Home

The definitive timeline

Posted By: Hisenberg

The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 07:26 AM

Here is the definitive timeline for the three movies,


18??
Antonio Andolini is born in Sicily.
Antonio's future wife is born in Sicily.
1887
Paolo Andolini is born to Antonio and his wife in Sicily.
1891
Vito Andolini is born to Antonio and his wife in Sicily.[nb 1]
Hyman Roth is born.
1897
Carmela Corleone is born.
1900
Don Altobello is born.
1901
Antonio is killed on the orders of Don Francesco Ciccio.
Paolo is gunned down during Antonio's funeral.
Antonio's wife is shot to death while attempting to avenge Antonio and Paolo's murder.
Vito immigrates to the United States.
1910
Johnny Fontane is born.
Tom Hagen is born.
1914
Vito and Carmela marry.
1916
Sonny is born to Vito and Carmela.
1918
Sandra is born.
1919
Fredo is born to Vito and Carmela.
1920
Prohibition begins.
Theresa Hagen is born.
Michael Corleone is born to Vito and Carmela.
Vito murders Massimo Fanucci.
1923
Connie is born to Vito and Carmela.[nb 2]
Vito returns to Sicily to avenge his family's murder and kills Don Ciccio.
1924
Kay Adams is born to a Baptist pastor and his wife in New Hampshire.
1933
Prohibition ends.
The Olive Oil War between Salvatore Maranzano and Vito Corleone begins.
Maranzano is killed on Vito's orders by Salvatore Tessio and his men.[nb 3]
1934
Vito survives an assassination attempt by Irish hoodlums.
Giuseppe Mariposa is killed by Salvatore Tessio on the orders of Vito.[nb 3]
Vito begins the Pacification of New York.
1935
Sonny and Sandra marry.
1937
Francesca and Kathryn are born to Sonny and Sandra Corleone.
Johnny is released from a personal services contract by his bandleader, Les Halley.
1939
Vito and his family moves to a compound in Long Beach.
World War II begins.
1940
Frank is born to Tom and Theresa Hagen.
Frank is born to Sonny and Sandra Corleone.
1941
Japan attack the United States at Pearl Harbor.
Michael enlists in the United States Marine Corps.
1942
Andrew is born to Tom and Theresa Hagen.
1944
Michael is awarded the Navy Cross and is pictured in Life Magazine.
1945
Santino, Jr. is born to Sonny and Sandra.
Kay commences an affair with Michael.
World War II ends.
Carlo and Connie marry.
Tom becomes Vito's consigliere after Genco dies.
Vito is severely wounded in an assassination attempt by Virgil Sollozzo and the Tattaglia family.
Sonny takes charge of family affairs.
1946
Michael murders Sollozzo and Mark McCluskey and flees to Sicily.
The Five Families War begins.
1947
Michael and Apollonia marry.
1948
Sonny is brutally massacred by enemies of the family.[nb 4]
Apollonia is killed in a car-bomb explosion due to the treachery of Fabrizio.
Vincent is born to Sonny and Lucy.
Michael returns to New York from Sicily.
1949
Victor is born to Carlo and Connie.
1950
Michael reunites with Kay.
1951
Michael and Kay marry.
Anthony is born to Michael and Kay.
1953
Mary is born to Michael and Kay.
1954
Michael assumes control of family business interests, with the blessing of Vito.
1955
Michael Francis is born to Carlo and Connie.
Vito dies of natural causes.
Michael becomes Don.
Michael eliminates most of his mobster foes and moves from Long Beach to Lake Tahoe, Nevada.[nb 5]
Carlo is garroted by Peter Clemenza on Michael's orders.
1957
Fredo and Deanna Dunn marry.
1958
Peter Clemenza dies.
Connie seeks Michael's permission to marry Merle Johnson.
Michael survives an assassination attempt at his Lake Tahoe mansion, orchestrated by Hyman Roth.
Michael does business in Cuba.
1959
Michael is summoned to appear before a subcommittee of the Senate.
Kay separates from Michael.
Al Neri kills Fredo at Lake Tahoe at the behest of Michael.
1960
Hyman Roth is killed by Rocco Lampone.[nb 6]
1976
Michael moves back to New York.
1979
Michael receives the Order of St. Sebastian.
Vincent enters the Corleone family circle.
Vincent saves Michael from an assassination attempt in Atlantic City, orchestrated by Joey Zasa and Don Altobello.
Joey Zasa is killed by Vincent.
1980
Vincent becomes Michael's heir.
Anthony has his opera debut at Teatro Massimo in Palermo, Sicily.
Connie poisons Don Altobello.
Mary is murdered as she leaves the opera house with Michael.
1997
Michael dies.
Posted By: Danito

