Instead of all this rambling, extending ideas previously made by rumors of a GF4 stemming from comments made by Andy Garcia et al., Why doesn't everybody try to rewrite GF3? I mean, it really didn't do the first two movies any justice. That's why USA and TNN won't show GF3 with the first two because it just wasn't as good.

Now, I know what I'm saying may sound sacrilege to many of you, but when you look at a movie like 3, you have be pretty pissed about the way things turn out, especially with a movie like Goodfellas coming out in the same year.

I liked GF3, but there's too many loose ends in it. Why follow up one not-as-great film with another, then offer up the possibility of a GFV, GfVI, etc. so we become Star Wars?

I agree with the "loose ends" part, but that's precisely why there should be a GF IV! I confess I like the other 2 better also, but GF III was different because it was a different kind of theme. The first 2 were about vendettas and power, while GF III was about redemption and making amends. And Michael's end -- Mary's dying -- was, although tragic, poetic justice (at least from a theological perspective).

Why don't we just write both? My GF4 would clear up loose ends between 1927 and 1944, and from 1955-1957, and a new era from 1960-1975. Then once we have those eras out of the way, we can continue with Vincent in the 80's

We can't re-write the whole Gf3 script but we can change it to fit our expectations. let's take Jgeoff's GF3 transcript, and change soem thigns.

For Instnace, A LITTLE backgroud on the Dons at the ATLantic City meeting. Lou Penning, Frank Romano, Leo Cuneo, Marty Perisi, and ALbert Volpe. I know they're nameless in the movie, but they shouldn't be.

Cuneo could have taken over his father's family, and avenged his father's death by killing Willi Cicci. the name Volpe comes from the Pennsylvania Mafia. Perhaps he is ALbert Bruno who died in 1980. A little background on Joey Zasa, and Vincent mancini post-1970. How is Don Altobello a family freind? WHat happened tothe Corleone/hagen/Rizzi children? Where did Luchesi come form? We could have a background plot, where Altobello was ent to AMerica 20 years before by Luchesi. And that Luchsi was a Barzini allie. Hegave Fabrizzio the order to kill Mike in 1950. He is Tommasino's rival. Mosca is his Capo Reime,etc. WHatever happened to the Pentangelli Family? No children?

Hello everyone. I have been coming here for many years, but its the first time I'm posting her, so I hope my comments here will be seen openly minded and won't be taken aback because of it being my first post. I intended some time later to open a similar thread, but after seeing this topic and especially after reading Ricardo's post below, I though I could continue as well..

I completely agree. Over the years, I personally (and many others I understand) have noticed most people's dislikeness, or rather unease with the third part of the Corleone trilogy. THE GODFATHER was an epic masterpiece of Shakespearen porpotions, portraying the tranformation of Michael from a naive, soft and innocent American citizen to a brutal, merciless, vengefull and powerhungry Don, showing also Vito's persistance on keeping the Family business clean from any dangerous involvement (ie drugs), resulting to the aforementioned transformation, and when coming back to his senses, understands the vanity of things and accepts his son's fate. The film was as good as it was due to Francis Ford Coppola's persistance to tell a good story based on a great novel (and wisely not showing Jonny Fontane's and Lucy Mancini's backstories), with a brilliant cast (glorious and undeniably all-time-classic Marlon Brando, delightfull James Caan, scene-stealing Robert Duvall, sweet Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Richard Conte, Abe Vigoda, Al Lettieri and at the top of the cake, flawless Al Pacino in possibly the role of his life) that the studio felt was innapropriate (particularly with Pacino) and the best crew possible (Gordon Willis as the cinematographer, Dean Tavoularis with the production design, Nino Rota and his father Carmine as the composers, and a number of others..). The film is brilliant, as it examines the life of mafia in way that is very parallel to the situations and events of the time. In the end, all of Coppola's decisions were on the money, and the producers a couple years later offered him a sequel. THE GODFATHER PART II was also an epic masterpiece, with the same crew and most of the cast back for more. What this second film succeeded, is unbelieveable. It expanded and deepened its original like no other sequel before it (ever since, there a few instances of a good sequel, but this one will always remain THE great one), by chronicling the family storyline both before and after the original film, providing excellent background for the original film by showing Vito's begginings and also showing Michael's further corruption of power and his extended cold-like approach that uses upon all things (which he will regreat in PART III as you know). The cast again was brilliant (Actor's Studio legend Lee Strasberg, brilliant John Cazale, bitter Diane Keaton, bitch angry Talia Shire, scene-stealer Robert Duvall (yet again), Robert De Niro brilliantly portraying Brando's legendary character adding to it a great deal of character personification, and of course Al Pacino in his best ever performance in the trilogy, and perhaps his entire career) as well as all crew-related aspects of the film. It is also more ambitious, with a larger scope than the last one and at times too dark and moody. Yet the film succeeds not only because it tells a back-to-back parallel story (which I think is One of the reason it received an Academy Award), but because it bonded with the original movie, so strongly, that it almost feels like an extension of the original movie rather than a sequel, and I think I understand why FFC did that, and why he wanted the third Godfather to NOT be called PART III. The way I see it, and probably the way Coppola sees it, as I recently discovered on the DVD (I am a relatively new fan), the first two Godfathers are essentially ONE film, telling one single story, which is Michael Corleone's transformation from a good to an evil man and the consequences that come from choosing a certain destiny, while THE GODFATHER PART III (originally called THE DEATH OF MICHAEL CORLEONE, a much better title than PART III, although not the best) is merely an epilogue, the final chapter to a story already told, the rise of Michael Corleone, the Godfather.

