By Matt Zoller Seitz
The most significant scene in the entire run of The Sopranos occurred in last night's episode, "Kennedy and Heidi." It wasn't the bloody car wreck or its disturbing aftermath. It wasn't Tony's trip (in any sense of the word "trip"). It wasn't either of Tony's two therapy scenes, and it wasn't any of the scenes of mourning (or not mourning). It wasn't even a scene really. It was a five-second cutaway to the two title characters, Heidi and Kennedy -- the teenage girls in the car Chris Moltisanti swerved to avoid.
"Maybe we should go back, Heidi," says Kennedy.
Heidi's reply: "Kennedy, I'm on my learner's permit after dark."
We all know David Chase's view of human nature is profoundly cynical. The Sopranos is set in a universe where good and evil have renamed themselves principle and instinct. Animals are not known for their inclination to act on principle. Nearly every significant scene enacts the same basic struggle, pitting the instinct toward self-preservation against the influence what Abraham Lincoln called "The better angels of our nature." The angels have glass jaws.
That cutaway to the girls in the car made Chase's central, recurring point more bluntly than six season's worth of beatdowns, strangulations and shootings, because the girls seemed so "ordinary" -- just a couple of students driving on the highway late at night, maybe thinking that when they got back home they might sneak a couple of glasses of wine and watch some TV (Six Feet Under, maybe). The difference between Heidi and Kennedy and Tony and Christopher is one of degree, not kind. The young women had a chance to do the right thing but didn't. The exact reason for their decision not to help -- by driving back to the scene or calling the cops -- doesn't matter in the end. What's important -- for Chase's purposes -- is that they were presented with a moral test and they not only failed it, they didn't seem terribly aware that it was a test. Tony Soprano and Christopher Moltisanti have failed too many moral tests to count.
Besides mirroring Tony and Chris at various stages of their lives, Kennedy and Heidi also represent the two identities inside so many Sopranos characters -- especially Tony, whose deeply submerged true self (the guy who dotes on his kids, banters with his wife and idealizes young mothers and innocent animals) rarely breaks the surface of his toxic cesspool of a personality. There have always been two Tonys, and in case we hadn't figured that out, Chase gave Tony a cousin named Tony Blundetto, a convicted gangster who'd gone straight, and introduced him in an episode titled "Two Tonys," and then, near the end of the season, had Tony B. impulsively revert to his gangster self and go on a rampage. Kennedy is the voice in Tony's head that says, "Do the right thing." To which Heidi replies, "Fuck that."
As I sit here writing this in the wee hours of May 14 -- and grinding my teeth over a computer problem that made it impossible to post episode screenshots -- I am already dreading morning-after discussions that focus on whether Chris, who spontaneously killed his screenwriter and AA mate JT at the end of last week's "Walk Like a Man," had already turned state's witness when we saw him at the Staten Island Ferry meeting.
True, there were a lot of clues suggesting as much, from Chris' nervous glancing around during the talk with Phil to his incessant fiddling with the radio while driving with Tony to the fact that he was wearing a goddamn Cleaver hat. (As Sars pointed out to me, Chris is not a hat man.) And I'm sure that in the last three hours of The Sopranos, Tony and various associates of Tony's will discuss the matter, obliquely or directly, with each other and perhaps with representatives of law enforcement; Tony already brought it up this week in the "dream" therapy session, telling Melfi that he has killed friends and relatives but that you get used to it, and that he was relieved to be presented with an opportunity to kill Chris cleanly and quietly because Chris fit the description of a guy who might turn state's witness and he was tired of waking up every morning wondering if this would be the day that Chris flipped. (I don't recall any indication that Tony or anyone else in the crew knows about JT's murder.)
In the end, the question of whether Chris flipped or was just acting strangely because he was coked up is not central to the show's concerns. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the show ended without definitively answering the question of whether Chris flipped or not, because I have a strong feeling that it's the ultimate example of a Sopranos specialty: a characterization catalyst posing as a big plot twist.
The disappearing "Pine Barrens" Russian has never reappeared because he was just the catalyst for a bleak comedy revealing how helpless and whiny Paulie and Christopher could be when denied creature comforts and a home-turf advantage. Ralphie's murder of his pregnant girlfriend -- the stripper and single mom, Tracee -- was never "resolved" in the law enforcement sense (i.e., in scenes where cops snoop and gangsters cover for each other); it was the catalyst for a nearly two-season arc that saw Tony trying to punish, or at least control, Ralphie while concurrently demonstrating his deeply buried capacity for tenderness by doting on the racehorse Pie-O-My. Tony snapped after Ralphie killed the horse (an innocent animal) in a fire for insurance money, fought Ralphie and killed him, then dismembered the body (with help from Christopher) and made the pieces disappear, just as Tony's mob family must have made Tracee's pieces disappear months earlier. The show never came out and said that Tony snapped because on some subconscious level, he associated the horse with Tracee (whom he described to Silvio in "University" as "a thoroughbred"), and belatedly did what he'd wanted and needed to do on the night that Ralphie killed Tracee, for an outwardly different set of reasons. The Sopranos never spelled this out because if it did, it wouldn't be The Sopranos.
Tony's murder of Christopher isn't about Tony's murder of Christopher: it's about the human impulse towards cold self-protection, illustrated with Macbeth-like viciousness in the scene where Tony silences his potential rat of a surrogate son, and in the cut-away to Kennedy telling Heidi they should go back and Heidi saying they can't because she'll get in trouble. (Tony starts to dial 911 but stops himself, punching all three digits only after Chris is safely dead.)
During that long, beautiful, sad moment in the car where Tony looked over at Christopher -- perhaps realizing that Christopher was high, or maybe fearing he was a rat; who knows what he was thinking, the show won't tell us, and like I said, it doesn't matter -- Chris' stereo is playing Pink Floyd's "Comfortably Numb." That's the second time in two episodes that the writers have invoked that song (Tony quoted the lyrics at the start of "Walk Like a Man," coming down the stairs to find his depressed son sprawled out before the television). The most important word in the title isn't "numb," but "comfortably."
Numbness is the means by which comfort is attained; if you're numb to morality, to empathy, you can do whatever you want and feel little or no guilt. Comfortable numbness pervaded "Kennedy and Heidi." It was there in the scene at the hospital where Tony is told that Chris is dead but can't muster the energy to feign shock or anger. It's tempting to rationalize Tony's non-response as a reaction his physical trauma, but remember, he's lucid after the accident -- lucid enough to abort his initial 911 call and kill his surrogate son -- and he later mentions (incredulously, and perhaps with a glimmer of deep guilt) that he escaped the wreck with no serious injuries (except for some damage to his knee -- the same knee he damaged while playing baseball in college). As the episode unfolds, Tony can't even muster a facsimile of authentic shock and grief; the best he can manage is paranoid touchiness about the fact that he's not dead, and occasional Tourette's-like anecdotal nuggets. At Chris' wake, he told the director of Cleaver about seeing the tree branch juxtaposed with Chris' daughter's car seat. His affable delivery was so inappropriate -- along with the rest of his autopilot responses throughout the episode -- that ironically, it could be interpreted as the behavior of a man in shock. Tony's expression as he kills Chris is horrifying because it's the face of a predator acting on instinct. It's frightening because it's inscrutable, mask-like, blank: comfortably numb. (AJ had a similar close-up in "Walk Like a Man," in the scene where he and the two Jasons pour acid on a debtor's toe. It was the most animated AJ had seemed in some time -- and the most disconnected from his own emotions.)
The Sopranos is Comfortably Numbland. Only a comfortably numb person could begin a condolence call on the survivor of a car wreck as Paulie does, by noting that the deceased had a lead foot. Carmela betrays her comfortable numbness by deflecting Paulie's anger over the fact that she and Tony arrived late to his mother's/aunt's funeral. In that same scene, Tony betrays his CN-ness in a small way, by cutting off Paulie's legitimate outrage over Da Family's non-attendance ("It's a fundamental lack of respect and I'm never gonna fucking forget it") by reminding him that Tony's the boss and a very busy man, and Paulie should be grateful that he showed up. Comfortable numbness enables men to kill again and again to protect money, property and reputation. Comfortable numbness allows women like Carmela to live with deep knowledge of their husbands' viciousness while reassuring themselves that a disinterest in details equals a lack of complicity. Carmela knows Adriana didn't just "disappear," but she chooses not to think about it because thinking about it would make her uncomfortable.
The Time-Warner cable summary of this episode promised, "Tony has a revelation." That sounds like a joke, and that's how it will probably play out. Regular readers of these post-Sopranos columns know that a part of me wants to see Tony and the rest of his criminal gang suffer tangible earthly punishment for their viciousness. There are suggestions that Chase, in his typically roundabout way, might have been heading in this direction -- that the series would confound our expectations in the most spectacular fashion yet by having Tony realize the error of his ways, probably with help from Melfi, and try to save his own soul by confessing not to law enforcement, but to his therapist, who would be well within her rights to report a man who has killed people and is bound to do it again.
But the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that these intimations of impending moral reversal will remain just that. If Tony brings down the family, he'll do it without realizing why he did it. He'll do it by amping up the same behavior we've seen throughout Season Six: the self-destructive, "Take me out of the game, coach" impulses, manifested in his heedless gambling and his willingness to hang personal dirty laundry out to dry in front of employees who should view him as strong and in control. If justice is finally done to Tony and his circle as a result of Tony's actions, it won't be intentional. Tony's flirted with a moral awakening many times without embracing it. (In this very same episode, he had a dream -- a revelatory dream -- in which he confessed his numb viciousness to Melfi, but when he got the chance to make the dream real, he couched the same statements in euphemisms.) Tony can't have a moral awakening. He's been too comfortable and too numb for too long. His family and "Family" are numb, too. There must have been three or four dozen verbal expressions of condolence in last night's episode, and none of them seemed truly felt.
It's no accident that this episode contained so many echoes of previous Sopranos dream sequences, including the Season One dream about the ducks (obliquely references in images of asbestos being dumped into marshlands, an image suggesting how Tony's business pollutes his domestic fantasies) to the image of Chris' wife nursing their orphaned baby daughter (reminiscent of Tony's breast-feeding dream from Season One) and the extended purgatory dream that occurred in the second and third episodes of Season Six. In the latter dream, Tony impersonated Kevin Finnerty, a solar heating salesman who, as far as we could tell, was a self-interested bastard; then he fell down some stairs and was incidentally diagnosed with Alzheimers', declined to tell his wife back home, or to return home at all (an interesting touch in light of Tony's Vegas trip, during which he contacted his family zero times). Then he found himself standing outside of a palatial woodland home on the night of a party where the other Tony, Tony B., served as gatekeeper. He was informed that his family was in there -- including a fleetingly-glimpsed Livia figure -- but he could not enter unless he dropped the briefcase, a symbol of his professional identity (Finnerty the heating salesman, Tony Soprano the gangster). At Chris' wake, there's a moment where Tony exchanges a silent nod of acknowledgment with Daniel Baldwin, who played a character in Cleaver who was so much like a worst-case-scenario version of Tony that Tony was actually hurt by it. The classic shot-reverse shot exchange has a mirror's symmetry: Tony denies that he is the man depicted in Cleaver, but in some fundamental sense, he is. Dreamworld Tony and Kevin Finnerty are the same guy, too.
There's a sense in which Tony's trip to Vegas seems a coded attempt to replay his tour of Coma Land in the waking world, with the peyote trip substituting for the actual out-of-body-experience he had after Junior shot him. Tony's subconscious presented him with a series of complexly interwoven but fairly clear instructions on how to change his life and be happy, as well as a warning of the consequences if he did not; after he awakened from the coma, he went through an uncharacteristically gentle period, then reverted more or less to type. In "Kennedy and Heidi," he goes to Vegas to revisit a critical juncture in his development as an adult human being (his dream detailing the two competing Tonys and the stakes in their struggle) and maybe get it right this time. He goes to Vegas hoping to see the light.
And he does see the light twice in the episode, literally -- first by looking up at the lamp on the ceiling of his hotel bathroom, then by watching the sunset with Christopher's former stripper girlfriend and erupting with joy at the sight of a solar flare that resembled the helicopter searchlights/operating table lamp from his coma experience. "I get it!" he shouts. "I get it!"
But he doesn't. Any righting of this universe's moral scales will be incidental. Tony's been living an expedient life for too long. If he was going to change, he would have done it. He's been going down this road forever. He's had too many close calls to count. Each time, he hears some version of Heidi and Kennedy in his head, Kennedy saying, "Let's go back," and Heidi saying, "No."
Heidi is driving.
For a review of Episode 19, "The Second Coming," click here. Sopranos recaps run every Monday at The House Next Door. For more articles about the series, see The Sopranos in the sidebar at right.
Monday, May 14, 2007
The Sopranos Mondays: Season 6, Ep. 18, "Kennedy and Heidi"
Labels:
HBO,
Matt Zoller Seitz,
The Sopranos,
The Sopranos: Season 6,
TV Recap
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
136 comments:
Great as always, Matt. Really going to miss THND and Sepinwall when the show's over...
My take on Chris's behavior at the meeting with Phil and in the car was that he was twitchy due to the drugs and needing a fix, not b/c he snitched. Of course, if he snitched (off-screen) then that could also explain the relapse, along with his not-drinking hurting his standing with Da Family...
And I believe the person at Chris's wake that Tony made the baby seat comment to was the director of Cleaver...
Thanks for pointing out the Heidi and Kennedy characters! I wouldn't have thought about that. Tony yelling "I get it!" but he doesn't get "it" at all is amazing. The fact that he kept hitting at roulette, but at the same time was instrumental in dumping poisonous waste into the environment makes me so sick to my stomach. Every moment, every single line of dialogue in this season, is brilliant. How is Chase accomplishing this?
Thanks for the catch, Tuck -- I just fixed it.
**I have a strong feeling that it's the ultimate example of a Sopranos specialty: a characterization catalyst posing as a big plot twist.**
====================
Excellent reading of Chase's narrative strategy, a key storytelling trick that frustrates many viewers.
I also think Chase's highbrow cynicism is wearing thin after all these years, and I'm glad you noted it, Matt.
