Pantangelli Question

A part from GF2 that i never understood was when Pantangelli was "strangled" with the guy saying greetings from Michael Corleone.

I'm assuming Roth set this up in order for Frankie to feel betrayed by Michael.

Does Frankie ever realize this? - does seeing his brother with Michael at the trial make him realize this? - Even when Tom talks with him after the trial the subject isn't mentioned as far as i can tell

Thanks - one part that always confused me

stracci, this is one of the most debated issues on the boards. I'm afraid we'll never get the real answer.

I had seen a tv interview with actor Danny Aiello (the one doing the strangling) and he claimed he ad-libbed that line ("Michael Corleone says hello") and evidentally FFC liked it so much he kept it in the movie (without regard to confusing the audience about the meaning of those words).

The man who garroted Frankie was one of the Rosato brothers. My understanding is the reason for the "Michael Corleone says hello" statement was so that Frank would believe that Michael had ordered a hit on him. And yes, Frankie does realize this. It was the reason he was going to testify aganist Michael.

What always confused me about Part II was why Frankie changed his story when his brother showed up. I could never figure out if his brother's presence alone intimitated him or he didn't want to be seen as a rat.

So you believe that the strangling was only to scare Pentangeli and not kill him? You believe that the cop who walked in (ending the strangling) was a part of the plan???

Both scenes have been discussed extensively. But I agree with SC that Rosato's intention was to kill Frankie, not scare him as evidenced by the cop's interruption. The line could have been ablibbed. We just don't know.

As far as Frankie's brother at the hearing goes, it was a warning to Frankie: testify and your brother is going down.

This is just about the most extensively discussed question on this board (other than "who killed tha Tahoe shooters?").

Roth and the Rosatos intended for Frankie to be dead. The cop breaking up the attempted murder was pure happenstance. There is no way--repeat, no way--Roth could have arranged the cop's entry with split-second precision to break up the murder in order to get Frankie to turn against Michael.

Some people here believe that Michael brought Frankie's brother Vincenzo to the hearing to shame Frankie: he couldn't break omerta after seeing his old-school brother watching him incredulously. Others believe that it was an implicit threat: if Frankie went ahead with his testimony, his brother (and, perhaps other family Frankie had in Sicily) would be harmed. It's possible that both viewpoints are correct.

The "Michael Corleone says hello" had to be an artistic whim of Coppola's. Danny Aiello admits it was an ad lib, so to leave those words in the film was a director's decision. For what purpose? Consider that a film is an artist's interpretation. There are many things that create dramatic effect and imagery; music, lighting, sound effects, make-up AND dialog. Those four words add a little punch to the scene and it can raise viewer curiousity. We tend to forget how a scene can affect us when viewed ONCE. Most of us here have viewed the scene hundreds of times. The initial impact has been covered over and distorted by years of analysis.

I join everyone else in this mystery. Certainly the intent was to kill Frankie, so it wouldn't make any difference to Frankie if Michael Corleone or Hyman Roth killed him. It could make sense if the Rosato Brothers reported that Michael had betrayed Frankie and blamed him for the hit in Tahoe, thus giving them a leg up on chiseling his territory, and perhaps turning Cicci.

I never believed that the line was ad-libbed.

A new actor with a non-speaking role in the most anticipated film of the decade would never ruin a scene by blurting out an ad-lib, especially one that contradicts a major plot point (who gave the order to kill Frankie).

I think the most plausible explanation is that there was an earlier version of the script in which this line made more sense.

Well stracci... I guess the bottom line is we don't know, BUT I believe that it was an ad lib (although TLW makes a good point against this) and we will never know... has any one listened to the commentary in part II to see if Coppola had anything to say about it during this scene??? I have only watched II with the commentary once and don't remember.

So you're saying it had been written that Aiello would say that and the most anticipated film of the decade was badly produced because of editing/writing/continuity issues?

Your point is well-taken, SC.

But a last-minute script change seems more plausible to me than it being an ad lib, especially in light of the alternate shooting scripts that have surfaced and other (minor) continuity issues that have been spotted (such as Questadt sitting behind Roth in Havana).

As for the purpose of Vincenzo's presence in the courtroom, I believed for many years that it was a threat to Frankie - we kill your brother if you testify. Michael's "It was between the brothers," was just one more lie he told to Kay.