TEH GODFATHER PART III is not a bad film though, not in any case. In fact, its downright brilliant, with a cunning cast (reconsiled Diane Keaton, matriarch Talia Shire, scene-stealer Eli Wallach, cool Joe Mategna, captivating Donal Donelly, satisfying Franc D'Ambrosio, mediocre Sofia Coppola, useless Bridget Fonda, garbege George Hamilton, brilliantly multi-layered Andy Garcia and of course, Al Pacino as the older, regretfull Don, in another captivating and downright ecellent performance), great production values and a storyline that is decidedly different from the other two, simply because the story here is Michael's unsuccessfull attempts to "buy" his redemption and to clear his Family from all criminal past, ties and current involvement, again unsuccessfully. It was a more personal dramatic movie than the other two, and it shows. But, for all the film's goods (which include FFC's excellent direction, proving that his amazing vision and imagery as a director is the one thing, among others, that truly remained the same in all three films), it still had problems, and most of them refer to its script, which is the weakest of the Godfather films (the weakest, which means "GREAT", but not "Godfather GREAT") and some questionable casting choices..

Specifically, the reasons for the drop of quality from the previous flicks are numerous, and they all most contribute to the fact that the film was simply made in very tight circumstances (won't say rushed, though I would say sloppiness. First and of more important factor to the film's uncomfort is the absence of Robert Duvall, who actually may not be in the same league of great actors like Pacino, Brando or DeNiro, he certainly brought alot of charm, familiarity, continuity and delight to the previous two pictures (less though in the second). Second factor could be the unfortunate situations that prevented quite a number of actors (who could possibly be better for the main roles) to be cast, like Julia Roberts (Coppola's top choice) and Winona Rider (exhaustion) for the role of Mary, Chazz Palminteri for the role of Joey Zaza, a number of actors (including Alec Baldwin, Nicola Cage, Val Kilmer etc.) for the role of Vincent Mancini and a few more. Add to that the death of the Willie Chichi actor and you get a porton of the script out. Third, Coppola was stripped of 6 months of shooting, and rushed production to finish the film for a December release. That actually shows that both Coppola and Puzo had little time to work on positive improvements and and worked hard to produce a quality picture from the material and time he had.

Anyway, given that the above flaws kept the film from becoming as great as the previous Godfathers, the film STILL did amazingly well given the circumstances. Could have been better, BUT not like the other two parts. Simply because it was a new story, not continuing from the second because both first two parts had a similar style and moodiness that was largely absent from the third film because the third film was intended to be darker, broodier and far more melancholic, as Michael questions his judgement over the years.

