These hits are clearly some kind of suicide mission, no way to run an escape safe...I don't understand. Did Michael not consider that? When talking with Rocco, Neri and Hagen looks like he got a big plan about Roth's hard hit, but in the and it's only a kamikaze mission..and what about the hitman? Are they so loyal to go without tinking about?

I can only speak of the Roth hit...but I never thought of it as a definite suicide mission. Sure, Rocco's chances of accomplishing it and getting away alive were slim...but he gave it a try.

Michael most likely didn't give Rocco's survival a second thought. He wanted Roth dead and simply chose the best man for the job. It was up to Rocco whether he returned home or not.

And as for loyalty...you're working for Michael Corleone, you know what he's capable of, and he in effect orders you to carry out a nearly impossible hit, one in which you might very well lose your own life.

What do you say...?

"Gosh, boss, I don't know...it's just too dangerous I don't think I want to do it. Could you get somebody else."

At the very least, loyalty increases your odds.

Apple

I agree with Apple. In the case of the Roth hit, Rocco didn't NEED to go himself (he was a capo so he certainly had people under him). He CHOSE to go himself probably because a) he wanted to show his loyalty (this goes back to the Neri vs. Rocco subtheme) and b) Figured he had the best chance of getting close enough to Roth. If he got killed along the way, then so be it.

With Luchessi, I believe that WAS a suicide mission, and Calo deliberately did it to avenge Don Tomassino. Calo probably didn't care if he got killed or not; all he wanted was vengeance ("Blood cries for blood" or whatever he said).

I think we have a consensus on why Rocco sacrificed himself.

As for Luchese, wanethegame is correct. Recall when the news of Don Tomassino's death reached Michael, he was in the dining room making nice with Kay, and Calo was beside himself. After he said "blood cries for blood" michael told him that one day he would need a service. Calo was 100% loyal to Don Tomassino and was more than happy to give his life to avenge the assination of his boss.

At the risk of boring some people here:
A subtheme of GFII is how Neri pushes past Rocco and attempts to push past Hagen to become Michael's Number Two man. In that penultimate boathouse scene, Rocco simply lurks in the background like the mere bodyguard he's become. Neri leads the discussion about Roth and his whereabouts. And, when Michael hurts Hagen by referring to his offer of employment and his mistress, you can tell from the smirk on Neri's face that he was the source of that info. The net of that humiliating exchange was: "Are you gonna come along with me in these things I have to do?" Hagen, humiliated, replies, "Why do you hurt me, Michael--I've always been loyal to you."
That sets the stage for Michael saying that "history proves that anyone can be killed." He then turns and says, "Rocco?" Notice that he didn't say, "Al?" The reason was that Rocco had become expendible at that point, but Neri wasn't expendible. And, at that point, Rocco, having witnessed Hagen's humiliation and all that stuff about loyalty, really had no choice but to say, "difficult, not impossible." He may also have agreed to do the job personally as a last-ditch attempt to prove that he was more loyal and more useful to Michael than Neri.

Add to that some sense of challenge. If Rocco could pull it off and NOT be killed he would have been in Michael's good graces for the rest of his life. He would have essentiallly been able to "retire."

I don't necessarily think that's true. Had Rocco survived the Roth hit, then that would've been great for him. I don't know that it would've been viewed by Michael as any more than a job well done, and now on to the next.

As for this 'sub-theme' busines...yes, Turnbull I've seen you mention that before and trust me it's NEVER boring. However I always wonder from where do we get the whole sub-theme idea of a Rocco/Neri conflict such as the one you describe?

Is it in a draft script?
Is it outlined in the Harlan Lebo or some other book?
Is there reference to it in a deleted scene?

Or do we surmize all of it in this one 4 minute scene, from Neri's smirk and Michael's query to Rocco on the chances of a successful hit on Roth?

Apple

I must agree with Apple.

Turnbull's post is certainly not boring, but I don't see where it comes from?

I can certainly see that Michael has put more trust,etc in Neri, but where is it shown that Rocco has fallen from good graces? I love the theory of Neri vs. Rocco, but I don't see the basis for it.

I think it is clear that over the years Michael placed more trust in Neri, and used Neri as an advisor more than he used him as just muscle. Neri simply rose up higher in the organization. I dont think it was anything more than Michael deciding Neri had more brains, and I think Rocco was always a little jealouos...much as it might be if two people began employment at the same time and one rose up higher in the organization than the other.

Refresh my memory folks. Neri was the former policeman, right? Where did Rocco come from?

He is one of Clemenza's button men - Killed Paulie and part of the team that took Tessio on his final ride.

May have killed Philip Tataglia as well - from the looks of one of the Carl Gustav wielding assassins - but its hard to say for sure.

Probably elevated for being a direct part of so many important hits.

Yes, my theory about Neri trying to nose out Rocco is just my theory. But it's based on more than a 4-minute scene:
--Rocco was Clemenza's choice; Neri was Michael's. Another guy who wasn't Michael's choice--either as a brother or as a consigliere--was Tom Hagen. Look how he was treated in II.
--At Anthony's party, Rocco is only a security guy; we see him doing nothing but surveying the crowd. Neri's nowhere to be seen.
--Then Johnny Ola shows up for his meeting. Neri introduces himself to Ola--he's a player. Michael turns to Rocco and says, "Johnny's men look like they might be hungry. Why don't you take care of them?" Now he's a waiter as well as a rent-a-cop.
--Deanna gets out of line at dinner. Rocco tells Fredo: "Michael says that if you can't handle this, I have to." Now he's a bouncer.
--Then Michael has his critical meeting with Frankie in the boathouse. Neri's with him. Rocco is nowhere to be seen. Presumably putting Deanna to bed--perhaps he's holding her drunken head over the toilet.
--After the Tahoe shooting, we see Rocco galumphing around looking for the perps. Where's Neri? Maybe sleeping? He doesn't seem part of the security detail.
--And when Michael returns from Cuba, he asks Rocco and Neri to leave the room so he can talk alone with Tom. Rocco goes right out. Neri starts out, stops, wheels back, swipes a cigar from the table, and then goes out. (Cheeky litle advantage-taker, don't you think? )
--Then there's that penultimate boathouse scene. Another clue in that scene: Rocco stands, says nothing; Neri slouches in a chair, leads the discussion.
--And of course, Rocco goes out on the one-way mission; Neri survives and is still alive and kickin' 20-odd years later in GFIII.

Sharp eyes, Turnbull!!

However, a theory (interesting as it is) and a sub-theme are two different things.

I think if FFC (and Puzo) had an underlying theme of such importance in mind, they might've made it just a bit less subtle for those of us who are not eyeing the comings & goings on of Neri & Rocco.

Personally, I don't think either Rocco or Neri were EVER trying to push past Hagen.

Apple

And all Neri does (according to Michael) is help him in and out of the car, carry his briefcase, and of course kill the occasional archbishop.

True enough, dt. But then again, Michael didn't ask you or me to help him in and out of his car, carry his briefcase, and kill any archbishops! I dunno about you, but I feel slighted...

A very interesting observation Turn...interesting that Rocco is around well before Neri, killing the men implicated in the assassination attempt of Michael's father and the attempted murder of Michael - yet Neri doesn't appear until after Michael is the Don - and Neri is involved in the murder of Barzini - the principle enemy of the Corleone family - and one would assume the most powerful of their non-Jewish rivals

Nice point, Stavka! And, to add to it:
In order to kill Tattaglia, we get Rocco and a cohort, who bust in on him in bed with a whore--and they use a pair of M3A1 "Grease Gun" submachine guns to do their work. Two guys, and two submachine guns, to whack one elderly Don in bed. But Neri, using a measly six-shot Smith and Wesson .38 revolver, dispatches Barzini, a bodyguard and a chauffeur--singlehandedly.

