Seinfeld Finale - The Way to Go

S09E23 The Finale (1)liveMay 15, 1998the next day34 posts by 25 posters
😂 Loved it🔥 Controversial

Fans debate the Seinfeld finale: some praise it as a bold, subversive ending that deconstructs the show, while others criticize it as unfunny and bleak with no satisfying resolution.

34 posts
Eric Sansoni

In the end, Seinfeld proved it still knows how to go right by going where other sitcoms never would. This finale took risks that thankfully paid off perfectly. This goes up there with Newhart as one of the cleverest, bravest and coolest series sign-offs ever concocted. It's so clear that the show is controlled by creators who still love it as if they were fans, not by any network formula-spinning machine. I'm surprised and glad they did something without regard for whether the mass audience or the overly sentimental fans would like it. It makes it all the more special for those of us who choose to "get it."

I wouldn't have wanted just another Seinfeld episode. To be special, the last one had to be different. I didn't want to see any heartwrenching plot threads tie up the characters' lives, face any "happily ever after" endings, or endure any corny self-congratulatory bows. I got what I wanted, something subversive, self-referential, seld-deprecating, honest, humble, satisfying, clever, and amusing.

What I got was the Anti-Seinfeld. If you're going to end, then really end it. Seinfeld's ending was a twist that turned the series on its head. It's like Darth Vader being unmasked in the last Star Wars movie. It deconstructs and reinterprets everything you've come to accept, but at the same time makes perfect sense as the ultimate, logical progression from what has come before. It does this by stepping out of the narrow conventions and logic that kept the story locked in on itself all along, entering a more complicated, more real world. You can't do that in the middle of a story. It tears down the superstructure that supports the entire artifice. But for the story's conclusion, this kind of ending succeeds sweetly by not just summing up the little make-believe stories in a comfortabll make-believe way. It ends the entire process of telling the story from the outside in.

The hilarious exchange at the beginning over the cell phone faux pas ("Have we gone too far this time?") was the first clue to the show's ultimate theme. Once they got past the cute red-herrings and references, the transport of the characters to the rural countryside was like Dorothy waking up in bed after visiting the land of Oz. This sneaky plot device pushed the characters out of the world where they can get away with what they do, and into a place where they're forced to deal with reality. All of a sudden, they become responsible for everything that we could just take for granted before. It's not so much ending the stories of these characters, as it is deconstructing all the assumptions the story itself was founded on. Talk about a more creative way to end a story than having the characters get married, or hit the lottery.

That's why the laughs at the end become almost muted. We can't laugh when we're forced to accept that the ridiculous behavior of the characters has real consequences. We can't laugh when we're forced to admit that these people are not lovable, but sad and pathetic. The whole layer separating the series from reality is broken down. If we knew people like these in real life, we would think of them exactly how we think of these characters by the end of the finale. The show sums this up perfectly with Seinfeld's failed prison comic stand-up. Jerry has lost that protective boundary, that illusion, that distance between himself and his audience that allows him to be funny.

Besides the daring structure, there were hilarious touches along the way. George got flustered, Elaine got bothered, and Kramer got jiggy. The Costanzas dysfunctioned, while Newman was at his most heinous. The show wasn't perfect, as no Seinfeld episode has been. A certain sloppiness and off-balance tone has always accompanied Seinfeld's rough edge and quirky pace. Going back to the most pointless and unfunny Seinfeld storyline ever conceived, the NBC show-within-a-show bit, was a mistake that stopped the episode dead in its tracks for five minutes. Referencing this in such a big way instead of recalling other classic bits on a small scale, like the shrinkage bit, was a poor choice. Apparently they've read too much of their critics, who never fail to discuss the most obvious episodes as opposed to the best ones. But overall this final Seinfeld provided a great deal of humor within an incredibly well-conceived and daring storyline. It almost makes it seem worth it to close the series when their creative talents remained in good form. It was a clever and unforgettable sign-off, one of television's best. Good show.

-Eric S.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

POTF2 and 12" Collector's Guide: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/3177/

The way to go? I don't think so.

I don't think any show could possibly live up to the hype around this one, but my disappointment was immense. It was not funny, it wasn't clever, it seemed like a hastily-cobbled excuse to roll out as many past characters as possible. I loved the series for years, until last night. What a shame...

I can't believe it is getting good reviews. Must be those same critics that love Ally McBeal, too... ;-)

Greg Beaulieu [email] Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article , [email] (Greg Beaulieu) wrote:

Wrong! I despise "Ally", but I am pretty much in total agreement with Eric on the "Seinfeld" finale.

While the finale was not "hysterically funny" like the best episodes of "Seinfeld" have been, it *was* thoughtful in a way "Seinfeld" has never been before. As much as it was a commentary on the "Seinfeld 4", it was also a commentary on NBC's network goons and the public that watches "Seinfeld". I would go as far as to say it was brilliant (and it was nowhere near as good as "MASH's" finales), but I thought it was good, and I thought it was better than "Cheers".

