God point ClothesHanger, I think that Al Pacino did do a good job and I think after 20 years, it's inevitable that his character would have gone through some sort of metamorphisis by the 3rd Movie.

I persoanlly think that Godfather 3 is a bit ridiculed because it fell so sort of the mark of the other 2 movies, which were sycint, complex masterpeices. Upon giving it much thought, I think Godfather 3 fell short because of various reasons and the main reason is FFC wanted to do too much witht he movie. GF and GF II both were complex and grand in scale. GF III attempted to top this by showing Michael's growth, as he attempted to move away from a life he knew would only lead to heart ache and loss, but was at the same time tempted back into it by his knowledge of how to run a crime family. Also he tried to add a myriad of themes to make this movie a true sucessor to the other 2 movies.

Michael moved from the most power Don in NY to controlling a huge empire in America to becoming legit and then became a global player. Quite impressive and as such FFC upped the enemies, and the complexity of the plot in GF III. Only it was so complex that I think 2 three hour movies would have done a better job ironing everything out and expressing everything he wanted to express.

I agree that the plot in an attempt to up what was done before fell short of the sycintness of the other 2 movies due to time constraints. As such much was left out by nececity, or glazed over in an attempt to do everything FFC set out to do. The plot is one example, it's not just complex, but too complex and confusing for us really get into and never really explained or ironed out. The new characters are not elaborate upon enough for us to efficeintly connect with them.

Also, we are introduced to enemies we know little about and we are not ever clearly clued into the plot as it unfolds, we are given hints here and there, but due to the complexity of the plot , FFC is given little opportunity to explain the dizzy array of enemies we are finally it seems introduced to at the end of the movie.

Both Mary and Andy Garcia's characters were not given an introduction sufficient enough to allow us to click with them. Mary was very one dimensional in the way she was written, and lacked the complexity or character development that was characterisitc of the other characters in the other GF's. Vincent's character wasn't sufficently elaborated upon to allow us to fully beleive he would be an effective Don. This is a major down point in the film. His intelligence or leadership ability is never fully elaborated upon.

What I think was done really well was the themes of the movie. Connie evolved into a true Mafiso-ette, by the 3rd movie and was an enemy to Michael in the sense that she was the main tempter to michael's righteous goal of being 100% legit, this is a true stroke of shakespearian intrigue. Also after 20 years of attoning and finally attempting to become completly legit, michael is tossed back into the ring by events and a small time hood backed by larger than life enemies. Also, no matter how hard he tried he cant' escape his past nor can any amount of money attone for his sins.

I think the final tragity of his character is not that he dies alone or even that his daughter dies. But the life-long dream of now 2 generations of Corleones, that was within his grasp (becoming legit) is undermined when he allows Vincent to take over the family by some coercion from his sister. It can be argued by grooming Vincent for the role, he ultimatly allowed himself be tempted back into the life and allowed circumstance and environment ultimatly control his destiny. Which in and of itself is a theme in the GF, the influence of one's environment on who they become.