The news this morning is bubbling over with reports of irritated fans that feel last night's finale was highway robbery. I, for one, couldn't be more OK with the ending. For the last week or so, I've scoured the bulletin boards for spoilers, hoping to brace myself for the end, and no matter how plausible each scenario seemed to be, none of them were ideal. From apocalyptic visions of Tony's entire family being taken out to a surprise claim of paternity from Junior, to Tony being sent to prison, none of these endings would have been satiating.
So, I may be alone in this, but I am comfortable with the ending of the show. Nothing is wrapped up in a neat package by the show's end, but if it were, there would be little room for future movies or specials, and it wouldn't be true to the nature of the show. If David Chase and the show's creators decided to go against their original goal of making The Sopranos as realistic as possible, devotees would be angry. The realism is what defined the show as being heads and tails above the rest.
The thing that did crack me up about most of the show were the moments where David Chase clearly intended to build up the viewers' worry of something drastic about to happen. Particularly with the final scene, and the intentional drawing of attention to other patrons who could whack the whole family, it was an artfully crafted moment of uncertainty.
I also think David Chase did what he set out to do: present a finale that no one expected. Almost all of the predictions called for major violence and death. One of them said that we'd see Sil flat-lining in the hospital. Another suggested the A.J. would try to blow himself up in the swimming pool. Aside from the true prediction that Phil Leotardo would be shot at a gas station, there was little violence or death, and that was unexpected.
In the end, I'm satisfied with the finale, and would have been a lot less pleased if everyone had died or all the ends were tied. Life isn't neat and tidy. So why should America's most realistic mob show be?
So, I may be alone in this, but I am comfortable with the ending of the show. Nothing is wrapped up in a neat package by the show's end, but if it were, there would be little room for future movies or specials, and it wouldn't be true to the nature of the show. If David Chase and the show's creators decided to go against their original goal of making The Sopranos as realistic as possible, devotees would be angry. The realism is what defined the show as being heads and tails above the rest.
The thing that did crack me up about most of the show were the moments where David Chase clearly intended to build up the viewers' worry of something drastic about to happen. Particularly with the final scene, and the intentional drawing of attention to other patrons who could whack the whole family, it was an artfully crafted moment of uncertainty.
I also think David Chase did what he set out to do: present a finale that no one expected. Almost all of the predictions called for major violence and death. One of them said that we'd see Sil flat-lining in the hospital. Another suggested the A.J. would try to blow himself up in the swimming pool. Aside from the true prediction that Phil Leotardo would be shot at a gas station, there was little violence or death, and that was unexpected.
In the end, I'm satisfied with the finale, and would have been a lot less pleased if everyone had died or all the ends were tied. Life isn't neat and tidy. So why should America's most realistic mob show be?