In the middle of GFII when Michael comes home from Cuba, Tom has the task of telling him about the "miscarriage" that Kay has had. Michael obviously is upset and proceeds to ask Tom is the baby was a boy. Is this sudden interest in the sex of the child a misogynistic (sp)side of Michael or do think that there is something deeper to his outburst. Maybe it's just me but if my husband's first words after finding out about my miscarriage was "Was it a boy?" that might be grounds for divorce.

Hello Belle!

One must realize that back in those days, especially within the Italian culture, it was preffered by the old fashioned Italian men that they have boys. If a father produced a son, he was real man because he was able to "make" a boy! Boys who would carry on the family name, carry on the family business, etc. I am not condoning this way of thinking at all, but the old school Italian men ( along with many other cultures ) had this frame of mind. That is the way it was. Pertaining to Michael's thoughts, this old fashioned way of thinking by the Italains was applied to him in this movie, along with the fact that he was The Don of a family, he had only one son at the time and in his mind it would be better to have another to carry on The Corleone name along with his brother. Even in legitimacy it would be good in Mike's mind if two son's could bring the family name into the legitimate world as successes. But no matter what his thoughts or feelings were about having a son, it also showed the coldness that Micahel had developed. Not being concerned that his wife had gone through a miscarriage, but being more concerned that he lost the oportunity to have another son to carry on for him! Almost giving the veiwer the message that if it had been a girl that had been miscarried, it would have been ok then! Yes, cold and definately grounds for divorce in this day and age!

Don Cardi

My ex-wife was Sicilian. The day she was born, her father asked her mother: "how could you do this to me?", because she didn't have a boy. ...true story.

If I'm not mistaken, Michael askes Kay when dancing if "it feels like a boy", so that wasnt the first time he was concerned about the sex of the child.

Like his father, Michael was looking to the future, toward an heir and successor. Anthony obviously wasn't going to be the heir and successor, so he had hopes for the unborn son.

I think all of you are wrong about this. Kay said she had the abortion because this "Sicilian thing" must all end. Mike was looking to build a mafia dynasty like his father had tried to do by producing a bevy of sons. That was the source of his interest inthe baby's sex.

And what was obvious about Anthony not being a family heir? That doesn't make sense. Michael told him that somedayhe would help him. He also got custody of his kids.

It's rare I that I ever disagree with Turnbull, but I agree with you. What was wrong with Anthony? Obviously in GF III we learned he wasn't Don material, but in GFII he was only a small boy.

Basically, that is what I said in my post, Mike was looking for another son in hopes of both boys carrying on the family name and business. As far as Kay's comment, that took place later on in New York, during the hearings. But earlier when Mike returns home and is told by Tom that she lost the child, Mike has no idea that it was an abortion, and thinks that she has miscarried. All he is concerned about upon Tom telling him the news is if she had lost a boy!


Don Cardi

You might want to take into consideration that Michael was not simply an everyday husband/father, but a Mafia Don. The Head of one of the most powerful organized crime families in the country at the time. The very reason he sought out and married Kay was to have children to pass his dynasty to. While I'm sure he loved his daughter, his primary interest was in having as many sons as possible for this very purpose. Just like a King who needs heirs to the throne. That is why (as Don Sonny has already pointed out) earlier in the film we hear him asking Kay if the baby feels like a boy. He makes no secret of the fact that that is what he would prefer.

And as for 'grounds for divorce'...Kay was ready to leave this marriage long before Michael was even told of the fictional 'miscarriage' (which was HER deceit). That is why she aborted the child, which she said she KNEW was a son...in the first place.

AppleOnYa

I agree with you absolutely. It was not whim, just foolish surmise that he would be somehow more "real man". He really needed sons. And, by the way, we may wish a child of certain sex, women as well as men, there's nothing unnatural. It doesn't mean that if the child will be of another sex, we shall love him less!
As to Michael asking it, I don't see any coldness here. At first he was absolutely stunned by the fact that his child was DEAD, and only then asked something. Of course child was first on his mind - Kay was alive and OK, and the baby - .
And, by the way, I don't think that he would ask that if he talked to Kay. He would show compassion to her personally, but he had no reason to show it in front of Hagen.
One more thought. Wishing sons so much, I think Mike would marry again after Kay had left him. He would not live dreaming about "How he lost her", he was not that kind of man. Just one of those annoying things about GF3...

i wouldnt be surprised if this had nothing to do with the whole mafia aspect, and just was Michael continuing with the old world mindset of always wanting male children. This is very common throughout the world, especially in China where they have a one child policy. The boy to girl ratio is moving steadily in favor of boys because parents abort female children in favor of trying again for a son.

