What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official "Space Blanket" for Better Call Saul*** (2 Viewers)

If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
I think that is why he suddenly backed out.

It Doned on him that he would never succeed on any level to prove his worth to chuck.
Ok, then who cares about Chuck? Take the job and pull in legit big bucks, which is what you were trying to do all along.

Is the argument that the ONLY reason he tried to walk the straight and narrow to prove himself to his brother, and once he realized that it was never going to happen, in a split second, he chose the path of the morally bankrupt man his brother always presumed he was?
I took it as a realization that going out like Marco did would be more true to himself than selling his soul to become part of a club made up of people like Howard and Chuck.
Another good point.
Who is he selling his soul too? He'd be joining a major firm that's not his brother's as the fruits of his hard, honest, and good work. It's not like he's being played, tricked, or has to give in to anyone or anything.
"The Man"

Not shtick.

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
He didn't enjoy the legit life as much as a criminal one. He was not working for a decade because it was his dream to be legit - it was his dream to earn his brother's respect.

It rang completely true to me - no offense to lawyers here - but IMO being an honest lawyer seems like it was suck as a profession.

 
Ok, then who cares about Chuck? Take the job and pull in legit big bucks, which is what you were trying to do all along.

Is the argument that the ONLY reason he tried to walk the straight and narrow to prove himself to his brother, and once he realized that it was never going to happen, in a split second, he chose the path of the morally bankrupt man his brother always presumed he was?
Ned, I take it you don't have a criminal bone in your body. If you don't then you'll never understand.

 
Who is he selling his soul too? He'd be joining a major firm that's not his brother's as the fruits of his hard, honest, and good work. It's not like he's being played, tricked, or has to give in to anyone or anything.
It would, however, be boring. :yawn:

 
I loved how they gave us the background of Jimmy's arrest at the Bingo Breakdown. Also the touch at the funeral where Jimmy shows the other guy outside his ring and the guy talks about it being worth some money to hock it. All those little things like bumming a cigarette add to the flavor of the time and the environment that Jimmy lived in. I also thought that the scam montage was gold.

Was a very good episode but as I'm not a subtle person, I thought they could have worked his turnover to Saul a little better. Jimmy had gone through the crisis brought on by his brother's betrayal and had already resigned himself to going back to Albuquerque. The job waiting for him was above and beyond what he envisioned himself having going back to Alb. I felt like something more cataclysmic was necessary for the ending.
Can you keep a secret? Because I really shouldn't be telling you this.

The montage was one of the best I've ever seen, a tour-de-force.
Your secret is safe with me. ;)
I know how to get some easy money, all we have to do is put up some "tarrif fees" to get access to a fortune that the Nigerian royal family can't right now, because they are in exile... They looted $400 million, conservatively estimated.
Sign me up. Sounds like a can't miss deal. How many racks you need?

 
Jimmy turning his back on "the straight life" is a lot more plausible than a guy like Walter White "breaking bad" IMO.

Did you guys have a hard time with that?

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
I think that is why he suddenly backed out.

It Doned on him that he would never succeed on any level to prove his worth to chuck.
Ok, then who cares about Chuck? Take the job and pull in legit big bucks, which is what you were trying to do all along.

Is the argument that the ONLY reason he tried to walk the straight and narrow to prove himself to his brother, and once he realized that it was never going to happen, in a split second, he chose the path of the morally bankrupt man his brother always presumed he was?
I think for his brother and people like Kim he tried to be legit. But he's finally admitted to himself he's great at being a scammer, that's what he really enjoys, and it's possible he could make more money more easily as a sleazy lawyer/con artist. For the sake of storytelling it probably could have been a bit more convincing of a turn had they had an extra 15 minutes and an additional final straw scene, but I think they've earned this conclusion over the course of the season regardless.
Betrayal by your bother isn't enough for you guys?

 
I know that's a silly thing to post and seems to be overanalyzing, but it's one of those "once you see it" things for me.

 
I really like Jimmy. What does that say for me? Guy is good but going of the cliff.

