I know there was a real Sicilian named Salvatore Giuliano who was known as the Ribon Hood of Sicily. Does anybody knnow what really happened and how much Puzo made up?
Safe bet that anything involving a fictional character named Michael Corleone is made up.
From the looks of it the bulk of the story is true. Did some checking on Wikipedia and it seems this is more truth to the story than anything else. That also may explain the reason why the fictional Corleone was left out of the story.
shareThis film is so far from the truth that only the addition of flying saucers and death rays could make it any more outlandish. It's highly romanticized and extremely inaccurate in a number of ways - Giuliano was much younger (28 when he died), his death was completely different to that in the film, he never smuggled grain to the starving (in reality he was selling on the black market), never gave money to buy land for the peasants (Giuliano had no interest in land reform), never married the sister of a communist (Giulano didn’t even have a girlfriend), never hijacked any trains (let alone troop trains), crucified any priests and or tried to stop the massacre at Portella della Ginestre (shamefully blamed in the film on Terranova, who was one of the few of Giuliano’s allies who definitely did not fire a single shot on that day) but actually took full responsibility for the massacre at Portella dell Ginestre... the list of errors in the film are endless. Take is as pure hokum spun off from a true story.
"Gentlemen, is this a great moment or a small one? I'm afraid I don't know."
corleone isn't fictional. it wasn't shot on location in the godfather because it had grown so much and wasn't that rural.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corleone
I think they're referring to the Michael Corleone character as fictional, not the town of Corleone itself which, as you say, is real.
Anyway, the book 'The Sicilian' is based on a real person and events, however Puzo took license with the facts to make them blend with 'The Godfather' plots and storylines. The film fictionalizes things even more, so as to make Giuliano almost a fictional character himself.
Events did take place such as the raid on the police barracks (Bellolampo), and the massacre at Portella di Ginestra, the responsibility for which is still argued about to this day.
The real Giuliano was indeed betrayed and killed by Pisciotta, though not as depicted in either the book or the film.
Pisciotta was sleeping in the same bed as Giuliano, who was on the run and unaware that his compadre was now working with the authorities, while they were hiding out at the house of a friend. During the night Pisciotta shot Giuliano as he slept. The body was taken and dumped in an adjacent courtyard, and the story put out that the bandit had been killed in a shootout with police as he tried to evade capture.
But Pisciotta did die by poisoning as depicted in the book and film, however the responsible party has never been publicly identified.
At the time of his death Pisciotta was the star witness at a special public hearing set up to investigate the circumstances behind the massacre at Portella Di Ginestra, and to identify those involved. This was a political hot potato and, as he was Giuliano's lieutenant, Pisciotta was believed to have been privy to inside information that was potentially damaging to some very influential political figures.
Incidentally, Giuliano did have a girlfriend who gave birth to his son, also named Salvatore Giuliano, after his death.
The real Giuliano was indeed betrayed and killed by Pisciotta, though not as depicted in either the book or the film.
It is scary to me that in this day and age some people actually think skimming Wikipedia can reliably verify the accuracy of a complex historical movie like this. FYI to the original poster- if you are going to make a post assessing the historical accuracy of a movie, at least do some research first so you have some sort of basis for your opinions.
shareCheck out Francesco Rosi's movie 'Salvatore Giuliano' for a more realistic view of what the man did.
shareso why, do you think, was the character of Micheal Corleone removed from the film?
Remember, Show Off Get Shown Up In Show Down.
Due to copyright issues.
Oh man, the *beep* piled up so fast in Vietnam you needed wings to stay above it.
My family is from Sicily. My grandmother told me that the people of Sicily loved him. He was a Robin Hood to them, who actually stood up for the poor farmers. They would sing songs about him. And that my grandfather actually met him once.
I'm not sure if the stories that she would hear are 100% true. But to this day she is convinced that he is a great man. So that's the Sicilian point of view who lived during that time.
PS.
There is another movie called Salvatore Giuliano. It was made in the early 60's. Its a pretty good movie. The rumor is that some of Giuliano's band were actually used as actors.
I own the DVD, i'm not sure if it has subtitles though. It might just be in Italian.
Ciao!
What copyright issues the fu*k? It's from the Mario Puzo novel, and they had copyright to film it, so why they couldn't film Michael, he has a copyright of his own, or what?
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=13276747
-my vote history
Something that I have yet see mentioned here, is that Puzo renamed his Robin Hood character Guiliano. The real Sicilian was Giuliano per wikipedia. (The "U" and "I" are reversed in the Novel.) The change in spelling appears to be deliberate on Puzo's part, perhaps to add the literary license?
share