The Godfather, Part III(1990)- User Reviews

If the first two installments didn't exist, this movie would have been applauded for it's breathtaking visuals and decent storyline. Nobody would argue that Sofia Coppola's acting was the worst part of this movie, but on the whole, the movie was much better than most junk out there.

So why does this movie get mixed reviews? Why is it called a disappointment? How could it NOT be a disappointment? Look at the expectations it had to live up to? Parts I & II are considered two of the greatest movies ever created; the standards by which most other movies are judged. Where do you go from the pinnacle? Did fans want III to be as good or better? Of course! Was it a realistic expectation? Not really. This is the biggest reason for the negative reviews. It is next to impossible to watch III without trying to compare it to the first two parts. It's like your favorite band releasing their greatest triumph; their groundbreaking album. As a fan, you can't wait for what comes next! You wait hoping it to be as great as what you just heard, but the bar has been set very very high and everything after is somewhat of a disappointment, even though they are masterpieces in their own right.

Bottom line, while agreed that III is nowhere near as good as the first two, it doesn't matter because it could never meet those impossible expectations. III in and of itself is a masterpiece. Watch it for what it is, and stop drawing comparisons to its big, successful brothers. Coppola's worst part of the trilogy is a much better movie than most other franchises' A-list material.