Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 31, 2008 20:59:16 GMT
I'm finished! "The Blue Comet" is such an incredibly fast, tense, succinct, dense episode.
I love those weird, eerie edits in the last episode, from Tony's face, to his POV, to his face, to his POV again, but the second POV is actually an objective shot, identical to the last but now with Tony in it. It's as if he's imagining himself in the scene; very dreamlike. It happens when he visits Uncle Junior (the penultimate scene in the entire show), and it happens again in the final scene, when he's sitting at the table in the restaurant without any warning. It's very effective.
I'm also convinced he's alive. I've no reason at all to believe he gets shot; things are made up with Butch and New York, and Butch doesn't have the balls to clip Tony; nobody's listening to Phil anymore (Phil's long dead at that point), and Butch was the one who wanted to reach out to NJ in the first place. I like the Members Only jacket thing, and the two black guys (two black guys tried to kill Tony at the end of season 1, as per Junior's orders). There's also a guy with a "USA" cap in the same scene, and it's an obvious reference to the same item of clothing earlier in the show - but who wears that cap eludes me right now (anybody remember?).
Anyway, I'm taking the final scene to mean that, although things have settled down again, Tony has no reason to relax in the long term.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 31, 2008 21:04:02 GMT
New season rankings:
6A 6B 4 3 2 1 5
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Mar 31, 2008 21:50:43 GMT
The Second Coming might be my favorite episode.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Apr 1, 2008 15:43:18 GMT
Yeah, I thought the same the other night. Such a well-balanced bringing together of all the forces in Tony's life. As a follow-up, "The Blue Comet" is up there too.
Those two episodes alone put season 6B on the map. I love the whole character arc between Tony and Paulie in "Remember When", too. I hadn't caught it on the first two viewings (I thought it was Tony acting out of character), but he's alienating Paulie because he speaks too much, but it's fuelled in his subconscious by feelings Paulie brings up about T's father.
A new theme that's emerged in this retrospect: the battle between honesty behind closed doors and maintaining one's self image. As a brief example, Phil's estimation of Johnny Sack as a man plummeting at Sack's daughter's wedding (after Johnny cries), but then Phil and the others defending him to an outsider passing by. It's a major theme, especially later on. I suppose it's the central conflict of the show, too: Tony kidding himself over his mother (hence seeing Melfi).
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Sept 5, 2008 2:18:39 GMT
I randomly put in to watch the fourth season episode "No Show" today.
I had forgotten how bleak this season gets. Ralphie's joke about Johnny's wife starts here. You can see Tony and Carmela's marriage continues to get worse. Chris still turns to junk. And worst of all, Adriana gets into the car with the feds, and it's the beginning of the end for her.
Some things I liked. The underlying aggression by most everyone of Chris getting put in as temporary Capo. Patsy soon shows his true colors, and Chris fucks up. But what's interesting is Silvio's role in this episode, and his true motives. While he does deliver the message from Patsy to Tony about the former being jealous of Christopher (in so many words), he seems to taunt Tony in his own subtle game of insubordination. Going over Tony's head to give Patsy the order to keep stealing from the job site, just to piss Tony off and to make Christopher look incompetent. Tony tries calling him out on it in his cellar, but Silvio will have none of it. In one of their best (and strangest) scenes together, Silvio relies on Tony's friendship to overlook what is really going on with the orders, all with the underlying message of his reluctance to have Christopher promoted!
Meadow is pretty annoying in some of the show, and this is part of her arc that I really can't get into, but at least the reactions of Tony and Carmela provide for compelling viewing. The closing shot of the episode provides great mis en scene, with Carmela lying motionless in a bathtub, and Tony standing in front of the sink and mirror, dissolving into Radiohead's "Kid A".
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Oct 31, 2008 17:42:37 GMT
Been pebble-dashing my way through the first two seasons, and reading various academic literature alongside. My admiration for this show is ever-increasing.
