Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis
The problem is the movie itself was a betrayal of Michael's character. It's like it was trying to meld the Godfather universe with the popularity of later movies like Wall Street... drawing political equivalences between Mobsters and Executives.
As far as the character goes, it's hard to visualize how Michael goes from the guy at the end of Godfather II to a hobnobbing high-society type, with no credible bridge built in between. It seems like they built it all up to tear it down in the name of teaching a moral lesson, ala Wall Street.
But Godfathers I and II were windows into a dark world. Part 3 was a condescending tack-on that tried to moralize the whole thing after the fact.
Coppola cashed in, no doubt. But I didn't see a betrayal of Pacino's character. The movie was probably unnecessary, since his wife was gone, and there is only one wife, his son hated him, his wife aborted what would have been his second son, which is a mortal sin in corleone terms, and he killed his only living brother for betrying him.
They took an entire third movie to tell us Michael ended badly.