I've reached the point where your Monday posts are more satisfying than the episode from the night before. Excellent writing, as always, and great insights.
Last night's episode resonated for me, more than any other in past weeks, because a major thread has been snipped with Christopher's death. Of course, it doesn't satisfy me: murder begetting murder is more of the same Chase nihilism in a universe where justice NEVER prevails.
Fans can argue that this dark view of life is 'real,' but it feels like soap opera covered with lots of ketchup.
Good stuff, as always, Matt. Are we sure that the final line of the episode is "I get it!"? I thought he was yelling, "I did it!" as in, he could finally say out loud that he had killed Christopher. But all the coverage I'm seeing today says it's "I get it!" so I may have just misheard.
I totally didn't catch the Heidi and Kennedy thing last night! So I guess dressing Kelly up as Jackie Kennedy was a clue that Christopher is Mr. Kennedy and Tony is Mr. Heidi?
Chris was deffinately needing a coke fix, the high only lasts about 15-20 minutes. One observation I have is that both the writers of a soon to be released horror/mob movie are mysteriously killed, wouldn't that give "Cleaver" that certain kind of cult hit buzz. One writer is murder in cold blood, one is involved in a mysterious car wreck that leaves him killed. Anyway just an observation. I thought it was brilliant how Chris and Paulie still can't get along even after one is deceased (Paulie being angry over everyone attending Chris's wake. ) I have always loved their rivalries, some of the funniest scenes in the whole series are from them being at odds with each other. I do have to say that I was very shocked at the killing of Chris, I couldn't even believe what I was seeing. Is it just me or are the writers really driving for the audience to hate Tony? I really have a genuine disgust for Tony's character right now, I am rooting for his death actually. Is that just me or do some of you feel the same?
Matt, it's funny: it never even occurred to me that Chris might be snitching already, both because the show almost always reveals that sort of information upfront, and because his behavior matched that of a drug user and he had only recently fallen off the wagon. I haven't really noticed any cyber-discussion about that possibility, either, so I don't think you have to worry about the episode's psychological underpinnings getting lost in plot analysis.
You and I have discussed -- and disagreed -- about the extent of Tony's change. There's that scene in last spring's finale where Tony reveals to Phil Leotardo that he does remember something about where he went during the coma, "And I know I never want to go back there." At the time, he's implying, disingenuously, that he's trying to be a better person so he won't end up in the Hell implied by that image of Livia standing in the doorway at the Finnerty family reunion.
But I think what Tony meant, whether he recognizes it or not, is that he doesn't want to die, and his instincts of self-preservation have overwhelmed every last shred of decency he had. More than ever before, Tony is looking out for Tony, first, last and always. He's alienating or humiliating all the members of his inner circle, doing rapid cost-benefit analysis of whether to kill them to fractionally increase Tony's own survival and freedom. (Paulie survived such a calculation; Chris didn't.)
I used to think that "The Sopranos" was a show about people incapable of change, but I think Tony has changed -- for the worse.
I agree with tuckpendleton that Chris' behavior at the meeting and in the car was due to drugs, not snitching. If he was trying to get evidence on tape, then he would have done more to draw out Tony in the car afterwards -- instead he kept telling him to calm down and "live and let live." Also, his fiddling with the volume -- and, right before the crash, cranking it up really loud on "Comfortably numb" -- is the last thing a guy wearing a wire would want to do, because it would make it very difficult to catch what was being said. Unless, of course, he was doing that on purpose because he felt guilty about snitching....but I don't think so. I think he was trying to disguise the fact that he needed a fix.
What struck me was the sense that there is a bit of Persona-like personality swapping occurring between Christopher and Tony. It suddenly made Tony's abrupt gambling addiction make more sense to me. Chris gives Tony the life is a gift speech and wants to stay clean, but can't; Tony has abandoned his brief new outlook and embraced addiction to gambling, experimentation with other drugs, even going to the point of hooking up with one of Christopher's old flames. The callbacks to old seasons this year have been plentiful. Even the wreck mirrored the wreck Tony and Adriana had (after a coke binge no less), the key event that really soured Christopher on Tony, believing he'd slept with his fiancee. Last week, we had a scene in Melfi's waiting room that virtually echoed the one from the pilot. In a way, when Tony collapses on the casino floor, the first thing I thought of was the end of Boca in Season 1, where he flopped around his living room drunk saying "I didn't hurt nobody" when he chose to turn the soccer coach over to the law instead of exacting his usual style of "justice."
This is a thoughtful and well-written post as they always are, but are you sure Tony yells "I get it!" at the end? I replayed it myself and he slurs the words, but if you listen to the echo I'm pretty sure you hear that he said, "I did it!"
As in, I killed Christopher. I saw a lot of last night's episode, the struggle Tony confronted, as the desire to not only admit what he'd done, but to enthusiastically rejoice in what he'd done. Chris was a mess and had been for a very long time. Who hasn't had those moments in life when he or she feels sure that someone else would be better off dead? I hope it's not only me and Tony Soprano.
Tony had the moment to act more godlike than any other in the shows history. To snuff out life in a way that seems colder than all the rest (maybe because of his closeness to Chris, but it's also because he was acting on a very human impusle--to be weak yourself and therefore judge others much more harshly). The constant refrain about the tree limb coming through the window and crushing the baby seat was like hearing a judge explain why a prisoner had to be sentenced to death. As a way to justify what's more thank likely unjustifiable. At least that's the way I took it.
The look of joy on Tony's face at the end is because he finally got to say it. I'm a murderer! Considering that he comes from a world of euphamism, where no one will even entertain the term mafia (not without getting shot in the forehead) it would seem profoundly freeing to shout such an admission aloud. And to do it before the sun, god, the world, whatever you want to call it only makes it that much more of a revelation.
As for the poor girl with him, I hoped that her stoned expression was meant to assure us that she hadn't registered much of anything and thus Tony wouldn't stuff her into a few bags after they came down. Or, perhaps, she'll be the star witness in a future trial! (Nah, I doubt that.)
But check the last line again. I really don't think it's, "I get it."
Yeah..Chris had to go...what an awful human being.
Chris was deffinately needing a coke fix, the high only lasts about 15-20 minutes. One observation I have is that both the writers of a soon to be released horror/mob movie are mysteriously killed, wouldn't that give "Cleaver" that certain kind of cult hit buzz. One writer is murder in cold blood, one is involved in a mysterious car wreck that leaves him killed. Anyway just an observation. I thought it was brilliant how Chris and Paulie still can't get along even after one is deceased (Paulie being angry over everyone attending Chris's wake. ) I have always loved their rivalries, some of the funniest scenes in the whole series are from them being at odds with each other. I do have to say that I was very shocked at the killing of Chris, I couldn't even believe what I was seeing. Is it just me or are the writers really driving for the audience to hate Tony? I really have a genuine disgust for Tony's character right now, I am rooting for his death actually. Is that just me or do some of you feel the same?
Hmm, I thought he said "I did it!" at the end. As in "I finally got my luck back by killing Chris." Or as in "I did it, I killed him!"
I just called HBO. They've had a number of calls today from TV critics requesting a ruling on "I did it" versus "I get it." According to the writers, Tony yelled, "I get it."
I thought he said "I did it" as well, but apparently the closed captioning said "I get it" and Alan confirmed that it was "I get it" from folks at HBO.
Oh, and hey...any thoughts about the brief clip of Kate Hepburn being interviewed by Dick Cavett? It sounded like she was talking about being able to cry impressively at auditions as a young performer and only later having directors notice she couldn't act. Seems like it mirrors Tony's inability to feign grief over Christopher's demise while everyone around him in gnashing their teeth.
Danker: I'm not actively rooting for Tony to die. I'm on the same page with my buddy Alan Sepinwall -- he thinks the worst punishment for Tony would be having to live with knowledge of what a complete shitbag he is. And I think that's what most of this season has been building toward. He's acting like a man with a literal or figurative death wish, but death would be a release for him, not a punishment.
Seeing his wife or kids suffer horribly because of his sins -- well, that's a whole different matter.
Also, Edward Copeland points out that the Season Five episode "Two Tonys" was the name of the pilot, but that Tony himself did not appear until the second episode.
Matt, technically, Blundetto did appear in "Two Tonys," but only in still photos on a TV news report about "The Class of 2004" mobsters getting their parole. So you're on solid ground there.
My wife thought it was "I did it" whereas I thought it was "I get it." I chalked it up to Tony having a "perfect moment" (to use Spalding Gray's phrase); one of those psychedelic experiences where you feel absolutely in tune with the universe and in perfect harmony with your place in it.
But character being character, his worse nature will triumph over his better impulses once the peyote wears off.
There's not much talk here about AJ, even though his storyline took up a fair amount of the episode. At one point, I got a very strong feeling that he is going to kill Tony after recognizing that his father epitomizes that which seems to make him so angry.
I'm surprised people heard "I did it" at the episode's conclusion as that would profoundly contradict the meaning implied by the difference in Tony's behavior in the real therapy session relative to his dreamt therapy session.
"I get it" suggests a(nother) self-fulfilling realization/vision that absolves Tony in his own mind and releases him from his guilt/lack of guilt inspired melancholy over finishing Chris off and/or Chris's absence without making any connection between the causes of his unhappiness and his behavior.
I found the end of the episode as disturbing as Tony's explanation of roulette ("It's the same principle as the solar system.") was hilarious.
Great piece. I love the lead in with Heidi/Kennedy. Let me add to it by saying that not only did Heidi/Kennedy fail a moral test, they will unquestionably "get away with it." There won't ever be any real-world repercussions for them, aside from what their psyches decide to do them. And that's what I think will happen to Tony at the end of the series. Now A.J....
Also, was I the only person who thought that Chris was trying (maybe subconsciously) to kill them both? I mean, they (like the viewers) both had to have been thinking of the Adrianna wreck while they were driving in the same car, through what looked like the same backroads.
The accident was similar to Ted Kennedy's accident in the 1960's that caused the death of a young woman, and ended his hopes for the Presidency. Kennedy and the woman were in a car that drove off a bridge and landed in water. Kennedy got out of the car and made it to shore, but didn't alert authorities all night. Apparently the woman (Mary Jo Kopechne) lived for a few hours in the car, and might have been rescued. Chris "drowned in his own blood".
I have always been leery of making predictions about The Sopranos, but after seeing this episode I'm going to make one with a bit of confidence.
Tony is on his way to a bona-fide psychotic break.
He has repressed too much guilt and trauma.
He is making his own personal hell.
I think a suicide is not out of the question.
Anyone else agree or disagree?
MoroccoMole:
A very astute TWoP poster observed that the Hepburn/Cavett interview was filmed impromptu on an empty stage when she was making a preshow visit to Cavett's studio. Out of nervousness, she'd first refused Cavett's invite, then delayed the interview more than once. Since she was just sitting around yakking with Cavett she had them start rolling the cameras because she felt it was the perfect opportunity to do it right, in a way she was comfortable with. Point being: Tony may have wanted to dispose of Chrissy for awhile now, but didn't have the nerve--but when the opportunity presents itself...
For a while, in earlier seasons, I agreed with the conventional wisdom that there could be only two possible ends for Tony - death or prison. Then it became clear either option would be way too obvious for Chase. Now it's clear that either option would also be far too easy on Tony, a gift of sorts. In prison, his ability to transgress would be greatly constrained. In death it would be eliminated.
Instead, something far worse is happening (and in some sense has already happened). It's fascinating and horrifying to watch.
Matt, great reading. I just want to bring in a point that has yet to be brought up and that is the slow and amazing way that the show DID finally deal with the aftermath of Ade's death. When Long Term Parking came and went, many were astonished at how the show did little to demonstrate the effects of Ade's death on Tony and Christopher. It was chalked up--and this is getting pretty banal by now--to Chase's nihilism etc. But I thought it was amazing how the sixth season and the souring of Christopher and Tony's relationship so crucially hinged on the killing of Ade and how last night's episode made that clear when Tony uses THAT particular point in his relationship to Christopher (during his session with Melfi) to talk about Chris' ingratitude. Adriana's killing acted as a slow poison that seeped into Christopher and Tony's life and they both did and are paying for it. And there is nothing nihilistic in that. It's just brilliant.
About AJ, maybe he's a bit smarter than I had given him credit for. Not to say that he's not lazy and naive, but I can't imagine the 'Jasons' having existential crises or not falling asleep during a lecture on Wordsworth.
It also seems obvious that he can only stomach the glamour/logic (as in, it is logical/exciting to beat someone if they fail to pay a debt) of being a mobster, and lacks the sociopathology of seemingly everyone connected and in the game. Maybe an aware/enlightened AJ can drag Tony out of hell? In any case, out of everyone, I think he's become someone to root for.
AJ, that is.
I believe that Tony's peyote experience helps him realize that the natural world has no moral rights or wrongs (the roulette table being like the solar system, the sun coming up over the canyons) and that he creates his own guilt for his actions whereas the universe makes no judgment one way or the other - things happen. His ambivalence up to this point is therefore in keeping with nature - and therefore something he no longer has to equivocate.
(This would not have worked with Carmela, who has been the religious believer of the two all along.)
As for Anthony Jr., I still believe that he's going to commit suicide (as opposed to Tony) with the set up of the anti-depressants he's been prescribed. His end will be the end of the Soprano line - and the end of the show's run.
Brad: I agree about AJ. I am rooting for him to be a positive force, take control of his life, and generally stop fucking up, so that the cycle can break, finally.
I'm also impressed as hell with Iler's performance in parts 1 and 2 of this season. I never thought of him as a formidable actor before (though I always thought he was well-cast). But he's hitting some very tricky notes, episode after episode, with a precision that suggests a complete understanding of the show and his character, and an ability to infuse that understanding into his acting choices without making too big a deal of things.
Also, his mix of gentleness and menace is disconcerting.
The Sopranos is set in a universe where good and evil have renamed themselves principle and instinct.
Matt, you just blew my mind. Excellent.
I'm with you on Tony's punishment and I've thought about this from the beginning of this final season. Someone close to him will pay for his sins, harshly. AJ will hopefully find his way and I think Carmela will be left totally alone to deal with the wreckage. I'm thinking Meadow more and more. We haven't seen a lot of her in this season and she's his little girl.
