I really liked this movie; it is better than 90% of the films ever made. Part 3 is not as good as Part 2, however, and I will give you three reasons why. First, where is Tom Hagen? He's my favorite character of the saga and I missed his presence in...
- 30.June.2010
- |
- by: Rodney Wollam
- Rodney Wollam rated this movie
0/10
I really liked this movie; it is better than 90% of the films ever made. Part 3 is not as good as Part 2, however, and I will give you three reasons why. First, where is Tom Hagen? He's my favorite character of the saga and I missed his presence in the movie. Second, why does no one (other than Micheal) have a problem with the pairing of Vincent and Mary? It's incest between first cousins, isn't it? I always thought it was. Finally, Michael's suffering is WAY overblown. He's one of the last people on Earth to feel sorry for (how many have died by his hands?). While he may feel a certain pathos, spending so much time on it was way too California. Otherwise, this film is a worth member of the Godfather saga. 4 Stars.
- 30.June.2010
- |
- by: Rodney Wollam
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
If you listen to the director's commentary track you'll notice that this movie is actually about Francis Coppola. Anyhow, even when I agree that this is the weakest movie of the trilogy that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Actually it's pretty good...
- 21.March.2009
- |
- by: Carlos Mal
- Carlos Mal rated this movie
8/10Great
If you listen to the director's commentary track you'll notice that this movie is actually about Francis Coppola. Anyhow, even when I agree that this is the weakest movie of the trilogy that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Actually it's pretty good and the most important thing, it's a necessary movie. With this one, for the first time, the Godfather project feels completed. Five stars, I don't regret it.
- 21.March.2009
- |
- by: Carlos Mal
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
*SPOILERS* This isn't as bad as the world would have you believe. Now, it's true that it pales in comparison to Parts I and II; however, those are two of the best films ever made, so it had a lot to live up to. Where it did go wrong is hard to pin...
- 20.March.2009
- |
- by: sethdellinger
- sethdellinger rated this movie
0/10
*SPOILERS* This isn't as bad as the world would have you believe. Now, it's true that it pales in comparison to Parts I and II; however, those are two of the best films ever made, so it had a lot to live up to. Where it did go wrong is hard to pin down. The plot is a bit convoluted (I admit at one point a bunch of people are getting killed and I had no idea why); also, things seem to have gotten a bit larger than reality would subscribe (Pacino's Michael Corleone getting a medal from the Pope? Not the best way to start us off. Imagine Don Gotti getting a medal from the Pope). It's true that Sofia Coppola's performance leaves a lot to be desired. She seems to have only one facial expression; that being said, she didn't 'ruin the movie' any more than Pacino's odd hairdo did. The legendary score of the first two films also lacks a bit; all the drama and suspense seems drained from it. There are too many characters introduced and too few of them are explored (where'd George Hamilton go? And Joe Mantegna is gone much too soon). In short, the film lacks the perfection that the first two own so well. However, it does do a few things right: the juxtopostion of music and religious imagery to seperated action comes to a satisfying crescendo here, as well as long, delicately edited scenes that highlight some beautful lighting work. Pacion's acting in the scene where his daughter is killed is probably his best scene ever. This isn't all bad; in fact, there's a lot of good here. It's just the runt of the litter.
- 20.March.2009
- |
- by: sethdellinger
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|