Film Festival

TV's Best of the Decade: No. 5 - 'The Sopranos'

Even though its first season aired in the '90s, David Chase' mob drama has enough juice to make this Top 5

TV's Best of the Decade: No. 5 - 'The Sopranos'

 James Gandolfini and Edie Falco of 'The Sopranos'

Credit: HBO
In this increasingly epic 31-part Best of the Decade series, I've referred to litmus tests for different shows, where you can judge the fan based on their reaction to certain arcs or episodes. Generally, with a litmus test episode, there probably isn't a right or wrong answer, but if meet somebody, you can check their test and know how compatible y'all happen to be.
 
For the decade, there was no bigger television litmus test episode than the finale of David Chase's HBO mob drama "The Sopranos." The finale, titled "Made in America" aired on June 10, 2007 and people were up in arms. Generally, the critical reaction was positive and respectful, but the fans were a good deal less generous. 
 
Obviously this article on "The Sopranos," No. 5 on my list of TV's Best of the Decade, will talk about the end of the hulking colossus of a drama, so be warned. 
 
Also be warned that although, as with all litmus test episodes, there may not be a right or wrong answer, if you hate the finale of "The Sopranos," our friendship may be strained.
 
What would be worse, though, is if you were one of the people who felt there was a conclusive ending to the series. The fastest way to earn my critical enmity is to try telling me that Tony Sopranos absolutely got whacked at the end of the series. 
 
Anyway, "The Sopranos" is No. 5. More after the break...
 
Every step I get deeper into this list, the more challenging actual placement becomes. Throughout the list there have been several packs of shows which were relatively indistinguishable, where the smallest whim or fancy determined one show going atop the next. We're in one of those packets now, between No. 6 and No. 3, in which each show has been above the other shows at some point. 
 
With "The Sopranos" the question always involved how much to penalize the series for premiering in the '90s. It's not a small issue. The first season of "The Sopranos" did nothing less than change the business and perception of TV. It's a landmark season and I can't imagine ranking anything above it on a list of The Best TV Seasons of the '90s. Not only did the season introduce the innovative tone and characters, but nearly every episode is superb, peaking with "College," an indispensable entry. How much do we love "The Sopranos" without that first season?
 
The answer? A lot. Still. We had Season Two, with the Big Pussy arc culminating in the episodes "Knight in White Satin Armor" and "Funhouse," two of the show's true classics. Season Three had the carefully arced brilliance of episodes like "Employee of the Month," with its focus on Lorraine Bracco's Dr. Melfi, but it also included "Pine Barrens," an episode so marvelously out-of-canon that viewers were still clamoring for closure as things went back on the finale. Season Four, somewhat a mixed bag, had Joe Pantoliano's Ralph, plus "Whitecaps," probably the best-acted episode in the show's run (question the episode's substance if you need to, but Edie Falco's just astounding in that finale). Season Five gave us "Long Term Parking" and the progression of Michael Imperioli's Chris and Drea de Matteo's Ade from occasional caricatures into plausibly tragic figures. Defending the first half of the bifurcated sixth season is a bit complicated, though "Members Only" was plenty surprising and "Join the Club" was an effective trippy "Sopranos" episode, if you happen to be able to tolerate Chase's detours into the subconscious. But the second half of the sixth season? Really, pure gold, starting with "Soprano Homes Movies," progressing with "Walk Like a Man" and "Kennedy and Heidi" and closing with bloodshed and Journey in "Made in America."
 
So yes, that's enough good stuff that I probably could have put "The Sopranos" at No. 3 on this list and not felt at all guilty. 
 
Over and over again on this list, I've taken issue with the Emmy voters, but "The Sopranos," like "The West Wing," was one of those shows that didn't slip through the Emmy cracks. It won twice for Outstanding Drama Series, took home multiple Emmys for writing and multiple Emmys for stars Falco and James Gandolfini and also landed well-deserving single wins for co-stars including Imperioli, de Matteo and Pantoliano for their appropriate seasons. Sometimes greatness is difficult to deny, even for a body as oblivious as the Television Academy. 
 
Despite airing on a premium cable network, "The Sopranos" was probably one of the most popular shows in my Top 10 (other than that "American Idol") thing. Yes, it was a show about remorseless mobsters, but "The Sopranos" was especially gifted at co-opting most of the major themes of the decade. Although launched before 9/11, "The Sopranos" became a show about the troubled War on Terror and the gaps in domestic protection it left behind. Although social critics sometimes railed at the exploitative violence in "The Sopranos," the show turned around and poked fun at Hollywood for its exploitation of violence. Although Italian-American groups complained that the show was perpetuating stereotypes, the show actually proved to be one of the most perceptive and articulate observers of ethnic identity in television history.
 
Bucking the trend of post "Godfather II" crime films, "The Sopranos" is a series about the American Dream, but it isn't an assimilationist narrative. This isn't the story of Tony Soprano attempting to extricate himself from the mob for the good of his family and being pulled back in every time he thinks he's out. No, this is mostly the show of a man trying to balance his work life, which his home life, which is probably an even more universal story. Always a show about family, "The Sopranos" had a long journey from the production of its pilot in 1997 to the finale in 2007 and the story of the central clan was often forced by external factors, something David Chase and company handled magnificently. A case in point would be the progression of Tony Soprano's relationship with his mother Livia, truncated due to Nancy Marchand's death in 2000. Chase has discussed the arc Livia would have had in future seasons, but real-life tragedy aside, it's better that Tony never was able to resolve his mother issues, that he's still able to use them as a convenient crutch all the way through the finale, where he rehashes his psychosis to his son's shrink in a perfunctory fashion, after having been ditched by Dr. Melfi, who feared she was enabling, rather than helping her patient. Another case in point would be the use of Jamie-Lynn Sigler and Robert Iler, as both actors had not-so-surprising periods of awkwardness in the middle of the series, but grew out of those phases to be assets by the end. Iler, in particular, was nearly crushingly useless in several middle seasons, but he rebounded to provide both comedy and pathos in the closing episodes.
 
More than anything, though, "The Sopranos" was about a circle of complicity. Just as Tony Soprano's arc wasn't one of a man attempting to go straight, it also wasn't the arc of a bad man trying to be good. Tony Soprano's arc is one of self-preservation at any cost, with that preservation serving as the impetus for therapy sessions that gave the show  its original hook. Tony doesn't go to Dr. Melfi because he wants to become a well-adjusted member of society. He just doesn't want to have panic attacks anymore. He does, frankly, want to continue to do exactly what he's been doing, moreso even, just without the darned shortness of breath and chest pains. That's not inherently sympathetic, now is it? But we were forced to love Tony, even as he routinely committed adultery, murdered or ordered the murder of the people closest to him and violated several provisions regarding interstate commerce. Oh and he also participated in a criminal conspiracy, so the RICO implications alone ought to have forced viewers to hate him. 
 
But viewers didn't regularly root for Tony Soprano to be killed until the finale, at which point a strange subset of people decided that the only acceptable way for the story to end would be with his death, as if that were somehow the story that Chase had been telling all along. 
 
Can we please get this straight? Tony Soprano was not whacked at the end of "The Sopranos," no matter how many armchair dunderheads wrote analysis claiming that he was. There were 20,000 word blog posts written analyzing the final scene and coming to the conclusion that the man in the Members Only jacket walked into the restaurant, eyed Tony for several minutes, went into the bathroom, took out a gun and came back and shot Tony in the head. Strangely, I rewatched "Made in America" just last night and in my version of the DVD, that wasn't what happened.
 
You can do a shot-by-shot reading of the scene until the cows come home and you're never going to see a gun in the Members Only guy's hand. You're never going to see or hear a gunshot. All you're going to see is, courtesy of Chase, a masterclass in suspense technique, red herrings and diversions. There are suspicious glances that seem to be going between Tony and Members Only guy, but there are similar glances between Tony and a loudly laughing couple and a pair of African-American youths. The soundtrack has been designed to over-amplified the opening of the restaurant door and the bell, leading one to worry that death is walking in the door, but the sound of Meadow's hubcap hitting the curb and several airplanes flying overhead have been similarly pushed to the foreground. What does Tony see when he looks up from his onion rings? Who knows? He's looked up nervously at everybody who entered the restaurant. So it's either the Members Only guy with a gun coming out of the bathroom, a supposition built on pure conjecture, or it's Meadow. Or it's another patron. 
 
