An erudite member of these Boards PM’d me with two very interesting questions re. Roth and Michael:

First, what if Fredo hadn’t revealed his treason at the Superman show? Would Michael have gone ahead with whacking Roth, knowing that doing so would stop him from identifying the traitor?

In a word: Yes. Michael had been stringing Roth along with the $2 million to buy time so he could identify the traitor. But he had a deadline: he knew that Roth had arranged for him to be assassinated in a military car that would take him back to his hotel after the New Year’s Eve party in the Presidential palace. He had to act before that: as he told Fredo (before Fredo revealed himself): “Hyman Roth will never see the New Year.” Time was running out, so Fredo’s fatal gaffe at the Superman show was a fortuitous development for Michael. As we saw, he gave the order to his bodyguard as soon as he recovered from the shock of learning that Fredo was the traitor. Fortuitous circumstances are a Hollywood script mainstay—they keep the plot perking along and keep our attention glued to the screen. (For the record: the combination of Michael’s persistence and Fredo’s stupidity would have revealed Fredo’s treason sooner rather than later.)

Fortuitous script stuff aside, Michael was the one in mortal peril, and his survival had nothing to do with his arranging Roth’s disability or death. Roth wasn’t going to drive the military car or pull the trigger. He would have arranged Michael’s assassination with Batista or one of his top henchman days in advance. The assassins would have gotten their orders from their boss—not from Roth, who would make sure that his involvement was hidden from everyone except Batista and his top henchman. The assassins would be all over Michael like white on rice. It wouldn’t have mattered to them if Roth was at the party or not, or if he lived or died—all they knew was that they had orders from on high to “escort” Michael to his hotel and kill him before he got there. They’d never have let Michael leave the palace on his own and escape to his waiting private airplane.

So: the real fortuitous circumstance was Batista’s abdication. As soon as he announced that he was fleeing Cuba, the assassins forgot about Michael and started worrying about something far more important—their own survival.

Second, how did Michael know when and how Roth was planning to have him whacked? This is another of those fortuitous script developments. Michael probably got his invitation to the Presidential New Year’s Eve party from Batista or one of his top henchmen because he was a VIP--one of the business pezzanovanti who had met with Batista earlier. I’m guessing that the Batista henchman offered Michael military transportation as a VIP perk as well as for his "safety.” But since Michael knew that Roth was behind the Tahoe attack, he didn’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure that Roth lured him to Havana because, as the most powerful gringo, he could have Michael killed by his government pals. Therefore, Michael was looking for a government move against him—and the VIP perk for his "safety" was the tipoff.

So Mike was on a suicide mission? He shows up to the party knowing his escape is not possible?

Pretty close to it, Ice. But Michael had coglioni. He knew that neither he nor his family would be safe until he found out the traitor--and he had to take incredible risks to uncover him. Basically, his back was against the wall. I think the choice (in his mind) was: buy more time by tempting Roth with the $2 million and take my chances in Cuba--or face certain death in Tahoe if I can't identify (and stop) the traitor.

Well he sure hid his fear pretty well during the New Years party, etc. But he was a soldier and the risk of death was not new to him.

He must have been the biggest Castro fan in the free world after that night though.

A most excellent post Turnbull.

All these questions with their many many different interpretations could almost complete a Godfather 4.

Vincent asking Michael all the questions we see on these boards and Michael clearing them up once and for all. Like a Martin Bashir interview.

Love these boards. I`ve never had my imagination provoked so regularly.

Interesting post, Turnbull.

However, I feel it stretches credulity to claim that Michael, coglioni notwithstanding, went to the party without an escape plan. What good is finding out the traitor if he dies the same night?

A possible explanation:

You've mentioned on many times the theme of Michael and Roth underestimating each other. Perhaps Michael was counting on being underestimated. If Roth et al. assumed that Michael was unaware of their plan they would not see the need to keep too close an eye on Michael throughout the evening. In that case, it wouldn't be hard for Michael to slip away at some point.

Still, I think that Michael would have been far more cautious than to place his life in the hands of such an assumption. It would be far more in character for Michael to have a detailed escape plan.

While there's no indication of what that plan might be, misdirection of some sort makes the most sense. For instance, an explosion elsewhere in the building or an assassination attempt on Batista would certainly distract the soldiers and cause enough commotion for him to escape.

Yes, I agree, TLW: Logically, Michael should have had an escape plan. In fact, not even his one personal defense--his bodyguard--was there with him. His actions turned out the way they did because of those, uh, fortuitous circumstances that Hollywood manufactures.

Michael did have an escape plan. He had a car waiting for him at the Batista party and he had a plane waiting to take him to Miami. He asked Fredo to go with him. No way was he going to get in the car with the Batista Generals and get assassinated.
It is very clear he had this plan in place, and he probably told his bodyguard that if he didnt get there on time he was on his own (or maybe he didnt even tell his bodyguard). The proof that he had this plan is that at the moment, Castro was seizing power, and Batista was fleeing Cuba himself, and people were rushing to their boats to leave the island. Senator Geary, who had no plan whatsoever (except to bang that Red headed Cubana) was in a complete panic at the US Embassy, screaming that he had to be let in because he was a US Senator. Meanwhile, Michael had his car waiting, his plane waiting, and he got away quickly and without any trouble.

