The Cut to Black: Why?

Apparently every major newspaper and critic think that Chase's end cut to black, with no music or credits, is supposed to mean that Tony was shot and killed. This is in the New York Times, New York Post, and on.

OK, I guess this theory was well thought out (probably not, though), but I just don't think that's what happened.

The Sopranos has been using a lot of cinematic editing tricks lately, and I think that's all this scene was: some bizarre editing. Actually very bizarre...

In the last scene, Tony walks into the diner, wearing a dark colored jacket, and a shirt. The camera is on Tony, he looks around the diner where the camera shows Tony Soprano
sitting at a table, in a slightly different outfit.

In other words, Tony walks into diner, surveys the area, and Tony "sees"
Tony sitting at a table in the diner. I put "sees" like that because Tony doesn't necessarily see himself. But we do. This isn't novel in any way. It's standard shot-reverse-shot editing that viewers are "trained" to understand from the thousands of films we've watched. Chase subverts the tradition, and he edits to confuse, manipulate and play with the audience. How 'bout that? Were there actually two Tony's? An alternate universe as has been mentioned in this final season? Was Kevin Finnerty Tony Soprano's coma dream, or some meta-physical other world? It seems obvious those are ridiculous thoughts, and I think they are. Yet in the Sopranos universe they play with that idea, occasionally. Here it was with clever editing.

Back to the shady truck driver and the two black guys. I think there's nothing to it, they are nobodies, and Chase edits his shots to seem like they might be someones. So the shots of the guy going to the bathroom, the 2 black guys, sure, anything is possible. But they edit like this often, comparing and contrasting, etc. and many times it is a manipulation to increase tension, and nothing else. Other times, 1 of the black guy's guns might all of a sudden be edited into the back of Tony's head. But that was not going to happen here.

Then again, they also concluded the show with an edit that, to my knowledge has never
ever been used like that. They seem to like using editing to confuse our perceptions, and they've done that for the whole series. Only the final cut to black was beyond what anyone could have ever expected or understood, maybe never will it be made clear what Chase meant. The end.

Jonathan Kleier

Nearly Identical to Last Season... Here's that Analysis

Jonathan Kleier

June 5th 2006
This was written last year immediately following the season's finale (or as HBO calls it, Season 6A) It seems Season 6B was just a repeat. Sorry, I couldn't help putting this up. Chase is a mysterious man.

For the most recent Finale, here.

The Sopranos is essentially the only film or T.V. show with the balls to set-up major things and leave those things unresolved. And that's part of what makes this show so spectacular. But this time it was different. Maybe for the reasons of wasted time on unimportant characters, maybe because the show is winding down to its end, and here with the season finale, NOTHING happens, NOTHING important gets paid off. Not only not paid-off, but in fact nullified... War with New York? Nah, Phil has a heart attack. Fine, these things happen in real life. But drama need not and should not be reality, it does, though, need to be authentic. Such a coincidence is an unacceptable plot device. It's one thing if this were the first time a heart attack saved the day, but it's the 3rd that I count -- Carmine senior, the rat in the first episode of this season, and Phil. Each conveniently averting major disaster for Tony.

I'll say this, in retrospect, the only way this episode could have provided satisfaction is if either Chris, Paulie, Silvio, or Tony had died or been murdered. Not because of some primal urge for blood and guts as a lot of other fans might want, but because one of their deaths is both the logical climax, and the ultimate set-up for this bullshit "bonus" season.

This episode had no dramatic tension. No consequences (negative or positive). Just more of the same. More of the same bullshit. Christopher's identical 30 minutes of drug induced coma a month ago was boring, but because it was early in the season, there was potential for it to have meaning because of what it would eventually lead to, yet it didn't. Nothing happened.

And so on, no consequences for anyone. No consequences for Tony’s shooting, no mention of it. Tony has not changed. He has not and will not. He’s a Mob Boss, and that’s how he likes it.

