BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I think Jim Rome was the one who said it best... something like "... the end of Soprano's was their way of saying, 'To be continued... as a Major Motion Picture!'" There will never be a movie. David Chase has never written or directed a movie, he spent his entire career in TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 Creator of ‘The Sopranos’ to Make HBO Mini-Series At the end of “The Sopranos,” Mr. Chase had indicated that he was turning his attention to the movies and one particular film project, which he said he would write and direct (but would not describe).... HBO has released no details on the expected length of the mini-series, nor when it might be put into production. But in the past HBO has altered its schedule to move up projects that it deemed most ready and most worthy. If Mr. Chase turned in a script by late this year, the network, in theory, could begin shooting the series in early 2010. But Mr. Chase will be directing his film project for Paramount first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extrahammer Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Props to Lori on The Wire! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 There will never be a movie. David Chase has never written or directed a movie, he spent his entire career in TV. Chase has only worked in TV, therefore there is no possibility for a Soprano's movie. That's some pretty tight logic you got there, son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 :Part 1 will show how Chase directed, edited and scored the final scene of the Sopranos to lead to the interpretation that Tony was shot in the head in Holsten’s and how this ties into the “never hear it happen” concept that Chase hammered into the viewer before the show’s final scene. If I remember correctly, Tony actually never said that - I believe that all he said was that "everything goes black". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I don't watch Lost, but I have a personal rule about jumping in late on serials. I wish I'd watched it from the start. I'll probably pick it up on DVD at some point. Same with the first couple seasons of 24. Top five shows: 1. Simpsons 2. Deadwood 3. Sopranos (you know you write about football when your urge is to type "Sparanos") 4. The Office 5. Police Squad "Deadwood" is quite possibly America's greatest contribution to western culture. I am not ashamed to admit that I openly wept the day it was canceled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 If I remember correctly, Tony actually never said that - I believe that all he said was that "everything goes black". Rewatching the episode not that long ago I got the feeling and the sense of that he did get whacked, but it just seemed way too obvious...At first I was among those who thought the viewers got whacked...I just look at it slightly differently now... The scenes in a particular epidsode sometimes build suspense/curiosity and show you things in the background that the main character doesn't fully notice...Tony is still trying to reconcile his families, there is a creepy guy in the Members Only Jacket indicating that even though Phil is dead, he/the NJ family is not out of the woods - the risk always remains. Ultimately the movie never ends it goes on and on and on... In the end, if they want to have a mini series or a movie, they will... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimGraham Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 If I remember correctly, Tony actually never said that - I believe that all he said was that "everything goes black". I don't recall the exact line, but Bobby was the one who delivered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 I don't recall the exact line, but Bobby was the one who delivered it. I had it reversed - Bobby said "you probably don't even hear when it happens". No mention at all of "everything going black". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimGraham Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 I had it reversed - Bobby said "you probably don't even hear when it happens". No mention at all of "everything going black". And Bobby did see them coming when he got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 They begged Gandolfini for another season, offering him more than a million per episode, and he turned them down. Why would he do a movie if he didn't do the TV show? He wouldn't get much more money, and he made it extremely clear that money wasn't the reason he was turning them down. Anyone see a Sopranos movie being made without Tony in it? Thought not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Why would he do a movie if he didn't do the TV show? He wouldn't get much more money, and he made it extremely clear that money wasn't the reason he was turning them down. Because one is a feature film and the other is TV. I think Gandy thinks of himself as a film actor, now, and not a TV actor. There is also a HUGE difference in time commitment between doing a 13-episode season, and one film. Add to that the $$ Gandy would make from one movie (while still being able to do other things, that year) and he just may come around. As with sports, never conclude a person won't do something because they once turned down something similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Because one is a feature film and the other is TV. I think Gandy thinks of himself as a film actor, now, and not a TV actor. There is also a HUGE difference in time commitment between doing a 13-episode season, and one film. Add to that the $$ Gandy would make from one movie (while still being able to do other things, that year) and he just may come around. As with sports, never conclude a person won't do something because they once turned down something similar. Money talks, regardless of what actors claim. If and when they throw enough money at Gandy, he'll "begrudgingly" put on his Tommy Bahama shirt again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Quint Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 there is a creepy guy in the Members Only Jacket indicating that even though Phil is dead, he/the NJ family is not out of the woods - the risk always remains. Ultimately the movie never ends it goes on and on and on... Not to mention, the first episode in the last season is named "Members Only". Also, when you watch behind the mom & AJ while