Last episode: 8/10
The Pulp Fiction quote came to mind:

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.
Jimmy tried being the righteous man but after being beset by the inequities of the selfish (his brother) he became weak. His shepherd (Kim) tried to help him but it wasn't enough and he became a lost child who falls into hands of evil men.

 
I really like Jimmy. What does that say for me? Guy is good but going of the cliff.

Last episode: 8/10
The Pulp Fiction quote came to mind:

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.
Jimmy tried being the righteous man but after being beset by the inequities of the selfish (his brother) he became weak. His shepherd (Kim) tried to help him but it wasn't enough and he became a lost child who falls into hands of evil men.
Great stuff.

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Thorn said:
Ned Ryerson said:
comfortably numb said:
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
I think that is why he suddenly backed out.

It Doned on him that he would never succeed on any level to prove his worth to chuck.
Ok, then who cares about Chuck? Take the job and pull in legit big bucks, which is what you were trying to do all along. Is the argument that the ONLY reason he tried to walk the straight and narrow to prove himself to his brother, and once he realized that it was never going to happen, in a split second, he chose the path of the morally bankrupt man his brother always presumed he was?
I took it as a realization that going out like Marco did would be more true to himself than selling his soul to become part of a club made up of people like Howard and Chuck.
Another good point.
Notice in that last scene he's still wearing marco's pinky ring

 
Sorry for the delay, Tanner.

There's a moment early in "Marco" where Jimmy and Kim walk past the dented trash can in the HHM parking garage — a reminder of so many of Jimmy's early frustrations with his brother's law firm — and he assures her that he's at peace with what he learned about Chuck. It seems, just then, that the "Better Call Saul" creative team — most of them (like co-creator Peter Gould, who wrote and directed the finale) veterans of "Breaking Bad," a show largely defined by the patient way it moved through its arcs — will be playing a particularly long game in getting us from Jimmy McGill to Saul Goodman. Chuck's betrayal was a brutal blow, but maybe it wouldn't be the one that knocked Jimmy over the edge.In the very next scene, though, Jimmy has a meltdown while calling out another bingo game at the senior center. As he flees Albuquerque for the friendly confines of Cicero and lets his old pal Marco talk him into running one last scam, and then another, and another... and another, it becomes clear that Saul Goodman is coming — even if he won't be called that at first — and Gould and company are just making sure they don't skip over any steps in that transformation, just as they didn't for that chemistry teacher who wound up employing Saul.

Though we had seen glimpses of Slippin' Jimmy in action, an episode largely comprised of his greatest hits — with Mike, Kim, Chuck and Howard left on the sidelines back in Albuquerque — felt like exactly what we needed before Jimmy's big declaration to Mike to end the season. The season to this point had done such a thorough and convincing job of presenting Jimmy as a good guy who had managed to rise above his worst impulses — a recovering addict who had managed to resist temptation far more often than even he might have expected — that we didn't need to just hear about the thrills of the Slippin' Jimmy days. We needed to see it for ourselves.

And boy, did we see it.

The Cicero scenes get to play things both slow and fast, first giving us the entirety of the hustle with the Kennedy half-dollar, then giving us the rest of the week's worth of scams as a giddy, kaleidoscopic montage, scored with jazz sounding straight out of the Rat Pack era, so that we can appreciate how much fun Jimmy and Marco are having, and also how good they are at this. Jimmy has found the law much more satisfying than Marco finds standpipe work, but this is the quite obviously the true calling for both of them.

After a decade of being a good guy, Jimmy needed more than just Chuck's betrayal and harsh words to knock him off the wagon. He had to go on an epic bender back among his old haunts, to really soak in that life, so that even when the dream scenario of a large Santa Fe firm offering him a partnership track job presents itself, he won't take it. Without the trip to Cicero, I think Jimmy takes that job because he feels he's earned it, and to prove Chuck wrong for so smugly dismissing him. With it, and with Marco's ring on his pinky, giving in to all his most selfish criminal impulses becomes the easier way to go.

