Sopranos
- Thread starter CDB
- Start date
supersoldier
She thinks my traps'rrrr sexy!
Seriously.
:wtf:
:wtf:
CDB
Registered User
Maybe they're leaving an opening for the movie. Who knows. Van Zandt sqaid it was going to be a controversial ending. Controversial I could have taken. Piddling into a puddle of bull**** nothing... And what's worse, that's like the second or third series where they let that happen. Very artistic. Lots of character moments. No ****ing action. They need a stronger editorial hand at HBO. Six Feet Under, that's how you end a ****ing series.
Alpine
Active member
It was an ode to what Bobby said while fishing in the boat with Tony. "I bet you don't even hear it when it happens." I think the guy who went in the bathroom got him right as he saw Meadow. The last scene is Meadow walking in (through Tony's view) and then BAM. An abrupt mid-scene cut, no sound. The guy came out of the bathroom to his side and whacked him. He didnt even see it coming. His last vision was Meadow...
It explains the lack of sound. The credits and everything were stripped. The cut was abnormally abrupt, not like a normal end scene cut.
You dont give these guys enough credit. They did think about the ending a bit I think.
Half of the people b1tching dont even fvckiing get it... Sweet IRONY.
It explains the lack of sound. The credits and everything were stripped. The cut was abnormally abrupt, not like a normal end scene cut.
You dont give these guys enough credit. They did think about the ending a bit I think.
Half of the people b1tching dont even fvckiing get it... Sweet IRONY.
CDB
Registered User
How very 'artistic' of them. I thought of that as a possibility, but since they've expanded the series well beyond Tony's pov, contracting it at the end and not giving any solid info or closure of any plot thread is a cop out. Especially since Bobby screamed in pain when he was shot. He plainly heard it. If they were going to kill Tony, they should have damn well done it outright. Fact is they left the ending very ambiguous. He could be dead, the story could continue, maybe someone else at th table was killed. No way of knowing. And after seven years and a couple ****ed up seasons that may as well have evaporated for all that was done with them, they could have gotten their **** together and instead of astounding themselves with their cleverness delivered a tighter ending. The same anti climactic bull**** that ended Deadwood. They shot their load with no fanfare, plain and simple, and without getting anyone else off in the process.
CDB
Registered User
Supposedly if you read the credits it names some of the people in the restaurant, so you can sort of imply what happened. I'll have to check, catch it next time it's on and just catch the credits. I did like the cat bit. Nice story element, the kind I seem to remember them throwing in and then lacking for a long while.
Nullifidian
Banned
Actually you aren't supposed to figure out what happened at the end because what actually happened wasn't important. What was important was the TENSION.
Tony's whole life is tension. Always looking over his shoulder, always wondering when the end will come, when someone will come to put a hit on him or his family. When he'll be arrested. During that entire final sequence, we are given a true taste of what it is like to be Tony. We feel insurmountable tension throughout the whole scene and at the end, it cuts off leaving us not knowing what happened. Why? So that the tension isn't relieved. Tony's tension is never relieved, he lives with it every day of his life. So it is only fitting that the entire show end without relieving that tension.
And it was very effective at its goal. I'd bet there are a ton of people who watched it who can STILL feel the tension it generated.
Tony's whole life is tension. Always looking over his shoulder, always wondering when the end will come, when someone will come to put a hit on him or his family. When he'll be arrested. During that entire final sequence, we are given a true taste of what it is like to be Tony. We feel insurmountable tension throughout the whole scene and at the end, it cuts off leaving us not knowing what happened. Why? So that the tension isn't relieved. Tony's tension is never relieved, he lives with it every day of his life. So it is only fitting that the entire show end without relieving that tension.
And it was very effective at its goal. I'd bet there are a ton of people who watched it who can STILL feel the tension it generated.
CDB
Registered User
Still seems to 'clever' for me. After seven years and a couple seasons which may as well not have existed, it would have been nice to see something more definitive. Besides, they opened the scope of the series well beyond his point of view a long time ago. The whole Kevin Finnerty bs never got another mention, the foreshadowing when he was on buttons and saw the lighthouse beacon again in the sunrise, nothing. It all turned to nothing. No resolution, no change, as if the entire 7 years you spent with them amounted to ****. Very disappointing in my view. No sense of finality.
CRUNCH
Registered User
That's pretty good.
Nullifidian
Banned
CDB
Registered User
I just think he could have gotten the same effect but given some resolution to something. Six Feet under managed that, you didn't know what happened to everyone but you knew how they died. Aftermath managed it, you didn't know what happened but you had a sense of closure, like at least your part as a viewer of the story ended. I can see the effect he was going for, I just think it was bad decision making given the fact that so much was left hanging, and not to mention they kep teasing and teasing in the previews all this season and all you got was a blank screen. Plus the whole writing team there just seemed to love character sketching with as little action as possible. Some pay off would have been nice finally. No need for a blood bath or anything major, just a sense of ending.
Alpine
Active member
I found these little tidbits interesting.
All the people who were in the diner were past characters....if you look at the final credits...
--The guy who went to the bathroom was actually Phil's Nephew
--The black guys in the diner were the guys who shot Tony before
--The couple in the corner were involved with Christopher over some video stuff
Also, if you remember how Tony's Dad dies....with his dad getting gunned down in a restaurant with his family but Tony just arriving late (like Meadow) ...
IMO, it is an open ending but I think Tony got killed. The abrupt mid-scene cut (not a normal end scene transition) and no sound signifies the convo he had with Bobby. "You dont even hear it..".
