This has been discussed before, but I’m raising it again, hoping we might have some new insights:

Michael didn’t initially suspect Fredo of complicity in the Tahoe shooting. When he told Tom, “Fredo? He’s got a good heart. But he’s weak and he’s stupid—and this is life and death,” he was saying that Fredo didn’t have what it took to run the family in his absence—not that he thought Fredo might be a traitor.

Some here think Michael might have had Fredo bring the $2 million to Havana in order to test him. I think Michael had sound tactical reasons: Tom was needed to run things in Nevada. And, by not using Rocco and/or Neri, Michael was signaling Roth that he still hadn’t ruled out one or both as traitor(s).

And yet: as most of us have remarked, Michael gives Fredo two suspicious, piercing looks: when Fredo asks if anyone he knows is in Havana (and Fredo denies knowing Ola and Roth); and at the nightclub, when Michael “introduces” Ola to Fredo, and Ola says, “we never met.” The close-ups on Michael’s face show Michael looking intently at Fredo’s response, as if trying to see if he was lying.

Also, Michael probably arranged for the plane to take him out of Havana as soon as he learned when and how Roth planned to have him killed. That was before he had his intimate chat with Fredo over drinks. But, he didn’t tell Fredo about the plane at that time--he waited until after he learned that Fredo was the traitor--possibly another sign of suspiciousness.

With that in mind: Why, if Michael had any suspicions of Fredo at all, did he let Fredo in on Roth’s plan to kill him—and his plan to kill Roth—even telling Fredo that “Hyman Roth will never see the New Year"? What’s more, Michael didn’t even need Fredo to do anything: when Fredo asks what he can do to help, Michael says, “You just go along.” What was he thinking? Why did he tell Fredo?

Well, to start with TB, I disagree about Michael's "looks". I don't see those looks at all and it was Fredo who initiated the knowing people in Havana conversation. FFC had Fredo bring the money to Havana to give Fredo a segue into the Havana scenes.

Of course, some will always struggle to know why Michael told Fredo anything about his plan to murder Roth if he suspected Fredo. For me, part of the answer is easy: Michael didn't suspect Fredo (there were no "looks"). However, Michael really didn't need to tell Fredo anything about his plan.

You're no doubt right about Michael's arrangement for the plane to exit Havana. Given that Michael revealed to Fredo that the Cuban military would carry out his murder, he probably needed the plane to immediately exit Cuba to avoid his own murder. I think that his failure to tell Fredo about the plane earlier was simply FFC's choice to add to the drama of the chaotic New Year's eve scene. But, Michael could not know of that chaos in advance, so why did he place himself in the lion's den? Remember, he leaves the party when he does only because he sees signs of Batista's collapse.

Sometimes there's a tendency to think that everything Michael does is "the smart move." Could just be that spoke too loosely while having a drink with his brother.

My thoughts.......

I think that Michael did indeed suspect Fredo, along with Rocco and Neri. Difference being that he had no emotional attachment to Rocco or Neri. But being Fredo's brother, he did have an emotional attachment so a part of him didn't want to believe that his own brother would set him up. I believe that Michael was in conflict over Fredo within himself. The cunning smart untrusting side of Michael battling whatever was left of the humane loving side that he had for his brother. The possible truth vs. emotion.

"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."


And that is why he did NOT tell Fredo earlier about his plan to leave Cuba by plane. He was not going to let his emotions, his love for his brother, cloud his judgement and the possibility that Fredo could have been the traitor at that point.

I am stumped. Whether or not Michael suspected Fredo, why trust him with all this sensitive information? If he was merely "weak and stupid," that should have been enough for Michael to know not to tell him...UNLESS he did suspect Fredo, and then it would be a matter of "keeping your enemies closer." If Michael telegraphed to Roth (through Fredo) that he knew about the assassination attempt, it could have thrown Roth off his plan to have Michael driven home. It was also a kind of declaration of war against Roth.

Michael clearly distrusted, if not outright suspected Fredo of treachery by the time he got him to come to Cuba with the $2 million. The whole point was to keep Roth off balance. Roth is obviously getting suspicious that Michael isn't putting his money where his mouth is, so the money has to be produced. But what better way to keep Roth believing that Michael is looking elsewhere for the traitor than to have the actual traitor brought to Havana with a suitcase full of money for Roth.

The whole Havana scheme was about Michael confirming his theory. He knew whatever investment he made was going to be lost, thus the reason for him telling Roth and the birthday guests about the rebel blowing himself and the police officer up. Being in Havana was all about sussing out who exactly had betrayed him, and I think the fact that it was Fredo who showed up with the money was all about Michael already having guessed that it was Fredo.

And remember Fredo almost spills the beans when they're having banana daiquiris. I suspect the entire purpose of that last outing between the two brothers was about Michael giving Fredo a chance to do the right thing and admit whatever his role was (perhaps Michael wasn't sure of the extent of Fredo's treachery).

I agree with several of your points. But the theory that Fredo bringing the $2M indicated that Michael knew he was the traitor
doesn't make much sense to me.

Good point about Michael's story of the rebel blowing himself up. Michael bringing that up was unusually injudicious. I think that was one last dagger at Roth, with Michael figuring that even if he doesn't survive he might have scared off some investors and cost Roth some $$$.

But none of this addresses the original question: Why Michael would have mentioned to Fredo about his plans if he thought Fredo was the traitor?

I think it's a lot easier to explain away a few possibly searching questions and looks to Fredo than it is those remarks. That, plus Michael's stunned reaction when Fredo slips up, force me to believe that Michael did not really suspect Fredo.

Exactly Woltz. It just plain makes no sense for Michael to tell Fredo anything. You are right about Michael's stunned look when Fredo's treachery is revealed.

I reckon "Why tell Fredo?" is a bigger mystery! than even "who killed the bedroom assassins"

I think this is something that deserves more attention. Clearly, Roth was upset with the conclusion of this conversation. However, while it was going on, when Michael noted that the soldiers were paid while the rebels weren't, Roth prompted Michael by asking "What does that tell you?". That's when Michael responded "They (the rebels) could win." but why would Roth ask that question, right there, with everyone paying attention? What kind of an answer was he expecting from Michael?

A possible explanation: Once Michael landed in Cuba, Roth could have had him killed at any time. But, Roth was greedy for the $2 million, and Michael knew Roth wouldn't have him killed until Michael handed over the money. Michael's overarching need was to string Roth along until he could find out who was the traitor in his family; hence his continual stalling and raising doubts about the rebels.

To Oli's much earlier point about Michael entering the lion's den: The Tahoe shooting proved to him that Roth would stop at nothing to have him killed--even if Kay or his kids got shot up in the process. But, Michael was the target. By removing himself from the Tahoe compound, he was removing the target from proximity to his family. Roth's greed for the $2 million, and Michael's foreknowledge of when and how Roth planned to have him killed, were his only weapons in Cuba. He showed real coglioni, and a cool head.

TB, I'm not sure that Michael removed himself from the compound to protect his family. While that protection might have been a byproduct of his removal, I believe that his plan to go to Florida was made in advance of Anthony's communion celebration.

I also believe that Michael was simply being prudent about committing to his Cuba investment because of the rebel activity. His witnessing of events simply confirmed his prudence.

I believe, after such traumatic events – bedroom machine gun sprayed - Vito would have cancelled his business plans and stayed with his family of wife and young children unless removing the 'target' was the only way “to protect his family”

I also believe that Michael was simply being prudent about committing to his Cuba investment because of the rebel activity. His witnessing of events simply confirmed his prudence. [/quote]
True, Oli. And, it raises another question: Had Michael decided, during his Havana sojourn, to give up on Cuba forever?
Everyone except Batista knew, in December 1958, that Batista was finished. But, there was no reason at the time to believe that gambling also would be finished. Tourism, with gambling at its center, was Cuba's third biggest industry, after mining and agriculture. Castro hadn't declared himself a Marxist, and had even reopened the casinos after the hotel and casino workers demonstrated against him. Michael was obsessed with getting Roth's Havana gaming empire, which probably would have made him the biggest legit gambling operator in the Western Hemisphere. I just can't see him walking away and never turning back.

What other option did Michael have but to walk away?

Even if Fidel kept the casinos open, Roth was clearly Batista's guy. There's no way he would have been allowed to keep control of the casinos under Castro.

Michael would also have been perceived as aligned with the Batista regime, if he was known at all. Even if he was not on Castro's radar, there was no indication he had any avenues through which to ingratiate himself with the new regime and get himself a piece of the pie.

With Batista's abdication, all paths to the Havana gambling empire were closed Michael, at least for the time being.

