Your tone is insulting and patronizing. We've treated you with courtesy and respect. In case you haven't noticed, the level of civility that we maintain on these boards is a lot higher than is usual for the Web. Try showing us a little courtesy and respect in turn.

Turnbull, I agree with you that it was part of Roth's plan to let Pentangeli be the fall guy. But Pentangeli was one of the plotters. Why did Michael give Pentangeli his "In my home..." speech? Also, when Tom met Pentangeli at the army base Tom said, "Frankie, when a plot against the emperor fails..." and Pentangeli did not deny that he was a plotter.

Remember what followed the "In my home..." speech? It was Michael's acknowledgment that Roth was behind the Tahoe attempt--and his request for Frankie to "help me take my revenge." Michael's "outburst" at Frankie was a brilliant ploy to make Frankie feel grateful that Michael didn't suspect him in the Tahoe shooting. Frankie practically passed out with relief when Michael said, "It was Roth..." So he said, "Michael, anything..." --and the "anything" was to get Frankie to do what he didn't want to do: settle his problems with the Rosatos. He played Frankie like a violin, getting him to take a serious risk in meeting with the Rosato brothers. Michael couldn't lose: if Frankie settled with the Rosatos, it was one less worry for him. If the Rosatos tried to kill him, it'd be one more confirmation that Roth was behind the Tahoe plot.

The "plot" referred to in Frankie's dialog with Tom on the Air Force base was Frankie's decision to fall in with the Senate committee and rat out Michael. It had nothing to do with Roth and the Tahoe shooting.

Well it wasn't Deanna!
Hey.. its as plausible as the theiry that Rocco was the mastermind. They could have told the assassins to go to Fredo's house where he would let them in, and then they could have told Fredo he should kill them because with Michael kidnapped by others he would appear to be some kind of hero...ok, so its a stretch.

Turnbull...I can assure you that I know you are a good man and my remarks were not directed towards yourself. I know I'm bringing up those two old boring questions; but all of your remarks have made me think and I am even more confident that I know the answers to those two questions. 1. Who killed the Tahoe shooters? Rocco. 2. Did Fredo know it was going to be a hit? yes. Fredo knowing is for another thread. I'm NOT going to keep repeating myself and restating my arguments again and again. This thread is about Rocco, so be fair and DON'T jump around. Don't keep asking me the same things again and again.

Turnbull, I notice that you believe that FFC was a real stickler for details. I agree 100%. I am wondering why he wouldn't know that we would be wondering about those 2 questions and the answers...man, that really would be a hugely flawed movie, if he didn't give us some clues to solve those 2 questions.

Don Tomasso...I never said Rocco "masterminded" the hit. I said he planned and carried out the details of hit night. Someone had to. Of course, Roth was the mastermind; but Roth certainly would not have known all the details and have control over the scene of the crime. Those things can't be planned for...there are a lot of variables and possibilities of things that could happen to change your plans...so someone on the scene who could look for the right opportunity to hit Michael would be essential. That opportunity arose when Kay went to sleep and Michael came to bed a little later. Rocco would know those things. He would have the answer to the question, "What are you doing in here?" BTW bodyguards do go anywhere and everywhere with the ready excuse of..."for your protection, Boss."

I've already stated that Fredo would not have been capable of carrying out the murders of the hitmen. He also would not have had control of the scene.

Since everyone agrees that it wasn't Fredo who killed the hitmen, then it must have been a part or paties unknown. On that we all agree, right?

What you are doing, Ceasar, is insisting that the killer had to be a character with whom we are familiar: Rocco.

What the rest of us are saying is that because the Rocco theory has so many flaws, it could not have been him, and in the absence of any other suspects whose participation would fit the facts, that is was "parties unknown" who were responsible.

Turnbull makes the point that since it was parties unknown, it makes little difference who they were, since the main thing from Michael's POV was to discover who the traitor in his family was.

I take a more critical view, on the other hand, calling FFC's failure to identify the killer or killers of the shooters a flaw in the film.

You want a scenario that raises no new questions of its own in addition to the holes in the asassination plot that we are already aware of (How did the assassins get onto the property in the first place? How could they depend on those drapes being open?), I'll give you one:

Fredo was told it was going to be a kidnapping, and that his role was to leave the bedroom drapes open so the kidnappers wpould know when Michael was in his room and they could grab him.

There were four of them. They got onto the property through Roth and his Nevada connections.

