Why did Michael feel he had to kill Fredo?

[Koxinga]

Was he just crazy with paranoia and revenge by the end of Godfather Part II? Or did he have some kind of justification in mind like in the killing of Carlo and Tessio (in that they would always be a potential threat to the Family, so they had to be rubbed out).

[Falafel Waffle]

ummm... excuse me... but Fredo ratted them outt! That's why the big kiss and the line, "I knew it was you, Fredo."

And Fredo knew he was gonna catch a severe case of bullet in the head when he went out on the boat.

[pldennison]

Yeah, what Mr. Waffle said. Fredo was warned in Godfather I, too, in the meeting between Michael and Moe Greene: "Don't ever side with anyone against the family again."

[Guy Propski]

Simply because he could no longer trust him. That's the dominant plot line in the Godfather II; once you violate Michael's trust, your days are numbered. Fredo was also a major screwup and admittedly jealous of Michael's power, so Michael had to be thinking that it would only be a matter of time until Fredo pulled some other stunt like that.

Coppolla wanted to have Michael kill Fredo right away, but Mario Puzo (the author) didn't agree. Their compromise was that Michael would wait until their mother had died.

Remember, Michael did something similar in the first film. He had his brother-in-law killed for betraying Sonny, but he waited until after Vito's death.

[buddy1]

Basically, Fredo was a harmless idiot, after Michael had wiped out Moe green, Hyman Roth, and the rest of his enemies. So why the bullet in the head (apres the HAIL MARY prayer)? My guess is that by this time, Michael has lost whatever humanity he once had-he has become a cold, unfeeling automaton-everything that his late father wished he HAD'NT! AT LEAST HE HAD THE DECENCY NOT TO kill Fredo while the mother was around-although she never opened her mouth about such matters of business. I just remember that cold hard stare that Michael gave the hit man, while embracing the hapless Fredo-it REALLY gave me the creeps! I think Michael should have set Fredo up in a candy store instead, although he probably knew too much to be left alive-and Michael certainly didn't want him talking to a senate investigative committe!

[astorian]

Michael learned in the first movie that his father's enemies were quick to take advantage of any perceived weakness on Don Vito's part. Thus, he was detrmined NEVER to show any sign of weakness. By killing his own brother, Michael sent a loud, clear message to all would-be traitors: if I'd do this to my own brother, imagine what I'd do to YOU.

Recall what Kevin Spacey said of the omnipotent criminal Keyzer Soze in "The Usual Suspects:" Soze understood that the secret to power was being feared, and the secret to being feared was in being willing to do what nobody else would do- includlling your own family.ing ki

[NutWrench]

Originally posted by buddy1
. . . AT LEAST HE HAD THE DECENCY NOT TO kill Fredo while the mother was around-although she never opened her mouth about such matters of business. I just remember that cold hard stare that Michael gave the hit man, while embracing the hapless Fredo-it REALLY gave me the creeps! . . .

I'm glad other people picked up on that. That was what convinced me that Michael had really lost whatever humanity he might have started out with. Michael was planning his brothers death even while he was embracing Fredo during an emotional moment. A great, chilling scene.

--Nut
A good man has few enemies. A ruthless man has none.

[kingpengvin]

Michael just couldn't handle any threat to his hold over the family or anyone questioning his decisions. Michael was paranoid that he was losing control so that he precieved any disention as a direct threat.

Fredo was an Idiot and a risk to the Family, but he was just niave and thought he could help himself without hurting the family. Remember Fredo didn't know Roth was going to attack the Compound.
In reality Fredo was no longer a threat after that as he broke away from Roth.

[Guy Propski]

As I pointed out earlier, Michael was already a cold-blooded SOB in the first movie. He plotted to have his brother-in-law killed even as he agreed to stand as his nephew's godparent.

As Tessio said, "It was only business."

I don't know that you could say that Fredo wasn't a threat after the death of Roth. As long as he lived, Fredo would be an opportunity for one of Michael's enemies to exploit, because Fredo always made bad choices.

[Opengrave]

Originally posted by Falafel Waffle
And Fredo knew he was gonna catch a severe case of bullet in the head when he went out on the boat.