So, I suggest we try and collaboratively re-write THE GODFATHER PART III by inserting lost plot scenerys and characters that we would like to have seen in the film. NOT change the film utterly, but rather modify it to our expectations. I suppose one thing all would like to add is Tom Hagen.

Anyways, I think we could actually create a "game" out of it, where every and any member of this board (and I mean any) can post their ideas on how the existing THE GODFATHER PART III could be improved. With a few steps and a couple of nots, we can have a great script...

First step I suggest to be suggest characters and plot points that you would want to have seen in the film.
Second step suggest to be change the title of the film from THE GODFATHER PART III to a title that accomodates its main theme (ala THE DEATH OF MICHAEL CORLEONE), so we keep it clear that the film is not the third part of the same story, just the third film with the Corleones.
And the third and most important step, is to have someone re-write the script, with JGeoff's THE GODFATHER PART III TRANSCRIPT as the basis of the re-write.

Remember, you cannot:
1) change the Vatican-Immobiliaire storyline (but you flesh it out better)
2) change Anthony's profession (otherwise why woulkd they go to the opera house?)
3) change the Mary-Vincent love storyline (Coppola was very persistant on this, but you could find ways to expand it and improve it, and possibly end their relationship in another way)
4) the treachery of the family that lead to the Atlandic City hit and Michael's stroke
5) delete scenes that are PIVOTAL to the storyline and
6) be a jerk


Wow, now that was a long writing. I am very, very sorry if I bored you, or tired you, but I though we could have some fun with the re-write, and also, improve on the material that exists and realize the film's enormous potential. Afterall, Coppola was able to work out a great film with a relatively weaker script (note that it is not weak, but flawed) from the other corleone scripts, so you know that the ideas could've been realized in another reality.

I hope we can begin this "game" soon, and I will post my suggestions shortly thereafter.

Hope you have fun.

See ya...

I wonder this ALL THE TIME! I wish they would just say "Sorry pretend 3 didn't exist, here's the new version." That way they could recoop their mistakes, include Duvall, take away Sofia, and all would be healed. I guess it's not realistic, but I sure wish they woul anyway.

As fun and redeaming that would be,3 was already released.Once something is released,thats it,you dont get to rewrite it,or change it in any way. Any rewrite of GF3 would make me love 3 that much more.

Yeah, I think you have to take the attitude of "what's done is done." Part of the fun on punching around the ideas of putting together a GF IV (and V) script is, how can you write such a script to patch up some of the script holes left in GF I, II and III, and also move the saga forward??

Of course, III left the greatest number of plot holes. But there were a few from I and II, too:

I) We get told several times in GF I that Genco was a great consigliere? Was he, and why? What happened in the 1936-37 war that Clemenza talked about??

II) Where did Hyman Roth and Frankie Pentangeli come from? They are introduced and everybody goes to great lengths to say they had long, long histories with Vito, but how come we never saw them before?? Why wasn't Pentangeli at Connie's wedding? You think a wine-drinking guy like Frankie would miss a bash like that??
Back in Sicily in 1903, obviously there was bad blood between Antonio Andolini and Don Ciccio. Where did that come from?

III) Vincent, Sonny's illegitimate son, comes out of nowhere and wants a role in the family. Sonny had two legitimate sons, and Connie had two sons - what happened to them? Why didn't they demand a role in the family too??
And, what really happened to Tom Hagen?

=======================

Anyway, those are just for starters. To me, the fun is writing a GF IV script that goes back and answers some of these questions. You don't have to -- in fact, you can't -- go back and erase what was in the other movies. You have to work around it and figure out the answers - connect the dots.