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 01:42 PM

Thanks for the work.
But why do you call this timeline definitive? Definitive according to who or what?
There are a lot of contradictions:
- within the novel (e.g. return of Michael)
- between novel and film(s) (e.g. massacre)
- between GF and GF2 (e.g. birth of Vito)

Some events aren't mentioned at all. How can you tell the year of Fredo's wedding?
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 04:14 PM

Exactly. Even we who have persistently rummaged through the novel and films can't be definitive. How can he?
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 04:15 PM

Originally Posted By: Danito
Thanks for the work.
But why do you call this timeline definitive? Definitive according to who or what?
There are a lot of contradictions:
- within the novel (e.g. return of Michael)
- between novel and film(s) (e.g. massacre)
- between GF and GF2 (e.g. birth of Vito)

Some events aren't mentioned at all. How can you tell the year of Fredo's wedding?


He got this timeline over here where it includes notes about those contradictions.

http://godfather.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 04:35 PM

One glaring error in the above timeline is the age difference between Tom Hagen and Sonny. They were the same age.

I know there is a difference between the novel and the movie over when they were born (the novel says 1910; the movie suggests 1916), but, again, they were the same age even if the timeline says they were six years apart.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 04:50 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
One glaring error in the above timeline is the age difference between Tom Hagen and Sonny. They were the same age.

I know there is a difference between the novel and the movie over when they were born (the novel says 1910; the movie suggests 1916), but, again, they were the same age even if the timeline says they were six years apart.


True, but the only source that states Hagen's age is the novel.
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 04:52 PM

There is no such thing as a "definitive" timeline because of all the contradictions and errors in the films and in the novel. I tried to do part of a timeline on Michael's Sicilian sojourn here:

http://www.gangsterbb.net/threads/ubbthr...true#Post580389
...I cited page numbers and direct quotes, but even that was contradicted by other passages in the novel. It's just all over the place.

Also, Hisenberg, if you're cutting and pasting from another source, you should identify the source. It's their intellectual property.
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 05:07 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
True, but the only source that states Hagen's age is the novel.


The novel also specifically states that Hagen and Sonny were the same age.
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 05:14 PM

Right:

"At the age of eleven he had been a playmate of eleven-year-old Sonny Corleone."
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 06:30 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
True, but the only source that states Hagen's age is the novel.


The novel also specifically states that Hagen and Sonny were the same age.


The novel makes a lot of specifications, like Vito being 25 in 1919 en then being sixty during the Dons meeting, contradicting his age. Also, the novel later states Sonny was sixteen in 1933.

According to Part II, Sonny was born in 1916, so we can assume Tom was too.
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 06:48 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
Originally Posted By: SC
Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
True, but the only source that states Hagen's age is the novel.

The novel also specifically states that Hagen and Sonny were the same age.

The novel makes a lot of specifications, like Vito being 25 in 1919 en then being sixty during the Dons meeting, contradicting his age. Also, the novel later states Sonny was sixteen in 1933.

According to Part II, Sonny was born in 1916, so we can assume Tom was too.


I assume you have a point. What is it?

Mine is the above timeline is wrong about the fact that Tom is six years older than Sonny.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 07:07 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
I assume you have a point. What is it?

Mine is the above timeline is wrong about the fact that Tom is six years older than Sonny.


My point is that the novel has numerous inconsistenties about character ages and should therefore be taken with a huge pine of salt when it comes to establishing an accurate timeline.
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 07:12 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
My point is that the novel has numerous inconsistenties about character ages and should therefore be taken with a huge pine of salt when it comes to establishing an accurate timeline.


So you don't think that Tom and Sonny are the same age as is stated in the novel? You are skeptical of that?
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 07:48 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
My point is that the novel has numerous inconsistenties about character ages and should therefore be taken with a huge pine of salt when it comes to establishing an accurate timeline.


So you don't think that Tom and Sonny are the same age as is stated in the novel? You are skeptical of that?