Roth was able to plant the four of them as workers for one of the caterers, or maybe as workers for the guys who delivered the tables and chairs or the tent.

They got onto the property, did their catering work or helped set up the tables and chairs, and then, when the trucks that they arrived on departd, the four of them slipped off into the woods to hide.

While waiting for night time when they would attempt the actual assassination, two of them killed the other two.

They were garrotted of course, since gunfire would have attracted attentiom.

Then, when it came time to open fire, the two shooters who were still alive dragged the two ones out from the woods and dumped them in the ditch.

Then they opened fire, and after the shooting, made their escape through the drainage ditch, which led to a large pipe that they were able to crawl through.

This led them to the shoreline of the lake, several hundred yards down from the compound, where a boat was waiting for them to help them get away.

It was necessary for the actual shooters to kill the other two guys because, as we see, once they were found the search stopped. So the two dead guys in the ditch were merely decoys who facilitated the escape of the real shooters.

So Fredo's role was to take care of the drapes, show Roth or whoever where along the lake's shoreline the getaway boat should be positioned, and point out to one of the assassins which ditch led off the property to the shoreline where the boat would be waiting.

None of this had to be depicted in the film, because as Turnbull suggests, it was unimportant.

We never learn the actual identities of the two guys in the ditch, and we never learn the identity of who killed them, because it doesn't make any difference.

There's a lot that we don't know about how the plot itself worked or was supposed to work, but that is unimportant because what we don't know are merely "operational details."

All that is important for the purposes of the film is that it was Fredo who was the traitor within the family.

So what did Fredo mean when he said "You guys lied to me."?

And why did Roth need "non-Roth assassins"?

And here's a better one:

If Fredo supplied the assassins through Pentangelli, how do you explain the conversation that Fredo and Frankie had upon seeing each other at the party for the first time?

PENTANGELI: Hey, FREDO -- you remember, uh, WILLIE CICCI, he was with old man CLEMENZA in Brooklyn. Yeah, look here --

FREDO: Look, we were all upset about that, Frankie. Heart attack, huh?

WILLIE CICCI: No - No, that was no heart attack.

PENTANGELI: Tha's -- Tha'sa -- That's what I'm here to see your brother Mike about. But wha' -- what's with him?

FREDO: What do you mean?

PENTANGELI: I mean, what do I hafta do, get a letter of introduction to get a sit-down?

FREDO: You, you can't get in to see Mike?

PENTANGELI: He's got me waiting in a lobby!

Isn't that strange conversation for two guys to be having who are in the assassination plot together?

I believe I have a more likely scenario for how the shooters were inserted and it's backed up by a scene in the movie...the scene with the boat arriving with Johnny Ola and his men. It appears to me that on that day Rocco had "outside" duty...the boat would have his men on it...and Rocco does meet the boat when it docks and brings Johnny and his men into the house. What if Johnny brought the hitmen and they were dropped off on the shoreline close to Michael's fortress, hid in the woods as you say. At a pre-arranged time they could have entered the property from the water.

You're missing my point about the drapes!!! No they could not count on the drapes being open. BUT they wouldn't need to if Rocco was involved. They would be ready to shoot and Rocco would be able to arrange the scenario of the shooting with whatever opportunity arose. In this case, the opportunity arose for Michael to be shot at in his bedroom.

I do not believe that Fredo thinking it was going to be a kidnapping is plausible. I believe that Fredo plotted with Roth to kill Michael. But right now I want to discuss Rocco because we just keep going in circles.

You can't simply dismiss Fredo frm the discussion.

Isn't his role an integral part of your theory?

You cannot just drop Fredo from the discussion because as we know he played an important part, information wise, in Roth's plot.

I for one do not believe that Rocco was involved. I tend to lean towards Plaw's theory that the asassains infiltrated the Corleone compound by way of caterers, equipment rental, etc.

And you're forgetting another line when the two asassains are found in the ditch " They look like they are out of New York."

Of course they were out of New York. Roth was a genius. Those two extra asassains, who as Plaw correctly points out, were the sacraficial lambs. It was all part of the plot by Roth.

Like Plaw said these two would be found so the search would cease, with the bonus being that the two of them would be from New York, so it would look like Pentangeli could be behind the hit attempt.

