Top 25 Favorite Films

1.                    The Silence of the Lambs (1991) – I’ll go on record saying that the difference between someone’s favorite film as opposed to what they consider the greatest film is a matter of personal preference and pleasure, whether guilty or not. The Silence of the Lambs is the film that inspired me into the arts and has made an impact on my writing and how I would handle my own production. Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter is my favorite antagonist, simple as that, I have never seen a more interesting, complex, and enjoyable villain in any novel, comic, game, or film. This also acted as a gateway for me into psychological thrillers, which has since matched my interest in the science fiction and fantasy genres. I’ve lost count as to how many times I’ve seen it, and it never gets old, and I never forget that there hasn’t been a movie that’s affected me more.

2.                  Let the Right One In (2008) – With the exception of A Clockwork Orange, no film has impacted me quite so much in the last few years like this one has. The term is often used far too often and has become synonymous with other overused terms, but I consider this a true masterpiece, and certainly a worthwhile comeback to the horror genre and vampire subculture. Never have I watched a film so horrifying and yet so beautiful at the same time, the chemistry between the two leads is fantastic, the story goes beyond turning simplicity into gold and instead provides platinum. After repeat viewings I haven’t liked it any less and feel that I am loving it more with every viewing.

3.                   A Clockwork Orange (1971) – What works best for A Clockwork Orange is how unapologetic it is and how it oozes with ingenuity in its writing, subtext and lead protagonist, who in and of himself is also the main antagonist. Right from the opening shot accompanied by a great synthesizer score I was immensely enthralled in the bizarre, dystopian universe originally envisioned by Anthony Burgess. A Clockwork Orange is a disturbing and enlightening adventure from the eyes of one of the greatest characters in fiction.

4.                  The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) – Talk about a perfect third film. The Return of the King set a standard for third films (at least for me) that has been unmatched to this day. Aside from the minor plot hole regarding the giant birds, it is absolutely flawless. Length is not a flaw to me, at least not in this case. I have never found myself bored or uninterested at any point in the entire runtime of The Return of the King, whether the theatrical or extended cut.

5.                  Inception (2010) – Inception is Nolan’s best film to date in my opinion, and while it may not have the same impact with repeat viewings, I feel that the initial experience is the most important. Inception is well-written and performed, and my compliments to The Dark Knight’s authenticity apply even furthermore for this production.

6.                  The Dark Knight (2008) – Talk about a pleasant surprise. I went into this film thinking I would enjoy myself, of course. I did not however expect to be absolutely stunned and surprised, and with my mouth agape by the time the credits rolled. Heath Ledger shocked everyone with his performance, and even without The Joker I feel this has a lot going for it, the pacing, the writing, and the immense weight the narrative carries without having to resort to a slew of action schlock. The action is just as intense as any Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich farce except in this case there’s weight and credibility going into it, so while these set pieces may not be as exaggerated or unnecessarily elaborate, they’re far more effective.

7.                  The Fly (1986) – Yes, I have seen the original 1958 film, and this is better.

8.                  Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (2008) – I don’t think I have ever watched anything that satisfied the gamer, comic book fan and general geek in me more so than this hilarious, action-packed and extreme piece of fiction. Love the characters, love the story, love the antagonists, love the music, love the comedy, and love how much of a cult classic it’s already become.

9.                  Clerks (1994) – My favorite comedy and the debut film of my favorite director. Clerks is an example of how intriguing and funny the “mundane” really is.

10.               Watchmen (The Ultimate Cut - 2009) – It would seem that I would end up watching the film before I had read the graphic novel from the always ingenious Alan Moore. While I feel that after I have read the graphic novel I do prefer it, I have nothing but good things to say about Zack Snyder’s adaptation, for the most part. The Ultimate Cut is the more complete experience, especially for fans of the source material, and while I wish the climax was handled with a little more depth, I still feel that this is one of the most effective comic book adaptations to date.

