I have even more reservations about a book than I do a possible Godfather IV. Of course, it will make a lot of money. I just feel sorry for the writer who's doing it, and ironically Puzo and Coppola made it even more daunting because of many things they did and did not do in III.

I loved III too, but there are few people I know who read the book that didn't have some problems with it. It's been awhile since I read the book (I've read it many times). I realize Michael could be included the book, but his inclusion/exclusion is a difficult question at best.

Other than Vincente and Connie, who left is a compelling character? I would see Anthony's involvement as being limited or as a victim. Any other reworking of his character I think would violate what Puzo and Coppola did in III. Kay would only seem to come into play as some sort of cheezy device such as Anthony being kidnapped. It's hard to see Andrew being terribly interesting at all. Al Neri, as a character is interesting but would probably be minor also. And heck, I forgot the name of Vincente's right hand guy, but he didn't grab me at all.

Since this book will be the story of the Corleone family and not about Michael as all three films were to me. The only available unmined dynamic I can think of, was something I thought ridiculously not dealt with at all in III was Vincente's siblings. I'm hazy about the number of children Sonny had in the book, but we of course, see his son in the first film. So I thought it very odd a story half/centered around Sonny's illegitamate son didn't at least acknowledge their existence. It's hard to imagine Michael lived his life not involved with his slain brother's children. It's very un-Italian.
So this guys going to write a book about the Corleone family. And you'd think he'd have to at least mention every member we know to be living. If he ignores Sonny's other kids, you'd think Connie's would be mentioned, and by the way, think those kids could have some issues? The trouble is how can he ignore them? And how can he effectively use them ivolving the family business without explaing where they were and what was happening during the events in III where they don't exist? It's tricky at best, and at worst it intrudes on a storyline Puzo and Coppola wrote.

As a devotee of the books and the films, I admit I was wondering what would likely have happened as Sonny's other children watched their bastard half-brother assume control of a multi-billion dollar family business. Apparently it was impossible to deal with in a 3 and a half hour movie, but it was one of several slights that bothered me about III. Has anyone heard Coppola discuss this?

Sorry I've been rambling here, but one final thought. Does Paramount own the rights to put out IV? I've assumed so and I have heard rumors (I thought) being bandied about that scripts were being written at Paramount without participation of Puzo or Coppola. Has Paramount secured these rights to make IV? If that's the case I could see Paramount deciding to produce the film and release it before the book comes out to cash in on the anticipation this book will create. Even if the Puzo family has some control and input, you're talking about a potential disaster even if everyone involved has the best intentions. If I'm Paramount and I do have the rights to put out this movie already, why would I risk the book coming out, being hated (though still best-selling) and sour millions on any post-Puzo/Coppola involvement in this cashcow?

Straighten me out here if you can. The worst thing that could happen for me is to get a conflicting mythology. The subtle differences in the book from I and II never bothered me, but III's omissions did and that of course, was with Puzo and Coppola involved.

Nice website here guys. I've enjoyed reading the threads.