It all comes down to Tony as he's the only character that matters. What defines a protagonist are the decisions he makes in the face of pressure or crisis. There was none of that last night. As opposed to, for example, season 5. Some would argue that the main dramatic tension was the penultimate episode where Adrianna is murdered. But really, that season's finale is what this show is all about, and the manifestation of it with Tony's coming to understand that he must act on his cousin or else face severe consequences from his crew, or from NY. He quarreled with it for a lot of the season, and completely resisted it up to the penultimate episode where he told Johny Sack to "go fuck himself." Then in the finale, after seeing his mistakes, and the mounting pressure from all sides, he makes a choice that goes against everything he wants, and blows a hole in his cousin's face.

This is similar to the Vito situation, but he got to keep his hands clean for that one. Which is fine, because the Vito thing was not the necessarily the drive of the season, but in light of the season finale, one wonders what was the point? Just to demonstrate more inaction by the only character, Tony, who by definition must be the one who perpetrates the action, yet does not. Phil does.

Chase has painted himself into a corner now. He set us up to think Christopher was gonna get it. It wouldn't have mattered if the set-up made it somewhat predictable, because no matter what, if Christopher were killed, it would have been utterly tragic and surprising no matter how much he has become irrelevant lately, he is 1 of 4 of the original crew that we have known for 7 years.

Paulie has faded into irrelevancy as well, but more tragically as he has cancer and looks to be dying anyway. Silvio is still a major player, and one who has always been loyal to Tony. So if he gets killed, that would be big, same with Tony. But that ship has sailed.

Now Phil is either dead, and thus the only connection we know of between NY and NJ is dead. Or Phil recovers, and his heart attack becomes a joke of a plot device. They might as well tell us that the whole show was a dream. Tony Soprano is really Kevin Finnerty, a patio salesman. There's misdirection (good film-making), and there's utterly fake, and inauthentic (the worst film making possible). (Bold below was added today).

Maybe that's how it will end, like it began. Tony's own family cannibalizing itself... Junior's ordering the hit on Tony, Tony retaliating and taking out Junior's entire crew, ultimately concluding the first season with a quaint family dinner on a stormy night.

Sopranos Ending, Sabrina

From: Sabrina Kleier Morgenstern
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 1:54 PM
To: Jonathan Kleier; Robert Morgenstern; Samantha Kleier Forbes
Subject: RE: Sopranos ending...

In a way it was in fact neatly wrapped up with us getting a sense of what is to become of each of the important characters, except Tony. It is confirmed that Junior is either senile, or is so good at pretending that he is that noone will ever know otherwise. Janice is shown as the opportunist she has always been- dramatic in her lounge chair in her sprawling house with her hair and make up done up- she was always an opportunist and will continue to be -making the most of Bobby's death, the money she will try to get her hands on, and the (not really) joke of a new husband. Terrified for his future but nevertheless conceding to Tony's offer, Paulie will take on captain. AJ's future seems to be clear-- in theory he might be depressed and anxious to do something for the world, but when it comes down to it driving a beamer, dating a model and being supported by his parents is certainly more convenient. Carmella will do her real estate and Meadow will become a wife and attorney. The big question mark, is Tony. Will he, like the eeery cat, have 9 lives? We certainly thought he was going down by the way the second to last episode ended but, now, here he is, noshing at an old fashioned diner with his family (do you remember when he said to his family "Out there it might be 2000 but in this family it is 1950). The very obvious song blasting seemed to suggest that ("Don't Stop Believing"). Will he be brought down by Carlos? Or one of the suspicious and menacing patrons at the restaurant? Or might he exist in alternate universes with different endings (Kevin Finnerty certainly alludes to that and I think that the Twilight Zone was playing in the background of the safe house)?

Sabrina Kleier Morgenstern
Executive Vice President
Gumley Haft Kleier
415 Madison Avenue, 5th floor
New York, New York 10017
P- 212-371-2525 x300
F- 212-202-5146
sabrina@ghkrealty.com

Samantha's Idea of Finale's Meaning

From: Samantha Kleier Forbes
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:30 PM
To: Jonathan Kleier; Sabrina Kleier Morgenstern; Robert Morgenstern; 'jpforbes@sunshinegroup.com'
Subject: Re: Sopranos ending...

I think that it actually did end, with the family back together, Phil being killed, Tony announcing he is to be indicted... But the key was that the family was back together. Then suddenly, with the fade to black, Chase makes us question whether it did indeed end (and it seemed, then, in light of the blackness, that it didn't... That meadow seemed to be running in to tell them something, or that they were going to be killed (all the weird angles, tony sitting there by himself, the focus on each character at the restaurant - as though chase was telling us to watch those people, they have some significance - the air was so heavy in the final scene. I felt when that scene began, and he was scrolling the juke box, and he puts on "don't stop believing" and then Carmela comes in, and then AJ (and I didn't look at the time the whole episode because I didn't want to be focused on the fact that there was 20 or 1 minute left - what was going to happen?) - I felt and even said to JP this is the end. But then all the focus on meadow not being able to park, and then her running in with that look, and then the very last shot of chase looking at her, and then the sudden blackness - well that seemed to say this didn't end. Maybe what chase was doing was saying - yours - the viewers- experience with the sopranos is ending- but theirs is not ending. Their life is going on. (Hopefully also he left us open for a movie...)

Chase and What's His Statement

Jonathan Kleier

The episode shown last night, if it had been any other time in the series (i.e. earlier in the season or another season), it would be an outstanding episode. But there was something, as a series finale of the greatest show in the medium’s history, there was something that didn’t feel right. There was nothing special. It was just another episode. Some might like that, and indeed Chase probably did this with great calculation. It disappointed, though. But maybe anything would have.

I think had they edited the final scene in a more traditional way, we might not be talking about this. But the fact that they literally went to total black – for many seconds – I think that editing decision altered my perception of the entire show, and I can’t figure out yet why Chase did it, I can't figure out if it is brilliant, if it is dumb, maby it was lazy, maybe it all makes sense. I don’t know. It just doesn't make sense in any way that I can tell.

Maybe David Chase just didn’t know how to end this series. After all, Samantha and I had been discussing how we could watch this series every week forever and still enjoy it. Maybe this series has no ending and therefore how does one end a series that is un-endable? But thousands of years have gone into studying storytelling – a beginning, middle, end. But we didn’t get an end in any traditional sense. Certainly, storylines were tied up and concluded, but still, it seems Chase chose to fly in the face of all traditional storytelling theory and give us a non-ending ending. Yet, as an audience, there must be a definitive ending, etc., we need it, and we didn’t get it last night.

I really do not know what Chase intended to achieve by edited the final scenes the way he did, but perhaps, after things sink in, maybe we will come to appreciate it.

I entered last night wondering, “What is Chase going to say? What profound comment on society or life will Chase show us, the audience." He has the stage to do this, with the whole world watching. Surely an artist like Chase has things to say about life, and he has made many of these statements throughout the series. But as the FINAL Final episode, I had expected to get a much clearer understanding of his message. Possibly I am knee-jerking, but I cannot figure out what this show means or what to take away from it. Chase always seemed to have some opinion, although often times it seemed he himself wasn't quite sure what the answers of life are. I wanted him to give us some meaning, a view that the world hadn't seen yet. He didn't do that, and I’m guessing many others feel as I feel.

Life goes on, we know. Life is messy. Chase likes to make that point, repeatedly. However, there is a grammar, so to say, a clearly established structural method to tell a dramatic story layed out by Aristotle and refined over the a few millennia. Chase may understand his decision, but I think maybe even he is unsure why he edited it as he did. As a writer, there's no one better than Chase... however, perhaps he should have allowed a more seasoned director handle the finale of the greatest series yet seen.