Who Killed the Assasins ?

I don't know if this is considered etiquette or not, but I thought I'd "re-post" this and see what some of the newer members think. This came up in another thread today, and got me thinking...
-------------------------------------------------

I'm new to this BB, so maybe this has been discussed before, I don't know. Anyway...

Who killed the assasins (the guys found in the ditch) after the attempt on Michael's life in Tahoe? Obviously, it could not have been Fredo. The only possibilities I can think of would be Johnny Ola's men who were there earlier. But if so, how did they hide on the estate until it was time to kill the killers, or why didn't they just attempt the assasination on Michael themselves?
And if it was them, how did THEY escape? It looks like more than just Fredo had to be in on the plot against Michael.

Remember after the assasination attempt Michael says to Tom (talking about the assasins) something like "Unless I'm mistaken, they're dead already...killed by someone inside, close to us"
Who did Michael think it was?

Personally, I've come to the conclusion that it was Anthony who killed the 'would-be' assasins at the Tahoe compound.

Remember how, only moments earlier he says, "Maybe I can help you...", while Michael visits him in his bedroom. Upon hearing the shots and realizing they were aimed at his parents, Anthony then decided this was his big chance to prove himself. So he ran to his closet, grabbed the rifle Neri had secretely given him for his birthday, blew the culprits away from his own window, then slipped innocently back under the covers. Notice how withdrawn Anthony appears throughout the remainder of the film. He is obviously suffering from guilt at having murdered for the first time, but also a little dejected, because here he's made his bones and can't tell anyone about it!!

This also helps to explains how, in GFIII the adult Anthony wants no part of the Corleone Family business, and is drawn instead toward a career in the Fine Arts.

Apple

-Apple

Now that is a new twist, in the summer rerun season!

Hope NJ is cooler then upstate NY...96 yesterday and 91 right now.... They say 98 or more on Wednesday...What happen to that great summer weather. At least it is dry and not raining...it pays to look at the good side I guess!

all that money I saved on the heating bills during that light winter is now being used to cool us off...you just can't win.

Nope, it's about the same, mid-90's and humid. As mentioned previously, I really don't mind it during the day. But I'll admit it's pretty tough to sleep nights (no air-conditioner)!!

Apple

An innocent kid like anthony doing something like that? I doubt it. Anyway I don't have any proof but I am certain that the assassins were caught in a crossfire and killed the Corleone Button Men who were searching the entire dark property in the woods

Thank God for the AC...I wouldn't be able to sleep without it. A fan blowing warm air just doesn't cut it for me. After a few nights of bad sleep I get really mean ...so it was air or living alone

Like this morning..8:30am and its 81 already. This will be a record breaking day in Central New York. Even with the lakes and mountains, trees and all the other of natures helpers it still is going to soak near 100.

Add that to the down stock market, slow business weeks and bad news around ever corner and people are going nuts. Parents doing back to school shopping alone is tuff, add this and a couple of kids that hate the thought of going back to school and trying on clothes and you have a bomb waiting to happen.
I can't understand what my 16 year old daughter wants to wear now a days... Call me an old crow, I never thought this would happen to me! I am turning into my Father!

I like this theory, I think I join up with this marvelous one.

I think Fredo was to weak, but I couldn't think of anyone else. And this theory is maybe a very good explanation.

No Guineapig, it did not.

Because I never opened the thread, in part because it was running the same time as this one and frankly, I'm tired of the question and all the possible theories. Therefore, I never had the pleasure of reading your opinion.

I guess great minds think alike.

Apple

Who Killed the Assassins?

Fred Savage.

Next topic!

-Lucky

I am laughing because everybody KNOWS who did it!!!

It was obviously Kay. I think that she arranged it all, even to have Fredo set up, then killed the people who fired because they did it while she was in the room and that was not how it was meant to be done.

Anthony? No. He DID help Roth though, convincing Fredo into...stuff, then fooling Mike so he has Fredo killed and not Kay or Anthony.

Kay had the miscarriage because the baby she was having had 2 penises and she didn't want that...

Something like that!

You gusty are a funny bunch. I don't think Fred Savage was alivwe in 1974 though, MAYBE in 1975!

Hope you liked yesterday's rain, i was stuck on an Island ina an open boat ina thunder and lightning storm with piercing rain!

I KNEW it, If Anthony REALLY wanted to ride with Mike in the car, why didn't he knock off Bussetta too!? Was it Bussetta who killed Moe Greene?

OH WEll, I guess Cam, and Apple forgot!

A coupel months ago, i came up with a new theory that was readily agreed upon!

The assassins were killed off the compund by Rocco and were placed in the ditch by Rocco and Fredo, Rocco did the shooting but purposely missed (I don't know how!) He gave Mike a chance to duck (Why are the drapes open!). Mike tells Rocco he wants them alive! Rocco knows they are already dead and says "We'll try!". Rocco finds them outside of Fredo's window (Deanna hears him first and has a tantrum), Tom appears and Rocco asks where Miek is, but he's already gone.

Fredo and Rocco agreed to participate knowing thatit WOULDN't be a hit! (I didn't know it was a hit Mikey!)

Roth or Ola was behind it!

Fredo screwed himself over in Havana (Old man Roth would never come here, but Ola knows this place like the back of his hand!)

He should have said (YEah, i know Ola and Roth), Mike knew they were firend sof Greene's and probably visited him whiel Fedo was out in Vegas! After all, Fredo was the Son of another Roth friedn, Vito!

Somehow Mike found out it was Rocco , perhaps the (we'll try, Mike. ALIVE!!!). Mike sends ROcco ona suicide mission vs. Roth

Pentangeli, Rocco, Roth, Ola, Fredo, are all out of the way!

***** Five Star theory??????

Or you can just say the reappearing Tessio did it, or Clemenza came back from the dead! (Fredo HEARD about Old Man Clemenza, they never did go to his funeral! We never saw Tessio get whacked!)

Oh my god, I want to correct my answer in this topic before! I totally disagree with it. I watched GF 2 again yesterday and everything links to Fredo. It was definetly Fredo who killed them.

The best link is the fact that Fredo's mistress runs out the house and says: " Two man.....before my window.....dead!!!!"

And Michael gives an other good link. He says it should be someone nearby who's very afraid when the two people survive and talk.

Gracias Diaz Paisans

Perhaps, Fredo had them killed not only to cover himself, but also to make sure they didn't try to get another shot at Mike, who he still loved as a brother, or killed them as punihsment for trying such a deed. I think the fact that Deanna saw them links their deaths with Fredo in some way.

This is really silly. The Corleone Button Men who were searching for them must have killed the assassins.

Whatever.

And Boss, your theory is not likely. When Corleone Button men kill them they would directly go to Michael and say it. And nobody did that. The found the persons dead and non of the button men had fired a single shot.

But it couldn't have been Fredo either. Cuzz he said simply," I didn't know it was going to be a hit Mike.

Mmmmm, that's true. But maybe that was a lie. There are simply no other clues about who killed the assasins.

Fredo wasn't lying. Johnny Ola called his home in the middle of the night and Fredo got scared after he realized what he had done. So no he didn't kill them

Nobody will ever convince me that it was Fredo who slit 2 guys throats. If they had been shot, maybe, but still unlikely.

It can't be Fredo. He never knew it was supposed to be a hit, so he couldn't have been prepared to find them and kill them. He also was too weak and ineffectual. He couldn't even defend his own father when he was shot. And Deanna is screaming about men outside her window, which makes sense if Michael's bodyguards were scouring the property.

There's also no way Anthony did it. He wasn't even sure what his father did for a living at that point. If he was withdrawn in the remainder of the film, it was because of the tensions building between his mother and father and their eventual separation.

