After reading Cafe Society during my lunch break for the past 7 years, I’ve finally decided to join in on the fun. You guys are so entertaining.
Here’s the question I’ve always wanted to ask (and, lord I hope i didn’t miss a previous thread on it).
In The Godfather: Part II, does Michael bring Frankie Pentangeli’s brother to the Senate hearing as a threat (like he’d kill the brother if Frankie squeals) or to shame Pentangeli (as in the brother is a serious, old school gangster from Sicily who’d never rat and his younger brother better not).
My best friend and I spent many a boozy night watching the Godfathers and arguing this point. I believe the “old school shaming” answer. Nick, who died on Christmas Day 2003 – te salute!, thought it was a threat.
Is there a real answer?
By the way, my kudos to whoever designed this site. It’s so easy to read and use.
Hell, Michael offed his own brother for crossing the family. I don’t think he’d send any less strong of a message to someone else via their brother than “I’ve got him here in my hands now, do what I want or he’s dead. Then you, your children, their children, and your little dog, too”.
Not that the brother himself necessarily understood the danger he was in.
ETA, OTOH: at that point in the movie, Michael wasn’t quite as paranoid insane as he was by the time he had his brother killed. I think Michael himself could have been ambiguous on his own motives.
Threat. Frank Pantangele was originally supposed to be Clemenza. The actor playing Clemenza for GF I wouldn’t sign so they just changed the character. Clemenza would have known for sure that Michael would do ANYTHING. He was the one who killed Michael’s brother-in-law, and saw Vito’s long-time friend Tessio offed in the “settle all family business” massacre in GF I.
I was not sure at first either. Was the look on the brother’s face anger? Shame? Fear?
After a while I decided it sent a very clear message: In a single day Michael could get someone from another continent to sit in the audience of a public Senate hearing, under his complete control. Frankie knew what he had to do. The brother was showing all of the above emotions, as in WTF are you doing, putting me and my family in so much danger.
Frankie later tells Tom (in that great prison scene) about how tough his brother is. He says something like “My brother could have been big here. He could have had his own family.” Which makes me think his brother was a tough Sicilian mobster.
When Kate asks Michael about it, Michael says that the guy wanted to just go home and that “It was between the brothers.” What Michael said and the way he said it just makes me think the brother was a tough no-nonsense dude who had come over to set little bro straight. Of course, Michael and Kate weren’t being straight forward to each other at that point.
Speaking of that, remember when Michael and Kate get in an argument about whether “Something is wrong with Anthony”?
He seemed like such a beat-down kid and that comment made me feel even worse for him. But when we see him in “Godfather III” he’s the talented, well-adjusted, strong, happy opera singer. That felt wrong to me.
I always thought it was a threat. Michael was demonstrating to Frankie that he was putting his entire family in jeopardy, not just in the US but in Italy as well. The brother had no idea what was actually going on.
The brother just doesn’t seem to me to be a mobster, either in dress or demeanor. He looks like a peasant. And his expression seemed to me to be more bewildered than angry or fearful.
The fact that Frankie’s conversation with Tom is all about seeing that his family is taken care of if he commits suicide also indicates that Frankie knew what the deal was if he did not.
I thought in a previous thread someone said that in the book, Frankie Pentangeli had a second family (mistress and children) in Sicily who were under the protection of his brother, and that the implied threat was against them.
Michael wasn’t paranoid or insane. Killing Fredo was rational, he would always be a danger because he was careless, ambitious and stupid. Also Michael wanted revenge. The fallout over the rest of his life makes Michael guilty and sick and vulnerable to Lucasi.
It was both a shame and a threat thing. As long as it worked, they didn’t care which motivated Pentangele.
I’ve always leaned toward the “shame” theory. After Pentangeli’s testimony has ended (and the committee chaotically adjourns), Tom leans over to the brother and says something like “la onore de la famiglia sta posto”–which I would loosely translate as “the family’s honor is intact” (“posto” as a form of “porre,” “to set” or “to establish”).
That line suggests to me that the brother knew what was going on (via Tom’s translating)–or at least knew enough to understand that his family’s honor was on the line, and if Pentangeli gave the “wrong” testimony (i.e., if he told the truth and ratted out Michael), it would bring shame upon the entire Pentangeli family.
Of course, the line between “shame” and “threat” is certainly a fine one–as the source of his family’s shame, Pentangeli’s own life would have been under threat, and presumably any member of a shamed family would be regarded as an infamia by other mob families (to draw a parallel from another mob film, it’s reminiscent of how Tommy justifies shooting Spider in Goodfellas–“his whole family is rats, he’d grow up to be a rat.”)
Still, I tend to doubt that Michael was specifically threatening to have Pentangeli’s brother whacked–only that he wanted to demonstrate to Pentangeli that his family’s reputation was on the line, and that ratting out the godfather would have negative repercussions in general for him and his loved ones (and possibly hinting that those same loved ones might see it as their duty to rub out Frank Pentangeli themselves).
I thought there was no Frankie Pentangeli in the book. The book the Godfather doesn’t include most of the events in II except for the flashback stuff. Unless there’s a sequel I’m not aware of.
You’re right that the character’s not in the book. I did a search and found the earlier thread is here. And here is the earlier post that offered the idea of the implied threat against Pentangeli’s mistress and child in Sicily, based on the Wikipedia article on the character.
It is never explicitly stated, but nobody else would have had access. So it pretty much had to be Fredo. And if Fredo did any thinking at all, he had to know why he was opening the curtains.