However, after watching and listening more carefully, I no longer think so. I believe that he was there to remind Frankie that they took an oath, and that he would disgrace their family if he broke it. To me, that is supported by Tom Hagen, after Frankie changes his testimony, telling Vincenzo (in Sicilian) that the honor of the family was intact. This makes Michael's statement to Kay sincere after all.

Of course, if the brother's presence could remind Frankie of his oath, fine. But do you really believe that Michael was going to rely simply on that to constrain Frankie's testimony (Michael: Golly gee. I thought that oath thing would do the trick. Now I'm going to prison. Shucks)? No. It was clear: testify and your brother dies. Remember: this is the Mafia we are discussing.

True! And remember that Pentangeli's brother was NOT a "civilian" either. He would have been fair game and that logic wasn't wasted on Frankie Five Angels.

I've always believed that the line, "Michael Corleone says hello," was aimed at Richie, the bartender, not Frankie. Richie was a civilian and he was nervous as hell ("Carmine, NO!, not here," he shouts as Carmine Rosato is about to kill the cop in Richie's place}. The cops would find Frankie dead in his place, so Richie might be under pressure to tell all. So the Rosatos fed him a line. That way, he could tell the cops, "I dunno who those guys were. But on of 'em said, 'Michael Corleone says hello' as they were stranglin' him." That'd be a perfect pointer to Michael had Frankie died as intended. And you can bet it'd get in the newspapers--another way to attack Michael's "legitimate" front.



"

In the book, Fabrizzio's shooter tells him, "Michael Corleone sends his regards." It's always seemed likely to me that that is the source for the line actually spoken by Aiello.

Much of that scene was based on real-life events involving the strangling of Larry Gallo (Crazy Joe Gallo's brother).

As with most mob folklore tales there is some uncertainty about the exact details of Gallo's strangling. Harvey Aronson in his book, "The Killing of Joey Gallo", describes Larry Gallo as standing at the rail of the bar talking to the bartender when he saw a flash of a reflection in the mirror. That "flash" was the rope being thrown around his neck (from behind). In "Joey" by Donald Goddard it is described that Larry Gallo went into the bar with John Scimone and they were followed in by Carmine Persico and "Sally" D'Ambrosio who then pulled their guns on Gallo and told him that they were responsible for Joe Jelly's killing. They started strangling Gallo (in the hope that he'd call his brothers for help, luring them into the trap) but Larry passed out first.

To further point out a few things about art imitating life -

- Larry Gallo was given a "C" note (just like Pentangeli was) before the strangling.

- Joe "Jelly" Gioelli's shirt was found in the street wrapped around a fish (the basis for Luca Brasi's bulletproof vest) two days before this strangling attempt on Gallo.

- The bartender of The Sahara Lounge (where this took place) was named Clemenza.

I never thought about Turnbull's point that this line was said for Ritchie the bartender, in case he ever had to give someone up. I always just figured they said it so Frankie would die thinking Michael turned on him.

His theory doesn't hold water. The bartender wouldn't have cooperated with the cops (and give testimony against Michael Corleone).

The line was delivered (IMO) because of a similar line made against Larry Gallo (and it was somewhat common knowledge) and FFC heard Aiello ad-lib the line in rehearsal and agreed to keep it in the movie because it sounded authentic.

I agree SC. There was no way that Ritchie was going to testify, period.

Why not? He would have been given immunity, and all he heard was some guy saying "Michael Corleone says hello." That would not be enough to implicate Michael in a court of law, because its hearsay.

Immunity from what? Death?

Prosecution. But the bottom line is if he gave the testimony that someone said "Michael Corleone says hello" before he killed Pentangeli, it gets law enforcement no where. It is not enough to incriminate Corleone. So they wouldn't need the testimony in any case.

Because Pentangeli lived and ratted Michael out, they needed the bartender even less.

The main thing the bartender had to lose was his liquor license.

Recall. What was it that one of the Rosato's yelled at Ritchie while exiting the bar: Open your mouth and you're dead. So what are we to expect now from Ritchie? He's going to implicate the most powerful Mafia Don in the country and that Don is just going to say "oh well. That's life?"

That threat has to do with Ritchie's relationship with the Rosatos. Not anything about Corleone. Hell, they wanted Corleone dead. They were probably in on the attampted hit with Roth.

