The Godfather: Part III : Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

The overwhelming consensus is that the Godfather 3 paled in comparison to the Godather 1 and The Godfather 2. Still, the Academy Awards nominated the Godfather 3 for 7 awards, including Best Picture. Likely, these nominations came from the reputation of Godfather 1 and Godfather 2.

Do the 7 nominations prove that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

I recently watched and thought the film was very good. Just because it is not as good as the first film, does not mean it was not better than most of the stuff in 1990. Remember Driving Miss Daisy got the win just the previous year. Godfather part III is so much better than that

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

this movie was horrible.

Who took my toast?

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

No.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

This was a terrible film. Slow and boring. Al Pacino overacted and Sophia was what the Raspberry Awards were made for.

This movie would be terrible even if you don't compare it to the first 2 "Godfather Films"

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

There is 'proof' that the academy awards is a sham every year in plenty of categories.
Given that Godfather III is a very good drama, I don't know if this applies.

Regional Manager
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008200422/

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

It doesn't prove they are a sham. Just because you disagree with the Oscars does't mean they are a sham. The Godfather Part III gets compared with the first two films (which are out standings). Is Part III terrible? Definitely no. There are also multiple critics who suggest that even Part II cannot even compare with I.

Part III is a very well written film. And keep in consideration that Mario Puzo and Francis ford Coppola only wrote this film in six weeks while they had six months! This is a very intelligent film considering it only had six weeks to be written. ANd they started from scratch even though there were some previous drafts written.

The only thing that is completely panned in tis film is Sofia Coppola's acting (which is terrible - we would probably agree on that).

It deserved every nomination it got. And what else should have been nominated in 1990?

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

I'd rather had seen Pacino win an Oscar for this than "Scent Of A Woman"

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Me too.

----------------------
http://viverdecinema.blogspot.com.br/

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

I used to think Saving Private Ryan losing to Shakespeare in Love was the best proof. Then the other day I read Apocalypse Now lost to Kramer vs Kramer. Priceless.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?


I used to think Saving Private Ryan losing to Shakespeare in Love was the best proof. Then the other day I read Apocalypse Now lost to Kramer vs Kramer. Priceless.

I don't find that so surprising, when you consider the Academy often rewards what its members see as social consciences and issues du jour over pure achievements in filmmaking. Not always, but I'd say more often than not.

Kramer vs Kramer was, above all, about women "finding themselves" and the dreadfully unfair dilemma of having to balance responsibilities and commitments they've already made with wanting to drop everything at a moment's notice. (If I sound sarcastic, it's because I am -- sorry!) Ahem. It was very much in tune with the zeitgeist of its time -- a time, incidentally, when most people were trying to avoid the issue of Vietnam and its vets -- and so I'm firmly of the opinion that it was a social vote that won that one the prize.

As for Shakespeare in Love ... well, you'll likely dismiss me on this one, but I bluntly, honestly think it was a better film than Saving Private Ryan. SPR had some brilliant set pieces (both technically and dramatically), but it was a problematic film, in that it set up some tough questions as its raison d'etre that it then never went near answering. It wimped out, in other words, something I found more than a little frustrating. Shakespeare achieved everything it set out to do, in spades. It gets my vote.



You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

No, Godfather Part III is an excellent film and deserved its nominations.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Come on! i think you were kidding or were drunk when you wrote that statement. This movie is not good. First of all, that opera (in which there are no, IMO, memorable songs) goes on forever and ever. Second, that massacre in Atlantic City is quite far-fetched, especially since it was supposedly planned by Joey Zaza, who was basically a street hood with some power. Could Zaza put that kind of attack off? Doubt it. And where did Eli Wallach's character come from? Didn't he say--and I'm paraphrasing -- "Your father and I have done business for many years"? OK, where was he in the first two films? This film is almost a parody of the first two great films. Too long, very over indulgent.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

I'm not kidding or drunk. In my personal opinion, Godfather Part III is a great film.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

There is no "sham" involved. You seem to be confused about what the Academy Awards are. Here's how it works.

The "Academy" is a private club. Appearing in motion pictures in speaking roles does not automatically get someone membership. You have to be approved by a committee.

Anyway, every year this private club gives awards to its members for their work in the various disciplines that make up the motion picture industry. These awards frequently have little or nothing to do with box office numbers or what the professional critics say or what the public thinks.

