Godfather 3 is still the only film I know to seriously tackle the Vatican banking scandal, which really happened, and with serious economic reprecussions.
The script was interesting , but no tom Hagen, Sofia is not actress and even the villains were not good... don attobello was okay but nothing compared to hyman Roth
In complete agreement with Bill - Appolonia was definitely the love of Michael's life and her story arc in Godfather 1 is perhaps the most beautiful of the series. I have always thought that Michael would have been much better off had Appolonia survived than he ever was with Kay. To me the dynamic between both wives mirrors the conflict within Michael himself; being caught between two mutually exclusive worlds. Appolonia is Italian, her love is pure and unconditional and Michael can be the truest version of himself with her. Kay is an American, she represents Michael's search for legitimacy and acceptance in the new world, she loves Michael for what he could be, not for what he actually is. These relationships demonstrate the tension that Michael, and many other children of immigrants, feel. A struggle between family, tradition and loyalty and a search for legitimacy and acceptance in America.
Well said, apollonia would have been a traditional wife who kept her mouth shut. Kay was not neccesarily a bad wife but she was in love with the old Micheal before he got mixed up in the business
@@bfoz but he did truly fall in love with Appolonia but unfortunately his bad choices was what began his struggles cause it endangered those he loved beginning with Appolonia & coming full circle with his daughter. Kay was in the middle cause she didn't die but was in a horrible marriage & witnessed the death of her daughter because of Micheal
Michael's and Kay's kids are not full blooded Italian, their son could not be made. "Real greaseball shit" Michael would have wanted legit careers for his children, a non Sicilian Mother would assure this.
The fact that the studio felt 3 could work without Duvall shows how stupid Hollywood executives are or a least can be. It’s like when MGM was making a killing at the box office with the James Bond franchise but wouldn’t give Sean Connery a raise.
The Godfather Part 3 (1990) was frankly not as bad as I thought it would be when I watched it for the first time. The bad reputation of this film is not unfounded especially when you compare it to Part 1 and 2. But as a separate film? It's actually not that bad. The Godfather Part 3 is definitely a downgrade from its predecessors, but it's still a good film and an acceptable end to this Trilogy.
I recently watched Godfather Coda (aka Part III) and it was not a good film. The first 45 minutes or hour was good but it nose dived after Vincent Mancini made his kill in middle of the street fair. Not going to give away spoilers. Coppola was ok actually because she played the nice innocent italian girl. The villains were weak even though I like Eli Wallach (honorary italian in my book like James Caan). The dialogue was quite good and the scenes with Pacino including him confessing to the Cardinal was powerful.
She was supposed to get on your nerves. She was the outsider that was on the outside. It’s a movie about family like the Sopranos was about family. Like Tom, being almost the opposite, he’s the outsider that’s more in/involved than anyone. By him being in both regimes (Vito’s and Michael’s), it makes him more of a big piece of the puzzle than anyone
Chris is right, the modern equivalent of fan disappointment is probably "Phantom Menace". I was a cinema mgr in Portland, OR when that came out & there were fans camping outside the theatre days before release; the anticipation & hysteria was unreal...and then it released. It was almost an ethereal experience seeing excited grown-up adult fans dressed up like Luke Skywalker & Han Solo literally run into the theatre to get their seat & walk out of the theatre after it was over like they had just been to a funeral. Some were like Bill's stepdad trying to convince themselves that it was great, saying things like "well, George Lucas did it again, it's, it's....well, he did it again" to looks of disbelief from their friends. I can only imagine how this movie must have been a punch to the gut for all those superfans who know GF 1 & 2 by heart. Bill is correct though that Coppola never wanted or intended this to be a "part III"; he conceptualized it to be an epilogue or (as his modern cut makes clear) a coda to the earlier stories. Oh, if only it had Winona Ryder & Robert Duvall...in some alternate reality, some multiverse, there is a perfect GF3 with them in the cast.
The best reaction I got from someone who saw "The Phantom Menace" when it came out, was it was a good summer popcorn movie, but it sucked as a "Star Wars" movie.
The level of hate on this movie baffles me to no end. Is it as great as the first two...? Hell no!! But it is by no means a cinematic debacle. Sofia Coppola, who isn't that much of an actress to begin with, didn't ruin the movie whole. Anybody who says that either wants attention or hasn't seen that many movies to begin with. Andy Garcia is great. Talia Shire nearly steals the movie. And the final 30 minutes at the opera house is one of the most gorgeous and suspenseful set pieces committed on film. I still remember how much of a gut punch it was to see Michael mourn like that at the end juxtaposed with the flashbacks of all the women in his life who are either dead or actively hate him. The fundamental issue of the film is that there's no Tom Hagen. Tom is as crucial to the journey of Michael as Sonny and Fredo were. It's like having Return of the Jedi without Darth Vader, you can't do it. Paramount to their detriment should've offered Duvall his full quote to appear in the picture, but they figured all they needed was Pacino and everything would work itself out. Uhhh...nope!
This film actually was well-received when it came out. I've always felt the degree of hatred towards it is grossly unfair, generated mainly by those who weren't there for its theatrical run. As good as the first two films? Certainly not. But a far better third installment of an iconic franchise than, say, Return of the Jedi, Last Crusade, or Matrix: Revolutions.
This is the first time I've watched one of these on video, and I must say that it adds a lot... The moment where Chris looks at the camera when Bill says something inappropriate is just gold.
I’m upset that they didn’t mention the whole scene when Michael confesses his sins to the priest. Just for priest to be Pope John Paul I and died in the movie.
Godfather 4 could have still been about Michael Corleone because he doesn't actually die in part 3 until he is significantly older. So if Godfather 3 takes place in 1979, we can assume Michael doesn't die until the 90s based on how much he appears to be aged up in his death scene. A fourth movie could take place within that time frame.
a movie about a man who gave his life to his Family and the impossible trials of "getting out". i dont understand why more people didnt appreciate how well made this movie is and how it pushes its point so effortlessly. i honestly cant find a single flaw with it and its in my top 10 greatest films ever made, i could watch it forever.
I always thought the idea that Michael's son played such a tiny role in Godfather III was a curious decision. In a series of films that is all about family it would have been interested if they went another route with his character. Anthony Corleone as an opera singer was a major fail IMHO.
