The Godfather Trilogy Official Appreciation and Discussion thread!

[Warhammer]

It may have. The original concept was what the first two were building up to, Michael vs Hagen for control. Throughout the first two films, the most consistent theme with Tom Hagen is despite not being a Corleone or Italian, he is the truest son that Don Corleone had, the only one who honored him, who learned from him, who carried on his legacy. A power struggle between Michael and Hagen, Don Corleone's son vs his legacy would've been fantastic.

Stop teasing me. You stop it right now.

 

[titansupes]

It may have. The original concept was what the first two were building up to, Michael vs Hagen for control. Throughout the first two films, the most consistent theme with Tom Hagen is despite not being a Corleone or Italian, he is the truest son that Don Corleone had, the only one who honored him, who learned from him, who carried on his legacy. A power struggle between Michael and Hagen, Don Corleone's son vs his legacy would've been fantastic.

You don't know how depressed I was listening to the Part III commentary track, and hearing Coppola describe this. If only...

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

It may have. The original concept was what the first two were building up to, Michael vs Hagen for control. Throughout the first two films, the most consistent theme with Tom Hagen is despite not being a Corleone or Italian, he is the truest son that Don Corleone had, the only one who honored him, who learned from him, who carried on his legacy. A power struggle between Michael and Hagen, Don Corleone's son vs his legacy would've been fantastic.

That does sound good.

 

[Lord]

Stop talking about what it could have been, just makes the ending more depressing

 

[LostSon88]

That Godfather 3 would've been AMAZING.

 

[Lord]

Not sure Tom Hagen would be the vilainous character though, in the original script it looked like that would be Michael's Sister and Vincent.

 

[antonydelfini]

It may have. The original concept was what the first two were building up to, Michael vs Hagen for control. Throughout the first two films, the most consistent theme with Tom Hagen is despite not being a Corleone or Italian, he is the truest son that Don Corleone had, the only one who honored him, who learned from him, who carried on his legacy. A power struggle between Michael and Hagen, Don Corleone's son vs his legacy would've been fantastic.

I can see it in my head. And it's epic. maybe Hagen hates Mike for what he did to Fredo and wants to take over before the family gets completely torn apart.

 

[titansupes]

Not sure Tom Hagen would be the vilainous character though, in the original script it looked like that would be Michael's Sister and Vincent.

The original Michael vs Tom script is available?

 

[Lord]

The original Michael vs Tom script is available?

I don't think so, i'm just talking about the ideas they mentioned. Also, as much as Tom Hagen could be disapointed with Michael's reign, i think that him suddenly turning against Michael would be a little against his character, he wouldn't f*** up like Fredo did, but i don't think he would plan a betrayal to kill his brother.

I could see him having ideologies that eventualy clashed with Michael's, but i don't think it was enough to be the main threat, or even "deadly", their conflict could still spark a realy good movie, with Vicent being the one that's going to try and kill Michael.

 

[Matt]

I think it could've been done. And it wouldn't have been Hagen betraying Michael, it would've been Michael coming full circle and turning into a villain, because that is what the first two films are really about; Michael's transformation. The Godfather III, Michael vs. Hagen would've essentially been Michael vs his father. It wouldn't have been Tom Hagen betraying Michael. It would've been Hagen desperately trying to carry on Don Corleone's legacy in light of Michael's madness and that leading to an inevitable power struggle.

 

[Warhammer]

Damn it, Matt. Stop teasing me. Holy s***.

 

[LostSon88]

See the thing is, I absolutely loved Michaels arc in 3.

The idea of him trying to redeem his soul after all these years of being an evil man whilst knowing that as hard as he tried he will never be truly at peace. That idea that he one day will have to pay for his sins (ergo the death of Mary).

He's a broken man that's finally realized the consequences of the evil path he took as a young man who desperately wants redemption but never gets it...and dies alone.

That's some powerful stuff.

Tbh, I think the only things I didn't like in 3 were No Tom Hagen, Sofia Coppola and the whole incest subplot.

Other than those nitpicks, 3 is pretty solid in my eyes.

