There's a short review of 'The Godfather Returns' in this week's Newsweek Magazine. It's less than positive, and gives a major spoiler about Fredo.

Well, everyone's entitled to their opinions. While I'm only 7 chapters into it cuz I've been busy, so far I think it's quite good. Only once so far did I think "hey, I don't know if Michael would be like that at this point in the story" but hey, it's a novel in its own right. Changing a detail here and there is no big deal, altho I'm not sure what the reason would be since I haven't gotten to that part yet.

Here is the review. I've pasted it below with spoiler warnings, so don't read that part if you don't want some plot points exposed:

Take the Cannolis: But leave the \'Godfather\' sequel by a new hired gun

By Malcolm Jones
Newsweek

Nov. 8 issue - "The Godfather" is like "the Wizard of Oz"—one of those stories that have become so embedded in the culture that their dialogue and characters can be strewn through our conversations without explanation. We all know a Fredo, a Sonny, a Michael. When it comes to "The Godfather," we're all the experts.

The question is, experts in what? The Mario Puzo novel, the two movies he coauthored with director Francis Ford Coppola? (Forget the third movie, if you can.) When Random House hired novelist Mark Winegardner to write a sequel to the Puzo epic—the author gave his blessing to the project before he died—it seemed possible that the variances in the legend could be ironed out. Instead, "The Godfather Returns" trips over practically every discrepancy it encounters. In the first novel, young Vito's mother sends him to America. In "Godfather II," she's murdered on screen before he leaves Sicily. Winegardner splits the difference. He has her murdered, too, but by different means (a shotgun in the movie, a knife in the new novel). Tinkering with a cultural totem, Winegardner ties himself and his book in knots.

*************** BEGIN SPOILERS ***************

Winegardner's version picks up more or less where Puzo's novel left off and ends in the early '60s. There's new material about the presidential chances of a certain Irish-American senator, here named Shea. There's a dandy plot about Fredo's dream of moving all the graveyards out of New York City and over to New Jersey. There are a few great lines, the best being "The tiny-fingered Don started to cry." But Winegardner seems straitjacketed by the myth he inherited and at a loss when it comes to expanding it. Does it help to be told that Fredo's bisexual—who knows what Puzo would have made of that—or that Tom Hagen secretly longs to be a killer?

*************** END SPOILERS ***************

C'mon, Mark, did you really think you could fool a Corleone fan with stories like that? Neither terrible nor original, this "Godfather" sleeps with the fishes.

© 2004 Newsweek, Inc.

Interesting review.Thanks for posting it Geoff, but I am eternally in your debt for puting up that spoiler warning.

When I heard of the book, I thought it was going to be a sequel to GFIII filing in the gaps until Michael's death.

This reaction was to be expected; the author knew the risks of doing this (please see the other thread for additional thoughts -> http://www.thegodfathertrilogy.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000027 ).

It has been a while since I have rambled on the board, so please allow me to catch up:

To understand the structural point of failure in this book, one simply needs to compare it with the Star Wars movie series. Lucas had a strategic plan. He wrote at least 9 scripts, released the middle segmentand then went back and released the first segment. Thus the last segment (Episodes 7-9)are being reserved pending the success or failure of the prior segments. Many people have written Star Wars books, but the stories only branch off of the 'cannonized' movie releases. Lucas controls how much of the story lines are revealed in the books, video games and web site. A very methodical approach that will allow him to use $100 dollar bills for toilet paper for quite some time.

Puzo was a great author but did not have the same strategic vision (that is not a criticism - just an observation). He did write other novels that referenced GF (like the Last Don - the Corleone name is mentioned) but even he did no more than branch off - he never revised the cannonized version of the novel, GF1, or GF2.

GFR is a diversion from the model. Not only does it branch off from the original work, it revises that which has been cannonized by the fans. To grasp the seriousness of this error, GFR is akin to someone not only writing about the missing years of Christ between 12 and 30, but also attributing something to Him that is contrary to cannonized scripture. Sure plenty of people do it (e.g. - the DaVinci Code), but they get raked over the coals in the process.

Please do not misunderstand my example. I am not suggesting that the GF novel is equal to the Bible. I am addressing a principle - it is OK to branch off and extrapolate from an accepted belief, but when you revise it, you can expect to catch hell for doing so. In that light, the GFR author has done something that Lucas or Puzo did not dare to do.

I respect his right to express his voice and to earn a living as he sees fit (after all, this is America). But he violated a basic principle, whether it is Luke Skywalker, Fredo, Indiana Jones or James Bond - never tamper with the original stuff.

Final thought - when you hire a contractor to paint your house, you do not expect him to add a room to it. In like manner, the GFR author has added color to the dark areas, but he has also changed the picture.

So far, I am 100 pages in and am debating putting it down. This book is beyond awful. The dialogue is just atrocious. The plot is plodding and boring. How could anyone screw this up this bad? I have been dying to read this story for years now- a book that fills in the gaps in one of the greatest film series of all times. And it blows it. I can't see it getting better from here.

Don't let this author anywhere near any Godfather prequels.

Anyone expecting this book to be anywhere near Puzo quality was bound to be disappointed. But for the few of us who realized the limitations of an author who isn't Mario Puzo, writing a spinoff of the Godfather, we can appreciate the book for what it is, a nice little side story that fills in a few gaps, builds a few more, but is ultimately satisfying, IMO.

I don't think it's the fact that anyone expected Winegardner to equal Puzo's writing style for the novel. It's the fact that he felt, for whatever reason, that he could change things that were already established in the movies (which are canon because Mario Puzo assisted Coppola in writing the scripts).

The way that Winegardner wrote GFR would be like someone writing a Star Wars novel and having Emperor Palpatine be Luke's father instead of Darth Vader; it would completely change the storylines that people are familiar with. This is what happened with GFR and, IMO, the reason why we are so vehemently against it.

I found nothing satisfying about this book. I won't post any spoilers in this thread, but some of the stuff in the book is just plain ridiculous.

I can't speak for anyone except myself, of course,
but if we call something CANON, it must be the original novel only, because it was created by Puso himself. Movies, however good some of them are, cannot be called so because, as you stated correctly above, it was Puso assisting Coppola, not even the reverse! And Coppola felt, for whatever reason, that he could change important things in the canon, and that's why we have so many inconsistensies even in GF2, nothing to be said about GF3.
The most annoing thing in this book is the same thing that Coppola did to some extent in the movies. It's the way they both make characters, created already, change incredibly and act in a way they never could.
If you want them to be different persons, capable of different actions, create such characters and write your own stories about them. But we have enough information about them already to see that some things are absolutely unnatural!
There must be some realism in portraying people. You can't just write what you please about any existing character and get away with it .
And after he said in his interwiew that he wrote the sequel to the book, and the book only, not to movies, it is still more strange to see such things written there that make you doubt, at least, that he read Puso's novel repeatedly and attentively.

But that would be really so interesting, Just Lou!
You may post them in the "Spoiler topic", if you don't want here...

But that would be really so interesting, Just Lou!
You may post them in the "Spoiler topic", if you don't want here... [/b][/quote]They've already been posted in the spoiler topics many times. Just look at two examples like when Tom and Kay went to the movies, or when Hagen took a boat ride with the head of Chicago and his bodyguards. What happened in those scsnes are two examples of things made me shake my head in disbelief. The Fredo stuff was acceptable, but I thought it wasn't necessary. Fredo was stupid and weak. There was no need for this book to make him "confused about himself" too.

**************************************************

"To understand the structural point of failure in this book, one simply needs to compare it with the Star Wars movie series. Lucas had a strategic plan. He wrote at least 9 scripts, released the middle segmentand then went back and released the first segment... ...Many people have written Star Wars books, but the stories only branch off of the 'cannonized' movie releases."

**************************************************

Even some of the stories and themes of the Star Wars novels that are set after "Return of the Jedi" have been contradicted by the new films - for example the character of Boba Fett and his origins - but it is still extremely enjoyable reading about those classic characters and how they have evolved since the end of "Return of the Jedi".

I bought and read this book (titled "The Godfather - The Lost Years" here in Australia) because I've missed the fact that there have been no more Godfather films since Part III, and the fact that having these characters back, even in novel form, is better than no films or book at all.

I loved reading anything to do with Peter Clemenza, Tom Hagen, Michael and Al Neri. Just like my love of Star Wars - Having further stories does nothing to harm the original films (whether you like or hate the book) because it is a different format.

I will always view Star Wars as Episodes 1 to 6 as the definitive Star Wars story but I do love reading other authors interpretations of what has happened since the finish of the last 'Star Wars' film - which is why I loved the new book.

Though I would have preferred to have some other parts of the Corleone history covered (more about Frankie Five Angels for example) I was still happy with what has been done with the story.

True, but your example is flawed. In the orignal movies, Boba Fett's origins were never explained so when one of the novels explained it, it wasn't canon and was later contradicted by Episode II.

The contradictions in GFR would be like already having episode II out and then having a novel that changes Boba Fett's origins completely.