I just finished watching Sopranos for a 2nd time. Death of James Gandolfini and instant availability of all 86 episodes made me do it.
I cannot believe that I didn't get the ending 6 years ago. Mr Chase laid it out so openly that once you get it, you feel really dumb for not realizing what the ending meant when you first saw it.
But I suppose that my wife and I, who watched the show religiously (one and only show that we got into completely), fell in love with the characters and couldn't see the show ending in anything else but another one of Tony's brilliant, intuition-driven, improbable bursts of luck, many of which we witnessed in all of the 6 seasons.
So, in the first 5 seasons Tony was this lovable, although criminal, dangerous and sneaky person. In the second half of season 6 we started seeing Tony's less attractive traits. He, the person who used the word "degenerate" to describe a gambler, is a gambler who pays loan sharking rates to cover his bets. Tony's presumable wealth resonated with a lot of people as good quality (despite the source of this wealth). Apparently, there isn't much wealth, despite fat envelopes constantly filling his breast pocket.
Also, cunning and crafty Tony makes a clearly stupid decision of taking an offer of whacking Phil, who's not of any value to the new management of New York, as a matter of payback for losing Syl and Bobby. By killing Phil he makes Butch a favor, while not showing any signs of strength to New York by taking at least one of their top guys.
Making a deal with New York (attending a sit down being frisked, while the other side is armed and is clearly in control) lowers Tony's ranking among his guys. Obviously he's willing to become a gun-for-hire for Butch while not getting any concessions. Smart surviving members of his family (The Glorified Crew) should be making moves toward the new regime. But what if someone already did? Mr Chase shows us a second-rate traitor being killed by Syl, but what if there was someone more dangerous who switched sides already?
That brings me to two recurring themes of the series. Revenge (the dish better served cold) and Brotherly Love.
I always thought that Phil Leotardo's constant ramblings about losing his brother Billy were blown a little out of proportion. Constant, never ending reminder that Phil lost his brother and the proper revenge was not conducted prolonged episode after episode, season after season. Why?
Let's look at the final episode. People who killed Bobby knew that he has a toy railroad hobby. People who came to kill Sal knew exactly when to drive onto the Bing's lot. When they started shooting, we only saw Syl looking for the gun while there were no action from Patsy. Only after Syl was incapacitated Patsy starts shooting, hitting no one. At the same time one of the assailants shoots at Patsy but misses him, even at point blank.
Patsy, the person whose twin brother was killed by Tony, has never let go of his grieve and thirst for revenge. By becoming Tony Soprano's brother-in-law, even posthumously, he maintains a position of the boss after Tony's gone. It's a smart move. For that reason, everything becomes dark before Meadow walks into the diner. She's spared, so she can marry Patsy's son to give legitimacy to his overtake of the family.
Nice and simple. While we were fed the long line of nemeses, who came and went (to hell), Patsy was always there, pretending to forgive and forget.
Agree, or disagree, this is my take.