The bartender knew the mob well enough to know that if he cooperated with the police in any manner he was a dead man. He was smart. He didn't object to a mob killing - he objected to a mob killing in HIS PLACE.

He would not have helped the police in any manner. His answer would have been, "I was in the back washing some glasses" or somethinhg like that.

I tend to agree. If it was today, maybe not. But in 1959, at the height of the Mob's power and "mystique," no way he'd rat. Don't forget, this is before the Witness Protecion Program was formed. Where was he gonna go?

Riche wasn't a made guy. If the cops found a stiff in his bar, he'd be squeezed. Because they knew he was a civilian, they'd offer him immunity from prosecution. That's why "Michael Corleone says hello" was tailor-made for Richie: He could "cooperate" with the police by claiming he didn't know the guys--only that one of them said, "Michael Corleone says hello." Meanwhile, the phrase would implicate Michael. By itself, it wouldn't be enough to form the basis of prosecuting Michael for murder--but it'd go a long way to besmirch his "legit" front when it hit the newspapers. The Rosatos would give Richie a pass as long as he didn't identify them by name. It's just the sort of complex scheme Roth would have thought of.

TB, you've been out of Brooklyn too long.

Nobody aware of the mob's influence would have cooperated with the cops (ESPECIALLY in the 50's as pb pointed out).

I agree with the statement that Roth was trying to pen the killing of Pentangelli on Micheal, thus the reason for that line. As far as his brother goes. I would think that it served a two-fold purpose. First Omerta, this would serve as a reminder. Second, it showed Frankie that Mike could get to his family at any time. Even his brother from that two-mule town. If Frankie didn't cooperate not only would his brother die but his wife and daughter could be in danger. Of course not necessarily from Mike killing them since most times women and children are off limits (though it didn't matter when they killed Tattaglia) but possibly Mike could have them deported or everything taken away from them.

Thanks for all the thoughts - I guess we'll never know all the answers - One thing I still can't make my mind up on is:

At the time when he commits suicide - Who does Frankie think tried to strangle him Roth or Michael? Does he realize Roth played him?

As Tom told Michael in the boathouse: "Our people in the NYC detectives said that Frankie was half-dead, scared, talking out loud about how you [Michael] betrayed him..."

I think you should be concerned about holding your own water.

At my age, you're asking too much.

The "greeting" supposedly from Michael always (and still) confuses me. I first assumed that Mike really was behind it given (as noted) the unforeseen incident of the cop walking in (I did not and do not think that was planned but who knows?). The rest of the context, though, indicates that Mike really did not want to have Frank killed (at least at that time). On the other hand, maybe it was to show just how devious Mike could be (even to the audience). I always thought, given Frank's brother's facial expressions, that he was not a prisoner, per se, but there to remind Frank of his vows and the consequenses of breaking those vows. By the way, sort of the reverse setup between Frank and his brother and Mike and Fredo in that unlike Fredo, Frank's brother kept to the code and unlike Mike, Frank (perhaps) acted to save his brother

At my age, I know I'm asking too much!

I would like to put this to rest, once and for all:

Roth's plan was to lure Michael to Havana, get teh $2 million from him, and have him assassinated on his way home from the Presidential palace. So, according to Roth's plan, Michael would be dead before dawn on Jan. 1, 1959. The attempted killing of Frankie occurred days earlier. Why would Roth engage in an incredibly complex, incredibly risky, split-second-timed plot to have Frankie brought within seconds of death, and then have him rescued? So that he could testify against Michael at a Senate hearing months later, when, according to Roth's plan, Michael would already be long dead?

And, just suppose Roth did plan the cop's entry? How would he do it? Call a police lieutenant in the local precinct and say, "Hello, Shultz? Listen, I want you to send a cop to Richie's bar on Tuesday at 3:29 p.m. and 28 seconds...not 3:28, not 3:29 and 10 seconds, not 3:29 and 40 seconds--I want him there at 3:29 and 28 seconds. Got that? Good, let's synchronize watches..."

Years ago, someone here surfaced an early script treatment in which Roth was supposed to have engineered Frankie's rescue. It was never filmed that way. We can understand why: It's too far-fetched.

You are right TB. Pentangeli was to be murdered days before Michael was to be murdered. This would throw the Corleone family into chaos, and gratly strengthen the Rosatos and Roth.

It turns out it was Roth's good fortune that Frankie lived, and ratted Michael out.


Once everyone was out of Cuba, Roth obviously learned that Frankie was alive, and it then was very easy for him to place a call to Questadt and let this new plan to destroy MIchael play itself out.

Three possible reasons for Roth to follow the Frankie/Havana paths concurrently:

1. Just to follow through on existing lines of strategy, so that Michael wouldn't detect any changes and become unrelaxed; or,
2. To have a backup plan, which might be wise in light of what actually happened; or,
3. That the perjury trap was the actual trap, and that anything going on in Havana was the diversion.

I've never really dissected the transcript for the Havana material. How much evidence is there that Roth was actually preparing a hit?

One thing about the cop scene is what appears to be the cop's ignorance of who the Rosato brothers are. It seems that even a beat cop would be familiar in those days with who were the organized crime players.

Well, most New York cops back then were Irish. You know, not so much in the brains department.

Oh relax. I'm just kidding.

HEY!!!!!!!!

New York Times, June 6, 1987:

President Reagan warmed up for a taping of his weekly radio address today by telling an Italian-Irish joke, unaware that his remarks were being picked up on broadcast monitors.

At a recording session at the villa where he is staying before the economic summit conference, Mr. Reagan announced that he was going to tell ''my gondola joke.''

The President's first words could not be overheard, but the joke evidently concerned a gondolier who was singing ''O Sole Mio'' as he piloted his boat through the canals.

The rest of the joke went like this:

''And the Lord said, 'I wonder what would happen if I took away 25 percent of his brain power?'

''So the Lord did,'' and the gondolier sang, '' 'O sole, O sole.'

''The Lord said, 'Hey, I'll take half of it away,' '' and the song became '' 'O so, O so.'

''Finally, the Lord said, 'What will happen if I take all of his brain power away?' and He did.'' And the gondolier sang, '' 'When Irish Eyes Are Smiling.' ''

Guys,
I never understood why Roth would kill Frankie anyway. Wouldn't he wait to see if Michael would kill him himself? Since the case has been made that it would be next to impossible to stage the cop coming in, it just doesn't make much sense. Then again, I've been up 24 hours.

I think that Roth viewed himself as being in a long quiet defensive war against the Corleone Family. In a period of less than a decade the Corleones have murdered Roth's best friend, taken over several Roth associated or owned hotels and casinos in Nevada and made moves into Roth's Cuban domains.

Roth evidently doesn't have the muscle to openly resist these things.

But if he can get the Rosatos to kill Frankie, he can hopefully draw Michael into a long war in NY. This weakens the Corleones and could give Roth the opening to save his own interests. As a bonus Roth might even be able to convince the Corleone NY branch that Michael had turned against them and start a family civil war.

Also despite Roth's protestations of business above all he really did view Moe Green as a friend and may have been waiting patiently for the chance to pay Michael back by taking out someone near and dear to him. This idea makes more sense when we remember that the Pentangeli character is really supposed to be Clemenza.

Keep in mind that, after the Tahoe shooting failed, Roth went to Plan B: Lure Michael to Havana to be anointed his heir and successor, get the #2 million from him--and have him killed.

In his meeting with Roth in Miami, Michael said, "Frank Pentangeli is a dead man." Roth figured that Michael blamed Frankie for the Tahoe attempt. But instead of killing Frankie, Michael sent him on a mission to settle his problems with the Rosatos. Therefore, Roth reasoned, Michael didn't suspect Frankie in the Tahoe attempt after all--meaning that he might suspect Roth.

So, Roth arranged for Frankie to be killed in order to eliminate Michael's ally and caporegime in New York and thus clear the way for the Rosatos--his allies--to take over the "Olive Oil Business." The attempt on Frankie was staged while Michael was in Havana, inside Roth's trap. Roth figured that any move by Michael to replace Frankie with his own man would be moot because Roth planned for him to be dead shortly after the Presidential New Year's Eve party.

Stracci,

Forgive me for being late on this, but I just joined the forum.

I have answers for your questions about Frank Pentangelli. 1) who strangled him & why, & 2) why was Frankie's brother brought to America & presented in the court. Both of my answers are based on early script outlines as well as conversations that I've had over the years with various people that were directly involved in the production. So, my answers are not based on heresay or opinion.

