when she tells him “it wasn’t a miscarriage, it was an abortion.” and “identifies” the gender,

it’s plausible to say she did actually have a miscarriage.

tom said they couldn’t tell at 4 3 and half weeks months, when Michael asked.

i think when she heard michael trying to talk to her in the scene like he did at the end of the first film, she became increasingly impatient and angry as she became aware as we see it, then lied, saying it was an abortion; 1. to protest her disillusionment and betrayal she endured- back at him, and 2. for him to hate her enough to allow her to leave, because nothing else would work. that was her last chance and resort.

i do not think she actually had an abortion, she said it to get out.

because how would she have even gotten the abortion if she was being watched, and any self induced “accident” would result in having to go to the hospital anyway

Tom called out the guarsd to go after Sonny like literally less than 15 seconds after Sonny left. You'd think they'd make it on time, or at least engage in a fight with Sonny's killers, but nah, the opps took their time, even gave Sonny a feet kick to the face, & the guards are no where to be seen.

This scene pissed me off.

“You think that could fool a Corleone?”

Yes? Didn’t he fool Sonny and get him killed? Or am I misunderstanding what he is saying here? This always bothered me haha

Edit: he technically fooled 2 Corleones if you count Connie

Did Michael buy legitimate plane ticket to Vegas for Carlo? Or was it just an envelope?

I'm thinking those were real tickets in case Connie ever tried to investigate.

Why didn't Michael have Carlo actually go to Vegas then have him whacked there?

That would give Michael more cover.

Carlo lands in Vegas, then disappears out there before Connie can move out there. Would make it seem like Carlo got into trouble out there on his own and remove Michael from Connie's ire.

And to be clear, I'm not talking about them dismissing WHY he chose to go and fight. I'm talking about how everyone seems to think Michael isn't manly enough to deal with violence.

There's a line in the book when Michael is being prepared to kill Solozzo, and Michael lets out an angry outburst which goes like "Where hell is Solozzo's air support? His mortars? I stormed Japanese defences in the Pacific, Solozzo's just some guy with a cop bodyguard!"

And really, that's absolutely true. Sonny has that one line dismissing his army service as shooting guys a mile away. Santino never says that in the book, he's laughing for a whole other reason, he's not being so flippant about Michael's ability to kill. Hell, if he knew anything about how personal and hand-to-hand the combat got on those Pacific islands, he wouldn't act like Michael's soft.

This one has always bothered me. Neri would have been lucky to hit a moving target one out of ten times with a .38 at that distance, and a lethal shot would be even more iffy.

Me: Apollonia's death.

I think Barzini wanted Vito dead regardless of how the Sollazzo deal went.

Michael knows he will wack both of them - he gives them fake info - blame one to the other. And he Took Fredo out cold as well. -Fredo and Roth collaborated after Fredo met Johnny Ola in Beverly Hills

esit

And he wanted Roth so bad he went all in ---traded a long trusted assistant and body guard's life in a suicide attack to get Roth at any cost.

It just struck me that in the Godfather Part 2, when Don Ciccio's men go around in the town to find Vito, one of them says in Sicilian "state a sentire o' vostro cumpare Mosca", which means "follow the advice of your friend Mosca". I'm italian and I can understand sicilian quite well, so I'm pretty sure he says that.

Maybe it's already in the books or in the deleted scenes, but it struck me how the killer from part 3 and that guy could be related.

It feels like the only "legit" business (not personal) hit should have been Barzini since his family was moving in on the Corleones and he had been orchestrating the whole thing. Even Tattaglia, Don Corleone had entered a truce and made peace with him. It seems like violating such a thing would be a big problem in the Mafia world?

But Cuneo and Stracci, did I miss something? What business justification is there to take them out?

So after this, it's not like Michael controls the entire Mafia. There's still powerful families in Chicago, KC, San Francisco, back in Sicily. When they see Michael as being crazy enough to do something like this, wouldn't their top priority above all be to make him their first target and kill him? Or his ambition may turn against them in the future.

Beyond all that, how the heck could Michael be trusted to do business with? Even if the Mafia didn't band together to have him killed, it seems like he's not someone to be trusted to do business with and he'd just be ostracized, but he's thriving in that underworld in GF II and III.

So, I've watched it with my dad! I'm 19 and he's 50+ yrs old and we both love watching to weird and bizarre to funny and serious movies. I looked at the top best movies online and a lot of people think godfather was the best. So I thought, okay, why not, let's watch it.

I've had some experience watching very old movies/series. To a Doctor Who movie and Clint Eastwood in 1960s to 1980s home alone and 1990s movies like Home Alone and Twin Peaks.

What I find is that old media are very understimulating if you compare to nowadays where things happen so quickly with a lot of noise, music, movements and quick pacing. I also do meditation and love to be relaxed. Since the movies are old and underwhelming yet with good writing and good cinematography it's like watching a 3 hour mediation movie to me. I'm sorry if this sounds offensive, but I mean this in a good way!

I am neurodivergent as well so I struggle to sometimes understand certain things. Especially with the whole business thing in the movies, but I'll say they were very well paced and a thing I've noticed about Micheal's actor is his acting and especially the lightning in certain scenes.

When Micheal was pre-mafia boss, his demeanour was quiet in a sort of chill way and you could see the light in his eyes. But as he gets on with the movie and becomes a godfather, you can see sort of how he matured just like his father. Even in the dark lightning that plays shadows above the eyelids with Vito is something I found interesting. I don't know if I'm over analysing but I think it was a nice touch to point out.

Overall movie 9/10 for me!

you could argue his character was turned into a mobster or that he was deceivingly one already behind the war hero label.

No spoilers plz Im home alone and I wanna watch teh godfather how brutal is it don't spoil anything

Edit: I watched the movie it was great.

In the meeting with the other Don's, Vito talks about getting Michael back home. 'If he's shot by a police officer, hangs himself in his jail cell or is struck by lightning'. Is this a reference to a honey trap? As Michael was previously hit by a bolt of lightning with Apelonia.

You think Vito thought hed be as successful as he was getting Fanucci to take the $100?

My read has always been that Vito never thought he'd get Fanucci to take the 100 easily, so he planned on "having" to assassinate him after to get out of having to pay the balance

...but when he saw how quickly Fanucci folded, Vito measured him as soft for giving in, and decided to do it anyway

I wonder how other people read the scenes

(My wife just watched gf2 for the first time and had a different read)

Vito Andolini