I think at this point in his life, Michael doesn’t trust anyone because he’s been betrayed by everyone. From his own brother to multiple capos in his family, to his own wife. He’s pushing back on Tom because he’s irritated by the insistent plotting against him and even Tom’s slight reluctance to kill Roth triggers a question in Michaels mind if Tom is now trying to make a move. He’s distrustful, fed up, and testing Tom to make sure he still with him.
I agree with this assessment. And Michael and Tom resorting to Itallian to confirm the loyalty and trust each has for one another is vey powerful. They are not blood brothers, but their bond runs even deeper than blood.
Agreed and may even have been attempting to illicit a response from Tom to reveal information he was holding back. He kind of did this with Fredo where his older brother reveals the reason for his betrayal to Michael and cements the decision to have him killed rather than exiled.
Sometimes it makes you wonder how much Michael is suffering from PTSD from his experiences from the war and watching Apollonia blown up in front of him.
I think we can all agree, that losing a loved one is more than devastating... It probably did lend to his coldness, but I still think it was always in Michael. He was in the navy, which would ultimately, made him more disciplined. Look at the last scene of G2... They all greet Vito, and Michael is at the table alone. He was just much more different, than the rest of his family
I always felt Tom was the best reflection of Vito he literally took all of his attributes and personality, Mike had the cunning, Sonny had Vito's inner rage he never let loose and Fredo had his resemblance
I never considered that Tom was more like Vito then Michael was. Tom, like Silvio Dante was to Tony Soprano, was really Michael's most trustworthy ally. Good observations! Another great video CineRanter!
Not sure why you think Michael is acting "un-Vito" like by looking to have Roth killed. It was a young Vito Corleone who traveled to Sicily with his family to ensure Don Ciccio would not die a peaceful death.
@@persephonekajira7269 Yes, but the circumstances were completely different. Vito had three adult sons when the war started as well as Tom serving or with the capability to serve in the family business making each of them targets. This provided a motivation for Vito to seek a truce. Vito was also in declining health and even admitted to Michael that the family was "weak". A position of weakness is not sustainable in that line of work. Michael came into the family business from a position of weakness both from the family perspective as well as his own personal leadership which was perceived as based on nothing more than nepotism. It gets somewhat tiring to hear the mantra about how if only Michael had been more like his father he would have been more successful running the crime family he inherited. The reality is more likely that he was put in an impossible situation and navigated through it much better than he is credited for doing. I also believe that the point that Coppola tries to make in the films is that all dynasties follow a pattern similar to what is seen in the Godfather. You can see this play out rather well if you study Roman history as I am sure Coppola would have done at some point in his life.
Watching the last half oh the Godfather 2 is heartbreaking. You know it's Michael winning at the cost of everything. Veto would have never gone this far. That last scene of Michael looking off in the distance shows you everything you need to know. I'd like to imagine that scene takes place in the late 70s
Prob takes place in the mid to late 60’s. He’s still relatively young at that point tho his hair has started to grey. Reason being- Godfather 3 takes place in the late 70’s and there’s even a scene at the end of that movie which shows how much he’s progressed in age. That’s always what I’ve believed at least. You could be right tho because Coppola never had any intention of making a third film so the end scene with Mike alone in 2 could be near the end of his life.
@@tubularbill Yes, II is from 1958-1960 and 1901-around 1925. The first movie covers 1945 to 1955. I always figured the last scene in II takes place sometime in the late 60s. Michael is grayer, but his hair is still short, which tells me it's sometime in the 60s.
The scene was deleted but Tom Hagen was dating Sonny's widow Sandra. When Michael tells him that he can pack his wife, his kids and "his mistress" and move, he is referring to Sandra. This relationship didn't go down well with Michael. In G1, when Don Vito is talking with Johnny Fontane, Sonny enters the room. Vito looks at him turns back and says "a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man." Michael probably had this in mind when he references Tom's mistress. Additionally, he may have had some animosity toward Hagan, believing he didn't have the mindset for criminal activities. Of course, we see a scene played out with Sonny and Tom where Sonny stated that he wasn't a good wartime consigliere. It's such a complex relationship. Thinking of the scene where Michael questions some competing job offers that Tom received (without telling him) demonstrates that Michael had suspicions about Tom's loyalty (going so far as to ask him for his loyalty).
Also remember that Tom was the acting Don while Michael is away. We see Tom insisting/ forcing Kay to stay within the compound, and yet it was during this time that Kay had an abortion (!)
@@lanicoya415 Kind of unfortunate where some things from the book are incorporated into the film without any reference for the viewer because of deleted scenes (not sure that happened here but seems quite possible).
Something I have only heard discussed in one other analysis: Tom was in complete control of family affairs while Michael was away. It was during this time that Kay had her abortion, and this is one of the worst things to happen to Michael. He would have been suspicious about this happening under Tom's watch, whether Tom allowed it to happen, or was tricked by Kay.
@@bigdaddytrips6197 That would have made perfect sense. Would also explain why Tom told her about Michael killing Carlo at the end of the book. Tom at that point was way too close to Kay. Why else would he risk his life telling Kay her husband's business.
I can't help but think how incredible G3 could have been if Michael and Tom had a showdown, with Connie playing the grey eminence (something hinted at in the actual film). Just think about it. All of Don Vito's strengths and weaknesses split among the last three siblings, and their own also.
Tom was a lawyer..an "officer of the court". Because of this , Tom could be made to testify under oath. Michael is protecting Tom by keeping him out of certain deals. This repudiation was to signal to traitors that Tom wasn't a guy who could spill secrets. I see Michael as realizing Tom was an asset that was best kept free of certain things.
@@judywright4241 True but him being an officer of the court is most likely the only reason why Sollozzo didn't off him. Offing Tom would have been the equivalent of offing Captain McCluskey. It would cause way too much chaos and the cops would be on all the families like white on rice.
@@PokemonTrainerVince not seeing how murdering a lawyer equates to a police captain. I am pretty sure that killing a police captain is going to bring a lot more heat from LE and media than killing a mob lawyer.
@@dondajulah4168 Still would have brought too much unnecessary trouble. There is a reason why Sollozzo let Tom go. Barzini didn't want to start another war over the killing of a mob lawyer.
@@PokemonTrainerVince I think Solozzo laid out his primary reason for not hurting Tom in the movie. He was the guy that would prevent Sonny from acting impulsively against him.
Michael has become so cold and calloused at this point because he's been screwed up and betrayed by everyone close to him so as a result, he trusts no one. Not even his loyal Consigliere. You bring up excellent points that make total sense to Michael's resentment and lack of trust for Tom. Once again, great analysis.
I seem to remember a part at the end of the novel where Tom told Kay everything and warned her not to tell Michael because he would have him killed. Kay couldn’t believe he would do that and Tom told her the only people Michael wouldn’t hurt were Kay and their children. Read it a long time ago though.
It’s also a deleted scene in part 2. Kay escapes from the compound and Tom goes to bring her back and they have that exact conversation. He tells that Kay is the only person in the world Michael would never harm. A lot of fans wanted Michael to kill Kay after the abortion reveal but as a book reader that thought never even occurred & those who wanted him to kill her never understood Michael or the movie. This is important because the average Godfather fan falsely believes that Michael never truly loved Kay and that she was disposable. This also explains why Michael is cold towards Tom after the hearings. Michael calls the compound from Cuba to speak to Tom but he’s out of the state to bring Kay back. Michael knows that Tom’s failure to keep Kay within the compound allowed her to go and get the abortion done. So he partly blames him for it. Plus, Tom is having an affair with Sandra, the wife of Sonny and Michael knows about it. He hates it because Michael has a soft spot for Tom’s wife Theresa in the book and in the movie(deleted scenes). He also disapproves of extra marital affairs in general and it’s also disrespectful to Sonny. I hate that they deleted so many scenes.
I always considered that scene as if they’re subliminally talking about killing Fredo and Tom being dead set against it. It never made sense to me that Tom was so much against killing Roth knowing full well what Roth was capable of. Everyone in that room knew what was going to happen to Fredo but nobody could’ve questioned the boss, but Tom tries his best to reason with Michael but to no avail. The giveaway in my opinion is when Tom ask Michael do you wanna wipe out EVERYONE, basically saying kill Roth and anyone else but let Fredo go. I might be wrong but it’s a very effective method of storytelling and scriptwriting.
I think you're right. I think the subtext is also that Michael has been betrayed by one brother and he's implying to the other that he had better not cross him unless he wants to end up like Fredo, especially since Tom is not related by blood. People sometimes cite this scene as evidence for potential conflict between Michael and Tom that would have been resolved in The Godfather part 3 if Robert Duvall had been in it.
I think this is the best analysis of the characters and their motivations you've done so far. Of course its always tricky to put real reasons and emotions to fictional characters. Well done.
Francis Ford Coppola has said in interviews that Godfather Part 2 was about Michael's devolution as a person and he was unredeemable by the end. Michael was just destroying another relation, this time Tom. That's one of the reasons Coppola didn't want to do a Part 3, Michael had destroyed himself by the end of Part 2 and there was nowhere to take that character.
While commenting second godfather Coppola said. " everything he did michael did for his family and in the end he destroyed his family ". Ending of the godfather 2 Coppola commented with words " He became puppet to his father and ruined himself ". He didn't say he didn't want to do godfather 3 He said that he thought it wouldn't happen " this was drama and jn the end men ruined himself ". Once they offered him chance to do third one he said it was his greatest desire to do it the way he ended up doing it. In fact he gave ultimatum to the studio " either I do it this way or I won't do it at all". Understandable .....bc michael at the end of godfather 2 was michael from godfather 3. At the end of GF 2 michael got diabetes stopped smoking drinking killing dressing like mafia aged over night and never took the ring of his finger.
There's the director's, vision, and the audiences interpretation. I don't see as Michael as broken, or the villain in Godfather 2. His family are the culprits. He never wanted any part of the life, yet his hand was forced. Neither of his older brothers could protect the family long enough for his father to fully heal, or protect him from an assassination attempt, that killed his wife instead. Fredo betrayed him, Sonny's temper made him an easy target, and his father made him the head of the family, when the Corleones were most vulnerable. He went from fighting overseas to fighting at home. What I saw, in the flashback at the dinner table was completely different. Sonny introduced his sister to the man who would abuse her, and set him up to be murdered. One of the men who'd betray the family was also a welcome dinner guest. And unbeknownst to anyone, Michael dropped out of college and joined the Marines. One by one they leave the table, until Michael is all alone. The irony is that courtesy of his family, Michael would be left the fight a war alone. Vito would be in no position to judge Michael, as he's directly responsible for Michael's involvement. He didn't betray his family his family betrayed him.
Tom was trusted w kay and children as well. Kay had the abortion while under Toms watch . Wonder if Michael also holds this against Tom as he did w Sonny’s death?
When Michael approached Roth's quaint little home, he was anxiously flexing his fingers anticipating a possible ambush or trap. He knew that Roth was a great threat to him.
I believe Michael blamed Tom for Kay’s abortion. While Michael was gone it was Tom’s responsibility to protect the future of the family i.e. Kay’s unborn child
Absolutely right! This is how I have always seen this scene, and although the other reasons may all have merit, I think the abortion was the number 1 reason Michael had resentment toward Tom.
The Kay situation is solely on Michael's hands. He made the silly decision to marry a squeaky clean American white woman instead of an Italian woman. Even if she wasn't Italian, he should've got a woman who at least respected the streets.
It’s not really “bizarrely” that Michael has turned on Tom-Tom had just openly questioned Michael’s intentions in front of Al and Rocco..and as we should know by now, to question Michael’s decisions in any way shape or form is to “take sides against the family”. Michael’s immediate questioning of Tom’s loyalty should have been expected. Also, it’s a sign of how good the writing in this scene is how Michael responds to Tom’s questioning is first basic and then gradually more direct and specific with a sense of gathering ire; it’s beautifully written!
But where Fredo was completely out of line questioning Michael's authority in front of a hostile party (Moe Green), Tom was acting entirely appropriately in questioning Michael in front of the most trusted inner circle. I do agree with your main point that Michael was displaying reactive emotion in his response to Tom, but it was much less appropriate here than earlier with Fredo.
But Tom, unlike Fredo, was consiliere. His job was to advise Micheal, and even give him an opposite opinion, if just to give an out if need be. It's just in that moment, Micheal was not in the mood to be contradicted. Choosing to kill your own brother would do that to you. Having the other one you consider a brother question you then, makes you really wonder if he's loyal or just trying to manipulate you into.. another trap.
Agreed, but like the other commenter says, Toms duty was to provide counsel and practical solutions to the Family’s issues. He was not out of place or out of his position in doing so.
When you have the likes of Al and Rocco sitting in Michael’s company, his thinking is he has to be tough on Tom so he can’t give off any signs of weakness as boss
I thought the “history has taught us..” thing was in reference of killing the police captain in Godfather 1. Tom said you couldn’t do that and Michael proved you could.
The people in that room at the time all thought the same, it’s only until Michael points out he is a dirty cop and that they can use there contacts in the papers to alter peoples perspective.
Michael had certainly lost the humanity we'd earlier seen (notably in the first movie) by this point.. Tom was really just another one who deserved better on the receiving end of that cold, hard fact.. And Michael wouldn't even be looking to get his humanity back until some future point way after what we see in the second film... And only after that would it lead him into becoming the redemption seeking older, wiser, genuine protective family man again we see in the third film.. That greatly coveted redemption, of course, being the wishful goal he, ultimately, never gets (nor was likely ever going to get, all things considered).. Tom deserved better, Kay and the kids deserved better, poor, weak Fredo perhaps especially deserved better.. FAR better.. "Michael, why do you hurt me?".. Because it's who the man became, and he wasn't ever coming back from that even when he later desperately tried so hard to.
What I find most interesting is the fact of how old these movies are and believe me all three are in my phone. The fact they are still being analyzed indicates just how powerful these movies really are. I have lost count how many times I’ve watched them and still catch something I missed before.
When Sonny brought Tom home when they were little, Michael resented the interloper Tom-especially when Vito adopted Tom. Michael was the runt of the litter (among the boys), and he felt that the attention from his father that should rightly have been his, was instead transferred to Tom the outsider. This is why Michael joined the military-to carve out his own destiny, as there were too many big brothers in the family business and there’d be no piece of the pie left for Michael. This childhood resentment and trauma is why Michael repeatedly treated Tom shabbily.
I've alqays interpreted the insult to Tom as Michael needing Tom to affirm his loyalty because they were about to kill Fredo. TOM: What is it you need me to do? Michael: Imma off our bro when he goes fishing. That cool with you? Tom: Oh hell naw. Michael: Well you just said you were staying, so too late now!
Nope. In the final chapter of the book and in a deleted scene in GF2, Tom tells Kay that she’s the only person in the world that Michael would never harm, let alone kill, plus, contrary to popular belief, Michael truly loved Kay and never even took off his wedding ring after her betrayal. He knew that he was being unfair to her even if he didn’t acknowledge it.
Would Vito have advocated letting Roth die of natural causes? I think his scene with Don Ciccio reveals the answer. Ciccio looks like he has days to live, it's a miracle he doesn't drop dead from the exertion of lifting up a can of olive oil. Vito did not have to take the incredibly risky move of killing him in his own villa, surrounded by shotgun wielding guards, but that's what had to be done. I think the way the kill Roth is crazy, surely there would be 100 ways to do it without it being a suicide mission, but is there any doubt that Michael, a man who shot a cop in the head to assassinator Sollozzo, would pay any price to end Roth's life?
It was explained by another channel or even this channel that Rocco "volunteered" to do this suicide mission as compensation for his failure to protect Michael. He was head of security in the compound.
@@Therock007dmx because Rocco knew he was supposed to die. Punishment for betraying Michael at the compound. No one else there that night could have slit the throats of the two hit men from New York, least of all Fredo.
People often lash out at those closest to them, as can bee seen in this relationship. After all, Tom is the last remaining 'brother' to Michael; one of the last links to his father as you said yourself.
Being an orphan, Vito really valued his family. Also Vito knew how to keep his business and life separate.Michael is messed up from ww2 and a little spoiled, he loves his family but is controlling and smothering.
I think your last point is the best, that Michael in front of Rocco and Neri wanted a commitment from Tom and this was the only way to do it. Also, the connection to the Don was interesting and true, Tom is the last connection to the Don.
09:45...talk about burying the lead 🤯 I don't I've ever heard that before. Every time i think i already knew everything about GF1 & 2, you always got some new info
Oddly, I always saw this move as just a smart way to get Tom out of the dirty side of things and send him forward into the "legit" side of the business, to which he's actually more suited, and in which, he's actually more useful.
One thing I always wonder is if mike told Tom he was going to kill fredo ? Did he consult with Tom about whether he should kill fredo ? If he did tell or consult with him I wonder if Tom was against it or for it ?
@M&FS Tom was too familiar with Sonny and Michael. He saw them more as peers and didn't give them the full respect as dons, like he gave their father. His tone was at times condescending and his pitch very loud for a lieutenant to have towards a general. He never acted or spoke that way with Don Vito. Fredo was the same way with Micheal. He questioned him in Vegas in front of Moe Green. If Tom was considering leaving, it was more because he didn't respect Micheal's leadership. If he feared he would get killed, it's because he probably feared his own desire to be tempted toward betrayal, since his respect for Micheal as don was never near where it should've been. That's essentially what got Fredo killed. He made no mistake. He made a decision that was borne out of jealousy and resentment. Tom was more than likely on that same path.
I don’t see Michael telling Tom about his intentions towards Fredo but in the book Tom had a great speech to Kay about routing out treachery because it endangers everyone else.
Tom was their peer though even if nor Sicilian. He's their Brother even if he was taken not born into the family . He and Sonny were the closest of the brothers, they had a very special relationship so sometimes he talks to them as a brother because he's not just the Consigniliere but a member of the family.
