Written by:
Jonathan Kleier
Under the guidance of David Chase, The Sopranos as an epic has influenced the very fabric of television programming, and further. The NY Times reported shortly after the show's finale that "writers of other hot series were watching," and explicitly stated the extreme influence of cutting-to-black had on profound superstar writers of series like Lost, and many others.
But this isn't particularly the influence I refer to. I think writers of Lost see this as an opportunity to be lazy -- an opportunity to let the audience decide the show's ending, it's a cop-out. You, J.J. are the writer and I want you to decide the ending, I, as the audience, do not want that responsibility because simply, it is your show, story and vision. Not mine. Conclude definitively, please.
The Sopranos influence I refer to is far more profound. There's the cliche in writing stories, "if you show a gun in Act 1, that gun damn well better show up in Act 3, and preferably as a major plot point. In other words, the conventional thinking is that every word, every object, every action must -- no matter what -- ultimately effect the 3rd Act or effect the following scene, which must effect the next scene, until ultimately it ends at the same outcome of, it better relate to ACT 3.
The Sopranos, David Chase and HBO, I feel, both followed this convention, yet they broke it in ways not previously done in mainstream storytelling -- successfully. Underrated in The Sopranos was the meticulous, pacing, misdirection, etc.? How can you make the great scenes impact the audience without adequately pacing (whether slowly or not) previous scenes. The writers understood tension and they were superb. To bash certain episodes or certain parts of a given episode as too slow is to, in my opinion, not appreciate that the pacing and the craft of slowing and speeding it is tough. Perhaps the fast action scenes would not be as impactful as they were had certain other scenes not been "slow."
Showing posts with label cut to black. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cut to black. Show all posts
8/17/2008
Chase's Cut-to-Black: 1 Year Later
Jonathan Kleier
08/15/2008
As is widely known, The Sopranos concluded with an obscure, rare, and maddening cut-to-black -- mid-scene. Indeed, at the time, Chase's bizarre choice of edit was baffling, meaningfully unclear, and confusing with respect to its intent.
But after one year of Chase's bizarre cut-to-black, after allowing that jarring moment its year to marinade in my brain, perhaps there is meaning. I intend to extract meaning from that infamous last scene, new meaning that most, myself included, didn't have the capacity to understand 1 year ago.
What did Chase intend to say when he abruptly and unconventional cut-to-black? Certainly, we the audience will never ever know the real answer – perhaps not even Chase himself has that solved. However, after a year of thoughts festering, the cut-to-black began seeping into my brain and it developed -- in a weird way -- in me, a somewhat life-changing outlook on the world.
While I do not believe that Tony is dead, I do believe that The Sopranos is dead -- and it dies abruptly and without warning.
Soon after, a close friend of mine died... abruptly, and without warning. Hit by a bus never to again exist in this world.
The world is indifferent and unknowable; it does not care about life or emotion, it just turns and turns as we go on day to day. Though it can be said that much of life is predictable, which it is, -- we wake up every day, go to work, sit at the same desk, do the same monotonous tasks, brush our teeth, take a shower, then go to bed. Then we wake 6 hours later and repeat. We go to lunch at places that we know what to expect and when we get the unexpected, we frown. And this is why McDonalds is what it is.
When one dines at McDonald's, no matter what state or country, we have an expectation that we can accurately predict that our Big Mac will always be the same Big Mac served to us locally -- and it always is the same. Predictability is comforting in this way, it is routine, it is knowing what to expect in a world that changes quickly and a world where we cannot always exert our control.
So, The Sopranos conclusion ruffled some feathers. It did not finish in any predictable way. If I were a betting person, I would bet that zero viewers in the whole world would have predicted Chase's ending. Thus, we as viewers felt a little uncomfortable. Chase did not give the typical happy Hollywood ending, the predictable one.
08/15/2008
As is widely known, The Sopranos concluded with an obscure, rare, and maddening cut-to-black -- mid-scene. Indeed, at the time, Chase's bizarre choice of edit was baffling, meaningfully unclear, and confusing with respect to its intent.
But after one year of Chase's bizarre cut-to-black, after allowing that jarring moment its year to marinade in my brain, perhaps there is meaning. I intend to extract meaning from that infamous last scene, new meaning that most, myself included, didn't have the capacity to understand 1 year ago.
What did Chase intend to say when he abruptly and unconventional cut-to-black? Certainly, we the audience will never ever know the real answer – perhaps not even Chase himself has that solved. However, after a year of thoughts festering, the cut-to-black began seeping into my brain and it developed -- in a weird way -- in me, a somewhat life-changing outlook on the world.
While I do not believe that Tony is dead, I do believe that The Sopranos is dead -- and it dies abruptly and without warning.
Soon after, a close friend of mine died... abruptly, and without warning. Hit by a bus never to again exist in this world.
The world is indifferent and unknowable; it does not care about life or emotion, it just turns and turns as we go on day to day. Though it can be said that much of life is predictable, which it is, -- we wake up every day, go to work, sit at the same desk, do the same monotonous tasks, brush our teeth, take a shower, then go to bed. Then we wake 6 hours later and repeat. We go to lunch at places that we know what to expect and when we get the unexpected, we frown. And this is why McDonalds is what it is.
When one dines at McDonald's, no matter what state or country, we have an expectation that we can accurately predict that our Big Mac will always be the same Big Mac served to us locally -- and it always is the same. Predictability is comforting in this way, it is routine, it is knowing what to expect in a world that changes quickly and a world where we cannot always exert our control.
So, The Sopranos conclusion ruffled some feathers. It did not finish in any predictable way. If I were a betting person, I would bet that zero viewers in the whole world would have predicted Chase's ending. Thus, we as viewers felt a little uncomfortable. Chase did not give the typical happy Hollywood ending, the predictable one.
The good guy did not win, per say. In fact, we have little idea who in fact did "win." Did anyone even "win"? Who exactly was the “good guy”? Tony? Because we know him, or Dr. Melfi? The F.B.I.? Try figuring it out.
And the lesson I learned from the abrupt conclusion is that anything in the world can come to an end. No warning, no indication. People sadly can just drop dead with a brain aneurism, undetectable to the best doctors. The Sopranos, autered by David Chase, is undoubtedly the greatest television show/novel/film yet to be written. College classes will form so that deeper readings can take place, and millions will, regardless of college, will engage in their own deep reading.
Thank you Mr. Chase for demonstrating with simply a canvas and words, multi-dimensional characters, and a show we love and cannot forget, thank you for instilling in me and millions that nothing is safe. To me, I have learned an important lesson: cherish every minute with your friends and your loved ones, because the world is simply too unpredictable and the cut-to-black can come to anyone and anytime, without warning, without indication or signal. It can just end, period.
Written by Jonathan Kleier
jonathankleier@gmail.com
6/18/2007
What is the Text? How Should The Sopranos be Read?
Jonathan Kleier
What can be considered the "text" of some work of art? Do the commentaries from The Sopranos DVDs -- from Chase, or other writers and directors -- does their commentary become part of the art? Certainly, I have heard "revelations" on these DVDs or at least statements that do add or alter some meaning of what is shown on screen. And, thus, must we purchase DVDs, lest we miss out on the "real" meanings? I don't think DVD purchase should be required. What happens on Sunday nights during that original airing, that is the text, because that is what viewers have bought. HBO never said that DVD purchases are required for full understanding. In other words, the author's commentary is meaningless in that it cannot add or alter anything.
Chase's day-after-finale interview he gave us, "Anybody who wants to watch it, it's all there." Well, I admire the hell out of David Chase and am grateful for what he has given us for 8 years, but his decision to conclude with a mid scene cut-to-black is a`bizarre gimmick ending. A story must end, I cannot understand otherwise. Is it acceptable for a novel in its final chapter to end mid sentence, followed by 4 blank pages? It needs to end, no matter how it does it, it needs to end somehow. The Sopranos does not end, and Chase's decision to do this needs to be scrutinized.