11.                 Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980) – Honestly, it was hard to choose between this and Return of the Jedi. The Empire Strikes Back is the darkest, the most tragic, and most well-handled of the Original Trilogy, and I chose it over Return of the Jedi because I seem to appreciate more every time I watch it, and Ewoks are too much of a flaw for the third installment. However, Return of the Jedi does have one of my favorite moments in all of cinema, when Luke flails his lightsaber about in rage and beats Vader into submission, gets my hair standing up every time.

12.                The Green Mile (1999) – Nowadays it takes quite a bit for a film to get me emotional enough to moisten my eyes. For the record, Titanic doesn’t make me cry, at least not anymore, but this one always gets at least one out by the end of it all. The runtime compliments the ironic humility of the prison setting, mostly thanks to the effective cast, and another simple but great narrative makes this one of the most memorable experiences I’ve had for a motion picture.

13.                American Psycho (2000) – The greatest black comedy I have ever watched, Bale never disappoints, and brings his A-game to the hilariously morbid Patrick Bateman. This is a character up to par with the likes of Alex DeLarge, Hannibal Lecter, and Norman Bates in terms of depth, mystery and overall effect.

14.               The Terminator (1984) – I love film noir, I love dystopian fiction, I love sci-fi, and I love Arnold Schwarzenegger being a badass. Well, whaddya know?  Here’s a film with all that and more. Yes, I favor the first film over the second, I also prefer Alien to Aliens, sue me.

15.                The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) – This is my favorite Disney animated film, though I admit it’s flawed. The scale, the artwork, the music, all fantastic. Tony Jay (R.I.P.) as Judge Claude Frollo makes this film for me, his performance, his voice, and the most epic villain song ever written and performed.

16.               12 Angry Men (1957) – This, along with To Kill a Mockingbird were among the first black and white films I ever gave the time of day. It was because of the two that I was able to appreciate not only black and white films, but the beauty of black and white photography in general, which later helped me love and appreciate film noir.

17.                Unbreakable (2000) – Remember when M. Night Shyamalan wasn’t a joke? I attribute this to his style really only working twice. All his films display a detached, bleak, and practically soulless society, and it’s intriguing to a degree, and because the story is so immersive you can forgive Shyamalan’s extremely lackluster direction. After Signs though, the novelty seemed to wear off, and he has still continued with the same schtick. I enjoy Unbreakable because I am an avid fan of superheroes, and the way this particular story is handled is captivating and unique, and I appreciate Bruce Willis in subtler roles that help broaden his range. I would even go as far to say that this is kind of a mild art house take on the superhero genre, with its immense atmosphere and slow pacing as well as an ending that I actually like just as much the ending twist for The Sixth Sense.

18.               Psycho (1960) – Halloween may have reinstituted the slasher genre, but Psycho had perfected it almost two decades prior. As talented as John Carpenter is, this is the legendary Alfred Hitchcock, there’s really nothing more to say in that particular aspect. Norman Bates is just one of those iconic and perplexing antagonists, constantly going from smiling and shy to strict and foreboding.

19.               Good Will Hunting (1997) – Good Will Hunting is very much the kind of film I see myself writing, it has a simple but extremely effective narrative carried by well-casted actors that deals with real-life issues and argues different aspects of morality and logic without becoming patronizing.

20.              Halloween (1978) – Most horror film fanatics have already talked to death about how much of a masterpiece of fiction this is, so I won’t bother trying to say something that hasn’t already been said. Being a film student who aspires for a screenwriting and directing position, Halloween speaks to me from a filmmaking standpoint, and how much can be done with so little. I will stand by my belief that Halloween wouldn’t have been nearly as good as it is if it had a much higher budget. Clever direction, fantastic soundtrack, and an impressive opening shot. It’s set a standard for modern horror films that I still feel hasn’t been matched.