That's the ring Saul will wear throughout "Breaking Bad," and you can perhaps look at it like the Precious from "The Lord of the Rings," corrupting Jimmy and possessing him with the spirit of Marco. (As he peels out of the courthouse parking lot, he starts humming — just as Marco did while waiting for Jimmy to arrive in the alley for their final scam — the classic opening riff of Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," before the song itself comes on the soundtrack.) Or you can simply look at it as a reminder of who Jimmy/Saul wants to be, and how much he has to resist the temptation to do the right thing when it could cost him money. Ex-smokers are sometimes counseled to wear rubber bands around their wrists and snap them whenever they're tempted to smoke; this is like an addict wearing one to remind them why they'd be stupid to quit.

There's still a very long road between here and where Saul and Mike are when we meet them in "Breaking Bad," and I look forward to watching this show take us along all those steps (like the name change, whenever that comes), especially if it's done with all the craft and emotion that was so abundant throughout this debut season. But it feels like "Better Call Saul" is going to have to be a fundamentally different show in its second season. Not only does Jimmy no longer have aspirations of respectability, which could make it harder to work in the likes of Howard and Kim (even as it should lead to greater prominence for Nacho, who wound up appearing in only four of this season's episodes), but the emotional arc of the series would seem to be very different. Season 1 was about a man realizing that the universe didn't want him to be good; once he makes the decision to break bad, it either becomes a matter of degree going forward (much like with Mr. White, only with a less horrifying endpoint), or some other inner conflict has to take its place.

Whatever it is, I look forward to it. I came into this series with some trepidation — wondering if we needed a "Breaking Bad" spin-off at all, and whether Saul was a compelling enough character to carry one — but these 10 episodes swiftly convinced me that a very different, but entertaining and powerful in its own right, show could exist in this universe, and that Saul was far more complicated and interesting than he'd ever had the chance to show as Walter White's consiglieri. This was a fabulous debut season, in many ways better — or at least more consistent — than the first year of "Breaking Bad," because the creative team has worked together for so long and weren't interrupted by a guild strike this time. Of course, "Breaking Bad" didn't start turning into an all-time classic until its second and third seasons, and "Saul" has a long way before it achieves those heights. But this first year was far better than I think even the most optimistic Saul fanboy had a right to expect. To borrow the kind of pop culture analogy the show's hero loves to make, this could have been "AfterM*A*S*H," when for the moment it feels like it could be on its way to being "Frasier."

Some other thoughts:

* I'll be talking to Peter Gould tomorrow to discuss the season (look for that in the early-mid afternoon), but I did already email him one question about the finale: was there a specific film or filmmaker he used as a model for the montage of Jimmy and Marco's cons? Though the look and sound of them was very early '60s, he said the actual model was the '30s montages of Slavko Vorkapich.

* Gould and Vince Gilligan also noted that while many of this season's title sequences were randomly assigned to their episodes, the last two were deliberately chosen to reflect the tone of those episodes. Last week as a Saul Goodman matchbook in a urinal; tonight, it was a Saul coffee mug falling to the floor, shattering, and spilling its contents everywhere. That about sums up what our hero has gone through emotionally over the last couple of weeks, even though it's really Jimmy McGill who shatters into many pieces; Saul Goodman is how he reassembles himself.

* The mark runs off with the wallet when it seems like Marco is dead, which brings us back to our discussion about the potential pitfalls of that scam. I leave it to someone who understands grifting more than I do to defend this particular hustle, but it just seems like more trouble than it's worth to risk a thousand bucks in the hope of making a few additional hundred.

* Mike's explanation for why he didn't just walk off with the money he stole from the Kettlemans speaks not only to the difference between the two men going forward, but to the reason why Jimmy, and later other people, will want to employ Mike Ehrmantraut. He, like so many of TV's most memorable criminals, has a code.

* AMC tends to allow its showrunners one F-bomb per season, which gets bleeped on air but often restored on DVD and other home video formats. Here, it's Jimmy apologizing to Howard for having called him a "pigf--ker."

