What Might Have Been Wednesday: Winona Ryder in The Godfather: Part III

Ryder in Godfather III

In honor of Winona Ryder‘s birthday, we’re looking at one of the actress’ biggest missed opportunities.  Originally, Ryder was supposed to appear in Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Part III which was released in 1990.  But Ryder dropped out of the picture at the last-minute citing exhaustion (or something – accounts are vague and sometimes contradictory).  The role was eventually played by Coppola’s daughter, Sofia, who proved that as an actress, she makes a great director.

Many claim that Sofia Coppola’s stiff performance in a key role ruined the ending of the beloved trilogy.  I don’t know about all that.  The third movie in the series had flaws that had nothing to do with Sofia’s performance.  But there’s no denying that an actress of Ryder’s calibre would have been an improvement.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
RossN
RossN
8 years ago

While I quite like Winona Ryder she was far too young for the part. But then so was Sophia Coppola.
If you do the maths Mary Corleone should be at least in her mid twenties in the third film. She is a girl of about four or five in the second film, set in 1958 and Part III takes place twenty one years later in 1979. Yet the character came across as very much a naive, sheltered teen girl – not simply sheltered from the world of the Mafia but sheltered from the wider world too.

robbushblog
robbushblog
8 years ago

Sofia Coppola wasn’t the only thing wrong with THE GODFATHER PART III, but she was the worst and most obvious problem. And why was she schtupping her first cousin? Gross.
Meanwhile, Winona would later help mess up BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA.

robbushblog
robbushblog
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

That’s why I said she helped mess it up. She was not the sole or main reason the movie was sub-par, but she wasn’t very good in it.

robbushblog
robbushblog
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I liked the visuals, atmosphere, and Gary Oldman in it. I hated the love story aspect of it. Dracula is a vampire. He has no soul. Therefore, he should not love. He is a monster spawned from Hell. Don’t make him some wussy who loves. Pre-damnation that’s fine. After damnation? No. Winona and Keanu (Especially Keanu!) stunk.

Jestak
Editor
8 years ago

I can’t remember the last time I tried to watch Godfather III, or even if I’ve managed to sit all the way through it, but my recollection is that many people, myself included, felt that the absence of Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen left a huge void that none of the new cast members came close to filling.

robbushblog
robbushblog
8 years ago
Reply to  Jestak

I completely agree.

Jacob
Jacob
8 years ago
Reply to  Jestak

George Hamilton’s character is the Tom Hagen clone. His role is actually quite good for what it does in the movie. BJ the lawyer has some interesting things to say and do. He attempts to recruit Tom Hagen’s son who is a priest as a spy before Michael calls him off. I’m a bit of a George Hamilton fan.
But it’s no excuse. That they didn’t offer Robert Duvall the paycheck he deserved is very sad.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)
Reply to  Jestak

Does Godfather III deserve the hate?
http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/305263

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)
Reply to  Jestak

10 Dead Movie Franchises That Hollywood Must Revive http://whatculture.com/film-tv/10-dead-movie-franchises-that-hollywood-must-revive?page=11 The Godfather I’d always be wary of messing with the heavyweight perfection of The Godfather and The Godfather Part II. These are films that make up some of the pantheon of Hollywood’s greatest ever cinematic achievements, along with Raging Bull, Schindler’s List, Fight Club and George Clooney. Imagine making a long-awaited sequel that didn’t measure up: or, worse, actively screwed the pooch. However, since Francis Ford Coppola has already done that job for us with The Godfather Part III, we’re quids in and ahead of the game. Let’s do this. Let’s… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)
Reply to  Jestak

I can argue this, the problem with Godfather III is that it seemingly believes its protagonist (Michael Corleone) is a tragic hero instead of a contemptible villain. Coppola became a Michael fanboy and tried to gloss over all of the awful things he did to the family, and so the third film is completely misaimed in its sympathies. Godfather II ended with Michael stealing his children away from his wife; you can’t expect us to see a happy reunion in the next film. On the other hand, I think that Coppola himself said that he had not paid for his… Read more »

