Do you think that Mike would have had Roth killed eventually even if he wasn't behind trying to kill Mike?

I think that, before the shooting, Roth really had Michael conned into thinking that Michael could take over Roth's empire without violence--and that Roth would simply fade away to a retirement of playing shuffleboard and pinochle with all the other Florida geezers.

Yeah when Ola tells Michael "our friend in Miami will go along with.." - Michael looks like he believes it... but what was really going on in his head?

He just believed it because he wanted to believe it. He gave Johnny a fervently grateful look, clasped his knee and said, "You tell him that's greatly appreciated"--a rare show of emotion for Michael.

Yeah I think you nailed it... "he wanted to believe it"... just like he wanted to believe Fredo wasnt involved... only hearing Fredo blab at party could he no longer "want to believe"

Look, these guys are constantly maneuvering. Like he told Roth, he didn't want anything interfering with their deal. Roth had something Michael wanted and Michael was willing to do what he had to do to get it even if it meant lying to Roth. Obviously, plenty of gangsters do peaceful beusiness with each other to their mutual benefit. But if the other guy becomes expendable, then he is expended.

"Rumbo... what mean expendabul" LOL

I dont know about this TB. In the scene before the hit, Pentangeli chides Michael about giving his loyalty to a Jew over his own blood. Micke replies that Frankie knows that Vito did business with Hyman Roth, and Frankie says that Vito did business with Roth, respected Roth but NEVER TRUSTED Roth.
If this is so that would have been something Vito passed along to Michael during the time he was training him to be Godfather.
Michael also had to know that the Rosato Brothers who were working for Roth were giving Frankie a hard time, but because he was looking at the big picture -- Havana -- he didnt want Frankie to make trouble. After the hit, Michael makes the snide comment that Roth has been "dying of the same heart attack" for years, which is further evidence that he was always suspect of him. This all leads me to believe that Michael never fully trusted Roth either, and when the hit came he knew right away it was Roth who tried to do it.

Logic is on your side, dt, but logic often falls by the wayside when greed (or lust) enters the picture.
Michael was greedy--obsessed--with attaining legitimacy. Roth was the biggest player in casino gambling in the only places where it was legal at that time. When Roth told Michael that he could move Klingman out of the Tropigala, and become heir-apparent to Roth's Havana empire, I'm betting Michael let his distrust of Roth slip in favor of believing that the old man was just getting older, more tired, ready to step aside. Besides, Roth had no organization--just Johnny Ola.
As soon as the smoke cleared after the Tahoe shooting, Michael knew it was Roth. But before that, I fear to say, he was slippin'.

I know Roth gave Michael the ok to move Klingman out, but I don't recall any mention of his being the heir apparent until Roth's announcement in Havana. As it was Michael had to contribute 2 million to the enterprise, so if 2 million is "just finance," te salute' Michael.

As for who was "slippin'" I'd say it was the guy who almost didnt notice the drapes were open in time to hit the floor. BTW notice how he moves across the floor under fire...shows what good military training he had.... he didnt win the Navy Cross for nothing.

I hear what you are saying.... its very hard to believe that Don Michael Corleone would have "slipped" like that... I think it was strictly FFC/Puzo writing it that way. Michael was to "on the mark" with just about everything to let that be the case IMO.

Expendable means someone or something that you can get rid of, that you don't need anymore.

I think Michael knew what he was doing all along.

Its a line from Rambo pt2

I wanna say that he did too... but... what was his plan if there no assassination attept(s) on his life of senate hearing...

Let Hyman live his life out?
Or eventually "suffocate" Hyman so it looked like he died naturally...
Or of that 30 year old heart attack?

Watch Rocco as he walks to the dock to greet Johnny Ola -- he is clearly limping.

The limp is one of the reasons why I think his assignment to the Roth assassination in the airport was the same kind of deal given to Pentangelli in the "We was like the Roman Empire" scene. The Roth assassination in the airport is a suicide mission, all the more so because the assassin has a limp and therefore has zero chance of getting away. Michael knew that Rocco was one of the traitors, but "kept him close" until the time was right to knock him off.

