The Godfather

[McCaffrey Dude]

I have no idea where to post this but I have been dying to ask this question for a very long time but just keep forgetting to.
I like the Godfather very much but there is such a glaring omission in it I cannot why see these so called " movie critics " call it one of the best movies ever made.
When Michael Corleone is hiding out in Sicily after he shoots McCluskey ( the cop ) and Virgil Solazzo; how is it that he comes back and does not face some kind of trial especially when Vito Corleone ( Brando ) calls a meeting of the heads of the 5 NY families and even mentions he has to get his son home and clear his name. This isin't even covered in a nanosecond. Just asking. It is not even implied anywhere in the movie.

 

[sport historian]

I have no idea where to post this but I have been dying to ask this question for a very long time but just keep forgetting to.
I like the Godfather very much but there is such a glaring omission in it I cannot why see these so called " movie critics " call it one of the best movies ever made.
When Michael Corleone is hiding out in Sicily after he shoots McCluskey ( the cop ) and Virgil Solazzo; how is it that he comes back and does not face some kind of trial especially when Vito Corleone ( Brando ) calls a meeting of the heads of the 5 NY families and even mentions he has to get his son home and clear his name. This isin't even covered in a nanosecond. Just asking. It is not even implied anywhere in the movie.

There (presumably) weren't any witnesses who would identify Michael Corleone as the killer of McCluskey and Solazzo. The script was lax in not bringing this out.

 

[The Hock]

And Michael when he proposes his plan points out that the family can use its media connections to play up the fact that the turk was a drug dealer and the police captain was on his payroll. That plus "nobody saw nothing" would discourage bringing a case against Michael.

 

[McCaffrey Dude]

Thanks gentlemen. I still think the lack of a real answer makes the movie great but not the best but that is arguable and up to each own's choice.

 

[GWTJ]

The answer is in the book. If you want to read it for yourself don't read any further. I understand why the movie didn't bother to explain it as it wasn't really important to the movie story line. In fact, I've answered many questions about the movie for people who didn't read the book but you are the first person to ask about this. Great job!

The book talked about a Mafia family that didn't have the brains of the other families but were ruthless and would kill any one who did wrong by them. No family was safe if they crossed this dumb but ruthless family. They made their living by providing hostages during negotiations. Foe example, when Sollozo and the Police Captain wanted to meet with Michael at the restaurant, they hired a hostage from the ruthless family to guarantee Michael's safety. If anything happened to Michael, the Corleone's would kill the hostage. The ruthless family would blame Sollozo for their hostages death and declare war on that family. Then destroy them at all costs. No family had ever crossed the ruthless family and lived to tell about it. Because of this ruthless family, the Corleone's could let Michael go with Sollozo and know Michael would be safe.

When Don Corleone recovered from his bullet wounds, he hired a guy from the ruthless family to take the blame for the guys Michael killed. The ruthless family was paid handsomely for this service. It also meant that the witnesses would need to alter their eye witness accounts as Michael was a different build than the fall guy. In the book, Clamenza talks to Michael about he will make the witnesses 'see the light' and change their testimony.

So, somebody was prosecuted for Michael's crimes but it wasn't Michael and he was able to return to the U.S. without having to hide from the authorities.

There you go.

 

[The Hock]

I'd forgotten all those details. I read the book (twice I think) but that was back in high school.

I've always thought the a novel is better than a movie based on it because you can get much more detail into a book than a movie.