I don't think Chase's knack for scrambling audience expectation will make him shy away from the inevitable. The bad guy gets it in the end. Meadow's suffering would be the most damaging. Enough to drive him to end up a nodding junkie drooling on himself in some shitty studio apartment somewhere in Jersey, forgotten.
What could be a more brutal fate?
Hi Matt, first time long time...
When Tony says "I get it!", I thought he/Kevin Finnerty found out the answer to what the beacon is/was/will be. But I don't believe we, the audience, will be told what it is, ever (like what's inside the briefcase in "Pulp Fiction.") My final guess is that this show ends in Kingman, Arizona.
Matt --
Short-time reader (I had no idea about these until Alan Sepinwall pointed people in this direction with a link from the Star-Ledger a couple weeks ago), first-time commenter. Thanks for doing these, they are excellent.
Still, with it being the first time, I hesitate to break your balls about the title, but on HBO.com it's Kennedy and Heidi, not the way you have it in the title.
I think it's important to have it that way as well, because I think it lends to the theme of the episode.
I agree with your premise. One of the first things I said to one of the guys in my office (we all watch) was that I liked the comment the writers made on the two girls. They too were "getting away" with something illegal: driving at night with a learner's permit. (Not only that, she should probably have an adult in the car while on a learner's permit, but I digress.)
Anyway, I think the Kennedy and Heidi names refer to ... and this is a stretch ... football and how it played a role in the national popular conscience.
After John Kennedy was assassinated, the NFL, led by commissioner Pete Rozelle, decided to play it's games on Sunday, the same day of JFK's funeral. Rozelle thought it would help the country heal. He took a gamble ... and lost. The players hated playing that day, the fans stayed away in droves. Rozelle would later say it was the worst mistake of his tenure as commissioner. Tony noted that Chris was a gamble, a mistake. Sometimes, you can't escape from the realities of your life. They're too big, too overwhelming to ignore or smother with drugs or therapy.
As for Heidi, that's famously, the title of the made-for-TV 1968 movie that NBC chose to run in its regularly scheduled time instead of pushing it back for the end of the Jets-Raiders game. Callers besieged the NBC switchboard asking -- WTF? Meanwhile, in Oakland, the Raiders scored two touchdowns for the come-from-behind win.
So, what does that have to do with The Sopranos? I think it mirrors the situation above. People, eventually, got what they wanted. No one cuts in on the end of football games any longer. Real life is pushed back (news, usually) to accomodate our games, our fantasies and push our realities further away.
That's what Tony's tried to do with the trip to Vegas. He tried to push his reality away, tried to keep the game going. But, eventually, the game ends, and the news airs. And finally, he gets it.
Then again, Kennedy and Heidi could just be names Chase likes?
Great job, Matt. I only started recently following this blog, and it's quickly become my go-to page for Monday afternoon Sopranos analysis. Spot on.
Along the theme of doubling and echoes that Chase explores so well, another thing I noticed is the juxtaposition of AJ and Tony's approach to therapy. It seems like AJ is turning into a kind of Tony, exhibiting the same kind of conflicted emotions about his external actions. One of the tensest themes I sense is whether AJ will actually turn into Tony, or whether he'll recognize that continuing a life of crime will only lead to psychic collapse, and that he has to stay away from that life to preserve his own. And credit where it's due: Iler has been fantastic this season. I don't think the series will end with Tony making a decision; Chase has made it clear that Tony has already made one, as we watch him devolve into a monster. I think the series will end with AJ making a decision: does he follow in his father's footsteps, his life inexorably ending in tragedy, or does he rise above it and become something better and more productive? This is by far the tensest season yet.
Rob--Yeah, you're right, I transposed the two, maybe because Heidi is the one in charge.
The football angle is interesting, and I hadn't thought of it until now. However, I suspect the actual explanation is closer to your last line -- that Chase just likes those names. He always poked fun at assimilated descendants of immigrants and minorities who try to express how well they've fit into American by giving their kids suburban-sounding first names (like Meadow, for instance).
Perhaps Tony finally "gets" why Christopher needed to be high...
to escape the incredible burden of having killed someone you loved.
Maybe Tony's experience on drugs has put him in Christopher's head for once, and for once he understands the struggle Chris was going through.
I don't think Chase will kill Meadow as that will make the story too similar to Godfather III.
David and all -
I couldn't shake the idea that Chase was making some sort of largish allusion to "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" last night, paralleling Hunter Thompson's debauch and associated commentary on the sad state of late 1960s America with Tony's escapades and symbolic role as Mr. Average American - morally compromised, flipped out on drugs and pointless psychoanalysis, hands dripping with blood and complicit with the destruction of the environment.
Last night was filled with unnerving imagery for baby boomer types - dead parents, dying children, fake drug epiphanies, trips to Vegas (a place that always seemed fairly geriatric to me, also note Tony and Paulies earlier trip to Florida), boomer music relics singing covers of boomer relic songs featured in boomer relic director's movies, kids with goofy baby boomer hero names like Heidi and Kennedy, and on and on.
Chase plumbed some pretty dark depths last night, and I really do think the episode is some sort of indictment of the baby boomer ethos that Tony Soprano arguable takes to a psychotic extreme.
Chris in Austin
Tony's instinctual ruthlessness re-emerges in this episode. The ease with which he pinches Christopher's nose shut is nothing short of shocking. It's hard to believe that Tony once thought of as a son. In fact though, Tony still thinks of him as a wayward son - his sessions with Dr. Melfi have shown that Christopher could still anger and hurt him (he is not comfortably numb there).
This makes Tony's delicate yet deliberate pinch of Christopher's nose (which Tony later castigates as a unsightly "schnozz" to Carmela) all the more horrifying. But let's not forget, this is the quality that made Tony a rising star in Da Family, and eventually its boss. Not quite so glamorous when directed against people legitimately close to him.
It's interesting that in previous episodes whenever Tony showed his humanity, however stumbling, for example in consoling AJ, he would lose when gambling. Now that he has reverted to instinct, he wins. the writers are cynical and no bad deed goes unrewarded, at least so far.
I don't get "I get it" and the apparent joy with which that is said. Is Tony feeling freed by an amoral natural order? Is he realizing that he "can't take it with him" and should repent?
Once again AJ functions as the show's conscience, arguing that everyone should be depressed. Matt you raise an interesting point in indicting Heidi, that the moral vacuum extends beyond the mafia subculture. I'm hoping we don't see religion rush in to fill this void, as has been done in many literary works. I'm not too worried though, given the gimbel eye the writers have cast on the Church throughout this series.
The Diatribe said...
"I believe that Tony's peyote experience helps him realize that the natural world has no moral rights or wrongs..."
Oh, well said The Diatribe (followed - somewhat inevitably - by 'my thoughts exactly!).
bret, I absolutely agree with you about "I get it!" I thought his realization started when he was rolling on the floor, helpless with laughter, after his incredible winning streak at roulette. He believes that by killing Christopher he has freed himself. He has moved beyond or above the laws that he now thinks were causing him to have such difficulties. He now believes that he is a law unto himself. He thinks he is home free. He can do whatever he damn well pleases without guilt, without consequence. I think his "happy times" are going to last about as long as AJ's did.
ns, thanks for your comments re: Ade's death as a slow poison. Bang on and well put.
Matt and Alan, you are both God-sends. I watched five seasons without either of you or the people who contribute the excellent and cogent commentary to your columns. How did I manage it?? I also didn't know about THND until Alan provided a link. Thanks to you both you your fine writing and your excellent analyses. I wait almost as anxiously for your columns as I do for the shows, and, believe me, that is saying something.
And the asbestos. They are poisoning everything around them on every possible level. "Waste Management," indeed.
Excellent stuff as always, Matt. I personally don't care if it's Chase's "nihilism" getting a workout here. Nor do I care that these chracters exist in some vile place that hell itself doesn't accomodate. When the writing is this good I say Let There Be Darkness.
As the series winds down, I feel that Chase has seriously upped the ante. This was an especially complex and challenging episode, and I have to give full props to you, Matt, for giving us such an insightful and thrilling analysis (not to mention your amazing speed
in posting it).
Frankly, I’m exhausted by all the predictions. We'll have to wait and see if Tony "gets it." But my hopes that he might achieve some tiny bit of redemption -- so high when Season 6 began -- are fading fast.
All his most negative qualities and behaviours have been on full display in the last few episodes, and in “Kennedy and Heidi” he seems to have hit rock bottom: alone, passionless, cowardly, a self-confessed “hypocrite” hating anyone around him who might have a genuine feeling of grief or shock.
We witness his murderous intent in smothering Christopher, which reminded me of his much earlier impulse to smother the smiling Livia who had almost certainly betrayed him. (I suspect Christopher would have died from his injuries anyway, but the cancelled 911 call made this a cold-blooded hit. Tony’s observation in the funeral parlor that the brunette Kelli, in her sheath and sunglasses, looked just like Jackie Kennedy is a nice bit of irony, considering that both women lost their husbands to a political assassination.)
We also recognize the depths of Tony’s self-delusion regarding the mangled infant car seat. His twisted rationale is that, had he survived and continued driving drunk and/or high, Christopher might have killed his baby. The baby’s well-being is all that matters, right? Yet moments later, unable to face the reality of Chris’ widow (the nursing Madonna) and his now fatherless daughter, we observe Tony slither down off his high horse, out of his house and, indeed, out of New Jersey.
We also see him returning (it seems more like perseveration than pleasure-seeking) to the old stand-bys which made him feel better in the past but seem to have lost their power: luxurious surroundings befitting his “success,” casual sex with a dark-haired woman (they seem to be getting younger and younger), gambling and mind-altering substances -- although until this episode, we’d only ever seen him indulge in alcohol and a bit of coke.
For me, Tony’s lowest point came right before the accident, when he and Chris were discussing the current dumping situation. We got a flash of that charming Tony Soprano grin followed by a shake of the head as he sighed, “Asbestos!” In that one dismissive word, we could read his total amorality, the same amorality that Matt saw in the actions of the two girls, Kennedy and Heidi, as they fled the accident scene.
There’s certainly no shortage of guilty parties in this episode, a point which Chase makes even sharper by inserting one guilt-free character early on – the young dump site worker, obviously a recent immigrant who spoke no English (I feel there’s an implied contrast here between him and the two girls who were quite obviously American-born and indulged by their parents).
We see the young fellow, who is eating his dinner on site from a Styrofoam tray, being yelled at by his boss about the danger of the airborne asbestos. Not knowing about asbestos and -- more to the point -- about his vulnerability in the world of Tony and Phil, he replies “What’s that?”
This nameless boy seems to be one more incarnation of the innocent who have already suffered at the hands of Tony and his ilk– Adriana, Sal Vitro, Jason Barone, Caitlin Moltisanti, Pie O’My, Cosette.
By the way, I found Phil’s tongue-in-cheek suggestion that Tony could always dump the asbestos-laden debris in his own swimming pool interesting. I guess if the ducks don’t get poisoned in the wild by the illegal dumping that occurs, they can always find contamination in the Sopranos’ back yard.
With just three episodes left, it seems that Chase is taunting us with our complicity as viewers (A.J. seems to have developed some voyeuristic tendencies, too, and it’s not a nice quality.)
It’s as if Chase is saying, none-too-kindly: "So you've come back, week after week, for nearly seven years, watching this fat fuck from New Jersey lie, steal, cheat, betray and kill, and you STILL wish him well? What’s wrong with you?”
I’m not sure. I’m just not ready to give up on Tony Soprano yet. Maybe next week.
I don't think A. J. is going to let adversity be his whetstone. He is so incredibly passive. In families where verbal, emotional and physical abuse are the norm (not to mention the shadow of whackings looming large), children basically have two options. They can give it right back as Meadow has effectively done, or they can try to stay beneath the radar as A. J. has, glued to a screen, disengaged. I said before that he was trying to get the hell out of there by marrying Blanca. That he saw her as an adult, as a mother. It just dawned on me that he emotionally wanted her as a mother. He was so attracted to Hector, because he identified with him. I hate to be the one to bring this up since I am a pensioner and a retired elementary school teacher, but much has been made of Tony as a powerful and very desirable Alpha male lover. Am I the only one who cannot imagine A. J. being a "chip off the old block?"
Until I replayed the episode and caught the names of the two girls, I assumed "Kennedy and Heidi" was a reference to the archetypes embodied here by Tony and the Vegas hooker: as in John F. (with whom Tony seems to identify as "presidential") and Fleiss.
An outstanding episode, obviously, but my wife and I were a bit confused by AJ's shrink sessions. The first, when he's upbeat, occurs when the rest of the family is mourning Christopher. (Tony tells Meadow to pour herself a Scotch and explains to someone nearby, "They were cousins, they were close," but AJ gives no clue of even being aware of what's gone down with his cousin.) The second, which finds him depressed, takes place after his gleeful participation in another beating.I think his arc is wonderful in terms of offering a parallel that shows us how his father was likely sucked into his own life of crime, but the impressionistic cutting takes away some of its lucidity.
Lastly, I think Tony's knee injury came from football, not baseball. The dialogue has never referenced it, but in Gandolfini's T-shirt moments, a tiger tattoo is visible on his upper arm, leading me to suspect that he was probably called "Tony the Tiger" in his high school athletic days.
I noticed Carmela looking at a Florida real estate website on her laptop when she got the phone call about the accident and Christopher's death. Could it be an escape wish? Like many others, I wonder what will happen to the Soprano family members, especially AJ and Meadow. I hope they will escape the violent, hideous life their parents live. AJ's recent intellectual interest and Meadow's established academic success may allow them to live a decent life. While the deaths of the children (suicide? murder? another accident?) would be the worst possible punishment for Tony, I hope David Chase does not end the show in such a sorrowful way.
This is the first time I have read THND. What a revelation!
After reading all the excellent posts, I am of the opinion that AJ's look during the acid torture and his response to beating up the Somali student both indicate a realization regarding his father. AJ has known what his father does for a living for several years. But I think in the last two episodes, AJ is finally beginning to see what his dad actually does.
