Rocco, Neri and Michael

Rocco was Clemenza’s man, Neri was Michael’s. At the end of the novel, Neri goes to Nevada with Michael to be head of security for his hotels. Rocco stays in New York with Clemenza. But, the novel only covers the transition period from NY to NV. In GF II, both Rocco and Neri are with Michael.

Why did Michael need Rocco? The movie gives many examples of how Neri seemingly eclipsed Rocco in Michael’s estimation and was trying to push past Tom to become Michael’s #2.

What purpose did Rocco serve? One possibility is that Michael needed Rocco as a counterbalance to Neri—a check on Neri’s ambitions, an ever-present alternative if Neri slipped or got out of line. Another is that Michael was holding Rocco in reserve for just the kind of “Mission Impossible” he sent Rocco on when Roth returned to the US. Your thoughts?

I think that Rocco was in charge of security of the compound in Nevada, while Neri was in charge of security of the hotels. Fredo probably oversaw the rackets in Nevada outside of Las Vegas and Reno.

Nothing wrong with some healthy competition between capos, right?
Also, you need someone loyal who's capable of taking out Rocco and someone loyal who's capable of taking out Neri.

So yeah, I'd say those are good reasons to hold onto Rocco. Plus, only a few years after the hits on the NY dons, things are still spread thin working out of Nevada and NY, so having Clemenza and Rocco settling things down in NY while Neri helps establish things in Nevada would be prudent.

By GF2, Rocco's in charge of security at the Nevada compound and Neri handles the more glamorous things like running Klingman out of town.

Did Michael NEED Rocco? I think that Rocco was an important part of the operation, not only for security on the compound, but it seemed he would also be in charge of the buttonmen in Nevada had things turned "interesting" out there. Neri was essentially Michael's bulldog while Rocco was Michael's general.

Rocco would be the Marines(show of force) while Neri was the Navy Seals (force without the show).

(???)Hmmmm...

TB, I don't find any evidence that Rocco did (nor attempted to) eclipse Neri or vice-versa. Neri was specifically recruited by Michael to assist Michael directly and to be (as Vito stated) Michael's Luca Brasi. Rocco was recruited to perform a specific task that Michael wanted accomplished,limited in scope and time. Rocco's performance of that task was done so well that, when Michael needed further help (Las Vegas operations) he turned to Rocco.

I don't think that Neri was trying to push past Tom. Michael had compartmentalized Neri's and Tom's roles. We've written or read many posts about Michael's antipathy toward Tom and Micahel's use of Tom for certain delicate tasks. In the same way, Michael used Neri, but there is no evidence of anything except a trusting relationship between Michael and Neri. As a crime family, there might be bleed over between Tom's role and Neri's role. However, their roles were clearly delineated.

We should also consider FFC's screenplay strategy that continued the adventures of two characters with which GF fans had become familiar.

It was twofold. First cause they would always be competitive and neither could ever think he alone was indispensible to ichael. Second The apppearance of or actuality of muscle.

DT, despite my post above, I think you are basically right. Competition for position, status, and money in any organization is always a factor. Also, as you state, having some muscle around doesn't hurt.

Let's look at your premises more closely:

Rocco was certainly in charge of security for the Tahoe compound--we see him scanning the crowd during Anthony's party, and galumphing around after the Tahoe shooting. BUT:

--Neri introduces himself to Johnny Ola in their boathouse meeting, like a full partner in the Cuba deal. Michael dispatches Rocco to feed Johnny's men.
--In a delted scene, Michael sends Neri to oust Klingman from his hotel. After Klingman caves, Neri sits down and orders the showgirls to resume their rehearsal. That tells me Michael may have given Neri a piece of the hotel.
--In another deleted scene, Neri tells Michael he's tracked Fabrizzio down--another sign of enhanced responsibility.
--In the penultimate boathouse scene, Neri, sprawled comfortably back in a chair, leads the discussion on Roth's odyssey. Rocco stands, silently. And Rocco, not Neri, is dispatched on that one-way mission.

