Michael vs the world (his father left behind)

Is Michael really the bad guy? Recently I showed my girlfriend and some friends part 1&2. They really enjoyed both movies but were completely disgusted with Michael's character which left me in total shock lol! Michael is my favourite tragic hero. I tried to defend him but I ended up being out numbered with opinions and ended up looking bad defending a ruthless character haha.


Some evil points were pointed out like: how could Michael kill Fredo?, why does Michael have to kill everyone in his path?, how come Vito was a warm hearted person and Michael was completely the oppisite? In my opinion/defense, Vito left behind a world full of murder,ruthless actions, & death of loved ones killed by enemies his father created. Does Michael deserve to be a cold hearted and ruthless Don? Yes.


Michael may have started out as a nice college boy, but after going through the torture of seeing your father nearly assinated, a new wife blown to pieces, and oldest loving brother slaughtered with bullets..any man would change his own destiny to complete revenge with no mercy. Vito passed on his rath of revenge thourgh Micheal..and suceeded.


Michael killing Freo? Do I agree?..no, but in Michael's life situation..then yes. This is a life/death situation where Fredo failed him as a brother. He would always be a danger to the family as long as he's around.I'm sure Michael could've exiled him somewhere far, but information equals power, which Fredo knows too much and would come back to destroy Michael.


I tried to explain to my friends, Michael's goal is simple: quest for legitimacy and to kill only when necessary in order to keep his family safe for the future.



Did I defend my opinion correctly to them?



Ps

sorry my spelling/grammar sucks

i agree with most of your points but killing your own brother would make him a ruthless charterer. I don't think Fredo was that big of a threat.

Broadly speaking, Michael is a tragic figure, but the tragedy was self-inflicted. He had alternatives to the life he chose at every stage, and his choices sank him.

Quite true.

See i dont agree when people say "poor Michael" or he is a tragic figure. Yes he strated out a good guy but he had choices. I mean i get he wanted to help his dad at first but if he really didnt want to be involved with the mob then he could have relinquished control or the corleones could have left the mob and lived a normal life. Also in Part 2 Mike really had become a cold psychopath. I mean Fredo wasnt a saint but most people knew that he never would try to harm his own family because he is not cold blooded

I think you can make a defense for many of Michael's choices, but not the killing of Fredo.

That action made clear that Michael had gone far beyond his justifications of "protecting his Family" or "seeking legitimacy" into a realm of almost inhuman cold-bloodedness.

The real tragedy was that of the innocents (or slightly less guilty) who suffered becuase of Michael's actions.

Going back to Turnbull's old mantra, the underlying message of the GF Trilogy is "crime doesn't pay." It didn't pay for Vito who lost a son, and saw his empire collapse, an it didn't pay for Michael, who despite his riches, watched his beloved daughter be murdered, and lost the amily he said he was trying to save.

A lot of the rest is atmospherics. Most significantly is the difference between Vito and Michael. A lot of this is generational, and also a result of the very different backgrounds they had. Vito was born in rural Sicily and had to be spirited out of the country to avoid being killed. When he arrives in New York, after spending months on Ellis Island in isolation he was taken in by the Abbanbando family and raised "like a son" .... something he would do for Tom Hagen later in life. He came up as an immigrant/street person and began his career by doing favors for people in exchange for bigger favors and profits. Yes, he murdered Fannuccio as a "favor" to Tessio and Clemenza, but in exchange he gained their loyalty and began what became the successful "Olive Oil Business." But he had a kinder touch as well...indicative are the scenes with people like the fruit vendor who would not let him pay for a piece of fruit, after which VIto told him "if there is anything I can do for you come to me," as well as the whole favor he did for his wife when he got the landlord to allow her friend and her pet to stay in their apartment for reduced rent. For that second favor he never even asked for anything in return.

Micheal on the other hand was born of privilege. He never wanted for anything. Went to the best schools, including an Ivy League college, and was a typical post war corporate director, and thats how he ran the family. Along the way he lost his "common touch" (I doubt he would care about some widow being evicted from an apartment) . So in many ways, his ruthlessness was no greater than Vito's, instead it was just mor out there for everyone to see because he lacked sympathy for others. He was a manipulator who believed the end always justified the means, and was a narcissist who could not see his own shortcomings until it was too late. The tragedy ofMichael was in III when he realized that he was his own undoing.

