Kay had no reason to attend Michael's investiture as a Knight of St. Sebastian and his party, except to have a private audience with him. There she made her plea: "Let Anthony go."

Uh, how's that again? Anthony was in his late twenties at that time. He had finished college, had attended law school, and evidently had some serious vocal training. I can't imagine that he was living under Michael's roof, so he wasn't being held against his will. When Michael said, "Finish law school," Anthony replied, firmly: "No," and walked out. And, his feelings toward Michael obviously weren't warm, so I didn't detect any emotional bond (as there was twixt Michael and Mary).

So, what was Kay getting at?

Perhaps she was asking for Michael's backing of Anthony's career? He did have a rather meteoric rise in the music world. Perhaps Kay was asking not only that Anthony be allowed to follow his dream with no pressure from his father to pursue other interests, but she was also asking Michael to pull some strings, make a nice fat donation to the Palermo Opera???

They're Italian, Turnbull. They never really get out from under they're parents and their opinions on their children's lives.

She may have also been saying. "stay out of his life".

She really went so she could continue her constant nagging of Michael.

"You call this greatness?"

"I liked you better when you were a common mafia hood"

"That's your thing,isn't it Michael, reason backed up by murder."

"Anthony knows about Fredo"

"I thought that was a despicable ceremony."

"You've become my dread."

The whole beginning of Part III is just pretty bad. The party, the music, characters being introduced, etc.

There might not have been any strong bond between Anthony and Michael, but I don't think Michael had fully grasped that concept yet.

Agree with this but rather than saying "stay out of his life" I think she may be saying "let him lead his own life and accept it".

Mike was a controlling psychopath. Even though Anthony was in his 20's its easy to see he was forced to get a law degree. So Kay wanted tolet her son do what he wanted to do but try to also get some kind of understanding with Mike

Well, Mike was an expert in bending people to his will, so he could have tried to interfere with Anthony.

But his arguments were deeply weird for a super-rich bloke. Law degree is an insurance for people who have to work for the living and scramble to pay for it. Ditto the risk of failure in a musical career.

I mean, if Anthony failed he could have gone back to law school or business school or go into business/politics or whatever, really. I am sure that Michael set him up with a nice trust fund and stock in the family corporation.

I don't see why it was even worth an argument on Mike's part, except that Coppola wanted to set up a confrontation with Kay. But he really should have come up with something more sensible.

Ironically, in the book Michael thought that he'd be glad if the next generation of Corleones became college professors or musicians, not just lawyers and politicians... And he never wanted his sons to inherit his criminal empire as he seemingly did in GF II, quite the opposite, he intended to take steps to ensure that they'd never be tempted.

Oh, and Luciano Pavarotti debuted at 26 after 6 years of singing training, so debut at 27 isn't completely out there for a tenor.

I still don't understand that while Anthony was an opera singer, why he had trouble singing in the shower.

Really? I think missed that part, or forgot. How ironic. On the other hand, people can change their views or opinions over the years. He probably envisioned that Anthony would take over his business once it was legitimate. He obviously wanted his son to be well educated. And a law degree can always be of good use.



I'm not sure that it was seemingly that Michael wanted his son to take over his criminal business. There's one scene about this just after the shootings, when Anthony says to Michael that he wants to help him. Michael responds with something like that he can help him in the future, but he's doesn't explain in what manner.

Yeah, Michael pats him on the head while he's laying in bed and Anthony says, "I can help you." Michael replies, "Someday you will."

That was a very touching scene that I always thought would have been used to lay the groundwork for Part III (possibly in a flashback). But they obviously went in another direction.

Back in the late '70s and all through the '80s when Part III was constantly being talked about, I always thought the film would deal with Anthony taking over the family. But obviously I was wrong.

It's in the part where Michael convinces Kay:
"But I’ll settle for my kids being doctors or musicians or teachers. They’ll never be in the Family business. By the time they are that old I’ll be retired anyway. And you and I will be part of some country club crowd, the good simple life of well-to-do Americans. How dote that strike you for a proposition?"

I thought it pretty chilling, myself. And IMHO the main reason for Kay having an abortion and finally leaving Michael was the realization that if the things continued as they were, her son(s) would get involved in the family business too. That's why she brought up Anthony in their break-up quarrel.
Also, if Michael wasn't subconsciously thinking in terms of having heirs for his criminal empire, why was he so fixated on having another son?



