Clemenza v/s Pentangeli

Greetings... I've been away for a while, but I had sort of a challenging thought as I watched GFII last night. I feel as though I could not see Clemenza in the same role that Pentangeli played. I feel as though he was far too loyal to do this. Others' thoughts on this is much appreciated.

I feel the same. It may just be the Michael V. Gazzo potrayed Frankie Pentageli though. Maybe Richard S. Castello would have been more suttle had he been it.

I can't imagine any other actors playing these parts,am i write in saying that Gazzo got a oscar nomination for his role..

Welcome back, Frank. Been a long time.
As you probably know, Richard Castellano was approached about appearing in GFII, but he wanted too much money and script control for Paramount's liking. So, FFC and Puzo wrote Clemenza out of GFII and created Frank Pentangeli as Clemenza's successor after Pete died of a "heart attack" (or maybe not?).

So, we're talking about two entirely different characters. Of course Richard Castellano--had he appeared in GFII--would have been given an entirely different personality and script to follow than Michael V. Gazzo as Frank Pentangeli. The concept of Clemenza surviving into GFII, and Castellano playing him, has been discussed many times here, and many people believe (as you do) that Clemenza would have remained totally loyal to Michael. But, Clemenza didn't survive into GFII, and we got a different boss of New York: Frankie.

IMO, Michael V. Gazzo makes GFII--Everyman as Mafia boss. He richly deserved the Oscar nomination he got, and I would have been delirously happy had he won. He's my favorite character in the entire Trilogy.

Thanks TB. Been far too long ;-).

OH!!! that's what i was missing. I was not aware that it was a whole new character written in. I was under the impression that Pentangeli was a "stand in" for Pete. Thanks TB, can always count on you to add a dimension that I never thought of before. Clemenza is my 2nd favorite character of the trilogy (to Sonny) and would have loved to see how he took the whole issue of control being transfered to Mike.

I think Castello wanted his girlfriend to write his dialouge.

Women !
LOL

Yes. Harlan Lebo quotes FFC saying that money wasn't the issue. Castellano wanted "his associate" (actually his girlfriend, Ardell Sheridan, who played Mrs. Clemenza in GF) to write dialog.

I wonder what she would have done different.

Who knows???

Furthermore... since this is the case... does anyone know what was going to happen with Clemenza, had he been in GFII???

The idea eventually, I believe, was that Clemenza would have turned into a disastrous liability for the Corleone Family, either by rolling over and turning informer, or maybe simply by making some stupid careless mistakes (the flashback scenes of GF II foreshadow this by showing Clemenza's rock-headed personality at times).

Also, at the scene of Vito's funeral, the thought of Clemenza betraying Michael is brought up when Tom Hagen says, "I always thought it would have been Clemenza."

Michael doesn't disagree that Clemenza would be loyal until death, but that Tessio "was the smarter one" and cut a deal for himself first.

Clemenza also foreshadows possible disloyalty when he comes to Vito asking to break off into his own family (attempting to back-door Michael in the process). Vito shoots down that idea in a hurry, but still it's on the record that Clemenza was at least thinking about it.

I think Michael was being a little sarcastic about Tessio in that scene. When he says, "It's the smart move...", I think he means that it looks bad for Michael and the Corleone Family because Michael was deceiving everyone into thinking he was weak and irresolute. But it was really a plan to get his enemies to show their hand--and Tessio did.
Yes, Clemenza did propose to break off and form his own family. But he prefaced it by saying, "Godfather, you once said that the day would come when me and Tessio could form our own families." So, it wasn't potential disloyalty so much as trying to redeem a pledge that Vito himself had made.
Far more revealing, IMO, is what came next:
Vito says, "Do you trust my judgment?" Clemenza says, fervently, "Always, Godfather." But Tessio merely hisses, "Yes-s-s-." And, if I remember correctly, Tessio simply leaves the conference without shaking hands or embracing anyone--a harbinger of disloyalty to come.

Exactly TB. I would have liked to see more of Tessio in the flashback scenes of GF2.

Yes... i agree TB. Clemenza didn't show any disloyalty in this scene. BUT, I do believe that he felt that Tessio was the "smarter" one of the two and was not, so much, being sarcastic.

This is one of the times that comparing the novel and the movie just don't work. The novel explains Tessio's role more while the movie concentrated more on Clemenza simply because Richard Castellano was the highest paid cast member and his lines/roles were beefed up due to that.

The character Tessio, portrayed by Abe Vigoda, a relatively little known actor at the time, was relegated to a minor role.

Tessio should have been more involved in the flashbacks og GF2.

OH WOW!!! i am in the process of reading the novel and i see i need to hurry and make this a reality because I'm missing that dynamic.

Actually Tessio uses his LEFT HAND to shake with Michael before he leaves the room. I always saw this as a foreshadowing of his betrayal. Also, there is another significant part of that scene where Carlo thanks Vito for Michael's naming him as his 'right hand man" in Vegas. It shows that Carlo has totally bought into the idea that Michael is not really in charge and that he is as weak and clueless as Barzini has been telling him.

His lines, and the way that he delivered them, were just priceless.



Don Cardi

Yes, Gazzo portrayed Frankie as the penultimate street-wise, from the neighborhood gangster. He was the most earthy of all the characters in the Trilogy.

I wonder why they didn't write some scenes for Frankie in the flashback segments, showing how Frankie came to know Vito and such.

and the fact that they deleted the Hyman Roth scene from the flashback segments also was a mistake. You have Hyman Roth and Frankie Pentageli as main characters in the 'Michael segments,' but no mention of these main characters in the 'Flashback segments.'

While I love the movie, I fail to understand this aspect.

Well... while I understand your gripes, I have to say that there was no need to foreshadow the Hyman Roth situation. And, although a mention of Frankie would have been usefull in understanding who he was and where he came from, it wouldn't have made much sense. Clemenza was Vito's man. The real purpose of the flashbacks was to establish the story of Vito's rise to power, develope his character, and give a contrast of he to Michael.

Well put FrankWhite.




Actually there IS mention of Hyman Roth in the flashback scenes. As a matter of fact we are introduced to him in the flashback scenes.

Yes, DC, the famous Johnny Lips!!

True, that, but Roth's scene was deleted from the movie, so it did little good.

Frankly, I thought the Roth scene was pretty funny. Clemenza says they call him Johnny Lips, and Vito says he thinks we can come up with a better name.

The wit of Vito. Ahh.

I'm new to the site and have never seen any of the deleted scenes, such as the one that introduces young Hyman Roth. But in GFII, the scene after Signor Roberto leaves the store, Vito and several others go into the street to watch the sign being hoisted. Obviously there are Tessio, Clemenza and Genco, but I notice two other guys who aren't identified. Might these guys be young Roth and Pentangeli?

That's the end part of the deleted scene. It is Hyman Roth. In the deleted protion of that scene, right after Roberto leaves, we are introduced to a young man who is called Johnny Lips aka Hyman Roth.

The last two posts show an interesting loss of continuity in editing.
Young Roth's appearance outside the storefront may have been the tail end of the deleted scene, but those few seconds were never deleted--they were in the original. So, a viewer like bradd, who has never seen the deleted scenes, may well wonder who this kid is and where he came from--obviously he belongs with Vito, Genco and Clemenza, but we never saw him before, and never see him after.

Is there any official statement available to dwell on the relationship between Clemenza and Frankie and what on earth happened after Micheal left NYC?

The only "official statement" concerning the succession was Michael's to Frankie in the boathouse: "Clemenza promist the Rosato brothers three territories in the Bronx after he died... You didn't give them to him." The only thing we can be sure of is that this tells us for sure is that Frankie was Clemenza's successor--probably (but not necessarily certainly) his immediate successor. We know nothing for sure about what Frankie did under Clemenza, or how he came to be Clemenza's successor.

We also can be sure that either Frankie or the Rosato Brothers are mediums who can communicate with the dead (i.e., "Clemenza promised ... after he died."

Did Frankie also inherit Tessio's territory in Brooklyn?

Good question! It points up a major disconnect in the novel and in the transition to GFII:
The novel says that, within 24 hours of The Great Massacre of 1955, Neri was sent to take charge of Tessio's regime. But, within a year of The Great Massacre, Neri had become head of security for all Corleone hotels in Nevada; "Clemenza had his own Family. Rocco Lampone was Corleone caporegime." This confuses me: If Clemenza finally did get his own family, what did it consist of? If Rocco was Corleone caporegime, where was he operating--New York or Nevada? If New York, it implies that Michael still had a criminal enterprise or territory that was in some way different from Clemenza's territory. If Nevada, it implies that Michael had illegitimate interests there in addition to his legal casinos and brothel.

Finally, we can conclude from the immediate aftermath of The Great Massacre that Michael valued Neri more than Rocco because he put Neri, not Rocco, in charge of Tessio's regime; and took Neri, not Rocco, with him to Nevada. This wouldn't be surprising, given that Michael recruited Neri and Clemenza recruited Rocco while Michael was still a "civilian." But I infer from the year-later scenario that Neri got nothing better than a job as chief rent-a-cop in Nevada, while Rocco seemingly became a real pezzanovante.

The film neatly ties up all the loose ends: both guys are with Michael in Nevada, and Frankie is definitely not independent of Michael.

Although I think that Frankie may have thought otherwise when he said to Michael, at the meeting in Nevada, that he was trying to tell him how to run HIS family. But Michael immedeatly puts him in his place with his response that HIS family is still called Corleone.