DISAPPOINTING!.... AND HOW COULD IT NOT HAVE BEEN?!
! MR. KNOW IT ALL ;-b | TRI STATE AREA | 06/09/2010
(3 out of 5 stars)
"OK we've all read the reviews and we've all got an opinion on this one. The Godfather III is so close to good and bad that it can go either way. Coppola should be commended for putting together a film with all the original characters and the same look as the first two flawless films. Coppola should have paid Duvall whatever he wanted to be in the film as he is sorely missed here. Coppola's daughter while not great in this film isn't the actor who bothered me the most. I found Pacino to run hot and cold here, in some scenes he is very good(his confession for his past sins)and in others I found him to be a completely different character(giving the fatherly advise to Vincent and yelling a lot). I also found Andy Garcia to be a bit fake although he did add life to a very slow and boring film. This was probably due to Coppola not giving him enough to do.
Some good points are the wedding with it's watered down version of the original's wedding scene, which sadly is the case in real life. I am Italian American and I remember those weddings with the old timers singing and entertaining everyone. It was a grand time with Nana and Pop Pop at the microphone and in this film when we see Connie trying to revive the old time fun again, it reminded me of a sad reality of these events nowadays. I also liked that Michael couldn't bare what he had done to his brother Fredo, but Pacino is like a raving madman in this film, what happened to cold and quite Michael? It just doesn't add up for me and I found his performance distracting at times.
Connie(Shire)is at her best here, I think she could have been a scarier Don than Pacino in the film! I also thought Diane Keaton was very good and true to her character. The plot is interesting, but it seems to take a long time getting where it wants to go and that is something I never felt about the first two films. In the first two films I wanted them to go on and on and with this one I just couldn't wait for it to end! ....Too bad, it's not a total loss, but it sure ain't what it "shoulda" "woulda" "coulda "been.
The new Blu Ray looks very good and looks obviously cleaner than the first two films. Coppola kept the tinting the same for this film, so they all look very much alike and I hope some day(soon)they will release the director's cut with all three films woven together as one. It's the best version IMHO and it deserves a DVD and Blu Ray release."
A brilliant climax in need of a film to go with it.
H. Jin | Melbourne, Australia | 07/27/2010
(3 out of 5 stars)
"No matter which way you look at it, the third instalment of the 'Godfather' series just isn't as good as the first two. While it retains the same high production values and attention to detail, and contains some powerful scenes, the storyline of 'Part III' is haphazard and the acting very hit-and-miss.
The plot revolves around an older Michael Corleone achieving his goal of making the family business (almost) completely legitimate, despite the reluctance of family, associates, and "friends" to let him walk away from his criminal past. This had the potential to be really engaging, but the film quickly dissolves into a series of side stories that are under-developed and don't really fit that well together. Instead of the complex interlocking sub-plots of Parts I and II, this film feels much looser and more fragmented; it's more like a series of individual scenes than a coherent narrative. Secondly, far too much time is devoted to the clumsy forbidden-romance subplot between Michael's daughter Mary and his nephew Vincent. This might not have been quite so bad had the two characters shown the slightest chemistry, but as it stands it just feels forced and awkward. Finally, the dodgy Vatican deal at the heart of the film just wasn't that interesting; "legitimate" business transactions, no matter how hard-nosed and complex, just don't have the same attraction as the criminal scheming and manipulation we saw in Parts I and II.
Unfortunately, the weaknesses in the story are only emphasised by the inconsistent performances. Some people criticise Pacino's performance here, and it's true that this Michael is very different to the character in Parts I and II. However, this suits the film, with Michael coming across as a man who has mellowed significantly with age, and seeking to atone for (or at least face up to) the terrible things he has done in the past. I also really liked Talia Shire in this one; instead of the flaky victim of the first two films, she is ruthless and determined here, almost a Godmother-like figure in her own right. Andy Garcia I thought was hit-and-miss as Vincent, he nails it as the suave gangster type, but is less convincing in the "hot-headed" scenes. And Sophia Coppola is definitely the weak link here, although to be fair her character wasn't that interesting to start with. These four apart, and in contrast to the first two films, none of the other characters were particularly memorable or distinctive, with the mobsters in particular tending to blend into one another. The film badly misses Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen, who would have fitted perfectly into the central conflict about staying legitimate or seeking personal revenge.
What saves `Part III' to some extent is the climax, which is even more tragic and poignant than that of `Part II' because Michael is more of a "good" character this time around. Michael has spent the bulk of the film genuinely trying to make things right after a lifetime of wrong-doing, yet still ends up suffering a loss even more devastating than before. Some might regard the climax as Michael's deserved come-uppance, and there is something to be said for him paying for his past sins. But the tone is overwhelmingly sympathetic, with the very final montage of scenes re-inforcing the immense losses Michael has suffered throughout his entire life.
These final scenes do at least give the entire Godfather saga an appropriate closure, and `Part III' is almost worth watching for the last 20 minutes alone. But that apart, `Part III' is easily the weakest of the three films, not only in comparison to the first two but also on its own merits. While the technical aspects of the film are still strong, and the film is as ambitious as its predecessors, it's too unfocussed and inconsistent to be a true success. A tighter script and more inspired casting choices could well have elevated Part III into the same category as Parts I and II. As it stands, there are just too many flaws here to ignore.