David Proval was an excellent addition to the cast, as was his character.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Oct 31, 2008 17:53:11 GMT
I hope Sopranos is not like Goodfellas. I have little interest in the Mafia. It wasn't clear from the few episodes that I have watched so far. I remember watching one episode where there is some rivalry between the guy who owns the restaurant and someone else over some immigrant girl and the guy plunges the hand of the other guy into a vat of boiling gravy. or some such. I don't want to see how they all attend churches and have big family parties and are affectionate to their grandmother while committing brutal crimes in the neighborhood. That story has been told a zillion times. Don't get me wrong. I am not AT ALL saying that Sopranos is like that. I am just hoping that the show has to offer more than that. In fact I am asking you guys because I am planning to delve into the show soon.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Oct 31, 2008 18:19:07 GMT
I've noticed a trend in its increasing sophistication; seasons one to three are enjoyable and addictive, but season four's a major turning point, not only in the noticeably darker tone (in thematic fabric and visual aesthetic), but also in that external events have a more prominent impact on the show's intrinsic happenings: the opening episode of season 4 is the first without the World Trade Center in the credits sequences, and is very post-9/11 in its concerns for the wider US economy. In the final season(s), it becomes very self-reflexive and -reflective in tone, placing all its major characters in major identity crises.
I'm in the process of beginning a 10-12,000 word dissertation on it, entitled (for now), "Self-Reflexive Identity Crises in the Post-Modern World of The Sopranos", focusing on the central recurring conflict(s) between self-honesty and maintaining one's projected image. For me, it's a show about Identity. And while you may argue that all great fictional TV drama is the same, I'd argue back that none are about Identity to the extent of The Sopranos.
It goes deeper than GoodFellas; wetdog recently convinced me of that film's narrow treatment of gangsterism as a microcosm in itself, ignoring the many social factors that allow for organised crime to work in the first place. While the characters in the show are forever quoting The Godfather, Chase's treatment of them is less romantic (than Coppola's of the Corleones).
Well, the central relationship in the initial episodes of the show is that between Tony and his mother; it's a relationship that has in turn, brought Tony to see a psychiatrist by way of panic attacks (but this is no Analyze This).
They do attend church, and they do attend family functions, but this is a much deeper, more intelligent handling of family and Family than filmic versions. It's very character driven and excellently acted, with a sharp, funny script; an English lecturer who taught me a few years ago said that Film offered The Godfather in the way of serious Shakespearean narrative, and that TV's The Sopranos went further still - nothing else came close. (He was also a huge Dickens fan, so I'd be interested in what he now thinks of The Wire.)
|
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Dec 29, 2008 8:03:21 GMT
I just finished re-watching Season 1 and I'm now five episodes into Season 2. So far, it's a drop-off in quality, but not by much. None of the new characters are that interesting (mostly I'm thinking of Jackie's brother, Janice, and the guy from Italy).
Maybe it was in this thread or a different one but someone said none of the actors from the show ever struck them as good actors. I disagree. I've mentioned earlier my love for Uncle Junior and Chianese. Also, Jerry Adler (Hesh) and Drea de Matteo (Adriana) stand out in my eyes. I love watching them on screen. Hesh is very cool and calm, which makes his character particularly unique. But get out of line, and he will let you know. Adriana is an interesting character. I don't know what she sees in Christopher, who is basically a loser. She doesn't seem to like his crap, and she's much smarter and more sophisticated than him by miles. This makes her fairly sympathetic, and I'd be sorry to see her get hurt.
You know, I'm just thinking -- is it okay to be sorry if a fictional character gets hurt? Obviously, no one is really hurt, so why have that emotion? But then, I guess you're supposed to have strong feelings for characters in art. Oh, nevermind.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Dec 29, 2008 15:18:58 GMT
The actor who played "Johnny Cakes" committed suicide a couple of weeks ago.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jan 7, 2009 17:18:36 GMT
This series is a masterpiece. It's an epic tragedy about moral disappointment, the decadence and failings of the American dream, of capitalism and organised crime. The excessive excuse of bad behaviour in therapy - the impersonality and hypocrisies of a therapy culture.
I think it's the greatest thing I've ever seen.
|
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Feb 3, 2009 2:45:30 GMT
Now I've seen every episode.
In regards to the final: I'm not satisfied. Shouldn't I be satisfied? What's wrong with a Hollywood ending? I don't want theories, interpretations, explorations. I WANT THE TRUTH. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.
Is this just intellectual laziness on my part? I liked the ending to NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN. That's my defense.
What I think though - I think he's dead. I think he was shot by the Members Only jacket guy. And for reasons that have been stated before - you don't hear it, supposedly. Reference to Bobby in the flashback would be unnecessary then.
But contrary to my earlier post, I don't think it was brilliant. I also don't think it stayed true to the show, as some have said.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 3, 2009 11:15:15 GMT
SEASON 6B SPOILERS
What reasons would the Members Only guy have for killing Tony? Who would have hired him? Phil's dead; Butch wanted a truce with New Jersey; nobody in the Soprano ranks would have ordered Tony to be whacked - it's bad business for everybody, considering he's the only worthy leader that side of the Hudson.
The flashback to Bobby happens at the beginning of the episode, when Tony finally has a moment or two to reflect upon what has happened; it's more about Bobby than Tony. If it has anything to do with the latter, it's due to his own life being in danger at that point.
All the interpretations arguing for Tony's death look a great deal at the aesthetic, at all the laden symbolism, but ignore the actual logicality of it.
Anyway: I love the final scene. I think the final three episodes are amazing. Succinct, fast, tense; Shakespearean, actually.
FWIW, my reading of the final scene is that life goes on, but in this life, for how much longer? Is it all worth it?
In ending on such an ambiguous note, Chase forces viewers - regular, hardcore, passive or casual - to invest their own moral accounting onto Tony, and in the process perhaps look at their own selves. If the ending had Tony sitting down happily with his family, then crime pays in capitalist America; if he's shot and killed, then there's a very obvious and clichéd closure to a very complex character. Or, if you really want Tony to suffer for his sins, kill Meadow or AJ and... ah, Coppola's already done that.
David Chase, responding to the recurring question surrounding the Russian in "Pine Barrens":
"Who knows? Who cares? This is what Hollywood has done to America. Do you have to have closure on every little thing? Isn’t there any mystery in the world?"
And, on the show's anti-network TV lack of closure in general:
"If you’re raised on a steady diet of Hollywood movies and network television, you start to think, 'Obviously there’s going to be some moral accounting here.' That’s not the way the world works."
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Feb 3, 2009 16:51:44 GMT
Thank you Mr. Chase for never compromising. I always found it rather sickening to scour IMDb for 5 minutes and see people asking
When the Russian was going to get revenge
When we were going to find out if Ralphie killed Pie Oh My
or even
When is Adrianna going to return (she was shot off camera)
I remember every freaking news outlet covering the build up to the final episode and thinking how great it would be if something that wasn't really standard happened. Sopranos didnt disappoint.
I hope if a movie is ever made (doubt it really), it goes somewhere in between 2 seasons, and not at the end of 6b. Diminishing that ending would be criminal.
|
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Feb 3, 2009 17:59:36 GMT
SEASON 6B SPOILERSWhat reasons would the Members Only guy have for killing Tony? Who would have hired him? Phil's dead; Butch wanted a truce with New Jersey; nobody in the Soprano ranks would have ordered Tony to be whacked - it's bad business for everybody, considering he's the only worthy leader that side of the Hudson. Who knows? Maybe that's the mystery. Maybe he's just some rising thug that wants his shot at fame, and thought he could impress Phil (without knowing he was dead) . Maybe he wants to be a Travis Bickle type. I don't know, but all the evidence (I consider the flashback to Bobby to be evidence, and the tension in the diner) points to Tony being shot. Chase just didn't go there all the way. Maybe, maybe, standing on its own. But when taken into account of the final scene, and also the scene where Sil never hears the shot at the restaurant, I think it has to have more meaning. And if it doesn't, then it was purposefully misleading. Let's say Tony was shown to be shot (as I conclude, not totally, but for now). The moral of the story is that if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. What's wrong with that message? Is that an obvious message or a cliche? Well, maybe. But, I don't think it makes Tony or his situation/life any less complex. Don't most stories have a beginning, middle, and an end? To think that's a Hollywood invention is wrong. Everyone knew the end to THE ILIAD, even if it doesn't tell it in the actual story. They knew what happened to Antigone, what happened to the Jesus, and the end of the world in Revelation, what happened to Michael Corleone, and right away, they knew what happened to Romeo and Juliet. Most stories have a closure - that's a 5000+ year tradition. Anyone can end a story in the middle and call it ambiguous and "a mystery." I'm trying to see the creativity or genius in that, and I can't. Chase acts as if having an end would prevent people from reflecting on the life of Tony Soprano. As if him living would really make me think that crime pays. After watching 6 seasons of the Sopranos featuring countless deaths, broken relationships and families, and overall sense of dread and frustration in these peoples' lives, I'm not thinking that this is such a great life if he gets to eat his Holstein steak. I am initially disagreeing with your thoughts, but thank you for the thoughtful reply, Capo.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Feb 3, 2009 18:11:54 GMT
Couldn't they have showed any clip of Bobby and Tony? Why that specific one with that specific line?
