# The Sopranos - "Made in America" *Series Finale* *spoilers*



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

The long waits between seasons are going to be done, and I still don't know what to think about it. On the one hand, the ridiculously long waits between seasons, well, again, they are gone, but there won't be more seasons.

The seasons themselves have had ups and downs, with more downs than up lately, and yet I still want to see more of the show and more of Tony Soprano's screwed up life.

No more Dr. Melfi after tonite. Yay. (Sorry, but the window slammed on Lorraine Bracco a long time ago!)
No more Big P., even in flashbacks where he's a talkin' fish.
No more Silvio.
No more Uncle June.
No more Livia.
No more wimpering AJ.
No more Carmela.
No more Meadow.
No more Tony Soprano, or at least no more Tony Soprano in new episodes.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

I sort of don't want to watch it, cuz once I do it's over.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

Since the thread is tagged as spoilers



Was the suv over the head really necessary.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

minorthr said:


> Since the thread is tagged as spoilers
> 
> Was the suv over the head really necessary.


I dunno. I almost suspect it was there to help make up for the preceeding 40+ minutes (which dddddddddddddddddrrrrrrrrrrrrrruuuuuuuuggggggggggggg on forever....)


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Huh?


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

This was probably the worst series finale I have ever seen. Thats what I had typed till I saw the end. and I'm sticking with it WTF I thought my d* signal went out.

Actually when you think about it its kind of funny they really made it seem like someone was going to get killed I guess the jokes on us


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Wow that end scene was tense.

But was there a payoff?

And silence over the credits.

The screen was black for so long that I thought the cable went out.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

WTF?!!? That's it!?!? That's the ending?!? With a batch of shots of various characters that look like they could be the ones that are going to carry out the hit on T, it just cuts away from the table as Meadow finally gets there?!?

David Chase is a jerk of the N-th degree. Thanks for flippin' off your fans like that.


----------



## RegBarc (Feb 18, 2003)

minorthr said:


> This was probably the worst series finale I have ever seen. Thats what I had typed till I saw the end. and I'm sticking with it WTF I thought my d* signal went out.


Exactly what I was thinking.

I think the point they were trying to make was that they wanted the audience to believe that something was about to happen.

So bad.


----------



## Legion (Aug 24, 2005)

Hook. Line. Sinker.


----------



## RegBarc (Feb 18, 2003)

bdowell said:


> WTF?!!? That's it!?!? That's the ending?!? With a batch of shots of various characters that look like they could be the ones that are going to carry out the hit on T, it just cuts away from the table as Meadow finally gets there?!?
> 
> David Chase is a jerk of the N-th degree. Thanks for flippin' off your fans like that.


I think I missed something. T was supposed to get whacked?


----------



## DUSlider (Apr 29, 2005)

Ummmm, ok.....


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

WtF???


----------



## Mr. Happypants (Jan 30, 2006)

Where's the local Comcrap number to cancel HBO now?


----------



## packerfan (Jan 8, 2002)

Major Disappointment.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

Mr. Happypants said:


> Where's the local Comcrap number to cancel HBO now?


I wonder how many people *will* cancel HBO tonight?


----------



## kcarl75 (Oct 23, 2002)

Good episode. I'm sorry the show is over though.


----------



## Lopey (Feb 12, 2004)

I'm with the WTF crowd.... What kind of ending was that? We don't know what happens with the court case... there were alot of questions left, it's definitly not ended nicely


----------



## etexlady (Jun 23, 2002)

That's it???


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

It's one thing to not have a big ending. It's a completely different thing to build up to a big ending, then cut to black. That sucked. 

tk


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

WTF is that kind of ending?


----------



## Lopey (Feb 12, 2004)

I guess it goes along with the last two season's.... it all sucked


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

I guess they left it open so we could draw our own conclusions as to what happened from there. 

My conclusion: The one guy comes out of the bathroom firing and instead of hitting Tony, he kills Meadow, since she is in the way. When the guy went in, nobody was there. He just comes out firing, not even realizing she is there.


----------



## gadgetgrrll (Dec 30, 2001)

This is *the* worst series finale I've ever seen. I can't believe I invested my time and interest in this show to get rewarded with that. So disappointed.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

That really did suck hard.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

Worst. Ending. Ever.


----------



## ngsmith (Jan 18, 2002)

Tony's dead. No ifs, ands or buts.

The show was Tony and he got capped, right in front of his family.


----------



## charlief1975 (Apr 16, 2004)

Wow...I was pretty nervous near the end..music got louder thought something big was going to happen.

Not sure what to think right now.


----------



## Dukeman72 (May 4, 2007)

packerfan said:


> Major Disappointment.


+1


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.

The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.

The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

Chapper1 said:


> I guess they left it open so we could draw our own conclusions as to what happened from there.
> 
> My conclusion: The one guy comes out of the bathroom firing and instead of hitting Tony, he kills Meadow, since she is in the way. When the guy went in, nobody was there. He just comes out firing, not even realizing she is there.


Thats what I was thinking.

Still lame...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think the point is that when the show is over, life for the Sopranos goes on, as it always has.

I'm not sure I like how that point was made, however.

I do, on the other hand, like the image of Chase muttering to himself, "You wanna talk about dropped plot threads? Huh?!? I'LL show you dropped plot threads!!"

[edit] I see TB and I had the same thought at the same time. Creepy...


----------



## chronatog7 (Aug 26, 2004)

Crappy episode. When I saw Phil get whack, I knew that was it. One of the worse endings. I hated all the background music throughout the episode.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

Burn in Hell, Chase!!! :down:


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

Good episode, great ending. Life goes on. Or it doesn't. :up:


----------



## Werd2406 (Jun 9, 2006)

Turtleboy said:


> Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.
> 
> The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.
> 
> The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


Tell yourself whatever you want to make you feel better


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

I wonder how many expensive TV's were ruined by the sudden, rapid appearance of a boot.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Well, we all knew it wouldn't be an obvious "crime does not pay" ending from Chase. I liked the ending, myself.


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

I fill up at the station where Phil got killed....gotta go look for the blood stains now...

The whole thing was ruined b/c everyone around here head that Phil was killed in the scene.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Seriously??? That's the best David could do?


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

RegBarc said:


> bdowell said:
> 
> 
> > WTF?!!? That's it!?!? That's the ending?!? With a batch of shots of various characters that look like they could be the ones that are going to carry out the hit on T, it just cuts away from the table as Meadow finally gets there?!?
> ...


I'm not saying that T was supposed to get whacked, just that there were lots of 'tells' that would lead you to think that T and his family were in danger there.

Tense, yes.

Leaving a big 'what if?' ending, sure. Rather like, well, I won't spoil the movie, but it's a few years old and was about being Lost, having to change words from one language to another, etc.

There were at least 2 or 3 potential people that would carry out a hit on T sitting in the restaurant, or who had come into the restaurant before all of the Soprano family was there. Camera shots that focused on those individuals, even after they came into the door and were sitting somewhere. Leaving you to think that someone was going to get hurt, or one of those 'redshirts' was going to be involved in something bad that might come up.

Instead of seeing any real finality, we were left with the _*OMG! Something happened to my satellite/cable and I'm missing the final sequence of the show!! *_ as the ending.

All a big rip-off, slap-in-the-face or whatever you want to call it, but most definitely not the kind of ending that fans of the early episodes of the series would have expected. Fitting for the last few years of the series as it was limping along? Maybe.

I feel a little like the cat that was starring at Chrissy's photo..... wondering what it was all about.


----------



## knuckles (Dec 21, 2002)

That was terrible. We waited an extra season for this ending?


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I think it was kinda the only thing they could do.

Any of the big endings that everyone talked about, they would ask why they didn't do the other ending.

I think the point the FBI/CIA/whatever guy said "I guess we won" in reference to the Sopranos.

I think it was implied that, with Phil dead, NY and NJ are back in peace (somewhat) and that Tony will get another charge/trail against him, and as his lawyer said "trials are meant to be won"

I think all the pieces were placed right there for us.

-Tony and Fam move on
-Tony and Mob move on, Paulie moving up, Patsy probably moving up, life in the Mob goes on
-NY is back to normal, either Little Carmine or another will take over
-War is over

I think it was the ending they had to do.


----------



## Kylep (Feb 14, 2003)

Big letdown for me too. I've been thinking of buying the series, maybe wait for HD.

Now, bah! Screw Chase.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

bdowell said:


> I feel a little like the cat that was starring at Chrissy's photo..... wondering what it was all about.


And that, my friend, is what it was all about.


----------



## Clarkey (Dec 29, 2004)

Add me to the list of "WTF?!" but at the same time, some points should be given for going the unpredictable route...

It also leaves the door open *if* they decide to come back and continue the show in a year or two.


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

For the record, I liked the episode. I can understand why people are mad at the lack of resolution. But with all the things that were addressed in the last couple episodes, did anyone really think that everything would be tied up? I mean, since we just found out that he would probably be indicted, did you really expect to have the resolution of that trial before the end of the episode?


----------



## dbyerman (Sep 12, 2000)

sgsmith said:


> Tony's dead. No ifs, ands or buts.
> 
> The show was Tony and he got capped, right in front of his family.


Absolutely dead-on right. Remember what Bobby said to Tony way back in "Home Movies" (and what was replayed last week in a quick flashback?) You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?" Tony's dead, folks.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> I sort of don't want to watch it, cuz once I do it's over.


Quoting / Answering myself.

I sort of wish I didn't watch it


----------



## knownzero (Feb 26, 2001)

[Peter]What the hell was that?[/Peter]

Seriously. If you're going to leave open an option to bring back the show in the future, don't make it so flippin obvious next time.  What's next Sopranos: Law & Order? 

Did I mention  ?


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

Clarkey said:


> Add me to the list of "WTF?!" but at the same time, this was not predicted. It also leaves the door open *if* they decide to come back and continue the show in a year or two.


Won't happen.....it's DONE!


----------



## kd_cooke (Jan 8, 2003)

Seems I'm in the minority. 

I liked the ending. And I think the awkward long scene was done well. We all knew what was coming; they didn't need to show it. Right down to Meadow being late to witness the event. I think it was very well done.

I'm just sad it's over.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

Excellent!


----------



## latenight (May 5, 2005)

Brilliant. Everyone is complaining we didnt get the payoff but we did. We are the payoff. Each and every one of us that was sure something was going to happen and then sat in silence for 3 seconds of the black screen and then started cursing (out loud in most cases) David Chase. 

Thats a bigger payoff than most shows EVER get.


----------



## flyers088 (Apr 19, 2005)

The worst series finale since Seinfeld!


----------



## rhuntington3 (May 1, 2001)

They left it wide open for a movie later. The ending did suck. I thought I had lost my signal.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I'm not sure he got killed. Possibly. Maybe not. 

I do like the fact that so many people demand resolution. The problem with mob shows is that there are only a couple of 3 possible resolutions: 1) getting killed, 2) going to jail, 3) going into the witness protection program.

Bah. They've all been done before. This is different.


----------



## chronatog7 (Aug 26, 2004)

Well if we follow the line of thought that Tony is dead, I guess it would make sense. THe show is Tony; no Tony, not Show. He did not see it coming and out of the blue he gets whack.

I guess.


----------



## ThreeSoFar'sBro (Oct 10, 2004)

I'm disappointed....

I don't want to have to imagine what happened, I want to see it.

Also...I'd love to see the other endings that were filmed, like in a DVD.

I lowered the volume telling the family that I didn't want to hear loud gun shots.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

Shroedinger's mobster?


----------



## kd_cooke (Jan 8, 2003)

jschuur said:


> Shroedinger's mobster?


Ahh. I get it now. We have to wait for the cat to open the box!


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

I have no problem with the 'life goes on' ending, however the abruptness of Tony looking up, and a solid black screen led me to think first "oh **** what at time for the cable to go".

And wasn't the guy at the counter from the NY crew?

One question, after all these years, who's the guy who whacked Phil?


----------



## knownzero (Feb 26, 2001)

jschuur said:


> Shroedinger's mobster?


Brilliant!


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

You think you're mad? The TWOP people are furious. http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3154768

I can't wait to see all the commentary in the papers tomorrow at all the people *****ing. I love it! 

There was NO WAY that he could have ended it to everyone's satisfaction, so Chase ended it to his.


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

MikeMar said:


> I think it was kinda the only thing they could do.
> 
> Any of the big endings that everyone talked about, they would ask why they didn't do the other ending.
> 
> ...


I took it that the FBI guy was getting some vicarious pleasure from the war between the families (and a distraction from his hated terrorism focus) and he let it slip out when he said "I think were gonna win this thing" because he was excited to actually have an effect on something.

That was my favorite part of the whole episode.....I laughed my ass off at that.


----------



## Knives of Ice (Nov 8, 2006)

i'm sure HBO had alot to do with that ending. i mean its so open ended anything could happen. a movie will definitely happen and now they can go anywhere with it. or they could even be roped into making another season in a few years if enough money is thrown at everyone. no way in hell this is the last we'll see from the sopranos especially since it is HBO's cash cow and i'm sure they will have thousands of cancelled subs tomorrow.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

Horrible, horrible ending. Total cop out on Chase's part. Have the balls to tell the story you want to tell, don't let the viewers decide for themselves.

Horrible.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

I have to weigh in and agree with the others.....with a big  WTF???

WORST Series finale EVER!

The only thing that this does is set us up for the big "Sopranos" movie.....to see what happens to Tony. This, when they promised that tonight's show would be the definitive end of the characters. This is no definitive ending.....just leaves it open.

Nice hit on Phil, I definitely cringed as they showed his head as the tire was rolling.....but the ending of this show was just pitiful. Ok...if you want to fade down to black...that is one thing....but I (and apparently lots of others) thought the DirectTV signal went out or I had a drop out on my TiVo. I even switched to my backup TiVo thinking my TiVo had a problem (especially since my TiVo had rebooted right before Christopher's car crash and came back up with Tony on the phone telling Carm that Chrisopher was dead!!!)


----------



## chronatog7 (Aug 26, 2004)

Maybe the FBI crew had an office pool? FBI guy bet on Sopranos


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

Gregor said:


> One question, after all these years, who's the guy who whacked Phil?


SSgt. William 'Wild Bill' Guarnere..........

oh wait, wrong HBO series....lol

he was just a low level crew member who showed up recently i think


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Knives of Ice said:


> no way in hell this is the last we'll see from the sopranos


Maybe it's not the last you'll see of it. But after that ending, it's the last I'll see of it. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.


----------



## Clarkey (Dec 29, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> You think you're mad? The TWOP people are furious. http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3154768


I wonder if something similar is happening over at HBO -- the site is down for me!


----------



## michad (Sep 9, 2002)

I want the last 40 hours of my life watching this pile of crap back please.....no soul whatsoever.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Oh, and my new subwoofer went BOOOM when the car blew up. 

The music in digital sounded great, and the picture looked great in HD.

I really enjoyed it. 

I also suspect that Chase knew that he would get the reaction that he is getting from most people, and I think he enjoys that too.


----------



## calitivo (Dec 6, 2002)

That sucked. I sort of expect this from Lost, but not Sopranos.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

They should have taken series finale lessons from the good folks at Six Feet Under.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

It was anti-climactic to say the least -- but it's what I expected as this Final Season went along. Chase didn't want to kill off Tony, I think he felt that the fans would not want to see that. 

My interpretation of the ending is that life goes on for Tony as it always had. He'll always be looking over his shoulder, he'll always beat the rap. 

That's an interesting theory about Meadow though. They do make a point of delaying her entering the restaurant by having the parallel parking difficulties long enough so that the mysterious guy at the counter goes to the bathroom before she is seated. Otherwise what's the point of showing us Meadow in the car. If the guy does in fact come out firing, then Meadow surely gets it. 

But I don't think that's what Chase was getting at.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Horrible, horrible, horrible.

Even if it was meant that Tony died then why go to black? When he was in a coma, we still saw life outside his brain.

If you want to leave it in doubt, why the sudden cut like someone ran out of film? 

F* you to the whole thing.


----------



## barrettd (Jun 14, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> They should have taken series finale lessons from the good folks at Six Feet Under.


Now THAT was a series finale!

I'm in the "worst ever series finale" camp, I'm afraid.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

dbyerman said:


> Absolutely dead-on right. Remember what Bobby said to Tony way back in "Home Movies" (and what was replayed last week in a quick flashback?) You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?" Tony's dead, folks.


I gotta agree with this ending. That was why Chase cut to black silence. And Meadow saw the whole thing.


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

The question of Mr. Chase's decision is one not to be lightly considered, and it is not for me to presume to set myself up as the one person able to answer it. And so I leave it with all of you: Which came out of the opened door - Meadow, or the hitman?


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

ClutchBrake said:


> They should have taken series finale lessons from the good folks at Six Feet Under.


There's a fan video just like that:


----------



## scheckeNYK (Apr 28, 2004)

piss poor. 

i don't think he got whacked. the ep title is pretty telling, "Made in America." at the end of the day the Sopranos are just like a regular old American family that sits down and eats together at a diner where average joe's like to visit. all the mob stuff aside, they are still your average human beings and as much as we want to read into the characters and love or hate them, they're still just regular people. chase is an artsy film school ******.


----------



## Martha (Oct 6, 2002)

Lori said:


> I wonder how many people *will* cancel HBO tonight?


At least one - I just did. I'm so sorry that I subscribed for this last season - what a waste.


----------



## claire_d (May 15, 2007)

hi - i'm not the expert it seems like some of you are. i watched the first two seasons on dvd and then caught up... but i thought this ending was kind of cool, and really fitting.

wasn't this a show about his family? and there were like tons of family dinners in the show...and it ends with one. and yeah, they made it like crazy tense at the end... but that was great.

they made it seem like maybe paulie was the one who turned? but no... he's just crazy paulie, seeing the virgin mary and being spooked about cats.

and uncle junior IS gone. he's not faking, he's gone.

maybe i'm way off, but i think however it ended, people would be here complaining. instead of making some absolute ending, its more like we were looking in on this world for a while, and now we're gone. but they go on.

so sorry if it got people mad, but i like it. i even like sitting there for like five seconds of all black and freaking out.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

dbyerman said:


> Absolutely dead-on right. Remember what Bobby said to Tony way back in "Home Movies" (and what was replayed last week in a quick flashback?) You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?" Tony's dead, folks.


I like this interpretation. We've seen all kinds of murder throughout the whole series. Tony's murder deserves a unique treatment, and what better way to do that than to show us his death from his perspective. :up:


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> You think you're mad? The TWOP people are furious. http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3154768
> 
> I can't wait to see all the commentary in the papers tomorrow at all the people *****ing. I love it!
> 
> There was NO WAY that he could have ended it to everyone's satisfaction, so Chase ended it to his.


Funniest comment from over there: "Our Lady of the Bada Bing" :up:


----------



## bcrider (Oct 31, 2000)

Will the guy at the bar kill Tony?

Will Meadow die outside while trying to parallel park?

Will the dudes that walked into the restaurant try to kill Tony?

What's the guy at the bar going to get from the bathroom to kill Tony?

The suspense at the end quieted my entire home and I gotta tell ya... maybe that's what the ending is about? This is Tony's life... anxious, paranoid and second guessing decisions forever and ever...

or The Sopranos: The Movie in 2009...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dbyerman said:


> Absolutely dead-on right. Remember what Bobby said to Tony way back in "Home Movies" (and what was replayed last week in a quick flashback?) You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?" Tony's dead, folks.


With all due respect, no way.

If Chase meant for Tony to be dead, Tony would be dead. Instead, he's eating dinner, and somebody who may or may not be a hit man is in the men's room.

I bet we'll be seeing interviews with Chase soon in which he says words to the effect that he doesn't know whether or not Tony is still alive, and that it doesn't matter. THAT is the moment at which he chose to end it, because for him, that is the moment when he's done what he wants to do with the show. If he wanted to do Tony's death, there would have been a few seconds more.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

Major suckage.


We were told they filmed multiple endings to keep it a secret. What we now know is that they decided not to use any of them.

The FBI guy's "We Won!" was the only good point of the episode.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

bdlucas said:


> I like this interpretation. We've seen all kinds of murder throughout the whole series. Tony's murder deserves a unique treatment, and what better way to do that than to show us his death from his perspective. :up:


That's the best argument that Tony is dead. Virtually the whole series has been from Tony's perspective. He's in 90% of the scenes throughout the run of the show. The cut to black for 8-10 seconds before the credits role let's us know that we are no longer seeing anything through Tony's eyes --- we can't, because he's dead.

I'm starting to be sold on the "Tony's dead" thing.


----------



## Grumpy Pants (Jul 1, 2002)

meh. I don't like to be left speculating. Maybe he gets in a plane crash and eds up on an island with 41 other survivors and...

Oh, wait a minute...


----------



## BlackBetty (Nov 6, 2004)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the song that was on the table radio that Tony picked. The lyrics were "Anyway you want it...."

The ending was just that. It is up for us to decide how we want the show to end in our minds eye.


----------



## Win Joy Jr (Oct 1, 2001)

I feel that Chase just gave us the finger tonight. I will not invest any time in any tv or movie production that he is involved with again...


----------



## Grumpy Pants (Jul 1, 2002)

BlackBetty said:


> I'm surprised no one has mentioned the song that was on the table radio that Tony picked. The lyrics were "Anyway you want it...."
> 
> The ending was just that. It is up for us to decide how we want the show to end in our minds eye.


I don't watch television to make decisions.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

BlackBetty said:


> I'm surprised no one has mentioned the song that was on the table radio that Tony picked. The lyrics were "Anyway you want it...."
> 
> The ending was just that. It is up for us to decide how we want the show to end in our minds eye.


He picked the other song -- "Don't Stop Believing".


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> With all due respect, no way.
> 
> If Chase meant for Tony to be dead, Tony would be dead. Instead, he's eating dinner, and somebody who may or may not be a hit man is in the men's room.
> 
> I bet we'll be seeing interviews with Chase soon in which he says words to the effect that he doesn't know whether or not Tony is still alive, and that it doesn't matter. THAT is the moment at which he chose to end it, because for him, that is the moment when he's done what he wants to do with the show. If he wanted to do Tony's death, there would have been a few seconds more.


Regardless of what Chase says, what he'll mean is: "If you really want to know what happened it will cost you. A lot." I expected an open ending to allow for movies or something, no way they'll kill a franchise worth millions. I just didn't expect to see a big middle finger given to those same people they'd want to watch any future event.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

And what was up with the whole cat storyline?

Are we to think that Adrianna came back reincarnated as a cat and sits there and stares at Christophers picture all day? It was just a bunch of wasted time in a series finale that should have had more real stories wrapped up. Pretty stupid storyline to begin with, but they could have done it as a filler or lead in on a regular episode...not on the series finale....I could see Paulie killing the cat, then Tony whacking Paulie because of it....ala Ralphie.


----------



## bcrider (Oct 31, 2000)

Just a small town girl, livin in a lonely world
She took the midnight train goin anywhere
Just a city boy, born and raised in south detroit
He took the midnight train goin anywhere

A singer in a smokey room
A smell of wine and cheap perfume
For a smile they can share the night
It goes on and on and on and on

Strangers waiting, up and down the boulevard
Their shadows searching in the night
Streetlight people, living just to find emotion
Hiding, somewhere in the night

Working hard to get my fill,
Everybody wants a thrill
Payin anything to roll the dice,
Just one more time
Some will win, some will lose
Some were born to sing the blues
Oh, the movie never ends
It goes on and on and on and on

(chorus)

Dont stop believin
Hold on to the feelin
Streetlight people


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Touche', Chase. Touche'.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

unixadm said:


> And what was up with the whole cat storyline?
> 
> Are we to think that Adrianna came back reincarnated as a cat and sits there and stares at Christophers picture all day? It was just a bunch of wasted time in a series finale that should have had more real stories wrapped up. Pretty stupid storyline to begin with, but they could have done it as a filler on a regular episode...not on the series finale.


But why does everything have to be "wrapped up?" Not everything has to be an explanation of how everyone died, or the imagination of an autistic kid.


----------



## Ekims (Oct 18, 2002)

I think a lot of people are pissed because of the lack of resolution, but what would have been a great ending for you? If Tony died, I think the same people would be here griping that Chase took the easy way out. This really had to come down to leaving it open ended for us as the audience to fill in our blanks. Only way he could do it. I say bravo David Chase!


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

bdlucas said:


> I like this interpretation. We've seen all kinds of murder throughout the whole series. Tony's murder deserves a unique treatment, and what better way to do that than to show us his death from his perspective. :up:


Other than for the logistical problem of setting up a hit that makes no practical sense from a mob perspective in a restaurant that they had only decided on going to like an hour before and that only Tony and his family knew about - I'd agree with that theory.........


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Big letdown. My wife and I plowed through the entire season this weekend as we hadn't watched any as yet, just to catch up for tonight's finale. So not worth it. Nothing but a set up for a potential film...

Someone earlier said it, great build of tension in the scene, but to what end? Hell, even a soft fade out as Meadow got there would have been better. [email protected]


----------



## Kharizzmatik (Sep 14, 2006)

I'm with the minority that thought it was brilliant.... at first I said "that cant be it, show me!" when the screen went black, but it just truly was a fitting ending. IMO he was wacked, theres no need for us to see Tony get wacked, when its the end, its just the end, ya know? The previous poster had it right from the conversation in Home Movies...


----------



## Weezoh (May 9, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> With all due respect, no way.
> 
> If Chase meant for Tony to be dead, Tony would be dead. Instead, he's eating dinner, and somebody who may or may not be a hit man is in the men's room.
> 
> I bet we'll be seeing interviews with Chase soon in which he says words to the effect that he doesn't know whether or not Tony is still alive, and that it doesn't matter. THAT is the moment at which he chose to end it, because for him, that is the moment when he's done what he wants to do with the show. If he wanted to do Tony's death, there would have been a few seconds more.


I agree - the focus of the series has always been family - not "Family" IMO it could end only by being focused on family.


----------



## jtlytle (May 17, 2005)

minorthr said:


> This was probably the worst series finale I have ever seen. Thats what I had typed till I saw the end. and I'm sticking with it WTF I thought my d* signal went out.
> 
> Actually when you think about it its kind of funny they really made it seem like someone was going to get killed I guess the jokes on us


When I saw the ending with black screen then credit..  It makes me wondering....... "Sopranos the movie" is coming.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

I haven't read any comments yet but just finished watching. Will share a few of my comments.

Noticed David Chase directed and wrote the episode. He has not directed many epiodes to my recollection. Anyone know how many he has directed before?

I thought the entire scene in Holsten's was amazingly tense.

At the end this was my reaction:

You Mother #*(#*#*#s
Mother #*$*$*33
Mother #*&#*#
Mother #*#*#*
Mother ###$$#
Mother @#$*#*
Mother @(*#*#
Mother @[email protected]#$

Then I paused my DVR to see if it was broken, then the credits started. Then I got up, took out the trash, got a beer, cursed some more and then sat down to see if there was anything else.

By the way I normally never swear. Anyways, I thought the ending was pretty good. Was the FBI there? Was someone to whack Tony and/or his family there? Was it nothing but a harmless dinner with our over-active imaginations there?

I am sure some people will be upset and claim it is a cop out, but I don't see it that way.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

bdowell said:


> WTF?!!? That's it!?!? That's the ending?!? With a batch of shots of various characters that look like they could be the ones that are going to carry out the hit on T, it just cuts away from the table as Meadow finally gets there?!?
> 
> David Chase is a jerk of the N-th degree. Thanks for flippin' off your fans like that.


See I disagree with you 100%. it would have been easy to pick any number of endings. Some rumors are they had 4 endings shot there regardless.

As it is, things go on, and who knows. The ending was what was ever important in the show. Predictability, closure, those things. never a part of this show. Why did you need some finality to it. They were there before we got there, and potentially there after us.

In the end does it really matter what happened to them after we stopped watching. This way everyone can believe what they want to believe happened to them.


----------



## FlugPoP (Jan 7, 2004)

Movie!


----------



## deaklet (Feb 15, 2003)

...Woke up this morning
got myself a...


(A gun right? I'm sure it's a gun. No need to tell me it's a gun. Quite satisfied really; no need to spell it out.... Fade to black, I suppose.) 

(Didn't Monty Python do this?)


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

I didn't mind the final scene that much, but I do have 2 questions:

1) Who killed Phil? Was it one of Tony's guys?
2) The guy at the counter that came in with AJ and went to the bathroom, were we supposed to recognize him? If it's the same as the guy who killed Phil, that would mean someone wants both Phill & Tony dead.

What's the mob protocol for orders to whack someone if your boss that gave them just got whacked? If there's new leadership in town, why risk carrying out the old orders?


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> Seriously??? That's the best David could do?


I suspect that was the ending in his head from the moment he conceived the show.

I think it was a good ending. Just having Tony die or go to jail would have been a cop out relative to the entire history of the show.

This show has always been different, yet somehow people wanted a derivative ending, and I don't get that.

Also I suspect David Chase doesn't give two flips if some people didn't like the ending.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

AJ is soooooo pathetic. "It gets 23 mpg." 

What a hypocrite and a loser. 

I'll take the M3, though.


----------



## Ekims (Oct 18, 2002)

I like to think of T having to keep looking at the door and everyone around him was a sign that he was going to become paranoid like Uncle Jr. 

I wouldn't doubt it if HBO decided to do a special later on showing alternate endings and cast interviews.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> With all due respect, no way.
> 
> If Chase meant for Tony to be dead, Tony would be dead. Instead, he's eating dinner, and somebody who may or may not be a hit man is in the men's room.
> 
> I bet we'll be seeing interviews with Chase soon in which he says words to the effect that he doesn't know whether or not Tony is still alive, and that it doesn't matter. THAT is the moment at which he chose to end it, because for him, that is the moment when he's done what he wants to do with the show. If he wanted to do Tony's death, there would have been a few seconds more.


But that doesn't explain the completely unconventional way it ended - a cut to black and an abrupt termination of the audio in the middle of the song. The ending could have been made ambiguous without going outside the normal cinematic vocabulary, e.g. a fade to black with the music still playing. The ending was so unconventional that we all assumed at first that there was a technical problem, and I think that had to have been done for a reason. Showing Tony's murder from his perspective fits perfectly.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

How many seasons have ended with the Sopranos around a dinner table? Food, family, life goes one . . .

I liked it. In retrospect, how else could the story end? 'Cause the story doesn't end. Any other ending has problems. Lots of 'em. Would I have ended it exactly as Chase filmed it, with the blackout? No. But he's always played around us. 

BTW, there will never be any more Sopranos. Gandolfino has made it very clear over the last year or so that this is it for him. And it ain't a negotiating tactic. He's ready to move on. All of them are.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

"Focus on the things that were good" ... as in the earlier seasons of Sopranos that didn't suck.

As for people in the restaurant, I looked up the last 2 pages of names in the credits for people in the diner. No clues there, almost all of them had zero listings in IMDB.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

cwoody222 said:


> Horrible, horrible ending. Total cop out on Chase's part. Have the balls to tell the story you want to tell, don't let the viewers decide for themselves.
> 
> Horrible.


Like I mentioned above, I suspect that has ALWAYS been the way he wanted to end the show. Probably before he even decided how he would start the show.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I don't know that it is the worst series finale ever. It was kinda disappointing in that it never felt like a finale. Those last 5 minutes were very intense. I just sat there thinking, oh here it comes, then it's just AJ. When the screen went black for a couple seconds, I definitely yelled WTF!!

I sat thinking the whole episode that I didn't want Tony to die. I know he's a mob guy, but I just didn't want to see him get shot. If he just went to prison, that would be pretty cliche. They definitely ended it in a way that will get people talking.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

If this show was completely through the eyes of Tony (ala Goodfellas and Ray Liotta's character), then this ending would make sense.....a quick cut to black, then Tony's voice echoing in the background "You never see it coming".

But...this show was not from his point of view....the quick end cut implies that his life ended without him expecting it, but it doesn't fit the rest of the series.

A more appropriate ending would have been to show him being hit, then show the FBI rounding up the rest of the both Tony and Phil's crews and saying that the heads of both the NJ and NY families were dead and that the mob as the tri-state area had known it was completely dismantled.

That would be an ending.



astrohip said:


> How many seasons have ended with the Sopranos around a dinner table? Food, family, life goes one . . .


If they wanted to leave it open, then show Tony and his family having dinner, laughing and having fun, and just fade to black.....nothing abrubt....just a nice fade with him and his family.

It's pretty bad for a series finale when a large majority of people think that their cable/DirecTV went out......pretty much tells me that they did a lousy job of trying to convey their ending.


----------



## TeighVaux (May 31, 2005)

So when the final season DVD comes out, it will have the special features of all the alternative endings that they shot? And commentary by Chase on what the final episode meant? 

I don't think there were any killings. The mobsters don't do hits when the women and children are around. Or kill the women and children.

Interesting scene with T and Uncle June, since one really can't tell if June is still faking it or if it really is a touching moment when T realizes he is gone.


----------



## sneagle (Jun 12, 2002)

Stephen King said at the end of The Dark Tower series--and I summarize because it is not family friendly--it's not about the ending but rather it's about the journey. If you just wanted to know the end, then turn to the last page. So, 

thanks for all those Sunday nights HBO, Mr. Chase, Tony. et al...


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

marksman said:


> Noticed David Chase directed and wrote the episode. He has not directed many epiodes to my recollection. Anyone know how many he has directed before?
> .


He only directed the very first episode and this episode...

and bdlucas has it right....he could have accomplished the same effect with a more conventional fade to black...folks would still have felt gypped, but they would have at least understood it was the intended ending and not wondering if their cable cut out....


----------



## rlc1 (Sep 15, 2003)

David Chase to viewers: F__K YOU!


----------



## BlackBetty (Nov 6, 2004)

sneagle said:


> Stephen King said at the end of The Dark Tower series--and I summarize because it is not family friendly--it's not about the ending but rather it's about the journey. If you just wanted to know the end, then turn to the last page. So,
> 
> thanks for all those Sunday nights HBO, Mr. Chase, Tony. et al...


+1 :up: Well said.


----------



## bqmeister (May 13, 2006)

Boo.


----------



## JLWINE (Jun 18, 2002)

kd_cooke said:


> Seems I'm in the minority.
> 
> I liked the ending. And I think the awkward long scene was done well. We all knew what was coming; they didn't need to show it. Right down to Meadow being late to witness the event. I think it was very well done.
> 
> I'm just sad it's over.


+1


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

Maybe Jersey got nuked....


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

sneagle said:


> Stephen King said at the end of The Dark Tower series--and I summarize because it is not family friendly--it's not about the ending but rather it's about the journey. If you just wanted to know the end, then turn to the last page. So,
> 
> thanks for all those Sunday nights HBO, Mr. Chase, Tony. et al...


That's great......if you get your family in the car for a vacation and they think they are driving down to Disney World and in the end you take them to a trash dump in Florida, you think they will accept the excuse of "Hey it was all about the journey here.....you had fun driving down, that is the important part." ????

Chase took us on a nice journey....there were a few bumps in the road along the way.....a few crappy episodes....but for the most part, a fun journey...but it ended at a trash dump....so of course we are going to say "WTF????".


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

unixadm said:


> It's pretty bad for a series finale when a large majority of people think that their cable/DirecTV went out......pretty much tells me that they did a lousy job of trying to convey their ending.


Actually, it's the exact opposite. The fact that everyone is angry and thinks theyir cable went out tells me that they did a great job of trying to convey their ending


----------



## ironchef (Dec 27, 2002)

Paulie not wanting to take a position because everybody else who took it died - so Paulie.

The FBI Guy - "We're gonna win this!"

Phil gets a closed casket funeral.

"One good thing, I haven't had a green vegetable in a week."

Sil's still there.

AJ in the army? Ah - give him a job working for Inga(!), a new beemer, and a 16 yo hottie and he's hapy again.

I liked the ending, I stopped mid-bite of dinner, but I liked it. This is Tony's life, watching everyone who comes into restos you're eating at and wondering if they're there to cap you in front of your family. What happened to him? I like Schroedinger's Mobster, we don't know, and for my part I don't fault that.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

WTF??? The ending was like having a bucket of ice water thrown on a great boner. What a waste!


----------



## Odds Bodkins (Jun 7, 2006)

Boooooo!


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

dslunceford said:


> and bdlucas has it right....he could have accomplished the same effect with a more conventional fade to black


On the contrary, a fade to black would _not_ have accomplished the same effect! He knows perfectly well what a fade to black means, and it was not an accident that he did not do that.


----------



## grecorj (Feb 6, 2002)

1 thing's for sure...people will be talking about this ending for a *long* time.


----------



## Sopranoman (Dec 16, 2001)

Absolutely BRILLIANT!!!!!


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> Actually, it's the exact opposite. The fact that everyone is angry and thinks theyir cable went out tells me that they did a great job of trying to convey their ending


So what is the ending they were trying to convey? Was he killed and that is why it went blank? Or, is it that he is alive and well and that the people in the diner had nothing to do with trying to kill him? Does the cut to black signify that the show's plug is pulled, but life goes on? If he lives on, then does he get arrested?

If we can't answer the questions, then it is open ended and not a definitive ending to the show as they had promised....and their ending didn't convey the finality of the show.

Like I said before, this would be a brilliant ending if the entire show was through Tony's eyes as a first person point of view...(as Goodfellas was).....then it would definitely signify that he was killed....and would be a perfect ending. This show wasn't told from the first person point of view, and therefore this ending doesn't fit the rest of the series.

I would even accept this ending (assuming the meaning is that Tony was whacked) if right after the cut to black, you hear Tony's voice echo "You never see it coming". Still a bit of a cop out, but it would be a definitive ending.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

grecorj said:


> 1 thing's for sure...people will be talking about this ending for a *long* time.


I don't think it'll be that long. A few days perhaps, maybe a week, but not much more really. Other than a lot of grumbling about feeling ripped off by the ending perhaps.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

CharlieW said:


> He picked the other song -- "Don't Stop Believing".


And the picture went to black at "Don't stop...."

Major suckness....

At least Chase could have had the balls to give us an ending of some kind, not this BS viewer-interpretation crapola! Instead of making a writing decision and living with it and taking the criticism or praise heaped upon him by the viewers and the media, we are left with the "sh*t my cable just went out" moment!

The Worst Season Finale EVER!

Just Horrible!


----------



## bcrider (Oct 31, 2000)

TeighVaux said:


> I don't think there were any killings. The mobsters don't do hits when the women and children are around. Or kill the women and children.


Phil got killed right in front of his family, babies, etc.


----------



## osterber (Feb 13, 2001)

grecorj said:


> 1 thing's for sure...people will be talking about this ending for a *long* time.


I disagree. I think there will be lots of water cooler talk tomorrow about how much this finale sucked, and then by Tuesday, it will just be a memory of a pretty good TV series that had the world's biggest let-down of a finale. It certainly won't make any "top 10 series finale" lists ever.

-Rick


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

Sopranoman said:


> Absolutely BRILLIANT!!!!!


Mr. Chase, is that you?


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

osterber said:


> I disagree. I think there will be lots of water cooler talk tomorrow about how much this finale sucked, and then by Tuesday, it will just be a memory of a pretty good TV series that had the world's biggest let-down of a finale. It certainly won't make any "top 10 series finale" lists ever.
> 
> -Rick


it'll be listed in the same breath as Seinfield. finales that sucked.


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

TeighVaux said:


> I don't think there were any killings. The mobsters don't do hits when the women and children are around. Or kill the women and children.


really? someone forgot to tell that to the guy who shot phil in front of his wife and grandchildren earlier in the episode. all is fair...


----------



## osterber (Feb 13, 2001)

And the whole final episode just dragged on and on and on. I kept looking at the time thinking that time was running for them to actually _do_ anything. OK, they killed Phil. But nothing else really happened. Do I go to the Army or not. I almost started a forest fire. There's a creepy cat that nobody knows what to do with. All just very very sllllooooowwwww that lead up to the most anti-climactic ending the world has seen.

-Rick


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Ekims said:


> I think a lot of people are pissed because of the lack of resolution, but what would have been a great ending for you? If Tony died, I think the same people would be here griping that Chase took the easy way out. This really had to come down to leaving it open ended for us as the audience to fill in our blanks. Only way he could do it. I say bravo David Chase!


Anything else but 8-10 seconds of black screen...thats Chase saying I can't decide so I'll let you! Huge cop out.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Anyone else notice the irony of people complaining that an abrupt cut to black was not acceptable but an abrupt death to Tony would have been okay?

I am just not getting how if they went for 20 more seconds and Tony died that would have somehow made it alright for those of you who claim this is the worst series finale ever.

Tony dying at the end would have changed anything? Got to be honest that does not make a lot of sense.


----------



## ngsmith (Jan 18, 2002)

TeighVaux said:


> I don't think there were any killings. The mobsters don't do hits when the women and children are around. Or kill the women and children.


Really? Better tell that to Bobby, who was gunned down in front of a man and two children in the toy store.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

unixadm said:


> So what is the ending they were trying to convey? Was he killed and that is why it went blank? Or, is it that he is alive and well and that the people in the diner had nothing to do with trying to kill him? Does the cut to black signify that the show's plug is pulled, but life goes on? If he lives on, then does he get arrested?
> 
> If we can't answer the questions, then it is open ended and not a definitive ending to the show as they had promised....and their ending didn't convey the finality of the show.


I agree. If I don't know the message they were trying to convey, that tells me they did a poor job of conveying it.

tk


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

marksman said:


> Anyone else notice the irony of people complaining that an abrupt cut to black was not acceptable but an abrupt death to Tony would have been okay?
> 
> I am just not getting how if they went for 20 more seconds and Tony died that would have somehow made it alright for those of you who claim this is the worst series finale ever.
> 
> Tony dying at the end would have changed anything? Got to be honest that does not make a lot of sense.


I can't speak for everyone, but for me the unknown is what's bugging me. If we know Tony lives, that's fine. If we know Tony dies, that's fine too. But being lead down a path, but not ever finding out exactly what happen is what's frustrating me.

tk


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Todd said:


> Maybe Jersey got nuked....


That would have been a better ending then this...


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

A fade out would have symbolized life going on and on. 

The quick cut to black is much more final -- I'm convinced, he got whacked. 

Taking into account the discussion between Bobby and Tony in 'Home Movies', adding in the way the series has always been shot from Tony's perspective. Tony looks up at the door to see Meadow enter and doesn't see the attack come from his side. As Tony is whacked, so is our view into the world of the Soprano family. Also, take into consideration his conversation earlier in the episode with Meadow about not having the opportunity to sit down and eat together -- a bit of foreshadowing?


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

I think it was a great ending. I think we saw things from Tony's perspective. He had his family, feeling good, but also paying attention to things around him, an inner nervousness and then it all ends suddenly.

I think we saw the final whack from a perspective we hadn't seen before.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

crazywater said:


> And the picture went to black at "Don't stop...."
> 
> Major suckness....
> 
> At least Chase could have had the balls to give us an ending of some kind, not this BS viewer-interpretation crapola!


It is funny you think it would have taken more balls to "give us some kind of an ending".

For one he did give us an ending. For two, this ending certainly took more balls then doing something predictable, which the show has never done.

Lets be realistic. We have seen Tony shot multiple times on the show. We have seen him in wrecks, we have seen him arrested and on and on.

What ending would not have been crap for you, and why. People act like if Tony would have been shot and killed that would have some how been awesome for them. Why is that?


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

He's dead. He's not dead. I don't give a ***** any more.
This series is in my rear view mirror, where I should have put it
a few years ago. My mistake.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

pendragn said:


> I can't speak for everyone, but for me the unknown is what's bugging me. If we know Tony lives, that's fine. If we know Tony dies, that's fine too. But being lead down a path, but not ever finding out exactly what happen is what's frustrating me.
> 
> tk


But that has been the show. The show has ALWAYS been that way. It has not been one for wrapping things up. The entire uniqueness of the show when it first started hinged on that as a major factor.

It is the thing that has bothered me for the last few years about some of the complaints about the show. A lot of them seem based on complaining about some of the things that have made the show so good for so long. This show encapsulated what has ALWAYS been good about the Sopranos. As mentioned earlier Chase wrote and directed it. In a nutshell this is the epitome of what the Sopranos has always been. Focused on Tony and his family first and foremost. Throw in a mix of psychology and psychiatry, and then as a secondary act the mafia lifestyle. We have always been glimpsing into the world of the Sopranos, it was never tied to a beginning a middle or an end. No conclusion, no finality.

This episode, actually could be a perfect encapsulation of what the show always ways. As someone else mentioned too, many Seasons have ended with the Soprano family around a table eating. I would be curious to know how many times out of the 6 years it has happened. I can think of maybe 3 off the top of my head.

I just don't get how not knowing what happens ruins the show or makes it any less compelling. I thought the final scene in Holsten's was amazingly tense. Nothing about the ending changed my experience watching the scene.


----------



## JLWINE (Jun 18, 2002)

I'm surprized people think Tony got whacked. With Phil gone, and the rest NY and NJ families all seeming to really want a truce who would whack him. And if they did want to whack him it would have been much easier and cleaner outside the meat market when Tony sat with Paulie for some time. 

Good ending to a GREAT series.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

Mr. Soze said:


> He's dead. He's not dead. I don't give a ***** any more.
> This series is in my rear view mirror, where I should have put it
> a few years ago. My mistake.


I have thoroughly enjoyed the entire run of this series, barring a couple of episodes here or there. I will miss this series -- thanks for the fine work, Mr. Chase, Mr. Gandolfini et al.


----------



## zuko3984 (May 4, 2002)

marksman said:


> Anyone else notice the irony of people complaining that an abrupt cut to black was not acceptable but an abrupt death to Tony would have been okay?
> 
> I am just not getting how if they went for 20 more seconds and Tony died that would have somehow made it alright for those of you who claim this is the worst series finale ever.
> 
> Tony dying at the end would have changed anything? Got to be honest that does not make a lot of sense.


I don't know about anyone else but i watch tv to have a story told to me. I want an definite ending not an ending where i have to make up what happens. If tony died that would have been an ending. It would have put closure into the series. By them leaving it the way it was ended there is no closure and for me that's not what i want in a series finale. I want the story told to me otherwise why am i watching if i have to make the story up myself.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

marksman said:


> What ending would not have been crap for you, and why. People act like if Tony would have been shot and killed that would have some how been awesome for them. Why is that?


Live by the sword, die by the sword....or in this case, live by the gun, die by the gun.

I wouldn't even care if they showed it or not.....as I posted earlier, a cut to black (maybe at the same time as a gun shot is heard), and Tony's words of "You never see it coming". That would have been a great ending.

There is no finality here.....we are left open to think that maybe he was whacked, maybe not. This is not an interpretive show......it is a story, with a beginning, a middle and an end....we took a journey as someone else had put it....and there was never a final end of the journey.....just an interpretation by everyone of how it ended.


----------



## knownzero (Feb 26, 2001)

So, after about two hours post ending and reading the television without pity discussion forum for a while I have one final thought that someone else echoed over there. I roomed with a film major in college and hung out with a lot of film people over the years and I've seen a *lot* of pretentious arthouse bullshiat films in my day. This one ranks right up there with the worst of them. This is first year film school, over the top pretentious crap. This reeks of 'Oh, I'm so going to go straight over their heads with this one because I'm a genius and misunderstood and only the cognoscenti will be able to understand the deep meaning of this and that will separate us film people from the unwashed masses' that I've seen countless times from the hacks that call themselves film makers. It's the lowest form of self indulgence and denotes a complete lack of understanding of the most basic tenents of storytelling and scriptwriting. It's a cop out from a show that ran out of gas years ago.

Yeah, I'm still ticked.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

My brother and I have been talking about it. He loved the ending, I thought it was ok but ultimately the easy way out.

David Chase has been saying for a long time that he's been having trouble reconciling Tony's fate - the notion that "Crime doesn't pay" and how that applies to Tony. By choosing this ending, he basically avoided having the answer the question. Everyone and their grandmother is going to ask him what happens after the cut and he's just going to say "That's up to your interpretation and beliefs" and walk away. To not have to make a decision and justify it is the easy way out.

At the same time, I see where he's going and what he's trying to do. In the least it is somewhat clever. Its going to generate a lot of discussion, and people are going to interpret it nine ways to Sunday. I must admit that it is very interesting to see the different things people key in on and their "endgame" for the Sopranos world.

However, for a series that's entire existence was built on principle of throwing haymakers, it feels like Chase pulled the last punch.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

unixadm said:


> .it is a story, with a beginning, a middle and an end....we took a journey as someone else had put it....and there was never a final end of the journey.....just an interpretation by everyone of how it ended.


Actually no its not. There was no real beginning. The show started squarely in the middle and ended squarely in the middle.

The show has never been like that.

You don't have to interpret what happened. You can assume the show ended the very second that it went to black.

The show is praised for years for being different and doing things its own way, yet again, at the end gets blasted for not doing things like everyone else.

I don't personally care if people like it or not. I can envision a lot of different endings, I don't particular see how any of them would have made the series or this episode better.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

zuko3984 said:


> I don't know about anyone else but i watch tv to have a story told to me. I want an definite ending not an ending where i have to make up what happens. If tony died that would have been an ending. It would have put closure into the series. By them leaving it the way it was ended there is no closure and for me that's not what i want in a series finale. I want the story told to me otherwise why am i watching if i have to make the story up myself.


Why do you want closure? Because all other shows try to do that? Because that is what a tv show is supposed to do? Again, I will say this, but this show has never been about doing things the way other shows did them. Why would you have expected some kind of closure with a nice little bow. Personally I would have felt cheated with such a pedestrian ending.


----------



## Sopranoman (Dec 16, 2001)

Langree said:


> Mr. Chase, is that you?