The real question is how did Fredo manage to get out of Cuba and to New York? It had to be someone with Roth who helped him. And how did Tom with his New York connections know that Fredo was there (while he didnt know Pentangeli was alive?)

When Michael told Fredo, "I'll be driven back to my hotel, for my safety," I inferred from the first person pronoun that Fredo wasn't going to be in the car, and was not a target for assassination. The last we saw of Fredo, he was running in the streets with all the other escaping gringos. I assume that he ran for the embassy and got out that way like everyone else.

As for Tom: I'm guessing that, when the Senator told Michael that "you may very well be subject to perjury," both Tom and Michael realized simultaneously that "perjury" could only mean that Frankie had survived. So Tom called his contacts with the NYC detectives to confirm. Why he didn't do that before Michael perjured himself five times is probably one of the reasons why Michael was hurtful to him in the penultimate boathouse scene.

Personally, my opinion about Michael killing Roth can only be identified by digging into his character. For example, the way I see it, A heroic character is one who is weaselly with no backbone---let's call that 'morally weak.' Does anyone deliberately act weak? If that was a no, then we'd have nothing but heroic characters and nobody to be a foil. In short, other kinds of story where twist is everything and character doesn't drive the story would mean that Michael would somehow gain that knowledge through the character developement. I do not believe this to be the case! the simple facts are that Michael is a rapacious character. This should tell you something about his grandstand! Michael would definitely still asphyxiate Roth in the upshot.

A very interesting post!

I was never convinced that Michael had plans of not surviving in Cuba and am not after reading some of the arguments here. Michael was like his father in always planning and thinking like his enemy thought. But I do agree that he assumed some tremendous risk away from the safety of the Tahoe compound. I also agree that Tahoe was no longer safe for Michael with a traitor in their midst.

Right after Fredo revealed himself to be the traitor in Havana, did Michael have a backup to his bodyguard? I cannot recall a backup. When Michael gives the bodyguard the order to kill Roth, Michael is left completely alone (as far as I can remember) in Havana. I know that he had a driver and plane ready for his departure, but it seemed as if Michael left himself open to being killed in Cuba on New Year's Eve.

I think that we all view most films in a 'rambo' type scenario where good guy always wins. We don't realize that this story of Puzos is like a myth. Like the myth that Homer tried to tell about this earth shattering war that sent echoes throughout the centuries. This La Cosa Nostra war is similiar to that great myth of Homers in that it is bloody and violent and knows no logic or conventional thought that we may take for granted. Mike's world is a world that no one knows about. A world where dying for 'your family' is not an option its the cold hard truth. Yes, Mike did know he was going to die. He made that decision when he took over for his pop. Thats why Vito was so upset I think, this war of their's leaves very few survivors. Mike was willing to die for his country, and willing to die for his family.

I'm telling ya, Turnbull has to be one of the world's elite on this topic. And it's hard to accept that Mike would have no escape plan, but.....the military police was following him the whole time and could have killed him at any point(as TB said).
For them to let him leave in his own private car that night as opposed to riding with the death squad would not be an option. That would have 'screwed up the arrangements' and I can't see Roth, etc, not planning for this and saying 'hey, dont let this guy leave the new years party alive.'

At the least it is very much a debate, and not to be set aside by our initial logic that thinks Mike has no problem escaping the new years party and havana alive.

TB is on to something folks!

Individualistically, my theorem on Michael’s hecatomb can exclusively be indubitable by unearthing his ethos. For exemplification, the way I percolate it, A stouthearted unit is an individual who is duplicitous with no intestinal fortitude - let's signal that “dispassionately languorous”. Does one Premeditately feign impuissance? If that were no-man’s land, then the inner circle would have a nullity of dauntless characters and zilch to be a counterblow. In short, other ilks of curriculum vitae where foible is aggregate and crasis does not shepherd the saga would adumbrate that Michael would anywise rake-off that cognition through the ethos augmentation. I do not fathom this to be the quandary! The turkey-shoot nitty-gritty are that Michael is an esurient singularity! This should divulge commodity about his pose! Michael would indubitably dust-off Roth in the denouement.

Sounds good to me.

What I'm wondering is why did this 'erudite member' PM the questions instead of introducing them on the BB. They obviously had the makings of a decent thread.

Apple

I have no idea. Apparently someone does not play well with others. Or perhaps they took Sen Geary's advice to deal w/ Turnbull.

Interesting.

I cannot think of a single member here who 'does not play well with others'.

Can you...???

Apple

Not me

Shutup.

Apple, what's that you said about the drapes?

Well said.