Who opened the drapes - It doesn't matter!!

Why do we think that whoever opened the drapes must have been involved in the attack?
With their machine guns, the assassins didn't need open drapes. It was enough for them to see that somebody entered the sleeping room. Michael was lucky that the drapes were open, so he could dive for cover when he saw the assassins or the muzzle flashes.

Who opened the drapes? Anthony or Kay.

I don't know the drapes were so thin that an assassin could see well enough with them closed. Where's the evidence of this?

D, that's preposterous. As DT points out, an assassin doesn't assume anything. Having fired a "machine gun" god knows how many times, I know very well that one needs to see one's target just as one does when firing a semi-automatic weapon to insure the rounds hit the target.

Shooting at shadows? Silhouettes? That's reliable.

No, those drapes needed to be open. The assassins needed to know it was Michael they were shooting. The drapes needed to be open to "tag" the room. And Fredo needed to be the one to do it.

Why would Michael ask Kay why the drapes were open if they weren't opened by someone else in order for the assassins to have a clear view of the room? That line served as an explanation to the viewer that someone else had opened the drapes.

Oli, the question is, what do we assume?
Why do we assume the drapes were not thin?
Isn't any assumption that Fredo, Tom, Pentangeli or whoever could just walk into Kay's bedroom much more far fetched? So the only adult person who could walk into the bedroom after Kay was Michael.
The light was on, so the assassins could have seen probably more than just a fuzzy shadow on the drapes.
Assassins don't assume anything? The assassins in GF2 assumed they'd definitely kill Michael (according to our mainstream theory with the drapes open) before he could dive for cover. And they probably assumed they'd get out of this affair alive.

Oh, and sorry for my English in my last posts. I'm a little sick in bed, which makes it hard for me to write in English. Having fired an Ak47 god knows how many times, I know the difference between an assault rifle and a machine gun.

its a safe bet that the bedroom is off limits to everyone, anybody except for mike, kaye and the kids. We know for sure Anthony was in there because of the drawing.

Exactly. I don't know why people go off on tangents and theories, making it more complicated then it is, when it's so simple and clearly presented in the film itself. It was obvious the drapes were kept closed, hence Kay's question. Somebody else had to have opened them, in order to give the hit men a clear line of sight. And that someone had to have access to Michael's home. And besides access, they had to have motive. The only one who fits is Fredo. Not Tom. Not Rocco. Not Neri. Not Connie. Not the ghost of Moe Green. Fredo. And that shows Fredo was lying when he swore to God he didn't know it would be a hit. That doesn't mean he didn't feel some sense of remorse anyway for the plot against his brother, in addition to fear of Michael and disappointment in his deal with Roth and Ola falling through. But he obviously knew Micheal being killed was a part of it. The end.

I think Fredo may have bought into the lie that it was going to be a kidnapping and not a hit. He probably used every ounce of his own denial to believe that. But ultimately, he knew in his heart what he was doing with the motive that he would then become the don.

Except when does the movie ever say or even hint that Michael would be kidnapped? What would the purpose of that even be? Fredo would know exactly what he was doing when opening the drapes.

Sorry, that tidbit is from an earlier draft of the script.

I often rely on that as the story they told Fredo- a story Fredo refers to on the phone when he tells Ola "you guys lied to me". From just the movie, we don't know really know what the lie was.

The reason for the kidnapping was pretty much the same as why Sollozzo kidnapped Tom Hagen in the first movie.
Michael was being tough on negotiations and kidnapping him and putting him under threat might speed up negotiations to Roth's favor. This is apparently the lie they told Fredo- which then would make sense to mark Michael's window. (even though it makes absolutely NO sense to kidnap Michael out of his Tahoe compound. Only Fredo would buy something like that.)

What we DO know is that a lie was told. Fredo did something in the compound to help Roth. Fredo wasn't told it was going to be a hit.

When does the movie ever hint that Fredo opened the drapes? Same kind of question... It's up to your own imagination.

It doesn't but it's the only explanation that holds any water, as Fredo was the only one that had both access and motive.

But that doesn't seem to be exciting enough for some so they start up with all kinds of wild and convoluted theories.

Which is what generates excellent debate. Without those theories this part of the forum would have been mute.