There was probably a third person who killed the other two and got away.

Don't take everything you read here so seriously. I'm new myself, and I've already learned that there's a lot of fun and good humor. I don't think anyone is serious in suggesting it was Anthony who did it.

It's a mystery to me as to who killed the assasins, but I am convinced that Fredo was not involved in the "hit." I believe he didn't know that an attempt was going to be made on Michael's life.

Hiya - great board you got here.

"it would be good for the family / there was something in it for me" Fredo took in some Roth/Ola men who were then able to ease the entrance of the assassins onto the compound, and who also would be there to tie up loose ends if the hit failed.

"...killed by someone close to us" could easily have meant any of Fredo's men (even recent recruits) who were at the compound. It didn't necessarily refer to someone more intimate than that, even though it gave that impression.

Fredo realized all of this after the attempted assassination, hence his "you got me in deep enough already".

Whaddaya think?

Genovese

You're implicating that Fredo purposely led the assassins onto the Lake Tahoe estate, that he set up the hit. I doubt it. Fredo may be pretty stupid, and a ladies' man, but he's not a bad guy, he wouldn't have anybody killed, especially his own brother. But "killed by someone close to us" maybe means someone close to Fredo covering up Fredo. And welcome to the boards, Genovese!

Thanks for the welcome GodYankee.

What I had in mind with Fredo's taking in some of Roth's men was that Fredo had probably been led to believe that sharing forces, so to speak, with Roth although in a regular capacity rather than as assassins after MC might, in his weak mind, seem "good for the family" and also as if he was more involved with things, i.e. Roth.

No, I wouldn't give him credit for killing anybody, certainly not setting his brother up.

It would have been the "recent recruits" who opened the drapes for the assassins. Fredo wouldn't even have done that IMO.

???

So what your saying is I didn't get it? Well, I'm not like everybody thinks! Like Dumb! I'm Smart!!

Hey Sicilian Babe:
Your post about Anthony doing it was soooo SERIOUS. I guess maybe I'm the Fredo here.

plawrence

I always felt that my brother-in-law was a real Fredo - I have to be nice to him as long as my mother's alive!!

I was watching GF2 on TNN the other night and it honestly bugs the heck out of me about Michael's would-be killers!! You get that hint from Michael that it's somebody close, but it never materializes. Also, does anyone know why Rocco is limping in that scene as he runs around?

I want to get this topic re-posted, so I'm replying to get it to the top of the board. Hope this is OK; I've never seen it done here before

so you are still not confident with the general thoughts about it huh?

well, plawrence, after 2,5 months, what are you're ideas now?

I remember Turnbull arguing it was Roth who ordered the hit, and Fredo not knowing he wanted Michael dead from the beginning, and Pentangeli not being able to do such thing.

The one who killed the assasins could either be informed prior to the hit, or just 'acted' like a true bodyguard (therefore, it could be a bodyguard).

Tom and Mike speak a moment later, and say it's someone close who's betraying them. I always thought that it was Fredo who they eventually seem to be meaning, but I don't know.

the Rocco theory above seems likely, Ricardo's theory...

so basically there are two questions:

-who attempted to assasinate Mike (and who ordered it?)?
-who killed the hitmen?

What's likely about the Rocco theory? Where's the evidence, or even the inference that he was involved?

I don't think it's important to know WHO the assasins were. I think we're told they were just hired guns. And it's fairly obvious (at least to me) that it was Roth who ordered it. (Fredo: "I didn't know it was going to be a hit", plus his involvement with Roth & Ola: "You guys got me in enough trouble already").

But the question remains: Who killed the assasins?
If it was Rocco, there would have had to of been witnesses-there were guards and such running around all over the compund after the shooting.

Michael says to Tom something like "Unless I'm mistaken, they're dead already, killed by someone inside the family" Who does he have in mind?

Also, I re-posted this to see what some of the newer members thought about this question. It hasn't been raised in a while and I figured that most newbies don't go reading topics from 2-3 months ago.

Consider this my friends,

Michael was a brilliant man, especially in his ability to anticipate events. Remember the advice the Don gave him in GFI while they were talking in the back yard about checking the phone calls that go in and out of the house because, "it could be anybody...you never know" One would believe that Michael utilized all the knowledge his dad passed on to him throughout his life. With that in mind:

What if it was Michael that actually "staged" a hit on himself to throw everyone off. After all, he knew someone close to the family was a traitor. All of their people were "businessmen" as he told Tom, and with that, "anything's possible" So Michael stages a hit on himself which could, 1, make the traitor extremely nervous about their relationship with Michael's enemy since the hit wasn't discussed, and/or 2, maybe encourage his enemies to start aligning together to discuss who actually wanted him dead and who attempted it. These types of meetings would surely get back to Michael, such as all seemingly pertinent information did. If girl with no family would be sacrificed for the advancement of Michael's gain (Senator Geary's hooker), surely two unkown buttons out of New York would suffice in the ultimate plan of flushing out and eliminating a traitor.

Oh, I almost forgot, it was Al Neri who killed the "assassins"

"What if it was Michael that actually "staged" a hit on himself to throw everyone off"





.

1) Michael didin't think there was a traitor in the family until AFTER the hit attempt

2) In that scenario, what were Fredo's associations with Ola & Roth all about?

3) And who killed the hitmen in that scenario? Someone else would have had to have been in on Michael's "plot"

4) Much too risky. Bullets flying all over his bedroom where his wife sleeps and his children come to play with their toys

Hi,
I believe it was Johnny Ola who killed the hitmen at the compound.

Paul

Hey C.D.,

I'm not dumb, like you think. I'm smart and I want respect!

Hey C.D.,

I'm not dumb, like you think. I'm smart and I want respect!

Hey C.D.,

I'm not dumb, like you think. I'm smart and I want respect!

Ola arrives by boat. There is a reference by Michael to getting "Johnny's men something to eat", so we know he didn't come alone. But the dead guys couldn't have been Ola's men, 'cause they would have been recognized from earlier in the day. And presumably Ola and his men left the way they came. I don't think he stayed behind (besides, he looked a little old and soft to be going around killing hired killers, one against two), and even if it was him, how did he get away?
Seconds after the shots were fired, the whole compiund was on lockdown.

I guess years from now I'll still be shooting down these theories until I find one I can live with.

If I seem a litle crazed about this, it's only because I think the question is SO important because of the statement Michael makes to Tom, to the effect "Unless I"m mistaken, they're (the assasins) dead already... killed by someone inside". Who did Michael think that was? Or even if he had no idea at that point, assuming he was right, who was it? Again, surely not Fredo.

And this stone in my shoe has been bothering me for 30 years

Time to take the boat out and catch the big one...Hail Mary full of Grace....

It was always my opinion that the hitmen killed themselves. I have heard many cases where the assasins would execute themselves after a killing is performed so that if the victim survived, there was no way on finding out who ordered it. Just a thought

By slitting their own throats?

plawrence, you made several good points, it would have to had been someone in the inner circle to have made it into mike's bedroom to open the curtains and not arouse any suspicions and not be stopped and questioned. but i believe that when mike said to tom that vito told him "to think as those around you think" he knew how everyone around him would react to the shooting and how he could manipulate that to his advantage. i have no doubt that neri and rocco were 100 % loyal to mike or else rocco would not have shot roth in the airport knowing that he was also going to end up dead shortly afterwards. also, how did rocco get that limp when he showed up and was speaking to mike ? i believe you brought up a point earlier in another post that the assasins were brought onto the estate in one of the catering truck and dropped off after the reception or the guests left. mike had no reason to doubt fredo until the scene in havana when he revealed himself.

I think after a few months, the best theory is still Anthony.
I think it would have been too suspicous for Fredo to be out of the house. Couldn't have been him.
More than likely Rocco - after Michael sends him out. Does Rocco re-appear in the movie? I'm trying to remember...
OR - it could have been Johnny Fontaine, with greasy hair and olive oil charm, stumbling around the woods drunk, about to sexually attack the assasins - realizes his mistake (or not) and kills them out of embarassment!

Wow, did this thread ever bring back personal memories.

The original post was the first one I ever made here, and after reading some of the responses from 3+ years ago, I see that some things haven't changed.

We had a nice 3 year period for contemplation on the matter.

To go off topic a little bit, how did Rocco know that the assasins were hired out of New York??

Hi Mignon. I don't really have a theory of my own about that, but I can point to one from an earlier thread from July, 2004: A GF II Question That\'s been Killing Me . (Link provided by plawrence in another recent topic).

First, some people noted that Rocco didn't actually make that comment; one of the other buttonmen did. (I checked the script on J Geoff's site and that is indeed the case.)

Second, dontomasso posted that the buttonman employed the deductive reasoning often found in Sherlock Holmes stories: " ... by observing clothing, haircuts, etc., you can tell a lot about someone. Their hats, shoes, etc., may have easily led a careful and intelligent observer to decude where these would be assassins came from."

That sounds reasonable. The witnesses (Michael, Tom, Rocco, etc.) probably recognized this too, or else one of them would have remarked, "What makes you think that?" Also, if that button man did recognize the dead gunmen AND he was in on the plot to kill Michael, he would have kept his mouth shut and not revealed any opinion on their origins or identity.

It was just a passing observation and we're not meant to infer any further significance from it. At least that's what I think ... until someone sways me with a better argument otherwise.

Hi Cristina-

Thanks alot I really appreciate all that.

As we learned in Cuba, people do make slips. Fredo slips while they are at the club didn't he? This time things aren't so crazy as they were after the hit. Michael caught the words said.

Karl

Yes, but --

1. Fredo was quite drunk
2. Fredo was quite stupid

I couldn't resist

Now I feel guilty about calling Fredo "stupid," as that's an adjective I don't like to apply. But his own brother described him as such, so I guess I could say I'm just quoting his brother. But actually, Fredo is not as keenly intelligent as others in his family; and his slip up was quite an absent-minded and unthinking thing to do.

I was going through some old topics from the past, and thought that I would revive this one for old time's sake, and more importantly for those new members who never had the privaledge of reading Paul's insightful and humorous posts.







Don Cardi

Not being here at the time he joined I remember going back to this post for some reason one night when we were talking, I think he wanted to point out to me his first post on the board, I don't remember why though.

Looks like this same thread also includes one of Sicilian Babe's first posts, too!

Back in the old days, ay, Don Geoff?? When we didn't need "can o peas" to eat when we hung out together, when we drank from a hose (what is up with that, anyway?) and tried to get the band to play a Tarantella.

I said all along that it was the landscaper, Ramolo.

I'll go on record and say that Roth/Ola told Fredo to open the drapes so the assassins could get a clear look at what they were shooting. That they simply wanted to scare the hell outta Mike and not actually kill or injure him. Fredo believed them

Obviously Fredo did not kill the assassins, and here is where Rocco comes into this picture. http://www.gangsterbb.net/threads/ubbthr...ge=1#Post340717

EDIT #1--Roth wanted Mike to think it was Frankie who TRIED to whack him, thus Mike takes out Frankie saving Roth the trouble.

Also, the shooting scene has always baffled me. The assassin can see Mike and Mike sees him. Yet the assassin can't get a single shot at Mike? As Mike is crawling toward the bed 4 or 5 bullets hit the mirror directly above his head, and then then the fire curiously shifts away from Mike to above the headboard which seems strange since the assassin can see that MIke is clearly on the floor. Perhaps a very typical Hollywood device that we have seen in almost every movie made where the good guy narrowly dodges the bullets. Not likely in real life, but thats the movies. [EDIT]

(I will edit this post/theory from time to time )

Your theory is logically plausible (although it seems like a pretty high-risk way to scare someone you don't want to kill or injure) but I don't think it makes sense in the context of the film.

I could list several reasons why, but before I do can you elaborate on why you believe they didn't really want to kill Michael, and what they felt they would have gained by scaring him? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument.

Well we are just throwing out theories here of course, but there could be several reasons Roth might want to scare Mike and not kill him. I edited my above post to include the possibility of Roth wanting Mike to think it was Frankie who ordered the 'hit,' thus Mike whacks Frankie saving Roth the trouble. There are several others including the $2million that Mike brings on his death ride to Havana.

Well Ice, while I think that the money issue may have a bit of validity... The issue of Mike whacking Frankie so that Roth didn't have too, i believe is crazy. It would be much easier to just whack Frankie than to ATTEMPT to whack Mike any day of the week.

Like you said, its about the money. If Roth kills Mike in Tahoe then Frankie is sure to fall, but Roth misses out on the 2 million.

Instead he makes Mike believe it is Frankie, so Mike whacks Frankie, and then Roth lures Mike and his 2 million to Havana. EDIT--and in Havana Mike is for sure a dead man until suddently the Batista regime falls



(Instead of taking time to call other's theories crazy you could first go ahead and give your own thoery eh? )

Ok, this part of the movie to me always seemed to leave tremendous pieces of the puzzle for the viewer to figure out on his/her own.

My conjecture is the following (and I would appreciate criticism on this):

First of all, I presume that the two would-be assassins found in the ditch were going to be murdered anyway. They had no way of telling whether or not they had killed Michael Corleone since they sprayed the bedroom with bullets. Thus, regardless of the outcome for Michael, they were going to end up in the ditch with their throats cut.

If it is safe to assume that Roth was indeed behind the hit, as Michael presumed he was, I would assume that Roth wanted the gunmen left as "bait" for whoever might be directing the family affairs after the shooting. Since the gunmen appeared to be "hired out of New York", this would present the appearance of Pentangeli's involvement to the Corleone family, misdirecting possible vengeance from the Corleone's.

Thus, if Michael lived, he might strike out at Pantangeli, or even let the Rosato brothers do it for him, which would be exactly what Roth wanted. Also, Roth probably figured the "new york" gunmen could misdirect Michael long enough to cause Pentangeli's death before Fredo squealed about his conversation with Ola, should Fredo indeed grow a heart and do so.

The other eventuality - Michael's death - would truly be a strange predicament. Who would assume control: Hagen? Fredo? Since Hagen was 'out' of the dealings with Roth (by Michael's orders) Hagen would be in no position to assume it was Roth behind the hit. Hagen did, however, see Pentangeli acting drunk and disrespectful at dinner, and heard Pantangeli give Michael an earful of insults during their business meeting. The "new york" men would probably be a link causing Hagen to go after Pantengeli. Again, Roth would benefit. If Fredo were somehow to have control, perhaps Roth could fool him into thinking it was not actually him behind the hit that night.

Lastly, I believe the assasin's assasins escaped by boat. The complex seemed to be relatively secure along all its land borders, but had a large border along the water which would make a convenient point of invasion. It would take a while to fire up the compound's boats and chase after anyone in the water. Also, due to the time period, the lighting equipment on the boats would make such a chase near impossible at night.

In the end, it seems like Roth put a lot of thought into striking at Michael.

I never understood how one looks like "out of New York." Maybe someof you New Yorkers can enlighten me.

