PDA

View Full Version : Poor strategy


illiades
June 6th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Firstly, as for myself, have been reading for a while and finally decided to post.

Secondly, and more importantly, the issue. A matter of chronology....

When AJ was in the 'secure unit' being visited by his parents Carmella commented 'just one more week of this'' to Tony.
The next scene Tony is being warned by Agent Harris that the hit is out.

Then, some time after, the scene where the 'who and who' should be touched from the New Jersey faction between the New York guys in the beauty salon occurs, followed immediately by AJ being at home coming downstairs for 'homemade oatmeal'.

Somewhere during these vital scenes a week has passed.

Tony has either not heeded the threat prior to Harris, or even pro Harris' warning, or has not accomodated it the importance he needed to.

Bobby was killed, as we are implied to believe, he didnt answer the telephone call which would have forewarned him in his car as he entered the train store.
Silvio was shot as he was just, literally, leaving his workplace.

Seconds made the difference between these two living and being hit, for, had Bobby answered the call, he might have been more cautious, and had Silvio not been warned by Tony until just before to have, somewhat morbidly, 'eyes in the back of his head', he too might have been more suitably prepared. Gun in hand, rather than in the backseat of the car, spring to mind.

Tony is not only responsible for the deaths'near deaths of his consigliere, and more importantly close friend, Sil and his brother in law, Bobby, but he is responsible for a clear lack of, or poor application of, strategy on his families behalf.

As Paulies audio book version of Sun Tzu will testify, never fight a war you cant win. And as the art of war suggests, striking first, categorically, and decisively, is a significant part of being a leader / general of men.

Tony has thus far 'failed' miserably.

The multitude are hardly with him, certainly not in regards to physicality.
His closest in one family are gone.
His closest in the other, those by him at Arties for one 'of the best nights of his life in the storming rain' are still with him.
For his downfall doesnt he have to lose these too?

His strategy towards them is far from convincing as of yet. He has left them in the 'open'.
No doubt seperating them from him is the logical move, but without a protector, has he not left them in the wilderness.
All of them. By themselves.

Truth be told, Tony has backed himself into a corner.

He cant call on a Hesh like figure to mediate, damn, even Hesh has relative vengeance towards him at the moment.
He cant 'rely' on a Christopher, on a Tony B, on a Silvio, on a Bobby, even on a Pussy who he lost touch of before he had lost touch 'of' himself. Nor his Uncle.
Those close to Tony dont surivive.

His strategy and planning fails them all.

His plans for Chris were fruitless. For Bobby too.
For Meadow, plans of a doctor dont fruit.
For AJ, nothing lasts.

A likeable character, in parts, Tony can be, and its only through the complexity of his character, or the talent of David Chase, that we can sincerely feel 'for' him. Be it empathy or not.

But as a symbol of a 'strong' leader, a giant amongst men, even as a mob boss? He has failed.

Their collective power has weakened under his command.

Tony is the anti-thesis of Sun Tzu's ideal.

His strategy has left him by himself in his room.

He is where he has carried himself to be.
Its his own fault. Its causality. Its the big bubble at the end of the flow chart.
Its karma. Its justice. Call it what you will, but he has only himself to blame and those around him have justification to blame their plights, to a great extent, on him too.

If all this is so, the final question is.....as a depressive sociopath, can we believe that subconsciously this was his all of his own willing? The downfall was of his making?







ps - and on another note,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=131AQlnDQu0 - a sopranos trailer for the final season, the 2nd part of the series.... 48 seconds in to the trailer, has this yet to happen? the 3 people shooting?

its 6.25 am here so maybe am 'forgetting' something.

Rike
June 6th, 2007, 12:48 AM
that thing 48 seconds in is definitely phil's hit on that short-lived boss of NY. I can't remember his name right now. He gets shot through the eye.

mkatona
June 6th, 2007, 12:54 AM
48 seconds in to the trailer, has this yet to happen? the 3 people shooting?


That was Faustino "Doc" Santoro. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_characters_from_The_Sopranos_in_the_Lupert azzi_Crime_Family#Faustino_.22Doc.22_Santoro) Remember when he took the food off Phil's plate?

illiades
June 6th, 2007, 01:34 AM
yes you are both right.

