Perhaps we've lost the thread. We measure or assess Michael against the background of his family. We don't know the backgrounds of Barzini, etc. We compare Mike with his father and brothers because that is pretty much all we have to work with.

I think we are debating degress of pathology. As I have stated in a previous post, Michael was a sometime imitation of his father - intelligent, but not as intelligent as his father. The ability to kill as Vito and Michael did is a functionof some degree of alacrity - in their cases, a measure of the value of life. They are all sociopaths (witht he possible exceptionof Fredo) to a degree. Michael was in the best position to leave it all behind. He chose otherwise.

Michael did chose to leave it all behind, he and Vito wanted to move the family away and become legitimate.

It did not work.

Michael never chose to leave it all behind. He would always resort to murder when things didnt go his way.

'When in Rome.....

'When in Rome..... [/QUOTE]


Isnt that Line from Ron Burgundy?

Well he was in the mafia.

Michael was every bit as intelligent as his father, perhaps even more so. If he were not, he wouldn't have expanded the Family as he did.

What his did not have was his father's 'finesse'...Vito's intuitive gift of understanding and knowing how to deal with people on a personal level.

And once Sonny died, he really did not have 'a choice' to leave. To do so would've been to abandon his father, which he would never do.

So technically he had a choice, but in reality he didn't.

Apple

OH, reality shmeality

As far as intelligence goes, it manifests itself by the choices people make. Vito died saying that life was so beautiful; Michael died alone with a little dog his only company, a consequence of his choices.

Also, I'm not buying the no choice. "Leaving" his father might have seemed analagous to patricide, but it was still a choice. I would have murdered to protect my father, but now that he is dead, there is nothing to protect that would warrant murder. It's all perception. Michael perceived that murder was to be used quite frequently for him to get his way. To tell you the truth though, I don't think he knew what "his way" was. His father did. Now, that's intelligence.

True. Due to the those 'differences' in personality that I mentioned in the previous post. Has nothing to do with Michael's degree of intelligence in comparison to his father.


Sure, it was 'a choice'...but it really wasn't. The moment he really had a 'choice' was when he decided to go through with the murders of Solozzo/McClusky. After that, there was really no turning back. As many have stated here on the Gangster BB...it was his 'destiny'.

That's because you weren't raised in the Corleone Family Business. Neither you nor I can really say what we would do, what 'choices' we would make if we had grown up in that kind of world.

Again, just like any other 'Don'.

And what do you consider 'frequently'? Let's take a look at all the murders Michael either committed or ordered, and the reasons for them.

Solozzo - Had twice tried to murder his father and would surely make another attempt.

McClusky - Hired to 'protect' Solozzo. Like it or not, he had to go as well.

JUMP several years forward after the death of his father who had advised, guided and planned with Michael during the final years of his life.

Barzini & Heads of ALL other Families - Settling of all 'Family Business'; payback for Sonny/Sicily (Appolonia); preservation of the Corleone Empire which would surely have come under attack after Vito's death.

Moe Green - Refused Michael's 'buyout'; backed by Barzini.

Tessio - Turned traitor to Michael and the Corleone Family.
Always liked him, it was 'only business'.

Carlo - Turned traitor to the Corleone Family; fingered Sonny for the Barzini hit.

JUMP several years ahead to life at the Nevada Compound:

Geary's prostitute - that was Tom's baby; can't be pinned on Michael.

Johnny Ola - had to be killed to get to Hyman Roth.

Hyman Roth - attempted to undermine/overthrow the Corleone Family; recruited Michael's dumb brother to unwittingly aid in assasination of Michael. Orchestrated Senate Hearings in further attempt to ruin Michael Corleone

Frank Pentangelli - turned traitor after being duped by Roth. (Actually, Michael didn't even need to order this hit; Frankie knew what he had to do.)

Fredo Corleone - turned traitor for personal gain & nearly enabled the murder of his brother.

I cannot address GFIII since I wasn't there...but so far, seems to me to be alot of good reasons for a mafia Don to have people killed.

As for Michael's 'choices'...of course they had an effect on the course his life took. But choices are also sometimes the result of 'circumstances'.

As Michael tells Kay in that lovely scene in GFIII...he loved his father. After Sonny died and even before...he had to make certain choices because of that love.

Apple

Michael had choices at every stage in his life. For example, He was right to think Sollozzo would try to kill his father after the failed hospital attempt. He was wrong to believe that only he could save his father, by killing Sollozzo and McCluskey. Ironically, an idea that Michael himself had suggested could have been modified to solve the problem bloodlessly. The Corleones could have fed the newspapermen on their payroll the story about McCluskey being a dishonest cop mixed up in drugs and murder before, not after, the trigger was pulled. The Police Commissioner would have been shamed into providing Vito with an army to protect him, to save further embarrassment. McCluskey and Sollozzo would have been neutralized without any bloodshed. At minimum, McCluskey would have been transferred or suspended pending investigation; with pressure from the Corleone judges, he’d have been indicted for taking bribes. Sollozzo would have been arrested and probably deported as an undesirable alien. With McCluskey alive, the cops would have had no reason to crack down on all Mob activities. There would have been no Five Families War of 1946, leaving it a contest between the Corleones and the Tattaglias—and as we know, Tattaglia was a pimp, alone he could never have outfought Santino. Michael could have married Kay and gone back to college (and we would have had no Godfather Trilogy!). Instead, Michael chose to be the triggerman.

