Alternate Best Actor 1990: Al Pacino in The Godfather Part III

Al Pacino did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a Golden Globe, for portraying Michael Corleone in The Godfather Part III.

The Godfather Part III marks the only time Al Pacino did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Michael Corleone despite the film’s rather considerable success with the academy despite its far less than glowing reception even at the time of its release. The film almost immediately reveals one of its fundamental flaws which is the characterization of Michael. We ended with Michael in the last film as the man who successfully destroyed all his enemies, yet alienated his entire family either entirely or into a cold submission and we saw the man fully in power yet wholly alone. Cut to this film he seems to have reasonably strong connections with his family, he’s making jokes at family functions, even his ex-wife Kay (Diane Keaton)’s reactions to him aren’t nearly as strong as you’d think they should be. This is not the man we were left with, or as Annie Wilkes might say to Michael’s terrified brother “He Didn't Get Out of the Cockadoodie Car!”. This sequel gives us something it never earned, and it doesn’t earn here. Yes you can say people change, people soften as they get older, but that’s bluntly a cheat, particularly when you never give any proper backstory to in any way explain these changes. Michael simply is a whole lot nicer and less cold, why? He just is. I will say this isn’t on Pacino, it is explicitly written this way, but it feels like such a waste, as to try to give where Michael was left in Godfather Part II a final reckoning could’ve been something special, which this film sadly is not. 

So Pacino’s stuck in a strange spot as Michael because he needs to suddenly portray the Michael he was in the earliest scenes of The Godfather but now is operating as the Don. Pacino does have a certain charm in moments, has charisma on screen obviously though it is unbelievably weird that he’s acting this way. Pacino though has an onscreen power, he does exude that power, but it is not the Michael we have known. It is something else, and in that something else Pacino does deliver in a general sense even in a disappointing sense. The aforementioned scene with Kay is another example of this where you have good acting from Keaton and Pacino in terms of really conveying the complicated history, however still what is written isn’t frankly extreme enough to where the two were left once again. You see old love, old frustrations but not really the old hatred that should be there. Again I do put it more on the writing as Pacino and Keaton have a great specific chemistry that just isn’t utilized perfectly. There’s probably one of the biggest wastes in Michael’s relationship with his children, both portrayed poorly but written just as poorly. Like why not get a real proper dynamic actor for Anthony, who truly challenges his dad about Fredo, instead of just seeming slightly upset, then let’s go swiftly towards the end. It lets Michael off the hook, and more so Pacino just presents Michael as either a slightly concerned or disappointed dad, not much more than that. 

A truly baffling element is in the character of Sonny’s illegitimate son Vincent (Andy Garcia) who everyone in the family thinks is awesome despite being a complete hothead who Michael embraces after biting a man’s ear like a lunatic. Pacino has good moments involving the relationship in presenting the quiet assertive wisdom particularly the scene where he talks about Sonny, where Pacino’s delivery captures an old burdened love as he switches to an impassioned warning. But all of this doesn’t add up into the why. Maybe because Vincent does things, albeit randomly, where Michael here, unlike the first two films, is frequently passive, which again could work if it was a point of the narrative, but it’s not. Instead we get Michael more so the slowly reacting mentor where in that role do we have what is probably the most remembered scene of the film, in that it has the one frequently quoted line from the film. The line being “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.” The whole scene of Michael unraveling the plot is another non-Michael like scene given his calculations were far more internalized in the previous films. Pacino’s performance of the scene is entertaining though it is also far more modern Pacino than classic Michael, as he goes for the more overt in both his specific more outward intensity and his physical movements. One can say the moments depict his buildup to his diabetic attack before we get the attack however it looks far more to me like Pacino’s more grandiose style of performing that he became known for and is far cry from his original work as Michael. I won’t say it’s bad because it is remembered for a reason, but it is yet another aspect that doesn’t feel like a continuation of the character. 

The closest we get to this is when the Corleone all go to Italy to see Anthony’s first major Opera performance. In a moment that is initially a performative function related to his dealings with the Vatican Michael is challenged by a devoted Cardinal to confess his sins. Pacino is genuinely amazing in what is an amazing scene where he begins with this just nearly disinterested delivery of a man who has put himself separate from notions of sins or damnation as he tries to quantify his reasoning to ignore. When the Cardinal calmly persists though, Pacino’s portrayal of Michael confession is excellent in the way we get a little in each delivery, as he begins admitting to his killings almost matter of factly, before it becomes a bursting dam of the truth and his sorrow as he admits his complicity in the murder of his brother. Pacino delivers the real intensity of his shame as his whole manner is a man facing down into his shame and truly suffering as he speaks words that have seemingly been kept locked away for so many years. Although one can still argue maybe Michael would never feel remorse, but this scene at least realizes some honest potential of what came before. The same goes for his later scenes with Keaton, which I think logically they’d never really come to any terms, but Pacino and Keaton do find such a natural way into the combination of a stilted bitterness of separation and old affection between them. And within the finale we do get a strong singular moment as he witnesses the death of his daughter, where Pacino’s performance expresses the sheer uncontrollable grief in his reaction where Pacino presents it as a man barely being able to comprehend the reality of it all and just delivering a most primal scream. A moment that actually does wholly feel like Michael as one bit of consistency since he did love for his kids…albeit in his own way. These moments are highlights of the film and where Pacino does shine. He still doesn’t come close to his two performances but he makes use of the few good moments he’s given to work with. Pacino is not the problem with this film, he does what he can even when frankly Coppola is sabotaging him with so many wonky script choices. Pacino doesn't suddenly make it a good film but he’s trying to make something out of it. In the end it’s not a proper finale for Michael Corleone but Al Pacino delivers a good performance within that failure.