Watching Tom Hagan in Godfather I and II, I see three different men.

Tom Hagan #1: consiglieri to Don Corleone - matter of factly stated his business, no opinions, just respect and the business at hand.

Tom Hagan #2: consiglieri to Santino - glib, quick and angry frustration, saying anything he wanted without much fear

Tom Hagan #3: consiglieri, or just "our lawyer in Vegas" to Michael - quiet, polite, a Yes Man, in total fear of Michael.

Tom Hagan's relationship with Vito Corleone was that of a respectful son.

Hagan's relationship with Sonny was that of an equal. He didn't fear Sonny because he knew that Sonny loved him like a brother, and felt he could say his honest opinions without fear of repercussions. I was always amused how Hagan would sometimes yell at Sonny in front of everybody - he didn't show Sonny much respect at all.

Now, Hagan's relationship with Michael, well. Hagan wouldn't dare shout at Michael, especially in front of other people. Hagan became very subdued, knowing that Michael could have him killed if the spirit moved him. Hagan knew that, deep down, Michael considered him as a brother, but also knew that Michael wouldn't take any shit from him.

Very good observation.

Yes, since Sonny brought Tom into the family, they were more like real brothers (as the novel notes). There was real familiarity there. Besides, despite Vito's injuries, there was never a time when Vito was not the Don. On the other hand, Michael was somewhat jealous of the relationship between Sonny and tom and I am still convinced that Mike blamed Tom for Sonny's death and being fooled by Sollozzo. Tom's demeanor with Vito, with Sonny, and with Mike was dictated by their individual personailities, and how they absorbed information and advice. I don't think Tom was fearful at all. He was truly hurt and despondent by Mike's attitude toward him.

Absolutely right Olivant. To the tee!

I also think Mike blamed Tom for not seeing that Pentangeli was alive, and that Roth owned Questadt. He may even have held it against Tom that he lacked the control over things which allowed Kay to get the abortion. The more I think about it, Mike used Tom as a scapegoat for everything that went wrong.

Exactamundo, Tomasso. In fact, I think Mike even blamed Tom for the leak to Geary about his intended move on the Tropagala. You remember the look he gave Tom when Geary stated he knew about that.

So, Tom was respectful toward Vito like a son is respectful toward his dad; he was quarrelsome with brother, but underneath it there was real affection like you find between brothers; with Mike, it was just business, no affection. Mike used Tom like Mike used everybody.

Yes, and Tom was stuck where he was. No way he could have taken that hotel job and move his wife and mistress out. He would be dead in six weeks if he tried. Kinda makes you wonder how he died...maybe that was no heart attack!

You know Tom was disenchanted towards the end of Godfather II - as Pentangeli said, "we were like the Roman Empire!" Tom said, sadly: "it was, once."

Interesting point (welcome to the boards btw)....I had not thought of it that way, but they were reminiscing about the "great old days." No question TOm was getting on in years, and he probably never thought he would end up becoming Michael's whipping boy in Nevada.

For sure. That was probably the most significant lamentation of the entire Trilogy with the exception of the silent scream. Indeed, under Vito, it was a family and a family.

The true harbinger of Tom's relationship with Michael is found in the flashback at the end of GFII. After Michael announces that he's joined the Marines, Sonny almost decks him. Tom, the conciliator, gets that patronizing, "family-retainer" look on his face and explains, in almost childlike terms, that he (Tom) and Vito, have made plans for Michael. Michael, in what I believe is the most chilling look and statement in the entire trilogy, turns on Tom and says, deliberately, "You...talked to my father...about my future..." You'd think Tom's sphincter would have imploded after that precursor to the famous Corleone stare. After that, it was never the same.

You got that one right, TB. There is a more subtle scene in GF I that caught my attention the very first time I saw the movie.
In the wedding scene, which is one of the greatest introductions to a movie ever made, with its expository themes complete with foreshadowings, Kay asks Michael why Tom Hagen is his brither but has a different last name. Michael tells her the story about how Sonny found him on the street etc, but the then goes on (which is out of character for Michael)to tell her that Tom is going to be named consigliere, giving Kay a window into the family business. When he does this he makes the comment that Tom is a good lawyer, but "not a Sicilian." I always thought it showed Michael had reservations about Tom from the get go.

Whatever reservations Michael had about Tom, it didn't stop him from giving Tom a big warm hug shortly before leaving to meet Sollozzo the Captain. It showed that he had as much affection for Tom as he did for Sonny.

Michael still had a heart at that point. It wasn't yet fully hardened.

He gave Sonny a huge bear hug, and with Tom he just hugged the back of his head. They were very different hugs.

Why tell Kay Tom's last name in the first place. "This is my brother Tom." Of course, saying the last name sets up how Tom came to be part of the Corleone household.

But I also thought the "not a Sicilian" was something of an indication of the direction things would take.

