At the cemetery Tom asks Michael, "Do you know how they're gonna come at'cha?" In his response Michael says, "It's a smart move - Tessio was always smarter."

He couldn't have been too smart. He got whacked. Was Michael playing with Tom, or was he serious? The outcome certainly did not support Michael's comment.

It was a smart move because for all intents and purposes, the Corleones would have lost a straight-up war. Realistically they only won because Michael orchestrated assassination attempts (on everyone in the movie, on Barzini and Tattaglia in the novel).

He wasn't being sarcastic; Tessio figured that Michael couldn't have beaten the other families and if something had gone wrong with the assassinations, he would have been right. Also keep in mind that aside from Michael's "inner council", nobody even knew those assassinations were coming. Tessio certainly didn't, so to anyone who didn't know what Michael had planned, Tessio's decision WAS the smarter choice.

Given that Tessio and Clemenza didn't know that Rocco had built up a secret regime, and given that they had no clue that Michael had a plan to wipe out all the heads of the other families at the time, the Corleone family appeared weak. as Moe Greene surmised they were being run out of New York, and they didn't have the muscle to deal with him, let alone Barzini. Michael was still untested as a Don, and Clemenza and Tessio wanted out to form their own family but were denied that permission. On top of that Michael announces that the family is moving to Vegas, and that Carlo was going to be his right hand man. Tom was declared "out." Now Tessio and Clemenza both knew Carlo was a traitor who set Sonny up, and even if they knew Tom was not the greatest wartime consigliere, they knew he could be trusted and that he brought a lot of knowledge and skill to the table. Oh, and Vito was dying. To stay loyal to a failing family was not a good business move, and it was "smart" to bail...nothing personal just business. Clemenza chose loyalty. Tessio, who was always smarter did not. Simple as that.

DT, I couldn't have stated it better.

Nobody knew for sure, let alone Tessio and Clemenza. It was only when they knew it for a fact when Carlo admitted it to Michael.

at the end of The Godfather Connie says to Michael "You blamed Carlo for Sonny...[/i]everyone did[i]" (emphasis added). Tessio and Clemenza had to know that Vito naver gave Carlo anything important to do, and they knew Sonny beat him up for what he did to Connie. To see him being named Michael's right hand man could not have made them feel confident.

Tagging onto what dt posted:

Clemenza stayed with Michael out of loyalty, not some penetrating insight about Michael's hidden strength. Tessio assessed the situation as he saw it, and came to the logical conclusion based on what he saw. That's why he was "smarter."

The key word is "always," as in "Tessio was always smarter." That means that Tessio was smarter than Clemenza in other situations that we don't know about from the film.

Also, Tessio was given more freedom to run his regime in Brooklyn, and that gave him an opportunity to get in touch with Barzini. So it wasn't all about him being the smartest. And as Clemenza was always closer to the Corleone family his loyalty was only natural. This isn't rocket science we're discussing.

I tend to agree with MaryCas.

It makes little sense to compliment someone's intelligence for making fatal mistake.

Maybe the "smart move" would have been to realize that Vito was advising Michael and he, even in his dotage, would not have allowed Michael to make so many (apparently) stupid moves. Or to trust Michael when he assures them that there are things being negotiated that will solve all their problems and answer all their questions. Or to realize that Michael - a war hero who had successfully outfought Sollozzo - could not suddenly become so weak and stupid.

I think that's just a silly line the script gave to Michael.

There's another one soon after: "that little farce you played with my sister - you think that could fool a Corleone?" It obviously fooled one Corleone.

Clemenza may have been more street smart than tessio. As seen in g2, he was already running scams on his own before be met vito and tessio. When all 3 started running together, their combined experiences started everything. Clemenza knew not to double-cross the boss no matter how unhappy he might have been at that time. There is a lot on the screen that is self-explanatory and alot that you have to surmise that MAY have happened as the posts here show. Clemenza MAY have been told that Carlo was being given that bogus position to set thing up. Clemenza MAY have been told how to act in the meeting in the den with the key players to trick Tessio into thinking everything is going as planned. If Tessio was ao confident with his play, why is he so concerned when he gets off the telephone in the kitchen, that when he turns around and looks at Tom, he has a look on his face that expected to get whacked right then and there. When they go outside, when he finds out what is going to happen, he never saw it comong.

