The Godfather Part III | | Cast : | Al Pacino, Diane Keaton, Andy Garcia | | Director : | Francis Ford Coppola | | Studio : | Paramount Home Video | | Format : | Color, Widescreen | | Released Date : | December 25, 1990 | | DVD Released Date : | May 24, 2005 | | Language : | English (Dubbed) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | August 06, 2005 | | Summary | Not bad, too long, missing Brando | Content
 | The movie, at nearly three hours, is simply too long. If it had been cut down by an hour it would have been better. It didn't have me interested for the whole three hours. The interest came and went.
I thought Sofia Coppola was excellent in the role she was so maligned for, the role of Michael Corleone's daughter. She was utterly believable, and she wasn't the annoyingly picture perfect beauty queen that is usually seen in movies. Thanks for giving us a real person for a change. She looks great.
The best thing about the Godfather series is the acting of Marlon Brando. His Don Vito Corleone is his finest work in a distinguished career, and it wins my award for best acting performance of all time by anyone. Without him, how can you compare Godfather Part 3 to the others? It's like taking Babe Ruth off the 1927 Yankees and then expecting them to be as good.
We have kind of had enough of those mass killings of mobsters. It's been done before, no?
Anyway, in much of the movie I really enjoyed the acting and the development of the story, and in other parts I felt my interest wane, until it picked up again. It's not a bad movie, but it doesn't sustain 3 hours and it really can't be compared to a Marlon Brando Godfather movie. |
| Rating | | | Date | August 02, 2005 | | Summary | I know it's the weakest one, but c'mon... | Content
| After seeing the reviews for this i was sceptical to say the least. But i watched anyway. Guys it's not that bad! Of course it's not as good as part one, or even part two, but i was as gripped as i was when i saw those two. What i will say is for everyone to take their heads out of their butts and stop expecting cinematic history every time, co guys if that was the case, then you'd have nothing to bitch about on here everyday.
Not as bad as everyone says it is. Enjoy |
| Rating | | | Date | August 01, 2005 | | Summary | Art Imitates Life A Little Too Much. | Content
| I have such a hard time understanding the bashing that sequels (or prequels) often receive. Yes, they are often not as good, but this equation of "UNORIGINAL = HORRIBLE MOVIE" is ridiculous. I too feel that "The Godfather: Part III" is disappointing when compared to the original two films, but that does not make it a disgrace. What hurts this movie is that I feel that there are aspects of this third chapter that are so believeable and realistically handled, that it's not entertaining. Here are some examples:
I'll tackle the obvious one first - The Acting
Yes, Sofia Coppola was the not perfect choice, but Corleone's daughter was supposed to be a naive, inexperienced young woman. Were people expecting a scheming villianess like Talia Shire's character? Yes, she delivers some very bad lines, but I think that most teens/young adults struggle to express their emotions clearly anyway. It's almost too realistic.
Many feel that Andy Garcia is not used very well here, but again, the point of Vincent Manzini is that he's not ready to tackle the responsibilities that Michael and Connie are pressuring onto him. In fact, that point is so expertly handled, that it often tests my patience.
Diane Keaton is bitter and hesitant to forgive. Well, I can imagine that a woman who's suffered as she has would feel that way. But, Michael and Kay can't seem to get their relationship on a good note, that I ended up screaming lines that surely would've helped them piece their lives back together. The tension is too dysfunctional, and made me want to play therapist by the time it was all over.
Al Pacino is the only actor here who never falters. Sure, supporting characters like Eli Wallach's Altobello are menacing, but Pacino holds the foreground with all of the skills he maturely grew in the 15 years that passed since Part II.
The story itself is a well-written, but needed a little trimming. The plot does feel like a rehash of the first two movies. Too much time is spent referencing to past stories and healing old wounds. But that's the point of the movie, take it or leave it. Redemption is the theme here, and although this movie didn't develop enough of its own strengths, the idea of going back to fix old wrongs always carries a risk of backtracking.
Now, for the inarguable strengths of the movie. This is the most stylish of all of the three movies. The first and second movie were more a classical, romantic portrait of gangsters and family values. Here, the gritty and unpleasant look of the world that these characters inhabit has a haunting presence. Just look at the brief sequence of shots that follow when The Pope's death is announced...that's a foreshadowing of dark events that enters only in your subconscious. The opera sequence is absolute genius, and the aftermath of the murderous massacre is so powerful, that Michael's last scene will remain unforgettable. The sound here is so expertly handled here. I know that Coppola didn't want his violent scenes to be fancy and wanted to focus on the drama instead, but the enhanced sound effects during the helicopter attack and the parade ambush helped me feel the weight that these murders just caused. Just listen to the haunting breeze that blows when Michael confesses to the priest. It's not a feeling of release, but a reluctant confrontation with evil.
I think the story is very sound in "The Godfather: Part III," as well as the cinematography and sound effects. The actors, though, don't find the right notes to balance art and realism. There is a such thing as being too true to life, and "The Godfather: Part III", unfortunately, guilty of that.
There is also a such thing as a movie being declared garbage simply because it's not as good as the original film in which it is based. Yes, this finale should've been much stronger, but that doesn't mean it has no merits worthy of praise. Whether you like it or not, this is the conclusion to "The Godfather" trilogy. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 15, 2005 | | Summary | Should Have Made a Better Offer | Content
| First off: I loved Sofia Coppola in this movie. (Winona Ryder, who was originally cast but dropped out, probably realized that she was wrong for the part). But Sofia brings an authentic look and an authentic innocence to the role.
She got toasted when this movie came out, and I thought it was really unfair.
I'd also read that Paramount was too cheap to pay Robert Duvall to return as Tom Hagen, which is very unfortunate since the first two GODFATHER movies really didn't leave a lot of characters that could come back.
Francis Coppola also said in an interview that Paramount approached him to write and direct GODFATHER III. He asked for six months to write the script. Paramount gave him six weeks. That, in a nutshell, is the problem with the film: it plays like a rough draft.
And considering its cinematic lineage, that's really the ultimate shame: Coppola should've been the one to give them the deal they couldn't refuse.
(I've always said that the real third film to this "trilogy" is GOODFELLAS, which picks up with mob life in the 1950's--about the time THE GODFATHER II ends--and takes it into the 1980's). |
| Rating | | | Date | July 11, 2005 | | Summary | A very good conclusion to the Corleone saga | Content
| It is disgusting how so many people describe The Godfather Part III as a "disgrace," as a movie that is just.....bad. People who give this movie one star are, quite frankly, imnbeciles - it's no Casablanca, nor is it a Gigli, either. It is not that bad as to be ranked a one star review - it should be judged independent of its predecessors, not against its predecessors.
The Godfather Part III is a movie about the redemption of Michael Corleone and his grooming of his nephew, Vincent Santorini (played wonderfully by Andy Garcia), to become the next Don of the Corleone family. The movie is written very well, and does not move slow or tediously, as another reviewer stated. This movie had me shaking with anticipation and excitement, especially at the opera scene.
Many people have pointed out Sofia Coppola's amateur acting as a main detractor for this movie. I came into this movie ready to be disappointed with subpar acting, but was pleasantly suprised with the fine acting. Granted, Sofia Coppola's acting in certain scenes (such as her discussion with Michael during breakfast about being a front for the Foundation) to be very grimace-worthing, but, IMHO, she did quite a decent job acting. Andy Garcia, while not up to James Caan's acting in the original Godfather(who could match him, though?) performs superb as Santino's son, and he is convincing enough to make the viewer believe he is, in fact, the son of Sonny Corleone. Al Pacino, regardless to say, is phenomenal as Michael Corleone, and provides some of the most moving moments in the whole trilogy here.
With The Godfather Part III, Francis Coppola ties many loose ends together, and satisfies the viewer with a very good conclusion to one of the greatest film stories in cinema. The similarities between the death of Vito Corleone and the end of this movie are striking, further tying the movies together. The harshness some people show towards this film is unwarranted-they are disappointed because it is not like any of its predecessors. Independently, this is a very good movie that deserves some sort of recognition for tastefully concluding a legendary trilogy. |
|
Picture 01 (20)
