I dont really understand why they even wrote that book. I think they should of made him write prt 2 and 3. I havnt read the book yet. But who's ever idea it was to write this book fuked up the godfather saga.

Made WHO write Part II and III? Pieces of part II are already in the original GF book. As for part III, a movie had already been made! The author of a Godfather Returns should have been someone from these boards! Someone from here who is a GF afecinato! This guy who wrote the new book was not a stickler for detail which proves to me that he was not the true GF fan! You know something? When the book first came out, someone from these boards trashed this guy, ripped him for riding the coatails of a classic, and slammed him for not writing an original self made book. I chastised that person for saying those negative things before he had read the book, telling him that he should give it a chance and read it before passing judgement. I don't remember who that member was, but you know what? After only reading half of the book and putting it down because of the boredom, that member was right! This author did not do his homework, did not push the right buttons in ressurecting the characters in an interesting way, and in essence he did ride the reputation and success of the original book and movie without really caring about the quality of what he wrote!


Don Cardi

I haven't read the book, but the title doesn't seem promising. The GODFATHER returns? Where'd he go? Why? Why is he coming back? When? Is he going to stay? I'm sure the brilliant writer they hired to pen this thing could had pulled a better, more original, inspiring, vaugeless title out of his bag of tricks. Or could he.

If I knew where he lived, I'd leave something in his sheets while he slept, although it seems this guy gets most his sleep at his word-processor.

Folks:

I think the word that summarizes what Winegardner did is 'redaction' - here is a definition:

Redaction
The process of revising a work so as to weave in themes and ideas that invest the finished product with themes and emphases the redactor wishes to emphasize.

This word is typically associated with theology in terms of critically analyzing the historicity of the Bible. While the Godfather is not equivalent to the Bible, I think that we can safely say that Winegardner has redacted what was publicly accepted as cannon.

To that extent, I think that we should view GFR not as 'gospel' but as 'pseudographia'.

It is easier to make a point when you include all of the words.