Christopher and the cop, my theory...
Nick
Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop that
Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up whatsoever.
However, while the cop was pleading for his life, saying whatever he needed
to say to try and save himself, ("you're being set up"), he planted the
seed of doubt in Christopher's head. Remember, earlier in the episode,
Christopher said to Adriana that he might be "on the endangered species
list", and was complaining about how Tony has been treating him lately.
Thinking that way, coupled with what the cop said, plus Christopher's drug-
fueled general paranoia, could lead to Christopher making some very BAD
decisions later on this season. And where would that leave Tony? The only
blood he would have to rely on, if he wants to stick with relying only on
blood, at that point would be (correct me if I'm wrong) AJ.
-Nick
Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)
"Nick" <...>
> Hi, I'm new here...
>
> Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop that
> Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
>
> I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up whatsoever.
Tony's a mob boss. They aren't known for being straight-shooters.
He was gaming Christopher, although who knows what the game is.
Tony wanted the cop dead and he wanted Christopher to be the
triggerman. So now it's up to us to figure out why.
> However, while the cop was pleading for his life, saying whatever he needed
> to say to try and save himself, ("you're being set up"), he planted the
> seed of doubt in Christopher's head. Remember, earlier in the episode,
> Christopher said to Adriana that he might be "on the endangered species
> list", and was complaining about how Tony has been treating him lately.
> Thinking that way, coupled with what the cop said, plus Christopher's drug-
> fueled general paranoia, could lead to Christopher making some very BAD
> decisions later on this season. And where would that leave Tony? The only
> blood he would have to rely on, if he wants to stick with relying only on
> blood, at that point would be (correct me if I'm wrong) AJ.
>
>
> -Nick
Christopher's done little but complain about how he's been treated since
he got made. And as for his decisions, I can't think of anything quite
as bad as the decision to become a heroin addict. If Tony's serious
about grooming him to be his successor, then Tony's got one hell of
a wake-up call coming.
RstJ
Nick
wrote in news:bxzh9.338876$_91.4...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net:
>
> "Nick" <...>
>> Hi, I'm new here...
>>
>> Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop
>> that Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
>>
>> I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
>> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up
>> whatsoever.
>
> Tony's a mob boss. They aren't known for being straight-shooters.
> He was gaming Christopher, although who knows what the game is.
> Tony wanted the cop dead and he wanted Christopher to be the
> triggerman. So now it's up to us to figure out why.
>
I agree that Tony wanted the cop dead, but I believe it is for the reason
he told Christopher: he had outlived his usefulness. Tony may be a
bastard, but he's not stupid. If the conversation he had later in the
episode with Melfi, about grooming Christopher to be his so-called bonded
son, was genuine, then I don't see a reason for him to jeopardize the
trust he's trying to build with Christopher just because he wants some
old cop dead. He could have gotten Sil or Furio to have done it just as
easily, but I think he gave it to Christopher because the cop did kill
his father.
The way the whole thing played out though, with Christopher and Tony
being followed, and the feeling Christopher had that his time was short
and he may have been up for being hit, was the point there. You're
supposed to think that he was right, and the feeling of paranoia coming
through the screen is to make you worry for Christopher. So not only is
Christopher paranoid, so are the viewers. That's how it felt for me,
anyway...
>> However, while the cop was pleading for his life, saying whatever he
>> needed to say to try and save himself, ("you're being set up"), he
>> planted the seed of doubt in Christopher's head. Remember, earlier in
>> the episode, Christopher said to Adriana that he might be "on the
>> endangered species list", and was complaining about how Tony has been
>> treating him lately. Thinking that way, coupled with what the cop
>> said, plus Christopher's drug- fueled general paranoia, could lead to
>> Christopher making some very BAD decisions later on this season. And
>> where would that leave Tony? The only blood he would have to rely on,
>> if he wants to stick with relying only on blood, at that point would
>> be (correct me if I'm wrong) AJ.
>>
>>
>> -Nick
>
> Christopher's done little but complain about how he's been treated
> since he got made. And as for his decisions, I can't think of anything
> quite as bad as the decision to become a heroin addict. If Tony's
> serious about grooming him to be his successor, then Tony's got one
> hell of a wake-up call coming.
>
> RstJ
The drug-taking is a hell of an indicator that Christopher has it in him
to make poor decisions, even when he knows, and has been TOLD better.
It's going to get uglier before it gets better... if it gets better.
