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.
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.
The confusion of family and crime organization is one of the motifs of GF and GF2.
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.
Killer Neri had become the closest person to Anthony.
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.
However, he could leave the crime organization at any time.
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.
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.
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...