That's what I'm trying to do in my GF IV plotlines - explain how the Corleone family came to power in the 1920s and 30s, how Sonny made his bones, how Vito interacted with Hyman Roth and a young Moe Greene; then in the 1980s, explain what had happened to Santino Jr. and Michael (Rizzi) Corleone, and explain how they would also want a piece of the empire controlled by Vincent...

and in my fragmentary GF V script - we go back to Sicily in the 1890s and see how the blood feud between Don Ciccio and Antonio Andolini started - then we return to the 1990s, when the battle for control of the Corleone empire heats up between Vincent, Santino and Mikey (Rizzi) Corleone -
then we flash back to the early 1970s, and we see both what happened to Tom Hagen, and how the Vito grandchildren Santino and Mikey were set on the path to the family business - and finally we see in 2001-2004, when the deaths of Michael Corleone, Santino Corleone and Connie Corleone push the family into an uncertain new era...

Sure there are parts and scenes in Part III that make fans want to kill themselves, but I think that once the movie evolves, it grabs a hold of you and makes you forget about the bad scenes.

Whenever I watch Part III the earlier scenes always make me cringe.

But then when I am at the opera scene, and the end scene, I totally forget about the earlier ones and I am in love with Part III all over again.

I'm finding with writing my own Part IV script that Vincent isn't that interesting a character - at least what we got of him from Part III. Sure he's got a temper like his old man, but beyond that, there isn't much. I have gotten into the habit of writing him like he's Michael, which I think is the way we saw him at the end of Part III.

But that isn't right.

Making Vincent into an even BETTER character than he was in Part III is the key to any Part IV script that takes place after the events in Part III.

Yeah, also one of the keys to Vincent is that he really has two role models to pattern himself after - Michael, who he actually saw operate as Don, albeit when he was older and to some extent slowed down by his health problems - and the idealized memory of his father, who he knows only through what he has been told by his mother Lucy, his aunt Connie and Michael.

The GF IV plot lines I've worked on feature the return of Santino Jr., who would have actually known his father, even for only a few years, while he was still alive, and would actually have remembered Vito from his childhood years.

Santino Jr., then, would probably more actual memory himself of the characteristics of Sonny and Vito, than Vincent would, which would make it more interesting if he became involved in the family again.
Maybe Santino would work along with Vincent? Would Vincent be willing to accept that? Or would Santino challenge Vincent for control?
It would force Vincent to become a more developed character.

I actually would propose the re-write, or rather re-working of PART III, because I feel the way it is now blocks the creaton of any new stories. I always thought that PART III retitled THE TRAGEDY OF MICHAEL CORLEONE, and having some changes that would accomodate the film better (more Vincent-screentime-development, Tom Hagen, more Luchesi, real reason of Ms. Hamilton's existance), gives the freedom to create a future sequels-prequels without the obligation of using the GODFATHER title of thematic, as the real Godfather tale was in the first two films. After the re-write, I plan on making my own preguel to THE GODFATHER, called THE RISE OF CRIME, showing Vito following Don Ciccio's death and the shaping of his empire till a few years before the first Godfather film. Then, it will be followed by a sequel to THE TRAGEDY OF MICHAEL CORLEONE, called THE FALL OF CRIME, focusing on the modern world and the death of Vito's empire and Francis returning to Sicily to restart his life, exactly 100 years after Vito left it.

As I said, one reason to polish PART III is to have Vincent Mancini be developed better, have his name change and thus be an almost entirely different character, thats serves its purpose to the script in the same manner. TRo iprove on him and enstranghtening his portrayal, sharping a more obvious metamorphosis throughout the film. In fact I suggest we replace him, but not adapt a different character. Just change name and inheritage. So, instead of Sonny's bastard boy, I think that co-protagonist has to be none other than...

Francis Rizzi (Michael cut off because of his hatred towards Michael). His character wouldn't be too different. The point however for this dramatic to say change, is the fact that, like in the actual PART III, he would evolve from a Sonny to a Vito. Garcia once said that Vincent was a combination of all the family members (having Vito's quiteness, Sonny's temper, Fredo's warmth and Michael's methodology) and thus why he was the best to follow Michael as Don. My idea is based on that, although with a small variation.

To my mind, none of Vito's sons were exactly like him. I always though that, even though all the children had chracteristics of their own, each of the male boys had one specific trademark that came from Vito. For instance, Michael inherited his intelligence and resourcefullness, something that is clearly shown in PART II, while Sonny inherited (or rather, took altogether) the anger that Vito was never able to expose, having seen the most effective result of anger exposure (his brother Paolo's death), and Fredo inherited Vito's obvious warmth and decency, something that made him lovable aside from being respected.

