This is something I've started to think about. Before his death, Sollozzo wants a deal with the Corleones to end the bloodshed before it gets more out of hand; remember at this point Luca is dead, Paulie has been killed, Don Corleone is severely injured and recovering, and Bruno Tattaglia is dead.

Tom Hagen says to Sonny and Michael that they should assume Sollozzo will make another attempt at Don Corleone's life, based on his past actions, and thus they figure make him think he's going to meet for a deal, and kill him.

I'm curious as to whether or not that was the case. Sollozzo really has no options at this point, and he says that himself during his meeting with Michael. He's backed into a corner because his attempt on Don Corleone's life failed, and now he technically has cost the Tattaglia's the life of the youngest son of Don Tattaglia.

With the limited information we have to go by, do you think that Sollozzo really was wanting to make a deal and get out with his skin, or was he attempting to stall for time to make one final attempt on Don Corleone?

Also, if Sollozzo really was looking to make a deal, and instead of killing him Michael had listened and the Corleones went for it, what do you think the outcome would be? Personally I think it would transpire much as if Don Corleone had agreed to finance Sollozzo's enterprises in the first place: That is, Barzini and Tattaglia would use their vested interest in the drug trade to increase their own power, while the Corleone's power took a bit of hit. Eventually, maybe a couple of years down the road, Barzini would have made his move.

IIRC correctly in the meeting with Sollozzo Michael's initial suspicion that Sollozzo was just playing for time was pretty much confirmed.

I think no matter what Sollozzo would have wanted to kill Don Corleone. If he did that the amount of "respect" he received from everyone else would have been worth the blood and money he had cost them. And it was also a personal thing by this point.

And by killing Vito Sollozzo may well have been able to forestall a long costly war as even Sonny said something along the lines of "if the old man died I'd be busy enough trying to hang on to what we already had". Even someone as bloody minded as Sonny might have had to temporarily stand down.

As Michael concluded during the meeting with Sollozzo, Sollozzo was just playing for time to concoct another plan to murder Vito.

But I always wondered why Vito agreed to meet with Sollozzo at all. The novel states that Vito had put off such a meeting until after Connie's wedding. Thus, he anticipated a problem and he already knew what his answer would be.

Sol's plan was to stall for time to kill Vito and to make a deal:

His original strategy after being turned down was to whack Vito, which would remove an immovable object from his path. A good deal of Vito's police/political protection would bolt rather than stand with Sonny the hothead, putting them up for grabs for Sol, Tatt and Barzini. Then Sol could use Sonny's greatly weakened position to bargain for the Corleones' remaining protection at a reduced rate.

Vito's survival didn't change the strategy. As long as he lived, there'd be no deal, and Sonny would be gunning for him. So, yes, he was stalling for another shot at Vito. And, yes, if he succeeded, he'd then present Sonny with a (greatly reduced) deal, hoping that Tom would make him see that he had no choice but to accept.

I think he had at least two reasons for the meeting.

First, he didn't want to gratuitously offend Tattaglia and Sollozzo by acting so high-handed that he refused to meet with Sol. Sure, he knew that his refusal wouldn't please them, but he probably thought that refusing to meet with Sol would be worse.

Second, I think he wanted the meeting so that all the key players in his family would be present to hear him refuse Sol's offer. He knew about the greed that drugs engendered, and he knew that Tom and Sonny were hot for Sol's deal. So, by gathering them together with Sol for his "no," he was telling Sol that there would be no back door to a drug deal in his family.

The reason why Vito turned Sollozzo down was that he knew that much of his 'political protection' would vanish. So why would they then go to Barzini and Tattaglia? That doesn't make sense at all...

Good point SB. The whole idea of murdering Vito who was the golden goose when it came to political protection and influence makes no sense. Of course, this has been discussed quite a bit in other threads. But the novel states emphatically (and one can definitely infer it from the film) that Vito's political influence was a function of his personal relationship with politicans and was not, in all likelihood, transferrable to Sonny or anyone else. So, if politicians were not inclined to follow Vito's lead on drugs, why would they be inclined to follow anybody's lead?