What does that tell you about Neri's role?

Exactly TB. As I posted above, Neri assisted Michael. Such assistance ranged over the scope of Michael's activities.

That's mere speculation. Fact is that Neri was put in charge of security of the Las Vegas hotels, effectively being in charge of those hotels.

Also, as a response to your other arguments, Neri was unofficially acting as Michael's underboss, while Fredo formally held that title. Obviously Michael prefered Neri above Rocco, as he himself had chosen Neri as his personal enforcer, while Rocco was introduced into the organization by Clemenza.

Just another reason why Rocco might have been the second traitor and killed the assassins.

However, I don't see a problem with Michael sending Rocco with Ola's escorts to get some food. Michael wouldn't want Roth's men galavanting around the compound on their own.

Hmm... of course it's not really all that helpful if Rocco's showing Roth's men where to position themselves for Michael's assassination. (see, all his men are businessmen. And with that in mind, anything is possible)

Micheal being Michael would definitely play Rocco and Neri against each other whenever he could. Notice, for instance in the scene where Kay comes to tell Michael shes leaving DC and taking the kids to New Hampshire, it is Rocco, not Neri who is having Michael sign papers...showing in his time of trouble before the committee that Rocco was his main man. At the same time it is Neri who gets the order to kill Fredo, not Rocco. I have never bought into the notion that Rocco was anything but loyal. I just think Michael knew how to make them competitive enough that either would do anything (Rocco making the ultimate sacrifice) to prove himself to Michael.If you look at the succession from Vito to Michael. It is really Roccco and Neri who became to Michael what Tessio and Clemenza were to his father.

DT, I just don't see any need for Michael to do that. Their respective positions in the organization would have already dictated such if that were Michael's intention. I just think that the screenplay and other variables resulted in those scenes.

Oli there may have been no need for Michael to do that because each had his role pretty well defined, but why would that stop Michael?

Because of Michael's pathology, it might be in Michael's character to do so. But I think that such a subtle nuance in the film would have been undetected by most moviegoers. I also think that there are contractual obligations of all parties that can result in minimum on-screen appearances for actors. In addition, as I recall, after the assassination attempt, we don't se Rocco for quite awhile until the hotel scene. So, FFC may have wanted to remind the audience of his presence.

Fair enough, Oli. I keep forgetting this is not a hagiography.

Well, for all the Catholic rituals in the film, it could well be.

Also remember the scene when Michael returns from Cuba. Neri and Tom are with him, and he's greeted at the door by Rocco (again, left behind.)

Then, if you take a close look, when Mike says "Fellas could you step outside for a minute?" Rocco immediately goes for the patio door. Al on the other hand, takes a moment, flicks his cigar, then slowly leaves. Also note how Neri stands at the door for a lingering moment once the door is closed.

I agree with Turnbull. There are signs there...they are just very subtle.

It looked like Neri paused on his way out in that scene, turned back, swiped a cigar from the box on the table, then left.

After the Roth assassination, it doesn't look like rocco was ever replaced. In III Mike had Neri to, as he told Kay, "carry my briefcase," but no Rocco or no Rocco successor. Is this because he was becoming more "legitimate?" or did he just not need that much muscle anymore?

DT, I think it's the latter. He only needed a bodyguard or majordomo.

Well obviously he could have used more help in Sicily. His nephew and the twins didn't cut it.

Yes, and there was a nice irony, dt: remember near the beginning when Vincent said he'd protect him, Michael said, "I need more lawyers..."

Good point TB. Of course he didn't see that in the span of a few short months, Anthony would transition from a law student to a tenor who landed the leading role in Cavelieri Rusticana at the Palermo Opera, unless he used his lawyers to "help" with Anthony's career, which would make the irony all the greater.

Odd that this is the only time in recorded history that this brief opera did not share the bill with Pagliaci. Oh I forgot. Clemenza was dead, so he couldn't sing.