Well the idea of killing Vito is inspired by Sonny's dissention at the meeting. Sonny might have gone along w/ the deal as he displayed so at the meeting. Plus, with Vito gone a lot of the Corleone assets would have been up for grabs. Remember, the Corleones would not have lost all their political contacts if the old man dies(tom said they would lose half)so Sonny would still have some clout. But.... Sonny chooses to avenge his father instead of making the deal....a question that puzzles me is...Would Sonny have eventually taken Tom's advice to make the deal IF Michael had not come along? If Vito dies Sonny might eventually agree to the deal If he and Tom would have in fact made the deal then Barzini played this one beautifully. I tend to believe that Sonny would NEVER have listened to Tom and would have fought it out.

The decision to try and bring the drug trade to the five families was kind of a long shot anyway. None of the decisions that Barzini and Co. made were certainties, this was a risky plot against the emperor indeed.

I agree Ice... Sonny would have never made that deal against his father's wishes, especially considering the taking of his father's life (even considering Tom's "this is business not personal" speech) b/c remember he said "Well business will have to suffer". Sollozo had to die; in Sonny's eyes.

Well I don't know Frank, but you are probably right. I think it's possible Sonny might have conceded to the advice of Tom though. Luckily Mike was there to remind them that Sollozo HAD to kill pop.

Vito thought Sonny a bad don b/c he chose to kill Bruno Tattaglia, by Vito's philosophy this was not justice. But if Vito would have fought it out just like Sonny did, this again proves that Tom's desire to negotiate was wrong. Thus by this logic I don't understand why Vito did NOT consider Tom a bad consig. Sonny did(and would have done)exactly what Vito would have done, fight it out.

Well Ice... Vito knew that Tom, although a good negotiator and very wise, was NOT a wartime consig., so I believe Vito did not hold him accountable for the things that he knew him to be untalented at... afterall, who holds Michael Jordan accountable for being a bad golfer? (extreme, i know, but i think you get what I'm saying )

I believe Vito came to the conclusion that Sonny would be a bad Don long before he killed Bruno Tattaglia. You can see the exasperation in Vito's face during the wedding conferences in his office (Vito whistles and says, "Hey, did you learn anything?") and especially after Sonny's Sollozzo meeting gaffe. Vito's remark about not considering Tom a bad consigliere was in the context of his thinking Sonny was a bad Don. And anyway, Vito chose Tom as consigliere. But by that point, Michael was in charge, and Vito wasn't going to contradict Michael, especially in front of Tom. For all we know, Vito might privately have tried to talk Michael out of removing Tom as consigliere. As you probably know, Ice, in the novel, after Sonny's assassination Tom admits to himself that he's no wartime consigliere.

TB, this may be a post for a different thread, but after reading your post, something came to my mind (and it may have been addressed before). When is Tom Consig.??? When Michael introduces him to Kay, his position is that "i think he's GOING TO BE CONSIGLIERI one day".

It's probably true that Vito realized that Sonny would never be much more than muscle. Sonny's sending Michael to kill Sollozzo would have confirmed that for Vito.

Keep in mind that Vito told Tom that he advised Michael regarding these things and that things were going to happen that Tom could not be a part of.

I think one of the challenges of posting is that it may not be clear if a post addresses the novel, the film, or someone else's post.

A couple of points regarding some of the more recent posts:

1) Concerning the decline of the Corleone family. Olivant writes:

"The novel states that the fighting qualities of the Corleone regimes had declined over the past decade. I suppose that other Corleone qualities had declined also. So, its preeminent position in the underworld was not as secure as it had been."

The regimes indeed were not in the best shape, but note that Michael states (in the novel) that Vito was the only one who understood that political connections are "worth more than 10 regimes." And in the movie Tom says, "we have the gambling and the unions, which are the best things to have." So I think that prior to the Sollozzo business, there was no marked decline, apart from that in the "muscle end of the family." This is not insignificant, of course, but Michael's comment about the value of political connections seems largely to compensate for the deterioration in regime firepower. Regarding Sollozzo's comment about the "Don slippin," I think it refers primarily, if not entirely, to his recent sloppiness regarding personal security measures.

