What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

☞ Official SOPRANOS Thread (2 Viewers)

http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-...ion-of-the-end/

Sopranos fans, do yourselves a favor, and take 20-30 minutes and read that. It is a comprehensive breakdown of the final episode, as well as the final season. Some great stuff.
Very well written. And it does make a strong case that Tony is dead. Of course, if one were so inclined I think a case that Tony is alive could be made as well. One part I took exception with was: "The scene actually suggests the exact opposite, that Tony is too relaxed and too comfortable." I disagree. I think the entire scene felt uneasy and I think it was meant to represent the lack of comfort Tony had in his life and would always have. So to me, the scene could just as easily be broken down to reveal how he is still alive but will never have a life of comfort any longer.Of course, Chase could end all of this and just tell us whether Tony is dead or not. Frankly, it isn't asking for that much given the character's importance. At some point, it'd be nice if he stopped playing coy and just gave a direct answer.
Nah, I would rather he not. Heck, if he was going to tell us, then he might as well have had ended the actual episode with it, instead of leaving it open-ended. And there were definitely quite a few stretches in that long explanation (in the link I posted), but a lot of it is on the money.
I just scanned the link, but I think it's the same or along the same lines as one posted shortly after airing. I agree completely that Chase should not give a definitive answer. Quite frankly, from my perspective, he already has unless you just don't want to believe it, which I didn't for awhile.
I'll believe what Chase says if he chooses to give a direct answer. In lieu of that, all I can do is go with what I saw and the last image I had of the show was Tony alive. If that isn't what Chase wants his viewers to believe then it's up to him to tell us directly what the ending meant. In my opinion.
 
I agree completely that Chase should not give a definitive answer. Quite frankly, from my perspective, he already has unless you just don't want to believe it, which I didn't for awhile
I don't think there is a definitive answer for him to give. The scene is what it is-intended to be ambiguous and let you draw your own conclusions. I don't know why everyone assumed Chase actually intended it to be one way or the other.
 
menobrown said:
I agree completely that Chase should not give a definitive answer. Quite frankly, from my perspective, he already has unless you just don't want to believe it, which I didn't for awhile
I don't think there is a definitive answer for him to give. The scene is what it is-intended to be ambiguous and let you draw your own conclusions. I don't know why everyone assumed Chase actually intended it to be one way or the other.
meno, go read the blog we are all raving about from a few posts up. Hard to come to any other conclusion than Tony being dead.
 
menobrown said:
I agree completely that Chase should not give a definitive answer. Quite frankly, from my perspective, he already has unless you just don't want to believe it, which I didn't for awhile
I don't think there is a definitive answer for him to give. The scene is what it is-intended to be ambiguous and let you draw your own conclusions. I don't know why everyone assumed Chase actually intended it to be one way or the other.
meno, go read the blog we are all raving about from a few posts up. Hard to come to any other conclusion than Tony being dead.
I read it. It's a neat theory, but it's not definive.
 
menobrown said:
I agree completely that Chase should not give a definitive answer. Quite frankly, from my perspective, he already has unless you just don't want to believe it, which I didn't for awhile
I don't think there is a definitive answer for him to give. The scene is what it is-intended to be ambiguous and let you draw your own conclusions. I don't know why everyone assumed Chase actually intended it to be one way or the other.
meno, go read the blog we are all raving about from a few posts up. Hard to come to any other conclusion than Tony being dead.
I read it. It's a neat theory, but it's not definive.
It may not be definitive but is it the best thing I have read that indicates Tony is dead. Show us something that will counter that blog.
 
http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-...ion-of-the-end/

Sopranos fans, do yourselves a favor, and take 20-30 minutes and read that. It is a comprehensive breakdown of the final episode, as well as the final season. Some great stuff.
From the link:
Season 3: The 2 major plotlines involve Jackie Aprile Jr. and his attempt to break into the Mafia (and Tony’s attempt to keep him out) and the introduction of Ralph Ciffaretto, a new thorn in Tony’s side. By the end of the season, Jackie Jr. is killed on Tony’s orders and Tony resolves (at least temporarily) a season long feud with Ralphie.
I seem to recall that Tony let Ralphie make the call whether to kill Jackie Jr. or not, mainly because Ralphie was engaged to Jackie's mom. They had a scene inside of a car. Also, it was one of Ralphie's guys--Vito--who pulled the trigger.(On a sidenote, I am usually not good with noticing flaws in scenes, but it always struck me as odd that they do a wide shot of Jackie walking, and there is no snow anywhere around him, but when Vito shoots, he falls face-first into a snowbank).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-...ion-of-the-end/

Sopranos fans, do yourselves a favor, and take 20-30 minutes and read that. It is a comprehensive breakdown of the final episode, as well as the final season. Some great stuff.
From the link:
Season 3: The 2 major plotlines involve Jackie Aprile Jr. and his attempt to break into the Mafia (and Tony’s attempt to keep him out) and the introduction of Ralph Ciffaretto, a new thorn in Tony’s side. By the end of the season, Jackie Jr. is killed on Tony’s orders and Tony resolves (at least temporarily) a season long feud with Ralphie.
I seem to recall that Tony let Ralphie make the call whether to kill Jackie Jr. or not, mainly because Ralphie was engaged to Jackie's mom. They had a scene inside of a car. Also, it was one of Ralphie's guys--Vito--who pulled the trigger.
Actually, Tony made it clear that he wanted Jackie Jr. gone, but he was gonna make Ralphie make the call, on the record. If you watch the scene in Satriale's, Tony played Ralphie like a fiddle, which is why Ralphie leaves with that look on his face. Remember when Tony said, "And who cares what people say behind your back that they don't have the balls to say to your face?" Or, "That's why I made you captain." Tony was trying to absolve himself of responsibility, while making it clear what he wanted done, and while also implying to Ralphie that it was his responsibility to take care of it, or else he would demonstrate that he was not worthy of being a captain, while also being undermined by others in their family.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually, Tony made it clear that he wanted Jackie Jr. gone
I thought that was the last thing Tony wanted. He saw himself in that kid so much, even when robbing the poker game. Jackie Jr. was Tony twenty years earlier.
I think Tony realized that Jackie Jr. had become a lost cause, and after what he did at Eugene's card game, he knew he had to go. If he had really wanted to save Jackie Jr., he would have. Jackie Jr. even called him at home and Tony blew him off. And Tony knew where he was (Sil mentioned to Ralphie that everyone knew where he was hiding, so you know Tony knew, too), so again, if he really wanted to save him, he would have. Heck, as the boss, all he had to do was say, "give him a pass," and it would have been done.
 
http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-...ion-of-the-end/

Sopranos fans, do yourselves a favor, and take 20-30 minutes and read that. It is a comprehensive breakdown of the final episode, as well as the final season. Some great stuff.
From the link:
Season 3: The 2 major plotlines involve Jackie Aprile Jr. and his attempt to break into the Mafia (and Tony’s attempt to keep him out) and the introduction of Ralph Ciffaretto, a new thorn in Tony’s side. By the end of the season, Jackie Jr. is killed on Tony’s orders and Tony resolves (at least temporarily) a season long feud with Ralphie.
I seem to recall that Tony let Ralphie make the call whether to kill Jackie Jr. or not, mainly because Ralphie was engaged to Jackie's mom. They had a scene inside of a car. Also, it was one of Ralphie's guys--Vito--who pulled the trigger.
Actually, Tony made it clear that he wanted Jackie Jr. gone, but he was gonna make Ralphie make the call, on the record. If you watch the scene in Satriale's, Tony played Ralphie like a fiddle, which is why Ralphie leaves with that look on his face. Remember when Tony said, "And who cares what people say behind your back that they don't have the balls to say to your face?" Or, "That's why I made you captain." Tony was trying to absolve himself of responsibility, while making it clear what he wanted done, and while also implying to Ralphie that it was his responsibility to take care of it, or else he would demonstrate that he was not worthy of being a captain, while also being undermined by others in their family.
:hot: Couldn't have said it better myself. This is exactly what happened, Encyclopedia.

 
Been watching the A&E episodes on Sundays before football.

God I miss this show :unsure:

I never realized all the things you pick up on the second time through. You learn so much more about everyone's character, personality, etc - especially Tony's.

 
http://masterofsopranos.wordpress.com/the-...ion-of-the-end/

Sopranos fans, do yourselves a favor, and take 20-30 minutes and read that. It is a comprehensive breakdown of the final episode, as well as the final season. Some great stuff.
From the link:
Season 3: The 2 major plotlines involve Jackie Aprile Jr. and his attempt to break into the Mafia (and Tony's attempt to keep him out) and the introduction of Ralph Ciffaretto, a new thorn in Tony's side. By the end of the season, Jackie Jr. is killed on Tony's orders and Tony resolves (at least temporarily) a season long feud with Ralphie.
I seem to recall that Tony let Ralphie make the call whether to kill Jackie Jr. or not, mainly because Ralphie was engaged to Jackie's mom. They had a scene inside of a car. Also, it was one of Ralphie's guys--Vito--who pulled the trigger.
Actually, Tony made it clear that he wanted Jackie Jr. gone, but he was gonna make Ralphie make the call, on the record. If you watch the scene in Satriale's, Tony played Ralphie like a fiddle, which is why Ralphie leaves with that look on his face. Remember when Tony said, "And who cares what people say behind your back that they don't have the balls to say to your face?" Or, "That's why I made you captain." Tony was trying to absolve himself of responsibility, while making it clear what he wanted done, and while also implying to Ralphie that it was his responsibility to take care of it, or else he would demonstrate that he was not worthy of being a captain, while also being undermined by others in their family.
:thumbup: Couldn't have said it better myself. This is exactly what happened, Encyclopedia.
Interesting. I never saw it that way, but I can't disagree. I always saw it as Tony leaving the decision to Ralph. But reading this post, I think it's obvious that Tony wanted Jackie dead.
 
Been watching the A&E episodes on Sundays before football.God I miss this show :lmao:I never realized all the things you pick up on the second time through. You learn so much more about everyone's character, personality, etc - especially Tony's.
:lmao: Noticed the same thing. And after watching again, I was def too harsh on the Blundetto season. It was better than I initially thought. But I still hold strong on the Kevin Finnerty episodes being horrible.
 
Been watching the A&E episodes on Sundays before football.God I miss this show :thumbup: I never realized all the things you pick up on the second time through. You learn so much more about everyone's character, personality, etc - especially Tony's.
:goodposting: Noticed the same thing. And after watching again, I was def too harsh on the Blundetto season. It was better than I initially thought.
I thought that season (5) was easily the third best, behind only 1 & 2.
 
I absolutely love mob movies . . . hands down my favorite genre. Yet I've never watched an episode of The Sopranos. It is almost sinful that I've not made a point to watch what many call the greatest television series in history.

Anyone know the cheapest place to order the entire series on DVD?

 
First episode ever is on A&E right now.
You what I can't get out of my head? That band singing Jewish songs from the wedding episode where Feech steals the expensive Mercedes.Simi tov and mazel tov and simi tov and mazel tov Simi tov and mazel tov and simi tov and mazel tovSimi tov and mazel tov and simi tov and mazel tov Heyyyyy lahhhhhhnuuuuuuuuu
 
I absolutely love mob movies . . . hands down my favorite genre. Yet I've never watched an episode of The Sopranos. It is almost sinful that I've not made a point to watch what many call the greatest television series in history.Anyone know the cheapest place to order the entire series on DVD?
The cheapest used would be eBay. New would either likely be Costco or Amazon.
 
BTW, pay attention to Gandolfini's sessions with Melfi in this episode.

He talks like Gandolfini instead of the heavy "Jersey Tony" accent.

 
A friend of mine was really into the Sopranos and was always nagging me to watch it. I said that I didn't like mobster stories and wouldn't enjoy it and didn't want to spend a bunch of money on a show I'd probably hate. He said he'd lend them to me. Well, I have seasons 1 & 2, and watched them. But now he just makes every excuse to not let me borrow them, or just sits there silently when I ask about them and refuses to answer. Pisses me off!

I wish I never heard of

the ####ing Sopranos!!!

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

:shrug:

 
Watched the "In Camelot".

Is there a more loathed episode?

I recall on this board several pages declaring that this was such a terrible episode that they had forever given up on the show.

Tony dealing with the goomar of his father.

But I always liked this episode. Tony watching "Cannon", notwithstanding.

I enjoyed insight into "Johnny Boy" Soprano.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watched the "In Camelot".

Is there a more loathed episode?

I recall on this board several pages declaring that this was such a terrible episode that they had forever given up on the show.

Tony dealing with the goomar of his father.

But I always liked this episode. Tony watching "Cannon", notwithstanding.

I enjoyed insight into Anthony Soprano Sr.
The reason I hated it is because the old lady was so annoying. Old bag still thought she was hot and I found it quite disgusting.

I wasn't able to achieve an erection for 2 months after she did her creepy Happy Birthday, Mr. President song.

 
Encyclopedia Brown said:
Watched the "In Camelot".

Is there a more loathed episode?

I recall on this board several pages declaring that this was such a terrible episode that they had forever given up on the show.

Tony dealing with the goomar of his father.

But I always liked this episode. Tony watching "Cannon", notwithstanding.

I enjoyed insight into Anthony Soprano Sr.
Easily the worst episode of the entire series. It had its moments, but it just had a weird feel. Even the parts with Christopher and J.T. just seemed a little off. Overall, a very forgettable episode; probably the only one I can say that about in the whole series, except for maybe "Chasing It," too.
 
Ghost Rider said:
Encyclopedia Brown said:
Watched the "In Camelot".

Is there a more loathed episode?
Easily the worst episode of the entire series.
Lots of short memories up in here. As bad as "In Camelot" was, it was Godfather II compared to "Christopher" ... the episode which was an hour-long Italian history lesson dressed up as a Sopranos episode. Iron Eyes Cody... Columbus Day.... UGHHHHHHHH. Unwatchable.
 
Oh, my memory isn't short! I know almost every episode pretty well. :thumbup:

"Christopher" would be probably 3rd worst, for sure, after the two I already mentioned. The last scene, with Tony and Sil going back and forth in the car, is pretty great, though. "He was gay, Gary Cooper?" "NO!!" :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.

 
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.
I assumed that this was the definition (from Wikipedia)One method of keeping this small change private would be for an individual to give money to an intermediary who is already legitimately taking in large amounts of cash. The intermediary would then deposit that money into an account, take a premium, and write a cheque to the individual. Thus, the individual draws no attention to himself, and can deposit his cheque into a bank account without drawing suspicion. This works well for one-off paper trail and could raise suspicion.

 
laudering is a way to get large amounts of ill-legit cash into a legit business then that business deposits it into a bank or other financial institution.

Try walking into a bank with like 10k in cash and see what they do

 
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.
I assumed that this was the definition (from Wikipedia)One method of keeping this small change private would be for an individual to give money to an intermediary who is already legitimately taking in large amounts of cash. The intermediary would then deposit that money into an account, take a premium, and write a cheque to the individual. Thus, the individual draws no attention to himself, and can deposit his cheque into a bank account without drawing suspicion. This works well for one-off paper trail and could raise suspicion.
Okay, so then couldn't the IRS ask Slava what Tony did for him which warranted such a big pay day?It seems like a slippery slope no matter how you cut it. Don't forget what landed Capone in jail.

 
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.
I assumed that this was the definition (from Wikipedia)One method of keeping this small change private would be for an individual to give money to an intermediary who is already legitimately taking in large amounts of cash. The intermediary would then deposit that money into an account, take a premium, and write a cheque to the individual. Thus, the individual draws no attention to himself, and can deposit his cheque into a bank account without drawing suspicion. This works well for one-off paper trail and could raise suspicion.
Okay, so then couldn't the IRS ask Slava what Tony did for him which warranted such a big pay day?It seems like a slippery slope no matter how you cut it. Don't forget what landed Capone in jail.
You set up some kind of dummy company. You put cash in. You collect salary or payment for "services rendered" or something.
 
Raider Nation said:
jdoggydogg said:
Raider Nation said:
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.
I assumed that this was the definition (from Wikipedia)One method of keeping this small change private would be for an individual to give money to an intermediary who is already legitimately taking in large amounts of cash. The intermediary would then deposit that money into an account, take a premium, and write a cheque to the individual. Thus, the individual draws no attention to himself, and can deposit his cheque into a bank account without drawing suspicion. This works well for one-off paper trail and could raise suspicion.
Okay, so then couldn't the IRS ask Slava what Tony did for him which warranted such a big pay day?It seems like a slippery slope no matter how you cut it. Don't forget what landed Capone in jail.
Capone got jailed for not reporting and paying taxes on the income. The laundering makes it all money that can be reported and taxed without having to admit to the underlying crime.Say Tony takes a half-mil payday as his cut of a drug deal. He can't turn over 33% to the IRS no questions asked, they're going to want to know how he got the money, even if just to make sure no other taxes are owed on it. He can't say how he got the money without incriminating himself.

So he gives the $500K to an intermediary. Say someone who owns a high-cash business like a restaurant/bar. That person says the bar just had great sales, an extra $10K a month for 50 months let's say. All in cash. Maybe they sold a lot of Zima at higher prices or something or took in extra tips or started charging for karaoke or whatever. Point is, a lot of cash came in, and the cash is untraceable any further back in the lines of transaction. Obviously the restaurant/bar is going to have to show some further info if the feds really looked into it (can't claim they sold 50,000 Zimas if they only had 10 cases on hand), but, for the sake of arguement, now this money is somewhat "clean", as in, it's entered a legal business as cashflow in. The IRS can tax it and can get an answer as to where it came from.

Now the bar/restaurant owner contracts Tony for some service, say, putting ads on his dump trucks or something, and pays him a fee. Most launderers pay back 50%. So the owner sends Tony a check for $250,000. Tony reports this to the feds as well as cashflow into his truck business. Whatever's left after taxes goes into Tony's pocket as cash.

The restaurant owner is on the hook for paying his share of the tax on the extra $500,000 of fictional sales. Whatever's left of his half, $250,000, after those taxes are paid is his cut of the deal, so that's what's in it for him. Launderers charge a fee for their service.

Part of taking a stake in joints like the Bing and Artie Bucco's is to provide a front for doing small laundering without needing to contract a launderer who'll take half. Dumping $10K into Bucco's every other month is no big deal.

 
January 10th was the ten year anniversary of the "Sopranos" debut.

I remember seeing the show and thinking: "is that guy Travolta chucked headfirst down the stairs in Get Shorty?

 
Explain money laundering to me as if I'm someone who would ever have enough money that I'd need it laundered.

In the Pine Barrens episode (or maybe the episode before it), Tony twice brings cash to Slava to have laundered. First he hands him a bag containing $250K in cash, the second time he gives him $200K. Slava says something to the effect of "the money will be sent to Moscow, then.... clean as whistle."

So what exactly happens from the point that Tony gives him the bag?

Specifically, what does Slava get out of it?

What is involved in the actual laundering process?

How will Tony be able to "use" this cash without raising red flags?

Etc.
I assumed that this was the definition (from Wikipedia)One method of keeping this small change private would be for an individual to give money to an intermediary who is already legitimately taking in large amounts of cash. The intermediary would then deposit that money into an account, take a premium, and write a cheque to the individual. Thus, the individual draws no attention to himself, and can deposit his cheque into a bank account without drawing suspicion. This works well for one-off paper trail and could raise suspicion.
Okay, so then couldn't the IRS ask Slava what Tony did for him which warranted such a big pay day?It seems like a slippery slope no matter how you cut it. Don't forget what landed Capone in jail.
He deals with Slava (instead of one of his own) because the money can go back to Moscow....a government that is not exactly unsympathetic to the interests of organized crime. It bypasses all Federal government involvement. The idea of "things used to be better" was a concept that was in the background of the entire run of The Sopranos. Tony at times talked about the lack of good men in the business anymore....but the reality is is that the Italian culture assimilated. Such as the Italians pushed the Irish out of organized crime at the turn of the century...other ethnic groups coming to this country are pushing the Italians out. That was one of the things I think Chase didn't utilize properly....the push of Russians and more importantly ex-KGB into the American organized crime arena at the expense of The Mafia.
 
Remember when Ralphie was showing Jackie Jr. his "pasta technique'...? I tried it tonight. :bag:

Gotta say, it worked great.

For those who don't remember, you drain the pasta when it's done. Then you put some butter and gravy (or "sauce" for the Meddigan in the crowd ;) ) back into the pan where the pasta was boiling, then throw the pasta back in and stir it all up for 45 seconds. Theory being that the spaghetti will absorb the gravy better that way, and damned if it didn't work. You know how sometimes when you get near the middle of the bowl, you've run out of sauce? Not when you do it this way. So simple, yet I never tried it before. :lmao:

 
Remember when Ralphie was showing Jackie Jr. his "pasta technique'...? I tried it tonight. :hifive:Gotta say, it worked great.For those who don't remember, you drain the pasta when it's done. Then you put some butter and gravy (or "sauce" for the Meddigan in the crowd :lmao: ) back into the pan where the pasta was boiling, then throw the pasta back in and stir it all up for 45 seconds. Theory being that the spaghetti will absorb the gravy better that way, and damned if it didn't work. You know how sometimes when you get near the middle of the bowl, you've run out of sauce? Not when you do it this way. So simple, yet I never tried it before. ;)
LOL we've done that since that episode.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top