Could Michael have gone legit if he actually was invoked with drugs? Michael was strongly opposed to drugs and I believe that that’s what enabled him to be able to go legit in the eyes of the public and politicians. But what do you all think? Would it have mattered if he was involved with drug trafficking at all? He made a lot of his money through his various businesses that he legitimized. After taking most if not all of the rackets from the rest of the families after he took out the bosses, it’s safe to assume that he had a monopoly.

I've never bought into Michael's seeking legitimacy (as most people define it) or that society in New York or Nevada would have granted him any legitimacy. How could the people in those locations not know who he was?

In prior posts, I, TB, and others have extensively commented on how Vito and Michael defined legitimacy concluding that it was quite different from the way most people define it. Regardless, a high profile Mafioso is not going to be legitimized.

Any quest for "legitimacy" on Michael's part was partly fueled by a healthy dose of self-delusion. By he end of II, he is not just a generic Mob Boss,but I would say that he has become THE Mob Boss.Of course,Michael wasn't subject to the kind of modern Media scrutiny that we see now, but I would think that his history would have never been too far below the surface. To divest himself of that baggage would have been a major feat indeed. Even by the time III rolls around and Michael has presumably no involvement in anything unsavory,there is still that stigma. The Archbishop mentions the Corleone family history,and the man at the shareholder's meeting protests Michael's involvement.Had he pulled off the Immobillare deal,no matter how rich and powerful he became,he would still be Michael Corleone.

We're never told that Michael was opposed to drug trafficking--he wasn't part of the discussion Vito had with Solozzo. Of course he would never permit the Family, even under Clemenza and Pentangeli, to actively deal drugs. But, since Vito agreed that he would provide police/political protection for drug rackets, and charge a fee, it's hard for me to imagine that Michael would walk away from that source of income--and leverage over other families. I think he might have been more realistic than Vito, who thought he could stop drug trafficking by refusing to provide that protection. As long as his NYC operation was doing what Vito agreed to, and as long as they were kicking back money (including drug protection money) to Michael, he'd look the other way.

I agree completely with Oli and Lou about the broader question of "legitimacy"--Michael defined it on his terms, which both eluded and deluded him, ultimately destroyed him.

He told Zasa that he was against drugs.

I agree that Michael’s definition of legit is different than ours. But what do you think his definition would be then? Would it be him being able to make as much money and have as much power as he wants without criminal rackets?

Michael's definition of legitimacy was contained in this dialog from GF when he went to New Hampshire to woo Kay:
MICHAEL
I'm working for my father now, Kay. He's been sick -- very sick.
KAY
But you're not like him, Michael. I thought you weren't going to become a man like your
father. That's what you told me...
MICHAEL
My father's no different than any other powerful man --
(then, after Kay laughs)
-- Any man who's responsible for other people. Like a senator or a president.
KAY
You know how naive you sound?
MICHAEL
Why?
KAY
Senators and presidents don't have men killed...
MICHAEL
Oh -- who's being naïve, Kay?

In other words, if senators and presidents can have people killed and be considered "legitimate," so can Michael and Vito be considered "legitimate" when they have people killed. No different from other people with responsibilities for other people...

My two cents worth!

No doubt it is well known, no secret Michael is a Mafia Don

GF III reporters were still asking even after he had achieved the semblance of legitimacy with being the largest single shareholder of Immobiliare
"What about Mr. Corleone’s connections with Las Vegas gambling? What about his involvements with the underworld?"

Michael's "legitimate" front was the Elephant in the room

I reckon people were not treating him as crime boss to his face and going along with his "legitimate" front

He sat with all those business people at Batista's meeting and Roth's birthday party like he was no different, was one of them
Senators were associating with him, Anthony's first Communion party at his home, Superman club and the Presidential palace New Year reception

I think that’s a really smart way to look at it Evita and TB. Do they ever make it clear just how much of the gambling in Las Vegas michael controls?

Well put Evita I too believe Michael had “achieved the semblance of legitimacy”

Michael may have defined "legitimacy" on his terms but it does not seem to me the "legitimacy" eluded and deluded him, ultimately destroyed him”

I believe what destroyed Michael was not having a wife like Camela
If Michael's wife Kay was like Vito's wife Carmela, Michael too would have had it all!