Second: He could have resumed the legitimate life after returning from Sicily. He could have said to Vito: “Pop, I was wrong to distance myself from you. But I atoned: I saved your life. And I paid a heavy price: two murders, abandoned my beloved fiancée, lost months out of my life in Sicily, lost my beloved bride to a bomb intended for me. We’re quits. Now you run the family…Oh, not feeling well enough to take the reins? Fredo not equal to the task? Sorry, Pop, that’s not my problem. Besides, you always said you didn’t want this for me—you wanted me to be a pezzanovante. Well, I can’t be Senator Corleone or Governor Corleone if I’m Don Corleone. Bye-bye.”Instead, Michael chose to succeed his father as Don.

Third: After moving to Tahoe, Michael could have retired behind the walls of his compound and invested his wealth legitimately—even putting money up-front in the legal casinos of Nevada. Instead, Michael chose to hide his ownership of casinos, continue to run the rackets in New York, and to conspire with his eventual nemesis, Roth, to control all the gambling in Cuba.

Fourth: he could have been “legitimate” in GFIII—but was he? He whines, “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.” But he was never out. He chose to boss the Commission and was influential enough to keep Zasa from rising (so Vincent tells us). He laundered his Mob cronies’ money through his “legitimate” businesses (maybe through his foundations) and cut Zasa out of his share. He chose to go to Sicily and, when told that an assassin "who never fails" is gunning for him, he arrays his beloved ex-wife and daughter around him in a prominent box at the opera.

Michael actively chose the Mob life each and every time. Disaster resulted each and every time. Michael succeeded--in turning everything he touched into death, including his own.

"I told you I can handle it, I'll handle it" implies that Mike had the choice to not whack the 5 families. Vito surely gave him plan B, but Mike agreed to go along with plan A and all the consequences that would follow.

I agree with Turnbull except that I don't think Mike could have ever told his pop 'handle it yourself, im outta here'(never leave a man behind).

And I still think that Mike always had the intent of getting out/becoming legit. Problem is that he was soooo competitive that it was not good enough just to 'get out/become legit', he had to 'get out/become legit' to the VERY best of his abilities. Thus whacking the 5 families, conglomerating a gambling empire and fighting against the vatican.

In the end this competitive fire burned him, he flew himself and 'the family' too close to the sun when he could have turned back long before(after part 2 for example).

No, he didn't. Still, he agreed to cooperate with Roth in some way after being told his brother was being 'tough on negotiations'. That alone indicates full knowledge that he was working against Michael. Traitor.

Michael was disconnected as well...although due to circumstances around him he eventually became connected.

In terms of the films, I think the Family and then Michael...did with Fredo what they could. He had to have some kind've inclusion in 'the Business'...otherwise he would not have been sitting in on the meeting with Solozo. I suppose it would've been after Vito's shooting that they came to figure him as a lost cause in terms of anything important. Off to Vegas...

As for Turnbull's very impressive post...Michael of course DID have the 'choice' to turn his back on his father & the Business once returning from Sicily, he was after all a free man. But by then too many things had happened. Sonny's death and Appolonia's ... he was way to far in and his father needed him. The Family needed him. By then, he was truly 'with them'. So again, he had the choice just as we all have the 'choice' to go to work on a warm, sunny morning or head for the beach. But we do what we have to do...and Michael did what he had to do. He didn't really have a choice.

Apple

Very insightful observation, Apple. And, as you know, the novel is even more explicit. Very early on, Puzo writes that Fredo was not expected to succeed his father because (I believe, not having the novel in front of me) he lacked "force." After his (apparent) nervous breakdown following Vito's shooting, someone suggests Fredo be included in the planning for revenge. But then Tom (or Sonny, I forget) says, "Leave him out of this, leave him out of everything" [emphasis added]. He certainly was.

Apple and Turnbull's posts raise a point that I find very interesting. That is whether Fredo actually had a larger role in the business before Vito was shot and that his actions proved he wasn't up to the task.

To sum up Michael, he is fiercely loyal to his family and will do anything, however wrong (putting it loosely), to protect the Corleone name.

I sort of feel that Michael feels like he has the weight of the world on his shoulders and in a sense he does. He felt that he had so save the family, he felt that he had to kill Solozzo and McCluskey.

I think Vito knew that Fredo had serious limitations, but he never figured that Fredo would be dumb enough to do what he ended up doing. Fredo was included in the Sollozzo meeting, and the Don fully understood that Fredo would never dare say a word during the meeting (if he even understood what was going on). At that point Sonny was the heir apparent, and if you look at how wveryone was seated in the room, Santino has a very prominent position, while Fredo is less prominent than Tom. It is Santino who shoots his mouth off, and who ghets rebuked.

