In Defense of an Unrecognized Classic: I <3 GF3

So this is a definite Opinion Piece. Many wont agree with my interpretation of the storylines. Many will refuse my opinions. What ever. It is though, long & a little rambly. Consider yourself warned.

IN DEFENSE OF AN OVERLOOKED CLASSIC

"The price you pay for the life you choose"

"From this day on, call yourself Vincent Corleone"

Foxtel has just finished showing the Godfather Part III, the culmination of a three week
advertising spiel that saw the classic films being shown every Saturday night for three
weeks in a row. Incidentally, these last three Saturday nights in a row have seen me stay
home. And once more after watching the final installment, I have something to say to all.
I love GF3. Love it. Seroiusly, if im drunk enough, certain scenes can make me cry.
Reckon 3 is a piece 'a shit, eh? Bugger you sideways. GF3 is awesome.

We can expound all we want on how overblown the script was, how elementary the plot,
and as always, bash on poor Sophia Coppola. The thing is though, 3 cops the most of its
shit by being held up against 1 & 2. No doubt it's the weakest of the three by far, but
the first two are literal materpieces of the genre! Shit, of the film medium!

Now this is 26 years after them; things change. It cant be the same. It's the epilogue to
the Corleone Family saga, and sadly, things dont always end they way the we'd like.
That being said, its still better than 90% of films ever made. The acting chops are
well present & abundant, Pacino, Shire, Garcia & so many other unsung masters. Great
cinematography, & locations, a true work of art. There's a reason it was nominated for a
bunch of Oscars. But because it has to cap off what was such an enticing story until
then, & does it on such a definite downer, shoving the consequences of Michaels life of
crime in our faces, people say, "thats shit". Well, they're shit. GF3 rules.

Sure number 3 has its faults & sure they're many compared to 1 & 2, but is it not the
natural progression? Why cant it be a little over the top & pretentious? Why cant
Michael Corleone conduct shady business with the Vatican & international conglomerates?
Why not a helicopter hit on the entire Comission at the same time?

He's not dealing with the likes of Pentangeli & the Rosato brothers anymore, no more
Hyman Roth & Johhny Ola's, no Vincent "The Turk' Sollozzo.
These are millionare's with a Gotti attitude gangsters.
I think that Joe Mantegna did a great job of the celebrity gangster, the foppish, cocksure
, sleazy mobster with a ruthless streak, & infact prefer a "new" face like Joey ZaZa's
as opposed to Willie Cicci or some other old hand portraying the new threat.
Also, it's a movie (quite the movie); Michaels business is on a much higher level these
days; consequently, so are his threats. Duh. Let it be over the top. GF3 rules.

What do i mean about it being the natural progression? Part I saw the twilight of the
great Don Vito, the tragic events that led to Michael being forced to step up as the
Godfather, he has to, ofcourse, to "protect his family".

2 saw Don Michael, now firmly confident in his birthright, moving up onto bigger &
better things, but still being dogged by the family history. But Michael, ever his
fathers son, manage's to again settle all accounts & tie of all loose ends, consolidating his
power & influence to make that leap into another kind of respectablity. But still, his
underworld success does not translate into his personal life, which suffers accordingly
& costs him dearly in so many ways; the loss of his wife, his brotherly guilt. Still,
his power at this stage is (almost) absolute.

And by 3, Don Michael Corleone, now approaching his own twilight, is nearly there,
finally within reach of where he's always been trying to get. But of course, "Just when
he thought he was out, they pull him back in". And Michael is now far removed from the
regular gangsters his enemies once were, stakes are much higher these days, with the
Palermo Families & the Vatican itself entwined in the intrigues.
Luckily of course, Michael is not without his friends & his own power; a staunchly loyal
nephew & inner circle. Good old Al Neri is still there, right alongside Michael, his
most reliable soldier, his own Luca Brasi. His sister Connie, grown into her brothers most
dedicated supporter, the family "glue", who work's in shadows towards Family interests.

After so much betrayal & shifting loyalties Michael prevails, again settling all accounts in
one deft stroke, a crescendo set against the stirring performance of "Cavaleria Rusticania",
some riveting scenes in any case.
But despite it all, despite the victories, a final bullet meant for him hits his
daughter, & from the way the Dons face tranforms during his tortured howl,
the cadaverous, partly insane, finally beaten expression, we learn, along with everyone
else, exactly what was most important in his life.