Michael successfully taking over was a stretch, Anthony doing the same would have been completely implausible, IMHO. I think that it could have been interesting if Anthony went the opposite way and became a honest prosecutor or whatever, in a bid to make up for the family's misdeeds.
There could have been stuff of interesting conflict and drama there, as opposed to really unconvincing objections to Anthony's singing career.

Well, you're right. But I never said Anthony had to be successful in doing so. He could have run the family it into the ground for all we know.

There were so many scripts over the years. My favorite was actually the one where Anthony ended up a CIA operative. It's been posted here a few times over the years.

Vito had intended for Fredo and Sonny to participate in, inherit his crime family. Michael was no different. He wanted boys. Remember how he asked Kay if it felt like a boy? Of course, that contrast sharply with what he told Kay when he was proposing marriage after his return from Sicily. As someone already posted, he told Kay that he had no problem with his children becoming doctors or professors.

Don't you think that it's one thing to be old fashioned (wanting boys) and another thing to be the merciless leader of a crime organization (which Michael confuses with "family")?
One of Michael's changes during "The Godfather" is his attitude towards criminal violence. In the beginning he strictly opposes it, even though he's used to cruelties from his war experiences. ("That's my family, Kay. It's not me.")
His change begins when he's confronted not only with the attack against his father but with the corrupt part of legal authority (McCluskey). Three (or five) years later, he has completely changed his mind: "My father's no different than any other powerful man (...) Who's being naïve, Kay?"
He has become now a fatalistic person who believes that you have to kill or get killed.

Plus:
In GF, when Michael wants to visit Vito in the hospital, Sonny tells Clemenza to send an armed escort. Clem replies that the opposition knows Michael's a civilian and he'd be safe. But by the end of the film, during the Great Massacre of 1955, Rocco and his accomplice kill the hooker in bed with Tattaglia, and Clem's shotgun kills at least one (presumably) innocent bystander in the elevator car.

"Great Massacre of 1955"?

Just because Michael's words were self-serving, doesn't mean that he was wrong. In the words of General Smedley Butler, a highly decorated US officer, who was notable for fighting against corruption:

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class thug for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism... Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

I don't want to downplay Michael's evilness, but objectively speaking, 20-ieth century was fool of people committing the most appalling crimes for variety of reasons and getting away with it more often than we'd like to admit.



To be fair, that was the situation he was in after he entered the game.

I also don't think that Michael confused his real and crime family, much.
The book strongly hinted that if Michael lost control of the crime family, then his extended real family would have been in dire straits.
Sonny didn't leave an estate, so his widow and kids were supported by the Corleones.
And prior to their marriage in the novel Michael told Kay that it would take some tricky re-structuring for her and their kids to be able to inherit anything should something happen to him.
And of course, one can readily imagine the consequences to Connie and her kids if Corleones fell, given how Carlo treated her as it was.
Not to mention that Tom and Fredo would have been in danger, too.

Now, movies kind of sideline this aspect and generally ignore the third generation apart from Michael's own kids (Vincent doesn't count, being completely out of the left field), which is a pity, IMHO. Godfather being a sprawling family epic and all.

1) He chose the game.
2) The confusion of family and crime organization is one of the motifs of GF and GF2. In Gf2 Michael asks his mother about Vito: "But by being strong for his family, could he lose it?"
They're all the time talking about the "family", when in fact they talk about business. Was Michael really trying to do good for the family when he made the deal with Roth or when he kept the crime business in New York? No, Kay was right. He had become completely blind. Killer Neri had become the closest person to Anthony. In a way, Michael was like many men at that time, a workaholic who didn't really care about his kids.
However, he could leave the crime organization at any time. But he didn't want to pay the price: Giving up control, power and money.

By the way, in a comment to GF2, FFC supports this interpretation of Michael's relationship towards his family.

Ok, I'll say it. Anthony was a wuss. A mama's boy, and probably a finocchio. He didn't have the guts to say "no" to Michael unles he was hiding behind his mother's apron strings.

All kidding aside, that's a pretty fair and accurate statement. He was only brave enough to tell Michael that he was going his own way when his Mommy was in the room with him.

KAY

Your son has something he wants to talk to you about. I came here for him.

CUT TO: Michael’s office. Anthony is waiting. Michael enters, looking annoyed.

MICHAEL

What’s wrong with being a lawyer?

KAY

Nothing, except he doesn’t want it. He loves music, he wants his life to be in music.

MICHAEL

Well music is great. I love music. But he should finish what he started.

(then)

Anthony...

ANTHONY

I’m going my own way.

MICHAEL

Your own way?

ANTHONY

Mmm Hmm.

MICHAEL

Professional singer?

ANTHONY

That’s right.

MICHAEL

And what happens -- what happens if you fail?

ANTHONY

I won’t fail.

MICHAEL

Men always believe that.

ANTHONY

I know.

MICHAEL

If you have a Law degree, you’re taking out insurance. After that you can do whatever you want. You can work for me…

ANTHONY

I will never work for you. I have bad memories.

MICHAEL

Every family has bad memories.

ANTHONY

I will always be your son. But I will never have anything to do with your business.

MICHAEL

Anthony, finish the Law degree.

ANTHONY

No.

<Anthony leaves.>

Madonne PB! Couldn't you make your dialogue point without taking up so much post space?

In any case, like most children, Tony tried to please his father. And like most fathers, Michael wanted a profession for Tony that he considered quite employable. But I don't think that Tony was incapable of going his own way without Kay's intervention. Because Tony was uncomfortable opposing his father in person, like many children would be, he took the opportunity with Kay there to opose his father's instructions. Like any maother, Kay wanted Michael to stop pressuring Tony about becoming a lawyer so that Tony could embrace his music career without that pressure.

Right, Oli.

One of the great things about GFI was the contrast of the Family life with ordinary family life.

I think that's what FFC (not entirely successfully) was going for here - a standard father-son dispute in the milieu of their totally non-standard lifestyle.

If Anthony had finished the law degree,Michael would have ended up owning Immobiliare, been legitimate, and Mary would not have died. Accordingly the real cause of Mary's death and Michael's lack of legitimacy going forward is entirely KAY's fault.

But didn't we see that with Sonny and Fredo already? Sons willing to go into criminal business, but not quite (in Sonny's case) or at all (in Fredo's) having what it takes. Also, heredity is not destiny, not even for a Corleone...

IMHO, after Sonny jumping into "the life" eagerly, but failing as a Don, Michael succumbing reluctantly and succeeding, but at tremendous personal cost, character of Anthony could have been a great dramatic chance to show somebody who really manages to walk away - but only if there had been real temptation for him to fall too and cost for persevering.

Generally, I feel that GFIII was a huge missed opportunity re: looking into fascinating question how normal, decent people raised on US values could relate to a loving and beloved family member, who is also a merciless killer.

Re: 1979 script, you picked my curiosity, so I looked it up... and wow, this reads like a Steven Seagal movie. Absolutely terrible, IMHO.




I don't see it in GF 2. Crime family was never anything but instrument of his will for Michael (unlike Vito).

He did confuse his own unbridled ambition, power-hunger and greed with what would be good for his extended real family, but it was all about himself, not the crime organization.



Not for lack of kids approximately his own age to socialize with, though. There were all these cousins on the estate, after all, and probably part of the personal had kids too. But yea, Anthony was a troubled boy. I kind of wonder if, ironically, Michael and Kay only had daughters, he may have been better off. Fear for Anthony's fate was a powerful motivator for Kay to stand up to Michael.



I am not really sure about this. Unless he was prepared to change his name, grab his wife and children, abandon his extended family and go start a completely new life somewhere far away.
Otherwise, people may have taken revenge on him (and that 50-55 massacre must have left a lot of pissed off people) or tried to make a name for themselves by taking him out, or even just made sure that he wouldn't change his mind and try to return, once he relinquished his power.

Michael surely didn't have to provoke Roth and he could have gone legitimate much sooner if he had switched from the casino business. But it would have been a tricky process, IMHO.



Well, few people were ever able to say "no" to Michael. He was expert at bending people to his will and not just by threats of death. Part of the job description.
And IMHO, it was smart of Anthony to want to avoid a massive quarrel.

But, really, the whole "conflict" over Anthony's career was so completely artificial and implausible, that it is difficult to take any of it seriously.
I mean, looking at Rockfellers from "Anthony's" generation - well, they did all kinds of things. Philosophy, divinity, languages, anthropology, etc.
And Michael knew by his own family's experience that not all sons are desirable heirs for their father's business, and that he himself couldn't be convinced by mere arguments, so...