How could Carlo be stupid enough to beat up Connie, given that she was the daughter of a Mafia leader? I'm not talking about when he did it to lure Sonny out to be assassinated, I'm talking about before that. Can someone really be that stupid? Perhaps I'm just being naive about the potential of the human race for stupidity, but it still never ceases to amaze me.

Per book Carlo was inordinately proud of his height, good looks and Northern Italian heritage. So maybe he thought that HE was the catch in the marriage and deserved greater than normal stroking and catering.

Also consider the times; it was more acceptable for a husband to slap his wife. If you throw in Connie's (book alleged) imperiousness and movie Carlo's obvious frustration with being shunted aside from the inner circle, it was probably easy for Carlo to justify his abuse by saying Connie "deserved" it and even if she didn't it was his petulant and incredibly dumb "revenge" on the Corleones. And also divorce was extremely uncommon back then and absent some great danger most people didn't "interfere" in other people's marriages.

There are and always have been a number of profoundly stupid people on the planet.

I see what you're saying, but the Mafia isn't "most people." Chancing that they wouldn't "interfere" concerning something like this would be far more risky than doing the same thing while being married to the average person.

What Carlo did went well beyond slapping.

An important subtheme in the novel is, as Vito put it, "Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men." Stupidity and carelessness, whether caused by greed, pride or revenge, has consequences. Did Carlo think that he could get away with slapping around Connie, and setting Sonny up for assassination? Did Paulie think that he wouldn't be the prime suspect in setting up Vito's shooting? Did Woltz think that fear of J. Edgar Hoover would let him get away with turning down Vito and insulting Tom? They all did--because they were stupid and careless.

The novel states that initially he was worried. But when the Corleones didn't react, he became bolder and even bragged to Sally Rags and Coach that he slapped Connie around.

No doubt a wise man would think twice before laying his hands on a Mafia princess but it's not entirely implausible-especially for stupid people. IRL Castellano allegedly had his son-in-law, Frank Amato, murdered for beating up and cheating on his pregnant wife. Supposedly Gotti had his people assault his future son-in-law, Carmine Agnello, for similar misdeeds. And in the book "Double Cross" the authors describe the brother-in-law of Mooney Giancana being so rash as to beat up Mooney's sister. Mooney wasn't a boss at the time but was well known for a sadistic temper and murderous tendencies.

Stupid people do stupid things..

Carlo wanted to be intitated into the Corleone Family but Vito refused. So part of the reason was that Carlo was venting out his frustration on Connie and showing he had power over Corleone in a way. Another reason was to get rid of Sonny who he hated and maybe he would then be welcome into the inner circle

The wife-beating that Connie experienced did not begin with Carlo. There were and still are plenty of dumb brutes out there, miraculously a film called 'Raging Bull' comes to mind and I'm sure many of the beatings seen there are NOT fictional.

Also as Lilo mentions, please consider the time period. Besides the abuse itself, you've got both parents insisting that Sonny 'not interfere', first by Vito in a deleted scene and then by Mama at dinner. Topping it all off is Connie herself, begging Sonny after finding her black-eyed and fat-lipped, not to do anything and that it was her fault because she hit him first.

Plenty of stupidity to go around in the year 1946, and for MANY years thereafter including the present only to a much lesser degree (hopefully).

What is so sad about the whole affair is that Vito did nothing to protect his daughter. You tell me what kind of father does nothing and especially when he had such prodigious resources at his disposal with which to do something. Puzo's pathethic claim in the novel that Vito was not as disinterested as he appeard because he tried to find out what Carlo did with the wedding money is abominable. Of course, we all know why. When Connie asked Vito if he ever hit her mother he answered that "she never gave me reason to." So, Vito was a potential wife-beater, pears or not. Disgusting!

I inferred that Vito may have tried to discourage Connie from marrying Carlo. His distancing himself from her domestic woes may have been his way of saying, "Well, I told you so..." Then again, he couldn't bring himself to whack Carlo because it would have left Connie a widow, and their kids fatherless. But no such stricture bound Michael.

True TB, but if that's so, it may point up one hell of a contrast: would Vito have tolerated such treatment of one of his Mafia family? To a large extent, on this Board we give Vito a pass for the piece of crap he actually was and his failure to protect his daughter is evidence of it.

and as mama would say. keep out of it. That is between a husband and his wife.

Apologies for bringing up the book some more but I think it's really important here.

Per book Vito was , by the standards of our day, and even the standards of his day, a sexist, a male chauvinist, a paid up leading member of the patriarchy. His attitude-and that of his wife- was that their daughter, who is described as somewhat spoiled and/or bratty needed to learn the facts of life, which apparently included being properly submissive and respectful enough to her husband to avoid conflict.

As a religious conservative-hypocritical though that was considering all of the commandments that he broke-Vito didn't believe in messing around in other people's marriages, for good or bad. I think he said something like "Even the King of Italy doesn't dare interfere between a husband and wife". And Vito was even more contemptuous of the idea of divorce. Vito thought that as bad of a husband as Carlo was he would be an even worse husband and man if the Corleones were telling him how to settle arguments with his wife.



That's it exactly. There's something in the novel about Connie acquiescing to her father's wishes for a large elaborate wedding since she had disappointed him so severely in the choice of spouse. So when she comes to Vito complaining about Carlo all she's really telling her father is that he was right.

Back then and even today to an extent, unless there's really serious public abuse going on, many people were (and are still) reluctant to get involved between a husband and wife.

Vito might have also felt that if he "helped" Connie with her Carlo situation he would be "helping" her for the rest of her life. I don't think he had interest in doing that. Cold hearted but you don't become what Vito was by being kind.

The only way I think Vito would have interfered was if he believed that Connie's life were in immediate danger or if Carlo was giving information to the authorities. It was just an impossible situation from Vito's POV and even more so after Sonny's murder.

Apparently Vito's objection to Carlo was because he was northern Italian and had had a little youthful trouble with the law in Nevada.

But I reiterate, what kind of a father fails to protect his daughter against physical abuse when that father has all the resources necessary to implement such protection? Vito's philosohphies aside, his failure to protect his daughter doesn't compute with me. He dragged two of his sons into his murderous world (despite "I never wanted this for you"), he spurned another son whom he left flailing in Las Vegas, and he allowed the abuse of his daughter. All of us should have such a loving parent.

Again, one must consider the times and even possibly Italian old world tradition. Once she married Carlo, Connie became his wife first and Vito's daughter second. You did not interfere in a marriage. It's possible that if Connie left Carlo and outright asked for help and/or to have him 'punished', then perhaps Vito would've pulled out all the stops. But even if she 'hinted' at any physical abuse she may have suffered, she did not come clean, kept the beatings to herself and therefore did not reach out to either of her parents and even begged for no retaliation from her hot headed brother.

Connie too was a victim of the times, probably believing that you simply stay with a marriage no matter what, Carlo, even with his fist and theft/gambling away of the wedding purse and girlfriends on the side, was the best she could get (I think in the book she is referred to as being not too attractive), and she had no choice but to put up with it.

And it wasn't just the 1940's / Italian way of thinking. This went on for several more decades.

As the novel states, the first time Carlo had "marked her up" she had gone right out to Long beach and told her parents what had happened. They remained aloof.

Interference? What if he had crippled her or murdered her?

Vito: "Oh well, you know those kind of things sometimes happen between a husband and wife. But she must have done something to deserve it. In any case, we can't interfere. I'm more concerned with how Carlo is running that book I gave him. Actually, it kind of works out. Now he won't be so distracted."

I forgot that we appear to be intertwining the film with the novel here.
In any case...point taken!

Again though, sign of the times AND I suppose, a fitting answer to VitoC's opening question, "How could Carlo be stupid enough to beat up Connie, given that she was the daughter of a Mafia leader?"

Apparently his behavior toward Connie wasn't stupid at all, as long as he was doing the job he was given to do.

What he did to set up Sonny WAS stupid, because THAT was business.

