In Part I, near the end of the wedding scene, Tom tells Vito: "Now your new son-in-law, give him something important." Vito immediately retorts with: "Never. Give him a living, but never discuss the family business." Vito's distrust of Carlo, of course, proved to be extremely well founded. But why did Tom not only put his trust in him, but do it so early? After all, Tom's most distinguishing characteristic was his ability to stand back and be analytical and dispassionate. Why did he see fit to have Carlo do something major so early on?

Genco would have smelled a rat .

I always thought that even though Tom said it sternly, this was more of a question: "Now your new son-in-law, give him something important?"

As an aside, Vito knew that plenty of guys married the daughters of rich, powerful men just for the perks.

There is a saying in Spanish that roughly goes: "The most dangerous person in the world is a son-in-law with an idea."

It was a question--there's a question mark after Tom's statement in the script that's available on Geoff's site.

Exactly TB. And Genco would have asked the same question.

The question is designed to have Vito be the one to make it expressly clear that Carlo is NEVER to have anything important. He is to make a living, but is never to discuss the family business.

I agree Genco would have put it the same way as Tom did. The consigliere in both cases would be armed with the strict instruction from the big guy that Carlo is and always will be small potatoes in the family.

That's what I always took away from that scene, that the question was rhetorical, but that Tom wanted to hear the answer from Vito's own two lips so he wouldn't be on the hook for it later.

We might also consider that both the novel and film wanted to make the audiences fully aware that Carlo was tolerated by Vito, but not welcomed. Also, that Vito definitely viewed him as an outsider.

I don't have the book in front of, but I think that Tom wasn't certain of what answer he would get from Vito, and was surprised at how strongly he reacted.

That leaves aside the question, why not just give Carlo a place among Vito's legitimate interests? Someone has to sell the olive oil. It seemed odd to me that he should be isolated from the family business, but then turned into a bookmaker.

It was definitely a question by Tom in movie and book.

In book, Carlo's low level bookmaking job was the Family's way of "giving him a living" but unusually Carlo's job performance was reported directly to Vito/Tom. There's an incident in book where Carlo had made a mistake transcribing odds and cost the Family money. And this is said to have confirmed Vito's judgment of his son-in-law. Even before all this Connie is said to have disappointed Vito in her choice of a husband.

Getting back to movie I think that someone like Vito by training and birth just had an ability to "read" people quickly. He didn't like the vibe he got from Carlo and wanted to minimize his/Family's exposure to him. I guess they could have found a spot for him at the olive oil company but then that meant Vito would have to see him more often.
And Vito already had one idiot (Fredo) to see every day.

Here's the novel:



Due to his long friendship and co-operation with Vito, Genco probably wouldn't have been as surprised as Tom.
But, pizzaboy, I don't think "Genco would have smelled a rat". At the time of the marriage, Carlo was just a friend of Sonny. Vito was extremely careful.

In a comment on the film, Coppola says that he wanted to have an uglier actress for Connie, because it was easy to fall in love with a beautiful girl. He wanted Carlo to be portrayed as someone who married a not-so-good-looking daughter of a powerful man.

One last thing: Even though it was clear that they wouldn't give him something important, but in fact they really gave him something very unimportant. It must have been humiliating. In a way, the Don created Carlo's hate.

That's a fair point, MP. Even a lowly family bookmaker is still part of a bigger criminal conspiracy, so why even give him that if you don't trust him?

He could have given Carlo a legitimate sales route in the olive oil business. Like you said, somebody had to go from store to store and restaurant to restaurant to take the orders.

This is a very insightful comment. It also leads to a circular argument of sorts.

IF Carlo was not of such weak character, would he have at least tried to work his way up the ladder rather than feel entitled? But then, IF that was the case, Vito would have trusted him with more responsibility, right?

But what IF Vito misjudged Carlo and he really had the character and shrewdness that could benefit the family if given more power (despite no evidence to support this)? Could such a misjudgement corrupt an otherwise loyal and shrewd person? Or would Carlo have tried to work his way up the ladder in spite of that if he had actually was a man of character?

Ultimately, Vito judged him, by all accounts accurately, but we will never truly know for certain. Certainly, Carlo was not corrupt when he married Connie, but he either was then or later became corruptable. Either way, Carlo's tale ties perfectly into the larger Godfather theme - Every man has a destiny. Carlo's was to become a &^%$!#@ rat.

Coppola's sister Talia Shire was perfect for the role and FFC knew it. In the early chapter of the novel it is described that Connie was not particulary attractive, but during the wedding she looked almost beautiful. FFC made that remark as a kind gesture to his sister, as she probably also read the novel and was aware of Connie's appearance.

I guess that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that because I thought Talia Shire was very pretty back then. But salciccia his own, I guess .

She was nice looking in all of them. I remember one III reviewer who commented that she was perfectly blousy in it. I agree.