* When I have time to revisit this season, I really want to focus on all the Howard scenes, knowing what we do now that he's basically a nice guy who was reluctantly doing Chuck's dirty work. The moment where Howard realizes how much Jimmy has done for Chuck over the last year was really nicely played by Patrick Fabian, and ditto on Odenkirk reacting to Howard's mention of the "Charlie Hustle" nickname. Once upon a time, he probably assumed this was a condescending reference to his former life, and while that may have been a part of it, it's clear now that the major idea was sincere praise of Jimmy's tenacity. As we see at several points in this episode, including Chuck coaching Ernesto (whom Jimmy knows well enough to know he prefers to be called Ernie) through the grocery list, Howard is a nice guy who sometimes comes across as a jerk, while Chuck is a jerk who thinks he's a nice guy.

* We learn that Jimmy has been in Albquerque for 10 years, which raises the question of whether Bob Odenkirk is more believable playing 16 years younger than when he first appeared on "Breaking Bad," or pretending to be Kevin Costner for an impressionable waitress.

* "Breaking Bad" in-joke: one of the many B-words Jimmy tries out for the bingo crowd is Belize.
:oldunsure:
If you need someone to tell you that he modeled the montage on Vorkapich, then maybe critical review just isn't for you.
If you need to copy and paste "Vorakapich" in order to be condescending about Vorkapich, then maybe condescension just isn't for you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
At first I thought the "breaking bad" segment was way too fast. All of a sudden he passed up big bucks just to go "hustle"?

But the more you think about it, the more it makes sense. The whole episode he was losing his interest in legitimate law. From the bingo speech to his binges in Chicago, he just has had it.

Now after all the disappointment I think he can't fathom pushing papers as a new lawyer in Santa Fe.

Personally I'm a little surprised with the turn the series took over the past two episodes. Before these two episodes, I thought the fall to Saul Goodman was going to take place over the course of 3-4 seasons.

But now he's basically there. Slippin Jimmy had no real morals, from what we could tell, he is a con man. So once he decides to revert back, he's just doing what he's already done, just with a law degree and to a presumably larger degree.

I guess the point is that there now isn't a lot of character development left. In a very realistic way they flipped a likable guy to slippin jimmy in two episodes. He's a name change and a little experience away from being the Saul Goodman we already knew.

 
When Jimmy walked away from the Santa Fe law firm, it felt like Walt turning down Gretchen and Elliott's big offer to return to Grey Matter.

 
The meltdown at Bingo, including The Hills Have Eyes comment had me :lol: :lmao: :lol: :lmao: :lol:

Great stuff!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There was a level of tint on that vehicle, that to this day, I'll maintain was not legal for an Illinois-licensed vehicle.

Brought back memories in the "$800" half dollar bar scam, when he pretended to be calling a coin dealer, and it was time info. Is that still a thing? I can't even remember the number I used to call for it. Of course now, the time is already BUILT IN TO YOUR PHONE DISPLAY.

* Sir, sir, could you help me, are these today's numbers?

The montage went by so fast the first time I didn't pause to think about it, but after rewatching, it came to me in a flash and sort of unbidden, cracking me up. You could do that scam by altering a newspaper so that the announced "winning numbers" matched a loser in your possession. But of course an unsuspecting blind man wouldn't know he had "won" and could be preyed on and taken advantage of.

There seemed to be some symbolism in the final shot from above looking at the two parallel yellow striped lane dividers, like two paths, fates or destinies, the one he could have gone down, and the one he ended up traveling instead.

The Moral Message in Better Call Saul's First Season (from The Atlantic)

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/the-morality-fable-of-better-call-saul/389820/

One season in, and Better Call Saul viewers have yet to meet Saul. Breaking Bad’s lovable scumbag lawyer still goes by his birth name, Jimmy McGill, even though there have been plenty of times during the first 10 episodes of Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould’s show that he’s been both lovable and a scumbag.

What is a scumbag, though? Are they born or made? It's now clear that Better Call Saul is, like Breaking Bad, a great meditation on the nature of wrongdoing, which incidentally is much the same question pondered by basically all great religions and philosophers. The Albuquerque (and, sometimes, Chicago) of Gilligan and Gould’s imagination bustles with normal-seeming individuals somewhere in the process of breaking bad. Under the crummy surfaces of strip malls and tract homes, accountants, teachers, veterinarians, parking attendant, cops, and lawyers are all playing the angles.

For many of these folks, morality isn’t quite black and white; instead, it’s invisible, unconsidered, something whose bounds are transgressed in dumb fumbling. Take those white-collar Stepford crooks, the Kettlemans, who try to absolve their misdeeds through sheer force of denial; Craig barely bothered to cover his tracks as he bilked the county government for millions. Or take the pill slinger in dad pants who goes by “Price” and hires Mike Ehrmantraut. After selling drugs to a cartel worker, he’s shocked to be told that he’s a criminal, stammering, “I’m not, like, a bad guy.” To which Mike gives the clearest explanation of how the BB/BCS universe, and maybe our own, works:

"I’ve known good criminals and bad cops, bad priests, honorable thieves. You can be on one side of the law or the other. But if you make a deal with somebody, you keep your word. You can go home today with your money and never do this again. But you took something that wasn’t yours, and you sold it for a profit. You’re now a criminal. Good one, bad one, that’s up to you."

It's up to you: This is the Ehrmantraut ethos, and it might be why he’s possibly the best character Gilligan has served up. In Breaking Bad, the old man turned out to be terrifyingly competent whenever he opted to make a move, which wasn’t often. The episode “Five-O,” Better Call Saul’s most raved-about hour, gave Mike a classic and tough backstory involving crooked policemen killing his son, the only upstanding guy on the force. It became clear that Mike's capable of doing terrible things even when not on a job, but only after great preparation and with great intention—as when he avenged his son with a double murder. He’s realpolitik, with heart. Should his daughter-in-law keep dirty money? If it helps her and her kid, Mike says, yes, of course.

Jimmy can, and does, learn something from Mike’s clearheadedness. The proto-Saul has a gift for deception and knows how to persuade. But in last night’s finale, viewers saw that Jimmy, for a time, got caught up in a confused swirl of emotions, pride, and expectations as he tried to make something of himself. Back in his Slippin’ Jimmy days, a lewd prank landed him in jail; his stuffy and successful brother freed him, and offered him a role in his law firm’s mailroom. Jimmy saw this as an opportunity to do more than straighten out—he could go good. It was Walter White in reverse, a guy trying to prove himself as a normal human being, not a monster manipulator. He buckled down. He passed the bar.

But brother Chuck, afflicted by both delusions about electro-magnetic fields and a vicious kind of pretension, didn't think reform was possible. He secretly resented and undermined Jimmy’s moves toward lawyerdom. When it finally became clear last week that Chuck had been ankling his younger brother, Jimmy seemed deeply wounded. But in the finale, hurt turns to bingo-calling rage turns to self-reflection. He realizes that all along, his desire to become a respectable person wasn’t actually driven by his own pursuit of self-respect. It was about his brother’s admiration—but his brother's admiration was never on offer.

Which explains why Jimmy turns around when offered a chance to get back in on the Sandpiper case. His parking-lot epiphany in the closing moments of the finale felt abrupt to me, until I thought back on the arc of the episode and the series. The visit to Chicago reminds Jimmy of what he's good at. If Chuck, who Jimmy thought was the best person in his life, is just going to cheat him, why shouldn’t Jimmy cheat too? With his new legal skills, he should be able to score Kettleman-level cash—as his con-artist pal Marco says, if you’re just getting by as a lawyer, you’re doing it wrong.

So it’s a mix of retribution and self-interest that powers him as he drives away, grunting out “Smoke on the Water.” But more than that, it's a deliberate choice. Michael McKean, who plays Chuck, nicely explained the new Jimmy philosophy as “the American escape hatch” to Salon: “If everything else goes off in your face, if your family can’t stand the sight of you, if you can’t hold a job, if you can’t stay away from drugs and booze, well, at least you can make a lot of money and have all this f-you money stacked up.”

