Duh not sure what I was thinking there. I guess I took it from the movie instead and thinking the book. I'm getting old.

Yea no doubt on Rocco, that was just absolute lunacy at that point. But was the reason Rocco was expendable the reason or his extreme passion to get revenge?

Rocco had to make up for not stopping the assassination attempt on Michael at Lake Tahoe. When Michael put it to him, killing Roth that is, Rocco knew he couldn't refuse because he had lost standing with Michael and knew Michael expected him to kill Roth to regain his "face."

I don't think anyone really meant anything to Michael and that he viewed everyone as an expendable tool.

I also, I think compared to Sonny, who was just a big thug (at least in the film) and Fredo, who always a non-entity, Michael really came off as a real Ted Bundy kind of creep. Something you really see in the flashback birthday party scene at the end of Pt. II. That said, I think it's something deeper than a delusion of legitimacy with Michael. I think it's a delusion of normalcy. I think Michael was borderline to begin with and that his wartime experience opened those otherwise latent psychopathic floodgates. His elevation to Don was just another stroke of good fortune for him as well, in that it gave him back the ability to kill again with impunity.

Which raises the question: Why send Rocco to personally perform the hit on Roth, in public view, for all the world to see? Maybe a bit of directorial license comes into play at this point, but I was under the impression that professional hit men were generally hired for this kind of duty, the more obscure and anonymous the better, specifically so that they would not reveal a connection to the person or family who hired them - if they should be so unfortunate as to get killed or captured while in the act.

I've always wondered about the whole Rocco/Roth scene.I think the postings I've read here tend to be pretty much on the money as far as Rocco's reason for being picked,his acceptance of his fate,and the utter impossibility of his escape after killing Roth.
The only thing that I would add is my opinion that Michael deliberately chose a known Corleone associate to do the hit. He wanted it known that he was behind it, and that no one is beyond the reach of the Corleone's. I think he felt that proving Rocco was acting on his orders would be impossible(not just difficult).
Finally, I think that Michael knew the respect and fear that he would gain when an underling willingly sacrificed his own life to do the bidding of his Godfather.

You make some very astute points.

Well with Rocco dead there would only be speculation and no conclusive proof that Michael was behind the hit.

Also as for the choice of Rocco over that of some Jerome Johnson type, I think what Lou_Para said seems to make a lot sense. Using Rocco for a kamikaze attack that Michael was both behind the hit and that no one was out of his reach. That it cost him a capo seems a small price for him to pay, especially considering that this particular capo was already redundant.

Ya'll are overthinking this. As a primary GFII character, Rocco was a vehicle for FFC's dramatic license.

Yes, it was directorial license in the sense that it supported a subtheme of GFII: Neri pushing past Rocco, and trying to push past Tom, to become Michael's #2. We see many examples, especially in the penultimate boathouse scene, where Neri leads the discussion about Roth while Rocco stands mute. Then, after Michael humiliates Tom and notes that anyone can be killed, he turns and says "Rocco?" Notice that he doesn't say, "Al?"

But Lou makes a very strong point. It was typical of Michael's character to show the world that he would stop at nothing to get revenge and punish transgressors. And, to make that point, Michael had to be identified in some way with Roth's assassination while he was in FBI's custody, no matter how risky to him. Rocco served that purpose dead or alive. Tom, like Rocco, was high up on the FBI's Corleone Family chart. Tom visited Pentangeli; Pentangeli promptly committed suicide. Another obvious link to Michael--another warning to would-be traitors.

TB, I usually agree with you, but not in this case. I've never bought this opinion that there was competition between Neri and Rocco. Neri was clearly Michael's Majordomo, his Luca (per the novel). Rocco was a capo, apparently Michael's only capo in Nevada. Neri had no need to push past anyone. He was already at the head of the line. Tom was only selectively utiized by Michael. He asked Rocco about Roth since it would be Rocco's manpower that would carry out the murder.

Neri, Tom, and Rocco were the subordinates that Michael had at his disposal. As such, whatever action they took would, of course, be interpreted as at Michael's behest by those who were in a position to know such things.

Why do you think, or more importantly, what made Rocco expendable at that point?

Was it that Michael wanted Roth dead no matter what the cost and knowing that basically it would be a suicide mission decided by process of elimination that Rocco was the least valuable to him (Michael) at that point?

Or did Michael come to that decision because he felt that there was a very good chance that Rocco may have been the 'inside man' that killed the Tahoe assassins before they were found?

Remember what Michael says when Tom asks him "What about your people ROCCO and NERI? You don't think that they had something to do with this?"

Michael replies "You see -- all our people are business men, their loyalty is based on that. Now, one thing that I learned from Pop was to try to think as people around you think. Now on that basis, anything's possible."

Any thoughts?

It is pretty clear that Rocco was always lower on the totem pole than Neri, and I have never bought into the idea that somehow Michael wanted Rocco out of the way, or that Rocco was trying to curry favor in some way to pvertake Neri. If anything Neri was the one who wanted to replace Tom. It wass Tom on whom he did the research Michael used to insult him. Neri was given the job of killing Fredo...arguably the most sensitive of all three, and When Michael sought out Rocco to kill Roth, Rocco was simply being a good soldier and following orders. I always though he botched the job by not having some kind of diversion which may have allowed him to escape. Had he, I am certain michael would have wekcomed him back into the fold, but still he would have remained number 3.

Part of Michael's problem was that his idea of "legitimacy" was doing business in the "legitimate" world and backing it up with his position in the mob. In effect he was stuck in the passt. By the time he reached his exalted position in The Commission, the mob was losing power, and being a mob boss wasn't all that it was back in the day. The times and his own family left Michael behind in the dirt, and he never got that.

I agree wholeheartedly DT. The Trilogy makes it pretty clear that Neri was Michael's majordomo and Rocco was a capo. Pretty plain and simple.

So Neri wanted to become the new family lawyer? Because that was the only thing that Tom was at that point.

DC, my simple physics is that Rocco was Clemenza's man, Neri was Michael's--just as Hagen was Sonny's choice for brother, not Michael's; and Vito's choice for consigliere, not Michael's. Michael needed someone to sacrifice himself to eliminate Roth, and he chose Rocco because he needed Neri more.

Others have reasonably asked why Rocco couldn't have arranged for others(s) in his regime to whack Roth--in a plot that might have enabled him or them to get away. And Rocco, alive or dead, would be directly linked to Michael via the FBI chart shown at the Senate hearing. Here I'm speculating that Michael wanted to send an unambiguous message: Michael Corleone never gives a foe a pass, and will exact revenge no matter how well the foe is protected by the authorities (same reason he wanted Pentangeli's suicide). He made that statement by using Rocco, not others. Sure, in real life that would have made plenty of trouble for Michael. But that's Hollywood.

Sorry, S_B, I did not make myself clear enough. I think Neri wanted Tom out of the way so he would clearly be Michael's Number Two man, AND Consigliere.

Thats Hollywood all right, but it is also in the realm of plausible deniability as all Michael's misdeeds weent up in smoke at the Senate hearing. Michael NEVER gave the order to have Roth killed. He simply said he wanted Roth's plane met in Miami. When Tom proteseted Michael said Roth had been dying of the same heart attack for 20 years, and then made it clear he DID NOT want to wipe EVERYBODY out, just his enemies. Then he turned to Rocco and only said "Rocco?" Who responded "Difficult but not impossible." Since Rocco wasn't talking after he killed Roth (FBI shout have gone for a leg shot and kept him alive) , the only witnesses to what transpired prior to ROth's death would have been Neri and Tom, so Michael didn't have much about which to worry.

Well if you look at it, no one ever replaced Rocco, there wasn't much of the olive oil business left because it was run by Joey Zasa, and Michael had cashed out of the casinos to buy Immobiliare, and set up foundations. It was Altobello who wanted him out, and even after that, Michael was upset at Vincent for Killing Zasa, so other than being "on the Commission" whatever that meant, Michael was no longer really connected with the "street" or with murder. When things unravelled in Sicily he stepped down and turned everything over to Vincent because, in his words "I can't do it anymore." So in the end he WAS legitimate. Of course his past sins were visited on him with Mary's death, but after that he seems to have withered away and died by himself. "Legitimate," but broken. You don't get more tragic than that.