The Godfather: Part III : The real issue is the Vatican scam

The real issue is the Vatican scam

Granted, nothing would ever make GF III surpass the first two, but I think it would have been a much better movie if they had strictly held to a mafia plot and not involved the Vatican and all of that Immobiliare craziness. I think a big part of the frustration, for me anyway, was the confusion generated by the Vatican scam. I'm sorry but a corrupt archbishop and some goofy Swiss banker didn't give me the same sense of a threat that past GF villains such as Hyman Roth or Barzini did. I read somewhere quite a while ago that one of the ideas they were originally toying with was to make the Willy Cicci character from the first two one of the main villains in part III. That would have tied nicely to part II and would have instilled a greater sense of treachery, as Cicci had been a long time soldier with the Corleones. I know I'm playing the armchair quarterback here, but I cannot understand what Coppola found appealing about a Vatican story line in a godfather movie. Yeah, I agree that keeping Michael's look and demeanor from part II would have also helped, but I don't think it would have saved the day. GF III is still a good film to watch once or twice a year and has some good moments, but it lacks the personality of the first two. Just my thoughts.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

Didn't care for it either, I also hated the opera scene, dragged on too long and it didn't have the emotional impact that the murder montages of the previous 2 had. This film had a lot of potential, I loved the idea of Michael Corleone trying to redeem himself and ultimately failing but it just didn't work.

"I really wish Gia and Claire had became Tanner" - Honeybeefine

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

I thought the Vatican subplot was OK; it was the cousin-incest thing that messed up the movie IMO.




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

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

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam


cousin-incest thing that messed up the movie

First cousin marriage is a peculiar prejudice. One the most of the world doesn't share.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage#/media/File:CousinMarriageWorld.svg

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

the "Vatican story line" that's not mob related is inspired in the actual story of the actual mob from real life.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/12/roberto-calvi-blackfriars-bridge-mafia

lol

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

It was ok. At least it was an excuse to view Rome. The real problem was the HORRIBLE execution of the climax. That issue repeats itself throughout the film - scenes ruined by horrible execution. Overall, it's a slightly above average film - not sure when I'll ever rewatch it. Come to think of it, the Vatican plot was probably better than anything else going. What else was there? More lame scenes with Kay crying and moaning, Michael being a shell and giving up control, incest, etc. Yeah, I'll take the Vatican and Don Altobello over those plots.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

Yeah. It reminded me of how Casino tried so hard to be Goodfellas part 2, and in turn, doesn't even feel like it's own movie, instead desperately wanting to be associated with something great and ultimately failing, pretty badly.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

I think that the Vatican was a great idea. But the problem is that it wasn't utilized enough, the movie focused too much on a family values. It's a big problem when Sofia Coppola's bad acting is in the middle of it all, and all that incest relationship distraction. I wish we could see more business, not family.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

The Vatican scenes are there to show how far the Corleone's influence has reached. So from that point they are important.
I do like the idea but sometimes it comes of as daytime soap plot.A bit shallow to be carrying a whole film.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

Well, the Vatican in the 1970s had well-established connections with syndicates in Italy, and the entire plot with Rome was a fictionalized account of events surrounding the deaths of Pope John Paul I, who was found dead in his bed after serving a very short time, an archbishop, high-ranking members of the collapsed Banco Ambrosiano, depicted by the Swiss in the film, as well as depicting the real-life allegations of money laundering by Vatican Bank in South America as verified.

The liberties taken have more to do with the conflation of all these events into a single grudge against a single family, the conspiracy surrounding these events, and the elevated status of American mafia families in Italian politics, which is not how the Cosa Nostra operated. If mafia were involved in the deaths of Vatican authorities in the '70s, it is far more likely to have been Magliana, or Italian-based Sicillian families without the American ties depicted in the film. There are 5-6 mafias in Italy besides Cosa Nostra.

The film also winks at Giulo Andreotti, prime minister of Italy during the 70s and 80s, whose detractors have accused of crimes in connection to some of the mafias. The character of Don Lucchesi, played by Enzo Robutti in the film, was cast for his resemblance to Andreotti and wears his recognizable glasses and hairstyle.

So the inclusion of the Vatican in the storyline was crucial to setting the events of the film in 1979 Italy, and were intended to be timely if crudely caricaturized depictions of known criminal and political unrest at that time.

Re: The real issue is the Vatican scam

The Vatican story-line serves two purposes. It bridges the lost time between himself and his children, particularly Mary who he assigns as the chairman of the Corleone Foundation that is heavily involved with the Catholic Charities in Sicily.

The second story-line is Michael's delusional belief that by rescuing Immobiliare's finances with his majority stake buy-out he would win favor with God's "right hand man" the Pope and his past sins would be forgiven.

As we see in the movie, both endeavors fail miserably, but to me it was unnecessary because I didn't feel the irony of Michael's failure, and it was like Coppola and Puzo were trying to recreate the ending of Godfather 2 where Michael already ended up alone. The could have had Mar running off with Vincent and it would have been just as "tragic" but the failed assassination attempt felt unoriginal and uninspired.
Top