Roth knows that Pentangeli is having problems with the Rosattos back in New York. He learns that Pentangeli is going to Anthony's communion, and will obviously seek an audience with Michael to get permission to do something about the Rosatto brothers. Roth knows that Michael will not do anything that could jeapordize the negotiations between Roth and Michael. So what better way to make it look like Pentangeli was making a move on Michael because he denied Pentangeli's request to take action against the Rosattos?

All Fredo did was provide information to Roth and Ola. Maybe even opened the drapes. Nothing more. And Rocco was not involved in the plot by any means. The only reason Rocco "volunteered" to go on what was basically a suicide mission to kill Roth was because as Turnbull has pointed out many times, there was competition between Neri and Rocco for Michael's approval. And this was Rocco's chance to show Michael that he was more valuable to him than Neri was. If Rocco got away after taking out Roth, his value to Michael would have increased ten fold and he would have really fallen into favor with Michael.

It was a gamble on Roccos part, not redemption for plotting against Michael.

Had Rocco been involved in the plot against Michael, FFC would have made it known and we would have seen Micheal take his revenge against Rocco. And if Rocco was involved in the plot against Michael, why in the world would Rocco be the one picked to kill Roth, the man that he had been plotting with?

The Rocco being involved theory has too many flaws for my liking.


Don Cardi

Dear Caesar's Dealer:

The reason this thread keeps 'going in circles' as you put it, is that Rocco simply plays no role in the initial betrayal that led to the assasination attempt at Tahoe. All fingers point to Fredo, and it was Fredo who made it possible.

Your gallant efforts to have the discussion revolve around Rocco will always lead to failure because at no point in either GF film does Rocco commit a traitorous act toward Michael or the Corleone Family. He remains loyal up to and including his own demise after successfully carryig out the hit on Roth.

So unless you decide to allow the thread to evolve as it naturally has, we will continue to 'go in circles'. There's no other direction for it to go.

Also...GFII is and EXTREMELY flawed film, especially with regard to the assasination attempt, as is proven by this very thread. Too many open ends, too many unanswered questions. (Not that I personally feel these questions need be asked, but that's not really the point.)

Fortunately though, the film in its entirety is so well made, so entertaining and compelling, that these obvious flaws serve more to generate discussion than to affect the overall quality of the picture.

Regards,
Apple

Nicely put, Apple!

Don Cardi...I agree with you about Roth's plan to have the shooters be the sacrificial lambs and point to Pentageli. Roth had that set up so that either way he would win...if the hit succeeded, Roth was done with Michael Corleone; if the hit failed, it would look like a Pentangeli hit.

I am not leaving Fredo out. I have stated many times that Fredo conspired with Roth to overthrow Michael. Also, it's obvious that Rocco and Roth have not met (Roth hit scene.) The buffer between Roth and Rocco would have been Johnny and Fredo. Rocco's part would have been the carrying out of the Tahoe hit. I'm going to give a synopsis my theory in a bit. But first, I too find the statement, "They must be out of New York. I-I don't recognize them," very interesting. Let me ask you this: If Rocco was not part of the Tahoe hit...HOW does Rocco know the shooters are out of New York? I don't think they had any ID on them...

Because as he says...he doesn't recognize them.

Apple

I think Rocco's comment was in there simply to strengthen our suspicions at the time that Pentangelli was behind the hit attempt.

Michael meets with Ola...everything is fine.

Then he argues with Pentangelli.

Naturally, after the hit attempt, who do we suspect?

Then the meeting at Pentangelli's house...."In my home...in my bedroom...."

Then Michael hits Frankie (and us) with his surpise bombshell, much to Frankie's relief:

"It was Roth."

Now Apple, your answer doesn't make sense. Do you think Rocco knows every hitman in Nevada? OR why didn't he say Miami instead of New York.

Yes, he was trying to put suspicion on Pentangeli. But HOW would he know they were from New York??? Don Cardi, where are you? I want an answer from the Dons.

By the way, I see I've been "elevated" to wiseguy status. So...I guess this means I'm not gonna get kicked off the Board for disrespecting the Dons...

I would think a person in his position would. Why do you think he wouldn't?

Or Chicago, or Detroit? Or Bayonne? Or Cleveland?
Or Nantucket?



Turnbull might able to articulate better (if he's willing to waste his time in the way I foolishly have), but it would seem that considering the Corleone Family history...New York would be the most logical guess as to where these guys came from.

Elevation of 'status' depends solely upon your number of posts. It has nothing to do with the way you behave on the boards, nor on how intelligent they are.

Believe me...I oughta know !!!