And finally, we witness the great Don Corleone, now elderly & infirmed, reflecting on it
all; he dies alone, a dog sniffing around his corpse. Was it worth it? Was the life
he chose worth the price? Regardless of how you feel about it, what better way to end the
saga of Michael Corleone & his family? His father died surrounded by loved ones, but
similar choices made by Michael have in the end brought him nothing but pain & loss.
Times had changed, & his birthright became his burden. Arrgh, GF3 frickin' rules.

And though Michael is the primary character, do not the others also fit the progression?
Connie, far removed from a jet-setting party girl, even further from the "spoiled ginny
brat", deciding on her place within the family; beside her brother, off a little to the
behind, of course. She orchestrates Vincent's ascension, the true heir of Sonny,
to the top of the Family. The newest Don Corleone, the one she will have a direct line
with, she knows the Family's reputation will be in good hands. Now that she's a part of
such things, she can hold her head high in the neighbourhood.
Poisoned cannoli? What about it? She's not gonna walk up & stab the guy for chrissakes!
She's a lady... that's what lady's do. Them being a lady is what makes it all right for
them to use poison. Lucrezia Borgia, y'know? She still did her part, & did what she had
to.

And Kay...
Decades after marrying into a Sicilian family, after raising Sicilian-American children,
after so many years of eating the food, hearing the language & the loving memories of
the "old country: Miss Kay Adams, after all the bullshit, she's finally there in Sicily,
right alongside Michael. Finally they can make their "peace", brought together by their
children, but then, of course, tragically destroyed by the death of one.
From the look on her face, we can tell how she feels during that magnificent scene;
Michael's pathetic howls, his hysteric tears, they tell her much more then he himself
would ever verbalise to her.

Still... you have to assume the death of their daughter,
by a mafia assasin's bullet no less, that would have been the final straw, the donkey
crippling one. Do we really expect Kay to stick around? After that? Is it any wonder he
die's alone? Kay left him long ago, his son estranged, Vincent & Connie far away in New York
& all his old friends dead...

Where else does Michael have to go in his life story? The son of his father, he reaped
what he sowed. A tragic Anti-Hero, one of modern films most compelling. The Godfather,
Part III, is an unsung classic, a frickin awesome movie.

In My Own Humble Opinion,
Mickey_MeatBalls.

So ive had few. Sue me. GF rules!!

I don't know. I can see some of your points, MMD, but I thought that GF2 completed the storyline. Michael had lost his family and consigned himself to hell in this world and the next. So I thought that GF3 was just unnecessary. The story was finished.

As far as specifics go I didn't buy Connie getting involved as she did or Vincent coming out of nowhere to lead the family.

What time do the bars in Australia open?

Although I agree that GF2 is a great movie (although, IMHO, not as great as its predecessor), if I were Coppola I wouldn't have made it, I'd have stopped after the first one. After having made such a great movie I wouldn't have wanted to risk a sequel tarnishing it, since sequels are almost always inferior to the original. And "The Godfather" tells a complete, self-contained story by itself, it doesn't need a sequel. Coppola was really lucky the second one turned out as well as it did (obviously, his luck ran out with the third).

They dont close is the thing.

Compelling case. However, 2 minor corrections, based upon your own words, above.

1. GF3 is NOT 'unrecognized'.
2. GF3 is NOT 'a classic'.

Even without being compared to GF and GFII, it is at best a very good movie. (Not in my opinion, but that of others on the BB).

Other than that, you're certainly entitled to you humble opinion, with or without a few drinks under your belt.

Well as I'm sure you know FFC was a bit miffed that GF1 wound up (in some circles) being interpreted or understood as a love letter to or romantification of the Mafia and wanted to tell a story that made it virtually impossible for anyone to miss the point that these were bad people. He was also quite interested in showing the bad side of capitalism and used the Mafia as a metaphor. I don't know if he still feels that way now but those were his feelings in the early seventies.

Aha, good sir, thats where you are wrong.

1 - GF3 IS a classic
2 - It IS unrecognized as such.