This transformation is a little bit more complicated, and a little bit truer to life's messiness, than Walter White's linear descent to evil ever was. Accordingly, it hasn’t been accompanied by nearly as many lethal confrontations as first-season Bad served up. As entertainment, Better Call Saul has been more scattershot, and it wasn’t always clear that the show knew what it was. But when it was great—I think back to the desert standoff in episode two, the Mike episode, and the swindler’s montage last night—it reminded that Gilligan and Gould are experts at filming crime scenes that feel like no others on TV. Surely there are more of those scenes to come once Saul Goodman shows up. Jimmy knows where he’s driving now, and the show does too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not only is Slippin Jimmy showing his true colors so is Chuck. Marco, who hasn't seen Chuck in years, calls him a condescending dooshbag. Then we see Chuck treating Ernesto like a condescending dooshbag.

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
He didn't enjoy the legit life as much as a criminal one. He was not working for a decade because it was his dream to be legit - it was his dream to earn his brother's respect.

It rang completely true to me - no offense to lawyers here - but IMO being an honest lawyer seems like it was suck as a profession.
I think there was also an element of him "chickening out", perhaps believing that some of what Chuck said was true. His brash unrefined style, doesn't fit in with a white collar type firm. No one got his "Go Husker's" joke when he mentioned Nebraska at the negotiation table as an example.

 
Is this thing any good?
It's OK. If you think Gilligan is the greatest writer ever and can do no wrong you will love it. If you go in with a completely open mind just looking for a good TV show, you'll probably think it's OK.
 
I enjoy how Saul and BB work through the fatalism of the character. We watch as fate predetermines the outcome, even though outside forces offer what would appear to be clear ways out. White could have walked away. Saul could go legit. But fate sends them on a predetermined path to their end. The two series on the surface present the characters with what appear to be decision points where fate can be changed but we see that there are really no decisions that will alter where these characters are headed. The basic question presented is whether our status quo (Jimmy as the ethical lawyer or Walter as the teacher) is really just an artificial weigh station on the way to an outcome predetermined by who these people are. Although we fought the idea, we knew the entire time that Walter would end up bad, the name of the show told us that. We of couurse know how Saul ends up. Yet, in both cases there is part of us that identifies with the temptations to which the characters succumb, but we have this unrealistic hope that they will make differing choices. Mike and Chuck understand this linear progression while characters like Kim and Skyler ask the question on behalf of the audience--why not just make a different decision. But no matter what opportunities these characters may have and no matter what stasis they may achieve in the short term, their equilibrium will only be realized once they give in to their fate. For the viewer, we get to contemplate whether our current state is merely temporary.

In the end Oedipus killed his father married his mother. That's just where he was headed and nothing was going to stop it.

 
Not only is Slippin Jimmy showing his true colors so is Chuck. Marco, who hasn't seen Chuck in years, calls him a condescending dooshbag. Then we see Chuck treating Ernesto like a condescending dooshbag.
I was glad Howard got a little bit of redemption. Chuck put him in a really tough position there.

 
I enjoy how Saul and BB work through the fatalism of the character. We watch as fate predetermines the outcome, even though outside forces offer what would appear to be clear ways out. White could have walked away. Saul could go legit. But fate sends them on a predetermined path to their end. The two series on the surface present the characters with what appear to be decision points where fate can be changed but we see that there are really no decisions that will alter where these characters are headed. The basic question presented is whether our status quo (Jimmy as the ethical lawyer or Walter as the teacher) is really just an artificial weigh station on the way to an outcome predetermined by who these people are. Although we fought the idea, we knew the entire time that Walter would end up bad, the name of the show told us that. We of couurse know how Saul ends up. Yet, in both cases there is part of us that identifies with the temptations to which the characters succumb, but we have this unrealistic hope that they will make differing choices. Mike and Chuck understand this linear progression while characters like Kim and Skyler ask the question on behalf of the audience--why not just make a different decision. But no matter what opportunities these characters may have and no matter what stasis they may achieve in the short term, their equilibrium will only be realized once they give in to their fate. For the viewer, we get to contemplate whether our current state is merely temporary.

In the end Oedipus killed his father married his mother. That's just where he was headed and nothing was going to stop it.
Well, he did have an Oedipus Complex. He was doomed when they named him Oedipus.
 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
He didn't enjoy the legit life as much as a criminal one. He was not working for a decade because it was his dream to be legit - it was his dream to earn his brother's respect.

It rang completely true to me - no offense to lawyers here - but IMO being an honest lawyer seems like it was suck as a profession.
I think there was also an element of him "chickening out", perhaps believing that some of what Chuck said was true. His brash unrefined style, doesn't fit in with a white collar type firm. No one got his "Go Husker's" joke when he mentioned Nebraska at the negotiation table as an example.
What makes it great writing is that he's a complex character with a number of motivations. I agree that 'chickening out' was part of it.

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
Agree with this. Was expecting something "big" to break him bad, but instead he just has a case of the #### its.

 
I enjoy how Saul and BB work through the fatalism of the character. We watch as fate predetermines the outcome, even though outside forces offer what would appear to be clear ways out. White could have walked away. Saul could go legit. But fate sends them on a predetermined path to their end. The two series on the surface present the characters with what appear to be decision points where fate can be changed but we see that there are really no decisions that will alter where these characters are headed. The basic question presented is whether our status quo (Jimmy as the ethical lawyer or Walter as the teacher) is really just an artificial weigh station on the way to an outcome predetermined by who these people are. Although we fought the idea, we knew the entire time that Walter would end up bad, the name of the show told us that. We of couurse know how Saul ends up. Yet, in both cases there is part of us that identifies with the temptations to which the characters succumb, but we have this unrealistic hope that they will make differing choices. Mike and Chuck understand this linear progression while characters like Kim and Skyler ask the question on behalf of the audience--why not just make a different decision. But no matter what opportunities these characters may have and no matter what stasis they may achieve in the short term, their equilibrium will only be realized once they give in to their fate. For the viewer, we get to contemplate whether our current state is merely temporary.

In the end Oedipus killed his father married his mother. That's just where he was headed and nothing was going to stop it.
:goodposting:

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
Agree with this. Was expecting something "big" to break him bad, but instead he just has a case of the #### its.
It was big deal that the guy he admired his whole life who he spent 10 years trying to impress and the last year catering to his every whim utterly destroyed any sense of worth he had developed for himself.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
Agree with this. Was expecting something "big" to break him bad, but instead he just has a case of the #### its.
There was. It just happened to occur in the episode before the finale.

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
Agree with this. Was expecting something "big" to break him bad, but instead he just has a case of the #### its.
It was big deal that the guy he admired his whole life who he spent 10 years trying to impress and the last year catering to his every whim utterly destroyed any sense of worth he had developed for himself.
Right, that happened the prior episode.

 
If I had one quibble, it was the very last scene. I understood Jimmy's enjoyment of his time in Cicero. That said he came home to live the legit life. He had a golden opportunity presented to him allowing him to play with the big boys, which he had been working towards for years. He could succeed on this level to prove his worth to Chuck, or as a big middle finger to Chuck showing that he could swim in the same pond with the big boys without his help. He got dressed up in his best suit and everything, and then, without even taking the meeting, he just walks away to be Saul?

It just rang a bit false to me. It kind of reminded me when Anakin killed the young Paduan in SW III, almost completely out of the blue. Everyone knows what the destination is, so we may have to take some shortcuts to get to where we want to go.

I really loved the first season, but I feel as if they had a few more episodes, maybe they could have shown him "breaking bad", as it were, a bit more convincingly.
Agree with this. Was expecting something "big" to break him bad, but instead he just has a case of the #### its.
There was. It just happened to occur in the episode before the finale.
Exactly.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top