It's the Academy's business to present these awards to whomever they see fit. If they want to give Liza Minelli an Oscar because Judy never got one or give John Wayne a career Oscar and say it was for True Grit, then they can. Clark Gable didn't win for Gone With The Wind because he already got one for It Happened One Night. The list is endless and includes Jack Lemmon, Art Carney and of course Marisa Tomei.

In short, it's their club, their awards. There's no sham.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?


It's the Academy's business to present these awards to whomever they see fit.


Incorrect -- the Academy touts itself as the celebrators of excellent filmography/acting. Thus, they give their awards to films/actors who are excellent, not "whomever they see fit."

From the Academy Awards own website:

The Academy requires that voting members of the Academy make their choices based solely on the artistic and technical merits of the eligible films and achievements.

http://www.oscars.org/academy-story

"Artistic and technical merits" = Excellence

Now, if the Academy Awards give their awards to films/actors who are not excellent, it follows that the Academy Awards are not truly celebrators of excellence and that they are, thus, a sham (for lying to the public).

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

OK. When you put it that way I see your point and I have to agree. They say one thing and frequently do another.

If anyone out there wants to weigh in on how Art Carney's performance in Harry & Tonto was "the best performance by an actor" that year, please join in. I remember how the presenter, John Huston seemed to know Carney was the winner before he even opened the envelope and gave a disclaimer before he looked.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Bashing GF III because it wasn't as good as the first two is like bashing hamburger for not being filet mignon. Yeah, the latter is better, but that doesn't mean the former can't be good.

III was definitely flawed-- it wasn't as great as its predecessors-- but it was a good movie.

It's been said: III suffered in part because of its title. I think if it'd been called "The Death of Michael Corleone" as originall intended it wouldn't get the flak it received.

At the same time, though, Sofia Coppola's acting was awful no matter what title the move had.

Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment. -Michael Corleone

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Did it deserve it to be nominated? Absolutely. It is a good and fascinating film.
Did it deserve to win? No, because it wasn't that good. There were better films that year.

Of course it pails compared to the first two but as a film on it's own terms it is really good and only Coppola could do a sequel with such a high standard.
The story is fascinating but it has a few fatal flaws: Sofia Coppola is a useless actress and she alone is a huge fatal flaw..
The other flaw is that the story at time feels as a soap-opera. The other films also had soap opera connections but there everything was so detailed you didn't really notice it. And the characters were deep and multi-faceted.
But here it becomes to distracting sometimes. Some of the plot elements were to unbelievable to believe and the characters are shallow.

Overall though a really good film.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Give the Academy some credit. The film didn't win a single award.

The Academy nominates the best films of that year, regardless of the overall quality. If the year 1990 only released bad movies, they they would nominate bad movies.

Are there any films that you would have nominated for the categories were The Godfather III was nominated other than the ones that were already there?

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

The real shame, in my opinion, is that how the most critics and people praise the first two and hugely trash this poor third and last part of the Godfather which I don't get it!

There are many elements which could be listed to prove my claim but let me just say this that Al Pacino's acting at the scene where his daughter gets killed is probably the best and most memorable performance I ever remember by a legendary actor like him!

Lastly, I'd say maybe this is a difference between people's tastes or opinions I don't know, my friend!

:)

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

GF III was better than "Dances With Wolves," which won Best Picture for 1990.

Nowhere near as good as GF I or II, no.

But better than "DWW."



================

4) You ever seen Superman $#$# his pants? Case closed.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

I like Dances With Wolves I think it's a bold film, with some exceptionally moments and great performances.
I do like The Godfather 3 too but I can see why it was pipped by DWW.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?


GF III was better than "Dances With Wolves," which won Best Picture for 1990.

Nope. Can't buy that one at all.



You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

Yep, some of the awards this one was nominated for were extremely generous to say the least.

*Duke

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

To the op:

Spotlight winning over The Revenant for Best Picture this year was proof the Academy Awards are a sham and a popularity contest.

Top 11 Worst Movie Sequels

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y_3igyDom4


There's so many bad ones, but which sequels are hands down the worst of the worst? Nostalgia Critic gives you his picks for Top 11 Worst Movie Sequels.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

"Paled"? It stank. It was awful. The only thing more awful was the horrible miniseries Coppola pieced together from the three movies, to air on TV.

The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.

Re: Godfather 3: Proof that the Academy Awards is a sham?

This movie is better than Ghost and Awakenings, which were also nominated for Best Picture.

It's funny that Pacino was nominated for Dick Tracy instead of this.

Please don't call someone a _____tard.
Top