S05.E06: Wexler v. Goodman

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, Eulipian 5k said:

However, nothing in the scene with Lil Kim gave any reason she became a lawyer vs say, an Alcoholism Counselor. Do we know why Kim is so attached to being a lawyer? Jimmy has been able to make the Law play to his strengths, but Corporate law and her pro-bono Public Defender cases also seem beyond her sensibilities .

They did show us that when she was working in the HHM mail room, she was impressed by Chuck, sort of star struck in a way.  She marveled at his abilities and mastery of details, etc.  In a way I suppose she's emulated Chuck in the regulatory work.  But let's face it, how long is someone with the thrill-seeking impulses she has going to be satisfied with that dry stuff with a side of mundane public defender cases?

[Eulipian 5k]

47 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

They did show us that when she was working in the HHM mail room, she was impressed by Chuck, sort of star struck in a way. 

Oh yes, that right, she was fan-girly for Chuck. But remembering those days, wasn't Jimmy stealing from his law clients in the Kettleman and Alpine Boy days? What a sleaze. See, Jimmy can do very well at his type* of lawyer. Kim just can't find herself in this field.

*In all the TV shows in the history of television I don't think there has ever been a lawyer so ethically challenged, with his own TV show. Usually they are one-off foils for the "real" lawyers.

[ruby24]

That's a good point about it being "Saul Goodman & Associates" on BB. I had totally forgotten about that. So who'll be the "associates?" Maybe it really is Kim all along, being kept out of sight for her own protection somehow?

[shapeshifter]

4 hours ago, ruby24 said:

That's a good point about it being "Saul Goodman & Associates" on BB. I had totally forgotten about that. So who'll be the "associates?" Maybe it really is Kim all along, being kept out of sight for her own protection somehow?

I am probably misremembering, but I thought "& Associates" were people like his shady secretary/office assistant, Huel, and all Saul's other partners in crime, and that by being "Associates," they (and he) would have some legal coverage regarding not incriminating each other. But I am not a lawyer, nor have I studied law beyond my own, non-felonious necessities. 

[Clanstarling]

17 hours ago, Eulipian 5k said:

Oh yes, that right, she was fan-girly for Chuck. But remembering those days, wasn't Jimmy stealing from his law clients in the Kettleman and Alpine Boy days? What a sleaze. See, Jimmy can do very well at his type* of lawyer. Kim just can't find herself in this field.

*In all the TV shows in the history of television I don't think there has ever been a lawyer so ethically challenged, with his own TV show. Usually they are one-off foils for the "real" lawyers.

I don't think he was, in general. He did take some of the money the Kettlemans stole, but as I recall, they spun it as a retainer, and he returned it (maybe? I don't really remember how that all played out - it was complicated). He didn't steal the Alpine Boy from his client, but from the owner of the printer business who wanted to hire him after his license was suspended.

Edited March 28, 2020 by Clanstarling

[PeterPirate]

On 3/25/2020 at 2:53 PM, ByTor said:

Like I said, to see if my interpretation of BO's expression changes I'd have to rewatch...which is pretty unlikely since I really didn't like this episode at all.  Actually, this episode made me realize I'm only still watching so I could finish what I started, I haven't enjoyed BCS as much since Chuck's exit.

Chuck's exit was a big change for this show.  Talk about Greek tragedy.  I started out a Chuck fan, and I am still a fan of those things that made me so.  I love the scene when Chuck told Kim about how Jimmy stole from their parents.  That said, Chuck's suicide validated everything said by people who don't like him.  Suicide doesn't solve problems, it just pushes them on to other people.  What Chuck did was wholly selfish.  

I will also add that I also didn't enjoy last season that much.  Things for me are much better this season, especially the last three episodes.  

 

5 hours ago, ruby24 said:

That's a good point about it being "Saul Goodman & Associates" on BB. I had totally forgotten about that. So who'll be the "associates?" Maybe it really is Kim all along, being kept out of sight for her own protection somehow?

I would like to see Kim and Howard become the central characters of a new show along the lines of LA Law or The Practice.  

[sistermagpie]

19 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Chuck's exit was a big change for this show.  Talk about Greek tragedy.  I started out a Chuck fan, and I am still a fan of those things that made me so.  I love the scene when Chuck told Kim about how Jimmy stole from their parents. 

Just to refresh my memory because I'm not sure I'm right, but Chuck wasn't exactly right about that, was? Didn't he think Jimmy's stealing was what ruined their father when really the father was always giving money away and Jimmy, seeing that, just also took some?

[Milburn Stone]

On 3/24/2020 at 11:31 AM, Ohwell said:

What I don't understand is why Saul continues to have a bug up his ass about Howard.  Why can't he just let things be?  Why continue to be a shitbird? 

That's my question, too. If anything was nearly as despicable as conning Kim, it was continuing to try to ruin Howard's life. What does he gain by it? He's told Howard to go f**k himself in no uncertain terms. Howard is not perfect, but he's not the worst person on earth either. This scene really made me hate Saul.

[scenario]

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Just to refresh my memory because I'm not sure I'm right, but Chuck wasn't exactly right about that, was? Didn't he think Jimmy's stealing was what ruined their father when really the father was always giving money away and Jimmy, seeing that, just also took some?

Jimmy's stealing was a tiny part of the reason that his fathers store failed. Chuck was a perfectionist. It's either perfect or its garbage. Chuck more or less gave up on Jimmy when he caught him stealing when he was 10 years old. 

I would bet that Chuck married who he did because she was a perfectionist too. Then they spent their whole marriage trying to fix each other. 

[PeterPirate]

4 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Just to refresh my memory because I'm not sure I'm right, but Chuck wasn't exactly right about that, was? Didn't he think Jimmy's stealing was what ruined their father when really the father was always giving money away and Jimmy, seeing that, just also took some?

2 hours ago, scenario said:

Jimmy's stealing was a tiny part of the reason that his fathers store failed. Chuck was a perfectionist. It's either perfect or its garbage. Chuck more or less gave up on Jimmy when he caught him stealing when he was 10 years old. 

I would bet that Chuck married who he did because she was a perfectionist too. Then they spent their whole marriage trying to fix each other. 

I went through the scene again.  Chuck didn't say specifically that his father was a sucker for every grifter in the area, but he did say his father was a lousy businessman who couldn't see sin in any form.  

Chuck told Kim they were in the same situation, having gone out on a limb for Jimmy only to have him saw it off from under them.  This was soon after Kim was sent to the Cornfield because of Jimmy's TV ad looking for Sandpiper clients.   

Chuck also congratulated Kim for getting Mesa Verde and said he would speak to Howard about getting her out of Doc Review.  In the next episode, that's what happened, and Howard was not happy about it. 

 

[JudyObscure]

Didn't Chuck also say Jimmy had stolen thousands over the years?  I got the impression that their father's small store ran on a very narrow profit margin and Jimmy taking ten today and twenty tomorrow for all those years, really did ruin the business.  Their father's soft heart wouldn't have encountered that many actual con-men but would most likely have meant letting lots of regulars take things home on credit, something a lot of small businesses did at that time. There would have been some record of money owed by the widow Jones, it wouldn't have created that big mysterious loss at the end of every year. 

So I took Chuck's word for it that Jimmy had ruined the business, but I doubt if Jimmy realized that his small dips were adding up that much.  Petty thieves and shoplifters always think they aren't doing enough to hurt anyone. 

Jimmy still doesn't see the long picture on his pranks and cons.  It's all just fun in the moment for him.  The writers are great at showing us examples of, "a fun night out on half price lawyers" or "a day in the life of a street prostitute,"  I would like to see the ripple effects of one of Jimmy's cons.  For example Howard's wife might hear a distorted version of what happened in the restaurant and think Howard was having an affair.  

