...and love you, that I kept things a secret from you"

What do you think Micheal means when he says this to Tom? Did he keep Tom in the dark to protect him or protect the family business?

Opinions?

Please refresh my memory on the context of the line.

Sorry, yes.

Its right after the attempt on Micheal's life when Tom goes in to see him.

Thanks, I think it's Michael at his manipulative best personally, but is consistent with the reasons that Vito and Michael gave him in the first film.

He kept Tom in the dark because he never considered Tom to be his consigliere. He used Tom, and told Tom what he though Tom needed to know. When he "turns everything over" to Tom, he needs Tom to believe all that stuff about how Michael admires him and thinks of him as a "real brother." This was just Michael being manipulative.

It always surprises me how much disregard people tend to think Micheal has for Tom - I just don't believe it to the same extent.

I posted in another thread two things about Michael's disposition toward Tom: 1) Michael was jealous about the brother relationship between Sonny and Tom; 2) Michael never forgave Tom for the attack on Vito, Sonny's death, and Tom's overall failure to protect the Corleones.

I agree with people saying that that line was just Mike being manipulative just so he could get Tom to do what he wanted. By GF II mike was showing signs of having psychopathic traits so he really didn't seem to care about anyone. However he would manipulate people by telling them what they wanted to hear. Tom has always wanted to be considered a real brother so Mike used that to his advantage

Exactly.

And there was me thinking it was a touching scene between two 'brothers'.

Micheal's jealousy towards Tom and him blaming Tom for Sonny's death: is there any particular evidence for this or is it what you have inferred?

Just about all of our analyses of Trilogy content is based on inference. The novel supplies alot of explanatory information that the films do not. For example, the novel states that when Tom was released by Sollozzo and returned to the mall, Michael noticed how warmly Sonny embraced Tom. Of course, "You're not a wartime consigliere" speaks volumes.

I agree olivant. Lets face it Sonny and Tom had a better relationship than mike did was tom. Sonny was hot headed and got mad at tom a lot but he would always apologize and treat him like a brother. Mike on the otherhand was pretty evil not just to tom but everyone else.

Wasn't Sonny the first to mention to Tom that he wasn't 'a wartime consigliere'?

It seems as though 'you're not a wartime consigliere' was a thought shared by all the Corleones and, for me, provided enough justiciation for Micheal's decision to displace Tom from the role. I didn't feel the need to read any further into Micheal's decision and infer that Micheal had some agenda against Tom. Vito saying that 'he advised Micheal' also strengthened this view as it shows that it wasn't Micheal alone who made the decision.

Was Micheal surprised that Sonny embraced Tom so warmly? They were like brothers and Vito had treated Tom as part of the family so of course Sonny was relived that he was back safe and sound.

Like you said, everything is inference but I really don't want to think that Micheal was resentful of Tom's relationship with Micheal. Micheal blaming Tom to some extent for Sonny's death is some way in line with what I think Micheals character is like but, some bitter jealousy towards close family members is not, atleast not in part I.

The wartime consigliere statement by Sonny was said while Michael was in Sicily. Michael's conclusion about Tom's wartime consigliere skills was based on his failure to protect the family resulting in Sonny's death. And Vito to Tom: "For reasons which you can't know, you must have no part in what mayhappen."

"Michael realized with a faint twinge of jealousy that in many ways Sonny and Tom Hagen were closer than he himself could ever be to hs own brother."

Tom wasn't a sicilian. Vito, Sonny and Micheal knew he wasn't a wartime consigliere and, given the circumstances they were in, to remove him from his position was entirely the right business decision. I don't think, therefore,that it suggested as much animosity or disregard from Micheal towards Tom as people make out.

The quote you provided does suggest some mild jealousy, though jealousy will not neccessarily manifest itself in a resentful manner. That said, there are instances in the film that do seem to portray a few edgy moments between them, but this is mainly in part II when Micheal's at the height of his paranoia. Overall, I'm not sure if I'm convinced enough by the whole 'Micheal resents Tom' movement to dismiss the conversation mentioned in the thread title to be 'Mike being manipulative'. Theres some genuine sincerity in his words.

I certainly, from the film, can't see enough evidence to say 'Micheal never forgave Tom for Sonny's death'. Are there parts in the novel that perhaps further that theory?

To me it doesn't really matter if he resents tom or not for Sonny's murder. Tha fact is that when he says to tom admires him and all that other garbage he probably doesn't mean it he is just trying to put tom at ease and do what he wants him to do

And what was that exactly?

I'm not sure it was 'garbage' - "I'm trusting you with the lives of my wife and my children".

It was Mike being manipulative. I'm sorry i don't agree with the theory that Mike really loved Tom. Mike treated Tom like shit for the most part. Even before Mike became the evil psychopath he was in Part 2 he was never really close to tom

Manipulative to achieve what ends?

Fair enough if thats your opinion.

Hey man you are right. Mike was a sweetheart. Tom was lucky to have someone like him as a brother. I mean verbally abusing him in front of Neri/Rocco was just a way to show his love. Murdering family members and women was also very noble of Mike. Glad I got that straight now lol

You're born a psychopath, you can't become one, unless you incur brain damage due to an accident. It's obvious you don't like the Michael Corleone character, and you've every right to do so, but calling him a psychopath without even knowing much about it is plain ignorance.

Thanks man very polite of you. Believe it or not i know about the term psychopath. I was just using it as an expression. I know I'm not as smart as you Sonny Black but I'm not the idiot you think I am

I don't think you're an idiot at all and I've never said it. I respect you're opinion and I think Michael being a psychopath is up for debate. I can't rule it out myself. But if Michael was a psychopath, he already was one at the beginning of Part I. He did show to have the ability to have remorse, so I'm sceptic about calling him a psychopath.

I understand. I just think using that word whether its true or not is not that big of a deal considering the evil acts the character committed

'Verbally abusing'?!? Lol, talk about an over-reaction, you should hear the way me and my brother talk to each other sometimes!

You don't seem to understand that the characters from the film are extremely complex. Micheal may well be a murderer but dosn't mean he can't love his family/friends. Vito was also a murderer, did he not love his children? He chided or 'verbally-abused' Sonny in front of Sol, does that mean he hated him?

Whether Micahel was, technically speaking, a psychopath or not, as you've stated Crush, Michael's behavior gave every indication that he was pretty dang close to being one. While it made sense for Vito to keep Tom out of the massacre scenario, and, as many have concluded, Tom wasn't a wartime Consigliere, there was no reason for Mike to only trust Tom with "certain areas of the family business" as he told Ola. Tom had faciliated murder and mayhem perpetrated at the orders of both Vito and Michael. His loyalty was beyond reproach. No, there was something else which aliented Michael from Tom. Sibling jealousy and Sonny's murder certainly come to mind. That's whyit's important to not only view the films, but to read the novel.

Hey man i never said that vito or Sonny were innocent of anything. They were both murderers. But even you gotta admit that they treated family better than Mike did. I mean Vito or Sonny would have never killed Fredo. they might have gave him a beating but they knew killing him went way too far. Also they might have agreed that Tom wasn't a wartime consigliere but they still valued his imput and treated him better than Mike did. i mean I think I'm being pretty honest when it comes to that.

Matter of opinion, I think the decision was the right one.

It's ironic because since roth basically outsmarted Mike throughout the whole movie he needed Tom to bail him out by convincing Frank to kill himself so Mike wouldn't be indicted again

Yes. As Vito states in the novel (paraphrase): there are some things that a man just can't bring himself to do. Maybe that's why I've turned things over to you. Vito could never murder his son? He could never even conceive of it.