1). Is there a script anywhere that gives us the dialog that was spoken in the italian restaurant between Michael Corleone and Sollozzo before Mike shoots him and the police captain? (I think his name was Sollozzo). I have always wondered what was said. I know it isn’t exactly important to the plot, but it would still be interesting to have that part of the movie translated.
For that matter, there are other parts of the movie that are just in Italian.m is there anywhere all lines of the script are available?
2) when Mike kills the police Captain and Sollozzo, he drops the gun. This has been something I’ve seen in many mobster movies. The hitman always tosses the gun. Why? In the case of Michael Corleone, his finger prints were on the gun. Why drop it in the restaurant? Why not at least take it away from the crime scene and try to get rid of it where it couldn’t be found?
The gun had been taped to avoid prints, if I recall correctly. Plus, as I understand it prints aren’t left on guns as easily as you might think.
They figured the gun couldn’t be traced and wouldn’t have his prints so the only way left for him to be connected to it is if he’s stopped with it on him. So just drop it right there.
Whenever I see or hear about this scene I remember the reference to it in the Sopranos, where Tony drops the staple gun in the street.
I don’t speak Italian, but it seemed that Sollozzo was telling Mike that he respected Don Corleone like his own father, but that his old-fashioned way of thinking was bad for business.
the gun’s trigger had been taped to prevent leaving prints. Mike dropped the gun because the Family could probably fix anything (even eyewitnesses) short of Mike actually being arrested in possession of the gun.
In the novel., Clemenza walks Michael through what he needs to do when he shoots Sollozzo and the police captain prior to the act. He instructs Mike to come out of the bathroom blazing away and then dropping the gun. Michael notes however that a “customer” in the restaurant is watching him surreptitiously and tenses as he goes to the restroom. He believes that this person is a plant and will kill him if he comes out with a weapon in his hand.
Michael comes out sits down briefly before drawing the gun and shooting both men. The customer freezes, but slowly places his empty hands on the table signaling that he won’t interfere with Michael leaving. When he does leave, as instructed by Clemenza he drops the gun floor so that if he is stopped for some reason no gun will be found on his person.
Before paraffin wax tests,DNA testing and GSR testing on clothing were common, the only way that the police could often connect a killer to a murder would either be witnesses, a confession or finding the criminal in possession of the weapon used. Since the handle and the butt were taped, and Tessio (the second Corleone caporegime) was waiting outside the restaurant to both take Michael away from the scene as well as to be a backup gunman in case of problems, there was no reason for Michael to have left the restaurant with the gun.
Leaving the gun would prevent the chances of Coreleone being caught with it in his possession if he was stopped afterward.
You make a good point about the tests that were possible when this killing was supposed to have taken place. I didn’t notice any tape on the gun, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t any. However, it does make sense that if prints weren’t an issue, then the best thing would be for him not to have the gun on him immediately after committing the crime. If they couldn’t put the gun in his hand, they would have trouble getting a conviction. I don’t know what forensic tests were used then or what was deemed reliable evidence.
If I remember correctly, when Bobby was shot, the gunman dripped the gun in the train store. And there were a couple of other killings where the gunman dropped the gun right after killing the target. So I thought this was just an organized crime thing.
So, in today’s world of DNA testing, and all other tests that exist to tie a gun to a bullet and a shooter… even if prints were not recoverable on the weapon, wouldn’t it be better with today’s forensics tests to keep the gun and toss it down a storm drain, or toss it in a river or lake or something? Isn’t it more difficult to get a conviction on someone if you cannot find the murder weapon?
I understand the idea that if you are caught holding the gun, that’s a bad thing. But leaving the gun provides investigators with the murder weapon. Is it safe ti assume that a gun used in an OC slaying would never be traceable to the shooter under any circumstances, so leaving the gun is really no help to the investigators?
He may have modified the barrel or even widened the gap between the barrel and the cylinders. The barrel may have been shortened and the muzzle could have been modified.
He could have also “hotloaded” the rounds. AS it was a “throwaway” weapon, long term wear and tear wouldn’t have been a concern.
Tying a specific weapon to a crime doesn’t help solve the crime. Unless, (A) the weapon’s found in the possession of a likely suspect (indeed, sometimes this is all it takes to nail someone, even if they’re innocent), or (B) forensics, i.e. prints and/or powder burns, establish that the suspect was indeed the person who fired the weapon.
Also (at least in movies & TV, but generally true IRL as well) the cops are often on the mafia’s payroll, or have other dis-incentives to properly solve a gangland murder.
From what I read a while back, meaning no cite, a dropped weapon was a message to the police that it was a mob hit. Even if there were people around there would be no witnesses. If the shooter does not have the weapon then it would be hard to prove what happened.
This was probably off of some show going on during a Godfather marathon so take it with a bag of salt.
I know the scene you are talking about. It isn’t any of the scenes I’ve mentioned. The stapler scene is in either season 1 or 2, when Tony staples a piece of paper to Junior’s boy, Mikey P. The scenes I am referring to involve actual guns.
And I don’t think it is possible to spoil anything on a show that has been off the air for what, 5 years now?
I guess it is foolish to think that someone doing an OC hit would use a gun that would be traceable to them or anyone else connected. Dropping it, assuming no prints were left, would be the best option, now that I’ve thought a bit about it.
Another thing worth remembering is that Mario Puzo made up a lot of his stuff. He was a storyteller and he’d sometimes add things just because he though they’d sound cool. But people got the mistaken idea Puzo was an expert in the Mafia and all his details were accurate.
Are you saying that Puzo made up this behavior, which has been taken as gospel by the movie-going public and Hollywood? So, whenever a mafia hit is captured on screen in the time after The Godfather, they repeat this act, but the behavior has no factual elements?
Or are you just throwing that out there as a possibility?
So then you did see the whole thing. So your spoiler claim was bogus!
I think you misinterpreted my initial reply, and when I explained it, you thought i was still referring to the stapler scene. So, we have everything straightened out, right?
Tony shot Mikey Pl full of staples. Bobby died looking at trains in the hobby shop. The guy that shot Bobby dropped his gun, just like in the Godfather.
Mikey P was shot in the woods, chased down by Paulie and Christ-a-fa.
Press the muzzle into a pillow or drape a table cloth over weapon. Anything to absorb the flash and noise. Short barrels pistols might not produce enough velocity to create a sonic boom.
Shooting firearms “left loud” indoors can produce a decibel level that will cause permanent hearing loss. The report also sounds louder to anyone standing in front of the weapon than it will to the shooter but the echo(s) will affect everyone in the room.
In terms of question 1 (them speaking Italian) I’ve seen a ‘making of’ special which showed an early cut of that scene and in it, after Michael comes out of the bathroom and sits back down, Sollozzo doesn’t speak Italian, he says his lines in English as they ever so slowly zoom in on Pacino. IOW, I think Coppola made the decision for it to be Italian in editing. I can’t say if they were the exact same words, but mostly yeah. He’s not saying anything particularly important (which is why there aren’t any subtitles)…
I’m offering it as a possibility. I’m not an expert of the Mafia so I can’t say for a fact how they carried out hit jobs in the fifties. But Puzo wasn’t an expert either. Ironically, Puzo had written books about subjects he knew: The Fortunate Pilgrim was about the Italian immigrant community in New York City and The Dark Arena was about the post-war occupation of Germany. But his publisher asked for a book about the Mafia, so Puzo wrote one even though his only knowledge of the subject came from reading the newspaper.