-Nick
Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)
> I agree that Tony wanted the cop dead, but I believe it is for the reason
> he told Christopher: he had outlived his usefulness. Tony may be a
> bastard, but he's not stupid. If the conversation he had later in the
> episode with Melfi, about grooming Christopher to be his so-called bonded
> son, was genuine, then I don't see a reason for him to jeopardize the
> trust he's trying to build with Christopher just because he wants some
> old cop dead. He could have gotten Sil or Furio to have done it just as
> easily, but I think he gave it to Christopher because the cop did kill
> his father.
I think it's probably true as well. Partly true. Somebody must have
given the order, however. It's hard to imagine the cop did it on his
own and that Tony (and others) knew about it all this time yet still
let him live because he was "useful." There's got to be more to it
than that. Wasn't somebody posting earlier that some of the fine
detail was wrong in what Tony told Christopher? Might be a continuity
mistake in the writing, but on such an important point, I doubt it.
Strange that Christopher left the cop alive for a while. Why not kill
him and bail? Why hang around? Unless he wanted to talk to him
before he killed him. Hell, I don't know, maybe the writer just wanted
a good scene.
> The way the whole thing played out though, with Christopher and Tony
> being followed, and the feeling Christopher had that his time was short
> and he may have been up for being hit, was the point there. You're
> supposed to think that he was right, and the feeling of paranoia coming
> through the screen is to make you worry for Christopher. So not only is
> Christopher paranoid, so are the viewers. That's how it felt for me,
> anyway...
Given that C has already been shot once in this show, he's probably right
to be paranoid.
<...>
> The drug-taking is a hell of an indicator that Christopher has it in him
> to make poor decisions, even when he knows, and has been TOLD better.
> It's going to get uglier before it gets better... if it gets better.
>
>
> -Nick
Christopher comes off as tough, loyal, and about as smart as Beavis.
There's none of the low cunning and fierce intelligence of a Tony
Soprano in his character. And it's surprising that Tony can't really
see that. As somebody else was pointing out, if Tony wants his successor
to be blood kin, Christopher's the only choice left to him, unless he wants
to wait for AJ to grow up. The logical choice among all of Tony's lieutenants
would be Furio. But that would be like giving away his power to a total
outsider. At least I *think* Furio's an outsider. Tony's not distantly related
to him through the Old Country connections, is he?
Anyway, to get back to Christopher--Tony's affection for Christopher
is pretty obviously clouding his judgement of him. Above and beyond
the problem of having your successor be a junkie, you also have
the problem of C not being very smart whether clean or strung out.
But I think the real problem is going to come when the rest of the Family
finds out that C is next in line. I could see a lot of the older guys not liking
that idea very much at all.
RstJ
Joseph S. Powell,III
This is quite a good indication that the cop did, indeed, off Christopher's
father.
As far as the theory that Tony was either messing w/Chris or that this was a
test, at this point Tony has to know that if he simply wanted the cop dead
he wouldn't have to make up a story to have Chris kill him - he'd simply
order a hit, and Chris would be more than happy to comply.
This was a "bonding" gift, IMO.
"Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <robert...@yahoo.com> wrote
in message news:bxzh9.338876$_91.4...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
Matt Miller
that the following message was delivered to alt.tv.sopranos:
> Hi, I'm new here...
>
> Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop
> that Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
>
> I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up
> whatsoever.
There's really no point to having a big scene with the cop denying it
unless he didn't do it. Everything seemed to be aimed at making the cop
seem sincere, so I'm going to guess that's what the was being communicated.
--
Matt Miller
"There are those who tend to shoot their
mouths off and keep their brains unloaded
just to be safe."
- Jonathon Wrench
Pisano
<jpowe...@charter.net> wrote:
>Well, toward the end the cop was crying "I'm SORRY, I'm SORRY!!".
>This is quite a good indication that the cop did, indeed, off Christopher's
>father.
>As far as the theory that Tony was either messing w/Chris or that this was a
>test, at this point Tony has to know that if he simply wanted the cop dead
>he wouldn't have to make up a story to have Chris kill him - he'd simply
>order a hit, and Chris would be more than happy to comply.
>This was a "bonding" gift, IMO.
>
Exactly.
But what gets me is how a common top poster could be so
insightful. ;)
lucretia
<yaddaya...@blah.blah> wrote:
>Sources close to Nick <ni...@nope.noway.com> revealed on 16 Sep 2002
>that the following message was delivered to alt.tv.sopranos:
>
>> Hi, I'm new here...
