"The Godfather, I and II": Patterns of Corruption

Author(s): Anthony Ambrogio

Source: Film Criticism , Fall, 1978, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Fall, 1978), pp. 35-44
Published by: Allegheny College

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44018614

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Allegheny College is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Film
Criticism

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
"The Godfather, I and II":
Patterns of Corruption
Anthony Ambrogio

NBC's 12-15 November 1 977 telecast of Godfather I and II in reedited,

almost strictly chronological form, padded by the addition of scenes previously
cut. provided some insights into and confirmations of elements in the original
films but didn't improve upon the initial structure of thf pictures, particularly
the point-counterpoint of Godfather II. The 4 4 complete novel for television'*
received disappointing ratings and even provoked some unfavorable critical
reassessment of the original films.1 This lukewarm reception contrasts sharply
to the rave reviews Godfather I and II received when first released in 1972 and
1974 respectively In faci in 1974, many critics proclaimed II even better
i han its predecessor . 2 'o doubt, IPs dual- plot structure contributed to this
preference, in //, the early History of v >i<» Corleone (né Andolini), the God-
lather adapted (and considerably embellished > from the unfilmed portions of
the book, alternates with the continuing story oí his son Michae. »Al Pacino),
the new Godfather, taken up from where / left it. Together, these two sections
of II provide a fascinating framework, backward and forward in time, for the
original film. TV disrupted this framework; the Godfather saga lost its epic
quality by no longer beginning in medias res , with I.
Despite the flashbacks, which comprise almost half of its running time,
Godfather II was advertised as "Michael's story," and most critics were quick
to see it as such, since it completes Michael's degeneration, begun in /, from a
nice ex-college bov. ex- war hero to a ruthless criminal. (For that matter, / is
'Michael's story," too.) What critics failed to see was the artful way in which
this »ransi ormation is accomplished.^ •
For U' modern section, director Francis Ford Coppola and his co-scenarist,
Godfather novelist Mario Puzo, the architects of Godfather /, simply went back
to their drawing board, unrolled their old blueprints, and remade The God-
father with, however, several significant differences. They repeated the
pattern they established in I while playing upon it numerous subtle, clever
variations in order to underline the further and complete corruption of the
Corleone family: every important incident in the first film has a parallel in the
second. Carlos Clare ns was the first critic to catalogue in print several of the

