I don't buy the dream sequence theory. It would have been a major departure from every other dream Tony had in the show - he was always at the center of his dream sequences. I don't see how he could have conjured up the other agent Harris was having an affair with, or that scene in Little Italy with the tour bus, or AJ's scenes with Rhiannon, etc. It really doesn't add up for me.

6/13/2007 5:36:50 AM

guys, please don't steer this thread into a freaking Thomas Hardy or James Joyce-esque discussion on novella themes or something.That episode was not dream sequence, and if it was, it was stupidly done. Typically, dreams don't show pretty neutral events like Phil's capping, or Paulie in the club wo/ Tony there in them. No sense.

There are no merits handed out to a show that explicitly does not want it known to the viewer that the last episode is a dream. That'd be the only way this would work. What's the point? I know Chase doesn't like to do audiences any favors, but he's not fuckin' M Night Shaliyan.

Not everything has to be a ruse guys. There's not enough here to substantiate nor warrant a need for a convoluted dream sequence.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 8:16 AM. Reason : I hate M. Night "see what i did there!" shaliyan.]

6/13/2007 8:15:28 AM

I agree with D5...

In every dream Tony has had, something outlandish has occurred in them. Pussy morphing into a fish at the market, the Jersey shore barren in the winter, Tony lighting himself on fire, the Italian woman, sex with Melfi in her office, Mr. Finnerty, opening up to Melfi after killing Christopher, etc. etc. etc.

What happened here that was so out there? I'm not saying that it isn't plausable, just not as likely in my opinion.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 9:41 AM. Reason : y]

6/13/2007 9:40:17 AM

NEUTRAL event like phil's capping?

what the hell do you think tony was hoping for the most while laying in that bed in the safehouse? how could that possibly be considered neutral?

you never dream about your personal hopes and wishes coming true?

it doesn't have to be so "out there" to be a dream.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 9:42 AM. Reason : ]

6/13/2007 9:41:40 AM

the dream theory is too weak.

Donogh5 pretty much nailed why.

6/13/2007 10:15:47 AM

What leads you to believe that Phil's death wasn't going to happen? In seasons past, normally the whacks that are potentially there, in one way or another, eventually happen. Who said anything about "neutral?"

I guess I just hope that the Sopranos didn't become "Dallas" without telling anyone.

6/13/2007 10:20:32 AM

^the post i responded to was edited, so that's why that doesn't really make sense.

of all the theories, i think the being whacked from tony's point of view is the absolute worst. to me it's either the episode was a dream and the end was him waking up, or it was all just really happening and it was the "life goes on" type ending.

without watching it again though, i'll give the theories and analyzing a break. and i did go back and watch the last scene again just for the shirt thing. i do think it's the same shirt, but i definitely see what made me think it wasn't. the way his jacket collar is covering up his shirt collar just makes it look a lot different. but it does indeed appear to be the same shirt, and as previously pointed out we do see tony's jacket on the seat later in the scene but i had never disputed that part anyway. so yeah, wrong on the different shirt thing.

the fact that it's a major departure from previous dream sequences isn't a good argument against it being a dream. this is the series finale, all bets are off. anything goes and it doesn't necessarily have to hold true to earlier representations. also keep in mind that chase wasn't actually directing the other dream sequences personally. he directed the series premiere and the series finale. i'd have to think that direction would play a role in the way those type of scenes are handled.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 12:34 PM. Reason : ]

6/13/2007 12:31:57 PM

I meant neutral as is in events happening away from Tony involving characters that are doing things out of his POV. Neutral was a bad descriptor..umm let's say, detached or outside activity?

I mean, do you think Tony would in his subconscious dream up a situation where Janice goes to see Junior and that dialogue happens? I don't think so.

All of his dream sequences in the past have been in local events restricted to him in them, right? Either way, it doesn't matter - the dream theory is silly.

