1979 में न्यूयॉर्क शहर और इटली में अपने व्यापारिक व्यवहार को वैध बनाने की कोशिश के बीच, माफिया डॉन माइकल कोरलियोन अपने भतीजे विन्सेन्ट मनसिनी को अपने कब्ज़े में ले जाते हुए, अपने पापों का ला... सभी पढ़ें1979 में न्यूयॉर्क शहर और इटली में अपने व्यापारिक व्यवहार को वैध बनाने की कोशिश के बीच, माफिया डॉन माइकल कोरलियोन अपने भतीजे विन्सेन्ट मनसिनी को अपने कब्ज़े में ले जाते हुए, अपने पापों का लाभ उठाने की कोशिश करता है.1979 में न्यूयॉर्क शहर और इटली में अपने व्यापारिक व्यवहार को वैध बनाने की कोशिश के बीच, माफिया डॉन माइकल कोरलियोन अपने भतीजे विन्सेन्ट मनसिनी को अपने कब्ज़े में ले जाते हुए, अपने पापों का लाभ उठाने की कोशिश करता है.
- 7 ऑस्कर के लिए नामांकित
- 6 जीत और कुल 23 नामांकन
कहानी
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAl Pacino was offered $5 million to reprise his role as Michael. But Pacino wanted $7 million plus a percentage of the gross. Francis Ford Coppola refused. He threatened to rewrite the script by starting the story with Michael's funeral sequence instead of the film's introduction. Pacino agreed to the $5 million offer.
- गूफ़When Cardinal Lamberto hears Michael Corleone's confession, he is not wearing the purple stole all priests wear during the sacrament. There is no reason why he wouldn't have one, since all priests carry one on their person at all times in case of emergency (such as giving absolution during last rites).
- भाव
Michael Corleone: Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe original theatrical and home entertainment releases had the 1987 Paramount Pictures logo with the 1989 Paramount Communications byline, the pre-2020 Blu-Ray releases meanwhile had the 2002 Paramount logo with the 1995 Viacom byline tinted in sepia, and the post-2020 home entertainment releases and current streaming releases had the current Paramount logo with 2020 ViacomCBS byline.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनThe VHS release is called "Final Director's Cut", features 8 minutes of additional and alternate footage not included in theatrical version and has been the version released on all subsequent home media and television releases, until the 2020 "Coda" version. The theatricals version was released in certain non USA countries on VHS and DVD, but never on Blu Ray or 4K until the 2022 Godfather 50th anniversary box set. The changes mostly consist of additional footage, but some alternate footage and dialogue in select scenes. Full set of changes are as follows:
- New scene of Don Altabello giving to the Vito Andolini foundation (1.5m).
- There is an added scene in Michael's party of the Arch Bishop and Bj talking (30s).
- New scene of Michael and George Hamilton at breakfast; then Andrew Hagen enters and speaks with Michael (1m 18s).
- New establishing shot of the church before Michael and the Arch Bishops meeting (7s, this is the opening shot of the 'Coda version')
- New scene of Mary questioning Michael's motives on the rooftop (1m 30s).
- Alternate take of Altabello leaving the Chinese restaurant before entering Michael's car (-3s)
- Two medium close-ups shots of Mary and Vincent added to the scene where they make gnocchi (8s).
- New dialogue is added to Michael reprimanding Vincent, Connie, and Neri (30s).
- Alternate dialogue in the scene where Mary is being told to not date Vincent, by Mary. Then additional dialogue is given to Michael and Anthony (10s).
- New scene of Michael giving Anthony the drawing form part II (32s).
- New scene of a shot of Michael and Kay's car driving through the hills, which dissolves into the next new scene (16s).
- New scene of Michael and Kay standing outside the door of Vito's old house, which references a deleted scene from the first film (30s).
- Deleted dialogue after Kay comments about the puppet show (No time difference).
- New scene of a cycling priest with flowers, who then gives them to Kay (28s).
- Alternate dialogue between Michael and Kay at lunch. The 1991 cut is far more emotional, where as the the article cut is far less emotional, having the characters find a much more blatant peace.
- Two superimposed shots were cut from the Restoration (making no change in the timing.) When the new Pope is elected, the Restoration at around 2:05:04 shows three superimposed shots of newspaper front pages. But the Theatrical Version included two extra front pages not included in the Restoration: a German newspaper 15 seconds later, and then an Italian newspaper another 15 seconds after that.
- कनेक्शनEdited into The Godfather Trilogy: 1901-1980 (1992)
फीचर्ड रिव्यू
Michael Corleone has sold his illegal business in an attempt to win back his family. However he must still contend with up and coming mobsters such as Vincent, who wants to work for him and Joey Zasa, who wants to fully take over the Corleone family's territory. When the Corleone family begin to deal with the Vatican and plan to buy out their share of an multinational corporation he finds that the Vatican is just as corrupt as his illegal operations were. Despite his best efforts he finds himself sucked back into the world he has tried to leave behind.