I think I'm convinced by all of that to the point that your two main interpretations actually fit together- both sets of ideas are true. I might only add: While it is true that Tom represents in selected ways the ghost of Vito's regime, he like all the characters of his generation represents a facet of Vito. Tom is the diplomat and peacemaker. Michael the hard headed don. Sonny was the man of action and passion. Even Fredo, the gentle love of family. Vito could be all those things, and could and did both personally kill men and order others to kill men. He simply had a more comprehensive character, could reflect which side of his personality suited a moment, and evolved along ultimately superior lines because the circumstances of his life and challenges allowed that. All his sons were in this way incomplete versions of him. He was a mafia renaissance man as they were specialists in temperament. Michael for a time seemed as though he could be that too, and in some ways he was when you look at his life as a whole. But he ultimately failed to be that kind of man. Many reasons could be advanced- he started in the business too late, where his father had known the life from childhood and built his own empire as a young man. Michael also had distorted expectations and his father had distorted expectations for him- Michael lived in the Sicilian world of the family and the WASP world of his wife, in the world of the gang and that of politics, and he was not quite comfortable in either, let alone in the balance. His father's expectations for him were also unrealistic- imagine expecting to go from penniless immigrant and crime lord to governor or senator in the second generation. Maybe, but it's quite a weight of dreams. These things also shaped Michael. The other things was his exceptionally poor choice of wives. Maybe Apollonia would have been a good wife, if only because Sicilian, but she was also seemingly erratic and immature and would have not fit in with Michael's wider business and social aspirations. Granted, neither did Carmela, but then Vito was living in a different era. And Carmela was a rock. Kay was always a poor choice. Shockingly so. Michael should never have sought her out again. It is a core part of the tragedy of them both that Michael pursued her again on his return, and she yielded. They'd have both been better off apart. Michael's weaknesses, perhaps solitude, perhaps the loss of Apollonia, perhaps a desperate need to move on and establish himself as head of a family, perhaps a need for love right away, perhaps still a need for Kay's world of middle class normalcy, or all those things, led him to make the fatal choice for Kay. That marriage was never going to survive his business, his kids were never going to be suited to that life, and he was not going to be able to perfectly shield a family whose other members did not have the mindset to be mafia royalty. Kay, for example, was never going to toughen up like Connie did when she had to. And with that, Michael had a personal family that was at least as much a burden and a threat as a blessing and a rock. He never had the wife and family his father had.
Apollonia's family would have affectionately kept her in check I think lol eventually MC may have arranged for her family to be closer, she would have been busy w all the domestic engineering scope of operations in that life and her exotic flair and devotion to Michael imho would assist in his gratitude for the adversity in his life or wtvr bc @ least he was lucky in love, awwww I do have a ♥️ 😆
There was a very tense, negative and hostile vibe against Tom in that room. The way Rocco and Al looked at Tom. When Tom entered the room he felt the tension and glanced around at Rocco and Al as if to say:”what is going on?” Michael knew that Tom was a peace maker and that he would first try to resolve issues before resorting to violence. So, Michael was prepared for Tom’s objections to his plan to kill more people. It was Michael and his two top assassins against the peaceful Tom. Tom was outnumbered. Of course Rocco and Al will agree with the plan for murder because that’s what their job is. The way Michael treated Tom was just one of a list of things that He did that I felt was wrong and uncalled for.
All great points folks. Mike respects Toms ability to remain above the fray. Despite the fact that Tom is actually up to his ears in it. And Michael says to himself. " I'm just as smart and respectable as you. How could you possibly leave your brother in his time of need. My family and I gave you everything. Is it too much to ask for you to take some punches for me.
After the scene in which Michael disrespects Tom, sealed the fact that Michael was a miserable paranoid boss. Michael’s world was crashing and he felt helpless to stop the crash landing.
Tom at the time was having an affair. Michael saw what happened to Fredo and Sonny because of affairs. It made Tom vulnerable to both blackmail and bad things happening..
I think to a degree, Michael resents Tom. Michael was born into the family and circumstantially swallowed by it. But Tom chooses to stay. He’s repeatedly made a conscious decision to embrace the mob life and the mob family. Kinda like the speech that Chuckie gives Will in ‘Good Will Hunting’; Tom’s the only brother Michael has left who he loves, trusts, and respects, and I think part of him wishes Tom would just leave all the mob stuff.
Chooses to stay? I don't think Tom really had a choice. The Family put him thru Law schools and paid for his educations. And I don't know exactly what Tom's childhood life was like before he came home with Sonny one day and never left, but I can guess it wasn't very good. Whether it was loyalty or guilt, Tom could never leave because he felt he owed the Family his life. Plus, you think the Family would feel comfortable with him leaving knowing what he knows, the Family Consigliere?
@@darthslackus499 You have valid points but I still think Tom chose to stay out of gratitude, not guilt or fear. In the book Vito asked Tom what career he was planning to be in after law school and he straight out said he wanted to represent for the family. That put a smile on Vito's face. Vito stated that a lawyer can steal more money with a briefcase than a thousand men with guns and masks. Tom even wanted to change his surname to Corleone but Vito thought it would be disrespectful to his parents' memory. Tom genuinely was grateful and loved the family. I have a feeling that if Tom didn't want to get mixed up in the family business Vito would have respected that. After all Vito didn't even plan on Michael getting into the family business either. He wanted him to be a governor or senator. Heck he didn't even want Fredo in the family business. The only one that he planned on being in the family business was Sonny and he only let him in because Sonny let it be known that he was gonna commit crime regardless so Vito had Clemenza show him the ropes as far as organized crime. Tom stayed out of love, loyalty and gratitude. In his eyes the Corleone family saved him so he had no problem saving it.
I do think he wanted to help out of love and gratitude but I think there was some pressure too in that as described in the book, their parents treated him kindly but not with real affection until he told The Don that he wanted to work for him. It was only then that they began to show him real love and affection so they didn't force him but the affection he craved wasn't going to be his until he joined.
Maybe that's what makes them tragic heroes. They aren't psychopaths, have heart, and guilt. His fatal flaw is he believed the ruthless path was the winning strategy.
Great analysis, he hurts Tom because he was hurting and he viewed any opposition as betrayal because of his history. You hurt the ones you love though i don't think he would talk that way to Rocco or AL just Tom. The last of his real family.
I’ve always wondered why he got so upset with Tom. I agree with everything you said in the video! It makes a lot of sense! I also agree that maybe he is a little upset with Vito (Father) because he had to give up his own life and dreams to take over the family business when his father was shot! He always said that he would never go into the family business! I love The Godfather 1 and 2! 2 is the best out of the 3 because it gives a backstory! I enjoy your channel CineRanter! Keep up the good work!
Sonny was the only one who treated Tom as a genuine member of the family despite their volatile arguements. Vito trrated Tom well but took the side of his favourite son, Michael when he cut out Tom. And Michael was manipulative. He treated Tom like a brother or as dirt as and when it suited him. A lot of things died in this family with Sonny's death.
In the book it explains that Michael is actually a little jealous of Tom, as Tom had a better and more brotherly relationship with Sunny. Tom also is a better advisor than most as he is not a yes man, despite Michael’s treatment of Tom outwardly, internally he appreciated this.
I forgot to add, that Michael also is a lot more insecure than his father. He feels that he needs to destroy all his enemies, to show that nobody is safe. This is why Michael had Fredo, Pantangelo & Roth killed, making people see that “nobody is safe”. Hide with the Feds, I will get you, hide in plain site, I will get you, if your part of my family, I will get you. Vito was seen more as a “hero” figure to most and only a monster to his enemies, Michael is seen as the devil on earth, Luca Brasse and Vito rolled into one. Vito wouldn’t have killed his brother, he didn’t need to prove anything to anyone.
I always saw this scene as a test. Michael's spies told him about Tom's job offer and Michael needed to know if Tom was leaving. After Fredo and the others , Michael learned not to trust Anyone. I like that Tom says in Italian he is staying.
This would have been perfect to plant the seeds for Part III with Michael vs Tom. That would have been a great storyline but of course Robert Duvall unfortunately wasn't in Part III
I don't know whether Vito would have ordered it, but I remain unconvinced that killing off Roth et al. was a mistake. Roth might have lived, or he might have died naturally, but indeed either would have been a defeat for Michael. Roth hadn't just tried to destroy Michael's business empire, he'd tried to wipe out Michael's wife and kids. That wasn't part of the old rules.
I think it’s possible that this is how Michael always felt about Tom. Earlier in the film, when Michael calls Tom a real brother to him, it’s possible that he was lying only and ensuring that Tom will take care of his wife and children while Michael sorts out business. Michael wanted to inspire devotion, as Tom was the one who Michael could trust the most and was the most competent. It’s possible Michael was being manipulative earlier, but expressed his true feelings later in the film
Interesting takes. I look at it a bit differently though, almost as an extension of the last thought you had when you mentioned Michael had to look tough in front of Rocco and Al. What is striking in this scene is the change from Sicilian to English and back. He speaks English to Tom when berating him. Al and Rocco would understand what is being said. But he speaks Sicilian when asking Tom if he was ok at the beginning, and at the end when asking if he was staying. Rocco and Al wouldn’t have understood what was said there. So it’s almost like Michael switches to Sicilian as a Wink to Tom at the end, revealing to Tom that Michael needed to put on a mean show in front of his captains, but that he never truly doubted Tom’s loyalty.
@jpssteveshanahan Sicilians speak Italian, yes. I'm 50% Toscano & 50% Sicilian. I could have simply said Italian, but as I'm sure you know, there are dozens of different dialects throughout Italy. Hence why I thought there may be a motivation to switch from English. Maybe Al & Rocco wouldn't be able to follow what was said in that specific dialect. I just find it really interesting. Why change the language there? Entirely out of the blue. Never in the first 2 movies does Michael speak to Tom in anything other than English. Why switch it to Italian for only a couple sentences in just that one scene? What's Michael's motivation?
I always felt he was pushing Tom away for his own safety. The reason he was so harsh to him, is he wanted Tom to not want to stay, not just send him away, which Tom might resist.
This is probably one (if not the only) moment in the first 2 Godfather films that I never quite understood. Unless Coppola didn't want to make everything obvious to the audience and instead have us make our own assumptions, I always felt like this scene wasn't quite written as clearly as the others in the first 2 movies. I always just felt that Michael wanted more war and not diplomacy which is why he mentions that Tom is not a "wartime consigliere". From a thematic standpoint, I understand that it was done to highlight the end- that Michael was alone just as he had somewhat been always apart from his family during the start of the first Godfather film.
In part 3 Kay says tony knows you killed fredo , how did Kay find out ? Connie confronted Michael for killing Carlo , but In part 3 she mentions fredo dying in the boat accident.
I think there's another dimension to Michael's cold disposition towards Tom. Michael left Kaye under Tom's care and responsibility, and she went and got an abortion (which Tom incorrectly told him was a miscarriage). Michael's loss of trust in Tom stems to a great extent from this perceived failure on Tom's part. Also, this scene is the second time in the movie that Michael lashes out at Tom, the first time being when he repeatedly asks if the baby he lost was a boy and Tom dithers.
Michael has always been a soldier. He is a soldier and cannot be with his family. He always has to leave his family to protect them. So Tom, trying to be part of the family, couldn't understand Michael and he was hurt.
Michael had Vito’s nature, Tom had Vito’s nurturing. Michael and Tom both felt lonely in the family. Michael was lonely because he had a different nurturing than his family. Tom was lonely a because of his different nature than the family. Michael and Tom both respected and loved each other it’s just that they were both at odds to living up to Vito
Tom is exceptional at his job. You have to remember Tom learned from the best which is Vito. Vito always study your enemies, only take out who you need to take out. Michael’s personal feelings got in the way allot. Which is why he wanted to wipe out his enemies. Tom was a straggist like Vito
Tom was responsible for protecting Kay and the children. Tom either knew that Kay was having an abortion (a cardinal sin in the Catholic faith) or Tom was too stupid to see it coming. Either way, Tom allowed that abortion on his "watch", and he did not tell Michael the truth; Tom lied and said it was a miscarriage. So, Michael needs an excuse to vent his anger at Tom.
I think it stems to the past even when Tom was always thinking what was best for mike like in the end of the movie when they are waiting for their father to sing happy birthday
I’ve always been kind of surprised that Meyer Lansky didn’t try to sue Paramount for how accurately he’s depicted by Hyman Roth. From Havana casinos, his Jewish heritage to being denied entry into Israel at the end of his life.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 it would have been a civil case between him and Paramount. He wouldn’t have gone to prison. Nor would the FBI have gotten involved.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 and the things portrayed in the movie are all common knowledge. He didn’t dispute the fact he was involved in casinos. Or the matter with his Jewish heritage and Israel. Those things happened. He even looks like Lansky. And said the same things as him.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 the fact that they were portraying him as a mobster in the movie would have worked in Lanskys favor even more so. If after 50 years they couldn’t find anything to convict him on, a lawsuit regarding the exploitation of his likeness and image wouldn’t have done him any harm.
Of course Tom new. At that point in the movie Tom is the only living member of that family that is on Michael's level of intellect. He knew a lot without Michael having to spell things out for him.
This is a very good topic i have always wondered this one myself i do feel in the end Michael was lashing out and being rude cause at this point he did not trust anyone and he did see him maybe leaving the family for more money somewhere else to be betrayal.
I too have had my theories about the orange Michael is eating. (I never knew I would type that, but anyway,) At first I thought it was him sacrificing his soul, but then, there is a scene in the movie where Vito, post Fanucci murder, buys an orange. As we all know, he didn't die in the movie, so what else could it be? Well, I figured, in those stages of their lives, (Michael and Vito) they were seen as bigger than life, almost even invincible. Vito buying an orange and Michael eating an orange could mean that they are invincible in this stage of their lives.
No Michael eating orange represents murder deaths that they are planning, death that is about to happen.. As Coppola himself said while commenting second godfather
When Michael tells Tom “If history has taught us anything is that anyone can be killed” I’ve always thought he was talking about the situation with McCluskey and Sollozzo and how Tom was convinced Sollozzo couldn’t be touch because he was being guarded by McCluskey and that made him “Invulnerable” of course Michael figured a way around that
True but he had no idea what Michael was thinking. In Tom's head Michael wasn't or doesn't wanna be part of the family business. Michael at that point made a decision to help and he knew his position at the time being labeled a "civilian" was his secret weapon to use on Sollozzo & Mcclusky
In my opinion this is Michael's lowest point. Even lower than the killing of Fredo. Because at least I could be convinced with rational thought why you would kill a brother who betrayed you. But a loving brother like Tom Hagen, being treated like this is completely unacceptable.
Michael is simply afraid that Tom would have more influence in the family after Sonny's death. Michael is a paranoid guy, he wouldn't want Tom to have more power.
I always thought of this as Michael either testing Tom and/or offering Tom an exit- in involvement with Fredo's murder. If Tom can convince Michael he has won, there is no need to kill Roth or Fredo. Michael offers the out, if Tom is unable "to come along in these things" -ie. killing Fredo.
*The Godfather | When Luca Brasi tried to KILL Tom Hagen:*
ruclips.net/video/RkPeDU6RT-Q/видео.html
Bring back the old intro bro this one is not your trademark
“He’s been dying of the same heart attack for 20 years”
One of the best lines in the whole series.
I always burst out laughing when he says that
@@ResistanceQuest 😂 same- watched it the other night and still laugh when he says it
@@BostonsF1nest it's somehow one of the most hilarious not-meant-to-be-funny lines in history
A move Roth learned from his old mentor Fred Sanford
Actually some in my family have had multiple heart attacks and are still alive.
I think at this point in his life, Michael doesn’t trust anyone because he’s been betrayed by everyone. From his own brother to multiple capos in his family, to his own wife. He’s pushing back on Tom because he’s irritated by the insistent plotting against him and even Tom’s slight reluctance to kill Roth triggers a question in Michaels mind if Tom is now trying to make a move. He’s distrustful, fed up, and testing Tom to make sure he still with him.
Well said…
I agree with this assessment. And Michael and Tom resorting to Itallian to confirm the loyalty and trust each has for one another is vey powerful. They are not blood brothers, but their bond runs even deeper than blood.
Agreed and may even have been attempting to illicit a response from Tom to reveal information he was holding back. He kind of did this with Fredo where his older brother reveals the reason for his betrayal to Michael and cements the decision to have him killed rather than exiled.
He made Tom the acting Don, that shows a lot of trust right there. Tom didn’t want a trusted soldier getting killed or arrested trying to kill Roth.
Tom is the only one Michael can trust and Michael loves Tom and he was worried and scared that Tom might leave him
I'm so glad that The Godfather films are still being talked about.
Sometimes it makes you wonder how much Michael is suffering from PTSD from his experiences from the war and watching Apollonia blown up in front of him.
Wow I actually never thought about that 🤔
I actually never thought of that it makes me wonder if that was intended.
I think we can all agree, that losing a loved one is more than devastating... It probably did lend to his coldness, but I still think it was always in Michael. He was in the navy, which would ultimately, made him more disciplined. Look at the last scene of G2... They all greet Vito, and Michael is at the table alone. He was just much more different, than the rest of his family
Weeks ago I proposed the creator of this channel examine Michael's PTSD from war and then the war at home.
No he was straight
I always felt Tom was the best reflection of Vito he literally took all of his attributes and personality, Mike had the cunning, Sonny had Vito's inner rage he never let loose and Fredo had his resemblance
I never considered that Tom was more like Vito then Michael was. Tom, like Silvio Dante was to Tony Soprano, was really Michael's most trustworthy ally. Good observations! Another great video CineRanter!
Not sure why you think Michael is acting "un-Vito" like by looking to have Roth killed. It was a young Vito Corleone who traveled to Sicily with his family to ensure Don Ciccio would not die a peaceful death.
Vito also called a truce after Sonny's death
@@persephonekajira7269 Yes, but the circumstances were completely different. Vito had three adult sons when the war started as well as Tom serving or with the capability to serve in the family business making each of them targets. This provided a motivation for Vito to seek a truce.
Vito was also in declining health and even admitted to Michael that the family was "weak". A position of weakness is not sustainable in that line of work. Michael came into the family business from a position of weakness both from the family perspective as well as his own personal leadership which was perceived as based on nothing more than nepotism.