Was it necessary to have that woman killed just to frame the senator in part 2 ?

Yes, but Fredo didn't even feel remorseful in the boat house. Instead, he outlashed at Michael with rage and jealously even though he alsmot had his "little brother killed"

I never really understood that part. How did the senator help Michael in the end? All he did was made a little speech at the hearings and walked away?

Just because Fredo was not remorseful does not mean he was a threat.

If Michael really felt Fredo was a threat, he would not have been allowed to outlive Mama. And he certainly would not have been allowed to visit the compound.

Fredo was killed out of vengeance, not to protect anyone. That's why the killing laid bare Michael's hypocricy, and why guilt tormented Michael in GFIII.

Well maybe not a direct threat, but Fredo sealed his fate by going against Michael secretly behind his back only to have "something" in it for him. Stupid and selfish, almost resulted the death of the complete Family. Family is family, and Fredo of all people should know best that you stick with blood since he's the only Corleone left as a man.

Michael probably looked at it from a royal emperor point of view, that even your own blood can make assination atempts to take the throne.

But honestly, that is cruel he actually did that to his own brother, but that doesnt make me view michael as an evil character haha

This is Stalinist logic. In the end of GF2 when Tom challenges him, he says that he only wants to kill his enemies. Does he realise that he's the one who has made the rest of the world his enemies?
The tragic is self-inflicted, yes. And that's what real tragedy is all about.

I think Michael may have been ready to give Fredo a pass, but his outburst in the boat house sealed his fate. Fredo not only wasn't repentent, but he tried to justify betraying Michael by admitting he was jealous and resentful; admitted he betrayed him for personal gain ("there was something in it for me"), admitted he witheld valuable info from his brother (Frankie's survival, Questadt belonging to Roth). Hard to not think of Fredo as not only deserving of death, but a threat if kept alive.

As for Geary: I've always believed that Geary helped set Michael up for the perjury rap. As a member of the subcommittee, he had to know that Pentangeli was alive and would be produced as a witness. I believe that, when he asked Cicci if there was always a buffer between him and Michael, he knew Cicci would say, "No, I never talked to him." That would make Michael think that could perjure himself because no one could back up the subcommittee's charges against him.

Agree with all your points TB plus, as I have posted before, Fredo lied to Mike in the boathouse scene. He sais he didn't know it would be a hit. He knew.

How do you figure that? Remember when Johnny ola called him and Fredo specifically said, "You guys lied to me"

I think the lie was that there was something in it or Fredo. They never gave him anything.

I dont buy that at all it doesnt fit with Fredo's character. Fredo is a womanizer and an idiot but he probably the only corleone brother who has a soul lol and he cares about his family. Mike by part 2 had become a psychopath with no empathy for anybody

How does Fredo care about his family when he witheld vital information from Michael about the senate hearings? Michael is not a psychopath, the people around him was inflicting his dark emotions. Think about it,

Connie: Doesn't respect Michael for killing her psycho husband who kills her brother (Sonny)

Fredo: Almost kills the whole family and witheld information to back Michael up

Kay: Aborts the baby

So who is truly loyal to Michael? Tom?..that's about it.

Look I love the godfather but characters like mike make me sick because they are murderers. Look Im not saying Fredo is a saint but he is much more humane than Mike is

Yes, that's about it.

With one caveat: Only when it suits Michael.

I agree too about murderers, I was just opinionating if I was in Michaels shoes haha. But in reality, Michael was a fine gentleman from the very beginning. His love to protect his family is what started his life of crime. Such a sad story though, he became so powerful & sucessful yet depressing at the same time.

It's no wonder Vito didn't want this life for him.

I agree with JCrusher - "The Godfather" has an interesting story, but there are not enough foul words in this world do describe Michael and other main characters. I hate Michael even more than Vito because, apart from being a criminal, he is a hypocrite: he pretended to be "different" at the beginning, but then started to behave himself like those criminals he initially wanted to distance himself from.

See this is where i disagree. Many people say "Poor Mike" or tragic character. He is not tragic really. Mike made his choices and he made bad choices so i dont feel bad for him. You reap what you sow. Sure he started off good but then he was seduced by power/greed and by part 2 he became a cold controlling psychopath.