Ian J. Ball | "Tell 'Helpful Boy' what you need! Helpful Boy's Grad Student, UCLA | motto is: 'Help me, to help *you*!'"-Tucker, FF [email] | Want my ep. guides or FAQs via the Web or FTP? [email] | http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/TV.html

"Seinfeld" have been, it *was* thoughtful in a way "Seinfeld" has never been before.

I guess the public didn't realize that comedy series were supposed to be "thoughtful" instead of "hysterically funny". And they shouldn't expect something resembling past funny episodes when the network hypes the show up as "the best Seinfed ever". They must not be as smart as you.

Maximoff (That last episode wasn't the funniest, IMO my favorite has always been the one where Jerry and George look for Kramer in California)

[email] (Ian J. Ball) wrote:

The episode was a cheat, designed basically to cover the asses of the writers and creaters. The attitude expressed as the 4 watched the carjacking was just so more blatant than anything that had ever transpired before it seems out-of-place and contrived. Fans liked the show and characters because their selfishness was driven by deep neuroses and character faults, not by "criminal disregard". The sledgehammer approach was just simplistic and, as it turned out, utterly devoid of insight or humor.

It was, of course, different and appeals to mainly to those who never cared about the characters; those who just laughed at the jokes without a second thought and those who who found somethiong lacking in the show's 9 year run; most professional critics had a foot in both camps. In writing a show thsat would appeal to these groups, however, the finale had to be false to both the characters and the premise of the show.

I'm not a rabid fan of the show, I've probably seen less than half the episodes, but it always seemed to me that, as bad as the 4 central characters acted, the people around them were no better. Are we really to believe that the Newman, the Soup Nazi, or the Bubble Boy had some sort of right to accuse anyone else of criminal behavior?

Perhaps that's the best way to interpret the final show; not simply as a critique of the main characters, but as an expose of a self-rightous society that is incapable of fairly judging the totality of any person's life, yet which cannot stop doing so incessantly.

[email]

I hadn't considered that, but you're right. That is not how our four would act during a carjacking -- not in the worst-written episode. (well, apparently in the worst-written episode, but never before that one)

Dave Gates [email]

I couldn't disagree with you more. I felt that that was _exactly_ how they would act. Remember Jerry ("let's go watch them slice that fat bastard up" or whatever the exact quote was). They would never make those comments outside the group because they want others to like them, but they would have thought them. All but Kramer who didn't say a word, which was also in character. Since it was only the 4 of them, and Jerry started it with his "observation" it made perfect sense.

Dennis Carlson wrote:
.
.
.
.
.
yeah, there's spoilers!
as if you didn't know!
duh.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

here's the thing... it was a show about nothing... and they got arrested for doing nothing... you see the humor in that?

plus, they're getting punished for being such horrible people. you know, Jerry mentioned how horrible the characters are, but we love them and laugh at them anyway. so anyway, instead of the last show being -about- nothing, they got sent to jail for doing nothing, and thus ending the show, and yadda yadda irony, blah blah whatever. right?

and i don't know about predictable. 50/50 i think. i figured they would get the show picked up, then the end of the Seinfeld would become the beginning of Jerry, which would be the same as the beginning of Seinfeld, and thus into infinite, ya know? either that or, while watching the plane going down, i half expected to see them go to heaven or hell and then another clip show. but Larry David's mother wouldn't allow that.

it was a long way to go for a joke, and i really hated the pullback shot, but i appreciate the joke just the same.

okay? get it now? it's not that they're evil, or criminals, just funny that they got sent away for doing... NOTHING. it's funny, dammit! even if it depresses the hell out of me, and ruined every old episode forever, and even if now everybody is going to be expecting another episode around May 14, 1999.

�������Don't disillusion me������� ���d�� T�mߛ ����I've only got record shoppes left����

In article , [email] wrote:

We can probably interpret it any way want, but the point for me is that it found a way to truly end the story of the show. It was satisfying in that it gave us a reason to believe things were over, to believe that there's nothing left to see. It absolutely had to step out of the previous boundaries of the series to do that. If it acted like just another episode, we'd reach the end and still be expecting more episodes. The carjacking subplot was blatant. We were supposed to think that finally the characters have gone too far, crossed the line, and are not going to get away with it. For me it wasn't that much of a stretch, considering the bread-stealing episode, and the idea of big city people being desensitized to crime. But I could tell it was a pivotal step when I realized the scene just wasn't funny. It forced us to look at the characters in a more real, more critical way, by not structuring their antics in a humorous way. Whether this means one thing or another is irrelevant. It worked because it undermined the whole premise of the show, giving the show a reason not to exist anymore. That's why it was the perfect final episode.