The easiest way to go would be Andy Garcia as Anthony and rework the character from the ground up. There are many ways to go with that. It could even set up more films. They tried to be overly creative instead of going logical. Vincent wasn’t necessary as a character since Sonny did have a legitimate son. Recast Andy as Michael’s son and bring in Tom’s actual son with another actor, and create a conflict between them stemming from the past. Easy.
Simmons doesn't believe that Matt Dillon was considered for Vincent? That seems very credible to me. Dillon gave a series of really great performances in the 80s, had done fantastic work with Coppola and was one of the few emerging stars that consistently played Italian roles. I'm baffled by Simmons' disbelief.
I think it was stephen fry who said that any piece of art done as a period setting invariably winds up saying more about the time it was actually made than the time it's supposed to be representing as a story
1:10 In 2003 I was pumped for T3 and Rise of the Machines sucked hard after the first two Terminator films are near perfect, Ray Liotta got robbed in 1990, Pacino in the 80's was nuts
Godfather 3 is an awesome movie. Of course it is not as good as 1 or 2 but it's still damn good. Pacino's performance is one of the most underrated in film history. It's the same guy he is just older and damaged. I bought it. The clear issue was no Tom Hagen. I think if Duvall is in it it would have been in the same league as 1 and 2. The storyline is actually my favorite in all 3 films.
Bill underrates Kay a little, but Apollonia's memory clearly hangs over Michael's life. Killing Sollozzo and McCluskey is not the moment that he loses his innocence. He clearly had to kill many men on the field of battle in WWII. Apollonia's death is the moment when he realizes that what he was born into is so dark that he must protect what he has no matter the cost, and he loses his soul in the process. That was hinted at in Pt. III, but they never make it explicit. That time in Sicily was the closest he ever had to an idyll, and the violent disruption of it turned him cold.
Godfather III gets a bad wrap. It's a solid movie with great performances from Pacino and Garcia. I actually wanted to see a 4th based on Garcia's character. Comparing part 3 to the first 2 isn't right. The first 2 are arguably 2 of the greatest movies of all time.
Sophia Coppola being a terrible actress affects the movie on another level - actors don't act in a vacuum, they play off each other - even the most experienced legends. So Sophia being bad dampens the performances of all the actors she's with. The worse she is, the worse they are, thus ruining the entire movie. God they must have been furious when they realized how bad she is, and how they just had to deal with it.
Thomas Crown III I hate it so much! I wish they’d put it on a separate feed. I find the people so smarmy and self satisfied. I just popped in here to see what they looked like.
It's my favorite trilogy of ALL TIME, and I hate how everyone acts like its pure trash it's a VERY GOOD movie but when you compare it to arguably the two greatest movies ever made then yes it's not on that level. But people act like it's trash and it's not. It was nominated for Best Picture for Gods Sake.
I'm convinced Pacino's skiing in the mid to late 80s and it changed him. Also, nothing better than CR giving with Bill and looking right into the camera.
I've tried to watch Godfather III so many times. I saw it once initially. It was cringe in the first ten minutes when Kay out of nowhere starts screaming at Michael that she doesn't trust him. It's exhausting and not in a good way.
Just found this channel great stuff... but what's Bill's trigger with Kay? Same Part 2 - it's a bit much. Edit. I had to go back and watch the scene with the school kids. After Apollonia was murdered. In that Kay scene in CT when he comes to her and proposes - there was a dissolve between the scenes. A time passage between when she is walking with the kids he walks up and when they are walking down the street before she gets in the car. So there was a passage of time - where we can believe the kids would have been taken back to school.
1)Sophia Coppola was in it 2)No Robert Duvall 3) The movie spent time going over shit that people already knew 4) Diane Keeton....who gave a damn about Kay, when Michael closed the door on her that's the last time I needed to see her
Is it being negative or positive to say the other 2 are better? Probably both, part II was so amazing that it would have taken some kind of miracle to match it. I thought part II topped the first one...that's a whole different argument for another video, may be good clickbait..
Agreed, although I would guess it's more an ignorant take than lazy; how many films of Franks have they really seen. Besides the 2 you mentioned (the latter is an especially great example) I would recommend the Manchurian Candidate, Some Came Running or Guys and Dolls. It's sad that some of the self-appointed arbiters of pop culture and film don't really believe film-making existed before the mid 70s or so. At least they often act and talk that way. Hollywood's greatest decade is the 50s (imo, or the 40's maybe) and 30's were no slouch either not to mention all the incredible foreign cinema all throughout the last century= Italian neo-realism, french new wave, various British films from Powell and Pressburger and Carol Reed and Asian Cinema from Ozu and on and on and on . . .
The problem was 2 things. Number one 16 years had gone by they shouldn’t have made it to begin with, but Coppola wanted to name it the death of Michael corleone not part 3 cuz part 3 added expectations that couldn’t be met leaving those 2 alone not attaching more to them would’ve helped and no Robert duvall
The plot of this movie was as good as the other two. Sophia C's performance, Tom's absence, and wasting time with Michael trying to rekindle a romance with Kay is what ruined the movie for me.
The Godfather Part 3 is like the least hot chick in the final round of Miss America. Nowhere near as good as the winner but crushing any chick at your local spin gym.
One aspect of Godfather III that has gone mostly unnoticed: early in the film some newspaper headlines indicate that the events are taking place in November 1979, but almost nothing in the film is appropriate to that period. Costumes, hairstyles, interiors - they're all contemporary 1990. Women have shoulder pads. Men wear double-breasted suits. Aside from some of the cars, nothing looks like 1979. I noticed this when I saw the film in theaters on its initial release. I wonder what Coppola's thought process was...
A lot of the acting was either terrible or just out of place. Andy Garcia, great actor, but he seemed over the top for over the top's sake. I didn't buy Eli Wallach's character. Sophia wasn't as bad as some say but she was forgettable. And the whole Vatican angle was terrible. Pacino really carried the film and the final two scenes with him on the stairs and in Italy were epic.
That real world Vatican plot would have been to hard for the best writer to fictionalize. Not getting a real actress after Winona Ryder dropped out and using Sophia Coppola was the nail in the coffin for GFIII. I'm not going to lie I still watch because of strong performances by Pacino.
There’s an edit and time lapse between when Kay is with the kids and when she gets into the car- Notice when she gets into the car , she is alone( presumably having taken care of who gets to take her place-
I remember at the time it came out Talia Shire had started doing this dramatic ‘Italian Woman’ acting by waving her arms about. She did it in Rocky 5 as well.