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

The fact that I'm even ON this forum to try and figure out WTF happened leads me to the conclusion that this show SUCKS, and wasted YEARS of my time.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

marksman said:


> Why do you want closure? Because all other shows try to do that? Because that is what a tv show is supposed to do? Again, I will say this, but this show has never been about doing things the way other shows did them. Why would you have expected some kind of closure with a nice little bow. Personally I would have felt cheated with such a pedestrian ending.


Uhhhh, maybe because they told us that this would be the definitive ending of the show.....the finale ?

Ending:
1.	a bringing or coming to an end; termination; close
2.	the final or concluding part; conclusion
3. To bring to a conclusion.

Finale:

1.	the concluding part of any performance, course of proceedings, etc.; end.

There was no final conclusion....there was not definitive ending. It was a cop out.....Chase couldn't decide if he wanted to end it with Tony getting whacked, which would have pissed off some people, with him turning states evidence and going into WPP, which would have pissed off others, or with a happy, June Cleaverish family dinner fading to black, which would have pissed off others.....so he chickens out of all the endings and gives us a non ending.

There were PLENTY of endings that he could have done that wouldn't have been "pedestrian". Look at my previous posts about suggestions.....even keeping this exact show....he could have made it brilliant with a gunshot sound and Tony's voice over after the cut to black. It would have been definitive and a well done ending.


----------



## zuko3984 (May 4, 2002)

marksman said:


> Why do you want closure? Because all other shows try to do that? Because that is what a tv show is supposed to do? Again, I will say this, but this show has never been about doing things the way other shows did them. Why would you have expected some kind of closure with a nice little bow. Personally I would have felt cheated with such a pedestrian ending.


like i said i watch tv to have a story told to me and that includes an ending. I don't need every little thing wrapped up but i would have liked an ending to the episode. It felt to me like i was reading a book and when i got to the end the last couple of paged had been ripped out and now i don't know how it ends and the book is out of print so i never will know. All the things that had no closure on the show were things that the main characters didn't know the answers to (like the russian in the woods, tony never found out what happened so we never did) that i can live with but to just do a cut to black in mid scene and that's it i just felt cheated. If you liked it more power to you but from most of the reaction i am seeing here and on other sites on the tv stations giving reviews i would say most people were disappointed in the ending.


----------



## purple6816 (May 27, 2003)

At least they can do a follow up mini series or movie.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

Lori said:


> I wonder how many people *will* cancel HBO tonight?


Why? Entourage is better than the Sopranos was the last couple seasons.


----------



## LouCipher (Nov 13, 2002)

I think that this episode is David Chase's version of the classic one-line joke:

How do you keep a moron in suspense?


----------



## Sopranoman (Dec 16, 2001)

unixadm said:


> Uhhhh, maybe because they told us that this would be the definitive ending of the show.....the finale ?
> 
> Ending:
> 1.	a bringing or coming to an end; termination; close
> ...


Your kidding, right? How was there no conclusion? How was there no termination?

Its like designing your own church, no ONE will ever be happy.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

knownzero said:


> [Peter]What the hell was that?[/Peter]
> 
> Seriously. If you're going to leave open an option to bring back the show in the future, don't make it so flippin obvious next time.  What's next Sopranos: Law & Order?


Sopranos The Movie!!!


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

The one question I have is, how was killing Tony the easy way out as so many people seem to believe? Can someone tell me another show in the history of television that ended with the main character being killed? That would've been unprecedented. Howdoes that make it the easy way out?

My problem with this ending is that I feel like we'll be reading an interview with David Chase in a week or a day and he'll say something like, "Yeah, I know how it ended." He did the same thing with the Russian storyline. If you're going to give me this "life goes on" ending, fine, but do it right like Cheers did. Just give me a freaking ending.

This episode will be talked about for years - I'm not overstimating. This was legitimately one of the least satisfying series finales in history, and it will be remembered as such for a long, long time.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

purple6816 said:


> At least they can do a follow up mini series or movie.


People need to stop thinking this is going to happen. As someone already mentioned, Gandolfini has already put the character behind him. There will be no revisitation to these characters. Move on.


----------



## bcrider (Oct 31, 2000)

Simply put, Tony's luck (if you can call it that) ran out. Had Meadow learned how to properly parallel park a car, she would have been seated next to Tony and blocked him from a clear shot to the head.


----------



## zuko3984 (May 4, 2002)

Sopranoman said:


> Your kidding, right? How was there no conclusion? How was there no termination?
> 
> Its like designing your own church, no ONE will ever be happy.


So what was the ending? What was the conclusion. Did Tony live or die at the end. Is he going to jail or maybe he just goes on living his life like it has been since the start of the show. Lots of people seem to think tony gets shot but show me were that is definitely shown in that last scene. If he gets shot that would have been a conclusion. What we got was a choose your own ending conclusion which to me is no conclusion.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

serumgard said:


> People need to stop thinking this is going to happen. As someone already mentioned, Gandolfini has already put the character behind him. There will be no revisitation to these characters. Move on.


Yeah I would be surprised if we ever heard from the Sopranos again.

I think that was the end of it. That moment in time and it is over.


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

serumgard said:


> The one question I have is, how was killing Tony the easy way out as so many people seem to believe? Can someone tell me another show in the history of television that ended with the main character being killed? That would've been unprecedented.


Blake's Seven


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

zuko3984 said:


> like i said i watch tv to have a story told to me and that includes an ending. I don't need every little thing wrapped up but i would have liked an ending to the episode. It felt to me like i was reading a book and when i got to the end the last couple of paged had been ripped out and now i don't know how it ends and the book is out of print so i never will know. All the things that had no closure on the show were things that the main characters didn't know the answers to (like the russian in the woods, tony never found out what happened so we never did) that i can live with but to just do a cut to black in mid scene and that's it i just felt cheated. If you liked it more power to you but from most of the reaction i am seeing here and on other sites on the tv stations giving reviews i would say most people were disappointed in the ending.


I am pretty sure the episode ended up with AJ, Carmela and Tony sitting at a table in Halston's with Don't Stop Believing on the jukebox, and Meadow was making her way in from outside.

Oh when you say you wanted an ending, you meant a different one. So when you say you don't want one to tie it up with a bow, you still mean one different then the one they gave you.

The episode did end. The series did end. Abruptly yes, but it did end and it is over.

Fair enough if it didn't fit into your dream of how it should be end, but I will emphasize this again, the show has never been about doing what is expected. So to expect them to do that now would be coping out.

What exactly do you feel cheated from? What if they just kept eating their dinner and then went home and went to bed. Would going to sleep have been a good enough ending for you? Where did you want it to go. Clearly some of you have other images in your head as to how it should have ended. Just saying it should have ended, doesn't really do much, as that is a cop out complaint.

I don't think it is anything like the last page of a book being torn out.

If you read a book and Tony was sitting there with his family and it said Meadow approached the door from the parking lot, the bell on the door jingle and Tony looked up.

The end.

That is the end. You didn't want any ending, you wanted a traditional storybook ending.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

marksman said:


> Yeah I would be surprised if we ever heard from the Sopranos again.
> 
> I think that was the end of it. That moment in time and it is over.


If that is truely the case, then we should have seen a definitive end to the show. If this was a season finale, with another season coming, or a movie coming, then I could see it....but if it is the end, then close the book on the character for good.



marksman said:


> I am pretty sure the episode ended up with AJ, Carmela and Tony sitting at a table in Halston's with Don't Stop Believing on the jukebox, and Meadow was making her way in from outside.
> 
> Oh when you say you wanted an ending, you meant a different one. So when you say you don't want one to tie it up with a bow, you still mean one different then the one they gave you.
> 
> ...


The tension in the diner was palpable.....it was a great lead up to something.....and even if that lead up was that nothing happened, and they all eat dinner and go home, it would have been better....it would give us an ending that Tony's life goes on and he continues as he always had with one eye always looking over his shoulder.

If it ended with him getting killed, then it finalizes the series....live by the gun, die by the gun. The NY family is history, and now the NJ family is history....finished, ended, final.

There is no final payoff with this.....we don't know if he lives or dies, it isn't a finale....just an open ended series.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

marksman said:


> I am pretty sure the episode ended up with AJ, Carmela and Tony sitting at a table in Halston's with Don't Stop Believing on the jukebox, and Meadow was making her way in from outside.
> 
> Oh when you say you wanted an ending, you meant a different one. So when you say you don't want one to tie it up with a bow, you still mean one different then the one they gave you.
> 
> ...


You're missing the point. We're not saying the show didn't have an ending...we're saying THE ENDING SUCKED!!!

Sure, them eating dinner is "an ending". But I didn't watch an entire series because it was about people doing daily routine stuff. I watched it because interesting and dramatic stuff happened. And an ending that builds dramatically as if something interesting is going to happen, and then the screen goes blank, is a poor ending.

You know the ending sucked when most people watching it thought their cable went out. That's not the result you want when creating a show or a movie.


----------



## Fahtrim (Apr 12, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.
> 
> The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.
> 
> The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


That's the point. I agree.


----------



## bcrider (Oct 31, 2000)

West Coast broadcast just ended, let's see what the other half of the US thinks.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.
> 
> The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.
> 
> The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


Yeah, but is isn't going to keep on going.......this was a show about the life of Tony Soprano.....and they promised an ending...this was to be the final show ever....it ISN'T going to keep going....so why should the character (possibly)? If they wanted to makes us think that life goes on as normal for the Sopranos, then do that....give us Tony, Carm, AJ and Meadow all eating dinner and fade to black with a "life goes on" kind of feel.

If they want to unequivocly end it, then have Tony get whacked.

It seems like to some people (me included), interpret that the quick jump to black ending signified Tony's life ending....he got whacked and never saw it coming (as we never saw it coming when the screen went blank). Others think that it signified that "life goes on" and it is just the end of our glimpse into Tony's life.

Not everything needs to be "wrapped up" in a nice package....but I think we all deserve a finale for this show that at least wraps up the fate of the main character that we have tuned in for 7 years to watch.

Leaving it the way he did, just seems like an open end for a movie, renewal of the series, or just a cop out because he didn't want to have an ending.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

i just finished it, and i loved it, a great ending, IMO. appears from reading this thread I'm in a very small minority, what else is new


----------



## RayChuang88 (Sep 5, 2002)

I believe everyone in the diner--including Tony Soprano--is dead.

If you have recorded the show on your VCR or DVR, _watch for the nervous-looking man that looks Middle Eastern at the bar in the diner, who later went into the restroom_. If we remember from the series, Tony went after Middle Eastern terrorists, and it's possible that the sudden end indicates a powerful bomb went off at the diner, killing everyone in it. It's certainly a pretty plausible ending.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

The more I think about it, the more I think I understand Chase's ending.....

This last few episodes, and final scene in particular is all about the tension that has been building....and Tony is always looking over his shoulder. Tony has said "You never see it coming".

I think Chase's meaning for the ending is that we as the audience have been drawn in for the past 7 years, and in the end, never see it coming.....He *wanted * people to think their cable went out.....it was supposed to be an epiphany for us.....sitting there on the edge of our seats thinking Tony's going to get whacked....when BLAM......we get hit.....almost like we are put in Tony's shoes and everyrthing went black when we got whacked.

He tried to be "artsy" about the ending, and I think it totally flopped.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

serumgard said:


> Can someone tell me another show in the history of television that ended with the main character being killed?


Action. "Time of death: Tuesday at 9:30" 
Forever Knight.

In fact, there was a thread a while ago about shows that did exactly that.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

I really loved the finale. I'm glad he didn't go a guns blazing finale like so many simple minded people would have loved. This isn't Scarface. The entire episode was hysterical and I found a lot of the moments surprisingly poignant. The entire last scene was ratcheting up the suspense to make people think something epic was going to happen.

By the way-I loved Phil's death. I had the same reaction as those guys watching.


----------



## jtlytle (May 17, 2005)

Who says they have to be killed??


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

I liked it as well.

Dead for sure. There is no other point to showing Meadow taking so long to park.

Go back and watch all the shots where the door bell rings. Camera on Tony. Door rings. Camera from Tony's POV. This happened four times. The final time it was Meadow. Camera on Meadow. Camera on Tony. Bell. Black. There is no more Tony POV - because he is dead.

-Mike


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

Or. Another idea. We got whacked. 

Someone sort of mentioned this above. Maybe the idea was that we were really an observer - and in the end - we were shot - ending our ability to watch. 

If that was the purpose - thumbs down for trying to be WAY too artsy.


----------



## fliptheflop (Sep 20, 2005)

^ Yeah I think David Chase just kicked us out of Tony Sopranos life. We don't get to peek inside the window anymore.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> I'm not sure he got killed. Possibly. Maybe not.
> 
> I do like the fact that so many people demand resolution. The problem with mob shows is that there are only a couple of 3 possible resolutions: 1) getting killed, 2) going to jail, 3) going into the witness protection program.
> 
> Bah. They've all been done before. This is different.


Different _and_ bad.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

cwoody222 said:


> Horrible, horrible ending. Total cop out on Chase's part. Have the balls to tell the story you want to tell, don't let the viewers decide for themselves.
> 
> Horrible.


Best post so far.


----------



## fliptheflop (Sep 20, 2005)

I doubt he's dead. I don't think they would have said anything about the upcoming indictments against Tony. I think his life goes on but were just no longer along for the ride. If he was going to kill him he would have killed him. This show has never been about easy anything. Its different then most shows and thats why everyone loved it. So it sticks to what it is and everyone flips. Everything ends but that doesn't mean it ended for Tony when it ended for us.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I'm in the WTF crowd! If this had been a season finale then that'd be one thing. But a series finale needs at least some sort of conclusion. Even the sound of a gunshot, with no real explanation of who actually got shot would have been better then this. This is like one of those shows that ends a season with a big cliff hanger then get canceled over the summer and never comes back. However unlike those shows these people have known the end was coming for 2+ years. If this guy Chase wanted to be some cheesy arthouse director then he should have gone out and made some sh*tty arthouse movie that nobody would have seen. They shouldn't have let him ruin the final episode of very popular and mainstream series with his pretentious crap. I'm sure him and all his buddies in the "in crowd" are all having a big laugh over this ending, but that laugh is coming at our expense. This is no different then pulling a practical joke. It's funny to the person who pulls the joke, but no so much to the victim. In this case millions of people were victims of a stupid practical joke, and I expect the vast majority of them are going to be pretty pissed off about it.

Dan


----------



## Bananfish (May 16, 2002)

So if you're David Chase and you want to have an ending that is simply "Tony Soprano goes on living his life, with all that goes along with that -- worrying about going to jail, having to watch his back to make sure he doesn't get whacked, an up and down relationship with the New York mob, dealing with a talented but wishy-washy daughter, dealing with a selfish, shallow son, dealing with a bunch of underlings who are not too smart and difficult to herd, dealing with other family problems (Janice trying to get her hands on Junior's money, for example), keeping Carmela happy while living the mob life," what do you do?

Well you do exactly what this episode did ... you show normal everyday life events happening to Tony and family, and then at some point, you just "pull the plug." That's literally what happened here - the sudden black screen was not an abrupt end to Tony's life, but instead it was an abrupt end to we, the audience, being allowed to eavesdrop on the Sopranos any more. "You never even see it coming" is more a mantra for our being dropped right in the middle of the Sopranos lives.

I don't really have a problem with that ending per se. Instead I have a problem with the philosophy that the show should have merely ended with life going on. I think that, indeed, was a copout on Chase's part. And more so, I have a problem with Chase leading us up to this final episode with Tony holed up like a rat with New York about to whack him at any instant, and then turning around and having a "life just going on as usual" ending. If that's the philosophy Chase wanted to employ, then he should have had the guts *not* to lead everyone to believe a true "finale" was coming by having the second to last episode be so eventful.


----------



## fliptheflop (Sep 20, 2005)

We were at the edge of our seats over a girl parking and a family eating because we know anything can happen to Tony Soprano. But this time it didn't it happened to us. Chase was telling us it was over when we thought it couldn't be. Thats what most people are having a problem with. But thats how things are they end without notice but they only ended for us. Tony lives on and now we're under black out restrictions.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

marksman said:


> ... I thought the final scene in Holsten's was amazingly tense. Nothing about the ending changed my experience watching the scene.


Not even when the power went out right before the climax?


----------



## rgr (Feb 21, 2003)

I especially liked where, after the black screen near the end, Bob Newhart woke up and realized the whole series had been a dream.


----------



## mikeinla (Jun 6, 2004)

unixadm said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think I understand Chase's ending.....
> 
> This last few episodes, and final scene in particular is all about the tension that has been building....and Tony is always looking over his shoulder. Tony has said "You never see it coming".
> 
> ...


You've almost got it right. I watched the whole show on the east coast feed and then just the ending on the west coast feed.

Tony didn't die; there was no one in the restaurant that was going to whack him.

It was an ordinary restaurant with ordinary people doing ordinary things, including his daughter having trouble parking the car.

Yet here's this crime boss constantly looking over his shoulder at everyone and every little thing. He's also got a potential RICO indictment hanging over his head.

The scene was edited to show Tony's paranoia which is his albatross.

That's David Chase's was of saying that crime doesn't pay. That constant paranoia is his sword of Damocles. If you look at this past season, he's made Tony a far less sympathetic figure, with the killing of Christopher being at the top of the list.

Would you want to live like that,constantly looking at everyone with the fear that this is your killer?

The only thing he should have done differently is fade to black instead of just stop. It made a lot of people think the dish had gone out instead of thinking bout the ending.

The episode itself wasn't very good; it didn't flow very well. It seems like the decision to kill Phil and end the war happened rather suddenly. I think that's what makes the ending seem worse.

If you watch the ending just by itself (as I did on the west coast feed), it's actually pretty good.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

mikeinla said:


> You've almost got it right. I watched the whole show on the east coast feed and then just the ending on the west coast feed.
> 
> Tony didn't die; there was no one in the restaurant that was going to whack him.
> 
> ...


Very simply: My problem is that it could be interpreted either way. Personally I like the "paranoia" theory best. That's worse than being dead - in my book anyway...

Regarding Christopher: In the context of the show, I don't feel that killing Christopher was that horrible. Tony has done much worse, and in a sick kind of way, he may have actually been "doing good" by protecting Christopher's little girl.


----------



## Clarkey (Dec 29, 2004)

Here's an AP story on what happened (or didn't) last night:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2007/06/10/sopranos-finale.html


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

Anyone who thought in that final scene that Chase would go all Scorsese with dramatic tension building to a cathartic orgy of violence over a pop music soundtrack just hasn't been paying attention to the show for the past nine years.

Nothing gets wrapped up in tidy little packages on _The Sopranos _(well, except for Joey Pantoliano's head). Some people love that, some are driven crazy by it, but there it is. I don't know why anyone expected this to change last night.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

Having slept on it, I am even more irritated at myself for sticking with the show for so long. I should never have paid any attention to all the apologists for this nonsense ("Chase is a genius", "Just wait, something great is just about to happen" etc.) and cut bait.

All the BS about the show having this "long arc" is just that. The show was never intended to go this long, and real real life, especially Nancy Marchand's death changed the course of the show, and for the worse, IMO.

There, I got it out. Cut to blank screen.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think Chase's biggest problem is he over-estimated his audience...


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

For those as bad with names as I am, here's Carlo, who flipped and would testify against Tony:










Frank


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

Lori said:


> I wonder how many people *will* cancel HBO tonight?


Not last night, but I will cancel today.


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

For the Tony got whacked conspirators...

What hit man sits in the diner and watches them, then goes to the bathroom?

Too many witnesses, too many people to recognize a face. They usually just walk in, rip off a few rounds and walk out.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

wow...over 200 posts already...

count me in the minority who loved it...just the perfect Soprano ep with boring family gatherings and family drama, sprinkled with a little mob action...only problem is: no Melphi!  

LOVED, loved, loved the FBI guy screaming "we're gonna win!"...

Don't believe Tony is dead...


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

For everyone wondering who it was that killed Phil, he was Benny from the NJ mob. He has been on the show for a few seasons now. Actor's name is Max Casella

I loved how Phil died, BTW...


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

marksman said:


> It is funny you think it would have taken more balls to "give us some kind of an ending".
> 
> For one he did give us an ending. For two, this ending certainly took more balls then doing something predictable, which the show has never done.
> 
> ...


Yes I am sure Chase's intention was to make everyone thing their cable/satellite signal went out...just brilliant!

What ending would have been ok for me? An ending. I would have been happier if NJ got nuked, or if there was a slow fade showing them eating onion rings, or how about all of the possible "bad guys" in the diner slowly start to make their way towards Tony for an undetermined reason and then a slow fade...

Anything but the "my cable went out" moment...


----------



## angbear1985 (Aug 25, 2006)

I've not had a chance to read all these posts... Sorry, going to read them in a moment. But ....
What sort of an ending? "Don't STOP"... screen goes blank. My Dad called me, thought that his cable went out, too! Just, a weird ending.

And - what was with the cat ?????


----------



## SoupMan (Mar 1, 2001)

Chapper1 said:


> For everyone wondering who it was that killed Phil, he was Benny from the NJ mob. He has been on the show for a few seasons now. Actor's name is Max Casella
> 
> I loved how Phil died, BTW...


I don't think it was Benny. It was the guy whose name Paulie was making fun of in the back of the Bing. I can't remember the name, but Paulie cracked "What kind of Itailan name is that?" or something.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

serumgard said:


> People need to stop thinking this is going to happen. As someone already mentioned, Gandolfini has already put the character behind him. There will be no revisitation to these characters. Move on.


Oh really...just like Season 4 was going to be it....How'd that work out?


----------



## Orthogon (Jul 27, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.
> 
> The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.
> 
> The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


Probable a smeek, but this was the first comment in the thread that felt the same way about the ending that I did.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

After having some time to sleep on it this episode just left more questions. What was with the freaking cat? Who was the woman the FBI guy was banging and why was she giving him the evil eyes? Why did the FBI guy say looks like we are going to win this one? Wasn't Meadow driving that Lexus that parallel parks itself ? Did junior really lose it, I thought he was always faking?


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

SoupMan said:


> I don't think it was Benny. It was the guy whose name Paulie were making fun of in the back of the Bing. I can't remember the name, but Paulie cracked "What kind of Itailan name is that?" or something.


His name was Walden or something like that. After Paulie gave him a hard time, he mentioned he was named for Bobby Darin. Darin's real name was Walden Robert Cassotto.

I could swear it was Benny though..


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Here's a resounding "Boooooo!" from Philadelphia. The ending sucked but, even worse, why spend so much time on meaningless AJ? I shouldn't be FFwding through a series finale.

There was no reason for Tony to be whacked. The war (what little bit there was) with Phil's crew was over.


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

minorthr said:


> After having some time to sleep on it this episode just left more questions. What was with the freaking cat? Who was the woman the FBI guy was banging and why was she giving him the evil eyes? Why did the FBI guy say looks like we are going to win this one? Wasn't Meadow driving that Lexus that parallel parks itself ? Did junior really lose it, I thought he was always faking?


That FBI woman would be his friend from the Brooklyn office that was giving him all the tips about Tony.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

I loved the ending. I hate movies/shows where everything is wrapped up in a neat little bow. The ending can be whatever you want it to be- Tony can go on living the way he always does or he got whacked. Does it really matter? The way you end the show in you head shows what you really thought about Tony....


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

GDG76 said:


> I loved the ending. I hate movies/shows where everything is wrapped up in a neat little bow. The ending can be whatever you want it to be- Tony can go on living the way he always does or he got whacked. Does it really matter? The way you end the show in you head shows what you really thought about Tony....


I just don't understand this reasoning. If you have a story to tell, tell the whole story, including the ending. It's like listening to a song that fades out at the end because the artists were too lazy or disinterested to write an ending. If I'm supposed to end the Sopranos in my head, I would have ended it after season seven.


----------



## Tandem (May 26, 2004)

I thought the ending was obvious. Meadow comes in late and she bumps into the gunman just as he is about to wack Tony. The gun goes off and we catch the bullet instead of Tony. We never even hear it coming. Brilliant!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> I just don't understand this reasoning. If you have a story to tell, tell the whole story, including the ending. It's like listening to a song that fades out at the end because the artists were too lazy or disinterested to write an ending. If I'm supposed to end the Sopranos in my head, I would have ended it after season seven.


But that WAS the ending. You're asking Chase to tell the whole story AND THEN SOME because you want to know what happens AFTER the ending!

I don't think you're supposed to end the story in your head. I think you're supposed to leave it where it is. And if you don't get why that is an ending, then as has been said before, I really don't think you get what this show has been all along.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> I just don't understand this reasoning. If you have a story to tell, tell the whole story, including the ending. It's like listening to a song that fades out at the end because the artists were too lazy or disinterested to write an ending. If I'm supposed to end the Sopranos in my head, I would have ended it after season seven.


What if there is no definite ending? Unless Tony gets whacked, everything goes on like it always has... Life doesn't have many abrupt endings. If you want that, just accept that fact that Tony got whacked and he's dead.

There was an ending. Whether or not you liked it is up to you... I thought it was really good.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think you're supposed to end the story in your head. I think you're supposed to leave it where it is.


Well, it's kind of crazy to do all that build up for a scene like that and not expect people to speculate as to what really happened..

Even if not, it just helps to hammer the fact that in his life, Tony (like us now) never knows whats going to happen to him or those around him...


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

I'm more okay with the ending the morning after.

Tony (& family) don't get whacked, confounding our expectations of violence. We see assassins everywere (in the restaurant) but they're not assassins. Or, conversely, this is Tony Soprano's world: he can go to dinner with his family, but he has to wonder if every guy he sees walking into the restaurant is the one who's going to end him.

And now, to quote another television icon of our times:


The Simpsons said:


> Homer: Marge, I'm confused. Is this a happy ending or a sad ending?
> Marge: It's an ending, that's enough.


----------



## Odds Bodkins (Jun 7, 2006)

Chapper1 said:


> His name was Walden or something like that. After Paulie gave him a hard time, he mentioned he was named for Bobby Darin. Darin's real name was Walden Robert Cassotto.
> 
> I could swear it was Benny though..


Benny is the guy from Doogie who is about 3 feet tall. I just went back to look and it was Waldon. Another stupid twist in a show that had no more time for them.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

I also had a big WTF moment when the screen went black, but after some time to think about it I think I understand it a little better. The tension building up to that point was amazing, and simply from the most mundane things. The idea that one of those guys was a hit man defied most of what we've come to know about that sort of thing throughout the entire series. Tony was the first one there, so what would he have been waiting for? They never go after the family (as Tony mentioned last week) so what would the point have been of waiting until they were all there? Those guys don't wait for the right moment, they go in, do the job, and get out. They certainly don't sit around giving witnesses a better chance of identifying them later. Why would we think that Meadow having trouble parking her car meant that someone was going to get killed? I don't know, but I damn sure did.

So what was the alternative to a bloodbath, fading to black while the four of them sat there eating? I guess he chose the abrupt ending rather than the obvious (well, one of the obvious possibilities). I'm not saying that was the best way to go, but at least it explains it, in my mind.

I thought it was interesting that they focused so much on the careers of A.J. and Meadow. Not that I'm surprised that it all came down to the four of them (including at the very end) but it was interesting nonetheless. After so much attention last week on how they'd coddled A.J. so much, he finally gets some vision and direction in his life, and they find him the cushy job working on some crap mafia-funded movie. Plus Meadow's comment about how she would have been a doctor if Tony hadn't been arrested so many times, and Carmela going from disappointed to enthusiastic about Meadow's switch from medicine to law.

I thought we'd get more of an idea about what would happen with the NY mob. I had a feeling before this episode that there would be an outcome similar to what happened, but with the plan that Little Carmine would step in and take over as boss because he'd be seen as a peacekeeper. And who was the guy who Tony was talking to when they arranged that, George I think his name was?

I wonder what was with the scene with the FBI guy and the other cop or whatever she was. Not that it didn't make sense, just not sure what prompted him to give us a glimpse into his personal life all of a sudden.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

I've got to disagree with the majority. Everything has come full circle. The war is over and it is back to business a usual.

I actually expected a flight of ducks to land at the pool.


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

Anubys said:


> LOVED, loved, loved the FBI guy screaming "we're gonna win!"...


i thought that was the line of the night. the fbi agent has been vicariously living in tony's world for the past few years, giving him tips, and wishing he was one of them.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

unixadm said:


> If they wanted to leave it open, then show Tony and his family having dinner, laughing and having fun, and just fade to black.....nothing abrubt....just a nice fade with him and his family.


I completely agree with this.

Having the possible hit man sitting at the counter and the artificial drama created by Meadow's lack of parking skills does nothing but add ambiguity.

If he wanted us to think that Tony was shot but didn't want to show it there are MANY better ways to do it rather than a way-too-abrupt "fade" to black.

It was lazy.


----------



## Ekims (Oct 18, 2002)

Everyone that wanted an ending like Tony lived or died for sure, let me ask you this. What if we found out he died? This wasn't the Tony Soprano Show. It was a show about his family. Would you be pissed if we found out that only Tony died? We wouldn't know how that affected Carm, A.J. or Meadow. So we would be here *****in that it wasn't closed out to our liking.

The ending was perfect from me perspective! Everyone got what they wanted. Some see it that Tony got capped and some see it that it closed out just like it opened, with the family together and life going on. That was the beauty of the ending, we each got our own.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that WAS the ending. You're asking Chase to tell the whole story AND THEN SOME because you want to know what happens AFTER the ending!
> 
> I don't think you're supposed to end the story in your head. I think you're supposed to leave it where it is. And if you don't get why that is an ending, then as has been said before, I really don't think you get what this show has been all along.


absolutely...I'll put a little different spin on the same point:

the TELLING of the story had ended, but the story continues...


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Agent86 said:


> My brother and I have been talking about it. He loved the ending, I thought it was ok but ultimately the easy way out.
> 
> David Chase has been saying for a long time that he's been having trouble reconciling Tony's fate - the notion that "Crime doesn't pay" and how that applies to Tony. By choosing this ending, he basically avoided having the answer the question. Everyone and their grandmother is going to ask him what happens after the cut and he's just going to say "That's up to your interpretation and beliefs" and walk away. To not have to make a decision and justify it is the easy way out.
> 
> ...


Yes, this was Chase's Kobayashi Maru where instead of picking an ending he opted to cheat and change the rules to those of his choosing, where he no longer had to make the choice at all.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cwoody222 said:


> It was lazy.


Well, no, Chase worked really hard to put us into Tony's mindset. The fact that you don't appreciate all that work doesn't mean Chase is lazy, it just means you don't appreciate all that work.


bdowell said:


> Yes, this was Chase's Kobayashi Maru where instead of picking an ending he opted to cheat and change the rules to those of his choosing, where he no longer had to make the choice at all.


You don't think Tony is paying? Look at how he has to live--seeing hitmen in every diner!


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

But there never is an ending... if they end with Tony getting killed, then you would have to wonder about what happened to his family? Would AJ end up taking revenge? Would there be any retaliation? If he got convicted, would he go to jail? How long? etc...

Although it's VERY unsatisfying to no see closure to Tony's life, I thought it was a good ending. We saw his fate- every moment is filled with Tension. Simple acts of sitting in a restaurant, parking a car, picking out music on a jukebox, could be your last. It's a fate worse then death.



cheesesteak said:


> I just don't understand this reasoning. If you have a story to tell, tell the whole story, including the ending. It's like listening to a song that fades out at the end because the artists were too lazy or disinterested to write an ending. If I'm supposed to end the Sopranos in my head, I would have ended it after season seven.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

Anubys said:


> absolutely...I'll put a little different spin on the same point:
> 
> the TELLING of the story had ended, but the story continues...


But the story DOESN'T continue.....at least we have no idea if it does.

If Tony dies, then the story is over....the story has been about Tony and his two families.

If Tony lives, then the story continues.....life goes on.

What Chase did was cut the story short..and shortchange the viewers.

Let's take another story.....

The Little Engine that could......at the end, the engine is saying "I think can, I think I can, I think I can".

If Chase wrote the ending, the engine would get close to the top of the mountain, you turn the page and find a blank page.

You need to see the engine rounding the top of the hill....and saying "I thought I could, I thought I could". If you don't, then it is not an ending....just open ended and poor story writing.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

unixadm said:


> Let's take another story.....
> 
> The Little Engine that could......at the end, the engine is saying "I think can, I think I can, I think I can".
> 
> ...


I think the level of someone expected to understand "The Little Engine That Could" vs a show like the Sopranos kinda invalidates the whole analogy. Even if the Engine story ended like that, you could surmise that the important part was that he "thinks he can"...

If you want endings like kids shows, watch kids shows...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Idearat said:


> Major suckage.
> 
> We were told they filmed multiple endings to keep it a secret. What we now know is that they decided not to use any of them.
> 
> The FBI guy's "We Won!" was the only good point of the episode.


I'm still sticking with what I said last night. THAT line right there was a clue that the war was over, and it's back to the same old mob routine, with Tony NOT DEAD.

Paulie and Patsy move up
AJ is back to "normal"
Meadow is going to get married to a guy in the "family"
NY and NJ differences are settled, both sides knew Phil was out there.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

The whole problem wasn't in the ending, but in these last bunch of episodes. I was already ambivalent about the whole show with the huge gaps, 1/2 seasons and such. The show lost it's edge long ago, and the gaps reduced any momentum it had.

I could have lived with the ending if the shows leading to the finale hadn't sucked. Why did we expect a satisfying ending? Because there was no satisfying middle. The only thing that kept me watching these last episodes was thinking that something was coming.

For the "It's not the destination, it's the journey" people. A great destination makes up for a harsh journey ( Think escaping a POW camp or crossing the desert in a covered wagon to get to California ) But if the destination sucks, it better have been a great trip.

The Sopranos hasn't been a great trip in a long while. It was the destination that kept many of hanging on. And when we got there, well, "There is no there there."


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

I can hear Chase singing the closing song from the Muppet Movie:

Life's like a movie
Write your own ending
Keep believing, keep pretending
We did just what we set out to do
Thanks to the lovers, the dreamers, and you......


----------



## RangersRBack (Jan 9, 2006)

I felt a little cheated by the ending, but I didn't hate it. I do, however, think it's pointless to discuss what we think happened in the next few seconds/minutes/hours/years after the screen went black, because I don't think even Chase knows for sure.

So let's discuss the rest of the episode. 

Loved how the cat was freaking Paulie out, and then the cat came outside to sit with Paulie outside Satriale's.

When Tony came to visit Sil in the hospital, with the way his hair was sitting it looked like Sil turned back into Miami Steve.

No resolution about the ending, but we did get resolution about where Agent Harris was getting his intel about Phil and his gang...in bed!

Anybody know anything about Emily Wickersham, who played AJ's friend/girlfriend? I know she played a high school junior but the actress may certainly be older than 18, maybe even a lot older. Just trying to figure out if I'm a perv for lusting after a young girl, or a healthy American male. She did a good job running down the mountain, that's for sure.

Great scene when Tony and Carmella were yelling at AJ about the car. Meadow chimes in, and Tony says 'You want some of this too?' Perfect dynamic of parents yelling at kids, although Meadow and AJ seemed a little old for it.

Did Phil not know about the meeting in that factory between Tony, his men, and Phil's men? Seemed weird that Tony was there and Phil wasn't, and also seemed weird that Phil's men basically said it was OK for Tony to whack Phil.

The look on Tony's face when AJ tells him he wants to go to Afghanistan to be a helicopter pilot, so he can come back and be Donald Trump's personal pilot, was priceless. Funny stuff.

Who flipped? Carlo? Was he Patsy's son or something? I lost track.

I thought you don't whack someone in front of their family? Do the rules change when the whackee spends his entire time with his family?

Another great scene was when Carmela met Meadow's friend who had flunked out of college, and now she's in her second year of med school. The very pained look on Carm's face was so real.


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

markymark_ctown said:


> could have been him, but since they never showed the killer, there is now way to definitely know.


I could swear they had shown the killer.

Maybe I am just hallucinating...


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

Chapper1 said:


> I could swear they had shown the killer.
> 
> Maybe I am just hallucinating...


They did. Of course, you could just be hallucinating my post.


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

jeff125va said:


> They did. Of course, you could just be hallucinating my post.


Was referencing markymarks post where he stated we never saw the killer...


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

RangersRBack said:


> Did Phil not know about the meeting in that factory between Tony, his men, and Phil's men? Seemed weird that Tony was there and Phil wasn't, and also seemed weird that Phil's men basically said it was OK for Tony to whack Phil.


There was a setup earlier about how Phils guy thought he was moving too fast and with all the heat that they should slow down and maybe work it out. Since Phil didn't want to do that, the NY guy went behind his back and worked it out with Tony, presumably for a larger role once Phil was out of the way...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that WAS the ending. You're asking Chase to tell the whole story AND THEN SOME because you want to know what happens AFTER the ending!
> 
> I don't think you're supposed to end the story in your head. I think you're supposed to leave it where it is. And if you don't get why that is an ending, then as has been said before, I really don't think you get what this show has been all along.


So what does a sudden black screen, out of nowhere, WTF ending have to do with "what this show has been all along"?


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

The thing is that The Sopranos main story lines have ALL been about resolution and specifically Tony getting resolution to his problems.....

Big ***** is talking to the feds....Tony figures it out, and even though ***** is his friend, he had to resolve the issue...and he did.

Ralphie kills dancer then kills Pie-Oh-My and is out of control.....Tony took care of it and resolved the issue.

Jackie Jr hits the card game, and Tony has him whacked resolving the problem.

Tony B kills Joey Peeps, sparking the beginnings of a family war....Tony S resolves the issue in his own way, rather than letting Phil do it

Chrisopher always being a drug addict, an albatross around Tony's neck....had to be resolved, and Tony did it.

The war with Phil....it had to be resolved and it was.

All of Tony's issues.....he talked to Melfi to resolve his blackouts and personal problems....and either got resolutions or at least made sense out of his problems.


Yet, instead of giving us a final resolution to Tony's life, we are left to interpret our own meaning to the cut to black. Tony got more resolutions to his problems and issues then we got in the end.

Sorry...that "artsy, fartsy" non ending doesn't say that "he's brilliant" to me, but says that he didn't resolve the most important part of a show that was all about getting resolutions.


----------



## disco (Mar 27, 2000)

Are these lyrics from Journey's "Don't Stop Believin'" possibly a tip of an upcoming movie?



> Working hard to get my fill,
> Everybody wants a thrill
> Payin anything to roll the dice,
> Just one more time
> ...


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

disco said:


> Are these lyrics from Journey's "Don't Stop Believin'" possibly a tip of an upcoming movie?


I would say that it is more like others have said....that life goes on.

As the song says, 
It never ends, it goes on and on and on and on

So the ending is that there is no ending.

Love the song, hated the ending....Pretty crappy IMO.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

GDG76 said:


> There was a setup earlier about how Phils guy thought he was moving too fast and with all the heat that they should slow down and maybe work it out. Since Phil didn't want to do that, the NY guy went behind his back and worked it out with Tony, presumably for a larger role once Phil was out of the way...


someone with Phil's experience should not have made this mistake...once Tony survived the initial assault, time away from the action just gives everyone time to think how life would be without him...sure enough, his crew saw a chance to move up and save their own skin...very stupid mistake...


----------



## Tsiehta (Jul 22, 2002)

markymark_ctown said:


> could have been him, but since they never showed the killer, there is now way to definitely know.


they did show the killer


----------



## 7thton (Mar 3, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> Thinking about it, I think it was brilliant.
> 
> The whole series the point was made time and again that things don't "end" just like life. What happened to the Russian? WTF does it matter? What happened to all those other lose ends in your life.
> 
> The family is eating dinner together. Life goes on. Does Tony get wacked? Does he go on trial? Maybe. It keeps on going.


+1

Everyone has their own idea about what happened. Chase gave us all the players in the restaurant....we don't know who they are or their motivations. It's up to us to fill in the blanks. I don't think it was lazy. Chase worked hard over many seasons to get us emerged in the Sopranos world. Now, based on the workings of that world, what happened at the end? There are lots of possible outcomes, none more or less "right" than any other. But answering that question is fun...but your mileage may vary.


----------



## Odds Bodkins (Jun 7, 2006)

Tsiehta said:


> they did show the killer


It was Walden. Nothing like introducing a new character just to do the deed we've all been waiting on. Weak sauce.


----------



## jgickler (Apr 7, 2000)

Great ending. The show is fundementally about Tony, Carmella, Meadow and AJ. I think this episode showed us that the family is still there, fundementallity they are the same, and regardless of what happens in Tony's work life, his family is whats most important to him. 

My guess is that Chase resents the fact that while he has created such rich characters, such compelling relationships, and really groundbreaking portrails of a typical family in a non-typical environment, many viewers see the whole series as a mob show. They want, and expect hits, fights, bing girls, etc. and when they don't get these, they complain that the show has gone down hill or that it is boring. 

So what Chase did IMO was say, here's a satisfying ending for those of you invested in the characters, and for those who just want to see a bloody end to the series, too bad. The ending to me said, life goes on, Tony's family is still the same family we grew to know way back in season 1, and while not perfect, all the 4 main characters are in a fairly stable place. Sure there are unresolved issues, but that is also a part of life. However, if you saw the Sopranos as just another mob show, finding interactions between characters as boring, then I can see how you feel the ending was not satisfying. I guess I also wonder how the series could ever be satisfying if you don't understand that its really a show about family.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

Chapper1 said:


> Was referencing markymarks post where he stated we never saw the killer...


I got that. Was joking about the hallucinating part...


----------



## Ekims (Oct 18, 2002)

jgickler said:


> Great ending. The show is fundementally about Tony, Carmella, Meadow and AJ. I think this episode showed us that the family is still there, fundementallity they are the same, and regardless of what happens in Tony's work life, his family is whats most important to him.
> 
> My guess is that Chase resents the fact that while he has created such rich characters, such compelling relationships, and really groundbreaking portrails of a typical family in a non-typical environment, many viewers see the whole series as a mob show. They want, and expect hits, fights, bing girls, etc. and when they don't get these, they complain that the show has gone down hill or that it is boring.
> 
> So what Chase did IMO was say, here's a satisfying ending for those of you invested in the characters, and for those who just want to see a bloody end to the series, too bad. The ending to me said, life goes on, Tony's family is still the same family we grew to know way back in season 1, and while not perfect, all the 4 main characters are in a fairly stable place. Sure there are unresolved issues, but that is also a part of life. However, if you saw the Sopranos as just another mob show, finding interactions between characters as boring, then I can see how you feel the ending was not satisfying. I guess I also wonder how the series could ever be satisfying if you don't understand that its really a show about family.


+1000 :up:


----------



## TomK (May 22, 2001)

jgickler said:


> Great ending. The show is fundementally about Tony, Carmella, Meadow and AJ. I think this episode showed us that the family is still there, fundementallity they are the same, and regardless of what happens in Tony's work life, his family is whats most important to him.
> 
> My guess is that Chase resents the fact that while he has created such rich characters, such compelling relationships, and really groundbreaking portrails of a typical family in a non-typical environment, many viewers see the whole series as a mob show. They want, and expect hits, fights, bing girls, etc. and when they don't get these, they complain that the show has gone down hill or that it is boring.
> 
> So what Chase did IMO was say, here's a satisfying ending for those of you invested in the characters, and for those who just want to see a bloody end to the series, too bad. The ending to me said, life goes on, Tony's family is still the same family we grew to know way back in season 1, and while not perfect, all the 4 main characters are in a fairly stable place. Sure there are unresolved issues, but that is also a part of life. However, if you saw the Sopranos as just another mob show, finding interactions between characters as boring, then I can see how you feel the ending was not satisfying. I guess I also wonder how the series could ever be satisfying if you don't understand that its really a show about family.


+1


----------



## jgickler (Apr 7, 2000)

unixadm said:


> The thing is that The Sopranos main story lines have ALL been about resolution and specifically Tony getting resolution to his problems.....
> 
> Big ***** is talking to the feds....Tony figures it out, and even though ***** is his friend, he had to resolve the issue...and he did.
> 
> ...


To me, those were not the main points of the series, and I would say if that is really what you got from the series, you really didn't get what Chase was trying to portray.

To me the main story lines were Tony and Carm raising their kids, how we cope with family relationships( Tony's mother, Uncle Jun, Janice etc), the loss of family members, keeping a marriage together even in the face of temptation ( gumbas, priest, Furio), working through problems, helping your kids grow into adults, and keeping your family togehter, even through trial and tribulation. These are the themes and plot lines that have been part of the entire show, these are the main plot points, and the mob stuff is really just a subplot to keep things a little more interesting.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

jgickler said:


> Great ending. The show is fundementally about Tony, Carmella, Meadow and AJ. I think this episode showed us that the family is still there, fundementallity they are the same, and regardless of what happens in Tony's work life, his family is whats most important to him.
> 
> So what Chase did IMO was say, here's a satisfying ending for those of you invested in the characters, and for those who just want to see a bloody end to the series, too bad. The ending to me said, life goes on, Tony's family is still the same family we grew to know way back in season 1, and while not perfect, all the 4 main characters are in a fairly stable place. Sure there are unresolved issues, but that is also a part of


I would have no problem whatsoever if they all met in the diner, had a few laughs, and it *faded* to black.....yes,that would be a satisfying ending, IMO that Tony's life continues and even though they aren't, that the Soprano's see themselves as a typical family.

I would have no problem whatsoever if they clearly indicated that Tony was whacked...weather it be they show it, or just a cut to black at the sound of a gunshot.

There is no satisfaction because we don't know if Tony continues his life with Carm, AJ and Meadow, or if they are left without a husband and father that night in the diner.

Having everyone check their cable/DirecTV signal thinking that it cut out at the most inopportune time is not a good ending, IMO.


----------



## disco (Mar 27, 2000)

unixadm said:


> I would have no problem whatsoever if they all met in the diner, had a few laughs, and it *faded* to black.....yes,that would be a satisfying ending, IMO that Tony's life continues and even though they aren't, that the Soprano's see themselves as a typical family.
> 
> I would have no problem whatsoever if they clearly indicated that Tony was whacked...weather it be they show it, or just a cut to black at the sound of a gunshot.
> 
> There is no satisfaction because we don't know if Tony continues his life with Carm, AJ and Meadow, or if they are left without a husband and father that night in the diner.


+1

Question, though (raised by Artie on the Howard Stern Show this morning): who would have ordered the hit on Tony? The "war" was "over"...or was it??

Let's just face it: Chase is f'ing with us.


----------



## jdag (Mar 14, 2006)

My take...Tony's life as he knew it is over (well, obviously). He could be dead, he could be in a constant state of paranoia, or he could be in jail. He's NOT in the witness protection program as he really had nothing more to offer the Feds. Couple of things to consider:

1) Agent Harris saying "we won" - Tony knows that the Feds control the mob now. Harris was able to spare Tony's life by tipping him off on the latest contract on his life. Also, Harris gave Tony Phil's head on a platter. Dance puppet, dance.

2) Could he (and even his immediate family) be dead? Sure. Maybe a bomb in the restaurant. Maybe a gunman coming from the bathroom? Whatever, it is possible. Last week's episode found Tony whispering to Carm something to the effect "you know that families are off limits". Well, that was shot down on the failed hit with Phil's goomar/father, as well as with Phil being killed right in front of his family. They all could be dead.

Alive, dead, it really doesn't matter. The Soprano crime family no longer exists, and Tony knows that. Or he's dead...and doesn't know that.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

disco said:


> +1
> 
> Question, though (raised by Artie on the Howard Stern Show this morning): who would have ordered the hit on Tony? The "war" was "over"...or was it??
> 
> Let's just face it: Chase is f'ing with us.


Although it was "over", we really don't know. Just because a couple of guys in Phil's crew meet with Tony and make "nicey, nice", doesn't mean that they called it off. Who knows....there could be people upset with how Phil was hit...in front of his wife and kids and no chance at an open casket........or maybe Little Carmine took over for NY and decided it was time for Tony to go now.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

jdag said:


> Whatever, it is possible. Last week's episode found Tony whispering to Carm something to the effect "you know that families are off limits". Well, that was shot down on the failed hit with Phil's goomar/father, as well as with Phil being killed right in front of his family. They all could be dead.


There is a difference between seeing someone killed and killing them. They probably try to spare the family having to see it, but Phil's situation was different, being in hiding.

I can't recall on the show when a made guy killed anyone who was a family member unless they were in the mob themselves. It's one of the "mobster justifications" in that they only clip people who are involved....


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

unixadm said:


> I would have no problem whatsoever if they all met in the diner, had a few laughs, and it *faded* to black.....yes,that would be a satisfying ending, IMO that Tony's life continues and even though they aren't, that the Soprano's see themselves as a typical family.


But that wouldn't have gotten across the sheer terror that Tony's life will continue under. Every random customer he sees in a diner could be a potential hit man--and some day, probably will be one. That whole scene was a brilliant exercise in building tension, not because something was going to happen but because Tony is always aware that something could happen.

I think in part Chase is a victim of his own success. There was enough mob action stuff in it to keep people enjoying the show while ignoring (or in some cases, perhaps not even being aware of) the central themes...mistaking the salad and desert for the main course. But the mob hits were always a side dish, and it's entirely appropriate that he end the show in the spirit of its main themes, instead of letting the ancillary stuff suddenly take over just to please, well, people who probbly weren't as big fans of the show as they thought.


----------



## disco (Mar 27, 2000)

unixadm said:


> Although it was "over", we really don't know. Just because a couple of guys under Phil meet with Tony and make "nicey, nice", doesn't mean that they called it off. Who knows....there could be people upset with how it was done....in front of his wife and kids and no chance at an open casket........or maybe Little Carmine took over for NY and decided it was time for Tony to go now.


If it was "time for Tony to go", why wouldn't the killer just shoot him when he arrives?? Instead, he waits at the counter where waitresses/staff can eyewitness him and recognize him in a lineup. And why go to the bathroom?? It's not like in The Godfather where he had to be searched when he walked in, then go get the gun from the back of the toilet. I'm lost. And that's what is most disappointing of this episode. Yeah, it's thought provoking. Yeah, it's making us talk (something Chase has got to LOVE). But I'm still unsatisfied.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

jdag said:


> 1) Agent Harris saying "we won" - Tony knows that the Feds control the mob now. Harris was able to spare Tony's life by tipping him off on the latest contract on his life. Also, Harris gave Tony Phil's head on a platter. Dance puppet, dance.


I totally disagree with this idea...Harris had been investigating Tony for a long time...and as long as the war is between two families (and not gangsters versus civilians), the FBI has had a long policy of letting the dogs kill each other...Harris simply had an emotional investment is "his" crew beating the NY crew...


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that wouldn't have gotten across the sheer terror that Tony's life will continue under. Every random customer he sees in a diner could be a potential hit man--and some day, probably will be one. That whole scene was a brilliant exercise in building tension, not because something was going to happen but because Tony is always aware that something could happen.
> 
> I think in part Chase is a victim of his own success. There was enough mob action stuff in it to keep people enjoying the show while ignoring (or in some cases, perhaps not even being aware of) the central themes...mistaking the salad and desert for the main course. But the mob hits were always a side dish, and it's entirely appropriate that he end the show in the spirit of its main themes, instead of letting the ancillary stuff suddenly take over just to please, well, people who probbly weren't as big fans of the show as they thought.


Ok...going with this they could have had the exact same ending, but after the fade to black, have Tony's voice saying "You never see it coming"....meaning that he is always living on the edge...it still wouldn't be definitve that he died (although it would imply that), but shows that at anytime his life could end in an instant.

When there are authoritative sources that say that the ending meant that Tony was whacked, and other authoritative sources that say he lived on, it shows that Chase didn't convey the ending well.


----------



## phodg (Mar 18, 2002)

Why are people assuming that Tony got whacked ? With Phil gone, there was a truce in place with New York. These guys might be stone cold killers, but business comes first. The new guys in New York have no beef with Tony. They have absolutely no reason to whack him. And an attempt on the head of a family wouldn't even be thought of without the word coming down from the top.
Tony's fine - at least until the subpeona comes down.


----------



## angbear1985 (Aug 25, 2006)

When Tony was telling AJ that he was going to Uncle Bobby's funeral - and AJ thought that would be too out in the open, Tony said that the Fed's would be there.
So - that was to make him safer?


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

unixadm said:


> You need to see the engine rounding the top of the hill....and saying "I thought I could, I thought I could".


Maybe you need it, but that's clearly not the case for everyone.



unixadm said:


> The thing is that The Sopranos main story lines have ALL been about resolution and specifically Tony getting resolution to his problems.....





jgickler said:


> To me, those were not the main points of the series, and I would say if that is really what you got from the series, you really didn't get what Chase was trying to portray....


Regardless of any resolution Tony's character found personally, we the viewers have been denied resolution time and again throughout the series. There are untold numbers of red herrings here and dropped plotlines there (most of which were complained about right here on these boards) through the entire run. Any given character in the show may or may not have resolved an issue in any given episode, but that is pretty demonstratively _not_ what the series was "about."


----------



## FlugPoP (Jan 7, 2004)

jdag said:


> 1) Agent Harris saying "we won" - Tony knows that the Feds control the mob now. Harris was able to spare Tony's life by tipping him off on the latest contract on his life. Also, Harris gave Tony Phil's head on a platter. Dance puppet, dance.


I think that he said "we won" because he was on Tony's side. He way basicly cheering for Jersey to win. His team won!


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

angbear1985 said:


> When Tony was telling AJ that he was going to Uncle Bobby's funeral - and AJ thought that would be too out in the open, Tony said that the Fed's would be there.
> So - that was to make him safer?


Phil's crew wasn't going to whack Tony at the funeral with all the feds there.

Frank


----------



## ReenieS (Sep 30, 2002)

During the last 10 minutes of the show, we were on edge, looking at every figure in the frame as a potential assassin. My husband and I were arguing the guy at the counter is a hitter, no, he's a FED! ACK! When the screen went to black I thought the cable went out, and we both screamed at the TV. Then we were mad when we realized that was the end. 

But I think this is an ending that has to "sink in". After we calmed down from being royally peeved, we realized that this was actually a good ending. 

So it didn't tie up all the loose ends? It sets up a potential follow-up to the series for a follow-up big-screen movie (if necessary) or it ends the series with your own imagination. 

The whole final episode was a setup about "what we expected to happen". I wondered if Tony was going to take out Uncle Jun - nope, he just made him think that "the Godfather" was part of his real-life memories. I wondered if the ducks were going to come back to the pool. I wondered if Tony would be nice to Janice. I wondered if Paulie truly was the informant (nope, just idiodic superstitions, as usual). I wondered if Meadow was going to get run over by shear accident, crossing the road.

With Journey echoing in your ears "Don't stop believing" we are encouraged to form our own ending. Here's my ending: 

1. The family is safe for now, but Tony might be indicted soon.
2. AJ has gotten over his altruistic stage and reverted to the selfish little pig that he has always been.
3. Meadow is in school and happy with her beau and a bright future.
4. Carmela will soon be focusing full-time on her next housing project.
5. That yellow tabby cat will eventually be the end of the superstitious Paulie.
6. Silvio can recover (just like Tony did).By the way, is Patsy Parisi still running?
7. The FBI guy will get sacked, because his "girlfriend/source" realized that she was used for information against Philly. Especially after Phil was "crushed".
7. Tony will go into therapy with AJ's therapist (who appears to be a younger clone version of Dr. Melfi).

Those were my thoughts on the finale, and that's what I choose to "believe-in".

Whatcha gonna do?


----------



## comic75 (Nov 12, 2003)

I think the FBI's we won statement was maybe a reference to an office pool?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

phodg said:


> Why are people assuming that Tony got whacked ? With Phil gone, there was a truce in place with New York. These guys might be stone cold killers, but business comes first. The new guys in New York have no beef with Tony. They have absolutely no reason to whack him. And an attempt on the head of a family wouldn't even be thought of without the word coming down from the top.
> Tony's fine - at least until the subpeona comes down.


Right. On top of that, there was no indication that they were faking everything that they were saying at the truce meeting. I.e., that Phil had gone too far, etc. I interpreted their "do what you need to do" comment to mean that they were fine with Tony's guys taking Phil out.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

unixadm said:


> When there are authoritative sources that say that the ending meant that Tony was whacked, and other authoritative sources that say he lived on, it shows that Chase didn't convey the ending well.


No, it means he conveyed the ending perfectly. Tony will live in fear the rest of his life, whether that be ten seconds or ten years.

Whether he lives ten seconds or ten years doesn't matter for the story.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Why didn't Tony pick some Springsteen or Bon Jovi instead of something that sounds like a Democratic Presidential Candidate's campaign song?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

5thcrewman said:


> Why didn't Tony pick some Springsteen or Bon Jovi instead of something that sounds like a Democratic Presidential Candidate's campaign song?


Well, it couldn't be Springsteen because the guitarist was comatose in a hospital bed...


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I was halfway dozing at the end of the episode, but when Tony first walked into the diner, for a second there I thought that he was looking at himself sitting in that booth. That is, I thought that maybe it was a throwback to when he got shot and he (dreamed?) that he was a salesman. I was thinking that they would show this other Tony and then his family and it would turn out that he wasn't a gangster this whole time. Like that was his fantasy life.

But that would have sucked as hard as the ending that was. IMO.


----------



## FlugPoP (Jan 7, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, it couldn't be Springsteen because the guitarist was comatose in a hospital bed...


LOL


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I think there are two different factions in the "I hated the ending" camp.

1) I hated the sudden, black screen, did my cable go out ending.

2) I hated the no carnage at the restaurant ending.


I'm in faction #1. I don't really care how Chase ended the show (although it made little sense for Tony to be whacked - the war was over). The open ended ending idea was fine with me. The way he presented it sucked, though.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

People are so short-term. In no way could this ever match the "badness" of the Seinfeld finale and some others. It seems most shows final show are not well received (Deadwood another example).

I was OK with it, a decent show, the tension at the ending was great and the cut to black surprising but it made me chuckle afterwards.


----------



## rimler (Jun 30, 2002)

I think Tony got wacked. He had the same look on his face that all the characters had just a nanosecond before the bullet hits....Bobby being the latest example....Tony B being another. If they don't get it in the back of the head, they see the killer, recognize it for what's coming, then boom!......gone.

I agree with Cheesesteak, I'm not sure why he'd be wacked, unless one of the other families is just tired of the carnage and BS from the Soprano crew. I think it's one of those open threads that Chase weaves throughout the show, that there's no answer to. 

I'm squarely in the "loved it" corner of the show. Great ending, and an ending that fits in well with the rest of the show.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think Chase's biggest problem is he over-estimated his audience...


Without trying to be mean, this reaction really makes me worried about the future of television. Sopranos might be considered a more high brow television show. Yet there is a lot of outrage that the Sopranos was not ended in a more cliche and contrived manner. It is disconcerting to be honest. I have not heard any alternative endings, here or elsewhere that are anything but predictable, expectable and wholly television typical endings. In other words more of what people expected. The Sopranos would not even exist if David Chase adhered to that ideology.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Dnamertz said:


> You're missing the point. We're not saying the show didn't have an ending...we're saying THE ENDING SUCKED!!!
> 
> Sure, them eating dinner is "an ending". But I didn't watch an entire series because it was about people doing daily routine stuff.


Yeah but that is the show. The show has ALWAYS been about the family, and how they relate to each other and how the struggle to get by, despite their considered good fortune. That has been the centerpiece of the show. So ifyou haven't been watching it for the reason it exists, that is your choice, but that does not change the reality that has always been the show.



> You know the ending sucked when most people watching it thought their cable went out. That's not the result you want when creating a show or a movie.


Why not? It certainly provoked a reaction.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

snowjay said:


> For the Tony got whacked conspirators...
> 
> What hit man sits in the diner and watches them, then goes to the bathroom?
> 
> Too many witnesses, too many people to recognize a face. They usually just walk in, rip off a few rounds and walk out.


Yeah I am not into that at all. We have seen a lot of hits on the show, and every single one of them were done quickly with the person dropping the gun and walking away.

Nobody stood around staring or waiting, or going to the bathroom.

I think people are making more of it than was there.. but that was kind of the point. We were subject to our own paranoia and fears. If you watch Tony's reaction the entire scene he was never the least bit concerned or worried with all those different people coming in... yet he supposedly has an instinct for this honed from experience.

I just think they went to eat dinner at a dinner, and the show ended.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I was expecting Sil to be in the hospital bed without his rug, not with just with hair that hadn't been slicked back. Wasn't that supposed to be obviously a toupe?


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

crazywater said:


> Yes I am sure Chase's intention was to make everyone thing their cable/satellite signal went out...just brilliant!
> 
> What ending would have been ok for me? An ending. I would have been happier if NJ got nuked, or if there was a slow fade showing them eating onion rings, or how about all of the possible "bad guys" in the diner slowly start to make their way towards Tony for an undetermined reason and then a slow fade...
> 
> Anything but the "my cable went out" moment...


I don't see how ANY of those endings are better than the one they had. The last one doesn't even make any sense.

The first one is extremely ridiculous. Fading out while eating onion rings, how is that better than just abruptly ending it. Again that would be an expected ending, potentially. They have ended many a season fading out with the family. Now he wanted it to end abruptly and completely. It is just weird that changing the ending from an abrupt cut to a fade out would have made people change their perception of the show to go from an F to a B or C grade.


----------



## Dukeman72 (May 4, 2007)

Chapper1 said:


> For everyone wondering who it was that killed Phil, he was Benny from the NJ mob. He has been on the show for a few seasons now. Actor's name is Max Casella
> 
> I loved how Phil died, BTW...


I thought it was the guy that was working out in the Bing when Pauly walked in and they started talking about the cat. Frank John Hughes??http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400606/


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

markymark_ctown said:


> could have been him, but since they never showed the killer, there is now way to definitely know.


They showed him clearly. He was standing over Phil and shot him again. It was clearly Benny.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

bdlucas said:


> But that doesn't explain the completely unconventional way it ended - a cut to black and an abrupt termination of the audio in the middle of the song. The ending could have been made ambiguous without going outside the normal cinematic vocabulary, e.g. a fade to black with the music still playing. The ending was so unconventional that we all assumed at first that there was a technical problem, and I think that had to have been done for a reason. Showing Tony's murder from his perspective fits perfectly.


No, it doesn't.

Not one second of the entire series was shown from Tony's perspective. Neither was this because the last thing we saw was Tony's face. How is that from his perspective?

Anyone can try to explain the ending all they want. It was horrible. A series that pretty much left nothing up to the viewer to interpret suddenly leaves the ending wide open?

(And I would have preferred to have the four of them sitting down and chatting with a fade to black...you can still have Tony being paranoid about everyone around him. That would have been an ending. The CUT to black was ********.)

I would believe if someone came out and said that there was a technical glitch and they screwed up in trying to run one of the four endings and the system cutover failed. That would make more sense than the CUT to black they did.


----------



## InterMurph (May 22, 2003)

serumgard said:


> The one question I have is, how was killing Tony the easy way out as so many people seem to believe? Can someone tell me another show in the history of television that ended with the main character being killed?


Homicide. Bayliss wasn't exactly the "main" character, but the show followed him from the beginning (new guy on the homicide squad, underqualified) to the end (gunned down).

And Homicide was the best TV drama ever.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> Actually, it's the exact opposite. The fact that everyone is angry and thinks theyir cable went out tells me that they did a great job of trying to convey their ending


Only if their ending was "screw the viewers."


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

Along with Tony getting shot and us viewing from his perspective, the audience experiences getting shot as well. It allows the audience to feel the "never saw it coming" and all of the frustrations, anger and unresolved issues that comes with getting killed suddenly. Judging from this thread it worked very well.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

it seems the reviews are across the board... WTF to brilliant. From reading and talking to people, i don't think LOVED IT is a big minority. I'm sure Chase fully expected this reaction.

I liked it, but am a little frustrated with the ending, but [stuart smalley]that's... OK. [/smalley]

i think he's not dead. the hitman mechanics and the 'noone to order the hit' theories sway me.

question:
when meadow and patsy were explaining meadow's case she would be working on.. defending the govt official... and carm and tony had a look on their face... was the point of that meadow would be working to defend mob actions??? bribes from the mafia and the such? that's kind of what i got, but am not sure... who was the client exactly?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

crazywater said:


> And the picture went to black at "Don't stop...."
> 
> Major suckness....
> 
> At least Chase could have had the balls to give us an ending of some kind, not this BS viewer-interpretation crapola! Instead of making a writing decision and living with it and taking the criticism or praise heaped upon him by the viewers and the media, we are left with the "sh*t my cable just went out" moment!


Exactly. He took a cop-out. He didn't have an ending so he just crapped out.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

CharlieW said:


> adding in the way the series has always been shot from Tony's perspective.


It has NEVER been shot from Tony's perspective. Tony is the central character but it was NEVER shot from his perspective. He is not the narrator. And scenes go on without his knowledge, so it is not from his perspective.

Apologists for this ending are making things up.


----------



## scoblitz (Aug 20, 2005)

unixadm said:


> Love the song, hated the ending....Pretty crappy IMO.


Thanks for finally stepping up and telling us how you really feel - I was starting to tire of the ambiguity... 

SB


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

SnakeEyes said:


> I think it was a great ending. I think we saw things from Tony's perspective. He had his family, feeling good, but also paying attention to things around him, an inner nervousness and then it all ends suddenly.
> 
> I think we saw the final whack from a perspective we hadn't seen before.


And that is bad storytelling 101. You don't change perspective suddenly in telling a story. Not when six seasons is told by an omniscient perspective. You don't suddenly go from a single persons. And how is the last thing Tony sees his own face without a mirror.

Indulgent crapola.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

marksman said:


> It is funny you think it would have taken more balls to "give us some kind of an ending".
> 
> For one he did give us an ending.


No. Cutting off the camera is not an ending. It is an interruption. By your definition, just stopping filming is an ending. This was not an ending. An ending doesn't have 99% of the viewers wondering if their TV broke.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

marksman said:


> Why do you want closure? Because all other shows try to do that? Because that is what a tv show is supposed to do? Again, I will say this, but this show has never been about doing things the way other shows did them. Why would you have expected some kind of closure with a nice little bow. Personally I would have felt cheated with such a pedestrian ending.


You know, that is ********. It hasn't been doing things "its way" at all. HBO propoganda. It is just a gangster movie dragged out over six seasons. What was new and different? That they cursed? That there was sex? That they killed people? That the villians were considered sympathetic and flawed? None of that was "new" except that much of it was never done on television before.

And I bet you would have been defending the ending if it ended "conventionially" or were you rooting for this particular ending? How did you envision that?


----------



## MasterOfPuppets (Jul 12, 2005)

I haven't read all of the thread.
I will join the WTF crowd...absolutely horrible ending.
I agree that they left the possibility for a movie wide open, but the way they did it left absolutely no resolution for fans of the show.
When it ended, I thought somebody had screwed with the...uhhh...method that I acquired this show...apparently not.
Was that Meadow's first time ever parking a car?
I don't think there's any way that Tony and family's life just went on, Tony was looking at some serious jail time if none of the shifty characters in the restaurant popped him.
Terrible.

ETA: Leaving the possibility to make more money wide open is not "brilliance", it's just greed and completely screwing up what has become a ridiculously overhyped event.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> An ending doesn't have 99% of the viewers wondering if their TV broke.


That just proves that 99% of viewers are idiots.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

mostman said:


> I liked it as well.
> 
> Dead for sure. There is no other point to showing Meadow taking so long to park.
> 
> ...


Bad ending if we have to debate it. Chase failed. A show that never got artsy and showed you exactly what it meant suddenly has to be interpreted?

That is nothing but an apology for Chase.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

MickeS said:


> That just proves that 99% of viewers are idiots.


Thanks a lot. You didn't think for a split second something was wrong? A show that prided itself in its ending music and how it spills into the credits suddenly goes black?

And a very nice F* you from the creators to the people who made him rich.


----------



## chuckwny (Nov 19, 2001)

FlugPoP said:


> I think that he said "we won" because he was on Tony's side. He way basicly cheering for Jersey to win. His team won!


"Were gonna win this thing" was almost a direct quote from R. Lindley DeVecchio

A real life agent who the Harris character seems based on.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

TonyD79 said:


> Not one second of the entire series was shown from Tony's perspective. Neither was this because the last thing we saw was Tony's face. How is that from his perspective?


Of course it was. Read mostman's post again - every time the door bell rang, we switched to seeing it from Tony's perspective. The next shot after seeing Tony's face would have been what he saw looking at the door, and what he saw was nothing because he was dead.


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

I posted earlier in this thread in a less direct fashion, and I think the reference got lost in a mountain of posts - so I will be more direct:

The ending was a classic example of ( Lady or the Tiger ) ambiguity. And if the notion that this type of ending is designed so that the choice says more about the viewer or reader, i.e. the creator turns the table so that you see the ending based on how you see the world, then I'd say that, in reviewing this and other threads, Chase got what he was aiming for.

Personally though, Lady or the Tiger endings tend to annoy the sh*t out of me......


----------



## scottie (Dec 22, 2003)

I loved the ending. But I must say I loved the first shot of the opening scene of the episode even more. Close up of Tony laying in bed but the shot was cropped to look like he was in a coffin and there was organ pipe music playing in the background. 

Nice. Anyone else catch that?


----------



## MasterOfPuppets (Jul 12, 2005)

If the darkness was truly Tony's POV, he still would have heard a gunshot at some point in time.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

MasterOfPuppets said:


> If the darkness was truly Tony's POV, he still would have heard a gunshot at some point in time.


Doubt it.....by the time the sound of the shot reaches his ears, and before his brain has a chance to process and interpret the sound, he would already be dead. If you are shot in the head, your brain wouldn't have had a chance to process the information before your brain is scrambled to the point of being non-functioning. You only hear something because your brain processed it.....if your brain is destroyed before it processes what the ear drum picked up, then it wouldn't be heard.

I agree that if that is what Chase was trying to portray, we should have gone black with the sound of a gunshot, and as I said before, maybe a voice over by Tony with "You never see it coming"


----------



## brianp6621 (Nov 22, 1999)

cheesesteak said:


> I just don't understand this reasoning. If you have a story to tell, tell the whole story, including the ending. It's like listening to a song that fades out at the end because the artists were too lazy or disinterested to write an ending. If I'm supposed to end the Sopranos in my head, I would have ended it after season seven.


I enjoy TV as much as the next guy with a recliner, but...

Lots of people think art (in multiple forms including TV) should be thought provoking and engage your imagination. If TV was as wrapped up as you suggest it should be, it really is the idiot box every says it is. I would MUCH prefer a show that gets me thinking/questioning/imagining things on my own EVEN if it pissed me off in doing so rather than a mind numbing trip through all the details so I didn't have to wiggle a neuron.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

unixadm said:


> I agree that if that is what Chase was trying to portray, we should have gone black with the sound of a gunshot, and as I said before, maybe a voice over by Tony with "You never see it coming"


To me, that would be as ridiculous as you think the actual ending was  Sounds more like a cheesy movie trailer than the end to a great TV show.... and there would still be people on here debating as to whether or not it was Tony that got shot, was he dead, when is the movie coming out, etc...


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

bdlucas said:


> Of course it was. Read mostman's post again - every time the door bell rang, we switched to seeing it from Tony's perspective. The next shot after seeing Tony's face would have been what he saw looking at the door, and what he saw was nothing because he was dead.


I thought this was the case last night but after thinking about it I don't believe thats what happened. The hitman isn't going to stake out the diner and then go take a leak before he kills Tony. How they heck would they know he's there anyway. Not like the dinner was a set planned event. I also don't think we were seeing things through Tony's eyes. Maybe from his point of view but not through his eyes.

Instead I'm going on the theory that "we" never saw it coming. It was a big build up, we were expecting something to happen, reading into every detail and then BAM! Shows over. We never saw it coming.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

jeff125va said:


> Right. On top of that, there was no indication that they were faking everything that they were saying at the truce meeting. I.e., that Phil had gone too far, etc. I interpreted their "do what you need to do" comment to mean that they were fine with Tony's guys taking Phil out.


Recall from the NY family war for the top spot, different factions of the NY family were supporting different bosses. A disgruntled Phil supporter could have gone off the reservation and taken out Tony.


----------



## brianp6621 (Nov 22, 1999)

TonyD79 said:


> A show that never got artsy and showed you exactly what it meant suddenly has to be interpreted?


Wow, you really haven't been watching/following.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

TonyD79 said:


> It has NEVER been shot from Tony's perspective. Tony is the central character but it was NEVER shot from his perspective. He is not the narrator. And scenes go on without his knowledge, so it is not from his perspective.
> 
> Apologists for this ending are making things up.


It has been shot from Tony's perspective -- not in a first person sort of way, but the narrative of the entire series follows Tony and we follow along. He is not in every single scene, but damn near 85% of them. And of the 15% he's not in, about 50% of those have something to do with him.

I'm not apologizing for Chase -- because he doesn't need apologizing for. The series was his vision, he stayed true to that vision from beginning to end and never took "the easy way out". Was I disappointed by the ambiguity in the ending of the series -- a little, but truthfully -- as this season went along, it's what I expected.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

bdlucas said:


> Of course it was. Read mostman's post again - every time the door bell rang, we switched to seeing it from Tony's perspective. The next shot after seeing Tony's face would have been what he saw looking at the door, and what he saw was nothing because he was dead.


We also saw Tony's POV when looking at the songs on the jukebox.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

snowjay said:


> Instead I'm going on the theory that "we" never saw it coming. It was a big build up, we were expecting something to happen, reading into every detail and then BAM! Shows over. We never saw it coming.


Yeah, I am thinking the same thing....

I see one of two ways that Chase is trying to portray it:

*1*
We don't know what happens to Tony....because *we're dead*

We never saw it coming.....we were expecting one guy to get whacked, and instead, BLAM.....we are dead.

We can't see Tony, Carm, AJ or Meadow anymore....because we are lying on the floor dead.

I really think this was the end that Chase was trying to portray...we were watching on the sidelines of this crime family, became evolved emotionally with them. We have taken some pleasure in seeing some of the violence and the hits of some of the past characters....we are now are part of the carnage that came from the life of crime we have become a part of.

Chase has killed us as the audience...thus ending any more interaction with Tony, and thus ending any more knowledge of his future.

*2*
We keep seeing Tony's nervousness and his POV at times during the diner scene.....I have to re-watch, but if the cut to black was when we were seeing from Tony's POV, then it is Tony that get's whacked....and it cuts to black because his life is over.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

if it were from Tony perspective, wouldn't the camera have been on Carm or AJ's face before going to black?

if we're supposed to see nothing because Tony suddenly sees nothing, then the last camera shot should have been of what Tony was seeing THEN go to black...


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

I don't know which way to go on this one. Yes, it was different and thought provoking. No, it wasn't very satisfying as the series finale. An ending like this CAN work, but only if it is used sparingly. If EVERY tv show, book or movie just cut out at the end, then that would break the trust of the reader. Why would you read a book if you knew that the story wasn't wrapped up in some fashion, but instead just left you wondering.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

Anubys said:


> if it were from Tony perspective, wouldn't the camera have been on Carm or AJ's face before going to black?
> 
> if we're supposed to see nothing because Tony suddenly sees nothing, then the last camera shot should have been of what Tony was seeing THEN go to black...


That is why I think Chase has pulled a fast one and "killed us as an audience". We have no idea and will never know what happens to Tony....because we have been killed by a hitman. Does Big *****, Christopher, Ralphie, TonyB, Phil, etc wonder what happened to Tony?....no, they are dead...once you are dead, your view into the lives of the Soprano family is gone.

Some people will hail this as "brilliant".....but I see it as a way to wiggle out of giving an definitive end to Tony Soprano's life of crime.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> Thanks a lot. You didn't think for a split second something was wrong? A show that prided itself in its ending music and how it spills into the credits suddenly goes black?
> 
> And a very nice F* you from the creators to the people who made him rich.


All the more emphasis to say this is IT.

We all know the music at the end flows to the credits.

This episode it stopped cold, to emphasis the point that the show is over.

No more. Kaput.


----------



## jradosh (Jul 31, 2001)

As much as I was disappointed in the ending (literally saying "what the f&ck"), I'll give it this much... the ending wasn't a trite wrap-up like (for example) "M*A*S*H". It tried to be different and for that I give it some credit. There were many more ways Chase could have ended the show that would have been worse.

That said, I feel manipulated by this ending. That goes very much against much of the show's history. It was never really a manipulative show. It hit you straight and honestly.

This ending... not so much.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

unixadm said:


> That is why I think Chase has pulled a fast one and "killed us as an audience". We have no idea and will never know what happens to Tony....because we have been killed by a hitman.
> 
> Some people will hail this as "brilliant".....but I see it as a way to wiggle out of giving an definitive end to Tony Soprano's life of crime.


well, that's not very fair of you...

first, you make an assumption about what Chase's intent was (one that is not very likely) then you condemn him for it!

my very first intuition was that Tony was dead and that's why we abruptly cut to black (ok, after I thought my dish went dead  )...but then I quickly discounted that because we were not looking through his eyes at the moment...

the logical conclusion is that "life went on" but the story ended...I think it's fair to pan him for what is most likely the intent, but not fair to pan him for all the unlikely scenarios that we can dream of...


----------



## Kevdog (Apr 18, 2001)

marksman said:


> Actually no its not. There was no real beginning. The show started squarely in the middle and ended squarely in the middle.
> 
> The show has never been like that.
> 
> ...


Absolutely spot on. After so many seasons of loose ends and red herrings, I'm amazed that so many people who claim to like this show are complaining that it wasn't tied up in a nice little package. What have you been watching?


----------



## jerobi (Sep 28, 2000)

Interesting conversation, so far.

I'm okay with the ending. In the end, it's a business. Name any clear cut ending and I think you'll find that 75% of people would hate it. By leaving us all in the dark, he still has a possible 100% audience for the first movie...or comic...or book, if and when it comes down to it.

It leaves the writers a lot of leeway for whatever comes next. And you can be sure that a large enough percentage of people will still want to know what happened. I'm excited for the next season of Weeds after their Mexican-standoff style cliffhanger scene.

The ending gets a standard aloof Sopranos grade for plot clarity, but that's kinda par for the course for this show. I kinda liked the tense buildup with everyone entering and moving in the final scene. I'm not saying it was great, but it wasn't horrible either.

Update: I also agree heavily with Marksman in his comment that the show started in the middle and ended in the middle.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> You know, that is ********. It hasn't been doing things "its way" at all. HBO propoganda.


Not really. Perhaps you judgement is clouded by the fact that so many shows since the Sopranos debuted over 8 years ago have borrowed from them, thus making you think it is more common place than it was when it started.



> It is just a gangster movie dragged out over six seasons.


I am squarely convinced that those people who did not like the ending and have groused for the last 3 years are almost all in this camp. Yet the reality is the show has never been a gangster movie. It has always been a family drama. Yet some people who never did understand the show and still don't only clamored for more mob and more killing. You never understood the point of the show, so it is not a surprise that you don't understand or appreciate the ending.



> None of that was "new" except that much of it was never done on television before.


HAHA.



> And I bet you would have been defending the ending if it ended "conventionially" or were you rooting for this particular ending? How did you envision that?


I didn't have any hard-fast preconceived notions. I did expect that Tony would personally kill Phil in the final episode. But the show has ALWAYS been about buckng expectation and not taking the easy way out. People think making a cliched and trivial ending would have some how made the show better. Those people don't understand the show. The more time I have had to think ont he ending the more I appreciate it. The story ended. it is over, it is done. Finality. Not a happy ending, not a sad ending.

I got to be honest it is hard not to become almost insulting in this, because the over-reaction does not make a lot of sense to me. So I will quote what a local radio dj told her co-hosts when discussing the show..."I did not realize you guys were so simple-minded."

The show was different because it always walked through with the thread that life is ambigious and unpredictable. Stuff happens, and then more stuff happens, and other times nothing happens. It struck a chord because it ressonanted how life actually is, not how fairybook story telling in the television and movies has mostly been. Yet here people are clamoring for some story book ending, or in other cases absolutely absurd ending.

I don't care what the ending was, but I would have been disappointed if they went out in some sort of gangsger cliche. That has never been this show. Now matter how much some of you try to argue that would have made a good ending. I again say to you, you never got the show.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

marksman said:


> All the more emphasis to say this is IT.
> 
> We all know the music at the end flows to the credits.
> 
> ...


We KNEW it was over....we knew that this was the finale.....no more, Kaput....

So why not give us an resolution to Tony's story...either good, bad or indifferent?

A cut to black, dead silence is not a resolution to the show.

As I said before, I really think that the ending is that we as an audience are sitting there in the diner watching Tony thinking he is the guy to get whacked....and someone killed us.....so the show is over because we are dead...we were the character on the sidelines that got whacked.

If this really was Chase's intention, I think it is cheesy and not what this show has been about (as others have said)....the show was about Tony and his two families and his issues.......and the ending should have at least given us closure to that story....even if it is that Tony, Carm, AJ and Meadow eat their dinner with no issues.

If Chase's intention was that Tony's life goes on with Carm, AJ and Meadow as a nuclear family.....then a nice fade to black with Journey singing "it goes on, and on, and on" would be a better end.

If Chase's intention was to indicate that Tony is whacked at the diner, then we should have heard a gunshot, then a cut to black....or a hit of Tony in the head with no chance of survival.

We really don't know WHAT Chase's intention was....and therein lies the problem. If we don't understand what the ending represents, then he did a poor job of conveying his ideas, thoughts, and intentions.


----------



## dolfer (Nov 3, 2000)

Have any other "endings" (TV or movie) in recent memory generated as much controversy as this one? 

Chase probably loves all of this. For better or worse, I don't think he ever cared about (or catered to) the audiences' wishes.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

MickeS said:


> That just proves that 99% of viewers are idiots.


Oh really...owning a TiVo Series 3, I think I have a reason to think that something crapped out or went terribly wrong with my video signal...


----------



## trojanrabbit (Mar 10, 2001)

All I know is, at 10:15 (she was behind) I had to listen to my wife screaming that her f**king TiVo stopped working and I had to fix it NOW! GET IN HERE NOW AND FIX IT BEFORE I MISS IT. THIS IS YOUR FAULT!

I kid you not. Totally obsessed.

Glad I didn't watch a single episode, and maybe now I can get her to cancel HBO.


----------



## trojanrabbit (Mar 10, 2001)

crazywater said:


> Oh really...owning a TiVo Series 3, I think I have a reason to think that something crapped out or went terribly wrong with my video signal...


I'd say a Comcast (or insert your cable co here) subscriber could come to the same conclusion.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

dolfer said:


> Have any other "endings" (TV or movie) in recent memory generated as much controversy as this one?


Seinfeld immediately comes to mind.

tk


----------



## bigray327 (Apr 14, 2000)

I was pissed at first, but now I like the ending. I didn't read through most of this thread, so sorry if this was already mentioned, but I think he's definitely dead and was killed by the guy going to the bathroom. They killed Phil in front of his family, and I believe they wanted the same fate for Tony, so the guy was sitting around, waiting for Meadow to arrive before he shot Tony. He went to the bathroom, came out, saw she was there, and popped Tony. I'm much happier with the ending if I think about it that way.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

dolfer said:


> Chase probably loves all of this. For better or worse, I don't think he ever cared about (or catered to) the audiences' wishes.


Judging by some of the interviews I've read and heard about him over the years, I would imagine that if he ever considered the audience in any way at all it was probably to deliberately NOT give us what we wanted. And I say thumbs up to that.


----------



## Chuck_IV (Jan 1, 2002)

Whether or not the story is being told from Tony's perspective, it was never being told thru his eyes only. As another mentioned, things happened behind his back, that WE saw, but he didn't.

Sorry, but the idea that he was gunned down, at the end, just doesn't fly with me at all, because we are not seeing the series thru his eyes, only his perspective. On top of that, the doorbell rang and within a second, the show ended. That's a heck of a shot, from across the room and he would have had time to hear the gunshot. Besides, most of their execution killings are done at close range, to prevent msitakes.

Personally, I think this was just a flat cop out by Chase. He couldn't decide how to end it, so he just didn't. He just stopped filming. He could have just killed Phil last week and saved and us an episode and and hr of our time.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

Well, I guess it was a good thing I was planning to cancel my season pass after this episode anyway ...

I would have been perfectly fine with the show ending with the family sitting around the table, fading to black while the music played over the credits. The way this season had played out, I wasn't expecting some big, final and definitive resolution.

But that abrupt, pull-the-plug black screen ... that's just cheap, pretentious, art-house bulls**t.


----------



## MasterOfPuppets (Jul 12, 2005)

unixadm said:


> Doubt it.....by the time the sound of the shot reaches his ears, and before his brain has a chance to process and interpret the sound, he would already be dead. If you are shot in the head, your brain wouldn't have had a chance to process the information before your brain is scrambled to the point of being non-functioning. You only hear something because your brain processed it.....if your brain is destroyed before it processes what the ear drum picked up, then it wouldn't be heard.
> 
> I agree that if that is what Chase was trying to portray, we should have gone black with the sound of a gunshot, and as I said before, maybe a voice over by Tony with "You never see it coming"


If he'd shot Tony point blank, with a sawed off shotgun, I suppose that perhaps this could be true.
If Tony was shot at the end at all...since there was no gun in the final shot anywhere else, I have trouble believing that any other method would have immediately stopped his brain function...even with the shotgun, unless it was pressed directly against his head, likely would have had a shot ring out before it made it to Tony's brain.
"Leaving it open to interpretation" is absolutely a cop out. Overly pretentious people will go around with their own "brilliant" conclusions as to what happened to dazzle everyone with this genius insight. For all we know, it was David Hasselhoff that came through the door and stood in front of Tony.
There's absolutely no point in telling a story that has no ending.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

I'm astounded at the number of people who think Chase "couldn't decide" how to end this. He did decide how to end it. He just didn't decide to end it the way people would have expected him to. I don't have any inside knowledge about what's going on in his mind, of course, but the idea that he just reached a point and said, "Aww screw it...I don't know what to do here, so let's just stop the camera and call it quits," is totally absurd.


----------



## MasterOfPuppets (Jul 12, 2005)

Here's a fairly accurate summary of how I feel.

Word on the street is that Chase actually shot 3 different endings. Whether those appear on the final DVD set or were just to ensure secrecy remains to be seen...but I'm guessing either of the other 2 would be much more interesting.

Here's some fun that has allegedly been circulating on the HBO message forums:


> "I tried to post this on the forum; however, my internet is lame here at work, anyway... posted at the HBO boards:
> 
> "So here is what I found out. The guy at the bar is also credited as Nikki Leotardo. The same actor played him in the first part of season 6 during a brief sit down concerning the future of Vito. That wasn't that long ago. Apparently, he is the nephew of Phil. Phil's brother Nikki Senior was killed in 1976 in a car accident. Absolutely Genius!!!! David Chase is truly rewarding the true fans who pay attention to detail.
> 
> So the point would have been that life continues and we may never know the end of the Sopranos. But if you pay attention to the history, you will find that all the answers lie in the characters in the restaurant. The trucker was the brother of the guy who was robbed by Christopher in Season 2. Remember the DVD players? The trucker had to identify the body. The boy scouts were in the train store and the black guys at the end were the ones who tried to kill Tony and only clipped him in the ear (was that season 2 or 3?)."


And...the problem with that theory.


----------



## ToddAtl (Jul 27, 2003)

There's always room for one more opinion right?

To me the finale was just "ok." My take is that tony survived and that the family simply had dinner and their lives continued on like they have these past seasons. This would be perfectly acceptable and fitting ending from where I sit. 

Where I take issue is why Chase intentionally created such ambiguity in what actually happened. The last few minutes of the show and the building tension were great. It allowed us as viewers to see the world as Tony has to. You never know if there is a gunman coming and the simplest family meal at a restaurant is dangerous. I think a simple fade to black with the family all together would have been a great ending. Even doing a quick cut to black of everyone sitting at the table together would have been OK, at least we wouldn't all have been spending 12 pages arguing if Tony got whacked.

I wonder how all the suits at HBO are feeling today?


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

Obviously, the ending was controversial, but insulting people for liking it or disliking it is ridiculous. I don't need people to tell me that it was good or bad, I can make up my own mind. I liked the ending. I have my own opinion on what it means and I don't feel like that makes me pretentious because I thought it was a good ending to the show. I don't think you are a hater if you disagree. I just don't get why only one opinion can ever be right. I also don't think the intention of the scene really matters, but rather what each individual gets from it. For me, the quick cut to black was Tony being shot. He would not have heard a gunshot, or seen a gun, if he was surprised and shot in the side of the head (from the bathroom). Was this intended? I don't know but that's what I took from it and expected based on the initial episode of the season with Tony and Bobby talking about death. It was quick, abrupt, quiet, and final. To me, that signifies an immediate death.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

The guy at the bar was "guy at bar in members only jacket" in the credits, wasn't he?

I feel like the ending was one of those "Choose your own adventure" books I read in the 5th grade.

tk


----------



## catzed (Jan 4, 2003)

I'm just thankful all those years of wondering what happened to Hunter were answered......................NOT!


----------



## Sopranoman (Dec 16, 2001)

To all that hated the end and think they got cheated....

I can not wait for the "finale" of LOST and hear what you haters think of that!


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Shakhari said:


> Well, I guess it was a good thing I was planning to cancel my season pass after this episode anyway ...


A real fan..


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

MasterOfPuppets said:


> And...the problem with that theory.


Heh.

Yeah, just a TEENSY problem there! 

Looks like we're not the only ones prone to over-thinking TV shows!


----------



## Tivo_60 (Jun 13, 2003)

And let's not forget that there is now a new "catch phrase" :

"have another onion ring"


----------



## TeighVaux (May 31, 2005)

bcrider said:


> Phil got killed right in front of his family, babies, etc.


Good point! Scratch that theory!


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

TeighVaux said:


> Good point! Scratch that theory!


I thought the families were immune from being killed, not from being witness to a killing.

tk


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

marksman said:


> A real fan..


The series was ending. Why would I need to keep the season pass?


----------



## maineman (May 11, 2004)

I felt like this final episode really gave us alot of what the show was about through years and gave resolution to alot of threads. It included everyone still left kicking except for Melfi and let us know where AJ's and Meadow's lives are heading while wrapping up the AJ depressed thread. We got resolution to the NY/NJ war, Junior and Paulie's intentions. The cat and Paulie brought back some quirkiness that began in the first show with the ducks. 

I, for one, did not want to see Tony get whacked. Part of what I loved about the show was how smart he could be at times and how at other times he would do stupid and violent things. I was hoping for him taking the smart way out of his problems with NY and that is what happened.

The final scene was great. Very tense. I think that trying to quess what happened is missing the point, it doesnt matter if T got shot or if life goes on because we will never know. This was a series finale, not an ending to this show. An ending is very different. You expect endings in books and movies but series are different. I think Chase gave us the ending no one was expecting and I am in the brilliant camp.


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

BTW, someone before said that the last thing we saw was Meadow coming thru the door then BLACK.

I just rewatched the ending and we see Meadow opening the door, the bell ring, then Tonys face, then BLACK.

So when the show stopped we were not viewing from Tonys perspective, we were viewing from the corner of the bar towards the table.


----------



## bruab (Nov 16, 2001)

I haven't read all the posts, and I don't care to speculate on David Chase's intentions ... but that ending sucked. Pure and simple. I don't watch HBO to re-capture the joy of a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book. But it's pretty much what I expected after the last several wishy-washy years. 

Years 1-3 were classic. After that, they might as well have been on NBC.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

minorthr said:


> Since the thread is tagged as spoilers
> 
> Was the suv over the head really necessary.


That's what you get for dissing pharmacists!
(Did I mention I am a pharmacist  )


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, it means he conveyed the ending perfectly. Tony will live in fear the rest of his life, whether that be ten seconds or ten years.
> 
> Whether he lives ten seconds or ten years doesn't matter for the story.


I'm with Rob on this one.

All of that tension that was built up in the final scene was to make us feel the same kind of paranoia and dread that Tony will always have to live with.

I don't think that it's a "Lady or Tiger" ending; Tony doesn't get whacked, it's just life goes on. But that life will always have that tension. A fade-to-black ending would allow that tension to dissapate. By abrubtly ending the show, he ends the story while maintaining that tension.

I think it was well done, and I'm unlikely to be any kind of apologist since I have vowed that if I ever met J.J. Abrams I would kick him in the nuts after wasting five years of my life on "Alias". Now if you want to complain about a series finale, _that's_ the one to complain about. This one doesn't even come close to that level of suckitude.

BTW... I wonder if there's any significance in _all_ the various song titles (and not just "Don't Stop Believing") that were visible in the jukebox that Tony was looking at:

"Somewhere In The Night"
"Those Were The Days"
"Only The Strong Survive"
"Victim of Love"
"Who Will You Run To?"
"I've Gotta Be Me"
"This Lonely Place"


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Wow, some of these theories are ridiculous and absurd. For a moment I thought I was in the Lost thread.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> Wow, some of these theories are ridiculous and absurd. For a moment I thought I was in the Lost thread.


If Lost has a "cut to black" ending I'll really be pissed.

To all those people defending this Sopranos ending by saying it was good because it was left up to our imagination to explain what happened, would you watch movies that ended that way? Star Wars could've ended with Luke about to fire at the Death Star but just before, the screen could've gone black and then the credits rolled...that would've been great, right? We decide whether Luke lives or dies...life goes on for he Rebels and the Empire, right?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

You know, if anyone should be pissed off about David Chase's attitude towards them, it shouldn't be TV viewers, it should be women drivers. They don't really aquit themselves well in this episode. 

First you have Phil's wife failing to grasp the subtle nuances that seperate "Park" from "Drive", and then you have Meadow unable to parallel park a car in a space that was big enough to easily fit a pair of SUVs. Wow.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Dnamertz said:


> To all those people defending this Sopranos ending by saying it was good because it was left up to our imagination to explain what happened, would you watch movies that ended that way? Star Wars could've ended with Luke about to fire at the Death Star but just before, the screen could've gone black and then the credits rolled...that would've been great, right? We decide whether Luke lives or dies...life goes on for he Rebels and the Empire, right?


Personally, I don't believe anything is being left to our imagination. There's no whacking; it wouldn't make any sense in the overall context.

But I do want to say however that your analogies are poor since movie storytelling and television storytelling are two completely different beasts.

(and that's not even getting into the discussion of how analogy-based arguments are inherently weak ones anyway... )


----------



## walkerjs (Sep 22, 2005)

Heh, this ending is generating controversy in the "WTH did Don Mclean mean by that _American Pie_ song" category rather than the Seinfeld ending. Here, it's WTF was Chase thinking with that?

I'm firmly in the 'audience was whacked' interpretation. That's what I told my wife shortly after the show ended, and after thinking about it it's a perfectly logical, and I'll even say somewhat brilliant way to convey that we aren't part of The Sopranos lives anymore.

Until the movie that is, when we all come back as the Zombie Audience.


----------



## jradosh (Jul 31, 2001)

I watched the ending scene again.

The audience wasn't whacked, and neither were the Sopranos.

Chase ended the series in the "rip the band-aid off quickly" school of thought. He toyed with our emotions by letting us worry, and then ended the series. That's it.

Nothing I saw suggested anyone getting whacked (upon re-watching).


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

jradosh said:


> I watched the ending scene again.
> 
> The audience wasn't whacked, and neither were the Sopranos.
> 
> ...


Well by ripping the band-aid off quickly he essentially whacked us. Not literally but figuratively. No one shot a bullet at us but we no longer have that looking glass into their lives. It's not that we didn't see the bullet coming, we never saw the end coming.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

CharlieW said:


> My interpretation of the ending is that life goes on for Tony as it always had. He'll always be looking over his shoulder, he'll always beat the rap.


That's sort of my take, too.

That end scene was very tense, very anxious.

They kept having Tony checking the door, even after Carm shows. He's continually checking out the guy at the counter. And *we're* checking out the guy at the counter. He's checking out the two black teens that come in. And *we're* checking out the two black kids. The counter guy gets up, and Tony's radar goes to defcon 4. So does ours.

While all this is going on, he's trying to hold conversation, joke with his wife, etc.

I think the ending was to try and get us to feel what Tony's day-to-day is like... what caused him to have those anxiety attacks that had him originally seek out Dr. Melfi. This end scene was to get us to realize... that those two tense minutes we watched, waiting/dreading something to happen.... that's how Tony feels every... waking... second.


----------



## mitchb2 (Sep 30, 2000)

snowjay said:


> So when the show stopped we were not viewing from Tonys perspective, we were viewing from the corner of the bar towards the table.


Well, you've thought about it more than Chase did, may he BIH.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

You guys!.

If the ending was changed simply by removing the 10 seconds or so of black and they had happy go lucky music, it would have been like any other season ender.

In all the other ones they ended with family having some sort of meal together. This ended the same way. I even wonder if the actors themselves knew any different. 

Everybody is saying he was about to get whacked. As was mentioned he is always at risk of getting whacked. That his life.

So we all get 10 seconds of quiet to think about the show.

As I said if they had played pretty music, and had no blackout would you be talking different?


----------



## deezel629 (May 30, 2006)

I thought the ending was OK. Not great, not awful, just OK. I don't think Tony got clipped. I think people are reading into it too much. So, I'm in the "life goes on" camp. Chase showed us what we needed to see, then pulled the plug. 

The Seinfeld references made me think of something. Pretty ironic that Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer end up in jail and the Sopranos end up in a diner.


----------



## RayChuang88 (Sep 5, 2002)

I think the big gripe about the ending was how it was so _sudden_.

Chase should have set up a camera shot pulling back from the Sopranos' table to a street scene outside the diner. That would give it a "life goes on" quality and we can still argue _ad nauseum_ whether Tony Soprano lived or not.


----------



## Crash_Corrigan (Feb 27, 2004)

I liked the ending...life goes on and so does the paranoia for being a mob boss. Click. It's over. Go home.

But, an Animal House ending would have been better. 

A portrait of Tony with the caption "Died on the toilet at his latest Hungarian or Latvian girlfriend's apartment in 2010". 

A portrait of Carmela with the caption "Moved to Italy to find the true love of her life Furio. Died in a Vespa accident in Naples in 2014 while checking out a hot young priest walking on the street. Never found Furio". 

A portrait of Meadow with the caption "Finished law school, but never took the bar exam. Got married. Got pregnant and stayed home to raise her kids in the Jersey burbs just like her mom." 

A portrait of AJ with the caption "Died of autoerotic asphyxtiation in his closet after his latest hot girlfriend dumped him and he totalled the BMW M3 in 2008. Never joined the army. Never became a helicopter pilot. Never worked for the CIA. Never owned a club." 

A portrait of Janet with the caption "Choked on a forkful of baked Ziti in 2009. Never found Uncle Juniors buried cash". 

A portrait of Uncle Junior with the caption "Never recovered from his dementia. Died in his sleep in the nursing home in 2014." 

A portrait of Sil with the caption "Recovered from his wounds. Opened a chain of Bada Bing's Men's Clubs worldwide rivaling Scores. Took Bada Bing's public. BBMC now traded on the NYSE. 

A portrait of the cat with the caption "The reincarnated spirt of Christopher snuck into Paulie's apartment at night and sat on Paulie's face while he slept, smothering Paulie in July 2007 as payback for doing donuts on his lawn and trashing all his expensive landscaping. The cat then lived out the rest of its days in contentment catching mice at the Pork Store and getting high on catnip whenever it could". 