Was it ever Vito’s dream to become “legitimate” like Michael?

Could Michael be compared to what Semion Mogilevich is in real life? Mogilevich is “legitimate” even though he most certainly is not and he has never done any prison time. He still lives freely and is supposedly worth billions.

This is also an important question. Would it be possible at all for a mob boss like Michael to reach the level of wealth and pseudo legitimacy in America like he did in Godfather 3?

No. Vito's hope for Michael's legitimacy ("Senator Corleone...Governor Corleone...") was based on Michael's prospects before the Sol-and-Mac shootings. He would have been a college grad, possibly a lawyer, with no criminal record or Mafia notoriety. Some here have compared Michael to JFK, in that JFK's father's notoriety didn't hinder his political career, while his father's money and influence were major assets in JFK's campaigns. But Vito was uneducated, probably not even officially a US citizen, and was identified as a major Mob boss. Didn't matter to Vito: he derived his legitimacy through his position as "justice dispenser" to his fellow Sicilian immigrants.

Yes. Moe Dalitz, a major Prohibition-era gangster who was head of Cleveland's Mayfield Road rum-running gang (the "Lakeville Road boys" in GFII), started going legit in the laundry business, won commendations as a laundry officer in the Army in WWII, then moved to Vegas in '47, where he built the Desert Inn, the Stardust and the Sundance hotel-casinos; financed and ran the re-election campaign of Sen. Pat McCarren (Senator Geary in GFII), Sunrise Hospital, the Las Vegas Country Club and the Las Vegas Convention Center. Dalitz, not Wayne Newton or Liberace, was known as "Mr. Las Vegas." Dalitz was named Humanitarian of the Year by the American Cancer Research Center and Hospital in 1976. In 1982 he received the Torch of Liberty Award by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith.

I wish they went deeper in Godfather 3 into how Michael made his billions so quickly. He was giving away hundreds of millions like candy LOL. Even though Vito did not want the mafia life for Michael, it seems like he was proud of how he was running the business. And I think Vito felt all along that Michael was the best choice to be his heir because he could take the family business to a level that his other sons could not. And that is exactly what Michael did. But even with all of the money and power that Michael had as Don, he never commanded the same respect that his father had. I truly believe that he is chasing that throughout the trilogy. Just look at how Senator Geary speaks to him at the beginning of the movie compared to how the people speak to Vito at the beginning of Godfather 1.

My take, for what it is worth!

Both Vito and Michael were evil murderous monsters Times were changing

As Turnbull posted Vito was the "justice dispenser" to his fellow Sicilian immigrants“ - even then Bonasera insulted Vito by offering Vito money

A tale of two Pats......Geary and Webb.
Extract:
Michael was dealing with [sophisticated 'top end'] entitled public office / business people eg: Senators who 'owned' the state and had the 'right' to lord it over any "newcomers."

Michael outsmarted all of them.

Biggest hypocrite Michael's horror, destroyer

Can you expand Capri?

Kay was part of the same hypocrisy the business she had chosen Biggest hypocrite
She had the choice not to marry into murderous crime family

She knew when marrying he was Mafia Happily enjoyed all the spoils of unholy and evil

Carmela would never have done to Vito, what Kay did to Michael One word abortion Say no more!

Looking at this thread again, with a broader view:

Could Michael ever have been legitimate? Or was he destined--by fate, by birth or by choice--to be a gangster? I've always contented that Michael had choices at every stage of his life, and always chose the gangster way.

I don't think Kay had any clue what she was getting into when she married into the family. She had very limited exposure to them before marrying Michael, that we know of. We were only shown her presence at Connie's wedding, and then the one trip out to the mall when Michael was in Sicily.

The next thing she knows, the guy comes back and says that his father's way of doing things is over, that he's going to take the family legitimate in five years, blah, blah, blah. Also, what would she know about organized crime? She was a WASP from New Hampshire. She knew nothing, except that it was different and dangerous and sort of exciting.

I think KAY was betrayed. Michael sold her a bill of goods, I don't think he truly loved her any longer. That died with Apollonia, However, he loved that WASP legitimacy that Kay brought to the marriage, that good old-fashioned thing that you can't buy.; And he promised her that he was a different man than his father, that he was going to change the business, move the family out of NY, to that nice clean air, and make his money as a legitimate man who owned shares of hotels and stock in AT&T. But he lied.