No matter what you guys think, I still consider Rocco a serious candidate for being part of the conspiracy. IMO, Michael's line "all our men are business men" would not apply to Fredo, but hints to one of his caporegimes. FFC would not want the viewer to know that Fredo was in on it so early on in the film. Remember that Rocco was in charge of security of the compound, so he could go to most parts of the compound without arousing suspicion. He would have been the perfect candidate for Roth, far more important than Fredo or the Rosato brothers, as he held real sway within the organization. Rocco knew that he would always be second choice to Michael, after Neri. But even though Michael favored Neri, Rocco seemed to be in command of the muscle-end in Nevada. So with Michael out of the way, Rocco would have been his natural successor. So the fact that Rocco could potentially form a threat to Michael along with being a possible suspect was more than enough reason for Michael to dispose of him. Afterall he could simply replace him with Neri.

I could never buy Fredo killing the assassins. Rocco was in a perfect position in the organization to orchestrate the intricacies of the hit- and there's enough going on to accuse him of it.
But without anything tagging a second traitor in the Family, I'm afraid I have to just settle on Rocco's treason being a pet theory.

It was in a draft of the script (second revision, I believe). When confronted, Fredo does his "I didn't know it was gonna be a hit!" routine but he says something that he was told by Ola that it was going to be a kidnapping; I guess the idea would be to grab Michael, force him to work out a deal, and release him (basically like what Sollozzo did to Tom in I).

FREDO: I didn't know it was gonna be a hit Mike -- I swear to god I didn't know it was going to be a hit. JOHNNY OLA bumped into me in Beverly Hills -- and he said that he wanted to talk -- he said that you and -- and -- ROTH were in on a -- a -- big deal together. And that there was something in it for me if I'd help 'em out. He said that -- he said that -- you were bein' tough on the negotiations. But if they could get a little help -- and close the deal fast -- it'd be good for the family.

My mistake, it's actually a quote from Hagen in the second draft of GFII:

HAGEN
My information is that Fredo thought it was a kidnapping. Roth assured him nothing would happen to you.

Something else people need to consider is well explained in the link below, i.e. there are no good answers and these were plot holes in an otherwise classic movie.

http://filmwad.com/three-nitpicky-and-ir...sor-5046-p.html

Wait, you're telling us this isn't a classic movie? Anyway, no need to spam this link in two different threads. This is nothing more than the opinion of some guy and it has bias written all over it.

Am I the only one who has no problem with the cop? It's not like the cop actually shot either of the Rosato brothers. He just shot his gun in their direction (and they toward him).

That Rosato was going to shoot the cop and the bartender told him not to gives me the impression that the whole thing was staged complete with a mock shootout outside- all for the sake of believability.

And in the "filmwad" article, it mentions shooting the assassins. In truth, their throats were slit which makes it even more unbelievable that it was Fredo. I'll agree that the killers of the assassins issue is not addressed and maybe should have been.

There's a lot of reasons I can cite that point to Rocco as a possibility but nothing concrete.

Michael says to Tom that same night: I give you complete power, Tom, over Fredo and his men, Rocco, Neri, everyone.

So it doesn't have had to be Fredo himself but rather some of his guys who killed those assassins. Obviously these men did not need to be implicated in the film as it centered on Fredo. Fredo's men are insignificant for the viewer.

First, when did I ever say it wasn't a classic movie? It certainly is. Second, the link applied to both conversations so it's not exactly spamming. Third, yes it's his opinion, but he makes some very good points. I'm not even sure what you mean by "bias."



It's easier for me to believe it was a simple plot hole then Rocco having anything to do with it. He had zero motive. And a good point was made before about Fredo's comment to Ola, saying "You guys lied to me." So if Fredo wasn't expecting Michael to be killed, there's really nobody left in my opinion. If Rocco or somebody else was the traitor, I think it would have been more well known in Godfather lore all these years later.

We DID talk about motive before in how Michael seemed to favor Neri over Rocco. Not a BIG selling point, but it IS there.

Roth could also have Fredo set up for the kidnapping and unbeknownst to Fredo, approach Rocco for the assassination (and subsequent killing of the assassins). After all, I really don't see enough time for Fredo to regroup his nerves and order his men to go kill the assassins (the whereabouts of whom he wouldn't really have a clue)

If anyone had the power, ability and knowledge to set up the hit and kill the assassins afterward, it would be Rocco.
But the motive IS pretty weak unless we could know what Roth had promised Rocco in exchange. The pot would have to be pretty sweet. And with Michael gone, it could have been.
After all, Rocco was a businessman.

His points are by no means more credible than those of any other Godfather fan. He basically presumes that Fredo would have done everything himself, including killing those assassins, and uses this as an argument to support his case. However, he somehow overlooks that Fredo had his own men, and that it is common practise that he would have used those men to do the "dirty work" for him. If he wanted to write an objective, and unbiased article he should have considered every possibility. The reason that he declines to do this shows that he was prejudiced from the start.



He did not have zero motive, like I've states before, he would have always been second choice as long as Michael was around.

I wonder if Fredo really had men of his own or if Fredo's men were really just Corleone men who would do reasonable Fredo biddings- and for anything other than reasonable biddings they'd consult Michael, Neri or Rocco. I'm not sure I could see Fredo's men being comfortable in assisting in the assassination of the don- on Fredo's order.

Difficult. Not impossible...

It's the only explanation in case Fredo would have been up his neck in the conspiracy. I won't deny that it seems a little flawed. But I can't imagine that FFC or Puzo wouldn't have noticed these supposed plot holes themselves. Maybe they didn't care, which I doubt, or maybe they deliberately left it open to the viewer's own imagination. You can compare this with Once Upon A Time in America, which ending also leaves the viewer with a lot of questions. Leone, the director, apparantly did this on purpose so the viewer could make his own interpretation. The same applies to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

So now you think Fredo had his guys do it? As if they would follow him in an attempt to take out the boss? And whatever happened to these co-conspirators?



You can't just pull a theory like that out of thin air. There's got to be something in the movie to give some basis for it. There is nothing to suggest Rocco wasn't loyal. He basically did a suicide mission, for crying out loud.

See how exaggerated and out there some of your guys' theories get? You guys come up with these insane scenarios and then have to do all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify them.

That's one of the most sensible statements made on this Board. I agree. Giving flight to one's imagination is certainly something a poster can do as just a polemic exercise. But, it is more meaningful to the Board community if extrapolations have some basis in what appears on screen (or in the novel).

That's why I preface my Rocco theory as it being just a theory with no foundations other than it cleans up the mess of the assassins nice and neat. In lieu of any other reasonable explanation, it's certainly no different than supposing that Fredo or Fredo's men killed the assassins which I find far less believable.

However, since there's only reference to ONE traitor, i have to just let my Rocco theory remain on the back burner.

I didn't say that I now believe that Fredo had his guys to do it, nor have I ever said that I believed it was Fredo doing it alone. Any of his guys who could have helped him would have been aware that support came from Hyman Roth, Johnny Ola and perhaps some factions in New York. Michael hadn't exactly won the popularity contest by killing all the other Dons. There was a lot of bad blood and I'm sure there were many who wanted to see him out of the picture. Fredo, no matter the extent of his involvement, was nothing more than a pawn.



Maybe you should just stick to real-life organized crime, using the FBI's statements and statistics and playing it safe. This part of the forum is dedicated to theorizing and debate, 'insane scenarios' or not. Take it or leave it.

At least they weren't Roast Beef Drapes Sonny

I'm not really sure there would be a good honest way to reveal Rocco's treason if that were to in fact occur. It would be hard to write such a scene into the film and keep it from coming off as pedestrian and in-your face. Rocco didn't really talk to other people and a scene where Roth and Ola approach Rocco personally would just be to obvious and clumsy- especially since it would have had to have happened before the start of the film.

It also would have muddied the waters for the viewers of who was the traitor. So even though it fits beautifully on paper, it really would have been a difficult reveal on film. As it is, i think the subtlety of it works just fine- even though many don't have any reason to believe it. (and isn't that how Rocco got away with it?)

A lot of thing "could" have happened. Maybe aliens came down and opened the drapes. My point is, even here one's theories have to stay within the framework of the movie itself, i.e. what it actually shows.

Or what COULD be implied, I'd say.

if roth had contacted rocco for the hit, would'nt he ( roth )have had some idea of what rocco looked like and suspected something was up when rocco is at the airport trying to pass himself off as a reporter?

in the hit scene, right after the compound is locked down, the bodyguards let the dogs loose down the drainpipe - 1) if anybody had been around that drainpipe, those dogs would have alerted to that and been going crazy. 2) a scene or 2 later, the 2 hitmens bodys are found in a ditch by a similar looking drainpipe. 3) how many drain pipes are on the property. 4) wouldnt a security minded mike have bars or fencing welded over the openings to prevent access through them. 5) if there is only 1 drainpipe, with everybody walking through out the compound, somebody would have been standing by the drainpipe that the dogs were sent down waiting for them to return, how did the bodies show up in that ditch?

You make good points not only about Roth recognizing Rocco at the airport, but about the dogs at the compound.

To reiterate though, while one may speculate about who may have done what in the films, such speculation would be more credible if it was not a flight of fancy.

Interesting discussion you guys have going. I've often wondered who killed those 2 gunmen.

I think more then one person had to have killed them. Assuming both gunmen were still armed, how would one guy cut the throat of 2 armed men? I'll give you the first one but the second? I would think he would of noticed number 1 get his throat cut and would of fought back or shot the attacker. Don't you usually cut someones throat open from behind them?

That is, admittedly, a decent argument. So, in this scenario, Rocco had most likely only communicated with Roth through an intermediary, perhaps Johnny Ola. Ofcourse, Roth might have not recognised Rocco at the airport as he was clearly exhausted and wasn't paying much attention to his suroundings, but that's probably a little far-fetched...

Another more viable reason why Rocco was sent on a suicide mission is that he, as head of security, had failed in his task to protect Michael on his own compund.

Roth didn't NEED to meet with Rocco. Ola could have handled it. But even so, Roth didn't have a whole lot of time to focus on Rocco while surrounded by police, Feds and several reporters gunning for the story of Roth's fall from grace. Had Rocco NOT been killed in the airport, it's even possible that Roth's dying words could have been "It was Rocco...". But since Rocco was killed, Roth wouldn't have seen the point in identifying him.

As far as the dogs go, don't you think they know Rocco and recognize his scent as it is pretty much EVERYWHERE on the compound. I think this certainly indicates an insider slashing the assassins' throats as the dogs might be inclined to "bloodhound" the scent of an intruder. But Rocco? No. The hounds knew his scent (and probably Fredo's too) and wouldn't think twice about it.

I would imagine a compound that size has several drainpipes and drainage ditches leading down to the lake.

Gabby -
i never said any thing about a "scent". Scent is a smell. I said 'sent'. Sent - the past tense of send.

as far as Rocco, I never said anything about the dogs recognizing him, I said as far as Roth recognizing him. etc..

what i'm saying is that if I was in mike's position, you could rest assured that those pipes would have several pipes and grates welded at the entrances and exits to them to stop pretty much anything except for water and wind from passing through.

There is more than one question that accrues to this subject.
1) was the person who opened the drapes the same person who murdered the assassins?

2) was the brief interim between the attempted murder and the locating of the assassin's bodies sufficient time for them to have been murdered at that location or murdered some place else and their bodies carried or drug to where they were found?

3) Why were the bodies located next to what appears to be a drainage pipe (in Texas we call that a tinhorn)? Was that their intended escape route (as someone posted above, why was the compound end of the pipe not grated or otherwise rendered impassable by a human)?

4) Of course, how did the assassins gain entry to the compound?

5) What was used to murder the assassins? A knife? A pistol with a silencer?

1. the person who opened the drapes did not necessarily have to be the same person who killed the hitters, and likely was not. The more I dwell on this question the more likely I believe it was Fredo who would have had access to the inner sanctum of the house, and he did it on Johnny Ola's orders.

2. The would be killers could have died as soon as they shot their last bullet so it sounded like a part of the actual hit. This would have been done by another member of the team who managed to escape. I also believe this person was helped by Fredo one way or another. Remember at one point Deanna was screaming something about their being right outside her window.

3. I think they were dragged to the drainage pipe, so it didn't matter if there was a grate. They were already dead. Maybe if there wasnt thats how the other conspirator got out.

4. I would think they gained access during the party, which would have been relatively easy.

I think they used the same way to get entry to the compound as exit: the drain pipes. That's why the 'backup' team knew where to kill them after learning that they failed.

I doubt Fredo, as the official underboss of the family, would be taking orders from Johnny Ola.



It would be a pretty balsy and kind of retarted move to drag the bodies all the way to the drain pipes after the failed hit. Within minutes after the hit the place was crawled with bodyguards and German shepherds.

Too bad Michael didn't think about installing bullet proof glass. It would have saved all this speculation, but then again there would be no GFII. So to answer this ongoing question, can we agree that FFC and Puzo opened the drapes?

Olivant;

I saw g2 last year in the theatre, on the one shooters neck, you could see that his throat was slit, the other shooters neck wasnt as visible.

That observation has been posted before and, thus, prompts the same question as it did then: Was Fredo sufficiently adept both emotionally and physically to cut someone's throat (and maybe another's)? If not, who then?

No and nobody.

The idea of a single person killing two professional killers in the aftermath of a hit, when they'd surely be on their guard, by slitting their throats (or one throat) does not stand up to scrutiny.

So then you're left with the idea of multiple traitors, or at least multiple teams of hit men running around the grounds. Again, this doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Pure directorial license.

I agree W. I think that so much we debate about is directorial license.

I agree. And since all of it is directorial license I suggest we stop debating and close this section of the forum.

Amen.

First of all how you said they would kidnap Michael force him to work out a deal and release him was the stupidest thing i have ever heard and i literally laughed at that. First of all attempting to kidnap someone like Michael Corleone is already a dumb idea much less releasing him after would only sign your death warrant.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Roth planned to kidnap Michael, just that they may have told Fredo that was their plan to get him to open the drapes.

Yes, kidnapping and releasing Michael may not have made much sense, but Fredo wasn't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer - and he was desperate for respect and power - so it's not too far-fetched to think he may have believed that kidnapping Michael, not killing him, was Roth's plan.

I'm not convinced that that is what really happened, but I haven't heard an alternative theory that better explains Fredo's "You guys lied to me" comment on the phone to Ola.

Only Fredo would be dumb enough to believe there was a viable plan to kidnap Michael. I think it is more telling when Fredo tells Johnny during that "wrong number" conversation that they'd got him in deep enough already.

And btw what would make Ola think Fredo was privy to whether or not Frankie was on the level with the Rosato deal?

DT, I think that Fredo was Ola's only source of such info. However, with Fredo in Nevada and Frankie in NY, it does seem quite a stretch for Ola to think that at all. But, as I stated, who else cold Ola turn to?

I guess Ola had no one else to whom he could turn, which leads me to speculate that maybe Fredo exaggerated his role in the family business to Ola and Roth. In truth Michael always kept Fredo in the dark on everything important(by Fredo's own admission in the boathouse scene). Still Fredo made a deal with Ola and Roth to get Mike to ease up on the "negotiations" for the "big deal" in exchange for something on his own. Maybe Fredo was playing both sides.

Well, I just don't see Fredo in any position (status or knowledge) to try and get Michael to ease up on the negotiations. Thus, you are probably right that Fredo did exaggerate his family position when he talked to Ola.

Ok, Oli, so lets take it to the next level just for yucks. Hyman Roth went back for decades with Vito Corleone. He knew all about Sonny, probably about his temper, and surely about his death. Through Moe Green he had to know that when things were going badly for the Corleones in NY, and while Vito was recuperating, that Fredo was sent to Vegas with the cover story of nerves, but in truth to keep him out of the way. He also probably heard from Moe about what an idiot Fredo was, his cocktail waitress exploits and so forth. He also had to know that Vito made a deal and brought Michael back, passed Fredo over, and that eventually Michael became the Don. He also knoew exactly "who gave the order" to put a bullet in Moe's eye.

Moe was no idiot, and I don't believe for one second that he really believed that Fredo could influence a business decision Michael was making. Besides, the "big deal" they were working on was Havana. The details of the negotiatiions had to be who was getting what share of which venue, how much money had to be paid and so forth. As we know further, Roth was always running around proclaiming Michael to be his heir apparent when he died of that 40 year old heart attack.

SO...........when Ola happened to bump into Fredo in Beverly Hills (wink, nod) la allowed Fredo to exaggerate his position in the family and made the ensuing promises about him getting something for himself. Now since Roth, and by extension Ola knew Fredo could do nothing to get him to change Mike's position on negotiations, they wanted him for one thing only...to set Michael up for the hit, and to use Fredo in some way to make it easy for them to be successful. So the drapes do get opened, and something goes on, according to Deanna, right underneath her window.

So at this point we can say the drapes were opened by Fredo... maybe he told a maid Mike wanted them open.. who knows...and we know Fredo had something to do with the hittters who were on the property.

We can also easily surmise if Roth had been successful in killing Mike, that Fredo would be next on his list. I would suspect a meeting in Havana, where Fredo would be safe, might have been the ticket.

Well DT, he probably did allow Fredo to exaggerate his family position and influence over Michael in order to secure Fredo's cooperation. However DT, that doesn't explain why Ola would ask Fredo in th elate night phone call if Frankie was on the level regarding the upcoming meeting with the Rosatos. At that post-assassination attempt point, there was no need to flatter Fredo in that way. If Fredo was Ola's only source of Corleone info, then maybe Ola thought that he would give it a shot by calling Fredo ... that it couldn't hurt.

The answer to this long time mistery is very simple:


The props guy!

Good point unless he was just testing the waters to make sure Fredo was still with the program.

DT, as you and I have discussed many times on this Board, I think the drapes question has one answer: Manolo. Had his scenes not been cut, I think we would have reached this conclusion many posts ago.

Do me a favor and stop with that freaking Manolo joke. It's not funny anymore, and frankly, it never was really..

I beg to differ. Olivant thinks it is funny, and I think it is funny, and God knows where Dick Nixon would be without Manolo.

Since the marathon yesterday, I finally figured it out who opened the drapes: Anthony!

It was right in front of out face all along. He left the picture on the pillow for Michael, he opened the drapes so Daddy could see the picture, maybe. The question is, did anybody suggest to him to open the drapes?