Mike Corleone and Tony Sorprano are both evil characters but since they are main characters people seem to forgive them for their faults lol

Lets say you were Michael right after killing sollozzo, how would you handle the family empire after that? Who else could Vito pass it along to? Sonny is dead, fredo will jump on that opprutuinty but ultimately destroy the family. Tom is not real Corleone blood.

First of all i wouldnt. Being in the mafia is not a good way to be living and plus i would never kill. I mean if mike really wanted to be legit he could have handed over the reigns to others and kept his family out of the life

Obviously the family goes to Michael to answer the last question.

What is not expressed often is Michael's total lack of humanity. Characters like Vito Corleone, and Tony Soprano and Nucky Thompson, others are bad guys, but they have an element of humanity to them. They show compassion, and they have subordinates who are loyal to them out of something more than fear. Michael has none of that. Everything he does is calculated and he always has an agenda. He is never kind for the sake of being kind. It is no surprise he ends up alone with no friends or family.

Actually Vito Corleone is the only one who has somewhat morals. He is still a murderer but he doesnt go as far as the others. Nucky and Tony are both egotistical, cheaters, killers, and would sell out anybody if they had to. although i agree with you mike says he does evil things for hhis "family" but yet he hurts his family

I completely agree with you about everything in terms of real life @JCRUSHER. But it's alway interesting to see how people would portray Michael's character given the situation that he is facing.

Wouldn't you be consumed with revenge if your family members were getting killed one by one? Even though all you wanted was an innocent lifestyle?

On top of that just to make things worse, your own brother inlaw was beating on your baby sister and personaly setted up your oldest brother to be murdered by your fathers enemies?

It wouldn't be easy to "simply walk away" after all that. He had to clean up his fathers business (which took years)

Yeah but that was the life Vito chose. Sonny also chose that life but i also blame vito because his sons saw what he was doing and wnated to emualate him. But sonny was much different than mike in regards to family because he would never harm them. Mike on the other hand had no problem killing family members because he was just evil at that point

Michael does show compassion. Remember the beginning in part 2, Fredo's wife was embarassing them at the party which Fredo had to apologize for. Michael responds in a kind way ensuring Fredo that he is a brother and never has to apologize. He also promises to take care of Connie and ensures her she can have anything she wants.

I think you misinterpret those scenes. The Fredo scene was just mike talking down to fredo like he was a child. And the Connie scene seemed to be more bullying than "compassion. I mean i part 2 mike is pretty much pure evil with no soul

Michael only killed one family member - Fredo

I thought it felt more like compassion. Those scenes may just scenes but in the reality of his world, Michael did take care of the whole family no different then Vito did for his.

Telling Connie to stay with the family and gets to have anything she wants is hardly bullying lol. Michael just seemed cold at that moment cause she was making childish decisions (marrying a random dude)

He was trying to control her. it doesnt matter whether she was making childish decisions. I mean her husband even though he was a dickhead was still murdered the of their child's baptsim by her brother tahst pretty dark shit. Hey im not defending Carlo since he was a jerk but i think you are making excuses for Mike lol

True but Carlo was family by marriage but i hate carlo just as bad as mike. also killing your brother who has a good heart and taht everybody liked is kind of a big deal lol

haha ok ok..Fredo did have a good heart, maybe he was just too scared of Michael, so that could be why he didn't confess everything. But you should go easy on Michael's character. He had to handle a multi million dollar company & free himself of enemies at the same time lol

dude i hope you are kidding. I mean he is a murderer of both men and women. So im sorry if im being too hard on him

I have to support Trilogy a bit. I think the movies make a good work in showing Michael motivation for his actions.

I think Michael loved Kay and his kids more than he loved Fredo (he is so stupid that he almost got them killed so he has to go).
He loved Sonny more than he cared for Carlo or Connie's feelings (and he was also a security risk).
He loved his mother more than he wanted to destroy Fredo after what he did to Kay and the kids.
He loved his father more than he could refuse to take over the family. And he started killing to protect him and his siblings who were in immediate danger because of the policeman.
He tried to protect Fredo and Connie and Kay but he wanted to protect them with sheer power (not letting Kay go out for shopping etc).
I think the movie also shows why Michael thinks that power is the only way in life (the betrayal of his father when he tries to play nice, corrupt police, his jaw is broken, the recurring racism he is facing even when he is powerful).He tried to be a soldier to get respect, tried to go to good school but the the society is not really appreciating his efforts to fit in to say the least.
Were his actions forgivable? No and he knows that.
Could he have done differently? If he was not compassionate about his identity, father, mother, wife, kids.. maybe.
Did he completely destroy all of his human relationships while he was trying to protect them? Yes.