Is there any adage to the idea that if you live by the sword you die by the sword?

media studies will have you believe its the archetypal american dream scenario, man lives big, comes to end, dies. Check any Hollywood produced gangster / mafioso film.
None end successful, so will Tony be any different?
Form means we have to be inclined to think he wont.

''rich men tried, none of it worked, cant take it with you under this earth''

makes you wonder,

why bother?

TheBing
June 6th, 2007, 07:58 AM
I have long thought that Tony was a 'reluctant' mobster and mob family leader. As we have seen in the coma and other dreams, he wishes he could have lived a confortable, simpler and less moraly conflicting life. Tony grew up not knowing any better than the mob life. He lost his father as a teenager. The men/father figures around him are all mobsters. Deep down, he knows that his life has been immoral, that conflict leading to his panic attacks and his other psychlogical problems. He knows that his life has put his 'Good' Tony as to his children at risk.
To be a top mafia mob leader requires some unique qualifications. It also requires no sementality, decisive decision making, good timing and a good cover. One has to wonder if Tony really had the ability to be a good leader. He far too often is semenital, makes panic or emotional decisions, defering not making decisions to take out people when he should have before they turned on him.
Tony probably should have killed off Christopher a lot sooner when his girfriend was ratting to the Feds or when his drug use was getting out of control. However, he was too emotionaly and financialy invested in him and he tried to look away. He probably should have dealt with the whole Vito-gay issue in a better way including killing him. He didn't want to lose Vito's good abilities as to income, but he faced a rebellion from many in his mob famliy (and Phil personaly) as to his gay lifestyle as it became known. He far too often had to make decisions in a panic, like with the current war with Phil, instead of recognizing that he should have comprimised on the take on projects to pacify or to 'respect' him and prevent a war.
He let personal emotions as to innocents being hurt (Pie-o-my's death, the abuse of the dancer) lead to killing personally people in his mob family even though they were good on the money side of the mob.
Tony sold off the 'waste management' business, so his only income is from illegal businesses. Thus he has no cover and can only be defined as a mobster, putting him at greater risk.
Perhaps too, Chase wanted Tony to be a failed leader, reflecting the desire of the public watching this series their desire to see that those that lead a criminal life suffer from it - that 'crime doesn't pay'.

dad1153
June 6th, 2007, 08:09 AM
That painting of Tony as a general (the one he got from Paulie's house and inspired him to do the deed on Tony B.) now looks more like a joke than ever before. Anthony Bonaparte anyone? :icon_mrgreen:

Isabella
June 6th, 2007, 10:56 AM
I have long thought that Tony was a 'reluctant' mobster and mob family leader. As we have seen in the coma and other dreams, he wishes he could have lived a confortable, simpler and less moraly conflicting life. Tony grew up not knowing any better than the mob life. He lost his father as a teenager. The men/father figures around him are all mobsters. Deep down, he knows that his life has been immoral, that conflict leading to his panic attacks and his other psychlogical problems. He knows that his life has put his 'Good' Tony as to his children at risk.
To be a top mafia mob leader requires some unique qualifications. It also requires no sementality, decisive decision making, good timing and a good cover. One has to wonder if Tony really had the ability to be a good leader. He far too often is semenital, makes panic or emotional decisions, defering not making decisions to take out people when he should have before they turned on him.
Tony probably should have killed off Christopher a lot sooner when his girfriend was ratting to the Feds or when his drug use was getting out of control. However, he was too emotionaly and financialy invested in him and he tried to look away. He probably should have dealt with the whole Vito-gay issue in a better way including killing him. He didn't want to lose Vito's good abilities as to income, but he faced a rebellion from many in his mob famliy (and Phil personaly) as to his gay lifestyle as it became known. He far too often had to make decisions in a panic, like with the current war with Phil, instead of recognizing that he should have comprimised on the take on projects to pacify or to 'respect' him and prevent a war.
He let personal emotions as to innocents being hurt (Pie-o-my's death, the abuse of the dancer) lead to killing personally people in his mob family even though they were good on the money side of the mob.
Tony sold off the 'waste management' business, so his only income is from illegal businesses. Thus he has no cover and can only be defined as a mobster, putting him at greater risk.
Perhaps too, Chase wanted Tony to be a failed leader, reflecting the desire of the public watching this series their desire to see that those that lead a criminal life suffer from it - that 'crime doesn't pay'.


