The Revisit – The Godfather Part III (1990)
I revisited the entire Godfather trilogy with every intention of just talking about the first film in this column. But I have found that what makes this column work for me is revisiting and talking about films that are more debated than embraced. The Godfather Part III, in all its lamented and beautiful scenery ladened glory, is generally looked down upon as a movie that destroyed the allure of the first movies of The Godfather Trilogy. Two movies that are, more often than not, embraced as two of the best films to ever be made.
I personally prefer the first one to the second one. 1972’s The Godfather was much more focused and has a more interesting plot drenched in elegance. My interest in Part II‘s story often starts to tune out around the time we’re watching the Senate hearings. I also think the film’s flashbacks to young Vito, while jaw-dropping in terms of cinematography and a bounce of parallelism, don’t feel as vital as Michael’s arc. Both of the films are great, of course, but Part I is the only Godfather movie I can keep re-watching over and over. However, the biggest reason Part I is superior to Part II is because all the emotional stakes which make Part II so powerful are established in the first film. All that considered, the first two films still hold up as superior pieces of cinema.
Background: I have heard Francis Ford Coppola say in interviews that The Godfather Part III is the only movie he has ever made which was done strictly for financial purposes. He had seen his power in Hollywood diminish in the 1980s to the point where he felt he had to make another Godfather, even though he didn’t really want to, and he has complained that Paramount Pictures steered him away from making the purely elegant Godfather Part III he would’ve preferred. He has often compared himself at this time to Michael Corleone: he was the ruthless genius in exile being manipulated by his enemies to do something he did not want to do.
Though for being manipulated, Coppola sure did have the best team available to do the best film possible. Mario Puzo returned to help write the script, and Coppola had some more of his most important collaborators back in place, including production designer Dean Tavoularis and cinematographer Gordon Willis. The biggest obstacle seemed to be trying to convince Robert Duvall to come back. The failure to do so could have been this movie’s downfall. But I digress until later.
To give a bit of background as to my approach to the film, I did not see any Godfather film until I was living by myself in a Reno apartment and going to college. This despite the original film being my mother’s number one favorite movie of all time and the first film having quite a bit of airplay in my house growing up. But I was too engulfed in the adventures of Han Solo and Luke Skywalker to care about a bunch of mobsters. It wasn’t until later in life, when my mother had told me about the mob activities in her hometown of Chicago, that I cared to give a look at the trilogy. I picked up the entire DVD set and decided to finally sit and watch them all. I gave my opinions on the two previous films above, so I am not going to repeat them here. But memories of me being a twelve year old who watched his parents come home in sheer disappointment over how bad the third film ended up being were still going through my head. I was not looking forward to watching The Godfather Part III for the first time, and was dreading the worst.
What I Thought Then: I will say this right off the bat. On a strictly visual level, the third Godfather film is just as magnificent as the first two. Coppola was right to keep Tavoularis and Willis on his team, as each frame lights up with extravagant visions of opera houses and Italian culture. Original producer Robert Evans has said the main reason he hired Coppola to do the first Godfather film was because he ‘wanted to smell the spaghetti.’ That ability is still here on the third, and for a man who felt financial pressure to do The Godfather Part III, he did not slack in this department.
Let me get the elephant in the room out of the way now. The performance of Coppola’s daughter Sofia is one of the most lauded parts of not only this, but ANY film in cinematic history. She was the recipient of not one, but TWO Raspberry Awards back in 1990. She is looked at as the unanecdoted poison of The Godfather Part III. In my first viewing, I have to say I completely agreed with them. Maybe it was because of what my mom would say (and STILL says) about how much Sofia brought the film down. It is hard to debate. I’ll get to more about her later. But there are way more problems than that. The Godfather Part III is a sluggish movie with nothing to say about the moral rot of the powerful that the first two parts didn’t say much better. Also, more than Sofia, The Godfather Part III is weighed down by Al Pacino’s fairly inert turn as Michael Corleone. Unbelievably, it seems by the time 1990 rolled around, Pacino totally lost the feel for the character of Michael. It’s not just that Pacino changed so much physically between II and III, but all through the film, except for the confession scene, I never felt like I was watching Michael Corleone. It unfortunately just felt like another pedestrian late-career Al Pacino performance. The calculation and the calmness of the character from the two previous films was drastically missing.
There are so many things which added to too many elements compromising the overwhelming tragedy which should have defined The Godfather Part III that I don’t know where to start. For example, after talking about Michael’s rise and sins in the first two films, Coppola and Puzo are now telling a story about the Corleone family’s umpteenth attempt to strike a deal that will simultaneously legitimize their business, atone for past sins, and sever all their ties with organized crime. But even back then it was clear to me throughout this film that Coppola didn’t have any affection left for these people. Part of what made The Godfather so influential was that through his striking direction, Coppola made mafia life look exciting and drastic. In The Godfather Part III, all that affection and excitement is lost.
