from characters to relationships to how the friendship/tribute thing to the Don works is beautifully done.  You're sucked into the world in the first minutes of the movie.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texzilla58

Texzilla58 4738

Posted
Posted
I - Has the edge on the story.  Gritty, bloody, graphic and told in such a great manner.
II - was shot better...Cinematography wise.  So many shots that could be hung on the walls of museums.  I have said it before, II has my favorite scene.  Mama's funeral.

2 had way more budget so it has shots they couldn’t afford in the first, which is why I love the lighting tricks and other little elements in 1.

That sound of the tomatoes going in the pot by Clemenza as he recites the recipe always gets me wanting to make some Sunday gravy.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...