they're sitting at the table, you can see the guy in the members only jacket looking at the table. He's the only one who seems to notice that they're there. I think the ending is the ultimate irony. Tony never sees it coming and neither does the audience. Who really expected it to end that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MembersOnlyJacketGuy Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 For the last time, I was only going to wash my hands before eating my onion rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Hey Tim: What guarantees can you make on behalf of your company the we won't see a reprise of Joe Theisman's god-awful "Bruschi" love fest, only this time it's Brady's name that is said over 350 times, during the broadcast of Bills v Pats? I suppose I wouldn't write with such contempt, if I, and the rest of the country, weren't treated to an equal amount of it from your network the last time around. Unlike most, I don't really blame Theisman for having oral Brushci diarrhea. Theisman isn't that smart, and he certainly wasn't behind the "we've got to sell the Bruchi story" lame marketing play. No. Clearly Thiesman was given orders by the producers to play up the "Return of Bruschi". This smacks of some tool overproducing and reaching for ratings: trying to make a guy who simply comes back from injury into a "hero" by exaggerating his every act, to include how he stands, the expressions on his face, etc. into game changing and winning "achievements". To be fair, clearly Theisman, in his dopey fashion, overdid it on his execution of the plan. But that doesn't change the fact that the plan came from some ESPN producer. What else explains Joe's sudden love for a LB? Especially after some 50 straight SNF games when he clearly only wanted to talk about the QBs? Hint: if something is truly significant, it only needs to be said once. Repeating yourself = sales tactic. Why do I need to be sold on Tom Brady coming back form injury? I think I got it: it's important to the league this year. Besides, during the game, I am already watching the game = the deal is closed. Annoy me, and if I am a Steelers fan, I find something else to do. So again, I ask you: what is ESPN corporate doing to make sure we don't end up with yet another idiot producer for the Bills vs. Pats game who is more interested in "the story" than the game? And don't tell me Tom Brady is a big story. So is TO(or have you missed the last 3 years of SportsCenter?) So is TO being on the Bills. Or, are we doomed to be spammed with the "gerbil on treadmill" machinations of the marketing "brains" at ESPN yet again? Said machinations being predicated on the fact that we are all idiots and that we will lap up their lame nonsense. Newsflash: we, and the rest of the country, just want to see the game. I was in Philly for the last time around. And let me tell you, Bruschi-festTM was treated with as much contempt there as I have used in this post. The entire country was laughing at your company the next day, on every blog, radio show, and column. Thanks for your answer, and this is not directed at you, just your company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddoublee Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Hey Tim: What guarantees can you make on behalf of your company the we won't see a reprise of Joe Theisman's god-awful "Bruschi" love fest, only this time it's Brady's name that is said over 350 times, during the broadcast of Bills v Pats? I suppose I wouldn't write with such contempt, if I, and the rest of the country, weren't treated to an equal amount of it from your network the last time around. Unlike most, I don't really blame Theisman for having oral Brushci diarrhea. Theisman isn't that smart, and he certainly wasn't behind the "we've got to sell the Bruchi story" lame marketing play. No. Clearly Thiesman was given orders by the producers to play up the "Return of Bruschi". This smacks of some tool overproducing and reaching for ratings: trying to make a guy who simply comes back from injury into a "hero" by exaggerating his every act, to include how he stands, the expressions on his face, etc. into game changing and winning "achievements". To be fair, clearly Theisman, in his dopey fashion, overdid it on his execution of the plan. But that doesn't change the fact that the plan came from some ESPN producer. What else explains Joe's sudden love for a LB? Especially after some 50 straight SNF games when he clearly only wanted to talk about the QBs? Hint: if something is truly significant, it only needs to be said once. Repeating yourself = sales tactic. Why do I need to be sold on Tom Brady coming back form injury? I think I got it: it's important to the league this year. Besides, during the game, I am already watching the game = the deal is closed. Annoy me, and if I am a Steelers fan, I find something else to do. So again, I ask you: what is ESPN corporate doing to make sure we don't end up with yet another idiot producer for the Bills vs. Pats game who is more interested in "the story" than the game? And don't tell me Tom Brady is a big story. So is TO(or have you missed the last 3 years of SportsCenter?) So is TO being on the Bills. Or, are we doomed to be spammed with the "gerbil on treadmill" machinations of the marketing "brains" at ESPN yet again? Said machinations being predicated on the fact that we are all idiots and that we will lap up their lame nonsense. Newsflash: we, and the rest of the country, just want to see the game. I was in Philly for the last time around. And let me tell you, Bruschi-festTM was treated with as much contempt there as I have used in this post. The entire country was laughing at your company the next day, on every blog, radio show, and column. Thanks for your answer, and this is not directed at you, just your company. why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 why? Because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 OC, since Tim's busy right now, I can answer for him: None. Not his job to program Sportscenter or produce MNF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 Money talks, regardless of what actors claim. If and when they throw enough money at Gandy, he'll "begrudgingly" put on his Tommy Bahama shirt again.... But there is no one left . Everyone is either dead or in a coma. How do you make a movie when the main characters are all dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts