OK...so the consensus with The Dons around here is that Rocco was not in on the hit on Michael.

OK...consider this... someone had to direct the events on the hit night. Someone had to know the fortress layout. Someone had to have access to Michael's bedroom and a good reason for being there. Someone had to know when Michael was going to be in his bedroom (the hitmen couldn't be standing around for hours waiting for Michael enter the target zone). Someone had to have control over the guards (of which there would have been plenty that night). Someone had to have control over the dogs. It appears that the hitmen entered the property from the water. The west shore of Tahoe is NOT swarming with boats...there are no marinas there. Michael particularly picked his home on Tahoe's west shore because, coming from land or water, anyone is going to be seen approaching a mile away. The hit on Michael was a very bold, daring plan.

Let's talk about Fredo...I personally believe that Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit and provided Roth with the players for the hit; but I do not believe that he took a PERSONAL part in the events of the night of the hit. First of all, I cannot see Fredo being physically able to control and coordinate the events of hit night without being detected by Michael's guards. But more importantly, Fredo did not have the nerve, the guts to pull off those events which included opening the drapes in Michael's bedroom while Kay was sleeping and killing the assasins. Fredo couldn't get a shot off at his own father's assasins. I doubt he ever killed anyone. Fredo was a man who was so harmless he couldn't belt his wife (much she was provoking him to).

Fredo was not a killer.

Fredo did not have the nerve that it would take to pull off the hit.

Fredo wasn't even nervous that night.

Talk to me, talk to me...

Rocco dies anyway, so who cares.

Fredo didn't know it was going to be a hit.

But somehow, he conspired with Roth in a way that enabled the assasination attempt, even though it failed.

Just how he did that is not explained anywhere in the movie and has been a source of discussion on the BB for years and years. Some have suggested that Fredo is the one who opened the curtains...only for what I cannot say since he didn't know it was going to be a hit.

It is never indicated, anywhere that Rocco was a traitor. He was loyal to the very end, even giving his life carrying out the 'difficult, not impossible' hit on Roth ordered by Michael.

Fredo was the traitor. Exactly HOW he betrayed Michael we'll probably never really know.

But Fredo was the traitor.

Apple

The key piece of information missing in that scene is, "Who killed the Tahoe shooters?" As Apple said, it's been a topic for years on these boards. While many have given interesting theories, no one has provided a definitive answer.
Some people claim to have seen an earlier script draft in which Rocco was somehow involved in killing the Tahole shooters. That script, if it existed, was never posted or linked here. Even if it did exist, it wouldn't answer the question, because it wasn't the version used in the actual film. I think it may have been speculation on the part of some posters here who want an answer to this age-old question.
Yeah, Fredo was described by Connie as "sweet," and by Michael as "weak and stupid." He falls apart after Vito gets shot, gets slapped around by Moe Green, takes sides against the family, is henpecked and can't "control" his wife. Not the portrait of a killer, I grant you. But it's also not the portrait of a traitor who secretly (and effectively) conspired against his brother--and showed us (in the boathouse scene) towering rage and resentment. So, I can't rule out that Fredo was involved with the deaths of the Tahoe shooters.

Fredo conspired with Roth and Johnny Ola to kill his brother. Part of the plan was to kill the assasins whether they failed or were successful. Dead men tell no tales. That was Rocco's job. A hit could never have been made on Michael without one of his bodyguards betraying him for the reasons I stated in my previous post. That betrayer was Rocco. Rocco did away with the Tahoe shooters, opened the curtains in Michael's bedroom, controlled the scene of the crime.
Relisten to Johnny Ola's middle-of-the-night telephone call to Fredo. Turn the volume way up so you can hear Johnny's part of the convo. I think you will see that when Fredo said, "You guys lied to me," he did NOT mean lied about whether there was going to be a hit on Michael.
Fredo knew there was going to be a hit from the beginning.
Fredo gave Roth what he needed which was non-Roth assasins (supplied by Pentangeli) and Rocco to penetrate Michael's fortress.

Where do you come to the conclusion that it was Pantangeli who supplied the assasins?

Not necessarily. What was there to direct once the shooters were on the property and instructed to wait until Michael enetered his bedroom?

We've generally come to the conclusion here, I think, that part of Fredo's role was in providing Roth with the layout of the compound.

Anyone who had a reason to ever be actually in the house is a candidate for being the one who opened the drapes.

We've also generally come to a consensus, I think, that that was part of Fredo's role as well.


