Are we supposed to be following Michael as he turns from the all american guy who would laugh at ideas of old world mafia dons, into that very thing?
I ask because I thought that was the weakest part of the series, I never felt like his “downfall” made much sense. Or am I focusing on something silly?
I think it was a major theme, yes. Why do you feel it was weak?
I wanted to get more of a sense how Michael could make the decisions he did, it sometimes seemed inexplicable.
Actually I agree. I don’t recall the book or the films explaining the deep sea change in Michael’s world view. Family loyalty and an understanding of Cosa Nostra go a long way but maybe its a Sicilian culture thing. Once you are in you are in. The die is cast at birth.
I think the book did a much better job. I know, I know, the book is better than the movie thing. But it’s true…it took three films to make it through the book and it missed so many of the great [deeper] parts.
I thought that when Michael blew away those guys in the restaurant, he thought he could still come back from it, but when the car bomb killed Appollonia, he realized he couldn’t.
I also thought that labeling anyone as particularly “good” or “bad” was kind of missing the point. The first time I saw the Corleone cars swoop in to rescue Vito Corleone from the cops in that hospital, I wasn’t sure who I was supposed to be cheering for, but felt that sense of exhilaration anyway.
No, it was Sonny’s death that sealed his fate. Michael couldn’t just walk away from the family, not when his father needed a strong heir apparent. The great irony of the movie is that it was this exact sense of responsibility, loyalty and love for his family - all positive qualities - that made his ascension inevitable. If only he’d been an asshole, he could have left that life behind him.
And when he had his other brother killed out in the boat, he was beyond redemption. The end of the tale, which is really why doing a part 3 was a weird idea.
The movies failed (for me) to convey an appropriate sense of the evil nature of the Corleone family. I grew up among Mafiosi–they were ignorant, selfish, incredibly small-minded and unimaginative bullies and thugs, and the movies would have you believe they were a loving band of would-be poets, philosophers and good family men. Show Michael as a heavy-set creep with a bad toupee and six gigantic rings, with a bad eighth grade education, wearing a garish suit, and see how exotic the Mafia seems.
I think the movie made it quite clear that Michael was going to be the “respectable” member of the family (He is serving in the army in the beginning). Sonny was probably going to inherit the clan.
However, Sonny was too hotheaded (and led to his death). Fredo was too weak. Thus, though the plan was for Michael to leave (organized crime was one way for families to gain respectability for their children, BTW), the pressure was put on Michael from the beginning to be part of the family business. He was reluctant, but when Sonny was killed, he felt he was forced to step up. Once he moved into that, it was a slippery slope to continue downward. It wasn’t any one decision, but a lot of smaller ones that ended up moving him on that path.
Possibly, but I’ve also heard that the old generation - second and third generation Sicilian immigrants, often - did know something about honor. They successfully manipulated the system, worked hand-in-hand with political machines, and often had fingers in numerous legal endeavors, along with political offices and so forth. The post-FBI generation fell down into the outright criminal underclass, since the various mobs were no longer allowed to run things their way, there was more competition, etc.
The theme of the movie is how Michael loses everything he loves - the love of his wife, his family, his sense of honor - in his attempt to save these very things. He “wins” but he loses everything.
I thought the theme of the movie was to not let a good cannoli go to waste.
The whole point of the story was corruption-and its destruction of good people. Michael wants to go straight-he is a Marine Corps officer, decorated, and has nothing to do with his Dad’s business. All of a sudden, he is forced into it…and it destroys him. In the end, the prediction of the old Don Corleone comes true-the durg trade destroys the family.
Michael tries to dissociate himself from the evil “it’s only business”-but it destroys his family, his marriage, and his life.
As long as they weren’t in the Mafia, they did.
This has always been my problem with the Godfather – it glamorized the Mafia – but the fanboys never seem to “get” that.
But is that any different than how the cowboy and knight are glamorized? For me, the man with no name, King Arthurs round table and Don Corleone are as realistic as Luke Skywalker or Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. But for some reason because The Godfather involves a version of the Mafia, it is somehow bad while the others are fun.
Yes, being a criminal and a killer is somehow less ethical than being a knight or a cowboy. Don’t know quite why that is.
“Now who’s being naive, Kay?”
I recall reading a critique a long time ago that said (paraphrasing) there was really no such thing as an “anti-war” war movie. Because no matter how badly one tried to capture the horrors of war, it always ends up glamorizing it through the shear spectacle of combat.
I think it’s the same thing with gangster movies. At the end of the day, people want to be like Michale Corleone, Tony Soprano, Henry Hill, “Ace” Rothstein and “Nucky” Thompson. The all-powerful gangster who does what he wants, when he wants with an army of goons to carry out his bidding.
No one ever thinks they’re Fredo or the Joe Pesci character who gets wacked and tossed in a ditch.