Post deleted by I'M GERMAN-IRISH

I disagree about the part of Neri being "an evil snake in all three films." He was conniving and duplicitious in II, to be sure. But he a practically non-existent role in the original and a minimal role in III. He was a force, no question, especially in the deleted scene where he kicks Klingman out of the casino that the Corleone's want to take over. And he certainly advanced himself in Michael's eyes past Hagen & Rocco.

What are you, some kind of nut?

I sure hope this is the end of that stuff.

Even Kay comments on Neri's presence in GFIII. Michael's less than authentic response is that he opens doors for him further validates the contention by many Board members that Michael just couldn't let go of the "business".

I concur. I hope that's the end of foul and vituperative language on this Board.

Uncalled for language and attitude.

I think that one has to read the GF novel to really understand the Neri character, to realize why he was so loyal to Michael, and the reason why he turned out to be the kind of person that he was.

Don Cardi

Good point. The novel goes into Neri's background (and homelife) that gives his character some depth. The movies don't touch on that at all.

Exgirl & I AM American, Please be polite this is a family BB. Thanks.


P.S."Why can't we all just get along", Rodney King.

Al was a loyal soldier who owed the Corleones big time (DC is right read the back story in the novel) and who paid them back with years of loyalty. As for his being a horrible person, of course he was he was a professional hit man! But that said, all Al ever did was follow orders.

Yes, let's make nice (big hug) Let us follow the example of the great Don Corleone during his meeting with the heads of the 5 families. I will forgoe my vengence.

I agree with others that one should read the novel. It provides beaucoup of understanding of the Neri/Michael relationship.

It also goes a long way to adding meaning to why Neri was "Michael's Luca Brasi"

IMHO, asking a question like this and using the word "evil" is actually a very delicate thing- because of the very nature of what "evil" truly means. One could get very philosophical about that kind of thing.

People can wake up in the morning and decide to be "good", they can wake up in the morning and decide to be "bad"- but only a lunatic wakes up in the morning and decides to be "evil".

I say that in order to prepare you for my next statement- I don't believe that anyone in the Godfather films is genuinely "evil". Greedy, duplicitous, conniving, yes- but these are all elements of being "bad", which is to say, they did evil things for (at least in their minds) a valid reason, be it family, unquestioning loyalty, greed, the desire to amass power, etc..

A person who does evil things is not necessarily an evil person. It is the person who does evil for no reason other than to be evil, or "Evilness for evilness' sake", that is truly evil.

So there are no evil people in the Godfather films.

But if I had to choose, I'd say Luca Brasi, based on his backstory in the novel.

Sammy The Fish

I agree,Luca is the most Evil Charecter in the trilogy for me

In the GFII probably Roth in GF III probably Luchese.

Why do you consider Roth more evil than Michael? They seem to be playing the same game. And Roth didn't, as far as we know, have his brother murdered.

I'm not challenging you; I'm just interested in hearing how you reached that conclusion.

Although Michael is often admired by many (including me at times), he is without a doubt the most evil character in the film. We have romanticized his reason for joining the family business, agreeing with his contention that he did it because his father needed him. The truth is, he cold-bloodedly made the decision to kill two men for no other reason than vengeance. He cast his wife out of his home, deprived his children of their mother, and kept his children under his very controlling thumb when they were younger. He manipulated his adopted brother, repaying his loyalty with rude insults. He ordered the murders of his brother-in-law, brother and an old family friend.

One of my favorite parts from the novel which is left out in the movie is Neri's background. It's very interesting, and a high point in the novel (compared to Lucy's 'problems').

In the movie, Al Neri kind of seems to me like an angel of death. Michael runs his empire, and Neri follows his order, regardless of the ruthlessness. Neri is definitely a badass throughout the trilogy. However, I would believe the most evil character to be Michael. He's the epic hero, and a vile creature who not only serves to protect his family, but also ends the life of two relatives. Sure, they had it coming but come on.

Michael is such a contradictory and that's what's so fascinating about his character: the good, and the bad.

Luca and heres why he had that poor woman kill his baby.

It's a toss-up. If Michael orders a murder, is he less evil than the murderer?

Even though he was a 'businessman' I would say Sollozzo is the most evil.

that ol' pimp tatt is the most evil. the book paints him as the 'anti-corleone'.

True...but having all that 'background' on Neri still would not come even close to him being the 'most evil' in the trilogy.

I too pondered the idea of Michael but it's not him either. He did not 'deprive his children of their mother'...as we clearly see she was allowed to have visits with them after the split. He may have 'cast' Kay out of their home...but only after she announced her intention to leave him and take the children with her...therefore depriving them of their father. And once she admitted to the abortion, even after he made it clear he would do everything in his power to prevent her from taking the children from him...I'm not sure what one would expect him to do other than exactly what he did. He may or may not have kept the children 'under his thumb', but they also had the benifit of a nanny and their Aunt Connie helping to raise them. We find out in GFIII he allowed their mother to over see their education.

Michael killed two men because among other things, he knew one of them would make a second attempt on his father's life and most likely succeed. The other was there for 'protection' and 'invulnerability' and therefore had to be killed as well. No other choice.

Michael Corleone ordered the murders of his brothers and brother-in-law because they both betrayed the Family, intentionally conspiring with a known enemy/rival...one causing Sonny's death and one nearly causing Michael's. Funny how when condeming him for these orders, we rarely consider THEIR actions.

Michael indeed became coldhearted and evil, there's no doubt of that. But the "..most evil character in the film.." ??? I think not. Nearly everything he did, he believed he was doing to protect his
'Family'.

Back to the topic...the most evil character in the films (excluding GFIII which I've never seen in its entirety)...was Hyman Roth.

Apple

Interesting...no one ever has a problem with his ending the life of Tessio, who was equally as guilty as the 'two relatives'.

Sure, he had it coming but come on ... for old time's sake!!



Apple

I always found Don Ciccio to be evil. Granted, he is a rather minor character in terms of film time, but obviously is essential in Vito's development into Don Corleone. Kills Vito's brother and mother and was quit eager to kill a young Vito as well.

And again...if you think in terms of the 'mafia' or 'organized crime' mindset...all with sufficient justification. Brother Paolo vowed revenge for his father's murder, which he most definitely would have sought. Vito's mother outright threatened Don Ciccio with a weapon after he refused to spare her son's life (knowing full well she was sacrificing her own life in the process). He correctly predicted that a 'grown' Vito would also return one day for revenge.

Evil? Maybe. But again, in my opinion NOT the most evil of the Trilogy.

Apple

Hyman Roth

Actually, I think the most evil character was Manolo, the Don's gardener. His influence over Vito, Sonny, and Michael was so profound that it was not even addressed in the film or the novel.

What was the gardener's first name? Barry?

Apple