This is probably a sort of minor rite of passage for kids. The child goes through life saying my dad is a banker, or firefighter, or whatever but at some point the teenager or 20-something finally realizes how their parents spend their day. It is an interesting moment.
In AJ's case, the epiphany leads to his comments during the second visit to the psychiatrist. I suspect AJ's roll in the rest of this series will be informed by this.
I even wonder if at the same time that Tony discovers that amorality is liberating, AJ may decide that he, AJ, needs to make the world a better place by stopping his Father.
Matt -
As far as Chris having already snitched and that being the tension underlying the pre-car crash scene with Tony...The show makes a point of Chris putting in The Departed soundtrack, a movie about snitches and father/surrogate son distrust. Whether they'll ever answer that dangling question about Chris, it seems like they put up some bright, blinking lights that point in one direction. Though it be just a wink at audience expectations.
Funny, I'd thought the "Comfortably Numb" lyrics Tony was singing beginning of last ep might have been an oblique reference to that big hit movie about mobsters that, while inferior to The Sopranos in a lot of ways, shared a similarly cynical worldview.
Tim: "I think Tony's knee injury came from football, not baseball. The dialogue has never referenced it, but in Gandolfini's T-shirt moments, a tiger tattoo is visible on his upper arm, leading me to suspect that he was probably called "Tony the Tiger" in his high school athletic days."
I hesitated before typing "baseball" because of the reference you mentioned. But I also seem to remember Uncle Junior busting Tony's chops over his one-time promise as a young baseball player. (Or did I imagine that?)
Ryan: If the "Comfortably Numb" fixation on "The Sopranos" came about because of "The Departed," that would be consistent with the show's longstanding habit of referring to other, "fictional" gangster stories within the fabric of the episodes themselves.
I do think it's bigger than that, though -- maybe as close to a full-on, "Listen up, people, this is the message" type statement as Chase and company have yet offered. That it occurred in the same stretch as the Kennedy and Heidi cutaway -- which pretty much hands you the show's moral sense on a silver platter, just in case you didn't catch it -- is not an accident, either.
I don't really see how it's possible at this point to mistake "The Sopranos" for an immoral or amoral show, just as I don't see how it's possible to say that Brian De Palma has no empathy for women after a viewing of "Casualties of War" or "The Black Dahlia." "The Sopranos" has stumbled in the past and become what it beheld (to quote "The Untouchables"), and it's sometimes been guilty of getting too close to its subjects and starting to see things their way (snickering at the suffering of the helpless or clueless). But in general it's been very consistent about depicting the mechanics of evil and cruelty and indifference without embodying them.
The unrelenting darkness and cynicism had gotten wearying at times, and one can make a compelling case that "The Sopranos" is saying essentially the same things over and over, with variations. But if movies and TV shows can keep finding new ways to tell us, "War is hell," I think Chase is entitled to keep turning over this particular patch of soil until it's totally exhausted.
Eve M: "By the way, I found Phil’s tongue-in-cheek suggestion that Tony could always dump the asbestos-laden debris in his own swimming pool interesting. I guess if the ducks don’t get poisoned in the wild by the illegal dumping that occurs, they can always find contamination in the Sopranos’ back yard."
Yeah, I thought about that, too. It syncs up with the Chris-Paulie Spy vs. Spy shenanigans last week. These gangsters think they can keep the work world and the home world separated, but they keep mixing it up themselves, and then they're surprised and outraged when the work world comes roaring up onto their front lawn and doing fishtails in their flower beds.
More than once, I've seen people theorize that there are only two ways out of the "family" once you're in: Prison or death. I disagree. If Chase has shown us anything it is that death is the one and only way out. Even Johnny Sack wasn't out while in prison. He only got out with his death. Obviously, there are a multitude of other examples from Big Pussy, from whom we learned that cooperation with the Feds was not a way out, to Eugene, who even after inheriting millions of dollars in completely legitimate money, couldn't get out until he hung himself. Now, as you mention, given Tony's apparent state of mind, death would be an escape for him, and clearly on some subconscious level he knows it. I suspect his death wish stems from a subconscious desire to not see where his choices will lead his family. Having said all that, I think the ultimate moralistic ending would have Tony finally getting whacked but only after "this thing of ours" takes revenge on those most important to him. Thus, rather than escaping, he will have to die knowing the full impact of his choices.
Somebody above theorized that Meadow would be the one to die and, thus, give Tony his final comeuppance. I have a hard time with that one, simply because I don't see how, given that she has always stayed on the periphery of the "Family" (not the family) and really has limited potential to interact with those who would harm her. AJ, on the other hand, would seem like the obvious choice (then, again maybe too obvious for Chase's tastes). It goes without saying that he is a confused young man, but we've now seen that he is equally capable of being a sociopathic thug and a weak-willed crybaby, all within the same day. It is now definitely clear that AJ's sadness at the loss of Blanca had as much to do with the loss of his last chance at a straight life as anything else. Let's face it, even his modest success at "straight jobs" (both in construction and at Beansie's pizza restaurant) were the result of family connections, rather than any innate talents. Blanca, not the jobs, was his way out, and now she's gone. In any case, I could see AJ getting into a situation where his newfound tough guy persona melts back to the depressed naive kid at the worst possible time (perhaps while attempting to stick up a card game, which is what Tony did to earn his own reputation when he was AJ's age) and that could be the way he loses his life. It would be the ultimate crushing blow to Tony, not only losing his son, but losing him through a combination of his own sins (the mob life) and the "putrid genes" he passed down (the tendency to depression).
Matt--
In seasons 1-3, there are references to Tony having played both football *and* baseball in high school. To the best of my knowledge, they've never specified which sport caused the physical injury, but it was his performance on the baseball field which elicited the criticism from Uncle Jun that scarred him for decades.
Anonymous--
It's a pretty low blow to dismiss Scorsese as a "boomer relic director" given the vitality of THE DEPARTED, but I agree with you 100% about the Waters/Morrison/Band version of "Comfortably Numb", which I find stomch-turning next to the original--though granted, my opinion of it improved a tiny bit today after learning (via Timothy Noah @ Slate) that it's a live recording from 1990 and not something that was recorded specifically for the film.
In "Goodfellas", Joe Pesci refers to the bar owner proferring an embarassing tab as "impending danger". Penelope Pitstop might have corrected him and said, "impending doom".This season, I can't think of a single character who I don't wish to see completely implode. I reflexively blame Oprah for just about everything these days and it is a welcome antidote indeed to see these characters stuck like Strasbourg Geese in front of the mirror.
Matt
I was just watching the episode a second time (before reading your post, and not knowing the title of the episode) and I thought -- those two girls, that's it, that's...well just what you wrote -- a single poetic montage that is the soul of the Sopranos...I also feel that in these final episodes he's really focusing on the Passing Down of the bankrupt moral code to the next generation, who become emeshed in it before knowing what hit 'em -- this is shown in the young dolt chomping his asbestos pizza in the first scene. The father berates him (but doesn't seem to truly care) and the son just chews and stares...Comfortably Numb...I expect the final scene of the series will involve something between A.J. and Tony, or Tony post that scene, but then again, as you point out, Chase always defies expectation
Hey really top-notch column and posts. Two things that struck me while watching this episode:
1. I equate Tony saying "I get it" to the "Say hello to the bad guy" speech in Scarface. At the edge of the world, with Hell calling to him, T acknowledges that he is the devil, evil, the dark side, whatever you want to call it. He is the problem, and he doesn't really care, although its worth noting that there are tears in his eyes at the end. Also, T looked like a psychopath being interviewed in a true-crime documentary in Melfi’s chair in that episode. I feel like Chase tricked us into liking Tony, and is now laughing at us after he removed the sympathetic facade. All that’s left is the beast.
2. Could Cleaver be some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy where Tony is haunted by the film and its merchandise rather than a ghost? Will Chris somehow get revenge for his wasted life through the movie? Just a thought. Thanks.
Matt: You are not mistaken about Tony and baseball. There indeed was an episode where Uncle Junior and Tony were in the stands of a baseball game discussing Tony's former skill as a baseball player. I believe the conclusion was that Tony's philandering crowded out his enthusiasm for sports.
maureenm: It was established in the early seasons that AJ does not have the "right stuff" to be a mob boss. Tony's continued love for him, despite this shortcoming, may have been a high point in Tony's character development. It certainly added needed moral capital to a storyline that has become increasingly both tense and exhausted.
I have to here again defend AJ against the charge of being "incredibly passive". Accepting his limitations taking on a blingless job, and attempting to love one woman wholly, are things no other character has had the courage to even attempt.
AJ's love of Hector may have been motivated by a desire to be a good father, or was simple love of a child, rather than identification as an infant.
To extend the psychoanalysis, AJ is the one "feeling his feelings", and had AJ truly been a "Tony Junior", we would be left, without a conscience to imperil.
David said...
I have always been leery of making predictions about The Sopranos, but after seeing this episode I'm going to make one with a bit of confidence.
...
I think a suicide is not out of the question.
Anyone else agree or disagree?
Dave,
I don't think a suicide is out of the question. I think there is something Hemingway-esque about Tony, especially this season when he referred to his wound several times.
Fantastic commentary from all of you -- just a few thoughts I'd like to add.
First off, there were a few moments when I felt that Chase & co were dropping anvils left and right. We didn't get just one shot of the tree branch through the window and into the baby seat, we got at least two, possibly three -- did we really need that many? Next up, it was hard not to notice that Tony literally had Christopher's blood on his hands after snuffing Chris out.
I'm in the camp that ascribes Chris's squirrely behavior to his needing a fix. I don't believe Chris would ever rat out Tony, because that would make mockery of Adriana's death. It has been very clear all along that Christopher was never going to forgive Tony for doing what he (Christopher) lacked the balls to do, but it was equally clear all along that Christopher was only living on Tony's continued good will and high hopes. Christopher did so many stupid things that should've gotten him whacked (first up, trying to shoot Tony that night in the Bing), but he managed to wriggle out of every situation until finally, like a gift, he gives Tony the perfect opportunity to get rid of him, no questions asked.
I must also point out that the Tony/Adriana accident came before they scored the coke -- they were on the way out to meet a dealer that Adriana knew. They weren't coked up at the time. Tony swerved to avoid a raccoon, and flipped the car. This accident was much more violent and severe -- and of course, the airbags had been removed! If not for their money-grubbing, Tony and Chris could've both walked away from that accident unscathed. I've always understood why the wiseguys disable the GPS from their fancy cars, but at the same time I wondered how long it would take before one of them died because he had sold his airbags.
About AJ -- heading for suicide, I'm afraid, now. After the exhiliration of being an enforcer in the acid-pouring incident, he was repelled by the brutality of the 2 Jasons in beating down that innocent cyclist. He didn't participate other than to shove the guy away when he stumbled into him -- and in his next therapy session, his world had once again gone black. He knows he can't do it, he can't be a part of this world if it means meting out violence indiscriminately to both the innocent and the guilty. Carmela should be proud of him: he has some semblance of recognizable morality.
Tony "gets" the allure of the addicts life, I think. Heightened awareness, awesome sex with a beautiful woman (and can I just say: Ick, no more please?), winning at roulette -- of course it seems as if the secrets of the universe have been revealed to him. I have it on good authority that pretty much everyone feels that way on a good peyote trip. He'll remember how great he felt in the morning, but he'll never be able to unravel those great mysteries while straight. That's OK, he doesn't deserve it anyway.
I felt some small -- very small -- sympathy for Paulie Walnuts at his once-again beloved Ma's funeral. Timing is everything, and it seems that Christopher was able to f' him over once last time.
As to where this is all headed -- I'm just along for the ride at this point, unwilling to bet that Chase will pursue any particular path. After all this time, I trust him.
This is sort of a meta-level interpretation of the show as a whole, but I wonder if we the viewers, who over the past six seasons have come to identify with Tony, are in the throws of the analyst (Chase and the writers) breaking the transference of the analysand (the viewer) with the analyst. According to traditional Freudian theory, this is a necessary moment of therapy. Tony's charisma, in both his previous good and evil moments, can no longer contain our disgust with his character and moral failings. We are now in the position to truly understand the psychoanalyst who laid it on the line with Carmela: we must leave Tony if we are to act morally. There is nothing morally redemptive in Tony with which to identify. The show leaves us only with ourselves and our own choices. Just a thought.
Brilliant Matt. I don't know how I've survived 6 seasons without reading this.
You said:
Tony's subconscious presented him with a series of complexly interwoven but fairly clear instructions on how to change his life and be happy, as well as a warning of the consequences if he did not;
I'm wondering what you meant? What did T's coma-life tell him he could do to change his life and be happy?
Damn, this is good, Matt. Your comments about how plot is used to reveal character remind me of why I think "The Sopranos" is still the best drama on TV. (Not even "The Wire" delves so deeply into human nature.)
The asbestos dumping scene is so deeply troubling in part because of the sounds of ducks (and other wildlife?) on the soundtrack. The reeds are in the foreground and the cityscape in the background -- drawing a direct connection between them. What were witnssing here is nothing less than the poisoning of the world itself.
I think it's funny that an episode with Kennedy in its name would spark off all sorts of conspiracy theories on its meanings. And I suspect the names are designed to allow all sorts of interpretation, although it could very well be just two names Chase thought sounded appropriate.
My long-shot reference is that the name Heidi also recalls Heidegger, with all the attendant associations of Heidegger's philosophy on the question of being, and the nature of existence; as well as with sympathising with Nazis - introversion leading to self-absorption - whereas Kennedy is the ask-what-you-can-do-for-your-country voice of concern for others...