Hence "unrecognized classic"
Disagree?
Watch the movie again.
Still disagree?
Have some drinks. Watch it again.
Still disagree?
Repeat.

Apple's not a sir, and she certanly ain't any good .


Well, if we keep drinking, even "Going Ape!" becomes a classic .

Man, they really gotta start thinking of prohibition in Australia .

Sorry about that AppleOnYa. I put to much stock in the avatars. I think Turnbull looks like a young Marlon Brando.



Im sure id agree. Erm, if i knew "Going Ape" I gather it's a film of some sort?
Y'know prohibition might work. But then two-bit drug dealers & standover men would make millions selling to a thirsty Australian populace that no longer see's them as "gangsters" but rather colourful characters who flout a ridiculous law, therefore giving them a base of legitimacy with the huge profits that they'd...

sorry. i'll stop now.

Oh, it's a classic 1981 film starring Danny DeVito, Tony Danza and an orangutan.

I think it cost 30 dollars and a large pizza to film .

Again? I've tried watching it about 4 times; can never get past the unrelieved boredom of the first 40 minutes (one time, I actually made it to an hour).



I had to have a few drinks to make it through that 40 minutes.

Then I had a few more and managed to watch the last 40 minutes. Death of Mary admittedly a stunner, extremely well depicted, and even a fitting, tragic conclusion to the life of Michael Corleone.

Still though, no 'classic' in there. Not even an inkling of one.

Oh, and pay no attention to pizzaboy. I'm only 'not good' here on the BB.

You make a compelling case though, and it's nice to see someone have such enthusiasm for a movie...even if I do not agree.

Best,
AppleOnYa

Be nice to me, Apple. I'm the most conservative of all the liberals on this site .

Plus, I was just kidding .

Hmm. Did you try drinking? Oh wait...

Seriously though, thanks for the input. While i know that my "classic" is not neccesarily everybody else's, i appreciate you respecting my opinion, as i respect yours.

In any case...
GF rules! By which I mean all three! GF3 4eva!!!11@!!11!!woot!1!
(runs to hills proclaiming love for a movie universally considered mediocre. with a portable dvd player under one arm, GF BoxSet under the other. cords dragging. oh crap i forgot batteries.)

A 'conservative' liberal. How does that work exactly?? Nevermind, don't bother explaining it. I'll just enjoy the concept.

****
Dear Mickey Meatballs:

The Godfather, as we all know, is a 'Classic'.

What makes The Godfather, Part II a 'Classic', is that even while complementing and advancing the GF story, it still stands on its own as a great film whether compared to GF or not. In some aspects it even surpasses The Godfather. Almost unprecedented for a sequel.

GFIII, while possibly a 'good' movie to many (and a joke to many others), does not hold its own when compared to either GF or GFIII. Otherwise, people wouldn't be compelled to say, 'It's pretty good if you 'DON'T' hold it up to the first two'. And...why shouldn't it be compared to them? Even Coppola has admitted that had he been given more time, it would have been a better film.

But again...wonderful that you are an avid fan of all 3 Godfather films. Just wait until you see 'The GF Saga', complete with deleted scenes...if you haven't already.

Apple

You know, ive seen the deleted scenes all disembodied & disconnected like, but not with them actually rolled into the films. Holy hell, that'll be awesome. I bought one of the first boxsets, i think i may need to update.

I don't think it's available in DVD. You would have to wait until it's shown again on television. And it's been several years since that has happened.

Wow. That really sucks. If you're still waiting there, i dont think i stand a chance in Australia.

Oh man. Now that really blows.

& i got all worked up and everything. i'll have to go lay down & "imaginate" the deleted scenes.

Uhm, that was a poor choice of words . Conseravtive Democrat is what I meant .

No, it wasn't a poor choice of words. Political ideology (or one's adherence to it)can be measured on a continuum (just like almost anything can). It's a normative description of where you see yourself fitting on that continuum.

The progression from the "olive oil business" to the casino business to international Immobiliare seemed logical over the three shows. But I think Part 3 suffered from the fact it was done too long after the first two.

I disagree. It was highly anticipated and a dream come true for GF fans who wondered what might have become of Michael in the years after that haunting final closeup of GFII.

What hurt it were the choices that were made in writing it. And...the absence of Robert Duvall.