I think Roberto that there is alot of license in the Trilogy. I wondered how two guys could get close enough to the window to be effective and then traverse the compound without getting sited and then killed without that being sited or heard or whatever.

Your conjectures about Roth throwing suspicion on Pentangeli seems logical. But I never got the impression that Michael had any suspicions about Pentangeli. I don't think he would have been fooled and I don't think Roth would have thought he would be.

Even if Roth didn't think Michael would actually be fooled, I think Roth was experienced enough to take contingencies into account. Thus, Roth probably considered the possibility of a failed hit, and that two known Roth associates in the ditch would leave Michael little choice but war.

first off... Welcome DonR. you stated "If Fredo were somehow to have control, perhaps Roth could fool him into thinking it was not actually him behind the hit that night."

but DR, that's just it... Fredo didn't need to be convinced that it was NOT Roth. HE KNEW... and not only KNEW... had something to do with it (either directly or indirectly). And maybe his involvement was indirectly, which I have come to accept. In which case, Fredo may decide to go after Frankie, but I don't believe that he could really "out-fight" anyone; considering his dimwitted dameanor (sp)

"I never understood how one looks like "out of New York." Maybe some of you New Yorkers can enlighten me."

Indeed. And this is one of the reasons why I think Rocco is one of the traitors.

Probably the way the guys were dressed.

Fredo may have had something to do with either providing cover for the would be assassins or even in their murders because when Deanna is taken from her house she is screming they were "right outside my window."

As for Pentangeli, I don't think Mike ever really suspected him. Right after Pentangeli has his rant at Mike, Neri specifically asks Mike whether there is anything he should do about Frankie, and Mike says let him go back to New York, he's an old man who had too much wine.

wow!!! great detail that I never noticed before. Thanks DonT! I never knew what was wrong w/ her... just thought she was acting out again or something

While watching The Saga yesterday, I noticed something that I never noticed before, and this is why I have quoted our late and great friend Plawrence :



To support what Plawrence said above about it not being Fredo, in the scene after the hit attempt on Michael, Fredo's wife is running around screaming and if you look closely you can see that one of the men trying to grab Deanna is Fredo himself. So that in itself would make it almost impossible for Fredo to have killed the hitmen himself.


Note : In another post in this topic, someone said that they noticed that Rocco was running around limping. I believe that in the book when Clemenza is contemplating who to use to kill Gatto, it talks about a guy in his ranks named Rocco Lampone and tells about his having a permanent limp as a result of being injured in the war.

DC, you are absolutely right. Rocco was injured during WWII (performing acts for strangers) and was left with a limp. I always wondered why FFC and/or the actor chose not to have him limp until this scene, though. At least I can't remember Rocco limping in any other scene. Unless it's the one where he's eating the Chinese food.

In a deleted scene in GF, you see Rocco galumphing up Clemenza's driveway while he's polishing his new '46 Cad.

I can't believe for a minute that Fredo would have the gravitas to kill anyone and especially, especially with a knife. I also son't understand why one would want two assassins.

And yes, both the novel and GFII note Rocco's limp.

IF Rocco was involved and Michael knew or had any inkling about it... I believe Michael applied "friends close, enemies closer" kind deal in regards to keeping Rocco around(similar to Roth and Michael)... AND... the reason why Michael didnt fear Rocco trying to kill him after the failed hit was because... Rocco was a businessman... the business "deal" had changed when attempt failed.... AND I believe that he allows Rocco to redeem himself with Roth assassination/kamikazi hit

Redeem himself for what?

For his bad "earlier" busines decision.

So Scarfather, from what you are saying, is it your asertion that Rocco was the "inside" guy for Roth and that he killed the assassins?

Ciao DC -

Actually I have no idea... just threw the thought out there as to how Michael handled Rocco if he suspected he could be involved - hence the "IF"

I think the story is swiss-cheesy there and a "hole"... we just have fun "going there" LOL

So then Scarfather, who killed the assassins?

It was Kay! She killed them with that look that she gives Michael when she's sitting on the couch holding Mary on her lap!

I am not sure... but when Michael says "killed by someone close"... I think its more of a reference to the betrayor in the family(Fredo) in other words... he could be wrong about killed by someone close... but right about Fredo... I actually think that the hitman were killed by design... Roth send 2 patsies and 2 buttonmen.... buttonmen take care of patsies

Just watching GF2... Rocco is watching Fredo right before Michael goes to talk to him.... so if Rocco was involved... Fredo may not have known

Rocco was not involved.

If Michael even suspected him one iota, there is absolutely no way that Michael would have let him hang around for as long as he did. Michael would have never taken that chance of having Rocco around to hurt him if he thought that Rocco was involved.

The Corleone family was big; there were quite a few people close to Michael and to "us" as Michael says. It could have been anyone at the compound. There's no more chance of the traiter or killer being Rocco than anyone else who was close.

But I kind of agree with Babe that it was Kay's look that killed them

This is like the age old question how many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?


Boy: Mr. Turtle, how many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?
Mr. Turtle: I never made it without biting. Ask Mr. Owl.
Boy: Mr. Owl, how many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?
Mr. Owl: Let's find out. One... two-HOO... three..
Mr. Owl: Crunch!
Mr. Owl: Three!
Narrator: How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?
Narrator: Crunch!
Narrator: The world may never know.

The right quote for this question.
Scarfather, although there haven't been any posts on this subject recently, the issue of who killed the Tahoe assassins is probably the longest-running mystery on this board. Though some have posted interesting theories, I don't believe anyone has ever said that they're certain.
Some people a long time ago theorized that Rocco had some role in the shooting, and went on the "suicide mission" to whack Roth to "repent." I think someone may actually have found an earlier script treatment (there are many) that supported the idea that Rocco had some role in the shooting. My view is the same as others' here: If Michael had an inkling that Rocco was involved, he'd have been dead then, or soon thereafter. I also believe that Rocco took the kill-Roth mission as a desperation move to restore his standing in the family after Neri's relentless climb to push him and Tom aside.

There are literally dozens of earlier scripts, abandoned scenarios, deleted scenes, etc. You have to assume that they were abandonded, deleted, not pursued, etc., because Puzo and FFC thought better of including them in the final cut--which is what counts.

In the end I think it was Manolo, the gardener.

Do you think that Mike would have had Roth killed eventually even if he wasn't behind trying to kill Mike?

I think that, before the shooting, Roth really had Michael conned into thinking that Michael could take over Roth's empire without violence--and that Roth would simply fade away to a retirement of playing shuffleboard and pinochle with all the other Florida geezers.

Yeah when Ola tells Michael "our friend in Miami will go along with.." - Michael looks like he believes it... but what was really going on in his head?

He just believed it because he wanted to believe it. He gave Johnny a fervently grateful look, clasped his knee and said, "You tell him that's greatly appreciated"--a rare show of emotion for Michael.

Yeah I think you nailed it... "he wanted to believe it"... just like he wanted to believe Fredo wasnt involved... only hearing Fredo blab at party could he no longer "want to believe"

Look, these guys are constantly maneuvering. Like he told Roth, he didn't want anything interfering with their deal. Roth had something Michael wanted and Michael was willing to do what he had to do to get it even if it meant lying to Roth. Obviously, plenty of gangsters do peaceful beusiness with each other to their mutual benefit. But if the other guy becomes expendable, then he is expended.