Personally, I don't think he lived or died. It ended before we could find out! ;D
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Feb 3, 2009 18:52:15 GMT
Don't most stories have a beginning, middle, and an end? To think that's a Hollywood invention is wrong. Everyone knew the end to THE ILIAD, even if it doesn't tell it in the actual story. They knew what happened to Antigone, what happened to the Jesus, and the end of the world in Revelation, what happened to Michael Corleone, and right away, they knew what happened to Romeo and Juliet. Most stories have a closure - that's a 5000+ year tradition. Surely a story can have an ambiguous portions, or loose threads that never get solved throughout its narrative (or in this case, at its ending). THe way I read Chase's statement, he feels that Hollywood stories are typically just a little too "tight-knit", and that he is rather annoyed by people that think his show should be that way. I hope not too many big Sopranos fans actually thought the Russian was going to come back for some big revenge in a later episode (which is actually what Chases quote was referring to, not the series ending). 35 episodes or so into the show at that point, I had pretty much gotten a handle on the "tone" of the show, and saw little to no possibly of something like that happening.
|
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Feb 3, 2009 19:13:07 GMT
I'm totally fine with no conclusion to the Russian, for what it's worth.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 3, 2009 21:25:09 GMT
SEASON 6B SPOILERS What reasons would the Members Only guy have for killing Tony? Who would have hired him? Phil's dead; Butch wanted a truce with New Jersey; nobody in the Soprano ranks would have ordered Tony to be whacked - it's bad business for everybody, considering he's the only worthy leader that side of the Hudson. SEASON 6B SPOILERSIf jacket man did kill Tony, I've read a reasonable motivation from a mafia buff. If a boss it to be taken out, the other bosses of other families should/must give the okay. It's possible that the other NY bosses didn't receive word and didn't take Phil's death too well. The factor here obviously is Butch. Perhaps Butch played Tony which is the other reasonable motivation. Get Tony to think he's safe so that he can go ahead and kill Phil without retaliation as promised by the Lupertazzi family. I don't remember the Butch-Tony sitdown in the finale so perhaps Butch did say that the other families are okay with the hit on Phil, but if he did, maybe he lied. (It's also very reasonable to say that it's implied that Butch got the okay from the other families.) This way, he's the likely successor to Phil, and he can kill Tony after which is what he always wanted to do. So jacket man was ordered to kill Tony by the Lupertazzi family either with or without the other families' okay. Regardless, from Butch's viewpoint, the retaliation would be okay in the other families' mind since Tony killed Phil. (Don't know if an okay is needed for a justified retaliation.) Killing Tony would be bad for business, but it's never pure business; they say it's only business but it's not. However, on the business side, one can say that by getting Tony out of the way, the Lupertazzis (Butch) hope to work with someone who'd be easier to work with (i.e., easier to get him to do what they want). Who's left? Was it just Paulie?
It's also reasonable to think that there was no hit on Tony. Butch and Tony would work together.
|
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Feb 4, 2009 2:28:40 GMT
I feel I should also make clear that my disappointment surrounding the end does not dampen my feelings towards the series as a whole. I enjoyed the ride immensely, and look forward to it again in the near future.
|
|