That's interesting, LW, when you think of it context of Michael's "They can win" observation. Michael's power, not just in Cuba but everywhere, depends on a population that's not willing to give up their lives to stop him from doing what he wants, and now a population that is willing to do that is right in front of him.

One characteristic of gangsters is that they think everybody has a price. As has been pointed out, noone knew (except Kruschev and Che) that Castro was a communist. So, Roth and Michael figured they could do business with Castro (although Roth doesn't seem to realize that the rebels can win). However, Michael wants to wait because he does think the rebels can win and the $2 million can better serve Michael's interests if it is paid to a possible Castro regime rather than to Batista in his waning days in power.

Ref: thread Michael's choices post by user Lana 24 February 2017

Extract:

Tom-anuch! Woltz, Hey, I had a hundred button men on the street, twenty four hours a day looking for you!

I had been somewhat 'doubtful' in hindsight that my 'Aussie' sense of humour [pulling leg] even when quoting Godfather lines! may not have come across humorous as I intended, to everyone on an international message board

If so, I apologise and will in future “try to think as users around me think! in Gangster BB style!

Sorry Woltz and Thanks

That's what I was thinking, Oli--biding his time, believing everyone has a price. But (and this is a reach, I admit), perhaps the subpoena to appear before the Senate subcommittee changed his mind. He clearly did not want to be identified as a casino owner--in his testimony, he admitted only that he owned "some stock in the [Nevada] hotels." Making a move on the new Cuban regime would have been risky at that point.

Are you apologizing to me? No need to do that. I got the joke.

As you Aussies say, no worries, mate.

Thanks Woltz you are good! Spot on! “no worries, mate” I am impressed!
And gracious

If I recall, the mob threw money at Castro, too. They saw the revolution coming and played the field. Castro burned them in the end. My guess is Castro played the mob, telling them they'd be able to continue running their casinos in exchange for financial support, then burned them once he took power.

Occam's Razor. The simplist (and correct) answer is that Michael did not suspect Fredo as the traitor. That's why he had no problem telling Fredo about Roth's comeuppance.

Still why tell weak and stupid Fredo Was blindsided Moe Greene buyout

One thing to consider about an entire movie's content is how the director conveys information to the prospective audience. In this case, how do we learn that Michael intends to murder Roth in Cuba? Well, FFC chose to convey that information to us through Michael's conversation with Fredo. Of course, it's probable that FFC knows that the audience would ask why tell Fredo. However, FFC feels that he has to convey that information to us, but his ways to do it are limited. Of course, Fredo's part of that conversation may contribute to our view of Fredo as a somewhat sympathetic character which is a theme that traces its origins back to GFI. So, FFC simply re-enforces that view of Fredo through the conversation.

It's also a way for FFC to rock our emotions back and forth between sympathy for Fredo and loathing of his stupidity, insecurity, and cowardice. That's one reason that I am exhausted after watching GF I, or II, or III.

Mike, you don't come to Havana and talk to a man like Fredo like that!

Makes no sense whatsoever "Can I trust you with something?" Famous last words!

I believe, the failed attempt to murder Roth in the hospital, by Michael's bodyguard, would have conveyed the information to the prospective audience, Michael's intention was to murder him in Cuba

Michael telling Fredo his plans to murder Roth was uncharacteristic and makes no sense whatsoever

However the brothers' conversation, did convey the information to the prospective audience, Roth's intention was to murder Michael in Cuba

It was totally unreasonable for Fredo never to have met Ola, in my opinion. Fredo was with Moe Greene for years. Greene was Roth's long time friend and, even, protege. Ola was Roth's "Sicilian messnger boy".

So, it stands to reason that Ola would have visited Vegas - on business mutual to both Greene and Roth - probably on many occasions, during Fredo's time there. That he wouldn't pay his respects to the great Don Corleone's son seems, as I say, totally unreasonable.

And also, if he remembers Tom from the old days, how would he not have, at the very least, met Fredo.

But he then goes on to give Fredo the dirt on Roth's plans.

A very ambiguous scene.

Greene was talking to Barzini Roth and Ola were unknown in Godfather, popped up in II like Pentangeli
Business was Greene running the Hotel the Corleones bankrolled

the great Don Corleone's son was banging cocktail waitresses two at a time! and was slapped around in public

It is possible their paths never crossed until Ola bumped into Fredo in Beverly Hills and gives the dirt on Roth's plans to conspire against his brother, for something in it for him