And Sophia's acting.

Duvall's absence did more to hurt the film than anything else, including Sophia's acting. I mean, Sophia Coppola was a spoiled 19 year old Italian American girl, playing a spoiled 20 something Italian American girl. Not much of a stretch.

True, but listening to hours of her incessant whining in that nasally voice was still grating. And I didn't even mention her dull expression.

Yeah, you'd think Mary grew up on the East Coast (although this is never really verified), so where did the valley girl accent come from?

There's no single character we really care about.
Michael has become a manager of a big company ("We need more lawyers.") We know already that he has destroyed his life and hopes. Who cares about the Immobiliare deals or whether or not he can fix his broken relationship to his kids and exwife?
Vincent is too simple minded to be a protagonist. He's a supporting character, but even Sonny's shoes are too big for him.
Sophia - even more naive than Fredo or young Kay.
Anthony - good singer, so what!


No hero, no real protagonist. Just a gangster movie.

Anyway, thank you Mickey for your thoughts and for stirring up the conversation about GF3.

The real difference between III and the first two is
that all the characters in III are two dimensional. In the others you look at Vito, Sonny, Barzini, CLemenza, Sol,
Tom, Michael even bit players like Woltz....and they are all larger than life.

Same thing in II. Geary, Pentangeli, Roth, ..Tom and Michael again.. and bit players like Cicci and Ola....great actors you can feel them.

In III everyone is either a parody of himself or herself, or two dimensional. A has been Fontaine brings nothing. Hagen's priest son?? Why is he even in it? Terrible reprise for Enzo the baker....Altobello's performance will forever be a stain on Wallach's career. I could go on but what for?

In a perverse way GFIII was perfect. It reflected the world of the 80s and projected the way the characters might have become. GF was very romanticized, and GFII was a slap-in-the-face reality check. GFIII was a very real, reality check. Think of Sopranos and you have GFIII; pyschological dissection, self-centered gratification, the "me" generation with money and egos to burn. It wasn't a fun movie. It showed us how f'd up the Corleones had become.......like the Gotti's had become.

That's interesting because I think Godfather III and The Sopranos couldn't be more different. In Godfather III you had Michael Corleone paying out $600 million like it was nothing to the Vatican Bank to take majority control of an international real estate company. You had intrigue that reached all the way up to the Pope, a helicopter attack that wiped out the whole Commission, etc. In The Sopranos you have a mob family in North Jersey involved in local rackets like bookmaking, card games, loansharking, extortion, stock fraud, truck hijacking, and construction kickbacks. Godfather III was much like the first two as far as being very romanticized and larger than life. The Sopranos was more like Goodfellas, down and dirty and more realistic.

Good point, and maybe that was part of the problem w/ GFIII - FFC overreached in extending the Corleone Family scope & influence. From NYC to Nevada is one thing but Italy & the Vatican? I suppose it was part of the 'full cycle' aspect, his father having been born there...but maybe a bit much with all the 'personal' family stuff going on. And not enough time to really develop the story.

Apple

Well at least when the Godfather franchise jumped th shark the Corleones didn't go to Hawaii.

I don't think that the size of the Corleone empire is really important in whether or not GFIII is a good film.
In GFII the Corleones were an absurdly big enterprise. Even in GF Vito had enormous powers in almost any branch of the US society.
GF3 could have been great. The pope, Michael's family, Sicily, old man Michael, new Mafia Dons, etc.
But they messed it up from the start. In defense of the actors: The script was lousy, I think they just didn't know what to do about it.

Yes, well, fourth Saturday in a row ive decided to stay home, & why not?
What am i gonna do? Y'know, i worked from from midnight to 10am today, got home, showered had a feed and thought, hmmm. Why not? My girlfriend started groaning & walked away rolling her eyes. She's decided to go to her sister's linen party after all. Sweet.

You know, you guys had me pretty shaken for a bit. Were my beer-gog's really on that tight? i thought, and Do i really just have a drinking problem? and such. Anyway, why not? At about 2pm i put on One. This time, no devil brew. Maybe some smokables. Cough.

One, just awesome, from wedding to closing doors. I basically cannot respect a persons opinion if they do not at least appreciate the Godfather's quality.

