Your thoughts? Please explain your answer.

I believe that he was. Michael originally never had the intentions to get involved. That changed the night he helped save Vito in the hospital. From that point on, at least in his own mind, everything he did would be to protect his own family. Over the years, those same things he was doing under the guise to protect his family ended up costing him his whole family. And in the end, he died alone with absolutely no one around him.

Obviously, he's intended to be, and at least in the book and first movie, it's easy to sustain. If timing of the gang war is just a little different, he has a good chance of an uneventful life. In the latter films, it becomes more difficult to sustain the notion that Michael is being carried along by events. He's too active a participant over too long a period of time to maintain the appearance of a victim of circumstance.

Another thing to consider is that there's really no indication that Michael thinks what the Family does is wrong. It's old-fashioned and inefficient, but at bottom no more corrupt than other organizations.

To be honest, even though I think maybe he was intended to be tragic to most of the readers/viewers, at least initially, but as far as my personal feelings are concerned, I would say that the only thing to differentiate him from other scumbags in the story is his bigger hypocrisy: not only does he switch from apparently honest person to a criminal in a moment, but doesn't seem to have any internal struggle at all, as if making such a change was completely normal. If he was a "villain" from the beginning and had never known any better life, it would be less difficult to somehow "sympathize" with him, or at least to judge him less harshly.

Don't get me wrong: I really appreciate "The Godfather" as a good book and good movies, the characters are well done, it's interesting to follow the story etc, but the main characters don't make me feel any sympathy, quite the opposite.

After you...

Michael's life was filled with tragedy. But for me to think of him as a tragic figure, I'd have to feel sympathy for him--and I don't. Every bit of tragedy in his life--and the tragedies those around him experienced--were caused by him. He had alternatives to every bad move he made, starting with how he chose to protect his father, and he did the wrong thing every time. I think killing Sol and Mac awoke in Michael a lust for power and control that defined the rest of his life. The real tragedy in his life was his perpetual quest for legitimacy, his pathetic rationales for his criminal ways.

This was summarized brilliantly and succinctly near the beginning of III, when he and Kay have their confrontation. He shouts; "I spent my life protecting my family from the horrors of this world." "But you became my horror," Kay replies.

Your view, Luca?

I agree Turnbull I never saw him as tragic. Yes originally he wanted nothing to do that life but it’s clear that he was capable of being in it and he stated to have a list for the power. There were many times he could’ve walked away but didn’t and he did incredibly heinous things once he got involved. Do I don’t feel sympathetic toward the character and can’t see him as tragic. Honestly I see Fredo as more if a tragic figure when it comes to the Corleone sons

I agree with Turnbull and Dwalin2011, who both made some excellent points.

To me, it's particularly striking that Michael was so cold and emotionless in his "... then I'll kill them both" transformation. Absolutely no moral quandary/dilemma.

My two cents worth!

He is my father too
Michael's emotions caught up with him at the restaurant and nearly botched the kill them both

No doubt he was as evil, ruthless, murderous as his father, the original "villain" but if his wife had been like Carmela, he too could have been growing tomatoes, peppers, drinking wine and died in their garden, playing with their grand son

If he was a "villain" from the beginning, then true it is difficult to "sympathize" with him and he gets no sympathy.

Michael originally never had the intentions to get involved because I reckon, initially, he must have thought what his Family does is wrong That's my family, Kay. It's not me.

While he was forced to switch from civilian to murderer, to save Vito in the hospital, I reckon he was not envisaging any further involvement because at that stage, Sonny was alive.

No doubt Michael's choices, decisions, deeds were good, bad and ugly
However so were the circumstances that he was forced into and once in, kill or be killed.

I personally can't see a way out for him after his Baptism massacre
Once a common Mafia hood -- No one is going to give him a pass because he switches to the straight and narrow

My two cents worth!

I reckon, whether we see Michael's life was filled with tragedy or think of him as a tragic figure, shock horror! I find it difficult not to "sympathize" with him because of how he was such an idealist wanting to have nothing to do with his family business but then was forced to turn murderer to protect and save his father's life.

The way I see,
1. he was the only one allowed to get near Sol and Mac
2. after the Baptism massacre, he was living a "legitimate" life
3. Michael's lust for power and control was in his "legitimate" business empire
4. he had realized his perpetual quest for legitimacy, certainly semblance of it
5. his criminal ways were hitting back only They hit him so -- he hit 'em back.

