@robaquarian godfather 3 was made cause crappola was broke....again.
francis crappola went bankrupt TWICE---and allowed to keep his winery----he owns about 1,500 acres in exclusive california.
francis loves to WASTE MONEY.
the best way to watch the money scandal of godfather 3 is to think of crappola going bankrupt twice, and keeping his 1,500 acres and selling his soul to make the 3rd movie in order to keep on livin the ez life.
@monk22yrs i know i live a mile from his office in san francisco i've ran into him a bunch of times.all he cares about is wine and pasta sauce not movies
This film was a dreadful mess. Sofia Coppola was mind-numbingly horrible -- you can't polish that turd. The dialogue throughout the film was stilted and cringe-inducing. The final scene was like something out of a WWE wrestling match. This is one of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. I saw it once and believe me, I'll never watch it again -- and I'm a huge Andy Garcia fan.
Godfather 3 isn't a horrible film, but it is pointless. The whole scope of this saga is proving how Michael is like his family, even though he denies it to Kay at the beginning of the first film. When Michael finally realizes this at the end of Part II after killing his brother, the saga is over. We don't need another film with Michael constantly regretting his past. The final scene of Part II with him in his courtyard sitting silently is enough to tell us. GIII was made just for $.
@ThePhantom135 it was made for money but the idea was that now that Michael knows he's a crook, he's trying to clean it up. He's trying to atone for his sins, whether by being able to go legitimate or by getting close to the church. In a way, he comes face to face with a greater hypocrisy, the Church. The flaws was Copolla did not completly possess his subject matter like the others. In the end Michael's daughter is killed so he get punished but there's nothing more to it.
Blame Cher for Winona Ryder not doing the film ! Cher held up the production Of Mermaids, which also stared Winona Ryder and prevented her from being able to do God Father 3 !
@248productions close, she did film Scissorhands Around the same time. but like I said it was because Cher held up the production on Mermaids that prevented her from working on Godfather 3 ! she was also suffering from exhaustion !
i also felt that if mikeys hair was longer and slicked back, and if his voice was different it would be less hated of a movie,..my favorate part of the movie was how he was torn up by fredo's death and confessed to it
I think that the first two Godfather films are brilliant, they are clearly two of the greatest films ever made.
I like The Godfather Part III, I think it is a very good movie, but it is not brilliant, it is not a masterpiece, it is definitely not in the same league of the first two films.
I thought Pacino was too "sedated" in this. In the other flicks even when he was quiet there was an air of dangerouness about him. In this he came off as just...tired.
@skinwalkerxxx Maybe but his "tired" performance doesn't really bother me since the Michael Corleone character is tired. Not just physically but tired of the killings and in that sense his performance works for me.
@15041985 definitly agree with you, after all he went through, all that stress. Being tired is just logical. To me he is an anti-hero, and seeing his fall mentally and physically from the first movie is all a part of it for me.
I think the reason this movie isn't liked is Pacino's hair in it just isn't right. Shoulda kept the slicked back look. He looks to much like real life Pacino. His voice is also different and takes me out of the story.
I hate the number 3 in Hollywood, and I know they often call it 'Godfather Syndrome' when a threequel is terrible compared to the first two. The thing is, though, I agree with Siskel: I don't think it was bad. It has its flaws, but it's nowhere near terrible like so many people say.
But I guess I'm speaking subjectively. I personally liked it, and I can understand those who hated it. I've been in a situation where I hated a popular threequel because it didn't live up to its originals.
@getlikemc I understand there are many who think that, but I just can't a valid argument for part II over the first one. And with III I was amazed to find it was actually pretty good excepting Sophia Coppola.
Roger is wrong, she was very badly miscast. Winona Ryder would have given the film a boost that it needed, and it would have been MUCH better overall with her in the role. Sofia Coppola looks like a pancake house waitress.
i absolutely hated godfather 3, i like the first 2, the 3rd one was just awful! it was just so damn boring! the first godfather was also boring but in a good way
@Zooroonies - Godfather 3 was the weakest one of all 3. Nevertheless, I found some ironic humor in it - like the whole scene in the beginning where Mike Corleone trying to buy "sainthood" at the Catholic Church with $100 million after murdering so many people. The whole underlying message of a ruthless thug buying his way to heaven with money was very befitting to the affluent society we live in (being sarcastic of course).
I don't know about this movie. The Godfather 3 certainly has good moments (the ending is great) but overall it's not really needed. It lacks the subtlety of the first 2 Godfather movies and it was WAY too based on continuity as opposed to being a stand-alone story which was what made Godfather 2 so brilliant. And of course, like everyone else, do I even need to mention Sofia Coppola? (WAS SHE EVEN TRYING?!?!?!?!)
I agree with the comments that this film was always going to suffer comparisons to the first two films. I think it's impossible to view this film on it's own terms, because of the long shadow cast by what's gone before.
@keno8spot It is still a movie that stands on its own but its a really hard act to follow when BOTH of the preceding movies in the series were Best Picture Oscar winners. That said, you have to see all three of the Godfather flicks to catch the full narrative, there's just no other right way of doing it.
There is a part in the movie where Michael asks Vincent, 'what are you doing with my daughter?' And Vincent just smiles at first. Smiling would not be the appropriate thing to do when Michael Corelone asks a question like that. Shitting your pants would have fit in a little better.
The criticism of this movie is way way overblown. The problem is that the first two films were so flawless that it could not possibly top them. The negatives are obvious: Sofia Coppola, no Tom Hagen and a long lag in between films. However Andy Garcia was excellent in this movie and added a lot of character to it. Al Pacino was underrated in this film in my mind. The storyline is interesting and this movie is highly entertaining. It is not a bad movie. It is a solid film.
Watched all 3 Godfather movies on Bluray this week. I think part three had most of my attention. The ending is so dramatic and emotinal. Had me holding back my tears (and I never cry). Verry underrated film. It plays a big role in the trilogy.
@CelestialWoodway Paramount tried to get him back. Duvall wanted the same deal that Pacino got and wouldn't settle for a penny less. He admitted it in an interview with Bob Costas. He said that the movie was only made to get some more money out of the franchise, so if he was going to be in it, he'd have to get his price.
This film is excellent but in a very different way than the first two. I doubt it would recieve as much flack had Sofia Coppola been replaced with someone who was a competent actress
movie critic and ebert foe armond white thought this was the best movie of 1990. plus he thought it was the best of the trilogy .to him each movie got better. i'll have to watch this again.
