Abel as the Anti-Corleone

I think Abel was the opposite of Michael in many ways.

You're comparing Michael Corelone from The Godfather Part II to Abel Morales when you should be comparing him to the initial arc of Michael Corleone during the original Godfather film.

In the first film Michael's change is more dramatic and he gets his hands far dirtier, but we only see Morales for a span of roughly 30 days, and in those 30 days he goes from not being able to put a wounded animal out of its misery, to pistol whipping someone's face in, to setting up a connection with a district attorney who - clearly imply - that they are willing to work together since he has gained so much real estate and power. It's clear as day that his greed and ambition will be obtained through tainted means going forward.

It was obvious that it was almost a direct re-telling of a very similar character arc. Isaac is a terrific actor and he did a fantastic job in this role, but the film and his performance were heavily influenced by Pacino and the original The Godfather movie. Whether that was the intention of the filmmaker or not, it's clear as day both characters are extremely similar and go through a near identical change. The only real difference between the two characters is scope. A Most Violent Year is told through a small window in time, so we don't see how far into the criminal world Morales goes. We see Michael Corlenone's actions span decades during three different movies.

Then there's a whole daddy speech which Chastain delivers that felt lifted from Mystic River. That scene was not nearly as well written or acted as Laura Linney's performance, but that's just another clear influence.


Poetry don't work on whores.

I too was thinking about Michael Corleone while watching Abel. I see what you mean, but as another poster said, this film was a small window in time, while The Godfather was longer. Given a lot more time, I think Abel could do a lot more to keep and attain more power.