 

[Prison Mike]

I just watched Part III for the first time. Doesn't even compare to the first two. I hated the whole incest subplot. I would have loved to see the Michael vs Hagen movie that never came to be. Anyway, I think the original is my favorite of the three. Only because I love the transformation of Michael over the movie. The second movie is a very close second in my books.

 

[LostSon88]

What did you think of Michael's "Search for Redemption" arc for III?

 

[Prison Mike]

I didn't really care for the redemption arc. He should have been a straight villain through the movie IMO. Would have been nice to see Hagen vs. Michael though.

 

[Thoix]

I finally watched the trilogy back to back for the first time this week. I've seen the first two before, but never watched the third until today. Let me say that I do agree when people say it stand up to the first two, but I still thought it was good overall. But the first two films are nearly perfect in every way.

My favorite of the trilogy is the first film because Vito Corleone is my favorite character from the trilogy and I liked seeing the rise of Michael. I found Michael's story in the second film not as interesting as the first, but Vito's rise to power was terrific.

The Godfather -10/10
The Godfather: Part II - 10/10
The Godfather: Part III - 7/10

Overall - 9/10

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I cannot understand why Coppola has only made really inferior films since he did Dracula? How did the brilliance that he had become 'burned out'?

Because Francis made a dangerous deal with the devil himself. " The only way I can to top the two Godfather is to give in to insanity. Devil, please let me make the most maddening piece of mainstream American cinema ever, as compensation, you can claim my talent".

The devil abliged. Apocalypse Now was made. Francis was never the same again.

 

[Lord]

I don't remember liking Dracula much, i remember finding it very messy and weird.

 

[Schlosser85]

Part III isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, IMO.

But Sofia Coppola can't act her way out of a paper bag.

Also, Connie seems like a completely different character than in the first two.

 

[The Endless]

I love Dracula. Only weakness is Keanu Reeves. But i like how Coppola brought romance and eroticism back into the Dracula story. Visually and sonically it's one of the most stunning films i've ever seen. The cinematography, production design and score is out of this world.

 

[Lord]

Part III isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, IMO.

But Sofia Coppola can't act her way out of a paper bag.

Also, Connie seems like a completely different character than in the first two.

I don't see how Connie felt like a different character, by Part II she had already accepted that what Michael does was for the family's "Greater Good", i think that both roads, the one taken (where she tries to ignore Michael may have killed Fredo) and the one that was planned (where she plans revenge against Michael) were both in character, depending on her mood and patience.

 

[LostSon88]

She "grew up" by the end of Part II. She was now "all in" in becoming a part of the family business.

She turned to the dark side just as Michael did and that's reflected in her personality in Part III.

 

[Octoberist]

The third film was how I viewed the fourth Indiana Jones. It felt different and it felt awkward. Then you start to realize that certain movies work in certain eras of filmmaking.

 

[Octoberist]

I love Dracula. Only weakness is Keanu Reeves. But i like how Coppola brought romance and eroticism back into the Dracula story. Visually and sonically it's one of the most stunning films i've ever seen. The cinematography, production design and score is out of this world.

I have to say that it was Keanu's worst role to date. It was like he was reading off cue cards, while struggling with his British-Surfer accent.

 

[DACrowe]

I think it could've been done. And it wouldn't have been Hagen betraying Michael, it would've been Michael coming full circle and turning into a villain, because that is what the first two films are really about; Michael's transformation. The Godfather III, Michael vs. Hagen would've essentially been Michael vs his father. It wouldn't have been Tom Hagen betraying Michael. It would've been Hagen desperately trying to carry on Don Corleone's legacy in light of Michael's madness and that leading to an inevitable power struggle.

There might have been elements of that, but Coppola seemed invested (however reluctant he was to make a third one), about it being Michael seeking last minute absolution for his failings and then being denied. There is no salvation from the choices he has made, particularly in murdering his brother.

So, it seems like it would always have been about "I try to get out and they pull me back in" as well as his daughter dying at the end. I am curious how that could work if Michael is the villain. Then again, killing Tom would just be him repeating his mistakes with Fredo all over again.