Apple

Apple...retract claws...

If I am not mistaken, there has been some discussion in the past as to whether or not it's even Rocco who makes the comment, since it is made off-screen.
It wasn't Rocco (or whoever made the comment) who was trying to shift the suspicion to Pentangelli, it was MP and FFC.

I have nothing more to add to this thread.

A very wise decision, Turnbull. Think I'll follow suit...



Apple

Thanks a lot, guys

Perhaps the status that you've been raised to is fitting for the way that you've presented yourself on these boards so far.

Your arrogance and your condencending remarks are not welcomed in these discussions. While you originally brought up a fair and interesting topic, you yourself have managed to deteriorate your own topic by implying that some other members here are not smart enough or knowledgable enough to see things your way.

While at times discussions here may get a little hot and heavy when we disagree on things or have different interpretations on various parts of the trilogy, we never spew condencending remarks at each other or make implications that the other is ignorant because they may not agree with the way that someone else sees things.

I will tell you point blank, you are more than welcomed to post your views and your interpretations and opinions about the GF Trilogy, and we welcome any interesting ideas or views that you may have. It makes for interesting and fun conversation here.

But if you insist on being arrogant or condencending towards ANYONE here who does not see things your way, your status may just descend from Wiseguy to .

So the choice is yours to make. You can either join us in having fun, exchanging ideas with us, making friends, and posting here for a long time or you can continue your practice of trying to belittle the other members here that may not agree with you, and have a very short lived life on these boards.


Don Cardi

Well put DC, and to CD

I sincerely hope that CD decides to stay on the boards because through it all, CD has made some very interesting points and has brought out some interesting theories about Fredo, the asassains, and Rocco. I truely enjoy reading CD's posts, opinions and ideas in regards to the GF Trilogy. It's the negative implications towards the other members that I think we and CD can do without.

So again CD, I hope that you decide to continue to make contributions to these boards by posting your thoughts and ideas about the Godfather, and do so in a fun and interesting way.


Now getting back to the original discussion, I went back and re-read the script when Michael is talking to Tom after the hit attempt, and I found this very interesting :

MICHAEL

I know. You're gonna take over -- you're gonna be the Don. If what I think has happened has happened, I'm gonna leave here tonight. I give you complete power, TOM -- over FREDO and his men, ROCCO, NERI, everyone. I am trusting you with the lives of my wife and my children -- the future of this family.


TOM

If we catch these guys do you think we'll be able to find out who's backing them?


MICHAEL

That's not the catch -- unless I'm very wrong, they're dead already. They're killed by somebody close to us -- inside. Very, very scared they botched it.


TOM

What about your people ROCCO and NERI? You don't think that they had something to do with this.


MICHAEL

You see -- all our people are business men, their loyalty is based on that. Now, one thing that I learned from Pop was to try to think as people around you think. Now on that basis, anything's possible.

Now again, I don't believe that Rocco was the traitor and I don't believe that Fredo knew that it was gonna be a hit, or that he was the one who killed the assasins. So who was the one, on the inside--very close, who was involved?


Don Cardi

Ok, lets try this another way. Who can we defintirely rule OUT.

Mama Corleone
Kay
Anthony
Mary
Michael
Tom
Deanna
Pentangeli
Cicci

That leaves Rocco, Neri and Fredo as possible suspects, none of whom appear to be likely.

So who is left? Gotta be one of Ola's men who slipped in as a caterer, as PLAW has suggested.

And therein lies one of the movie's most infamous flaws. For although it is later shown without a doubt that Fredo was the traitor...it is never quite made clear who opened the curtains and why(since it makes sense that whoever did open them would know it would have to be for a hit), nor why Kay didn't notice them open until she's already lying in bed...assuming she's gone to bed every other night for the past 4 years with the drapes closed. Nor are we ever made certain who killed the assasins. It is also never made clear exactly WHAT Fredo did to aide Roth...although it's been discussed that he may have opened the curtains but if he didn't know it was going to be a hit, then by what reasoning would they get him to open them (and by the way, I don't think he did). Which leads us right back to the question that will never really be answered...WHAT did Fredo do?

Flaws, flaws, flaws. There's just no escaping it, either for us or for FFC.

But that's ok...I like the movie anyway

Apple

I believe that Fredo thought it was supposed to be a kidnapping.

They "kidnappers" would have needed the drapes to be open so they would know when Michael was isolated in one room of the house so they wouldn't have had to roam all over the place looking for him.

