I've thought about this scene quite abit, I'll have to admit I agree with Michael's decision about executing Fredo. Fredo "has a good heart"...but honestly through out the movies he hasn't shown any loyalty or appreciation to Michael as a brother at all. Yes I understand he was "stepped over" but he had no right going behind Michaels back and associating with Michaels enimies for his own benefits. To me, that is a big sign of a traitor. In family a traitor should never be forgiven. I feel no sympathy for Fredo at all.

Disagree.

Michael's actions - not only allowing Fredo to live indefinitely, but allowing him access to the compound - demonstrate that he did not consider Fredo a threat.

Exile would have been sufficient. The murder was strictly personal and cannot be justified by business/security concerns.

I've thought about exile as well, but Fredo knows too much about the family business & would use that information to harm Michael as much as possible. Or he might even go to the senate and confess everything.

Again, if Michael had really considered Fredo's knowledge a threat, he would not have allowed him to live as long as Mama did, and certainly wouldn't give him free rein to the compound.

And Fredo would never have gone to the Senate, as that would have destroyed his ambitions of being a big shot in his own right.

Keep in mind that in the novel Tom tells Kay that treachery can't be forgiven. Although he was talking about Carlo and Tessio, the same could be applied by Michael to his own brother.

Agree with the decision.

Perhaps their mother being alive kept Fredo reigned in also.

Yes, that's it exactly. Fredo would have been a threat to the family for as long as he lived. As Puzo also pointed out (vis a vis Bonasera being called upon to bury Carlo), gratitude is very short-lived and breeds resentment. The depth of resentment Fredo showed Michael in the boathouse also showed that he'd never get over his being passed over. Another enemy of Michael's would have seen Fredo as a possible ally.

Okay, question - on one of the extras on the DVD set, Mario Puzo says he didn't want to kill off Fredo although I don't think he gave any reasons why on that one. [And yes - if I'm remembering this incorrectly, please let me know!]

I think Michael is very pragmatic when it comes to dealing with his enemies, but he had Fredo under house arrest from the looks of things. Yes, Fredo constituted a threat in many respects - but it seemed as if his death in the movie was more for the symbolism of tying up loose ends to parallel the same ending scene in the first movie.

Also - do you think Tom knew that Fredo was about to be killed? Is that touched on at any point?

There was no reason to kill Fredo. There was a reason to kill Tessio and there was a reason to kill Carlo. The reason is because Tessio was a powerful capo who was setting Mike up to be killed. Carlo was a punk sore at the world who helped plan Sonny's Murder. Now Fredo was not a violent guy I'm sure he had bodyguards working for him but he wasn't a cold blooded killer. I still dont believe he wanted Mike dead. some people believe that fredo's plan was always to have Mike killed but it just doesn't seem like that since Fredo had a good heart. There is no doubt he was pissed about being passed over but he never would hurt one of his brothers. I think at that point Mike became a full fledged psychopath and his paranoia took over

How realistic was it for Fredo to think that he was "passed over" ?

I mean, every guy has a reputation that stays with him. Everybody knows that Don Michael killed Sollozo and the police chief.

Everybody also knows that Fredo froze and started crying when the hit took place on his father.

He had to be completely delusional to think that he could ever be the Don after that.

It is not explicitly shown because I think that would have removed the shock of the action. But remember that Michael, Tom, Al and Rocco are all in the same room discussing business when Michael strikes out at Tom and says "...Are you gonna come along with me on these things I need to do or what" just after Tom has said "Michael, you've won, do you need to kill everyone?". I think Fredo is an unspoken subtext between the two brothers.

So I don't necessarily think Tom was in the room when Michael gave Neri an explicit order but then again why would Neri need one at that point. Michael had already told him that "nothing was to happen to Fredo as long as his mother was alive".

Tom is as good as anyone at picking up vibes so I think he knew Fredo was not long for this world.

I was going to start a seperate thread on something related to this, but it ties in well here with my opinion that Michael was right to kill Fredo.

More evidence of my long held belief that Fredo was lying to Michael in the boat house about not knowing a hit was planned was this:

Fredo said Johnny Ola told him Michael was being tough on "the
negtiations," and that if Fredo could lend a hand there wouldbe something in it for him on his own.