Especially,with that said, it is not all there in front of us, despite Chase's claim. There is not any ending. Arguments, plausibly, can be made for almost anything to have occurred in the blackout, and so fine, if it's all there, I guess perhaps his definition of "all" is that all possible outcomes are there -- choose one. Unfortunately, I had hoped that Chase would be the one to choose the ending, or an ending. I do not want to choose the ending; it is not my show and perhaps had HBO paid me millions, perhaps, I would have dreamed something up. It would not, however, be Chase's ending, the only one that matters.
While Chase's interview is interesting, it's irrelevant in terms of the show's meaning. Chase is not part of the show's text, and I don't believe most of his "insights," ever, nor many other author's. Partly because I think they deliberately lie or are vague, or because perhaps the author's subconscious is responsible for some of the text, and even he or she cannot know what is meant.
Anyway, Chase's first quotation from the article, about his final scene, "I have no interest in explaining, defending, reinterpreting, or adding to what is there." Then why are doing an interview where you defend the end of the show?
Thanks for the help.Personally, I'm glad Chase said nothing, to me, the text should reveal its meaning, not the author. But why, why give an interview? Chase, with his bizarre cut to black sucked most attention away from the text, Tony, and aimed it at himself. So many wonder, why did you do that Chase? Why, Chase, didn't you provide something of some sort of ending? let Meadow walk in, perhaps sit, fade out with a nice dissolve over meaningful music, and life goes on. Or, show Tony dead, or show anything, just so long as a proper fade out is provided. Instead, he provided nothing. Black. The majority of viewers thought,rightfully so, that the cable went out. Why would Chase want the audience to not even realize. Just blackness without sound, perhaps there is symbolism in the black. Black is death, no?
In a way, Chase seems to have used symbols for the sake of using them and therefore abusing them. Throughout 6 seasons, so many seeming "clues." Symbolism is always risky to interpret, but it is used often and often by the best writers of literature, and these authors do it in some sort of honest way. But Chase gave symbolism, hinted some meaning, then later hinted some other meaning, then said, no I was kidding, first time I meant it. Actually, it wasn't symbols, it was part of the plot, and now people wonder what the cat symbolizes...
So what constitutes text? The show's end credits? Pointing out that the man in the "Members Only," obviously a "hint" (though, is it relevant because the show doesn't end and we will never know. The title episode of the 6th Season's Opener is "Member's Only." In that episode, outside Satriales, Vito (I think) asks one of the rats -- either Ray Curto or Eugene specifically about the "member's only" jacket.
So, then the cut to black was not the end of the series? If the end credits had information, pertinent to the scene, then that's part of the text? Almost the entirety of the theory that Tony dies is linked to that credit.
Since the end credit's are a part of the text, can we consider the "Scenes from Next Week" as well? How about HBO's spokesman, speaking to Reuters, said that the flashback in the penultimate episode is a very "legitimate" theory. As evidence, the article quotes, incorrectly, the flashback's dialogue, "At the end, you probably don't hear anything, everything just goes black." To be clear, this is a complete misquote. Bobby says, "You'll probably never hear it when it happens." No mention of anything going "black." Why is HBO deliberately misleading its audience?
It's so trendy to say at this point, but to quote the New York Magazine titled article, it seems like a "long con." In time, I hope that is found untrue. The Sopranos does stand as a series, with meaning, every episode, every season. Every scene written with craft and calculation, every gesture revealing intent. Even the final episode was quite wonderful,if only Chase would tell weather it ended. Cut-to-black, credits? Chase's interview??
What can be considered the "text" of some work of art? Do the commentaries from The Sopranos DVDs -- from Chase, or other writers and directors -- does their commentary become part of the art? Certainly, I have heard "revelations" on these DVDs or at least statements that do add or alter some meaning of what is shown on screen. And, thus, must we purchase DVDs, lest we miss out on the "real" meanings? I don't think DVD purchase should be required. What happens on Sunday nights during that original airing, that is the text, because that is what viewers have bought. HBO never said that DVD purchases are required for full understanding. In other words, the author's commentary is meaningless in that it cannot add or alter anything.
Chase's day-after-finale interview he gave us, "Anybody who wants to watch it, it's all there." Well, I admire the hell out of David Chase and am grateful for what he has given us for 8 years, but his decision to conclude with a mid scene cut-to-black is a`bizarre gimmick ending. A story must end, I cannot understand otherwise. Is it acceptable for a novel in its final chapter to end mid sentence, followed by 4 blank pages? It needs to end, no matter how it does it, it needs to end somehow. The Sopranos does not end, and Chase's decision to do this needs to be scrutinized.
Especially,with that said, it is not all there in front of us, despite Chase's claim. There is not any ending. Arguments, plausibly, can be made for almost anything to have occurred in the blackout, and so fine, if it's all there, I guess perhaps his definition of "all" is that all possible outcomes are there -- choose one. Unfortunately, I had hoped that Chase would be the one to choose the ending, or an ending. I do not want to choose the ending; it is not my show and perhaps had HBO paid me millions, perhaps, I would have dreamed something up. It would not, however, be Chase's ending, the only one that matters.
While Chase's interview is interesting, it's irrelevant in terms of the show's meaning. Chase is not part of the show's text, and I don't believe most of his "insights," ever, nor many other author's. Partly because I think they deliberately lie or are vague, or because perhaps the author's subconscious is responsible for some of the text, and even he or she cannot know what is meant.
Anyway, Chase's first quotation from the article, about his final scene, "I have no interest in explaining, defending, reinterpreting, or adding to what is there." Then why are doing an interview where you defend the end of the show?
Thanks for the help.Personally, I'm glad Chase said nothing, to me, the text should reveal its meaning, not the author. But why, why give an interview? Chase, with his bizarre cut to black sucked most attention away from the text, Tony, and aimed it at himself. So many wonder, why did you do that Chase? Why, Chase, didn't you provide something of some sort of ending? let Meadow walk in, perhaps sit, fade out with a nice dissolve over meaningful music, and life goes on. Or, show Tony dead, or show anything, just so long as a proper fade out is provided. Instead, he provided nothing. Black. The majority of viewers thought,rightfully so, that the cable went out. Why would Chase want the audience to not even realize. Just blackness without sound, perhaps there is symbolism in the black. Black is death, no?
In a way, Chase seems to have used symbols for the sake of using them and therefore abusing them. Throughout 6 seasons, so many seeming "clues." Symbolism is always risky to interpret, but it is used often and often by the best writers of literature, and these authors do it in some sort of honest way. But Chase gave symbolism, hinted some meaning, then later hinted some other meaning, then said, no I was kidding, first time I meant it. Actually, it wasn't symbols, it was part of the plot, and now people wonder what the cat symbolizes...
So what constitutes text? The show's end credits? Pointing out that the man in the "Members Only," obviously a "hint" (though, is it relevant because the show doesn't end and we will never know. The title episode of the 6th Season's Opener is "Member's Only." In that episode, outside Satriales, Vito (I think) asks one of the rats -- either Ray Curto or Eugene specifically about the "member's only" jacket.
So, then the cut to black was not the end of the series? If the end credits had information, pertinent to the scene, then that's part of the text? Almost the entirety of the theory that Tony dies is linked to that credit.
Since the end credit's are a part of the text, can we consider the "Scenes from Next Week" as well? How about HBO's spokesman, speaking to Reuters, said that the flashback in the penultimate episode is a very "legitimate" theory. As evidence, the article quotes, incorrectly, the flashback's dialogue, "At the end, you probably don't hear anything, everything just goes black." To be clear, this is a complete misquote. Bobby says, "You'll probably never hear it when it happens." No mention of anything going "black." Why is HBO deliberately misleading its audience?
It's so trendy to say at this point, but to quote the New York Magazine titled article, it seems like a "long con." In time, I hope that is found untrue. The Sopranos does stand as a series, with meaning, every episode, every season. Every scene written with craft and calculation, every gesture revealing intent. Even the final episode was quite wonderful,if only Chase would tell weather it ended. Cut-to-black, credits? Chase's interview??
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)