Hi evreyone i'm just wondering why Michel bought the casino's. After his father's death Michel was probley set for life I don't see why he could'nt just retire. Thx for replies

Why Not?






Welcome to the boards.

Because he couldn't stand to see Moe Green losing money

Welcome, Mercop. Very good question!
Yes, Michael could have continued to be boss of the "olive oil business" after he took over from Vito, and after he whacked the other Dons. But Michael's lifelong obsession was to be "legitimate." Since the Corleones were pre-eminent in gambling, his move to Nevada--the only state in the US where gambling was legal at that time--was intended to migrate his illegitimate gaming interests into legalized outlets.

The ongoing question is: Why wasn't he content to be "legitimate" through ownership of casinos in the state where gambling was legal? Why did he have to hide his ownership interests? Why did he have to pursue Roth's Cuban gaming empire? Why did he continue to hold onto the NYC "olive oil business" by bossing Frank Pentangeli and keeping his heavy thumb on Frankie?

Thank you very much for your ansers

We'll never settle this issue about Mike seeking legitimacy. I for one have posted elsewhere that while Mike pursued legitimacy, it was to be achieved by him on his terms. I think that his and Vito's version of legitimacy is quite different from ours.

As GFIII illustrated, he was still the Supreme Court when it came to underworld business across the Nation. In GFIII he is wracked by guilt and he is tired, but that still does not motivate him to just leave it all behind.

By the way, did you notice that in the novel the Corleones own four hotels in Vegas. But in II they have two in Vegas, one in Reno and they they intend to move Klingman out and take over the Tropigala. What happened to the fourth hotel they had in the novel? And would their taking over Moe Greene's hotel give them a fifth?

It was imploded in a New Year's Eve ceremony witnessed by a crowd of 200,000.

Five years later, when a new hotel's foundation was being excavated on that site, a set of bones was discovered in the rubble. DNA testing proved conclusively that the skeleton belonged to a certain Fredo Corleone...

It was good business.
Michael took the opportunity to get in on the ground floor of a great business that was only going to expand.

The Family got another method to launder money.
More money buys more political figures which can come in handy years down the line.

Michael was able to further distance himself from any of the Family's less savory activities. He could argue with a straight face that "Hey I'm just an investor in casinos and hotels-I don't know anything about labor racketeering, extortion or narcotics".

Profits from casinos could be used to expand into other legal businesses like banking, real estate and financial services.

With more profits to dole out Michael could further reward loyal subordinates or allies by giving them points in his casinos or related ventures.

Good questions.. Michael was probably hiding at least some of his ownership interests in casinos because he wasn't paying all of his taxes and the money being skimmed was probably being diverted to fund activities the Federal government wouldn't have approved of. The other more prosaic reason of course could have been that as the son and brother of NY mob bosses and as someone who was at least temporarily charged with murder, even a corrupt gaming Commission Board could not easily grant Michael a license.

But the deeper question you touch on is why did Michael keep one foot in the illegitimate world. I think he did it because he liked it. He was good at it and he wasn't going to give away anything that he had come to think of as HIS.

The tragedy of the Corleones is that although Michael was the only one who could have saved the Family in its time of crisis he was also the only one who could have built a completely legitimate career outside of the Family. I think Vito knew that , which is why he was so distraught about events.

Michael also had two sons in the novel.

All possible, even likely, reasons. Another is that it represented Michael's deep-seated ambivalence about being "legitimate": as a Mafia Don, he instinctively hid his business interests, even if they were truly "legitimate." In effect, he couldn't stop being furtive.


Yes indeed, Lilo. That's it in a nutshell: he was too much of a pathological controller, too much a gangster, to give up anything he had. Not to get too psychological, but, by holding onto the NYC olive oil business, he was, in effect, rejecting complete legitimacy.


In the novel, one of Vito's oft-repeated phrases is, "A man has but one destiny." That was probably the awful realization he came to when he heard that Michael whacked Sollozzo and McCluskey.

Excellent points by the both of you!

And if I may, I'd like to expand on what you've both said by adding that in the movie, when Vito is brought home from the hospital, he asks "where's Michael?" And when he is told that it was Michael that killed McCluskey and The Turk, we see a complete emotional mixture of disgust, distraught and disappointment come across his face followed by the waving of the hand signaling that everyone should now get out of his sight.

Brando does a brilliant job in that scene conveying exactly what Puzo wrote in the novel and what you've both have said above, including Vito's belief that a man has but one destiny. At hearing that news it became an awful realization to Vito that it now applied to his son Michael.

And Lilo, if I haven't already done so, let me welcome you to the boards. It looks as though we have another Godfather affecianato upon us and I am looking forward to future discsussions with you!

Don Cardi , I am honored and grateful to be welcomed to the board