Rating of
3/4
Not the best movie, but not the worst
The Film Rebel - wrote on 11/04/10
In all honesty, this film isn't quite as bad as people say. Its definitely not the masterpiece that the original two are, not in the least. However, I personally found this to be a rather enjoyable sequel. Even despite the fact that some scenes dragged a bit.
This one takes place in 1970. Michael Corleone is now in his 60s and is seeking redemption from the Catholic Church. In the meantime, he's trying to make the family business legit and even tries to find an heir. His son wishes to be a singer so he looks to family friend Vincent Mancini to take his place.
The acting in the movie is, well, not that good. Pacino's not quite as strong as he was the last two but he still gives just as good of a performance as usual. The acting is really just decent with the exception of **deep sigh** Sofia Coppola. That girl needs to stick to directing and leave acting to the professionals.
As I said earlier, the film does drag a bit. Mostly due to the fact that the story isn't as all that engaging. It doesn't pull in like the first two did and its not all that compelling.
Overall, despite the countless flaws and the fact the film is just so uneven, "The Godfather Part III" is a semi enjoyable sequel. Sure it doesn't live up to the first two, but hey, its still good for what it is.
