post #841 of 1093
5/15/06 at 9:15am
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
| But the longer it takes to get to the actual punchline...the better the punchline needs to be. |
|
Originally Posted by Joseph DeMartino
Maybe people don't know "what the Vito story was about" because it isn't over yet so it is a little harder to assess its meaning and importance. Personally I wait until I hear the punchline before deciding if a joke is funny or not, but maybe that's just me.
Characters you don't really care about. Some of us are actually interested in the supporing players and don't mind that they maybe get the spotlight for an episode or two in six years. As for the show being "all about the mafia" - it never was. If this were a Mafia show Tony wouldn't be in therapy, we would hardly ever seen wives, kids, parents, etc. It would be about "the life". It isn't, and never was, and as it approaches the end it needs to deal with impact of the past six years on the human beings involved. That's called drama and is not the same thing as action/adventure, which is the genre a lot of people seem to think the show should be. |
|
Originally Posted by JonZ
Yea but wouldnt you rather see how Phil is sneaking around quietly taking NY away from Johnny S behind his back, or what sort of backlash theres been about Rusty getting whacked or how Carlo is handling his new responsiblity,being made a capt after whats nis name hung himself?
|
|
Originally Posted by Joseph DeMartino
I'd like to mention that the book the fireman was reading, The Devil in the White City by Erik Larsen, is a very good read.
|
|
Originally Posted by Joe S
Did anyone catch when they had Vito and "Johnnycakes" in bed and they cut to the scene with Bobby's model train entering the tunnel. Had to chuckle at that.
|
|
Originally Posted by Allen Hirsch
First use of the "train into the tunnel" sexual imagery was North by Northwest, that I know of (and I know Hitchcock was pleased that they slipped that one by the censors).
|
| . I was so confused when he seemly for no reason, started beating up his business partner and turning evil in the course of a few seconds, right before our eyes. I actually watched the episode three times and couldn't figure out what lead him to doing that. Just because he conveniently found a bag full of money on the steet and had a couple of setbacks with getting his business started up? |
|
Originally Posted by YiFeng
i believe silent films were utilizing that already.
re: Vito storyline, doesn't it remind you of six feet under w/David's story. that was kinda' weird |
|
Originally Posted by YiFeng
ya think those kids that attacked the conductor will get capped?
|
| it seems that there are so many things that happen in the newer seasons of the sopranos that would have warranted retaliation in a regular mob movie |
| it's not impossible with the resources+money if he was vengeful enough. |
|
Originally Posted by Alex-C
All complaints aside, tell me you didnt LOL when Vito said "I love you..Johnny Cakes."
|
| if you've been reading the thread, it has everything 2 do with classical forms of storytelling. chase wants a verite so truthful that the universe of the sopranos is MORE real than real life itself. even in reality, the guy probably would've utilized all of his mafia resources to track down the kid. it's not impossible with the resources+money if he was vengeful enough. |
| I guess Chase just isn't telling a story you're interested in watching. |
|
Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie
Yet they keep on watching. I just don't get it.
|
|
Originally Posted by Jeremiah
Not for long, or at least, not without the same excitement as in years past. I haven't been excited to see an episode of the Sopranos since the start of S4. Now I watch it because nothing better is on and am hoping that the show will be exceptional once again.
|
|
Originally Posted by Tim Gerdes
I'm curious. Let's say Chase followed your advice and had Bobby, or Tony, go after the kids that attacked Bobby. What's the point? What does that show us? What further insight does it give us into these characters?
If all Chase did with The Sopranos was give us the same tired plot, over and over—which you point out, practically every other mob-related movie has already done—I would have preferred he ended the show long ago. What you propose is not a classic form of story-telling. It's a classic story. One we've already seen, over and over again. Instead we're seeing something new—for this universe anyway—a crew of bloodthirsty thugs, on the decline, whose muscle and influence aren't what they used to be. Much more interesting than just watching people being savagely beaten to show us how dangerous the Soprano crew are. We know that already & frankly I don't need to repeat it just because it follows some archetype, or simply for the sake gratuitous violence. I guess Chase just isn't telling a story you're interested in watching. |
| On the other hand, I seem to be more and more disappointed after watching it and realizing that it's never again going to be as good as seasons 1 and 2. |
| again, read what i've already written. |
| Two of the very best characters (Johnny Sack and Phil Leotardo) are relegated to the background |
|
Originally Posted by Raasean Asaad
I think the fact that he doesn't get some sort of revenge and basically just takes it is what Chase is trying to convey. What have we seen from this character this season, Tony rags on him and disrespects him. His wife and kids are overbearing and give him no respect. He tried to earn a few extra bucks by shooting the rapper and screwed that up. Now to add the most insult Bobby gets attacked by some kids and may lose his eye. I can maybe see some things happening for Bobby Bacala before the end.
|