THE END 

Then again, maybe a Futurama ending...fastforward into the 33rd century and find the disembodied head of Tony Soprano in a jar still running the Jersey mob in space, and Artie's head in a jar still cooking in the kitchen at Vesuvios.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Just watched tonight, since my DVR screwed up the recording last night.

I liked the ending a lot. It wasn't what I expected, but that's OK. I really disagree with all the "someone got whacked" theories: Tony definitely didn't get whacked and the "audience got whacked" is just too bizarre for me--that really _would_ be pretentious art-house bullsh*t.

I agree with busyba etc.: Tony's life went on, just as it had been going before; he's got an indictment coming up (or not), AJ's whining about this or that, Meadow's getting married, Carm's working on her houses, etc. Maybe he gets killed that evening, maybe next week, maybe never. There's no big ending, no come-uppance, no good wins over evil, no bomb, no whacking. The show is just... over.

I like it, and I agree that this is very fitting for this show, and I agree that this show has never really been about the whacking.

As for the chop to black, I will admit that for a split second I thought of some kind of technical fault, then I was on the edge waiting to hear something... but when the credits rolled I was fine with it.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

busyba said:


> But I do want to say however that your analogies are poor since movie storytelling and television storytelling are two completely different beasts.


Doesn't matter if they are different beasts, ending an entire series (or movie) by leaving the audience guessing is poor storytelling. I have no problem if Chase wanted to portray a "life goes on message", but to make it look like something else might happen, then have Tony look up as if something might happen, then leave us all guessing is not a "life goes on message"...its the "WTF" message which is what 99% of the audience said as they watched it. If he would've had Meadow sit down and then we watch them all sitting together, he would've conveyed the "life goes on message" much better. But by keeping us all in the dark, he doesn't appear to be good at getting his message across. Heck, people can't even agree if someone got whacked or they're just going on with life. So, he was either attempting to confuse us/leave us guessing (which is poor storytelling) or he's not good at getting his message across.



busyba said:


> (and that's not even getting into the discussion of how analogy-based arguments are inherently weak ones anyway... )


Not if the analogy is good.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Crash_Corrigan said:


> I liked the ending...life goes on and so does the paranoia for being a mob boss. Click. It's over. Go home.
> 
> But, an Animal House ending would have been better.
> 
> ...


I like your ending the best  Very entertaining :up:


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

I believe Paulie summed it up for all the "Tony got killed, and it was "genious" the way David Chase did it fans... 




> Pauli Gualtieri aka Paulie Walnuts put his cigar-like index finger on the directors ultimate goal in dropping another plot line that will dangle forever: the fate of a Russian mobster who escaped a whacking.
> 
> He wanted the audience just to suffer, he said.


----------



## Royster (May 24, 2002)

Most of you are missing the point completely. To you this show is all about plot -- who got whacked, who did the whacking, who moved up. This show has never been about the plot, it has always been a character study of the two families -- Tony's family and Tony's Family.

This is made clear from all of the references to the ducks in the pond at the beginning of the show. It wasn;t about the frigging ducks. It was about Tony's panic attacks. After years of therapy, most of which you were hostile to, Melfi tells Tony "I can't help you." At the end of the show Tony is exactly where he was at the beginning. In most worthwhile stories, the hero grows in some way during the course of the story. The character at the end is different in some fundamental way than the one at the begining. Tony isn't. He hasn't grown a bit. Melfi was absolutely right. She can't help him. Not because he's a psychpath, but because he won't grow. 

And we actually did get a lot of closure for the main character developments arcs. 

Tony's goal has been to try to get his kids out of the Family. He wanted them to have a life that wasn't dependent on the mob. We see that he failed with Meadow. She was parroting the mob wife's complaint about being persecuted by the FBI. He had a chance with AJ. He should have pushed that kid into the army and let him have his own life. Instead he doomed him to a life of more dependance on Tony by being too chicken to let the kid take charge. 

In the final scene, it didn;t matter if in the next second the man came out of the bathroom shooting, or the guy by the jukebox triggered a suicide bomb or Meadow came in and sat down to dinner next to her dad. The story of these characters is over. They are condemned to live as themselves because they can't or won't change.

I myself was at the end of my seat for most of the movie because I expected something sudden to happen. Chase instilled in me the kind of jumpy nervousness that Tony was feeling at the diner when every time the bell on the door rang, he looked up to see if it was his turn. That, my friends, is filmmaking. and it's why I gave the episode an A in the Rate It thread. I don't need a Sopranos Movie. I can't imagine what story is left to tell.

I'm sorry if you got fooled into thinking this was about the mob and the schemes and who got whacked. If that were me, I might feel as if I had wasted a lot of time on this series.


----------



## disco (Mar 27, 2000)

Chase talks:


> "I have no interest in explaining, defending, reinterpreting, or adding to what is there," he says of the final scene.
> 
> "No one was trying to be audacious, honest to God," he adds. "We did what we thought we had to do. No one was trying to blow people's minds, or thinking, 'Wow, this'll (tick) them off.' People get the impression that you're trying to (mess) with them and it's not true. You're trying to entertain them."
> 
> ...


----------



## Sopranoman (Dec 16, 2001)

Royster said:


> Most of you are missing the point completely. To you this show is all about plot -- who got whacked, who did the whacking, who moved up. This show has never been about the plot, it has always been a character study of the two families -- Tony's family and Tony's Family.
> 
> This is made clear from all of the references to the ducks in the pond at the beginning of the show. It wasn;t about the frigging ducks. It was about Tony's panic attacks. After years of therapy, most of which you were hostile to, Melfi tells Tony "I can't help you." At the end of the show Tony is exactly where he was at the beginning. In most worthwhile stories, the hero grows in some way during the course of the story. The character at the end is different in some fundamental way than the one at the begining. Tony isn't. He hasn't grown a bit. Melfi was absolutely right. She can't help him. Not because he's a psychpath, but because he won't grow.
> 
> ...


 :up: :up: :up: :up:


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

unixadm said:


> Very interesting that the actor who plays Paulie Walnuts claims that Chase just wants to make the audience suffer......he wants us to be pissed off and definitely did that to a lot of the audience.


You're reading an awful lot into an offhand remark. Probably all he meant by that was "He didn't want the audience to know what had happened to the Russian."


----------



## dolfer (Nov 3, 2000)

It was definitely a challenging ending. However, I think it was a good one. It makes you think a little. Interpret. Imagine.

And while the use of "Don't Stop Believing" has been ridiculed by some as a random, "let's use a stupid and insulting song", in-joke by Chase, I don't think he would stoop that low.

I think the key sentiment that he wanted to convey was:

"Oh, the movie never ends
It goes on and on and on and on"

Thus, Tony and the rest of the crew's lives go on and on and on.... However, I think if he listened long enough, he could have found a better song that conveys the same! 

It seems like most people want a _Six Feet Under_ style ending. I have not searched yet, but I am curious whether or not the final _Six Feet Under_ thread generated as many posts as this one will. Since _everything_ was resolved with extreme prejudice, I am willing to bet not.

My _only_ problems with the finale was that it was only an hour and that more people didn't get killed! Hell, the _season_ finale of _The Shield_ got the 90 minute treatment!

I was hoping for the return of Furio! He would never have botched the hit on Phil.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

I've decided, on a 2nd and 3rd viewing, that I really liked the ending. I'm leaning towards the "brilliant" camp. I only wish that instead of cutting to black silence, it had cut to black with "Don't stop believin" continuing to play in the background. It ruined a big moment for the audience. In almost every series finale, a moment of sadness and relief accompanies the final seconds and rolling of credits. Instead, that moment was replaced with, "Is it over? I think it's over. Did my cable go out?"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jradford said:


> I only wish that instead of cutting to black silence, it had cut to black with "Don't stop believin" continuing to play in the background. It ruined a big moment for the audience. In almost every series finale, a moment of sadness and relief accompanies the final seconds and rolling of credits. Instead, that moment was replaced with, "Is it over? I think it's over. Did my cable go out?"


But I think the problem with this and similar suggestions is that it would undercut the almost overwhelming sense of menace that had been growing through that whole last scene. The juxtaposition of ordinary family life and impending doom is what establishes how Tony's life is going to go from now on, and having a nice, safe, fade-to-black ending would have undermined that. It was very unsettling, and it _should_ have been.

The more I think about it, the more perfect I think it was.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But I think the problem with this and similar suggestions is that it would undercut the almost overwhelming sense of menace that had been growing through that whole last scene. The juxtaposition of ordinary family life and impending doom is what establishes how Tony's life is going to go from now on, and having a nice, safe, fade-to-black ending would have undermined that. It was very unsettling, and it _should_ have been.
> 
> The more I think about it, the more perfect I think it was.


Believe me, I agree. The ending gets better and better on repeated viewings, but I don't think "my cable is out" should have entered anyone in the audience's mind on 1st viewing. Maybe run the credits a little quicker, I don't know. It seemed like there was a lengthy pause of silence and black prior to any credits where the audience actually WAS given a moment to let it all sink in, but instead of enjoying that moment, it felt like the end of "The Truman Show" where the plug gets pulled and we all start hitting our TV's.

So my only problem is that I refuse to believe that Chase wanted people to think their cable went out, and, unfortunately, it was impossible not to have that thought creep in your head. I'm not a filmmaker so I hate saying, "He should have done...," but I am still frustrated that he didn't find a way to end it suddenly where everyone actually knew it had ended suddenly.


----------



## InterMurph (May 22, 2003)

Here's the major problem I had with the finale.

It was filmed at Holsten's, in Bloomfield, NJ. Tony ordered onion rings "for the table".

Yet onion rings are _not on the menu_ at Holsten's! Check out the menu at http://www.holstens.com/page0004.html, but here's the proof:








French fries? Yes. Onion rings? *No!*

What is David Chase trying to pull here? What is the symbolism of the onion rings? Does it prove that the final scene is a dream, since dreamland is the only place where one can order onion rings at Holsten's?


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

If Tony orders onion rings you go and find onion rings even if they are not on the menu.


----------



## jradosh (Jul 31, 2001)

They were pretty crappy onion rings at that! Not real ones, but clearly the type made from onion bits that are pressed and formed into rings. Nope... not a good ending at all


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

Onion Rings actually are on the menu, just not listed online. They used to be on the specials menu. I know people that have been there many times over the years.

http://offthebroiler.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/nj-dining-holstens/


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

InterMurph said:


> Here's the major problem I had with the finale.
> 
> What is David Chase trying to pull here? What is the symbolism of the onion rings? Does it prove that the final scene is a dream, since dreamland is the only place where one can order onion rings at Holsten's?


they represent the circle of life, and the ketchup they are dipped into symbolize the blood on tony's hands.

further proof of chase's brilliance


----------



## ravonaf (Sep 2, 2003)

Brilliant ending. The show has never been about the mob. If that's what you thought you probably hated the ending. The mob story line is just the pretty wrapping paper they are using. What this series is really about is human nature, good and evil, temptation and society. It's a metaphor for the average American. 

From the very beginning this is Tony telling his story to Dr. Melphi. The Dr. represents the audience and at the end the audience is supposed to see this ugly behavior for what it is just as the Dr does. Tony truly is evil and represents the evil in all of us. How many people would do what he did if they had the power and could get away with it? Lots I bet. Tony represents the average American taken to their natural conclusion. He has no self control and is completely self centered to the point he would kill even his own family. He once said he thought of Chris as a son. When someone he loved became difficult he took the easy way out and tossed him away, just like he did the cleaver cup. Tony's hypocrisy knows now bounds. When confronted with his own gambling addiction he condemns Chris for his own. Every season he physically gets fatter and fatter and more and more selfish. 

All the people surrounding him are very similar. Carmella knows he's evil and even said so many times. In the end she sold her soul and became his partner in crime. AJ represents the path Tony followed. AJ suffered from depression and blackouts just like Tony. AJ had a chance to change his life and to try to do good with it. He went through a transformation and was reborn. In the end he gave in to temptation just like his father. Meadow was the out, but in the end what does she do? She dedicated her life to protecting evil people just like her father. She also sells out for a fat paycheck.

After all is said and done Tony created a world in which he sees death around every corner. As in the real world you reap what you sow. A nice fade to black would represent a happy ending. Tony's ending is not happy. Cutting it off keeps the suspense alive and allows us to imagine just for a second what this kind of life might be like. It creates an exclamation point at the end of the story. The emotion you felt sticks with you for awhile. You are left not knowing whats going to happen. That's Tony's reward for the life he has lived. Never knowing what's going to happen.


I also thought introducing each character into the diner one at a time was a way of each of them coming onto the stage one by one and taking a bow.


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

markymark_ctown said:


> they represent the circle of life, and the ketchup they are dipped into symbolize the blood on tony's hands.
> 
> further proof of chase's brilliance


post of the day


----------



## Rkkeller (May 13, 2004)

Possibly the worst finale I have ever seen. Just glad its over so I can cancel HBO. :up: Slow dull and boring like most of the episodes were. I kept watching as I hoped it would get better but it never did. This sorry ending was right on par.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

MasterOfPuppets said:


> Word on the street is that Chase actually shot 3 different endings. Whether those appear on the final DVD set or were just to ensure secrecy remains to be seen...but I'm guessing either of the other 2 would be much more interesting.


yeah...

he had one ending, where it cut to red abruptly

and another where it cut to green.

credit: eric norris


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

jradosh said:


> They were pretty crappy onion rings at that! Not real ones, but clearly the type made from onion bits that are pressed and formed into rings. Nope... not a good ending at all


BLASPHEMY!! Those fake ones are the only kind of onion rings I will eat. I LOVE those things.


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

bruinfan said:


> yeah...
> 
> he had one ending, where it cut to red abruptly
> 
> ...


i think fred was joking about that...


----------



## Bananfish (May 16, 2002)

dolfer said:


> It seems like most people want a _Six Feet Under_ style ending. I have not searched yet, but I am curious whether or not the final _Six Feet Under_ thread generated as many posts as this one will. Since _everything_ was resolved with extreme prejudice, I am willing to bet not.


Well, come on, Six Feet Under wasn't nearly the cultural phenomenon that The Sopranos was. It would have been a tremendous surprise if the SFU finale generated even a significant fraction of the viewership and buzz of The Sopranos finale, regardless of how resolved things were.


----------



## TomK (May 22, 2001)

Here's an interview with David Chase:

http://blog.nj.com/alltv/2007/06/david_chase_speaks.html


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

dolfer said:


> It seems like most people want a _Six Feet Under_ style ending. I have not searched yet, but I am curious whether or not the final _Six Feet Under_ thread generated as many posts as this one will.


http://archive2.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=255592

276 posts


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

TomK said:


> Here's an interview with David Chase:
> 
> http://blog.nj.com/alltv/2007/06/david_chase_speaks.html


great article...the best i've seen yet. alan sepinwall is my favorite tv writer, by far. :up:

thanks for posting the link!


----------



## Bananfish (May 16, 2002)

bruinfan said:


> yeah...
> 
> he had one ending, where it cut to red abruptly
> 
> and another where it cut to green.


I heard there was an ending where Tony punched in "Renegade" by Styx on the jukebox, and another with "Hot Blooded" by Foreigner. (They decided not to even film the "Turn Me Loose" ending that Chase considered.)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jradford said:


> So my only problem is that I refuse to believe that Chase wanted people to think their cable went out, and, unfortunately, it was impossible not to have that thought creep in your head. I'm not a filmmaker so I hate saying, "He should have done...," but I am still frustrated that he didn't find a way to end it suddenly where everyone actually knew it had ended suddenly.


But that moment of shock and panic that we all felt was perfect. Sure, it was manipulative as hell, but it got the right jolt into our systems...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that moment of shock and panic that we all felt was perfect. Sure, it was manipulative as hell, but it got the right jolt into our systems...


He could have ended the series any way he wanted to but he didn't have to make me scramble around, looking for the @!#$%^* remote for 10-15 seconds. Two days later and I'd like to jolt him.


----------



## Bananfish (May 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that moment of shock and panic that we all felt was perfect. Sure, it was manipulative as hell, but it got the right jolt into our systems...


Gee, now I feel robbed because I didn't have a moment of shock and panic. I didn't fumble around for the remote - I felt pretty confident that that was just the chosen ending. About 10 seconds before, my wife said in a panicky voice "he's gonna get whacked" and I said "nope, they just want you to think he's gonna get whacked." It was classic bait-and-switch.

I don't really feel robbed by the ending, because to be honest, I felt like the last 3 seasons or so were a bit of a petering out of the show. Most of the major highlights of this show came in the first 3 seasons or so. After that, the spark just wasn't quite there like it had been.


----------



## angel35 (Nov 5, 2004)

RegBarc said:


> Exactly what I was thinking.
> 
> I think the point they were trying to make was that they wanted the audience to believe that something was about to happen.
> 
> So bad.


Yes this is Tonys life looking at enery one he sees?Is this going to be it?


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

The emperor has no clothes.


----------



## Dignan (Jan 27, 2002)

Loved the ending, loved that people hated it.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

Rkkeller said:


> Possibly the worst finale I have ever seen. Just glad its over so I can cancel HBO. :up: Slow dull and boring like most of the episodes were. I kept watching as I hoped it would get better but it never did. This sorry ending was right on par.


Why would you continue paying for HBO if this was the only series that you watched and you felt like you were only watching it hoping that it would get better?

How many seasons have you been hanging on?


----------



## dolfer (Nov 3, 2000)

Marco said:


> http://archive2.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=255592
> 
> 276 posts


thanks Marco!

also, I am glad someone was brave enough to bring up the onion rings! They looked like run-of-the-mill Ore-Idas!!!!


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

HBO.com changed the last sentence in the episode description.

From: "Finally parking the car, Meadow runs inside to join her family, just in time for... "

To: "just in time for dinner."

Take that however you will.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

Dignan said:


> Loved the ending, loved that people hated it.


  Why?


----------



## walkerjs (Sep 22, 2005)

SnakeEyes said:


> Onion Rings actually are on the menu, just not listed online. They used to be on the specials menu. I know people that have been there many times over the years.
> 
> http://offthebroiler.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/nj-dining-holstens/


There's a place in south Jersey, ironically called _Sopranos_ (yeah, really!) that doesn't have fries on the take-out menu. Yet you can ask for fries and get them. So perhaps a menu oversight. Don't remember if they have onion rings on the menu, but they probably put them on the menu since. They could call them Sopranos "Whack-out-black-out rings"!


----------



## bareyb (Dec 1, 2000)

Here's my spinoff or Movie theory (whichever comes first): 

They wanted to kill Tony in front of his family. Meadow see's the whole thing and becomes a District Attorney and goes after the mafia as a result. 

My feeling is they left it open ended for a reason. Money. Just in case there might be a way to wring a few more dollars out of the franchise. The final chapter could be a Movie. If there's not enough residual interest then perhaps a spinoff or a one episode "special finale" on HBO. If that flies then they can sell the DVD. I wouldn't shock me if they put up a website asking fans what ending they'd like to see.


----------



## Bananfish (May 16, 2002)

SnakeEyes said:


> HBO.com changed the last sentence in the episode description.
> 
> From: "Finally parking the car, Meadow runs inside to join her family, just in time for... "
> 
> ...


Interesting. Here's my take: I suspect their original thought was that putting in the ellipsis fit in with the theme that life goes on for the Sopranos but the viewer is simply no longer in on their lives, but after hearing how many people think that the "sudden black screen" meant that Tony got whacked from behind and realizing that the ellipsis could be interpreted as meaning something big happens just as Meadow walks in, they changed it to "for dinner" to more concretely reflect the idea that nothing of importance happens when the screen goes black and life simply goes on for the Sopranos.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Dignan said:


> Loved the ending, loved that people hated it.


+1.

I love the sense of entitlement people have regarding a TV show, as in "I'm entitled to have closure."


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Royster said:


> Most of you are missing the point completely. To you this show is all about plot -- who got whacked, who did the whacking, who moved up. This show has never been about the plot, it has always been a character study of the two families -- Tony's family and Tony's Family.
> 
> This is made clear from all of the references to the ducks in the pond at the beginning of the show. It wasn;t about the frigging ducks. It was about Tony's panic attacks. After years of therapy, most of which you were hostile to, Melfi tells Tony "I can't help you." At the end of the show Tony is exactly where he was at the beginning. In most worthwhile stories, the hero grows in some way during the course of the story. The character at the end is different in some fundamental way than the one at the begining. Tony isn't. He hasn't grown a bit. Melfi was absolutely right. She can't help him. Not because he's a psychpath, but because he won't grow.
> 
> ...


Yeah! What he said!!!


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> +1.
> 
> I love the sense of entitlement people have regarding a TV show, as in "I'm entitled to have closure."


And then allow that to ruin the whole series for them since they didn't get one of the endings they were expecting. I've seen quite a few posts out there on the internet (not just here) about how people feel they've wasted eight years on this show. Huh?

The momentary disappointment that I felt immediately after the show ended disappeared pretty quickly once I allowed it to sink in. Watching it a second and third time, I am convinced that he wanted us to see exactly what it felt like to be Tony Soprano.

We always assumed throughout the run of the series that they would never bump off Tony in mid-series -- without him there is no show and we all knew that. So we never felt too uncomfortable when things got dicey for Tony -- we always had "nothings going to happen to Tony, he's the whole show" swimming in our head as we watched each week. We never really got the feel of what it was like to be Tony Soprano -- until we knew that the series was coming to an end and all bets were now off. We were all expecting something to happen, looking at every shady character in the diner, wondering which one it was going to be -- if any of them. Tony lives like this everyday. Trying to act as though he is holding it together, when inside he is all panic attacks and paranoia. The sudden cut to black was the best way to end that scene. Does Tony get whacked in the diner -- maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter and it wasn't important because the show is over. But Chase gave us a greater gift by ending it this way -- he let us be Tony Soprano for just a few moments. This ending was nothing short of brilliant.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

midas said:


> The emperor has no clothes.


And yet he looks good naked.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> +1.
> 
> I love the sense of entitlement people have regarding a TV show, as in "I'm entitled to have closure."


Tony would say "You're entitled to s%!t"


----------



## Dignan (Jan 27, 2002)

jradford said:


> Why?


I loved that people hated the ending because I'm a miserable manipulative sociopath beyond redemption. 

I knew when I watched it people would be very upset, I'm not happy people are upset, I'm happy Chase decided to go with an unconventional finale. It wasn't going to please everyone, he knew this. He challenged us with something more than a Scarface "say hello to my little friend" shootout.

I also thought


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

Dignan said:


> I loved that people hated the ending because I'm a miserable manipulative sociopath beyond redemption.
> 
> I knew when I watched it people would be very upset, I'm not happy people are upset, I'm happy Chase decided to go with an unconventional finale. It wasn't going to please everyone, he knew this. He challenged us with something more than a Scarface "say hello to my little friend" shootout.
> 
> I also thought


OMG!!! WHAT HAPPENED!?! My internet is broken. I don't understand what just happened.
.
.
.
.
ARGH!
.
.
.
.
I was enjoying your post until you ended it like that...now, I think it was the worst post I ever read. BOO!!!


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Dignan said:


> Loved the ending, loved that people hated it.


You rebel


----------



## BobB (Aug 26, 2002)

Count me on the side of those who consider this an absolutely perfect, brilliantly executed ending! And by that I mean not just the cut to black, but the entire final restaurant scene up to and including the cut, an exquisitely crafted exercise in evoking the kind of "is it or isn't it" paranoia that a mob boss like Tony is cursed to live with forever.

It's sad (though not surprising) to see so many react so negatively to the lack of a good old-fashioned comic-book style finale. As several have said above, if that's all you were watching for in this show, you really WERE wasting your time all these years. The Sopranos was so much deeper, so much more than that. My thanks to Chase for delivering an ending that truly did justice to the complexity of the series.


----------



## RayChuang88 (Sep 5, 2002)

I still however find that the ending was condescending towards its audience because _there are better ways to end the show_.

Those of you here over 50 years old probably remember _The Fugitive_, one of the most famous TV shows with lots of tense moments. After four years, this show ended with a dramatic climax at the amusement park, and who could forget the very end when--



Spoiler



Dr. Kimble walks down the steps of the courthouse and sees a police car arrive at the courthouse with its sirens blaring, put a scare into the audience for one last time. That was a _perfect_ coda to a truly landmark TV series.



Chase should have learned from how Roy Huggins wrote _The Fugitive_, in my humble opinion. It appears from Chase's interview with NJ.com that Chase couldn't figure out how to end _The Sopranos_ and came up with this ending.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Bananfish said:


> I heard there was an ending where Tony punched in "Renegade" by Styx on the jukebox, and another with "Hot Blooded" by Foreigner. (They decided not to even film the "Turn Me Loose" ending that Chase considered.)


Staying Alive was shortly considered, but they felt people would read too much into it, besides Tony not being a BeeGees fan.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Lots of interesting comments here. Just think what this ending did, it created more talk, news items, talk show discussions, and water cooler discussions than anything else I remember. What could be better for creating an impact. 

The more I read here and the more I think about it, the more happy I am with the ending and the controversy/impact it has caused.


----------



## bobsbizzy (Jun 20, 2002)

John Stewart used the same ending in one of his scits on the Daily Show. 

