I've dedicated seven years to The Sopranos. I've spent 85 hours watching one of the most morally and emotionally ambiguous serial narratives in modern times. I waited through a painfully long 16-month hiatus to find out how the series--one of the great works of pop culture--would be resolved. And tonight I sat through another 55 torturous minutes of waiting for the ending only to have my dedication and patience rewarded with…a non-ending ending.
David Chase should have read his Aristotle: The plot, the most important feature of a tragedy, must be “a whole,” with a beginning, middle, and end. As a whole The Sopranos had a beautiful beginning, an intriguing middle, and no ending whatsoever.
Many critics, bloggers, and other pundits will be exclaiming: "I get it." But they are as stoned as Tony when he made that exclamation in the Nevada desert. The truth is that there is nothing to "get." In fact, it's obvious now that we all gave series creator David Chase too much credit. He simply didn't know where the story was going or how to end it in a way that did justice to one of the best serial dramas in history.
Many people--otherwise bright people who usually aren't so easily conned--will praise Chase for his brilliant non-ending ending. But the truth is that Chase is laughing at all those who think his non-ending ending actually has a purpose, or meaning. But the fact remains that a plot requires an ending, a real ending, and Chase has marred The Sopranos by not giving it one.
(Of course that's my generous view. The cynical view is that he left it unresolved for The Sopranos: The Movie. Yes, I realize that everyone involved says that they are finished, that they are tired of the characters and ready to move on. This is Hollywood speak. Translation: Any studio interested in making the film version can expect to pay truckloads of money to get everyone on board.)
Even discounting the last four minutes, the entire episode was a waste. Why dedicate so much precious screen time on AJ, the least interesting character on the show? Is there anyone on the planet who cares about that self-indulgent punk? It's like if the series finale of M*A*S*H has spent half the episode focusing on Sergeant Rizzo.
And why all the set-up of plot points that will never be resolved? The entire episode felt as if it could have fit anywhere in this lackluster half season. Did Chase pull out an abandoned script from earlier in the year, dust it off, and try to pass it off as a series finale?
Chase has had moments of brilliance. That is not in dispute. But I come to bury Chase, not to praise him. Which is unfortunate because The Sopranos has been so consistently brilliant for so long that I really thought Chase could pull it off. I truly thought he was talented enough not to take the cheap, easy, "life goes on even for mobsters" route that he has hinted at for so long.
But he did choose the easy way out and gave the finger to all of us who thought he had the talent to end the series in a way that…well, that ended the series.
Too bad. We had Chase pegged as a minor league Shakespeare when in fact he was nothing more than another major league poseur.
Pal - get a clue. Chase ended it exactly as he wanted to, and there's absolutely zero chance of some kind of sequel or movie. Zero, ok? Why you ask? The ending only works because viewers of mob movies (and the Sopranos) have always been split on the morality of mob justice. Some people like Tony Soprano, some hate him. You draw your own conclusions about what happens to him and his family, based on your own biases of who he is. Chase doesn't superimpose his personal opinion on us. I'm not saying it's "genuis", but it's certainly a valid ending.
"Pal - get a clue."
How about a little more respect for Joe on his own blog.
"Chase ended it exactly as he wanted to, and there's absolutely zero chance of some kind of sequel or movie."
That pronouncement has been uttered so many times in Hollywood that producers and actors should have to be legally required to wink after they say it.
"The ending only works because viewers of mob movies (and the Sopranos) have always been split on the morality of mob justice."
So in other words, in trying to please everyone, he pleases no one. Ambiguous endings rarely, if ever, work. They tend to only frustrate.
"Some people like Tony Soprano, some hate him."
If he's a fully drawn, complex character, then it shouldn't be such a binary choice.
"You draw your own conclusions about what happens to him and his family, based on your own biases of who he is."
I thought the whole point of watching the Sopranos was to see what happened to the Sopranos.
