I'll be the first to say that I thought Carlo was a low-life and I loved the way Sonny stood up for Connie when everyone else in the family just turned a blind eye to Carlo's behavior (the scenes of Sonny beating him up in the street and Clemenza garroting him while Michael looks on are among my favorite scenes in the movie). The thing that I found a bit ironic, though, is how strongly Sonny reacted to how Carlo treated his sister when he wasn't exactly a model husband himself to his wife. He practically ignored his wife and treated her as if she just existed to take care of his kids and keep house. I loved how Vito looked directly at Sonny when he said, "A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man." I think it was Vito's fatherly way of telling Sonny to get his priorities in order. Aside from his lack of attention to his wife, Sonny was also cheating on her with a woman nearly half his age. While I don't think adultery is anywhere near as bad as the physical, verbal, and emotional abuse that Carlo put Connie through, I imagine it still had to be pretty humulating for Sandra--even in an era where women were considered second-class citizens and were expected to be obedient and subservient to their husbands. And I think the fact that the movie took place in the 1940s and 1950s were the reasons that Sonny was unable to acknowledge his own shortcomings as a husband and Vito refused to get involved to help his daughter. Men could treat their wives however they wanted and the wives were expected to just sit back and take it.

Just a random thought I had and thought I'd share it with the board.

Are you serious?

Serious about those two scenes being on the list of my favorites in the movie, yes. I don't understand why you think I was joking.

In the Mafia, a "good" husband is one who has only one or two goumads, and doesn't either beat his wife or infect her with STD's. By that measure, Sonny was a "good" husband. Carlo was an adulterer, a wife beater and a traitor. Also (according to the novel) a poor earner--the major Mafia offense.

I don't think Sonny was bothered by Carlo having a bimbo or two on the side, but he couldn't/wouldn't stand Carlo beating his kid sister.

[quote=Turnbull]In the Mafia, a "good" husband is one who has only one or two goumads, and doesn't either beat his wife or infect her with STD's. By that measure, Sonny was a "good" husband. Carlo was an adulterer, a wife beater and a traitor. Also (according to the novel) a poor earner--the major Mafia offense.

Thanks for the info, Turnbull. I never realized that. I tried to consider the time period that the movie/novel takes place in, but I guess it's hard for me not to take into consideration what kind of man would be considered a good husband by today's standards. Carlo definitely wouldn't fit the bill, and I don't think Sonny would have either.

Look at Carmella Soprano and the other wives on The Sopranos. They were willing to turn a blind eye to an awful lot in order to maintain their lifestyles.

Ditto.

I wasn't a regular viewer of the Sopranos, but I know that Carmela left Tony for awhile because she finally got fed up with his affairs. She ended up dating her son's teacher. Of course she did up getting back with him before the series ended, so I agree with you. She definitely wanted to maintain the life she was accustomed to by being married to him.

Anyone think there might be any guilt on Sonny's part? He is the one who introduced Carlo to Connie and thus brought her into this situation.

Oh absolutely.
In the novel as Sonny is driving to the toll booth, he thinks of how he feels bad for having hooked up Connie and Carlo.

I agree. Sonny would have felt bad about inviting Carlo over to his house to meet his sister.

We are talking about the mob here, yer pretty much not gonna get a faithful husband (unless you coun't Mikey, but do you want to be in Kay's place?.) So I think that Sonny is a "good" husband. Mikey I think is good as far as he really cared about Kay and when he thought she was leaving he was trying to get her to stay. Sigh... I dunno. Like I said in the mob, "good enough" is the best you can hope for! lol

I thought Michael was a very good husband up until the point he slapped Kay and kept her from seeing the kids in Part II. He did lie to her, but that was because he didn't want to involve her in his illegal activities. But he never ignored her or cheated on her. I also thought Vito was a good husband to Mama.

A blast from the past - Brwne!

These guys don't exactly follow the ideas of, say Gloria Steinham. They are mob guys in the '40s and '50s. Wives were meant to have kids and men were meant to cheat and beat.
Reminds me of that great De Niro line in Analyze this when Billy Crystal finds out he has a mistress and asks if he is having marital problems and De Niro says no. Crystal asks then why does he have a mistress and De Niro says very self righteously, my wife uses her mouth to kiss my children!

I thought on this some more. I wonder if mob protocol of what was considered "personal" and what was considered "business" might have been at least part of why Vito refused to interfere in Connie's problems.

Maybe Vito thought it would set a bad precedent within his larger Family if he "corrected" Carlo. In the hundreds of loyal buttons that ultimately answer to the Don there must be at least a few dozen who are abusive to their wives. Would the Don have wanted to get involved in their marital affairs?

As long as you're making money for your leaders and following orders I don't think the bosses care too much about how you treat your wife-unless/until it interferes with business.

And while I think Sonny definitely would have been remorseful about the situation, I wonder if Vito wouldn't have told Connie something like "You married this guy I didn't think too highly of. You're grown. You deal with it".

Of course in the film Vito doesn't see the extent of the beatings. Sonny does.

In the novel, Vito and his wife do, in fact, display that attitude. Vito's statements indicate that he thinks wife-beating can be appropriate in some circumstances.

Also in the novel Mike tells Tom that everything is personal.

Interesting thoughts. In a deleted scene of the movie, Vito sees Carlo and Connie arguging and when Sonny tries to intervene, he tells him to sit down and says, "You never interfere between a man and a woman." In the novel, he clearly knew about the beatings because he actually tells a pregnant Connie to go back to Carlo and behave so he wouldn't beat her anymore. I'm glad they never put that in the movie because the Vito that Marlo Brando portrayed was warmer than the Vito in the book. I can't imagine Brando's Vito saying something like that.

I'm not sure if Vito did know the full extent of the beatings, but I think he was at least aware that Carlo wasn't treating his daughter with the respect she deserved. But he chose to stay out of it, because like you pointed out, Connie chose to be with Carlo.

No, I think that Vito approved of wife beating. In the novel he answers Connie's question by telling her that her mother never gave him a reason to beat her. Obviously, he believes that there are reasons to beat one's wife.

The Vito in the novel and film were slightly different. IMO, the Vito in the novel was colder. I wish Coppola had included the scene of Vito telling Sonny, "You never interfere between a man and a woman." That comment made it seem like Vito thought he wouldn't protect Connie because she became Carlo's responsibility as soon as they got married. I think Mama felt the same way. She too told Sonny not to intefere when Sonny got on Carlo's case about telling Connie to shut up at the dinner table.

You're right about the Vito in the novel. He did think it was okay for a man to beat a woman if there was a reason for it.