Having read most of the book when it came out, and put it down, (I couldn't stand the prose style) - I just wanna say this much...

Wasn't this ment to be a sequel to the original book? Why did Winegardener include so many refrences and aspects from the films? (Like Fredo's killing, having Anthony and Mary when the original novel clearly states that Michael and Kay have two son's by the book's end, Kay's abortion, Michael buying what is clearly ment to be the apartment at the start of GF3 etc.). Doesn't this defeat the purpose of this non-Puzo penned sequel? Have it a sequel to the original novel, and not stricly related to the films?

Could have been great, but it is written in such a self-consious "This is a GODFATHER book!" vein. But I suppose the main problem there (and here is where I sympathise with Winegardener) is that when Puzo was writing the original, at least he didn't have a trio of critically acclaimed films and a cultural phenomenon hanging over him...