Not bad, but unnecessary third part of the series

Rating: 7/10 (14 September 2014)

I've seen the first two parts a few times each, but never got around to the much-maligned third installment until now. Not that everyone hates it. It was well reviewed and was nominated for Best Picture. It's that one element that garners most of the hate. You know which one. And, I have to say, Ms. Coppola's performance deserves the derision. It's a rare performance - a supporting one, at that - that drags the whole film down a level. She just has no business being in front of a camera. The film after her is hardly perfect, either. Pacino has entered his hammy phase. Keaton is mostly a non-entity. Frankly, the reason to watch, acting-wise, is Andy Garcia, who was the only actor in the film who earned an Oscar nomination. He's usually a bore, but he's excellent here. Talia Shire and Eli Wallach are both pretty good, as well. The film also lacks the focus of the first two films. With all that, though, it's still pretty good. Beautifully produced, of course, and Coppola's directing talent had yet to leave him (by my account, he had one more great film in him, Dracula, before he became worthless).