I dont agree AT ALL with the opinion that Andy Garcia is great in this. He spends the whole movie overacting as hell. There is a huge gap between his phisicality and how loud he sounds. That is jarring to witness. You actually see him struggle with it. He is good in a couple of scenes, like when he kills the thugs sent by Joey Sassa, but overall, not belieavable to me. I mean, A LOT of people overact, like Elli Wallach, who is a great actor, and that is the problem with the director, not reigning in some of that. I think. I agree that San Giacomo would ve been great as the daughter. She is very sexy, but a great actress as well.
One of the major problems is the dialogue. It's like they had a random Godfather dialogue generator machine. Wasn't there a "stone in my shoe" reference...was there a "wetting my beak" reference? I could be wrong. It's been decades since I saw it. All the dialogue sounded like an echo of the previous two movies. But yeah, it wasn't all Sophia Coppola: I don't generally get "taken out" of watching a movie by who's onscreen, but George Hamilton had to be the worst choice. Eli Wallach wasn't convincing. There was just TOO much wrong with this movie for it to be great. Yes, Pacino and Garcia gave great performances and who doesn't tear up a little bit when (spoilers) Sophia gets shot in the end? It was an opportunity lost.
Pacino's character in GF3 was off base. In 1 and 2 his character's were clever, reserved and sphynx like which draws you into the character. In 3 his Character was unconfident, twitchy, and nervous. That bothered me to look at that for three hours with no explanation on why his character's were polar opposites.
I always thought Micheal went back to who he originally was before he got mixed up in the family business. Also he was a old man dealing with his mortality with the realization that what he done was for nothing so he's trying to redeem himself & the family only to realize it was impossible & realizing he wasnt that evil man anymore who could go back to doing the terrible things he did in his past
@@rxtsec1 So the young Man that told Sonny in a mild and soft tone that he enlisted in the Marine's in GF 1 had the same demeanor in GF 3? Pacino tanked that role it was horrible.
@@chess7558 I thought he was different as a old man but also a good man like he was originally before he got mixed up. Also people do change. I'm almost 40 & not the same person I used to be. Also in part one his character changed. So people like you aren't really mad that he changed or if you are that's unreasonable cause people change all the time. What your mad at is he changed into somebody you didn't like. As for me I'm fine with it & find it believable because of who his character was originally & when you do the things he did you become guilt ridden & want redemption which is what this whole movie was about
@@rxtsec1 Your missing my point. Im ok with a character changing his or her demeanor but as an actor or director you haft to show how and why. You said he had the same character in 1 and 2 and your absolutely wrong. That was my original statement that he over acted and it shown which is why GF3 is considered a piece of shit in alot of people's opinions.
@@chess7558 I said he was a good man in 1 & then changed later in the movie. In 2 you saw how evil he became because of that change. In part 3 it doesn't take a genius to realize why he's guilt ridden, sick & wants redemption for himself and his family which I can believe because he originally was a good man which is similar to part one. I get your point. I just disagree with it and have given you my reasons why I feel that way
I think that combined with Duvall not being in it doomed the movie from the jump. It just was never going to work. Pay Duvall and get someone else to play Mary or just wait until Winona Ryder feels better.
23:00 Exactly. G3 failed to show the viewer how the Italian Mafia fell in America. Not that it ever went away fully but how is stopped being what it was in the era G1 & G2 take place. It loosely mentions it through a terribly acted character of Joey Zaza and even then barely. You get the idea that he's a scumbag and not doing it the way they did things back in the day. That's all. They allude to the idea that everything had changed without *showing you* that it had changed. You just get Michael being different and Connie mentioning it a few times. Which is strange because the entire movie has the aura and overtones of the mafia itself having changed. It's always there but there is no single scene to show this fact. There is no "call from the brothel" in G2 or "meeting to finance a drug operation" in G1 to cement both characters and scenery. It's a very empty, vapid movie. I don't even think Pacino was all that great in it. 1:00:33 That's the point! It alludes to what I said above in that the mafia had fallen off to the point of sending junkies to do your hits. Even that doesn't get so much as a mention from Vincent *because this new, weak, scumbag-filled mafia is all he knows* . Of course that's who Zaza sent. Again, it alludes and hints at it but never once shows you. It breaks a cardinal sin of filmmaking.
It's a fine film. Problem is you watch it after GF1 and GF2 and it pails in comparison. But I dare anyone to watch a handful of the "great" films of the last ten years and then watch GF3. Try watching Argo or Green Book or Hurt Locker and then watch GF3. It'll feel like GF2 next to that stuff.
I agree with the take that GF3 is better than most films, just so much 'worse' than the preceding films in the trilogy. It's like the worst Michael Jackson album or the ugliest supermodel.
@@blakeharris58 thats because it was never intended to be the concluding part of a trilogy though. the studio insisted it had to be called godfather part 3 at the time for obvious reasons but Coppola has always insisted he told the Godfather story in Parts 1&2. 'Part 3' was meant to be an epilogue to the Godfather story, not an epic crime story in the same vein as one and two. When you look it at that way the decisions made int he movie make far more sense. Coppola's thankfully released a final cut of the movie that restores the original title he intended: "Mario Puzo's The Godfather Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone. Its released on Blku Ray next month
@@supremeworld87 I've been reading about the Coda film, very interested. *Most interested* in 'Francis and The Godfather' with Oscar Isaac and Jake Gyllenhaal. I just want to see modern actors re-create some of the classic scenes.
Agreed. I would also add the Insider into that equation. Pacino and Crowe worked great together. I think in both those movies he took it a little easier on the whoa lol.
Fantastic episode. Chris's impressions of Gilday has me rolling. I can't believe Bill didn't go on another hilarious rant about Al Martino sucking as Johnny Fontaine. I think Sean is wrong, Bill doesn't hate Diane Keaton he hates Kay.
What went wrong is it was called godfather part 3. It wasnt supposed to be the third part of a trilogy it was an epilogue to the godfather part 1&2 which is why it was never supposed to carry the godfather name and coppola intended the name "the death of Michael corleone". The studio ultimately forced the name godfather part 3 which is why its seen as such a disappointment when looked side by side with 1 & 2.