Re-cycling original phrases like "Now they'll fear you' (which made me wanna beat Connie) and "He's got me waiting in the lobby" by Joe Zazza were cheesy...as was Al Neri going all the way to the Vatican to shoot the Arch Bishop, and not use a silencer.
Is Sofia Coppola a bad actress, or do we misunderstand her role? She gets shot in the end: for us to be moved by it, we must have known her as a simple, trusting, guileless girl: the one who least deserved to be shot. And Sofia fits perfectly.
The Bridget Fonda cameo, I feel now, might have been put in to serve as a contrast to Sofia, to highlight Sofia's girl-next-door quality.
Is Sofia Coppola a bad actress, or do we misunderstand her role? She gets shot in the end: for us to be moved by it, we must have known her as a simple, trusting, guileless girl: the one who least deserved to be shot. And Sofia fits perfectly.
The Bridget Fonda cameo, I feel now, might have been put in to serve as a contrast to Sofia, to highlight Sofia's girl-next-door quality.
This is a good movie, with a few flaws and obviously doesn't stand up to the first two but hey, what can you do? I would have definitely preferred Winona Ryder to Sofia Coppola, she should stick to directing. I dunno why Siskel keeps going insane about the makeup on the old Michael at the end tho, whats so awful about it?
This movie is HORRIBLE - almost unwatchable. In the commentary Coppola says he really only did it because he NEEDED the money. (the studio was asking him to do this movie for 15 years) Duval wanted the same money Pacino was gettting - the studio wouldn't give it to him - so they had to write him out. (Coppola says that Duval's character was CRUCIAL to the story, in hindsite) His daughter was atrocious as Mary - people like this movie because they loved the characters previously.
I didn't think the final scene with the old Michael was all that bad... I would've like for him not to colapse on the ground but still it was a pretty strong scene.
the other godfather films are just as flawed its just that they get away with it because they are older and old films get away with bad make up, acting, everything!
I wish you could upload all the old 80s episodes of At The Movies/Siskel & Ebert, if you have them. The asshole who had them posted on here before, closed his account.
One of the most misunderstood films ever. Sure, it may be inferior to the first 2, but it's still an above average film. It would have been a miracle if this matched the first 2 in greatness. The Godfather Part III ain't perfect, but it certainly beats a lot of the crap Hollywood releases these days. Great movie. Siskel and Ebert made a great review too.
This really was a disgrace to the other 2 parts. Its pretty near the top of the things that really bug me. Right next to the death penalty, abortions, and religion, lies the Godfather Part 3.
@CoolerKing37 It wouldn't be that bad if I was considering it merely as a sole movie in its own right, however, we must take into account its status in relation to the previous films. And I can find no reason why we shouldnt. Hence, it was a real disgrace to the two previous films... Sorry, I dont mean to sound like a 'hater', but this film really killed the godfather for me....
@Snako85 now. that`s streching it a bit. It sure is a great film, but nowhere near the first two films. At least to me. Sophia´s performance and how Connie was portrayed in this film puts this below the first films. But it is good
A great review. The film's sort of like Disney's 'Toy Story 3' in more ways than just the time that's passed between the predecessors and their threequel: it has many flaws, but at least there's effort. And like with both, they had really high expectations to live up to, so not to live up to them, while disappointing, was expected.
That said, I realldy did like 'The Godfather Part III', but I can see what other people see wrong with it. Sofia, of course, was the big one.
@CoolerKing37 Heh. Well, sure, the same way that Catholicism is universal.
Even the good movies have their critics. There's going to be people out there who didn't like 'Chinatown' or 'Citizen Kane'. So of course there's people who didn't like 'Toy Story 3', myself included. As there are people who didn't like 'Godfather Part III'.
And my apologies. I shouldn't have said 'disappointing' there; I didn't mean that, on the whole, the world was disappointed. I just meant that I personally was.
@CoolerKing37 Also, I'm sure that, at the time, 'Godfather Part III' was considered to be "universally loved" as well. I actually asked that as a Yahoo! question, since I was about three years old when the movie came out, and I got responses that overall, the film was initially loved by the general movie-going public (although Sofia was still being put down by critics).
@roger767 that's exactly my main problem with this film. It's not Sofia, it's not the un-interesting Vatican plot.... it's the MICHAEL character. It just has absolutely nothing to do with the way Michael was portrayed in the first two films and I hate that because that character was flawless and terrifying.
I agree with everyone saying that the hate this movie gets is undeserved. On the other hand, it's not a great movie. It's an adequate third chapter in a series best left alone after part two. As for the Oscar nomination, I don't think it deserved it.
Sofia Coppola is a much better director than she is an actress. But she does an okay job here given the circumstances. More problematic is the Vincent story line which feels rushed. We don't see him gradually blossoming into his eventual role in the family. The transition is jarring and unfocused, especially compared to the arcs of Vito and Michael.
When people want to defend Godfather III, they use words like 'misunderstood'. No, it wasn't misunderstood, it was a film that was continually rewritten while being shot, resulting in a slapdash final product that fell way short of its two formidable predecessors. Face it, if Godfather III hadn't been packaged exclusively with the first two movies for several years on DVD (and now Blu Ray) it would not be defended by so many people. The Godfather story should have ended after the second film.
@padraic2001eire lol, see youve got nothing to counter me. You have no explanation for what you said. The other Godfathers had the same problems as this and so did Apocalypse Now. THis Movie was fantastic and youre an idiot
@Snako85 The difference between those movies and The Godfather Part III is that it couldn't hide the fact that it was a work in progress. Even Al Pacino called the film a "major mistake".
@padraic2001eire i doubt he said anything along those lines. GF III had the same problems as the other two but went underrated by tools by you. As i said earlier. Apocalypse Now was even worse in terms of getting it done but it was fantastic, just like GF III
@Snako85 Listen, you dick. Maybe if you spent a little more time looking into these facts, and a little less time mouthing off and insulting people, I wouldn't have to waste my time replying to someone who is clearly to stupid to understand me. Al Pacino's exact words were "a major mistake was made in Godfather III, I think, which was they tried to redeem Michael Corleone". The trailer for Godfather III and the finished film barely correspond.
@padraic2001eire im fairly sure youre making that up. you are the one mouthing off and insulting people i stated the facts about Coppolas films filming and this is no different fron GF I & II or Apocalypse Now. Coppola did a fantastic job on this and your ignorance astounds me
@Snako85 My ignorance astounds you? It's been a while since I've seen such blatant demonstration of the pot calling the kettle black. Google the quote, for fuck sake.
