I heard a lot of bad critizism about the movie. I did eventually watched it. I thought it was great. It became my favorite of the three films (although the book itself reighs all). I really enjoyed the story too. People seemed to reject it. Even Puzo in an interview made it obvious that the movie wasn't too good.
I liked the whole added character that Andy Garcia played. And the relationship between Michael's nephew and his daughter reminded me something that would happen in a Shakespearian play. Yeah, it was obvious incest, but attractions like that can happen between two cousins the same age, especially if they never saw each other before. I am not saying that their incestious relationship was right, but I can see why it happened.
Anyways, I am looking for replies on who's seen the film and their honest opinion of it. Lot of love from above.

I don't hate the third movie as much as others on the board may, but it's still easily the weakest of the three. The grim Michael Corleone of the first 2 movies that sold his soul turned into some joke-cracking goof. (I'm thinking of his uncharacteristic moments of joking about listening to Tony Bennett records or telling Kay to give him the signal to kill himself. The film lacks logic at points. Sophia Coppola's acting wasn't on par with other cast members. Neither was Andy Garcia's, in my opinion.

Still, I liked the intrigue with the Vatican and thought it was a terrific plot elements. The Vatican banker archibishop was a terrific character.

Still, it sufferes from the lack of great actors from the past films, especially Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen.

I dont think it ruined the trilogy, but it definatly wasnt as good as the first 2. The plot was too confusing for me, 5 million old guys who looked the same were all trying to kill Mike.Sophia Coppola simply cannot act(although she can direct quite well)and Andy Garcia was not the right man for the job,as you can hear his Cuban accent numerous times.I think the ending was a fitting way to end the Corleone saga.

I heard Nicolas cage wanted to take Andy's role. That would be interesting. Yeah, Mike's daughter was a lame actress, but she did spark an interest with me physically. I had to cope with the book's story being completely change for the 2nd and 3rd movie. I ended with accepting it as a spin off of the Puzo masterpiece.

But thanks for the responses. Ciao. Ciao

Although I'm sure GF3 has been dissected a lot here, I'll add my 2 cents. One of the questions I used to ask myself is, why did Michael need more money. At that point in his life, he could have been enjoying what he reaped for himself over his lifetime. Instead, he continued to feed his empty heart/soul/life with more and more external power and materialism. He chose to be feared rather than loved. Is it any wonder he was never content. FFC structured GF3 on the demise of Michael as a man,and I believe he succeeded in that one area. The death of Mary, the love of Michael's life was the final price he paid for having other people's children killed. Afterall, the Turk and McLuskey were some mother's sons, not to forget Fredo of course. Call it karma.

Interesting Archangel,

Many of us will tell you that GFIII is not a bad movie, but when compared to the first two it doesn't hold up.

Funny, but the reasons you give for liking this movie are the same reasons I did not care for it, along with the drawn out and confusing segment on the Pope/Vatican story.

Goes to show everyone's taste is different, what one finds appealing, another won't.

TIS

I think it's hard for a filmmaker to please all of his movie audience and therefore he tries to please himself, as like other people he'll like the same elements. We all have our own opinions in films and that's what makes it hard to make a film for everyone.

I don't think it was more money he was after in PART III. It was legitimacy. He wanted to get into an honest business that his children would be in charge of and would benefit from. He was hoping this would help wash the blood from his hands. It didn't work because the people involved in the legitimate businesses were as corrupt as the mobsters.

i´m don´t hate this movie, have some good parts too, not like the first ones but still good, my favorite part is the end, is so touched the way michael scream (silent scream) for mary, also he remember the days with apollonia and the dance with mary and then die alone.
ciao, angie.

The 3rd wasn't as good, cobbled and disjointed, in my opinion, in comparison to the other 2. Still, a fitting end to the trilogy. I always cry like a fool at the end as he dances with the 3 women he's loved and lost
I also agree with what Alonzo The Armless said about the legitimacy too

FH

well i have to say GF3 was the first movie of the trilogy i have seen and i thought it was a pretty good movie, then after watching GF1 and GF2 i had to say that GF3 aint half as good the first 2 but i dont say its a bad movie, i still like it but compared to 1 and 2 it aint half as good as them. still got good parts.

I think they tried to throw too many plot threads in there, which made it difficult to suitably resolve any of them.

IMO, the Vatican/Immobilare plot line should have been dramatically reduced in scope and the ascension of Vincent in the family structure should have been more fully explored.

Only Puzo and FFC would know this for sure, but I believe the loss of Robert Duvall and the resultant writing-out of the character of Tom Hagen drastically changed the overall direction of the script.

Clearly, toward the end of GF II, the continuing loyalty of Hagen is an issue. The entire scene at the Nevada house, where Michael puts Hagen on the spot about the job offer from the competing hotels, Hagen's "Why do you hurt me, Michael," and the conversation in Italian ("So, are you staying?" "Yes, I'm staying") very clearly set up the idea that Hagen's loyalty, in the end, may NOT be absolute.

Immediately following those scenes we have Hagen visiting Pentangeli (aka Clemenza) in jail and "explaining" to him the suicide option for long-trusted members who betray the family.

And then, we have Michael's final disposition of the Fredo problem, which shows that Michael's final loyalty is to himself - he would get rid of ANYBODY who he perceives as a threat.

All of this IMO was intended to set up the questions in GF III, whether Hagen's loyalty was absolute, and if not, what Michael would do about it.

Had Duvall been in the GF III cast, my guess is the movie would have centered almost completely on the internal family politics, and external stuff like the Vatican/Immobilare plot line would have been greatly reduced.

this is exactly why i liked it so much. i was very confused the first couple times watching it, but then everything clicked.
food for thought: how long do you think Altobello was involved with the vatican?
also: the check that altobello wrote to mike in the beginning i almost see as a sign, its like he was saying "you dont know this yet, but me and the vatican are or are going to become partners.
just thinking out loud sorry