6/13/2007 12:36:53 PM

Unrelated, but yesterday I discovered that there is a Satriale's-esque italian meat market on Blount Street (near Peace College) with 2 cafe tables in front of it.

I'm going to start hanging out there to tan.

6/13/2007 1:51:35 PM

It seems pretty obvious to me that Tony got whacked in the end there, and he never saw it coming.

6/13/2007 1:53:49 PM

It seems pretty obvious to me that Tony didn't get whacked in the end there, and life just goes on as usual.


see how that ending works?

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 2:03 PM. Reason : .,]

6/13/2007 2:02:49 PM

A sudden cut to black with no music playing during the credits = life goes on?


No, I don't see how that works.

6/13/2007 2:23:42 PM

sounds like a personal problem

the point is, you can interpret it however you would like. no one saw tony die. no one saw tony live. that's how the ending works. you seem like a smart person, so i don't know why im explaining it to you anyway/

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 2:27 PM. Reason : .,]

6/13/2007 2:24:27 PM

The show has always been about Tony's perspective. We see Tony's dreams but nobody elses. We frequently see things through his point of view, but rarely from anyone else's.

It's fitting that instead of seeing Tony get whacked, everything just blacks out and we never see it coming.

6/13/2007 2:33:37 PM

I don't know about the Tony's perspective shit.

We saw everything that was going on when he was in a coma, we saw various informants (that he didn't know about) meeting with the FBI, we saw Phil planning to kill him, we saw Vito in hiding having gay sex, etc etc.

How does that count as part of Tony's perspective?

Quote :

"We see Tony's dreams but nobody elses."

I can recall several dreams that Carmella had about Aidriana after she disappeared.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 2:41 PM. Reason : .]

6/13/2007 2:40:31 PM

^^of course that is a fitting ending. so are several other possibilities. that was the whole point of the ending. maybe he did get whacked. but, maybe he didn't. it really doesn't matter one way or the other what the two of us believe. no one can be truly correct. it's up to each individual viewer.

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 2:42 PM. Reason : n]

6/13/2007 2:40:53 PM

Quote :

"Unrelated, but yesterday I discovered that there is a Satriale's-esque italian meat market on Blount Street (near Peace College) with 2 cafe tables in front of it. I'm going to start hanging out there to tan."

Conti's

6/13/2007 3:11:01 PM

^ you got it

6/13/2007 3:19:37 PM

who is whacking tony if, as a bunch of idiots seem to think, he is getting whacked at the end? This theory is bogus.

no major character killing on the Sopranos (no apostrophe on the name Sopranos...) happens that isn't the effect of something else. Tony kills Chris for a reason. Vito kills Richie Jr. for a reason. Whatever the reason, there is one. We always see the scene where carrying out a hit is mentioned or planned. We did in this episode, regarding Phil, for chrissake! The previous episode had both NJ and NY discussing who they planned to take out.

Phil was dead. There is no talk of disloyalty among his crew (save for Carlo, who is turning state's witness), no scenes to show us that anything was going to happen to T. The driving narration of season 6 (and back to 5) of impending doom because of Phil's and Johnny Sack's tendencies to hold grudges was resolved. Butchie promised peace from NY.



p.s. re: dream sequences, doesn't Chris have one in Season 1, or am I misremembering? I know Carmela has one in episode 6.01

[Edited on June 14, 2007 at 12:15 AM. Reason : s]

[Edited on June 14, 2007 at 12:15 AM. Reason : typos]

6/14/2007 12:15:05 AM

yeah i remember chris having at least one about that dude he killed at the meat packing place

6/14/2007 6:07:18 AM

Quote :

"who is whacking tony if, as a bunch of idiots seem to think, he is getting whacked at the end?"

maybe the arab's found out that he was snitching on them.

i don't necessarily believe that tony was killed in the end, but you can't act like he was a saint that nobody wanted dead.

