The Godfather Part III

Francis Ford Coppola didnt intend to make the Godfather films into a trilogy - instead there were supposed to be two parts and an epilogue. He wanted to name the epilogue The Death of Michael Corleone, but the producers didnt want that. The final result? The Godfather Part III (1990). It didnt meet the high expectations set by the first two Godfather films, which led it to become a target of angry and negative criticism. The most confusing difference to its predecessors is its more obvious focus on Michael instead of the entire family. The biggest offender for most of the fans was casting Sofia Coppola, the director's daughter, as Mary: her performance is rather terrible.

The film's content is fine as it is: it is a great character study of Michael. As an "epilogue", it doesn't need to be anything else. The ending, however, is a mess: after the great build-up, the ending is awfully forced and disappointing. And not to forget the very last scene which just ruins the rhythm of the entire film.

The film's form is nice although sometimes it is rather plain when compared to the first two films. However, the whole opera sequence at the end of the film was a masterpiece of editing and photography. It's a stunning achievement - not least as a sequence which builds enormous amounts of tension.

While Sofia Coppola's performance was god awful, the other "newcomers" were more or less awesome. Andy Garcia seemed irritating at first, but after a while I realised how brilliant his performance was. Joe Mantegna was also great as the smug Joey Zaza.

In overall, the film is a little unbalanced, but it has a few pros worth mentioning.

Score: 7 out of 10

The Godfather Part II

Even though I had considered The Godfather (1972) overrated back when I watched it, I always thought its sequel, The Godfather Part II (1974), deserved all the praise it received. I'll put my answer as briefly as possible: While the sequel is as cinematically sophisticated as the original, its subtlety wears it down a bit and makes it feel a bit unbalanced on an emotional level.

Score: 9 out of 10

PS: I know this review is awfully short and disappointing, but I struggled with writing the review for over 2 days so I figured I should do it as briefly as possible.

The Godfather

The Godfather. The film that has received more praise than any other film ever made. It has been over 2 years since I watched the entire trilogy for the first time - and now I'm going to do it again. Back then, I admitted that it was a great film, but I considered it a bit overrated. Do I still consider it overrated? Keep on reading to find out.

The Godfather (1972) is the epic tale of an Italian American organized crime dynasty in the 40's. The film's major conflict is a violent power struggle between the "Five Families" of New York and New Jersey. Coppola captures the attention of the viewers by offering us a world of great characters in rich detail. We are there to witness several brilliant storylines: Michael's painful development from a respectful and caring man to a cold and calculating Don, Don Vito's desperate fight to keep his family safe and the troubled marriage between Connie and Carlo, among a few others. The running time of 3 hours is certainly worth it even if only for the perfect montage used at the end of the film.

Coppola's form is amazing as well. The beautiful lighting, great camerawork (gracious and used only when needed), magnificent compositions, fascinating editing and on top of it all, an unforgettable musical score.

While acting in general was very good in the film, there were a few performances which stood out as too melodramatic and distracting. For example, Talia Shire's performance as Michael's sister always distracted me and made me cringe. Luckily, there were a few brilliant performances as well, such as Marlon Brando's and Al Pacino's performances.

My conclusion? While I admire it greatly for most of its aspects, I still consider it slightly overrated.

Score: 9 out of 10