@@BishopWalters12 as an epilogue to the godfather story, which is completed in part 2, it is a fine addition. If looked at as part 3 of a trilogy, its bad and doesnt come close to the two that came before.
@@supremeworld87 Who needs a 3 hour epilogue about an old beaten down Michael? Godfather 2 showed us everything we needed to know, Michael lost his real family, his soul and it didn't matter if he was killed a year later or lived to be 90. He was gone and there was no coming back.
If they were able to get Robert Duvall back and didn't have to replace him with George Hamilton and if Winona Ryder didn't have to drop out and have to replace with Sofia Coppola it would've been a much better movie. I mean it might've not gotten as high of reviews as part I and II. But it wouldn't have been that far behind them.
without Tom Hagen there was no possible confrontation with Michael that would be deep enough to make a great story. Duvall wanted as much as Diane got, NOT Al.
Andy Garcia is fantastic in it. No Duvall certainly hurt. Having Sophia Coppola instead of Winona Ryder (who was originally cast) really hurt the movie as well.
People are so pushed by the narrative of "good" or "bad" They've grown to like Mike's story. Obviously that's what the writer want to you assholes to see. But, those people has no education on how to critique a movie.
Al Pacino is what went wrong. Everytime I try to think of other flaws, Pacino is the main one for me. I get the redemption thing and all that, but he did a total 180 on the whole character. It was like Pacino never played Michael before. All the coolness was gone. In GF3 he was Weak, emotional and then he's a diabetic to boot and all the kissing up to Kay. Yuck. All in a dozen or so years. Ridiculous.
Chris's epic International Immobiliare bits:
45:53
46:31
1:01:22
1:07:47
1:16:46
1:22:12
Jan Puhar can we pin this comment to the top?
Those moments were absolutely hilarious 😂
Thank you
You've done God's work here
Apex mountain for Chris
Godfather 3 is still the only film I know to seriously tackle the Vatican banking scandal, which really happened, and with serious economic reprecussions.
It might be the only redeeming thing about it in my eyes.
Agree that alone makes it a great film for me
The script was interesting , but no tom Hagen, Sofia is not actress and even the villains were not good... don attobello was okay but nothing compared to hyman Roth
@@azizmutlaq5370 Much better than in part 2
That aspect was excellent. And, of course, Joe Mantegna.
In complete agreement with Bill - Appolonia was definitely the love of Michael's life and her story arc in Godfather 1 is perhaps the most beautiful of the series. I have always thought that Michael would have been much better off had Appolonia survived than he ever was with Kay. To me the dynamic between both wives mirrors the conflict within Michael himself; being caught between two mutually exclusive worlds. Appolonia is Italian, her love is pure and unconditional and Michael can be the truest version of himself with her. Kay is an American, she represents Michael's search for legitimacy and acceptance in the new world, she loves Michael for what he could be, not for what he actually is. These relationships demonstrate the tension that Michael, and many other children of immigrants, feel. A struggle between family, tradition and loyalty and a search for legitimacy and acceptance in America.
Well said, apollonia would have been a traditional wife who kept her mouth shut. Kay was not neccesarily a bad wife but she was in love with the old Micheal before he got mixed up in the business
But Michael wasn't struggling with this. He merely went to Italy to hide out.
@@bfoz but he did truly fall in love with Appolonia but unfortunately his bad choices was what began his struggles cause it endangered those he loved beginning with Appolonia & coming full circle with his daughter. Kay was in the middle cause she didn't die but was in a horrible marriage & witnessed the death of her daughter because of Micheal
Michael's and Kay's kids are not full blooded Italian, their son could not be made. "Real greaseball shit"
Michael would have wanted legit careers for his children, a non Sicilian Mother would assure this.
@@rxtsec1 Yeah, because some weak men seek out submissive "traditional" mute sex objects since they can't deal with women at all
Not having Robert Duvall is what ultimately killed this movie.
George Hamilton was horribly miscast in this movie....2nd only to Sophia Coppola.
Well said
That was a big problem.
The fact that the studio felt 3 could work without Duvall shows how stupid Hollywood executives are or a least can be. It’s like when MGM was making a killing at the box office with the James Bond franchise but wouldn’t give Sean Connery a raise.
You think Tom Hagen should've been recast, then go with the original script?
I thought the best scene of the movie was Michael's confession to Cardinal Lamberto. Just the most real and raw scene in the film.
Agreed. I’m shocked it didn’t come up.
Can you imagine the guy about to become pope telling you "Your sins are terrible. It is just that you suffer?"
Totally
I killed my mother’s son
@@brandonfranzen5191 HEART CRUSHING
The Godfather Part 3 (1990) was frankly not as bad as I thought it would be when I watched it for the first time.
The bad reputation of this film is not unfounded especially when you compare it to Part 1 and 2. But as a separate film? It's actually not that bad.
The Godfather Part 3 is definitely a downgrade from its predecessors, but it's still a good film and an acceptable end to this Trilogy.
Completely agree its definitely a guilty pleasure movie for me. Sofia Coppola is bad but she doesn't singlehandedly ruin the movie for me.
it's a watchable movie but a poor ending.
@@vizionaryentertainment8464 Sofia was a cutey, but not the most experienced actress.
I recently watched Godfather Coda (aka Part III) and it was not a good film. The first 45 minutes or hour was good but it nose dived after Vincent Mancini made his kill in middle of the street fair. Not going to give away spoilers. Coppola was ok actually because she played the nice innocent italian girl. The villains were weak even though I like Eli Wallach (honorary italian in my book like James Caan). The dialogue was quite good and the scenes with Pacino including him confessing to the Cardinal was powerful.
We need a "INTERNATIONAL IMMOBILIARE" t-shirt NOW
His last performance that has nuance? Do you even watch movies Bill??? Donnie Brasco, Carlito's Way, Heat, The Insider, Paterno, The Irishman.
Devil's Advocate and the Dr.Kavarkian movie
Insomnia
Jerry 85g where was the nuance in his devils advocate performance?!
Nick M lol yeah that’s not a good example.
Carlito's Way is Pacino's best performance of the 90s.
Bill's hate for Diane Keaton in the Godfather series is real, lol
moresources it’s like she wronged him in another life or something. Mentioning the hair before the incest as what’s aged the worst? Yeesh.
@@jomarch1085 I wasn't thrilled with Diane Keaton either, maybe she was miscast, or the script. Some how she just seemed out of place.