The novel points out that, at the beginning of the Five Families War, the police brought all Mob activity to a standstill because of McCluskey's murder. But they let up after a while because "they still had mortgages to pay off and kids to put through college." The same would apply if Vito had been killed. Some would bolt the Corleones because they didn't trust Sonny's judgment. But they'd still need payoff money, and they'd be fair game for the other Dons.

Hello all. I just finished the book and re-watched the movies and felt that I needed a deeper insight of this epic story. Glad to have found this forum. Great display of literary intelligence in these threads. Di salute!

My question in this topic would be, why was Solozzo still interested to make a deal with the Corleones (kidnapping Hagen) when he thought don had died? Had the old man died, the family's political influence would have been dismissed. What would he have gained by forcing a deal to a partner with no political influence? Money?

Welcome, Ristiisa!

I think that at that moment Sollozzo's biggest goal is just to avoid a full-scale war so that he can start his drug operations. His most pressing need was to get the Corleones to pull their button men off the street.

OK, to take of from your point, Sollozzo wanted to rule out any possibility for a revenge from the Corleone family so that he could materialize his business aspirations without any risks to his life or operations. And the threat of a full-scale war was just a mean to achieve the deal in the negotiations since nobody really wanted that. A mean he would have preferred to avoid himself as well.

But in this case, why would the war have started in the first place if Sonny said no for the deal and Mike wouldn't have killed McCluskey?

btw: Ristiisa means Godfather in Estonian.

R, we've debated this very subject many times on this Board. Many Board members believe that, as Sonny states in the novel, Sollozzo could make a deal with Sonny on drugs. However, some of us have countered that since Vito was wanted for his legal and political influence to protect the drug trade, murdering him removed that influence. Others then counter that Sonny could exercise that influence. But I counter that Vito's influence was personal and that Sonny did not have that personal touch and, thus, no influence. So, as TB has opined, Sollozzo's attempted murder of Vito was a ploy by Barzini to ascend to the top of the NY underworld. Even though the attempt failed, as the novel states, Barzini achieved his objective (even if temporarily).

I think that the Corleones under Sonny would have fought to gain justice or vengeance over Vito's killing. I think that Sollozzo and the Tattaglias would have fought because they had committed to get the drugs project started (which they couldn't do in wartime), and also because the Corleones were attacking them. (The surprise in the war would be if Barzini threw his men into the fight against the Corleones).

I should say that by "all-out war" I meant between the Corleones and Sollozzo/Tattaglia (and maybe Barzini) at this point. I think the refusal of the Corleones to give up McCluskey's killer is the incident that sets off the war against all of the other families.

Michael: "If they had gotten the old man, what would you have done?"

Sonny: "Sollozzo is dead meat. I don't care what it costs. I don't care if we have to fight all the five families ..."

Welcome, Ristiia! Yours is a thoughtful question that, as Olivant said, we've discussed many times here because it deserves the attention we're giving it.

Yes, I believe Sol really wanted a deal. He saw that Sonny was "hot for my deal. And you [Tom] know it's the right thing." The novel also states that Sonny wanted an operation of his own and was anxious "to get out from under the Don's thumb." Solozzo surely knew that, too.
And, although the Corleones would lose some of their police/political protection with Vito dead, others would remail loyal to the Corleones. Sol would need them to protect his fledgling business, at least until he and Barzini were strong enough to buy those who had defected.

The key for Solozzo was to avoid an all-out war. He knew the other families would not dare attack Vito. But Sol must have convinced them that since Sonny was hot for his deal, there would be no war.

He miscalculated in two big ways: first, he failed to kill Vito; second, even if he did kill Vito, there'd be no way Sonny would make a deal. If Sonny made a deal, he'd look like a traitor to his father. The caporegimes and many others in the Family would suspect that he actually conspired with Solozzo in his father's death. Sonny would be at war with his own Family..