35

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
many parallel sequences between / and //, but he doesn't realize or stress the
reason for these repetitions or note that they're imperfect repetitions- by
design.4 A complete catalogue- and comparison- of these inexact parallels
will reveal that reason and design.
Godfather I begins with a large, outdoor celebration- the wedding of
the Godfather's daughtei - while the Godfather holds court inside, taking care
of business and personal matters (e.g. undertaker Bonasera's request that the
Godfather avenge his daughter; godson Johnny Fontane's request for a part in
a movie); Godfather II begins the same way- the new Godfather throws a gala
outdoor party in honor of his son's- first communion and also attends to
business and personal matters (e.g. Frankie Pentangeli's trouble with the
Guzzardo brothers; his sister's parade of boyfriends and neglect of her child-
ren). In each movie, we see that these initial matters are later acted upon ; the
most notable- and most parallel- of them are the intimidation of movie
producer Jack Woltz (John Marley) in I and of Senator Pat Geary (G. D.
Spradlin) in II. Both the producer and the Senator- after refusing to accede
to a Corleone request- undergo ordeals which persuade them to change their
minds (the proverbial "offer they can't refuse"): they wake up stunned and
bloody in bed. Woltz finds his Arabian stud horse's severed head under the
covers and Geary finds his favorite s & m prostitute cut up and dead under
the covers. (Clarens also mentions these parallels.)
Early in/, there is an unsuccessful attempt on the Godfather's life; even
earlier in //, there is an attempt on the new Godfather's life. Both films pro-
ceed from these points to tell tales of gang warfare and betrayal within the
organization and the family. Barzini (Richard Conte) surreptitiously leads the
Five Families in opposition to the Godfather's organization in /; Hyman Roth
(Lee Strasberg) duplicitously threatens Michael's operations in II. ( In both
films, the factions ostensibly reconcile. In /, Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando)
calls a meeting of the Five Families; they sit around a conference table while
the Godfather makes an impassioned plea for peace. This plea is apparently
heeded, and everybody becomes "business" partners again, planning to go into
dope dealing together. In //, Michael Corleone and Hyman Roth seem to form
an uneasy alliance; they also become business partners and sit around a con-
ference table with others, planning to divide up Cuba together. Of course,
reconciliation in both films is only a smoke screen; violence between the two
factions erupts again before each film ends. Just as his father balked at be-
coming involved with drug dealing, so Michael balks at investing money in
Roth's Cuban scheme- a smart move, since Castro's guerillas take over the
country shortly afterward. However, in a reversal inspired by I- wherein
Michael prevents his father's attempted murder while Don Vito is recovering in
the hospital- Michael is prevented in //, from having Roth murdered while
Roth is recovering in the hospital. Michael becomes the unscrupulous criminal
his father's opponents were.
Trusted Corleone lieutenant Tessio (Abe Vigoda) betrays the family to
Barzini in /; in II, another trusted lieutenant, Frankie Pentangeli (Michael V.
Gazzo), Clemenza's successor, betrays the family to the government. Each pays
the price for his treachery. Similarly, brother-in-law Carlo Rizzi (Gianni Russo)
betrays the family and sets up Sonny (James Caan) in I; in //, brother Fredo
(John Cazale) betrays the family and sets up Michael. In each case the delin-
quent family member is given a grace period (no one touches Carlo while Don
Vito is alive, nor Fredo while Mama Corleone is alive) before he, like Tessio
and Pentangeli, is eliminated. Both movies have as their climax a blood bath, a
series of multiple murders carried out under Michael's orders; he uses these

36

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
executions to consolidate his organization's power, ruthlessly wiping out
"business" opponents (Barzini, the heads of the Five Families, and Moe Green
[Alex Rocco] in /; Hyman Roth in //), traitors to the group (Tessio in /;
Pentangeli in //), and the traitors to the family (Carlo in I; Fredo in II). Clarens
also notes this parallel slaughter.
But the parallels do not stop there. In /, Michael convincingly lies to his
wife, Kay (Diane Keaton), assuring her he had nothing to do with Carlo's
death, then ushers her out of his office and closes the door on her, effectively
shutting her out of his life as he goes back to business. In II , the latent prob-
lems in their relationship (re)surface, and her resentment over his refusal to go
legitimate causes her to leave him. Exerting his Godfatherly authority, Michael
retains custody of their children. On one of her clandestine visits to see them,
Kay tarries too long trying to get her son to kiss her goodbye. He is on the
verge, about to come embrace her, when Michael returns to find Kay on the
threshold. He goes to the door and quietly, firmly, shuts it in her face. This
gesture is a repetition of his closing her out in I, but it takes on added weight
here because of the different circumstances and has a note of finality to it.
Indeed, we do not see Kay again in II.
As is obvious, Coppola and Puzo clothe their retelling of / in different
terms, disguising the similarities between the two films by using different
locales (Florida, Cuba, and more of Nevada than in /) and the later-model cars,
hair styles, and fashions of the fifties in //, and by adding to II a variety of
contemporary detail (the Cuban revolution, the Kefauver-like Senate sub-
committee investigation)- all to obscure its thematic and narrative duplication
of I. Besides returning to / for their inspiration, Coppola and Puzo also return
to the book, incorporating flashbacks of the early life and career of Vito
Corleone (here played by Robert DeNiro), which helps to contribute to the
deceptive "new look" of II. However, Coppola and Puzo's talent and integrity
save II from being a mere copy of /: they use its repetitions to expand upon
ideas put forth in /, and they use its Vito Corleone flashbacks to counterpoint
Michael's contemporary story; they develop possibilities which are only
suggested in the hastily and sketchily written (but admittedly fascinating)
pages of Puzo's novel.
Godfather /Ts repetition of key incidents in Godfather I shows the
perpetuation of crime and the criminal empire in the second generation of
Corleones. At the same time, ZTs imperfect repetitions show the expansion of
evil, the degeneration of crime and of that criminal empire. Coppola and Puzo
subtly illustrate the loss of any kind of tradition or honor in this dirty business
and the gradual and complete corruption of Michael Corleone, a process which
begins in /-when he avenges himself upon Captain McClusky (Sterling
Hayden), the crooked cop who broke his jaw, and Sollozzo, the "Turk" (Al
Lettieri), who had his father shot- but which reaches completion here.
Godfather II may begin with a big celebration, as does /, but the latter
celebration is inferior to the former. There is none of the ethnic verve of r s
wedding in //'s expensive, homogenized communion party, situated in the alien
land of Lake Tahoe. Don Vito's suburban New York estate, though somewhat
removed from the city, is still close to his roots and to the heart of the Italian
community, of which he and his family remain very much a part. In Nevada,
the Corleones are strangers in a strange land, where people cannot even pro-
nounce their name correctly.^ In Nevada, there is no Italian community: in/,
Ital i an- American singing sensation Johnny Fontane (Al Martino) croons a love
song at Connie Corleone's wedding; in //, a local boys' choir- practically all
blue-eyed blonds- sings some innocuous "inspirational" piece at Anthony

37

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Corleone's communion party. In /, everybody dances to sprightly or romantic
Italian music- Tessio with a little girl, Clemenza with a Corleone soldier, the
Godfather with his daughter; in //, all the party guests sit around while two
heavily made-up performers do a theatrically torrid tango on stage. In /, an old
man leads the wedding guests in a bawdy Sicilian rendition of "C'e la luna 'n
mezzo mare,'' to which everybody- even Mama Corleone (Morgana King)- adds
a verse or sings the chorus; in //, Frankie Pentangeli (a New Yorker, in Nevada
to see Michael) tries to get the WASPish band to play something Italian,
something as familiar as "La Taran tella," and all it can come up with is "Pop
Goes The Weasel"! All the guests laugh, and Pentangeli is ridiculed off the
stage; the old ways are shown to be inoperative in modern -American Nevada.
This action sets the tone for the rest of the modern segment of II.
Central to Godfather I is the Corleone family structure; that family
structure completely collapses in II. No family portrait is taken on this day, as
one is at Connie's wedding. Of course, when II begins, the family is no longer
complete anyway: some of the Corleones (Don Vito, Sonny) are already
gone- and, by the film's end, only one (Michael) will remain. Also, when II
begins, several surviving Corleones' present conditions reveal the family's
further degeneration: Fredo is married to a non-Italian "broad" over whom he
has no control, and twice- divorced Connie (Talia Shire) neglects her children
and Hits around the world and from man to man, still making the same mis-
takes in her choice of mates. (Her latest is Merle Johnson [Troy Donahue]-
another somewhat beefy pretty-boy in her first husband Carlo's image.) These
two are a far cry here from the naive innocents they were at the beginning of/,
where Connie was in her virginal wedding white and Fredo^still ineffectual and
awkward in his tux- was unattached and unharmed by marital and other
entanglements.
The attempt on Michael's life comes much sooner in II than does the
attempt on Don Vito in I. Although Michael escapes injury whereas the Don
does not, the attack on him is much closer to home than the one on Don Vito :
his bedroom is riddled with bullets and his wife's life is endangered along with
his. Later, Michael violently decries this infamita , bitterly complaining to
Frankie Pentangeli about this breach in the unwritten code: "In my home! In
my bedroom, where my wife sleeps, where my children come and play with
their toys." The assassination attempt (like Senator Geary's earlier insulting
remark about Michael's "fucking family") is not kept on a business level, as is
the attempt on Don Vito; Michael's family is indiscriminately threatened.
The attack on Michael is just one example of how much more corrupt
everything is in II. The Corleone organization destroys a race horse to get its
way with Jack Woltz in /; in //, it murders a woman to get its way with Pat
Geary. ® Treachery in II penetrates nearer to the inner circle: brother-in-law
Carlo- the outsider- betrays the family in/; brother Fredo- an insider, a blood
relative- betrays it in II.' Likewise, Tessicr-the lesser of the two Corleone
lieutenants (and not Clemenza, the more favored caporegime )&- betrays the
organization in /, but Frankie Pentangeli- -Clemenza' s successor, to whom the
family entrusted its original New York territory, who now lives in the
Corleones' former home- betrays it in 11.^
Though less extensive than Godfather /' s blood bath, IPs is more
brutal: /' s murders are all "necessary," their vengeance "legitimate"; //'s
murders are gratuitous - they represent an extreme form of vindictiveness on
Michael's part. He has to eliminate Moe Green, Barzini, and the heads of the
Five Families as a matter of "business" in I- in order to solidify his family's
position, and because Barzini is out to get him first- but, in//, he doesn't need

38

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
to murder Hyman Roth because the old man is no longer a threat to him or his
business. Roth's empire, power, and influence are no more ; Roth himself is no
more than an exile from his adopted country, Israel- a walking corpse because
of the disease that will terminate his life in a matter of months- about to be
imprisoned by the authorities as soon as he sets foot on American soil. In fact,
the hardest part about killing Roth, Michael's henchmen tell him, is getting a
clear shot at him: from the moment Roth gets off his plane, he'll be sur-
rounded by reporters and police and F.B.I, agents, ready to take him to jail.
But Michael insists the job be done anyway. In /, Carlo- a despicable person
anyway- is actually responsible for Sonny's death and deserves to die, but, in
//, Fredo- a poor, misguided fool- only bumblingly and unwittingly helps
Michael's enemies, never dreaming Michael might come to any bodily harm
because of it, so Michael's insistence on Fredo's execution (especially since he
knows Fredo's mental limitations and has escaped injury anyway) is utterly
unnecessary.
Similarly, Pentangeli's betrayal in II is not as damaging nor as per-
sonally dangerous to Michael as Tessi o's is in I. Fear, not selfish reasons of ga
motivates Pentangeli: the Guzzardo brothers have tried to kill him (their
abortive attempt here parallels the Tattaglia's successful one on Luca Brasi in
/-both Pentangeli and Brasi are lured to a bar and strangled from behind); he
mistakenly believes Michael is responsible for this attack and only turns to the
authorities out of self-preservation. Therefore, his betrayal is not as calculated
nor as deadly as Tessio's: it only involves turning state's evidence, not being
party to murder.
The Corleone organization neutralizes both Tessio's and Pentangeli's
threats, but it neutralizes Pentangeli's before any real damage is done: the
Corleones fly in Frankie's brother from Italy and prominently display him next
to Michael when Pentangeli appears before the Senate subcommittee. The sight
of his brother in the company of his former boss grimly reminds Pentangeli of
the Corleones' power, and he tells the committee nothing. Thus, he never goes
as far as Tessio, who has already arranged a meeting between Michael and
Barzini in /, at which time Michael is to be killed. His actual betrayal of
Michael prevented, Pentangeli- convicted of numerous crimes- is doomed to
spend the rest of his life in prison; however, that is not revenge enough for
Michael, and he persuades Tom Hägen to go to Pentangeli and make him an
offer he can't refuse: his life in exchange for the complete monetary and
physical security of his family. So, we next find Pentangeli dead in his bath, his
wrists slit.
There is some reason for Michael's cold and calculating behavior in /: he
must regain the family's lost position in the underworld and hold his family
together. In light of this "necessity," his elimination of his enemies, his lies to
his wife, and his other actions are all understandable- even justifiable from his
point of view. However, his behavior becomes more of a habit in II, the means
become an end in themselves. This change in Michael, along with and as part of
the many parallels to /, best illustrates the altered, harsher tone of II. Michael
becomes less and less human as II progresses until, like Paul Newman's Hud, he
is left with nothing but his empire and his wealth.
One by one, Michael cuts himself off or is cut off from his family. He
banishes his brother Fredo when he discovers Fredo has been disloyal to him
and only reconciles with Fredo after their mother's death so that Fredo will be
conveniently close by when Michael gives the order to have him murdered.
Michael has already demoted Tom Hägen from consigliore to the family's Las
Vegas lawyer in /; in //, he shunts him aside and distrusts him more and

39

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
more. ^He loses his mother to illness. Before her death, he has a heart-to-heart
talk with her, just as he has with his father in /. However, while Don Vito gives
him vital advice, telling him that whoever approaches him with a deal to meet
Barzini will be the traitor, his mother's advice about how to be strong like his
father and keep the family together in his time of crisis is useless. He loses his
wife because of his adamant refusal to give up crime and make the Corleone
family legitimate. She tells him she aborted their last baby because she wants
to stop this process- which we can see from film to film- of the continuation
and perpetuation of one Corleone generation to the next of crime and violence
and revenge, these "recessive traits" growing more dominant in each succeeding
Corleone. He slaps her when he hears about the abortion, when she calls their
marriage an abortion, and thus commits another crime against his family,
against his own wife- a crime which only the uncouth Carlo, who constantly
beat his wife, Connie, is guilty of in/. And, although he keeps his sister and his
children with him, it is only through power and not through love. Connie has
been through the mill; after her broken marriages and countless affairs, she has
nowhere to go and no one to turn to but Michael, who needs her because he
needs someone to take care of his children. (The final irony/indignity for
neglectful mother Connie is that she ends up entirely domesticated, chape-
roning a brood of kids, her own and Michaers.) He keeps his children to spite
Kay and because he must possess them- not because he wants them. He is
hardly with them; he merely orders subordinates, such as Tom Hägen, to buy
expensive presents for them (especially for his son) because he's usually away
for their birthdays and the holidays. *2
Michael Corleone's saga is contrasted to his father's through the
parallels to Godfather I and by counterpoint to the interspersed flashbacks of
young Vito's life. In 1901, nine-year-old Vito loses his family to one of those
insane Sicilian vendettas: local Mafia chieftain Ciccio has his father and older
brother-and his mother-killed. Friends help Vito escape to America. There,
he is shunted around on Ellis Island, given the wrong name, and quarantined
for small pox. A pathetic scene shows the boy alone in a bare room, singing to
himself (an important image to compare to later shots of Michael). His window
affords him a clear view of the back of the Statue of Liberty.
Later (1917), we see Vito the young man now integrated into American
society- or at least into Itali an- American society: he has a job and friends and
has begun a family of his own. When local Black Hand bigwig Fanucci (Gastone
Moschin) threatens his job and friends and family, he eliminates that threat by
eliminating Fanucci. Soon, he and friends Clemenza and Tessio are prospering
in the "olive-oil importing" business, and they gain and command the respect
of the community. Now that circumstances permit it, Vito takes his family
back to his homeland, where he evens up his score with the now-ancient Don
of Corleone.
Vito's vengeance is extra-legal and reprehensible, but it is justified- if
no way else- in the manner of Greek tragedy, where only more bloodshed
erases a crime of bloodshed. However, like Michael's trio of killings at the end
of //, young Vito's two murders are excessive. For example, after shooting
Fanucci twice and killing him, Vito shoves his revolver in the dead man's
mouth and blows Fanucci's brains out. And Vito feels compelled to plunge his
knife into Ciccio even though the old Mafia Don is on his last legs- in worse
shape than Hyman Roth- when Vito confronts him. (Nearly blind and prac-
tically deaf, he doesn't recognize Vito and can't even hear the name of the
person Vito has come to avenge. The added TV footage here underscores Vito's
excesses by showing him brutally murdering Ciccio's old henchmen, too- as
CI arenš also notes.)

40

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Middle age mellows Vito Corleone, as / shows. He operates his organiza-
tion like a business; there is a civilizing influence upon it and him. He avoids
open bloodshed whenevever possible and conducts his affairs on a business
level, keeping all personal reasons out of them. Just the opposite happens to
Michael Corleone. Starting off at a fairly civilized level, he gradually degener-
ates. The policies of Vito Corleone's heirs become increasingly immoral,
beginning in I with hot-headed Sonny's murderous, manic campaign against the
Five Families when his father is hospitalized. Michael deceptively "normalizes"
conditions when he takes over- until //, when his policies become totally
immoral, divorced from any kind of code of ethics.
The last shot of the contemporary sequence of //- a revealing one of
Michael, alone - comes in for a close-up of his face, a face which has taken on
certain sinister aspects ever since McClusky broke his jaw in /, but which looks
colder and harder than ever now. This scene shows clearly what Michael has
become and gains even more force by comparison with the final sequence of//,
into which it dissolves- another flashback, but to Michael's past, not Vito's.
This segment surprises (and delights) the viewer because it seems to be some
unshown portion of Z Actually, its date is 7 December 1941, almost five years
before the beginning of that film. The place is the Corleone dining room, where
the family is preparing for a birthday. Sonny brings his friend Carle home for
dinner and practically pushes his sister onto Carlo's lap throughout the scene (a
perhaps too-easy irony, but revealing nonetheless: the seeds of Sonny's,
Carlo's, and Connie's destruction are planted early, here). All the brothers-
Sonny, Tom Hägen, Fredo, and Michael- sit around the table discussing Japan's
attack on Pearl Harbor; Sonny dominates the conversation, complaining about
the nerve of those Japs to start a war on his father's birthday (another, more
subtle irony: it is significant- fitting- that Don Vito's birthday should be on
Pearl Harbor Day, since the Corleone birthright is one of war and slaughter, as
the two pictures make clear). Tessio, who brought in the birthday cake,
mentions that 30,000 men have rushed to enlist. Sonny sneers, wondering
who'd be stupid enough to do a thing like that; Michael quietly says that he
would: he enlisted in the Marines that morning. Sonny immediately greets this
news with a belligerent attack, Tom with an attempt at logical argument
against Michael's position, and everybody else with shock.
Sonny can't understand how Michael could do such a stupid thing,
especially on their father's birthday; he tells him that the only group ever
worth fighting for is one's own flesh and blood. Their argument is interrupted
by the arrival of Don Vito, and everybody rushes off to wish him happy
birthday, leaving Michael sitting alone at the table, contemplating, while they
sing "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow" off-screen. (Michael's loneliness here
contrasts to his father's isolation when he first comes to the U.S. Then, Vito's
isolation was societally ordained ; now, Michael's is self-made. )
In both the contemporary and the flashback sections of //, then,
Michael is left alone at the end, in an isolation he has created against his own
family. And, while on December 7 his isolation may be based on a nobler
principle, allegiance to a cause or ideal larger than that of Family, his present
isolation - after he has succeeded to his father's position and is now supposedly
dedicated to his father's principles and the concept of Family- is due to no
high ideal at all, not even that of blood being thicker than water, since his
family no longer exists- since he has destroyed it. The movie ends with the
image of the earlier Michael, sitting by himself at the table, but this shot- this
entire flashback segment- has been superimposed over, has evolved from, the
final shot in the contemporary segment and everything that has preceded it: we

41

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
are made to see how far Michael has fallen. (The importance of this scene
coming where it does is evident: the otherwise chronologically presented TV
version does not tamper with its original position.)
The wheel has come full circle- and then some. The last surviving
member of his vendetta-depleted family, Don Vito had come to America and
established a new family, had moved from personal vendetta to businesslike
behavior, to rationality and respectability. College student and war hero
Michael, at one time not part of the family business, had been the prime
example of that new rationality and respectability, his family's best and
brightest hope. In /, when it is already too late and Michael has become inex-
tricably involved in the family business, his father tells him during their heart-
to-heart talk about those former high hopes. ~He thought Michael might have
become "Senator C ori eone... Governor Corleone.,." Michael waves away the
never-to-be-fulfilled dream. Then, for the rest of / and throughout//, he slides
steadily downward from business to personal vendetta to senseless killing.
The two films never specifically deal with the motivation for Michael's
degeneration, but the audience never really questions that motivation, either. A
viewer takes Michael's actions for granted because he senses that / and II deal
with larger issues in which personalities are submerged and subject to manipu-
lation by greater forces: they are a working-out of the age old notion about the
sins of the father and the more recent notion about the souring of the Ameri-
can dream.
We don't expect Michael to escape from his heritage, and he doesn't.
Ironically, when he finally, whole-heartedly embraces that heritage, he cannot
cope with it. He is the victim of his own wrong choices and the fact that the
younger generation is not equal to the older. Faced with a set of circumstances
similar to those his father surmounted, he tries to but cannot solve them in as
satisfactory a fashion (because everything- including Michael- is worse than it
was in his father's time). Like father, like son, but- as much as he would like to
be- Michael can no more be Don Vito than hot-headed Sonny or feeble Fredo
can. His love for his father eventually involves him in the family organization
he sought to avoid: his quick thinking at the hospital, which saves Don Vito's
life, earns him a broken jaw from McClusky and triggers in him his father's
streak of revenge (though he insists to his brothers that his murder of Sollozzo
and McClusky is "just business"). Hiding out in Corleone, Michael relives his
father's Sicilian experience and loses a loved one (his Italian wife) to a ven-
detta. After this episode, Michael- unlike his fatheir-can never escape from the
cycle of murder and retribution bred in him. He remains the Sicilian killer his
father outgrew. Don Vito, during the conciliatory meeting he convenes in /,
voluntarily ends the violence: both he and Tattaglia have lost a son; he says
they must call it quits - there can be no more killing.
Michael can never call it quits. He is incapable of adopting and still
preserving his roots. He displaces his family from the East to the West, and is
then bewildered when it falls apart in this incompatible environment. He clings
to inappropriate customs, not making allowances for new conditions, and
ignores the more important traditions. Always out of step with his family,
when he thinks he is acting most like his father, he is actually most unlike
him; he tries too hard, and destroys his family while trying to preserve it.
Other directors have sometimes re-made their own films, often to
rethink and expand upon themes set forth, to expose flaws inherent but not
apparent in their originals (e.g. Ford in The Searchers [1956] and Two Rode
Together [1961], Hawks in Rio Bravo [1959] and El Dorado [1967] and
again in Rio Lobo [1970]), but none have succeeded quite so artfully as

42

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Coppola and Puzo in the two Godfathers . By telling the tale of the Godfather
and then essentially retelling it in order to show the deterioration in the second
generation of Corleo nes, they masterfully make the same thing different and
the same theme more far-reaching.

NOTES

1 See especially Carlos CI arenš, "The Godfather Saga," Film

Comment , 14, no. 1 (Jan.-Feb., 1978), pp. 21-23.

2 For two prominent examples, see Judith Crist, "All in the Family
New York , 23 Dec. 1974, pp. 70-71, and Pauline Kael, "Fathers and Sons,"
The New Yorker , 23 Dec. 1974, pp. 63-66.

3 I partially except Richard Schickel who, in "The Final Act of a

Family Epic," Time , 16 Dec. 1974, pp. 70 and 73, notes the repetition-
alteration technique used in the wedding-communion party celebrations of I
and //.

4 "Whatever seemed to work in the first is repeated almost identically

in the second" ("The Godfather Saga," p. 22). " Almost identically" is the key
here. Clarens continues: "This calculated arrangement of episodes that recall
each other has been disturbed by the new TV format." True, but the arrange-
ment is so much a part of the two films' inherent structures that it carries over
anyway. For example, TV segments 1 and 3 end at the same parallel point- in
the middle of the wedding and communion celebrations, which then begin the
next days' episodes.

5 Senator Geary mangles the name "Corleone" when he speaks it

publicly. However, in private he has no trouble saying it right. His "real
American" contempt for the Corleones expresses what must be the prevailing
attitude toward Michael and his "kind." Geary- who doesn't like these dis-
placed, ethnic Easterners with their "greasy hair"- even stoops so low as to
make a disparaging remark about Michael's family: he says he doesn't care for
his "whole fucking family"- a comment which understandably angers Michael.
In New York, in /, people don't make such personal slurs- they leave their
families out of business. Even Californian Jack Woltz, Geary's parallel in /, who
makes a number of ethnic slurs when he is approached by Tom Hägen about
Johnny Fontane, never resorts to the kind of familial insult the Senator does
in//.