Real talk. Bill really ain't feelin' Diane Keaton!
P Pumpkin she was supposed to be out of place
She was supposed to get on your nerves. She was the outsider that was on the outside. It’s a movie about family like the Sopranos was about family. Like Tom, being almost the opposite, he’s the outsider that’s more in/involved than anyone. By him being in both regimes (Vito’s and Michael’s), it makes him more of a big piece of the puzzle than anyone
Pacino's performance during the confessional scene is fantastic and the best part of the movie.
Absolutely agree, he’s good to great in this movie
Chris is right, the modern equivalent of fan disappointment is probably "Phantom Menace". I was a cinema mgr in Portland, OR when that came out & there were fans camping outside the theatre days before release; the anticipation & hysteria was unreal...and then it released. It was almost an ethereal experience seeing excited grown-up adult fans dressed up like Luke Skywalker & Han Solo literally run into the theatre to get their seat & walk out of the theatre after it was over like they had just been to a funeral. Some were like Bill's stepdad trying to convince themselves that it was great, saying things like "well, George Lucas did it again, it's, it's....well, he did it again" to looks of disbelief from their friends. I can only imagine how this movie must have been a punch to the gut for all those superfans who know GF 1 & 2 by heart. Bill is correct though that Coppola never wanted or intended this to be a "part III"; he conceptualized it to be an epilogue or (as his modern cut makes clear) a coda to the earlier stories. Oh, if only it had Winona Ryder & Robert Duvall...in some alternate reality, some multiverse, there is a perfect GF3 with them in the cast.
The best reaction I got from someone who saw "The Phantom Menace" when it came out, was it was a good summer popcorn movie, but it sucked as a "Star Wars" movie.
That never happened
4:05 Donnie Brasco, The Insider, Insomnia, Angels in America, You Don't Know Jack, Phil Spector, Paterno and The Irishman all say hello.
The level of hate on this movie baffles me to no end. Is it as great as the first two...? Hell no!! But it is by no means a cinematic debacle. Sofia Coppola, who isn't that much of an actress to begin with, didn't ruin the movie whole. Anybody who says that either wants attention or hasn't seen that many movies to begin with. Andy Garcia is great. Talia Shire nearly steals the movie. And the final 30 minutes at the opera house is one of the most gorgeous and suspenseful set pieces committed on film. I still remember how much of a gut punch it was to see Michael mourn like that at the end juxtaposed with the flashbacks of all the women in his life who are either dead or actively hate him.
The fundamental issue of the film is that there's no Tom Hagen. Tom is as crucial to the journey of Michael as Sonny and Fredo were. It's like having Return of the Jedi without Darth Vader, you can't do it. Paramount to their detriment should've offered Duvall his full quote to appear in the picture, but they figured all they needed was Pacino and everything would work itself out. Uhhh...nope!
This film actually was well-received when it came out. I've always felt the degree of hatred towards it is grossly unfair, generated mainly by those who weren't there for its theatrical run. As good as the first two films? Certainly not. But a far better third installment of an iconic franchise than, say, Return of the Jedi, Last Crusade, or Matrix: Revolutions.
My lucky coat
@@habovay3 No way, Return of the Jedi and Last Crusade were far better endings.
Bill never goes hard on Nicklaus cage for being in con air, which ruin a great movie. How can bill be so blind at times
This is the first time I've watched one of these on video, and I must say that it adds a lot... The moment where Chris looks at the camera when Bill says something inappropriate is just gold.
Happens all the time. These three are hilarious.
Not to mention Big Boy from Sick Tracy brilliant performance.
Coppola mentions in the DVD commentary that the incest is from the Coppola family history. Coppola was mocked as a child for his family history.
well....he should have been because that is pretty fucked up lol.
(*banjos playing Italian music*)
45:54 Chris had Sean dying over there.
Highlight of the episode
I’m upset that they didn’t mention the whole scene when Michael confesses his sins to the priest. Just for priest to be Pope John Paul I and died in the movie.
That was the best scene in the movie in my opinion.
"And you'll have the shortest executive career since that Pope that got poisoned!"
The tom hangan character was missed in the godfather part 3. They should have paid the man. It would have been a different movie 💯💯
You should of went to school. Would been a different comment.
@@Dajmoxker Both of you should HAVE gone to school. Jesus Christ lol
@@shyadeny oh wow, you don't even realize I'm doing that on purpose.
@@Dajmoxker of course you did ;)
@@shyadeny Damn, you got me, much smart.
Godfather 4 could have still been about Michael Corleone because he doesn't actually die in part 3 until he is significantly older.
So if Godfather 3 takes place in 1979, we can assume Michael doesn't die until the 90s based on how much he appears to be aged up in his death scene. A fourth movie could take place within that time frame.
a movie about a man who gave his life to his Family and the impossible trials of "getting out". i dont understand why more people didnt appreciate how well made this movie is and how it pushes its point so effortlessly. i honestly cant find a single flaw with it and its in my top 10 greatest films ever made, i could watch it forever.
Sophia Coppola’s acting is arguably the only flaw but it is an *ENORMOUS* flaw.
I always thought the idea that Michael's son played such a tiny role in Godfather III was a curious decision. In a series of films that is all about family it would have been interested if they went another route with his character. Anthony Corleone as an opera singer was a major fail IMHO.
The easiest way to go would be Andy Garcia as Anthony and rework the character from the ground up. There are many ways to go with that. It could even set up more films. They tried to be overly creative instead of going logical. Vincent wasn’t necessary as a character since Sonny did have a legitimate son. Recast Andy as Michael’s son and bring in Tom’s actual son with another actor, and create a conflict between them stemming from the past. Easy.
After Godfather III, Pacino became even more focused on live theater, which is why I have so much respect for him.
Simmons doesn't believe that Matt Dillon was considered for Vincent? That seems very credible to me. Dillon gave a series of really great performances in the 80s, had done fantastic work with Coppola and was one of the few emerging stars that consistently played Italian roles. I'm baffled by Simmons' disbelief.
And Nicolas Cage would've been an actual cousin to Sofia Coppola, no?
And Dillon already had a history of working with Coppola in The Outsiders and Rumble Fish.
Godfather 3 is honestly not a terrible movie, its just not as good as the first two.
Understatement of the decade
The movie is set in 1979 but nobody is wearing late ‘70s fashion styles!! All late 80s fashions! 🙄WTF?
