The point is made in the excellent documentary "I KNOW IT WAS YOU" about John Cazale, who played Fredo, that is worth posting here. His acting and his portrayal of a man who betrayed his own family, who probably set up his own brother to be murdered just because he resented being "passed over" is, to the audience a far more sympathetic character than Michael. While this speaks to Cazale's great acting, it also speaks to Pacino's reacting as the cold blooded bastid he has become.

Yes, that was an excellent documentary. The commentators made the point, time and again, about Cazale's ability to project hurt and vulnerability in all his roles.

Ironically, that quality is what made his betrayal of Michael all the more diabolical.

The irony of Fredo is that he's screwed regardless of whether or not one concludes he deliberately set Michael up to be killed. If he did, then he deserved what happened to him. If he didn't, then while he may not have deserved to be killed, he was one of the stupidest people ever, and therefore forfeits his right to complain about being "stepped over" or about the fact that Michael and others don't respect him. Either way, he loses.

But why wouldn't Fredo be the more sympathetic character? He is set up to be from almost the first moment he is seen in The Godfather.

While what he did to Michael was despicable and he deserved to die...he was the stupid, (seemingly) gentle, weak brother. The one who was indeed 'stepped over', but precisely because of these shortcomings that were clear to his father as well as everyone else (including Hyman Roth).

Admittedly, credit MUST be given to Cazale, for nearly every scene where Fredo appears in GFII. The drinks with Michael in Havana. The lakehouse. The embrace at mama's wake. All of these moments just make your heart bleed for this imbecile...who in the hands of a lesser actor may very well have come off as a clown.

Really? I don't see that. People don't generally have great feelings of sympathy, let alone respect, for those viewed as being both stupid and wimpy. If by "The Godfather" you mean Part I, what's so likeable about him there? He plays a minor role in the film, and when he is significant he's either totally ineffectual (when Sollozzo's men gunned down Vito) or needlessly causing trouble (between Moe Greene and the Corleones).

Fredo got the short end of the stick in GF. The novel described him as dour, ultra-dutiful, still living at home, devoted to his parents. He was almost cartoonish in the movie in ways that he wasn't in the novel: drunk and reeling at Connie's wedding, fawning over Moe in Vegas and yelling at his brother for the way he talked to Moe. A small part, and not much to it. In a way, the trivialization of his character in GF amplified him in II, making him a major character, and his betrayal of Michael all the more powerful.

I never said anything about Fredo being 'likeable' (although that is the topic subject line). Just 'sympathetic', more so than Michael or either of his other brothers. This was in response to someone else's post where the following was stated:

"His (Cazale's) acting and his portrayal of a man who betrayed his own family, who probably set up his own brother to be murdered just because he resented being "passed over" is, to the audience a far more sympathetic character than Michael."

Perhaps 'pitiful' is the better word to describe Fredo in 'The Godfather'. But sympathetic still holds. Gently giving Paulie a pass for being out sick when Vito's suspicions are immediately raised; fumbling with the gun and sobbing over his thought-to-be-dead 'poppa'; being sent to Vegas for 'rest'; and then being slapped around by Moe Green.

Sympathetic/pitiful...right up to the moment he decides to grow a set and then uses them to disrespect Michael & take sides against the Family.

He goes back to 'sympathetic' in GFII and pretty much remains there up to the moment he's killed, despite his idiocy.

Fredo suffered from Sonny's death. Had Sonny survived and took charge of the family Fredo would not have been cast out as some "gofer", or perhaps he would have been but have been made to feel more important to the family. And whilst Sonny and Tom would have recognised Fredo's incompetence to handle any thing important they would have still valued him as a family enough to let him be and feel apart of the family business.

It kind of appears that there is a real brotherly love between Sonny and Fredo, as shown in the birthday scene, the way they play about briefly in that scene. Where as with Michael, he's so distant it appears that he doesn't really have any bond with his brothers, even though it's Fredo who sticks up for him when Michael declares he's joined the army. I mean, what he says to Tom in that birthday scene "You talked to MY father about MY future"....not "Our father", it's like he doesn't recognise Tom as part of the family. Fredo respected Sonny, his old brother, he understood what that meant. Where as Michael didn't, he mistreated Fredo and treated him like shit.

Sonny loved the family, he took that from Vito. He cared for his family, his adopted brother, his incompetant younger brother and his distance younger brother who was a heretic to his family's tradition and his younger sister.

Michael didn't love the family, or he did in a very selfish way, they were HIS family. He didn't act out of love for his family as much as some warped sense of possessiveness of them.

The way I see it, Vito's traits are split between his three sons.

Sonny has Vito's strength, his sense of value and family.

Fredo has his looks, well I think Fredo looks the most like Vito. Yet it's probably the worst trait he could hadd

Michael had Vito's smarts, but smarts only. He didn't have the sense of value, family and reasoning which made Vito so respected, Sonny had that.

I kind of got off the point there, but as I said Michael became so distant ot the family that he didn't really have a bond with Fredo (as Fredo says in GF2, "why didn't we spend time like this together before?") which is perhaps why it was so easy for Michael to dispose of him. Where as Sonny and Fredo did seem like brothers, Fredo would have never betrayed Sonny even just to "scare him".