If I may be permitted to be extremely anal here, Jeffrey Goldberg (in Slate) barely touched upon the 'meta-commentary' provided by this particular version of "Comfortably Numb":
Here is how he treated it:
""Comfortably Numb" reappeared in last night's episode, sung this time by Van Morrison with Pink Floyd's Roger Waters and the Band (minus Robbie Robertson and Richard Manuel). It's a gorgeous version recorded live in Berlin in June 1990 as part of an all-star restaging of The Wall to commemorate the fall of that other wall seven months earlier. The stage was erected on Potsdamer Platz, which for 44 years prior to November 1989 had stood unoccupied as disputed territory. An account of the staging on Roger Waters' Web site relates that the West German military had to be brought in to clear the site of unexploded ordnance from World War II and that in the course of that search, the soldiers unearthed a previously undiscovered section of der Führerbunker. Martin Scorsese, who (like David Chase) has a genius for incorporating music into his narratives, used the Berlin version of "Comfortably Numb" in The Departed, in the scene where Billy (the undercover cop played by Leonardo DiCaprio) makes love to Madolyn (Vera Farmiga), his psychiatrist and, unbeknownst to him, the girlfriend of Colin (Matt Damon), the mole planted by the Irish mob in the state police.
Even before we look at the lyrics, then, this is a piece of music that's fairly bursting with associations. The numbness (not all that comfortable) of life in East Germany, where before the Communist regime's collapse the Stasi had neighbor routinely betraying neighbor (a surveillance nightmare vividly depicted in the German film The Lives of Others). A similar sense of demise and mutual betrayal pervades this season of The Sopranos. The explosive nature of buried and long-ignored debris echoes in Tony's relationships with just about everyone, most especially Carmela. Hitler's bunker represents evil in its purest form, and last night's development demonstrated that Tony is himself becoming more evil and more spookily convinced that his destiny is to triumph. The love scene from The Departed conjures Tony's sexual attraction to Dr. Melfi and, less literally, his unrequited (and completely undeserved) desire to be comforted and accepted without having to hide his darkest self.
The song itself is about the easing of pain, both in the positive sense of relief ("There is no pain you are receding") and in the negative sense of drifting away from reality ("This is not how I am/ I have become comfortably numb"). Literally, it is about taking a drug ("Just a little pinprick"). As it happens, drug-induced reality bookends this latest episode of The Sopranos ("Kennedy and Heidi")."
-----------------------------
This is indeed the "Departed" version, which was remixed (all audience sounds removed from this live track, and the ending cleaned up) from the "Wall Live berlin '90" album. However, Chase is actually 'layering up' the meanings of the track *even more* than Scorcese does (which is a neat and impressive trick,due to Scorcese's acknowledged mastery of the use of music in his films already.)
Its not just the Berlin Wall associations to the provenance of the recording - look at the performers. Each is also demonstrative of aspects of being "Comfortably Numb". Here, Roger Waters is performing the song that is the 'explanatory' heart of the album "The Wall", without the rest of thje band that comprised the original group. Why? Because he was in an angry feud with Gilmour, Wright and Waters that was going on 11 years strong(and, aside from the last Live Aid, still does). These members froze each other out of their lives entirely, and essentially destroyed the most-excellent thing that they created growing up. They all seemed to be quite CN-ed to the situation.
The Band was (and still is) also rife with acrimony, as, post 'Last Waltz'-show, Robertson refused to re-team, the rest continued to tour as "The Band", but it obviously wasn't the same. Robertson and Levon Helm were the angriest feuders. Manuel died after committing suicide on a tour as the latter 'Band'. All had/have been quite CN to their own feuding situation too. Only Danko, Hudson and Helm are in this track as "The Band".
Scorcese, of course, had to be keenly aware of these 'statements' that the track was inherently making - not only is he a student of rock-and-roll generally... but he used to live with Robbie RObertson, directed "The Last Waltz" (and more recently, the Dylan documentary, whiched focused on the years ending with "The Hawks" as his touring band. "The Hawks" of course became "The Band".
And Robertson has since also worked for Marty repeatedly as his music producer on his films' soundtracks - including on "Departed". He had a hand in selecting the track too. Forgiveness? CN-ness overcome?
All I'm saying is that its impossible to really over-analyze the soundtrack choices of geniuses.
[Question: Had we ever seen Chris' Vegas goomah Sonya before? Did anyone else think that she was the most fully gorgeous female the show has ever presented before? SUrely Tony must have been stunned at the lady Chris was stowing away from everyone's eyes - including his. Another reason that he decided that he absolutely had to posess her.]
It should also be said that Tony's reaction to the peyote was entirely normal. One - always on the first time - vomits, before taking 45 minutes or so for the effects to kick in. But the real effect here is also cinematically effective; Tony first "purges' before he can "see the light".
Joan said: "...This accident was much more violent and severe -- and of course, the airbags had been removed! If not for their money-grubbing, Tony and Chris could've both walked away from that accident unscathed. I've always understood why the wiseguys disable the GPS from their fancy cars, but at the same time I wondered how long it would take before one of them died because he had sold his airbags."
is this right? I know that Chris had previously been running a stolen air-bag scheme, so that development would have been poetic... but I thought they showed that chris wasn't wearing his seatbelt, and that the airbag had indeed gone off, contributing to his death. It was shown in the aftermath, and Tony also explained it that way to Carmella. And I don't think Tony lied about that - he took sick comfort in that being the provable, medical truth about how Chris got his (initial) injuries in the crash.
Joan also said: "[AJ]... was repelled by the brutality of the 2 Jasons in beating down that innocent cyclist. He didn't participate other than to shove the guy away when he stumbled into him..."
also not correct. AJ didn't appear 'stunned' this time - he actively and angrily shoved the Somalian back into Jason, and then went and threw the bicycle into the path of an oncoming truck. He was no non-participatory bystander here.
During Christopher's intervention, Tony, after learning that Christopher suffocated little Cossette by siting on her, tells Christopher "I oughta suffocate you." It's true. Check it out. Creepy.
I think when Tony said "I get it" he was refering to the fact that the people around him such as Chris, are his problem! Like....when he was winning at the roulette table, he started laughing and said "He's dead".....I think he thought that his bad luck was now over since the thorn in his side, Chris was gone now....also has anyone noticed that Tony's now doing what Chris was doing? He's ignoring the business back home(The asbestos dumping) and doing drugs....the very same thing he like HATED Christopher for....and I think AJ's gonna commit suicide in the end....cuz no matter how good Tony feels about everything else, he'd never be able to get over the death of his son.....especially if he felt responsible...
Just want to point out that AJ didn't throw the bike under the car, another one of the goons did. I just re-watched, and the individual who threw the bike is wearing an entirely different set of clothing.
Long-time reader, first-time poster. Anyone else notice they also replayed that song 'Space Invader' by the Pretenders after Tony had finished in bed with Chris's Vegas Gommah. Anyone know which episode this song was previously used on and what its significance is? It's on the 'Pepper and Eggs' soundtrack.
Micheal, Dublin, Ireland
A couple of posters have made the case that, unlike his father, AJ has already proven incapable of being a mob boss. I do not necessarily agree with that point of view. There have been hints that, perhaps, in his youth, Tony was not all that different from AJ. Like AJ, Tony briefly flirted with taking a "straight path" by going to Seton Hall. In "Remember When", Paulie says that Tony's hand "shook a little" when he made his first kill. Finally, we know that Tony was not with his cousin Tony B. the night he got pinched because he'd had a panic attack and cut his head after an argument with his mother. This is certainly not enough to prove anything, but there are definitely hints. Perhaps, just perhaps, Tony was similarly weak-willed, passive and depressive as a kid, but, as he aged, it manifested itself in an inability to fight the inevitable slide into the mob life. Perhaps, the young Tony was more like AJ than we'll ever realize and, quite possibly, THAT is why AJ has always caused Tony such worry... because he sees way too much of himself in him.
Matt - Great analysis as always, but I disagree that Chase picked the names Heidi and Kennedy at random. Tim hit it on the head, Christopher was Kennedy -- the one who wanted to do the right thing (ie make amends with Phil Reotardo) and was overruled. [Making the character the namesake of the slain president and turning Kelli into Jackie O was another clue.] Tony was Heidi, the one who acted on instinct. No idea about the significance of the name Heidi, however.
"Not even "The Wire" delves so deeply into human nature."
The Wire is more concerned with story than with delving into the souls of its characters. I would argue that that is what makes it superior to The Sopranos, but YMMV, you know?
By the way, note that AJ invoked Rodney King when he said,"Why can't we all just get along." King's plea was seen as either profound or naive. It is probably both -- although it sounds naive coming from AJ
Jerry,
On top of that, Van Morrison is an alcoholic, adding layer to the Numb-ness.
Anna: I think "The Wire" delves as deeply into human nature, but it goes into much more detail about the environment the characters inhabit. So does "Deadwood," which, despite its untimely and unsatisfying cancellation (Season Three was setting up a Season Four that never happened) is still my favorite HBO show. It's a matter of personal taste, but what makes "The Wire" and "Deadwood" more satisfying, to me, is that they portray a wider spectrum of humanity. We're not just seeing the worst kinds of people week in and week out; the corrupt and vicious coexist with decent, hardworking, but no less fascinating and contradictory individuals.
"The Sopranos" is uniquely bleak, though. It's like a six-season dirge.
bigbumprun: Rodney King's plea has been invoked many times in movies and TV shows, and it's interesting that it's often framed as naive. I'll never forget seeing the first such quote, in the Mario van Peebles western "Posse," which I saw in a theater in Dallas back in 1993. When one of the characters cried, during a scene of much bloodshed, "Can't we all just get along?" the audience roared with laughter.
@ Joe F: Really? I re-watched too, and the bike-thrower was wearing a light-brown jacket. AJ was the only one wearing a light-brown jacket in the group. I'd like a 2d opinion.
Jerry, AJ didn't throw the bike. The kids who did is wearing dark pants. AJ was wearing blue jeans. AJ's passive and stationary butt is visible in the shot of the bike getting run over by a car.
Jerry and Chris: Glad you guys clarified that point about the bike. I was just about to go in and argue against AJ gaining new insight into his dad's wretched brutishness. To me he seems more like he's drifting into Tony's mindset -- laughing at the kid with the burned toe, laughing when the biker flips onto the sidewalk, pushing the biker into the embrace of AJ's thug pals.
But if AJ wasn't the kid who tossed that bike (the moment was rather confusingly edited) then that complicates everything.
There was a very short classroom scene in which the professor was speaking of an author/poet that was as popular in his day as John Grisham is today. I was wondering who she was speaking about and what was the poem she was speaking with the class about - I suppose this was a class that AJ was sitting in on.
Anonymous, she was talking about Wordsworth, specifically "The world is too much with us; late and soon, Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers." and his rejection of materialism.
Anon, it was Wordsworth. The professor quotes, "The world is too much with us," and asks "why such strong words against the material world?" The phrase "getting and spending we lay waste our powers" is written on the board. Here's a link to the poem in question, which is probably at least as relevant as the history of Pink Floyd reunion concerts. ;-)
Anyone else sensing associations with Graham Greene's Brighton Rock? This shows up most strongly with AJ's gang's choice of sulphuric acid (vitriol) as a weapon, which I thought was a clear shout-out. But now with Tony murdering Chris, I'm further reminded of that original study of a psychotic gangster who murders all who can possibly take him down - even including "family". If this continues, I would expect more ponderances of the nature of evil and redemption in the final 3.
Anonomyous said:
"I think when Tony said "I get it" he was refering to the fact that the people around him such as Chris, are his problem! Like....when he was winning at the roulette table, he started laughing and said "He's dead".....I think he thought that his bad luck was now over since the thorn in his side, Chris was gone now..."
Good find - I only noticed this comment on second viewing last night. Tony had to go to Vegas to be able to freely experience (and express) the relief that was his authentic reaction to Chis' demise. With Sonya, he initially maintained his mask, but under the peyote his inhibitions dissolved. He associated Chis' death with the end of his losing streak. In his psychedelic high, I think he was verging on delusions of grandeur, expressed by his "I get it!", that he can control his own destiny.
Meanwhile, his business is grinding along unattended by his oversight....
BTW, I only recently discovered this blog, and want to commend everyone, especially Matt, for the excellence!
I think that if it weren't for "Kennedy and Heidi" Chris may still be alive. IMHO all the talk about football, the Heidi program, et cetera is just over thinking it and reading a little too much into it.
Nobody seems to be touching on the dynamic between Phil and Tony. Phil is glad that Chris met his end and I think that he sees it as pay back for the murder of his brother. Phil has Tony by the short and curlies and there isn't much he can do about it.
Another thing is the visuals of the lights. When Tony was in his coma dream world there was that lighthouse beacon. Then there was a similar beacon when Carmella was in Paris. The headlights from Kennedy and Heidi's car and lastly there were the headlights that shone over the top of the ditch just after the crash while Tony was snuffing the life out of his beloved nephew. The bathroom light and of course the sunrise. Seeing the light?
Just think of what was going through Chris's mind while his uncle was suffocating him. He was fully conscious but unable to do anything to stop it.
I so despise Paulie Walnuts. He curses his real mother then the woman that raised him like a son. She is in her casket and all he can think about is the "disrespect" being shown to him and the money he wasted on five hundred prayer cards. I hope he gets paid back in spades.
One question: Is "The Sopranos" really so bleak and nihilistic? I don't think so at all. There's so much joy and humor in the show. It's just that the main characters are part of a corrupt world and a crumbling family. And that reminds me (as most things do) of a line from "Chinatown," when Noah Cross asks JJ Gittes if the DA is honest: "He has to swim in the same water we all do." Everyone in "The Sopranos" has to swim in the same water we all do, and the recognition of that fact (back to Noah Cross again: "Most people never have to face the fact that at the right time and the right place they're capable of anything") is what makes the series so compelling, and terrifying. That dirty water is befouled by our own waste (management). Is that dark and cynical and nihilistic? Or just a clear-sighted view of the moral universe we all inhabit? I think the greatest shot in all of "The Sopranos" was the Christmas tableau closer of last season -- outwardly perfect but quietly imploding. Maybe that's harsh, but it's a reality. Anything less would be pollyannaish.
Ken, thanks for your take on AJ. It has caused me to see Tony's face in the Satriale's finger-chopping scene, at the amusement park when Johnny Boy and Junior are arrested, and various scenes in their house. Tony's face when Paulie was waxing nostalgic about his first hit was not a picture of pride. I have also been remembering Junior's frequent disparaging remarks about Tony as a leader. Now that is partially sour grapes, but he his remarks about Tony's athletic abilities are also telling perhaps. I think you are correct about the similarities. Janice gave it right back to them, but with much less effectiveness than Meadow. I wish we knew what Barbara did. Removed herself as much as possible, if her behaviour as an adult is any guide. I'm still not at all sure that A. J. can do what his father did.
Jim: Yeah, but in "Chinatown," the hero is a private eye who, for all his cynicism, has a code of values and isn't working on the side of darkness (though he gets suckered into doing so without realizing it).
I don't mean to imply that the show is no fun, or that it has no moving or charming moments. But the context is definitely grim, because so many of the main characters are selfish and/or viciously violent. "Oz" and "The Shield" might rival it in that respect, but even those shows usually included one or two major recurring characters who weren't profiles in sociopathy.
And a general note: I love that arguably the most intensely discussed, explicated and theoretically characterized line in "Sopranos" history is "I get it." I can't think of a better example of the show's main strength: its ability to frame moral or psychological situations in great detail without giving you "answers."
Jim, great comment. I think it's very easy to condemn the appalling choices the characters in "The Sopranos," make, but unless you have lived that life, been brought up in the kind of homes that Tony, Chris and Paulie, etc., were, how do we know how we would react? God knows we hope we would all be Barbara or better, that our innate sense of right and wrong would triumph,but you can you know if you haven't been there?
The one thing that slapped me in the face at the end of Ep 18 was my mother's admonition that "crime" movies were OK so long as the bad guy "gets it in the end."
Tony already "gets it". And the end is near.
Thinking for a moment in the manner of a person on peyote [ahem]:
Tony says, matter-of-factly, that the roulette wheel works the same way as the solar system.
Watching the sun go up and down is the most direct experience we have of how the solar system works.
If the solar system really worked like a roulette wheel, we would "win" by falling into the sun.
So what he "got" ...
---
In other notes, extra credit to whoever noticed the similarity of the headlights going by to Finnerty's "beacon". And the closeup of the bathroom ceiling light was unnervingly reminiscent of David Lynch, wasn't it?
GREAT EPISODE...Thanks for your posts.
Here was an unintentially funny moment from the show (for me anyway)...
After puking, Tony sits on the bathroom floor as the peyote starts to kick in. The shot cuts from his face to a zoom up to the bathroom light on the ceiling (with a slight buzzing sound in the background).
For a second, I chuckled because the zooming shot on the light looked very similiar to the a camera set up used in a old Star Trek episode called "Dagger of the Mind" (which, interesting enough, centered around a mind control device).
BTW, I'm not suggesting that it was done on purpose...just noting it.
My recollection of Irregular Around the Margins is that Adriana and Tony did coke at her club prior to the accident but then decided to drive to get more, but I haven't watched the episode recently to be certain.
In "The Wire, Season One, " D'Angelo Barksdale finds he isn't well suited to the Barksdale Family Business, and he ends up murdered at the request of someone senior in the family's management, Stringer Bell. Stringer thinks D is weak and therefore a threat to the family. Sounds familiar, doesn't it. In the last season, Wee-Bey's son, Namond, realizes he isn't cut out for his father's business, and he may have made it out, but he had a great of help, and his father's permission.
After looking at the show again, I see that AJ is shown being consoled by his a-hole friends at Christopher's memorial service. He's playing the part of someone aggrieved, but in the next scene, he's upbeat in the shrink's office, showing keen interest in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The next time we see him, he's in class, but evidently an English literature course that he may be attending because the instructor is attractive. His next appearance finds him depressed and asking, "Why can't we all get along?"
Which adds up to 1) AJ is actually mourning his own loss of innocence by discovering that not every problem has an easy, kindergarten solution; 2) he's in denial about his own growing contribution to the world of violence and paranoia; and 3) he's rapidly becoming Tony all over again, his covert criminal lifestyle enforcing his dishonesty in therapy and thereby guaranteeing his depression and festering emotional stasis.
2 things sticking with me: the look on the girl's face as AJ and Jason laugh over the kid who lost his toes, and Tony telling Phil, "This is the sound of me hanging up" and then Phil snaps his phone shut first.
Don't you see? Tony DOES get it. He sees now that the pull towards a better, more morally-centered Tony has caused him nothing but harm and that his decisions should be driven by his instinct to survive. He struggled greatly to dispose of both Pussy and Blundetto, but in the end it was necessary. The same can be said for Christopher, and this time there was no dilemma. He just did it. And now he sees.
I'm glad "Deadwood" was mentioned. I immediately thought of Al Swearingen's "mercy killing" of the minister when Tony smothered Christopher. It wasn't until T's many later references to the death/his act that I understood he was ridding himself of a problem, not committing a warped act of mercy (as if the interrupted 9-1-1 call hadn't been clue enough for my thick skull).
Nobody's addressed the continued ratcheting up of the Tony-Phil conflict. Can there be any question that violence between the two looms? They pointedly repeated Doc's whacking--Phil's moment of ascension--in the preshow summary.
I didn't take AJ's laughter at school over acid-toe boy's fate as anything less than an indication he's crossed over. Wordsworth readings from a hotty teacher aren't going to save him.
Finally, in the continued mob slaying of the English language, Tony's using prostate for prostrate generated a chuckle.
Regarding IRREGULAR AROUND THE MARGINS, my memory is that Tony and Adriana had not done any coke right before the accident. They do coke together onscreen earlier, in a scene that takes place on a different day, and it is implied that Tony is doing coke (he leaves a bathroom rubbing his nose, invoking Meadow's suspicion) in an even earlier scene that takes place on yet another day.
However, the night of the accident, we see Tony and Ade after hours, bemoaning the fact that they don't have any coke, and talking each other into driving to her dealer's place.
By the way, when they are discussing where to get coke in that scene, Tony mentions that the Bing's regular dealer has probably gone home for the night. I always found that line slightly implausible (perhaps I am just being naive), as I would have thought that the crew would want to keep drug dealing out of one of their important "places of business" (for reasons that are obvious, given the Adriana/FBI arc), and not be on a friendly first name basis with a drug dealer who operates there. Even if Tony's self-destructive tendencies cloud his judgement, I'd assume Silvio would be more careful.
I'm confounded by all this talk of the punishment that Tony supposedly deserves -- his death, his family disintegrating, his world disintegrating, his children dying, etc. Wouldn't that just be an exceedingly pat and derivative ending?
Stephen articulates what I felt during the transcendent sun-beacon moment -- that Tony actually arrives at some sort of real epiphany regarding his hypocritical, pussyfooted bullshit. Now, maybe I'm just a sick, sick person, but I've had this long-standing itch for Tony to "fully commit," truly embrace his nature and realize his potential as the unconquerable king of crime he could very well be. Unfortunately (for Tony), drug-induced states of ultimate harmony and insight tend not to stick.
Sorry to beat a dead bike y'all - but there are plenty of other sites that believe - as i & Matt thought - that AJ threw the bike (you only see the brown jacket in the throwing scene). So, Matt, please bother your HBO contact to sort out that unclearly edited scene definitively.
- Also, the last time we heard Van Morrison on the soundtrack was his "Glad Tidings" - after Tony killed Tony B. (iirc - which I may not be).
- A plea for help: When Tony woke up in the hospital bed, I felt like the Bart Simpson parody of the Wizard of Oz scene: "I know you, Paulie... and you, Sil... and you, Benny... *you*, I don't recognize."
Who was that other young family-member who asserted himself like an upper-level capo? I didn't recognize him - was he a red-shirt being awkwardly "Nikki/Paolo'd" into the show at this late date?
Skeeterbytes wrote: "Nobody's addressed the continued ratcheting up of the Tony-Phil conflict. Can there be any question that violence between the two looms? They pointedly repeated Doc's whacking--Phil's moment of ascension--in the preshow summary."
I just don't see a gang war erupting in the last three episodes. More likely Tony will self-destruct in some fashion, and Phil will be positioned as the beneficiary of a weakened North Jersey family. Either that or Phil will get whacked or arrested, and the positions will be reversed -- Tony Soprano in control of everything, at at the peak of his meltdown. Who knows, really?
Skeeterbytes also wrote: "I didn't take AJ's laughter at school over acid-toe boy's fate as anything less than an indication he's crossed over. Wordsworth readings from a hotty teacher aren't going to save him."
Yeah, that was my feeling, too. The kid has embraced comfortable numbness. The only thing that can snap him out of it is chemicals -- the antidepressants prescribed by his shrink. But somehow I doubt he's headed for a Columbine or Virginia Tech freakout, or even violence against dad, just because Chase and company are continually trying to outguess the fans, and any viewer who hears the word "antidepressant" in conjunction with a teenage "Sopranos" character is going to think, "bloody rampage."
Jerry: "So, Matt, please bother your HBO contact to sort out that unclearly edited scene definitively."
Will do. Hopefully I can find something out tomorrow.
Nick: "I'm confounded by all this talk of the punishment that Tony supposedly deserves -- his death, his family disintegrating, his world disintegrating, his children dying, etc. Wouldn't that just be an exceedingly pat and derivative ending?"
Not really. I can think of plenty of gangster tales that ended with the protagonist dying or going to jail or into witness protection, the event causing (or occurring in tandem with) the end of his organization. But I've never seen a gangster tale where the whole enchilada just fell apart -- total entropy, all at once. That would be something new. (Unless there's some other movie or TV show that did the same thing and I'm forgetting.)
This comments thread and Alan Sepinwall's take are slowly convincing me that Tony's epiphany will be a negative one -- that, as Nick says, he'll embrace his inner gangster and turn stone cold Macbeth on everyone and everything. The reason that seems convincing is because of the much-discussed and generally agreed upon worst-case scenario drama of the show. Tony getting worse and worse all the way to the end would end the show with some kind of grand nihilistic implosion, or close to it, and abuse the audience as well -- all of which is very much consistent with Chase's sadistic prankster M.O. It'd be like, "Thank you for enjoying a six-course feast of rancid ziti. Here's your dessert: a bowl of razor blades."
Finally, if you're interested in a detailed analysis of the William Wordsworth poem quoted on the chalkboard of AJ's class, read this post by blogger and House regular M.A . Peel.
Matt: I agree with the whole enchilada entropy thing. What I'm reacting negatively to is the idea of punishment -- something about that word seems a tad simplistic and ill fitting in Tony's case. I'm having trouble articulating this, but I think I'm uncomfortable with the implication that there is some external force of justice or some unbalanced scale that needs to be righted, like something out of Aeschylus. The Sopranos is more internal than that, and I just don't see any emphasis on such abstract, extrinsic influences. It's not like The Godfather or even The Departed in that sense, where I would have fewer qualms with the word "punishment." I could be glossing over or forgetting stuff from past episodes, of course.
Jerry, I don't take it personally, but—really—I promise you AJ didn't throw the bike. It was the little psychopath who was driving the car. He's wearing a dark leather jacket and dark pants. AJ is wearing a brown jacket and light-ish blue jeans and is visible (motionless) in the shot of the bike flying through the air. I've watched it about a dozen times on the Tivo.
Tony sees Kelly at the funeral and at first he (and we) are impressed that she does indeed sweep into the room with the stature of the wife of the former president. But one sight of the body and she is blubbering with grief, shattering any further comparison with the great lady who famously held her grief inside throughout the aftermath of JFK's assassination. Tony is shown glancing at Kelly after this outburst of uncontrollable grief. Maybe he is thinking how wrong his assessment was when she first walked into the room. Or maybe it is Tony wishing that he was close to something better.
I just checked with HBO. AJ did not throw the bike -- it was someone else.
Also, an aside to one of the House visitors (you know who you are): I just got an explanatory message from you via Blogger comments saying you had posted two versions of the same comment and wanted to keep the second one. But looking back over the thread, I can't tell which comments you're talking about. Email me at reeling@aol.com to clarify.
I find it interesting that HBO has an employee in charge of resolving textual disputes with respect to its programming. Does this person work for HBO or for the show? Does he decide these things for himself (consulting video and transcripts) or does he check with the producers and get back to you?
the other family member...I don't know who he is, but the actor's name is Frank John Hughes and he's a really good actor from what I can tell, most memorably in his role as Bill Guarnere in "Band of Brothers".
I posted a little bit last week about why it was important that the acid-burned frat boy owed gambling debts, and I think what I wrote there helps explain A.J.'s reaction in therapy this week. It goes back to the Second Treatise of Nietzsche's "On the Genealogy of Morality": "The feeling of guilt, of personal obligation ... had its origin ... in the oldest and most primitive relationship among persons there is, in the relationship between buyer and seller, creditor and debtor". A.J. (and Tony as well) can torture debtors and gamblers all they want without developing a feeling of guilt because the masochistic joy they experience by causing pain to the debtor is their payment from the debtor for the sums he can't present them.
The Somali on the bike, though, is a different story completely. Who watching that episode could possibly have felt it was OK to do what the gang did? The Somali was innocent of any crime. He was the symbolic equivalent of Pie-O-My or Cosette or the ducks or Chris's baby or any of the other innocents for whom Tony has his soft spot. AJ was wracked by guilt for what he did. He knew the beating was wrong, but he was not a strong enough person to stand up and stop it.
What I find interesting going into these last three weeks is that we have Tony succumbing completely to being an animal, extinguishing any sense of guilt that might have once haunted him through the orgy of self-effacement that Vegas provides, while A.J. is struggling to retain his humanity. I wouldn't be surprised to see the conflict between father and son as the one that finally ends the season.
Chris: "I find it interesting that HBO has an employee in charge of resolving textual disputes with respect to its programming. Does this person work for HBO or for the show? Does he decide these things for himself (consulting video and transcripts) or does he check with the producers and get back to you?"
Well, there isn't one person for all the shows. Whoever serves as the lead PR person on a particular program answers these questions. Whenever possible they try to resolve it themselves without bugging the writers, producers, etc., by consulting the stack of scripts in their office, for example, or popping in DVD and going through a disputed scene and making a referee-type call. (Which is what happened when I made the request related to AJ and the bike.)
The question of what, exactly, Tony said on the cliff necessitated a call to the writers' room. Ditto the question of whether "Chasing It" was shot on High Def or 35mm film that was futzed with to look like video (the latter, as it turns out -- so said the episode's director, Tim Van Patten).