Yes. And the way Michael tried to pursue his "love" was violence, again and again.

I'll concede that Michael probably loved his daughter, Mary, but he never knew how to express it. To get to her he named her the head of some foundatiion he started, and even Mary questioned the legitimacy of that operation. Bottom line? He tried to buy her love.

As for this shibboleth that Fredo had a good heart, and which permeates everything about the GF Trilogy, I fail to see anything Fredo ever did that showed he had a good heart.
Examples anyone?

Yes i can give examples. First of all i never said Fredo was a saint but compared to his brothers he is probably the only one who has a chance to go to heaven lol. I mean when his father gets shot and when his mother dies he gets very emotional which shows he loved them very much even though they didnt think that much of him. Also Fredo spending time with Anthony is important. teaching him how to fish is something Mike never would do or would want to do. Heck he never even knew what his son got for Christmas.

Thanks for the support!

A chance to go to heaven? Fredo was running a brothel house, which means he was involved in the murder of that prostitute. Also he was scheming and providing intel to Michael's enemies knowing fully the risks that could happen to Michael & The Family.

Fredo was always loved by his family but his actions showed he just wasn't dependable which Fredo will never understand that. His jealousy and stupidness made him a secret threat to Michael.

And of course they would say "he has a good heart" since he is lacking muscle/intelligence to run a family.

Trilogy i know the mafia sounds cool but you cant excuse a character liek mike who killed men women and family. I mean i gotta be honest im a little surprised that you have no emotions over what mike did. yes its only a movie but people like mike exist in the world unfortunetly

No no, i'm not a fan of the mafia or anything. I just feel bad for Michael's character from where he started..to where he ended. I'm glorified of the story line/characters but nothing else that is related in real life.

I did a english project few years back on The godfather which made me think more in depth about the decisions and tranistions that were made from father to son.

If you really think about it, The Corleone family were viewed as good people.

-Vito never harmed anyone to benefit himself. He protected his community and was loved, not feared. Even though he was a "mafia" leader.
- The family activites didn't really harm inncoent ppl. They stayed away from drugs and prostitution.
-Michael fought for his country which shows he cared for inncoent

Trilogy, that is what makes the GF films a classic saga. It is a family story that ends in complete tragedy.

The reason i dont feel bad for mike is because he made those choices. I understand protecting your family but he could have easily named tessio or clemenza as boss and gotten his immediate family out of the life. Mike deserved everything he got in the end

This may seem ridiculous to you but, considering my opinion on animals' rights and what Vito had done to that horse, I wouldn't have been too displeased if somebody presented his head to the Corleone family like he did with the horse's head to Woltz (yes, I know Woltz was a pedophile, but it was him who deserved to die, not the horse).

If Michael left everything to those guys, then Michael would have absolute no power what so ever. Keep in mind Michael & Vito orchestrated the massacre so there will always be people out there hunting him. Once they find out he gave up evrything, Michael would be killed immediately.

I feel bad for the horse too. I may have exaggerated slightly then.

Anyway, I got the impression that it wasn't the film creators' intention to make us sympathize with Michael. I think the scene where he "renounces" his sins and right at the same moment his hitmen start to whack everybody he doesn't like clearly shows the hypocrisy of the mafia, whatever "noble" intentions its leader may originally have.
I agree that most of the people he killed were criminals themselves, but if somebody kills a criminal, it will be easier for him to kill an innocent later.

Wow. I mean most of us eat animals and that poor horse's head actually came from the butcher's.The rest of it was eaten by real "people in your neighborhood". you would kill off 90% of the people too because they eat cute chickens and piglets?

I am not saying I would kill them, don't mock me. The animals themselves eat one another too. But, if people can't do without meat, they could at least keep it to their needs, without butchering animals just to settle scores with each other.
It's like with hunting: I can understand if a starving peasant in Africa goes hunting to feed his family, but it's completely different if somebody rich with nothing to do goes and kills animals just to entertain himself.

