I know that we see a scene where Sonny tells that Fredo is going to learn the casino business... but what is the connection with Mike trying a move to Vegas and taking over the gambling world?

Was Michael inspired by Sonny?

According to the book, it was Michael inspired by Vito.

Was it? I always had the idea that Vito was content to be top dog in NYC gambling. Certainly he gained a toehold in Nevada by giving Moe Green "a big chunk of money" to help finish his hotel, and I can't imagine Vito did it simply because he liked Moe or thought he'd dabble in interior decorating. But I inferred that the move to buy Moe out was Michael's idea--certainly with Vito's approval but not necessarily as a result of Vito's initiative.

The move itself to buy Moe Green out may have been Michael's idea. However I've always felt that the whole plan overall, taking out the five families, getting Michael the political connections and clout, and the plan to move the family to Nevada were things that were inspired and supported by Vito.

I believe that there is a passage in the book ( don't recall the exact words) where Michael is talking to Johnny Fontaine and tells him something to the effect that The Don, Hagen and himself felt that the future of the family would be in Nevada and the casino business. Something like that was said by Michael and I've always felt, from that line, that the Don may have inspired Michael to go in this direction.

At the meeting of the Dons, it says that they all recognized that Las Vegas was a city of the future and any family could operate there. After that meeting, Vito tells Tom to put together a team to go out to Las Vegas and find out what's really going on out there.

I think Vito engineered the move to Vegas in order to give the family a chance to go legitimate.

Unfortunately, Michael still affiliated himself with Frank Pentangeli and the NY mob world, Las Vegas brothels, and engineered a move to take over all gambling in the Western Hemisphere.

Again, I think the move to Vegas was Vito's way of getting the family out. As he tells Michael...I never wanted this for you. Apparently Mike DID want it however. His illusions of becoming legit were delusions. Michael just couldn't drag himself away from the illegitimate world even though Vito gave him the perfect chance w/ the move to Vegas.

I don't see that at all. Vito was looking to expand his interests and Las Vegas simply offered an opportunity to do so.

At the time there was little about Vegas that was legitimate. The gambling laws were set up so that people such as the Corleones could not get controlling interests in the casinos, and it was all done by artifice. We see that when Michael is discussing ownership of the casinos and the conversation is about the nominal ownership being held by some legitimate people in Beverly Hills, but the real control being held elsewhere. We also see it when Ola tells Michael that Roth wouldn't object if he "moves Klingman out." By owning the casinos as he did Michael was still very much in bed with the mob and there was nothing legitimate about it. Note that when he testifies before congress he only admits to haveing some stock in the hotels, and is quick to add he has stock in blue chip companies as well.

Personally I think the move to Vegas was planned by Michael and Vito, who both saw it as a way to expand their empire, gain new political contacts and get even richer. Dont forget that the New York operation Clemenza eventually inherited came not only from the Corleone interests. but also what was left of the interests of the other families after Michael wiped them out.

Unrelated to this topic, but related to this point, I would guess that in the aftermath of the killings Hyman Roth engineered his way into gettting some territory in New York, giving rise to the power of the Rosato Brothers.

I'd guess that, after the Great Massacre of 1955, Clemenza presided over a relatively peaceful period. Apparently the Rosato brothers were making independent noises, but I'm inferring from Michael's conversation with Pentangeli in the boathouse that the Rosatos appeared to be mollified by the promise that they'd get the territories after he died.

A further guess: When Pentangeli refused to give them the territories, the Rosatos went to Roth for influence and leverage--they figured that since Roth was cooking up big deals with Michael, maybe Roth would make the territories in the Bronx a condition of his turning over his Havana operation to Michael.

But I don't think Roth was interested, at that stage of his life, in having a piece of the NY Mob business per se. It seems pretty clear to me that he wanted to remain king of legitimate gambling in the two places in the Western Hemisphere where casino gaming was legal--Nevada and Cuba. Michael was horning in on him, he needed to eliminate Michael. He planned to have Michael whacked in Tahoe and put the blame on Frankie. With Michael dead and Frankie either dead or on the run (according to his plan), the Rosatos would take over and no one in NY would threaten him. Perhaps the Rosatos would pay him a tribute, but I don't see Roth as the new Don of New York.

Ok... so was Clemenza killed by someone connected to the 5 families. Revenge for what Michael had done "taking care of family business"?

Cicci - "that was no heart attack"

Cici's statement, "That was no heart attack," is enigmatic enough to have baffled many of us here many times. Clemenza clearly was grossly overweight and was cruising for a coronary. Some people here think Cici may have been referring Clemenza's bad health being exacerbated by agida caused by the Rosato brothers. But I don't think he was murdered by them or by another of the Five Families in revenge for the Great Massacre. If that had happened, it would have been tantamount to war all over again.

I agree with Turnbull about Clemenza and Cici's comment.

Besides there was no one really left at that point who would benefit from killing Clemenza to avenge what Michael had done earlier to the heads of the families.

The Rosatto brothers probably gave Clemenza so much grief that his heart could no longer take it. That is probably what Cici meant when he said that it was no heart attack. They indirectly may have caused his death.

One of the script drafts for Part II alluded to Clemenza being poisoned by some drug injection. IMO this whole subject was somewhat intentional on FCC's part (to leave Clemenza's death unclear) as a way to smack the character so popularly portrayed by Richard Castellano who didn't come to terms with FCC to reprise that role in Part II.

I've always felt that way SC.

FFC was very spiteful to actors he couldn't come to terms with.

Brando and Castellano were not pictured on the crime chart (in the Senate hearing scenes).... lots of confusion over how Clemenza and Tom Hagen died.... little digs that could have been prevented.

It was Coppola and NOT Pentangeli who had too much (of his own) wine....

I posted this several years ago. I once saw a very early draft of GFII that a former neighbor of mine had aquired with a GF Laser Disc set that he had. There were storyboard drawings and on one of them it showed Tom Hagen getting shot and killed.

You mean, Tom wasn't strapped into a car and pushed into water to drown? Maybe that was just a bad dream then...

Puzo and FFC manipulated their knowledge of the Mafia to fit their storylines. I think it was Magliocco that had the heart attack. Clemenza was probably based on Profaci or Magliocco. Cicci's line is one such manipulation. I always inferred from it that Clemenza may have been poisoned.

Its funny... the way Tom and Michael never see eye to eye in GF1 and 2... they could have easily had Tom leave Michael or Michael whack Tom.... As much as I would have like to see Duvall in GF3... it almost would have been weird

And why would they have done that to such an important character?

He was offered the Vice Presidency of Hotels(turned it down) but could have gotten another offer between GF2 and 3.

Michael didnt take kindly to people who werent on his side. Tom's loyalty could have been in question between movies. See Fredo. He could have seen Tom as a threat. Yet another angle that could have been played.

Oh, so your saying that they could have done something like this at the end of GFII because Duvall was not in GFIII?

I guess if I could use the phrase "posting out loud"... I am simply stating that Michael questioned Tom's loyalty at the end of GF2.... so who knows...

"I thought you were gonna tell me that you... VP of Hotels"
"ARE YOU GONNA COME ALONG WITH ME ON THESE THINGS THAT I HAVE TO DO"

etc...

Yes, but keep in mind that when that scene with that line in GFII was written, the making of a GFIII wasn't even a thought. They could not know that 15 years later Duvall would not sign on to reprise his roll, so therefore they had no reason to off him at the end of GFII.

How much do Michael and Vito know about Las Vegas.

Here are my questions:

1.) Does Vito/Michael know that Hyman Roth has a piece of the Tropigala? If so, how could Vito/Michael think that Hyman would "go along with any move you make"(per Ola) without any retribution/interference?

2.) If Michael did know and was successful and Roth was trying to kill and just let the takeover happen? What would Roth's cut? Would Michale have him as business partner?

How about somewhere between GF2 and 3?

Well, Ola tells Michael that our friend in Miami will go along with Michael's moving Klingman out of the Tropigala. Vito had been dead for years by then.

As Olivant said, by that time Vito had been dead.

In GFI we are only introduced to Moe Green as a hotel/casino owner. Then in GFII Roth gives the speach to Michael about his childhood friend who was murdered.....Moe Green.

So one would have to assume that Roth was a backer for Moe Green and his casino just as Meyer Lansky (Roth) was a backer for Bugsy Siegel (Green) in real life.

I am sure that both Vito and Michael did their homework before deciding that the Corleones were going to move out west and get into gambling. And Michael absolutely did his homework before meeting with Ola fully knowing that Roth would back him if he decided to move Klingman out. Michael knew the answer way before Ola gave it to him on behalf of Roth. Michael's meeting with Ola was just a formality to make Roth believe that he respected him and could trust him.

Roth never intended to be partners with Michael. His initial plan almost worked.

1) Give Michael the approval to move Klingman out. Let the Corleones do his dirty work for him.

2) Then have Michael killed and become the sole owner of the hotel.

When the second part of his initial plan failed, Roth went to plan B.

Bottom line is that Roth wanted everything for himself and only after failing to have Michael killed on his Tahoe estate decided that he now needed to make Michael believe that he was on his side. Make Michael believe that he was bringing him in on his Cuba deals, make a cool $2 Million on it, and then kill Michael.

Then Roth would still accomplish what he originally set out to accomplish by having everything for himself and at the same time make a quick $2 Million in the process.

Roth never intended to be partners with Michael. But I do believe that Michael's original intent was to have Roth as a business partner. But that was before he figured out that Roth was behind the hit attempt.

That's it in a nutshell, SF:
Roth and Vito had been partners in the Prohibition booze business (as Roth constantly reminded Michael). But I think that they were never partners in gambling--Vito had NY, Roth had Nevada and Havana. Michael began horning in on Roth's gaming empire when he returned from Sicily (moving Moe Green out was the first business move we say him in). Roth was biding his time and stringing Michael along, pretenting that Michael was his heir-apparent. The Tropigala/Klingman assent was an example. But Roth was simply buying time until he found the right opportunity to have Michael killed.

TB -

Do you think that initially Michael WAS willing to be business partners with Roth?