0 registered members (),
121
guests, and 30
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums21
Topics43,473
Posts1,090,508
Members10,381
|
Most Online1,254 Mar 13th, 2025
|
|
|
Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33117
09/29/05 06:15 PM
09/29/05 06:15 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770 UK
The Dr. who fixed Lucy
OP
Underboss
|
OP
Underboss
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770
UK
|
In 1 Mike kills the heads of the five families to consolidate his power.
Question: could he not have just killed Barzini?
Barzini was the focus of the anti-Corleone movement. If Mike had targeted him only, then the others would surely have fallen into place without futher bloodshed. Even Tattaglia would presumably have crumbled if Barzini had fallen.
NB Obviously he also had to kill Carlo to avenge Sonny's death... possbly also Tattaglia to avenge Luca Brasi. But Cuneo? Strachi? was that really necessary?
Joey ...
BANG BANG
... Saza!
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33118
09/29/05 06:20 PM
09/29/05 06:20 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058 The Slippery Slope
plawrence
RIP StatMan
|
RIP StatMan
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058
The Slippery Slope
|
Necessary? Possibly (or perhaps even probably) not.
But certainly beneficial. He consolidates his power and eliminates possible future enemies.
That notwithstanding the fact that there is a line in the movie, spoken by Tom to Sonny, I believe at the start of the war (which I'm too lazy to look for), in which Tom makes some reference to the fact that "All the other families will be against you."
So quite possibly they were, and Michael felt that he had to eliminate all of the other family heads.
"Difficult....not impossible"
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33120
09/29/05 06:43 PM
09/29/05 06:43 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058 The Slippery Slope
plawrence
RIP StatMan
|
RIP StatMan
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058
The Slippery Slope
|
Just for the record, BTW, in the book he kills Barzini and Tattaglia.
"Difficult....not impossible"
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33121
09/29/05 08:43 PM
09/29/05 08:43 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 17,300 New York
Sicilian Babe
|

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 17,300
New York
|
Originally posted by The Dr. who fixed Lucy: [Even Tattaglia would presumably have crumbled if Barzini had fallen.
There is no way Michael could've let Tattaglia live. The Tattaglias not only killed Luca, but they had Carlo set up Sonny. Even though it was Barzini who approached Carlo, the killing was in retribution for the Tattaglia son. So Michael had to kill him to avenge his brother's death. As for the the other two, why not? Obviously they had given tacit approval for Barzini and Tattaglia to wage war against the Corleones. If you remember, Barzini broke the peace several times while Michael was taking over the reins from his father (and it was Michael's inaction against them that made Tessio turn). I would imagine that was part of the reason that made Michael want to wipe them all out.
President Emeritus of the Neal Pulcawer Fan Club
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33124
09/30/05 06:24 AM
09/30/05 06:24 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770 UK
The Dr. who fixed Lucy
OP
Underboss
|
OP
Underboss
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770
UK
|
Sicilian Babe As for the the other two, why not? Bloodshed is generally bad for business. I would have thought that Vito's approach, imparted to Mike, would have been to look for a reason to kill, rather than a reason not to. Don Lights The Corleone family looked bad,as it basically gave into the deal minus Sollozo. The other family heads would think they can muscle in on them now. OK, so that's the obvious reason and the reason explicitly cited - the loss-a-respecta for giving in to Sollozzo. But Cuneo and Strachi were not directly mixed up in the Sollozzo/Barzini/Tattaglia thing. Cuneo and Strachi, being small potatoes, would simply have sailed with the prevailing wind. IF the hit on Vito had worked, and Barzini and Tattaglia had wrestled the mantle from the Corleones, they would have followed. But S/B/T had failed - the Don lived - and Cuneo and Strachi, minnows that they are, would have continued to support the now victorious Corleones. The deaths of Barzini and tattaglia would have been sufficiet to cancel out the respect issue. Cuneo and Strachi were plain unnecessary and, might I add, bad for business. Who knows how much disruption and loss of income was caused among their regimes (which the Corleones inherited)? Surely better to allow Cuneo and Strachi to continue, with a heavy tax payable to the Corleone family. Less blood, and more money.
Joey ...
BANG BANG
... Saza!
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33125
09/30/05 07:31 AM
09/30/05 07:31 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058 The Slippery Slope
plawrence
RIP StatMan
|
RIP StatMan
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 15,058
The Slippery Slope
|
Originally posted by Sicilian Babe: There is no way Michael could've let Tattaglia live. The Tattaglias not only killed Luca, but they had Carlo set up Sonny. Even though it was Barzini who approached Carlo, the killing was in retribution for the Tattaglia son. So Michael had to kill him to avenge his brother's death. I think the assassination of Sonny was more of a strategic move to either help the Barzini/Tattaglia alliance win the war, and/or force Don Corleone to negotiate, than it was direct retribution for the killing of Tattaglia's son. In the novel, Puzo writes .....the enemy was making its plans. They too had analyzed the situation and had come to the conclusion that the only way to stave off complete defeat was to kill Sonny Corleone. They understood the situation better now and felt it was possible to negotiate with the Don, known for his logical reasonableness. They had come to hate Sonny for his bloodthirstiness, which they considered barbaric.
"Difficult....not impossible"
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33131
10/07/05 11:37 PM
10/07/05 11:37 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275 Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
Frank Pentangely
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275
Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
|
1)Thats the way the choosen! anyway if he killed only Barzini, Tattaglia would get into drugs get the support of the other families and drive the Corleone family to the hell. 2) Barzini and Tattaglia killed, then the other families would say the Corleones are triying to get control of the buissness and move them out.
That means: He was forced to do it, maybe it felt good too, and if I were Michael I would do the same... In that buissness you can take no chances!
RING-A-DING-DING
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33132
10/08/05 03:44 PM
10/08/05 03:44 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770 UK
The Dr. who fixed Lucy
OP
Underboss
|
OP
Underboss
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770
UK
|
Frank Pentangely In that buissness you can take no chances! There speaks the man who met with the Rosotto brothers without any protection!!
Joey ...
BANG BANG
... Saza!
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33133
10/08/05 04:08 PM
10/08/05 04:08 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275 Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
Frank Pentangely
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275
Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
|
Originally posted by The Dr. who fixed Lucy: Frank Pentangely [b]In that buissness you can take no chances! There speaks the man who met with the Rosotto brothers without any protection!! [/b]Watha hell, boy, I survived... And Cicci was out, they werent supossed to be such a rats! From that day on I taked no chances...
RING-A-DING-DING
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33134
10/08/05 04:33 PM
10/08/05 04:33 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770 UK
The Dr. who fixed Lucy
OP
Underboss
|
OP
Underboss
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 770
UK
|
Frank Pentangely Watha hell, boy, I survived Yes, that was the plan!
Joey ...
BANG BANG
... Saza!
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
#33135
10/08/05 04:35 PM
10/08/05 04:35 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275 Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
Frank Pentangely
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 275
Somewhere, sometime... Somehow
|
Originally posted by The Dr. who fixed Lucy: Frank Pentangely [b]Watha hell, boy, I survived Yes, that was the plan! [/b]It kind of was... Those were rats, we shoulded move them out while we´ve gotted the muscle!
RING-A-DING-DING
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
[Re: gnocchi]
#561589
12/03/09 05:56 PM
12/03/09 05:56 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 466 Stewartstown, PA
VitoC
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 466
Stewartstown, PA
|
"From an ethical standpoint, Moe could have been the only character spared because he did not present a danger to life and limb."
I don't know about that. Remember Moe said "I tocked to Barzini. I can make the deal with him, and still keep my hotel!" Because of this statement, when Michael found out about the plan to kill him, he had reason to believe that part of "the deal" Moe referred to was that Michael would be killed. Remember that Moe (like Bugsy Siegel, the real life person he was based on) was a violent gangster in his own right: "I made my bones when you were going out with cheerleaders!" If, as was proven in Part II, Hyman Roth had the ability to kill Michael (yes, he failed, but only by an eyelash), why couldn't Moe have as well?
Let me tell ya somethin my kraut mick friend!
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
[Re: VitoC]
#561590
12/03/09 06:02 PM
12/03/09 06:02 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,721 AZ
Turnbull
|

Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,721
AZ
|
In the novel, Moe is killed well before the Great Massacre of 1955, with Vito's consent. He stood in the way of the family's expansion, insulted Michael and slapped Fredo around. And, he was the kind of swaggering braggart who, if he weren't whacked with the others, would have crowed that Michael was afraid of him.
Ntra la porta tua lu sangu � sparsu, E nun me mporta si ce muoru accisu... E s'iddu muoru e vaju mparadisu Si nun ce truovo a ttia, mancu ce trasu.
|
|
|
Re: Did Michael go too far in 1?
[Re: Turnbull]
#561592
12/03/09 06:03 PM
12/03/09 06:03 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5
gnocchi
Associate
|
Associate
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 5
|
|
|
|
|