Lol I’ve said that for years too. No one really brings that up.
I always chalked it up to all of them being very rich and having the money for the latest fashions. Still, over done.
I think it was stephen fry who said that any piece of art done as a period setting invariably winds up saying more about the time it was actually made than the time it's supposed to be representing as a story
1:10 In 2003 I was pumped for T3 and Rise of the Machines sucked hard after the first two Terminator films are near perfect, Ray Liotta got robbed in 1990, Pacino in the 80's was nuts
Same thing for me with that movie and with Aliens 3.
Godfather 3 is an awesome movie. Of course it is not as good as 1 or 2 but it's still damn good. Pacino's performance is one of the most underrated in film history. It's the same guy he is just older and damaged. I bought it. The clear issue was no Tom Hagen. I think if Duvall is in it it would have been in the same league as 1 and 2. The storyline is actually my favorite in all 3 films.
Love the pod guys!...Appreciate you doing it...Everyone be careful out there!
Bill underrates Kay a little, but Apollonia's memory clearly hangs over Michael's life. Killing Sollozzo and McCluskey is not the moment that he loses his innocence. He clearly had to kill many men on the field of battle in WWII. Apollonia's death is the moment when he realizes that what he was born into is so dark that he must protect what he has no matter the cost, and he loses his soul in the process. That was hinted at in Pt. III, but they never make it explicit. That time in Sicily was the closest he ever had to an idyll, and the violent disruption of it turned him cold.
Godfather III gets a bad wrap. It's a solid movie with great performances from Pacino and Garcia. I actually wanted to see a 4th based on Garcia's character. Comparing part 3 to the first 2 isn't right. The first 2 are arguably 2 of the greatest movies of all time.
Why is it not right to compare a movie in a trilogy to the others? Just because it’s not as good? That logic makes no sense
Citizen Kane is regarded as the greatest movie of all time.
Sophia Coppola being a terrible actress affects the movie on another level - actors don't act in a vacuum, they play off each other - even the most experienced legends. So Sophia being bad dampens the performances of all the actors she's with. The worse she is, the worse they are, thus ruining the entire movie. God they must have been furious when they realized how bad she is, and how they just had to deal with it.
The Rewatchables is what I enjoy most about The Ringer. And Laura San Giacomo as Mary is a brilliant pull.
Thomas Crown III I hate it so much! I wish they’d put it on a separate feed. I find the people so smarmy and self satisfied. I just popped in here to see what they looked like.
Is a good movie, but is too hard to keep the standars set by the first two.
Pacino in Insomia lacked nuance?
He was amazing in Insomnia.
It's one of his best performances.
He's about as mysterious as a clogged toliet is to a plumber
It's my favorite trilogy of ALL TIME, and I hate how everyone acts like its pure trash it's a VERY GOOD movie but when you compare it to arguably the two greatest movies ever made then yes it's not on that level. But people act like it's trash and it's not. It was nominated for Best Picture for Gods Sake.
I'm convinced Pacino's skiing in the mid to late 80s and it changed him. Also, nothing better than CR giving with Bill and looking right into the camera.
Bill was in rare form here. Truly at his best 🤣
I've tried to watch Godfather III so many times. I saw it once initially. It was cringe in the first ten minutes when Kay out of nowhere starts screaming at Michael that she doesn't trust him. It's exhausting and not in a good way.
Bill cannot let go of the poodle haircut. Hilarious!
Come on, it's horrific. 😁
It's just a perm.
So BIll complains about Kay's hair but not Pacino's?! And neither Sean or Chris say anything about it either? It is distracting.
Just found this channel great stuff... but what's Bill's trigger with Kay? Same Part 2 - it's a bit much. Edit. I had to go back and watch the scene with the school kids. After Apollonia was murdered. In that Kay scene in CT when he comes to her and proposes - there was a dissolve between the scenes. A time passage between when she is walking with the kids he walks up and when they are walking down the street before she gets in the car. So there was a passage of time - where we can believe the kids would have been taken back to school.
"I SAY WE HIT BACK AND TAKE ZASA OUT!!!" LOLed I don't even know how many times, got it on repeat.
1)Sophia Coppola was in it 2)No Robert Duvall 3) The movie spent time going over shit that people already knew 4) Diane Keeton....who gave a damn about Kay, when Michael closed the door on her that's the last time I needed to see her
P.S. ... Rudy Giuliani's first wife was his first cousin. You can look it up.
James Tobin what a mess the United States government is
I love Part III, I love the three movies.
Is it being negative or positive to say the other 2 are better? Probably both, part II was so amazing that it would have taken some kind of miracle to match it. I thought part II topped the first one...that's a whole different argument for another video, may be good clickbait..
@@bradmodd7856 positive if your talking 1 and 2
Who's the drummer in the poster behind Chris?
"Sinatra couldn't really act."
That's a lazy take. Go watch From Here to Eternity or The Man with the Golden Arm.
Agreed, although I would guess it's more an ignorant take than lazy; how many films of Franks have they really seen. Besides the 2 you mentioned (the latter is an especially great example) I would recommend the Manchurian Candidate, Some Came Running or Guys and Dolls. It's sad that some of the self-appointed arbiters of pop culture and film don't really believe film-making existed before the mid 70s or so. At least they often act and talk that way. Hollywood's greatest decade is the 50s (imo, or the 40's maybe) and 30's were no slouch either not to mention all the incredible foreign cinema all throughout the last century= Italian neo-realism, french new wave, various British films from Powell and Pressburger and Carol Reed and Asian Cinema from Ozu and on and on and on . . .
Agree with Johnny Thunder. Frank did his thing in The Manchurian Candidate.
@@deangelostarnes1795 Sinatra was even good in "On the Town."
The Man with the Golden Arm! Sinatra---an epic performance.
Frank was a great actor!
49:55 I always enjoy how the godfather discussions devolve into kay-corleone-hate
The problem was 2 things. Number one 16 years had gone by they shouldn’t have made it to begin with, but Coppola wanted to name it the death of Michael corleone not part 3 cuz part 3 added expectations that couldn’t be met leaving those 2 alone not attaching more to them would’ve helped and no Robert duvall
If you watch 3 more than twice its very good
The plot of this movie was as good as the other two. Sophia C's performance, Tom's absence, and wasting time with Michael trying to rekindle a romance with Kay is what ruined the movie for me.
