Yes, that is a deleted scene.

In my opinion the most memorable line from that garden scene came from Michael:

"What about Sonny...what about Sicily?"

Vito's exit line is a close second:

"We have plenty of time to talk about that now."

Let's face it, in hindsight all the deleted scenes were ones of value that could've and several cases should've been left in. However, time was of the essence, and neither FFC nor Paramount could foresee the monumental legacy both GF and GFII would leave.

It's nice to ponder what we think shouldn't have been deleted and why...since we've been able to viewed the deleted scenes thanks to the tv Saga. A gift not usually bestowed upon movie fans.

But are there any scenes that remained in either of the films that you think didn't need to be left in?

Or better still...any deleted scenes that you would trade off for any that remained in the films?

Editing...it's a tough job but somebody's gotta do it.

Apple

To hear Robert Evans tell the story, much of the movie as we see it today was a "deleted scene" left on the cutting room floor. According to Evans, he encouraged Coppola to make it the epic it became instead of the standard 100 minute movie we've all come to expect.

As important as each scene is to the whole story, imagine how marginalized The Godfather would have become had even one more scene been deleted from the movie as we know it. On the other hand, it would be interesting to see the movie in its "final edit / first pass" form for the sake of comparison to the version that made it to the big screen..

tony b.

Its just pondering isnt it, some scenes could have gone in favour of the superior deleted scenes

Which ones?

Apple, here's a trade-off that might have been worthwhile.

I would delete Kay's visit to the mall in search of Michael ("That was an accident but nobody was hurt..."). It's good, but eliminating that scene wouldn't cloud the plot, nor would we be here advocating it's inclusion because of some question or issue that becomes clearer because of its inclusion.

In it's place I would add one of three scenes that DO advance the plot or clarify some point. I would add either the Genco deathbed scene, or Sonny's dialog with Michael about Clemenza/Paulie and his phone call from "his man at the phone company," or the killing of Fabrizio.

"Pop had Genco. Look what I got..." Unless you read the book, or actually saw GF-II, the name Genco doesn't mean anything in GF-I. The addition of the Genco deathbed scene would have introduced the role of the consigliere to "the family," clarified Genco's actual importance to the family and Vito in particular, and served as a validation of Tom's ascendency to consigliere.

"Paulie sold-out the old man." When Sonny makes that proclamation, it calls for some suspension of disbelief. While Paulie was conveniently sick and you could reasonably infer that he was complicit in Vito's shooting, it would be great to have plausible evidence that points to Paulie's responsibility for the attempt on Vito. Sonny's call and his exchange with Michael make Sonny seem less emotional and more rational with firm evidence of Paulie's complicity in Vito's shooting. You may or may not argue that it makes Sonny almost don-like...but it certainly points to some strong leadership skills with solid intelligence.

And finally, I can't imagine that Michael really would have "settled all family business" without taking care of Fabrizio.

Delete Kay at the mall and add just one of these scenes and it would have been an even better movie.

tony b.

Great post tony. Fabrizio being dealt with at the end of part I would have just been perfect. As it stands, theatrically, Michael never does get him.

Personally, I wish the Hyman Rothstein scene was left in. One of my favorite aspects of PtII is the interplay between the two stories, past and present. I think much of the sadness of the Michael segments comes from the contrast to the young Vito segments. It's quite moving, after Michael and Roth's deadly battle in Cuba, to show Young Roth's interaction with Young Vito. Just to think that this kid Vito takes under his wing would, some 35 years later, be in a life-or-death power struggle with Vito's son.
Just imagine how (possibley) more powerful PtII would be if the plot had stayed with Clemenza turning on the family and killing himself in the end, instead of Pentangelli! Gotta love Pentangelli, though...
Plus, I agree with Turnbull that Clemenza's transformation from big-shot (At least in his head) to side-kick is really entertaining.

Would they have definitely gone the same direction if castellano had signed on?

Welcome to the Boards!

I agree with you. It would be a nice touch if they would have added that scene. It would have been one of the rare instances where the parallel stories in Part II actually come in contact.

I think the fact that this was left uncertain improved the film.

Sonny is emotional and is not rational, so why should we see him any other way? His pinning of blame without evidence is totally in character and foreshadows his fatal flaw.

Also, not knowing for sure it's Paulie adds a level of suspense, since there's the possibility of the traitor still being at large.

Hey welcome, that is a cracking username you have chosen! I can't remember how many times i've watched the last schmaltz

Fabrizio's shooting scene...
I wonder why didn't FFC leave it in the movie

I have to believe FFC considered it. My guess is that there was no easy way to insert this. If it was included in the baptismal sequence, it may have disrupted or diluted the scene. I think the brilliance of the scene lies in its economy. The scene flows smoothly and orderly with dense content. Adding more killings could have had the effect of minimizing the assassinations of Moe and the heads of the Five Families.

Perhaps a single shot of Fabrizzio's sprawled bloodied corpse near the end of the scene could have satisfied those of us, who want him to pay for his transgressions.

I think AFTER the baptism but BEFORE Carlo's fate, Mike could have been driven to Buffalo to deal with Fabrizio personally. That definitely should have been in, Fabrizio just HAD to get it

I Have Two Scenes In Mind ... Both Posted Before:

Defintly Mikey Trackin Down Fabrizio & Whackin Him

The Corleone Men Visiting Genco

Fabrizzio getting killed definitely should have been included. Unless you read the novel, you'd have thought Fabrizzio got away scot-free with killing Michael's wife.

That, and I am from Buffalo, NY, and it would have been cool to see a scene from "The Godfather" take place in Buffalo!

Will there ever be versions of GF1 and GF2 released with all the deleted scenes inserted into them? I just watched the cinema versions over the weekend for the first time in about six years and it just amazes me how many scenes were left out.

I have the chronological TV version of I and II on video from when it was shown here in Australia back in 1990 and it has every single deleted scene in it. However, the quality is terrible as i've watched it countless times and it is 16 years old, after all..

Deserved to be cut: the extra Connie and Carlo argument

Most mistakenly deleted: Michael and Vito talking in the garden

However, ther eare far too many mistakenly deleted scenes, I think.

One scene that should have remained, although they thought it redundant, was after Bonasera left the office at the start of the film - after Vito closes the door and says to Tom: "put Clemenza on it. I want people who aren't going to be carried away..." then he looks over at Santino and whistles at him. "You payin' attention," Vito asks. Sonny: "yeah, yeah." [this was seen in "A Novel For Television"]

I thought the Genco scene was a little corny. Not the lead up - those scenes I thought were good, and could have been left in, but the actual standing over Genco's death bed. Very corny dialog, and would have diminished this extraordinary film.

Wonder if we'll ever get ALL the deleted scenes on DVD soon?

I really liked the extended scene between Paulie and Clemenza that took place just before Paulie's execution. It really showed how these guys can sit down and eat a cannoli with you one minute then help carry out your murder the next.

Just look at my signature.

Very good DMC.

Michael: "Won't they take that as a sign of weakness?"

Vito: "It is a sign of weakness"

I wish they would have left the Godfather eating ice cream scene in. That made him seem more human, more sensitive. Plus we get to see his wife being a wife.

One deleted scene which I think was extremely important to part of the plot is the one where Michael arrives at the Corleone Mall after finding out that his father has been shot, and when he walks into the house, we are shown Thresa Hagen sitting alongside Clemenza, outside the Don's office. When Michael enters the Don's office, we see Sonny and Tessio sitting there talking. Now I don't remember the exact dialogue, so I am going to paraphrase a bit here.

Sonny tells Michael to leave, that he may not like what he is going to hear from him and Tessio. So Michael tells him " He's my father too." Sonny says something like " Pop would kill me if he found out that I let you in on this stuff." But Michael refuses to leave. Sonny then says something like " Ok college boy, you're so smart, who set up the old man, was it Clemenza or Paulie?" and Michael sits there for a moment and then says " Nah, not Clemenza, It had to be Paulie." and Sonny tells him, "Yes you're right, our man in the phone company confirmed that by tracing the calls from a phone booth across the street from pop's office." So that scene tells us that Sonny immedeatly suspected Clemenza, and that is why he had Clemenza sit out of that meeting between him and Tessio. They were deciding and trying to find out if Clemenza was involved.

Now again, I may not have the exact dialogue down pat, but that is basically what took place in that scene. It gives clarification to the later scene which shows Sonny telling Clemenza to take care of Paulie, because he set up the old man. Without that deleted scene we are left to wonder how Sonny came to that conclusion.

Don Cardi, I need to rewatch the scene but didn't Michael say neither of them first? As if Michael was being naive that either of them could have done it?

I could be wrong, and be thinking of another movie but I think he made a comment first that pisses off Sonny.

It's a very important scene because it shows that within the inner sanctum of the family, it's Tessio and not Clemenza who is considered to be beyond reproach, making Tessio's betrayal that much more powerful, later on. I wish they'd left it in.

He pisses off Sonny when Sonny tells him to leave the office because he don't want Michael hearing certain things. And Michael defies Sonny telling him that Vito is HIS father also. Sonny then poses the question to him, saying something like "Ok college boy, who set up the old man?" And if memory serves me correctly Michael ponders for a moment or two, and then replies that neither Clemenza or Tessio did. I'm going off of memory here as I haven't watched that scene in quite some time. But it went down something like that.

Michael replies that it was "not Clemenza" Clemenza because he always gave Michael presents at Christmas time; He didn't want it to be Paulie either because he used to be in the same 6th grade class as Michael.

The part I didn't care for was Sonny's reaction to Michael after he said "not Clemenza." Sonny said, 'you're right, it was Paulie, that stronz,' then says how he knew it was Paulie because of tracing the calls from a payphone outside Genco's office to the enemy. This kind of logic is wrong because, heck, it coulda been anybody using that payphone. How they could have connected Paulie to it, just because he was conveniently sick that day, is beyond me. Imagine if Paulie was really innocent??

As I recall in that scene there is also some gesture Michael makes to teresa Hagen who is just sitting alone worrying about her husband. Doessnt he tell someone to take care of her? To me it showed that Sonny was already not controlling everything the way a good Don should.

DC your point is a good one, and Clemenza remains suspect throughout. At VVito's funeral when Tom asks Michael if he knows how they are going to come at them, and Michael says they are teking him to a meeting on Tessio's grouns "where I'll be 'safe'" Tom says, "I always thought it would be Clemenza."

I wonder about this lingering suspicion about Clemenza because in GF II we learn that Clemenza was Vito's first real "partner" and that Tessio came on board later.

I can't remember, but are you guys recalling the movie or the novel? It's in the novel that way. That I know