Jacob
Jacob
8 years ago

It’s not a popular position, but count me one of those who does not think Godfather III is a bad movie. Perhaps it’s because I am not old enough to have emotional ties to I and II and no sense of betrayal by FFC by doing such a lesser movie as the conclusion to Michael Corleone’s story. Was III great like I and II? No, of course not. Does III have things going for it though? Yeah. At the very least, it’s an entertaining movie about international high finance and crime and the way the two meld together using fictionalized… Read more »

brokencandy
brokencandy
8 years ago
Reply to  Jacob

I disagree with the last line as well. One can still act well with a poorly written character. Mary Corleone wasn’t much- she was just one man’s daughter and another man’s love interest, though it’s hard to see why because there was nothing interesting about her. She was a blank. Winona Ryder would have at least projected a bit of personality, and where personality falls short, at least she’s pretty enough that you’d understand the appeal of such a seemingly empty girl. The casting choice of Coppola was strange; it isn’t as if there weren’t a dozen other reasonably competent… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)
Reply to  Jacob
admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  Jacob

I actually like everything about “Godfather III” (it’s biggest sin is just not being the masterpiece the previous films were) except for Sophia Coppola’s performance. Usually I stick up for an actor/ress when critics and viewers pile on, but in this case I believe majority rules. I’m a big fan of her in the director chair though. Winona Ryder was more seasoned a performer; she likely would’ve gave a more convincing and less awkward take on the character.

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
8 years ago

Considering how poorly The Godfather III is regarded today, it’s interesting that Gene Siskel ranked it among his 10 favorite films of 1990….

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Siskel got it completely right with his #1 pick for 1990, at least. Goodfellas is my favorite movie of the whole decade.

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
8 years ago
Reply to  Craig Hansen

Ha! Well played, sir.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

‘The Godfather Part III’ Turns 25: 5 Reasons It Deserves a Second Look
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/the-godfather-part-iii-five-great-things-162632393.html

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

12 Movies That Would Have Been Great With a Different Lead Actor http://screenrant.com/bad-movies-great-different-actor/12/ THE GODFATHER PART III – SOFIA COPPOLA Coming off of two of the greatest films ever made, most felt that The Godfather Part III was a great letdown, and one of the biggest reasons for this is the subpar performance from Sofia Coppola. There may be no better example of nepotism in film than the casting of Sofia Coppola, the daughter of Francis Ford Coppola, as Mary Corleone. Sofia’s lackluster performance was by far the worst part of this film, and served to pull audiences out of… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

9 Terrible Casting Decisions That Ruined Great Movies http://whatculture.com/film/9-terrible-casting-decisions-that-ruined-great-movies.php/7 Sofia Coppola – The Godfather: Part III A decision so infamous people still laugh about it, the casting of Sofia Coppola in The Godfather Part III might not be the film’s only issue, but it’s definitely the biggest. Winona Ryder was originally set to play the role of Michael Corleone’s daughter, but had to drop out suddenly. Young Sofia was wheeled in to replace her and – to put it nicely – she wasn’t much of an actress, and putting her in such a key role, complete with lots of emotional… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

The Godfather 3 http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/553370/godfather-3 Post by Captain Hokage on 7 hours ago What happened? Do not get me wrong it is a good movie in its own merit but for me it is always the most difficult to sit through. It felt more like a stand along story than anything but in saying that if you did not see the first 2 movies you were shit out of luck to know what was going on. Not going to get into the actresses acting as that is always brought up anyway. What are your thoughts on the Godfather 3? Post by… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Apparently, Winona Ryder gave Francis Ford Coppola the notice about a week before production. He did the third film because he was in debt and needed to pay off the bad loans and expenses he had. He never intended for Sofia to play the role of Michael Corleone’s daughter. It was in the dying minute, no time for auditions, so they used her. Even though Sofia had absolutely zero acting experience, she was only picked for the movie because she was on set, and was the same age as the character. Winona decided to do Edward Scissorhands instead after her… Read more »

29
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x