21.                Dances with Wolves (1990) – Part of the reason why Avatar has never really irked me as much as it has other viewers is because even when Dances With Wolves came out, the narrative was old hat. And wouldn’t you know it; Dances with Wolves won Best Picture at the Academy Awards as well as five Oscars. I never hear people bash on this film’s reputation though, and I wonder why that is. Yes, Dances with Wolves is a far more complete and finer executed film than Avatar, but the plot was just as tired then as it is now. What makes this differ is depth, a lot of time is devoted to John J. Dunbar in his intentional seclusion before he even meets one of the Native Americans, and his abandoned post is the product of military necessity and realistic casualty rather than greed and prejudice just for the sake of easy antagonists. Either way, I have only seen the 4-hour cut, no shorter, and like it just fine like that.

22.              Lord of the Flies (1963) – I will come right out and say that I can understand Roger Ebert when he says this story is very dated, it’s part of the reason I didn’t care for the remake. However, I still feel that this is a story of great tragedy, nonetheless. Children portrayed in such an instinctual and savage nature makes for some great storytelling as the right-wing Ralph and Piggy attempt to remain civilized and logical rather than resorting to violence and petty thievery. A tale of adult conflict and warfare through the eyes of our youth is psychologically bewildering in a way, and while I do recall my creative writing instructor’s disparaging attitude towards the film, his disdain for it only came from him preferring the original novel, and since I have not read it, I can only judge the movie on its own, and on its own it’s great.

23.               The Prince of Egypt (1998) – Being an atheist, you know this film did something right by me, because I love it. To me, DreamWorks has never topped this production. There was a great deal of heart and effort poured into this, and it shows in the presentation, the scale, the music, and the casting. In fact, there was so much work put into it that DreamWorks had doubts on whether they could pull off The Road to El Dorado, as they had felt that every bit of their creativity and passion had been used at that point. While I do like The Road to El Dorado for its fun, I can’t say they were far from that statement.

24.              Batman (1989) – This is the film that introduced me to Batman in the first place, I watched it at a very young age, and it was from this and the spectacular Animated Series that I was able to become an avid reader and fan of not only Batman comic books, but comic books in general. While I do see the first Burton film in a different light nowadays, it has aged extremely well in my opinion, and I find myself enjoying it a little more every time I watch it. It may be fairly spotty in terms of its faith to the source material, but Keaton makes for a great Batman, and Nicholson a great Joker, and while Hans Zimmer is one of my favorite composers working in the industry, nothing beats Danny Elfman’s score for this flick. This remains one of my favorite comic book films of all time, and boasts one of my favorite soundtracks and endings as well.

25.              Wall Street (1987) – Before Charlie Sheen was a warlock, he was a novice stockbroker trying to make it to the top. It may be difficult to believe, but our bi-winning, internet meme producing friend did have to kiss ass and complete errands for someone higher on the food chain than himself. Wall Street takes a mundane subject matter and turns it into a “little guy gets lucky” type of narrative, which may seem redundant up until this point but execution is what comes through in this case. Without a doubt, it was the performances that made this movie for me, particularly from Michael Douglas as the great Gordon Gekko. Gordon Gekko is the epitome of a “love-to-hate” villain to me, and I feel he is the most crucial factor to this presentation. And yes, I have seen the sequel, very moderate.

Critibility - Episode 1: The 2011 Spike VGAs...among other things.

It's a bit long but it was a first attempt, things will improve.
Link to podomatic.

Dragon Age: Origins (Ultimate Edition) (PS3) - Review

After quickly getting tired of the initially exciting but progressively repetitive Marvel vs. Capcom 3, I took a trip to GameStop one day with a few other unwanted titles and traded them in. Thankfully, this was before Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 had been publicly known, and so the trade-in credit had not significantly dropped. The last time I was at GameStop, I noticed the Ultimate Edition of Dragon Age: Origins for the PlayStation 3, and had heard some good praise for it. I took Angry Joe of Blistered Thumbs word for it and expressed interest in purchasing since I’m an avid RPG fan; it has probably become my favorite genre at this point. However, during that visit, I didn’t have the money for it, hence the MvC3 trade-in. So I paid for it, and brought it home with me, though my fun would have to wait as the installation download coupled with every DLC made for quite the delay. After every last download had finished, I finally began my quest in the land of Ferelden.

Dragon Age: Origins is an RPG developed by the Western RPG giant known as BioWare, (famous for Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect) developed as a spiritual successor to Baldur’s Gate. Origins details the adventures of your protagonist, a Grey Warden, as he or she battles against the Darkspawn, among other things. Your character is custom when you start, physical appearance, class, race, and combat preference are up to the player. Such choices include a Human Noble, a Dwarf Commoner, and an Elf Mage, to just name examples. Each class and race pairing has its own unique backstory, hence a part of the subtitle. Players of BioWare titles will feel right at home to Dragon Age with trademark dialogue branches and combat. Being a personal fan of Knights of the Old Republic and its sequel, it didn’t take me long to get comfortable.

There was something that felt right the moment I began playing, mostly familiarity. My first save file included a Human Noble, and I loved the old-fashioned feel of role-playing that brought me both a feeling of nostalgia as well as a sense of tradition. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with RPGs that push the envelope in a different direction such as Bethesda’s Fallout or The Elder Scrolls series, and as blasphemous as it may sound, I have not had the chance to play any of the Mass Effect games. That being said, Dragon Age: Origins is a fix for a certain hole left unfilled, and that is the Knights of the Old Republic 3 I always wanted (The Old Republic does not count to me). Between a main protagonist without a voice outside of battle phrases, a memorable selection of characters, some unobtainable depending on your choices, and an influence mechanic, the game could very well have Lightsabers and The Force in place of swords and magic.

That’s not to say that the game is some sort of a diamond in the rough, because it has glaring issues. First off, the graphics are a little subpar, but the game has so much to offer in other categories that this fault can very easily be excused. Second, there is considerable slow-down in certain areas, which in my honest opinion, is much less dismissible on a console than a PC. Next, we have texture pop-in, a lack of an alignment mechanic, and dialogue branching could be a little more advanced, considering the technological advancements since KoTOR II in 2004, despite it being developed by Obsidian. These issues make the game feel dated, despite it a fairly recent product. Also, among DLCs, I felt all of them could have been longer; Awakening was particularly disappointing both length-wise and from a storytelling standpoint.

Despite my complaints I would recommend this to most consistent RPG players, as the various origins and different classes offer a solid amount of replay value, and your companions are quite memorable, each having their own personal missions, plus the integration of sex and blood helps this mature package come full circle even with the few bumps in the road. Ferelden is an intriguing setting, the game’s soundtrack is more than generic fantasy, and solid voice acting is greatly appreciated, particularly from Morrigan, played by Claudia Black, previously known for playing Chloe Frazier in Uncharted 2. There are some issues, but I think I probably would have paid a full $60 for it, knowing how good it is now. 9 out of 10.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare - Review

It’s no secret that an overabundance of sequels tends to ruin a franchise. It’s a curse that plagued Friday the 13^th, 007 (on and off), and every cringe-worthy Scary Movie spin-off. It is also no secret that A Nightmare on Elm Street is a staple of pop-culture and the character of Freddy Krueger is a widely known horror icon. I was around nine or ten years old when I stayed over at my aunt’s house, and had spent the day with my favorite cousin, and during the day I had noticed a box set collection of the Nightmare series from the original to Freddy’s Dead. I stood up the entire night watching every film in the series other than New Nightmare as it wasn’t a part of the collection. I thought it was great entertainment, though I was never scared, not even in the slightest. Being a child who was raised on more mature films at an early age, I was considerably desensitized throughout my childhood, at least in terms of movies. The only “scary movies” that were able to frighten me were Child’s Play and later the original Halloween. A Nightmare on Elm Street was entertainment for me, and has been to this day, back then I watched it for the special effects and the treat of seeing such a wicked and likeable antagonist, now that I’ve gotten older I truly appreciate its craft, though I will never say it frightened me, because it never has.

As with many franchises gone awry, there were just too many installments in the Nightmare series, each one becoming more comic and more cartoonish than the last, albeit gore and self-relishing profanity. Sure, Krueger became downright hilarious by the time of Freddy’s Dead, but he had still become a joke, a slasher comedian nine years prior to American Psycho. Wes Craven, the man who introduced the masses to the mythos in the first place, knew it too. I was young when I had first seen New Nightmare, possibly a year or two after I had seen the films before it, and I wasn’t impressed at all. The film-within-a-film premise [insert Inception joke here] did not appeal to me, the lack of screen time for Krueger felt stagnant, and when the redesigned Freddy did appear, I felt it was too little, too late.

Well, years have passed, and I have watched New Nightmare once again. Wes Craven’s New Nightmare follows Heather Langenkamp (Nancy from the first installment) playing herself and dealing with Freddy coming into our world, she’s been having dreams about it, so has Craven, and so has Robert Englund. This is the real world, the Nightmare films are known to the public and the fans hunger for yet another installment despite Freddy being killed off in the previous installment. Apparently Freddy Krueger is a demon who has been contained within the films, and now that they’re concluded, he wants to enter reality. I find this plot a lot more enthralling then I did when I was younger, and Craven’s writing is clever, played serious, and meta, years before the term was used far too often by drones on the Internet.

The film does what modern horror films lack; it takes its time, and instills a sense of dread and anticipation. Krueger’s presence is felt throughout the majority of the film, and the self-aware plotline makes the inevitable confrontation all the more foreboding. The film also includes subtext about the impact of the horror genre and the questionable romanticizing of characters like Freddy Krueger, who are loved and adored for being murderers. New Nightmare was that treat for horror fanatics before Craven had directed Scream two years later. You get the most out of a movie like this when you’re an avid fan of the genre and/or the franchise, especially with the homages to previous installments.

That being said, with credit where credit is due, the film is still flat in some areas, and it does get a little dull in certain areas despite the adjustment to steady pacing. In many ways New Nightmare is akin to Rocky Balboa in terms of its nostalgia-driven narrative and bookend finality, but I wouldn’t call it perfect. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3 is still a superior follow-up which holds up as a film in its own right, whereas if New Nightmare was seen in that same light it doesn’t do very well. Not to mention, there are certain ideas I wished the film explored or displayed, like a meeting of Robert Englund and the new Freddy as Welshy of ThatGuyWithTheGlasses mentioned in his own review. However, this is as good a closure as you’re going to get, so give it a chance if you hated Freddy’s Dead. 7.5 out of 10.

Batman: Year One - Review

The latest Warner Premiere is an adaptation of the Frank Miller comic book run of the same name, and is one of the most acclaimed Batman comics out there. I’m a big fan of Frank Miller’s take on Batman in a time when he wasn’t pushing out schlock like his All-Star run. After Green Lantern: Emerald Knights, I knew that this was next and was looking forward to it. As soon as I started I felt right at home with the solid inner monologue of Lieutenant Jim Gordon (Bryan Cranston), which coupled with the similar artwork, makes for a satisfying transition to an animated film, at least in the aesthetic and tonal sense.

As the title of both the film and the graphic novel suggest, Batman: Year One chronicles Bruce Wayne’s first year as Batman and Jim Gordon’s first year as a Gotham City Lieutenant, respectively. Bruce Wayne (Benjamin McKenzie) is just starting out in his quest to purge Gotham of crime and corruption, and is inexperienced at this point, and so he fumbles. The first time we see Bruce out in the city at night; he is shot and arrested after taking down a pimp. At the time of this incident, he has not donned the cape and cowl yet, and is still searching for a symbol to run by, which he of course finds in a bat when he escapes the patrol car and manages to get back to Wayne Manor despite his injury.

The scene in which he finds his symbol in the form of said bat was my favorite scene in the film as it evokes the epitome of the Batman mythos. However, taking away my Batman fanaticism and focusing on the film itself, this may very well be the strongest Batman animated feature since Batman: Mask of the Phantasm and Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker.

The script is solid and the voice acting only helps, it’s dramatic and shady enough without being over-the-top. Since the story spans over a single year, and it’s not just a crime-fighting extravaganza, we get to see Gordon’s troubles with his personal life and his doubt, being that he’s our narrator. The point of Batman is that he is a human being without powers, he’s flawed, and so are his accomplices. Gordon is smart, calculating, and his heart is in the right place, but he cheats on his pregnant wife and is constantly under pressure of his racketeering commissioner. Wayne has not perfected his technique and is prone to mistakes, of which he makes many. In fact, he gets shot more than you may expect.

Like the graphic novel, the film includes a subplot about a prostitute named Selina Kyle (Eliza Dushku) and her eventual escapades as Catwoman, which is mildly gratifying but not handled with as much depth as the rest of the plot and so she’s left on the back burner. Then again, the narrative has more important things to attend to so settling on a tiny bit of fanservice is tolerable. Audiences of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight will probably recognize similar characters upon viewing this such as Gordon’s crooked partner Flass, a questionable Commissioner Loeb, mob boss Carmine Falcone, and a pre Two-Face Harvey Dent. The Year One comic run accounted for a large amount of source material in writing both films, particularly the former.

My point is, is that Batman: Year One has the merits, has the feel, and has the dystopia that comes with the territory, but also brings the writing, the acting, and the presentation to back it up without all the bells and whistles. Those factors alone merit its superiority over Red Hood, but then again that comes from Year One being a superior comic to A Death in the Family and Under the Hood. One note though, while I admire the artwork and its homage to David Mazzucchelli's design, I’m getting a little tired of the CG motor vehicles in these premieres, it's unnecessary no matter how much the technology pushes the envelope. 9 out of 10.

X-Men: First Class - Review

Ah… I remember a time when X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine were non-existent. How the times have changed. X-Men was a good film, not great, but pretty good. X2 was great, satisfying sequel and a definite game changer (until Spider-Man 2 the year after). The third film was mediocre, and Wolverine’s prequel left a very sour taste in my mouth. Let’s face it; passing the director’s chair to Brett Ratner was a terrible idea, but it boils down to Bryan Singer’s mistake, but let’s focus our attention on the present.

X-Men: First Class is a prequel film (like Origins) directed by Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass), and returning to the series is Bryan Singer (X-Men, X2: X-Men United), this time as Executive Producer. The film opens with a recreated opening to the first film, in which a young Erik Lensherr is separated from his mother in a concentration camp. In his emotional distress, he awakens his powers over magnetism and bends and distorts a metal gate obstructing him from his mother. However, this time around we actually get to see what happens afterward, Klaus Schmidt (Kevin Bacon), also known as Sebastian Shaw, kills Erik’s mother after he fails to use his powers to move a silver coin at his request. Meanwhile, a young Charles Xavier meets and takes in a young Raven Darkholme, who will later become Mystique.

And so begins X-Men: First Class, the origin of the X-Men in general, at least in sense of the film universe. I won’t bother beating around the bush with this one; this is the best X-Men film thus far. There are some great things in this latest installment that make it exactly that, despite minor issues I have with it.

Of course the biggest question is how James McAvoy portrays a younger Charles Xavier as he forms the X-Men with Erik (Michael Fassbender) at his side. Professor X and Magneto are iconic characters, the two elder titans of the X-Men franchise, and I am happy to say that both McAvoy and Fassbender were well-casted, flawless performances from the both of them. Out of the two performances I would have to favor Fassbender, the best prequel portrayal since Robert DeNiro’s young Vito Corleone, and I will defend that statement.

The plot centers on Xavier and Lensherr forming the X-Men (though they aren’t called that directly) and putting a stop to Sebastian Shaw’s activities, which if succeeded, would mean nuclear war. In the meantime, Erik is out for revenge, as Shaw killed his mother and put Erik through the horrors of The Holocaust. Among the main characters is Raven Darkholme (Jennifer Lawrence), who has stayed with Xavier after he took her in.

The plot is well-executed, and it feels like the Singer films again, though Vaughn brings his own clarity and sense of humor to the table. The characters are surprisingly likeable on the protagonists’ side, though on the antagonists’, villains like Azazel and Riptide are completely underdeveloped, the latter not even having a single line of dialogue. The film also has some continuity issues with the other films, some are welcome, and some irked me. I won’t give out spoilers but I am happy to say that First Class eliminates The Last Stand and Origins from canon, which was a very welcome change for me.

On the whole, this film has more thrills than the previous films, but unlike Origins, it keeps its integrity and doesn’t adhere to action schlock or cliché. Like the first two films, this is a character-driven story, not an acti0n-driven or effects-driven one, between the attention to detail, the solid chemistry between McAvoy and Fassbender, and the believable outcome of this possibly ongoing tale from this point in time. First Class has that passion and humanity that Ratner and Hood muddled in their films and this is as close a redemption as we could want. Apparently, it may be the start of a new trilogy, though the term “prequel trilogy” is synonymous with dread for obvious reasons. They have my support; I just hope they don’t make me regret it. 9 out of 10.

The Godfather: Part III - Review

The Godfather and The Godfather: Part II are two of the most critically acclaimed films in the history of cinema. When I watched The Godfather for the first time, I thought of it as being good but terribly overrated. About a half a year later, I decided to give it a second viewing, and upon this second viewing I enjoyed it much more, and recognize just how fantastic it really is. At the time of this review, I have seen The Godfather: Part II for the first time about a month prior to this. In my personal opinion, The Godfather: Part II is the superior film, an absolute masterpiece and a fantastic sequel at that. I was reluctant to give the third film a try since I’ve heard so much negative backlash toward it.

If you have never seen first two films in the trilogy, then you will scarcely understand the third installment, and therefore this review may not apply to you. Bluntly put, The Godfather: Part III falls into what I like to call “The Curse of the Trilogy”, in which a trilogy contains two solid first installments but the third film doesn’t measure up, and in many cases ends up being a poor film on its own. This curse has plagued sequels for years and it’s hard to find a solid trilogy anymore.

The Godfather: Part III, like the first two films, is directed by Francis Ford Coppola. The film takes place in 1979, twenty years after Part II, in which Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is older, seasoned, and guilt-ridden about his past. The plot follows Michael’s attempt to finally legitimize the Corleone family, this time via stock exchange and bank percentages involving the Vatican. Joining Michael in his battle against those who obstruct his goal is Vincent Mancini (Andy García), Santino Corleone’s son born from Lucy Mancini, the woman he was having an affair with in the first film. Vincent begins to take matters into his own hands regarding the Corleone family’s actions when Michael is weary and unable to, and begins an incestuous relationship with Michael’s daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola).

This “threequel” is plagued with problems. Most notably is Sofia Coppola’s performance, which is dull, exasperating, and sticks out like a sore thumb when she’s performing next to the brilliant talents of Pacino and Garcia, among others. Another issue is the film’s plot, which makes me feel as if Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo ran out of ideas for this one. The original idea for Part III is another problem I have with it, being that I’m disappointed it wasn’t utilized.

Originally, Part III was to chronicle a split between Michael and Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall) from the first two films, and the plot was going to revolve around that. However, Robert Duvall felt insulted by his and Pacino’s intended salaries (being that Pacino had three to four times more) and dropped out of the film, causing a re-write. To me, Part III feels empty without Tom, and I honestly think this original idea would have made for a better follow-up to Part II.

Granted, there are things I liked about it. I actually enjoyed the prerequisite of having to see Part I and II in order to understand most of the third film, I honestly see it as a sort of reward. Pacino’s performance is great as always, and I can sympathize with his torment at this point, but I say García stood out the most, as Coppola said himself, Vincent is very much an amalgamation of the Corleone family males, though with his own respective characteristics.

I wouldn't say that Part III was unnecessary, if the original Godfather was regarded as such a masterpiece, was a sequel to that necessary? I wouldn’t even say Part III is terrible, it’s just disappointing. Unfortunately, it’s something we’ve grown accustomed to when we talk about third movies, save for very few exceptions. 6.5 out of 10.