- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: .
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:18 pm to Ace Midnight
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:18 pm to Ace Midnight
Part III would have been fine without the whole Vincent/Mary incest shite.
Part III should have been all about Michael coming to terms with all the wrong he did to his own family and attempting to fix things.
Not cousin fricking and a new enemy from out of nowhere
Part III should have been all about Michael coming to terms with all the wrong he did to his own family and attempting to fix things.
Not cousin fricking and a new enemy from out of nowhere
1
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:20 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
Part III would have been fine without the whole Vincent/Mary incest shite.
"Apart from that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"
Terrible movie is terrible. Pacino did everything a human being could do to save the film - but it wasn't salvageable.
This post was edited on 10/9/15 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:25 pm to Ace Midnight
What pisses me off the most about that movie is when in the hell did Connie get the stroke to start making decisions about the family business? Especially after spending the majority of her life removed from it?
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:28 pm to Ace Midnight
Let's not derail here. The subject is Michael killing Fredo. For Michael's character arc this had to happen. The hypothetical is should he have done it and what would you have done? I got called weak for saying I would have banished him to Sicily to live out his days. Fredo was a threat no more. The question I ask myself is what would have Don Vito done? No way would he have had his own brother killed. He most likely would have handled it in the same manner I proposed.
Don Vito would be very ashamed of what Michael had become.
Don Vito would be very ashamed of what Michael had become.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:34 pm to SoDakHawk
quote:
Don Vito would be very ashamed of what Michael had become.
Same Don Vito that got shot up while Fredo fumbled around like a retard and then cried like a bitch as the shooters fled and same said Don Vito is on the ground bleeding out?
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:34 pm to SoDakHawk
quote:
I got called weak for saying I would have banished him to Sicily to live out his days. Fredo was a threat no more.
Until some rebel faction wants to hang their hat on THAT Corleone. Just like with a royal heir, dead men are no longer a threat (although in some cases a martyr is powerful in death) - Michael did the tough, but right thing. Kill Fredo - he was never going to be happy "being taken care of" and was too useless and weak himself to actually run anything. There was no reward to the risk proposition of keeping him alive.
quote:
No way would he have had his own brother killed. He most likely would have handled it in the same manner I proposed.
Maybe. If he truly learned from the Sonny situation, though, he might have listened to counsel suggesting Fredo be eliminated. I agree the old man was probably softer - at that point - than Michael was at the time he cleaned house. However, if you accept De Niro's interpretation of Vito's character in Godfather II, young Vito would have killed Fredo without thinking. THAT was a freakin' gangster from the old school.
quote:
Don Vito would be very ashamed of what Michael had become.
Michael became the most like Vito. He was not weak like Fredo, nor ruled by his passions like Sonny - he was exactly the kind of Don that Vito was.
This post was edited on 10/9/15 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:39 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
There was no reward to the risk proposition of keeping him alive.
Ummm...well there's not killing a family member and have it frick with your mind for 20 years.
If the reward you speak of is no longer having to worry about your brother, then he still could have sent him away and accomplished the same thing. Especially if Fredo is so dumb and stupid as the movie portrayed him to be.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:43 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
Ummm...well there's not killing a family member and have it frick with your mind for 20 years.
True - but again, we're operating with the benefit of hindsight on that (and assuming you even accept Godfather III as canon).
quote:
If the reward you speak of is no longer having to worry about your brother, then he still could have sent him away and accomplished the same thing. Especially if Fredo is so dumb and stupid as the movie portrayed him to be.
Well, he's exactly dumb and stupid enough to get involved with multiple betrayals of the family, in deed, word and action. Therefore, he's dumb enough to do it again.
Soldiers come home from the war feeling bad about the people they killed. Some are messed up forever about it - doesn't mean some or all of those folks didn't need killing. That's all I'm saying.
(I felt bad for Fredo. I agreed with the decision. Same thing with Tessio.)
This post was edited on 10/9/15 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:43 pm to Ace Midnight
You have to establish that Fredo was a credible threat for your reasoning to hold water. He wasn't. He was too weak to be a threat. No one besides Michael who was alive even knew about the betrayal.
And you contradict your argument with this admission. Fredo would have been no threat living out his days in Sicily. He would have just been some powerless schmuck. No one is going to follow him. He isn't going to build up some empire across the ocean.
You're right about Michael not being weak like Fredo or ruled by passion like Sonny. Michael was methodical, sterile, emotionless, inhuman and totally immoral. He was worse than both.
quote:
He was not weak like Fredo,
And you contradict your argument with this admission. Fredo would have been no threat living out his days in Sicily. He would have just been some powerless schmuck. No one is going to follow him. He isn't going to build up some empire across the ocean.
You're right about Michael not being weak like Fredo or ruled by passion like Sonny. Michael was methodical, sterile, emotionless, inhuman and totally immoral. He was worse than both.
This post was edited on 10/9/15 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:45 pm to Peazey
quote:
Michael was methodical, sterile, emotionless, inhuman and totally immoral. He was worse than both.
Fair enough - ergo, the perfect Don.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:45 pm to Ace Midnight
No, no, no. Vito and Michael were not exactly the same. Vito led the family and gained power in order to provide for and protect the family. Michael led the family in a quest for power.
Michael was misguided and his mistaken quest for power ended up costing him what he thought he was doing it for, his family.
Vito never would have crossed the line of killing a family member.
Michael was misguided and his mistaken quest for power ended up costing him what he thought he was doing it for, his family.
Vito never would have crossed the line of killing a family member.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:49 pm to SoDakHawk
quote:
Michael was misguided and his mistaken quest for power ended up costing him what he thought he was doing it for, his family.
Michael didn't even want to be in charge. He was supposed to be the legitimate face of the family. He got pulled in after the old man was shot.
Hate the game, not the playa. The fact the family didn't understand/respect the choices he made was on them, not Michael. Of course he wasn't perfect, he was a mafia don. I fear some of you may have missed the point. At the end, all there is to it is a power play. You can pretend or sugarcoat why you do it, but much of it is self-delusion with these cats.
Like The Sopranos, The Shield and Breaking Bad - at the end of the day, Tony, Vic and Walt were doing it because they liked the feeling of power - they just told themselves they were doing it for their family.
Just like Vito, Sonny and Michael.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:54 pm to SoDakHawk
quote:
Vito never would have crossed the line of killing a family member.
Exactly. Michael lost track of what all of this was supposed to be about.
I guess you could say the central point of the story is that ultimately the purported family values of the mafia and its actual nature are irreconcilable. The Dons keep trying to push for legitimacy, but you can't get something pure from corruption.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:55 pm to SoDakHawk
I think he had to get rid of him. He put the entire family at risk. We don't all of the neices, nephews and cousins under the Corleone roof (Sonny and Connie both had more than a couple of kids). Plus all the illegitimate kids and extended family. Part 3 is flawed in that Michael would have remarried and had a half dozen more. He is a true old school Catholic.
It was necessary though. Michael had to be in charge and control. Its like that story in the Usual Suspects. He had to show his enemies and potential enemies what real power was.
It was necessary though. Michael had to be in charge and control. Its like that story in the Usual Suspects. He had to show his enemies and potential enemies what real power was.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:57 pm to SoDakHawk
Vito would never have signed off on Fredo's killing, I agree, but neither is he above killing purely for vengeance. His return to Sicily to kill the elderly Don Ciccio makes that pretty clear.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 2:57 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Hate the game, not the playa.
They were willing participants in the game that ultimately destroyed them. It was their poor choices and character that created this situation.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 3:08 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Michael didn't even want to be in charge. He was supposed to be the legitimate face of the family. He got pulled in after the old man was shot.
Another mistake here. Even though Vito got shot he still didn't want that life for Michael. In the hospital, Michael tells Vito "I'm with you now." It caused Vito to tear up, not because he was touched by Michael being there for him, it was because it was at that point that Michael chose the gangster lifestyle, a lifestyle Vito never wanted for him and didn't want him to choose.
It was Michael's first mistake. He could have remained outside the family business and stayed on the course his father set for him, a Senator or Governor who held all the puppet strings, but Michael chose to enter the gangster life because he wante drevenge for his father and he wanted revenge for the police captain disrespecting him by breaking his jaw. All the Corleone's were quick to temper and could make rash decisions. This was Michaels' bad decision, even though he comes across as cool and calculating.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 3:15 pm to SoDakHawk
quote:
He could have remained outside the family business and stayed on the course his father set for him,
And what about when Sonny was killed? Let Fredo take over?
Posted on 10/9/15 at 3:19 pm to DelU249
Yes, but not until Mom died.
Posted on 10/9/15 at 3:21 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
And what about when Sonny was killed? Let Fredo take over?
At the moment that Michael made the choice Sonny was still alive.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News