It wouldn't have been for "hours". All they had to know is when the party was breaking up.

Maybe a signal from Fredo?

Yes, that was Rocco. But what did Rocco do that makes you think he gave less than his best effort?

It was eventually the guards and the dogs who found the shooters, wasn't it?


If Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit, what did he mean when he said to Johnny Ola in the late night phone call "You guys lied to me"?

What is there in Ola's part of the conversation that we need to turn the volume up to hear that indicates fredo knew?

I also don't understand what you mean by "Fredo...provided Roth with the players for the hit".

Fredo controlled Rocco? Don't think so.

There's also an earlier version of the script floating around here in which it is stated that Fredo thought it was going to be a kidnapping attempt, not a hit.

I'd agree, for all of the reasons you stated.

I do believe, however, that it was he who opened the drapes.

And since you've pretty much eliminated Fredo from having done anything in this plot, what do you think his role was?

That's the real question here, of course.

And it's really the only argument, as speculative as it is, for Rocco's involvement since, as you correctly point out, "Fredo was not a killer."

Some here have offered the opinion that Rocco's quick acceptance of Michael's suggestion that Roth be assassinated in what figured to be a suicide mission was Rocco's attempt at redemption for the failed Tahoe attempt on Michael's life.

That could be the case and, if so, is more evidence that points in Rocco's direction.

But....if there is one thing we know about Michael, it's that he was sharp and cunning and perhaps even a bit paranoid, and not likely to give a traitor a pass.

So if he even suspected Rocco, I'm sure he would've whacked him along with Fredo.

Here's what I think happened:

Discovering who the traitor was is probably the main plot line of the whole movie.

I believe that if Puzo and FFC had anyone else in mind that was close to Michael and involved in the plot, they would have revealed that to us.

In all three films Micheal himself (or his agents) kills every single one of his enemies.

I simply think that this is a major black hole in the plot, and the film's greatest flaw.

Michael never wonders about who killed the Tahoe shooters - which is 100% out of character for him - so we are not meant to wonder either.

All that MP and FFC wished us to know is that Fredo was the traitor.

I remember seeing the film in the theatre, and I didn't leave wondering "Who killed the Tahoe shooters?"

And that question didn't occur to me until after a few re-watchings in the early days of home video, some 10-12 years later.

MP and FFC never anticipated that this film would be watched, re-watched, and re-re-watched, and then analyzed, re-analyzed, and re-[i]re-[/re]analyzed by so many people so many years later.

Frankly, I think that they figured - if they figured at all - that identifying Fredo as the "traitor" would be enough, and that people would never go as deeply into these questions as we here do.

Just to add....

There are no theories of which any of us are aware, that fit all of the facts.

Someone had to be in on it besides Fredo, if only to kill the shooters.

If you want to make the case that it was Rocco, here's what doesn't fit, IMO:

1- How did Rocco kill the assassins without being seen by anyone?

2- Why didn't Michael ever wonder who killed the assassins? Surely he couldn't have thought that it was Fredo.

3- If he thought it was Rocco, why did he keep Rocco around for so long?

4- Why didn't Michael pump Fredo for more information with respect to who else was involved during his key conversation with Fredo ("You're nothing to me now...")

5- If Rocco was involved, surely Fredo, as dumb as he was, would've figured that out. He knew that he didn't kill the assassins. Why didn't he suggest that possibility to Michael when Michael told him "You're nothing to me now"? Why didn't Fredo say "Me? How about Rocco?" Or "How about Al?" Wouldn't Fredo have said "Hey, it wasn't me that killed those guys they found in the didtch."

I was just reading the original script for the movie and reviewing the film. Fredo's wife was trying to get away and was screaming "They're dead right outside my window." Who's dead? The assasins, that's who. That leads to yet more speculation. If they were right outside the bedroom window where Deanna and Fredo were, it would have been easy for Fredo to kill them. But nobody heard anymore shots, other than the machine guns. Could it have been Rocco? To borrow another line from the movie, difficult, not impossible. Could it have been Al? Wasn't he in Reno or somewhere taking over the Tropigala at that time? If so, that leaves him out. Al found out a lot of things for his boss: He found Fabrizzio, he told Mike about Tom's mistress and job offers that Tom had. He was a good investigator, yet he kept his own counsel and no one except his boss ever got any info. He could have been the one who found out that Rocco was the traitor (and I'm not saying that Rocco was). And there's one more possibility, although it too is indeed far-fetched. What if Michael set up the whole "hit" thing himself to cause a lot of infighting between Roth and Pentangelli? Just something to think about? Or maybe it was Tom. Tom was really upset about being cut out of a lot of things. One of Don Vito's teachings was "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer." Michael kept all the people close hwo eventually were killed by him or his orders, except Fabrizzio. Carlo, Tessio, Fredo, Pentangelli, Roth ....Rocco?

I highly doubt that Michael would have set something like that up just to cause infighting between Frankie and Roth. There is no way that Michael would have jeapordized the lives of his own family just to make a play with Roth. I totally doubt that Michael would have had someone machine gun up his bedroom where his wife sleeps, where his children come and play with their toys.


Don Cardi

They weren't shot. I believe that we've all come to the conclusion that they were garrotted (If you look closely, you can see the marks around their neck).

Also, there's certainly no way that it would have been "easy" for Fredo to kill them.

Here's the case against that scenario:

1- Weak Fredo, getting the drop on two professional hired killers, and garrotting both?

2- How could he have done it so quickly and without being seen? Immediatley after the shots are fired we see lights go on, and guards and dogs running around like crazy.

In fact, I don't believe that there's any scenario in which anyone could have killed the hitmen without being seen, unless that person was standing right there with the shooters while they were shooting.

And even so, assuming that they weren't shooting from the ditch in which they were found, how were they killed and dragged there so quickly without anyone seeing any of this.

Possible Answer: The drainage ditch or whatever it was was their escape route. Whoever killed them knew that and was waiting for them there. Fredo? Doubtful.

3- If you believe that Fredo "didn't know it was gonna be a hit" (and if you think he did know, then you have to provide an explanation for what he meant when he said to Ola "You guys lied to me."), then how could he have been prepared to kill the hitmen, much less accomplished it? He didn't even know that there would be hitmen to kill.

4- These two guys were killed so quickly and efficiently after they did their shooting, that killing them must have been part of Roth's plan, whether Michael was killed or not.

Reason? Again, because they were killed too quickly and efficiently.

The reason that they were killed could not have been simply because they failed in their mission, because whoever killed them did it so quickly that I don't see how he could have known that Michael was still alive.

I doubt if an old shrewdie like Roth was depending on a bumbling fool like Fredo to kill two professional killers.

If they were strangled, wouldn't that mean that they were killed by TWO people. I can't imagine some hitman sitting idly by while his partner is strangled. So, wouldn't there have to be two people, so that the hitmen were killed simultaneously??

Probably so. Just another flaw.

If MP and FFC knew then that 30+ years later people would be able to watch these movies over and over again in their own homes, and that there would be maybe, I dunno, 100 or more people on an internet forum (hell, they didn't even know that there would be an internet, either) who all considered themselves to be experts on the films and were willig to discuss them and analyze them endlessly, I think they quite possibly would have been more careful.

Maybe they committed suicide

Reason #6 why Rocco being a traitor doesn't fit the facts:

It makes not sense that not only did michael keep Rocco around, he kept him around as a trusted confidant as well.

Rocco was present when Michael returned form Cuba, Rocco was with Michael in Washington, and Rocco was present during the initial discussion about killing Roth.

I find it impossible to believe that if Michael suspected Rocco of being a traitor and being on Roth's side, he would've allowed Rocco to know that he (Michael) was planning to kill Roth.

Yes, Michael's quest to uncover the traitor certainly dominated much of the movie. But once he found out that Fredo was the traitor, I believe that the rest of the film focused on his final transformation from nice college boy and patriot to cold-hearted Mafia Don--exemplified by his entrapment and murder of Fredo, and his estrangement from Kay.
I also agree that it seems out of character for Michael to not wonder who killed the Tahoe shooters. But, logically, the identity of the killer of the Tahoe shooters was subordinate to the identity of the traitor--because, Michael assumed, the traitor and the killer of the Tahoe shooters were one and the same ("...killed by someone very close to us...very scary."). So, when Michael found out that Fredo was the traitor, he must have assumed that Fredo personally killed the shooters, or arranged for some hired guns to kill them. Either way, he could not have suspected Rocco as an accomplice, because if he did, Rocco would have been dead toot-sweet. As far as Michael was concerned, it was enough to know that Roth was behind the shooting, that Fredo betrayed him, and that Roth would never "live to see the New Year."
As for Rocco's suicide mission: As I've posted many times [sound of plaw yawning], Neri had pushed past Rocco, and was trying to push past Hagen, in attempting to become Michael's #2 guy. Rocco was basically a bodyguard and gofer in GFII. Michael let this happen because he'd determined that Neri was useful to him, but Rocco was dispensible. That's why, after humiliating Hagen in the penultimate boathouse scene ("you know, Tom, you surprise me...you can kill anyone..."), Michael turns and says, "Rocco?" He doesn't say, "Al?" Rocco, having witnessed Hagen's humiliation for having suggested that Roth couldn't be killed, and wanting a last chance to prove himself in Michael's eyes, says, "Difficult, not impossible." Basically, Michael gave him no choice. But I believe Rocco's fate was sealed by his desire to get back ahead of Neri-- not because he was complicit in the Tahoe attack.

PLAW, you asked how Rocco killed the assasins without being detected. The fact is--the assasins WERE killed without the killer being detected. Who would be able to do that--I say Rocco.
You say Michael never wondered who killed the assasins. That was the whole point of Michael's convo with Tom after the hit. Michael already knew that Rocco killed the assasins. Neri wasn't at the fortress--he was taking care of Senator Geary in a Carson City whorehouse.
Why didn't Michael get rid of Rocco right away? He didn't need to. Where was Rocco going to go...what was he going to do? Rocco was trying to figure out whether Michael knew he was involved or not. He couldn't be sure of that until he received 2 bullets in the chest--then he knew Michael knew. Plus Michael used Rocco's great expertise to eliminate Roth.
You ask why Michael didn't pump Fredo for more info on who the other killers were. Michael already knew who they all were. Fredo couldn't shift the blame to someone else...he knew Michael knew that. He did try to tell Michael that he didn't know it was going to be a hit. But Michael knew that he knew. Michael knew in Cuba that Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit. And as Turnbull pointed out, Fredo's resentment, jealousy, and anger came pouring out in the boathouse confession. And to top it off Fredo told Michael that Roth had the senate lawyer Questadt (sp?) which showed Michael that Fredo had continued to plot with Roth even after the hit. The Senate hearings were Roth's ace-in-the-hole play and Fredo knew about that too.

What was Fredo's role in the plot? He was contacted by Johnny Ola. I'm sure they all knew eachother from Vegas since Roth was close friends with Moe Green. Roth saw what happened to Moe and he determined to kill Michael knowing that he (Roth) would probably be moved out of his Vegas operation.
Johnny approached Fredo about hitting Michael. Fredo would be able to tell Roth HOW to hit Michael and WHO could be used to do it. Fredo knew that Pentangeli was not happy with Michael over the Rosattos. Pentangeli supplied the hitmen. One of Michael's bodyguards would have to betray Michael for the hit to happen (see my first post for the reasons why). Rocco was the "businessman" instead of loyal friend to Michael. Rocco killed the Tahoe shooters. Rocco also opened the drapes in Michael's bedroom. Can you really imagine Fredo sneaking into Kay's bedroom while she's sleeping and opening the drapes? What would he have said if he was caught?!! Don't think so...

In the middle of the night phone convo Fredo says, "You guys lied to me." Johnny replies, "Your brother won't find out." Now, tell me what Fredo meant? What was Fredo talking about? He was lied to about SOMETHING; but he wasn't lied to about whether it was going to be a hit. That doesn't make sense.


I completely disagree that GF2 is flawed. The major plot is not flawed. This movie has a very complicated plot that requires a lot of thinking to figure out. FFC and MP didn't just give us all the answers. They gave us a puzzle to figure out with many clues. I believe this movie stands alone. A person doesn't need a book or script to figure it out. I'm not saying I have even one-tenth of the answers; but I DO know:

1. Who opened the drapes and killed the Tahoe shooters--Rocco.

2. Did Fredo know it was going to be a hit--yes.

I think, the traitor was Merle. He was very angry, because Michael didn't offer him a drink.

There were two professional assassins who were garroted? Connie helped Merle, right after she had opened the drapes. She was very angry, because Michael didn't give her money to book a sea passage on The Queen.

Hasn't that ever occured to you?

Yes, Rocco would have been able to do it.

But that doesn't mean that he did.

Who did? We don't know, and there's no character to whom we can attribute that act to whose actions fit all of the facts. That's the flaw in the movie.

How did Michael know, and what does he say or do that indicates that he does?

I believe that there are certain statements made by the characters in films which are meant to be taken at their face value so as to advance the plot along.

The purpose of Michael's conversation with Tom was for us to know that at that point Michael didn't know who the traitor was.

If he already did, what was the purpose of that scene in the first place?

If Michael had it figured out ten minutes after the shooting that Rocco was a traitor, or the traitor, why did it take him so long to figure out that Fredo was involved as well?

Actually, altho Neri is not shown in the aftermath of the assassination attempt, the whorehouse scene with Geary is much later.

If anything, Neri was already on his way to Vegas to move Klingman out.

But since Michael mentions Neri as a possible suspect in his discussion with Tom, I assume that Michael considered him to be one.

From Michael's POV, knowing what little I think he knew at the time, if there were other confederates involved it wouldn't necessarily have been required that Neri actually be there. His planning may have been enough.

This one is a real stretch.

If there's one thing we know about Michael, it's that he doesn't allow his enemies to live any longer than necessary.

Rocco alive and still part of his inner circle posed a continuing threat to Michael.

To think that Michael would keep Rocco around, knowing that he had been part of the assassination plot, is rather preposterous IMO, knowing what we know about Michael's character.

It's not a case of keeping Rocco around because Rocco had nowhere else to go - Rocco had a place to go, anyway: He could've openly joined Roth.

Put yourself in Rocco's place.

The assassination attempt on your boss, in which you are involved, has failed. You're gonna hang around, waiting to figure out if Michael has figured out that you're involved?

And I don't see what "great expertise" was involved in killing Roth.

All it required was someone with the nerve to step up to the plate and shoot Roth in public, knowing that almost certain capture and possible death would follow.

I'm still not sure how you know that Michael knew all this.

Ten minutes after the shooting, he knew Rocco was involved, but it took him months to figure out that Fredo was also?

Fredo knew that Michael knew what? Why couldn't he shift the blame, or at least implicate Rocco?

And how did Michael know that Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit? And how did he know that in Cuba, at least prior to the "Superman scene"?

That Fredo didn't know it was gonna be a hit is perfectly consistent with his character:

Stupid and weak. And as Michael said to him, "I know Roth misled you."

If you accept Fredo’s statements in the boathouse at their face value, then he “didn’t know it was gonna be a hit.”

Yes, all of Fredo’s resentments came pouring out, so why lie about that?

Fredo even went so far as to tell Michael about Questadt, which indicates that he (Fredo) was still in contact with Roth, so clearly he was holding nothing back.

I accept Fredo’s “You guys lied to me” comment to Ola, along with his “I didn’t know it was gonna be a hit” comment to Michael at their face value.

As far as Questadt goes....

I could never understand why Roth would tell Fredo that he had Questadt in his pocket. What did he gain by that?

Seems to me that it was to Roth’s advantage for Michael to not know, and by telling Fredo he was risking Fredo telling Michael.


I agree, up to the point about Roth thinking that Michael intended to move him out of Vegas.

I don’t think that Roth figured that Michael intended to move him out of the Vegas operation at all.

Remember, the real prize here is the deal in Cuba, which would not be possible without Roth..

Remember also, the real life Roth, Meyer Lansky, lived a long life and died of natural causes because, like Roth, “he always made money for his partners.”

It was Lansky whose expertise in gambling made the casinos in Las Vegas and Havana really profitable for the first time, because he understood the percentages and realized in the long run they would make more money by not cheating their customers.

I believe that Michael was an honorable businessman who knew that Roth’s expertise and connections with the Cuban government in partnership with him was invaluable.

Michael could never have brought off the Havana deal without Roth, and the “partnership with a friendly government” was possible only because of Roth’s friendship with Batista.

I believe that at the first meeting that Michael had with Johnny Ola, it was Michael’s intention to honorably partner with Roth in Havana and Las Vegas.

But that was before the hit attempt, which changed Michael’s way of thinking a bit.

As far as Roth goes, I think that he was perfectly happy with the way things had been going in his gambling operations without Michael’s involvement, and that his main motivation in eliminating Michael was revenge for the death of Moe Greene.

I believe that Fredo was told that it was going to be a kidnapping rather than a hit, as suggested by the unused script.

Maybe the “How”, but not the “Who”.

Fredo was taking an awfully big chance enlisting Rocco in the plot, don’t you think?

Rocco is Michael’s #3 man. What happens if he doesn’t bite?

You point out elsewhere that Fredo and Rocco were on friendly terms, as evidenced by the playful pat that Rocco gives Fredo before removing Deanna from the dance floor.

To me, though, that was a condescending gesture on Rocco’s part which displayed the degree of contempt which he had for Fredo – a man who could not even control his own wife – and the idea that Rocco would involve himself in a plot suggested to him by Fredo, the black sheep of the family, makes no sense.

How did he know that?

The “that was no heart attack” conversation regarding Clemenza indicates to me that Fredo was not aware of the infighting going on between Pentangelli and the Rosatos.

If this is Roth’s plot, why involve Pentangelli at all? What does he need him for?

Makes no sense to me. Pentangelli was at odds with Roth’s cohorts in New York, the Rosatos.

Eliminating Michael weakens Pentangelli’s position in New York. Involving Pentangelli in the plot does nothing for Roth that I can see.

Now we come to the heart of the matter, and I believe that it’s ground we’ve been over before.

Yes, someone killed the hitmen.

But, as I’ve said, there is no character to whom we are ever introduced that is the likely killer, no character whose participation fits all of the facts.

And that, IMO, is the film's great flaw.

It’s hard to imagine anyone sneaking into the bedroom while Kay was asleep and opening the drapes.

But someone did. What would Rocco have said if he had been caught?

So, yes, I can imagine Fredo doing it.

That’s what I asked you.

If Fredo wasn’t lied to about it being a hit, what was he lied to about?

That Fredo was lied to about it being a hit attempt makes perfect sense to me.

If you’re so absolutely certain of that, then you have more than one-tenth of the answers.

The answer to #1 is really the only thing that leaves us hanging, AFAIC, and you haven’t come anywhere near convincing me that it was Rocco.

Just too many holes in your theory.

I don't see the plot as being all that complicated. It just has a few holes, and they're big ones.

Pentangeli didn't supply the hitmen. To the contrary: Pentangeli was set up by Roth to be the fall-guy for the shooting. Roth knew that Pentangeli would be at Anthony's party, contentious over Michael's support of the Rosato brothers against him. Therefore, he'd have the "perfect" motivation to attack Michael, and thus divert suspicion from dear, kindly, let's-make-a-deal Roth.

Kay wasn't asleep when the drapes were opened. In fact, she's wide awake when she notices that the drapes are open--how could she notice that if she were asleep? So, the drapes were opened earlier, when the bedroom was unoccupied. Now, there were thousands of guests at Anthony's party. Michael had security--we see uniformed police around, plus Rocco's always scanning the crowd while Michael and Geary are doing their love-fest with the big donation check. We can assume that the house was guarded to keep wanderers and the light-fingered among the guests from strolling in. But that wouldn't stop a member of the family or staff from coming inside and opening the drapes. I think that was Fredo's job.

As Michael told Tom just before leaving Tahoe, "Right now, you're the only one I can completely trust." Logically he couldn't rule out Neri and Rocco because they were his security--and security failed. But his statement, "Fredo? He's got a good heart. But he's weak and stupid--and this is life and death," did not rule out the possibility in Michael's mind that Fredo was somehow complicit in all that happened--that's implied in "weak and stupid," and later in "Tell him I know Roth misled him."

Once Fredo revealed himself as the traitor, Michael had no need to pursue other details. If he thought Rocco was complicit, Rocco would have been dead before he got back from Cuba. Instead, both Rocco and Neri embraced him when he got back. They were both in his good graces.

Michael only trusted Tom at the time of the shooting, and specifically said that anyone could have done it because "all our people are businessmen." In other words, if he suspected Rocco or Neri then he would be looking for a motive related to their getting a better deal for themselves with michael out of the way. Ironically as it turned out, the shooting was partially about business ina sense because Fredo thought there was "something in it for me....on my own."

There has been a lot of speculation that Rocco resented the fact that Neri got closer to Mike, and higher up in the family, but I never thought this was so. If Rocco was behind Neri and Tom, he would still be Michael's number three man with enormous power, and one of a very few who were "buffers."

Actually, TB, I found the "when" part of the drapes-opening question in Ceasar's Dealer's theory to be rather interesting.

He (or she) seemed to naturally assume that they were opened while Kay was asleep, which could makes sense since Kay presumably would have noticed that they were open when she started to get undressed.

Like you, I had always assumed that they were opened when the room was empty.

But then, I realized that they had to have been opened prior to her entering the room, because...

Well, let me explain it this way:

There are six possible scenarios for the drapes opening:

1) Michael enters room first, drapes are already open
2) Michael enters room first, drapes are not yet open
3) Kay enters the room first, drapes are already open
4) Kay enters the room first, drapes are not yet open (Ceasar's theory)
5) They enter together, drapes are already open
6) They enter together, drapes are not yet open

This raises questions:

Was it assumed that they would get a clear shot at Michael when he went to close them, or simply get a clear shot because they were open.

Let's assume the latter, since they had no way of knowing that he would go to close them

Since the killers could not have known who would enter the room first,

#1 is perfect for them, since they get a shot at Michael immediately

#2 is bad for them, since if Michael is in bed before the drapes are open and the lights are out, how do they get a clear shot at him?

#3 isn't great for them, since Kay may have noticed they were open, and closed them before Michael got there.

#4 which is Ceasar's theory, is risky because the drapes-opener might've awakened Kay when entering the room

#5 is good for the shooters (same reasons as #1)

#6 is bad also, for the (same reasons as #4, except they risk waking Michael)

How did shooters know who would enter first, or if they would both enter together?

In fact, depending on the drapes being open for the assassins get a clear shot is quite problematic.

But clearly, the least problematic scenarios involve the drapes being opened first, regardless of who enters the room first, even though if Kay enters first (#3) that could ruin the whole plan if she notices and closes the drapes before Michael gets there.

You have to think that the drapes were opened while the room was empty, since scenarios #1 & #5 are by far the best from the shooters POV.

For Ceasar's theory to be workable, the shooters would have had to know that
1- Kay would enter the room and fall asleep before Michael got there, and
2- Assume that Michael would turn the lights on when he walked in, risking awakening Kay. Wouldn't it have been more likely that he would simply undress in the dark and slip into bed?

The more I think about it, the more ridiculous the whole drapes thing becomeas all together.

Picture the discussion....

Roth: How are we going to do this?

Ola: Someone will sneak into the bedroom when it's empty and open the drapes. Then when Michael walks in we open fire.

Roth: That works if Michael walks in alone, or if he and Kay walk in together. But what happens if Kay walks in first and sees the drapes open and closes them before Michael gets there?

Ola: Well, we could hope that Kay enters first, and then when she's sleeping, sneak in and open the drapes. Then when Michael gets there, we open fire (Ceasar's heory).

Roth: That idea is even worse. Suppose Kay wakes up? Suppose Michael walks in while the drapes opener is still there? Since Kay will be sleeping, Michael probably won't turn the lights on and we won't even know he entered the room.

So after close analysis, the whole "Drapes Idea" stinks.

They had to have been opened when the room was empty, and even then, they had to depend on Michae entering first, or Kay and Michael entering together.

Altho Kay apparently failed to notice that they were open while getting indressed (and probably gave the shooters a free show), it's hard to believe that an old shrewdie like Roth depended on that happening.

And This....

Ola - In order to Kidnap Mike, we're going to have to do it in a way that insures that he has no body guards around, so our idea is to kidnap him from his bedroom.

Fredo- Thats no good Johnny, that's where his wife sleeps and their children come to play with their toys.

Ola - Well, Fredo, here's the deal .. you hang around and --- we're gonna leave this entirely up to you -- you can just go in there and open the drapes, and then hope no one notices and then when Mike comes into the room we grab him.

Fredo - Why don't you just unlock the window and then no one will notice. You wait till Kay goes to sleep then you grab Mike.

Ola - Freddie, let me do the thinking here. Look just open the drapes and...

Fredo - I dunno Johnny, are these the kind of drapes that have the string pulley things on the side or are they the kind you pull open from the middle? And do they have those sheer drapes under the heavy ones? Do I open them both?

You guys are TFF. Your pretend Roth, Ola, Fredo conversation only proves my point that Rocco was the person to take care of the hit scene. Left Wing...there's some holes around here; but not in my "theory."

Roth would not have told Rocco HOW to do the hit. That would have been Rocco's plan. Rocco could have varied his plans to kill Michael any way of his (Rocco's) choosing within the time frame of hit night. As I've said before, and your silly dialogs prove, one of Michael's bodyguards HAD to betray him for the plot to work at Michael's home.

Turnbull, I agree with you that it was part of Roth's plan to let Pentangeli be the fall guy. But Pentangeli was one of the plotters. Why did Michael give Pentangeli his "In my home..." speech? Also, when Tom met Pentangeli at the army base Tom said, "Frankie, when a plot against the emperor fails..." and Pentangeli did not deny that he was a plotter.

Who killed the shooters??? If you guys can't figure it out, oh well... That's just the beginning of the puzzle. And it isn't hard to figure out...it does require a little thinking...and you don't need to search for another script or say the movie is flawed because you don't understand it.

"Too fucking funny"?

Not trying to be....trying to point out how silly the idea is that the whole plot in general had to depend so much on the unknown factors involved in the opening of the drapes.

Hagen's comment to Pentangelli about the plot against the emperor referred to Frankie's plan to bring Michael down at the Senate hearings, not the assassination plot against him.

So, tell us....

What did Ola "lie" to Fredo about if not that it was going to be a hit?

Why did Michael act completely out of character and keep Rocco around if he knew Rocco was part of the plot?

How could Fredo been so sure that if he approached Rocco to join the plot Rocco would agree to? We are given one major clue that indicates that Fredo was an unhappy fella and had a possible tendency towards disloyalty - his little speech at the Michael-Moe Greene meeting - but where is it ever indicated that Rocco was anything less than 100% loyal to Michael? How did Fredo know that Rocco wouldn't turn around and tell Michael about the plot? That seems to me to be his more likely reaction.

If the success of the plot depended upon Rocco opening the drapes while Kay was asleep in the bedroom, why would the plotters assume that Kay would go in first and be asleep when Michael got there? And assume that Michael would turn the lights on?

("Where else was Rocco gonna go?" doesn't answer the question. Where else was Fredo, or Carlo, or Tessio gonna go, but Michael killed them).

If Michael knew it was Rocco and Roth from the beginning, why put himself directly in harm's way in a country where his enemy was in control by making the trip to Cuba and engaging in dealings with Roth?

Why did Roth need to involve Pentangelli in the plot at all?

If Pentangelli was working with Roth, why was he so stupid as to throw direct suspicion on himself by arguing with Michael the very night he knew that the hit was gonna go down?

And, if Pentangelli was working with Roth, that would mean that his whole feud with the Rosatos didn't really exist, so why the obvious personal animosity between Rosato and Pentangelli?


There are more questions -- I'll post them as I think of them.

Here's what we know absolutely for sure:

1) Roth was behind the plot
2) Fredo was in some way involved
3) Someone killed the assassins.

The problem is - as I've said - there is no character about who we can say with certainty "He killed the Tahoe assassins."

We know that someone killed them, but trying to determine who is simply theorizing.

Your theory, CD, is that Rocco did it, which I do not believe fits the facts as we know them, and which raises too many questions of its own.

My thoery is that I don't really have a theory that fits all the facts without being full of holes, and that's why I think that this particular unanswered question is a major flaw in the plot.

Well obviously you've mixed up the plots here. Tom is talking about Frankie's plot to testify against Michael. Not kill him. Frankie only "plotted" against Michael after he thought that Michael was behind the attempted hit on him that Roth engineered. But If you can figure that out, oh well.....

Now as to who killed the shooters, well if you really know that answer as you've implied, then why not educate us all here and indulge us with your brilliance in providing us with the answer to this question?


Don Cardi

The only possibility is that there was another member of the group of "shooters" who killed two of them and then somehow managed to get off of the compound. The other possibility is that Fredo did it.


When Michael is talking to Tom about this whole thing he implies that he has a theory about the whole thing because he says something like If what I think happened happened, then I have to leave tonight. Then he says that that he thinks that the shooters are dead already, and, "they're killed by someone close to us...inside....very very scared they botched it."

The very next scene is Deanna screaming that there are dead guys right outside her window. This suggests it could be Fredo, who in the conversation with Tom, Michael describes as "weak and stupid."

Another clue comes much later in Havana. By then Michael has confirmed the traitor was Fredo because Fredo made the slip about knowing Johnny Ola. Of course Mike set him up for that by asking him point blank if he knew Johnny, and Fredo lied and said he didnt.

In other words, I think Michael suspected Fredo from the beginning, but he had to be sure. What clinches this theiry is what Michael says to Fredo in the famous kiss of death scene. "I KNEW IT WAS YOU FREDO...."
Also,

The "Fredo killed the assassins" theory has only one flaw:

" Fredo killed the assassins"?

Besides, if you believe that then you have to believe that Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit, because he would have had to plan for killing the asassins.

Which brings us back to the age old questions :

"Who Killed The Asassins?

"Did Fredo know?"

Oh, I forgot, there is one new member here who knows the answer but hasn't posted it becuse he feels that But he knows!!!!!




Don Cardi

Exactly right Neal. If Fredo couldn't even shoot a hand gun to protect his father how is he gonna carry out an assasination on the shooters? Did he practice shooting a gun over the years?