Yes Apple, you hit the nail right on the head! Excellent point! It was her way out because she knew that Michael would never forgive her for doing that!


Don Cardi

Yes it is true that the old school Italian men wanted boys so they could carry on the family name. But Michael already had a son. So why was he so concerened that the baby that should have been born was another son? Was he scared that maybe in "his" world that only having one son was not safe enough to carry on the family name. maybe he was scared that perhaps one day his oldest son would get wacked perhaps and he wanted another son for insurance.

How many months was Kay with child for? She did not look pregnant. Did they show her at all in the begining of the movie as pregnant. she would have been at 4 months along to find out what the baby was going to be.

Yes, it was the most cruel action possible. But as a way out it was really stupid. At first place, it was dangerous to do to a man like Michael a thing that he could never forgive, he might easily kill her at that moment. If he did not, it was extreme humanity .
And of course she could not really think that he would let her separate his children from him. It was certain that she would lose her children, anyone would figure that beforehand. Senseless cruelty.

Tom says: "Mikey, after three and a half months..."
Maybe she didn't know. Maybe just said it to give him more pain? I believe she was as mean as that.

That is a very good point Don Smitty, but again, the old school mindset was one that if a man "produced" many sons, then he was a real man. But as you say in the case of Michael, the more sons the better. Case in point within his own family ; three sons, Fredo : not one that had the abilities to carry on the family business. Santino : one that could carry on the family business, but was killed which in reality only left one son, Micheal, who at first did not want to get involved in the family business but was eventually put into a position where he had no choice. So your theory of another son as insurance is a good one. In GF III we see that Anthony wanted absolutely nothing to do with the family, so Micahael had no choice but to take Vincent in like his own son and turn the business over to him. So in theory the more son's that Micahal would have had, the better the chances that at least one of them would have carried on the family business for him.

Don Cardi

All of those posts are pretty good. Mike wanted another son for a combination of those reasons ya'll have expressed. Yes, he was old world Italian to an extent, but also a Mafia Don who wanted to hand the reins of power to his sons, probably in succession. My father was certainly in that tradition. He had six kids (three boys). It was supposed to be nine, but my mother miscarried three times. Had he been a Don, our family might still be in power.

Kay's reasons for the abortion were to end the "sicilian thing" and to hurt Mike. It's very complex, but remember that Kay was Anglo, not born to or raised in the old world Italian tradition.

Mike was certainly intelligent, but not as intelligent as his father, not as sensitive as his father when sensitivity was called for, and, overall, not as wise as Vito when it came to handling people, and situations.

brings up an interesting point...

Vito, if confronted with the same situation, having one of his children aborted; what do you think he would do?

i personally cant come up with a reasonable reaction for the situation that would also be reasonable for Don Vito. Such an anger-inducing situation for such a subdued person.

He would have let it go. He wouldn't do anything. He didn't kill carlo(a non member of family) even when he knew that he was behind sonny's death.

Interesting question. First, I must say that Mama would have NEVER, under any circumstances,had an abortion, however, if she did, Vito would have looked at any "reasonable" side there might have been.
How would Vito have viewed Kay's abortion?

In the same topic as the miscarriage, I don't feel that Coppola did a very good job in showing us the marriage fall apart. It seems to go from happy, sweet couple dancing and kissing at Anthony's party to "I feel no love for you at all" and by the way I killed our unborn child. I realize that the whole shooting incident would be unnerving but would it make you leave the person you love and the father of your children?
Grazie i miei amici for all the great feedback!

Belle, you're missing the subtleties of Diane Keaton's acting the part of Kay. Remember when they were dancing at Anthony's communion and she brought up the subject of the Conrleone family's becoming legitimate? Remember the look of near comtempt she gave Michael after the attempted assasination when she was sitting on the couch with kids and he was walking around behind? Then, watch her closely at the Senate hearing - you can tell that she is very unsettled and that something is brewing in her mind.

My thinking exactly. I believe he should not consider himself better writer than Puzo. Everything he wrote as sequel to the original leaves me confused at least. By the way, Kay became a strict Catholic... And I really don't see reasons to leave him NOW. If she would leave him, it should be when she did it first, and if she returned then, after all, she did it knowing everything, and accepting him as he was, with all that Sicilian things. It would be strange to despise him now for shooting in his home - as if he wouldn't prevent it if he could! If she loved and respected him as she did in the novel, even knowing what he was, she would never change so quickly just because he had difficult times now. It would be still less normal for Kay not to show him any kind of support, understanding and compassion at all. She knew perfectly well whom she was marrying, she was clever enough to see that he never will be absolutely legit, and if she decided to stay with him despite everything that happened, it is absolutely out of character to change her mind suddenly and begin to kill your children just because someone shoots at your husband (great surprise, indeed!) and you are requested to stay at home for the safety of your own children (as if any sane mother in her place wouldn't put off all her trips without being requested!). She could not be so light-headed.
It's just another violation of logic performed by FFC. He seemed not to understand that you cannot just take existing characters and change them the way you please, without taking anything into consideration. Michael's character suffered from him even more.