Edited March 29, 2020 by JudyObscure

[Milburn Stone]

2 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

So I took Chuck's word for it that Jimmy had ruined the business, but I doubt if Jimmy realized that his small dips were adding up that much.  Petty thieves and shoplifters always think they aren't doing enough to hurt anyone. 

This is a great observation, and pertains just as much to Jimmy's current behavior. In playing that "prank" on Howard, does Jimmy ever think he might be destroying a man's entire life forever? I doubt it. In his narcissistic need, I'm sure he convinces himself that his acts are mere perfidy and the suffering of his powerful victims is minor compared to his own. Mesa Verde is going to be "OK." Howard is going to be "OK." Chuck was going to be "OK."

Edited March 29, 2020 by Milburn Stone

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, JudyObscure said:

Didn't Chuck also say Jimmy had stolen thousands over the years?  I got the impression that their father's small store ran on a very narrow profit margin and Jimmy taking ten today and twenty tomorrow for all those years, really did ruin the business.  Their father's soft heart wouldn't have encountered that many actual con-men but would most likely have meant letting lots of regulars take things home on credit, something a lot of small businesses did at that time. There would have been some record of money owed by the widow Jones, it wouldn't have created that big mysterious loss at the end of every year. 

So I took Chuck's word for it that Jimmy had ruined the business, but I doubt if Jimmy realized that his small dips were adding up that much.  Petty thieves and shoplifters always think they aren't doing enough to hurt anyone. 

Jimmy still doesn't see the long picture on his pranks and cons.  It's all just fun in the moment for him.  The writers are great at showing us examples of, "a fun night out on half price lawyers" or "a day in the life of a street prostitute,"  I would like to see the ripple effects of one of Jimmy's cons.  For example Howard's wife might hear a distorted version of what happened in the restaurant and think Howard was having an affair.  

I do think their father's soft heart was responsible for the largest part of the loss. I think he likely trusted the people who bought from him to pay him back, and didn't write anything down, as he certainly didn't seem like the kind of guy ask for the money back. In addition, I'd bet there was a fair about of shoplifting he never noticed. So while Jimmy contributed, I think Chuck resented him so much he put it all on Jimmy's shoulders.

Which is to say, I don't consider Chuck a reliable witness when it comes to all things Jimmy. Yes, he was right about him more often than not, but he also only saw Jimmy through a negative, resentful, lens from the time they were children and never ever gave him the benefit of the doubt. He was a petty man who couldn't even tell him that their mother had asked for Jimmy before she died because he was hurt she hadn't asked for him instead.

 

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

Didn't Chuck also say Jimmy had stolen thousands over the years?  I got the impression that their father's small store ran on a very narrow profit margin and Jimmy taking ten today and twenty tomorrow for all those years, really did ruin the business.  Their father's soft heart wouldn't have encountered that many actual con-men but would most likely have meant letting lots of regulars take things home on credit, something a lot of small businesses did at that time. There would have been some record of money owed by the widow Jones, it wouldn't have created that big mysterious loss at the end of every year. 

 

4 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

I do think their father's soft heart was responsible for the largest part of the loss. I think he likely trusted the people who bought from him to pay him back, and didn't write anything down, as he certainly didn't seem like the kind of guy ask for the money back. In addition, I'd bet there was a fair about of shoplifting he never noticed. So while Jimmy contributed, I think Chuck resented him so much he put it all on Jimmy's shoulders.

Which is to say, I don't consider Chuck a reliable witness when it comes to all things Jimmy. Yes, he was right about him more often than not, but he also only saw Jimmy through a negative, resentful, lens from the time they were children and never ever gave him the benefit of the doubt. He was a petty man who couldn't even tell him that their mother had asked for Jimmy before she died because he was hurt she hadn't asked for him instead.

 

I saw it the way Clanstarling does. Chuck has no idea how much Jimmy did or didn't take in random 20s over the years, and there's just no way that one kid--one who hasn't even been shown as an adult to be so very extravagant--was doing more damage than a guy constantly being stolen from, giving out money and giving away stock for free for years. Chuck wants to give Jimmy the thief (iow, someone who maliciously and proactively harms the business intentionally) more guilt than his father the poor businessman (iow, someone who's doing his best but is just innocently over his head).