6/14/2007 8:05:46 AM

what it boils down to is


most of you =

6/14/2007 8:22:58 AM

most of us eat baby food?

6/14/2007 8:24:25 AM

mmmm, mashed carrots

6/14/2007 8:47:29 AM

even aside from the ending, it was a good episode, AJ's irritating car explodes (i told you a thousand times, the hot converter and the dry vegitation!) and it brings him out of his slump, we get final closure on the corrado storyline, meadow is getting married, paulie is worried about shit as usual, we got to see sil's hair messed up, phil meets a gruesome end, etc. yeah all things considered it was a good finale on the whole. the endnig was a little off color but it was for the best. you couldnt end the sopranos forever without some kind of trick.

6/14/2007 1:21:24 PM

I never got meadow titties and that is my only point of dissatisfaction.

6/14/2007 1:38:51 PM

Quote :

"The main evidence supporting the dream theory for me is when Tony tells Carm about the endictments at the restaurant. Number one, why would Tony tell her that? He has never given any type of information like that to her...and the way it was stated to her suggested that they had previously talked about it"

this is just wrong. In season one when the informant cop warned about indictments they did spring cleaning. Carm knew that Tony could potentially get indicted. He doesnt just let shit fall on her head if he knows about it. He gives her some kind of heads.

6/14/2007 1:51:21 PM

I find it hilarious how many misinformed opinions are in here. You guys need to go back and watch all the seasons over again. No other dream sequences besides Tony's? Are you fucking joking? Tony not telling carmela about indictments? Have you people been watching the same show as me?

and like it was said before, they settled the beef with New York. Phil's dead. Who the fuck is coming to kill Tony? The level headed guys in New York know that it's beneficial to them business-wise to have Tony and NJ around. Phil's reasons for wanting him dead were almost 100% personal. Butchie realized this, thus why they took out Phil. I think most of you just wanted a death to conclude the series so you're reaching.

6/14/2007 2:01:51 PM

^ listen to this man

6/14/2007 2:05:15 PM

Quote :

"Phil's reasons for wanting him dead were almost 100% persona"

And through out the 6.5 seasons of the show, I guess there's no one else who's ever had a personal problem with Tony.


Certainly no one can prove that he's dead, nor can anyone prove that he's not unless David Chase wants to come out and state as such.

6/14/2007 2:06:11 PM

^^but if we did, then we'd "stop believin'"



[Edited on June 14, 2007 at 2:20 PM. Reason : ^^]

6/14/2007 2:06:56 PM

Carlo should know that snitches end up in ditches

btw how likely is that for something like AJ's car to catch on fire like that. You would think an issue such as that would have been realized and worked over the years of automobile manufacturing, especially on SUV's. I do not ever remember hearing about some car or SUV blowing up b.c they were parked over dead leaves during autumn. Sounds like a liability lawsuit waiting to happen against the automobile industry.

6/14/2007 2:10:34 PM

Quote :

"No other dream sequences besides Tony's?"

That's not what I said. I said that in Tony's past dream sequences he was always at the center of them.

So is the latest update to the theory that all the characters had separate dreams that were stitched together for the last episode?

6/14/2007 2:13:18 PM

^^as a former Xterra owner, I asked that myself after the episode. I was told it had something to do with the muffler and how deep the dried pile of leaves were. But I really didn't understand what he was saying, so I could be repeating what he said completely wrong.

6/14/2007 2:20:04 PM

Hey Buddha--

I DON'T agree with the dream theory BUT to defend my point, yeah he has brought up shit like that before....but nothing to that degree, indictments have been talked about in generalities. Tony has said in seasons past that yeah, Carm, it could happen in the future. In the diner scene, he says, essentially, Carm I'm definitely about to go down.

But basically, my point was in how Carmella reacts. She doesn't give a shit, basically.

And I love it how some are saying, "THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED!!!"

Unless your name is David Chase or Tony Soprano, you don't know a fucking thing.

6/14/2007 5:42:52 PM

the way i took the whole indictment thing is that it ain't shit compared to what they just went through

Tony's won court cases before, and if that's all that's left, then they're basically home free.

I took it to be a sigh of relief from both of them that things were back to "normal"

6/14/2007 5:56:28 PM

Quote :

"Unrelated, but yesterday I discovered that there is a Satriale's-esque italian meat market on Blount Street (near Peace College) with 2 cafe tables in front of it. I'm going to start hanging out there to tan."

hahaha i'll meet you there

6/14/2007 5:56:40 PM

Some funny political cartoons on the finale:

http://cagle.msnbc.com/news/SopranosFinale/main.asp


Also... A review by Jammer (mostly a Star Trek and BSG reviewer)
http://www.idwid.com/blog/archives/57

Quote :

" Jammer’s Review: The ‘Sopranos’ finale By Jamahl Epsicokhan Warning: Spoilers follow for the series finale of The Sopranos (and other episodes). I see what David Chase was going for here, but I’ve got to go with my gut here: “Made in America,” the Sopranos series finale, is not satisfying to a television audience. Because The Sopranos is on television, it follows that “Made in America” did not do what it was supposed to do. It broke the rules. It certainly did what David Chase wanted it to do (and for seeing his vision through on his terms, he should be commended on the level of Artistic Integrity), but as a series finale to one of the most celebrated TV series in history, I don’t know. Many people are rightly furious. And I can see their point. I suppose I can also see Chase’s. Sopranos finale The family awaits Meadow for a routine meal in a casual diner in the final scene of The Sopranos. (HBO) The Sopranos has been in a gradual decline of sorts for the past two seasons (actually one if you buy into the notion that 2006 was “part one” of season six and 2007 was “part two”). Nonetheless, I’m going to defend The Sopranos even though the past two seasons have occasionally been tedious and uneventful by the standards of this series. The reason is that I still like the writing, even though I might not always like the stories. This show explores its characters and their psychology in a way that few do. I think the problem with season six (parts one and two) is that the creators simply dragged the show out too long considering how much material they had. If you look at what we had the past 21 episodes, there was a lot of filler material and needless protraction of story arcs. It was usually well-written filler material and arc-protraction, I will grant you. The series, even when “nothing” was happening, was filled with the appearance of significance and of characters trying to deal with the mystery of their (often unmanageable) lives. I think perhaps the episode that sums up my overall feelings of the last 21 episodes of The Sopranos is “Kennedy and Heidi,” in which Christopher (high on drugs) was severely injured in a car crash while driving with Tony as his passenger. Tony finished him off by suffocating him. It happened in the first five minutes of the episode, and the scene itself was deliberately drained of all tension — like much of the season has been. In a way, it was a totally appropriate death for Christopher — whose drug addiction had caught up with him yet again — and for Tony, it was a choice about seizing an opportunity to squelch a frequent pain in his ass. But there was something less than satisfying about it, and in a way I think that’s the point. It’s not about giving us dramatic payoffs that satisfy; it’s about showing us life that ends because of circumstances both telegraphed and unforeseen. This series has become an intensely introspective affair. It’s not about what happens, but about what Tony feels about what happens. After Christopher’s death, Tony flies to Vegas and has a drug-induced epiphany. What does it mean? It’s not explicit, but it does express Tony attempting to deal with the emotional fallout of a messy situation. And really, that’s what this series has always been about, so I find myself wondering what everyone’s complaining about. (Then I recall how prolonged the show has become; perhaps that’s the real problem here.) In “Made in America,” various arcs are tied up like they would be in any Sopranos season finale. The war between Phil and Tony — which climaxed last week with Bobby’s murder and Silvio’s hospitalization in a coma — ends here in deadpan Sopranos humor-violence style (Phil is tracked down based on information supplied to Tony by Agent Harris; Phil is shot, and then an SUV runs over his head). Meanwhile, legal problems continue for Tony. It appears Carlo has flipped and it seems likely that Tony will be