"Rumbo... what mean expendabul" LOL

I dont know about this TB. In the scene before the hit, Pentangeli chides Michael about giving his loyalty to a Jew over his own blood. Micke replies that Frankie knows that Vito did business with Hyman Roth, and Frankie says that Vito did business with Roth, respected Roth but NEVER TRUSTED Roth.
If this is so that would have been something Vito passed along to Michael during the time he was training him to be Godfather.
Michael also had to know that the Rosato Brothers who were working for Roth were giving Frankie a hard time, but because he was looking at the big picture -- Havana -- he didnt want Frankie to make trouble. After the hit, Michael makes the snide comment that Roth has been "dying of the same heart attack" for years, which is further evidence that he was always suspect of him. This all leads me to believe that Michael never fully trusted Roth either, and when the hit came he knew right away it was Roth who tried to do it.

Logic is on your side, dt, but logic often falls by the wayside when greed (or lust) enters the picture.
Michael was greedy--obsessed--with attaining legitimacy. Roth was the biggest player in casino gambling in the only places where it was legal at that time. When Roth told Michael that he could move Klingman out of the Tropigala, and become heir-apparent to Roth's Havana empire, I'm betting Michael let his distrust of Roth slip in favor of believing that the old man was just getting older, more tired, ready to step aside. Besides, Roth had no organization--just Johnny Ola.
As soon as the smoke cleared after the Tahoe shooting, Michael knew it was Roth. But before that, I fear to say, he was slippin'.

I know Roth gave Michael the ok to move Klingman out, but I don't recall any mention of his being the heir apparent until Roth's announcement in Havana. As it was Michael had to contribute 2 million to the enterprise, so if 2 million is "just finance," te salute' Michael.

As for who was "slippin'" I'd say it was the guy who almost didnt notice the drapes were open in time to hit the floor. BTW notice how he moves across the floor under fire...shows what good military training he had.... he didnt win the Navy Cross for nothing.

I hear what you are saying.... its very hard to believe that Don Michael Corleone would have "slipped" like that... I think it was strictly FFC/Puzo writing it that way. Michael was to "on the mark" with just about everything to let that be the case IMO.

Expendable means someone or something that you can get rid of, that you don't need anymore.

I think Michael knew what he was doing all along.

Its a line from Rambo pt2

I wanna say that he did too... but... what was his plan if there no assassination attept(s) on his life of senate hearing...

Let Hyman live his life out?
Or eventually "suffocate" Hyman so it looked like he died naturally...
Or of that 30 year old heart attack?

Watch Rocco as he walks to the dock to greet Johnny Ola -- he is clearly limping.

The limp is one of the reasons why I think his assignment to the Roth assassination in the airport was the same kind of deal given to Pentangelli in the "We was like the Roman Empire" scene. The Roth assassination in the airport is a suicide mission, all the more so because the assassin has a limp and therefore has zero chance of getting away. Michael knew that Rocco was one of the traitors, but "kept him close" until the time was right to knock him off.

Rocco was NOT sent to kill Roth because he was a traitor. Rocco took that mission because, as Turnbull has said many times, he was looking to get as close to Michael as Neri had been.

There is absolutely NO WAY that Michael would have kept Rocco around that long knowing that he was one of the traitors. No way.

And if your theory about Michael keeping Rocco close until the time was right had any merit to it, than Michael would never have let Rocco in on so many of the meetings that he had that contained such crucial information.

The only reason that Fredo was kept around until the time was right was because Michael did not want to have his mother go through losing another son. Otherwise if Mama had already been gone when Michael found out that Fredo betrayed him, Fredo wouldn't have ever even made it out of the boat house alive.

If Mama Corleone was already gone, Fredo may not have made it out of Cuba alive.

No way Michael viewed Rocco as a traitor. He never would have kept him around so long. Once Fredo gave it all up in his boat house "confession" there would be no reason for Michael to keep Rocco alive, if he suspected him.

Thanks for the reply. I'm still not convinced, though:

1) I can see why Rocco would want to get as close to Mike as Neri, but if he thought the Roth assassination in the airport was the way to do it, he must have had closeness in the afterlife in mind. Surely Rocco must have known that there was no way that he would ever escape from the airport. He would either be shot dead, as he was, or taken into custody "by half the FBI." If it was known in advance that there was no chance of returning to his normal duties in the Corleone Family after shooting Roth -- being dead, or in prison for Murder 1 -- then how could this be an attempt to get closer to Mike? This is the key part of my argument, that it was known in advance that whoever was to shoot Roth was never coming home -- it was a Jack Ruby type assassination, and known in advance to be such.

2) Which crucial meetings are you referring to? If my memory serves me, these are the only meetings that follow the attempt to assassinate Michael:

-when Michael returns from Havana, he sends Neri and Rocco outside so he can speak to Tom alone.

-There is the brief exchange which precedes Michael's discussion with Fredo in the boathouse, and there nothing you wouldn't want a traitor to hear is let out. In fact Rocco wasn't even present for this conversation: he was with Fredo, and then leaves when Michael comes to speak with his brother.

-Edit: Rocco is handing Michael forms to sign in the Hotel after the Senate hearings.

-Finally, there is the meeting where Michael announces that Roth is to be killed at the airport -- "Difficult, not impossible."

Edit: Maybe I give more weight to symbolism than is warranted, but the fact that Rocco is wearing an orange jacket at the beginning of the film, and that he is the one who hands Michael the "orange from Miami," seems to me to be indirect evidence of at least something.

Valid polints 90Caliber. At least you back up your opinions with fact from the movie.

Do you believe that if Michael would have suspected Rocco as being the traitor who almost had him killed, where his wife slept, where his children played with their toys, that he would have kept him on the compound, where his wife lived, where his children played with their toys, for so long?

Would Michael have let Rocco sit in on a meeting where they were planning how to get to Roth?

I just don't believe that he would have. Michael trusted no one after the hit attempt. He even tells this to Tom. So there is absolutey no way, as far as I'm concerned, that Michael would have let Rocco live had he suspected him, let alone give him free reign around the compound.

Good points, but I think there is a way to account for these concerns:

1) After the assassination attempt on Michael, he immediately left for Miami. Thus having Rocco on the compound posed no threat to Kay and the kids, since they are civilians, and it's Michael they were after.

2) It's important to note that Michael was not immediately certain who the traitor was. As far as he was concerned, it could have been Rocco or Neri -- as he tells Tom, both are "businessmen," with "their loyalty based on that." To put it a different way, I think your point #1 is invalidated by the fact that Michael knows right after the assassination attempt that there is a traitor in his Family, but he still leaves for Miami and Cuba knowing that the traitor, whoever it is, will be on the compound "where his wife sleeps" and "where his children play with their toys." But again, this is not a problem for him while he is away, because his wife and children are "civilians" whom Roth has no interest in killing.

3) When Michael gets back from Cuba, he is knee deep in the Senate Committee hearings. It seemed then that he was going to end up in prison for a long time, and the fact that the whole proceedings were being viewed by 50 million Americans made it problematic to have him killed at this time. If he were assassinated while he was such a highly visible figure, there would have been a lot of pressure to find out who it was, which would put Roth at great risk. Roth already failed to kill him once, so why not just wait for what to all appearances was the likelihood that Michael would be indicted and imprisoned?

4) But Roth had problems of his own. After Michael gets off the hook with the Senate, we learn that Roth and the Rosatos "are on the run." At this point Michael doesn't have to worry about someone helping Roth to kill him. Michael is now back on top, and a "businessman" would be loyal to him, not to Roth, who can't even bribe corrupt politicians to let him find a permanent residence, let alone conduct his business.

I think my points 1), 2), and 4) are the strongest. 3) still needs some work, I think.

I think that your points are excellent.

However



Why then did Michael have Rocco meet him at the motel upon his return from Cuba?

If Michael suspected Rocco, what grounds did he have to suspect him and at what point did he become pretty certain that it was Rocco?

These are good questions, and I've formed some conjectures as to the answers.

Regarding [1]: Michael went to Cuba largely to try to discover who the traitor in his family was. But when he learned that Fredo was involved, this was for him somewhat disappointing, not only because Fredo is his brother, but also, and more importantly, because he must have surmised that Fredo could not have been the only traitor -- surely he didn't slit those assassins' throats. (As a side note, I think Michael is being honest when he says to Tom that Fredo didn't realize that Roth misled him, and that he shouldn't be afraid to come back to Nevada. In my view, it's only after Fredo says in the boathouse conversation that he helped Roth because he thought "there was something in it for him" that Michael decides that Fredo must be killed. To be duped is one thing, but to be duped as a consequence of selfishly trying to partially "break off" from the Family and have some action on one's own -- that's quite another, and deserving of the penalty dealt to traitors). So when Michael returns from Cuba, he still has some detective work to do -- who else in his family was involved? To make this discovery he must use the same technique he used earlier: Michael utters the famous "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" remark to Pentangelli because he says this is how he'll be able to find out who the traitor in his family is. Since the Cuba trip yielded only a partial answer, he needs to employ this tactic again to find out who the other traitor was. This, I think, explains why Rocco is still treated as though it's business as usual.

Regarding [2]: This one is far tougher to answer, but I think a reasonable conjecture can be made. I believe that Michael suspected it was most likely to be Rocco at some point before the "difficult, not impossible" conversation. Sometime after that conversation, I believe Michael "tested" both Neri and Rocco -- some kind of conversational ruse, similar to what he does after the failed Tahoe hit, i.e. he goes to the two possible suspects, Roth and Pentangelli; he is almost certain it's Roth, but he still rips into poor Frankie like a lightening bolt ("IN MY HOME!") as if Pentangelli was behind the hit -- a little trick just to verify that he is right about Roth. So I think some kind of ruse like this was used on both Neri and Rocco. I also believe that Michael thought, in advance of using this ruse, that Rocco was the more likely suspect because Rocco was in charge of compound security, and he had far more opportunity than Neri did to point Michael's bedroom out to the assassins. Also, I come back to the audience's point of view (as distinguished from Michael's): Rocco hands Michael the "orange from Miami," he's wearing an orange jacket during the assassination attempt sequence; and the movie begins with him kissing Michael's hand. [edit/deleted an error].

Another point is that after Michael learns that the attempt to kill Roth failed, he knows he has to figure out a way to try again. Since Roth will be impossible to kill unless a suicide assassin does it, Michael holds off on confronting the suspected traitor with the same type of "suicide deal" he offered Pentangelli until he has an opportunity to kill Roth -- i.e. when Roth returns to the US. This way Michael gets rid of his traitor and Roth in "one stroke," as Machiavelli would say.

Excellent thought process here my friend, but I'm sorry, I'm not convinced. There are just too many holes in your theory.

90:

Why do you think Michael went to Cuba to discover who was the traitor? He was already ready to go to Cuba onthe night of hte assassination attempt. What i the world wouold he learn in Cuba. He went to Cuba to participate in the deal that he had arranged with Roth.

Rocco was in charge of compound security? Where did you get that from? Rocco didn't have to volunteeer to kill Roth. There's nothing to indicate otherwise.

Some of your reasoning reflects that of Board members about whether Tony Soprano is dead or not. In both cases, there's noting there on which to base a conclusion.

Michael, the old manipulator, gave Rocco no choice. Put yourself in his shoes:

--In the boathouse, Neri reclines in the chair and leads the discussion on Roth. Rocco stands guard, like the security guard he's become (when he's not a waiter, feeding Johnny Ola's men).
--After Michael brutally humiliated Tom about his job offer and mistress (watch Neri smirk; he was obviously the source of that info), he then says he wants Roth's plane met.
--Tom, true to form, falls right back into character: "Impossible...like assassinating the President." Sets stage for another humiliation: "Y'know, Tom, you surprise me...if there's one thing that's certain...it's that you can kill anyone."
--And then Michael turns and says, "Rocco?" He doesn't say, "Al?" He says, "Rocco?"

Now, what's Rocco going to say? "Uh, Mike, uh, I agree with Tom: impossible"?? After Tom was humiliated giving the "impossible" answer? Not a chance! Michael gave him no options.

All true, except for the inference which you (and Olivant) seem to make from Rocco's reply: you believe that he is volunteering for the actual hit when he says "Difficult, not impossible." This is a mistake, if that's what you mean. The question was whether Roth could be killed, not who was going to kill him. As far as Rocco was concerned, Neri or someone else could get the actual assignment for the hit. And note that that casual expression on Rocco's face would have vanished very quickly if Mike had then said, "Good. You're going to dress up like a reporter, and when Roth is stopped by the press and half the FBI, you're going to pretend to take notes, and then shoot him. Alright?" Gulp!

These are the key questions: Was it known in advance that whoever was to kill Roth was without any doubt going to be shot or thrown in jail? If yes, what kind of circumstances/predicament/frame of mind must someone be in in order to be recruited for such a job?

By the way, is there no significance to be attached to the business about Rocco handing Mike the orange from Miami, and the fact that he's wearing an orange jacket during the opening/assassination sequence? When Ola wears an orange suit, when Carlo wears an orange shirt and pants, when Tessio grabs an orange and flips it up in the air, when Vito is surrounded by oranges when he's shot, everyone notes the obvious symbolic significance of oranges. What about the example I raise here?

Every great film or novel will require a greater or lesser degree of inference making. If everything to know about the plot were placed right in front of our eyes, this Board would not exist, and the movie would be pretty boring.

I am not intending to disrepsect your opinions about this, but am sincerely trying to understand your thought process.

You say that that Rocco was sent on this Roth hit and took it as a form of self redemption, similar to Pentangeli, and that it WAS a suicide mission.

Then a few posts later you ask if Rocco had known in advance that he was going on a suicide mission, what kind of frame of mind would he be in going on this mission.

So which is it?

Did Rocco take this assignment as a way of going out with honor for betraying Michael, just as Pentangeli did?

Or

Was Rocco sent on this mission unaware that he would be killed? Unaware that Michael was setting him up for betraying him?

Okay, so Mike knows that Rocco betrayed him. No problem Rocco. I'll figure out some way to get back at you. But in the meantime, you can walk around me freely with a gun and you are free to continue to plot with Roth against me. I've got time. It's in the attenpted assassination manual: once a person fails in their attempt to assassinate someone, they never try it again for quite awhile.

Please don't respond with that stuff about "keeping your enemies closer." Closer for what? Rocco commnads a regime; he's got plenty of guns at his disposal. He can move against Mike at any time. So Mike's going to let him roam, right, on the assumption that Roth might in the future end up walking through an airport and Rocco might volunteer to kill him. Madonne!? I don't think so.

My opinion on the matter is that when Rocco was approached by Michael and told that he would do the hit in the airport, he knew Michael figured out he was a traitor because there was no possible escape from the bullets of "half the FBI" at the airport.

Now I do not think this has anything to do with redemption in the usual sense of that term. I don't even think Pentangelli's choice has to do with redemption, or going out with honor. It's a deal. Indeed this is how Tom puts it to Frankie. Frankie kills himself because he is getting something tangible in return: "When a plot against the emperor failed, their families were always given a chance to keep their fortunes." Frankie then says "only if they [the plotters] killed themselves." At this exact moment Tom chucks his cigar and extends his hand as a sign that he got what he came for and he's now leaving -- Frankie gets my point: he kills himself, and in exchange we take care of everything he leaves behind. "That was a good break, a nice deal."

To your question, "Was Rocco sent on this mission unaware that he would be killed? Unaware that Michael was setting him up for betraying him?" -- I think Rocco must have known, as soon as Michael approached him to assign the Roth hit to him (a conversation which necessarily occured but is not shown on screen), that he was a dead man. Why? Tom already gives us the reason in the earlier "Difficult, not impossible" conversation: when Roth gets to the airport he'll be swarmed by customs and half of the FBI. This little conversation is truly remarkable: after Tom notes this fact, it's now understood by all four men in the room that whoever is later approached by Michael to do that hit is not coming home. What drama!

Now I think that you are reaching a bit.



If that is the case than what benefit was it for Rocco to take the assignment? Why even bother showing up at the airport if you know that your boss is sending you on a suicide mission because he knows that you betrayed him?

With all due respect, your argument is weakening with each explaination that you give.



Yes, it was a deal. But it was a deal presented to Pentangeli out of respect, out of understanding that he was duped into thinking that Michael tried to have him killed. A deal to let Frankie off the hook which allowed him to regain his family honor. A deal that said, "we understand why you almost testified against Michael, but it cannot be forgiven, so here is a way out with honor."

And Frankie took it to redeem his family's honor.

Yes, to redeem his family's honor, but also, imho, to guarantee the safety of his brother.

Let me outline the premise that sits at the bottom of my argument:

Michael approaches you, and says, "I'm giving you the Roth hit. When Roth gets off the plane, he'll immediately be surrounded by armed customs men and half the FBI. You'll dress up as a reporter so you can get close to him, and kill him." Unspoken words: "It is obvious to me and you that there is absolutely no chance that you will make it out of that airport. On the day of the hit, your life is over. After you shoot Roth, only a miracle will prevent you from being shot dead by the FBI."

When someone approaches you with this order, what are they saying?

Actually he guaranteed the safety and honor of his brother the moment he changed his testimony at the hearings.


The meeting with Hagen was to save HIS honor and to make sure that his family would be taken care of for life.

The first scene were Rocco is seen limping is when he is galumphing down Celemnzas driveway ' in the wooden bumpa's scene ', is when he is given the Carlo hit. Any one in the family has to know that there would be a time either when sent on a hit or just walking around the neighborhood that they have a chance of getting whacked either by a rival family or the cops or when you double cross your boss. I feel that Rocco was sent on this mission was that he was not as valuable to Mike as Neri was. Neri didn't report to anybody but Mike, unlike every other button, who had to go through someone else to report info to Mike. Neri's importance, closeness, reliability and trust by MIke can be seen in all 3 movies. Mike has Neri take care of business were Mike knows there is no room for error. By that I dont mean that all of the business undertaken ( no pun intended ) has any room for error, but the business that Mike has every one but Neri take care of, surely Mike knows that there is some room for error. Neri's former job as a cop made him more cautious and calculating, which Mike used and knew how to put to work. Neri was truely Mike's right hand man. Mike gave Neri the most important jobs where there was no room for error. Probably the only reason that Mike took the ancient button to Cuba to whack Ola and (attempting whacking ) of Roth is that Mike knew that that trip would be one way for his bodyguard. Neri was to valuable to have something happen to him, Mike had plans for Neri. The only time in the 3 movies that Mike gets mad at Neri is when Vince is given the nod by Neri and Connie to whack Zasa. Mike knows by giving Neri the look ( and the tone of voice that he uses ) that he gives him after learning of the hit is that Mike knows deep down that it was done with good intention, but also that neither Neri or Connie knew that Mike needed and wanted more information from Zasa - who was pulling his strings and his intentions.

They're telling me that I am going on a suicide mission. NOW, if I actually was the one who betrayed the boss who is sending me on this suicide mission, than I am not showing up that day. If I know that I am a traitor and now figure that my boss knows it to, if I refuse to carry out the order, I am a dead man. If I carry out the order, I am a dead man. So I accept the order and then run for the hills.

However it didn't play out that way. It actually was Rocco who told Mike that getting to Roth would be "difficult, but not impossible."

So it's obvious, by his own words, that Rocco figured that he could pull it off. And If he did pull it off, he would be bigger and better than Neri ever was and then Michael would have to at least treat him as an equal to Neri.


Rocco was expendable. Neri was not.

I should start by saying that this exchange is very beneficial to me. I've been away from the board for quite a while, and I'm glad I'm back on.

To [2] & [3], I think we must take into account Turnbull's correct observation that Rocco had no choice but to say it was a doable hit. Turnbull wrote:

"Michael, the old manipulator, gave Rocco no choice. Put yourself in his shoes:

--In the boathouse, Neri reclines in the chair and leads the discussion on Roth. Rocco stands guard, like the security guard he's become (when he's not a waiter, feeding Johnny Ola's men).
--After Michael brutally humiliated Tom about his job offer and mistress (watch Neri smirk; he was obviously the source of that info), he then says he wants Roth's plane met.
--Tom, true to form, falls right back into character: "Impossible...like assassinating the President." Sets stage for another humiliation: "Y'know, Tom, you surprise me...if there's one thing that's certain...it's that you can kill anyone."
--And then Michael turns and says, "Rocco?" He doesn't say, "Al?" He says, "Rocco?"

Now, what's Rocco going to say? "Uh, Mike, uh, I agree with Tom: impossible"?? After Tom was humiliated giving the "impossible" answer? Not a chance! Michael gave him no options."

Now this doesn't necessarily mean that Rocco was lying here. Also, just because he says it's difficult, but not impossible, it doesn't mean he's at this moment volunteering for the hit. He is just answering a question: is killing Roth possible? If he said, "I think I can do it myself," that would be different. But to infer that Rocco's statement was meant as self-enlistment for the hit is a stretch. Again, he's only answering a question, and as Turnbull observes there was only one answer he could give, whether that answer was his true opinion or not.

There is a lingering problem for me here. You seem to agree that objectively speaking the Roth hit is a suicide mission. Do I understand you correctly in thinking that in your view Rocco thought he could outmaneuver "half the FBI" in an airport and make it out alive? I think Rocco would know better than that. And if he thought there was 0.0000001% chance of getting away alive, did he really think it was still worth a shot if it meant supplanting Neri? This is a tough sale for me as well, as it's not the calculation of a businessman -- "All our people are businessmen -- their loyalty is based on that."

Regarding [1], there are things that can be done to get the guy to "show up" on the day of the hit. Firstly, you assign him to the job on that day, not before -- an old trick of clever ringleaders of conspiracies. The other aspect of my little theory is that Rocco is given a Pentangelli type deal. "You have to die, now there are two ways we can do this: Neri blows your head off right now, or, you do me this 'service' (kill Roth), and in exchange . . . ." Now what is the "in exchange"? Here I admit I'm really speculating, but perhaps not too wildly: wouldn't Rocco have had a family, like Pentangelli did?

Rocco was not responding to a hypothetical or impersonal question about whether or not Roth could be killed. Nor was he thinking that perhaps someone else could be engaged to do the killing. The operative premise--the one that set off Tom's reply and Michael's humiliation of Tom--was "I want it [Roth's plane] met." Michael said, "Rocco?" Rocco had to know that Michael intended him to meet the plane.
I think you're having difficulty believing that anyone would "volunteer" for what seemed certain to be a suicide mission. You and I wouldn't, but you and I aren't Rocco--a guy who had been brought along by Clemenza in the ways of old-time Mafia obedience; who was losing status in the family to Neri; who was put on the spot by his boss after the boss thoroughly humiliated his "brother"; and who may have seen (or rationalized) in this mission a glimmer of a chance to get away with it and reinstate himself in Michael's estimation.