Now I believe, that if Michael Francis Rizzi (still played by Andy Garcia) could be used in Vincent Mancini's place, his transformation from a raw animal to the new Don would be more realistic, because being the son of a female Corleone, all of Vito's characteristics (that were each devided to the three boys) could result in Vito's effective re-birth (I know it sounds ridiculous, but hear me out).

At the beggining, he would be a Sonny. Later on the film, he would a Fredo, while loosening his Sonny temper due to many events in the film, would reach his Michael when dealing Luchesi himself, and when he becomes the Don, he eventually is a new Don Vito. I know that thats PART III actually presented us, but with the redux of the script it could be more obvious. Plus, it adds a certain point of irony by showing the son of a traitor (Carlo Rizzi) and of a female Corleone, becoming the new Don instead of Michael's son, who at PART II was an obvious candidate for the place. Plus, Michael is his GODFATHER, as he baptised him in PART I during the ritualistic murders of the Heads of the Five Families, which adds to the thematic of the passing to the new Don (as with Vito in PART II, who, after killing Fanucci, holded Michael on his arms, transmiting an obvious message to the audience).

Here's the idea: Ever since PART II, Michael Francis Rizzi has a fueled hatred towards Michael after learning from his brother Victor that he killed his father. So he joined his brother to the world of crime and became the leader of his own gang at the age of 18. At his 19, his brother Victor is killed in what seems to be an accident , but Francis knows it can't be an accident (later on, it was Zaza, as Victor killed his capo-regime). Michael, decinding that his godson took a very wrong way, advices him to finish school and desolve from crime, but refuses. Francis (he doesn't like to be called Michael as he is reminded of the "monster") is then send to Joey Zaza, with whom he has a good relationship at first. However, an event happens that changes his mind of both Zaza and Michael. He soon learns that his father Carlo betrayed his uncle Sonny to the Barzini family and hit off his mother very often when she was pregnant with him. How? Because he heard Zaza refer of him as a "traitor's son". He specifically heard the true story when Zaza was speaking with Gluello (Don Luchesi's messenger, later to be known) about betraying Michael and calling him a shit. By hearing what he heard (didn't got to know much), his opinion on Michael changed drastically and decides to go to the party to tell Michael. Later on, its more or less the same Vincent, except that he doesn't tell Michael that Zaza sent his people to his apartment. That would make him more appealing in my mind.

Anyways, the above are the most drastical of changes. Of course, I would also expand on Ms Hamilton who would constantly appear as the reporter who handles the story and wants to know what is Michael Corleone up to and eventually, flies in Sicily to find out the truth with the mysterious Immobiliaire. But her story doesn't end here. While she did sleep with Vincent (now Francis) to get more information for the Corleone Family, she actually feels attracted to him and continuously falls for him, and Francis feels attracted to her (doesn't love her like Mary, though) and thus a love triangle is created between them. I do this so in a future Corleone sequel Hamiton could be the wife.

Anyways, these are some of my ideas. I'll watch PART III again and I will come up with a summary of thoughts.

Some good ideas, especially the inclusion of Michael Francis Rizzi into the storyline. And good analysis of the character traits of Vito's sons. Of course, especially with GF III, Connie also should be included in that.

Quite obviously, as the "symbol of innocence" in GF I - the innocent child being baptized as Michael Corleone makes his deadly bid for control of the family empire, and in fact arranges the death of Carlo Rizzi - it is altogether fitting that Michael Francis Rizzi would, some day, rise himself to a key position, and probably have to either challenge or succeed Michael Corleone in the family.

I don't buy, though, that Michael Rizzi would have grown up with seething hatred of Michael Corleone.

Carlo Rizzi was bad news. He betrayed the Corleone family, in fact directly betrayed Sonny and led to his death, and put everyone in the family in mortal danger.

In addition, of course, Carlo flagrantly cheated on Connie and brutally abused her, beating her severely several times when she was in fact pregnant with Michael Francis.

Once Connie got over her intial bitter reaction, she realized very quickly she was way better off with Carlo dead. Younger sisters always idolize their oldest brothers, and if anything, Connie would have seething hatred for Carlo. After Connie realized the truth about what Carlo had done, I doubt she ever shed a tear for him more than about two days after he was dead.

So I doubt very much Connie would have brought Michael Francis and Victor up seething with rage against Michael Corleone. Much more likely, as Connie moved more back into the circle of the family in GF II, Connie would have brought them up with Uncle Michael serving as their surrogate father.

My own opinion is Connie would have wanted Victor and Michael Francis to know as little as posssible about Carlo - she probably would have dropped "Rizzi" from their names and brought them up as Corleones. She was proud of being a Corleone - she would want her sons to be Corleones too.

On the second part of your plotline, I don't think you can recast existing movies and change people's identities.

Like it or not, Andy Garcia is Vincent Mancini-Corleone, Sonny's illegitimate son.

Although the character of Michael Francis Corleone would be an interesting one to bring into the storyline, I can't see "morphing" Garcia into him.

My own idea is to have Johhny Depp play Mikey Corleone.

And then, bring in not only Michael Francis Corleone, but Santino Jr. (Sonny's legitimate heir) and Anthony.

Which grandson would be the truest inheritor of the legacy of Vito Corleone?

Excellent ideas. Thats exactly what I thought about Michael Francis, and thats why I think he should've been PART III's Vincent (meaning co-protagonist, heir). Santino could be in it, but Anthony wants to do a career as singer . What can I do. Besides I think it would be best as he provides the key to an important event: The opera house finale! Though his anger towards Michael and his business while at the aprty could be a little detailed. Anyway..

I agree with you completely with the Rizzi thing. I thought about it today and you were right, so I decided to drop that. However, he would still reject Michael because he doesn't like to be told what to do (like Vito). I think Garcia fits well as Francis, because he is supposed to be a new Vito, and he is quailifed enough to be one. Remember that it would still be filmed in the 90's. Aside from Johnny Depp (excellent choice:)), though, other people I would consider for the part are Matt Dillon (already wroked with Coppola, so familiarity is ensured) and Nicholas Cage (a great actor, nephew to Coppola, and also bears a small familiarity with first two films' Vito), and all three would be at the right age (perhaps Garcia could still be Sonny's boy, only that is Santino Jr..). Connie of course would like to see her son as the head of the family because "he is the only one with my father's strength". Her role in the film remains absolutely the same. Progressively in the film, hMichael Francis' resemblence to Vito will grow stronger and stronger, and thus he will be the ideal choice to be the Don. Santino Jr. could be a traitor to the family, like in Puzo's earlier drafts, supported by Don Altobello and secret partner to Zaza, he would have killed Victor and Zaza would have backed him up. Then Santino Jr. would be hiding in Sicily, quite a while before it is announced that Anthony will be at the opera, and when Michael Francis is guided by Don Luchesi (who as we learn was an orphan that Barzini took under his wing, and he also approached Carlo at the behalf of Don Barzini to betray Sonny), he is ordered to kill Santino Jr. as a test of strength. The amazing thing is, he doesn't. As a true Vito heir, he tried to understand why Santino did what he did, and told him he had to choose between loyalty to his family (=suicide) or power (=death by an "unfortunate accident"). Santino Jr. kills himself, out of guilt for Victor's death and his hatred for Michael (think of something later). Michael hears it AFTER his confession, and mourns about how his family reached to this point (when Tomasino dies, when he mourns over his corpse, he could mention this, something along the lines of "I lost my family, and destroyed everyone around me") and contemplates with Connie.

Anyways, thats my ideas at this moment. I will see THE GODFATHER PART III tommorow or the day after to put here my full story.

You can count Tom Hagen in it . BTW EnzoBaker, how would YOU handle the Hagen-Michael relationship in PART III? I know you are great writer and your did compose a wonderfull GODFATHER PART IV and V, so I am really intrigued to know would you handle it..

What do you think?

