There are some generous reviewers on here who claim that if not compared to the two "Godfather" movies that came before, this movie is not so bad. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Although the begining of the movie is promising, with Michael Corleone now a much older man with fully grown kids, the introduction of Vincent quickly brings the film downhill into a structureless plot full of nonsense conspiracies and assassinations, which unfortunately have very little connection to anything that made the first two "Godfather" movies great (and that's not even the main reason why it's bad).
As mentioned by numerous reviewers--even by those who gave this a high score--the acting is truly horrendous. But it's not just Sofia Coppola. Even though her scenes really stand as some of the most amateurish, even Al Pacino isn't good in this. Take the scene where he's repenting for all of his murders in the first two movies. There's really no indication in this scene that the real Al Pacino is thinking about anything else except his paycheck. I didn't believe for a second that this was the real Michael Corleone feeling bad for killing his brother. What's even more horrific is that I couldn't even believe that this was an actor trying to play Michael Corleone. I had no idea what was going through Pacino's head when he was doing this movie.
Coppola clearly needed the money, otherwise he wouldn't have agreed to make a third 'Godfather.' I think the historical context on which this was based would have made for a very interesting Vatican movie outside of the "Godfather" timeline. Coppola probably could have released this film with the same title, "The Godfather: Part III," without Al Pacino, but then almost nobody would have went to see it.
The only reason this gets three stars is because we at least get a small insight into what could have happened to Michael Corleone years after the events of the second movie. Unfortunately, when he does finally tip over as an old man and dies, it's figuratively not the first time we see his death.
Although the begining of the movie is promising, with Michael Corleone now a much older man with fully grown kids, the introduction of Vincent quickly brings the film downhill into a structureless plot full of nonsense conspiracies and assassinations, which unfortunately have very little connection to anything that made the first two "Godfather" movies great (and that's not even the main reason why it's bad).
As mentioned by numerous reviewers--even by those who gave this a high score--the acting is truly horrendous. But it's not just Sofia Coppola. Even though her scenes really stand as some of the most amateurish, even Al Pacino isn't good in this. Take the scene where he's repenting for all of his murders in the first two movies. There's really no indication in this scene that the real Al Pacino is thinking about anything else except his paycheck. I didn't believe for a second that this was the real Michael Corleone feeling bad for killing his brother. What's even more horrific is that I couldn't even believe that this was an actor trying to play Michael Corleone. I had no idea what was going through Pacino's head when he was doing this movie.
Coppola clearly needed the money, otherwise he wouldn't have agreed to make a third 'Godfather.' I think the historical context on which this was based would have made for a very interesting Vatican movie outside of the "Godfather" timeline. Coppola probably could have released this film with the same title, "The Godfather: Part III," without Al Pacino, but then almost nobody would have went to see it.
The only reason this gets three stars is because we at least get a small insight into what could have happened to Michael Corleone years after the events of the second movie. Unfortunately, when he does finally tip over as an old man and dies, it's figuratively not the first time we see his death.
Tell Your Friends