With the finale of the Sopranos getting more coverage than the Stanley Cup did and every person purporting to know what the final scene meant, you should realize by now that it's pointless to argue over what actually happened, because I'm going to tell you what happened right now.
Let's take some of the more popular arguments:
1. David Chase ended it abruptly and with much ambiguity to produce speculation and discussion for years to come.
This doesn't work unless you accept that David Chase is a lazy, unimaginative writer. If you can stomach that and the notion that such an ending has been done ad nauseum and that it was an easy way out, then by all means promote this theory. But why would Chase end such a monumental show, one that he carefully crafted over the last 8 years, by saying, "you fill in the rest." Why even have a final show? Couldn't we have just made up what happened after the second to last show? Everyone who praises this theory as being genius is missing the fact that Chase had an opportunity to end this show with a bang (pun intended) but still maintain artistic credibility AND make that final scene just as intense as it was.
2. The scene ends with the family at the ice cream parlor discussing life and the future, signifying that the Sopranos' lives are cyclical, and that they will continue to face the same issues in perpetuity.
This idea is more plausible, except it doesn't work for a few reasons. First and foremost, if that were the intended ending, why end the scene so abruptly? Tony faces another indictment, Meadow has relationship issues, A.J. deals with growing up (and another peon job secured by Tony), and Carmela has her spec home to sell. From a directing standpoint, the sharp ending completely clashes with the idea that life goes on. If Chase was telling us this was it, the end would have been smoother; it would have felt less acute.
Another item that people keep bringing up is the new therapist and how Tony opened up to her, signifying that he would continue with treatment and repeat the cycle. What those people are missing was Carmela's disapproving glare after Tony brought up his mother, evidencing that he had not been helped at all over the last 7 years, thus justifying Dr. Melfi and providing closure to the whole "treatment" storyline.
Also, there were far too many MAJOR loose ends to argue that "life goes on." I can get past the indictment, but Tony just lost Silvio and Bobby, which will drastically change the face of the family. If you're reading this article I don't have to tell you what losing Silvio means. But Tony and Bobby, his brother-in-law, had formed a bond and since episode one of the final season. Bobby was slated to take Christopher's place, who had fallen out of favor with Tony. That place was one of extreme confidence and importance, and now Tony has lost him. You can't say that "life goes on" when the landscape has changed so drastically. To make that argument, think: If Chase all of a sudden came out next week and said, "We're doing 5 more seasons!", how would you feel? It doesn't work, life for the Sopranos does not just go on.
Paulie, however, remains, and the issues Tony faced with him this last season bring us to what really happened.
3. Tony got whacked.
This is the only plausible outcome. So many people are ridiculously territorial about the Sopranos, more specifically Tony, and they have come up with every reason they can to say that he wasn't shot. But if you really listen closely, the arguments against this outcome fail. Many people attack others personally, saying that if you think Tony got killed then you are missing the picture, or are not high-level enough to understand what Chase was trying to say, or that you are just plain stupid. Either these people are over-thinking this show, or they refuse to believe that their favorite TV character is dead and will say whatever they can to block out that view.
Unfortunately for them, Tony is dead. Fortunately for everyone who understands this, the ending was beautifully done except for a few small details.
First, I enter into the record the flashback from one episode ago to when Tony and Bobby are talking on the boat about death (episode one of this last season), and Bobby says, "You probably don't even hear it when it happens." This piece of evidence is not new or original, but it is important.
One good argument against is: Who is left to order the hit? This is admittedly a flaw in Chase's plan, only because it was not fleshed out as good as it could have been. With Phil dead and a presumed peace between the NYC and Jersey crews, who would even order the hit? Perhaps it was left over from Phil's reign, perhaps the NYC crew was simply paying Tony lip service, there are a few speculative possibilities.
However, in looking at the season as a whole, there is really only one theory that makes sense: Paulie ordered the hit.
Paulie? The guy who idolizes Tony? Not so fast. First, go back and watch Paulie's scenes. Tony presents Paulie with the opportunity to head Bobby's crew, and the looks he gives during those scenes shows that he's got an internal struggle going on. Paulie states that he's afraid of getting killed like everyone else that ran that crew. As paranoid as Paulie is, that's motivation enough to order the hit. Combine that with his connection to the New York family, the episode this past season where Tony almost killed Paulie, AND PAULIE KNEW IT, and you've got all you need for motive. As an aside, the cat was Christopher. It kept staring at the picture, and Paulie fought with the cat constantly, a la Chrissy in real life.
Now, let's discuss the parlor scene itself and all of the people that are in there. There's the truck driver, the guy with his girlfriend, the boy scout troop, the black guys and the guy in the Members Only jacket.
Clearly, Members Only guy is the one that everyone thinks is the hitman. Too obvious, right? No, it isn't.
Everyone is looking for some genius way for Tony to get shot, as if this was a show about high-tech espionage or guerilla warfare. Perhaps everyone would accept Tony's death if there was a split-second shot of a ninja in the background. Fact is, the guy only looked like a hitman because IT'S A SHOW ABOUT THE MOB. If this was some other show the guy would have just looked like a guy going to take a piss. But Chase was screwing with us that whole scene, wasn't he? Here's what you were supposed to think, in case you missed it:
Members Only guy walks in, is he gonna walk right up and shoot Tony????
Whew, no, he sat down....Wait, he's getting up, this is it!!!!!! Whew, no, he's just going to the bathroom.....talk, talk, talk; Meadow can't park, she's running in....(Loud power ballad playing...and then....) BLANK SCREEN! Gotcha....
You see, there were two camps of people, those who wanted Tony to live, and those who knew it could only end with him dying. For those people who wanted him to live, the last episode was going to be very sad. For those who knew he had to die, they wanted it in a way that they could not see coming. It was lose-lose for Chase because nobody was going to be happy. So for the Members Only guy to do it, who clearly LOOKED like a hitman, you lose the Pro-lifers and most of the Tony must die-ers. This is why it seems like the vast majority of arguments are against Tony getting whacked: People don't like the ending, so they want to believe that life goes on (perhaps both ficticiously and non-ficticiously), make up an argument for that theory, and applaud the ending as being more high-level than it was.
Ending the way Chase did really was the only way he could do it. Seeing Tony get shot would be too traumatic for the die hard Pro-lifers, seeing him die in with his screaming family around him would have been too cheesy. No, we finish the show from Tony's perspective, the door rings, and in the split second when he looks up, he does not look up with a look of recognition of his daughter; it's a blank, borderline terrified, recoiled look, and then...Silence.