"Chase doesn't superimpose his personal opinion on us."
Yes he does. He's the one telling the story. He's the one who created the characters. This whole thing is a product of his creative energies. Make no mistake, any great, good, mediocre, or terrible storyteller injects their vision and opinions into a story. From Homer to Heinlein, it's always been done. The mark of a good storyteller is when he doesn't insult your intelligence by presenting it in an organic and compelling manner.
"I'm not saying it's 'genius', but it's certainly a valid ending."
That's a fantasy of the postmodernists and the avant garde. Even supposed "ambiguous" endings end the immediate principal conflicts of the story.
I've never watched a minute of "Sopranos", and for all I know, I never will.
If you, Joe, say I'm missing out on some brilliant story-telling, I'll take your word for it. Peggy Noonan said the same thing, even more strongly, last week.
But somehow life seems too short to follow the ins and outs and ups and downs of a mob family in New Jersey. I'd rather read a good book, I guess.
Or maybe I just find it a little obscene to celebrate organized crime by treating it as a subject for soap opera. Not that I think it's wrong to do that -- it's just not something I want to go out of my way to participate in by watching, or rather by spending my time watching. I'd feel like I'm voting for the show in a modest, marginal way, and indirectly paying my respect to evil men doing evil things.
Season 6a was bad, season 6b was worse. The finale, as you said, could have fit anywhere is these. There was no real ending and consistent with the season, contained story lines that were not previously developed in the series and began story lines that seemed to come out of the blue. The only redeeming quality was that it wasn't 55 minutes of dream sequences.
I guess this is God's way of punishing Christians for watching this kind of stuff in the first place.
I never watched the show, but it must have been something to generate such bitterness. I've never seen a review of a TV program turn into ad hominem before. Good grief!
"I've dedicated seven years to The Sopranos. I've spent 85 hours watching one of the most morally and emotionally ambiguous serial narratives in modern times."
I'll be praying for you... :-)
The media culture is just getting worse by turns, and cable TV is just a cesspool.
The Audience is Dead
The point of the abrupt cut to black along with the eerie silence is simple - we the audience do not know what happens next. The reason for that departure from every event in the show that foretold someone's death is that the Audience, lulled into Tony's own paranoid sense of impending doom, is killed off. One of the most interesting if not unsatisfying uses of irony I have seen. But a bit trite as well.
See, http://musing.tatuskofam.com for more.
The Audience is Dead
The point of the abrupt cut to black along with the eerie silence is simple - we the audience do not know what happens next. The reason for that departure from every event in the show that foretold someone's death is that the Audience, lulled into Tony's own paranoid sense of impending doom, is killed off. One of the most interesting if not unsatisfying uses of irony I have seen. But a bit trite as well.
See, http://musing.tatuskofam.com for more.
Sorry, it's http://musings.tatuskofam.com
Sorry, it's http://musings.tatuskofam.com
Sorry, it's http://musings.tatuskofam.com
Sorry, it's http://musings.tatuskofam.com
Sometimes, it is fun to write your own endings, which I did. I really think my solution would have been the perfect ending.
http://beyondtherim.meisheid.com/?p=731
The short of it is that Tony gets whacked, but not how most people would have thought.
Joe,
I watch less than a couple hours of television a month. I don't watch regular programming, pay-per-view, specials, or sports. I just don't watch.
Needless to say, I know nothing of The Sopranos, yet the sun seems to come up every day. I was a devoted X-Files fan, but when that show went off the air, I decided that life was more than TV, so I moved on.
That said, I can't comment on the ending of The Sopranos except to say that your description of the ending parallels many European films that garner critical applause.
The open-ended "European ending" that lets the viewer wonder how it all ends is a tried and true formula that seems to work for a lot of people. Its success with film critics shows that at least some portion of the population enjoys not being told everything.