@padraic2001eire Your ignorance does astound me. i looked up the quote and spent 10 minutes looking for it but it wasnt anywhere to be found so thats why i know your pulling it out your ass.
I thought it was mediocre too (not bad, just meh, like Spiderman 3), but you must've missed Sofia Coppola in this movie. She is truly awful, right up there with Stallone and Van Damme.
However, I actually thought Al Pacino was at his best here. But to be fair, he's a much more likable character now.
I think this movie was misunderstood. I honestly think this one deserved the Oscar. I liked it better than Dances With Wolves. As for Sofia, no, she was not "good." She is not an actress, and nor should she be. Her performance was over the top and unbelievable. Her character was not badly written, but the actress was misplaced. She was clearly trying to live up to something she had no business trying to live up to. On the whole, though, great flick.
@xJoeEDangerouslyx I agree that Dances With Wolves didn't deserve the Oscar that year. But it wasn't this one either. Goodfellas is an absolute masterpiece, second in gangster movies only to the first Godfather film, and should have run away with the Oscar in this year.
I know how to bring Pacino back for Michael in Godfather 4. Michael dies in 1997 so story could take place couple of years before 1997 and Michael can advice Vincent from Sicily....
i don't think this movie was "as bad" as people say it is. Sofia's acting wasn't great but i think she got a lot of flack because she was the directors daughter. If it had been someone else who didn't play the role that well then i don't think it would've came under such scrutiny. Part 3 wasn't on the same level as the first two but lets be realistic people, it's a rare occasion that a 3rd movie in a trilogy IS as good as one of the first 2.
The worst thing about this film was not Sofia Coppola. She was actually okay, playing an unimpressive mallrat. The character assassination of Michael Corleone is makes this film leave a bad taste in the mouth. ALthough I have to admit, Michael's confession to the priest in the garden is a VERY effective scene.
I think the movie was great and horribly cheesy at the same time.It tried to become a spoof of itself.
Like in the beginning it had cameos with people like Sonny's mistress, and Enzo the baker. Later we see Michael's old Cicilian body guard take a larger role. I wouldn't of been surprised if the ghost of Capt. McCluskey appear before Michael.
@takerdust ...the only cheesy character was Connie Corleone. She was over the top silly, especially with that line they should have not try to turn into a "I'll be back" joke...and the line was "Now they'll fear you".......Personally, when I first saw the movie, I cringed at that, and the "waiting in the lobby" quote....should have come up with new ones..and the whole time, I wanted to beat Eli Wallache to death with my bare hands for being so fucking annoying.
I hate to say it, but Ebert is right about Sofia Coppola. You had to spend this film kind of HATING Mary. For her naivety, and frankly, for her foul desire. It also had to be someone unrecognizable. Yeah I hate her, too, but you're supposed to. It was perfect.
This is the ONLY way this trilogy couldve ended. This or NO godfather 3. I know no one wants to admit it, but you'd rather have this than nothing. and it is damn good.
People are ridiculous...some just bad-mouth The Godfather Part III because they hear it from other people....this is a GREAT crime film....not as good as the first two but it is superior to most crime films in the market now-a-days.
You sir, are an idiot, part 2 and 3 are the best sequels ever made, together with Aliens and Terminator 2, and when you think Coppola is hungry for money, than you don't know nothing.
@Citrus3000 You sir, didn't understand me! I agree with what you said, the Godfather is the greatest trilogy ever IMO. What I said, when FFC was asked on Inside the Actors Studio, why he made the sequels, he said because he needed money. You can check for yourself, the videos are on YouTube.
No need for insults, movies are my life, I know about them more than you'll ever know, kid!
Ebert gets it very, very, very wrong about Sofia Coppolla. I mean, for the love of God at 5.28, she looks directly at the camera. That's the first rule of acting, don't look at the damn camera (unless breaking the fourth wall).
That is one of the other problems with the film, alot of the young actresses cast in the film, particularly Coppolla and Bridget Fonda, is that they are not that good in their roles. Compare them to Diane KEaton, then at her prime, acting wise, and it's obvious.
Thanks. But what I don't understand why Ebert and Siskel didn't pick up on it. They were the critics getting paid for this, not me. They shoulda picked up on it, and Coppola should have seen it also.
I think this one has gotten an undeservingly bad reputation. True, it's not as good as the first two, but it's still a good movie. It touches on themes that few other gangster movies don't, like growing old as a gangster, and it. focuses on white collar crimes rather than drugs which most gangster films from the time focused on.
But yeah, Sofia Coppola was kind of a crappy in the role, and the movie lacks the presence of Robert Duvall (my favourite actor in the first two).
I think Sofia Coopola's look is fine; why does everyone have to be so goddamn pretty? But her plain face is no excuse for ridiculous, ear-bleeding line delivery. Otherwise I enjoyed this movie quite a bit for its social commentary on the church and high finance. The whole opera scene is brilliant (excepting Coopola) from the assassin-who-can't-miss to Pacino's silent scream.
This is definitely under-rated. In some ways I enjoyed it more than the second entry.
my only issues with this film are 1) the absence of Duvall, the presence of who would have given this film more weight, and 2) the somewhat overly convoluted Vatican-banker intrigue that you have to watch at least three times to fully grasp (it didn't need to be that complicated to get the idea across
The acting of Sofia Coppola and the "old man make up" Siskell was so worked up about didn't bother me in the least, or not enough to make much difference to my opinon of the film.
I agree with Ebert 100% on this take on the casting of Sophia Coppola. Who better to take the role of the quiet, unassuming daughter of the crime lord than the quiet, unassuming daughter of the director?
On the other hand, I agree with Siskel in that the chemistry between Mary and Vincent is bland and we don't really get why they're into each other.
two liberal shitheads who MUST give a good review to such a shitty movie ONLY because it was an expose of vatican banking.
these two liberal turds praised a lot of crap just because the crap had liberal creditials.
monk22yrs 1 week ago
i hated this movie.it seemed like a parody. Coppola must of been drunk. Sophia was so terrible i clapped when she gets killed in the end.
robaquarian 1 week ago
@robaquarian godfather 3 was made cause crappola was broke....again.
francis crappola went bankrupt TWICE---and allowed to keep his winery----he owns about 1,500 acres in exclusive california.
francis loves to WASTE MONEY.
the best way to watch the money scandal of godfather 3 is to think of crappola going bankrupt twice, and keeping his 1,500 acres and selling his soul to make the 3rd movie in order to keep on livin the ez life.