Rocco was NOT sent to kill Roth because he was a traitor. Rocco took that mission because, as Turnbull has said many times, he was looking to get as close to Michael as Neri had been.

There is absolutely NO WAY that Michael would have kept Rocco around that long knowing that he was one of the traitors. No way.

And if your theory about Michael keeping Rocco close until the time was right had any merit to it, than Michael would never have let Rocco in on so many of the meetings that he had that contained such crucial information.

The only reason that Fredo was kept around until the time was right was because Michael did not want to have his mother go through losing another son. Otherwise if Mama had already been gone when Michael found out that Fredo betrayed him, Fredo wouldn't have ever even made it out of the boat house alive.

If Mama Corleone was already gone, Fredo may not have made it out of Cuba alive.

No way Michael viewed Rocco as a traitor. He never would have kept him around so long. Once Fredo gave it all up in his boat house "confession" there would be no reason for Michael to keep Rocco alive, if he suspected him.

Thanks for the reply. I'm still not convinced, though:

1) I can see why Rocco would want to get as close to Mike as Neri, but if he thought the Roth assassination in the airport was the way to do it, he must have had closeness in the afterlife in mind. Surely Rocco must have known that there was no way that he would ever escape from the airport. He would either be shot dead, as he was, or taken into custody "by half the FBI." If it was known in advance that there was no chance of returning to his normal duties in the Corleone Family after shooting Roth -- being dead, or in prison for Murder 1 -- then how could this be an attempt to get closer to Mike? This is the key part of my argument, that it was known in advance that whoever was to shoot Roth was never coming home -- it was a Jack Ruby type assassination, and known in advance to be such.

2) Which crucial meetings are you referring to? If my memory serves me, these are the only meetings that follow the attempt to assassinate Michael:

-when Michael returns from Havana, he sends Neri and Rocco outside so he can speak to Tom alone.

-There is the brief exchange which precedes Michael's discussion with Fredo in the boathouse, and there nothing you wouldn't want a traitor to hear is let out. In fact Rocco wasn't even present for this conversation: he was with Fredo, and then leaves when Michael comes to speak with his brother.

-Edit: Rocco is handing Michael forms to sign in the Hotel after the Senate hearings.

-Finally, there is the meeting where Michael announces that Roth is to be killed at the airport -- "Difficult, not impossible."

Edit: Maybe I give more weight to symbolism than is warranted, but the fact that Rocco is wearing an orange jacket at the beginning of the film, and that he is the one who hands Michael the "orange from Miami," seems to me to be indirect evidence of at least something.

Valid polints 90Caliber. At least you back up your opinions with fact from the movie.

Do you believe that if Michael would have suspected Rocco as being the traitor who almost had him killed, where his wife slept, where his children played with their toys, that he would have kept him on the compound, where his wife lived, where his children played with their toys, for so long?

Would Michael have let Rocco sit in on a meeting where they were planning how to get to Roth?

I just don't believe that he would have. Michael trusted no one after the hit attempt. He even tells this to Tom. So there is absolutey no way, as far as I'm concerned, that Michael would have let Rocco live had he suspected him, let alone give him free reign around the compound.

Good points, but I think there is a way to account for these concerns:

1) After the assassination attempt on Michael, he immediately left for Miami. Thus having Rocco on the compound posed no threat to Kay and the kids, since they are civilians, and it's Michael they were after.

2) It's important to note that Michael was not immediately certain who the traitor was. As far as he was concerned, it could have been Rocco or Neri -- as he tells Tom, both are "businessmen," with "their loyalty based on that." To put it a different way, I think your point #1 is invalidated by the fact that Michael knows right after the assassination attempt that there is a traitor in his Family, but he still leaves for Miami and Cuba knowing that the traitor, whoever it is, will be on the compound "where his wife sleeps" and "where his children play with their toys." But again, this is not a problem for him while he is away, because his wife and children are "civilians" whom Roth has no interest in killing.

