The Sopranos (Bada Bing)

[PlanetFrnd]

... No closure at all.

Not to be an ass, but don't you think that was the point?

Seriously though, was I the only one cheering when Phil got capped?

Was right there with you - I can't call it, but I feel like I am one of the few also cheering for Tony not to get killed.

 

[svrnblk]

Add me to the list of the disappointed people after watching that episode :(

 

[craigblitz]

Add me to the list of dissppointed. I understand them selling out for a later movie release, if there is a movie but it is still complete junk to end it like that with so many questions. Serioulsy I walked away from this as if the Super Bowl ended in a tie.... There was just nothing.... except for more questions. To me it chose Chase is a coward of a director, he didn't have the cahonas to end things.

I can see why people like it, but not my taste at all. I really hope they do not sell out and make a movie... but too much money in it not to I am sure

 

[BurgBuck52]

Plus that Russian is still on the loose, that Chris and Paulie let get away in the woods.

This will at least explain the Russian.


'NYT' Sunday Preview: The Russian Did Return on 'The Sopranos'

'NYT' Sunday Preview: The Russian Did Return on 'The Sopranos'

By E&P Staff

Published: June 09, 2007 9:50 AM ET


NEW YORK One of the most popular speculations in the national guessing game surrounding the final episode of "The Sopranos" airing Sunday night on HBO is that the mad Russian who escaped in one of the series' most famous episodes -- "The Pine Barrens" -- will re-appear in the finale.

Tomorrow's New York Times features mini-profiles of several stars in the series and their final thoughts. One of them is Tony Sirico, who plays Paulie Walnuts. While creator David Chase has laughed off suggestions that he planned to have the Russian come back, Sirico reveals that they actually shot a scene with him this year.

It had Paulie and Christopher chatting in a bar about whatever happened to the Russian, who had been wounded by gunshots but ran off in the snow in that earlier episode. "And in the script," he says, "we were supposed to go outside and there he [the Russian] was standing on the corner. But when we went to shoot it, they took it out. I think David didn't like it.

"He wanted the audience just to suffer."

 

[NewYorkBuck]

No closure? But thats just the brilliance in it - there closure, or lack thereof, is entirely contingent upon your own mindset. If you think killing Phil was the end of the war, then those guys in the restaurant were really nobody and the family just continues as before. Sil pulling through is also up to you. If you think the war was still going on, then who leaves the restaurant is also up to you.

 

[craigblitz]

Again I use a sports analogy... Would you be upset if the super bowl or world series ended in a tie... have an outcome be interperted by you as to who was better or what would happen?

There is no brillance in this ending... thought provoking maybe... great idea to lead into a movie because people will be talking about this ending for a while... but I do not see the brillance in "ending" it they way he did.

 

[Big Papa]

I am just pissed that Meadow never got nekked.

 

[NewYorkBuck]

Again I use a sports analogy... Would you be upset if the super bowl or world series ended in a tie... have an outcome be interperted by you as to who was better or what would happen?

There is no brillance in this ending... thought provoking maybe... great idea to lead into a movie because people will be talking about this ending for a while... but I do not see the brillance in "ending" it they way he did.

The analogy is not applicable - this is not a sporting event where the utility is largely derived from the final outcome. The utility from watching this show comes from the drama itself, and the ending created plenty of that.

Did Tony die because the screen went black? Was the war over and they just moved on? Just creates more drama. Just look at the number of threads on the net today because of this - everyone has their own opinion because of their own personal mindset. To me, that is way better (and more cerebral) than someone walking up to Tony at the end and blowing his brains out. To me, that would be the ultimate let down. Nothing imaginative and nothing to the imagination and nothing personal. This ended gave all of that.

The more I think of it, the more brilliant I think it is. Kudos to Chase.

 

[TheStoicPaisano]

Dude copied the Vito Waddle...

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Just creates more drama.

It's kind of pointless, IMO, to create more drama if it's the end of the series. It's a cop out. It's easier to create storylines than it is to come to a satisfying conclusion.

I should probably mention I haven't seen the episode, I'm just going off of what people have described.

 

[BayBuck]

It's kind of pointless, IMO, to create more drama if it's the end of the series. It's a cop out. It's easier to create storylines than it is to come to a satisfying conclusion.