Two. Of course. Two. Two. Apple's quote was very succint:
And 3...
Sorry. I still <3 it. Sure, its all a little unnessecary, and the fact that it takes itself so seriously now, so much more pretentious than the quiet dignity of the first & dark progression of the second, that could be off putting, if you were not comfortable with your gangsters being so lofty & Shakesperian.

But i love the first 40 minutes. Is something wrong with me?
Really. I still hold that larger then life was the natural progression.
Why not ear-biting & helicoptors? Father/son assasins and poison canolli's? Surprisingly enough, stone sober i still enjoyed it. I at least didn't cry this time.


I disagree, my man. Respectfully, of course. After all these years, finally, finally, in his mind at least, Michael is going to rise above his "mafia hood" roots, he's finally making the transition he's always wanted, into "legitimacy". But of course it's all gonna blow up in his face. He's killed too many times, made too many enemies. Its a fitting post-script, a "whatever happened to".
As you could probably imagine, i like Vincent. The illegitimate son of Sonny & the broad he was doin' at his sisters wedding. His Dad all over.
A natural hood, he wants nothing more then to live up to the legendary reputation of his father & grandfather. He's been slugging away, sticking to the rackets. Michael offered him real work; he turned it down. He needs to live the life. Finally, after all the time spent in the background, his Uncle Mike is taking notice of him.
And with Connie, i dont see her as getting involved with the "mafia" as such, but rather involved in working to support her blood nephew. In no small way did she push for Vincent to be accepted.
So, um, hence a poison canolli. Cough.


Totally.


Good point. But i dont think it suffered all that much, as it really served to seperate from the "old days", which were long gone. New times, higher stakes.

Really, i love it because it ended the saga of Michael Corleone. These three films contain the life story of this man. From "birth", to an old man's death

I should point out at this time that i also regard the first (last, whatever, Eps.4, 5 & 6) Star Wars Trilogy, Bad Lieutenant (the '92 Harvey Keitel one) Natural Born Killers & Big Trouble in Little China, for example, as classics. (serious. stop laughing. i said stop it )

Now GF1 & 2 are for me up there with Raging Bull, A Clockwork Orange, The Usual Suspects & Chinatown (though that does NOT make it allright to get young girls drunk & sodomize them. Asshole Polanski. They should've sodomized him. Let him get drunk first. Asshole.)

Sorry about that.

Anyway, GF3? Somewhere in between those two groups for me. Not the worlds greatest movie, but leaps & bounds beyond the average fare.

Thank you, ladies & gents, for your arguments. I have to go now. My girlfriend brought home some Mezcal. Mmmm. Scorpion. Crunchy

Wow. Way to kill the thread Mickey.
Anyway, i know i meant to say "from Bonasera's meeting to closed doors" & most of you are probably disgusted, but the fact is it had been about 10 or 11 hours earlier & things slip your mind when you go without sleep. Shut up.
Still... i am embarrassed.

True, true, Sophia Coppola was a poor choice & a weak point amongst an otherwise strong cast, BUT... let go of that & dont see her as a bad actor, but rather as a badly naive & awkward teen. Thats why she's so earnest, so wide eyed & stitled, she's learning how "big" the world is, she's in love with her cousin & finding out about her father & his world, and it all scare's & arrouses her a little, leaves her a little awed & lost for words, a little stiff & stilted around her family.

Alright, i know that's ridiculous. Sorry. Luckily Pacino is good enough for the both of them.

My friend, I must disagree. I care about the characters. Im happy to see what's happened to Michael, nearly 30 years later. It his "almost" redemption. I like Vincent. Sure, he's got much to learn, but you could imagine him growing in to a more serious role. Sophia is definitely ridiculously naive, which does a little for my pardoning some bad acting (read above) And as for Anthony, well singing is pretty far removed from his father's business yeah? Which is what Anthony wants at his father's chagrin, innit? And of course, it sets up the crescendo at the end, with Anthony onstage singin Opera while all these murderous plots unfold.

Aha. Good points. While i agree that many characters are more like carictures, i can see that as an extension of what Michaels world has become. Fontaine is a has-been, but after all these years, he's still showing his support for the family. As far as Hagen's son, it shows us that even though Tom is long dead, Michael & the Corleone's are still a very big part in the lives of hid children.