I'm saying that if they're the same age, then both are born in 1916 rather than 1910. I think it's kind of ridiculous that Sonny would be born in 1910, Fredo in 1915, Michael in 1920 and Connie some years later. We are to believe that Vito and Carmela only got together every five years? Or did Carmela have numerous misscarrieges in between?
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 07:51 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
I'm saying that if they're the same age, then both are born in 1916 rather than 1910.


OK. Regardless of in what year they were born we agree that the timeline above is wrong .... and that is all I was saying.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 08:03 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
I'm saying that if they're the same age, then both are born in 1916 rather than 1910.


OK. Regardless of in what year they were born we agree that the timeline above is wrong .... and that is all I was saying.


It's impossible to establish a perfectly accurate timeline because of the numerous inconsistenties in the novel and even the films. The novel states that Tom was 35 in 1945 and Sonny of the same age. Later on the novel states that Sonny was sixteen in 1933. You see where I'm getting at? One has to make choices in creating a timeline based on personal preferences. Puzo and Coppola never offered us a consistent timeline in the first place.
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 08:42 PM

All I know "for sure" is that the massacre took place in '51 (a little bird told me).

However, the timeline is all over the place no matter which source one uses. Maybe Puzo and FFC conspired to keep us dissecting the novel and th film 40+ years later.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/06/12 09:54 PM

Originally Posted By: olivant
However, the timeline is all over the place no matter which source one uses. Maybe Puzo and FFC conspired to keep us dissecting the novel and th film 40+ years later.


You nailed it. Illuminati.
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/07/12 01:37 AM

Originally Posted By: olivant
All I know "for sure" is that the massacre took place in '51 (a little bird told me).

However, the timeline is all over the place no matter which source one uses. Maybe Puzo and FFC conspired to keep us dissecting the novel and th film 40+ years later.

Oli, the reason I did the timeline for the novel was that the "little bird" in the film was Sonny's car radio playing the Dodgers/Giants final playoff game in October 1951. My reason for doing the timeline was my belief that the Five Families War couldn't have gone on for nearly five years--thus Michael had to have returned from Sicily way before that. Also, Sonny would have been driving a 10-year-old car when he got whacked.

I made a case for Michael's early return based on quotes from the novel, putting his return either in late '46 or early '47, in several scenarios. But then you pointed out that, if Michael did return that early, he'd have had to be Vito's apprentice for eight or nine years, given that Vito died in 1955 (film). That would be as unlikely as my original premise: that the war couldn't have lasted nearly five years.

All I can say is what you and I said earlier in this thread: it's impossible to reconstruct a definitive timeline for either the films or the novel. And thank you very much, Mario Puzo, for giving us this opportunity to bang our heads against the wall. tongue
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/07/12 02:38 AM

Originally Posted By: Turnbull
I made a case for Michael's early return based on quotes from the novel, putting his return either in late '46 or early '47, in several scenarios. But then you pointed out that, if Michael did return that early, he'd have had to be Vito's apprentice for eight or nine years, given that Vito died in 1955 (film). That would be as unlikely as my original premise: that the war couldn't have lasted nearly five years.

tongue


I agree. I think the above is what causes most of the confusion. Why would both Puzo ("It was nearly ten years since there had been such a celebration of people in the house, nearly ten years since the wedding of Constanzia ...")FFC (the headstone) chose to separate Michael's exile to Sicily from Vito's death by a decade. Most impractical. Well, as you said, thank you Puzo and FFC.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/07/12 03:22 PM

Originally Posted By: Turnbull
if Michael did return that early, he'd have had to be Vito's apprentice for eight or nine years, given that Vito died in 1955 (film). That would be as unlikely as my original premise


I think it is not realistic that somebody, even though the son of a Mafia boss, rises to the top of boss in only a few years after becoming involved. I think eight or nine years being groomed for the top spot is perfectly normal.
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/07/12 08:29 PM

Sonny, we might be able to account for that long apprenticeship by observing (as Tom told Fredo in the scene with Moe Green) that the Don was semiretired and that Michael was in charge--that he was the day-to-day Don of the Corleone Family. And, he needed his father's prestige and his counsel.

But, realistically, Vito admitted that his agreement to protect drug trafficking at the Commission meeting was a sign of weakness. And, the novel tells us that the other Dons, and even Tess and Clem, thought Michael "lacked force." Michale himself was feigning weakness to buy time. Over a period of seven or eight years of that, the other families would have taken advantage of that passivity to reduce the Corleone holdings to insignificance. As Tess said in the "fish tank" scene: "Pretty soon I won't have a place to hang my hat."
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/07/12 09:13 PM

Exactly TB. Also, as the novel states (yes, the novel) "It was almost three years since he had returned home ... The three years had been spent in learning the Family business."