indicted. A.J.’s emotional crisis is resolved — or at least once again put on hold. Really, a lot of this season has been about A.J. and his utter aimlessness. Depressed for weeks (culminating in a botched suicide attempt), his latest turning point comes here when his SUV comically blows up. It makes him somehow feel “cleansed.” Does this represent the breaking of the cycle of materialism that has gone from end-to-end of this series concerning Tony and his family? A.J. turns a corner and announces his intention to join the Army. The Army could maybe straighten him out and supply him with a work ethic — but there’s a war in Iraq, and few parents currently relish the thought of their kid joining the military. Tony offers A.J. a job with his connections in the Little Carmine’s “movie” business. It’s the easy way out, but it’s safer than going to Iraq. Has the road that leads A.J. inevitably down the path to becoming his father’s son finally been irreversibly paved? Maybe, but maybe not. Maybe it’s just another aimless chapter in A.J.’s existence. It’s these moments that the show is more interested in. Perhaps my favorite little moment in the show is when Hunter comes over to visit Meadow, and Carmela greets her with a friendly (on its face) hello, and asks what she’s up to. Hunter had years ago been kicked out of college for drunk driving, but she has since gotten her act together, and now she’s in her second year of medical school. The way the conversation unfolds makes a mockery of Carmela’s would-be superiority. It’s such a true moment. After all, what Carmela really wanted was for her daughter to have continued into medical school. And then there’s that final scene. Some people love it, some hate it, and there’s allegedly very little in between. Well, consider me in between, because I can see both sides of the argument. The final scene is a calculated, deliberate attempt for Chase to ditch a payoff. It might be a smart move, because the expectations are so high that no payoff could possibly be satisfactory. So Chase goes out on a complete and total non-ending. Is it a betrayal of the audience? It might be. There’s a certain amount of closure that the audience demands in a series finale, and, yes, I know, Chase is not committed to “closure,” but we’re talking about storytelling here, not real life. Sure, Tony’s life doesn’t have to end just because we’re no longer watching it, but I would argue that the story should. But the story here doesn’t end; it merely stops, literally in mid-scene. In concluding The Sopranos, What David Chase has actually done here is expressed his conscious decision to make no final decisions. It is perhaps a statement on Tony himself, who year after year has refused to take responsibility for his actions; he blames everything on everyone else. Is it also a cop-out? I think so. Not just because it’s a non-ending, but because it’s so in our faces about being an anticlimax. My own problem with the final scene of “Made in America” is that in announcing its decision to do nothing, it has supplied us a gimmicky device that feels heavy-handed, as if the whole point of the scene is to stick it to us for having expectations at all. The final scene is shot and edited with escalating suspense, as if Something Awful Is About To Happen. There’s even a nod to The Godfather as a would-be hitman (although I don’t think he is) gets up to go to the restroom. Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believin” plays on the soundtrack — obviously intended as a cosmically significant choice when you consider that one of Chase’s foremost missions from day one on this series has been his commitment to the careful selection of the songs. And then the scene just goes black, as the lyrics significantly say, “Don’t stop…” Jim Emerson has written a brilliant deconstruction of the scene, which takes the position that Chase upends the notion of the TV series finale to great effect. I can concede the brilliance here if the point of a series finale is to buck the system and defy audience expectations and ride the pithy introspection to a bitter, anticlimactic end. But is that why we watch The Sopranos? Doesn’t Chase have an obligation to satisfy the audience with something that comments on Tony’s life, beyond a cosmic joke about unending cycles? I could probably respect the final scene of “Made in America” more if it had simply been a straightforward scene. But by building, via pure technique, to a climax that never happens (and based on what the scene was on its face, nothing is exactly what should’ve happened), Chase has toyed with us. As a critic I admire his creative temerity. As a viewer I feel cheated. Jammer’s rating: **1/2 (out of four) "

[Edited on June 14, 2007 at 10:51 PM. Reason : ]

6/14/2007 10:37:42 PM

Tony Soprano is dead theory gains credence
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19236576/

Quote :

"LOS ANGELES - Fans of “The Sopranos” are seizing on clues suggesting the controversial blackout which abruptly ended the TV mob drama meant that Tony Soprano was rubbed out, and HBO said on Thursday they may be on to something. One clue in particular, a flashback in the penultimate episode to a conversation between Tony and his brother-in-law about death, gained credence as an HBO spokesman called it a “legitimate” hint and confirmed that series creator David Chase had a definite ending in mind. “While he won’t say to me 100 percent what it all means, he says some people who’ve guessed have come closer than others,” HBO spokesman Quentin Schaffer told Reuters after speaking to Chase. “There are definitely things there that he intended for people to pick up on,” Schaffer said. Chase himself suggested as much in an interview on Tuesday with The Star-Ledger newspaper of New Jersey when he said of his end to the HBO series, “Anyone who wants to watch it, it’s all there.” In the final moments of Sunday’s concluding episode, Tony, the conflicted mob boss who has just survived a round of gangland warfare, sits in a diner with his family munching on onion rings as the 1980s song by rock band Journey, “Don’t Stop Believing,” blares from a juke box. Tension builds as a suspicious man wearing a “Members Only” jacket eyes Tony from a nearby counter before slipping into a restroom. Then, as Tony looks toward the restaurant’s entrance, the screen abruptly goes blank in mid-scene — with no picture or sound for 10 seconds — until the credits roll silently. Stunned viewers, many initially believing something had gone wrong with their cable TV reception, were left wondering whether Tony ended up “whacked” or whether his sordid life went on as usual. The jarring, fill-in-the-blank finale, concluding a show widely hailed as America’s greatest television drama, sparked a furious debate about whether Chase had conceived of an actual ending and whether he left the audience any clues. From Adriana to Ralphie, the friendly and not-so-friendly faces that surrounded Tony and crew. The biggest hint, according to a consensus taking shape on the Web, is a scene from an earlier episode in which Tony and his brother-in-law, Bobby Bacala, muse about what it feels like to die. “At the end, you probably don’t hear anything, everything just goes black,” Bobby says while they sit fishing in a small boat on a lake. That scene is recalled briefly in a flashback played at the end of the penultimate “Sopranos” episode, as Tony is lying in the darkened room of a safehouse clutching a machine gun to his chest in the midst of a mob war. “I think that is one of the most legitimate things to look at,” Schaffer said when asked about theories that the Bobby Bacala flashback was meant to foreshadow Tony’s death. Moreover, he said the man in the “Members Only” jacket could be interpreted as a symbolic reference to membership in the mob. “Members Only” also was the title of the episode in which Tony’s demented Uncle Junior shoots him in the gut. The “Members Only” guy was played by the owner of a real-life pizza parlor, Paolo Colandrea. Schaffer denied reports that Colandrea had appeared earlier in the series as the nephew of Tony’s New York gang rival, or that there ever was such a character. He also dismissed reports that Chase had filmed more than one ending to the finale."

6/15/2007 8:31:11 AM

and James just doesn't know

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/news/article/42656/sopranos-star-says-he-doesnt-know-if-hes-dead/

Quote :