Convincing argumetns. Sollozzo didn't really have any options at the time of the "try the veal, it's the best in the city" meeting since he messed up in the first place by not killing Vito.

How can you mess up such a hit anyway? Puzo didn't bring any efforts to make that failure look more reasonable in my opinion.

I have no evidence, but I've wondered if Vito's little diversion to the fruit stand didn't throw off the timing of the hit.

Let's face it: if the hit men had succeeded, we'd have had a very different book--if we had one at all.

Seriously, I remember a thread on this subject a long time ago. It is possible for someone to survive being shot five times if the bullets don't hit a vital organ (I think Vito was shot in the buttocks). And his heavy overcoat might have helped. What is inconceivable is that two hit men would negelect to give him the coup de grace in his head.

Well, the two hit men didn't emerge until Vito had already been at the stand for awhile. Had Vito gotten right into the car instead, the only shot the hitmen would have had would have been as the car drove by. But, of course, the whole scene was based on the novel and was designed for drama.

"Frederico Corleone appeared out of his car, looming over it. The gunmen fired two more hasty shots at the Don lying in the gutter. One hit him in the fleshy part of his arm and the second hit him in the calf of his right leg."
The last two shots were fired hastily. The gunmen must have believed that Fredo had already pulled his gun.

The Godfather is a great movie and also a great book. However, beyond those accepted facts, it is not completely realistic. It is a 'bigger than life' type of film and novel but compared to real life , there are many things in the movie and book that are unrealistic. Just to name a few: 1) The attempt on Vito Corleone's life is unrealistic to a certain degree. In real life, there would have been at least two more hit men involved, and they would have killed Fredo & Vito. One of the men would have shot Vito in the head and Fredo would have been killed also. 2) The killing of Sonny at the toLl bridge is way exaggerated and somewhat unrealistic. 3) Mafia Families in New York have way more than 2 or 3 Caporegimes. A person like Micheal would never all of a sudden become the Head of a Family because he killed a police captain and was Vito's son. Just to name a few... it would take too long to name all the other unrealistic things. DON'T GET ME WRONG, FROM A NOVEL AND MOVIE PERSPECTIVE, THEY WERE BOTH VERY ENTERTAINING WITH GREAT ACTING.

So your saying the movie was unrealistic but entertaining with great acting, what a smart contribution to ad for your first post.

Wow that's like so dramatic

Welcome, Chic! I think the overkill on Sonny was supposed to be retribution for Sonny's own unnecessarily brutal prosecution of the war.

I repeat, The murder of Sonny at the Toll Booth was unrealistic. They would never have that many men with guns out in the open shooting one person. That was strictly Hollywood. I challenge anyone to produce evidence of one Mafia hit in the last 50 years where 10 or 12 men with machine guns shot one person in broad daylight right out in the open. The Godfather is a great movie but has many exaggerated unrealistic things in it that was done for Hollywood. A Bronx Tale is a more realistic movie. If noone can see this difference, then you don't know much about the Italian American Mafia.

What is your point? It was a movie, yes. The director was impressed with Bonnie and Clyde. Vis a vis the story, given that one Corleone had already shown an irritating ability to survive assassination, I think Barzini wanted to make sure it would not be repeated..

Good points Lilo.

For that matter, what NY Mafia family ever had just two capos,or murdered a police captain in the middle of a restaurant,or had the undisguised son of a Mafia don commit that murder, or had an Irish Consigliere, or wiped out a bunch of NY dons in an elevator, in a revolving door, or on the steps of city hall? As Lilo stated: it's a movie!

Since this is the novel discussion, just a note to point out that in the book there are three shooters.

Also a good point. Sometimes it's hard to keep the novel and film separated.

It was the adrenaline. And they probably couldn't have known that Fredo would chicken out. They knew he was armed which is why it was a hit-and-run.