2) A brief observation regarding Tom's capacities as consigliere: at one point in the novel Vito says that "any man should be allowed one foolishness in his life. I have had mine." About a hundred pages later, the narrator writes: "And of course an Irish consigliere had been the only foolishness the Don had ever perpetrated. No Irishman could hope to equal a Sicilian for cunning."

I apologize for posting about the novel here, but since I'm responding to previous entries, I'd like to keep it in the same thread.

Vito's reference to his one foolishness was to his vulnerability to physical attack, not to Tom as Consigliere.

That's clear, but what I mean to point out is that the narrator thinks differently, and is probably right in suggesting that it was choosing an Irishman as consigliere that was in fact Vito's true act of foolishness. I don't mean to say that Tom is incompetent. He's damn good, but not as good, according to the narrator, as a Sicilian would have been in his place.

I'm assuming this is a deleted scene contained in the saga? Sure wish I had a copy, I have not seen those edited scenes in quite some time.

(but your pt is well taken TB, thnx. )

Two points here:

1. On Barzini, I think we have all reached a consensus that Barzini was using Tattaglia as a sort of front man on the drug issue. Assuming that to be the case, why would Barzini make such a bone-headed move as to approach Carlo to set up the hit on Santino? Why wouldn't he have used Tattaglia?


2) On the issue of Santino, I agree that Vito did not have a lot of confidence in him, and that may well be why there was so much tension between Vito and Michael while Michael was in his rebellious phase. IMO Vito was torn between Michael becoming "Senator Corleone, Governor Corleone....something" and Michael coming to work for him. Obviously he knew Michael had the smarts that Sonny lacked, and he probably knew deep down that Michael would be a better Don. Although he wanted Michael to have some kind of success outside of the family, he still derided him for his military service and for his choice of a non-Sicilian girlfriend. He had to know that military service in WWII would be a prerequisite for a run for political office, and he would have had to understand that the appearance of distance between Michael and him was also necessary for Michael to be successful in the world of politics. Perhaps he was secretly pleased with Michael going out on his own...Clemenza says as much to Michael when he tells him "We was all proud of you bein a war hero and all.....YOUR FATHER TOO."

Being a practical man, the Don did his best to train Santino, and perhaps he hoped that Tom Hagen could keep a lid on his temper. He had to know, however that Santino would have never been able to keep the politicians and judges in his pocket as he had done, so perhaps in a way he foresaw the collapse of the family.

Don T... I have been struggling w/ this concept of whether Vito was torn between Michael becoming a Senator or Governor and coming to work for him as of late. And I came to ma POV of this: Vito did, indeed, want Michael to become a senator or governor of some sort, but he also wanted him involved with the family. One may think... how is this possible??? The only thing that must happen for this to be possible is to legitimize the Corleone family. This way, Michael would lead the family in a legitament light of business. This is not to say that there would not still be illegal practices going on (after all "whose being naive???"). I would like to hear more POV's on this, if any one else has ever had this same line of reasoning.

He foresaw the collapse of the family if Michael chooses to go his own way. Vito tells Mike in the book to come work for him after college. The reasoning you give Don T may have been precisely why he needed Mike. B/c as TB has discussed before, if Sonny lives then he and Mike would form a 'two headed monster' of sorts w/ Mike running the legitimate side and Santino running the olive oil business. Sonny may not have been able to keep the judges and politicians in his back pocket but Mike probably would be capable.

Good question.
I think that no matter what Vito's awnser was, yes or no, Barzini had plans on thwarting the Corleones all along. Why else use Tattaglia as a decoy? The fact that Barzini attempts to mislead Vito must mean he has intentions of foul play. Whether it was simply for money or to challenge Vito's top spot, Barzini's deal seems to be a 'trojan horse' the whole time, and Vito's awnser could not have changed that.

I suspect that Barzini knew all along that Vito would not go for the deal. He was too straight laced, and too cautious that the drug business was unlike "women and gambling" and the other things the pezzanovante denied the people. Because Vito's strength was with politicians and judges, the drug market would be a tough sell, and he could not have held on to many of them.

Overall Barzini was in a "win-win" situation at that point because if Vito had gone along with it and lost political support, the Corleones would be further weakened, and it would only be a matter of time before the likes of Tessio would defect, and before Santino would take over and run the family into the ground anyway. On the other hand if Vito refused, and Sollozzo under the cover of the Tattaglias whacked Vito, he would have been able to consolidate his power much more quickly. What he didnt count on was Vito surviving, and Michael getting into the family business.