For the first question, please refer to "Turnbull"'s latest post on 10/14/08. He's exactly right. Coppola couldn't have put it any better (kudos, Turnbull).

The second question regarding Frankie's brother: His brother was brought in because Frankie had children living in the same town as Frankie's brother. The intended threat (to Frankie) was that, had Frankie testified against Michael, the brother would kill (or ordered killed) Frankie's children.

This was from an early script outline that was never fully developed or (to my knowledge) ever filmed.

One other thing, regarding Part 2, there was a tremendous amount of footage filmed that was never included in the final film. Probably an extra hour's worth. The rough cut was well over 4 1/2 hours. Lee Strasburg suggested that they keep all of the footage and put an intermissin in. In fact, there is a spot for the intermission, but right now, I forget where. I'll have to get back to you on that. Unfortunately, the studio didn't want a long movie because, since this was such an anticipated film, they wanted to show as many times per day as possible. So, the studio ordered Coppola to cut it down to what you see now. As far as I've been able to gather, nobody knows where all of that footage ended up. The people that I met that worked on the film that I've spoken to, didn't know. I guess Coppola would be the only one who knows.

Anyway, hope this helps clear things up.

Great first post, JT. Welcome to the boards!

Thanks, SC. I just kind of stumbled onto this forum. It seems like a lot of nice people. It's nice to see that so many people love The Godfather films as much as we do.

Welcome aboard, JT I bet there are several hours' worth of scenes from II--probably enough to make a movie with significantly different scenes. If you've been visiting this site, you've seen the posts re. Michael entering Fabrizzio's pizzeria and killing him with his own lupera (stills appear in Harlan Lebo's "The Godfather Legacy"). Another part of an early script that never made it: Notice when the bigshots are meeting with Batista in Cuba, the Senate lawyer Questadt is sitting right behind Roth. But in the final cut, Questadt never again appears in Havana. An alert member found an earlier script in which Michael was to meet with Questadt in Havana. Probably the Questadt/Batista scene was shot to support that script, then left in even after FFC abandoned the idea of having Michael meet Questadt. Plenty more like that, we can assume.

Hi Turnbull. You're right, that scene where Michael kills Fabrizio WAS filmed but never used. After they filmed it, the studio saw the daily rush of the scene & deemed it too bloody for the times (remember, this was the early '70's), so FFC left it out. If you'll notice, the alternate scene where Fabrizio gets into his car & it explodes is even shot in "long shot" to pacify the exects at Paramount.

I've also heard about the Questadt thing with Michael. FFC was constantly changing the script every day. On Part 1, there were days when the actors would literally get the script the morning of the day's shoot. Which drove everybody nuts. Brando had his lines hidden taped all over the place (on his desk,on other actors,etc)
Even the last scene in Part 2 (the flashback scene) where all the kids are gathered for Vito's birthday. & Michael says to Sonny, "That's pop talkin'", it was. Those lines were written for Marlon Brando. Brando was supposed to be in that scene, but he had a grievence with Paramount after Part 1 so he said he wouldn't be in Part 2. FFC held out hope that he would show up at the last minute, but he never did. So, they gave Brando's lines to James Caan.

One of the stills of that scene in Lebo's book shows Fab covered with what looks like 2 gallons of Caro syrup. It's a wonder he didn't drown.

Another still from Lebo's book shows Robert Duvall with a cardboard strapped to his chest containing Brando's lines. Lebo tells that in the scene between Luca and Vito in Vito's office on the day of the wedding, Lenny Montana scotch-taped a piece of paper saying "F**k you!' to his tongue--and stuck it out at Brando during the filming.

Do you have Lebo's book? It's the bible.

No, I don't have Lebo's book, or any other for that matter. I've heard of it, but haven't picked it up yet. Most of my info is based on conversations I've had with people who worked on the production of the films. My dream is to meet FFC one day & really give him a good grilling. I'll get all of the info on the missing footage, & all of his views. But, so far, I've only gotten as close as the production people, some of the extras, Peter Bart from Paramount at that time, Al Martino, & Alex Rocco (who played Moe Green). Alex Rocco & Al Martino VERY informative.
Anyway, I'll get Lebo's book one of these days. I'm also praying for the release of 1 & 2 in chronolgical order (The Complete Epic, The Godfather Saga, et al) to be released on DVD. I guess it's sacreligious to admit that on this website, & I'm sure I'll be ripped apart for it, but I can tell you that most of the people that I've met who worked on the film prefer it that way. The movie flows better &, with all of the extra scenes added back in (Genco dying in the hospital,etc.), it really ties everything together.

So are just about all of us on this board.

The issue of whether the theatrical releases or the chronological version is better has been debated here often. My guess is that posters have been about evenly divided. I prefer the chronological version w/deleted scenes added for the same reasons you cited.

This all seems very logical expect you're omiting one key thing: before strangling Pantangelli, the Rosato brother (played by Danny Aiello) tells him, "Michael Corrleone says hello."

If the Rosatos are acting on Roth's orders, why would they lie to Pantangelli about who ordered his killing? It makes no sense.

I wouldn't worry so much about the Rosato brother (Danny Aiello) saying "Michael Corleone says, Hello".

First of all, that saying was simply an ad-lib by Danny Aiello, nothing more, nothing less. That line was never in the script. But Coppola left it in because, very often, when the mob kills somebody, they want the victim to know who killed them so it will be the last thing on their (the victim's) mind before they die.

Roth wanted Frankie killed because, once Frankie was out of the way, that would pave the way for the Rosato's (&,in turn, Roth) to take over the Corleone Family in New York.

Also, don't discount the Senate hearings. Remember, Sen. Questadt was on the panel questioning Michael. He was sitting behind Roth at the Havana meeting. Remember Fredo telling Michael: "The senate lawyer, Questadt, he belongs to Roth". So, it's safe to assume that, since Roth couldn't kill Michael in Tahoe OR Havana (remember, NOBODY expected the rebels to take over that night), Roth figured that he would have Questadt form a senate subcommitee to investigate Michael & get him on a charge of perjury. The fact that Frankie lived was a bonus for the senate (& Roth) because then, thinking Michael turned on him, he could be used as a star witness against Michael.

It was an ad-lib by Danny Aiello, and it made no sense, given that the Rosatos indended Frankie to be dead. So why did FFC leave it in? IMO, the line was not intended for Frankie, but for Richie, the bartender, whose ginmill was being used to set up Frankie:

It’s obvious that Richie is a “civilian,” not a Made Man, and he’s nervous as hell about his bar being used for a murder (“Carmine, NO, not HERE!” he screams at Tony’s brother (played by Carmine Caridi) after the cop enters and Carmine draws his gun). The Rosatos know that Richie might be squeezed by the cops investigating Frankie’s murder. Richie would be too fearful of the Rosatos to identify them as the killers. Still, as a civilian, Richie is not bound by the code of omerta. So they hand Richie something he can give the cops so that Richie can get off the hook: “The murderers said, ‘Michael Corleone says hello.’ ” That line would set the police after Michael, and would be picked up by the press-- another nail into the coffin of Michael Corleone’s “legitimacy.” Clever Roth!

Questadt wasn't a Senator--he was chief counsel to the committee. Yes, he was sitting behind Roth in Havana, but that was an editing mistake on FFC's part. In an earlier version of the script, Michael was to confer with Questadt in Havana. That part of the script was ultimately dropped. But FFC had already filmed the Havana sequence in the Dominican Republic, and he wasn't going to go back and reshoot it. So he left in the quick shot of Questadt and hoped no one would notice. He hadn't counted on the sharp-eyed people here!

Put another way: If Michael knew Questadt "belonged to Roth" because he spotted him sitting behind Roth in Havana, he'd never have perjured himself when Questadt showed up as chief counsel to the Senate committee grilling him.

I believe Roth didn’t arrange the Senate hearing: Questadt did:

Senate committees schedule high-profile, televised hearings (like the one on organized crime) months in advance, so the Senators can get the publicity and viewership they need to be re-elected. Roth would have learned about the hearings far ahead, and would have feared that he could be called as a witness. He also would have heard from his political contacts that Questadt was “for sale.” So, he bribed Questadt (as Fredo told Michael, “The Senate lawyer, Questadt, he belongs to Roth”) to keep him informed and to protect him. What’s more, as the chief counsel to a Senate committee investigating organized crime, Questadt would have lots of contacts with law enforcement, including the FBI and the NYPD—very useful to Roth.

When the cops broke up Frankie’s garroting, as Tom told Michael, “Frankie was half-dead, talking out loud about how you betrayed him.” The NYPD would have instantly recognized that they had a potential high-level Mob turncoat, and would have kept his survival secret—to protect him from assassination and to keep possible targets of Frankie’s revelations from learning that they were in danger of being exposed. Questadt would have heard about Frankie’s survival almost immediately.

Bingo! A lightbulb went off in Questadt’s head: He’d convince the committee chairman to ask NYPD to give Frankie to the Feds, where he’d be safer (on an Air Force base) than in a NYC jail or hotel room—and where he could be put to far greater use in the upcoming organized crime hearings. Why would NYPD agree to hand him over? Because they wouldn’t be able to nail Michael for the Great Massacre of 1955 and other crimes on Frankie’s testimony alone. They’d need corroborating witnesses for each of Frankie’s revelations--and they wouldn’t get any. But no corroborating witnesses are required to obtain Federal perjury convictions—only the testimony of one witness and some other evidence or testimony—and the Feds could trap Michael on perjury charges if Frankie’s survival were kept secret.

Then, another lightbulb went off in Questadt’s head: Roth would surely be interested—and would pay handsomely for—the knowledge that Pentangeli was alive and ready to testify against Michael. Roth by that time had escaped from Cuba and had recovered sufficiently from his stroke to listen. Roth prompted Questadt with facts about Michael’s crimes. Questadt was able to turn that info into questions for Michael when he was sworn in. Result: five counts of perjury against Michael.

Roth consistently showed himself to be preternaturally clever in laying traps for Michael, and in recovering from reverses. But Michael had a trump card: his Sicilian cunning. That’s why Michael ultimately prevailed.

I know Danny Aiello has claimed ownership for the line, but it is very similar to what is said to Fabrizzio just before he is killed in the book. Maybe they were playing with the line during filming, trying to get it in, but it seems very likely to me that the book is the real source.

And that brings up another "mess" in Part II. The Corleone's would have undoubtedly heard about Pentangeli's survival as well... they still had police officials on the payroll. Yet FFC "forgot" this.

As great as Part II is, I still say that it was rushed to cash in on the popularity of Part I and some storylines simply don't make sense.

Again, Turnbull, that's a thoughtful answer with a lot of logic but ultimately, it's too complicated. No viewer should assume that Aiello is talking to Richie. The angle clearly suggests that Aiello is speaking to Frankie.

It's very strange that Aiello would ad-lib that line. Why would he feel so compelled to ad-lib a line that would confuse the audience? I'm thinking that he must have realized that the line gives Frankie the needed motivation to testify against Michael in the Senate hearings and then he convinced Coppola to use it.

But it really doesn't make sense in the moment. Not if it's Roth who orders Frankie's killing. Which leaves me to believe that the scene is poorly rendered. And ulitmately, a major flaw in the film. Does anyone agree?

...perhaps because there were so many false starts and changes in the scripts that FFC couldn't keep track of them.

I remember that line from the book. That, too, would have made no sense. If Michael, like Vito, needed to provide "buffas" between himself and the underlings who committed crimes on his behalf, why would he have the actual killer tell Fab: "Michael Corleone says hello." If the killer had been caught, or squeezed for another crime, he'd have that to offer the police.

Then again, Michael had three witnessess--Neri, Rocco and Tom--when he gave orders to have Frankie and Roth taken care of. Dangerous! Maybe he was slippin'...

I don't think that the killer saying "the buffer told me to kill Frankie and say Michael says hello" would have any more legal effect against Michael than if the killer said just "the buffer told me to kill Frankie."

Coppola was in a terrific bind with GF2. Every minute of the flashback material took time away from the main Michael-Fredo storyline, but the De Niro scenes are the only thing in the movie that make Michael a tragic figure, instead of a run-of-the-mill monster. The movie is more melodrama than mystery, so I think Coppolla made the right choices, even if we have to connect a lot of the dots ourselves.

The reason that the line makes sense to me when spoken to Fab is that his murder was personal, not business. I can see Michael wanting to make sure that Fab knew he was being killed to avenge Apollonia.

As for the Danny Aiello line, I do not believe that it was an ad-lib or a message to the bartender. I think it is merely the remnant of a discarded plot line.