Apple

I agree with Olivant - Vito is a cold-hearted piece of crap, and the talk about him being a product of his times isn't much of an excuse.

Sonny - a 1940s Italian, albeit more modern than Vito - is enraged by Carlo's treatment of Connie.

And how much "interference" would it really have been for Vito to tell Carlo to stop beating up his daughter? Even had he done it in a non-theatening, casual manner Carlo surely would have wised up.

Vito's failure to act - or even to recognize that Sonny would find the situation unacceptable - set off a chain of events that turned Carlo traitor, led to Sonny's death, and nearly destroyed the Corleone Family (and family).

It is impossible to imagine the mentality that prevailed in those days regarding wife beating. If a husband beat his wife many people looked at it as a situation where the wife was not satisfying him enough, and that her being hit somehow showed she was failing as a spouse. That was a part of the Catholic Church and much of society until relatively recently.

Vito, who supposedly never slapped his wife was the exception to th rule. Even Michael slapped Kay.

None of this is to say Carlo was anything but a moron.

I doubt anyone is offering this as an 'excuse' rather than an explanation of why Vito did not intervene. As dt states, we cannot imagine the mindset of those times...and that world...here in 2010.



Ok, you're reaching a bit there.

I believe it was Vito's simple act of refusal to conduct business w/ Sollozo's that set off far more events leading to Sonny's demise and near destruction of the Family. The setup and ambush of 'acting Don' Santino was certainly a link in the chain, but when it happened Vito was still recovering from being shot...which happened due to his refusal of Solozzo's, combined of course with Sonny's careless display of interest.

It was Michael's brazen shooting of Solozzo & McClusky that really set off the war that eventually led to Sonny's murder.

Apple

If anything it was Sonny's stupidity in beating the crap out of Carlo and telling him if he ever hit his sister again he would kill him. Sonny should have followed his mother's advice (albeit bad advice from a 2010 perspective) and "don't interfere." By losing his temper (which as Michael later tells Vincent clouds judgment) Sonny accomplshed a couple of things. First he permanently alienated Carlo and became
Carlo's enemy. Second he essentially told Carlo that he could be set up. Although Carlo tells Michael it was Barzini who first approached him, I have no question that Carlo let it be known he could be approached.

Carlo probably thought he could cast his lot with Barzini, because like everyone else he underestimated the Corleones.

Carlo (nursing his wounds the next day): "Sonny's a no good SOB! Did you know Connie laughed at me when I got home?!!! Laughed! And my twist told me I'm a weak sister. Me!!! Carlo Rizzi!!! Why I oughta drive out to the compound and settle things with Sonny!"

Barzini Flunky: "Be smart Carlo, he'd just kick your a** again. And you know Sonny's killed more people than cancer right??"

Carlo: (Silence)...."Yeah"...

Flunky: "Now this palooka drove all the way from Long Beach to attack you just because you and your skirt had a little argument. That's not smart. He could get hurt doing that. And that don't sound like a very friendly brother-in-law to me. And his father's got you shunted off in this penny-ante book while that mug Sonny and the Irish kid are running things. Is that fair?"

Carlo : "No."

Flunky: "Well if you want to meet some people who can set things right for you, I can arrange it. Of course kid, if you'd rather be Sonny's punching bag for the next twenty years, that's up to you. Your call chum, but I gotta say you don't look like a patsy to me."

Carlo: So how do I know you're on the level?
Flunky: I'll introduce you to my boss. When you see who it is you'll know I'm the real deal.
Carlo: Who is he?
Flunky: Ahhh now here's where you gotta keep your mouth shut. If the word gets out we'll know its you.
Carlo: I swear I'll keep omerta.
Flunky: And if you don't.....
Carlo: I know, I join Luca Brasi with the fishes.
Flunky: Very well. Tomorrow I want you to go to that clam bar in Little Italy. There you will meet face to face with Don Barzini.
Carlo: Barzini? I thought it would be Tattaglia.
Flunky: Tattaglia's a pimp. It was Barzini all along.