I think Tattaglia was simply a pawn and had no part in the actual planning of Barzini's scheme. Aside from that, I don't think Tattaglia had the skill set that was required to approach Carlo. He was good w/ da whores but thats about it. This was Barzini's plan and Tattaglia was just a cog in that plan.

My guess is that Tattaglia probably had no clue about the Carlo set up nor much else that did not concern his role directly.

Frank, to your earlier post: At the time that Michael was sitting with Connie, Genco was still the consigliere, even though he was on his deathbed. After he died, Tom took over. The novel says that Vito made Tom consigliere after the hospital visit. Sorry I took so long to answer, but I've been away the last couple of days.
As I've posted before: I believe Vito wanted Michael to be a senator or governor so that he could work toward "legitimizing" the family business. If Vito had his druthers, and if Michael were in a powerful political position, he might work to legalize gambling on either a statewide or nationwide basis, so that the Corleones could move their pre-eminence in illegal gambling to the legit world. And Michael could channel Vito's clout with unions to support for his own political ends. "His" unions would then be used as patronage and a base for further riches. Sonny would be the head of a decreasingly important "illegitimate" Corleone operation, and would eventually become obsolete. An interesting question: how would a "legitimate" Michael and an "illegitimate" Sonny cooperate/compete/oppose each other after Vito was gone?

TB, thankyou. I actually came to this realization last night (after watching the deleted scenes). I didn't, however, know that Vito made Tom consigliere after the visit. I believed that he was just sort of consig. by default.

And that is a very interesting scenario you described w/ Mike heading the "legit" business while Sonny heading "illegitimate" parts... I believe this to be the optimal scenario. I think it would run seamlessly. I seem to remember a great family in American history who ran something of this sort to perfection... OH YEAH, KENNEDY.

How realistic was this idea? Forgetting the family ties, which could have been played down by people who worked for the newspapers who were also on the payroll, I don't think Mike would have been much of a politician. He was cold, secretive, and not at all likeable. For an Italian Catholic to win in the late 50's early 60's he would have had to have had the level of charm JFK had.

I think the only way Micheal gets elected anything is if he moves to Chicago and they fix the election.

good point DonT... but we must remember that Michael went through a metamorphis of sorts as a result of some of the exact actions which Vito would have liked Mike to forego in light of becoming a politician. At first meeting, I thought Mike to be very charismatic and likeable. Remember, he told Kay exact reccollections (sp?)of events, being very open. It's only after subsequent events is Mike cold and secretive.

Excellent observation. The Michael we see at the wedding is very different than the Michael we see in the black fedora walking down the street proposing to Kay.

Yes, it is an excellent obseration, Frank! I based my Michael-the-pezzanovante scenario on "if Vito had his druthers," which obviously didn't include Michael killing Sollozzo and McCluskey and getting exiled to Sicily. The pre-Sollozzo Michael just might have had enough charm to be an electable politician.

As soon as Vito saw Tattaglia's prints on the deal wouldn't he have seen that someone sent him a deal they were pretty certain would fail?
Hard to say yes but Vito had to have seen the deal as a declartion of war as soon as he knew Tattaglia was involved. But the fact that he later asks for Santino's and Tom's opinion shows that he had not yet made up his mind, that maybe he was atleast considering the deal despite Tattaglia's involvement.

ANY THOUGHTS???

Also.....When Tom tells Vito that Tattaglia is involved, we don't know if this is the first Vito hears of it, or if he already knew this at the wedding. But....if Vito does have this knowledge on his daughter's wedding day(and thus had already rejected the deal b/c of Tattaglia) then Vito would be extra sure NOT to invite the Turk to the wedding. No Sicilian can refuse a request on his daughter's wedding day, so he did not want the Turk and his drug proposal hanging around. But if instead he wanted the deal and embraced it with open arms, then he would have had Sollozo at the wedding and let him request political protection and 1million cash. If this was a snub by Vito then obviously the Turk did not pick up on it, b/c he appears to be surprised when hearing Vito's refusal.