GODFATHER 3 IS FRANCIS' LIFE STORY.
monk22yrs 1 week ago
@monk22yrs i know i live a mile from his office in san francisco i've ran into him a bunch of times.all he cares about is wine and pasta sauce not movies
robaquarian 4 days ago
This film was a dreadful mess. Sofia Coppola was mind-numbingly horrible -- you can't polish that turd. The dialogue throughout the film was stilted and cringe-inducing. The final scene was like something out of a WWE wrestling match. This is one of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. I saw it once and believe me, I'll never watch it again -- and I'm a huge Andy Garcia fan.
localcrew 2 weeks ago
Godfather # 3 is a flawed but still entertaining motion picture.
FunzCrue 2 weeks ago
THE PROBLEM WITH THIS 1 IS THAT IT HAD A PLOT INSTEAD OF JUST TELLING THE STORY OF ORGANIZED CRIME
chitownreak 3 weeks ago
3/4 of the film was pretty good (excluding Sofia of course), but that finale was a rushed mess.
CoolerKing37 1 month ago
I'll have agree with Siskel. There was no chemistry between the two. He was more like her babysitter than love interest.
Methrt3 3 months ago
Godfather 3 isn't a horrible film, but it is pointless. The whole scope of this saga is proving how Michael is like his family, even though he denies it to Kay at the beginning of the first film. When Michael finally realizes this at the end of Part II after killing his brother, the saga is over. We don't need another film with Michael constantly regretting his past. The final scene of Part II with him in his courtyard sitting silently is enough to tell us. GIII was made just for $.
ThePhantom135 3 months ago
@ThePhantom135 as much as I do like Godfather 3 ! I would agree with you on what you said !
Reborn8303 3 months ago
@ThePhantom135 it was made for money but the idea was that now that Michael knows he's a crook, he's trying to clean it up. He's trying to atone for his sins, whether by being able to go legitimate or by getting close to the church. In a way, he comes face to face with a greater hypocrisy, the Church. The flaws was Copolla did not completly possess his subject matter like the others. In the end Michael's daughter is killed so he get punished but there's nothing more to it.
skinwalkerxxx 1 month ago
I have to agree with pretty much everything they say here, except I think Sofia was terrible :P
GoneWiththeWindLove 4 months ago
I thought this was a horrible sequel.The first one is overrated imo and the second is the best of all the three and a masterpiece.
emaimon1 4 months ago
Blame Cher for Winona Ryder not doing the film ! Cher held up the production Of Mermaids, which also stared Winona Ryder and prevented her from being able to do God Father 3 !
Reborn8303 4 months ago
@Reborn8303 Actually I believe it was because Ryder was working on Edward Scissorhands.
248productions 3 months ago
@248productions close, she did film Scissorhands Around the same time. but like I said it was because Cher held up the production on Mermaids that prevented her from working on Godfather 3 ! she was also suffering from exhaustion !
Reborn8303 3 months ago
i also felt that if mikeys hair was longer and slicked back, and if his voice was different it would be less hated of a movie,..my favorate part of the movie was how he was torn up by fredo's death and confessed to it
Kronicyumyum 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think that the first two Godfather films are brilliant, they are clearly two of the greatest films ever made.
I like The Godfather Part III, I think it is a very good movie, but it is not brilliant, it is not a masterpiece, it is definitely not in the same league of the first two films.
Riddler95 5 months ago
I thought Pacino was too "sedated" in this. In the other flicks even when he was quiet there was an air of dangerouness about him. In this he came off as just...tired.
skinwalkerxxx 5 months ago 5
@skinwalkerxxx Al Pacino was getting old and tired of his life in GF3. I think Al Pacino played his part just right.
NORDSTRAND83 1 month ago in playlist Flere videoer fra GoFuckYourselfBiatch
@skinwalkerxxx Maybe but his "tired" performance doesn't really bother me since the Michael Corleone character is tired. Not just physically but tired of the killings and in that sense his performance works for me.
15041985 3 weeks ago
@15041985 definitly agree with you, after all he went through, all that stress. Being tired is just logical. To me he is an anti-hero, and seeing his fall mentally and physically from the first movie is all a part of it for me.
mentalanime 3 weeks ago
I think the reason this movie isn't liked is Pacino's hair in it just isn't right. Shoulda kept the slicked back look. He looks to much like real life Pacino. His voice is also different and takes me out of the story.
kingv911 5 months ago
I hate the number 3 in Hollywood, and I know they often call it 'Godfather Syndrome' when a threequel is terrible compared to the first two. The thing is, though, I agree with Siskel: I don't think it was bad. It has its flaws, but it's nowhere near terrible like so many people say.
But I guess I'm speaking subjectively. I personally liked it, and I can understand those who hated it. I've been in a situation where I hated a popular threequel because it didn't live up to its originals.
GoldenFlither15 6 months ago
The first was the best. Take out Sophia Coppola and I think III rivals II, which is very overrated.
I never understood the relationship between her and Garcia though. Isn't that technically incest?
ACDC392333 6 months ago 3
@ACDC392333 Part II could easily be the greatest movie ever made
getlikemc 1 month ago
@getlikemc I understand there are many who think that, but I just can't a valid argument for part II over the first one. And with III I was amazed to find it was actually pretty good excepting Sophia Coppola.
ACDC392333 1 month ago
@ACDC392333 cousins are common.prt 2 is the best one not overrated
robaquarian 1 week ago
Roger is wrong, she was very badly miscast. Winona Ryder would have given the film a boost that it needed, and it would have been MUCH better overall with her in the role. Sofia Coppola looks like a pancake house waitress.
cinemavirtualis 6 months ago
Too bad the Mafia didn't get Ebert
ZarahLean 6 months ago
i absolutely hated godfather 3, i like the first 2, the 3rd one was just awful! it was just so damn boring! the first godfather was also boring but in a good way
Zooroonies 6 months ago
@Zooroonies - Godfather 3 was the weakest one of all 3. Nevertheless, I found some ironic humor in it - like the whole scene in the beginning where Mike Corleone trying to buy "sainthood" at the Catholic Church with $100 million after murdering so many people. The whole underlying message of a ruthless thug buying his way to heaven with money was very befitting to the affluent society we live in (being sarcastic of course).
konman001 6 months ago
I don't know about this movie. The Godfather 3 certainly has good moments (the ending is great) but overall it's not really needed. It lacks the subtlety of the first 2 Godfather movies and it was WAY too based on continuity as opposed to being a stand-alone story which was what made Godfather 2 so brilliant. And of course, like everyone else, do I even need to mention Sofia Coppola? (WAS SHE EVEN TRYING?!?!?!?!)
ThePhantom135 7 months ago
So many shitty movies , thx to the laws of the universe we won't have enough time to watch'em all. Thank You Universe!
stinkbandit 7 months ago
@Snako85 and your reasons are spmething other than mental insanity?
Stiny114 7 months ago
This movie could have been better.Could have been shorter,less music and Sofia should have been replaced.Wasn't Winona Ryder suppose to be in this??
mrgb46 7 months ago
@mrgb46
Sofia Coppola gave the worst dramatic performance I have ever seen on film in this movie.
imblessedso 7 months ago
I agree with the comments that this film was always going to suffer comparisons to the first two films. I think it's impossible to view this film on it's own terms, because of the long shadow cast by what's gone before.
DaveM599 7 months ago
Im one of the few people who thoght the third one was the best and i have legitamate reasons
Snako85 8 months ago
its nice to see siskel and ebert
so sad what happened to both of them
sorry but this film cant touch the forst 2 period they are perfect films this isnt
keno8spot 8 months ago
@keno8spot It is still a movie that stands on its own but its a really hard act to follow when BOTH of the preceding movies in the series were Best Picture Oscar winners. That said, you have to see all three of the Godfather flicks to catch the full narrative, there's just no other right way of doing it.
tucsonia 7 months ago
There is a part in the movie where Michael asks Vincent, 'what are you doing with my daughter?' And Vincent just smiles at first. Smiling would not be the appropriate thing to do when Michael Corelone asks a question like that. Shitting your pants would have fit in a little better.
utuber377 8 months ago
The criticism of this movie is way way overblown. The problem is that the first two films were so flawless that it could not possibly top them. The negatives are obvious: Sofia Coppola, no Tom Hagen and a long lag in between films. However Andy Garcia was excellent in this movie and added a lot of character to it. Al Pacino was underrated in this film in my mind. The storyline is interesting and this movie is highly entertaining. It is not a bad movie. It is a solid film.
Vertigo2903 8 months ago
Sofia was terrible!!
RingoWinfrey 8 months ago
Watched all 3 Godfather movies on Bluray this week. I think part three had most of my attention. The ending is so dramatic and emotinal. Had me holding back my tears (and I never cry). Verry underrated film. It plays a big role in the trilogy.
pafalzon 8 months ago
Can't believe they didn't bring Robert Duvall back for this one.
CelestialWoodway 8 months ago
@CelestialWoodway Paramount tried to get him back. Duvall wanted the same deal that Pacino got and wouldn't settle for a penny less. He admitted it in an interview with Bob Costas. He said that the movie was only made to get some more money out of the franchise, so if he was going to be in it, he'd have to get his price.
MegaObserver1 8 months ago
Great film. A masterpiece. Not as good as I and II but still awesome and underrated.
ps3fan4life007 9 months ago
This film is excellent but in a very different way than the first two. I doubt it would recieve as much flack had Sofia Coppola been replaced with someone who was a competent actress
Drac39 9 months ago
movie critic and ebert foe armond white thought this was the best movie of 1990. plus he thought it was the best of the trilogy .to him each movie got better. i'll have to watch this again.
mic187x2 9 months ago
Part 3 gets a lot of flack just cause the first two movies are so perfect.
TheAwesonVideoDude 9 months ago
the movie sucked.
ovarylicker 10 months ago
you can hear coppola putting money into ebert's bank account.
kingcaesar5 10 months ago
If only Siskel was around to see Toy Story 3...
austinthebookworm5 10 months ago
@austinthebookworm5 There are so many films I would have loved to have seen Siskel's opinion on.
Drac39 9 months ago
Who cares if it wasn't as good as the first two; it was still better than DANCES WITH WOLVES!!
austinthebookworm5 10 months ago
Good movie. Doesn't deserve the hate.
HolySasquatchTurd 10 months ago
Re-cycling original phrases like "Now they'll fear you' (which made me wanna beat Connie) and "He's got me waiting in the lobby" by Joe Zazza were cheesy...as was Al Neri going all the way to the Vatican to shoot the Arch Bishop, and not use a silencer.
WiseGuy5674 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I just watched it last night and I enjoyed it more than ever before...
Derby14 10 months ago
Is a masterpiece, not at the level of the other two, but a masterpiece.
lesassassins 10 months ago
Is Sofia Coppola a bad actress, or do we misunderstand her role? She gets shot in the end: for us to be moved by it, we must have known her as a simple, trusting, guileless girl: the one who least deserved to be shot. And Sofia fits perfectly.
The Bridget Fonda cameo, I feel now, might have been put in to serve as a contrast to Sofia, to highlight Sofia's girl-next-door quality.
geoffreymathews 10 months ago
Is Sofia Coppola a bad actress, or do we misunderstand her role? She gets shot in the end: for us to be moved by it, we must have known her as a simple, trusting, guileless girl: the one who least deserved to be shot. And Sofia fits perfectly.
The Bridget Fonda cameo, I feel now, might have been put in to serve as a contrast to Sofia, to highlight Sofia's girl-next-door quality.
geoffreymathews 10 months ago
Sofia Coppola only has a good mouth for a blowjob. Acting not so much.
IrishGodThe4th 10 months ago
i've never understood the ranking of Sophia coppala. Shes fine in this movie
headlesssoldier 10 months ago
Godfather 3 is alright, but it's no Goodfellas.
InspectorKimball 10 months ago
This is a good movie, with a few flaws and obviously doesn't stand up to the first two but hey, what can you do? I would have definitely preferred Winona Ryder to Sofia Coppola, she should stick to directing. I dunno why Siskel keeps going insane about the makeup on the old Michael at the end tho, whats so awful about it?
washbrook45 11 months ago
This movie is HORRIBLE - almost unwatchable. In the commentary Coppola says he really only did it because he NEEDED the money. (the studio was asking him to do this movie for 15 years) Duval wanted the same money Pacino was gettting - the studio wouldn't give it to him - so they had to write him out. (Coppola says that Duval's character was CRUCIAL to the story, in hindsite) His daughter was atrocious as Mary - people like this movie because they loved the characters previously.
totallytommy 11 months ago
It's ok.. The first 2 are magnificent masterpieces.. This one is just good!