So, I think that Kay miscarried (abortions were incredibly difficult to come by, especially for someone watched over as closely as Kay), and told him the two things he could never forgive - that it was an abortion and, worse, that it had been a son. She was hurt, and she wanted to hurt him back in the worst way. Just remember the look she gave him the night of Anthony's communion party after the shooting. IMO, that was the end of their marriage.

I think both TB and Babe pretty much say it all.

Michael made a choice to pursue his brand of legitimacy through lies and murder.

From his conniving words to convince Kay to marry him, one sentence stands out: "I need you." He needed [used] everyone.

Yes. Moreover, I don't think that there's anything, in either the book or movie, that hints that Michael thought that there was anything wrong about gangsterism. It was old-fashioned or inefficient, but not wrong - or at least not any more wrong than politics or business.



I think the exchange where Michael tells Kay about his father and the bandleader is a seduction scene, Michael pausing every so often for Kay to ask for more, and Kay asking for more each time. I don't think that she wanted to know all the details, but I do think that it was a turn-on for her to be connected to that life.

My two cents worth!

Michael and Kay, sentiments aside....

I reckon Michael's choices were thrust upon him

She was exposed to the gun to the band leader's head, his brains or his signature

I reckon she had an idea what she was getting into, might not have been the full extent, she knew they were crime family, about the killings and he has become like his father when she married him but deluded herself or was a turn-on for her to be connected to that different and dangerous and sort of exciting life.

He deluded himself believing he can make the family legitimate in five years

She never understood nor supportive that he was a top Mafia boss, trying to become a "legitimate" businessman

Once Michael took over, it was not easy just to walk away He was a powerful man with responsibility for others

They became each other's horror but I don't think he lied to her because I reckon he, himself believed in the bill of goods he was selling Both were unrealistic in their expectations

Yes he did--he owned stock in ITT, not AT&T(my former employer, AT&T, would never have let a gangster like him own shares.


Though abortion wasn't legal until after Roe v. Wade in 1973, most women or girls with a few hundred bucks could have gotten an abortion, and from a medical professional in a sanitary setting. But, I agree that Kay's confinement to the compound would have made it difficult. Even more difficult: what Dr. in his right mind would perform an abortion on the wife of Michael Corleone? So, I think miscarriage, with lies about abortion to hurt Michael, is more probable. Also, amnneocentesis was unknown in the US in 1958--how could she have known (at three months, per Tom) that it was a boy? She said it to hurt him.


Yes, indeed. It was all over, right there and then. If looks could kill...

My take, for what it is worth!

Kay knew Michael had gone from “That's my family Kay It's not me” to It is me when they married and was happy to enjoy the spoils of the unholy and evil Sicilian thing for five years, the original time frame for “legitimacy” and another two years [and another....] until the Tahoe shooting, then learning at the Senate hearing that Michael had personally murdered in addition to ordering murders

Michael's “choices at every stage of his life” was catch-22 and in a way “thrust upon him” and 'forced' to “choose the gangster way” under the circumstances

among others -

• Michael murdering Sollozzo and McCluskey to protect Vito We saw Michael's mental anguish on his return from the bathroom with the gun
• Vito got Michael to re-establish the Corleones' glory, standing, reputation etc. to do all the dirty work, thus leaving a murderous legacy for “I never wanted this for you” son Thanks! Pop
• Michael initially underestimating Roth until the Tahoe shooting

Michael must have thought that gangsterism was wrong Hence he wanted to have nothing to do with their family business
Though later Michael conveniently deluded and justified gangsterism was “not wrong - or at least not any more wrong than politics or business”

Once a common Mafia hood always an evil murderous monster indeed However

Aptly put! – Extracts:

What would Kay have done?

I believe Michael was against the use, possession and trade of drugs. He understood the amount of distrust and backstabbing within the world of drugs. He also disliked the race-mixing (similar to Joe Bonanno) because it broke down the tradition and the rules of the secret society.

If his plan was to stop the drug trade he would ultimately fail.

But this is The Godfather , he could of opened a fish shop the next day if Coppola wanted.