>>
>> Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop
>> that Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
>>
>> I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
>> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up
>> whatsoever.
I agree. Why would Tony want to set Christopher up? He wants Chris to
be his heir.
>
> There's really no point to having a big scene with the cop denying it
>unless he didn't do it.
<snip>
Um... how about, the cop was trying to save his own life? If he *was*
the person Tony was talking about, that's exactly what he would do. As
a dirty cop, he'd be a good liar just like Tony and the others.
If you watch the cop closely during this scene, I think they give away
the fact that he's lying in the way he answers questions and reacts to
Christopher. When he says he doesn't know who Dickie Moltisanti is,
and has never heard of that other guy, he looks down.
But the biggest clue, of course, is when the cop cries "I'm sorry! I'm
sorry!" after he breaks the bannister and tries to get away. I suppose
he still *may* have been just trying to save his life, but I don't
think so.
This was a gift Tony gave Chris to cement Chris' bond to him. And
judging from Chris going to his mother's house, wanting to talk about
his father, and placing the $20 on the fridge, Chris believes he's
avenged his father's death.
Just my thoughts, we'll see how it plays out.
lucretia
Crow T Robot
>Sources close to Nick <ni...@nope.noway.com> revealed on 16 Sep 2002
>that the following message was delivered to alt.tv.sopranos:
>
>> Hi, I'm new here...
>>
>> Now that that's out of the way, I have some thoughts about the cop
>> that Christopher whacked, and potential fallout...
>>
>> I believe that the cop actually was the guy who killed Christopher's
>> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up
>> whatsoever.
>
> There's really no point to having a big scene with the cop denying it
>unless he didn't do it. Everything seemed to be aimed at making the cop
>seem sincere, so I'm going to guess that's what the was being communicated.
Of course he is going to deny it! Not much prospect for the future to
respond with something like "you cant prove I did it, punk". Then as
he is getting loose from the bannister, he cries "I'm sorry! I'm
sorry!" Seems that Plan A (denial) failed so he switched to Plan B
(remorse); if he didnt do it he would have stuck to Plan A.
The point to the scene was before that: T let a lowly soldier/driver
attend a big sitdown with him and Carmine from NY, clearly grooming
him for Something More, which Chris just doesnt see yet ('you sure got
a hard on for me..'). Then as part of the bonding thing he later told
Melfi, he 'let' Chris whack the guy that killed his father.
The only thing that indicates a "set up" is the cop trying to plead
his way out. I do think the murder will come back on Chris later,
but not because of prints or DNA, but Agent Bunny will find the
engraved watch laying around the house.
Paul Schneider
this was a
> test, at this point Tony has to know that if he simply wanted the cop dead
> he wouldn't have to make up a story to have Chris kill him - he'd simply
> order a hit, and Chris would be more than happy to comply.
> This was a "bonding" gift, IMO.
Yes. Very convenient that the cop retired at exactly the time Tony
needed to be able to "bond" with Chris.
This fact alone makes me think it was a setup by Tony and the cop
didn't kill Chris's dad.
Paul
Pisano
wrote:
>
>Very convenient that the cop retired at exactly the time Tony
>needed to be able to "bond" with Chris.
>
No, when the cop retired, it was exactly then that Tony
decided he was no longer useful. That only makes sense. No longer an
insider = no longer useful.
Using the situation to bond with Chris, if that is really what
T was doing, was just an added benefit to an otherwise ordinary
"business" decision.
>This fact alone makes me think it was a setup by Tony and the cop
>didn't kill Chris's dad.
>
You're free to think what you want, but thinking it don't make
it so. Can you offer something else to back up your opinion?
lapup
What about the underlying fact, if the cop had killed Moltisante, that
this means the Sopranos did business with the murderer of Chris'
father for most of Chris'life. More, they protected him because he was
useful.
Wouldn't that cause some internal turmoil as the stressed
Christopher has time to brood on it in a strung out state? Christopher
is said not to be the brightest bulb, but he makes up for it in
intensity. Man, can Imperioli smolder! He could have the makings of a
volcano if some remote primal trigger is set off. I'd say this
bonding by fire of a gun, the Oepidal transfer which Tony engineered,
will figure prominently in the psychology of Chris' character this
season. On the other hand, it could be unceremoniously dropped like
many promising threads last season. I don't think so in this case.
between Paulie's straying and Chris' issues and Furio's possibly
coming under Carm's charms and vice-versa, there's potential for
anarchy. It's almost too rich. A.J. feeling his dumb oats, Meadow
acting out, Janis up to not much good, Ralphie a major asshole pain in
the ass, the undercover FBI Jersey cooch, (Uncle Junior turning?
perish the thought), psychotic sexpot Gloria reappearing, it's a
challenge to do all these justice in a season. Could get a little
hectic for T.
