Whose a better Don?

My vote goes to Vito. Not only was he a brilliant man, but he was always able to keep his wife, whereas Michael has a rough history with Kay, and they end up getting a divorce.

Altough Vito demonstrates his intelligence in a number of scenes throughout the movie, the scene that gives me the best, and clearest understanding of Vito's intelligence is when Michael and Vito are in the Courtyard discussing about their plans. Vito is the one that is credited for figuring out all about the traitor and this saves Michael's Life

I think Vito would be the "better" one simply because he was the one who started it. In terms of intelligence I believe that Michael learned everything from his father and not much of his knowledge was really figured out on his own (I know people can dispute that but I feel like the "main message" was from his father and he put it to use with little fragments of each teaching)


But in terms of just my opinion I liked Michael better he was just ruthless and was a business type of guy and didnt let anything get in the way

i would perfer vito because whilst he was involved in criminal affairs he was more of a family man that michael was..he was willing to help anyone and when he needed have them repay the favor and because of that he had alot of respect

This topic has been done many, many times.
IMO, Vito was the biggest fish in a relatively small pond: NYC Mafia in the pre- and immediate post-WWII era. He succeeded in controlling his pond. BUT: he lost his oldest son, and he failed to achieve his dream for his youngest son (to be a Senator or Governor).
If Vito fished a pond, Michael rode the ocean: he was the biggest gangster in America and possibly the world. But he failed to become totally legitimate ("just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in"); his surviving brother betrayed him, his wife left him, his son wouldn't follow Michael's plan for his life, and his beloved daughter was murdered before his eyes. Michael died alone, attended only by a little dog.
Who was a better Don? Neither succeeded in achieving the lifetime goals they set for themselves. Michael, especially, spent his life winning battles and losing wars.

Turnbull, so true...
Vito, having started it all, was the better of the two- he had nothing in life, having witnessed his entire family murdered... He created his empire from nothing. Michael had a priviledged life. VIto was calm, cool and ruthless - he was respected because he proved himself.. Michael's heart wasn't in it - "That's my father... not me" Would Vito have killed off the other 5 families? I mean, Michael got scared and killed everyone...which, I guess is smart if you don't know who will get you first.

Both were great....

Turnbull, remember that Don Vito Corleone was instrumental in killing the other five Families and Michael used his help once his father passed on.

Michael was the more ruthless, cold-blooded, and harder man. Vito still was sensitive and compassionate and relied on this as well as his other existing power structures to maintain his kingdom.

Michael could not trust anyone and believed (maybe rightly so) that everyone is a businessman...in this, if it became good or better for their business, then they would betray the Don and loyalty was not as important as with Vito. (Clemenza and Tessio were loyal, and would never go against Vito, but could go against Michael.)

What do you think?

I usually lean towards Vito,for 2 reasons
1 He started the whole empire.He came over with nothing and built a large and prosperous business(not getting ionto the methods he used....)and
2 He was able to keep his family together through it all. Something Michael was never able to do was keep his business out of his home life.His wife left him,and his children grew to resent,for lack of a better term,him.

I agree with Turnbull and would add that in the novel, it really goes into how Michael wanted no part of the Family business. At one point, he tells Kay that they'll get married (before Vito is shot) and that Michael will be a professor. In Part III, Michael tells Kay, "You have to understand. I had a whole different destiny planned."

i think vito was the better don, he just seemed much more wiser.

Hands down.. Id say VITO was the better Don..

Aside from the fact that these two men were operating in very different social climates, I would have to side with Michael. Vito may have drawn the blueprints, but Mike laid the brick. Michael took what he learned from his father and expanded to make it his own. In doing so, Mike was able to avoid Vito's mistakes and in essence evolve into a better and more powerful Don.

Come on Turnbull! Vito in a small pond? The five NY familes along with the Outfit in Chicago were, for all pratical purposes, "the" MAFIA in America and still are. The MAFIA of that period was in its heyday that would last up through the 70s. Don't you remember the wedding scene where Tom tells Vito about the judges and the Senator sending their apologies for not attending, but sending gifts? How about Vito's telling Tom to "give it to a Jew Congressman in another district, not to our paisan"?

They were different dons at different times and their worlds' operated differently. Neither achieved all they wanted, but Don Vito was a player on the national scene and sought to protect his family while Michael used his family. While Vito's soul was surely corrupted, fratracide lost Michael's soul for him.

IT HAS TO BE VITO.

From Sparknotes.com:

Vito Corleone

The Godfather trilogy presents Vito as the paradigmatic Mafia don. When placed beside him, Barzini lacks class, Don Ciccio looks cruel and petty, and Don Fanucci is smalltime and brutish. Even Michael, despite his tremendous successes, loses in such a comparison, as he appears lacking in warmth and joie de vivre. It is unclear whether we are to believe Sollozzo’s words about Vito, that “the old man [is] slipping,” but even if he is, even if Vito walks right into an assassin’s bullets and survives only though sheer luck, he is still the Godfather par excellence. He is wise and intelligent, an excellent reader of others’ intentions, and a smooth, subtle talker, able to convince with words, not only bullets. The most exceptional thing about Vito, and the way in which he most outshines his son, is the manner in which he conducts his personal life. Though a ruthless, violent criminal, Vito is also a warm, loving father and husband, and the paradox of his character is that it is precisely the warmth of his humanity that makes him appear superhuman. In his later years, Vito comes across as relaxed and playful, even mellow. He has lived a rich, full life and earned a quiet retirement. As a younger man, when he is played by Robert De Niro, he is caring and devoted but also silent and intense. Unlike Michael, he does not let this intensity eat away at him. There is never any tension for Vito between the two meanings of “family” (i.e. blood relations and crime family), and he doesn’t feel conflicted about what he’s doing. Only when he learns that Michael has killed Sollozzo is he noticeably pained. His intensity is that of a hard-working man, though one who still manages to come home at the end of the workday to spend time with his family. In short, Vito comes across as both the perfect father and the perfect Godfather, making him a difficult model for all of his children, especially Michael, to imitate.

Michael Corleone

Michael is cold-blooded, ruthless, smart, and determined. His ability to think clearly under fire, to be decisive, and to command respect makes him an excellent Godfather. Of Vito’s children, he is certainly the best candidate to take over the family. But Michael was never supposed to get involved in the Mafia. He was supposed to become a senator, perhaps even president. Even when he does begin working for his father, he doesn’t seem fully reconciled to the decision. He promises Kay before they marry that the family will become “legitimate” soon. Over twenty years later, in The Godfather Part III, he still seeks this legitimacy. Unlike Vito, who appears at ease in the role of Godfather, Michael is burdened by the responsibility. One senses that he views himself as a sacrificial hero, slaving away for the rest of the family, sacrificing his soul for the well-being of those around him. In many ways, Michael’s story is a familiar one in American mythology: that of the immigrant’s child. He achieves great heights of success, just as his hard-working immigrant parents hoped for him, but at considerable personal cost. In Michael’s case, this cost is to his family life, as he loses his wife and children.

Michael can also be seen as a classical tragic figure. Immensely talented and powerful, he is undone by tragic flaws: his insatiable desire for vengeance, which creates a web of violence and recrimination that he cannot escape; his illusions of omnipotence, which blind him to the fact that achieving legitimacy is impossible; and his sense of being perpetually at war, which never allows him a moment of rest. At the end of Part III, Michael dies alone in the yard of his Sicilian villa. The death of his daughter, Mary, has sealed his fate, severing his ties forever with the rest of the family, the family that he tried to save and bring to legitimacy. Instead, he brought them only pain and death. If Vito is an ideal, almost romantic figure who might make the naïve viewer want to live the gangster life, Michael’s tale has a corrective effect. His life is tragic and his pain immense.

I said relatively small pond, Olivant. I meant "small" relative to what Michael controlled and strived for. Sure, Vito was the top Mafia Don in New York in his era--and New York had the richest rackets. But other than his influence on the Hollywood unions, his writ didn't extend beyond New York City, where he was the biggest--but not the only--Don. Michael arranged for the murder of the other NYC Dons, leaving him in a far more powerful position than Vito held in New York. Michael extended the family's influence to Nevada by arranging for Moe Green's murder, then owned or controlled three Nevada casinos and was acquiring Klingman's interest in another. Michael was the heir-apparent to Roth's Cuban gaming empire. And he still controlled New York through Pentangeli. At the Senate hearing we learn that he "controls all the gambling in America." Even in GFIII, when he's supposedly totally legit, we learn from Vincent that he still controls the Commission and is taking over control of International Immobiliari.
Vito knew his limits and kept his appetite for power under control. Michael didn't. Vito was relatively more successful in what he tried to achieve, while Michael constantly won battles and lost wars.

I say Vito by a mile. Because while being a smart, savvy, wise, and intense mafia Don, he was still a very warm and loving person.

Your choice is evident from your name