Just because we never see Vito being involved in violence doesn't mean he was an angel. He ordered people to kill. What do you think how did he handle union problems? And Luca Brasi was more than just a body guard. If the band leader hadn't signed the Fontane contract Luca would have shot him.

Also, helping Luca after he burned a baby alive is infamous even compared to the actions of most other criminals.

Exactly. The first film does a great job of avoiding what it is the Corleone Organization really does. But extortion, labor racketeering, loan sharking, etc are not victimless crimes.

I didn't read the books, so I wasn't too familiar with the background stories. It was late when I wrote that last statement

Vito started out with a reasonalble proposition first to the band leader. He never used violence unless it was absolutley necessary.

I agree Vito was much less violent than Mike but still violence/murder against anyone is wrong

Absolutely necessary?! Johnny signed a contract he later regretted. Vito's threat of lethal force in such a simple business matter shows where Michael got his cold-bloodedness.

And I agree with the previous posters about the many victims Vito left in his wake, although they are never shown on the screen.

There is a reason why the Corleone family outlasted every other family and built the empire to sucess - Vito Corleone

I believe Vito's success was built on his karma. He cared for every person that came his way who had troubles.

Killing Fannucci in godfather 2 was his first sin. But how many people did Fannucci terroize in the community? I'm not saying killing is ok, it's just a movie. But karma makes sense. He's helped so many poor people, thats why he became the richest and most powerful

I must say though, Vito's bad karma was losing a son, being shot multiple times and other tragic things he encounterd.

As for Michael, he fought for his country and intially didn't want anything to do with the life of crime. All he wanted was to live a humble life with Kay. So deep down his roots were innocent and good. Vito had to channel his success through someone, sadly it had to be Michael.

im sorry but thats a bunch of crap. Vito made his own bed. Mike made his own bed. The only difference is that Vito would never harm his family like mike did

Vito did make his own bed, but he had a dream of making Michael his sucessor in a legitimate way. Sadly, it didn't turn out that way..which is also tragic.

Mike fucked up

Well we will never know. Vito's brother never risked the life of his wife, children and his actions never led Carmella to leave Vito and abort their unborn child. Maybe he would have killed a brother so stupidly harmful too.

I think the question to discuss would be if Vito was alive during Fredo's betrayal, if Vito would have allowed Michael to kill him (or give his support towards the hit). I believe that what sealed Fredo's fate wasn't his betrayal per se, it was his vehement rant to Michael about being passed over and about there supposedly being "something in it for [him]". That rant made it clear to Michael that he could never be trusted, since he wouldn't yield to Michael's leadership and could easily be swayed again (imagine someone like Don Altobello in GF3 approaching Fredo with the same kind of story). I personally think if it wasn't for that rant Fredo would have been exiled from the family and probably set up with a sustenance living and then cut off, but not killed.

Michael would never have whacked Fredo during Vito's lifetime, just as he didn't as long as his mother was alive.

But, you're right: the rant sealed Fredo's fate. With all that resentment bubbling to the surface--AFTER Fredo's betrayal had nearly cost him and Kay their lives--there was no way Michael could let him live..

If you take a look at the history of the family we learn that a little boy has lost his father because of an offense or a refusal to poor little Vito witnessing his own mother being murdered right in front of him to him getting shot because of his son's clumsiness, to his youngest unwillingly to take over the family-- we are meant to sympathize with this family! With all this history is good enough for me to sympathize with and even care for these people.

I dont sympathize. I know people who have had rough lives yet they went on to live a good honest life despite the hardships they had. Those people i respect. Mike and Vito used violence to gain money and power and they paid for it in the end. You reap what you sow

I think Vito and Michael used violence to protect people from the violence and discrimination they faced in the country. The state did not want to take care of them so they had to build a state of their own where they were the kings. This is exactly what the opening scene of the Godfather says and explains why the institution is kept alive and cherished by people who are regularly treated as second class citizens, and could not have good and honest lives even when they tried. The story is well written. Was it true in real life? That is another question.

That's why I believe Vito and Michael was the strongest and lasted the longest out of all families. They didn't kill for greed or stupidity, they killed for protection and smart tactics.

By the time Michael had Fredo killed, his conscience had been seared, "as with a hot iron . . . "

Michael was acting more like a wild animal, on survival instincts, than a human being with a moral compass.