Easily one of the most hated films ever made or at least you'd think it was by the critical mauling it got for a raft of reasons. However watching it now it isn't that bad and really it only suffers from comparison with the two films before it. But lets be fair, Coppola has made 3 or 4 of the best films ever made did we really expect another one from him?
The film has a reasonable plot and brings the trilogy to a logical end. The plot however does have it's weaknesses for example it starts well with Michael's attempt to `get out' being hampered by other families on their way up. But when it starts to get involved with money laundering through the Vatican and the corruption therein, it starts to lose it's way and it's focus on Michael.
The main weakness comes in the characters. Would Michael really go straight just to get his family back and how come he managed to do it so easily up till the time of the film? Worse still is Connie who seems to have become some sort of Mafia widow when that was not part of her character in the previous films would she really have got that twisted or influential? Little problems like these just bugged me and they also fed into the performances.
For such a great cast the acting was very average. Pacino is good but I sensed he didn't see Michael turning out this way and he didn't convince occasionally. Keaton has little to do and again I felt that her approach to Michael was too forgiving, although maybe I'm not allowing for time. As I Siad before Shire was doing some sort of `Bride of Frankenstein' act as Connie and I didn't buy it for a moment. Garcia was OK and faces like Wallach, Hamilton and the like helped. The two worst performances were sadly two of the main ones. First Joe Mantegna ..now it wasn't that it was bad it was more that I've seen him do so much better. Here all I could think of when I watched him was how his character and his acting was very like his Simpsons' character of ` Fat Tony'. Bare in mind Fat Tony is meant to be a spoof of the Mafioso characters and you'll see why I didn't like it.
The worse performance was Sofia Coppola. Now she was vilified at the time for her role a bit unfairly and cruelly but she was still bad. She has this strange scowl on her face for most of the film and she acts like a spoil little girl. She also has no realism in her voice and speaks in the same constant tone that Vincent would fall for her was just a leap of faith too far to accept. The cast does have others who are unused or underused Fonda being the best example. Why did she bother with that role!?
Overall, this is miles behind the other two Godfathers and it has plenty of weaknesses. However at it's heart it's a good try as the concluding part and the story is watchable. It's not bad, it just is average and it feels like the director and large sections of the cast felt they just had to turn up to make a third classic film.
Easily one of the most hated films ever made or at least you'd think it was by the critical mauling it got for a raft of reasons. However watching it now it isn't that bad and really it only suffers from comparison with the two films before it. But lets be fair, Coppola has made 3 or 4 of the best films ever made did we really expect another one from him?
The film has a reasonable plot and brings the trilogy to a logical end. The plot however does have it's weaknesses for example it starts well with Michael's attempt to `get out' being hampered by other families on their way up. But when it starts to get involved with money laundering through the Vatican and the corruption therein, it starts to lose it's way and it's focus on Michael.
The main weakness comes in the characters. Would Michael really go straight just to get his family back and how come he managed to do it so easily up till the time of the film? Worse still is Connie who seems to have become some sort of Mafia widow when that was not part of her character in the previous films would she really have got that twisted or influential? Little problems like these just bugged me and they also fed into the performances.
For such a great cast the acting was very average. Pacino is good but I sensed he didn't see Michael turning out this way and he didn't convince occasionally. Keaton has little to do and again I felt that her approach to Michael was too forgiving, although maybe I'm not allowing for time. As I Siad before Shire was doing some sort of `Bride of Frankenstein' act as Connie and I didn't buy it for a moment. Garcia was OK and faces like Wallach, Hamilton and the like helped. The two worst performances were sadly two of the main ones. First Joe Mantegna ..now it wasn't that it was bad it was more that I've seen him do so much better. Here all I could think of when I watched him was how his character and his acting was very like his Simpsons' character of ` Fat Tony'. Bare in mind Fat Tony is meant to be a spoof of the Mafioso characters and you'll see why I didn't like it.
The worse performance was Sofia Coppola. Now she was vilified at the time for her role a bit unfairly and cruelly but she was still bad. She has this strange scowl on her face for most of the film and she acts like a spoil little girl. She also has no realism in her voice and speaks in the same constant tone that Vincent would fall for her was just a leap of faith too far to accept. The cast does have others who are unused or underused Fonda being the best example. Why did she bother with that role!?
Overall, this is miles behind the other two Godfathers and it has plenty of weaknesses. However at it's heart it's a good try as the concluding part and the story is watchable. It's not bad, it just is average and it feels like the director and large sections of the cast felt they just had to turn up to make a third classic film.
- bob the moo
- 24 जुल॰ 2002
- परमालिंक
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Godfather Part III?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- El Padrino. Parte III
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Mare Chiaro bar "Toni's nut house", 179 Mulberry street, Little Italy, मैनहटन, न्यूयॉर्क शहर, न्यूयॉर्क, संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका(Actual owner Toni sat in background smoking cigar as always..)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $5,40,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $6,67,61,392
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $63,87,271
- 25 दिस॰ 1990
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $13,68,61,392
- चलने की अवधि2 घंटे 42 मिनट
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें