Quote:
Originally Posted by scho63
The Mafia in the 60's and 70's went underground and the bosses were quiet as hell as well as out of the spotlight. You would NEVER see a mafia boss and say "OH, that guy's a gangster." They didn't dress like hoods, they didn't drive flashy cars or big houses and kept real low profiles.
|
Coincides with the Apalachin Meeting.
"Coincides" is probably not the right way to put it. "Was a direct result of" is probably more accurate.
What a hilarious shitshow that whole thing was. Vito Genovese may have been the biggest idiot in the annals of organized crime, including the mouth-breathing triggermen (which was essentially all Genovese was to begin with).
I'm not criticizing the way Pesci played the understated way that Pesci played the role, I'm more curious with how much control they have vested in Bufalino. It just seems that they had a few too many roads leading back to him.
Maybe I'm wrong; it's possible that the universe being portrayed in this move is a little more narrowly focused than I am understanding and in fact he WAS the big dick in charge. It just seems odd to me that they are suggesting that Bufalino was possibly directly responsible for the Anastasia assassination or at least had to sign off on it.
I mean c'mon - Anastasia ran the what would be come the Gambino outfit at the time, no? Am I really to believe that this guy had the power to sanction a hit on the leader of arguably the most powerful family in NY? My recollection is that the entire NY Commission pretty much had enough of Anastasia's shit and had him killed. That's not something that Bufalino would've been directly responsible for.