Any notions on why the elder Moltisante was rubbed out? He wasn't a
mere hit-and-be-hit man was he? From Carm's family?
ctakim
Crow T Robot <none> wrote in message news:<f0rhouch8a3b15ubj...@4ax.com>...
the Wernik files posted a newspaper clipping on Dickie Moltisanti's
death that matches up with Tony's story quite well. The shooting
death, the TV trays, etc. And the first cop on the scene was Officer
Haydu. The murder weapon was a standard issue .38. All this points to
Tony being on the level with Christopher. I had originally thought
that Tony was making up a story, but it is true that he could easily
have just ordered Christopher to make the hit. Now I think that this
was Tony's way of giving Christopher a "gift". You are right that
Christopher definitely did see it this way, hence the unexpected visit
home and the $20 memento.
Liam Devlin
Why do you find this so compelling? Tony was getting Christopher to bond
with him over a couple of months. If this cop hadn't retired, Tony would
have used some other situation.
Liam Devlin
Law & Order had a similar plot line in an early & good episode.
> All this points to
> Tony being on the level with Christopher. I had originally thought
> that Tony was making up a story, but it is true that he could easily
> have just ordered Christopher to make the hit. Now I think that this
> was Tony's way of giving Christopher a "gift". You are right that
> Christopher definitely did see it this way, hence the unexpected visit
> home and the $20 memento.
Tony sending Christopher to kill the guy who killed Christopher's father
sets up Tony as the substitute father for Christopher, very clever of
Tony. Do you think this is something he learned from Melfi?
Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)
"lapup"<...>
> Any notions on why the elder Moltisante was rubbed out? He wasn't a
> mere hit-and-be-hit man was he? From Carm's family?
This is the most interesting part. Why was Chris' father killed in the
first place? And why use a cop to do it? You have to assume that the
Family had triggermen to do this kind of work, and wouldn't risk a dirty
cop (a valuable asset) to do this kind of a hit. Then again, we're just
assuming it *was* a hit. Could have been some private business between
the two of them.
I think to truly understand why Tony chose Christopher to kill the cop,
we have to know why the cop killed Chris' father.
RstJ
SZK
demonio\)" <robert...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Why was Chris' father killed in the
>first place?
Because he took out the guys eye for killing his cellmate. The guy
who lost the eye hired the cop to do the hit.
Crow T Robot
>Paul Schneider wrote:
>> "> As far as the theory that Tony was either messing w/Chris or that
>> this was a
>>
>>>test, at this point Tony has to know that if he simply wanted the cop dead
>>>he wouldn't have to make up a story to have Chris kill him - he'd simply
>>>order a hit, and Chris would be more than happy to comply.
>>>This was a "bonding" gift, IMO.
>>
>>
>> Yes. Very convenient that the cop retired at exactly the time Tony
>> needed to be able to "bond" with Chris.
>>
>> This fact alone makes me think it was a setup by Tony and the cop
>> didn't kill Chris's dad.
For that to be true, the whole thing about trusting blood that T went
thru with Melfi has to be BS. You wouldnt "set up" someone you want
to bond and endear to you.
>
>Why do you find this so compelling? Tony was getting Christopher to bond
>with him over a couple of months. If this cop hadn't retired, Tony would
>have used some other situation.
I'm struck by how much of the bonding is lost on Chris.
T asks him to drive for awhile to spend time with him. Chris thinks
he is in trouble and maybe on the endangered species list.
T mentions his father, putting things on a personal level, Chris
thinks it is so he comes off inferior.
Crow T Robot
I never thought T was making it up: as details came out, Chris would
say "yea, they said it was a cop...." or "thats what I heard...."
Everyone would have had to be lying to him for the last 30 years.
Liam Devlin
He needs to sign up for The Plan and rebuild his crumbling foundation.
Discord
"Crow T Robot" <none> wrote in message
> cta...@gvtc.com (ctakim) wrote:
>
> >For what it is worth:
> >
> >Crow T Robot <none> wrote in message
news:<f0rhouch8a3b15ubj...@4ax.com>...
> >> Matt Miller <yaddaya...@blah.blah> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Sources close to Nick <ni...@nope.noway.com> revealed on 16 Sep 2002
> >> >that the following message was delivered to alt.tv.sopranos:
> >> >
> >> >> father, and that Tony was doing nothing to set Christopher up
> >> >> whatsoever.
> >> his way out. I do think the murder will come back on Chris later,
> >> but not because of prints or DNA, but Agent Bunny will find the
> >> engraved watch laying around the house.
> >
> >the Wernik files posted a newspaper clipping on Dickie Moltisanti's
> >death that matches up with Tony's story quite well. The shooting
> >death, the TV trays, etc. And the first cop on the scene was Officer
> >Haydu. The murder weapon was a standard issue .38. All this points to
> >Tony being on the level with Christopher. I had originally thought
> >that Tony was making up a story, but it is true that he could easily
> >have just ordered Christopher to make the hit. Now I think that this
> >was Tony's way of giving Christopher a "gift". You are right that
> >Christopher definitely did see it this way, hence the unexpected visit
> >home and the $20 memento.
>
> I never thought T was making it up: as details came out, Chris would
> say "yea, they said it was a cop...." or "thats what I heard...."
>
> Everyone would have had to be lying to him for the last 30 years.
Well, he could have been honest about everything except the actual identity
of the cop. It doesn't make sense for him to lie about anything else anyway.
SZK
>You wouldnt "set up" someone you want
>to bond and endear to you.
Why would anyone in the Mafia want to "set up"someone who could
testify against him? This whole thread is silly. If Soprano wanted the
cop killed for some other reason, he would give the order to Chris and
it would be done. Why fabricate some crazy story that is going to get
Chris excited and make it more likely for him to make a mistake and
get caught? Soprano does not want Chris to be arrested for murder. And
if he wanted him to disappear, that would be easy enough to make
happen too.
Pisano
>Han...@BigPussys.com (Pisano) wrote:
>>
>> You're free to think what you want, but thinking it don't make
>> it so. Can you offer something else to back up your opinion?
>
>
>What about the underlying fact, if the cop had killed Moltisante, that
>this means the Sopranos did business with the murderer of Chris'
>father for most of Chris'life. More, they protected him because he was
>useful.
>
That's just the nature of the "business".
>
> Wouldn't that cause some internal turmoil as the stressed
>Christopher has time to brood on it in a strung out state?
>
Not necessarily. Because Chris understands the "business",
and the way it works, he would most likely see it in the same terms I
stated above.
>Christopher is said not to be the brightest bulb, but he makes up for it in
>intensity. Man, can Imperioli smolder! He could have the makings of a
>volcano if some remote primal trigger is set off. I'd say this
>bonding by fire of a gun, the Oepidal transfer which Tony engineered,
>will figure prominently in the psychology of Chris' character this
>season. On the other hand, it could be unceremoniously dropped like
>many promising threads last season. I don't think so in this case.
>
I agree with you there . . . in every respect.
>
>between Paulie's straying and Chris' issues and Furio's possibly
>coming under Carm's charms and vice-versa, there's potential for
>anarchy. It's almost too rich. A.J. feeling his dumb oats, Meadow
>acting out, Janis up to not much good, Ralphie a major asshole pain in
>the ass, the undercover FBI Jersey cooch, (Uncle Junior turning?
>perish the thought), psychotic sexpot Gloria reappearing, it's a
>challenge to do all these justice in a season. Could get a little
>hectic for T.
>
I think Walnuts could become a serious threat to T, because he
is such a loose cannon. Though I used to think he was very loyal,
that loyalty was badly damaged by his feelings of being slighted in
the "sit-down" with Ralphie (who, by the way, is *also* still around
by mere virtue of the fact that he remains very "useful").
In regard to Furio, I get the impression that a lot of folks
here think that just because Carm may be infatuated with *him*, that
that settles it, as if he has no say in the matter. Time will tell,
and it just may turn out that he is more loyal to Tony than is
commonly thought. Carm's infatuation could very well backfire, and
cause trouble for *her* in ways upon which we can only now speculate.
I, for one, really liked Gloria, until she showed her
psychotic side. That was unfortunate . . . as it always is, when such
an otherwise cool and sexy female goes over the edge. Tough break.
I'll miss her.
Can't help but wonder about the FBI cooch. She may in fact
yet turn out to be the Sopranos' answer to Annikan Skywalker, and
become "seduced by the Dark Side". Who knows?
As for Janis & A.J., I think, for now, their personal problems
are more of a simple nuisance to T, than anything else.
>
>
>Any notions on why the elder Moltisante was rubbed out? He wasn't a
>mere hit-and-be-hit man was he? From Carm's family?
Because he gouged out the eye of his cell mate so bad, the guy
couldn't even be fitted with a glass one.
Crow T Robot
<robert...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"lapup"<...>
>> Any notions on why the elder Moltisante was rubbed out? He wasn't a
>> mere hit-and-be-hit man was he? From Carm's family?
>
>This is the most interesting part. Why was Chris' father killed in the
>first place? And why use a cop to do it? You have to assume that the
>Family had triggermen to do this kind of work, and wouldn't risk a dirty
>cop (a valuable asset) to do this kind of a hit. Then again, we're just
>assuming it *was* a hit. Could have been some private business between
>the two of them.
Tony retold the story in the car about the cellmate...gouged
eye...revenge etc. It wasnt the mob that had Dickie whacked, the one
eyed guy contracted the degenerate, gambling cop to do it.
>I think to truly understand why Tony chose Christopher to kill the cop,
>we have to know why the cop killed Chris' father.
But for it to be other than the bonding thing he told Melfi, means T
was lying to her and aside from shading details to protect the guilty
he has generally been very honest with her. He also risks alienating
Chris later and botching his whole bonding plan if Chris finds out it
was substantially other than the way T said (which might be why he
didnt let the crib-TV trays misconception stand).
The only thing that says "set-up" was the doomed cop, which he more or
less recanted with "I'm sorry! I'm sorry!"
>
>RstJ
>
>
Paul Schneider
> decided he was no longer useful. That only makes sense. No longer an
> insider = no longer useful.
This is obvious.
>
> Using the situation to bond with Chris, if that is really what
> T was doing, was just an added benefit to an otherwise ordinary
> "business" decision.
This is obvious also.
>
>
> >This fact alone makes me think it was a setup by Tony and the cop
> >didn't kill Chris's dad.
> >
>
> You're free to think what you want, but thinking it don't make
> it so. Can you offer something else to back up your opinion?
A tremendous coincidence then that exactly at the time Tony was trying
to "bond" Chris to him, the cop that happened to kill Chris's dad
retires.
Isn't it much more likely that a random dirty cop retired that knew
nothing of Chris's dad? Tony was going to have him wacked anyway, why
not use the situation to his advantage by a little lie?
Paul
Liam Devlin
>> No, when the cop retired, it was exactly then that Tony
>>decided he was no longer useful. That only makes sense. No longer an
>>insider = no longer useful.
>
>
> This is obvious.
>
>
>> Using the situation to bond with Chris, if that is really what
>>T was doing, was just an added benefit to an otherwise ordinary
>>"business" decision.
>
>
> This is obvious also.
>
>
>>
>>>This fact alone makes me think it was a setup by Tony and the cop
>>>didn't kill Chris's dad.
>>>
>>
>> You're free to think what you want, but thinking it don't make
>>it so. Can you offer something else to back up your opinion?
>
>
> A tremendous coincidence then that exactly at the time Tony was trying
> to "bond" Chris to him, the cop that happened to kill Chris's dad
> retires.
Are you forgetting that T's been bonding Christopher to him over a
couple of months (and he's not done yet)?
> Isn't it much more likely that a random dirty cop retired that knew
> nothing of Chris's dad? Tony was going to have him wacked anyway, why
> not use the situation to his advantage by a little lie?
That's a bigger tremendous coincidence, IMHO. Tony's a don, if he wants
someone whacked, he gives the word & the guy's dead, no need for an
elaborate cover story.
Crow T Robot
>
>A tremendous coincidence then that exactly at the time Tony was trying
>to "bond" Chris to him, the cop that happened to kill Chris's dad
>retires.
>Isn't it much more likely that a random dirty cop retired that knew
>nothing of Chris's dad? Tony was going to have him wacked anyway, why
>not use the situation to his advantage by a little lie?
Thats possible, but then it is mere manipulation and leveraging the
situation, not a "set-up". And if Chris ever found otherwise it would
work against T and undo all that warm bonding they have been having.
;)
The faux background stuff does show the cop as the first on the scene
when Dickie was killed. Makes the coincidence of a different dirty
cop retiring that day hard to swallow.