I should probably mention I haven't seen the episode, I'm just going off what people have described.

Disagree. It's just as easy to tie things up neatly by killing off all the Sopranos and ending with Phil in power, or have Tony get arrested with Paulie ratting him out, or whatever (though "satisfying" is a very subjective term and wouldn't apply the same to all viewers). This fit with Chase's effort to create a rich dramatic series that isn't as neat and pat as most big-send-off-series ultimately are, and anyone who ever heard him in an interview leading up to this finale should have expected an ending pretty much like this one.

 

[methomps]

I wouldn't call it particularly brilliant or innovative. Sopranos has been this way for a long time.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Disagree. It's just as easy to tie things up neatly by killing off all the Sopranos and ending with Phil in power, or have Tony get arrested with Paulie ratting him out, or whatever (though "satisfying" is a very subjective term and wouldn't apply the same to all viewers). This fit with Chase's effort to create a rich dramatic series that isn't as neat and pat as most big-send-off-series ultimately are, and anyone who ever heard him in an interview leading up to this finale should have expected an ending pretty much like this one.

It's not just as easy to tie things up neatly because nearly every series that tries gets heavily criticized. I'm not proposing a Hollywood cookie cutter ending but if the series doesn't touch on any of the issues then what was the point of watching? I always give kudos to the people who actually try to make the series come to some sort of conclusion because that takes cahones. It's not artistic/bold to leave everything open and up for interpretation because no one can really criticize it. How do you criticize questions?

And it's bullshit if Chase only did that just so he could promote his movie. The tv show and movie should be two separate things. Ok, I'm done ranting.

 

[BayBuck]

It's not just as easy to tie things up neatly because nearly every series that tries gets heavily criticized. I'm not proposing a Hollywood cookie cutter ending but if the series doesn't touch on any of the issues then what was the point of watching? I always give kudos to the people who actually try to make the series come to some sort of conclusion because that takes cahones. It's not artistic/bold to leave everything open and up for interpretation because no one can really criticize it. How do you criticize questions?

And it's bullshit if Chase only did that just so he could promote his movie. The tv show and movie should be two separate things. Ok, I'm done ranting.

I'm not talking about every series, I'm talking about this one: fans have been publicly formulating their ideal finales for the Sopranos for years now, and Chase could have easily incorporated any of those familiar plotlines and "resolved" all those pressing "issues" with his own ending, but instead he left it open-ended, like life so often is. No one can criticize it? I think you (and many other disappointed viewers) are doing just that.

Not long ago Tony asked Bobby what he thought death would be like, and Bobby said something like "you won't even see it coming... everything just goes black..." Just because we knew this TV series was not going to continue after last night doesn't mean we should have expected such a complex story to be truly concluded.

And I don't believe there will be a Sopranos movie, at least not in connection with David Chase.

 

[Big Papa]

Not long ago Tony asked Bobby what he thought death would be like, and Bobby said something like "you won't even see it coming... everything just goes black..."

I think BayBuck has it right here. I just found this comment from an individual on digg.com and it really makes sense to be know. I guess I was one of those looking for a cut and dry ending and when it did not come, I was just pissed and didn't bother to really get into what it could really mean. I think this is what it meant, cutting to black at the end and no music with the credits. My original thought was that the ending was just put there to get you all geeked out, waiting for the hit to happen and then have it end. Just Chase f'ing with all of us.

Look... Listen...

Tony died. He was shot in front of his family the moment Meadow walks into the restaurant. The final scene is viewed from Tony's perspective (as is most of the show) and the reason it cuts to black when it did was because he was shot and killed at that moment.

The key to understanding the last scene comes from a phrase by Bobby that was repeated a couple times: "I bet you don't hear it when it happens."

The bullet travels faster than sound... and it enters Tony's head before he ever hears it.

Everyone who complains that the ending was meaningless just hasn't given the show the benefit of the doubt. If you stuck with the show this long you must understand the symbolism of the complete silence during the credits. It's the first time a show has ended without music.

So, if you think the ending was meaningless or a lame attention grabber, think again. Because there is meaning here... and it's spectacular.