Overall, I thought that The Godfather Part III was a not up to par end to a still classic series. When it was over, Michael was dead, and my affection for the first two was not affected.
What I Think Now: Coppola has often said that The Godfather Saga to him has always been about fathers trying to make a better life for their children by making choices that ultimately spread sin to the very people they were trying to protect. With The Godfather Part III, Coppola defined his characters by throwing his daughter to the wolves, but with the best intentions. However, watching the film this time, I noticed that Sofia was not the worst part of the film. Overall, I did not think she was terrible. To me the only scene where she was truly bad is when Michael forbids her from seeing (a sometimes worse) Andy Garcia and she argues with him and proceeds to run away. It’s the only scene where she has to do some real emoting, and she is just not good at it. Sure, it would have been great if Winona Ryder (my all time favorite Hollywood beauty, by the way. Call me Winona) was able to take the role as Coppola had asked. I would have loved to see Jennifer Jason Leigh (call me, Jennifer) in the role. And the premise of the late Rebecca Schaeffer taking the role on after a reportedly tremendous audition prior to an untimely death is intriguing to think about. As is the audition and attempts by Madonna to take the role of Mary. But again, despite all her flaws, I think Sofia as Mary is not the most deterrent part of the film.
What I noticed the most this time about The Godfather Part III‘s flaws is simply this. Very little about it is merely implied. Everything the movie means to say about sin, repentance, and fearsome legacies is just said through badly written exposition. Also, more than the presence of Sofia, The Godfather Part III is missing Robert Duvall. His character was essential to the Corleone family saga and deserved a better coda than what he got. The loss of Tom Hagen really hurts The Godfather Part III. But the behind the scenes problem came down to money. Duvall wanted the same salary as Pacino and Diane Keaton, as well as to be billed as a lead. High demands? Maybe. But guess what? He deserved it. Could you imagine a Godfather Part III with Tom Hagen and Michael finally settling their affairs? It would have been a fitting and potentially classic end to the saga. Tom’s lack of presence and Duvall not being there to bounce off Pacino hurt and affected ALL parts of the film’s production.
But there were more positive things I noticed this time than before. All of the film’s flaws don’t take away from the beauty of scenes like the one where Michael gives his long-overdue confession to the man in line to become the pope, while standing in a garden. Or the touching chaos of the Corleone family gatherings, where their in-house secrets are shared. Or the decay of the Lake Tahoe estate where much of the second film took place. As a visual aid to moral and physical decline, The Godfather Part III looks more stunning with each passing frame. I just wish everyone in it would just stop talking and spilling exposition like a child does bottles of milk.
However, no matter what anyone thinks of this movie, it does have one scene that I would rank among my favorite scenes from the entire trilogy – the scene when Michael’s son plays that song on the guitar and Michael reminisces about his life is heart tugging. Sure, it is an excuse to give viewers some moments of clarity about the films. But Coppola is meticulous about when to add heart to his films, and his use of this moment worked for me. Even if the entire film doesn’t.
In Conclusion: I feel The Godfather Part III‘s reputation wouldn’t be nearly as bad if the first two movies weren’t such beloved classics. There are times when I find it deeply moving. The ending where Mary is killed, which in a metaphorical sense kills Michael too, is extremely powerful. Francis Ford Coppola himself has said The Godfather films were the biggest home movie in history. They are in essence the most personal movies he ever made. But by the time Part III came out, the first two films had long since been anointed as two of the best movies ever made. How can you possibly live up to that? Coppola deserves praise for refusing to take the lazy way out by simply giving us more of the same of what we’ve seen before. He’s showing his characters evolved, and how the world around them has changed. He is so skilled at layering his scenes with details that give a sense of reality, and it is impossible to overlook his cache in bringing them to life.
The big reason The Godfather Part III falls so far short of the first two films is because of its acting. Instead of surrounding Pacino with all-time great actors giving peak level performances like Marlon Brando, James Caan, Robert Duvall and Robert DeNiro, Coppola’s got him playing off of Sofia, Garcia, and the horribly written return of Diane Keaton. It also should be noted that Bridget Fonda’s character just disappearing from the film might be the weirdest and most underwritten thing about the entire series. I am glad I revisited The Godfather Part III, because there were so many positive things about it which I did not notice the first time. However, in doing so I also noticed more flaws, and Coppola’s starvation for money is detrimental to his characters. Still, as a conclusion to a classic series, it never stood a chance.
Jack Falvey IV
August 26, 2015 @ 4:09 pm
This is a film that is on a very short list of movies I don’t even acknowledge as existing. There’s a mood and an atmosphere that seems disingenuous to me about this film especially in contrast to parts 1 and 2. I’ve always found Pacino’s performance to be an almost caricature of what he delivered in the first two films, with the exaggerated grey hair and the crazy screams to “Fredo”. Also, let’s not forget, let’s NOT forget, Robert Duvall > George Hamilton.