The real tragedy in his life was however we summarize, when he survived the car bomb and came back, he could have tried to live a "legitimate" life but Vito dragged him into their crime business

He could have cut their losses and retired, handing over the family business to Clemenza and Tessio but he didn't because he wanted needed Michael to restore the Corleone family reputation, standing etc. dragging his never wanted this for you son, into their criminal world and leaving a murderous legacy
1. Baptism massacre
2. making his daughter a widow
3. jealousy, resentment and betrayal of his stepped over son

I reckon, Michael's wrong thing was his bad choice of wife who became his horror,"

Please explain -- I'm particularly interested in knowing his alternatives

. I mean let’s be honest he definitely had alternatives. He could’ve gotten his immediate family out if the crime world much sooner and the tragedies within his own family like Kay, Fredo, and Mary are on him

'm repeating a post I made on this subject in '09:

There’s a ton of tragedy in Michael's life—all self-inflicted. He had free choice at every turn, and he freely chose the Mob life, with disastrous results. Here are four major examples:t

First: He was right to think Sollozzo would try to kill his father after the failed hospital attempt. He was wrong to believe that only he could save his father, and by killing Sollozzo and McCluskey. Ironically, an idea that Michael himself had suggested could have been modified to solve the problem bloodlessly. The Corleones could have fed the newspapermen on their payroll the story about McCluskey being a dishonest cop mixed up in drugs and murder before, not after, the trigger was pulled. McCluskey was on the take all his life, and the Corleones had all the details because they paid him. The newspapers would have given that story such headlines that the Police Commissioner would have been shamed into providing Vito with an army to protect him, to save further embarrassment. McCluskey and Sollozzo would have been neutralized without any bloodshed. At minimum, McCluskey would have been transferred or suspended pending investigation. With pressure from the Corleone judges, he’d have been indicted for taking bribes. Sollozzo would have been arrested and probably deported as an undesirable alien. With McCluskey alive, the cops would have had no reason to crack down on all Mob activities. There would have been no Five Families War of 1946, leaving it a contest between the Corleones and the Tattaglias—and as we know, Tattaglia was a pimp, alone he could never have outfought Santino. Michael could have married Kay and gone back to college (and we would have had no Godfather Trilogy!).

Instead, Michael chose to kill Sollozzo and McCluskey, setting in motion his abandonment of Kay, his Sicilian exile, the Five Families War, Carlo’s betrayal, Sonny’s murder, Apollonia’s murder. Sonny and Tom were complicit in Michael’s decision. But, if he didn’t volunteer to do the killings, some other scenario might have been possible.

Second: He could have resumed the legitimate life after returning from Sicily. He could have said to Vito: “Pop, I was wrong to distance myself from you. But I atoned: I saved your life. And I paid a heavy price: two murders, abandoned my beloved fiancée, lost months out of my life in Sicily, lost my beloved bride to a bomb intended for me. We’re quits. Now you run the family…Oh, not feeling well enough to take the reins? Fredo not equal to the task? Sorry, Pop, that’s not my problem. Besides, you always said you didn’t want this for me—you wanted me to be a pezzanovante. Well, I can’t be Senator Corleone or Governor Corleone if I’m Don Corleone. Bye-bye.”

Instead, Michael chooses to become the Don, setting in motion Tessio’s betrayal, the Great Massacre of 1955, Connie’s widowhood and breakdown, and the beginning of Kay’s disillusionment with him.

Third: After moving to Tahoe, Michael could have retired behind the walls of his compound and invested his wealth legitimately—even putting money up-front in the legal casinos of Nevada.

Instead, he chose to hide his ownership or controlling interest in three hotels; muscle Klingman out of his interest in a fourth hotel; dominate the New York mob scene through Frankie Pentangeli; undercut Pentangeli through his support of the Rosato Brothers and their drug-dealing; stake Fredo to ownership of a brothel, and plan for a huge international expansion of his gambling empire through his deal with Roth. Results: Fredo’s betrayal; the machinegun attack that nearly killed Kay in her bed and scared the bejesus out of his kids; Kay’s estrangement, abortion and divorce; Anthony’s estrangement; Fredo’s murder (and a host of other killings).

Fourth: he was “legitimate” in GFIII—but was he? He whines, “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.” But he was never out. He was still a member of the Commission and influential enough to keep Zasa from rising (so Vincent tells us). He laundered his Mob cronies’ money through his “legitimate” businesses (maybe through his foundations) and cut Zasa out of his share.

Result: the machinegun attack in Atlantic City that killed all his pals and precipitated his diabetic stroke. It wasn’t enough that he became a Papal Knight: he had to dominate International Immobiliare by bribing crooked-as-a-corkscrew Archbishop Gilday, setting in motion Altobello’s betrayal and putting him against Don Lucchese, who was far more powerful in Europe. And, in an act of supreme irresponsibility and egotism: told that Sicily’s top assassin—“a man who never fails”—has targeted him, Michael gathers his entire family around him in Sicily, making them all sitting ducks. Surprise, surprise: his beloved Mary gets killed and his budding reconciliation with Kay is nipped in the bud, leading to his own, lonely death, attended by a little dog.

Michael succeeded--in turning everything he touched into death, including his own.

Wow. Great post, man.

My take, for what it is worth!

Turnbull, I think you are being too harsh! on Michael

Whilst “There’s a ton of tragedy in Michael's life” in my view, it is not “all self-inflicted” and I see it differently that neither “He had free choice at every turn, and he freely chose the Mob life” nor "Michael succeeded--in turning everything he touched into death, including his own" though “disastrous results” is not disputed

First: Sollozzo and McCluskey killing
Nobody came up with “some other [viable] scenario” because there wasn't any that “might have been possible”

Corleones destiny
It was Barzini all along – as such the “contest” was never “between the Corleones and Tattaglias” who was just the front
It was Barzini who “outfought Santino” not the pimp Tattaglia

• Carlo

“Carlo’s betrayal, Sonny’s murder” were Vito's doing not Michael's

Vito treating Carlo like an outcast and Vito's inaction to Carlo's domestic violence abuse of Connie, his daughter which resulted in Connie's brother, Sonny's public beating of Carlo because of which Carlo lured Sonny, to Sonny's murder

Second: Donship
Sure thing Michael could have refused the Donship Then again, Michael's loving father and family man Vito never should have put - never wanted this for you son - who “saved [Vito's] life. And paid a heavy price:” in that position

Vito “chooses [Michael] to become the Don, setting in motion Tessio’s betrayal, the Great Massacre of 1955”

• Kay

hypocrite Kay could have refused to marry Michael but Kay did knowing Michael was Mafia

Kay's gripe seems to have been that Michael had not delivered on his promise of making the Corleone family completely legitimate

Both Michael and Kay were delusional about “legitimacy” but Michael was at least trying!
If organized crime could wash their blood money clean, become “legitimate” let alone in five years RICO would be out of business!

Ref: Third: Extract: “the machinegun attack that nearly killed Kay in her bed and scared the bejesus out of his kids; Kay’s estrangement, abortion and divorce; Anthony’s estrangement;”

Kay enjoyed the spoils of the blood money for more than 7 odd years knowing her rich, privileged life was funded by tainted money from other people's murder, misery and blood until her bedroom was machine gun sprayed when it suddenly dawned! on her, this unholy and evil Sicilian thing that's been going on for 2,000 years must all end

Bet Kay never told Anthony about his unborn brother she murdered Yet.... Nice!
Third: "legitimate" businessman

• casinos and hotels

“he chose to hide his ownership or controlling interest” because Michael's unsavoury reputation would have hindered, Michael “investing his [ill-gotten] wealth legitimately—even putting money up-front in the legal casinos of Nevada”

• Frankie Pentangeli

Once a common Mafia hood -- Michael needed Pentangeli as his muscle
Otherwise Michael becomes just another casino operator, easy pickings for anyone

It was indeed unbecoming of a Don
1. Michael “undercut Pentangeli through his support of the Rosato Brothers” against his own man
2. Michael gave his loyalty to a Jew [Roth] before his own blood
3. Michael asked Pentangeli to lay down - settle these troubles - to the Rosato Brothers who spit right in Pentangeli's face
4. Michael threw Pentangeli [good old man -- who was loyal to Vito, Michael's father and to Michael, for years] under the bus
5. then abandonment of his 'dead' capo's family

• "machinegun attack"

Sure thing among others -
1. Michael's greed for Roth's local and international gambling empire
2. and believing Roth that Michael was Roth's successor Roth's heir apparent
got Michael and Kay's bedroom, machine gun sprayed

• Fredo

“Fredo’s betrayal;”
“stake Fredo to ownership of a brothel” What else could Fredo do? other than Fredo's specialty! Good times all around
irrespective no excuse whatsoever for “Fredo’s betrayal;” for something in it for me -- on my own, the Donship

“Fredo’s murder”
Nevertheless Michael could have spared Fredo

Did they have to die?
Fourth: GFIII

• Zasa

“He laundered his Mob cronies’ money through his “legitimate” businesses (maybe through his foundations) and cut Zasa out of his share” What share?

