The Godfather Part III

First off, I adore the first two Godfather films. They were wonderfully made, scored, directed and acted with compelling elegiac stories. However, while I do not think it is as bad as it is made out to be, The Godfather Part III is a disappointment. I did like it in general, but in comparison to the first two it is like a distant relative.

Starting with the good things, it does look splendid. The cinematography is beautiful and the settings are superb. The music is also outstanding, and the direction is good. The acting is uneven, but not all of it is bad. Al Pacino does have a lot of fine moments as a more gentler Michael, while Andy Garcia is electrifying too.

However, I didn't like the story as much here. It lacked the elegiac feel of the first two, it has a lot of loose ends and there was a number of times I didn't know what was going on. The script isn't as thoughtful, intelligent or as sophisticated here, instead some of it is quite stilted. As much as I do love Diane Keaton I personally don't think she was necessary here, she served her purpose perfectly in the first two. Finally I have to concur about Sophia Coppola. She never convinces as the "symbol of innocence", and just comes across sometimes as embarrassing. Much has been said about the climax in the opera house, some loved it, others didn't. I think it was a mixed bag. I had no problem with Pacino, the way it was shot and the music but it did come across as very protracted.

So all in all, not awful, not great. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I recently watched all three Godfather films again in sequence and was surprised at how bad GF III is when closely compared to the other two fims. There are characters in the film whose presence is never made clear (i.e. George Hamilton, Brigette Fonda and Don Novello - Father Guido Sarducci??) The major characters bear little resemblance to themselves from the previous films. Connie Corleone is now a major supporter of Michael even though she knows he had her husband killed? Michael now has a change of heart and tries to go "legit" even though he so eagerly immersed himself into the power and control of the Corleone family. And Kay continues to "hang around" even though she dreads Michael and all that he stands for. Why?? The movie drags on in parts and never really gains it's true identity untill the end of the film during the opera scene. Not even Winona Ryder who was scheduled to be cast in the part of Mary could have helped. It only serves to give us an appetite for the earlier two films. Both of which I consider masterpieces.

I finally saw it ! As a total devotee of the two previous installments, I avoided seeing the third one, on purpose, people I respect had told me about the disappointment and, quite honestly, I didn't go there. Last night I did and surprise, surprise, it moved me no end. Maybe because I haven't seen the other two in four years. Yes at times is more Ken Russell than Francis Ford Coppola and in my book that's not a bad thing. I was, however, a bit taken aback by the healing in Pacino's Michael as far as Keaton's Kay is concerned. As it nothing had ever happened, while in Diane Keaton the memory of that pain is always present. Talia Shire is a lot of fun as a sort of Madame Sin. Raf Vallone, superb as the doomed Pope John Paul I and then a bit puzzling casting choices that I think they me code for something. George Hamilton, for instance, takes over from where Rubert Duvall left off. Helmut Berger plays the head of the Vatican Bank. Helmut Berger! Just as curious as to find Troy Donahue in The Godfather Part II - All in all, I'm really glad I've seen it and I'm sure I'll see it again.

Definitely not my favorite of the 3 but it's hard when the first 2 were just that good. It still portrays well, from my historical knowledge, much of the struggle of the mob families to legitimize their business dealings and try to enjoy life in the later age of the mafia in America. Al Pacino performs brilliantly and I enjoyed Joe Mantegna in his roll. Definitely worth the watch if you were a fan of the previous 2 films.

This film came out about the same time as Goodfellas, and pales in comparison with the Martin Scorsese effort. I know the two shouldn't be compared, but the fact that they are both gangster films begs some sort of comparison.

Does Godfather III "complete" Coppola's Godfather series? Only in the sense that we see what happens to Michael when he is an old man. In my opinion, we didn't really need to know that. To me, the Godfather films ended with Michael Corleone as a shell of a man after losing his wife and murdering his brother.

Besides, I'm of the view that the best American films of the 20th century were made in the 1970s.