Very clever, very funny.


----------



## smickola (Nov 17, 2004)

I'm surpised no one's mentioned this, or maybe I just missed it, but the ducks were back! In the next to last scene, as Tony is sweeping up in the backyard, he pauses and looks upward, and you hear what sounded very much to me like ducks quacking. Very fitting...the ducks are flying away, just as his kids are grown and almost gone. (Although of course AJ may never leave, now that I think about it!)

Tony looks upward, and we get a shot looking up at the trees and the sky...very reminiscent of the scenes we got earlier in the season as Tony was pondering his life after the shooting. Only this time instead of the soothing wind rustling through the leaves, we see barren trees and bleak frigid skies...no doubt a reflection of what life holds for Tony.


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

SullyND said:


> Not last night, but I will cancel today.


I was planning to cancel, but damn Comcast for not having a triple play package that includes the digital channels without the premiums.


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

JohnB1000 said:


> Lots of interesting comments here. Just think what this ending did, it created more talk, news items, talk show discussions, and water cooler discussions than anything else I remember. What could be better for creating an impact.
> 
> The more I read here and the more I think about it, the more happy I am with the ending and the controversy/impact it has caused.


Just because something causes lots of discussion, news items, etc, doesn't mean it is a good thing.

Someone could do something bad, and it would create lots of talk, news items, talk show discussions and water cooler discussions. Just look at Paris Hilton 

If Chase had done an amazing ending that really did finalize the series, I am sure there would be tons of dicussion about that as well.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

unixadm said:


> Just because something causes lots of discussion, news items, etc, doesn't mean it is a good thing.
> 
> Someone could do something bad, and it would create lots of talk, news items, talk show discussions and water cooler discussions. Just look at Paris Hilton
> 
> If Chase had done an amazing ending that really did finalize the series, I am sure there would be tons of dicussion about that as well.


Either way, it IS amazing that he made an ending that seemingly 50% of the population loves and 50% of the population hates.


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

smickola said:


> I'm surpised no one's mentioned this, or maybe I just missed it, but the ducks were back! In the next to last scene, as Tony is sweeping up in the backyard, he pauses and looks upward, and you hear what sounded very much to me like ducks quacking. Very fitting...the ducks are flying away, just as his kids are grown and almost gone. (Although of course AJ may never leave, now that I think about it!)
> 
> Tony looks upward, and we get a shot looking up at the trees and the sky...very reminiscent of the scenes we got earlier in the season as Tony was pondering his life after the shooting. Only this time instead of the soothing wind rustling through the leaves, we see barren trees and bleak frigid skies...no doubt a reflection of what life holds for Tony.


I heard the ducks, and wondered if Chase meant that.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

I didn't say it was a good thing (though I think it was). I simply said it's amazing that a TV show, that's on pay cable, could create such a stir.


----------



## bruab (Nov 16, 2001)

Sopranos fans - read the product description today on woot.com. It's hilarious!



woot.com said:


> Printed In America
> 
> Tommy Baritoni watched the photo print roll out of the HP Photosmart 3210 All in One Printer. Ah, thats the stuff, he thought, admiring the full-color portrait of his favorite band in all their early-80s glory, headbands, keytars, and all. They stopped making bands like Journey anymore, but I still believe. Tommy checked his watch and wondered where Marcela, Summer, and T.J. were. They were supposed to meet him here fifteen minutes ago.
> 
> ...


----------



## sketcher (Mar 3, 2005)

woot.com said:


> ...it felt like everything was about to come to a sudden, inexplicable, unsatisfying end...


And that's exactly what happened.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

getbak said:


> OMG!!! WHAT HAPPENED!?! My internet is broken. I don't understand what just happened.


I think Dignan just got whacked.

Of course, this being the internet, it's entirely possible he just suddenly stumbled across some porn.... in which case whacking would still be an issue.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

busyba said:


> I think Dignan just got whacked.
> 
> .


No, no, no!

Since we can't read it anymore, _we're_ the ones who got whacked.

Like the Bugblatter beast who is so dumb that if it can't see you, it thinks that you can't see it.


----------



## ravonaf (Sep 2, 2003)

smickola said:


> I'm surpised no one's mentioned this, or maybe I just missed it, but the ducks were back! In the next to last scene, as Tony is sweeping up in the backyard, he pauses and looks upward, and you hear what sounded very much to me like ducks quacking. Very fitting...the ducks are flying away, just as his kids are grown and almost gone. (Although of course AJ may never leave, now that I think about it!)
> 
> Tony looks upward, and we get a shot looking up at the trees and the sky...very reminiscent of the scenes we got earlier in the season as Tony was pondering his life after the shooting. Only this time instead of the soothing wind rustling through the leaves, we see barren trees and bleak frigid skies...no doubt a reflection of what life holds for Tony.


The ducks where not back. Tony thought they where...but when he looked he saw nothing but empty sky. The ducks where Tony's chance at redemption. They ultimately led to his therapy. The therapy failed. No more ducks for Tony means no redemption in his life.


----------



## jradosh (Jul 31, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> No, no, no!
> 
> Since we can't read it anymore, _we're_ the ones who got whacked.


No, you got it wrong. The entire thread has been from Dignan's point of view. So when we see the thread end, we're really seeing Dignan's experience. He definately was whacked.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Funny story on how the show got clearance to use "Don't Stop Believin'" in the finale. When Steve Perry got the call, he refused to allow the song to be used unless he was told how the show ended.

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1562298/20070612/journey.jhtml



> "I was not excited about [the possibility of] the Soprano family being whacked to 'Don't Stop Believin'," said Perry, who watched the show with glee Sunday night and again on Monday. "I told them, 'Unless I know what happens  and I will swear to secrecy  I can't in good conscience feel good about its use.'" The show's producers made Perry promise to keep it under his lid, which he did, and then they spilled the beans on how the song was used and how the show ends, after which Perry signed off.


----------



## BryanRDC (Jan 16, 2001)

aindik said:


> Funny story on how the show got clearance to use "Don't Stop Believin'" in the finale. When Steve Perry got the call, he refused to allow the song to be used unless he was told how the show ended.
> 
> http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1562298/20070612/journey.jhtml


That is *so cool!* I've never given Journey two thoughts - I know some of their music and it just fits into that era in my mind (Jouney|Styx|Kansas|Rush - I can never remember who's who), but I'll never hear that song the same way again.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm kinda surprised in the aftermath of this story that there haven't been massive internet rumors that Steve Perry made them change the ending to Sopranos...


----------



## tecban (Oct 10, 2005)

marksman said:


> But that has been the show. The show has ALWAYS been that way. It has not been one for wrapping things up. The entire uniqueness of the show when it first started hinged on that as a major factor.
> 
> It is the thing that has bothered me for the last few years about some of the complaints about the show. A lot of them seem based on complaining about some of the things that have made the show so good for so long. This show encapsulated what has ALWAYS been good about the Sopranos. As mentioned earlier Chase wrote and directed it. In a nutshell this is the epitome of what the Sopranos has always been. Focused on Tony and his family first and foremost. Throw in a mix of psychology and psychiatry, and then as a secondary act the mafia lifestyle. We have always been glimpsing into the world of the Sopranos, it was never tied to a beginning a middle or an end. No conclusion, no finality.
> 
> ...


I'm late to the discussion since I was out of town last Sunday and Monday (and boy was it hard to avoid the spoilers everywhere - even ESPN!)

+1 marksman - very well said.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm kinda surprised in the aftermath of this story that there haven't been massive internet rumors that Steve Perry made them change the ending to Sopranos...


I wouldn't put it past that little, sawed-off troll!


----------



## schmatt (Dec 9, 2004)

The Finale was good but the ending was sort of like having sex, slowly building to a climax, and then your kids open the bedroom door.

I don't think Tony was killed. Most of the hits usually happen right away. They walk through the door and start firing like with Bobby. It's obvious that Chase wanted us to think Tony might get wacked and possibly to show that Tony will forever be on guard and suspicious.

Yes, the FBI's exuberance over Phil's death was funny. I think what he meant is that Tony and his crew may win this war and by saying "we" he's including himself. I think the FBI Agent felt connected to Tony and his crew after all those years. I think the scene were he calls Tony from a motel after sleeping with another agent was him gleaning information from her about Phil's location just for Tony. So by doing that and helping Tony, and he was now "in the war" and affected it's outcome.

Overall, Chase left the outcome wide open for your own interpretation and possible future shows. I'm ok with that. It's been one heck of ride. Great show. It will be missed.


----------



## dmdeane (Apr 17, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think Chase's biggest problem is he over-estimated his audience...


I don't have time to wade through this entire thread, so I'll just quote you here. You've hit the nail on the head.

People who are going "wtf" about this ending puzzle me: what precisely did they think they were watching for the past eight years? This was a show about life, about how all the little threads of life interconnect and intertwine, often without apparent logic or plan. There was no way to conclude this show in the way people seem to demand. This could not be ended neatly - so Chase just ended it. Period. It's done. There's no need to invent theories that Tony was killed or anything else. The family got together, had dinner, story ends.

I'm amused to read people in this thread who openly declare, among other things, that they 1) don't like to think about TV, 2) they don't watch TV in order to use their imagination, 3) and they expect things on TV to be neatly resolved at the end of every episode or every season or at least at the end of the series.

Obviously some people missed the point of the Sopranos.


----------



## Paul Wozniak (Jun 5, 2006)

No dmdeane, YOU are the one that hit the nail on the head. I thought maybe I was alone in seeing this.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

From slate.com, how Harry Potter ends:



> Harry walked into the Three Broomsticks and took a seat in a booth near the back. Who were all the people in here tonight? They looked familiar, but Harry didn't know any of them. Was that Dolores Umbridge? No, just some woman in a hideous cardigan.
> 
> None of these diners knew yet that Voldemort was deadnot by Harry's hand, but killed instead by Dean Thomas and Seamus Finnegan, who'd happened upon He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named outside of London. They'd cursed him from behind and watched as the Knight Bus ran over his head with a horrible crunching sound.
> 
> ...


----------



## ravonaf (Sep 2, 2003)

One thing is for certain. Tony himself would have hated this ending as a viewer. I think that perfectly sums up the message of the show. They make a point the entire show of showcasing the ugliness in people and then have an ending that people who don't see the point would hate. That's why this ending is brilliant.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

Here's an interesting article from an HBO exec. It doesn't really say how we're supposed to interpret the ending, but it hints at it quite a bit:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/06/15/television.sopranos.reut/index.html


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

jradford said:


> Here's an interesting article from an HBO exec. It doesn't really say how we're supposed to interpret the ending, but it hints at it quite a bit:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/06/15/television.sopranos.reut/index.html


Ha! The theory they're hinting at is my favorite, the "Tony is dead" theory. :up:


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

I didn't buy into the Tony is dead theory. But after reading that article, it makes total sense. He didnt hear it comin'. Neither did we.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I agree that article hints at the "Tony is dead" ending, but I hope it's wrong. I loved the ending when I thought it just stopped there, but if Chase was thinking what this article implies he was ("you probably never even know" and cut to black) then I like it a _LOT_ less... really I would do a 180 in my opinion of the finale. To me that would _really_ be a cop-out, pretentious art-house bullcrap ending :down: :down: :down:


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> I agree that article hints at the "Tony is dead" ending, but I hope it's wrong. I loved the ending when I thought it just stopped there, but if Chase was thinking what this article implies he was ("you probably never even know" and cut to black) then I like it a _LOT_ less... really I would do a 180 in my opinion of the finale. To me that would _really_ be a cop-out, pretentious art-house bullcrap ending :down: :down: :down:


Well, according to the article, this is what some guy at HBO thinks, not what Chase thinks.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

Jeeters said:


> I didn't buy into the Tony is dead theory. But after reading that article, it makes total sense. He didnt hear it comin'. Neither did we.


My problem with that, if we were supposed to be seeing things from Tony's pov, to feel the anxiety he feels. They shouldn't have kept cutting to Meadow, since there's no way Tony knew she was having parking issues, we shouldn't have either.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

By cutting to Meadow, it lets us know he's wondering/worried where she is.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Langree said:


> My problem with that, if we were supposed to be seeing things from Tony's pov, to feel the anxiety he feels. They shouldn't have kept cutting to Meadow, since there's no way Tony knew she was having parking issues, we shouldn't have either.


the theory, which I do not agree with, goes like this:

every time the door bell rang, Tony's head snapped up to see who was coming in...so we would see Tony's face, hear the door bell, then the camera would show us who/what Tony sees...

At the end, as Meadow comes in, we're looking at Tony, hear the bell, then see nothing (indicating Tony is dead)...

it's plausible, I just don't agree with it...


----------



## unixadm (Jan 1, 2001)

It's funny....I didn't like the cut to black ending, but today, Don't Stop Believing came on my iPod (on shuffle mode), and I listened to the words. Although it wasn't written for this show, I can see why Chase chose it, and it really can be interpreted to fit this show perfectly. I do think it was the perfect song to end the show....if only he had just had Meadow come in, sit down, and a fade to black.

Just a small town girl
Livin' in a lonely world
 Carmela before she met Tony....growing up in a small town in NJ

She took the midnight train
Goin' anywhere
Carmella marrying into the "dark" side of the mob 

Just a city boy
Born and raised in South Detroit
 Well, not South Detroit....Newark, NJ

He took the midnight train
Goin' anywhere
Tony took the path of getting involved in the dark underworld of the mob

A singer in a smokey room
A smell of wine and cheap perfume
For a smile they can share the night
It goes on and on and on and on
 Not a singer, but a stripper....Bada Bing.....a reference to all of Tony's infidelities

Strangers waiting
Up and down the boulevard
Their shadows searching
In the night
All of the hitmen and enemies that are lying in wait for Tony

Streetlights, people
Livin' just to find emotion
Hidin', somewhere in the night
 Hookers, mobsters and other seedy people in the underworld's world

Workin' hard to get my fill
 Tony and crew are all trying to get their piece of the pie

Everybody wants a thrill
 Another reference to the hookers, booze, drugs, etc....even the thrill of killing

Payin' anything to roll the dice
Just one more time
 A reference to Tony's increased gambling habit

Some will win
 Tony, now that Christopher has been killed

Some will lose
 Christopher, Phil, Bobby, Big *****, etc....all of those who died

Some were born to sing the blues
AJ...and even Tony to some extent

Oh, the movie never ends
It goes on and on and on and on
 The crime, deaths, lies and deceit keep going on and on, even when some of the players are killed

Don't stop believin'
Hold on to the feelin'
 Tony keeps believing he is a good person, good family man, etc....keeps trying to do things to feel good about himself and hold that feeling of superiority.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Apparently "Don't Stop Believing" has been burning up the iTunes charts ever since the finale.


----------



## knownzero (Feb 26, 2001)

I think something has been missed in this debate and its the thought that shows work on many different levels. Take the road runner and coyote for example. It's not just about a hungry coyote trying to bring home dinner. (Google for examples, specifics aren't relevant to my point). But the cartoon works on a lot of different levels - if you want to watch it for the pure cartoony enjoyment and the yuks, it definitely works for that and if you want to get all meta and analyze the hell out of it it certainly work on that level as well.

The Sopranos worked on a number of levels as well which is where I think Chase just missed the high water mark with the ending. As much as he protests, it *is* a mob show with all the gory parts exposed. For the entire series, a person who wants to be entertained without having to think their way through a Kantian philosophical dilemma could do so. Also, it *is* a show about family. It's a show about all the foibles of the American family (only perverted) but at it's heart its a fairly deep look at ourselves. Since this show worked so well on both levels, picking just *one* of those levels to end the show on completely missed the crowd who saw the show as a pure mob show. He took the high road, the film auteur, and made people who were unwilling or unable to decode the subtle intonations of Chase's intricately honed ending, suddenly, well, freak out. It completely and utterly swung and missed with the 'mob as entertainment' crowd which is (if I had to guess) the vast majority of the viewers (myself included).

Hunter S Thompson said it in reference to something else but it's certainly applicable here:



> And that, I think, was the handle  that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didnt need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting  on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. . . .
> 
> So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark  that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.


The final episode was where the wave broke and rolled back. It came so close to being that high water mark for all of television but it missed the mark by just 10 or so seconds of....nothing.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, according to the article, this is what some guy at HBO thinks, not what Chase thinks.


True, that's why I said "if". I'm still holding on to my theory of the end and am very happy with it, thanks very much


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

Don't remember seeing this posted yet... 

It is somewhat unusual that the music that we hear over the last scene was not just a soundtrack, but was the music that the characters in the scene were actually hearing. In fact a bit of a big deal was made of this when they showed us Tony picking out the music and playing it.

So when the audio cut out at the end, it wasn't just a soundtrack that only we the audience were hearing that ended; it was the music that Tony was hearing that ended. But of course if they are showing us Tony's death from his point of view it had to be so.

Not proof of course, but just one more piece that fits...


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

ravonaf said:


> One thing is for certain. Tony himself would have hated this ending as a viewer. ........


Yeah, can't you see him on the couch with his big bowl of ice cream, the scene cuts to black, he jumps up to exclaim, "_*Oh WTF!!!*_"   



Classic Tony. I'm gonna miss him.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Yeah, can't you see him on the couch with his big bowl of ice cream, the scene cuts to black, he jumps up to exclaim, "_*Oh WTF!!!*_"
> 
> 
> 
> Classic Tony. I'm gonna miss him.


he woulda thrown the bowl at the big screen too.


----------



## schmatt (Dec 9, 2004)

bdlucas said:


> Don't remember seeing this posted yet...
> 
> It is somewhat unusual that the music that we hear over the last scene was not just a soundtrack, but was the music that the characters in the scene were actually hearing. In fact a bit of a big deal was made of this when they showed us Tony picking out the music and playing it.
> 
> ...


This theory really intrigues me and it does seem plausible. BUT, if Tony is shot as suggested by the blackness, wouldn't he (and us) at least here a split-second loud as hell noise - which is the gun going off? I've never been shot in the head by surprise, but I have shot my own handgun and I have to wear headphones because of the noise. We should have at least heard a bang, then silence.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

schmatt said:


> This theory really intrigues me and it does seem plausible. BUT, if Tony is shot as suggested by the blackness, wouldn't he (and us) at least here a split-second loud as hell noise - which is the gun going off? I've never been shot in the head by surprise, but I have shot my own handgun and I have to wear headphones because of the noise. We should have at least heard a bang, then silence.


In a scene that they replayed in the next-to-last episode, Tony and Bobby speculate that when you're shot you're dead before you have a chance to hear anything. Who knows (or can know) whether that's really true, but that would be what they're going for according to the "Tony's death from his POV" interpretation.


----------



## schmatt (Dec 9, 2004)

bdlucas said:


> In a scene that they replayed in the next-to-last episode, Tony and Bobby speculate that when you're shot you're dead before you have a chance to hear anything. Who knows (or can know) whether that's really true, but that would be what they're going for according to the "Tony's death from his POV" interpretation.


Good point. I do remember that conversation and the final scene would fit with that.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

bdlucas said:


> In a scene that they replayed in the next-to-last episode, Tony and Bobby speculate that when you're shot you're dead before you have a chance to hear anything.


Of course, for Bobby, that clearly wasn't the case. 

Phil Leotardo, on the other hand, when he got hit, he almost certainly must have thought his cable service cut out.


----------



## snowjay (Mar 27, 2007)

bdlucas said:


> Don't remember seeing this posted yet...
> 
> It is somewhat unusual that the music that we hear over the last scene was not just a soundtrack, but was the music that the characters in the scene were actually hearing. In fact a bit of a big deal was made of this when they showed us Tony picking out the music and playing it.
> 
> ...


It also works for the audience being killed also. We are basically a fly on the wall hearing and seeing everything going on.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

snowjay said:


> It also works for the audience being killed also. We are basically a fly on the wall hearing and seeing everything going on.


Sure, but if the intent was to kill off the audience it would have worked just as well for the song to be playing as a normal accompanying soundtrack that just the audience hears. They wouldn't have needed to go to the trouble of setting up the somewhat unusual circumstance that the song is part of the scene itself.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

In the 85 episodes of the Sopranos prior to this finale, did we ever see all four of them around a table eating something that wasn't Italian food? In fact, did we ever see Tony eat something that wasn't Italian food?

Now they go to diners and and eat onion rings. "Best in the state if you ask me."

Weird.


----------



## CharlieW (May 30, 2001)

aindik said:


> In fact, did we ever see Tony eat something that wasn't Italian food?


Tony and Carmela were really into that Sushi place for awhile.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

bdlucas said:


> So when the audio cut out at the end, it wasn't just a soundtrack that only we the audience were hearing that ended; it was the music that Tony was hearing that ended. But of course if they are showing us Tony's death from his point of view it had to be so.
> 
> Not proof of course, but just one more piece that fits...


Or, it could just be that the show is... over. Tony's not whacked. The "audience" is not whacked. No one is whacked. The show ends. Hence, no soundtrack. I don't think the music ending gives us any information at all.

I think you guys are really reaching.

Why not just accept the ending that was? It was excellent without having to invent your own.

BTW, if you want to hear a reason I _don't_ believe the Members Only guy whacked Tony, it's because we never hear him come out of the bathroom. When he goes in you can clearly hear the door open and close. Unless you think Tony got shot through the door, Tony (and us) would have certainly heard him come back out, but we never do. Hence, he's still in the bathroom when the screen goes black. If Chase wanted us to think he whacked Tony he would have had the door open/close on the soundtrack just before the end.


----------



## Warren (Oct 18, 2001)

just caught the end to see what every one was talking about. wow


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Check out the July 14 *Pearls Before Swine* comic strip . . .

http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/archive/pearls-20070714.html

http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/


----------



## MikeekiM (Jun 25, 2002)

Wow...no activity since 2007?

I just finished binge watching and it was neat to see all of your reactions back in 2007, and how closely they matched the reactions of me and my wife 10 years later...

I am more than a little shocked that others who have binge watched over the last 10 years haven't posted to this thread.

Great journey (no pun intended). The destination was not what I expected. I had a similar feeling after watching the finale for Lost.


----------



## Thom (Jun 5, 2000)

astrohip said:


> Check out the July 14 *Pearls Before Swine* comic strip . . .
> 
> http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/archive/pearls-20070714.html
> 
> GoComics.com - The largest source in the world for comic strips, political cartoons, and the home of Calvin & Hobbes, Garfield, Doonesbury, Dilbert, and hundreds more.


Updated link: 
Pearls Before Swine by Stephan Pastis for Jul 14, 2007 | GoComics.com


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Wow, has it been 10 years already? Another show, I'd like to binge - rewatch but just don't have the time and so much new stuff out there, I'd like to watch.

I still get a kick out of opening credits where they show Tony passing a Sunoco station and the price of gas is under $1.00 per gallon. Ohhhh, the good old days


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

D*mn you MikeMike, I had the last word in this thread until you resurrected it. 

I agree, this is one I'd like to rewatch. I've become a more educated (experienced) TV viewer since then, and I think watching it again would be an interesting experience. But like S-knj, there is just too much new stuff to go back to the oldies.


----------



## MikeekiM (Jun 25, 2002)

I am trying to figure out what my next binge series will be...

I am thinking Madmen or The Wire...


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

MikeekiM said:


> I am trying to figure out what my next binge series will be...
> 
> I am thinking Madmen or The Wire...


Both excellent series. The Wire ranged from A to A+. Mad Men had some slow seasons, but they were still A- quality. Can't go wrong.

Watch the first episode of both, and see which one strikes your fancy more.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

One thing about The Wire...it requires pretty intense concentration. There's a LOT that goes on, and they throw you right in the deep end. So if you're a more casual viewer, maybe Mad Men would be a better choice...


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> One thing about The Wire...it requires pretty intense concentration. There's a LOT that goes on, and they throw you right in the deep end. So if you're a more casual viewer, maybe Mad Men would be a better choice...


I would agree with this. I didn't have the concentration level for The Wire.

Back to The Sopranos. It's a much different series if you binge watch it. Some of the more mundane episodes don't bother you as much when you haven't invested months, sometimes more than a year, waiting for a new episode.


----------



## Thom (Jun 5, 2000)

MikeekiM said:


> I am trying to figure out what my next binge series will be...
> 
> I am thinking Madmen or The Wire...


If only for Christina Hendricks, I'd nominate Mad Men.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I still have the barrel box set of Breaking Bad waiting for the opportunity to re-watch (and watch anew as they are not the AMC versions). Haven't fired up the Blu-ray player in months though!


...and...fade to black!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I couldn't get into The Wire, but others rave about it (same with Breaking Bad, another series I stuck with but couldn't get into). I'd revisit Terriers (a one season series on FX). Great detective caper. I've also been thinking about Deadwood for a rewatch.


----------



## Thom (Jun 5, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I couldn't get into The Wire, but others rave about it (same with Breaking Bad, another series I stuck with but couldn't get into). I'd revisit Terriers (a one season series on FX). Great detective caper. I've also been thinking about Deadwood for a rewatch.


Justified is another good candidate for a rewatch.


----------