That point's well-taken, Olivant. Although the nominal purpose was to set Kay up to ask Michael why Tom's last name was different so that Michael could explain the heart-warming story of how Tom was "adopted," Michael might just as well have said, "This is my brother Tom"--period--and left the story out, or left it till later. Michael at that point was still distancing himself from his family, and it's clear in that scene that all the warmth was on Tom's side. Michael, to my mind, disapproved of Tom's activities on behalf of the family to the same extent that he disapproved of family's business. The use of "This is my brother, Tom Hagen," could easily be interpreted as part of the disapproval. It's a marvelously subtle scene.

For someone who dissaproved so much of what his family was, he sure did what seemed like a lot of bragging to Kay with the Luca stories and the explaining about a sicilian usually being a consigliere and how Hagen was about to be named one.

Was he just showing off to Kay? And even if he was, then he couldn't have really felt that ashamed of what his family was. For if he truely dissaproved and was ashamed, he would never have went into detail about his family's business practices.

Excellent point guys. I think this scene shows that despite his
claim that he was not going to be a part of the family business "that's my family, not me, Kay," that he did have a certain admiration for the Corleone's vast wealth and power, and a certain pride in his heritage "do you like your lasagna?" Like many other pieces of that great wedding scene this dichotomy that we see in Michael is a foreshadowing of things to come.

I think it was just good manners to introduce Tom as "Tom Hagen." Same as if you were to introduce a cousin with a different last name than yours.

Sure, it lent itself to explaining Tom's history with the Corleone family, but I don't think it was any deeper than that.

Vito always said to Tom, "Never forget your [original] family," and I'm sure the three sons overheard this. Michael was respecting Tom's heritage by mentioning his real last name. To me, it shows that he respects Tom, not the other way around.

While I understand that the line was partially meant to reveal to the audience that Tom was an adopted brother, I also agree with Turnbull in that it was Michael's way of showing his disapproval of Tom's position in the family.

We later learn that Tom and Vito had made plans for Michael's life. I realize that this took place in a flashback scene from GFII. But as a whole, if you put everything into perspective,
Michael's introducing Tom in the manner that he did could have been a message to Tom which meant "You are not really a Corleone and therefore you had no business talking to MY father about MY future."


Michael surely had that kind of an attitude. I vaugely recall a part in the book when Don Tomassino tells Michael that he must advise him NOT to marry Apollonia until he informs Vito and gets his approval. And Michael responds, with all due respect of course, that he never listened to his own father about these things and was not going to wait for his approval through Don Tomassino.

Michael was a shrewd article.

All the posts on this subject have their virtue. But I think that Michael had a certain cold streak in him. Many of us have opined that Michael did not have the warmth of his father. I agree. Michael could be so taciturn at times and I think the Tom Hagen statement was evidence of that. I even perceive some resentment in it. Who knows? As the book says, Tom and Sonny embraced after Tom's release, embraced as true brothers and it also says that Tom and Michael had never been as true brothers. In a way, I think that Mike almost welcomed Tom's screw-ups; they rationalized his resentment of him.

One other thing. Vito and Sonny are dead, right? Fredo is off somewhere being Fredo. So, of the original family, who's left to challenge Michael? Only Tom.

He didn't say to Kay "This is my brother Fredo Corleone," he just siad this is my brother Fredo. He could have said "this is my brother Tom" just as easily and at some other point explained to her what the situation was. For a guy who later became fanatical about not allowing her to discuss his business, he was pretty loose lipped on this particular ocasion.

Good point Tomasso. In the novel it states that even such polite questions as how did your trip go were considered awkward. However, Mike reveals quite a bit of info about the family to someone who is a relative stranger. Imagine if Kay would have been called before a grand jury.

[quote=olivant Imagine if Kay would have been called before a grand jury. [/quote]


The family didn't have a lot of buffas for that one did they? However, if she so testified, I suppose they could have indicted Luca and Vito for extorting the band leader, but the evidence would have been predicated on Michael's hearsay and Kay's double hearsay, which would be subject to an objection at trial. Michael's comment, however couild be construed as an "admission against [his family's] interest," which is an exception to the hearsay rule. The problem however would be the prosecutors would have to extablish that Michael's interests and the family's business overlapped, which at the time they did not. Hagen would therefore have been able to persuade easily one of their bought judges that Michael was not a part of the so called crime family....that he was in the Marines, etc and that this was some figment of his imagination arising from some resentment of his father and his desire not to go into the legitimate world of selling olive oil. Tom's victory in this case would have humiliated Michael, and probably estranged Michael from Vito who would say about Michael "As you can see I spoil my children. They talk when they should listen." And Later he would say to Michael "Whatsa matter with you....I think your brain is going soft with all that comedy you're playing with that young girl."

Therefore if Kay had been hauled before a grand jury Michael would never have become the Don and everything else would have changed, including the prestige of Tom Hagen who may well have been the power behind the throne of Don Fredo Corleone (after Sonny's death).

You're the lawyer, but I thought a wife couldn't be forced to testify against her husband.

Because Michael knew that Fredo really didn't have a postion in the family! He didn't want her to know that Fredo was a Corleone!

Either that or he had heard from Momma that Fredo was left on the doorstep by gypsies.

Correct SC but they weren't married at the time.

OK... I see it now.