I agree & i dont agree. I shall expound below.

They did fall a little short of what he seems to be aiming for, but not by all that much. Of course its pretentious, Michael & his cronies standing in the shadows..."this Pope has powerful friends. We may not be able to save him..." Of course its ridiculous. Now the first bunch of times i watched that, i would roll my eyes (like i would at other parts of the script) & wish they'd either left it out or worded it better. Over time though, the overly-serious-bordering-on-cheesy script came to seem fitting to the circumstances. Michael definitly falls short of the quiet eloquence & wisdom his father's speech but he definitly tries.

I thought nearly 3 hours was ample time; and in a way it left plenty to be resolved & explored in a GFIV. (yeah, i said it)

I do love this movie. I have to admit it has many faults, but it outshines many others in most regards.

Anyway,

Wooo. That Mezcal some nasty stuff. I cant even smell it now without dry-retching. Scorpion. (shudder)

Well, after reading about your love for GF 3, I was going to ask what drugs you were taking, but now I know. Thanks for sharing .

Are you counting George Hamilton among that otherwise strong cast?


I'm afraid he is not...if he were, we not continue be so focused on HER casting & performance all these years later.







Whereas in GF and (especially) GFII one can find something new to enjoy and appreciate with almost every viewing...

If you needed to watch the movie a 'bunch of times' before ceasing to roll your eyes & finding some kind of explanation for the pretentious, ridiculous, bordering-on-cheesy script, then that's a problem right there.

Again, while your unshakable love and increasingly enthusiastic defense of GFIII (with or without the Mezcal) continues to be admirable, and while it is certainly not the 'worst' move ever made (that would be 'Titanic')...

For all the reasons you mention above, this film can NOT be defined as a 'classic'.

Apple

Actually, as I've said before, I think Titanic is an excellent movie, even with it's flaws. It's not on the AFI's list (second edition) of 100 best American movies for nothing (Titanic is #83 on the list).

I personally don't mind GF3. Like many have stated numerous times, it's nothing in comparison to the first two classics, But I don't think it deserves the hate it gets. But I must say, that diabetic stroke scene where he's falling all over the place screaming about the thunder outside...man that scene makes me cringe!!

Well, I think it starts even earlier. The scene where Michael, Anthony and Kay discuss their relationship and Anthony's future is like a soap opera scene - a long, empty discussion. In GF, every single sentence is meaningful and causes an effect.
GF3 pretends to be meaningful.

Danito, regardless of its length, it's not empty. Many of us wondered about Mike's relationship with his children once they were old enough to understand who and what he was and how he attempted to estrange them from their mother. In that scene we learned the answer regarding Anthony.

The only thing I didn't like about the scene is when a petulant Anthony tells Michael "No" to the idea of law school.
Kate then says something to the effect that the "No" was something that would have come out of Michael's mouth when he was that age. In fact when Michael said NO to his father's entreaties to come and work for him, he didn't need his mommie
there to intercede.

DT, Kay's reference to No ("Well, that he got from you. That "no.")
was from GFI when she asked Michael if Connie's statement's about Carlo were true and Michael said No.

We may have learned the answer, but Danito hit the nail on the head. It pretends to be meaningful.

Much of the movie, if it doesn't actually pretend, tries too hard to be meaningful. Sometimes with very tedious, tounge-in-cheek and throwaway dialogue that is nothing more than that 'wink & nod' to fans of the original two.

Apple

I don't think so. The "No." To which you refer was a blatant lie. The "No." Anthony says is in defiance of his father, just as Michael defied his father.

Empty is the wrong word. I mean, it's bad writing in terms of efficiency. In GF and GF2 FFC and Puzo gave them less words and trusted in their acting.
Here it's badabeep-badabaap-badaboop.

Michael: Oh, God - You hate me, you hate me.
Kay: No, I don’t hate you. I dread you.
Michael: I did what I could Kay.

or
Michael: Every family has bad memories.
Anthony: I will always be your son. But I will never have anything to do with your business.
Michael: Anthony, finish the Law degree.
Anthony: No.

Sounds like a Dynasty-soap dialogues to me. Not that there's no information in it. But they tell us everything, even what we see.