I think they wanted it to be open so that we dont know who for sure killed him or if he is truly killed at all. I personally think he got whacked. But clearly they wanted it open to interpretation.
There are no plans (or leaked rumors) of a movie and David Chase has said in numerous interviews that a movie or follow up is highly unlikely. Besides that, Gandolfini was the main force behind the show ending. He wanted out. He has washed his hands of Sopranos and is moving on with his career.
All the people who were in the diner were past characters....if you look at the final credits...
--The guy who went to the bathroom was actually Phil's Nephew
--The black guys in the diner were the guys who shot Tony before
--The couple in the corner were involved with Christopher over some video stuff
Also, if you remember how Tony's Dad dies....with his dad getting gunned down in a restaurant with his family but Tony just arriving late (like Meadow) ...
IMO, it is an open ending but I think Tony got killed. The abrupt mid-scene cut (not a normal end scene transition) and no sound signifies the convo he had with Bobby. "You dont even hear it..".
I think they wanted it to be open so that we dont know who for sure killed him or if he is truly killed at all. I personally think he got whacked. But clearly they wanted it open to interpretation.
There are no plans (or leaked rumors) of a movie and David Chase has said in numerous interviews that a movie or follow up is highly unlikely. Besides that, Gandolfini was the main force behind the show ending. He wanted out. He has washed his hands of Sopranos and is moving on with his career.
Bionic
Well-known member
Well Bobby heard it. Felt it, too. He moaned in pain. Maybe it's us, the viewers, that got wacked?
Alpine
Active member
Thats not the point, we saw Bobby get shot. I think Tony's death was supposed to be as perceived by him. The end of the second to last ep we see a scene where he staring at the door, it switches to his POV then ends. There is also some odd camera work going on in the dinner. Tony walks in and looks in, apparently looking at himself sitting down in the dinner. It then cuts to him at the table. At first it seems like a coincidence in the progression of how it was cut. I doubt this was an accident at all. There is a LOT going on here that many people simply didn't catch.
I have been reading around the net about various theories. The #1 theory gaining momentum is the one I outlined previously. Phil's nephew is likely the culprit. Still, it WAS intended to be open. The dinner is full of people that want to hurt Tony. The point is he wont ever escape his past and the life of crime. If he does live, he will be looking over his shoulder forever. Personally, I think there are many clues telling us that he was likely whacked. Chase just didnt spell it out for everyone. In the end, it turned out better. The True fans that know the characters were rewarded and the dolts that don't know **** were left screaming at their TV.
Bionic
Well-known member
Sorry man. It just doesn't make sense. They were at a place where they've never been before. How could all of these people already be there when they intended to go someplace else, first? Don't get me wrong. I LOVED the finale. I thought it was well done but I think all of these "theories" are just that and David Chase left it that way because nothing in life ever gets wrapped up into a nice, neat little package. The show was "whacked" and we never heard it coming. I also think that all of those people at the diner were metaphors, if you will, of the fact that he'll always be looking over his shoulder as long as he's "in the life."
chaos92287
Member
if there isn't a movie that has an actual ending im gona shoot someone. stupid producers only care about making money. the movie's gona BANK
CDB
Registered User
Which would mean the 'true fans' of Shakespeare would rather the curtain fell before Hamelt's final duel, or before MacBeth's death, or before Othello kills Desdemona, etc. The idea that this ending was more high brow or true to the series is nonsense. Like it or dislike it, that's a matter of opinion. But a clear ending with some resolution would have been better in a lot of people's eyes, including long time fans.
Nullifidian
Banned
I still say the whole point was to make sure the tension of that final scene is never relieved in order to give the audience an idea of what it's like to be Tony.
AnonyMoose
Well-known member
I got the same take on ending as you!
CDB
Registered User
Too bad the last scene is of Tony looking up, apparently at Meadow. If it was supposed to be a first person view, they screwed it up. If it was supposed to let us know his life is full of tension, they're 6 seasons too late.
Consider this: originally Phil was going to kill Christopher to let Tony know what it was like to lose someone close to him to such a murder. Suppose Meadow got shot on a last standing order of Phil.
Bottom line is Chase left it open which is, in my opinion, the artsy, I'm-so-impressed-with-my-writing-ability-deserved-or-not way out. It's a cop out that will leave English profs and majors and art house critics praising the writer, but for the rest of the world is like getting a great handjob and then the chick just up and walks away as you're about to blow and leaves you throbbing. It's not delivering when you should.
Kill Tony, kill Meadow, kill Carmella, or Melfi, or anyone or no one. It's possible to leave an ambiguous ending and still give a sense of the larger story ending. In my personal opinion Chase is an ******* who is too impressed with himself and could have used an editor to help him get his **** together.
Nullifidian
Banned
CDB
Registered User
Which I think was his goal. To which, kudos. He succeeded. But he also, in my view, completely ****ed the ending of what started out as a great show, and could have ended as such too despite some grey area in between.
CDB
Registered User
Chase has to give people a break and cut the "It's all there" bull****. If it were all there everyone would know what the **** happened without any doubts. I would say the ending was legitimate if he didn't seem to be wallowing in prid over his cleverness. Every modern artist who ****s on a canvas and hangs it up says 'it's all there' when people ask if there's any meaning to their 'masterpiece'. It's pretentious bull****.
Besides, if the ending was from anyone's first person POV it was Meadow's. So maybe she croaked or got killed and that is what's 'all there'. Afterall, when Agent Harris said that thing was out again, it was a reference to when Phil wanted to kill Christopher in retaliation for not getting to kill Tony's cousin. I say Meadow is dead. Sad ending for a great piece of ass, fictional though it may be.