"NEW YORK—“I have no idea what happened to Tony,” actor James Gandolfini said Thursday night, standing aboard The Highlander, the Forbes family yacht at Pier 60 on Manhattan’s West Side. “You have to ask ("The Sopranos” creator) David Chase that. Smarter minds than mine know the answer to that. I thought it was a great ending. You decide.” Gandolfini was joining most of the cast of “The Sopranos” for a fund-raising cruise to benefit St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital—Tony (Paulie Walnuts) Sirico’s pet charity. The stars defended the ending—which had the screen cut to black as Tony’s family sat down to dinner—even if not all of the actors understood it. “I have no idea why I had so much trouble parallel parking at the end,” said Jamie-Lynn Sigler, who played Meadow Soprano. “It was on the page, and like always, I played what was written. But I loved the ending. I can’t think of a single better way to have ended this show.” Edie Falco, who played Tony’s wife, Carmela, said that after a sad goodbye, it was nice to have the old gang together for charity. “No one says no to Tony Sirico,” she said. “But I don’t think it will be long before we all see each other again.” Was she talking about a hotly rumored movie that would clear up the ending many fans felt was too ambiguous? “God, no,” Falco said. “I don’t mean that. I think the ending was just great. I mean that. I have never second-guessed David Chase, and I’m not about to start now.” “Yes, I was at that table, but I have no idea what happened after the screen went blank.” Sirico couldn’t understand the criticism of the finale. “I thought the ending was outstanding. We got Phil Leotardo. We went back to our lives,” he said. “What do people want? More blood? A whole family whacked? I like that David Chase let the viewers decide.” Aida Turturro, who played Tony Soprano’s erratic sister, Janice, floated two theories as she wobbled across the lolling money-green yacht. “Tony and Bobby talked a few episodes back about how when you finally get hit, you never see it coming and the world just goes black,” she said. “The other one is that they just live their lives as a family, and we just left them in the middle of their lives.” Like Turturro, Steven Van Zandt, who played Silvio, was glad the ending kept viewers—and castmates—guessing. “A conventional ending would have been a fraud,” said Van Zandt, a member of Bruce Springsteen’s E Street Band. “Life doesn’t have tidy little endings. Even some great songs just fade out like the last episode of `The Sopranos.’” “But on my Sirius radio show, I see the opinions shifting across the country. It started out fifty-fifty, and by last night, it was eighty-twenty in favor of the ending. “It’s also a lie that we shot three or four endings. David Chase, who wrote and directed the last episode, did one ending. He knew what he wanted, and it was great. Like the show.” Billionaire Steve Forbes stood at the door of the family yacht donated for the night and greeted all the stars and guests, who paid $500 a head to climb aboard. “I have no idea what happened to Tony Soprano,” Forbes said. “I do know that when it ended, I threw around several four-letter words like Tony Soprano would have and thought my cable went out.” “I hope the creator, David Chase, rushes the movie into production because I want to know how it ended.” Gandolfini insisted he didn’t have an inside line on that. “The ending was exactly what it should have been,” he said. “Don’t look at me, I don’t have an answer. All I know is that it’s over.” "

6/15/2007 9:55:41 AM

Quote :

"“At the end, you probably don’t hear anything, everything just goes black,” Bobby says while they sit fishing in a small boat on a lake."

...a scene which is reprised in the second to last episode? Not coincidence. Tony's dead. Ah, sweet closure.

6/15/2007 2:28:37 PM

^ But Bobby never says "everything just goes black"

Go back and watch the episodes again.

Quote :

"The myth of "everything goes to black" I feel like I dealt with this in the blog a couple of days ago, and yet unlike the Nicky Leotardo theory, this one keeps gaining credence, to the point where even an HBO spokesman suggested it might be right. One rather large problem, which I feel I must repeat: Bacala never says anything about it all going to black. The exchange is: Bobby: "You probably don't ever hear it when it happens, right?" Tony:" Ask your friend back there. On the wall." That's it. You can check yourself if you don't believe me. I think Quentin (the HBO spokesman in the article) is just having some fun with what I'm sure are hundreds and hundreds of media requests for an explanation of what happened. I'm not saying that the Tony Is Dead people are wasting their time. It's as valid an overall theory as any, even if the evidence is sketchy. But argue your point only with the evidence that exists, not the evidence that you wish existed. "

http://blog.nj.com/alltv/2007/06/final_opinion_made_in_america.html

6/15/2007 3:55:05 PM

zing!