I believe someone here surfaced an earlier script in which Roth did plan to have Frankie survive--and the line was intended to set Frankie against Michael. That plotline was dropped for obvious reasons--much too far-fetched. But the "Michael Corleone says hello" line was far too prominent to have been left in by mistake. That's why I believe FFC rationalized it as something for Ritchie the bartender.

Rosato definitely intended to kill Frankie. The copo just interrupted the process. That happened to be a good break for Roth as he could now use Frankie to get Michael. It is interesting that Roth had to apparently keep Frankie under wraps as it was clear that Michael thought Frankie was killed ("Who gave the order. I know I didn't"). We all know how Frankie felt about Roth so how Roth ever got Frankie to turn, even if he (Frankie)thought that Michael tried to kill him, is still somewhat of a mystery to me.

As for the seen with his brother at the hearing, all you have to do is look at Vincenzo's facial expression when he first sees his brother. It is clear that this is an issue of honor and not one of fear that Vincenzo would get whacked by Michael. How is it that Michael would have been able to get Vincenzo to America on such short notice. He was clearly there on his own volition.

But hear's another question: Why would Willie Cheech sing to the Feds. Did Roth get to him too, and if so, how?

Great post, fathermarcello. Welcome.

I agree 100% about the brothers Pentangelli. Frankie idolized his brother.

I assume that once they got Frankie talking, they could use his information to bring Cicchi around.

I've always thought that Roth set up the entire Pentangelli scenario. I can't see any way that Frankie could be taken into police custody, without leaving a trace that he was alive, unless someone knew he was coming.

Great first post, offering some insight and thought. Welcome to the boards, fm!

I've always assumed that Willie Cicci was Frankie's "boy" and where ever Frank went, Cicci was sure to follow.

That may have been Vincenzo's motivation, but the threat to Vincenzo posed by Michael was Frankie's.

And Cicci was facing one hell of alot of prison time.

I doubt that Roth knew Frankie had survived until Roth recovered from his stroke. Here's how I think it went down:
--Frankie started talking trash about Michael as soon as he revived. NYPD, recognizing that they finally had on their hands a Mob higher-up willing to rat out his boss, kept Frankie's survival secret, to keep him talking and to protect him from others trying to finish the job the Rosatos started.
--Questadt, Roth's man, was chief counsel to a Senate committee looking into organized crime. He had contacts in NYPD. They told him immediately about Frankie's survival. BINGO! Questadt had a brainstorm: he convinced his committee chairman to get NYPD to release Frankie to FBI custody so the committee could use him to set up Michael for the perjury rap.
--Questadt then contacted Roth. Roth was surprised that Frankie survived. But he immediately figured that if he hadn't known that Frankie was alive, neither would Michael. He then supplied Questadt with details of Michael's involvement in the Great Massacre of 1955, nationwide gambling, etc. That info became the source of the questions the Senators and Questadt asked Michael at the hearing, that set him up for perjury.
--The FBI told Cicci that Frankie had survived and was going to testify against Michael. They advised him that, since his boss was willing to break omerta, Cicci had nothing to lose by doing likewise. If he did, he'd get a break, like Frankie did. If he didn't, Cicci would be the fall guy. Cicci went along.
--The beauty part here: Neither Frankie nor Cicci realized that Roth was pulling the strings! Michael himself didn't realize it until Fredo told him: "That Senate lawyer, Questadt--he belongs to Roth."

As for Vincenzo: the look on his face is one of astonishment that his brother was about to break omerta. But he also could have been worried about the consequences on him and his family at the same time.

I saw some say the bartender would never talk... so then why warn him on the way out?

If the police accuse him of accessory to murder, which would make sense since he was right there and clearly allowed his place to be used for the crime, I don't think you could assume he would never talk. Especially since a cop was shot.

I don't really think that's why the line was put in, but it still makes sense.

But more than that I think the reason for the line is to make Pentangelo's death even more painful and to cause him more hurt. That was pretty common in mafia killings. If the ability to make somebody suffer above and beyond was there, it was done.

After that, I agree with Turnbull's timeline.

As for Frankie's brother, I think he was brought in because it was thought that just his presence would remind Frankie of the "right" thing to do. Would Michael have killed him had Frankie still talked? Probably, but the looks given in the courtroom say "honor" was the real driver, not a simple fear of retaliation.