I think Vito figured that Fredo could just be a kind of hanger on, and sort of a non entity. I believe Vito knew Fredo was limited because in his speech to Michael at the end of the movie he tells Michael he knew Santino would have to "go through" all of this and that he never expected that Michael would have to. When he mentions Fredo (who you would think would have been #2 to Sonny (when in fact Tom was) the Don simply says "Fredo was....well...." and he moves on. This tells us the Don knew well that Fredo could never have been the head of the family.

As many have pointed out, I think it's pretty clear from the novel and the film that Fredo was had limitations that the family members recognized. Keep in mind that from the book and the film, we learn that the only son in whom Vito really wanted to invest was Michael. Remember how he allowed sonny to become involved in the family business under Clemenza's tutelige, but Clemenza saw what the Don really wanted, and used Sonny primarily as a bodyguard for his father? Also, remember how the Don let Sonny handle the situation with the furnace repair guys and how the Don was no satisified with the way Sonny handled it. On the other hand, the Don expresses surprise at Fredo's talent for running a hotel, but almost in the same breath disdains his son's usefulness ("What for? My wife can cook our meals.") and his unnatural proclivity for sex. Mike, onthe other hand, the Don wants to invest extensively in Micahel's future whether as part of hte family or as a poitician.

Regardless of Michael's reason and rationalizations, he could walk away from it all at any time without endangering his blood family. He chose not to. He wanted, instead, to leave it all behind (perhaps) on his own terms and that kept his family in danger.

I don't think he had a 'larger' role in the business at the time of Vito's shooting...more likely that up to then he was still included in Family Business in the hopes he might eventually be more useful.

After all, it was Fredo who ended up offering to drive his pop home after Paulie called in 'sick'. Had he had a role more befitting of one of the Don's sons...that task would surely have fallen to someone else.

Which makes it all the more ironic that, years later he was complaining to Michael about: "...Send FREDO off to do this, send FREDO off to do that! Let FREDO to take care of some Mickey Mouse night club somewhere! Send FREDO to pick somebody up at the airport...!!"

Apple

I still feel there was some sort of hope for Fredo before the Don's assassination. I suppose hope is a very optimistic word when it comes to discussing Fredo, however as we have discussed in this thread, he is present at the Solozzo's meeting even though he says nothing and is present when the war council briefs Vito after he returns home. It's a possibility that in terms of the motive for sending Fredo to Las Vegas is that the family finally realized that Fredo would amount to nothing in his present role.

Paulie was the driver. Fredo said he didn't mind getting the car this time. I think Fredo acted as his father's bodyguard which was probably his regular job in the family. It was one where the Don could keep a watch on this one son of his whom he probbaly did not have much hope for.

When I think of Fredo, I think about Mikey in the TV series American Chopper. He and Fredo are relatively harmless guys, apparently not that bright, show little interest in the family business, but are thought of fooindly by their respective fathers.

Ya think....?????

Some 'bodyguard'...

Anyway, in terms of 'getting the car this time' in lieu of the 'out sick' Paulie...one would think that in a Family with the stature of the Corleones, there would be a stand-by driver for just this case. The 'stand-by' driver ended up being Fredo, probably because unlike Santino, he had nothing more important to do than 'observe pop at the office'.

Apple

My point exactly.

I wouldn't necessarily take that as an insult. Michael could have meant its not easy being the son of such a great and powerful man. Big shoes to fill.

Ace

I think at that point, Michael was talking more about himself than Fredo--about how hard it was for Michael to be Vito's son. If so, it'd be a rare crack in that cold facade.

TB, I agree but o you think this was a shot at Vito? Or is it just a statement due to who Vito was?

If Michael really was talking about himself, it might have been an admission that he wasn't the man his father was.

I agree 100%.

Does this thought contribute to Michael's coldness towards the end of GFII?

Not that I think this quote from III would escape your eye, but doesn't this at least give some sort of credence to the notion that Mike was forced into the life.........? "I swore I would never be, a man like him – but I loved him. And he was in danger; what could I do? And then later, you were in danger. Our children, were in danger. Look at it."

What could he do? I believe him in this scene, I don't think he is disillusioned. While I agree that Mike's competitive nature made it impossible for him to be a 'half-ass' don, I think that Puzo/FFC's intention was to write his character as one who was forced into the life he led.

I also think that Vito was forced into the life by his birth into the pezzonovante system and later by his life as a poverty stricken Italian-immigrant in NYC.

I'm kind of "on the fence" about this topic.

I will say this - When were Kay and the children in danger ?

Since when are the innocent wives and children of gangsters in the American Mafia put into the line of fire ?
I'm sure there are instances, but they are few and far between.

Michael said this to himself so often, that he eventually believed it. He had to blame someone, but he could never actually blame homself.

I do believe that Michael believed he had no choice. However, I agree with Turnbull, in that he had a window, albeit a short one, to escape the life while Vito was still alive.