I wrote about this at the time the finale aired, but I'll say it again: Tony Soprano didn't die in the "Sopranos" finale that we saw, but he may indeed have died five minutes afterwards or five seconds afterwards within the diegetic world of the show. But that was always the case. There was never a single episode of "The Sopranos" that passed without somebody in the show's version of New Jersey contemplating the idea of killing Tony Soprano. After the show's penultimate episode featured a bloodbath, the finale set up a loose truce and featured the the death of Phil Leotardo. Tony was both as safe as he'd ever been, but also in as much danger. As ever, the threat coming through the door could have been carrying a gun or just a badge or a subpoena. That was all the show promised for 86 episodes and all it ever should have been expected to deliver.
 
It was bizarre to me that after those 86 episodes, some fans thought the only way "The Sopranos" could close would be as a game of Clue. They wanted Tony Soprano dead and they all had some ending that they felt would be satisfying. Would it be Janice bludgeoning Tony to death with a photo album? Would it be Carmella shooting him in bed? Would it be some long-forgotten mistress or son-of-a-whackee returning, dropping a reference to a Season Two episode and garroting him? The great thing about the finale is that any and all of those things eventually could have happened to Tony. He could have gotten the full "Murder on the Orient Express" treatment just two days later. 
 
In the finale, though, Tony Soprano met his family for dinner, ordered onion rings, paid for a Journey song on the juke box and he balanced the pride he felt at being out in public with his nuclear unit with the terror of his inevitable bloody demise. I can't watch that cut to black without laughing at both the audacity of it and the appropriateness (and I watched the last five minutes four or five times last night... better each time).
 
Personally, when I thinking of the finale, I actually prefer the penultimate scene, the last interaction between Tony and Dominic Chianese's Uncle Junior. Tony sits with his Uncle, formerly a titan of a man, now plagued with dementia and tries to get him to remember anything. Uncle Junior can't remember Tony. He can't remember his brother. He can't remember being part of "this thing of ours." When Tony tells him that he used to run North Jersey, Junior can only give a half-smile. "That's nice," he replies as tears fill Tony's eyes. What's it all amount to if you survive the wars, if you make it past the point where people are trying to have you killed and none of what seemed so important and worth dying for even lingers in your memory? Maybe getting whacked is a better fate? But it's not the fate we're shown. 
 
Anything else I might want to say, my buddy and colleague Sepinwall has already said 50 times over. "The Sopranos" was smart and funny and bloody. It played into some cliches and stereotypes, but usually found a way to subvert them in the end, giving even the most one-dimensional characters the chance for illuminating glimpses and spotlights over the years. And Gandolfini and Falco anchored the show with two of the great TV performances of any decade. 
 
That's why "The Sopranos" is No. 5 on my list of TV's Best of the Decade and could just as easily have been No. 3.
 
Coming up tomorrow: International intrigue, family secrets and forbidden passions. This show is bananas. [Yes, I've given up on trying to fool y'all.]

A full explanation of the parameters for this list. 

 

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Fernando

    YAY!!! I FINALLY GUESSED ANOTHER ONE.

    Took me all of 08 to get thru this series, thanks 2 how hbo structured its monthly release of episodes. I went in skeptical but it was a great series. As u would agree, not better than the wire, but i can see y someone would say that. Livia's Funeral and Chris' Intervention were some of the funniest moments of tv in the decade.

    As for the finale: completely agree. Having the crown on ur head and worrying constantly who will knock it off was the perfect way to end. And over 86 episodes, nothing ever changed. Tony still runs things, Carm is still complicite in marriage, the kids get what they want, etc...

    Tomorrow's show: Just remember, there's always money in the banana stand, CHICK, CHICK!!!

    December 27, 2009 at 8:18PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    BugKiller

    You're right in one thing.

    This show's first season was easily it's best. And it took place in the 1990's.

    I hope y'all realize, as much as I've lobbied against this show's inclusion in the top-5, that I don't dislike The Sopranos.

    The Sopranos is a very good show. Very good. Not great.

    It is derivative. In some ways to Italian Americans, it is offensive (trying being offensive like this with African Americans stereotypes and see how far you get). It had some great moments, but the show itself is not better than:

    Battlestar Galactica... I'm sorry, but this show does not even come CLOSE to how well written and well acted Galactica was. All of those Emmys won for The Sopranos should have gone to shows like this, and the worst offender as far as never getting award recognition goes, later on my better than The Sopranos list.

    Rescue Me (which I still hope finds its way into the top-3, but am increasingly fearful you left it off a list with 31 frakking shows on it, including fluff like The Gilmore Girls and PTI... and if you did, you have some frakking 'splainin' to do)

    30 Rock

    Rome

    Deadwood

    Freaks and Geeks

    Buffy

    And The Wire... which looks more and more like it is number one. And I really hope you have the forethought and courage to rank The Wire, probably the greatest, most honest, most thrilling, saddest, truest, and just best television show ever made, at it's rightful place at number one.

    Because you know what show DOES NOT deserve to be number one either, let alone in the top-5?

    Mad Men.

    Overrated. Over-awarded. All the shows I mentioned plus Arrested Development? Better than Mad Men.

    And The Sopranos is better than Mad Men, too. Mad Men is good tv, possibly top-10.

    But it ain't better than Rescue Me or BSG or AD or Deadwood or Rome or Buffy or the others.

    December 27, 2009 at 9:04PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan BugKiller - Since you seem to be the only one in suspense on "Rescue Me," I'll just say that I loved the first season, liked the second season and was done by the third season. But I really love that first season. Or like it a ton. As for "Rome," it was a good show, though "Rome" was basically "The Sopranos" in Ancient Rome, so if we're talking about derivative... As for my No. 1 show? It's just days away! -Daniel

      December 27, 2009 at 9:20PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      BugKiller Wow, dude.

      You have PTI and Gilmore and reality crap ranked over Rescue Me, one of best scripted shows of the past decade.

      In 20 years, you'll be ashamed of that.

      Heh.

      December 27, 2009 at 9:34PM EST
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan BugKiller- Worst-case scenario, in 20 years this list will be a fine snapshot of where my mind was in December of 2009. Probably that's also the best-case scenario... And I hope I'll have many worse things to be ashamed of by then... -Daniel

      December 28, 2009 at 1:56AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      alynch Dan's right about Rescue Me. It began to lose me in the third season with the seriously ill-conceived rape scene and the horribly lazy manner in which they dispatched with Tommy's brother ("Man, we've really written ourselves into a corner with this love triangle business. What if we just have some random crackhead shoot him?"). It lost me completely with the out of left field and, more importantly, completely out of character way they wrote the Chief out the following season.

      December 28, 2009 at 3:50PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Rachel Friedman

    I thought Freaks and Geeks started in 1999! It was Judd Apatow's show Undeclared that was produced in the 2000s.

    December 27, 2009 at 9:31PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan Rachel - Check out the first post linked at the bottom of the article, the one explaining the rules of the list. Any show airing post-Jan. 1, 2000 is eligible and more than half of the excellent run of "Freaks and Geeks" game in 2000. Anyway, both Apatow shows made the list... -Daniel

      December 28, 2009 at 1:59AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Tom

    #4 is AD. Ok I live with that.
    That leaves 3 spots left.

    The Wire, Mad Men, Rome... would be my picks, but I am guessing they wont pick Rome.

    Firefly maybe? They do have Buffy and Wonderfalls on the list.

    December 27, 2009 at 9:44PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      andrew88 I'm guessing it's The Shield, with Mad Men at #3.

      December 27, 2009 at 10:05PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Anon

    I think we all know Arrested Development, The Wire, and Mad Men will be three of the next four. I'm curious to see what the fourth will be.

    Even if I'm not personally a fan of these shows and would not want them on my list, I'm surprised that either Curb Your Enthusiasm or The Shield (or both) won't make it anywhere on the top 31. And since PTI already broke the "not really what we consider a TV show" rule, I'm surprised that variety shows like The Daily Show or Conan won't get a mention.

    For a top 3 spot on the list, its a bit surprising that we can't figure out what this last show is. Unless you're just going to name the four show "YOU".

    December 27, 2009 at 10:14PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    rosengje

    I am pretty certain that Dan has mentioned several times that he hasn't watched The Shield, much to the chagrin of my other favorite tv critic. And I also think that only Judd Apatow has the distinction of having two shows on the list with Freaks and Geeks and Undeclared, meaning no Firefly.

    My own remaining 4 would have consisted of The Wire, Mad Men, Arrested Development, and The West Wing. I have no idea what your extra slot is going to be, but I hope it is another fun choice in the vein of PTI. I don't think you love Curb, so I am going to guess The Daily Show.

    December 27, 2009 at 11:50PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    belinda

    The Wire has to be at no. 1 - if only because it's probably the best show of the decade that's completely missed by a number of big award shows through all its seasons, being overshadowed by HBO's other show all the time. I would love to see The Wire top the list.

    And 4 is AD, which leaves only 2 spots for still a handful of worthy shows like Mad Men, The Shield, Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Breaking Bad (though that's definitely out on this list, since Daniel hasn't watched S2 yet) etc. I can't imagine how it'll all go down. This has been one fantastic decade of television, so a lot of tough choices even for a list covering as many as 31 shows of the decade.

    December 28, 2009 at 1:23AM EST Reply to Comment
  • 000_vulcan_smiley_alternate_talkback_profile

    Trekscribbler

    Hmmm. I always thought THE SOPRANOS was a bit overrated for my tastes. It certainly was quality TV; I'd never argue otherwise. I just thought it was a huge "been here done that" factor cinematically, but it still had solid "must see TV" appeal.

    December 28, 2009 at 1:52AM EST Reply to Comment
    • The_boondocks_a_pimp_name_slickback_talkback_profile

      tigger500 Yea. It, along with Seinfeld and The Simpsons, is the most overrated show ever televised. I didn't hate it, but it was gloriously unenthused for the whole thing.

      December 28, 2009 at 1:18PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    JanieJones

    I thought The Sopranos was an excellent series. Yes, it was filled with some cliches, etc. Tony Soprano was the definition of "survival of the fittest" or he tried to be....There is so much I could say about this wonderfully crafted show, that had a a few stalling moments, I'm just appreciative that Chase was able to create this show and the inclusion of wonderful acting from the likes of Edie Falco, etc.
    Also, "Made In America" was a fitting ending in my opinion. I never involved myself in the uproar in regards to the series finale. I thought those final minutes were well-crafted.

    December 28, 2009 at 1:01PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Beatrice


    Sorry Sir,

    Even Alan has pretty much come around on this issue. David Chase intended the audience to believe (or at least the audience with some intelligence) that Tony Soprano took a bullet to the head at the end of the show. It's time to just admit that most t.v. critics were lazy and wrong on this issue. You mock the 2000 word treatise (linked below) on the subject but most people have come around. There aren't many holdovers left. Actually, you only need Part I to tell you Tony died but the rest is just icing on the cake to remove all doubt. Read Part I and it's clear that Tony wasn't anxiously looking at anybody, he was as happy as he's ever been. He NEVER looked at the couple and only saw Members Only Guy when he went to the bathroom. You mock these"clues" but DAVID CHASE himself spoke of these clues and suggested Tony died. The following interview excerpt was in the 2000 word essay you mockingly refer to:

    Richard Belzer: I was working with Steve Schirripa [Bacala] recently, we were judging “Last Coming Standing” for NBC and we were talking about a lot of things and he was saying he heard all of these theories for the show that had nothing to do with your intention and wasn’t anything the actors thought, like little hints along the way, like a word, like when Tony and Steve are on the boat at the lake and they say “‘you never know its gonna happen” or “you never know its gonna hit you”

    David Chase: That was part of the ending.

    Richard Belzer: Oh, it was? see, what do I know? Were there other things in previous episodes that were hints towards it?

    David Chase: There was that and there was a shooting in which Silvio was a witness, well he wasn’t a witness, he was eating dinner with a couple of hookers and with some other guy who got hit and there was some visual stuff that went on there which sort of amplified Tony’s remark to Bacala about you know “you don’t know its happened” or “you won’t know it happened when it hits you”. That’s about it.

    Richard Belzer: That's what Kennedy said.

    The final scene represented the most visceral, emotionally engaging, and downright horrifying death scene in cinema history. The sad thing is, most people don't know it. The POV sequence is pure Kubrick, which the author of the below piece goes into in the last part.

    Those astonishing final 10 seconds of silent black screen represent the POV of a dead man. His life suddenly interrupted by death. It's unfair, and always sooner than we expect. "It's all a big nothing" as Tony often says, and Chase believed that too.