Think about this....it is nonsense. Fredo is making it up as he is going along. First of all, having been "passed over" Fredo had no clue what "the negotiations" were....at lease not from Michael. Let's say one day out of the blue Fredo suddenly says to Michael, "Say, aren't you being a little hard on the negotiations with Roth in that Cuba deal?" Assuming Michael was a total moron (which he was not) he would have said, "Good point, Fredo, I'll ease up." Then Fredo goes back to Johnny and says "Ok what is in it for me on my own?" Since Roth could not give Fredo anything within the Corleone family it would have to come from without. Would it be a sudden sellout of the Rosato operation with Fredo running it?
Maybe a piece of the casino operations independent of Michael?
I don't think Michael would go along with this. There was never a promise there was "something" in it for Fredo. The promise (on which Roth would have renegged) was if Fredo helped out with the hit (i.e. opened the drapes) there would be EVERYTHING in it for him. The implication was Fredo would be the new Don, and no longer the one who was passed over.
Fredo plotted to have Michael hit. He had to go just like Tessio.

Bt DT, what about Fredo's statement on the phone "You guys lied to me"?

Could have been anything...."Don't worry Fredo I guarantee this will be pulled off. You don't have anything to worry about."

Unless, of course, Manolo posed as Johnny Ola in Beverly Hills and told him some other lie.

Well, that's just it. We don't know what role Manolo may have played in it all.

Fredo's jealousy will always consume him whenever Michael is around...if Micheal were to forgive him on the situation that cost him his life..there is no telling if Fredo would attepmt it again..this time Fredo would make sure he doesn't fail on taking over Michael.

Fredo was in deep with Roth, and had to go, period. He bent over backward to make it appear that he had never met Johnny Ola, even shaking his hand at the table at the gala as if being introduced for the first time. Only after he got too much liquor in him did he slip up at the peep show, talking about how Ola knew where all those places were, etc., revealing to Michael, who was listening nearby, that he was indeed connected to Roth and Ola, and was therefore involved in his assassination attempt. I don't buy that he didn't know it was "gonna be a hit" for one second.

Opinion question: if Fredo hadn't slipped up, would Michael have ever known of Fredo's connection to Roth, and the assassination attempt?

Fredo had to go. I think that Michael was willing to let his brother live in exile, until the scene in the boathouse. Fredo revealed two things in that scene:

1. The depth of his resentment and jealousy.

2. Knowing that Questadt was Roth's man revealed a far greater knowledge of Roth's empire than a casual "Johnny said there would be something in it for me."

He envied Michael his brains, his position and his family (he tells Michael how he wishes Deanna was more like Kay). He is even convinced that his parents loved Michael more (Fredo was passed over by his father and his mother told him he was left by gypsies). The depths of Fredo's anger and envy, in addition to his past betrayal, meant that he would always be a threat to Michael and to the family. He had to be killed.

Nobody loves me but my mother...and she could be jiving too.
-BB King

Yeah, I think Fredo still had a chance before the boathouse meeting, but the boathouse meeting was essentially Michael putting Fredo through a test, and Fredo failed every question.

He would have slipped up sooner or later--probably sooner. But even before that, Michael still would have been obsessed about finding the traitor in his family. Even with Roth dead or on the run, the traitor would still be a threat to him. His suspicions wouled have led him to Fredo eventually.

While these debates over whether the killing of Fredo was justified are very interesting, I think just looking at that question misses the whole picture. Killing your own brother is rather like dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki--even if it is morally justifiable and appropriate, it's still a terrible thing. Unless someone is a total psycho (and as I've said before, I totally disagree that Michael is), even if they felt their brother deserved to be killed they couldn't do it without deeply mixed feelings and deep sadness that the whole situation came about in the first place. It's totally different from, for example, Vito going back to Sicily and killing Don Ciccio to avenge his (Vito's) family. I think even if Michael was convinced he was justified in killing Fredo, it would still be something that would weigh heavily on him the rest of his life, as we saw in Part III (although it would certainly weigh less heavily that if he thought it had been wrong). If FFC wanted to present a less romanticized picture of the mob, he certainly succeeded with this plotline, regardless of how one judges Michael.

