When i first saw the Godfather i was dissapointed. In fact i still think it is only so-so. Just be prepared: it is long, soap opera-ish and somewhat dated since it has been rendered a bit conventional due to its endless copying. Still an important film, but personally i wouldn't expect anything too mindlblowing. Strange for me as well since Coppola is one of my favourite directors. Godfather II on the other hand is magnificent, very different from the first film and more comparable to Coppola subsequent masterpieces The Conversation and Apocalypse Now in terms of direction and style.

The third entry was very criticised upon release. In truth, it is not all that great, but it definitly has its moments. The biggest thing is that it is so disconnected from the first two. To best approach the series it is best to do it the way Coppola himself designed the films: Godfather and Godfather II go together to form one story. Coppola ironically fought against titling the second film uniquely because he felt it was simply the second part to the first film. The film ends brilliantly and really finishes the saga. The third film was not supposed to be "Godfather 3", Coppola wanted it to be called The Death of Michael Corleone, and i think that shows how the film should be evaluated--a sort of epilogue off-shoot that is disconnected from the proper I/II story and gives a sort of different perspective to the character about his redemption.