re: Biggest plot hole in Godfather II, and probably the whole trilogy

I didn't realize johnny ola was jr soprano

quote:

---

you don't say?

---

I do, and it was in response to your statement:

quote:

---

Tom didnt do anything, he didn't kill him or give him a weapon, they had a vague conversation where Frankie is the one that mentions the Roman plotters would kill themselves.

---

From that, it sure sounded like you didn't understand their conversation or the purpose of Tom's visit at all.

Instead of plot holes. This thread should turn into a godfather trivia thread. For example I found this one on one of the trivia sites:

"According to the script, the movie's last shot in the film centering on Michael as he gazes at the lake occurs in 1968. That accounts for Al Pacino's additional wrinkles and slightly receded and graying hairline. It was actually the concluding aspect of a scene with his son, Anthony, who declares he will not follow in his father's footsteps. Anthony was portrayed by an actor about 18 years old; the scene was half filmed, but Francis Ford Coppola lost the light before wrapping for the day and was unable to return to complete the scene. "

quote:

---

From that, it sure sounded like you didn't understand their conversation or the purpose of Tom's visit at all

---

Context is your friend, I was responding to someone else and answering this entirely illogical (btw that's a reference to your screne name as Mr Spock in Star Trek was known for being logical) premise that it was a plot hole for the FBI to allow Tom to visit Frank after Frank reneged on his deal to testify against Michael. While the intent of the convo is clear, especially since the audience has already seen the scene where Michael, Tom, Al Neri and Rocco discuss taking out Michael's enemies, it was vague and Tom didn't do anything overt so no one could prove he did anything.

quote:

---

Context is your friend, I was responding to someone else and answering this entirely illogical (btw that's a reference to your screne name as Mr Spock in Star Trek was known for being logical) premise that it was a plot hole for the FBI to allow Tom to visit Frank after Frank reneged on his deal to testify against Michael. While the intent of the convo is clear, especially since the audience has already seen the scene where Michael, Tom, Al Neri and Rocco discuss taking out Michael's enemies, it was vague and Tom didn't do anything overt so no one could prove he did anything.

---

You're mixing up the content of the conversation with the FBI approving the visit. It was pretty outlandish for the FBI to allow Michael's attorney to speak privately with their star witness he had just intimidated in open court, resulting in Pentagelli recanting and blowing the govt's case out of the water. I guess it's somewhat believable on the basis of incompetence, indifference, and/or corruption. For the content of their conversation to be a plot hole, the FBI would have needed to have taped it and failed to put Frankie on suicide watch, as the meaning would have been crystal clear to the people who had gotten to know the mob and its tactics, and not just, we, the audience, not to mention, they had just lost their star witness's testimony to it. We weren't shown that, so you have to chalk it up to incompetence, indifference, and/or corruption again.

As for what Tom said to Frankie, of course he wasn't going to directly say "kill yourself or else", but what he did say came damn close and was confirmed by Frankie's response. It would have been totally out of character for Tom to have said or done something stupid and blatantly incriminating, so the fact that he did not is not particularly notable. I guess that's why I found your post confusing and replied as I did, especially since you made it out to be all Frankie's idea during a "vague conversation" and described Tom as a plain old "visitor".

Be sure to check out the Sicilian Messenger Boy in Boardwalk Empire, too.