I think he suspected Fredo from the beginning. In the boathouse he tells Tom Fredo is weak and stupid. He also says the hit was botched, and that whoever did it was
very afraid. I also think his pointed question to Fredo in Havana about Johnny Ola
being there, and Fredo's lame lie that he'd never met him was a giveaway, as was Fredo's near confession while they were having a drink when Fredo angrily says,
Why couldn't we spend time together like this before? Before what? And then
th coup de grace at the night club when Michael pointedly "introduces" Fredo to Ola and Ola smoothly pretends they do not know each other, while Fredo is looking at his shoes....all giveaways. But Michael needed more, which he got at the Superman show.
I agre, however if Fredo had not given himself up directly Michael would have found out.

"Exile would have been sufficient. The murder was strictly personal and cannot be justified by business/security concerns."

Exile would not have been sufficient; Fredo was a threat as long as he remained alive. Maybe not in the immediate future, but somewhere, somehow down the line, maybe years, was the possibility of another betrayal (this one w/ Roth was not the first - only the most damaging).

The murder wasn't personal...it was business. Had Michael allowed Fredo to live ONLY because they were brothers (for there would have been no other reason), then THAT would've been 'personal'. The only personal aspect was the compassion Michael showed his mother in not permitting her to lose another son.

"Killing your own brother is rather like dropping the atomic bomb ... even if they felt their brother deserved to be killed they couldn't do it without deeply mixed feelings and deep sadness that the whole situation came about in the first place."

And what is conspiring against your own brother with a known rival, even if to smooth negotiations? Thereby knowingly or unknowingly, nearly causing his death and the downfall of possibly the entire Corleone Empire? Is that akin to dropping a bomb?

People seem to love to forget the seriousness of what Fredo did. Michael Corleone did not simply wake up one day and decide to kill his brother.

I believe Michael DID have mixed feelings and sadness that it all came about...however he knew what had to be done. Also...that statement that Fredo was nothing to him, neither a brother nor a friend...should be taken very seriously.

In short ...I agree with Michael's decision.

Fredo HAD to go.

You are right for all the reasons stated,kand also because it was always the philosophy of the Corleone family that traitors planning assinations of the Don had to die. Fredo should no more have been spared because he was Michael's brother than Tessio should have been spared "for old time's sake."

Would it change your mind if you thought that Fredo was more stupid than malevolent?
The late night phone call from Ola makes me think dumba$$ but the boathouse scene is obviously someone who's been grinding his teeth in resentment for years.

Despite the fact that Mike told Tom that Fredo was weak and stupid, he still maintained him in a position of authority. As he stated to Tom: "I give you complete power over ... Fredo and his men". He could have jettisoned him at any time and, thus, not put him in a position to threaten the family at that time. Finally, he did exile him from his crime family and that ended his usefullness to any of Mike's enemies. But Mike was a murderer. He murdered and he presided over a group of people who murdered with no thought about its morality. So, fratricide may have been as natural an act to him as ordering a hit on anyone else.

That's being way too harsh on Michael.

If Fredo was genuinely a threat, I don't think the threat would be totally removed simply by exiling him from the family. Fredo would still be resentful and could still have offered his knowledge of the Corleone family to Michael's enemies and conspired in future plots against Michael. He also could have testified against Michael in future prosecutions or government hearings like what we saw in Part II.

And I think it's ridiculous to say that the fact that Michael used violence means that fratricide was "natural" to him. Mafia families operate outside the law. They can't rely on the police and the courts for enforcement because what they are doing is illegal to begin with. While many mafiosi are much more violent than necessary, if the mob never used violence (and, at least sometimes, killing) they would have no power or credibility whatsoever. What reason, for example, would anyone who owed them money have to pay them, since they would have nothing to fear if they didn't pay? When Michael learned of the plot against him at the end of Part I, what was he supposed to do other than what he did? Send the heads of the other families to bed without dessert? I don't think the fact he was a Mafia don means that he had absolutely no feelings for anyone, even close family members. Tom and Vito were also members of organized crime and they both broke down and cried after Sonny's death.

[quote=Lilo...Would it change your mind if you thought that Fredo was more stupid than malevolent?...[/quote]

Of course not, because we already know he was stupid that's how he got snookered in by Ola & Roth.

Fredo's resentment toward Michael was understandable...but his stupidity led him to act upon that resentment. That's what made him dangerous, and what may have made him dangerous again in the years to come. He had to go.

I still don't see how he could provide any substantive information to any Corleone crime family enemies once he was exiled from the Corleone crime family. Someone may be able to provide an example of such information that would not be otherwise available to the underworld.