I don't think he knew but I DO think the sister knew, that is why she didn't want the kid to go out in the boat. I agree that Fredo was a weak idiot who made bad choices and was a risk to the family.

[bafaa]

I'm SMAHT!

...poor Fredo

[kingpengvin]

Opengrave:
I don't think he knew but I DO think the sister knew, that is why she didn't want the kid to go out in the boat. I agree that Fredo was a weak idiot who made bad choices and was a risk to the family.

No she didn't know. Michael's son was taken away by one of Miceal's men under the pretence that he had to go out. Connie had no clue, she tried to have Fredo forgiven by Michael.

Guy Propski:
I don't know that you could say that Fredo wasn't a threat after the death of Roth. As long as he lived, Fredo would be an opportunity for one of Michael's enemies to exploit, because Fredo always made bad choices.

By that point Fredo was on his last legs. While he was in exile he was as Connie described weak and helpless. Under supervision he would be no threat because all power he had before was stripped. Don't forget when he made the deal with Roth he was working a few Casinos for the family and had oppurtunities to make contacts. Without any responsibilities he wouldn't have outside contact, therfore no threat.

[Guy Propski]

kingpengvin--in that case, then, I view Fredo's death as a mercy killing. Who'd want to live that way?

[Guinastasia]

But um, didn't his brother-in-law beat his sister, so Sonny went out and beat the guy up, and they killed Sonny?

Also, I was watching the beginning of the first one yesterday-with the wedding part, and all that. I know it's in the book-which I read-it just depressed me that Michael, who seemed like the good guy of the family at first-became the SOB. And I'm sorry, but what's her name-Kay was an idiot.

Some guy told me a story about his father being in the Mafia, I think I'd split.

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
But um, didn't his brother-in-law beat his sister, so Sonny went out and beat the guy up, and they killed Sonny?

Two different incidents. Sonny goes over to Connie's place and finds her with a black eye and fat lip, then goes and finds Carlo and beats him silly.

The next time, Connie answers the phone call from Carlo's girlfriend, gets in fight with Carlo, and he beats her unmercifully. She calls the house and gets her mother, who gives the phone to Sonny. Sonny leaves, presumably to kill Carlo this time, but Carlo has already sold Sonny out to the Tattaglia family, and they gun him down.

That's why, when Michael visits Carlo after the christening of Connie's son, and has wiped out Tattaglia, Barzini, Moe Greene and everyone else, he tells Carlo, "You have to answer for Santino."

[kingpengvin]

Still pretty frickin evil to kill a guy after the christening of his Kid. At least he gave Fredo a little while before offing him (a week or so?)

But I have a question in number 3 (uggh) Was Michael repentent that he killed his brother or that his killed his mother and father's child?

[hansel]

Originally posted by kingpengvin

But I have a question in number 3 (uggh) Was Michael repentent that he killed his brother or that his killed his mother and father's child?

If you mean during his confession to the Cardinal, I'd say so. I thought the point of that scene was Michael releasing all of the humanity he'd pent up over the years. He always wanted to let it out, to be legit, to get out of the business, but protecting the family came first, and he felt that protecting the family offered him no other choices than the brutality he'd caused so far.

[kingpengvin]

Still pretty frickin evil to kill a guy after the christening of his Kid. At least he gave Fredo a little while before offing him (a week or so?)

But I have a question in number 3 (uggh) Was Michael repentent that he killed his brother or that his killed his mother and father's child?

[MovieMogul]

king pengvin says: No she didn't know. Michael's son was taken away by one of Miceal's men under the pretence that he had to go out. Connie had no clue, she tried to have Fredo forgiven by Michael.

This is reinforced in Part III when we hear Connie talk about the tragic circumstances of Fredo's boating accident. She never found out.

Guinastasia says: Also, I was watching the beginning of the first one yesterday-with the wedding part, and all that. I know it's in the book-which I read-it just depressed me that Michael, who seemed like the good guy of the family at first-became the SOB. And I'm sorry, but what's her name-Kay was an idiot.
Some guy told me a story about his father being in the Mafia, I think I'd split.

I think this incident is important in pointing out that Michael isn't really much of a nice guy, even in the beginning. I think he obviously relished telling Kay the "brains or signature on the contract" story, and his efforts to distance himself from his father's "way" is hypocritical. I don't think he holds any moral judgement against what his family does--he may be out of the business loop, but it's still in his blood, something he's proud of even with his clean-cut military hero demeanor.

[warmgun]

Guinastasia, the secret to any good screenplay is conflict. If Mike going bad bothered you, the writers did their job.

[BobT]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
But um, didn't his brother-in-law beat his sister, so Sonny went out and beat the guy up, and they killed Sonny?

Also, I was watching the beginning of the first one yesterday-with the wedding part, and all that. I know it's in the book-which I read-it just depressed me that Michael, who seemed like the good guy of the family at first-became the SOB. And I'm sorry, but what's her name-Kay was an idiot.

Some guy told me a story about his father being in the Mafia, I think I'd split.

But that's not me Kay, that's my family.

[Guy Propski]

I was just reading an on-line transcript of GF2, and there's a line said by Michael that pretty much sums up his behaviour with Fredo, Paulie, et al:

"I don't want to kill everybody, Tom; just my enemies."

[furnishesq]

I think that Michael killing Fredo was to show us "how out of control" Michael and his situation had become. While he had become his father in title, he was NOT his father. His father, while Godfather, was able to handle the family business while at the same time being able to have a close tight nit family.

Michael could not do this. At the end of Part II (Part III does not exist in my mind) we see that Michael has lost the love of his wife, his sister is less than loving, and he kills his older brother. He has even fired Tom Higgins whom his father has adopted as one of his own family.

The final scene of Part II shows Michael sitting outside -- alone. I do not think this was by accident. Micheal could not be tough and ruthless without giving up love and compassion -- which is what made his father a great man.

[BobT]

It's Tom Hagen. He's German-Irish as he tells Waltz in Part I.

Obviously a lot of people on the SMDB must be watching AMC these past two weeks as the Godfather films have been shown a lot.

[Morbo]

Originally posted by NutWrench

I'm glad other people picked up on that. That was what convinced me that Michael had really lost whatever humanity he might have started out with. Michael was planning his brothers death even while he was embracing Fredo during an emotional moment. A great, chilling scene.

--Nut
A good man has few enemies. A ruthless man has none.

Definitely the best scene in the movie. Hell, it even gave Al Neri the creeps - he could hardly believe it and had to avert his eyes.

As for the OP, I always naturally assumed he killed Fredo simply b/c he took sides against the family again, which he was warned not to do.

[Oblong]

I have a different take.

I've always thought that Michael was sincere when he told Tom to tell Fredo "Tell him everything's alright... that I know he didn't know they would try to kill me".

Also, when leaving Cuba he yells "your still my brother"

I didn't think Michael decided to kill Fredo until Fredo lashed out at him in the boathouse. That's when he realized he was beyond weak and stupid, he was jealous.

I always thought the stare he gave Neri at the funeral was one of regret to Neri, that Neri felt Michael was weak for embracing him. Neri kind of looks away. I dont think Neri would be spooked by Michael's sudden decision to kill Fredo. He already expected it. Remember when he tells him "I don't want anything to happen to him while my mother's alive".

But then again, if my theory were true, nothing happened between that scene and Fredo's death to change his mind, so maybe I am wrong. Maybe the combination of pentangelli, Roth, and Fredo boiled over and he decided to do it.

[Guy Propski]

furnishesq, I have to point out a few errors in your comments.

--Michael did not fire Tom Hagen at the end of GF2. He did tell him that Tom had to commit to being with him, because Michael had found out that Tom had been offered a new job. Tom reaffirmed his committment to Michael, and proved it by a carrying the suggestion to Frankie Five Angles that he commit suicide.

--Connie rebelled against Michael at the beginning of the film, but after their mother's death, she begged to come back and take care of Michael. She admitted that she had behaived badly.

--Michael was sitting inside, not outside. But you're right, he was alone, both in reality and symbolically. Then again, he'd been an outsider all along. The flashback to 1941 (just before the end) showed that very clearly.

[furnishesq]

Guy Propski,


While I do agree with some of your comments. . .

Tom was relieved of his duties as "head counsel" to the family and was reduced to the status of "special advisor" to the family. I believe that this was one way of Michael distancing himself from all who loved him. That really hurt Tom and was one of the reason's Tom went looking for other work -- the promise Tom made to Mike at the end was I believe made more out of fear than loyalty -- you could see that the tone Tom's promise was half-assed. Tom would have done anything for Mike's father.

Connie admitted she behaved badly -- however I believe (and this is just my theory) she did this because she had not other choice -- it was not out of sisterly love. She just lost her mother -- the only "insurance" she had that Michael would not cut her off. Thus, when Mom died she needed to kiss some ass so that she wouldn't be kicked out. Good ole' Dad didn't have this problem -- his family really loved him. Mike doesn't have that luxury.

I'll give you that he was sitting "inside"

My point is -- Mike somewhere along the line snapped -- losing all who loved him and making him capable of offing his brother.

[Oblong]

I think it was poor writing in III when Connie refers to Fredo drowning. How naive could she be. She was acting in such a way in that movie that she had to know what went on. "Maybe they should fear you!"

Maybe it was just her trying to psyche herself to the point where she wnated to believe he drowned.

[buddy1]

..as a long-time student of the mafia/mob/organized crime history, I was always fascinated about what held these organizations together. It must be pretty scary to reach the upper levels of the mob-you never know if a subordinate is plotting against you, or the "godfather' of the family might be decidine to have YOU whacked! I think Michael got too smart for his own good..he should have moved to las Vegas, bought the hotels, and settled down to a peaceful existance. but no. he has to keep making deals with hyman Roth ("we are bigger than US Steel"), and keeps nominal control of the mob back in NYC. His subordinates are confused, and thus the family falls apart. Something along the same lines hapened to paul Castellano (late don of NYC). He forgot to watch everyone, and an ambitious young hood named John Gotti rose up and whacked him! I wonder what life is like in the successors to the mafia-the mexican, russian, chinese gangs, etc.

[Morbo]

Originally posted by Oblong

I always thought the stare he gave Neri at the funeral was one of regret to Neri, that Neri felt Michael was weak for embracing him. Neri kind of looks away. I dont think Neri would be spooked by Michael's sudden decision to kill Fredo. He already expected it. Remember when he tells him "I don't want anything to happen to him while my mother's alive".

Really? That's not what I thought at all - I always believed it was a private "I'm going to need you to kill him later" stare between Michael and Neri, and Neri got the message, and seemed to look away b/c he couldn't believe Michael was already planning it not even hours after the mother's funeral.

Does anybody else wanna give their take on this? Since it's one of my favorite moments from the series, I'd like to make sure I understood it correctly...

[Oblong]

You probably have the right take. I always fail to 'get it' when it comes to things like this.

What made me think that is the way Neri looks away. I'll look at it again when I get home.

[Guy Propski]

Here's the final Michael/Tom scene dialogue from GF2:

TOM: Why did you ask me if something was wrong when I came in?

MICHAEL: I thought you were goin' to tell me that -- you were going to move your family to Vegas -- and that you'd been offered the vice-presidency of the house and hotels there I thought you were goin' to tell me that.

TOM: I turned them down -- do I have to tell you about ever offer I turn down?

MICHAEL: let's do business.

TOM: Alright -- just consider this Mike -- that's all just consider it. Now ROTH and the Rosato's are on the run -- are they worth it? And are they strong -- is it worth it -- I mean you've won -- do you have to wipe everyone out?

MICHAEL: I don't fell I have to wipe everyone out -- just my enemies -- that's all. You gonna come along with me in these things I have to do -- or what. Because if not you can take your wife, your family, and your mistress -- and move 'em all to Las Vegas.

TOM: Why do you hurt me MICHAEL -- I've always been loyal to you -- I mean what is this.

MICHAEL: So -- you're staying?

TOM: Yes, I'm staying. Now what is it that you want me to do?

There's nothing in there about Tom being demoted. Michael just forces him to clearly state his (Tom's) position. Also, Tom says they came looking for him, not that he looked for a job. As a man in his position, I'm sure Tom received lots of job offers.

Now here's Connie's final speech to Michael in GF2:

CONNIE: MICHAEL please I want to talk to you. MICHAEL I hated you -- for so many years. I think I did things to myself -- to hurt myself -- so you'd know -- .that I could hurt you. You're just being strong for all of us the way Papa was. Now I forgive you -- can't you forgive FREDO -- he's so sweet and helpless without you. You need me MICHAEL -- I want to take care of you now.

Okay, so she was sucking up. But if you wait until GF3, though, she's completely on Michael's side, even going to far as to help him kill one of Michael's enemies.

I think one thing needs to be said--it's always going to be hard to pin down everyone's motivation in the Godfather Saga because of all the double-dealing and plotting. I'm still a bit confused about some of Hyman Roth's plans!

[AMM9132]

Originally posted by astorian
Michael learned in the first movie that his father's enemies were quick to take advantage of any perceived weakness on Don Vito's part. Thus, he was detrmined NEVER to show any sign of weakness. By killing his own brother, Michael sent a loud, clear message to all would-be traitors: if I'd do this to my own brother, imagine what I'd do to YOU.

astorian, I agree 100%

[Papermache Prince]

Originally posted by pldennison

Two different incidents. Sonny goes over to Connie's place and finds her with a black eye and fat lip, then goes and finds Carlo and beats him silly.

The next time, Connie answers the phone call from Carlo's girlfriend, gets in fight with Carlo, and he beats her unmercifully. She calls the house and gets her mother, who gives the phone to Sonny. Sonny leaves, presumably to kill Carlo this time, but Carlo has already sold Sonny out to the Tattaglia family, and they gun him down.

That's why, when Michael visits Carlo after the christening of Connie's son, and has wiped out Tattaglia, Barzini, Moe Greene and everyone else, he tells Carlo, "You have to answer for Santino."

It's a small point, and we've moved to other matters but . . .
Sonny's murder was carefully planned - surely you can't hijack a toll road on the spur of the moment without a high risk of discovery. The call from Carlo's "girlfriend" is too conveniently timed. After all, there's no requirement that Carlo's "real" girlfriend has to be the one who calls. Any woman could have provided the female voice, which provokes the argument, and so on. In fact, if Carlo is momentarily monogamous, he'd be even angrier at the accusation from Connie.

[Guinastasia]

Originally posted by warmgun
Guinastasia, the secret to any good screenplay is conflict. If Mike going bad bothered you, the writers did their job.

Well of course! I still just want to slap the hell out of Kay, after all, part of fighting ignorance means that Mafia Men Do Not Good Husbands Make.

[Guinastasia]

I only saw the first movie, and I read the book. The part that kinda got to me was the killing of Michael's first wife-what was her name-Appolonia? I always thought it was kinda funny, he goes off, marries this girl in Italy, just this innocent peasant girl, and she gets killed...hmmm...was there a point to this part?

[pldennison]

Papermache Prince, true 'nuff. I thought that myself after I posted it.

Originally posted by Guinastasia
I only saw the first movie, and I read the book. The part that kinda got to me was the killing of Michael's first wife-what was her name-Appolonia? I always thought it was kinda funny, he goes off, marries this girl in Italy, just this innocent peasant girl, and she gets killed...hmmm...was there a point to this part?

I haven't read the book, but as far as the movie goes, it showed the extent to which the Corleone enemies were willing to go. If Michael had not come down the stairs and spotted Fabrizio, he would have gotten in the car and been killed himself. He already knew that it was no longer safe in Sicily; this was another demonstration that he could not allow any enemies, real or perceived, to get the upper hand.

[Milossarian]

OK, this question has been thoroughly answered.

I'd just like to point out that my user-name in a few different Internet places that require them is Fishing_With_Fredo.

[HelloKitty]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
I only saw the first movie, and I read the book. The part that kinda got to me was the killing of Michael's first wife-what was her name-Appolonia? I always thought it was kinda funny, he goes off, marries this girl in Italy, just this innocent peasant girl, and she gets killed...hmmm...was there a point to this part?

I have always felt that the part where his wife is killed was where Michael's heart really turns cold. He loved her more than he ever could love Kay(if he even loved her at all), and because of his actions (killing the police chief, etc) she was dead.

When he met Appolonia, I think he envisioned the kind of marriage and family that Vito had, and it was all gone in seconds. It seems to me that when he was in Sicily he sort of fooled himself into a false sense of security and he was jolted back to reality by her death (and his near death). Notice how he never talked about it with anyone back in the states?

To me, this is a major turning point in the series.

[hansel]

No one has mentioned the fact that Michael tells Tom later in GFII that the reason he pushed Tom out of the family business is so he could always trust Tom, so he would always have someone who could protect his family if he needed them to.

[BobT]

In "The Godfather Saga" where parts I and II are shown in chronological order, a scene, deleted from Part II, shows Michael ordering the murder of Fabrizio who is running a pizzeria in the U.S. You then get to see Fabrizio's car blow up.

So Michael obviously had a long memory about what happened in Sicily to Appolonia.

[Stoid]

Originally posted by BobT
It's Tom Hagen. He's German-Irish as he tells Waltz in Part I.

It's Woltz .

[Stoid]

I feel like a clear explanation has been missed here.

My understanding was always that Fredo had set Micheal up for the hit early in the film, without actually knowing they were going to try and kill him. I don't know what else he thought they were going to do, but that isn't detailed.

Somewhere later in the movie, there is a moment, I think it's in Cuba, where Fredo says something while they are watching the sex show that reveals that he had been there before, maybe with Moe Green...something, I can't remember the details of what it was, but it essentially reveals a lie to Micheal. We get a shot of the light dawning in Micheal's face, and that is what prompts him to say "I knew it was you, Fredo". Prior to that moment, he did NOT know it was Fredo.

Can anyone fill in the detail of this? how does Fredo's tongue slip reveal himself to Micheal, and what was the slip of the tongue anyway?

[DPWhite]

Earlier that day Michael introduces Fredo to Roth's people and Fredo pretends it is the first time he has met Johnny Olaf or Hyman Roth. Later at the disgusting sex show (Michael is offended, but he already knows Fredo is a perv) Fredo says that he found this place because Johnny Olaf showed it too him, but that it is too much for the old man (Hyman Roth). Well, Fredo wasn't supposed to have known either before that evening on a personal basis.

[BobT]

It's Johnny Ola. He's Italian, not Norwegian. If he had been Norwegian, the movie would have had a much different spin. I doubt Norwegians wear orange suits however.

Of course, I misspelled Woltz, so I should probably stop correcting people.

However, DPWhite has the story right. The whole Havana episode proves that Fredo, despite what he thinks, isn't very smart.

[Guinastasia]

I thought the whole thing about Fredo was that he was "slow"? And Sonny, even though he was supposed to be the oldest, was too much of a hothead?

[BobT]

Fredo is very "slow" in Part I, but in Part II he actually seems like he has gotten a lot more intelligent. He's not the brightest star in the Corleone constellation, but he's improved from being the bumbler who can't even hold on to his gun while his father is being gunned down.

Moe Green must have been a good influence on him.

[KneadToKnow]

Originally posted by BobT
The whole Havana episode proves that Fredo, despite what he thinks, isn't very smart.

I'll say!

Fredo: How do you say "banana daiquiri"?
Michael: Banana daiquiri.
Fredo: Really?

[waterj2]

Originally posted by DPWhite


Earlier that day Michael introduces Fredo to Roth's people and Fredo pretends it is the first time he has met Johnny Olaf or Hyman Roth. Later at the disgusting sex show (Michael is offended, but he already knows Fredo is a perv) Fredo says that he found this place because Johnny Olaf showed it too him, but that it is too much for the old man (Hyman Roth). Well, Fredo wasn't supposed to have known either before that evening on a personal basis.

The best part of this is how the camera focuses on Michael's face at this point. As soon as Ola's name is mentioned, Michael's eyes immediately shoot towards Fredo, and in a couple seconds, you see Michael put everything together in his head. He's clearly devastated that his own brother would betray him.

I don't understand why Pacino didn't win for Best Actor for that performance. That scene, and the scene in the boathouse at the end, are masterpieces of getting a simple look exactly right.