I’m sure I’m not alone in wondering what a superior actress (such as Winona Ryder, who dropped out last minute) could have added to the film. Considering her importance to the story, Coppola’s performance is a genuine drawback to the film. Her interactions with cousin and love interest Mancini are excruciating, made even harder to watch due to the distinct lack of chemistry between the two, which overshadows any attempt at developing their relationship past surface level. Sofia Coppola, whilst now an excellent director, looks wildly out of her depth here, faring poorly against her famous co-stars. The main narrative, whilst thoroughly engaging in parts, falls somewhat short, particularly during the meandering second act, which contains a couple of scenes which wouldn’t look out of place in a Scarface rip-off. However, there are also a number of serious missteps which threaten to derail the film entirely, recut or not. He plays Mancini with a frenzy akin to a young Pacino, and a suaveness reminiscent of De Niro’s Vito Corleone, a truly accomplished performance. Garcia gives an assured and charismatic performance as wildcard Mancini, fizzing off the screen in every scene. Another highlight of the film for me was Andy Garcia, who plays the long dead Sonny Corleone’s illegitimate son Vincent Mancini. The scenes between Michael and his wife Kay are some of the most affecting scenes in the whole trilogy, with Al Pacino and Diane Keaton giving brilliantly convincing performances as once infatuated lovers turned exhausted divorcees. The plot sees him making multi-million dollar deals with the shady head of the Vatican Bank, to negotiating his relationship with his estranged wife and children. Michael Corleone, the patriarch, more rich and influential than ever, toils in his conscience over his reprehensible actions during his rise to power. I found some of the most engaging moments to revolve around the intertwining themes of guilt and religion, which contained the best expressions of a true ‘coda’. There are many scenes in the film which evoke the same blend of unmistakable melodrama and style as the other films in the series, along with some truly excellent performances.ĭespite taking place 20 years after The Godfather II, Coda continues many of its central themes, with a strong emphasis on fatherhood and family, which form the emotional aspects of the story. So, how does The Godfather Coda actually hold up? I think it’s fair to say that it’s a mixed bag. There seems to be a general consensus that The Godfather III just isn’t worth the watch, as not to taint the seemingly flawless impression left by its darling older brothers. What I was aware of, was the reputation it holds in filmic history: a missed third step in a glittering franchise, one which had racked up countless awards, the first two entries considered to be amongst the very best that film has to offer. Having seen The Godfather and it’s (almost) equally extraordinary second entry, I was going into The Godfather Coda completely blind – at least to the extent that I was not aware of the plot. Francis Ford Coppola’s opening speech before The Godfather Coda (the newly titled and re-edited The Godfather III ) provides an interesting look into the mindset of the esteemed director as he justifies his re-entry back into the world of The Godfather. “The musical term coda is sort of like an epilogue, a summing up, and that’s what we intended the movie to be”.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |