Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:20 am



Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
 The Godfather: Part III 

What grade would you give this film?
A 14%  14%  [ 2 ]
B 36%  36%  [ 5 ]
C 36%  36%  [ 5 ]
D 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
F 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 14

 The Godfather: Part III 
Author Message
College Boy Z

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
Post The Godfather: Part III
The Godfather: Part III

Image

Quote:
The Godfather Part III is a 1990 American gangster film written by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola, who directed. It completes the story of Michael Corleone, a Mafia kingpin who tries to legitimize his criminal empire. The movie also weaves into its plot a fictionalized account of real-life events—the 1978 death of Pope John Paul I and the Papal banking scandal of 1981-1982—and links them with each other and with the affairs of Michael Corleone. The film stars Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and Andy García, and features Eli Wallach, Joe Mantegna, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda, and Sofia Coppola.

Coppola and Puzo originally wanted the title to be The Death of Michael Corleone. However, Paramount Pictures would not accept that title. Coppola states that The Godfather series is in fact two films, and Part III is the epilogue. Part III has received mixed reviews and receptions, but nevertheless grossed $136,766,062 and was nominated for seven Academy Awards.


Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:15 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:35 pm
Posts: 1912
Location: Texas
Post 
Today I decided to watch Godfather Part III. I went in a little biased that this movie would be far inferior to the first two which are classics. I found this movie very interesting, and enjoyed it. Yes, it did drag about 30-40 minutes. I did not like the last scene with Michael dying, or the whole opera scene which lasted forever. I also kind of was a little confused with the Vatican issue. Great film, but I think this movie, is just a little inferior to the 2nd. A-

_________________
The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.....


Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:21 am
Profile YIM WWW
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post 
It's not terrible, but it's very drawn out and becomes rather silly at times. It shows flashes of the brilliance that made the first one great, but, overall, it's nowhere near as good as it - but then again, neither was the second. Pacino is Pacino, and Andy Garcia makes an impressive showing, but Sofia Coppola is simply dreadful in her too-big role. Definitely a big case of nepotism, because she's a terrible actress; her death scene is laughable. It doesn't really feel like a Godfather movie for a big portion of it, and the ending is too clearly an attempt to mimic the original. It's solidly acted and directed, but it's pretty bland.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:43 pm
Profile
The 5th B-Sharp
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:48 am
Posts: 1506
Post 
The Movie was probably about 45-1 hour too long. I really wish this had never been made, so I pretend it doesn't exist, but then AMC has to show and I'm lulled in by the fact its a godfather film. I have to say thought I really to like Andy Garcia's performance.


Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:26 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
Never understood the hate for this one -- sure, it's not up to the stellar heights of the first two, but then not many movies are. It was a solid conclusion to the saga!


Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:47 am
Profile
George A. Romero

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:30 pm
Posts: 9763
Location: Enjoying a cold pint
Post 
while not a classic like parts I and II, it's still a solid, well above average mobster movie. the only thing truly bad about this film is sofia coppola....uuggghhhh....

B+


Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:37 pm
Profile
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37887
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
Wow, this surprised me.

It's definitley not a Godfather movie. At all. Coppola's direction is closer to someone like Hitchcock(the opera scene is admittingly right out of The Man Who Knew Too Much) than it is himself in the first two movies, he's not really bent on the style as much as he is just letting the movie do the talking.

But I think as a crime drama/thriller on its own, it's actually quite good and very fun. Pacino and Garcia and a lot of the others actors are definitley on their game, though Sofia Coppola is brutal. The storyline and plot unfolds quite nicely, taking the approach of starting with nothing and bit by bit packing on the developments until the entire ordeal is totally overwhelming. I missed a few of the details, but I got the gist, and I can take complex plots like that.

And really, I think this film is kind of intense. Coppola is as good at blood spattering and death scenes as he ever was, my favorite being the initial b&e in Garcia's apartment and his retaliation. The ending is totally crazy and over the top, but I kind of liked it. I could do without Pacino's slow motion yell though. I also liked his death scene. I wouldn't have cut immediatley from the uber-climax to it, but somehow I think dieing old and in the chair like that was a pretty poetic and beautiful way to have to have him go.

The screenplay isn't perfect, some of the subplots pass a bit into sillyness, Sofia really brings the film down in points. But I still really really liked this film. It's just fun. It was a very entertaining 2 and a half hours of mob drama and gunplay, and it never felt long. Criminally underrated!

A-

Btw, I could've sworn Jmart had a review written for this. I only remember he's a fan of the film. Maybe it was in Movie Mayhem or something he said that.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:37 am
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:53 pm
Posts: 8636
Location: Toronto, Canada
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
really apart from a few scenes it was not good.

It is a decent film however due to the fact the other two were just so much better, this film got a ton of hate.

B

_________________
The Dark Prince

Image


Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:49 am
Profile WWW
Stanley Cup
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:52 pm
Posts: 6981
Location: Hockey Town
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
i never understood the hate for the film. Its not incredible but still a good film

B+


Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Profile
The Lubitsch Touch
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:48 pm
Posts: 11019
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
I always felt it was a mere shadow of its predecessors, a real snooze, and it tells a story that, frankly, isn't necessary. The ending of Godfather Part II tells us all we need to know.

In fact, it plays like all the least interesting parts of that film (the present day stuff) repeated but with lesser actors and grayer hair.

And, come on: George Hamilton? hahahahahahaha

_________________
k


Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:37 pm
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 21628
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
yoshue wrote:
I always felt it was a mere shadow of its predecessors, a real snooze, and it tells a story that, frankly, isn't necessary. The ending of Godfather Part II tells us all we need to know.

In fact, it plays like all the least interesting parts of that film (the present day stuff) repeated but with lesser actors and grayer hair.

And, come on: George Hamilton? hahahahahahaha


The Production was a mess, Robert Duvall was suppose to have a very important role in the script but he figured it would just be a cameo and asked for a lot of money. Im going with the Talia Shire conspiracy, she appeared in the Godfather Part III and Rocky V that year, both of them failed to excite the boxoffice and audiences and put big stains on the franchise.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:03 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:53 pm
Posts: 8636
Location: Toronto, Canada
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
shire was good in part 2 but was the only bad actor in part 1.

_________________
The Dark Prince

Image


Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:24 am
Profile WWW
Superman: The Movie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 21141
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
Shack wrote:
Btw, I could've sworn Jmart had a review written for this. I only remember he's a fan of the film. Maybe it was in Movie Mayhem or something he said that.


It might have been movie mayhem. I know I've talked about the film and have defended it (not as good as the first two, but better than most movies - without Sofia Coppola and a couple of other things, it'd right there with them) in threads, but I don't think I've written a review. I'd write something now but I haven't seen the film in a long time; probably since the boxset came out. Sometime over Christmas I'll revist all three films.

_________________
My DVD Collection
Marty McGee (1989-2005)

If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.


Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:22 pm
Profile WWW
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 21628
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
It's a ok gangster film, but a boring finale to the Godfather chapter. The plot of this film is just kind of uninteresting. The idea of the closer you get to legit power, the more corrupt it actually is an interesting concept. It's the family subplots that take over much of the plot that make it a chore to watch. Quite simply, the Corleone family isn't filled with the exciting characters it once had (With the departure of Cazale and unfortunately Robert Duvall this time around.) Connie, Mary, and the freshly made up Vincent are the bulk of the new characters, and they just don't work. I don't even blame Sofia that much, the character and bizarre "first cousin" romance subplot is just awkwardly written to begin with.

Pacino is fine as the war wearied Michael, and Garcia is formidable, but in the end, this slower type of Gangster film is out of date, especially when compared to the same year released Goodfellas. Coppola desperately made this film to get out bankruptcy, and he's stated he doesn't think of this as a film, just a simple epilogue, and extra stories. And it feels just like that. I think if Coppola could have updated his characters and really bring them to the late 80s/ 90s style of filmmaking and really tried it could have been worthy of the legacy. As it stands. It is exactly as it was intended. An after thought.

C+/B-

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:59 pm
Profile
Superman: The Movie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 21141
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
Yeah, so I saw a little bit of it awhile ago on one of the movie channels, and I'd say my opinion has changed a little bit. It's not great, but far from bad. To state the obvious, the cousin romance doesn't work. Does anyone give a shit about the Garcia/Coppola romance? Maybe it could've been elevated with better actors (everyone always shits on Coppola, and with good reason, but Garcia isn't much better in the scenes they share together...maybe she brought him down?), but I just didn't care about those two. They just bring the movie to a halt. And whenever Coppola talks, no matter what the emotion, it's always in that same monotone yet slightly whiny voice.I can't go without blaming Francis too though. Not just for hiring his daughter (I know it was a last second decision), but the material he gives them just isn't good. Cut out that subplot and you've got a much better film.

The rest is good though. The story doesn't have the same weight to it as the other two did, but Michael Corleone is still as intriguing as ever.

(B)

_________________
My DVD Collection
Marty McGee (1989-2005)

If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.


Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:16 am
Profile WWW
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 67000
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
I saw this many years ago. Thought it was shit and very, very, very boring. But then, I don't see the attraction with the first two either.

But the story leading up to how it got made is much more interesting. Due to Coppola refusing to make a third film, Sylvester Stallone was brought in to direct and star (with Travolta starring too) until Paramount invited Stallone to their offices and showed him an already-printed poster with his name and face on above the text "Godfather Part III", to which he told them this was the worst idea ever, and that they are not honouring the legacy of the previous films. Paramount handled the movie rather pathetically in the early years, and the film had over 10 rewrites (some by Puzo too), and also had other directors attached to make it like Michael Mann, Michael Cimino etc. Coppola eventually only made the film because he was in so much debt.

Can you imagine, though:

Image

Still, it may have fared better than Stallone's other 1990 movie, Rocky V. ;)

_________________

STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG
FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
FREE TIBET
LIBERATE HONG KONG
BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA



Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:12 am
Profile WWW
The Kramer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 23695
Location: Classified
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
I had been putting this movie off forever, turned away by all the criticism directed towards it. However, since Director's Cuts are hot these days and FFC just happened to put a new version of this recently and I just happened to have a free trial for Paramount Plus from the grammies, it seemed appropriate to finally dive in.

The movie is ... OK. Not the disaster I'd been warned about, but nothing special in a good way either. The parts with Michael are mostly good, especially the helicopter scene. I can also now finally use his famous quote (just when I thought I was out...) in real life without being a poser. His war with the church, god itself, also seems like the correct way for his story to end all things considered.

Sofia Coppola understandly gets the main brunt of critique here, but I don't think the movie would have been any better with Winona Ryder in that role. We're still talking about an incestuos relationship that started with a fifteen year old seducing an eight year old (or so it is implied.) Sofia can do a great "fuck me" face, but the entire plotline was so awkward and I was cringing anytime the two were alone on screen together. This took me out of the second half of the movie far too often, and I didn't really care about what happened until the opera scene finally started. There we get the usual excellent Godfather closing montage of all the Corleone enemies being taken out at the same time ... But then Mary dies and I knew I was supposed to feel something ... but just couldn't, despite Pacino giving all he had to show the grief and tragedy.

So I'll put Godfather Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone (though he doesn't actually die in this cut) right on the border of a B-/C+. From what I've read, the only major change was changing the opening to a scene where Michael and the Bishop lay out the details of the Immeubiarle takeover, which apparently originally took place later in the film. I definitely think that was a good move, since I would have been hella confused if they had just launched right into the celebration. Otherwise it seems like small cuts were made to help the pacing, but I can't speak to whether that improved the experience or not.


Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:56 pm
Profile
Keeping it Light
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 8:06 am
Posts: 11185
Location: Bright Falls
Post Re: The Godfather: Part III
Just rewatched this too, thought I more or less remembered the story, I'm not really sure how I felt when I saw this the first time a long ago, just that it was not as good as the first two. And well, it's clear to me now it's really far from them. The story is just not as good, Pacino is not at all as enthralling as he was a younger Michael and there isn't anyone else to pick up the slack either. Duvall is missed, and I don't mind Sofia in the role, but can't decide whether she isn't that good because the film isn't or the other way around. Andy Garcia is kind of cool, but not close to giving a performance like Pacino or Caan or Cazale either. This mostly just feels like a fanservice cash grab which brings the trilogy down. I have to say, the cinematography is still great in Part III, but while the first two films are totally worth rewatching, this is better skipped.

C+


Thu Apr 27, 2023 7:38 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 19 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.