Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit

Rating: Null/10 (3 July 2002)

One of the great benefits of buying DVD is that in most cases you not only get the film itself but also loads of extras that can only add to the overall feel & premise of the movie itself.
I recently bought the DVD Collectors pack of The Godfather saga which not only included the three original cinema versions but also the usual extras such as picture galleries, the Corleone family tree, biographies and additional scenes that only appeared in the TV versions.
But the two best features of all were the Director's commentary overlaid for each film and also a separate documentary focusing on the rather difficult productions of all three Godfather films from inception in 1970 to the conclusion in 1990.
When I viewed the video version of GIII some years ago I was rather disappointed by the rather bloated & totally unbelievable story concerning corruption and murder within the Vatican by the Mafia.
Not only was a I disappointed by the story but also I felt the acting was weak compared to its two predecessors, with the film solely dependent on Al Pacino carrying the torch throughout the saga, while the supporting cast drifted in and out like passing ships in the night.
However, now that I have viewed the DVD version along with the behind-the-scenes documentary I can begin to appreciate some of the problems director Coppola faced during the making of GIII.
For years Paramount were very keen for GIII to be made, with or without Coppola behind the lens. So desperate were they that up to 15 initial drafts were put forward from different screenwriters but none ever saw the light of day.
But on top of this Paramount were not even bothered whether Coppola directed or not since they felt confident that nearly any competent director could carry on the Saga Coppola had so successfully conceived during the 70s with I and II.
There are many good directors who could have done this but when one reads that Sylvestor Stallone had been pencilled in by Paramount not only to direct but also to star, one has to consider the sanity of the studio execs at the time.
And even when Coppola & Puzo were roped in they had to rush the scripts through in weeks rather than in months so it is not wholly surprising the screenplay looks half-baked.
And then of course there is the inclusion of Coppola daughter Sofia as a last minute replacement to more accomplished actress Winona Ryder. It wouldn't have been so bad had her character been no more than a supporting role. But Sofia was asked to play Mary Corleone, daughter to Michael and heir to the entire Corleone business empire.
Regrettably the task was to great for someone so young and with so little major acting experience and as a consequence was one of the major faults within the film with poor Sofia panned by both critics and fans alike. It seems strange that Francis cast his daughter for such a major role at such short notice but cast her he did and I guess his decision will forever haunt him.
Another omission was that of Robert Duvell as Tom Hagen. GIII was in desperate need of some familiar faces from the previous movies to make the saga complete. However, with the exception of Pacino himself the only significant stars who reprised their roles were Diane Keaton & Talia Shire.
Both Keaton & Shire give good solid performances with the latter having a far more significant role than before. But all the same I felt Pacino was very much on his own now that Duvell had been left out due to contract disagreements. I felt the inclusion of Tom (at any cost) would have added more gravitas to the movie. Duvell's character was very prominent & stong in the previous two movies and this was emphasised all too clearly by his absence in III.
I liked the story; at least in part. Pacino was excellent as the elderly Don trying to shake off the ghosts & horrors of his past and his determination to go "legit" not only for himself but for his family (not his Mafia family on this occasion but his true family - his wife and children)
This part of the story was well done & very moving but was let down badly with the main storyline of corruption and murder within the Vatican by Mafia henchmen over big business dealings & power sharing. This was so unbelievable that any passion & feeling I had for Pacino's wish to be a decent man again went right out of the window by this overblown and frankly stupid premise.
However, putting this film in the context of what I have learnt from the documentary I have to say that Coppola shouldn't be blamed completely for this relative flop. The execs at Paramount should hang their heads in shame for trying to rush the screenplay through too quickly and not trusting Coppola's own judgement. I could understand their anxiety if they were dealing with an unknown director but to undermine Coppola with his own movie legacy is a disgrace.
GIII is not a bad film by any standards. If one takes a huge pinch of salt then the Vatican storyline can be tolerated. But for the Godfather purists GIII ended up as a wasted opportunity and will always be consigned as the weakest of the three films. In addition one has to feel sympathy for Sofia Coppola for no matter what she does now or in the future she will always be remembered for her rather poor performance in Godfather III.
***SPOILER*** I loved the ending, it was so underplayed and yet so moving that for a moment I completely forgot about the utter farce that had gone on minutes before. But to see Pacino sitting in his orange grove an elderly man, crippled & blind and subsequently dying was well done and very open to suggestion. For we are not told whether he died a free man or whether the guilt of his past misdemeanours went with him. But it was very touching of Coppola to continue the "orange fruit" symbolism significant throughout the entire saga ***END OF SPOILER***

***/*****