FFC chose the weapons and the circumstances of the murder primarily to provide variety and drama. Still, you can't help but conclude that Michael saved Neri for the most important hit of the afternoon--and he did it all by himself, with relatively minimal armament.

I've always agreed with what Wayne said about Rocco.

No where is it implied that it must be Rocco himself who carries out the hit on Roth.

Yes, Rocco was made responsible for Roth's murder, but had he come up with a different plan that did not involve himself as the shooter there's no reason why Michael would not have approved it.

AAMOF, if Michael viewed it as a probable suicide mission, why would he rather lose Rocco instead of some unnamed button man who was lower in the pecking order?

Despite the fact that, as Turnbull correctly and never boringly points out, Neri had pushed past Rocco in importance, Rocco was still one of the three key people in the upper level of the Corleone organization.

Interesting, BTW (I think, anyway), how we always refer to Rocco by his first name, and never by his last (Lampone) and Neri by his last name, never his first (Al).

I always took the machine gunning of Don Tataglia as payback for the similar over-kill of Sonny. His body would be shredded

While Barzini was involved in the set-up, Tataglia probably did the shooting if for no other reason than to avenge his son Bruno, he certainly doesn't deny it at the Commission sit down.

Neri has to use the S&W Police.38 to pull the whole Police Officer scam - but still that's not much of a margin for error, what if Barzini had a second body guard, or the chauffer didn't go down on the first shot?

Felt Clemenza's choice of a shotgun was a tip to the old country, where the cutdown doublebarrel was the mafia weapon of choice

Of course, Neri was recruited by Michael and Vito; Lampone, by Clemenza. That makes all the difference in the world when it comes to expendability.

And not to be picky - but the Tataglia assassins are using Danish Madsen SMG's not US made M3's

The M3 has a retractable L stock, while the Madison has a flip over full fold

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG

the MS has an upper and lower receiver with no squared edged - while the Madsen splits in the the middle and is squared - this is clearly seen in the the first shot where gunner #1 is cleaning the two halves of his weapon.

The barrel of the danish weapon extends from a triangular/conical receiver - while the M3's comes from the middle of the larger cylinder that is formed from an upper and lower receiver

http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/firearms/smg/img/m3.jpg

Good catch, Stavka! I wasn't able to see the grip safety in the shooting scene, but the flip-over butt was visible.

Why, Turnbull! I'm shocked!!

I can understand why you didn't see the grip safety, but how did you ever miss the flip-over butt?

At my age, I can't muster as much interest in butts as I used to.

You're a pistol, TB.

I think another important fact to point out is, that in the original book, Michael refers to Al Neri as "his Luca Brasi." Now considering how loyal and valued, not to mentioned feared, member of the family Brasi was, I think that makes a statement as how Michael felt how invaluable Neri was.

Yes, he did, but I always thought that he handled that hit poorly and was more lucky than good.

By starting to fire before Barzini gets closer, he nearly allows Barzini to escape. While his marksmanship in killing Barzini was impressive, what if he missed the first shot? He probably wouldn't have gotten another.

Then he leaves before verifying the Barzini was dead or dying. Vito survived 5 shots, and Neri just assumes that Barzini is dead from one?

This seems to me like a pretty sloppy way to handle such an important assignment.

Indeed it does. But it makes for good drama and graphic violence, as in Barzini keeling over backward with blood gushing out his back, tumbling down the steps...

Hollywood will stop at nothing to make improbable use of guns and shooting situations. Consider "Dirty Harry," in which Clint Eastwood did for the .44 Magnum what Playboy did for breasts in the Fifties. The reality is that the .44 Mag is the absolute least likely firearm that a plainclothes cop would carry. But...

Not to nitpick, but it's not Michael who refers to Neri as his Luca Brasi, it's Clemenza, who was "bragging" about Neri, saying he would be a "wonder" who would be "Better than Luca" since "after all, Neri was his discovery."

Just a question here. Didn't the old Don, in the original movie, say to Michael, I think you've found your Luca. Or, was that only in the book? Or am I imagining things again? I've run out of medication, you know.