Well, my 'embryonic' GF V storyline, includes a flashback to the early 1970s... maybe 5 years before the beginning of GF III. (And also the pre-pre-prequel sequence, in Sicily in the 1890s, and the final epilogue in 2001-2004.)

In my GF IV plotline, I have Santino Jr., estranged from Michael and the rest of the family by decision of his mother, Sandra, who was resolved that Santino would grow up 'legit', turning to the outlaw way of life after a mid-life legal and financial disaster leaves him ruined economically and deserted by his wife and family.

At the urging of Kay, Anthony makes a 180-degree turn, rejects opera singing, goes back to law school, and wants in to his father's business. Kay and Anthony are utterly obsessed with one goal - making those guilty of the death of Mary, pay with their lives. (Of course, this might ultimately include Michael or Vincent.)

Anyway, to resolve the Tom Hagen situation, I would work in one of three 'flashback' sequences in GF V.

At this point, 1972-73, Tom Hagen would be sick with cancer. (This would allow the appearance of Duvall, who is now in his late 60s, in the movie, simply explaining that the cancer treatments have him looking drawn and aged.)

Hagen would be involved in legal maneuvers to start to take the Corleone Corp. legitimate, and also legal maneuvers to keep Victor and Michael Francis Corleone out of prison - both of them, in my opinion, would be heavy into crime by this time, since as young kids in 1959 in GF II, Michael said they had 'already been picked up for shoplifting.' By the 1970s, they'd be heavy into drugs and crime.

I'd have Victor getting killed in a drug deal gone wrong, and Michael Francis gettting sentenced to a long prison term. (This explains where he was during GF III.)

Tom Hagen would begin maneuvering to put pressure on Pat Geary - by now, Vice President of the United States - to deliver a presidential pardon for Michael Francis. But this bid fails - it isn't until 10 years later, 1982-83, that it succeeds and Mikey gets out.

By this time, Hagen's loyalty is no longer in question - we find out through dialogue that he left the Corleone Family in the early 60s, and after a hit attempt gone wrong, helped deliver the Corleones a rival boss for a hit of their own, redeeming himself in Michael's eyes and returning as Michael's second-in-command.

But like Genco, he dies of natural causes, just before a time of great tribulation for his Don.

Just as Vito was left with a weak consiglire, so is Michael. Tom Hagen was weak in the 1940s simply because of youth; later as he got older and wiser, he became every bit Genco's equal. But Michael Corleone is stuck, after Tom Hagen's death, with B.J. Harrison, who is just an airhead pretty-boy. In a way, Harrison is like a mini-Fredo - he's just too stupid to entrust with anything important.

In the events of GF III, Connie of course becomes, for all intents and purposes, the consigliere.

Forgive me EnzoBaker, if I sound repetitive. But I already knew much of the stuff you just wrote, as I have read it already in another topic.

Great job though, beautifull. If theres any Corleone sequel coming on, they should use your basis and make the new Godfather Trilogy with you on board. Ideally, they would be made back-to-back, and would be released every year, and FFC would direct them all after watching the original three Godfathers about "a million times".

One question that came from the previous topic, though. How would YOU handle Tom Hagen in THE GODFATHER PART III, or rather, how do you think his relationship with Michael would evolve. Specifically, many members of this board claim that there would be a "battle of wits" between them, continuing the thread from PART II. What do you think would happen in there?

BTW, you handled Hagen in particular perfectly in PART V. I think you created yet another excellent parallel between Vito and Michael.

I think Michael and Tom would eventually have had a falling-out - Michael is clearly testing Hagen's loyalty in the second half of GF II, and Hagen, in some subtle ways, shows some dissatisfaction with this treatment.

IMO, this situation would have come to a head a few years after GF II, or the mid-1960s more specifically.

Pacino and Duvall are now way too old to play Michael Corleone and Tom Hagen in the 1960s, so I don't think it's practical to include these passages in the saga. I'm OK with recasting parts, but not in the "middle" of a character's lifespan. I don't want Robert Downey Jr. playing Michael Corleone or Anthony Edwards playing Tom Hagen in 1966...