6/15/2007 5:09:11 PM

the "goes to black" theory wasn't why I thought Tony died...but the "don't ever hear it coming" and then you literally don't hear anything...it going to black signalling an end was bonus or partner to that or what have you. that's what BobbyDigital originally pointed out on page 11.

[Edited on June 15, 2007 at 5:51 PM. Reason : ]

6/15/2007 5:25:13 PM

I'm definitely not saying that it's not possible that Tony was killed...I just can't believe that it's gotten to the point where CNN/MSNBC and whoever else are writing stories about something that never happened on the show.

6/16/2007 8:08:41 AM

Quote :

"and like it was said before, they settled the beef with New York. Phil's dead. Who the fuck is coming to kill Tony? The level headed guys in New York know that it's beneficial to them business-wise to have Tony and NJ around. Phil's reasons for wanting him dead were almost 100% personal. Butchie realized this, thus why they took out Phil. I think most of you just wanted a death to conclude the series so you're reaching."

That's right on point.

mobsters are greedy fucks through and through. Everyone else in NY realized that Phil was trying to cut off financial ties and start a mob war with NJ over personal problems, and meanwhile the NY mob was losing their construction rackets and the massive amounts of money that come in through sanitation. Phil trying to stonewall Tony on the asbestos racket was only resulting in Tony making more money by not having to pay NY a percentage and Phil not getting jack shit.

The level headed guys in NY realized that Phil was putting their lives and livelyhood at risk over some blood-family vendetta. Once they realized this, it was an easy decision for them to make. Since they had managed to knock out Bobby and Sil previously, they had to keep Tony alive so that they could get their cooperative rackets working properly again. No one else with half a brain seems to be left.

On another note, this was the first season I ever heard mention of the 5 families of NY. Before, people always just refered to Phil and Carmine's crew as the NY crew. I was wondering if they were trying to imply within the show that for production sake, the NJ mob only had to deal with one family in charge of NY.

6/16/2007 5:28:53 PM

can someone go over the whole asbestos storyline? i didnt really catch what was going on there.

6/17/2007 12:32:42 AM

Tony and Vito had a construction scam going where they would charge absurd amounts of money to renovate buildings containing asbestos and "properly dispose" of the hazardous chemical. What they were really doing was dumping the shit at the local landfill at regular tonnage fees and hiding it in an area where it wouldn't be detected by the local EPA. When the family that owned the landfill sold it last season to a person in cahoots with the NY family, Tony was continuing to dump asbestos at the site without telling Phil. When Phil found out about it, he demanded a 25% share of the payoff they were getting.

To give you an idea, asbestos costs about $100 a ton to dispose of at a landfill, and that asbestos has to be double bagged, handled by people using respirators, and carried in specialized dump trucks to prevent contamination. Dumping it like it's garbage costs about $30 a ton. after the subcontractor adds up all the hazmat procedure costs and trained personnel he charges the building contractor for, he could easily be charging the contractor an additional $500 a ton or more for work he's not performing. If a dump truck hauls around 10 tons in each load, then that's $5,000 of scammed money per truck that can be split up between the subcontractor and the mobster that is greasing the contractor's union, the EPA inspector, and the landfill.

There is a hell of a lot more to asbestos scams as well, such as inspectors being paid to quantify building materials as containing asbestos when they don't and then getting several different subcontractors to place bids on the asbestos removal when in actuality they are all just shell companies falling under the same ownership that are rigging their bids collectively. When you see it from the big picture perspective, you can see how heavily organized the whole racket is and why the mob is involved.

6/17/2007 1:25:40 AM

there are more theories in here about the ending than salisburyboy has in soap box.

6/17/2007 10:47:22 AM

well, salisburyboy has only one theory.

he just applies it as the reason for everything.

6/17/2007 11:21:13 AM