What I've gathered about the Sopranos finale...

[InvisibleTouch]

...and I'll say first of all that I have not seen it, that I don't want to know the details of how it went, because I've made an effort to avoid that info until I can catch up with the DVDs and see for myself - but from unavoidable headlines and thread titles, I've gathered that it was in fact a non-ending, that it didn't "go out with a bang," so to speak, or nicely wrap up all the loose ends, and a lot of fans are annoyed. Well, to you I would suggest this: maybe the non-ending is a good thing. It gives you the freedom to decide for yourself how you want it to end - and the beauty of it is that each fan's ideal ending will then be different, and tailored to your own wishes. What could be better?

Back in the 80's one of my favorite shows was "V" (the Visitors). After two very successful mini-series, it ran as a weekly series for a single season, for 19 episodes. The last episode ended on a cliffhanger that was never resolved. I couldn't have asked for anything better - because it allowed me to picture the ending I wanted. And that surely wasn't the ending that the series writer would have come up with. Years later I actually found the unproduced script to the 20th episode, which was to be the start of the second season - and it resolved the cliffhanger from episode 19, but still left things open-ended enough that I could still picture my own chosen outcome.

Just by way of comparison.

If you reply to this post, let me request no "Sopranos" spoilers, please - I'm still trying to avoid them. :)

[JoDog]

1. I think there's a difference

between when a show ends with ambiguity on purpose, and when it gets axed before it can resolve a cliffhanger. While I never watched the Sopranos, from what I heard, the creator made a decision to leave the stage with a little mystery, perhaps mirroring the ambiguity and darkness of some of the characters' lives. When the "X-Files" was finally dragged off and shot, the ending was kinda left open, too.

What frustrates me is when things happen the other way. For instance, Joss Whedon's "Firefly" and "Angel" were forced to end with things unresolved. So was the new "Dark Shadows" in the 1980s.

I have noticed that some writers are trying to prevent that from happening either by getting movies based on the shows funded ("Serenity"), or simply not writing a cliffhanger if the show hasn't been renewed yet ("Dresden Files"--and SciFi better renew it. No Harry, No Peace!--and the first season of the "Gilmore Girls").

And then there are the rare shows that simply tell their stories and bow when they reach the end of it--like what "Battlestar Galactica" is planning.

And yes, I'm a science fiction geek. But as an old fan of "V", I hope you understand.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

2. It was a different kind of ending, for sure.

I have mixed feelings about it, but I give David Chase props for having the guts to end it that way.

It seemed especially odd, considering he knew the show was ending, as opposed to a show pre-emptively canceled, like Twin Peaks, which still managed one hell of a cliffhanger.