And if he didn't kill himself, do you believe that his brother would not have been bothered?

I really do. I believe that once Frankie recanted his earlier testimony, his brother's honor and safety had been restored. Tom even turns to him and tells him in italian that his (Vincenzo's) family's honor is ok.

Okay, I'll buy that. Frankie did do the right thing by Michael, in the end, by recanting his testimony.

There is just too much supposition here. Such supposition is based on the belief that Rocco was a traitor. That's going a little too far.

Just to shift gears for a moment: any takers for explaining the significance of the fact that Rocco hands Michael the "orange from Miami," and that he is wearing an orange jacket?

Well yeah... BUT... he surely planned on testifying..."there is more people than a ballgame in here".... if he had NOT seen his brother with Michael. He would be Mr. Cheddar

I am in the minority here but... I think Rocco made a business decision. He lost because of it then spends the rest of his Corleone life trying to make up for it.

I think Michael suspected him. But wasnt sure. Because it was business. I think Michael felt safe. Rocco knew that he made a bad business decision. Michael held it over him, HARD. Rocco was from that point on forever loyal. I think it was one of the most dangerous "chess" games Michael played in the movie.... along with the constant manuevering with Roth.

Ok. So he let Rocco slide because it was family business, but he ordered the death of his own brother to protect the family business.

I'm completely with Olivant here. "Friends close, enemies closer" is a strategem for when you know your enemy and you have time and wherewithal to play him--as Sonny did with Paulie, Vito and Michael did with Carlo, and Michael did with Roth. The Tahoe shooting didn't qualify. Unknown and unexpected assassins, who had to either know or strongly suspect that Kay and/or the kids would be in his bedroom, attacked with machineguns. While Kay and the kids weren't targets, the would-be killers had no compunctions about wiping out anyone who got between their bullets and Michael. They were assisted by an unknown person "very close." And they'd almost certainly try again. It was a situation, as Michael told Tom, that was "life and death."
Under those circumstances, if Michael'd had any inkling that Rocco was involved, Rocco would have been dead sooner rather than later.

It was the smart move... Rocco was always smarter

Take a chill pill... you or I cant know WHAT he(Michael) thought about Rocco.

Bulletin board are for debate of opinions... and sometimes they are about "what if's" or "other" possible scenario's.

Fredo WAS more dangerous than Rocco. IMO.

Thank you Scarfather, for enlightining me about what an internet bulletin board is for! I don't know how I would have been able to continue on here had you not joined this board and enlightened me with your extensive knowledge and experience in regards to internet bulletin boards!

You are the man!

You are welcome!
Anything I can do to help.

Olivant & Turnbull: Don Cardi raised this objection already and I tried to address it earlier. Let me add a few things and restate my points in a perhaps more convincing way:

1) When the Tahoe hit fails, Michael vanishes, so another hit that could endanger his family is not a problem. True, Michael orders that Kay and the kids not be allowed to leave the compound, but if this fact does anything, it supports my point. The traitor is someone "close to us, inside," and yet Michael orders his family to stay on the compound -- with the as yet unknown traitor -- when he's away.

2) The "keep your enemies close" strategy is always extremely risky. It is to gloss over the real facts to say that Michael was at liberty to play around with Roth this way as though in a liesurely and low risk fashion. Michael knows Roth tried to kill him, so going to Cuba was extremely dangerous. (Even going to visit Roth in Miami was dangerous, as is clear from Michael's very cautious approach to Roth's front door.) He could be whacked at almost any time from the moment he landed in Havanna -- the plan to do it "neatly" when Michael was in a military car was the least risky move for Roth. Sure, Roth would have liked to have gotten the 2 million first, but a guy who would give 4 million just to take a piss without it hurting would certainly pass up 2 million if it meant getting rid of Michael.

3) Not long after the Havana operation fails, Roth and the Rosatos are "on the run." As I already noted, this changes the whole dynamic of the situation for a would-be traitor. That is, you don't try to kill your boss for another boss, when a) your boss is now back on top ("Michael, you've won") and b) the other boss is on the run and unable to provide you with the same incentive to turn on your own boss as he could previously.

4) If, as I believe, Rocco was the man helping Roth, he would not recruit his own men, with all their "machine guns," to help him kill Mike. Why? If he approaches one of them and makes this proposition, he gives the guy he makes the proposition to an opportunity to replace him as Caporegime. This guy will pretend to go along, and then go straight to Mike with this information. Nothing Rocco could offer him could outweigh what Mike would do for him in return for this information. Machiavelli puts it well when speaking of men who want to recruit others to kill a tyrant: "as soon as you disclose your intent . . .you give him the means with which to become content." [Addition:] This, I presume, is why the two guys who turn up with their throats cut are not men who were part of the compound security detail.

The GF world will never know.

. ..you know what a haza is, Scarfather?

Hey 90caliber... thats where I was going with the Rocco theory. Great detail. Thanks.


"You tell 90caliber it is greatly appreciated"

Great debate guys.Ive enjoyed reading your thoughts and opinions on this matter.As for my two cents,i'll keep it short and sweet.

I dont think Rocco was the traitor.As others have pointed out,it would be a little silly giving Rocco so much freedom around the compound after the attempted hit on Michael.Michael was a mastermind remember.I think he would have come up with something better than biding his time with Rocco for so long and then sending him on a "suicide mission".Rocco obviously thought that after he wacks Roth that yes,its gonna be difficult getting away but not impossible.

This is a very enjoyable debate indeed.

Let me say that I think the Aussie-Turnbull-Olivant-Don Cardi, et al. argument is plausible. I don't deny that it could be right. Obviously I favor my own theory, but reasonable people can disagree, after all.

Now I don't see why it is "silly" for the mastermind Michael to give Rocco "so much freedom around the compound after the attempted hit," as you put it. Keep in mind these two crucial points:

1) After the attempted hit, Michael has nothing to worry about a traitor roaming free on the compound, because he, Michael, is not there. He's in Miami, then Cuba. Nothing silly here.

2) When the Havana operation fails, his worries about getting whacked by one of his own men (on Roth's order) are completely gone. Indeed, what would be silly is for one of Michael's men to whack him for Roth at this point. Why? The tide has turned: Michael is on top, Roth is "on the run," he's lost. A traitor will be a traitor for "business" reasons, i.e. the other boss can give me more than my own boss. With this in mind it is clear that at this point in the movie Michael has no worries that one of his own guys will whack him for Roth. There is nothing for the traitor to gain, and everything to lose. Notice also that at this point in the movie the compound no longer looks like an army base -- Fredo and Anthony are out fishing and having fun, etc.

"Anything I can do to help"

I'm rereading the novel after not having gone through it cover to cover for a long while, and I found the passage I was looking for: Rocco does have a wife and children (p. 105 of the hardcover 1st edition).

This one is still up for grabs. Any thoughts?

Valid examples 90caliber. However I still find it hard to believe that Rocco was the traitor for the reasons that I've given in my other posts.

For some reason, I can't recall Rocco wearing an orange jacket ever. Wasn't it sort of tan?

The jacket (in the opening/assassination sequence) is light orange, but definitely orange.

But even if this can be reasonably denied, he is still the one who hands Michael the "orange from Miami." I forgot to add in my earlier post that before he hands it to him, he flips it up in the air, just as Tessio did (!).

Another quick note: I also find it interesting that just before Rocco says, "Difficult, not impossible," he hoists two potato chips up to his mouth -- exactly what Roth is eating after his "small potatoes" line.

Mike then says" I've already made my plans." What plans? What did Mike mean?