Godfather II Query

My husband and I are having a serious argument here.

Okay, so Fredo made a deal with Johnny Ola that wound up being a hit on his brother, Michael, head of the Corleone family. Though Fredo was mislead and didn't know they would attempt to kill Michael, he did go against The Family.

Michael kicked Fredo out of the family, but said nothing would happen to him as long as their mother was alive (he did not say this to Fredo). At their mother's funeral, their sister begged Michael to forgive Fredo, and so he did.

Fredo lived on the Corleone estate for however long, and then Michael had him killed.

So which brother betrayed the other more?

I say Michael betrayed Fredo more. What Fredo did was a mistake and he was mislead. Fredo was nothing without Michael, and Michael pretended to forgive Fredo. Fredo felt safe in their home, was bonding with his nephew, and Micael offed him.

My husband says Fredo put a hit out on the head of the Corleone family, whether he was mislead or not, and Michael's revenge was clever, as well as justified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

Michael kicked Fredo out of the family, but said nothing would happen to him as long as their mother was alive. At their mother's funeral, their sister begged Michael to forgive Fredo, and so he did.

---

If I read this correctly, Michael betrayed his sister, not Fredo. He didn't promise to Fredo that he wouldn't harm him when their mother died, did he?

Did he? I never saw the second one.

Michael always tried to make his enemies feel safe before he had them killed. He plans his vengeance well, but Fredo is just a dumbass.

Either way. He let Fredo back into their home, and they hugged and Fredo cried and it was all "Awww..."

Michael said nothing would happen to Fredo while their mother was alive to one of the goons. I don't remember which one.

If you take your self out of the mob movie mentality, Micheal obviously did the more wrong by having someone killed.

But in the much more fun mob movie mentality, hmmm. Perhaps Micheal didn't want to have his brother live in fear and gave him a bit of happiness before he was killed. I can't exactly remember the circumstances, but I think Micheal just called his son back and like Fredo wouldn't have known. I'm pretty sure he was shot in the back (of the head?), too.

Yeah, he called Anthony away from their fishing trip to "go to Reno" and then had Fredo shot in the back of the head while he was saying a Hail Mary.

Michael made me sad. ;_;

Remember how Michael told Fredo off for allowing this guy Moe to take charge over the family's casino? You can kind of see this as his first and final (matters as delicate as this tend to only result in one chance) warning 'don't take sides with anyone against the family'. Families in these types of films are very close and regard loyalty very highly. Fredo's lack of perseverence is what cost him his life which is partly due to the reason why he was sent to run the casino away from the family's personal affairs. In the first film a number of people backstabbed their own families so in terms of being the head of his own (Mafia and personal) you can see why Michael did not trust him and he probably feels violation of their brotherhood is punishable by death. I haven't seen Part ii for about two years so I may be wrong when I recall that Michael did not look his brother in the eye to tell him he was forgiven and thus a promise was never set.
In terms of the way Mafia families run, what Fredo did may have been slightly worse, only because Michael pulled his off in a way that the word 'betrayal' could not really be bestowed on him through the reasoning above.

In the his final conversation with Fredo I think he gave him a final choice to leave and never come back again. Either way I would've thought he still would have sent his men after him so death on his actions was probably never going to escape him

Michael knew the type of person that Fredo was. Lots of people knew it. It was on them to make sure he was not in a position to bring harm to the family. He's a grown man, but he had the mentality of a 10-year-old. So when Fredo wanted his hands in the business it was Michael's job to keep him out BEFORE he messed things up.

Anyway, you don't kill your brother, no matter the circumstances (with the exception that he is actively trying to kill you). Michael had the money, power, and influence to hook him up in a way that kept him out of everyone's hair if he had taken action before the "present-day" events of Godfather II transpired.

The fact that Michael is wracked with guilt to the point that in Godfather III he has to confess that crime specifically--especially knowing everything else he had done--shows that even he came to view it as worse than the many other (heinous) crimes he had committed.

i dont blame Michael but killing your own brother is over doing it! but he did it the right way he waited till after his mother died like when he whacked Carlo in GF1 he waited till after the Godfather died.

Definitely Michael. It was and still is a shocking scene to me, and the whole thing haunts Michael in the third film, which provides some nice dramatic tension.

I totally win. Thank you for saving my marriage. *weep*