One should also consider that waiting almost a decade to exact revenge might invite the following:
Michael and/or Vito's murder or death otherwise (his, it did)
Michael and/or Vito's incarceration
The unrecoverable denouement of the Corleone family ("The Corleone Family was definitely in decline.").
Treachery (which waiting just a few years did invite)
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 03:29 AM

Originally Posted By: olivant
One should also consider that waiting almost a decade to exact revenge might invite the following:
Michael and/or Vito's murder or death otherwise (his, it did)
Treachery (which waiting just a few years did invite)

Very strong points, Oli.
When you're bleeding in the water, the shark doesn't wait for you to expire before closing in for the kill.
Posted By: The Last Woltz

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 12:49 PM

Originally Posted By: Turnbull
Originally Posted By: olivant
All I know "for sure" is that the massacre took place in '51 (a little bird told me).

However, the timeline is all over the place no matter which source one uses. Maybe Puzo and FFC conspired to keep us dissecting the novel and th film 40+ years later.

Oli, the reason I did the timeline for the novel was that the "little bird" in the film was Sonny's car radio playing the Dodgers/Giants final playoff game in October 1951. My reason for doing the timeline was my belief that the Five Families War couldn't have gone on for nearly five years--thus Michael had to have returned from Sicily way before that. Also, Sonny would have been driving a 10-year-old car when he got whacked.


I wouldn't read too much into the use of the audio from the Giants-Dodgers 1951 playoff game. That is one of the only (if not the only) extant long-form baseball broadcast from that era, so if FFC wanted to have Sonny listen to a baseball game, he wouldn't have had much of a choice.

Fun fact:

That broadcast is known for Giant announcer Russ Hodges's manic "The Giants win the pennant!" call. But it only survived because a Dodgers fan (one of the few people with recording equipment in 1951) taped the game with the intention of taunting Hodges and other Giants fans with it when the Dodgers won. A pivotal moment in broadcast history was preserved only because of a somewhat petty fan.
Posted By: Hisenberg

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 06:08 PM

Without any doubt the biggest contradiction in the entire timeline is the 55 massacre being said to take place in 51

This makes no sense because:

1. Vitos tombstone says 55
2. if we go by the timeline said in the second movie of the Turk killing in 47 then its saying that Michael left for Sicily, came back, married Kay, and had a 3 year old all in less then 4 years. This is pretty far fetched because we know he spent at least a year in Sicily and didn't see Kay for at least a year coming back to america
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 06:28 PM

I think the reason FFC changed Sonny's death to 1948 during production was for the same reason as we've discussed, and so to make the timeline more consistent.

Puzo has Michael returning to the US in 1950 in The Sicilian.
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 06:30 PM

Originally Posted By: Hisenberg
Without any doubt the biggest contradiction in the entire timeline is the 55 massacre being said to take place in 51


I agree 100% despite olivant's and Turnbull's protestations. Part II starts in 1958, at Anthony's first communion. He was born in 1951, and was already 3 years old reading the funny papers when Vito died. The massacre could not have been 1951.

That aside, the whole timeline is a weak, poorly written part of the movie/novel.
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 06:42 PM

But it's interesting how this thread started out with the premise of a "definitive" timeline, and then evolved into a detailed discussion of the myriad inconsistencies that make it impossible to create a definitive timeline. But that's part of the fun of being on these boards--discussions often evolve in interesting ways. smile
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 06:44 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
I think the reason FFC changed Sonny's death to 1948 during production was for the same reason as we've discussed, and so to make the timeline more consistent.


Sonny, some people here anchor their belief that Sonny died in '49 to the presence of a "Dewey for President" poster on a wall when Sonny beats up Carlo. But, Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican Presidential candidate in '48, also was their candidate in '44, so the poster could be part of support for an earlier date for Sonny's death.
Posted By: Hisenberg

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 07:20 PM

did they even watch godfather 1 while writing godfather 2?
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 07:29 PM

Originally Posted By: SC
That aside, the whole timeline is a weak, poorly written part of the movie/novel.


Agreed.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 07:31 PM

Originally Posted By: Turnbull
Sonny, some people here anchor their belief that Sonny died in '49 to the presence of a "Dewey for President" poster on a wall when Sonny beats up Carlo. But, Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican Presidential candidate in '48, also was their candidate in '44, so the poster could be part of support for an earlier date for Sonny's death.


The screenplay has Sonny's murder occuring in the Spring of '46. But in Jenny M. Jones' book you get a glimpse of FFC's Sicilian notes that state those scenes take place in 1948.
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 08:07 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
Originally Posted By: Turnbull
Sonny, some people here anchor their belief that Sonny died in '49 to the presence of a "Dewey for President" poster on a wall when Sonny beats up Carlo. But, Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican Presidential candidate in '48, also was their candidate in '44, so the poster could be part of support for an earlier date for Sonny's death.


The screenplay has Sonny's murder occuring in the Spring of '46. But in Jenny M. Jones' book you get a glimpse of FFC's Sicilian notes that state those scenes take place in 1948.


The whole timeline is so screwed up. If the '48 clues above punctuate the timeline, then we must suppose that after murdering Sollozzo, Michael was in exile in Sicily for most of '46, all of '47, and some undetermined part of '48 (The Republican convention was held in June). So, sonny is still alive at that time as he beats up Carlo. Thus, prior to Sonny's death in '48, Vito lay in his sick bed for all of '46, all of '47, and some undetermined part of '48; possibly 2.5 years. Seems implausible.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 09:26 PM

I don't think he lay in his sick bed for two years, but the attempt on his life had severely weakened his health -- he was shot five times. I think he was already in the process of turning over complete control to Sonny. When Sonny was killed, he needed to start that process all over with Michael.
Posted By: Danito

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/08/12 09:51 PM

Bonasera manipulated the year on the tombstone on purpose.
The undertaker's revenge for the humiliation back in 1945.
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/09/12 01:24 AM

Originally Posted By: Danito
Bonasera manipulated the year on the tombstone on purpose.
The undertaker's revenge for the humiliation back in 1945.


That makes more sense than anything else I've read.
Posted By: Hisenberg

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/09/12 04:06 AM

Originally Posted By: Danito
Bonasera manipulated the year on the tombstone on purpose.
The undertaker's revenge for the humiliation back in 1945.


but as i explained before the massacre occurring in 50 is impossible going by the timeline
Posted By: SC

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/09/12 04:11 AM

Originally Posted By: Hisenberg
Originally Posted By: Danito
Bonasera manipulated the year on the tombstone on purpose.
The undertaker's revenge for the humiliation back in 1945.


but as i explained before the massacre occurring in 50 is impossible going by the timeline


Danito was joking.
Posted By: Sonny_Black

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/09/12 03:24 PM

Hyman Roth pressured the Senator to give false information about the timeline during the hearings. Roth was a 1950 loyalist which is why he was killed.
Posted By: pizzaboy

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/09/12 03:37 PM

Originally Posted By: Sonny_Black
I think it is not realistic that somebody, even though the son of a Mafia boss, rises to the top of boss in only a few years after becoming involved. I think eight or nine years being groomed for the top spot is perfectly normal.

Well, there wasn't enough time, Michael. There just wasn't enough time.

Was Vito lamenting that 4 or 5 years wasn't enough time, or that 8 or 9 years wasn't enough time?

Therein probably lies the answer. But there's no answer beyond anyone's own conjecture. The timeline was the weakest part of both the book and the films.

But when they wrote this stuff over forty years ago, they weren't picturing a bunch of lunatics with no lives (like us) discussing it on the Internet all day (Or as FFC famously asked Puzo during filming in 1971: What's the Internet? whistle).
Posted By: Turnbull

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/10/12 05:26 PM

I always wondered what Vito meant by "wasn't enough time." The novel states that it wasn't enough time for Vito to "wire" his political contacts into Michael. But, so what? He was planning to move the family to Nevada and go "legitimate."
Posted By: olivant

Re: The definitive timeline - 10/11/12 07:39 PM

Originally Posted By: Turnbull
I always wondered what Vito meant by "wasn't enough time." The novel states that it wasn't enough time for Vito to "wire" his political contacts into Michael. But, so what? He was planning to move the family to Nevada and go "legitimate."


TB, of course the novel does not contain such a scene. I think FFC put it in there as a way of conveying to the audience Vito's reluctance to involve Michael in the business. I don't think it has anything to do with setting Michael up with the politicians. I think he just meant that there wasn't sufficient time to see Michael embark on a path to become "senator Corleone".
© 2024 GangsterBB.NET