IF YOU DONT LIKE GODFATHER PART 3..THEN YOU NEVER LIVED THAT LIFE...that LINE is used over and over in SOPRANOS
The Godfather Part 3 is like the least hot chick in the final round of Miss America. Nowhere near as good as the winner but crushing any chick at your local spin gym.
One aspect of Godfather III that has gone mostly unnoticed: early in the film some newspaper headlines indicate that the events are taking place in November 1979, but almost nothing in the film is appropriate to that period. Costumes, hairstyles, interiors - they're all contemporary 1990. Women have shoulder pads. Men wear double-breasted suits. Aside from some of the cars, nothing looks like 1979. I noticed this when I saw the film in theaters on its initial release. I wonder what Coppola's thought process was...
A lot of the acting was either terrible or just out of place. Andy Garcia, great actor, but he seemed over the top for over the top's sake. I didn't buy Eli Wallach's character. Sophia wasn't as bad as some say but she was forgettable. And the whole Vatican angle was terrible. Pacino really carried the film and the final two scenes with him on the stairs and in Italy were epic.
This is one of your guys’ best. The three of you are dynamite
That real world Vatican plot would have been to hard for the best writer to fictionalize. Not getting a real actress after Winona Ryder dropped out and using Sophia Coppola was the nail in the coffin for GFIII. I'm not going to lie I still watch because of strong performances by Pacino.
There’s an edit and time lapse between when Kay is with the kids and when she gets into the car-
Notice when she gets into the car , she is alone( presumably having taken care of who gets to take her place-
I remember at the time it came out Talia Shire had started doing this dramatic ‘Italian Woman’ acting by waving her arms about. She did it in Rocky 5 as well.
Perfect to end the video with...'' Sunday, Monday, Tuesday,....'' LOL
You guys are my heroes!
I dont agree AT ALL with the opinion that Andy Garcia is great in this. He spends the whole movie overacting as hell. There is a huge gap between his phisicality and how loud he sounds. That is jarring to witness. You actually see him struggle with it. He is good in a couple of scenes, like when he kills the thugs sent by Joey Sassa, but overall, not belieavable to me. I mean, A LOT of people overact, like Elli Wallach, who is a great actor, and that is the problem with the director, not reigning in some of that. I think.
I agree that San Giacomo would ve been great as the daughter. She is very sexy, but a great actress as well.
One of the major problems is the dialogue. It's like they had a random Godfather dialogue generator machine. Wasn't there a "stone in my shoe" reference...was there a "wetting my beak" reference? I could be wrong. It's been decades since I saw it. All the dialogue sounded like an echo of the previous two movies. But yeah, it wasn't all Sophia Coppola: I don't generally get "taken out" of watching a movie by who's onscreen, but George Hamilton had to be the worst choice. Eli Wallach wasn't convincing. There was just TOO much wrong with this movie for it to be great. Yes, Pacino and Garcia gave great performances and who doesn't tear up a little bit when (spoilers) Sophia gets shot in the end? It was an opportunity lost.
This is my first time watching one of these episodes and Sean getting so uncomfortable when anything provocative gets brought up is hilarious
'International immobilarle,'...I've bewitched THAT scene many times. Thank you😊
Would definitely love to hear an update from the Rewatchables Crew on their thoughts about the newly released GF3 Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone.
Thank you for making this. So good
“It was true...” dead silence. Love it. Don’t bad mouth the chairman of the board boys. 57:11
Patreon for goodfellas?? You just sold to spotify come on
it's almost like the dude not so secretly sucks
Bill Simmons loves that money.
The Archbishop impression has me howling 😂😂
GF 3 is realy about someone who tries to turn family business into corporation one and fails.
Pacino's character in GF3 was off base. In 1 and 2 his character's were clever, reserved and sphynx like which draws you into the character. In 3 his Character was unconfident, twitchy, and nervous. That bothered me to look at that for three hours with no explanation on why his character's were polar opposites.
I always thought Micheal went back to who he originally was before he got mixed up in the family business. Also he was a old man dealing with his mortality with the realization that what he done was for nothing so he's trying to redeem himself & the family only to realize it was impossible & realizing he wasnt that evil man anymore who could go back to doing the terrible things he did in his past
@@rxtsec1 So the young Man that told Sonny in a mild and soft tone that he enlisted in the Marine's in GF 1 had the same demeanor in GF 3? Pacino tanked that role it was horrible.
@@chess7558 I thought he was different as a old man but also a good man like he was originally before he got mixed up. Also people do change. I'm almost 40 & not the same person I used to be. Also in part one his character changed. So people like you aren't really mad that he changed or if you are that's unreasonable cause people change all the time. What your mad at is he changed into somebody you didn't like. As for me I'm fine with it & find it believable because of who his character was originally & when you do the things he did you become guilt ridden & want redemption which is what this whole movie was about
@@rxtsec1 Your missing my point. Im ok with a character changing his or her demeanor but as an actor or director you haft to show how and why. You said he had the same character in 1 and 2 and your absolutely wrong. That was my original statement that he over acted and it shown which is why GF3 is considered a piece of shit in alot of people's opinions.
@@chess7558 I said he was a good man in 1 & then changed later in the movie. In 2 you saw how evil he became because of that change. In part 3 it doesn't take a genius to realize why he's guilt ridden, sick & wants redemption for himself and his family which I can believe because he originally was a good man which is similar to part one. I get your point. I just disagree with it and have given you my reasons why I feel that way
“Has he aged the best or the worst?”
“He has added the most”
😂😂😂
Casting Sofia Coppola in The Godfather has to be the worst casting decision of all time.
I think that combined with Duvall not being in it doomed the movie from the jump. It just was never going to work. Pay Duvall and get someone else to play Mary or just wait until Winona Ryder feels better.
23:00
Exactly. G3 failed to show the viewer how the Italian Mafia fell in America. Not that it ever went away fully but how is stopped being what it was in the era G1 & G2 take place.
It loosely mentions it through a terribly acted character of Joey Zaza and even then barely. You get the idea that he's a scumbag and not doing it the way they did things back in the day. That's all.
They allude to the idea that everything had changed without *showing you* that it had changed. You just get Michael being different and Connie mentioning it a few times.