I suspect, though, that most Americans align with the Greek playwrights. We want it all neat and tidy at the end. I know that's what I prefer most of the time. But sometimes a film comes along that leaves us hanging and that feeling of not knowing is actually better. Doesn't happen much, but it does happen.
Seems to me that the finale of The Sopranos wasn't one of the latter, at least as you saw it. You're probably not alone in that disappointment.
But then the French probably think you're nuts.
I am embarrassed to say that I did watch some of that show last night. The only ending that would have been worse would be if Tony woke up and it was all a dream.
My wife and I are avid fans of the "Sopranos" and for several seasons now we have recognized that it is so unlike a story about the mob (for instance, "Wise Guys") This is essentially a story of everyday American life!
Replace the big murders (like a summer storm, they come on suddenly, almost without warning, tumultous for a minute and then it's over with a dead body or two to hide) with the little "murders" that happen in almost every family in modern America and you have 100 million Soprano families out there relating to this show.
And the ending is perfect. This saga is not a typical beginning, middle and end. This is a circle! And the circle was closed last night when, as they had begun 8 seasons ago, the family sat down to dinner. Life in America goes on.
Love
David
I feel that I'm part of a decided minority today. Every personality I heard on the radio and many bloggers I read this day were talking about the last episode of 'The Sopranos.' Even Chris Matthews devoted some time to it.
But my wife and I got rid of HBO a few years back. We never watched it because none of the programming appealed to us. So, we had the cable people whack it.
Mark Daniels
I guess this is God's way of punishing Christians for watching this kind of stuff in the first place.
lol =P no idea if you're serious, but it's funny either way.
No one has yet mentioned Hitchcock's The Birds. That has to be the mother of all ambiguous endings, and for years I hated it. But as I've grown and come to appreciate Hitchcock's genius, I realize it was the perfect ending to that story. Any other ending would have ruined the film.
Just so with The Sopranos. Did Tony get whacked by the guy walking into the restroom. Holy shades of The Godfather, Batman! Remember the conversation Tony and Bobby had in the boat on the lake, which was briefly revisited in the last episode: Bobby says, "You'll never know when it happens. You won't feel a thing. Everything'll just go black."
But Chase did exactly the right thing: there was so much speculation as to what would happen (Tony gets whacked, Tony goes into witness protection, Carmela whacks Tony, the Russian from the Pine Barrens comes back and whacks Tony ...) that Chase couldn't possibly do any of these endings without appearing to have compromised his own storytelling.
Joe, Aristotle said in Poetics that stories should be like real life--only better. Unfortunately, sometimes real life is, well, real life. Chase realizes that.
I thought my TiVo had crapped out, then I thought my cable had crapped out, and then I realized that that was the ending Chase intended. And the more I thought about it, the more I was reminded of Hitchcock: brilliant.
No one has yet mentioned Hitchcock's The Birds. That has to be the mother of all ambiguous endings, and for years I hated it. But as I've grown and come to appreciate Hitchcock's genius, I realize it was the perfect ending to that story. Any other ending would have ruined the film.
Just so with The Sopranos. Did Tony get whacked by the guy walking into the restroom. Holy shades of The Godfather, Batman! Remember the conversation Tony and Bobby had in the boat on the lake, which was briefly revisited in the last episode: Bobby says, "You'll never know when it happens. You won't feel a thing. Everything'll just go black."
But Chase did exactly the right thing: there was so much speculation as to what would happen (Tony gets whacked, Tony goes into witness protection, Carmela whacks Tony, the Russian from the Pine Barrens comes back and whacks Tony ...) that Chase couldn't possibly do any of these endings without appearing to have compromised his own storytelling.
Joe, Aristotle said in Poetics that stories should be like real life--only better. Unfortunately, sometimes real life is, well, real life. Chase realizes that.
I thought my TiVo had crapped out, then I thought my cable had crapped out, and then I realized that that was the ending Chase intended. And the more I thought about it, the more I was reminded of Hitchcock: brilliant.