I fight a losing battle.

I still however maintain, that whatever it's (many) faults, its a film much better then the majority. Its in both a class above & a class below, if you know what i mean.

Agreed Apple. That whole line from Neri "he's waiting in the lobby". I was like, "really????" Can we use a new phrase FCC?

Watching the GF 1 outakes, is seems that Jack Woltz was the original "Polanski"...

But what's the point of making such a character (who is ridiculously stupid and naive besides) _the_ central sacrifice in a tragedy? Sophia here or there, the character as written just wasn't compelling, her death wasn't much of a loss to the viewer. Not to mention that her story is just halfheartedly cribbed from Tony Montana's sister in Scarface. Meh.
Conflict over Anthony's career and interaction with Kay is also really absurd and vapid.
Vincent is a completely unbelievable, cardboard character who comes from nowhere.
Michael's failed redemption? What redemption? He didn't even try, he was just foolish and wishy-washy.

And yet it was not because the themes were uninteresting - on the contrary, there was so much (wasted) dramatic potential in the exploration of interaction of normal, decent people with a beloved person, who is, well, a monster. How does one cope? How do you call them to account? How does one deal with all that dark heritage, without succumbing to it? Etc.

Michael's Moses complex and view of himself as a victim of circumstances would have also been fascinating to explore, particularly if he had a real emotional connection to his criminal apprentice and sense of failure re: not being able to steer him towards respectability.

In fact, it would have been nice to see some evidence that Michael had indeed been a "good man" once. The theme of GF1 is supposed to be his fall from grace, but there is little indication that he ever had it in the first place.

Criminal plot also doesn't hang together at all, IMHO, and it's resolution made zero sense.

Nor do I see the need to have Michael "slipping", like Vito supposedly was.
Michael was clever and deadly in the previous installments, yes, but he was also lucky.
IMHO, it would have been much more powerful if in GF3 he was more cunning and subtle than ever, and almost won, but in the end luck simply wasn't with him this time.

Michael's death was also completely OoT, IMHO. He wasn't a kind of person to vegetate in despair for decades and in Sicily, of all places.
If he had been really completely shattered by the events, he would have killed himself, IMHO.

Nah, I can't agree that the film was even good. Without established iconic figures and public's emotional attachment to them, it would have been deservedly considered mediocre and forgotten by now.

I never had the stomach to sit through the end of II, much less enjoy it. For that reason, I ended up preferring III as the definitive ending to the series itself. For me it would be I, III, II in that order.

I enjoy flawed sequels that are still pretty good, even when they aren't as great as the originals or the first sequel...Godfather III, Terminator 3 and Salvation, Prometheus...

I always enjoy an opportunity to delve back into a familiar world and revisit characters that I enjoy watching. GF3 is no different. The first time I watched the trilogy, I cried my eyes out after III ended. It probably had the biggest impact on me and made me go back to watch the first 2 movies again since III was the one that brought it home for me.

If I am a father and GF 1 and 2 are my perfect, straight-A kids, GF3 is my reject kid, close to failing out of school, and it gets more of my attention and affection, that it probably deserves.

The biggest flaw in the Mary character was a combination of bad writing, nepotism and poor acting. The bottom line is the movie fails when Mary is killed because the viewers never felt all that much affection for her.

The character was a shallow, spoiled and temperamental daughter. We clearly see how much Michael loved her, but it is not possible to believe Vincent fell for her as hard as he did, and when she died we did not share the pain of her family and of Vincent.

I've never agreed with characterizations of Mary as yours. She played the part that was written for her and from my experience typifies what a young woman on the brink of adulthood would be like in many instances. We don't see or hear enough of her to know if she was shallow or not, I don't see or hear any instances of her spoiling, and who among us is not tempermental (if you stated that as an indictment of her). As uncomfortable as the potentially incestuous relationship between her and Vincent is, I can see Vincent falling for her if only that she is the scion of one of the most powerful men in the world (as hard as he did is, of course, subjective).

I totally agree. The failure of the Mary character to seem real lessened the drama and the impact of her killing.

As I've posted before, when I saw GFIII in the theatres, by the end of the movie people were laughing out loud whenever Sofia delivered a line. Sort of spoiled the mood.

