They screwed Brando financially in the first film. He did it for the love of acting I guess, and it was the most riveting performance maybe of all time. Theres a point I guess to doing something not for the money at times but yeah Duvall was right he shouldn't have worked for less than he's worth.
I also appreciate his honesty. Nowhere is it written that it's wrong to refuse large sums of money, and the idea that you're turning them down because you're worth more has merit. I don't think too many people who aren't wealthy understand that the principle of not accepting less, or too much less, than what you're worth isn't only applicable and noble when we're dealing with modest sums of money. Because in this case, if I'm not mistaken, Pacino got about 5 million, which means Duvall was offered, more or less, 800,000.
Wow. It's refreshing to hear an actor, especially a guy on the level as Robert Duvall to flat out say that Godfather 3 was basically looking to undercut him a lot money wise and that's why he didn't do it. I knew that was the reason, but it's cool to hear him say basically that without too much bullshit.
@@southsideman4891 That was a lot more on Paramount haggling Coppola more than anything Francis did on his own. The studio wasn't budging to give Duvall his due, and because of that, the whole movie suffered.
Duvall has a superb tone, accent and attitude in his voice, and he can mimic Brando at the drop of a hat, what a great actor! One of those guys you could listen to all day and not get tired.
No way Duvall is underrated!! That's because he's the most OVERRATED actor in every film he's done. EVER! He LOOKSZ EXACTLY the same for every role. He's never changed his voice. He uses the same mannerisms in every role. It's funking disgusting. Look at Brando, Penn, Deniro, Daniel-day Lewis, even idiots like Depp. He talks with his hands and that's what you get and all your gonna get. Can't stand his work.
@@petarkacic1561 Have a look at his performance in Lonesome Dove and then Apocalypse Now and then The Godfather. He has range, maybe not in the same league as Penn or DDL, but he's an excellent actor.
Robert Duvall- his unforgettable portrayal of a taxi cab driver in Bullitt. I always wanted to have a cup of coffee with this guy. I've enjoyed his work from the beginning. Thank you Robert!.
I really think that by the time part 3 came along, Pacino had lost the thread as to whom Michael was, or perhaps if was the script - but either way you just felt you weren't watching Michael Corleone anymore... It was someone else.
Personally, I was very impressed with what Robert Duvall had made his own feelings quite clear about the third "Godfather" film. After all, regardless of the film's intent, it still kind of divides the entire fan base for decades since.
Im going to say an affirmative on this. First of all - "bit part"?!?!?! Tom was supposed to be HIS BROTHER!!!!! How could he view Tom as a "bit part"!!! Then as an actor to offer him that after all he accomplished?!?! Yes, very insulting the more I think about it.
@@grantmckeever507 I don't think it's that crazy. I mean, Duvall does have 9 years on Pacino. I did notice something that you might think is a little crazy. They were the same age, 53 years old, when they won their Oscars :- o peace
Thanks for posting this fivealex2010. I remember watching this back in '91. This was one of many great interviews on "Later with Bob Costas." If you have more I'd love to watch them. I sure miss that kind of approach to late night television: 1:30 in the morning, no live audience, no jokes, no monologue, no angry musicians, just a relaxed, intelligent and illuminating conversation between Bob and his guest. Those were the days....
I agreed. Brando was already an acting icon at that time. All the other actors were so in awe with his presence and inspired by him. That's why everybody did a great job and thus Brando should get credits where credits were due--because of his presence the Godfather is what is.
Respect for Robert Duvall. This guy seems really down-to-earth when you compare him to other Hollywood actors. And looking back now, if they had added Tom Hagen to Godfather Part III, the movie would have mostly likely been more interesting than what we got. Didn't like how they killed him off-screen as well.
Everyone overlooks Duvall in those films. Hagen's quiet and professional manner speaks of his debt of love to the Corleones. He's the one man above suspicion among men who do not trust each other further than immediate need. Vito has Hagen there to handle the complex angles, and he can count on Tom getting it done. As can Michael, who in the end sees via Fredo's betrayal that love is stronger than blood ties.
Duvall is absolutely brilliant. Add to that he’s a straight-shooter, no B.S., and you can’t go wrong with him. If you haven’t seen him ‘Get Low,’ check it out.
Holy cow I remember this interviewer from the 90s, I loved his interviews! He's so smart, about the whole bizness and you can hear it around 2:30 or so when Mr. Duvall is like, right, right, right. There's a respect there and the interviewer is not kissing ass
Robert Duvall is one of the VERY FEW actors who can even compare to Brando...and one of the very few with such a long career of first rate films...he was even in "To Kill a Mockingbird"!!
***** well, apparently Coppola underrated him when he wanted to pay him less than Diane Keaton for Godfather III...not that I dont think Keaton is great...she just wasnt as integral part of the plot line, especially towards the end of Godfather II, when Hagan was obviously becoming increasingly disillusioned with Michael, and his role in the family's future
***** I think that's what makes Michael's character so compelling...his complexity...it IS hard to connect with him and figure him out...Vito was the same way in some respects...one of the parts of the third film that I DID like was when Michael was in front of Don Tommasino's casket, and he realized that Dons Vito Corleone and Tommasino were both well loved in their community, while he himself was only feared.
Don Altobello can only be played to perfection by the late, great Eli Wallach... Try rewatch G3 and note his gestures picturing his words it's consummate acting at its best...
IF YOU HAVENT SEEN THE GODFATHER, (DIRECTORS CUT), YOU HAVENT SEEN IT AS IT WAS MENT TO BE... IT COMBINES 1&2 TOGETHER IN A TIMELINE AND IT IS JUST BRILLIANT....!!!
Love Duvall's honesty here without walking on eggshells, and most definitely it's generally agreed upon by almost everyone that GF3 was not nearly as good as the first two, but from the perspective of quality of films overall released in that era and even MORE so these days, it's still a much better, well made film than most other movies out there anyway, but it's not a ''must see'' if you've already seen GF1 and 2.
Thanks for the upload too. This was a really good job by Bob Costas honestly. I'm not a fan of his but he interviewed Duvall like a fan would. Not asking what you think of the world or madonna. He hits him with what I was thinking honestly. He was right. First question, given this was 1991 should have been GF3. And he stayed with it. Good job!
Can't say that I blame Duvall for holding out for a bigger piece of the pie. He's a veteran actor. He was in parts 1 and 2 and his character was a major part of the series. Part 3 was "ok" by my standards, which (like it or not) parts one and two are my comparisons, as are everyone else's. Right? Duvall SHOULD HAVE received pay equal to Pacino, who was paid $5 million for part 3 ,and since he held a Best Supporting Nod for an Oscar for the films. The GF is one of THE best films ever made, period. If we are talking money here, according to Wikipedia, part 3 had a $54 million dollar budget and grossed $136 million, so, there was plenty of cash made from part 3 even tho, it didn't have the same classic feel and appearance. Part 3 just didn't do it for me, and I would give this a "C" rating, so, maybe Duvall was better off not being in it after all. He was totally correct in stating that part 3 was made for the money cause why else would you resurrect an old film and put a new part to it? Idk for sure, but I'd say it's pretty safe to assume that the Godfather trilogy collectively would be worth over a Billion or two if sold Not bad, since Paramount reportedly purchased the story from Mario Puzo for $84k. What a DEAL!!!
Talking about Peter Boyle and Brando. Did you ever see the SNL bit "Dueling Brandos"? John Belushi and Peter Boyle dressed like Johnny Strabler (The Wild One) going back and forth trading Brando lines. One of the funniest moments in TV history.
Duvall had his run with Coppola, 3 great films in a row: GF 1, GF 2, and Apocalypse Now (where he really shined). He had already shown his stuff. And he's still great. His character 'Old Man' in The Road had the best lines and as per Duvall: he nailed it. Santini, Tender Mercies, True Confessions, he's had some seriously memorable roles and performances.
I have to agree with Robert Duvall, the 3rd one was not nearly as good as the first two. I really love the first ones, but I did miss seeing Duvall in 3; he's a great actor and I thought his role as Tom Hague was awesome (he was the only sane one LOL)
It really is a shame. But FFC didn't have the leverage to accede to Duvall's wishes; meanwhile, Pacino is a huge movie star. But Duvall, so intelligent, is correct: the third should have been Hagen's story. I always imagine the opening scene a tired, totally fatigued, totally corrupt Hagen - they could have relied on his character from "The Conversation" as well. The camera would follow Hagen through the hallways of one of the Twin Towers, or one of those awful skyscrapers on Sixth and 48th: he's just collecting signatures, talking to accounts receivable, etc, wrapping things up for the end of the day, and his last errand is to drop the paperwork off on the desk of the CEO - and that's our setup, that's the first glimpse of Michael. Tom says good night, and Michael says - "Tom, hold on, there's one more thing." Michael asks Tom to invite his kids, and Kay, to the ceremony at St Pat's, and Tom's reaction of surprise, reluctance, and offense sets up the whole film - *that* would have been a good movie!
***** I don't think Duvall wanted the third one to be his story. That wouldn't make sense. But he was a key player who would be very important in the third film, no doubt. But not HIS story.
Paul Jesus You're correct. I didn't mean to imply I thought he did. I do think, though, that that would have been an interesting way into the story. To replace him with George Hamilton - I mean, it's not the same man who directed the first two Godfathers. But it wasn't. Let's not forget that FFC was coming off absolutely devastating tragedies. I'm still hoping for #4! There's a script. It cuts between contempo NYC and the early days of Sonny.
***** the absence of Robert Duvall was the main disappointment of Godfather 3….but I disagree with your timeframe for Godfather 4... It should cut between the early 60s, where 2 left off (think of the post-Castro/Kennedy assassinations scenarios), and the formative years of Don't Vito's family coming into power, prohibition, etc
I don't think The Godfather Part III can ever be fairly judged since it will always be compared to Part I and II, which are by and large considered the greatest films ever made. What IS better than those two films? Part III is not a bad film by any stretch of the imagination. It's still a compelling story with solid, multi-dimensional characters and it acts as an honest addendum to the previous parts. It gave closure to the story, something I always felt Part II did not do. If we took Part III as a standalone film, it would have been far more well received at the time and far more well regarded as the years have gone on. Whether they did it for money or not, The Godfather Part III is a very good movie.
J Hallenbeck I have said what you said COUNTLESS times. The third film should be taken as a standalone film. That's how I always took it, and I've never seen it as being anything but a solid, good film.
J Hallenbeck I agree,I personally thought it was just as good if not better than the first 2 it touched on some actual events tho names were changed involving Roberto Calvi,The Vatican,The P2 Masonic lodge,and organized crime, I thought it was brilliant in its story line and I liked Mr Coppola's commentary on the DVD as well.
Part 2 ends off after Michael kills Fredo then they flashback to him sitting with the whole family and at the end it just ends up being Michael alone in the room just as he’s alone after he killed fredo it was symbolic that everyone he had was gone and that flashback was a foreshadow of those events
I agree that third part was very poor . But some how the point is right. third part is not much about role,acting but point of how ending one empire such is Corleone family.sorry for my English.And one more thing, Duval is right ,he said right. He did so much in first two parts.