And not to mention how obvious Tessio made it appear at the funeral that he was siding with Barzini. Not so smart if you ask me.

Clemenza and neri would have never sold out mike.

In the novel Michael says, "He's [Tessio] the most intelligent. And he did what seems to him to be the smart thing ... He sticks with me and gets wiped out;"

Michael's and Vito's objective was to portray the Corleones as weak. Even Barzini was deceived and Clemenza opined that in six months they'll be nothing left to build on. Michael's and Vito's objective was achieved.

I would say that tessio didn't stick with mike, he tried sticking it to mike and got stuck instead - from the amount of buttons that took him for a ride, he got stuck a couple of times.

The only ones who were were fooled were Fredo and Connie. Vito was on to carlo from the beginning when he told Tom to NEVER give him anything important, but to give him a living and to never discuss the family business with him. Santino was on to him, and was on his way to kill him. Michael was also on to him once he got back from Sicily, if not sooner.

The "farce" Michael refers to was Carlo provoking a fight to lure Sonny out to his death.

It fooled Sonny.

Why would Tessio have gotten wiped out if he stayed with Mike?

I think Michael is speaking in the abstract. His comment is predicated on what Tessio's understanding of the Corleone Family's situation to have been at the time he betrayed Michael. While ins truth he would not have been wiped out if he had stayed with Michael, in Tessio's mind that is what would have happened.

And here all these years I thought the "farce" he was playing with his sister was the farce that they had a decent marriage, and that he was on the up and up. the basis for this is that it was Barzini who set Sonny up. Csrlo regualrly beat Connie, and this time he beat her so badly she called "home" for help. That was a set up, not the entire farce Carlo was playing.

As a side note: Tessio's betrayal was a great stroke of good fortune for Michael:

In the fishtank scene, Clemenza says, "Don Corleone, you always said the day would come when me and Tessio could form our own family" [emphasis added to highlight "family," not "families"]. But, just as Vito's promise to the other Dons not to be the first to break the peace wasn't binding on Michael, neither was his promise to let Clem and Tess form their own family.

Michael had no intention of letting either or both form a separate family because he knew that there never was, and never would be, a co-Donship: sooner, rather than later, Tess and Clem would either break up the Corleone family into separate, competing families; or fight each other to the death to control the whole enchilada. Either would have fatally weakened the Corleone enterprise. And, Michael needed to keep control of the NYC "olive oil business" for two reasons. First, he needed the tribute he'd receive as the ongoing boss of the family, and the synergy that the high rollers from the illegal NYC gambling operation would have with his legal gaming operations in Nevada (i.e., junkets). Second, he needed the muscle in his NYC operation to deter competitors in Nevada--otherwise, he'd be just another legitimate casino operator, fair game for "real" Mafiosi.

Tessio's betrayal gave Michael the reason to have him killed, removing the dual-Donship dilemma. And, it left Clemenza--loyalty to Michael proven beyond doubt--as the inheritor. Clem, getting old and probably with no further ambitions--would far more readily accept being Michael's underboss in NYC than would Tess, who'd have wanted to be the Don in his own right. He might even have tried to move against Michael in Nevada.

I disagree.

Michael is telling Carlo why he's being punished. It's not for being a bad husband, but for complicity in Sonny's murder.

Plus, if Michael were referring to the bad marriage and Carlo's general shortcomings, he would have said "that farce you're playing," not "that farce you played." After all, they were still married.

Good point TB. As soon as Michael took over, even while Vito was still alive, he brought his people, Rocco and Neri in to the inner circle, and not Tessio or Clemenza who were older, and who saw Michael as a "kid." A co-donship with Tessio and Clemenza operating as free agents was indeed not workable and Michael would not have allowed it.