RockyBalboa211 11 months ago
You guys are crazy. Godfather 3 sucks.
Dogfacesoulja8582 11 months ago
Godfather 3 IS good.
abcomid 11 months ago
i only like the first two. My favorite storyline in both movies is Vitos rise to godfather
mousie1 11 months ago
Sofia Coppola is a good actress? O_o wtf.
Water4Jeremiah 11 months ago
I didn't think the final scene with the old Michael was all that bad... I would've like for him not to colapse on the ground but still it was a pretty strong scene.
OcelotDAD 11 months ago
the other godfather films are just as flawed its just that they get away with it because they are older and old films get away with bad make up, acting, everything!
howsaboutno 11 months ago
@howsaboutno
I think that 1,2 are better paced than 3.
I think that 3 has some fundemental differences (not make up or acting) to 1,2.
DarkAntiU94 11 months ago
I wish you could upload all the old 80s episodes of At The Movies/Siskel & Ebert, if you have them. The asshole who had them posted on here before, closed his account.
TheWuCepticon81 1 year ago
One of the most misunderstood films ever. Sure, it may be inferior to the first 2, but it's still an above average film. It would have been a miracle if this matched the first 2 in greatness. The Godfather Part III ain't perfect, but it certainly beats a lot of the crap Hollywood releases these days. Great movie. Siskel and Ebert made a great review too.
Moviefan7359 1 year ago
@Moviefan7359 bullshit. Me and my friends always say if Siskel and Ebert say the movie is good we're not gonna watch it cuz it must suck haahhaha.
Mr420woo 1 year ago
@Mr420woo
Your face is a R->4 retarted!
You just have bad tast!
DarkAntiU94 11 months ago
RIP Siskel
sweetmary116 1 year ago
this was the perfect example of overhype and too high expectations killing a decent film.
Regenmacher175 1 year ago
It was a great film but was hard to follow at times... thats all! I dont see why it deserves this much criticism.
SandoTrini 1 year ago
This really was a disgrace to the other 2 parts. Its pretty near the top of the things that really bug me. Right next to the death penalty, abortions, and religion, lies the Godfather Part 3.
anand308 1 year ago
@anand308 Wasn't that bad.
CoolerKing37 1 year ago
@CoolerKing37 It wouldn't be that bad if I was considering it merely as a sole movie in its own right, however, we must take into account its status in relation to the previous films. And I can find no reason why we shouldnt. Hence, it was a real disgrace to the two previous films... Sorry, I dont mean to sound like a 'hater', but this film really killed the godfather for me....
anand308 1 year ago
Better than Dances With Wolves?? OMG! LOL. Don't make me laugh.
LukeLovesRose 1 year ago
i was told this film absolutely sucked but simingly not im gonna check this out
TheReilly8 1 year ago
Does she look directly at the camera at 5:28?
That dosn't seem like the right thing to do.
AngreyDude92 1 year ago
it was just as good if not better than the first two
Snako85 1 year ago
@Snako85 now. that`s streching it a bit. It sure is a great film, but nowhere near the first two films. At least to me. Sophia´s performance and how Connie was portrayed in this film puts this below the first films. But it is good
hallowedbeeddie 1 year ago
@hallowedbeeddie its equall to the first two and sophias performance isnt affecrting that for me
Snako85 1 year ago
*were
CoolerKing37 1 year ago
A great review. The film's sort of like Disney's 'Toy Story 3' in more ways than just the time that's passed between the predecessors and their threequel: it has many flaws, but at least there's effort. And like with both, they had really high expectations to live up to, so not to live up to them, while disappointing, was expected.
That said, I realldy did like 'The Godfather Part III', but I can see what other people see wrong with it. Sofia, of course, was the big one.
GoldenFlither15 1 year ago
@GoldenFlither15 Wait....there were people who DISAPPOINTED with 'Toy Story 3'?! I thought it was universally loved...
CoolerKing37 1 year ago
@CoolerKing37 Heh. Well, sure, the same way that Catholicism is universal.
Even the good movies have their critics. There's going to be people out there who didn't like 'Chinatown' or 'Citizen Kane'. So of course there's people who didn't like 'Toy Story 3', myself included. As there are people who didn't like 'Godfather Part III'.
And my apologies. I shouldn't have said 'disappointing' there; I didn't mean that, on the whole, the world was disappointed. I just meant that I personally was.
GoldenFlither15 1 year ago
@CoolerKing37 Also, I'm sure that, at the time, 'Godfather Part III' was considered to be "universally loved" as well. I actually asked that as a Yahoo! question, since I was about three years old when the movie came out, and I got responses that overall, the film was initially loved by the general movie-going public (although Sofia was still being put down by critics).
GoldenFlither15 1 year ago
...the bad make-up?
I'm afraid I've never noticed this alleged bad make-up job.
Although, I totally agree with Siskel about Sofia.
stitch99 1 year ago
godfather 3 should be called scent of a mafia, because al pacino isnt acting like michael corleone but more like the scent of a woman character
roger767 1 year ago
@roger767 that's exactly my main problem with this film. It's not Sofia, it's not the un-interesting Vatican plot.... it's the MICHAEL character. It just has absolutely nothing to do with the way Michael was portrayed in the first two films and I hate that because that character was flawless and terrifying.
OcelotDAD 11 months ago
I agree with everyone saying that the hate this movie gets is undeserved. On the other hand, it's not a great movie. It's an adequate third chapter in a series best left alone after part two. As for the Oscar nomination, I don't think it deserved it.
lessthanevil 1 year ago
Yeah! Fuck you make-up guy.
stimpp 1 year ago
@badasschill And you're the loser replying to a 4-month old comment.
NOcomunismo92 1 year ago
Sofia Coppola is a much better director than she is an actress. But she does an okay job here given the circumstances. More problematic is the Vincent story line which feels rushed. We don't see him gradually blossoming into his eventual role in the family. The transition is jarring and unfocused, especially compared to the arcs of Vito and Michael.
billsparks 1 year ago
When people want to defend Godfather III, they use words like 'misunderstood'. No, it wasn't misunderstood, it was a film that was continually rewritten while being shot, resulting in a slapdash final product that fell way short of its two formidable predecessors. Face it, if Godfather III hadn't been packaged exclusively with the first two movies for several years on DVD (and now Blu Ray) it would not be defended by so many people. The Godfather story should have ended after the second film.
