Godfather trilogy is all archive footage???

@gromit82​ All this edition is, is a director's cut of all three films, with the scenes rearranged in chronological order, so the young Vito in Sicily and adult Vito played by Robert DeNiro all from Part II are put at the beginning of the trilogy. Some scenes previously deleted for the original theatrical release are added back in.

There is no newly filmed footage. If there were, the actors in that would not have the archiveFootage attribute. In this case, there are no actors without that attribute, which seems wrong to me.

I think it's a misuse of that attribute, and should be removed from all cast.

@gromit82​ 😀

Was this put together to get more money

without the expense of making a new film ??

(recycling)

.

@gromit82​ 

This isn't archive footage though and there probably shouldn't be any cast list at all as all of these actors would be covered by a movie connection. The three movies should be listed as "edited from" and no cast should be listed. At least, that's the way I read the current rules.

As a comparison, this does not have the attributes: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0809488/fullcredits/

So there is some inconsistency at least.

@adrian​ I've commented on inconsistencies in the "archive footage" rules before, but I presume that the cast members in The Godfather Trilogy: 1901-1980 are eligible for credits for this title based on the following guideline from https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/archive-footage/G4X4TVH6HXYBW8WM#:

The "on screen credit" rule

If someone's appearance is credited on screen it automatically qualifies as a valid archive footage credit, regardless of what type of archive footage it is. This supersedes any of the potential exclusions below.

@ACT_1​ According to the IMDb trivia, yes Coppola made the edit originally in 1977 to fund the making of Apocalypse Now.

@mbmb​ That link, The Godfather Saga (1977) is the same edit (rearranged chronologically & re-added deleted scenes) as The Godfather Trilogy (1992) we're discussing, except that the latter has Part III added to it. So if The Godfather Saga doesn't have any archiveFootage attributes, The Godfather Trilogy shouldn't either.

@Mvybuf​ I agree that the same policy should apply to both The Godfather Saga and The Godfather Trilogy, but I think that should result in both titles having (archive footage) credits for the cast, rather than neither.

@gromit82​ I don't think the archiveFootage attribute should be used at all for The Godfather Trilogy (1992). Isn't that attribute just for NEW productions that have clips or excerpts from a previous production? That's not what this film is: it's just a director's cut of the 3 films put together. A recut or re-edit from existing material. No newly produced material at all (restored deleted scenes don't count).

In fact the first 2 parts are the same identical re-edit as The Godfather Saga (1977), which was just the first 2 films. And that doesn't have the archiveFootage attribute at all.

@Mvybuf​ 

I think the archive footage attribute is useful so that people know that this isn't a new production.

@adrian​ I don't think that's what the archiveFootage attribute is for. I think this title maybe shouldn't even have a separate listing. Same with Godfather Saga. Should just be an entry under Alternate Versions on all 3 movies. And an extra running time on the 3 for the Trilogy version and another for the Saga version.

The way I understand the guidelines on versions getting their own separate page, is they have to be VERY different from the original. Adding deleted scenes doesn't qualify it for a separate entry. Putting the 1900s (Vito as a kid) and 1920s (DeNiro adult Vito) segments from Part II all at the beginning before Part I begins, may not qualify it either.

As for the guidelines on the archiveFootage attrib, they've always confused me, and I've frequently seen contradictory and confusing uses.

The question of a separate listing is done on a case-by-case exception basis by staff. Perhaps we need to hear from them. Maybe they can also shed light on the convoluted archiveFootage attribute.