I differ a little on the situation with regard to the olive oil business once Michael moved to Nevada.
Clemenza and his successor Frank Pentangeli ran the day to day operations, and I don't think Michael was as involved in them as Vito had been, so technicaly I don't think they were "under-bosses". Michael had bigger fish to fry, and he was content to continue to make money from the Clemenza/Pentangeli family. Further, he maintained ultimate control over them even though he was not a hands on manager. We see this dichotomy in II when Pentangeli has to come to Michael to work out the trouble with the Rosato Brothers. This isn't a matter of some deadbeat being handled in the loan sharking, or some problem with a bookie ... Michael probably didn't even want to know about that stuff once he moved. Dealing with the Rosatos...wanting to kill them.. was something that could start a war, and Frankie knew it. When Michael refused him Frankie was dismissive of Michael implying he didn't know how to handle "street" things any more because he was living the high life in the Sierras drinking his "champagne cocktails." Michael had to remind him that Frankie's family was "still" named Corleone, and that with regard to dealings with outsiders Michael had the final say. Later Michael explained his whole strategy to Frankie vis a vis Roth and why he wanted Frankie to make the deal with the Rosatos.

Well, now you raise another point, dt:

I think greed for Roth's Havana gambling empire blinded him to a fundamental question: Why would Hyman Roth be taking the Rosatos' side in an internal dispute with Pentangeli in New York City? Why would Roth--based in Miami and Havana--care? We know from the denouement that Roth was backing the Rosatos in his bid to simultaneously kill Michael and neutralize NY by having the Rosatos get rid of Michael's man Pentangeli. But, Michael didn't know that prior to the Tahoe shooting.

He should have questioned Roth's interest in this seemingly internal dispute. Perhaps he did. If so, I can envision Roth telling him, "Michael, just go along with me on this--it'll be good for our Havana deal." And Michael probably bought it.

TB, I think that Michael did realize what Roth was up to.

Michael: It was ROTH who tried to kill me in my home. It was ROTH all along. He acts like I'm his son -- his successor -- but he thinks he's gonna live forever -- and he wants me out.

Roth could play both ends. If he murdered Michael, then NY would fall into the Rosatos (and his) hands. If he failed to murder Michael, then he could continue to foment the Rosatos resistance to Frankie.

Good point TB because if the Roatos were chiseling on Corleone territory with Roth's blessing, why wouldn't Roth through Ola made some kind of pro forma gesture to Michael about this, e.g. "I have to back the Rosatos in New York, and you'll get back whatever Pentangeli loses from our deal in Havana," just go along with it.

When Frankie approached Michael in Tahoe, it should have been a warning to him that Roth was not playing fairly. Frankie actually saw through it in his own way before Michael did.

DT, as I posted above, I think that Michael was well onto Roth before Havana. But he couldn't do anything about Roth backing the Rosatos except to convince Frankie to go along with his plan. Both Michael and Roth realized that Frankie (and the Rosatos for that matter) thought in parochial terms, not global.

Wasn't Roth jumping the gun a little if he wanted to lure Michael to Havana? Maybe he figure the hit in Tahoe would work and gave the Rosatos a premature "go ahead"

That whole thing is troublesome. Michael told Roth in Miami, before he left for Havana, that "Frank Pentangeli is a dead man." Roth no doubt rejoiced: Michael believed that Pentangeli was behind the Tahoe shooting. But, when Michael dispatched Pentangeli to "settle these problems with the Rosato brothers," it proved that he didn't suspect Frankie after all--meaning he might suspect Roth. So, Roth gave the Rosatos the go-ahead to kill Frankie.

BUT: Why did Michael send Pentangeli to settle up with the Rosatos when, by that time, he knew Roth was behind the Tahoe shooting? Perhaps he was still playing out his fiction of trying to make Roth relax until he could find out who the traitor was. Or, he may have looked at it as a "win-win" for him: If Pentangeli did settle with the Rosatos, it'd be one more problem he didn't have to worry about in NYC. If the Rosatos killed Pentangeli, it'd confirm that Roth was behind the Tahoe shooting. Either way, the logic isn't strong.

TB it had to be the former...he wanted Roth relaxed, but I think he underestimated Roth at that point. Each man was bluffing the other.

I think the Corleone's were weakened in the olive oil business when Pentangeli and Cicci were taken out. It is not shown in the film, but in the bactstory someplace, Michael had to find new people to fill Frankie's shoes.

Basically Frankie was running his own family with Cicci as his Number 2, even though he remained a part of the Corleone family when it came to dealing with other families, and people like Hyman Roth. By taking out Pentangeli, that would leave Cicci, who I don't think was Don material.

Did they whack Tessio immediately, or take him away somewhere?

First time I saw the scene, I supposed that the offscreen sounds that we hear are silenced gunshots.

Later, I conceded that these were the various car doors closing.