@strangebedfellows said:

Sorry if I am out of sync with this reply - I haven't quite figured out this database's workings yet !! Anyway - I too would have liked to have seen a "Godfather IV" with Andy Garcia as the new Don. He is a good actor and I think he would have made a great job of it - Note to FFC - it's not too late you know!!!

Oh, I know! It would be a great movie. I think Godfather III was set in the 1970s. We don't know when Michael died -- but he looked pretty old at the end ---when he tumbled out of his chair. Soooo.....say the story takes back up in the 1990s. It's possible that Michael and Connie could even be in Godfather IV.

Mary's death scene was ridiculed unjustly. So much fun was made of Micheal's gaping mouth. It's a wonderful scene! He is trying to scream, but he can't. How hard is that to comprehend? As for Sophia's acting; I've known people who were "wooden" in how they behaved. She was impugned unjustly as well.

I'm definitely a fan of Godfather III. We all agree it isn't perfect, but for all those who got carried away with glorifying violence of the prototypical "mob movie", and thinking Michael was just ice cold, this movie reminds us of a young Michael who really did not want this life, but had it foisted upon him.

His search for redemption was not a waste - his death, of natural causes, was the writer's indication that he was not evil. Most dons who chose the life died violently, or in jail. For Michael, it was neither.

And yes, I do also agree that it'd have been nice if Duvall reprised his role as Tom Hagan one more time - alas, he got caught up demanding more money than the producers felt he was worth. He might have been right, we all missed his presence in the final installment...ah, what might have been...

"I rank III and II equally."

lmao. funny joke

@Jetfire59 said:

Mary's death scene was ridiculed unjustly. So much fun was made of Micheal's gaping mouth. It's a wonderful scene! He is trying to scream, but he can't. How hard is that to comprehend?

Really? I couldn't tell if they did the scene with no audio at all, for dramatic effect, or not.

This is not a bad movie, but it sure as hell aint a good movie either. And since it follows a great movie and then a good movie, it is hard not to see the downward trajectory.

It has a lot of faults. I loved the opera stuff, but I probably belong in a niche group there. But the other parts of the soundtrack, except the bits that deliberately call back to the original score, are both intrusive and banal. The script is stilted and as subtle as a sledgehammer. We get it that in the first two movies oranges were a visual motif for impeding doom. Here we get oranges everywhere.

As for the acting, Garcia is brilliant. His character was supposed to be a sort of blend of Vito and his three sons. What Garcia does with the way he stands, the move of his head, the way he positions his hands, absolutely channels DeNiro and Caan. Brilliant stuff and well worth the Oscar nomination. Shire and Keaton both improve on their (less than stellar) performances in II. Wallach was great. But Pacino, man oh man, he went between mailing it in as tho he were waiting for the director to call cut, and chewing the scenery. No nuance or subtlety whatever.

As for the story, ignoring the stupidity of the helicopter scene, this ought to have been a decent story. New World meets Old World. New Money meets Old Money. New Mob meets Old Mob. The collisions of religion and business; of crime and legitimacy, is fertile ground, and the background stories actually happened. GF III takes these rich themes and turns them into literal melodrama.

And there is a laziness not just to the script and some of the acting, but even down to the costumes. Sure the GF trilogy has always been chronologically challenged, but here everyone is dressed in clothes straight out of 1990. Not even a token attempt to make it look like 1979. Except for the Sicilian peasants of course: for them it's still 1930 for some reason. I could go on, but I think most movie goers already know that this film missed the mark.

I always said that The Godfather Part III on it's own is an OK film. The problem is comparing it next to the masterpieces of the first II. OP said he ranks III and II equally and to that, I say you're outta your gatdamn mind (respectfully, of course ) . First of all, Sofia Coppola shouldn't have been anywhere near this set except to perhaps bring her dad and the actors coffee. Her acting was BAD. That scene where Michael tells her she can no longer see Joey always sticks out to me. "No dad. No. " Ugh, was so wooden! For sure Duvall should have been in it but besides that I thought the film sorta clunked along. It wasn't smooth storytelling even though the plot was decent and this blame falls squarely on Coppola. On par with Part II. Pshhh!

The Godfather: Part III (1990) - 7 outta 10 stars

The Godfather: Part II (1974) - 10 outta 10 stars

The Godfather (1972) - 10 outta 10 stars

Me llamo Vito Andolini y eto es pa ti!

BTW, a 74% rating indicates quite clearly that you are not the only one who liked this movie.

;-)