- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 4 |
| Registered on: | 6/20/2021 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Was Tony Soprano already in Hell? (Spoilers obviously)
Posted by WBrab on 1/29/25 at 9:01 pm to frankthetank
There's another death on The Sopranos that people got confused about because it wasn't explicitly shown on-screen: Adriana's. Writers immediately popped up and confirmed she was deceased with no stuttering, cryptic language, or hesitation.
In 18 years, David Chase has never confirmed that Tony died in that diner. He did confirm that he initially thought of killing him off on the way back from a business trip and then he did mention a diner would have been a nice place for Tony to die. But given his venom toward fans, it's very likely that they repulsed them so much he changed his mind about killing him off and left him alive. He hated his fans so much he didn't even care enough about them to show him living through the scene either.
The only reason I can think of for Chase to not explicitly say, "Tony is deceased" like they did with Adriana is because he actually didn't kill him off in that scene and realizes now how much damage that reality would cause the show's mysterious legacy. Absolutely nothing happened. Saying he died would make a lot of people happy. But almost two decades later, he hasn't.
Can anyone else come up with any other reason David Chase wouldn't plainly confirm Tony's death the way he did Adriana's - in a way that couldn't be backpedaled other than "I actually fricked up and didn't kill him, surprise, enjoy your anguish."
In 18 years, David Chase has never confirmed that Tony died in that diner. He did confirm that he initially thought of killing him off on the way back from a business trip and then he did mention a diner would have been a nice place for Tony to die. But given his venom toward fans, it's very likely that they repulsed them so much he changed his mind about killing him off and left him alive. He hated his fans so much he didn't even care enough about them to show him living through the scene either.
The only reason I can think of for Chase to not explicitly say, "Tony is deceased" like they did with Adriana is because he actually didn't kill him off in that scene and realizes now how much damage that reality would cause the show's mysterious legacy. Absolutely nothing happened. Saying he died would make a lot of people happy. But almost two decades later, he hasn't.
Can anyone else come up with any other reason David Chase wouldn't plainly confirm Tony's death the way he did Adriana's - in a way that couldn't be backpedaled other than "I actually fricked up and didn't kill him, surprise, enjoy your anguish."
2
re: Was Tony Soprano already in Hell? (Spoilers obviously)
Posted by WBrab on 1/29/25 at 8:57 pm to Godfather1
Another reason this hitman's behavior doesn't make any sense. He's wearing a jacket with pockets. He walks right by Tony and could very easily have swiveled a bit and popped him in the side or even back of the head. He was right next to him just like the hit on Phil.
Why in the world would you go to the bathroom out of reverence for the Godfather? lol He wouldn't have. It means a longer shot and a better chance that Tony is going to notice him when the bathroom door opens (the guy has bat ears after all this danger).
While the Sopranos was never hyper-realistic about mob behavior (for example, a boss wouldn't be a foot soldier with 7 kills), the hitman's behavior is over-the-top stupid from the beginning. First off, why would you wear a member's only jacket? You're aware your target's friend was attacked by someone wearing one - and aware that he knew another enemy who used to wear one. Way to put blazing red flags over your head to Tony. Why would he walk through the door looking like he has a chip on his shoulder? The goal of this is to be inconspicuous and harmless. He busts through the door and glares at Tony twice in full view of Tony. Then he walks by him to the bathroom to? No way that's a hitman unless this is a comedy.
Why in the world would you go to the bathroom out of reverence for the Godfather? lol He wouldn't have. It means a longer shot and a better chance that Tony is going to notice him when the bathroom door opens (the guy has bat ears after all this danger).
While the Sopranos was never hyper-realistic about mob behavior (for example, a boss wouldn't be a foot soldier with 7 kills), the hitman's behavior is over-the-top stupid from the beginning. First off, why would you wear a member's only jacket? You're aware your target's friend was attacked by someone wearing one - and aware that he knew another enemy who used to wear one. Way to put blazing red flags over your head to Tony. Why would he walk through the door looking like he has a chip on his shoulder? The goal of this is to be inconspicuous and harmless. He busts through the door and glares at Tony twice in full view of Tony. Then he walks by him to the bathroom to? No way that's a hitman unless this is a comedy.
re: Was Tony Soprano already in Hell? (Spoilers obviously)
Posted by WBrab on 1/29/25 at 8:48 pm to pevetohead
The issue with this theory - although it's a neat one - is that David Chase would have very clearly said, "Tony died in that scene" at some point in the last 18 years.
Here's what I think happened. They wanted a Sopranos movie at some point and were in negotiations for it (just like Peaky Blinders was). That means they can't kill off the protagonist. But HBO at least knew they had to make it look like something happened - maybe the Member's Only guy popped him. Maybe the black men who walked in popped him. Maybe he had a heart attack eating onion rings. They probably went to work trying to figure out some way to make it look like he'd died without actually killing him so that the movie would make sense.
Which is why The Sopranos had no problem saying, "Adriana is deceased" to frustrated fans, but to this day, 18 years later and even facing his own mortality from a heart attack, David Chase has never come out and said in clear, plain language that can't be retracted - "Tony Died in that diner." It's that simple. That's all he would need to say - and the only reason he wouldn't say it is if it's not true.
Can you imagine the uproar if one of the top 5 greatest shows on the history of TV really did end with its gangster protagonist happily eating onion rings with his family and going home? They'll never admit that he lived through that scene because it would destroy the mystery they inadvertently created by trying to make sure a movie could go ahead if need-be.
Here's what I think happened. They wanted a Sopranos movie at some point and were in negotiations for it (just like Peaky Blinders was). That means they can't kill off the protagonist. But HBO at least knew they had to make it look like something happened - maybe the Member's Only guy popped him. Maybe the black men who walked in popped him. Maybe he had a heart attack eating onion rings. They probably went to work trying to figure out some way to make it look like he'd died without actually killing him so that the movie would make sense.
Which is why The Sopranos had no problem saying, "Adriana is deceased" to frustrated fans, but to this day, 18 years later and even facing his own mortality from a heart attack, David Chase has never come out and said in clear, plain language that can't be retracted - "Tony Died in that diner." It's that simple. That's all he would need to say - and the only reason he wouldn't say it is if it's not true.
Can you imagine the uproar if one of the top 5 greatest shows on the history of TV really did end with its gangster protagonist happily eating onion rings with his family and going home? They'll never admit that he lived through that scene because it would destroy the mystery they inadvertently created by trying to make sure a movie could go ahead if need-be.
re: Are Yorkies really that stupid?
Posted by WBrab on 6/20/21 at 6:16 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
They're actually in the top tier of dog intelligence, albeit on the low end of that "top." 76% of dogs are dumber than Yorkies, yes, even your incredibly intelligent Beagle who's the 8th dumbest dog in the world, or your big old Mastiff who's reliably ranked 1st or 2nd on "dumbest" dogs.
I always question how they rank these things. Highly trainable - to me - in the human world means "dumber than a rock." If you think of people who conform or just go along with everything, they rarely come across as intelligent. But they're happier. I think it's the same with dogs. Not easy to train doesn't mean the dog is stupid. It means the human is stupid and doesn't understand the breed.
I trained my dumb beagle dog perfectly. I can't get my Yorkie to reliably do anything, but it's not because she's dumb, it's because she's stubborn. When she wants to - or thinks she'll get a treat - she'd do cartwheels if I asked. So I'm not sure how reliable the dog IQ tests are anyway, but that's what they say. Yorkies are actually brighter than 104 other dog breed and only dumber than about 33 of them.
I think the problem is always the owner. If you can't train your dog, you're the problem, not them. If you know the breed, know their limitations, know their strengths and their personality, you can train almost any dog. But humans don't have time for that most of the time.
Anyway, Yorkies aren't dumb by a long shot. But if you get the wrong owner - AKA tough guy who's ashamed to have a little dog - stupid insecurities prevent a bond from forming, and eventually that little dog doesn't give a flying dang what you think. So bad owner = bad dog.
I always question how they rank these things. Highly trainable - to me - in the human world means "dumber than a rock." If you think of people who conform or just go along with everything, they rarely come across as intelligent. But they're happier. I think it's the same with dogs. Not easy to train doesn't mean the dog is stupid. It means the human is stupid and doesn't understand the breed.
I trained my dumb beagle dog perfectly. I can't get my Yorkie to reliably do anything, but it's not because she's dumb, it's because she's stubborn. When she wants to - or thinks she'll get a treat - she'd do cartwheels if I asked. So I'm not sure how reliable the dog IQ tests are anyway, but that's what they say. Yorkies are actually brighter than 104 other dog breed and only dumber than about 33 of them.
I think the problem is always the owner. If you can't train your dog, you're the problem, not them. If you know the breed, know their limitations, know their strengths and their personality, you can train almost any dog. But humans don't have time for that most of the time.
Anyway, Yorkies aren't dumb by a long shot. But if you get the wrong owner - AKA tough guy who's ashamed to have a little dog - stupid insecurities prevent a bond from forming, and eventually that little dog doesn't give a flying dang what you think. So bad owner = bad dog.
Popular
16