I am not sure if this is the hidden meaning behind the "I get it!" shout at the end of the episode, but, after some thinking, I realize that these past two episodes mark an enormous and important change for Tony. Tony finally crossed a line that he avoided for all these years. While Tony never shrunk from killing members of the "Family" when necessary, he did everything in his power to protect his blood relatives, right up until the past two weeks.
Think about it. Uncle Junior tried to kill him twice and only decided against a third attempt (spearheaded by Richie Aprile) because he lacked support and, as a result, determined that he better off siding with Tony rather than against him. Still Tony allowed him to live. Tony's own mother, along with a lifetime of vicious mental cruelty, conspired with Junior on one of his attempts (the one that came closest to success, too), but, in spite of temptation, Tony allowed her to live. Tony even protected his cousin Tony B. from an obvious "hanging offense" until it was on the verge of costing him his power and, when he was finally left with no other choice, he did the deed in New York, not New Jersey.
Suddenly, last week, Tony, after a lifetime spent protecting AJ from "the life", orders him right into the arms of what he knows is a crew of entry-level mobsters, Now this week, after Christopher had previously committed numerous "hanging offenses" for which Tony consistently gave him a pass, Tony whacked him. The final scene of the dumping of asbestos in the meadows on the New Jersey side of the river was a obvious metaphor for Tony no longer caring about "sh***ing where he lives" (and as I re-read this before posting, I realize that perhaps doing the deed in the meadows may foreshadow something for Meadow, or maybe I am trying way too hard to read into it. lol).
Anyway, Tony's deal with the devil is now complete, and his soul has been surrendered. All that's left is to see what the final butcher's bill will be.... and, let there be no mistake, it will be huge.
Rewatching the episode, I noticed another small moment.
During the ugly attack on the Somali biker, one of AJ's "crew" used the "n-word." In response, the Somali seems to be angered by the term NOT for the reasons one would expect from a typical African American TV character, BUT because the Somali didn't think the term applied to him ("I have a job" "I'm a student").
Very subtle and interesting spin.
Three (rather elaborated) points:
…after first saying that I only discovered this blog a week ago and am quite appreciative of the detailed and coherent discussion here.
First, regarding the notion of Tony and Chris switching roles (e.g., Chris taking on 'smell the roses', Tony turning to drugs): A feature of human nature whereby someone who disdains another’s perceived character flaw is often proven to be someone just itching to dive into that same flaw, a kind of “pre=emptive hypocrisy” if you will… In this regard, with Tony posthumously ‘honoring’ Christopha by indulging in his women, his drugs, after in particular haranguing Chris from day one about drug use [curiously of the ‘old school’ – oddly in keeping with American proscribed laws -- whereby the only drug to scorn was the inhaled or injected kind, not the imbibed variety, in which T always indulged aplenty], T echoes none so much as the right-wing judge or politician or even religious leader who castigates pornography or sexual affairs or homosexuality or drugs only to turn out to have a ‘secret life’ wherein they indulge the very ‘sins’ they publicly deride and seek to punish in others.
This is almost classic human nature, even in much less publicly hypocritical ways, wherein among friends, many people can be seen to gossip or ridicule those character traits in others which in fact are ones they cannot see in themselves as being their own bugaboos too, a human effort to banish in oneself by refusing to acknowledge one’s own capacity for ‘temptation’ or ‘evil’ by indicting it in others. So often, as with T now, they are only a step away from falling off the wagon they convince themselves and others they are on, going from proselytizer against or rabid indulger of the one-and-same ‘sin’. The morality lesson here might be: Beware of what you preach against. Not so far from the Sermon on the Mount which so many so-called Christians in our own time cannot seem to apply: Do not decry the speck in thy brother’s eye whilst ignoring the log in your own.
Second, regarding the notion of AJ potentially (and I would say only potentially) finding some sort of conscience, if not wisdom … I sense that Chase is tapping here into the philosophical belief that there is the potential for good and evil in all of us, that in fact it can take very little sometimes in life experience to push us one way or the other. AJ sits in on ONE class about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and suddenly he has a bit of a ‘conscience’ about something which actually would show selfless concern for the world [i.e., he can’t possibly benefit personally from the resolution of peace in Palestine]. He sees an innocent Somali get beat up by his so-called friends and ‘suddenly’ it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back [Tony’s own appropriated metaphor in the episode] and he has what has been called this week his “Rodney King moment”? [But let’s not forget that it was King himself who’d been beaten to a pulp, voicing a kind of forgiveness as well, which does NOT apply here, also noting that King had in fact been doing his own ‘walking on the wild side’ with several prior acts before he got stopped and then beaten up, none of which justified the beating he took but which suggest he did have some reasons to feel a bit of remorse/guilt rather than self-righteousness in the face of what happened to him]
I can’t yet assume though that AJ’s therapy-session tears for “the world is too much with us” (unclear whether he yet sees, as Wordsworth did, that the root cause of why we can’t get along is the pursuit of material wealth and territorial ‘security’) are a point of no return. AJ did also, in this episode, laugh and even make his own pointed “joke” at the expense of the guy whose toes had to be amputated due to his new cohort’s terrorizing ‘vengeance’. And, at the outset of the response to even the Somali biker, AJ seemed to join in the “us vs. him” group mentality. While he seems to have pulled back from that incident, enough to feel remorse and apply it more broadly, perhaps given the more clear-cut ‘innocence’ of the Somali biker [well, clear-cut if you’re not locked into “us vs. them” mentality] but we haven’t seen him apply that yet to the fate of the guy who lost his toes to acid, perhaps suggesting AJ ‘indulged’ in that one on the rationale that the guy hadn’t paid up his betting debts and therefore “deserved” it??
In short, jury is still very much out on AJ and his potential for conscience either ‘winning the day’ or not, but I do think it illustrates a Chase pov that the direction we head in life, the actions and behaviors we opt for, can be determined by sometimes even the littlest of gestures or experiences. One session of Wordsworth? One class on Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
In contrast, look too at how little it takes to turn someone to cast his lot with evil. Tony, shark-like, only needed to see blood in Christopher’s mouth and he was suddenly willing to cast his lot with his murderous side against – for the first time – someone who he had actually trusted – the one person he had ever turned to in his most ‘secret’ dealings, e.g., Ralphie… and with whom he had had his ‘bond in blood’ – they were ‘blood brothers’ if ever two in this series were ‘blood brothers’ and yet T could flip on him on a dime (hah! – so worried, T alleges he was, that Christapha could have “dimed” on him) …
Trace that all the way back in T’s life and, while it’s hardly a little thing, imagine T’s life without the modeling and maneuvering of Livia. In a way, was there any other outcome for T except this one given that – try to imagine – would Livia have acted any differently than T did in the face of a bleeding ‘ally’ who she also suspected of potential treachery? No, this was a Livia response to life events, pure and ‘simple’ and Tony was being “his mother’s son” in this moment as much as ever. Livia would have done in T himself, her blood son, given half a chance, for similar paranoid fears of treachery [manifested even merely in ‘lack of spine’[ from Tony.
Perhaps on balance, as many a philosopher does suggest (and Shakespeare, after all, WAS also a philosopher, so why not Chase too?), it takes more than a little to turn a human path toward a choice for evil, but it can take so very little -- as AJ may be symbolizing -- to turn that path around toward good, toward conscience.
Third, the “I did it!” vs. “I get it!” controversy, albeit allegedly ‘resolved’ by HBO’s own claim… I myself heard “I did it!” and was going to write here something I will still put forward even despite the apparent resolution in favor of “I get it” because my own interpretation, I think, makes the two hearings not so very different, as might first seem. I heard “I did it!” to mean not simply “I killed Christopher” but much more reverberatingly “I figured it out”, i.e., “I did what I needed, dumb fuck that I am having stumbled on to it – just following through, upon the sight of blood, to make sure it meant death" [quite like a shark, Tony, ‘blood on the water’ and he goes for the kill] – "and now suddenly my luck is back, I must have figured out that the key to life is not deliberating too much, not letting my so-called conscience get in the way" [which would imply, if so, that he’s unlikely now to ever continue with or take seriously any Melfi ‘lessons’, even long enough to misapply them as rationales for corruption or killing]. The "I did it/I get it" is a rejoicing in the 'bliss' of just going for pure hedonism, as well as shark-eat-shark, living as if his big ‘gut’ instinct is blessed with the Midas touch, i.e., the ‘anti-Hamlet’ lesson, to not be stymied by self-doubt. [And now, when he goes back to Melfi, presumably only to gloat over his sense of revelation/triumph, the question is: Will SHE “get it” that he’s completely derailed himself?]… In short, “I did it!”, i.e., “I did what it took, semi-inadvertently, to get my life [i.e., my sense of triumph] back!” … in fact is not so terribly different from “I get it!” in terms of what it says about Tony’s episode-ending so-called revelation.
This too, then, would seem to be a Chaseian commentary on all those 'I found the truth!" declarers in our world, religious, political and otherwise, who in fact are seeing the world through self-serving, ahem, peyote eyes, the kind of vision and truth whereby a roulette wheel is "just like" the solar system?
CygnusX1 re Tony's reaction to Kelly at the funeral. I believe his reaction after seeing her breakdown was a manifestaion of the feelings that he expressed in Melfie's office, where he stated something to the effect that he sees people around him in real pain, and in the end, it makes him feel mad at them.
If you go back to the very beginning of this show- it all started with Tony meeting with Melfi. Won't it end with Melfi turning on him?
Sorry it has taken me a while to get back to this -- I was finally able to rewatch the episode and there were indeed airbags, I just missed them the first time around. I know why I did it, too -- because reselling airbags has always struck me as monumentally stupid, and I expected that eventually it was going to come back and bite one of these guys on the ass. My bad.
Carolyn, I'm just cranky enough this morning to want to dispute just about everything you said, but I'll just choose the one that struck me as most wrong: Tony, shark-like, only needed to see blood in Christopher’s mouth and he was suddenly willing to cast his lot with his murderous side against – for the first time – someone who he had actually trusted...
This reading of the scene ignores the entire Tony/Christopher storyline. I would say you sound like a new viewer, but you brought up Christopher's participation in Ralphie's disposal, so that can't be it. But Christopher was never the man that Tony wanted him to be, even before he became a heroine addict and before his girlfriend became an FBI mole. Way before all that, Christopher showed that 1) he wasn't very smart 2) he was overly ambitious and cocky about his small accomplishments -- withness his ongoing conflict with Paulie Walnuts and 3) he wasn't fully invested in the life as anything other than screenplay fodder -- first examined in-depth in season 2's "D Girl."
By the time Tony murders Christopher, he's doing nothing more than calling in a very old debt. The number of times Christopher should have been whacked, according to the Family code, are numerous. Each and every time, Tony gave him a break, only to cause him much regret later: when Chris got uppity with Paulie before he was a made guy, Tony solution was to promote Chris; when Chris became a junkie, the solution was rehab; when Adrianna was revealed as a rat, the solution was to whack Adrianna; when Chris indulged his Hollywood fantasies by taking advantage of Tony's medicated state during his recovery, Tony indulged Christopher and went along with it. Tony had so many reasons to kill Christopher it was amazing that he lived as long as he did. The only real surprise relating to Christopher's death was that it was Tony who finally murdered him; I was betting on either Paulie or suicide.
Matt
I just ran across this blog and find it extremely interesting and insightful. I just wish I had found it sooner, because you are able to answer and analyze so much more than I ever thought of.
I too, was a HUGE fan of Deadwood and was sorry to see its cancellation. I found it to be truistic historically, which drew me in each episode.
Has anyone else noticed that we haven't seen Artie this season? I wonder if he will come into play at some level. His friendship with Tony was almost brotherly.
After watching this episode for the 2nd time, I agree that Chris's behavior was most likely due to drugs. Tony found an easy way to get rid of Chris and took it. It left me in shock, but I guess we shouldn't be...it is the Soprano's. One never knows when your number is up!
Carolyn writes: "...would Livia have acted any differently than T did in the face of a bleeding ‘ally’ who she also suspected of potential treachery? No, this was a Livia response to life events, pure and ‘simple’ and Tony was being “his mother’s son” in this moment as much as ever."
One of my smartest, Sopranos-obsessed confidantes -- okay, he's my son -- was ruminating on just this point after digesting the "Kennedy and Heidi" episode.
Are we seeing Tony Soprano finally turning into his mother? I noted that the teaser for this coming Sunday's episode contained a clip of Tony sarcastically saying, "Poor you!" to someone.
Think about it for just a minute. Why wouldn't Tony have inherited some of his mother's qualities? One of his sisters --Janice -- certainly did.
Tony (and we) spent years listening to Dr. Melfi's take on what was WRONG with Livia as a person and a parent, and how this might have affected him.
But not once did she ever raise the possibility that some of Tony's problems --not his depressions or panic attacks, per se, but maybe his calculating, self-centred qualities -- might stem from Livia's example. Any thoughts?
a p.s. to my earlier post, this one regarding Christopher's death and its timing...
Taking as a given that Chase is a brilliant screenwriter (and, as noted earlier, philosopher too), one has to take as a given that each scene -- and with him, even each line -- is there for a reason, nothing 'superfluous'... Why, then, we must ask, does that particular scene of Tony vs. Phil and the subsequent position advocated by Christopher precede Chris's death, rather than some other moment?
I posit two things which I haven't seen noted in other comments here. First, is -- yet again -- money. Tony hears Chris taking a position which eats into his already-'engandered' pocketbook. He's advocating relinquishing 25% of the 'take' on asbestos when Tony is craving a full take for himself. After all, at that point, he still has huge gambling losses of late to make up for. Thus, he hears Chris's new adoption of the "smell the roses" which Tony has abandoned as being one that is going to cost him, in real mullah. This in itself puts Christopher in the camp (again to T) of those who cannot be trusted -- to be on the same side of the financial coin that he is.