Absolutely. Which is exactly why Sonny shipped Fredo off to Vegas for a rest after he bumbled up the shooting of Vito.



Keep in mind that that brotherly 'playfulness' you see takes place several years prior to Sonny having any responsibility of running the family, even if he was 'heir apparent' at the time. No one can know how Sonny would've treated ANY member of his family had he survived to be Don, as opposed to 'acting' Don during his father's recovery. (Although the behavior & judgment that led to his death were a pretty good indication.)



Of course...which is why he constantly banged women on the side, practically under his wife's nose. And in addition prompted the 'real man' comment from Vito, spoken to Johnny Fontaine but with a deliberate gesture toward Sonny.

Actually, it was Michael who posessed Vito's strength, as well as his 'smarts'...what Michael did not posess was Vito's warmth. Which is why, as he himself knew years later, he evoked fear but not respect.



He would not have had to. Sonny was older. Fredo would've probably respected that fact. Much of the resentment toward Michael that led to betrayal was that he was 'stepped over' in favor of his kid brother. Even in Vegas after the Moe Green debacle, he attempts to go over Michael's head to Tom & the Don.

Michael treated Fredo as well as he possibly could, considering Fredo's limited intelligence and abilities. Sonny might've done the same. Sonny was older. That's the only difference in how Fredo would've reacted.

It was Fredo who messed up, Fredo who lacked the sense of 'family', which he proved by twice conspiring against his own (Family), the second time on a far greater scale, with potentially disasterous results...purely for personal gain, with a known emeny.

There are two things about that birthday scene that you may have not noticed that provide some additional insight about Sonny and his siblings. When Connie pleads with them not to talk about the War, Sonny shuts her up and eventually tells Connie to show Carlo the Christmas tree. Then, when Fredo shakes hands with Mike, Sonny not only breaks up the handshake , but then tells Fredo go get him a drink. Obviously, Sonny's comments to Connie and Fredo are dismissive of them and indicate that Sonny has his limits to affection for his siblings.

That's an EXCELLENT point, Oli. And, to be honest, it was very typical of his being the eldest sibling in an Italian family. It was often like that. In my experience, anyway.

I still think Fredo didn't know what was going to happen at Tahoe. The scene where Fredo gets the phone call in the middle of the night pretty much proves this.

He was weak and dumb, but he wasn't that evil.

I agree that that call at least calls into question whether Fredo knew they were going to try to kill Michael. But at the same time, it's completely irrelevant as far as passing judgment on Michael for killing Fredo is concerned. After all, there's no way Michael could have known about the call--only the audience watching the movie knows. Michael certainly had every reason to believe Fredo knowingly conspired to kill him, Fredo's protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

Good points. BUT: It was Michael's love for his father and his family which drew him into the story: The moment he learns about his father being shot, he puts a foot into the door and takes responsibility (or at least what he believes his responsibility.)

Fredo freezing up and crying when Don is shot in part 1....is a bit surprising.


They never mentioned him making his bones, but how could such a coward be involved in the family business?

One of the nice things about being a Don is that you can do anything you want in your family, including waiving "making your bones" for sons. The novel says Fredo was helpful to his father in many ways, but never associates him with violence. I don't think Fredo was a coward per se--I think he was surprised and shocked by the attack on Vito, fumbled his gun, and had a nervous breakdown when he saw his beloved father bleeding in the street.

I hear you Turnbull.

The book describes Fredo as immediately panicking......and the gunmen not killing him more out of fear(of the crowd and commotion) than how Sollozo tried to explain it later, as sparing Fredo and only shooting the Don.


I have to go back and see the film again or read the book, but if Fredo carried a gun, then he was a coward for reacting the way he did.

You figure the only one in the organization who didn't commit acts of violence was the Consig., and EVEN then......normally he would be Sicilian so violence wasn't out of the question(if required).

Even Connie wasn't above violence, in the film she grabs a knife when Carlo attacks her.

Coward? As the novel states, Fredo was stunned at seeing his father gunned down. What's cowardly about that?

If he was holding/carrying a gun and his father- sees the hit and manages to brace himself/duck ............then Fredo didn't unholster his gun, return fire or even chase the men off...........he was a coward.


I'm not sure in the book who makes the decision to send Fredo off, since the Don was recovering, but it's a good decision because there was no way that help the family in the time of crisis.


I know the character is viewed in a sympathetic way, but Fredo wasn't built for the life his family was involved in.
In the book, once the Don recovers and learns what Fredo is up to, he is impressed that Fredo has a knack for hotel management but he is disappointed that Fredo is such a sucker for the ladies...the word that the Don, or Puzo chooses to describe such a man translated into something analogous to being greedy for his mother's nipple or something like that, weak.


Just my take....

Fredo wasn't a natural killer like Sonny or a trained warrior like Michael.
We don't know for sure what Fredo's role was in the Family's previous wars but I would guess he wasn't on the frontlines. I also doubt anyone ever told Fredo "Go do the job on this guy".

As mentioned (movie)Fredo wasn't really cut out for the life and his performance during the assassination attempt shows that but I'm not sure I'd say that alone was cowardly. He was more inept than cowardly. He was slow to respond and fumbled his gun. It was over in seconds. Certainly Paulie would have reported his impression of Fredo to Sollozzo.