If my memory serves me right, Zasa didn't entrust Michael to launder Zasa's money in Michael's casinos as Michael's other "Mob cronies" did, so how can Zasa expect a share when Michael's casinos were sold

• International Immobiliare

So who wouldn't?! especially the former head of the most powerful Mafia family, wash away his nefarious history

• Mary

Michael's choices

Vito didn't ask Michael to kill Sol and Mac--he was too weak to even ask the nurse at the hospital for a bedpan. And, he was anguished and dismayed when he returned home from the hospital and Tom told him that Michael had killed Sol and Mac. Sonny and Tom didn't ask Michael to kill So and Mac--"Maybe we should leave Mike out of this"..."Madonn', the old man would have my head if I got you involved in this." Michael volunteered to kill them--he wanted to kill them.

The novel tells us there was a strong personal element for Michael. After Mac broke his jaw, and before he passed out, Michael "...wanted to hide the delicious icy chilliness that controlled his brain, the surge of wintry cold hatred that pervaded his body. He wanted to give no warning to anyone in this world as to how he felt at this moment." Later, in the restaurant with Sol and Mac, Michael, sensing that Sol is talking down to him, "...felt that strange delicious chill filling his body." And, he smiles at Mac before shooting him.

Spot on TB!

This is only my personal opinion,but despite all of his BS justifications that he only did what he had to do to protect his family,once Mike got a taste of blood,vengeance,and power after the Sol/Mac murder,he became a nice college boy who got mixed up in the rackets and got what he deserved.

And Vito feels "an icy rage" when Fanucci tries to extort him. The novel is replete with examples where Michael is the second coming of Vito, and that it's because of nature more than nurture.

Pete, both you and TB are spot on.

No doubt personal and business too. How can it not be a strong personal element for Michael? After Mac broke his jaw, and Sollozzo, bodyguarded by Mac, keeps trying to kill his father

True Vito didn't know it was Michael who had killed Sol and Mac until he returned home from the hospital

True Sonny and Tom didn't ask Michael to kill So and Mac-- Michael volunteered to kill them--he wanted to kill them, to save his father's life. The novel also tells us He really had to go, his bowels were loose

I too reckon, there was no other [viable] scenario” they can't wait, because Sollozzo was going to kill Vito ("That's the key for him.")


carried out as per Vito's counselled strategy after his death and renouncing Satan -- after the Baptism massacre, he was living a "legitimate" life and public Benefactor

The "machinegun attack" was Roth not the rackets

Speaking of the Baptism massacre, I would say it was a very powerful scene showing how immoral, ruthless and hypocritical (and in my opinion, completely worthless as a person) Michael was. Swearing to renounce his sins in the presence of a small baby at the same moment his "soldiers" blast away everybody, it's difficult to sink lower than that in terms of hypocrisy! Even if he personally didn't care about religion, still the symbolic meaning of this scene is very powerful in my opinion, it still makes me angry sometimes when I remember it.

He wasn't Swearing to renounce his sins only Satan No hypocrisy!

religion -- crooked-as-a-corkscrew Archbishop Gilday
Baptism massacre --
1. They try to kill Vito Then Michael
2. Killed Sonny and Apollonia

First: Sollozzo and McCluskey killing
So no other [viable] alternatives

Vito didn't ask Michael to kill Sol and Mac-- He never wanted this for him

[quote=Capri]He wasn't Swearing to renounce his sins only Satan No hypocrisy!



"... and all his works?"

Michael was renouncing - Satan "... and all his works" not Michael himself! "... and all his works"!

The novel also tells us He really had to go, his bowels were loose -- not so icy! now

My take too, Sonny and Tom would have left "Mike out of this..." if there was any "other [viable] scenario”

Business or personal?