EDIT--I guess what I'm driving at is...
When Vito learns of Tattaglia's involvement(which may have been before 'we' the audience find out) did he see this supposed 'deal' as a declaration of war? Since all involved knew Vito would never touch a deal w/ Tattaglia involved, it would seem so.

No, I think this whole Sollozzo thing is spelled out pretty well. After Vito has finished up his business and asks if there is enything else, Tom mentions that they have to give Sollozzo a day "next week" and Vito tells Tom that he has to go to California first to fix things with this movie big shot.

In the movie (there are deleted scenes which change the timing) when Tom gets back, and after Khartoum is dog food, Vito asks Tom if he is too tired to talk about Sollozzo and Tom says no, he slept on the plane. Then Tom briefs Vito on what he knows...that Sollozzo is a top narcotics man, good with a knife, but only in matters of business. That he's done two terms in prison in Italy for narcotics, that Tattaglia has to be in it for a lot of money, and that he wants the Corleones to back him.
Vito then asks Tom and Sonny for their advice. Tom says that drugs is the future, and that if they dont get into it now, it will hurt business down the road, and weaken the family. Sonny only says there's a lot of money in that white powder. Sonny then stupidly says "So what's it gonna be Pop?" If the Don had his mind made up he hid it from his consigliere and his son, which is plausible. He was the final decision maker, and he did not want anyone...not even them to know what he was thinking until he met with Sollozzo. At that meeting the Don says no, and wishes Sollozzo luck "so long as your interests don't conflict with mine." Which of course they would. That is where Sonny makes his error of judgment, and it is where Sollozzo sees a ch*nk in the Corleone armor. The real qustion here is if Sonny had kept his mouth shut would it have been necessary to send Luca at all? Also did Sonnny's indicatiion he liked the deal make it easier for Sollozzo to sell Barzini on the idea that Vito should be taken out?

I always inferred that Vito had made up his mind not to go for the Sollozzo deal well before he met with Sollozzo. (In the novel, before the meeting, he tells Tom, "What he will propose will be an infamita.") He was putting off the meeting, which is why Tom said what he said at Connie's wedding. So, I believe that Vito just wasn't thinking things through about the meeting, and therefore he didn't really know or care who was backing Sollozzo. That was one of his big errors.

There's no question that Sonny's enthusiasm for the deal helped Sollozzo to convince Tattaglia, Barzini and perhaps other Dons that he could whack Vito and get the deal. No doubt he told them that, although Sonny was a hothead, his greed for the deal, combined with Tom's endorsement, would save the day.

I think that Vito had to have known that his refusal would bring on a war. So....while he tells Tom to go ahead and set the meeting he already knew where this thing was going.

If my speculation is true then the wedding scene has all the more importance. The wedding would represent one last big 'hurrah' and party before the war began and things changed. While Vito may have appeared to be focused on the wedding and the business that day, in this back of his mind he is preparing for a huge sudden change that is likely to occur with the upcoming war.

ANY THOUGHTS???

Absolutely. And that is why he summons Luca Brazi and sends him to try and find out what Sollozzo and Tattaglia's plans are since he refused the deal.


Don Cardi

Exactly...he wants to know "what is under [Sollozzo's] fingernails."

Here's a question about this which I have never figured out. When Sollozzo and Tattaglia have their meeting with Luca, Sollozzo seems to know why Luca is there. This implies that Luca had a previous meeting with someone...probably Tattaglia indicating he was unhappy with the Corleones, etc. If this is so, then Luca would have reoprted back to Vito something to the effect "they are interested in me, they are setting up a second meeting," which should have tipped the Don that they were actively recruiting muscle. If that's so wouldnt that tend to make Vito want security beefed up even more? After all it seems Fredo was in charge of Vito's security because when Sonny is getting on Clemenza's case about Paulie, Clemenza passes the buck to Fredo by saying he asked Fredo about replacing Paulie, but Fredo said no.

Therefore Vito would have known at Connie's wedding that a war was on the way, unless he did not yet know Tattaglia was involved. But I think Tattaglia or not he had to figure one or more of the families were involved and that his refusal would bring their wrath.
Thus, while Vito is dancing and having fun and trying to deal w/ the business of the wedding day, this impending war must have been on his mind as well.
Thus, much of the dialogue and character interactions of that wedding scene would have to be analyzed with this fact in 'our' minds.