[Lone Wolf]

"I'm sorry I sandbagged you with the ol' switcheroo."  Poor Kim.

I don't think a restaurant of that caliber would have let those two young ladies in.

Otherwise, great ep.

[ShadowFacts]

On 3/29/2020 at 6:51 AM, JudyObscure said:

Jimmy still doesn't see the long picture on his pranks and cons.  It's all just fun in the moment for him.  The writers are great at showing us examples of, "a fun night out on half price lawyers" or "a day in the life of a street prostitute,"  I would like to see the ripple effects of one of Jimmy's cons.  For example Howard's wife might hear a distorted version of what happened in the restaurant and think Howard was having an affair.  

I would like to see more of that, too.  We did see Jimmy have some pangs of conscience, didn't we, when he managed to turn all the retired ladies against Irene, if that's what her name was.  I cannot remember any of the details, it was so long ago.  At this point I don't know how much he would care about collateral damage done.  He has gone precipitously downhill morally.  I think in show time it is only a short time since he was reinstated to practice, and what does he immediately do?  He's like 'catch me if you can' and part of him wants to be caught and punished at the same time that he thinks he can pull off any slime that occurs to him.

[PeterPirate]

Jimmy gave up a ton of money in order to restore Irene's reputation.  In my book that was the first thing he did that was redemptive.  I also think what Jimmy did in this episode was somewhat redemptive, because he knew Kim was going to be angry with him--he showed some ability to measure the impact of his actions.  Of course, things may blow up in their faces later on.

Edited March 30, 2020 by PeterPirate

[Macbeth]

On 3/24/2020 at 5:25 AM, Lonesome Rhodes said:

 

The Nacho/Mike dynamic was crackling.  Nacho may have simply been desperate.  yet, I took away a sense of a budding mentor/mentee.  Each knows the other is fully capable of atrocity.  They also each have a code the other respects.  Mike's handling of the librarian was an oasis of humanity.  It really is too bad that life overwhelmed Mike and he chose evil.  When he wants to be, he is winning.  I also had a whole Lalo fun (sorry) watching that arrest.  You just couldn't leave things be, could you, Lalo?  Eat it.

All in all, this was a phenomenal episode.  A gift.  

I really like Mike's handling of the librarian as well.  It shows how good a cop he really is.  And also how bad of a cop.  Showing her a picture of the car and only that one car....  Wouldn't past muster in court.  Assuming this would be found out.

It's not surprising he is an ex-cop that has no problem breaking the law.

Edited May 9, 2020 by Macbeth

[Terry McDanel]

Better Call Saul, S05.E06, Wexler V. Goodman

As the episode opens we watch a girl with a cello waiting in front of Red Cloud Junior high in black and white. i know black and white usually signals post-Breaking Bad but the Wikipedia episode summary says it’s Kim as a girl. But i didn't get the scene At All.

What is the relevance to the storyline?

What does this tell us about who Kim is?

[qtpye]

7 hours ago, Terry McDanel said:

Better Call Saul, S05.E06, Wexler V. Goodman

As the episode opens we watch a girl with a cello waiting in front of Red Cloud Junior high in black and white. i know black and white usually signals post-Breaking Bad but the Wikipedia episode summary says it’s Kim as a girl. But i didn't get the scene At All.

What is the relevance to the storyline?

What does this tell us about who Kim is?

Yes, it is just a tantalizing taste of who Kim is and does not tell us a lot.

She is a person who has pulled herself up to success, loves to do Pro Bono and help others, but still wants to take down Howard for no other reason than he is rich and born into privilege.

I can not wait to find out more about her.

[Kel Varnsen]

That was a great episode. And considering all the bad consequences that people end up with on this show I really thought Mike setting the cops on Lalo would end up with Lalo shooting a cop.