3) When Michael gets back from Cuba, he is knee deep in the Senate Committee hearings. It seemed then that he was going to end up in prison for a long time, and the fact that the whole proceedings were being viewed by 50 million Americans made it problematic to have him killed at this time. If he were assassinated while he was such a highly visible figure, there would have been a lot of pressure to find out who it was, which would put Roth at great risk. Roth already failed to kill him once, so why not just wait for what to all appearances was the likelihood that Michael would be indicted and imprisoned?

4) But Roth had problems of his own. After Michael gets off the hook with the Senate, we learn that Roth and the Rosatos "are on the run." At this point Michael doesn't have to worry about someone helping Roth to kill him. Michael is now back on top, and a "businessman" would be loyal to him, not to Roth, who can't even bribe corrupt politicians to let him find a permanent residence, let alone conduct his business.

I think my points 1), 2), and 4) are the strongest. 3) still needs some work, I think.

I think that your points are excellent.

However



Why then did Michael have Rocco meet him at the motel upon his return from Cuba?

If Michael suspected Rocco, what grounds did he have to suspect him and at what point did he become pretty certain that it was Rocco?

These are good questions, and I've formed some conjectures as to the answers.

Regarding [1]: Michael went to Cuba largely to try to discover who the traitor in his family was. But when he learned that Fredo was involved, this was for him somewhat disappointing, not only because Fredo is his brother, but also, and more importantly, because he must have surmised that Fredo could not have been the only traitor -- surely he didn't slit those assassins' throats. (As a side note, I think Michael is being honest when he says to Tom that Fredo didn't realize that Roth misled him, and that he shouldn't be afraid to come back to Nevada. In my view, it's only after Fredo says in the boathouse conversation that he helped Roth because he thought "there was something in it for him" that Michael decides that Fredo must be killed. To be duped is one thing, but to be duped as a consequence of selfishly trying to partially "break off" from the Family and have some action on one's own -- that's quite another, and deserving of the penalty dealt to traitors). So when Michael returns from Cuba, he still has some detective work to do -- who else in his family was involved? To make this discovery he must use the same technique he used earlier: Michael utters the famous "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" remark to Pentangelli because he says this is how he'll be able to find out who the traitor in his family is. Since the Cuba trip yielded only a partial answer, he needs to employ this tactic again to find out who the other traitor was. This, I think, explains why Rocco is still treated as though it's business as usual.

Regarding [2]: This one is far tougher to answer, but I think a reasonable conjecture can be made. I believe that Michael suspected it was most likely to be Rocco at some point before the "difficult, not impossible" conversation. Sometime after that conversation, I believe Michael "tested" both Neri and Rocco -- some kind of conversational ruse, similar to what he does after the failed Tahoe hit, i.e. he goes to the two possible suspects, Roth and Pentangelli; he is almost certain it's Roth, but he still rips into poor Frankie like a lightening bolt ("IN MY HOME!") as if Pentangelli was behind the hit -- a little trick just to verify that he is right about Roth. So I think some kind of ruse like this was used on both Neri and Rocco. I also believe that Michael thought, in advance of using this ruse, that Rocco was the more likely suspect because Rocco was in charge of compound security, and he had far more opportunity than Neri did to point Michael's bedroom out to the assassins. Also, I come back to the audience's point of view (as distinguished from Michael's): Rocco hands Michael the "orange from Miami," he's wearing an orange jacket during the assassination attempt sequence; and the movie begins with him kissing Michael's hand. [edit/deleted an error].

Another point is that after Michael learns that the attempt to kill Roth failed, he knows he has to figure out a way to try again. Since Roth will be impossible to kill unless a suicide assassin does it, Michael holds off on confronting the suspected traitor with the same type of "suicide deal" he offered Pentangelli until he has an opportunity to kill Roth -- i.e. when Roth returns to the US. This way Michael gets rid of his traitor and Roth in "one stroke," as Machiavelli would say.

Excellent thought process here my friend, but I'm sorry, I'm not convinced. There are just too many holes in your theory.

90:

Why do you think Michael went to Cuba to discover who was the traitor? He was already ready to go to Cuba onthe night of hte assassination attempt. What i the world wouold he learn in Cuba. He went to Cuba to participate in the deal that he had arranged with Roth.

Rocco was in charge of compound security? Where did you get that from? Rocco didn't have to volunteeer to kill Roth. There's nothing to indicate otherwise.

Some of your reasoning reflects that of Board members about whether Tony Soprano is dead or not. In both cases, there's noting there on which to base a conclusion.

Michael, the old manipulator, gave Rocco no choice. Put yourself in his shoes:

--In the boathouse, Neri reclines in the chair and leads the discussion on Roth. Rocco stands guard, like the security guard he's become (when he's not a waiter, feeding Johnny Ola's men).
--After Michael brutally humiliated Tom about his job offer and mistress (watch Neri smirk; he was obviously the source of that info), he then says he wants Roth's plane met.
--Tom, true to form, falls right back into character: "Impossible...like assassinating the President." Sets stage for another humiliation: "Y'know, Tom, you surprise me...if there's one thing that's certain...it's that you can kill anyone."
--And then Michael turns and says, "Rocco?" He doesn't say, "Al?" He says, "Rocco?"

Now, what's Rocco going to say? "Uh, Mike, uh, I agree with Tom: impossible"?? After Tom was humiliated giving the "impossible" answer? Not a chance! Michael gave him no options.

All true, except for the inference which you (and Olivant) seem to make from Rocco's reply: you believe that he is volunteering for the actual hit when he says "Difficult, not impossible." This is a mistake, if that's what you mean. The question was whether Roth could be killed, not who was going to kill him. As far as Rocco was concerned, Neri or someone else could get the actual assignment for the hit. And note that that casual expression on Rocco's face would have vanished very quickly if Mike had then said, "Good. You're going to dress up like a reporter, and when Roth is stopped by the press and half the FBI, you're going to pretend to take notes, and then shoot him. Alright?" Gulp!

These are the key questions: Was it known in advance that whoever was to kill Roth was without any doubt going to be shot or thrown in jail? If yes, what kind of circumstances/predicament/frame of mind must someone be in in order to be recruited for such a job?

By the way, is there no significance to be attached to the business about Rocco handing Mike the orange from Miami, and the fact that he's wearing an orange jacket during the opening/assassination sequence? When Ola wears an orange suit, when Carlo wears an orange shirt and pants, when Tessio grabs an orange and flips it up in the air, when Vito is surrounded by oranges when he's shot, everyone notes the obvious symbolic significance of oranges. What about the example I raise here?

Every great film or novel will require a greater or lesser degree of inference making. If everything to know about the plot were placed right in front of our eyes, this Board would not exist, and the movie would be pretty boring.

I am not intending to disrepsect your opinions about this, but am sincerely trying to understand your thought process.

You say that that Rocco was sent on this Roth hit and took it as a form of self redemption, similar to Pentangeli, and that it WAS a suicide mission.

Then a few posts later you ask if Rocco had known in advance that he was going on a suicide mission, what kind of frame of mind would he be in going on this mission.

So which is it?

Did Rocco take this assignment as a way of going out with honor for betraying Michael, just as Pentangeli did?

Or

Was Rocco sent on this mission unaware that he would be killed? Unaware that Michael was setting him up for betraying him?

Okay, so Mike knows that Rocco betrayed him. No problem Rocco. I'll figure out some way to get back at you. But in the meantime, you can walk around me freely with a gun and you are free to continue to plot with Roth against me. I've got time. It's in the attenpted assassination manual: once a person fails in their attempt to assassinate someone, they never try it again for quite awhile.

Please don't respond with that stuff about "keeping your enemies closer." Closer for what? Rocco commnads a regime; he's got plenty of guns at his disposal. He can move against Mike at any time. So Mike's going to let him roam, right, on the assumption that Roth might in the future end up walking through an airport and Rocco might volunteer to kill him. Madonne!? I don't think so.