Crow T Robot
>>
>> A tremendous coincidence then that exactly at the time Tony was trying
>> to "bond" Chris to him, the cop that happened to kill Chris's dad
>> retires.
>
>Are you forgetting that T's been bonding Christopher to him over a
>couple of months (and he's not done yet)?
>
>> Isn't it much more likely that a random dirty cop retired that knew
>> nothing of Chris's dad? Tony was going to have him wacked anyway, why
>> not use the situation to his advantage by a little lie?
>
>That's a bigger tremendous coincidence, IMHO. Tony's a don, if he wants
>someone whacked, he gives the word & the guy's dead, no need for an
>elaborate cover story.
The coincidence is more tremendous because this random dirty cop was
the first one on the scene of the Dickie M killing according to a
HBO/Warnick article.
The *BIGGER* puzzle IMO is the doc's office. Everything we know about
an undercover/agent/informant came thru Murph (poor
bastard...sometimes he has food down the front of his shirt). He told
Jun that 'they had an undercover in there since January or D-Day or
some shit'. Which means he could have muffed other details.
Maybe nurse DeeDee wants to go under the covers with Junior in January
(or some shit). LOL.
Paul Schneider
> situation, not a "set-up". And if Chris ever found otherwise it would
> work against T and undo all that warm bonding they have been having.
Your right, but Chris seemed to have 0 interest in his father's death
prior to this.
>
> The faux background stuff does show the cop as the first on the scene
> when Dickie was killed. Makes the coincidence of a different dirty
> cop retiring that day hard to swallow.
Maybe. Bad TV shows have lots of tremendous coincidences. Perhaps
the Sopranos is devolving, only future episodes will tell.
Paul
lapup
I thought I read she would make an appearance this season. I don't
remember where I read it. Something tells me T would go to the well
(so to speak) once more if Gloria made herself available. He may be a
little weak that way. Of course he might have to disappear her
afterwards. Was it Patsy who was assigned to warn her off last season?
Did I see in the previews for this week that Patsy looked like he was
in an argument with one of the fellas? Could it be over his brother?
Yet another ticking bomb to set off Tony's attacks (psychological or
physical).
>
> Can't help but wonder about the FBI cooch. She may in fact
> yet turn out to be the Sopranos' answer to Annikan Skywalker, and
> become "seduced by the Dark Side". Who knows?
>
> As for Janis & A.J., I think, for now, their personal problems
> are more of a simple nuisance to T, than anything else.
If they f%ck up badly enough, it just adds to T's pressure.....and we
can expect them to screw up.
KimStar
lapup wrote:
:Pisano wrote:
> > I, for one, really liked Gloria, until she showed her
> > psychotic side. That was unfortunate . . . as it always is, when such
> > an otherwise cool and sexy female goes over the edge. Tough break.
> > I'll miss her.
> I thought I read she would make an appearance this season. I don't
> remember where I read it. Something tells me T would go to the well
> (so to speak) once more if Gloria made herself available. He may be a
> little weak that way. Of course he might have to disappear her
> afterwards. Was it Patsy who was assigned to warn her off last season?
Yes, it was Patsy who got the message over.
And yes, there were reports last year that Annabella Sciorra (Gloria) was
seen going to and from the NYC studio where some of the Sopranos is filmed.
The entertainment press said her agent confirmed that she had come in to do
some scenes.
I was very surprised when I read this. I cannot imagine her coming into the
story again.
> Did I see in the previews for this week that Patsy looked like he was
> in an argument with one of the fellas? Could it be over his brother?
No, not over his brother. The synopsis I saw for tomorrow's ep said
something about Patsy being bent out of shape over an important assignment
given to Christopher that Patsy believes should have been his.
KimStar
lapup
> lapup wrote:
>
> :Pisano wrote:
> > > I, for one, really liked Gloria, until she showed her
> > > psychotic side. That was unfortunate . . . as it always is, when such
> > > an otherwise cool and sexy female goes over the edge. Tough break.
> > > I'll miss her.
>
> > I thought I read she would make an appearance this season. I don't
> > remember where I read it. Something tells me T would go to the well
> > (so to speak) once more if Gloria made herself available. He may be a
> > little weak that way. Of course he might have to disappear her
> > afterwards. Was it Patsy who was assigned to warn her off last season?
>
> Yes, it was Patsy who got the message over.
>
> And yes, there were reports last year that Annabella Sciorra (Gloria) was
> seen going to and from the NYC studio where some of the Sopranos is filmed.
> The entertainment press said her agent confirmed that she had come in to do
> some scenes.