Which is strange because the entire movie has the aura and overtones of the mafia itself having changed. It's always there but there is no single scene to show this fact. There is no "call from the brothel" in G2 or "meeting to finance a drug operation" in G1 to cement both characters and scenery.
It's a very empty, vapid movie. I don't even think Pacino was all that great in it.
1:00:33
That's the point! It alludes to what I said above in that the mafia had fallen off to the point of sending junkies to do your hits. Even that doesn't get so much as a mention from Vincent *because this new, weak, scumbag-filled mafia is all he knows* . Of course that's who Zaza sent.
Again, it alludes and hints at it but never once shows you. It breaks a cardinal sin of filmmaking.
Is the "Coda" re-vision better??
It's a fine film. Problem is you watch it after GF1 and GF2 and it pails in comparison.
But I dare anyone to watch a handful of the "great" films of the last ten years and then watch GF3. Try watching Argo or Green Book or Hurt Locker and then watch GF3. It'll feel like GF2 next to that stuff.
Argo is a good movie. Much better than GF3
Hurt locker is a great film. So is Argo. What on earth are you talking about?
I agree with the take that GF3 is better than most films, just so much 'worse' than the preceding films in the trilogy. It's like the worst Michael Jackson album or the ugliest supermodel.
@@blakeharris58 thats because it was never intended to be the concluding part of a trilogy though. the studio insisted it had to be called godfather part 3 at the time for obvious reasons but Coppola has always insisted he told the Godfather story in Parts 1&2. 'Part 3' was meant to be an epilogue to the Godfather story, not an epic crime story in the same vein as one and two. When you look it at that way the decisions made int he movie make far more sense. Coppola's thankfully released a final cut of the movie that restores the original title he intended: "Mario Puzo's The Godfather Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone. Its released on Blku Ray next month
@@supremeworld87 I've been reading about the Coda film, very interested. *Most interested* in 'Francis and The Godfather' with Oscar Isaac and Jake Gyllenhaal. I just want to see modern actors re-create some of the classic scenes.
Everytime they talk about Pacino they never talk about Donnie Brasco.
One of the Most Underrated performances in Films period. Top 5 in Pacino performances
Agreed. I would also add the Insider into that equation. Pacino and Crowe worked great together. I think in both those movies he took it a little easier on the whoa lol.
4:07 Bruh, dafuq you talking about?
Donnie Brasco has one of his finest, more nuanced performances ever!
J.J. Abrahams remade the movie into Star Trek Into Darkness for one :)
Fantastic episode. Chris's impressions of Gilday has me rolling. I can't believe Bill didn't go on another hilarious rant about Al Martino sucking as Johnny Fontaine. I think Sean is wrong, Bill doesn't hate Diane Keaton he hates Kay.
What went wrong is it was called godfather part 3. It wasnt supposed to be the third part of a trilogy it was an epilogue to the godfather part 1&2 which is why it was never supposed to carry the godfather name and coppola intended the name "the death of Michael corleone". The studio ultimately forced the name godfather part 3 which is why its seen as such a disappointment when looked side by side with 1 & 2.
Agree
Never should've happened.
@@BishopWalters12 as an epilogue to the godfather story, which is completed in part 2, it is a fine addition. If looked at as part 3 of a trilogy, its bad and doesnt come close to the two that came before.
@@supremeworld87 Who needs a 3 hour epilogue about an old beaten down Michael? Godfather 2 showed us everything we needed to know, Michael lost his real family, his soul and it didn't matter if he was killed a year later or lived to be 90. He was gone and there was no coming back.
Part 3 has had some changes made to it and is getting re-released in December.
if this had been made no later than 1980, we may have had greatness again. (w/Duvall.)
If they were able to get Robert Duvall back and didn't have to replace him with George Hamilton and if Winona Ryder didn't have to drop out and have to replace with Sofia Coppola it would've been a much better movie. I mean it might've not gotten as high of reviews as part I and II. But it wouldn't have been that far behind them.
without Tom Hagen there was no possible confrontation with Michael that would be deep enough to make a great story. Duvall wanted as much as Diane got, NOT Al.
Great episode
The Michael/Gilday scene should have been the opening scene, it tells you everything about the deal and put Michael going Legit to the forefront.
So this is what happens when there are no sports...
I just got in, thought it was a movie channel and subscribed. Guess I'll leave now x)
This generation's The Godfather 3 is the final series of Game of Thrones. Heartbreaking stuff.
I haven’t seen the original Part 3 but the new version - Coda - is an amazing film. A worthy sequel.
Meh
They are not much different. I like the original GF3 much better. It explains the plot better. Coda is just a shorter version of the original.
Anthony Quinn would have been an AMAZING Don Altobello.
Can someone tell me what Kay was saying to Michael in Godfather 2 regarding Anthony? I couldn't pick out what being said with all of the yelling.
Internal Affairs rewatchable for your next one. Bill and Chris are spot on about how good that movie is.
Bill doesn’t watch movies with subtitles
Scarface had a Italian play a Cuban and The Godfather 3 had a Cuban play a Italian. Both actors did a great job.
lol
I was shocked at how much Vincent resembled young Vito (De Niro’s portrayal), once he lost the leather jacket and started wearing his hair back.
Garcia does not look Italian.
@@walliegirl2Garcia looks far more Italian than Pacino looks Cuban
I enjoyed it. But I also have the discipline of no expectations from anything. Take things as they come.
Live inside out.
I know it won’t happen. But, a Duvall - Pacino short film at Benihana would strike a few cords.
Andy Garcia is fantastic in it. No Duvall certainly hurt. Having Sophia Coppola instead of Winona Ryder (who was originally cast) really hurt the movie as well.
“(who was originally cast)”: as if we didn’t plan to watch the video.
Its the only way it could have ended for Michael.
Exactly
People are so pushed by the narrative of "good" or "bad"
They've grown to like Mike's story.
Obviously that's what the writer want to you assholes to see.
But, those people has no education on how to critique a movie.
Al Pacino is what went wrong. Everytime I try to think of other flaws, Pacino is the main one for me. I get the redemption thing and all that, but he did a total 180 on the whole character. It was like Pacino never played Michael before. All the coolness was gone. In GF3 he was Weak, emotional and then he's a diabetic to boot and all the kissing up to Kay. Yuck. All in a dozen or so years. Ridiculous.
I completely agree. There’s no way Michael would act the way he did in part 3. I don’t care how much guilt he has.