Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics What's this?

User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 193 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: In this third film in the epic Corleone trilogy, Al Pacino reprises the role of powerful family leader Michael Corleone. Now in his 60's, Michael is dominated by two passions: freeing his family from crime and finding a suitable successor. That successor could be fiery Vincent (Garcia)... but he may also be the spark that turns Michael's hope of business legitimacy into an inferno of mob violence. [Paramount Pictures] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 19
  2. Negative: 4 out of 19
  1. This lushly photographed, brilliantly acted and wonderfully entertaining movie has its own claims to uniqueness. It's the most thoughtful of the three films, and its climax brings the entire series into sharper focus. [25 Dec 1990, Daily Datebook, p.E1]
  2. Though definitely one of the best American movies of the year--a work of high ensemble talent and intelligence, gorgeously mounted and crafted, artistically audacious in ways that most American movies don't even attempt--it's still a disappointment… It's not the capstone we might have wanted Coppola to make. [23 Dec 1990, Calendar, p.9]
  3. 88
    It's strange how the earlier movies fill in the gaps left by this one, and answer the questions. It is, I suspect, not even possible to understand this film without knowing the first two, and yet, knowing them, Part III works better than it should.
  4. Andy Garcia, who first became noticeable in The Untouchables, has seductive strength, homicidal cool. One reason to look forward to Part IV is that he'll fill the center better than Pacino does. [21 Jan 1991, p.26]
  5. 50
    An air of embarrassing familiarity hangs over the entire project, as if it were a story told by an aging relative not quite aware of how many times, and how much better, he has been over the same material before. [25 Dec 1990, Tempo, p.1]
  6. Reviewed by: Barry McIlheney
    A dreadful disappointment.
  7. 10
    The Godfather Part III isn't just a disappointment, it's a failure of heartbreaking proportions... It makes you wish it had never been made.

See all 19 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 40
  2. Negative: 12 out of 40
  1. Feb 18, 2013
    The amount of suspense towards the end is crazy and the ending really lets it all out, I haven't seen a scene more heartbreaking. There's less of the Godfather theme to it because its not as dark and it has no Marlon Brando, but its still the same characters and actors and it doesnt fail to show the fate of the Corleone family. One of the greatest movies Ive ever seen. Expand
  2. HudsonT
    Nov 9, 2008
    Not perfect, but certainly better than part two. Ultimately, after hearing about how everyone was so disappointed with three, I was surprised by how good it was. Expand
  3. Nov 28, 2012
    It's almost common knowledge that this film gets a boatload of flack, but I actually found "The Godfather Part III" to be quite an engaging and gratifying conclusion to the truly epic trilogy. While the film does have a few flagrant problems here and there, I find its merits to outweigh them deftly. Expand
  4. Aug 15, 2013
    Nada que ver a las otras dos partes, "The Godfather: Part III" mantiene un buen enfoque a la vida mafiosa y una historia mejor que muchas otra pelĂ­culas a las que uno le puede poner mas nota. Pero es un tanto aburrida con respecto a las anteriores. Expand
  5. EricR.
    Mar 17, 2006
    Horrible, horrible, horrible. How is it possible that Al Pacino could give such an inept performance. I hated it, hated the whole damm thing. Bad acting, lame cliche script. Coppola took one of the most complex characters in cinema and made him paper thin. Sophia's terrible performace is just icing on the shit cake. The only thing that was good was the ending. Everything else was dull beyond beliefe. At least the Matrix sequels were entertaining. Expand
  6. RexG.
    May 13, 2006
    The film music alone made me dislike the movie from the beginning. It has been "hollywood-ized" - the atmosphere of the first two parts its missing entirely. I couldn't even watch it at once - I actually wouldn't have watched it to the end at all if it weren't for the money that I spent on the DVD. One thing they managed to get on screen though: The decline of the family by the decline of the movie itself. Expand
  7. RonD.
    Dec 13, 2005
    Terrible acting, plot (what little unbelieveable amount there is) doesn't hold together. Took 4 viewings to watch the entire thing, that's how bad it is. Garcia acts as well as the average wrestler and shire/little coppola may as well have entered a hog calling contest. Expand

See all 40 User Reviews