It gets somewhat tiring to hear the mantra about how if only Michael had been more like his father he would have been more successful running the crime family he inherited. The reality is more likely that he was put in an impossible situation and navigated through it much better than he is credited for doing.
I also believe that the point that Coppola tries to make in the films is that all dynasties follow a pattern similar to what is seen in the Godfather. You can see this play out rather well if you study Roman history as I am sure Coppola would have done at some point in his life.
Watching the last half oh the Godfather 2 is heartbreaking. You know it's Michael winning at the cost of everything. Veto would have never gone this far. That last scene of Michael looking off in the distance shows you everything you need to know. I'd like to imagine that scene takes place in the late 70s
Prob takes place in the mid to late 60’s. He’s still relatively young at that point tho his hair has started to grey. Reason being- Godfather 3 takes place in the late 70’s and there’s even a scene at the end of that movie which shows how much he’s progressed in age. That’s always what I’ve believed at least. You could be right tho because Coppola never had any intention of making a third film so the end scene with Mike alone in 2 could be near the end of his life.
It takes place around 1960
@@tubularbill Yes, II is from 1958-1960 and 1901-around 1925. The first movie covers 1945 to 1955. I always figured the last scene in II takes place sometime in the late 60s. Michael is grayer, but his hair is still short, which tells me it's sometime in the 60s.
It is also where it was meant to end, but FF Coppola had financial woes.
@@johnbrowning8785 Coda has a thematically fitting end tho
This feels like it could've led to a plot for The Godfather Part 3 where Michael and Tom are at war with each other. What could have been.
The scene was deleted but Tom Hagen was dating Sonny's widow Sandra. When Michael tells him that he can pack his wife, his kids and "his mistress" and move, he is referring to Sandra. This relationship didn't go down well with Michael.
In G1, when Don Vito is talking with Johnny Fontane, Sonny enters the room. Vito looks at him turns back and says "a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man." Michael probably had this in mind when he references Tom's mistress.
Additionally, he may have had some animosity toward Hagan, believing he didn't have the mindset for criminal activities. Of course, we see a scene played out with Sonny and Tom where Sonny stated that he wasn't a good wartime consigliere.
It's such a complex relationship. Thinking of the scene where Michael questions some competing job offers that Tom received (without telling him) demonstrates that Michael had suspicions about Tom's loyalty (going so far as to ask him for his loyalty).
I had no idea, that Tom was w/Sonny's widow! I've never seen the deleted scene of Sandra and Tom together!
Also remember that Tom was the acting Don while Michael is away. We see Tom insisting/ forcing Kay to stay within the compound, and yet it was during this time that Kay had an abortion (!)
@@lanicoya415 Kind of unfortunate where some things from the book are incorporated into the film without any reference for the viewer because of deleted scenes (not sure that happened here but seems quite possible).
That clarifies a lot
Sandra was a Ho-waa ;-)
After Fredo's betrayal, Michael was incapable of trusting anyone again. At least that's the way I've always interpreted this scene.
That's how I saw this scene. Michel loves Tom as a brother, but he also loved Fredo and he loved Kay, and they both betrayed him.
That’s a good point. Mike is very different from Vito. He doesn’t want input or advisors he just wants total compliance
Something I have only heard discussed in one other analysis: Tom was in complete control of family affairs while Michael was away. It was during this time that Kay had her abortion, and this is one of the worst things to happen to Michael. He would have been suspicious about this happening under Tom's watch, whether Tom allowed it to happen, or was tricked by Kay.
Tom was having an affair with Kay . He got her pregnant
@@bigdaddytrips6197 Tom got your dad pregnant
@@bigdaddytrips6197 That would have made perfect sense. Would also explain why Tom told her about Michael killing Carlo at the end of the book. Tom at that point was way too close to Kay. Why else would he risk his life telling Kay her husband's business.
I think that’s 100% the reason.
I always wondered how Kay could have had an abortion if she couldn't leave the compound at all.
I can't help but think how incredible G3 could have been if Michael and Tom had a showdown, with Connie playing the grey eminence (something hinted at in the actual film).
Just think about it. All of Don Vito's strengths and weaknesses split among the last three siblings, and their own also.
Tom was a lawyer..an "officer of the court". Because of this , Tom could be made to testify under oath. Michael is protecting Tom by keeping him out of certain deals. This repudiation was to signal to traitors that Tom wasn't a guy who could spill secrets. I see Michael as realizing Tom was an asset that was best kept free of certain things.
Yet being ‘an officer of the court’ didn’t keep Tom from being kidnapped while the assassination of Vito is being carried out.
@@judywright4241 True but him being an officer of the court is most likely the only reason why Sollozzo didn't off him. Offing Tom would have been the equivalent of offing Captain McCluskey. It would cause way too much chaos and the cops would be on all the families like white on rice.
@@PokemonTrainerVince not seeing how murdering a lawyer equates to a police captain. I am pretty sure that killing a police captain is going to bring a lot more heat from LE and media than killing a mob lawyer.
@@dondajulah4168 Still would have brought too much unnecessary trouble. There is a reason why Sollozzo let Tom go. Barzini didn't want to start another war over the killing of a mob lawyer.
@@PokemonTrainerVince I think Solozzo laid out his primary reason for not hurting Tom in the movie. He was the guy that would prevent Sonny from acting impulsively against him.
Michael has become so cold and calloused at this point because he's been screwed up and betrayed by everyone close to him so as a result, he trusts no one. Not even his loyal Consigliere. You bring up excellent points that make total sense to Michael's resentment and lack of trust for Tom. Once again, great analysis.
I seem to remember a part at the end of the novel where Tom told Kay everything and warned her not to tell Michael because he would have him killed. Kay couldn’t believe he would do that and Tom told her the only people Michael wouldn’t hurt were Kay and their children. Read it a long time ago though.
It’s also a deleted scene in part 2. Kay escapes from the compound and Tom goes to bring her back and they have that exact conversation. He tells that Kay is the only person in the world Michael would never harm. A lot of fans wanted Michael to kill Kay after the abortion reveal but as a book reader that thought never even occurred & those who wanted him to kill her never understood Michael or the movie. This is important because the average Godfather fan falsely believes that Michael never truly loved Kay and that she was disposable.
This also explains why Michael is cold towards Tom after the hearings. Michael calls the compound from Cuba to speak to Tom but he’s out of the state to bring Kay back. Michael knows that Tom’s failure to keep Kay within the compound allowed her to go and get the abortion done. So he partly blames him for it.
Plus, Tom is having an affair with Sandra, the wife of Sonny and Michael knows about it. He hates it because Michael has a soft spot for Tom’s wife Theresa in the book and in the movie(deleted scenes). He also disapproves of extra marital affairs in general and it’s also disrespectful to Sonny.
I hate that they deleted so many scenes.
You remember correctly
@@lunamilo2065 Kay had her abortion before the hearings, not after.
I always considered that scene as if they’re subliminally talking about killing Fredo and Tom being dead set against it. It never made sense to me that Tom was so much against killing Roth knowing full well what Roth was capable of. Everyone in that room knew what was going to happen to Fredo but nobody could’ve questioned the boss, but Tom tries his best to reason with Michael but to no avail. The giveaway in my opinion is when Tom ask Michael do you wanna wipe out EVERYONE, basically saying kill Roth and anyone else but let Fredo go. I might be wrong but it’s a very effective method of storytelling and scriptwriting.
I think you're right. I think the subtext is also that Michael has been betrayed by one brother and he's implying to the other that he had better not cross him unless he wants to end up like Fredo, especially since Tom is not related by blood. People sometimes cite this scene as evidence for potential conflict between Michael and Tom that would have been resolved in The Godfather part 3 if Robert Duvall had been in it.
This is a great interpretation
Al Neri also didn’t want to kill Fredo, when Michael gave him that look Al looked away in sadness.
"...only my enemies." was a warning to Tom; choose your words carefully from now on.
fredo is toms brother hes his family
“Keep your friends close and your enemies dead.” I tell ya, your channel is great, but that may be the greatest line you’ve ever said.
I think this is the best analysis of the characters and their motivations you've done so far. Of course its always tricky to put real reasons and emotions to fictional characters. Well done.
Francis Ford Coppola has said in interviews that Godfather Part 2 was about Michael's devolution as a person and he was unredeemable by the end. Michael was just destroying another relation, this time Tom. That's one of the reasons Coppola didn't want to do a Part 3, Michael had destroyed himself by the end of Part 2 and there was nowhere to take that character.
The ending scene of Godfather 2 says it all about Michael...alone and broken
While commenting second godfather Coppola said. " everything he did michael did for his family and in the end he destroyed his family ".
Ending of the godfather 2 Coppola commented with words " He became puppet to his father and ruined himself ".
He didn't say he didn't want to do godfather 3 He said that he thought it wouldn't happen " this was drama and jn the end men ruined himself ".
Once they offered him chance to do third one he said it was his greatest desire to do it the way he ended up doing it.
In fact he gave ultimatum to the studio " either I do it this way or I won't do it at all".
Understandable .....bc michael at the end of godfather 2 was michael from godfather 3.
At the end of GF 2 michael got diabetes stopped smoking drinking killing dressing like mafia aged over night and never took the ring of his finger.
There's the director's, vision, and the audiences interpretation. I don't see as Michael as broken, or the villain in Godfather 2.
His family are the culprits. He never wanted any part of the life, yet his hand was forced. Neither of his older brothers could protect the family long enough for his father to fully heal, or protect him from an assassination attempt, that killed his wife instead.
Fredo betrayed him, Sonny's temper made him an easy target, and his father made him the head of the family, when the Corleones were most vulnerable. He went from fighting overseas to fighting at home.
What I saw, in the flashback at the dinner table was completely different. Sonny introduced his sister to the man who would abuse her, and set him up to be murdered. One of the men who'd betray the family was also a welcome dinner guest. And unbeknownst to anyone, Michael dropped out of college and joined the Marines.
One by one they leave the table, until Michael is all alone. The irony is that courtesy of his family, Michael would be left the fight a war alone.
Vito would be in no position to judge Michael, as he's directly responsible for Michael's involvement. He didn't betray his family his family betrayed him.
@@shadysif6220 this is the one comment I've read that gets it
Tom was trusted w kay and children as well. Kay had the abortion while under Toms watch . Wonder if Michael also holds this against Tom as he did w Sonny’s death?
This. ^^^
Great analysis. Tom makes Michael vulnerable because Tom is the only one Michael can trust.
And of all of Vitos sons, his adoptive son Tom turned out to be more like him than his blood sons.
When Michael approached Roth's quaint little home, he was anxiously flexing his fingers anticipating a possible ambush or trap. He knew that Roth was a great threat to him.
Did you notice that or did someone point it out to you?
Send Fredo to pick up someone up from the airport.....
Why was Michael even driving that car in Miami?
Keep these videos coming CineRanter. I constantly watch Godfather 1 and 2. These revelations and theories are positive and insightful
I believe Michael blamed Tom for Kay’s abortion. While Michael was gone it was Tom’s responsibility to protect the future of the family i.e. Kay’s unborn child
What an interesting point! Of course he would have harbored suspicions as to how she managed that.
Absolutely right! This is how I have always seen this scene, and although the other reasons may all have merit, I think the abortion was the number 1 reason Michael had resentment toward Tom.
The Kay situation is solely on Michael's hands. He made the silly decision to marry a squeaky clean American white woman instead of an Italian woman. Even if she wasn't Italian, he should've got a woman who at least respected the streets.
@@d.rabbit7276 In the book, she did.
There's so much here that you bring to the table that it only makes the entire saga exceedingly wonderful to experience.
I have always been mystified by this scene, and this analysis is so insightful! Thank you!
It’s not really “bizarrely” that Michael has turned on Tom-Tom had just openly questioned Michael’s intentions in front of Al and Rocco..and as we should know by now, to question Michael’s decisions in any way shape or form is to “take sides against the family”. Michael’s immediate questioning of Tom’s loyalty should have been expected. Also, it’s a sign of how good the writing in this scene is how Michael responds to Tom’s questioning is first basic and then gradually more direct and specific with a sense of gathering ire; it’s beautifully written!
But where Fredo was completely out of line questioning Michael's authority in front of a hostile party (Moe Green), Tom was acting entirely appropriately in questioning Michael in front of the most trusted inner circle.
I do agree with your main point that Michael was displaying reactive emotion in his response to Tom, but it was much less appropriate here than earlier with Fredo.
But Tom, unlike Fredo, was consiliere. His job was to advise Micheal, and even give him an opposite opinion, if just to give an out if need be.
It's just in that moment, Micheal was not in the mood to be contradicted. Choosing to kill your own brother would do that to you. Having the other one you consider a brother question you then, makes you really wonder if he's loyal or just trying to manipulate you into.. another trap.
Tom received a job offer, and Michael had to find out about it on his own. That extra step gave Michael pause.
Agreed, but like the other commenter says, Toms duty was to provide counsel and practical solutions to the Family’s issues. He was not out of place or out of his position in doing so.
When you have the likes of Al and Rocco sitting in Michael’s company, his thinking is he has to be tough on Tom so he can’t give off any signs of weakness as boss
I thought the “history has taught us..” thing was in reference of killing the police captain in Godfather 1. Tom said you couldn’t do that and Michael proved you could.
The people in that room at the time all thought the same, it’s only until Michael points out he is a dirty cop and that they can use there contacts in the papers to alter peoples perspective.
Tom’s the only one that doesn’t laugh at him.
I’ve always thought that.
Michael had certainly lost the humanity we'd earlier seen (notably in the first movie) by this point.. Tom was really just another one who deserved better on the receiving end of that cold, hard fact.. And Michael wouldn't even be looking to get his humanity back until some future point way after what we see in the second film... And only after that would it lead him into becoming the redemption seeking older, wiser, genuine protective family man again we see in the third film.. That greatly coveted redemption, of course, being the wishful goal he, ultimately, never gets (nor was likely ever going to get, all things considered).. Tom deserved better, Kay and the kids deserved better, poor, weak Fredo perhaps especially deserved better.. FAR better.. "Michael, why do you hurt me?".. Because it's who the man became, and he wasn't ever coming back from that even when he later desperately tried so hard to.
For any fan of this movie, this is simply excellent analysis.
What I find most interesting is the fact of how old these movies are and believe me all three are in my phone. The fact they are still being analyzed indicates just how powerful these movies really are. I have lost count how many times I’ve watched them and still catch something I missed before.
Or how stupid people are
Very good interpretation, i like it and i agree with it. Recently i've re watched all movies. Haven't watched them since school years.
When Sonny brought Tom home when they were little, Michael resented the interloper Tom-especially when Vito adopted Tom. Michael was the runt of the litter (among the boys), and he felt that the attention from his father that should rightly have been his, was instead transferred to Tom the outsider. This is why Michael joined the military-to carve out his own destiny, as there were too many big brothers in the family business and there’d be no piece of the pie left for Michael. This childhood resentment and trauma is why Michael repeatedly treated Tom shabbily.
An understandable psychological insight but questionable given the role Tom held in the family. But fake play, it makes sense.
I always thought it went back to the scene at the table when Tom told Mikey that he and Vito had discussed Mikey's future "many times."
@@mphrdldn That too. I commented on this as well in a different post.
This is all in the book correct?
@@yospidey0078 Yea.
I've alqays interpreted the insult to Tom as Michael needing Tom to affirm his loyalty because they were about to kill Fredo.
TOM: What is it you need me to do?
Michael: Imma off our bro when he goes fishing. That cool with you?
Tom: Oh hell naw.
Michael: Well you just said you were staying, so too late now!
Another thing I wondered is at the height of his madness , did he consider killing kay ?
Nope. In the final chapter of the book and in a deleted scene in GF2, Tom tells Kay that she’s the only person in the world that Michael would never harm, let alone kill, plus, contrary to popular belief, Michael truly loved Kay and never even took off his wedding ring after her betrayal. He knew that he was being unfair to her even if he didn’t acknowledge it.
Wow great analysis and assessment of this scene!
Would Vito have advocated letting Roth die of natural causes? I think his scene with Don Ciccio reveals the answer. Ciccio looks like he has days to live, it's a miracle he doesn't drop dead from the exertion of lifting up a can of olive oil. Vito did not have to take the incredibly risky move of killing him in his own villa, surrounded by shotgun wielding guards, but that's what had to be done.
I think the way the kill Roth is crazy, surely there would be 100 ways to do it without it being a suicide mission, but is there any doubt that Michael, a man who shot a cop in the head to assassinator Sollozzo, would pay any price to end Roth's life?
It was explained by another channel or even this channel that Rocco "volunteered" to do this suicide mission as compensation for his failure to protect Michael. He was head of security in the compound.
Why didn’t (a) Rocco have on a bullet proof vest and (b) why did he stop running away when the cops 👮♂️ told him to stop 🛑?
@@Therock007dmx bulletproof vests aren't a guarantee of surviving multiple gunshots. Rocco stopped running because he was surrounded
@@Therock007dmx because Rocco knew he was supposed to die. Punishment for betraying Michael at the compound. No one else there that night could have slit the throats of the two hit men from New York, least of all Fredo.
Exactly. I totally disagree with the notion that Vito would have decided like Tom here.
He questioned Michael's judgement which makes Michael question Tom's loyalty.
People often lash out at those closest to them, as can bee seen in this relationship. After all, Tom is the last remaining 'brother' to Michael; one of the last links to his father as you said yourself.
Being an orphan, Vito really valued his family. Also Vito knew how to keep his business and life separate.Michael is messed up from ww2 and a little spoiled, he loves his family but is controlling and smothering.
I think your last point is the best, that Michael in front of Rocco and Neri wanted a commitment from Tom and this was the only way to do it. Also, the connection to the Don was interesting and true, Tom is the last connection to the Don.
A very thoughtful and fascinating discussion. Nice work!
09:45...talk about burying the lead 🤯
I don't I've ever heard that before. Every time i think i already knew everything about GF1 & 2, you always got some new info
Oddly, I always saw this move as just a smart way to get Tom out of the dirty side of things and send him forward into the "legit" side of the business, to which he's actually more suited, and in which, he's actually more useful.
One thing I always wonder is if mike told Tom he was going to kill fredo ? Did he consult with Tom about whether he should kill fredo ? If he did tell or consult with him I wonder if Tom was against it or for it ?
@M&FS I wonder if Tom considered trying to warn fredo. If he warned him and mike found out mike would of killed him too.
@M&FS Tom was too familiar with Sonny and Michael. He saw them more as peers and didn't give them the full respect as dons, like he gave their father. His tone was at times condescending and his pitch very loud for a lieutenant to have towards a general. He never acted or spoke that way with Don Vito. Fredo was the same way with Micheal. He questioned him in Vegas in front of Moe Green. If Tom was considering leaving, it was more because he didn't respect Micheal's leadership. If he feared he would get killed, it's because he probably feared his own desire to be tempted toward betrayal, since his respect for Micheal as don was never near where it should've been. That's essentially what got Fredo killed. He made no mistake. He made a decision that was borne out of jealousy and resentment. Tom was more than likely on that same path.
@M&FS Exactly... the fans who beat up on Micheal never bring those slights up.
I don’t see Michael telling Tom about his intentions towards Fredo but in the book Tom had a great speech to Kay about routing out treachery because it endangers everyone else.
Tom was their peer though even if nor Sicilian. He's their Brother even if he was taken not born into the family . He and Sonny were the closest of the brothers, they had a very special relationship so sometimes he talks to them as a brother because he's not just the Consigniliere but a member of the family.
"KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE, BUT YOUR ENEMIES DEAD"! 😀👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I think I'm convinced by all of that to the point that your two main interpretations actually fit together- both sets of ideas are true.
I might only add: While it is true that Tom represents in selected ways the ghost of Vito's regime, he like all the characters of his generation represents a facet of Vito. Tom is the diplomat and peacemaker. Michael the hard headed don. Sonny was the man of action and passion. Even Fredo, the gentle love of family. Vito could be all those things, and could and did both personally kill men and order others to kill men. He simply had a more comprehensive character, could reflect which side of his personality suited a moment, and evolved along ultimately superior lines because the circumstances of his life and challenges allowed that. All his sons were in this way incomplete versions of him. He was a mafia renaissance man as they were specialists in temperament.
Michael for a time seemed as though he could be that too, and in some ways he was when you look at his life as a whole. But he ultimately failed to be that kind of man. Many reasons could be advanced- he started in the business too late, where his father had known the life from childhood and built his own empire as a young man. Michael also had distorted expectations and his father had distorted expectations for him- Michael lived in the Sicilian world of the family and the WASP world of his wife, in the world of the gang and that of politics, and he was not quite comfortable in either, let alone in the balance. His father's expectations for him were also unrealistic- imagine expecting to go from penniless immigrant and crime lord to governor or senator in the second generation. Maybe, but it's quite a weight of dreams.
These things also shaped Michael. The other things was his exceptionally poor choice of wives. Maybe Apollonia would have been a good wife, if only because Sicilian, but she was also seemingly erratic and immature and would have not fit in with Michael's wider business and social aspirations. Granted, neither did Carmela, but then Vito was living in a different era. And Carmela was a rock. Kay was always a poor choice. Shockingly so. Michael should never have sought her out again. It is a core part of the tragedy of them both that Michael pursued her again on his return, and she yielded. They'd have both been better off apart.
Michael's weaknesses, perhaps solitude, perhaps the loss of Apollonia, perhaps a desperate need to move on and establish himself as head of a family, perhaps a need for love right away, perhaps still a need for Kay's world of middle class normalcy, or all those things, led him to make the fatal choice for Kay. That marriage was never going to survive his business, his kids were never going to be suited to that life, and he was not going to be able to perfectly shield a family whose other members did not have the mindset to be mafia royalty. Kay, for example, was never going to toughen up like Connie did when she had to.
And with that, Michael had a personal family that was at least as much a burden and a threat as a blessing and a rock. He never had the wife and family his father had.
Apollonia's family would have affectionately kept her in check I think lol eventually MC may have arranged for her family to be closer, she would have been busy w all the domestic engineering scope of operations in that life and her exotic flair and devotion to Michael imho would assist in his gratitude for the adversity in his life or wtvr bc @ least he was lucky in love, awwww I do have a ♥️ 😆
There was a very tense, negative and hostile vibe against Tom in that room. The way Rocco and Al looked at Tom. When Tom entered the room he felt the tension and glanced around at Rocco and Al as if to say:”what is going on?” Michael knew that Tom was a peace maker and that he would first try to resolve issues before resorting to violence. So, Michael was prepared for Tom’s objections to his plan to kill more people. It was Michael and his two top assassins against the peaceful Tom. Tom was outnumbered. Of course Rocco and Al will agree with the plan for murder because that’s what their job is. The way Michael treated Tom was just one of a list of things that He did that I felt was wrong and uncalled for.
All great points folks. Mike respects Toms ability to remain above the fray. Despite the fact that Tom is actually up to his ears in it. And Michael says to himself. " I'm just as smart and respectable as you. How could you possibly leave your brother in his time of need. My family and I gave you everything. Is it too much to ask for you to take some punches for me.
After the scene in which Michael disrespects Tom, sealed the fact that Michael was a miserable paranoid boss. Michael’s world was crashing and he felt helpless to stop the crash landing.
Tom at the time was having an affair. Michael saw what happened to Fredo and Sonny because of affairs. It made Tom vulnerable to both blackmail and bad things happening..
It's a shame that they didn't follow this up with a Godfather III.
I think to a degree, Michael resents Tom. Michael was born into the family and circumstantially swallowed by it. But Tom chooses to stay. He’s repeatedly made a conscious decision to embrace the mob life and the mob family.
Kinda like the speech that Chuckie gives Will in ‘Good Will Hunting’; Tom’s the only brother Michael has left who he loves, trusts, and respects, and I think part of him wishes Tom would just leave all the mob stuff.
Chooses to stay? I don't think Tom really had a choice. The Family put him thru Law schools and paid for his educations. And I don't know exactly what Tom's childhood life was like before he came home with Sonny one day and never left, but I can guess it wasn't very good. Whether it was loyalty or guilt, Tom could never leave because he felt he owed the Family his life.
Plus, you think the Family would feel comfortable with him leaving knowing what he knows, the Family Consigliere?
@@darthslackus499 You have valid points but I still think Tom chose to stay out of gratitude, not guilt or fear. In the book Vito asked Tom what career he was planning to be in after law school and he straight out said he wanted to represent for the family. That put a smile on Vito's face. Vito stated that a lawyer can steal more money with a briefcase than a thousand men with guns and masks. Tom even wanted to change his surname to Corleone but Vito thought it would be disrespectful to his parents' memory.
Tom genuinely was grateful and loved the family. I have a feeling that if Tom didn't want to get mixed up in the family business Vito would have respected that. After all Vito didn't even plan on Michael getting into the family business either. He wanted him to be a governor or senator. Heck he didn't even want Fredo in the family business. The only one that he planned on being in the family business was Sonny and he only let him in because Sonny let it be known that he was gonna commit crime regardless so Vito had Clemenza show him the ropes as far as organized crime. Tom stayed out of love, loyalty and gratitude. In his eyes the Corleone family saved him so he had no problem saving it.
I do think he wanted to help out of love and gratitude but I think there was some pressure too in that as described in the book, their parents treated him kindly but not with real affection until he told The Don that he wanted to work for him. It was only then that they began to show him real love and affection so they didn't force him but the affection he craved wasn't going to be his until he joined.
Maybe that's what makes them tragic heroes. They aren't psychopaths, have heart, and guilt. His fatal flaw is he believed the ruthless path was the winning strategy.
Appreciate your analysis and discussion
Great analysis, he hurts Tom because he was hurting and he viewed any opposition as betrayal because of his history. You hurt the ones you love though i don't think he would talk that way to Rocco or AL just Tom. The last of his real family.
This is a brilliant commentary
I’ve always wondered why he got so upset with Tom. I agree with everything you said in the video! It makes a lot of sense! I also agree that maybe he is a little upset with Vito (Father) because he had to give up his own life and dreams to take over the family business when his father was shot! He always said that he would never go into the family business! I love The Godfather 1 and 2! 2 is the best out of the 3 because it gives a backstory!
I enjoy your channel CineRanter! Keep up the good work!
Sonny was the only one who treated Tom as a genuine member of the family despite their volatile arguements. Vito trrated Tom well but took the side of his favourite son, Michael when he cut out Tom. And Michael was manipulative. He treated Tom like a brother or as dirt as and when it suited him. A lot of things died in this family with Sonny's death.
In the book it explains that Michael is actually a little jealous of Tom, as Tom had a better and more brotherly relationship with Sunny. Tom also is a better advisor than most as he is not a yes man, despite Michael’s treatment of Tom outwardly, internally he appreciated this.
I forgot to add, that Michael also is a lot more insecure than his father. He feels that he needs to destroy all his enemies, to show that nobody is safe. This is why Michael had Fredo, Pantangelo & Roth killed, making people see that “nobody is safe”. Hide with the Feds, I will get you, hide in plain site, I will get you, if your part of my family, I will get you. Vito was seen more as a “hero” figure to most and only a monster to his enemies, Michael is seen as the devil on earth, Luca Brasse and Vito rolled into one. Vito wouldn’t have killed his brother, he didn’t need to prove anything to anyone.
Excellent analysis.
I always saw this scene as a test. Michael's spies told him about Tom's job offer and Michael needed to know if Tom was leaving. After Fredo and the others , Michael learned not to trust Anyone. I like that Tom says in Italian he is staying.
Excellent analysis!
This would have been perfect to plant the seeds for Part III with Michael vs Tom. That would have been a great storyline but of course Robert Duvall unfortunately wasn't in Part III
I don't know whether Vito would have ordered it, but I remain unconvinced that killing off Roth et al. was a mistake. Roth might have lived, or he might have died naturally, but indeed either would have been a defeat for Michael. Roth hadn't just tried to destroy Michael's business empire, he'd tried to wipe out Michael's wife and kids. That wasn't part of the old rules.
I think it’s possible that this is how Michael always felt about Tom. Earlier in the film, when Michael calls Tom a real brother to him, it’s possible that he was lying only and ensuring that Tom will take care of his wife and children while Michael sorts out business. Michael wanted to inspire devotion, as Tom was the one who Michael could trust the most and was the most competent. It’s possible Michael was being manipulative earlier, but expressed his true feelings later in the film
Interesting takes. I look at it a bit differently though, almost as an extension of the last thought you had when you mentioned Michael had to look tough in front of Rocco and Al. What is striking in this scene is the change from Sicilian to English and back. He speaks English to Tom when berating him. Al and Rocco would understand what is being said. But he speaks Sicilian when asking Tom if he was ok at the beginning, and at the end when asking if he was staying. Rocco and Al wouldn’t have understood what was said there. So it’s almost like Michael switches to Sicilian as a Wink to Tom at the end, revealing to Tom that Michael needed to put on a mean show in front of his captains, but that he never truly doubted Tom’s loyalty.
@jpssteveshanahan Sicilians speak Italian, yes. I'm 50% Toscano & 50% Sicilian. I could have simply said Italian, but as I'm sure you know, there are dozens of different dialects throughout Italy. Hence why I thought there may be a motivation to switch from English. Maybe Al & Rocco wouldn't be able to follow what was said in that specific dialect. I just find it really interesting. Why change the language there? Entirely out of the blue. Never in the first 2 movies does Michael speak to Tom in anything other than English. Why switch it to Italian for only a couple sentences in just that one scene? What's Michael's motivation?
@jpssteveshanahan yeah you’re spot on. Usually there are very specific reasons for switching to Italian.
@jpssteveshanahan z as
I always felt he was pushing Tom away for his own safety. The reason he was so harsh to him, is he wanted Tom to not want to stay, not just send him away, which Tom might resist.
This is probably one (if not the only) moment in the first 2 Godfather films that I never quite understood. Unless Coppola didn't want to make everything obvious to the audience and instead have us make our own assumptions, I always felt like this scene wasn't quite written as clearly as the others in the first 2 movies.
I always just felt that Michael wanted more war and not diplomacy which is why he mentions that Tom is not a "wartime consigliere". From a thematic standpoint, I understand that it was done to highlight the end- that Michael was alone just as he had somewhat been always apart from his family during the start of the first Godfather film.
In part 3 Kay says tony knows you killed fredo , how did Kay find out ? Connie confronted Michael for killing Carlo , but In part 3 she mentions fredo dying in the boat accident.
I think there's another dimension to Michael's cold disposition towards Tom. Michael left Kaye under Tom's care and responsibility, and she went and got an abortion (which Tom incorrectly told him was a miscarriage). Michael's loss of trust in Tom stems to a great extent from this perceived failure on Tom's part. Also, this scene is the second time in the movie that Michael lashes out at Tom, the first time being when he repeatedly asks if the baby he lost was a boy and Tom dithers.
Michael has always been a soldier. He is a soldier and cannot be with his family.
He always has to leave his family to protect them.
So Tom, trying to be part of the family, couldn't understand Michael and he was hurt.
Michael had Vito’s nature, Tom had Vito’s nurturing. Michael and Tom both felt lonely in the family. Michael was lonely because he had a different nurturing than his family. Tom was lonely a because of his different nature than the family. Michael and Tom both respected and loved each other it’s just that they were both at odds to living up to Vito
Another peerless critique and dissection of this outstanding film, thanks and enjoy your weekend there 👍
Tom is exceptional at his job. You have to remember Tom learned from the best which is Vito. Vito always study your enemies, only take out who you need to take out. Michael’s personal feelings got in the way allot. Which is why he wanted to wipe out his enemies.
Tom was a straggist like Vito
Tom was responsible for protecting Kay and the children.
Tom either knew that Kay was having an abortion (a cardinal sin in the Catholic faith) or Tom was too stupid to see it coming.
Either way, Tom allowed that abortion on his "watch", and he did not tell Michael the truth; Tom lied and said it was a miscarriage.
So, Michael needs an excuse to vent his anger at Tom.
I think it stems to the past even when Tom was always thinking what was best for mike like in the end of the movie when they are waiting for their father to sing happy birthday
I’ve always been kind of surprised that Meyer Lansky didn’t try to sue Paramount for how accurately he’s depicted by Hyman Roth. From Havana casinos, his Jewish heritage to being denied entry into Israel at the end of his life.
He would have incriminated himself if he had done so. Can you imagine what would come up in court in order to ‘win’ his case?
@@arnesaknussemm2427 it would have been a civil case between him and Paramount. He wouldn’t have gone to prison. Nor would the FBI have gotten involved.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 and the things portrayed in the movie are all common knowledge. He didn’t dispute the fact he was involved in casinos. Or the matter with his Jewish heritage and Israel. Those things happened. He even looks like Lansky. And said the same things as him.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 the fact that they were portraying him as a mobster in the movie would have worked in Lanskys favor even more so. If after 50 years they couldn’t find anything to convict him on, a lawsuit regarding the exploitation of his likeness and image wouldn’t have done him any harm.
When tom was walking past fredo showing Anthony the fishing rod he gave them a look and adjusted his tie. Maybe he knew……
Of course Tom new. At that point in the movie Tom is the only living member of that family that is on Michael's level of intellect. He knew a lot without Michael having to spell things out for him.
Amazing video.
This is a very good topic i have always wondered this one myself i do feel in the end Michael was lashing out and being rude cause at this point he did not trust anyone and he did see him maybe leaving the family for more money somewhere else to be betrayal.
Michael can't trust anyone in his mind and heart
Im surprised you didn't mention 'Kays abortion. No way she could had left the property to get an abortion, without Tom knowing it.🤔
I too have had my theories about the orange Michael is eating. (I never knew I would type that, but anyway,) At first I thought it was him sacrificing his soul, but then, there is a scene in the movie where Vito, post Fanucci murder, buys an orange. As we all know, he didn't die in the movie, so what else could it be? Well, I figured, in those stages of their lives, (Michael and Vito) they were seen as bigger than life, almost even invincible. Vito buying an orange and Michael eating an orange could mean that they are invincible in this stage of their lives.
No Michael eating orange represents murder deaths that they are planning, death that is about to happen..
As Coppola himself said while commenting second godfather
Like they say it lonely at the top and heavy is the head with the crown
When Michael tells Tom “If history has taught us anything is that anyone can be killed” I’ve always thought he was talking about the situation with McCluskey and Sollozzo and how Tom was convinced Sollozzo couldn’t be touch because he was being guarded by McCluskey and that made him “Invulnerable” of course Michael figured a way around that
True but he had no idea what Michael was thinking. In Tom's head Michael wasn't or doesn't wanna be part of the family business. Michael at that point made a decision to help and he knew his position at the time being labeled a "civilian" was his secret weapon to use on Sollozzo & Mcclusky
In my opinion this is Michael's lowest point. Even lower than the killing of Fredo. Because at least I could be convinced with rational thought why you would kill a brother who betrayed you. But a loving brother like Tom Hagen, being treated like this is completely unacceptable.
Fredo didn't betray Michael.
He fucked up.
And by the way Tom was planning to leave Michael
Love by sleeping with sonny wife? Sleep with Luca brasi gf? Fyi tom hagen almost got killed by luca brasi
My interpretation of Michael being cold to Tom he viewed him as being weak you cannot leave an enemy like Roth alive you have to wipe him out
Because they were writing out Tom Hagen because of a salary dispute which he never received😢😢😢
Simple: the Corleone M.O. is to coerce loyalty with threats and flattery.
"You're out Tom"
I feel like the "...anyone can be killed" line is in reference to the Mcclusky/Sollozzo hit
What surprised me somewhat was that Tom had a mistress.
Michael is simply afraid that Tom would have more influence in the family after Sonny's death. Michael is a paranoid guy, he wouldn't want Tom to have more power.
I always thought of this as Michael either testing Tom and/or offering Tom an exit- in involvement with Fredo's murder. If Tom can convince Michael he has won, there is no need to kill Roth or Fredo. Michael offers the out, if Tom is unable "to come along in these things" -ie. killing Fredo.
I think you nailed it! Lol
Michael was just becoming more and more isolated.
Man, was Robert Duvall missed in Godfather 3. It wouldn't have fixed the film but it would have helped a lot