-Eric S.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

POTF2 and 12" Collector's Guide: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/3177/

Absolutely! This is exactly why it had to be this way.

In other words, it gave closure to the 9 years, and allowed views to realize that the show didn't have to exist anymore, and yet gave us reason to believe that the 4 would still live on unchanged after their year was up. It was the ultimate no hugs, no learning.

Haha, everything is subjective, and as thrilling as it must be to whine and complain, and condemn something as 'utter crap,' I'm glad the final episode hit MY funny bone in exactly the right spot. I guess it wasn't for everybody, but I'm glad they went out the way they wanted to. And boy did I laugh. From the petty banter of the first half hour, to the musical montages, to the parade of witnesses. And the little touches, such as the "Seinfeld" Theme by way of "Matlock" as the jury came back with their decision.

And as far as whines that it was a clip show...I don't get it. The witness scene was 15 minutes of the show, and maybe about 2 minutes total of unoriginal footage was used. This was obviously to benefit new viewers to the show, and in no way makes it a 'clip show.'

Trust me, the show WAS funny...just not to everyone. In fact, I almost think alt.tv.seinfeld is the wrong place to look for validation of my argument...around here there are just way too many people that set some sort of nebulous standard for how good an episode should be. Lurking in this group has always been a bit frustrating, probably because most of the disgruntled posters are like Seinfeld characters themselves: neurotic, unsatisfied, too obsessed with minute detail to sit back and enjoy the simple things, like comedy. Maybe my all-around enjoyment of the show has to do with the fact that for the past 9 years (regardless of Larry David), I've been laughing AT the "New York Four," rather than with them. Maybe the finale was a little too personal for people, as if THEY were being put on trial. :)

The only problem I had with the final "Seinfeld" was that it seemed too rushed, as if it could have been a full two hours. It seemed like every 30 seconds we were hearing different versions of the familiar Seinfeld bass riff, indicating a scene change. But otherwise, I thought it was great. And I know this won't change your opinion of the show, but all I have to say is, "Between 8:45 and 10:00 Thursday night, I was laughing and having a good time, and you weren't! NEENER!"

:)
Mark Monroy [email]

chris markle wrote:

So you object to his post 'cause it looks like it was actually written by someone intelligent? I don't agree with everything Eric wrote, but it's one of the few genuinely intelligent posts I've read, pro or con, about the finale. Most of the posts just say "that sucks" or "that's an insult" or whatever. Yawn. Give me Mr. Sansoni any day.

Don WeinmanJaime J. Weinman

Jaime J. Weinman wrote in message ...

Hear, hear! Well said.

His analysis of the device of taking out of the place where they could get away with everything was, IMO, right on.

DPW

Did we watch the same episode? The finale I saw last night was complete and utter crap....a big disappointment....

XYMOXIwuzhere

I have to agree.

Although the premise was intriuging, the execution was poor. It wasn't funny, and quickly became tedious -- ultimately it became more like a clip show than a rousing finale, particularly when each character took the stand and recounted old events.

They could not have pleased everyone.

One word describes the series and the finale:

S A R D O N I C.

http://coffee.bc.ca/coffee The Coffee Expert's Group Victoria British Columbia Canada The Complete Coffee Resource | Machines | Coffee | Home Roasting |

Jeff Jones wrote:

Seinfeld has always been self-aware.

I would say it was the most self-aware show on TV.

By the way, were any of the characters they brought back to the show characters which were created when Larry David was no longer on the show? From what I could tell, all the characters they brought were created when Larry David was still on the show.

Where did you learn that stupid rule?

-Eric S.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

POTF2 and 12" Collector's Guide: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/3177/
DancerEric Sansoni

On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:34:58 GMT, [email] (Eric Sansoni) wrote:

You're one of those fans that no matter what he did, you would defend it, aren't you? I understood and applauded what the finale was trying to do, the problem was it wasn't done well. The writing, the acting were all listless and subpar to Seinfeld's normal show. the court scene was like any other cliche of a finale with a trip through past episodes - that was nothing creative. I liked the ending, I thought that was done well, but on the whole - the show was weak.

There was no surprises in the show, no humor, nothing new! Where's the clever ending? that wasn't clever - most people saw that coming! I was hoping they would die in the plane - that would have been interesting.

daring structure? What the hell are you talking about? There was nothing daring about it - don't give it credit it doesn't deserve.

IMO, that was one of the biggest wastes of a finale in TV history. They had a perfect chance to really do something great, interesting, new, at least funny - and they wasted it on crap.

Brad

I don't think so. I haven't even seen more than half of the series. I was a major fan during the earliest seasons, never missing, taping, etc. After the whole "show-within-a-show" subplot dragged on and on during that one season, I decided the show had lost its magic and never became a regular viewer again. I was pleasantly surprised that it did recover and produced many good episodes after that of course, but I gave up carrying the fan's torch for Seinfeld long ago.

I thought everything was up to par in those respects. I laughed a lot at many of the lines and performances. The main difference was that the premise and the plot of this one was not silly. It was much more sly and satiric.

The plot elements were not creative, but the plot itself was. The court room was just a device to bring in the flashbacks and make the characters see their lives through the filter of a new reality. The court was not used for the cliched humor and melodrama that you might expect.

Yeah, the newsgroup had it all figured out way in advance...

That would have been stupid.

The way it confounded viewers' expectations, refusing to give them a happy ending or to neatly tie up the characters' lives was daring. The way it reinterpreted the entire premise of Seinfeld and refused to follow the standard Seinfeld story formula was daring.

And that's exactly what they did.

-Eric S.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

POTF2 and 12" Collector's Guide: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/3177/

I'll say it refused to give viewers a happy ending! That was about as hellish at it comes. An hour and fifteen minutes of unfunny comedy. A painful trial. A little scene in a jail cell that makes it clear that the small talk has run out. Seinfeld's painful stand-up in front of the heavy-hitting prisoners. A quick reference to sodomy and the heckler who promises to cut Jerry later.

Hell, isn't this show still a comedy? Couldn't they at least make it funny? How about if the judge has sex with the old lady and cuts them a little slack by having them spend their year (together) in county jail instead of prison. No more preposterous than other things they've done. Then lighten up their chatter in the jail cell at the end. If you're gonna show how they're so oblivious that they never consider the morality of the things they've done, at least lighten up on the imagery for those of us at home who thought we were watching a comedy!

Dave Gates [email]

Dave Gates wrote:

funny? How about if the judge has sex with the old lady and cuts them a little slack by having them spend their year (together) in county jail instead of prison. <

How do you know the judge didn't have sex with Mrs. Costanza? The one year sentence itself felt very light, considering the shellacking they received in court.

In article ,

But this is where opinions differ. I thought the trial was funny... Everything that came before it wasn't too funny (except the phone subplot).. I thought the standup at the end was funny.

[email]

"unfunny comedy" is an oxymoron, moron

Matt Ackeret wrote in article ...

Everything

thought

Thanks, Matt. I was gonna respond in my own defense but, on a hunch, I decided to sort alt.tv.seinfeld by author so that all of Johnny Letterman's articles were grouped together. Reading them, I saw that a lot of his posts are quick ad hominem replies to all sorts of authors.

Discovering this, I didn't feel so strong an impulse to defend myself.

I wonder if it's true though: "Comedy," by definition, cannot be "unfunny?" That doesn't sound right to me.

Dave Gates [email]

I'm convinced the writer is still pissed at NBC and this was his revenge. Especially the words written for NBC execs.

DancerEric Sansoni

On Fri, 15 May 1998 16:07:33 GMT, [email] (Eric Sansoni) wrote:

Confounding nothing! Eveyone knew that it would end the way it began -at least fans of the show did. Few people expected to see a tearful goodbye.

It perfectly followed the Seinfeld formula. Everything ties together. Kramer's ear, Elaine's phone, the entire supporting cast. It followed the formula but failed to be interesting.

Brad

In article ,

Yes, and that's what I thought was cool about it.

Instead of "wrapping everything up" within one episode, it wrapped everything up *for the whole series*. That is, instead of two or three threads in one episode tying together at the end, this took all of those various episodes and tied them together.

I will say that I don't think the show was *all that funny*.. Especially the whole setup wasn't great. But once they got into the courtroom, it was pretty funny. Yes, in some ways it was a glorified clip show (I wish they hadn't've shown clips at all and had described everything verbally in the court)... but there actually weren't very many clips timewise in the hour and 15 minutes show.

So, in other words, even though it wasn't a hilarious show, I thought it was interesting. It was a letdown in not being as funny as other episodes, but I give it points for the cleverness in wrapping up all of the various characters into the episode.

[email]

Dancer wrote in message ...

off

bravest

is

something

fans

choose

plot

endings,

ever

big

their

Sorry, but I agree with Sansoni. Despite your long and somewhat rambling criticism of Eric's opinion, I thought the show was funny. I heard the critics hated it too, but since when have one them ever been right about anything?

Dave ThomasDancer

[email]'sup? (Dancer) wrote:

Gotta agree. The beginning had some promise, but the whole show (especially the trial) seemed like they wanted to do a "clip" show, and this was the closest they could get to it. I've watched the show from the beginning. Seeing a bunch of old charcters show up and repeat the plotlines of old shows is not what I consider entertainment.

And for those who are "amazed" at the gathering of all the different characters, it's not really that amazing. All you have to do is call some agents.

DT - Pixel Planet Reviews of CG software, books, programming tools, games, comics, music, movies and more! http://www.pixelplanet.com

I'm not amazed, I just think it's F U N N Y . Frank