OK...so I'm reading the book.

There's this whole paragraph where after discovering the head of his beloved Kharthoum, Woltz ponders what Corleone has done just to get Fontaine this movie part...after he had confidently turned Hagen away with an unequivocable NO to casting him in the part.

Is the conclusion Woltz comes to that if he will to this to a six hundred thousand dollar horse, he is capable of just about anything else and therefore Woltz has no choice but to offer Fontaine the part in the movie?

Have to say...it's a very interesting and well worded passage, you can almost look into Woltz's mind as he makes his decision.

Apple

So are you enjoying the book so far Apple?


Don Cardi

I forgot about that scene.

During a recent rewatch of the film, I actually came up with what I thought was a way to improve the movie ( ), which a scene like this in which Woltz contemplates his options.

I really do need to read the novel again, it was so good.

Apple, if I recall correctly, after Woltz calmed down, he saw not only the ruthlessness of killing Khartoum, but the calculation behind it--what was the penalty for killing a horse in California? He also thought that the Khartoum decapitation showed that the Corleones wouldn't kill him: "they had something more clever and painful in reserve." I took that to mean that Woltz, the old pervert and pedophile, was afraid that the next item to be severed by the Don's henchmen would be his gonads. If so, that'd be an even more subtle message from Vito: No more screwing that underage starlet, Woltz! Or anyone else!

Thanks, Turnbull!!!

And yes, Don Cardi I am enjoying the book!! I only get to read about 3-4 pages at a time during lunch, so as mentioned previously this could take a while.

Something else I have to admit appreciating is the subtle thought process, or unspoken messages behind each action. Not only during Woltz & Hagen's meeting...but the story of Johnny Fontaine's bandleader, who did not get the point (or warning) of Vito's initial offer being dropped from $20K to $10K. Also the beating of those two that assaulted Bonasera's daughter...no blows to the top or back of the head so to avoid accidental death. Very clever stuff!

I could still live without the details of Lucy & Sonny's relationship, including whatever is to come regarding 'Dr. Jules'...but I guess it all comes with the package!!

Apple

No pun intended.

dontomasso...'package' doesn't necessarily mean to me what it means to others .

Apple

I've watched the movie so many times that I can remember exactly how the movie looked as things were said. So when i read it, i read it as if I were watching the movie and I can actually see what's going on. It's cool, I guess. But i like it better when you're own imagination takes it over and you think about it to yourself and picture your own setting.

Something about this are that i find interesting is when Woltz is thinking about the situation. He "thinks" that his is unforgiveable, unecessary, unethical. That it is a "childish" reaction (this is the understanding I get anyway). What I find interesting is how he doesnt view how he acts, how he wields his power, flexes his muscle in the same vein. It is all from the same cloth. A powerful man using his power to get his means.

I for one, find his attitude and "revenge" against Johnny to be more childish than what Don Vito does to him and his horse.

I'm reading the book for the first time as well. Wrapping up the novel-only scene with Johnny Fontane if I recall correctly.

Anyways, just had a thought here: why put the head in the bed? If Woltz was so sex-driven, as we saw with not only the starlett, but also his comment on the horse's endowment, why not put something else in the bed? Woltz wanted to breed Khartoum, and losing that would certainly make life hard for him and the horse. Perhaps the Don just wanted to be nice to the horse, or maybe there was a thought that the head would be more recognizable, as opposed to, "What in the world is that?"

Most likely that's it--no chance of confusion or wonder, just instant shock value.

I would think leaving the head for Woltz would be a much more personal message and have a far greater effect on his emotions than 'something else'. Besides being proud of his 'endowement' and having a vast financial investment in the horse, it was pretty clear that Woltz also had a genuine affection for Khartoum. Especially in the movie.

Placing his male parts in the bed would simply be gross and not quite as devastating to Woltz. Yes, Woltz was 'sex driven', and yes, his vendetta against Johnny was due to his having taken the starlet...but really, this message from Don Corleone was not about sex.

Apple

I'm reading the book for the umteenth time. I want to read it as well as the Godfather Returns (again) before I start on Revenge. This morning on my commute, I just read the first 96 pages, and the scene with Woltz included. I loved how Woltz was thinking to himself and I quote: "People didn't have any right to act that way. It was insane. It meant that you couldn't do what you wanted with your own money, with the companies you owned, the power you had to give orders. It was ten times worse than communism. It had to be smashed. I must never be allowed."

That passage is just brilliant especially what I bolded.

In an otherwise poorly written novel, that is a well written part. Each time I read the novel I am still struck at Puzo's ratatattat delivery, his horrible punctuation, and the bevy of incomplete sentences.

Wanna see some really bad puncuation? Read LA Confidential by James Ellroy.

According to the book, Woltz is a bit of a pedophile (if there's such a thing as being a bit of one).
This is somewhat alluded to in one of the deleted scenes through the use of the adolescent girl at Woltz's estate.
Why would Coppola have left this out ?
Does anybody think he did this for moral reasons ?
Or was it simply in the interest of editing ?

That's the most likely reason. The movie was already much longer than the standard movie, and Paramount was paranoid about that. FFC had to make plenty of cuts, and that was one. By cutting out that snippet of film, he was also able to make a cut later, when Tom returned from California and Vito asked if it were "true about the little girl."