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@padraic2001eire youre an idiot plain and simple
Snako85 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Snako85 At least I use basic punctuation, fuckface.
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@padraic2001eire you know you have no argument whwn you diss spelling, grammaror punctuation jackass
Snako85 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Snako85 Yeah, because your argument was very persuasive... Do us all a favour and fuck off.
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
@padraic2001eire lol, see youve got nothing to counter me. You have no explanation for what you said. The other Godfathers had the same problems as this and so did Apocalypse Now. THis Movie was fantastic and youre an idiot
Snako85 1 year ago
@Snako85 The difference between those movies and The Godfather Part III is that it couldn't hide the fact that it was a work in progress. Even Al Pacino called the film a "major mistake".
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
@padraic2001eire i doubt he said anything along those lines. GF III had the same problems as the other two but went underrated by tools by you. As i said earlier. Apocalypse Now was even worse in terms of getting it done but it was fantastic, just like GF III
Snako85 1 year ago
@Snako85 Listen, you dick. Maybe if you spent a little more time looking into these facts, and a little less time mouthing off and insulting people, I wouldn't have to waste my time replying to someone who is clearly to stupid to understand me. Al Pacino's exact words were "a major mistake was made in Godfather III, I think, which was they tried to redeem Michael Corleone". The trailer for Godfather III and the finished film barely correspond.
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
@padraic2001eire im fairly sure youre making that up. you are the one mouthing off and insulting people i stated the facts about Coppolas films filming and this is no different fron GF I & II or Apocalypse Now. Coppola did a fantastic job on this and your ignorance astounds me
Snako85 1 year ago
@Snako85 My ignorance astounds you? It's been a while since I've seen such blatant demonstration of the pot calling the kettle black. Google the quote, for fuck sake.
padraic2001eire 1 year ago
@padraic2001eire Your ignorance does astound me. i looked up the quote and spent 10 minutes looking for it but it wasnt anywhere to be found so thats why i know your pulling it out your ass.
Snako85 1 year ago
Good film, gene is right.. bad casting for sofia ...
Alirezajazayeri 1 year ago
i ;liked this more than parts 1 and 2. i know not common but thats how i feel
Snako85 1 year ago
Excellent movie and a great ending to the trilogy!
bierbuik 1 year ago
It's not as good as the previous two but still a fantastic closure of the saga.
anisblond 1 year ago
After 15 mins i turned it off. Terrible performances, i actually thought Dianne Keaton was the worst thing.
Very, very bad.
edmundsampo 1 year ago
@edmundsampo
I thought it was mediocre too (not bad, just meh, like Spiderman 3), but you must've missed Sofia Coppola in this movie. She is truly awful, right up there with Stallone and Van Damme.
However, I actually thought Al Pacino was at his best here. But to be fair, he's a much more likable character now.
cb2198 1 year ago
I think this movie was misunderstood. I honestly think this one deserved the Oscar. I liked it better than Dances With Wolves. As for Sofia, no, she was not "good." She is not an actress, and nor should she be. Her performance was over the top and unbelievable. Her character was not badly written, but the actress was misplaced. She was clearly trying to live up to something she had no business trying to live up to. On the whole, though, great flick.
-Joe E Dangerously
xJoeEDangerouslyx 1 year ago 12
@xJoeEDangerouslyx I agree that Dances With Wolves didn't deserve the Oscar that year. But it wasn't this one either. Goodfellas is an absolute masterpiece, second in gangster movies only to the first Godfather film, and should have run away with the Oscar in this year.
roguefilmmaker 1 year ago 16
@xJoeEDangerouslyx I agree that it was bettern than the Costner movie, but Goofellas deserved it more, IMO:
IamConnorMacLeod 1 year ago
@IamConnorMacLeod Not a bad point. Not sure I agree, but not a bad point.
By the way, I AM The Highlander! There can be only one!
I'll send you a friend invite so we can set up the sword fight.
-Joe E Dangerously
xJoeEDangerouslyx 1 year ago
@xJoeEDangerouslyx Wasn't better then GoodFellas.
spxeli 1 year ago
DevSodDribble:
Agreed
CableW11 1 year ago
Botton Line: This movie was only made to make money.
ElTuco84 1 year ago
I know how to bring Pacino back for Michael in Godfather 4. Michael dies in 1997 so story could take place couple of years before 1997 and Michael can advice Vincent from Sicily....
razbigranicu 1 year ago
i don't think this movie was "as bad" as people say it is. Sofia's acting wasn't great but i think she got a lot of flack because she was the directors daughter. If it had been someone else who didn't play the role that well then i don't think it would've came under such scrutiny. Part 3 wasn't on the same level as the first two but lets be realistic people, it's a rare occasion that a 3rd movie in a trilogy IS as good as one of the first 2.
y2johnnie 1 year ago
The worst thing about this film was not Sofia Coppola. She was actually okay, playing an unimpressive mallrat. The character assassination of Michael Corleone is makes this film leave a bad taste in the mouth. ALthough I have to admit, Michael's confession to the priest in the garden is a VERY effective scene.
KillSwitch2 1 year ago
It just goes to show, Critics don't know anything. G3 was a terrible movie.
DarthHater100 1 year ago
this movie was baaaaaaaaad
the first two movies were awesome.
they are my favorite movies.
Corleone suck now. Dude, what happened to the awesomeness?
juliusyeung0330 1 year ago
lol at 2:02 the guy bout shits himself :)
YoJimBoHugabaJoe 1 year ago
Ebert for president!
HaraldNordgren 1 year ago
what was the bad makeup at the end?
bfoaliali 1 year ago
A stinker through and through. Coppola should have known he had lost his powers by then,
calebengler 1 year ago
I think the movie was great and horribly cheesy at the same time.It tried to become a spoof of itself.
Like in the beginning it had cameos with people like Sonny's mistress, and Enzo the baker. Later we see Michael's old Cicilian body guard take a larger role. I wouldn't of been surprised if the ghost of Capt. McCluskey appear before Michael.
takerdust 1 year ago
@takerdust I agree.
drcoxcentral 1 year ago
@takerdust ...the only cheesy character was Connie Corleone. She was over the top silly, especially with that line they should have not try to turn into a "I'll be back" joke...and the line was "Now they'll fear you".......Personally, when I first saw the movie, I cringed at that, and the "waiting in the lobby" quote....should have come up with new ones..and the whole time, I wanted to beat Eli Wallache to death with my bare hands for being so fucking annoying.
WiseGuy5674 1 year ago
@WiseGuy5674 I agree, I can't remember one moment in the film where I wasn't annoyed by his presence. Especially how he gleaned over the cannoli.
takerdust 1 year ago
Sofia Coppola was like nails on a chalkboard in this movie. I mean bad acting is one thing but she was awful in this. Cringe inducing.
prismgap 1 year ago
Movie was good until they went to Sicily
Spiffy789 1 year ago
2:26 "It was not what I WANTED!!!" lol I love Pacino
bennyvega100 1 year ago
Ebert is so wrong about Sofia Coppola, she was terrible, she has got to be one of the worst cases of nepotism in film history.
laparka1138 1 year ago
I hate to say it, but Ebert is right about Sofia Coppola. You had to spend this film kind of HATING Mary. For her naivety, and frankly, for her foul desire. It also had to be someone unrecognizable. Yeah I hate her, too, but you're supposed to. It was perfect.
RipTheJacker0 1 year ago
This is the ONLY way this trilogy couldve ended. This or NO godfather 3. I know no one wants to admit it, but you'd rather have this than nothing. and it is damn good.
RipTheJacker0 1 year ago
People are ridiculous...some just bad-mouth The Godfather Part III because they hear it from other people....this is a GREAT crime film....not as good as the first two but it is superior to most crime films in the market now-a-days.
NOcomunismo92 1 year ago 5
@NOcomunismo92 your insane , its a terrible film. bad acting,bad script, teribble.
robaquarian 10 months ago
Godfather 3 is like the new Star Wars films, I pretend like they never happened.
rockyrack2 1 year ago
An ok movie but nowhere near the quality of the first two.
bladerunner951 1 year ago
I think this movie is amazing to tell you the truth. I felt like this movie is more artistic than the first two films.
ShaneBeacham 1 year ago
Good acting, bad screenplay. That's all folks!
GyprockMusic 1 year ago
When FFC was asked why he made 2 and 3, he said he neede money!
ScorseseKubrick 1 year ago
@ScorseseKubrick
You sir, are an idiot, part 2 and 3 are the best sequels ever made, together with Aliens and Terminator 2, and when you think Coppola is hungry for money, than you don't know nothing.
Citrus3000 1 year ago
@Citrus3000 You sir, didn't understand me! I agree with what you said, the Godfather is the greatest trilogy ever IMO. What I said, when FFC was asked on Inside the Actors Studio, why he made the sequels, he said because he needed money. You can check for yourself, the videos are on YouTube.
No need for insults, movies are my life, I know about them more than you'll ever know, kid!
ScorseseKubrick 1 year ago
Ebert gets it very, very, very wrong about Sofia Coppolla. I mean, for the love of God at 5.28, she looks directly at the camera. That's the first rule of acting, don't look at the damn camera (unless breaking the fourth wall).
That is one of the other problems with the film, alot of the young actresses cast in the film, particularly Coppolla and Bridget Fonda, is that they are not that good in their roles. Compare them to Diane KEaton, then at her prime, acting wise, and it's obvious.
yellowcougar18 1 year ago
@yellowcougar18 Excellent catch in regards to 5.28. I usually notice things of that nature but I never caught that one.
mrwrister 1 year ago
@mrwrister
Thanks. But what I don't understand why Ebert and Siskel didn't pick up on it. They were the critics getting paid for this, not me. They shoulda picked up on it, and Coppola should have seen it also.
yellowcougar18 1 year ago
biggest mistake of the movie was why in the world was Bridget Fonda in the picture, that, and I didn't like Andy Garcia at all
rah01kah 1 year ago
A shit movie,fuck paromount this is an failed abortion of a film.
Thefriendlybaron 1 year ago
as a regular film its very good, something i might want to see again if it was on TV while channel surfing.
as the sequel to two of the best films ever made of all time its absolutely terrible.
Ichiro20 1 year ago
I think this one has gotten an undeservingly bad reputation. True, it's not as good as the first two, but it's still a good movie. It touches on themes that few other gangster movies don't, like growing old as a gangster, and it. focuses on white collar crimes rather than drugs which most gangster films from the time focused on.
But yeah, Sofia Coppola was kind of a crappy in the role, and the movie lacks the presence of Robert Duvall (my favourite actor in the first two).
raizumichin 1 year ago
I'm not big on the Godfather films but I have to say part III did suck
carnosaurfan103 1 year ago
I really disliked this movie. Don't think I would ever watch it again.
kmvoss 1 year ago
Sofia Coppola ruined this film for me, her eyes are vaccant through the whole thing!
lepikimar 1 year ago 2
The enitire series is overrated, and mostly pointless.
Well made, yes. ....but devoid of any real deeper meaning.
rdecredico 1 year ago
5:29, I can't believe she actually looked right at the camera, what a fucking horrible actress, and what a fucking terrible director...
AhmadAlony123 1 year ago
I think it should have ended after GFII
JoelH790 1 year ago 2
I agree with SeanConnery9000, Sofia was out of her depth next to Andy Garcia.
cs925 1 year ago
I think Sofia Coopola's look is fine; why does everyone have to be so goddamn pretty? But her plain face is no excuse for ridiculous, ear-bleeding line delivery. Otherwise I enjoyed this movie quite a bit for its social commentary on the church and high finance. The whole opera scene is brilliant (excepting Coopola) from the assassin-who-can't-miss to Pacino's silent scream.
This is definitely under-rated. In some ways I enjoyed it more than the second entry.
dashrirprock 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Should I go and see it?
xaxie1 1 year ago
my only issues with this film are 1) the absence of Duvall, the presence of who would have given this film more weight, and 2) the somewhat overly convoluted Vatican-banker intrigue that you have to watch at least three times to fully grasp (it didn't need to be that complicated to get the idea across
The acting of Sofia Coppola and the "old man make up" Siskell was so worked up about didn't bother me in the least, or not enough to make much difference to my opinon of the film.
christomacin 1 year ago
I agree with Ebert 100% on this take on the casting of Sophia Coppola. Who better to take the role of the quiet, unassuming daughter of the crime lord than the quiet, unassuming daughter of the director?
On the other hand, I agree with Siskel in that the chemistry between Mary and Vincent is bland and we don't really get why they're into each other.
ogredm 1 year ago
Robert Duvall and Winona Ryder pulling out of this really ruined this movie.
Quadzilla99 1 year ago