6 The significant look which passes between Tom Hägen, kneeling by

the dazed Senator's bed, and a Corleone torpedo, standing and wiping his
hands just inside the bathroom, makes it obvious to the audience- if such
confirmation is necessary - that the Senator is being framed for the killing
which the hit-man performed. However, an alert observer of this scene may
note- in the last shot of the bed, just before the cut- that the victim's stomach
does move. This suggests either that the "victim" is in on the frame-up or-
more likely- that the actress playing the part of the corpse is not a complete
adept in the art of shallow breathing.

43

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 7 Godfather I foreshadows Fredo's treachery in II. When Fredo tries
to defend Moe Green in /, Michael tells him, "You're my brother and I love
you. But don't ever take sides with anyone against the family again." Unfor-
tunately, Fredo does not heed these words.

® Richard Castellano 's Clemenza is given far more screen time and is
shown to be more intimate with the family than Tessio is. For example, it is
Clemenza who makes spaghetti for the group and gives Michael, whom he
addresses familiarly as "Mikie," advice, about cooking, about love, and- later,
when they're setting up Sollozzo and McClusky^about killing.

9 Clemenza himself was supposed to be the betrayer in II. However

since Richard Castellano considered his services too valuable and played
hard-to-get, he remained ungotten for II. Coppola, figuring that public identi-
fication of Castellano with Clemenza was too great to permit him to substitute
some other actor for the part, hit upon the expedient of writing Clemenza out
of the script (it's mentioned that he died of natural causes) and writing a new
character in, one who supposedly got the nod from Clemenza before he passed
on. Besides Pentangeli's overall Clemenza-like demeanor, the clearest indication
that he was meant to be Clemenza comes when he tries to explain to Michael
why he should get better treatment from the Corleones in New York: he says
he deserves it because he was with Don Vito in the old days. However, I makes
no mention of and never shows Pentangeli, whereas all other characters in II
(except Hyman Roth- a necessary afterthought on the part of the script-
writers, since they'd eliminated all of the Corleones' other enemies in I) can be
found in /. Obviously, Pentangeli's speech was originally written for Clemenza.
Thus, Pentangeli is meant to represent someone closer to the Corleones than
Tessio was.

1® With all of this excess, Michael proves himself to be far less scrupu-
lous than his father, who always only allowed an eye for an eye. When under-
taker Bonasera, in /, asks the Godfather to have the two boys who brutally
beat his daughter put to death, Don Vito tells him, "That would not be justice;
your daughter is still alive." Once Bonasera accordingly alters his request-
"Then make them suffer, as she has suffered"- the Don readily complies and
orders that the guilty duo be brutally beaten.
Michael's demotion of Hägen is all the more telling in II because it
follows on the heels of a promotion: at the beginning of//, Michael leaves Tom
in charge as acting Don while he goes to Florida, New York, and Cuba on
Hyman Roth-Frankie Pentangeli business. When he confers this post upon
Hägen, Michael tells him that he always regarded him as a brother. Hägen is
choked with emotion. "I always wanted to be thought of as a brother by you,
Mikie," he says. However, as II progresses, Michael steadily moves away from
this early growing-together; he later makes Tom wait outside while he
discusses business with some associates. This belies Michael's action at the
beginning of II when he lets Hägen sit in on his meeting with the Senator and
others, telling Geary that he trusts Tom implicitly. In the end, he becomes so
suspicious of his step-brother that he accuses him of duplicity and disloyalty.

12 When Michael returns from his months-long trip away from his fam-
ily, he sees his present-by-proxy to his son, the toy car Tom Hägen sent for
him, unused and snow-covered on the lawn. When Michael goes inside his
home, no one is there to greet him. He wanders through the house and sees
Kay at work in front of her sewing machine. She is engrossed and does not
notice him. He stands there and says nothing to her. Through these wordless
scenes, Coppola visually conveys Michael's estrangement from his family.

44

This content downloaded from

193.52.209.134 on Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:57:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms