"Let's face it, Tom, and all due respect, the Don, rest in peace, was -- slippin'. Ten years ago could I have gotten to him?"

Could I have gotten to him? To me, this is one of the more enigmatic lines in the movie. Is Sollozzo simply referring to the actual hit? Implying that the Don was "slippin'" because he was less conscious about his personal safety and the hit was so easy?

Or was he referring to the Don's willingness to meet with Sollozzo face-to-face even though it appeared that (in both the novel and the movie) the Don had already decided to say no to the proposition? Could I have gotten to him? Could a Virgil Sollozzo even get a meeting with a Don Corleone ten years ago? Perhaps Sollozzo was implying that a younger, more perceptive Don Vito might have even found a way to prevent Sollozzo from rising up as high as he had in the rackets as a result of his successful drug business.

I'm fairly certain it refers to the first...that a younger Don Corleone might not have engaged in the simple pleasure of shopping for produce; that a younger Don Corleone might have a small entourage and not just a one-man security detail; that a younger Don Corleone would not have taken the peace, and his own personal safety, for granted. None-the-less, every time I hear Sollozzo say those words -- Could I have gotten to him? -- I wonder if it had more than one implication.

tony b.

I think Sollozzo was referring to the actual hit. But I can see your argument for having the meeting proposal on drugs. I tend to believe it was more about the actual hit - I think Sollozzo was basically saying that the hit was relatively easy and that the Don would not have been so careless with his security. As we all see in the movie, Fredo provided absolutely no protection, as evidenced with his bumbling of the gun. In the novel, Sollozzo tells Tom that Fredo could have easily been killed too, but Sollozzo didn't want any more hard feelings than necessary. I believe he said "Fredo is alive because of me" and that the gunmen had 'strict orders' not to kill Fredo.

Your theory is certainly possible, YTB, but I think that had MP/FFC wanted that implied as well, they might have thrown in an additonal bit of dialogue to that effect.

Something like

"Let's face it, Tom, and all due respect, the Don, rest in peace, was -- slippin'. Ten years ago could I have gotten to him? Would he have even met with me ten years ago?"

I have to agree that "slippin" referred to the actual hit and the fact that Paulie's recent "sick-days" had not raised any alarms.

I'll go with the reference to the 'hit'. When Tom asks Vito about meeting with Sollozzo, you can see the look on Vito's face and his tone indicating that he wants to size up Sollozzo (keep your friends close, but your enemies closer). Vito probably was viewing Sollozzo as a potential enemy.

Vito may have been slippin' with respect to having his guard down on the hit. But, there had been a long period of peace and possibly Vito was a little complacent or "slippin'".

Thoughtful question, Tony--and one that I think hasn't been asked before!
I think both your theories are possible. The personal safety issue is clear. And, as you and others point out, why would the Don agree to meet with Sollozzo if he had no intention of agreeing to his proposition? Doing so precipitated Sonny's blunder, which exposed "a ch*nk in the Don's armor," as Puzo put it in the novel.
I'll add one other possible explanation: Sollozzo was trying to put Michael on the defensive. He started their meeting by saying, "This is terrible--it's not the way I wanted it at all." What did he want? For the Don to be killed instead of wounded? Then he adds that "...the Don was slippin'...ten years ago, could I have gotten to him?" Meaning: "It was your father's fault that he got shot--he shoulda been more careful." Add to that, "I hope you're not a hothead like your brother--you can't do business with him." All of this suggests Sollozzo trying to somehow overwhelm Michael and make him believe that the Corleones were to blame for the crisis.

Sollozzo was referring to the hit, and how he believed the Don was slipping in his old age. In his prime, at the height of his power, nobody would have even gotten close to Vito. The Don's security detail would have been impenetrable, especially since he was shot before as a younger man.

That's an interesing theory.

I had always interpreted this line differently than you.

I had thought that Sollozo was saying that 10 years ago the Don would have taken the deal that Sollozo was offering.

"Gotten to him" in my mind meant that Sollozo was saying "I could have persuaded him to take this good deal 10 years ago". But now the Don is too old and cautious and risk-averse to something as brash as what Sollozo is offering to the Corleone Family. The "slipping" line meant that the Don was no longer aggressive enough to try new "business" opportunities and therefore Sollozo could not "get to him."

But I think your theory is probably better.

Ive always taken it as a referance to the hit, but your other theory is possible too.I always thought it ment he wasnt always employing the best people(or putting them in the right places) or wasnt taking the best deals anymore,wasnt thinking of the future.

MaryCas...I never really noticed Vito's reaction when Tom says, "Virgil Sollozzo called. Now we're gonna have to give him a day sometime next week." I'll have to watch more closely next time.

I'm now convinced there is more meaning to "Could I have gotten to him" because of the circumstances surrounding this meeting.

Neither the novel nor the movie indicate who was initially approached in the Corleone family about meeting Sollozzo. I guess the implication is that the request eventually made its way to Tom's desk. To grant this appointment Tom had to know Sollozzo and his agenda. There's no way Sollozzo should get a meeting WITHOUT being vetted. If that happened, shame on Tom. Furthermore, Tom must have simply assumed Vito would agree to the deal. I can't believe he grants this appointment if he believes there is any chance Vito would say no. Tom's consent to the appointment was presumptuous and a perfect example of putting personal feelings ahead of business because HE wanted this deal.

If Vito consents to see Sollozzo because Sollozzo is a "serious man to be treated with respect" surely it should be to give his APPROVAL to this partnership. Saying no outright to Sollozzo would be perceived as disrespectful by the Corleone family and personally embarrassing to Sollozzo. And that's exactly what happened. "A refusal is not the act of a friend." Consigliere Tom Hagan of all people should have anticipated this.

After the meeting, Vito's admonishment to "never let anyone outside the family know what your thinking" should have been directed at Tom as well. Granting the appointment led Sollozzo to believe he had a deal. He said as much when he took Tom for a ride after the attempted hit on Vito. "Sonny was hot for my deal, wasn't he? And you knew it was the right thing to do." Nobody counted on the Don's ultimate "no" vote.

"Ten years ago could I have gotten to him?" NO! Ten years ago, consigliere Genco would have shut this down without ever letting a Sollozzo even get close to Vito. Genco would have understood the strategic importance of saying an absolute NO further down the ladder and only allowing Vito to say YES to something the family could support with absolute control. Genco saying no is not the same as Vito saying no. If Tom says no, it forces Sollozzo back to Tattaglia/Barzini, and now someone higher-up would have reach out to Tom or Sonny or Vito and that should tip-off someone that this is an important issue that needs closer scrutiny and could have serious impact on the family. Regardless, he never "would have gotten to him."

tony b.