Home

Vito and Fredo

Posted By: Immobiliare

Vito and Fredo - 07/16/11 02:17 PM

This is a hypothetical question: what would Vito's advice to Micheal have been regarding Fredo's treachery? I know this is a difficult question to answer as its unlikely that Fredo's actions would have occured whilst Vito was still alive but do you think Vito would have agreed with Micheals handling of the situation?
Posted By: olivant

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/16/11 03:39 PM

The novel points out that one of the reasons Vito retired was because he couldn't bring himself to do what had to be done: murder Carlo. If he couldn't murder his son-in-law, he surely couldn't have murdered his son. Vito was all about family.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/16/11 04:13 PM

I think Vito would have advised Michael to banish Fredo, not kill him. That was purely Michael acting.
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/16/11 04:38 PM

I agree with Sonny and Oli. But, as in Carlo's case, Vito would understand that once he was gone, his word was no longer binding on Michael, and that Michael would do what he had to do.
Posted By: Immobiliare

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/16/11 10:23 PM

I'll admit I haven't actually read the novel but have heard various bits and pieces about it. What was Carlo's exact role in Sonny's murder? Did he know it was going to be a hit? If yes, then I find it strange that Vito couldn't bring himself to participate in Carlo's death - did he atleast agree that Carlo should be killed but just did not want to be the one that has to make that decision ultimately?

Good comparison beteen Carlo's death and Fredo's - I think Vito's reaction/handling of Carlo should provide good insight into what he would have advised Micheal to do with Fredo. Perhaps he would have agreed that he needed to be killed. Lets not forget that Fredo's actions and treachery led to Micheal being an inch away from death - I don't think its completely unfeasible that Vito would have decided that Fredo deserved a fate atleast as bad. Of course the eternal question of wether or not Fredo 'knew it was a hit' comes to the fore...
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/17/11 03:04 AM

Originally Posted By: Immobiliare
I'll admit I haven't actually read the novel but have heard various bits and pieces about it. What was Carlo's exact role in Sonny's murder? Did he know it was going to be a hit?

The novel notes that Sonny's beating of Carlo was observed by someone who was connected to the Tattaglias. Then, as we learn at the end of the film, Barzini contacted Carlo. He knew that, since Carlo's first beating of Connie caused Sonny to rush out of the Compound, a second beating--timed by Barzini and Carlo--would bring Sonny out again, and into an ambush.

Quote:
Of course the eternal question of wether or not Fredo 'knew it was a hit' comes to the fore...

"Eternal" may be an understatement. That's one of the most discussed topics on this board. Do a search and you'll see.
Posted By: Lilo

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/17/11 11:15 AM

Originally Posted By: Immobiliare
I find it strange that Vito couldn't bring himself to participate in Carlo's death - did he atleast agree that Carlo should be killed but just did not want to be the one that has to make that decision ultimately?


Basically. The novel makes it clear that pretty much everyone (Tom, Michael, Vito and Mama Corleone, likely Connie) knew of Carlo's treachery but pretended not to know. This is why Connie asked Michael to be Godfather to her child and in book was constantly seeking (via Kay) some affirmation from Michael that Carlo was doing a good job and well-liked.

In book Vito never speaks about Carlo's planned demise openly but Michael says everything is in place; it's the right decision and that he takes all responsibility. Vito says something along the lines of "good b/c there's some things even he can't do." Tom later confirms to Kay that Vito was in an impossible position. In order to avenge his son he had to murder his son-in-law. Even though Vito approved, by Michael taking responsibility (helped immensely by Vito's death) Michael took the brunt of Connie's rage, spite and grief.
Per book Connie was arguably his favorite child so Vito didn't want to hurt her like that.

Carlo's murder had to be simultaneous with or after the murders of the other victims otherwise it would have tipped them off. So Vito and Michael had to wait.

I don't think Vito ever would have countenanced or advised the murder of his children. Of course if Vito were still around Fredo would not have had the resentments he had nor would Roth have thought he could get to the Corleones via Fredo. I do think that Vito might have been a bit more solicitous or even aware of Fredo's feelings and have found an oblique method of dealing with them.
Posted By: olivant

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/17/11 09:53 PM

Sometimes I think we discredit Fredo too much. In the film he carries a gun (yes, I can anticipate your guffaws about that) which, since Luca needed a license to carry one, we assume that Fredo was licensed also. According to the novel, Vito concluded that Fredo had a genius for running a hotel and even considered this a reward. Also, in GFII, Fredo has "men", a crew I suppose and he does run at least one brothel. Further, he is trusted to transport $2 million from the US to Cuba. Of course, if he is the drapes man and is otherwise in cahoots with Ola and Roth, it took his being intoxicated and off-guard to reveal his conspiratorial complicity. Prior to that, he kept his secret.
Posted By: Lilo

Re: Vito and Fredo - 07/18/11 12:36 PM

Originally Posted By: olivant
Sometimes I think we discredit Fredo too much. In the film he carries a gun (yes, I can anticipate your guffaws about that)

smile
In film, if Fredo had been able to fire a couple of shots during the assassination attempt, I think he would have hit Vito.. whistle
© 2024 GangsterBB.NET