Excellent post - Looking back, I totally agree.

wizdog
June 6th, 2007, 12:51 PM
[/QUOTE]His strategy and planning fails them all.
...
But as a symbol of a 'strong' leader, a giant amongst men, even as a mob boss? He has failed.
...
Tony is the anti-thesis of Sun Tzu's ideal.
...
His strategy has left him by himself in his room.[/QUOTE]

Well, you might remember who is Ton's true Idolized character? Gary Cooper. "The strong silent type." While it was none other than Tony who did the mist bitXXing about his problems (at least to Melfi but he still was talking abou it).

All the more, the main thing with this character has always been his indecisiveness: how he is unable to cope with certain stressfull situations, mainly the one with Tony B. I always looked at him as a king who will dethroned soon. Or maybe not. But he came close to falling out of his chair many times in the past too.

terrencewintersolstice
June 6th, 2007, 01:08 PM
that christopher in the car being followed scene never happened.

MrMojok
June 6th, 2007, 05:00 PM
The DiMeo bunch have gotten more and more sloppy as Tony has gone furthur on his downward spiral, it seems to me. Both his families are falling apart... just like him.

I just can't understand why they wouldn't use someone from their inner circle for the Leotardo hit, instead of someone from overseas.

PFloyd69
June 6th, 2007, 08:11 PM
Not only that but why would the crew not have been on the lookout from the moment Harris told Tony that they were out to get him and those close to him??

-Why was Bobby going to the train store by himself in the 1st place? Especially if he's management?

-Why would Sil go back to the Bing, even if he does need his papers? Have someone lower go grab your stuff for you. Or at least have another car outside with a couple guys to watch the place.

-I am also not sure why they wouldn't go after Butch as well. Everyone knows that guy is dangerous.


-Also, why weren't Benny, Anthony Maffei, Jason Molinaro, and others at or near the safe-house? If the house was located by NY I would think that they would want more than 4 guys there to protect the boss (and Tony even tried to send two of them home). Time to rally the troops Tony.

"Blue Comet" was an amazing episode (maybe the best ever) but the crew did make some questionable decisions to say the least.

bigbadbill007
June 6th, 2007, 08:30 PM
In the first few seasons, Tony was a great boss. he made a few mistakes and got lucky, but all great leader have had faults. look at winston churchill. the chances he took that he didn't need to take

From season 4, tony's skills have started to decline, culminating in a near loss of control in this episode. ASAP after the Harris meeting in satriales, he should closed shop and hid his crew.

he could of avioded the phil feud if he had of asked for permision to beat up ccco.

bigbadbill007
June 6th, 2007, 08:32 PM
Not only that but why would the crew not have been on the lookout from the moment Harris told Tony that they were out to get him and those close to him??

-Why was Bobby going to the train store by himself in the 1st place? Especially if he's management?

-Why would Sil go back to the Bing, even if he does need his papers? Have someone lower go grab your stuff for you. Or at least have another car outside with a couple guys to watch the place.

-I am also not sure why they wouldn't go after Butch as well. Everyone knows that guy is dangerous.


-Also, why weren't Benny, Anthony Maffei, Jason Molinaro, and others at or near the safe-house? If the house was located by NY I would think that they would want more than 4 guys there to protect the boss (and Tony even tried to send two of them home). Time to rally the troops Tony.

"Blue Comet" was an amazing episode (maybe the best ever) but the crew did make some questionable decisions to say the least.


Really great points. i was thinking the same myself

MrMojok
June 7th, 2007, 06:49 AM
You are dead on there, Floyd. Everyone is bopping around like they don't have a care in the world, knowing that a hit has just been ordered on the boss of one of the NY familes.

They don't even begin to show any sense of urgency until they discover the hit was bungled.