If that was FFC's and Puzo's original idea, they must have thought it made sense, and although the mentioning of it was discarded from the final version of the film, that doesn't mean that the idea was discarded.

It certainly accounts for why the drapes had to be open, and it accounts for what Fredo was lied to about as well.

I can't agree that Fredo thought it was to be a kidnapping. Even with that vague promise of something in it for him...I can't see him going along with a kidnapping plot of his brother or a member of Michael's family.

Just as it was not in character for Fredo to stoically accept his death on the lake...it was not in character for him to be a willing accomplice to Michael's kidnapping.

I suppose that if that WAS the original thought of FFC/MP then they should have made it clear in the movie, then at least it wouldn't be speculated even today. It's possible that there was no way to depict it believably, since it was simply not like Fredo to be knowingly involved in so sinister a plot.

Again, an unmistakeable flaw in the telling of the story.

Hey...I thought I was done with this thread!!!

Funny though, how the topic of 'traitor' has yet again evolved away from Rocco and right toward Fredo.

Apple

Well, the kidnapping idea was more than something they simply imagined, or that we imagine that they imagined.

They at least had it down on paper and were seemingly planning to use it at some point, so it's not pure speculation on our part.

I have to agree with Plaw here. If we are to go with the original idea by FFC and Puzo that Fredo was told that it was going to be a kidnapping, then I have to agree that Fredo was the one who opened the drapes, as "the kidnappers" would have needed to see who was in the house at the time. Fredo surely was stupid enough to buy a story like that from Ola, and not smart enough to realize that it was really going to be a hit.


Don Cardi

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Turnbull:
[QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by plawrence:
[qb] Here's what I think happened:


As for Rocco's suicide mission: As I've posted many times [sound of plaw yawning], Neri had pushed past Rocco, and was trying to push past Hagen, in attempting to become Michael's #2 guy. Rocco was basically a bodyguard and gofer in GFII. Michael let this happen because he'd determined that Neri was useful to him, but Rocco was dispensible.

Turnbull, I disagree with you on Neri -R.I.P. - position - except for the fact that Rocco was dispensible. Here's why. Neri was with Michael from the " moment " he came into power. Michael selected him over everybody else already in the organzation as we saw it in the movie. Michael selected him for a reason. Neri knew exactly to handle his job and his responsibilities to Michael. If Michael wanted to, he could have just as easily told Clemenza that he wanted Rocco to be his enforcer. If you remember, Rocco is seen much earlier in the movie when Clemenza told that he is going to get made for shooting Paulie. I don't believe that Neri would ever betray Michael.

OK, I'll buy into the theory for a minute, since right now we can apparently think of no other way Fredo could've been duped. But let me ask you this...

Later during their boathouse talk, Fredo admits that he was told Michael was being 'tough on negotiations' in this 'big deal' going down with Hyman Roth. He was told that there'd be something in it for him, and that it would 'be good for the family' if he helped them to 'close the deal fast'.

Can anyone explain what possible 'good' a kidnapping plot would do for the Family. How 'closing the deal' fast would ever work out if it were the result of a kidnapping? It would mean all out war! Even if Fredo's role in it were never to be discovered, how could he possibly get 'something out of it', 'on his own' from Roth without Michael ever realizing he'd been involved?

True, Fredo was too dumb, envious and greedy to have thought any of this through...but I can't imagine that even he would believe that his aide in a kidnapping would ultimately result in any kind of 'good' for the Family. I don't think he'd have opened the drapes making Michael that easy of a target, even if he thought it were to kidnap not kill him. I don't think Fredo would've cooperated in quite that way.

And if he DID think he were involved in a kidnapping plot in which his brother were the intended victim...I don't think he would've been quite as relaxed as we see him at Anthony's Communion party that very same afternoon/evening (except of course when his moron wife is acting up). He would've never been capable of playing it that cool.

I figure what he did was provide some kind of information that he thought would be harmless but aide Roth in some way...but which ultimately led to the attempted hit being able to take place.

Apple

"I didn't know it was gonna be a hit Mike. I swear to GODd I didn't know it was going to be a hit. JOHNNY OLA bumped into me in Beverly Hills and he said that he wanted to talk. He said that you and ROTH were in on a big deal together. And that there was something in it for me if I'd help 'em out. He said that you were bein' tough on the negotiations. But if they could get a little help and close the deal fast it'd be good for the family."