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.