Let me start off by saying that i know GF3 is not as good as the first 2.

In saying that....

I still like it. I find it completed the trilogy very nicely. I know alot of people bag on George Hamilton, but let's be honest, he's barely in the movie. I can think of two scenes he's in, that's it. I'm not touching Sophia, because that horse has been beaten to death. Without the third we wouldn't have gotten the wonder performance by Andy Garcia. Vincent Mancini was a great character, full of passion and aggression. I love the scene where Michael transfers power over to Vinny.

I agree. III was good enough, especially the final scenes. As I've posted before, the silent scream and Michael's death alone and unloved is the ultimate pathos.

There's not much that can be done, except for FFC to re-edit the film. I'm sure he can make a better film of it if he really wants to.

But whether you like it or not, Part III is a reality and part of the storyline.

The script was definitely lousy.

The silent scream n GF3 gets me every time. The last five minutes of the film is a perfect ending to the trilogy.

For me GF 3 is not a classic,but a good film and ending to the saga and i can look past the poor script and average acting because it's the GF, i just wished Puzo and Coppollo would have spent more time writing the script before making the film..

The silent scream is one of the most profound scenes in cinematic history. It subsumes all the pathos of human tragedy, of the paths taken and not taken, and the subordination of morality. For the Trilogy fan, it seemed almost inevitable.

The scene where Mary goes NO is one of the worst acted scenes i have ever seen.

Is that where she runs of sulking as Michael told her to end her relationship with Vincent.. That was pretty bad.

With all the revelations about the corruption of the Roman Catholic Curia and the Vatican Bank going on these days, the plotline of GFIII is especially salient and prescient. I have ragged on this film as much as anyone, but the performances by Andy Garcia, and the guy who played the Archbishop are really very good.

The silent scream, the soliloquy at Dontomassino's coffin, the transfer of power, the scene with Andy Garcia and Bridgette Fonda in his apartment and a few others are excellent.

I am going to take a vacation from complaining about Sofia Coppola. She has turned out to be a first rate director in her own right. She was thrown into the Mary role by her father when Wynona Ryder who was supposed to play the role got sick and couldn't do it. What was Sofia supposed to do?

It was horrible, and you would think that since her father said no is such a badass way she would do it to.

One think the reason i really dont like part 3 is because in part 1 and part 2 you see Michael become a colder and colder gangster reaching its highest point at the end of part 2 when he kills his brother. When i first went into part 3 i was hoping to see a continuation of his evil that would bring his final downfall , Instead we got a Michael that wanted forgiveness and out of the gangster life. That is not what i was expecting and not WHAT I WANTED!

I'm sure Coppola could edit Part III into a much better movie, leaving out the love scenes between Vincent and Mary. Ofcourse Sofia Coppola cannot be blamed for her 'dramatic' performance. And yes, she is a skillful director.

Personally, this is the part I liked best. I liked the idea of Michael trying to get out and redeem himself in the end, kind of like Darth Vader.

Coppola Should have just paid Duvall the amount he deserved instead of just writing out his character. It would have been better if they had Tom Hagen.

Also i think if they had flashbacks like Godfather 2 of Vito in the 30s (Which i think they were going to do in part 4) it would have been better because we would get to see more of the corleone crime business then in the final version

It wouldn't seem right seeing a young Vito without De Niro, this is why i wouldn't want flashbacks if they made a GF4. In fact i not sure i want a GF4 anymore.

If de niro packed on some weight, altered his speech a little and had a good amount of makeup/ special effects i think he could make an amazing Vito in the 30s. Special effects have gotten to a point where you can make anyone look like anything.

Im not so sure, he's approaching 70, i'm not so sure he would want to do it in anycase..

Michael already had reached the nadir of heartlessness in GFII.

The final scene is very touching, with a flashback to when everything was different/better. It's a great contrast between a young, idealistic Michael surrounded by family and a lonely, cruel Michael in Nevada.

This sets the stage for the regretful Michael of GFIII. Having him be MORE evil would have been sensationalistic and boring.

The only thing that bothered me a little about Michael's character when I first saw GFIII was his playfulness, which I didn't feel was ever shown, even in the beginning of the Trilogy. This part of Michael's character was later revealed in the deleted scenes with Kay in the hotel.