    For those who haven't read it yet, here it is. It's brilliant in of itself but more importantly reveals the true artisry of the Sopranos. Enjoy and thank me later:

    http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-sopranos-definitive-explanation-of-the-end/

    December 29, 2009 at 9:00PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Gizmo_bigger_talkback_profile

      dan Beatrice - I assure you that Alan (Sepinwall, I'm assuming) has come around to no such thing, "pretty much" or otherwise. I'll ask him next time we talk, though, just to be sure he hasn't changed his mind in the past two days. But here's your choice: I can either stand by my certainty regarding the show's ambiguous ending, or I can buy the over-explained and far-too-pat and simplistic ending that you link to here. The way "The Sopranos" ends in *my* mind is perfect and worthy of the show's status as a classic. The way it seems to end in your mind feels boring and unimaginative and reductive to me. If Chase directed the last scene to be literal and conclusive, it's almost comically on-the-nose and belabored. See, you don't need 20,000 words to read the way he directed that scene as being "whacked." That's the *obvious* answer. That's the superficial answer. That's what you were *supposed* to fear. I like to believe Chase is both smarter than that and more playful. So if Chase ever wants to make an actual public statement saying "Tony got Whacked," I'll drop the show on my list according, because that's an ending that will piss me off. Instead, I'll continue to believe that the reason Chase hasn't made an actual public statement on the ending, because he enjoys the idea that you can be passionate in your sense of the ending and I can be passionate in mine. -Daniel

      December 29, 2009 at 9:14PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Alan Sepinwall Yeah, Beatrice, I'm not sure where you got the idea that I had gotten on board the "Tony died" train, but I'm still with young Daniel on this one. I can see why some might think that's what happened, but I think it flies in the face of so many things that the series did that I don't believe it myself.

      December 29, 2009 at 9:33PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Beatrice Dan and Alan,

      First off I apologize. I thought Alan was on board b/c I discovered that treatise on the ending through him.

      A couple of points:

      Chase DID suggest Tony died. He won't explicitly say it because he doesn't feel, as an artist, that it should be explained. However, once again, read the Belzer interview again. I can't see how any logical person can read those statements as meaning anything other than Tony dying. The treatise also links to another Chase interview where he explains the Torciano whacking as related to the ending but stops short of answering directly whether Tony died because he says "to explain it would be to diminish it" [although ironically he just did!].

      I agreed with your opinion until I found the treatise (through Allen). I thought Chase brilliantly gave us an ambiguity that gave us Tony’s death and “life goes on”, a Tony finding happiness in his family but at the same time being a hunted man.

      However, this explanation of the ending convincingly demonstrates that there is an unambiguous meaning to the astonishing final shot (especially the examination at the way the final scene is shot and edited).

      I think I understand where you’re coming from. I also mourn the loss of the ambiguity I enjoyed. On the other hand, the way the explanation makes the case is thoroughly absorbing and shows that the final scene is even more artfully constructed than I realized. I now realize it’s the ONLY way it could end.

      If you get past your resistance of losing the ambiguity, you’ll finally see the ending for the genius that it is.

      Also, read Part II and then tell me the Tony dies ending is simplistic. What it shows is the true genius of David Chase. It shows those final few minutes as an inevitable result of 86 hours that came before it. Even the connection of the final scene to the ducks is brilliant, and in hindsight, make so much sense that to ignore it would be willfull ignorance.

      Again, I urge you to read it.

      December 29, 2009 at 10:41PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Rich

    Excellent essay. Probably the best I've read regarding the controversy.

    One point regarding whether or not Tony died: killing Tony would have been the obvious thing to do. And I believe if Tony had actually died in that restaurant, Chase would have included that and shown in the most graphic way possible while his children looked on in utter horror.

    January 3, 2010 at 2:17PM EST Reply to Comment
Daniel Fienberg

About This Blog

At the dawn of the 21st Century, Daniel Fienberg came out to Los Angeles for grad school. He hasn't left. "The Fien Print" is a blog about television -- reviews, interviews, analysis -- but it's also about movies and the business of Hollywood. It probably won't be a blog about the Red Sox, though it might seem like that at times.

Get Instant Alerts on The Fien Print

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook