Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop Cyber Monday Deals Week in Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now DIYED Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Listen in Prime Shop now Shop now

Customer Reviews

3.8 out of 5 stars67
3.8 out of 5 stars
Format: Blu-rayChange
Price:£10.24+ £1.26 shipping
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
TOP 1000 REVIEWERon 22 June 2014
I got this as part of the Godfather "box set" so it was a compulsory buy as such all the 3 main films and the extras.

Part III I watched many years ago after first release and I didn't like it much, it felt rather wooden and not particularly convincing screenplay wise. Having had the chance to sit down and watch it more times, it isn't a terrible movie...but it's clearly not up to the hard hitting previous instalments.

The story is a continuation from the previous film, a more aged and somewhat regretful Michael Corleone is trying to clean up his business affairs and seeks to do some good deeds giving to charity and his involvement with the Vatican can be seen as "sin cleansing" for his ruthless prior actions. We have an enthusiast though slightly OTT performance from Andy Garcia as Vincent Mancini the son of Michael's late brother Sonny, who is the perky though lacking in restraint potential future "Don" in waiting as Michael winds things down personally.

Cast wise a mixed bag we have a decent performance as ever from Pacino, Diane Keaton does solid service as Kay, Garcia is a bit too eager in my view and overplays the Vincent part. The film came in for serious criticism regarding the acting of Sofia Coppola who plays Mary Corleone, many saw it as a ill advised move from Francis Ford Coppola to parachute his own daughter into an important role. Sofia never looks at ease and struggles throughout the entire film. Roger Ebert defended her as a casting choice, but I won't..the girl can't act simple as that. (sorry but that's how I see it)

Even more painfully obvious when on-screen with people like Pacino (whilst not to everyones taste acting wise, is one of the hard hitters of acting no question), Sofia lets the show down and is unconvincing in the role. She withers and pales next to the on screen legend. I'm not fond of Garcia's over acting either trying too hard to overplay the role of a Sonny Mk II.

Leaving that aside, the story is ok, though feels a little dragged on in places in a way the first two instalments never did (they are all long films) certainly worth a watch and if you can overlook some weaker performances and flaws, the story is reasonable enough, but not really outstanding either and fairly predictable. The real problem is the reputation it has to live up to, Francis Ford Coppola openly admitted the film was done mostly for financial reasons, rather than a strong desire to continue the series (some fans would argue it was complete with part II and didn't need a third instalment) I think the film could have been just as good as the first two with a better story, a more risk taking screenplay and plot. In some ways it feels a little rushed to market as they say.

It's not a complete waste, there are some good performances here too. But don't expect the same as part I and II it's just not in that league.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
on 7 December 2011
Finally! I have seen the Godfather Trilogy, something I've wanted to be able to say for the longest time. And, with this part of the trilogy, I went in with my eyes wide-open: the movie the critics despise. I was absolutely determined to avoid having my view or my opinion poisoned by this known negative bias, and I think I succeeded. The problem, though, is that the film just isn't as good as the other two.

You see, the film has its strengths, sometimes it even displays strengths the other two just didn't, such as the strong emotional reaction evoked by Pacino and Keaton's chemistry; although, of course, one shouldn't ignore the well written dialogue between the two characters either. For the first time, I was made care about Michael's love for Kay, something that his immorality had blocked in the prior two parts. This time, however, with Michael's quest for redemption, his love is absolute and obvious, which Pacino makes very obvious in his (again) outstanding performance.

Unfortunately, the emotional depth sacrifices the sort of objectivity the previous films had, making this movie a little melodramatic and soppy at points. This is actually a holistic problem for the film: almost all of it is simply too over the top. Any believability the other two films had is sort of shot here. This just wasn't a film I wanted some sort of alternate history in, it completely destroyed my ability to suspend disbelief.

The inclusion of the new characters is necessary, I suppose, but also not entirely successful. I found the new characters a distraction for a number of reasons, both the problem of the writer and a certain actor. For one, the new characters just didn't get any real development; the exception being Vincent Mancini, of course, but his development was so rushed. By the end of the movie, he ends up where Michael took a film and a half to get to. Then there's the pivotal character of Mary Corleone who is completely savaged by Sofia Coppola, as sad as that is. The returning characters though are as outstanding as they always were.

Although not too big of a problem- because direction was never really a big deal for Coppola with these movies- the direction feels off. It just doesn't fit with the other two. But I suppose that's too be expected considering the time gap between part two and three. This is a problem, though, because it kind of alienates the film.

With so many criticisms, it may seem like I intensely disliked the movie, but that isn't true. The great soundtrack, dialogue and characters are still here to be loved. And I, for one, feel the ending did do the trilogy justice. I've heard complaints that Brando's death scene was so much more dramatic than Pacino's, but surely it's supposed to be? Michael is an empty vessel at the end; with nothing to live for and no one to care, such an eventless demise seems perfectly fitting to me. I also like the operatic climax, if not a little predictable.

So all in all, this was a good movie; a character study in Michael Corleone. After all, Coppola did want to call it 'The Death of Michael Corleone'. I think a problem many people had was the change in tone from the first two, but that's expected, as this really isn't a sequel but an epilogue. Putting the character to bed was Coppola's intention here, and I think he did it with style. Not a masterpiece, but a good, steady finale for Michael Corleone.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on 15 November 2014
Anonymous's excellent remarks have nailed it. As he/she or another perceptive reviewer observed, with GIII Coppola shamelessly plundered and squandered a towering legacy that should have been left magisterially alone and sacrosanct after GI and GII.

The moments of jarring implausibility are too numerous to mention, although I'll gladly pick out Don Altobello and Connie's cannoli at the opera (the old man clearly suspected foul play but happily scoffed it all anyway, apparently unwilling to consider the possibility that the tiny end morsel he obliged Connie to eat before he touched it might have been left deliberately free of the poison that did for him); and the fact that Vincent's character changed, seemingly overnight, from that of his father's leather-jacketed, hotheaded street-hood son to a statesmanlike don-in-waiting ready to command similar levels of respect as his Uncle Michael. It just didn't add up.

And what was Bridget Fonda doing there? Her part, as slight as the manner in which she played it, felt like it had been forced into the narrative with a crowbar, the viewer waiting in vain for her reporter character to reappear with some crucial plot-points later in the film. Was this evidence of the power of Tinseltown royalty, a younger member of a heavyweight Hollywood dynasty handed a dolly of a cameo which would put her up-and-coming (at the time) name in lights? And don't get me started on the relentless brown, from Diane Keaton's appalling wardrobe - a strange, kitsch cavalcade of shiny fabrics that looked like nothing more than a shopful of chocolate cakes left out in the sun, and not in a good way - to the overall sickly sepia look of the thing that made me feel queasy from the off. In a word, dreadful.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
14 of 17 people found the following review helpful
VINE VOICEon 3 September 2007
I confess it! "Godfather III" is one of my favorite movies. All right, it has less-than-perfect moments, but it also has memorable ones, such as the touching confessional scene between Michael (Al Pacino) and the Cardinal (Raf Vallone) in the cloister, and the reconciliation of Michael and Kay (Diane Keaton) in Don Tommasino's dining room.

I especially enjoy the Italian locations, and since I spent the `80s in Italy, amidst rumors about what was commonly regarded as the suspicious death of John Paul I; the scandals of the Vatican Banco Ambrosiano (with the banker Calvi hanging from the Blackfriars bridge); the P-2 scandals in the highest posts of the government, not to mention numerous assassinations of judges in Sicily, the background of the story--the last half of which takes place in Sicily--rang true for me. Furthermore--and more importantly--Coppola's brilliant use of recurrent visual and thematic imagery renders the film outstanding not only on its own merits but also in respect to the first two films. Besides the well-discussed use of oranges whenever a catastrophe is imminent, Coppola constantly juxtaposes themes of religion and death, replicating the events of the story--the biting of the ear; the religious procession, the veiling of the head--with those of Mascagni's magnificent opera about death, revenge, and religion in Sicily: "Cavalleria Rusticana." Coppola intersperses scenes of the opera with scenes of actual vendetta, as the plans of Vincenzo--the new godfather--are carried to their violent conclusion. The part I love the best, though, is when Coppola transfers the tragedy taking place onstage in the opera, outside onto the steps of the opera house--life imitating art. That final choreographed scene, staged to the heart-rending music of Mascagni, gets me every time (Please pass some more Kleenex tissue!).

Al Pacino's silent scream on the steps of the opera house embodies the mask of Greek tragedy. And tragic irony renders "Godfather III" particularly powerful, when the film is viewed in the context of the whole. For instance, the preservation of the family is the device that moves the plot of the entire trilogy. The crimes committed first by Vito Corleone and then by Michael are committed in order to keep the family safe, even though the meaning of 'family' becomes distorted from its original significance during the course of the trilogy. In "Godfather III," however, the aging Michael, who is trying to become a pillar of society in order to preserve his immediate family, accomplishes the very opposite of what he intended. The final scenes of "Godfather I" and "Godfather III"--both set in gardens--emphasize the tragedy. Whereas Vito Corleone dies in the garden, alone except for the youngest member of the family--his toddler grandson--at his feet, Michael Corleone dies in the garden, alone--except for a dog at his feet. Perfect examples of tragic irony!

I wish that Coppola would reprise his "Godfather Saga" which he made for television in the seventies. He reshuffled the scenes so that the narrative ran in chronological order from the funeral of Vito's father in Sicily at the beginning of "Godfather I" to the shooting of Fredo at end of "Godfather II." In combination with this particular format, "Godfather III" would make an especially effective tragic finish to the trilogy. The entire saga would then recall the Greek dramatist Aeschylus's trilogy. The original saga of family and its disintegration through revenge and murder, "The Oresteia" depicts the fall of the House of Atreus, just as the Godfather trilogy depicts the fall of the House of Corleone.

When I once made this observation to my daughter, she gave me a sarcastic look and said: "Mom, you're over-educated!"

Mea Culpa!
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful
on 26 November 2010
This film bears no truly artistic relationship to the original two. If it was a stick of rock the term 'SELL-OUT' would run through it in bold letters and it would taste bitterly of shame and embarrassment. The presence of Sofia Coppola smacks of blind nepotism and the misjudgement of a once great, now seemingly exhausted, talent. She is without any acting ability at all and gives one of the most truly terrible performances it has ever been my misfortune to witness. It takes every effort not to groan each painful second she is on the screen.
As well as this, and just as unforgivable, is the replacement of the mighty Robert Duvall with the faintly ridiculous George Hamilton; perhaps the most cynical intimation of the only real reason why this film was made, that is, money {Coppola wouldn't pay Duvall what he was asking}. A tired, hackneyed script, ropey performances {at best} from all involved and woefully uninspired direction from a once great master makes this film one of the most monumental duds in modern cinema. In short, TO BE AVOIDED.
22 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 16 April 2001
Although fatally flawed by the casting of Sofia Copolla as Michael Corleone's daughter, the film still holds the same magic as the first two Godfathers. The story of the film revolves around a much older, tired Michael than in the last film. Now 60 he tries desperately to reconcile his sins and in the process release his family from the grip the underworld still holds on it. Although Pacino does not have the same commanding presence playing the don that Brando ensued his character proves just as likeable. Andy Garcia plays out the role of vincent, Sonny Corleone's son, desperate for the power and respect his uncle commands. All in all the film does not live up to it's predecessors, but then that in itself is impossible, however very watchable and a brilliant ending, the use of the Mascagni Intermezzo near the end is probably the most brilliant piece of emotional manipulation I have ever witnessed in a film, pure cinematic magic. If you liked the first two how can you not watch this to see how the greatest saga in american cinematic history concludes.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on 2 December 2012
This film seems to rehash part 1 and its a bit embarrassing.

But its not that bad and I have to say some about Sofia Coppola...shes NOWHERE near as bad as people say she is. Her acting isnt terrific but come call her the worst ever? Ridiculous. Cut her some slack. She did an ok job. Nice looking girl too.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
14 of 18 people found the following review helpful
VINE VOICEon 6 November 2004
I enjoyed this film even more than the acclaimed Godfather II and it provides a seamless and accomplished finale to the Godfather series. There is another awesome performance from Al Pacino as Michael Corleone, supported superbly by Diane Keaton,Talia Shire , Andy Garcia and Sofia Coppola who plays Michael's beloved daughter Mary. Godfather III is set in 1979 and deals with the declining years of Michael Corleone and his desire to distance himself from his gangster past and to achieve the respectabilty and legitimacy he craves for. This leads him into financial dealings with the Vatican and involves him in a brilliant, but controversial sub-plot concerning a web of corruption and murder within the Roman Catholic hierarchy. However it is family, tradition, revenge , love and power which are the main themes of the film. Michael's desire to mend fences with ex wife Kay and his relationship with his two children are superbly explored, yet his repemtance and paternal love remain always shadowed by a murderous criminal past that he cannot shake off. The climax of this film is superb, one of the best endings to any film I have seen, full of tension ,suspense and brilliantly directed by Coppola. The poignant final scene is a perfect conclusion to the whole trilogy.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 4 July 2015
Pacino is excellent. Thoroughly excellent. The film itself has some great moments, but in the end, it is not a great film. Sofia Coppolla is honestly, truly, awful and although she's not in enough scenes to completely ruin the film, her character is pivotal to the plot. The ending on the steps of the opera house is truly affecting, but what was Frank thinking when he cast her?
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 31 July 2015
Absolute Muddled Rubbish.It would have been nice to have A few of the Old Actors back in key parts and God knows they had the time to whip up a decent Script,but you get the Impression with Godfather 3 that the script wasn't completed by the time Filming began and they were making it up as they went along. Long, Drawn out Garbage.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
Customers who viewed this item also viewed

The Godfather [Blu-ray] [1972]
The Godfather [Blu-ray] [1972] by Marlon Brando (Blu-ray - 2011)

The Godfather: Part II [Blu-ray] [1974]
The Godfather: Part II [Blu-ray] [1974] by Al Pacino (Blu-ray - 2011)

Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.