R.I.P. Sopranos - 06/10/07 (Open SPOILERS after post #12)

Cafe Society
401

First off, I just want to state that I think there is evidence that the ending is meant to be ambiguous. I just think that there’s better evidence that Tony was whacked.

I thought “Whitecaps”, the ending of season 4, was remarkably climactic. It also worked very well as a cliffhanger.

Not very often. I mean, did anyone truly expect Steve Buschemi to survive until season six? How many major characters died in the first few episodes of a season, as opposed to at or near the end of one? Certainly there was much that was unexpected in the show. Who would have guessed the Bobby would rise from Junior Soprano’s driver to someone important enough that New York had him on their short list of people to bump off pronto? But while the show was rarely truly predictable, I don’t consider unpredictability to be one of its core traits.

And I think that’s a good thing. True unpredictability becomes akin to chaos. An internal logic makes things somewhat predictable, but increases realism. I’d say “The Sopranos” did a good job of keeping a strong internal logic, keeping events and characters believable, while also adding a zest of spontaneity and surprise. We might all know that Adriana’s talks with the Feds cannot end well. But we don’t know exactly what will happen until it happens. We know early on that Feech is going to be a problem for Tony. We know that something will have to give. But we don’t know whether Feech will die or what.

402

I don’t understand how Tony dying in the very last scene of the very last episode is wrapping things up. If Tony got killed at the very end, then it’s the very opposite of wrapping things up. There’s a dead mob boss in a diner and his family saw the whole thing (as well as some cub scouts). What happens next? Well, we can certainly speculate on the immediate aftermath, but calling that a “wrap up” with “closure” (precious or not) is, in my opinion, silly.

We would still not know who the killer is, or even for sure who sent him. We have no idea what would then happen to A.J., Carmela, and Meadow. We have no idea if Sil ever regains consciousness, whether Paulie dies of old age or gets whacked, whether Janice catches herself a new husband, whether Silvio’s hair is transplanted onto an unsuspecting bald man leading him to a life of crime, etc. I just don’t see the “Tony is dead” hypothesis as a tidy wrap up at all.

403

I just need to interject something from page seven:

In conclusion, for all you “Sopranos” fans who speculated Tony died when that last scene went black because those people in Holsten’s were various characters from the series’ past who had tried to do in our Tony, you are mistaken, according to the HBO rep.The HBO rep isn’t terribly clear, so for those of you who insist T dies at the cut to black, may I submit they all simultaneously choked to death on onion rings?

I still say the Holsten’s scene is a horrible daydream. It’s like going into an ice cream parlor and getting served a dogshit sundae with a rancid Steve Perry topping.

404

Oh yeah, that’s exactly what I was saying, that you’re dumb. :dubious: Why twist my words? Inability to tolerate ambiguity =/= lack of intellectual capacity. The ending is ambiguous. People are trying very hard to convince everyone that Tony’s dead is the One True Ending. It ain’t, purposely so. That’s all.

405

Rubystreak, can you go into more detail as to why you believe the ending is deliberately ambiguous? Also, can you go into more detail why you believe those who favor the “Tony is dead” hypothesis simply cannot tolerate ambiguity?

El Cid Viscoso, I don’t think it’s possible to choke to death on an onion ring. What do you think the hole is for?

406

I think the HBO rep is saying that people are mistaken that those people in Holstens were various characters from the series’ past. . .not on the speculation that Tony died.

An HBO rep wouldn’t comment on that.

407

She gave us fuckin’ ougats.

408

Are you seriously asking me this? The last shot is Tony’s face and “Don’t stop.” Then, it stops. Was he shot? Is it just over at this arbitrary point? It’s not clear. We hear no gunshot. We see no one with a weapon. Any “evidence” that he’s dead is purely circumstantial. You can choose to take all the hints, innuendoes, foreshadowing, and speculation to point to a certain ending, but there are other possible endings, and Chase has never been afraid of building towards endings that don’t actually happen. Nothing in the text of the show precludes either reading of the ending. That is the definition of ambiguity.

You can favor whatever hypothesis you want, as long as you understand that there are other ways to read the ending that are equally valid. When people insist that theirs is the only right answer, and get aggravated when anyone disagrees, that’s intolerance for ambiguity. If you said, “I’d like to think that Tony died, so that’s the interpretation I’m choosing,” that’s one thing. Saying, “Tony is definitely dead and those of you who don’t agree are wrong,” is a baseless assertion.

409

I knew that rep wouldn’t flip. She’s a stand-up guy.

410

I guess I should have been more clear because that’s not really what I meant. You are absolutely right in that there were many storylines that could only end badly for the individuals involved. Adriana and Vito being two of the most recent. I was referring more of how they would build the tension in certain scenes to an almost inbearable point where it feels like something monumental will happen and then it immediately gets diffused. The latest example of this that comes to mind was Paulie and Tony’s unnerving fishing trip, where it was obvious that Tony was a hair’s width away from offing Paulie (and Paulie knew it). They pushed the tension of that scene right up to the breaking point but then they let it drop. And anyone (not involved with the show) who claims they were 100% certain of how that scene would end is a liar. That’s what I meant by it being unpredicatable and that was a quintessential Sopranos moment to me. And one that I felt was very possibly mirrored in the final diner scene.

They made it seem like Tony could very likely die, but it fits the Sopranos formula just the same if he lives. In that case “Don’t Stop…” could mean that everything continues as before.

I expected an ending to one of my favorite shows, but not two. Both interpretations of which I find satisfying and true to the spirit of the series, so I’m elated with how it all turned out. Now I just hope Lost can do half as well.

411

Thank you, Chrissie Hynde!

412

That was definitely a dramatic and terrific scene. And I certainly had no idea if Paulie was going to die or not. (I’ve said for a while that I suspected he would survive the entire series, but that wasn’t anywhere near 100% certainty. It was just a gut hunch.) If the same scene had occured in season three, I would have been fairly confident that Paulie would be ok. But I agree that often on the show tension is raised only to be gently diffused instead of exploding.

But that doesn’t fit the ending. Nothing was diffused at all. (Nor was there an on-screen explosion of that tension.) It just stopped. I don’t recall any previous part of “The Sopranos” where tension was raised to near breaking point and then the camera cuts away to something else and we don’t find out what happened. I just don’t think the final scene fits that pattern anymore than it fits the also-well-established pattern of raising tensions and then having that tension explode.

John Locke: You are all ready. I can reveal the final secrets of the Island with you! You see, it’s all -
10 seconds of black silence on TV as fans riot in the streets

:smiley:

413

I have to say that I’m with Ruby on this one. When the episode ended, I thought there would be three sides to the discussion. That Tony lived, that Tony died, or that it was purposely ambiguous. I figured the people thinking he lived would be the most firmly set in their beliefs, needing everything wrapped up in a happy little bow. It’s now almost a week and a half later and I couldn’t have been more wrong. Those believing that it was clear that Tony died are attacking this with an almost religious fervor.

Some of the supposed “evidence” for Tony’s death has clearly been 100% fan wanked. Maybe someday Chase will come out and say that he wanted Tony to die in the end? That still wouldn’t be the ending shown. The shown ending was left open for the viewer to fill in the blanks.

414

Yes, I am seriously asking you that. The last shot is not Tony’s face. The last shot is 10 seconds of black silence that the writer / director chose to include after the shot of Tony’s face. And again, I think it is clear. Not 100% completely unequivicably true, but I definitely think the “Tony is dead” hypothesis is far more likely than not.

Serious question: If there had been an extra shot showing the “Members Only” guy with a gun pointed at Tony’s head as he left the bathroom, immediately followed by the 10 seconds of black silence, would you still be arguing against the idea that Tony is more than likely dead? How about if we saw him with a gun but didn’t see him point it at Tony? How about if he had a bulge in his jacket that could be a gun? How about if they had flashed back to Bobby and Tony’s “Do you think you’ll hearing it coming?” conversation the very second before the black screen?

The fact that Chase has never been afraid to build towards endings that don’t happen cannot, in itself, support the idea; Chase has also never been afraid to build towards endings that do happen.

What reading of the text of the show supports the idea that Tony lives after the show ends? Why do you think it’s just as strong as the case for Tony’s death?

Are all readings equally valid? Who gets to decide?

No, that’s just intolerance for being disagreed with. I don’t see what ambiguity has to do with that. I hope you’re not suggesting that there’s never a right answer. (I also hope you see that you believe there is only one right answer, unless I completely misunderstand you.)

I don’t think anyone has claimed complete certainty, except for those who seem to be completely certain that the ending is entirely ambiguous. I mean, what’s the point of even discussing TV shows if we can’t actually discuss why we think what we do about them?

On preview: I disagree with RogueRacer. I feel like I’m in a debate on god’s existence and I keep hearing from agnostics about how they don’t know so I can’t possibly know either. Their position is not special, nor free from criticism. Nor is mine. Nor is the idea that the ending is completely ambiguous. I don’t see why we cannot discuss the merits of the position that the ending is truly ambiguous without being accused of “religious fervor”. I like the show. I like discussing the show. I certainly don’t think those who disagree with me about the ending are idiots or anything. I hope I have not given that impression.

415

When it ended, I thought, “that’s funny. He set it up like Tony was going to die, then went blank. He was really just creating a false mood, and Tony lives.”

But, on two repeated viewings. . .well, all I can say is that if Chase didn’t intend that to be the end of Tony, then he’s just an asshole.

Do you really think it’s fan “wanking” to draw a parallel to the guy in the Godfather (Sollozo) who said “try the veal, it’s the best in the city” right before Michael whacks him?

Do you think that David Chase – who has repeatedly drawn from, and nodded to the Gofather – just coincidentally wrote “try the onion rings. The best in da state.” That he overlooked that the same line is uttered in what is pretty much the most famous scene (Yes, the scene where Michael makes his bones, and is told, “I don’t what you coming out of the bathroom with just your dick in your hand.”) in what is considered the greatest American movie ever made?

You have to either think

  1. That’s coincidence and Chase wasn’t thinking about the Godfather, or

  2. That David Chase wrote that parallel line but is saying to the audience, “oh yeah, it’s the same line, but that doesn’t mean he gets killed in the restaurant by the guy I focussed on repeatedly even though the screen goes black for 10 seconds at the end.”

Seriously, we have to rule out 1, right? Chase ain’t overlooking that line.

So, what about 2 (and combined with myriad other things, but forget that for a minute)

Is there ANYTHING that Chase could have done, short of showing Tony with his head blown open, that would indicate to you that Tony got hit?

If he showed a guy in a black robe walking by with a scythe, would that have done it?

Dogs howling?

A couple of crows sitting on a pole out front?

How much Death does he have to set up so that you don’t have to see it to believe it? Any amount?

416

Why is this so unlikely? As Rubystreak and others have pointed out, Chase repeatedly would put in lots of hints and so forth indicating that something was going to happen… and then it didn’t happen. If Chase had wanted the show to end with Tony dead, he easily could have done so. If he wanted us to know for certain that Members-Only-Jacket-Guy was carrying a gun, he could have shown us that for certain. He did none of the above. Why? Well, the two obvious options are:
(1) Because he left it ambiguous, for whatever reason
or
(2) Because he absolutely positively wanted to film an ending in which Tony died, but also wanted to do so in a way that allows people on the internet to have dick-length-measuring contests about who is right?

417

The more I think about it, the more I think that the sudience was supposed to infer that Tony died. It’s not just the clues on the show itself but Chase’s own cryptic statements imply that he had a specific ending in mind, not deliberate ambiguity. Saying “it’s all up there” for the audience to figure out implies clues. The audience wouldn’t need clues for a “Life goes on” ending.

The fact that an HBO exec conceded that the flashback to Bobby saying “you’ll never hear it coming” was intended as a significant hint about the ending.

The fact that Chase originally wanted an even longer black screen (up to 30 seconds) suggests that he wanted to imply a death.

Chase has said that some people have been “closer” to figuring out the ending than others, which again suggests that “Life goes on” was not his intention (or else there would be nothing to figure out).

The only plausible alternative to LGO (that I can think of anyway) would be Tony’s death. I just wish Chase would say what he was going for and stop being cute. I think people would accept about anything he told them as long as they got an answer.

418

He can put Tony out on a boat with Paulie, and create a sense of foreboding that doesn’t pay off. That’s just basic tension building & release, a little misdirection.

When he sets up a scenario for a whacking, and then cuts to black that’s something else entirely.

If he cuts to the family walking off into the sunset, it’s the same thing as the Paulie scene. You go, “whew. . .all that set up over nothing. He had me going.”

If he cuts to black after all that set up, it’s something else entirely. At that point, you’re forced to ask, “what direction was he going with this?” There’s only one answer to that.

PS: your dick-measuring comment says much more about how much stock you place in some message board discussion than it does about how much stock the rest of us might place in it.

419

To me it is still an argument between who got whacked- us or Tony. Somebody died.

I find the pussyfooting on Chase’s behalf more plausible if the intent is a truly odd, arty ending like the killing of the audience. I mean, that’s ballsy. It also allows for the “some people are closer than others” construction.

It seems fitting.

I agree with those that find it brilliant, even if we don’t agree on the interpretation.

420

I think that the audience whacking theory – while clever – doesn’t seem like something Chase would do. He hasn’t had a history of doing anything that meta before and it would be strange for him to go there in the last ten seconds of the finale.

I do agree that it’s about the only conceivable alternative to Tony’s death, though, and I think that Chase has broadly hinted that neither ambiguity or LGO was his intent. SOMEBODY got whacked.

Has anybody brought up the fact that “Members Only” was the title of the episode in which Tony got shot by Uncle June? You can’t read that character’s jacket in the finale. he’s identified as the “guy in the Member’s Only jacket” only in the credits. That CAN’T be a coincidence any more than all the allusions to “One.”