Just Me, I don't quite agree with you that Copolla screwed up with the characters. I think he was able to put that shock element to each of the characters... Kay aborting a child, Michael killing Fredo, pentangeli suicide, michael trusting Tom earlier and distrusting him towards the end etc. Ofcourse each author will change the story as per his taste, but the question is, did it look unnatural or was it not sufficiently justified?

Well, you know, Winegardner also brought many shock elements in Puso's characters, but it didn't make his book more interesting. Shocks are different, I believe, and the shock of disgust cannot help the work very much. FFC did some good shocking changes, for example, the killings of all 5 families heads instead of two - it looked great.
But when he makes people act in a way perfectly unnatural to their way of thinking, it is annoying, sometimes more than shocking. He changes their nature just because HE wants them to act so, not because they want or need it. If it would be a separate story, about different people, we might accept them the way he shows them, but since we know enough about them, and Puso developed to the utmost subtleties their characters, shallow, groundless and willfull changes in their nature, justified by nothing better than his wish, don't add quality to his work. Even shocking, they leave me rather disappointed than impressed. He was clever enough, I believe, to avoid many mistakes he made if he would take trouble, and listen more to Puso.

Grazie JUSTME, we're on the same page. As a woman I simply can't justify leaving the husband you love and father of your children after a few bumps in the road ( or assassination attempts) whatever the case may be. If her love and devotion for Michael was not that strong why marry him after the whole Sicily mess? Or better yet if Coppola had her leaving after Carlo's demise as described in the book. Even in that instance she left Michael because he lied to her, not because of the whole "Sicilian thing that's been going on for two thousand years!" I think the scene from the book between Kay and Tom when he is sent to fetch her at her parent's house in New Hampshire would have been a great addition.

Michael and Kay's marriage was always a little rough, but the fact is, they both always loved eachother. Kay, I believe had the abortion just so that she could get as far away as possible from Michael. She had a part of Michael in her, a part of Sicily inside of her (note that it just so happens that it was during Michael's senate hearings that she aborts the baby). She knows Michael is cold and ruthless, and, as much as she loves him, she can't stay married to him. And as much as she loves Anthony and Mary, she can't bare another child of such a cold man.

And, to Michael's wondering if it was a boy, you have to look at where he grew up. What if Vito only had Connie and Fredo, then where would the family be? What if Vito only had Connie and Santino (who by GFII is dead), then where would the family be. Maybe Michael knew, that as hard as he tried, he would never break free from the Mafia, but even if he did, you wouldn't want someone like Fredo running a casino, or any business for that matter. Sorry, Fredo...

Don Genco: your post makes alot more sense than those of some others regarding this topic. For example, Belle refers to Kay's justification for leaving Mike because of a "few bumps" in the road like assassination attempts. For sure! Despite the countless number of times someone tried to assassinate me, my wife told me after each one, "Honey, I know it's tough, but I will stand by you even if they try to blow up the house with you, me, and the kids in it. Those are just the bumps in the marriage road that we are destined to endure. I love you ,Honey, and even if I am lying in tatters on our bedroom floor, torn to pieces with machine gun fire, I hope I die in your arms and you live to get those suckas!" Give me a break!

Prego! I'm so happy to find that someone except me feels it not to be criminal to criticize Coppola!
As a woman, I agree with you . She married him perfectly knowing and accepting all "Sicilian things". She liked them enough to wait 3 years for murderer to marry her. She lived with him long enough to know and accept them as much as to change her religion. She was "on her way to becoming a Sicilian", Puso writes. Why after all that she would suddenly begin to despise them? After her talk with Hagen she knew about them even more than she should-and she returned to him, even despite his lie. I think that she did it for love she had for him, to support him and pray for him, even if they will not be as happy anymore. Puso shows us that their mutual trust is broken, for a while at least, by what happened, but still she stays with him. I think that she wasn't such an empty place as FFC makes her later, she must have some sense of duty. Not only to her kids, but to the man she connected her life with. After all, marriage is not a trifle, it's an obligation, a responsibility for her dealings with his life and feelings as well, and making that step she seemed to understand it.
Her leaving him even without abortion seems not at all justified.
Yes, there was much to film from the book, enough left. It would be anyway better than inventing and pushing his own ideas, not always as good!