Second, Chris's position means a softening of the one thing that is tantamount to Tony's view of the Family (i.e., the mob one): namely, that it's us vs. them, NJ vs. NY. Any smelling of roses in the name of making peace with NY is also a hint of betrayal to T, no matter how he tries to puzzle it out as he stares (as if into Christopher's soul) while he watches him from the passenger (ahem, shotgun) seat.
A point was well noted somewhere, I believe on a different website, that Tony had once said to Christopher, in the intervention when they put Chris into the rehab facility, upon learning via Ade that Chris had suffocated her dog, "I oughta suffocate you."
There is yet another 'motive' for Chase to have come back to this (I doubt he pre-planned that many seasons ago that Tony would suffocate Chris but may well have looked back and liked the retrospective foretellingness of that line seasons ago) and a) make it the vehicle for T's 'breaking point' vis-a-vis Christapha and b) time it to follow on those two particular types of perceived betrayal -- costing him money, costing him power in the territorial rivalries of the mob as "final straws" (also a metaphor T uses in the episode).
My main point here being: Don't forget the money. T now saw Chris -- on top of everything else, the potential threat to his secrets, etc -- as not on the same page vis-a-vis Going For the Gold, and that was enough to override bloodlines, lifelong 'kinship', whatevah.
just putting this out there, and please don't freak out in some bullshit conservative/liberal shootout just because someone even mentions these things...
thinking of all these things on the table. Chase's affinity for today's political climate and world events... In the past few episodes we have been reminded by christopher and tony of the terrorists in the scene with Tony dropping the dime to the FBI on the two arab men from earlier. Carmella reading "Rebel in Chief". AJs talk with the shrink saying you'd have to have your head so far up your ass not to be depressed right now. AJ going to a class on Israel and Palestine (but only casually and half assed). Kennedy and Heidi's delimma as mentioned above... Kennedy being one of the biggest conspiracies of the last century. Which brings me to my point...
Chase would not make such a careless reference to 911 as the scene in which tony nearly dials the phone but stops... Not on a show that has been with us through one of the most important transitional periods this nation has ever seen.
This is not meant to drag out any other discussion of conspiracy or politics, but Chase has always meant this show as a reflection on our own, real life... using this completely absurd family with all of its extremes...
What i am saying is that 9-11 marked a moment in our nations lifespan where right decisions could have been made... from that tragic day when the Bush administration, having all the evidence on hand, turned its head and let events take place that would eventually lead to war profiteering the likes of which are hardly matched in history.
A truth is, and i have to believe as an artist that Chase is speaking to this...
we are a nation that kills our own children, and destroys our own resources in order to maintain our way of life. Like Tony and like Kennedy's choice to keep driving. We are comfortable numb as Americans.
I just think that beyond the discussion of "what is this show talking about?" is the next question... "Why is this show talking about this?"
(btw, great mention of Ted Kennedy by one poster above, fleeing the scene of the accident... which also made me thing of JFK and PT109 was it? dragging his crewmembers to safety by his teeth as he swam to shore... Two Kennedy's as well...)
To Joan
I'm guessing that you may have read something into my post that wasn't there or intended. I say this because your response as to how you see the Tony/Christopher history and dynamic sounds pretty much exactly the way I see it. Perhaps you read into my use (and maybe it was unfortunate) of the word "suddenly" when I said "Tony, shark-like, only needed to see blood in Christopher’s mouth and he was suddenly willing to cast his lot with his murderous side against – for the first time – someone who he had actually trusted..." I only meant 'suddenly' in terms of choosing to use that moment and that occasion, opportunistically, to go with his murderous self-preservation-at-all-cost instinct rather than the much-Hamleted indecisivenss and procrastination and second-chancing Tony had 'given' Christopher, as you document. Indeed he had, but I think the spirit of this episode (and symbolically the series) was that many of this cohort's murder victims resulted from final-impulse moments whereby sometimes longstanding ambiguities of trust and loyalty got decided "on a dime" ... Without that car accident, I would say it's pretty clear that Tony was still in 'debate' mode about Christopher during that drive.
Unfortunately another post of mine isn't up yet. I wrote two posts for this blog on Wed. morning but have been utterly unable to get my submissions to "register" such that Matt has had to upload them after my emailing them to him and the 2nd one isn't yet uploaded, but maybe it will be already by the time you read this, in which case I refer you to it. I elaborated there on my views about the nature of the 'debate' T was deliberating on in that car ride, pre-accident, and what it says about the tightness of Chase's scripts and how that prior scene with Phil and Christopher's reaction to it were pivotal in T's ultimate decision. But, still, had there been no car accident, T would not have chosen that night, I posit, to kill Christopher, newfelt anxieties about him notwithstanding. I think Chase's point here was to show just how shark-like these guys are and that a sign of blood, of weakness, of suspicion can be all it takes for prior loyalty or even prior ambivalence including a whole history of distrust -- but also a whole history of blood, and son-like, kinship feelings, to be overthrown, and indecision or second-chancing 'suddenly' cast aside in the name of "Fuck it. Throw the guy overboard. Cuz I'm too suspicious, and I need to relieve myself of suspiciousness."
I'm not sure what else -- you say you disagreed with virtually everything I said. I confess that surprises me cuz I felt I was merely extrapolating as to the series' overarching themes or messages (obviously subject to debate). I can't help thinking perhaps you heard something as an assumption which I wasn't intending. In any event, no, I'm not a new viewer. I started in Year 3 and then went back and borrowed from the library every episode from Year 1 and 2, and I've followed it ever since. For me, my chief interest that made me a watcher was the family dynamic, small 'f', not the Family dynamic... since family dynamics are my professional focus as well. For me the finale of Season 4 was Edward Albee and then some, utterly exemplary American drama for the ages, Falco and Gandolfini updating and actually ratcheting up the 'reality' level once set by Taylor and Burton.
One thing I would dispute, a bit, or tentatively, in your characteriztion of Christopher:
You say he "showed that 1) he wasn't very smart 2) he was overly ambitious and cocky about his small accomplishments -- withness his ongoing conflict with Paulie Walnuts and 3) he wasn't fully invested in the life as anything other than screenplay fodder -- first examined in-depth in season 2's "D Girl."
I see Christopher a bit more complexly than that sounds, I think. I think he had that gnawing ego of an up-and-comer, classic 30-yr-old American male syndrome of thinking the world is their oyster, in this case mobbed-up oyster... I think he was -- or thought he could be anyway -- "fully invested" in "the life" but also turn a further 'profit' on it by screenwriting his insider account of "close encounters" or brushes with fame -- Mob Boss Life -- into an additional personal glory, one he thought mere mob-insider-status should and would shoe him in the door to (and, in effect, it did, so far as it went). His bluster and absolute conviction that he could bully anybody to do anything, something I dare say he thought he'd come by through Tony's aegis -- and he, I always figured, could in the final analysis never actually kill Tony, or flip on him -- unless maybe 'inadvertently' if the Feds had him by the balls ... cuz deep down he still wanted to succeed on T's turf, be T's most-trusted, eventual successor -- But he was kidding himself to think he wasn't playing with fire by doing the screenwriting as well as all the other screw-ups ... and I mean playing with fire vis-a-vis The Family, thinking with the arrogance of an up-and-comer that he could get away with special dispensations etc...
Well, I've rambled on too much, but those are some of my views of Christopher which, with this one exception I've just belabored, I see as essentially overlapping all of those you mentioned.
To Eve:
You followed up my first post by saying:
"Tony (and we) spent years listening to Dr. Melfi's take on what was WRONG with Livia as a person and a parent, and how this might have affected him.
But not once did she ever raise the possibility that some of Tony's problems --not his depressions or panic attacks, per se, but maybe his calculating, self-centred qualities -- might stem from Livia's example. Any thoughts?"
It won't surprise you, from my earlier post, that I share your line of thinking. In fact, as someone who deals professionally with family communication dynamics, it has long been my view that we underestimate just how much two -- at least two -- fundamental parental influences shape a child's development. One is the way the parent responds directly to the child, including -- in worst-case scenarios -- abuse, abandonment, etc., things which make the child feel unloved, hurt, ashamed, labeled a 'failure' (classically by a demanding father), etc. The other is the way the parent models how adults deal with life, how they trust or not, love or not, laugh or not, make conscientious and conscience-based choices or not, etc etc..
As you point out, and I think accurately as I recall, Tony's time with Melfi reviewing his past and his relationships with his parents has focused almost exclusively on this former influence, things which can make a child grow up hating a parent, seeking to reject or go the opposite way of a parent, often embittered and insisting they'll never be the kind of parent their own parent was, based on how rejected or unloved that parent made them feel.
Yet, even the most "rejecting" of children -- meaning those who so hated their parent that they vowed to become the opposite -- still, mostly unwittingly, ALSO absorbed traits of that very parent in all those ways mentioned -- like whether the parent viewed the world with trust or distrust in default mode, whether they socialized their child by their own daily talk into seeing the world exclusively or not in terms of "us versus them." These kinds of influences are the kinds which Tony "inhaled" from Livia (and his dad) and which make him "his mother's son" regardless of how much he may have grown to despise her for not loving him as he'd have wished. And, indeed, I think Melfi has touched on those things very little if at all in her sessions with Tony. She takes too much as a given, it seems, her client's representations of himself and his mother and sees the mother, Livia, as having wounded him, but not the extent to which she infused him too with the very spirit and way of approaching life which festers in T's body and soul.
Read the poem, folks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_Coming_(poem)
The Second Coming, by William Butler Yeats
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
-----------
The gaze blank and pitiless as the sun....that look on Tony's face you were talking about.
Going back to your original point: Had K & H gone back to the SUV, they would have stumbled into Tony murdering Chris, meaning their own consequent murders...mirrored later when Tony points out that Chris's daughter would have been killed had she been in the car seat.
Perhaps these two characters are not as inconsequential as they seem. One of them may feel guilt over what happened and confess to the police, or making it even more direct: Doesn't Tony look up and see their headlights as he finishes murdering Chris? Is there any possibility that they saw Tony, if not killing Chris, then doing something that will call attention to the accident? We were not shown them coming back, but we don't know that they didn't come back. Getting the title is a lot of billing for 2 supposedly inconsequential characters. Perhaps their names refer to this plot playing out: the Kennedy being referred to is not JFK, but RFK, who relentlessly prosecuted the mafia, and this Kennedy--the one who wanted to turn back--is the one to bring about Tony's downfall. As far as Heidi goes, that seems to me to be a pun on "High - T," "T" being Chris's usual name for Tony.
One other note for those making abstruse connections to Tony as the "other Kennedy," since he was the passenger in the other car. The RFK analogy could also apply re all the Arab (at the Bing) and Palestinian (AJ's class) content: RFK was murdered by a Palestinian. (RFK was actually the first American murdered by an Arab terrorist).
I'm not sure whether I am just imagining this but:
In the car, prior to the accident, the closeups of both Christopher and Tony seem to show a lot of red highlight. It could be a trick of lighting but it looks accentuated to me. Almost photoshopped in.
Or am I just seeing things that aren't there?
John Henry
Incredible! On May 19, right at the end of the "Kennedy and Heidi" blog, someone calling herself "bg's girlfriend" posted "Second Coming" by W.B. Yeats.
She did this before the latest episode (also titled "Second Coming")aired on HBO tonight (May 20).
Girlfriend, you are either remarkable prescient, or else someone at HBO or Chase Films with the initials "B.G." gives great pillow talk!
I am impressed and can't wait to see Matt's analysis and the subsequent discussion -- about the use of this powerful, apocalyptic poem and more.
BTW the way folks Chris was not in need of a fix. He wasn't using cocaine or any other stimulant. He was actively high on heroin or a derivitive. His obsession with the radio was an attempt to keep from nodding off. I can't get into details with this , but I'll say that I have professional and personal experience.
i read ALOT of recaps.
and you are the best.
seriously, thank you so much for giving superb analysis to the best show on tv, ever.
Speaking of familial moral bankruptcy...
"Kennedy"? Fleeing the scene of an accident?
A quick google of "Chappaquiddick" and "Sopranos" confirms that I'm not alone in making the connection.
Coming very late to the party (just caught up last night) and doubt this will be read by anyone by Mr. Moderator, but just a thought: I think the "specific reasons" why K&H bypass the accident *do* matter, at least in the sense that their failure to intervene is motivated by the fact that they're already breaking the law. Bad deeds beget bad deeds, and the more you commit, the harder it is to (literally) turn back. Worth noting, too, that Heidi's youth and immaturity is emphasized not only by the fact that she's not old enough to get her driver's license, but by the fact that she's wearing her retainer. Although the two girls would likely be about the same age, Heidi is portrayed as the less mature/morally developed. And yet, as Matt points out, she's the one behind the wheel. In theory, the goal of any therapy process is to give the more reasoned, far-thinking aspect of ourselves more time in the driver's seat. But unless we're careful, and show considerably more knowledge of self than Tony has or wants, the brute instinct for avoidance and self-preservation will keep on rolling down the road.
Good post, I only have to disagree with the idea of Christopher already snitching. Countless times Chris talks about being ostricized from the family due to his drug problem. Tony's same emotionless thought process/paranoia is simply filling in the blanks with what he needs to think in order to justify himself in killing Chris. Throughout the series, he has always, 100% of the time, justified every action he has ever taken, no matter how absurd. As far as the experience at the house during his coma after being shot, I didn't see it at all as Tony the gangster vs. Tony the family man. This would only make sense if the house was full of his family members as they pertain to his family life. However, the fact that Tony B and his mother, both of whom are dead, are shown means that the house is resembling the afterlife and his briefcase his earthly posessions or ties. Further evidence of this exists in him hearing his daughter's voice crying out to him from the trees telling him not to leave them, causing him to be frightened of going into the house and ultimately stopping him from doing so. If the house and everything inside were to resemble family life, why would his daughter's pleas stop him from entering? That aside, great post.
I noticed something very interesting when you view the last scene where Tony is looking up as Meadow enters frame by frame. It is clear to me that his expression is not just of acknowledging her entrance but instead of one of movement and fear. His arm comes down very fast off the jukebox, dips low and then starts back up as the screen goes to black. It seems to me that he went for a gun and was just bringing it up when things stopped. Was Tony left handed?
Post a Comment