.jpg)
Well, this is certainly interesting. When discussing sequels and how inferior they are to the first movie, people often point to The Godfather: Part II as the go-to proof that a sequel doesn't have to suck. I too like to name that movie, along with The Road Warrior and Toy Story 2, to give examples of sequels that can be better than the original.
Francis Ford Coppola apparently disagrees, believing that the story of the Corleones should have ended with the first movie, and that II and III should not have been made.
In a new interview with Movieline, Coppola debunks the developing of a fourth film, while admitting that the Godfather sequels were more or less cash-ins.
"I don’t think Godfather ever should have had more than one movie, actually. It was not a serial, it was a drama. The first movie wrapped up everything. To make more than one Godfather was just greed. Basically, making a movie costs so much money that they want it to be like Coca-Cola: you just make the same thing over and over again to make money, which is what they’re doing now. But Godfather was not really a serial, you know?"
Coppola is very much in an "experimental, indie, unique" film phase at the moment, getting ready to release his latest film Tetro, so such a statement is understandably consistent with his outlook on filmmaking. It would be interesting to know, though, if he'd always felt this way or not. I would guess no, but hey, a man is allowed to change his mind, right? At least we can agree that Part III was completely unnecessary.