>
> I was very surprised when I read this. I cannot imagine her coming into the
> story again.
>
She was at the Sopranos Season IV Premiere also.
http://www.pagesix.com/celebphotos/celebs09082002/grid.htm
The Magnificent Bastard
wisdom:
> "KimStar" <star...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<SN2j9.491561$me6.57716@sccrnsc01>...
> > lapup wrote:
> >
> > :Pisano wrote:
> > > > I, for one, really liked Gloria, until she showed her
> > > > psychotic side. That was unfortunate . . . as it always is, when such
> > > > an otherwise cool and sexy female goes over the edge. Tough break.
> > > > I'll miss her.
> >
> > > I thought I read she would make an appearance this season. I don't
> > > remember where I read it. Something tells me T would go to the well
> > > (so to speak) once more if Gloria made herself available. He may be a
> > > little weak that way. Of course he might have to disappear her
> > > afterwards. Was it Patsy who was assigned to warn her off last season?
> >
> > Yes, it was Patsy who got the message over.
> >
> > And yes, there were reports last year that Annabella Sciorra (Gloria) was
> > seen going to and from the NYC studio where some of the Sopranos is filmed.
> > The entertainment press said her agent confirmed that she had come in to do
> > some scenes.
> >
> > I was very surprised when I read this. I cannot imagine her coming into the
> > story again.
> >
>
> She was at the Sopranos Season IV Premiere also.
>
> http://www.pagesix.com/celebphotos/celebs09082002/grid.htm
Her face is just ok, but she definitely has body karate going on....
>
>
>
> > > Did I see in the previews for this week that Patsy looked like he was
> > > in an argument with one of the fellas? Could it be over his brother?
> >
> > No, not over his brother. The synopsis I saw for tomorrow's ep said
> > something about Patsy being bent out of shape over an important assignment
> > given to Christopher that Patsy believes should have been his.
> >
> > KimStar
>
--
Magnificent Bastard Productions 2002 ®
Jeff Wagner
crap, but if a person needs to know what was said in the past it is
there for them to scroll to and read if they so desire, without forcing
everyone else to do so.
Jeff
In article <n90hou80ggobmgdns...@4ax.com>, Pisano
<Han...@BigPussys.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:59:46 -0500, "Joseph S. Powell,III"
> <jpowe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> >Well, toward the end the cop was crying "I'm SORRY, I'm SORRY!!".
> >This is quite a good indication that the cop did, indeed, off Christopher's
> >father.
> >As far as the theory that Tony was either messing w/Chris or that this was a
> >test, at this point Tony has to know that if he simply wanted the cop dead
> >he wouldn't have to make up a story to have Chris kill him - he'd simply
> >order a hit, and Chris would be more than happy to comply.
> >This was a "bonding" gift, IMO.
> >
>
> Exactly.
>
> But what gets me is how a common top poster could be so
> insightful. ;)
>
Rob Jacobs
"Jeff Wagner" <jwag...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:220920021359036512%jwag...@mac.com...
> Top posting is convienant for all involved. No scrolling thru quoted
> crap, but if a person needs to know what was said in the past it is
> there for them to scroll to and read if they so desire, without forcing
> everyone else to do so.
>
> Jeff
>
The top posting vs. bottom posting vs. interwoven posting is a very old
debate, as old as Usenet itself and the subject of thousands of flame wars.
My personal take on it is post and let live..
Rob
Pisano
wrote:
No it isn't. It's annoying. Those who communicate in English
read from right to left, top to bottom. It is unnatural, as well as
potentially confusing, to construct a written conversation any other
way.
> Top posting is convienant for all involved.
If it's crap . . . flush it. That's what thread histories are
for. Top posters force everyone else to conform to *their* standards,
because they are generally too lazy to place their comments in proper
context, or delete extraneous material. By simply hitting the "reply
button", and blithely typing away, they force other readers to do
*more* scrolling up and down to follow the conversation, and this
illogical inconvenience exponentiates with each and every additional
top poster who becomes involved in any particular thread, eventually
resulting in such a twisted conglomeration of gobbledygook the point
is often lost, and it would take a trained cryptographer to decipher
it all.
Liam Devlin
> Top posting is convienant for all involved. No scrolling thru quoted
> crap, but if a person needs to know what was said in the past it is
> there for them to scroll to and read if they so desire, without forcing
> everyone else to do so.
BS! It's like smoking, filthy & selfish.
