S06.E01:Wine and Roses/S06.E02: Carrot and Stick

[monagatuna]

23 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I adore this show, I’m so glad it’s back! The New Mexico board of tourism really should send them a fruit basket, they make their state look unimaginably beautiful, I desperately want to take a vacation out there. Also full of drug lords, sleazy crooks, and the Kettlemans, but the scenery is worth the risk. 

I know several New Mexicans and they all say the same thing: it's beautiful, except for the people. Being from WV, I can relate.

(Edit: this was intended as a joke, but it came out much more cruel than I intended. WVans (and probably NMans) are by and large lovely people.)

Gus is indeed Chilean, and talked to Hank (or Gomie, I can't remember) about his family records being destroyed under the Pinochet regime. I read somewhere that Giancarlo Esposito had to learn Spanish for the role, and you can hear it in his accent, which is very clear and deliberate. Chilean Spanish is beautiful and somewhat clear, but it is much faster and much less enunciated than Esposito's Spanish, which is honestly really admirable. Spanish is my second language and I try not to look at the subtitles when this show is on to see if I can understand it, and Esposito's is quite clear. Clear, unaccented, over-enunciated language is a dead giveaway of someone who learned it later in life. (You should hear my French, it's...elementary at best!)

This episode/s was everything I'd hoped for, and worth the wait and the late bedtime. I always thought nothing could compare to BB, but Gilligan and company really outdid themselves with this series.

Edited April 20, 2022 by monagatuna

[JudyObscure]

2 hours ago, Starchild said:

You're not alone. I can't say I love him, but I like and respect his character. I think he's always done the best he can under difficult circumstances, he's never done anything purely out of spite, and he doesn't deserve to be targeted by Kim and Jimmy. What's happening to him right now is just Kim being mean, and it's wrong.

 I agree Kim is just being mean, and the sad part is that she thinks she's being good and noble, because she believes ruining Howard will make the Sandpiper deal work out and Poor People will benefit. 

Something happened to Kim when that stubborn old man who refused to move for Mesa Verde called her a bunch of names she didn't deserve.  He must have hit some sensitive spot in her that made her feel like she had become a terrible person and now she's had to go to the other extreme in order to like herself again. Only now the "good" pro bono, social servant Kim is actually much harder and more ruthless than the old corporate Kim.

When she was describing her new case, working for the young guy who was innocently "just driving" the getaway car for the horrible, guilty, thieving rich kid,  I kept wondering why she was so sure her client wasn't lying to her.  All  while she was talking Jimmy seemed to be just humoring her. 

I'm not looking forward to Kim's big let down when she finds out that all rich people aren't bad and all poor people aren't good.

[Bannon]

What Kim and Saul are trying to do to Howard is inexcusable (and evil enough to more than cancel any ostensibly virtuous purpose Kim intends to use for any part of the Sandpiper settlement they are trying to expedite), but Kim's utter contempt for Howard is extremely well earned. He was a lazy, cowardly, irresponsible, petty, dishonest, and incompetent senior partner of a large (for Albuquerque) law firm, at the time the BCS story began. He's a better person now, which is part of what makes him so interesting. His previous very poor qualities, of course, in no way makes the attacks, now being targeted upon him, in any way tolerable.  An element of what makes this show so well written is that our inclination to root for our two major protaginists is now being subverted  by their nasty attack on one of the few characters who is actually succeeding at becoming a more noble human being.It's brilliant, really.

 

[Adiba]

All I kept thinking during the “get Howard” scenes was, don’t Kim and Jimmy have anything better to do? I mean, life’s too short for this crap. Saul is supposedly building his practice, and Kim is saving the poor. Why waste time and energy on an elaborate revenge plot that could ruin your own lives?

[Bannon]

1 hour ago, Adiba said:

All I kept thinking during the “get Howard” scenes was, don’t Kim and Jimmy have anything better to do? I mean, life’s too short for this crap. Saul is supposedly building his practice, and Kim is saving the poor. Why waste time and energy on an elaborate revenge plot that could ruin your own lives?

Because they are consumed with grief, anger, and resulting hatred. It's really dumb and unfortunate, but even very high IQ  people are not infrequently dumb in this way.

Edited April 21, 2022 by Bannon
clarify

[chick binewski]

7 hours ago, Penman61 said:

[Warning: Rant incoming. Feel free to scroll on by...]

With cousins/twins featured so prominently in this ep, time for one of my very few critiques of the BB/BCS universe: The cousins are a not-great concept very poorly executed.

First, conceptually, they are just over the line, even for BB/BCS (which, we should recall, featured a severed human head bomb on a tortoise). But the cousins are just too extreme, too "badass!," too laconically menacing, too many shots of their deathshead boot-tips.

And the two actors are...underskilled? Is that the polite way to say this?

 

7 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I think I read somewhere that the twins aren't actors at all, but just two guys hired for their looks. Good for you for noticing.  That's why we almost never hear them say anything. In fact I think, "alive!" in Spanish was their first spoken line. 

I think Dean Norris implied they had a dicey background and had not acted before. He sounded a little freaked out by the "F you" tattoos one of them has on his eyelids.

4 hours ago, Starchild said:

You're not alone. I can't say I love him, but I like and respect his character. I think he's always done the best he can under difficult circumstances, he's never done anything purely out of spite, and he doesn't deserve to be targeted by Kim and Jimmy. What's happening to him right now is just Kim being mean, and it's wrong.

 

4 hours ago, Gobi said:

At heart, Howard is a decent person. He might not have everyone’s favorite personality, but he was never malicious, just a stuffed shirt at worst. Chuck put him in a horrible position vis a vis Jimmy.

 

3 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

LOL poor little rich boy. I’m sure his father paid for his undergraduate degree at a pricey college. He could have gone on to do anything he wanted and stood on his own. But I’m assuming he was too much of a coward to stand up for himself, and ultimately cared more about not losing daddy’s money than striking out on his own.

Thank you Howard non-haters for coming forward!

He's not Ted Beneke - he's in a job that is highly visible & required higher education. The Hamlin practice was not a large one until Chuck came on board; we didn't see Howard's backstory but it was clear he felt he had to defer to Chuck until it ultimately became too chaotic. Howard also stepped in front to play the bad guy for Chuck not only to make it easy for Chuck but to protect Jimmy's feelings.

To me, Howard's emotions, attitude and reactions are very believable for a guy trying to walk a certain line; that his resentment at Kim for not being more careful around Jimmy and his feeling of betrayal when Chuck threatened a lawsuit resulted in these kind of buttoned-up lash-outs made him more genuine to me. 

1 hour ago, JudyObscure said:

When she was describing her new case, working for the young guy who was innocently "just driving" the getaway car for the horrible, guilty, thieving rich kid,  I kept wondering why she was so sure her client wasn't lying to her.  All  while she was talking Jimmy seemed to be just humoring her. 

Yes, it was pretty suspect that Kim had already cast a pure hero & pure villain in that scenario. But at that point I still thought Saul was in agreement because he's so smitten with her (however that feeling seemed to start unraveling by the end of the episodes).

[KittyQ]

On 4/19/2022 at 6:05 AM, nodorothyparker said:

Shoutout to the big neon El Camino sign at the dining room where Kim and Jimmy had dinner.

I thought that was terrific. 

I also thought that it was interesting to see the Kettleman's setup that would later be echoed (appropriated) by Saul's office. 

I think that the mansion moveout was the result of Saul's taking the vacuum cleaner's exit plan, although it didn't seem like the kind of place Saul would live in, based on how modest his home with Kim is. Perhaps he took her advice and went flashier as Saul Goodman.

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

Lying because someone else instructed him to doesn’t make him any less of a liar.

I don't recall the lie. I know he didn't tell Jimmy that it was Chuck who prevented his getting a job at HHM but  I don't ever recall him saying it was him either---just that it wasn't going to happen.  Jimmy wasn't entitled to a job at his brother's firm.

4 hours ago, Gobi said:

My recollection is that the family law firm was in shambles and that Howard, as the rainmaker, and Chuck, as the brains, turned it around. 

I don't think we got much of a backstory on the firm.  I think there were a couple of seasons before we learned that the other H in HHM was Howard's father.  There is little we know about Howard's background other than he was brought into the family firm.

The firm did fall apart when Chuck died.  Not having Chuck or his father around clearly threw Howard which makes me think he had a bit of an imposter syndrome from knowing he got this job because of his last name and not sure whether he could hold up the firm on his own without his mentor. 

It wasn't just Jimmy who experienced the grief; we saw that it also strongly impacted Howard.  However, he did the healthy thing and went to therapy to try and grapple with it. 

I think the story of Saul is ultimately going to be about how people influence one another.  For a long time, I thought Kim would be what prevented Jimmy from going full Saul but starting last season, I think she's going to be what pushes him over the edge.  Equally, I think Kim fought so hard to make something of herself but because of her involvement in Jimmy's schemes, she's going to destroy herself by giving into her dark side.

Because it's more than just a Robin Hood situation for her. Not after she manipulated her client into taking a plea just because she didn't like the decisions he was making. 

[LittleIggy]

I like Howard, too. He doesn’t deserve Kim’s vendetta.

[gallimaufry]

I really like Howard too and I think he's basically a good person.  In some ways, he hasn't had any obvious hardships but reading between the lines it feels like he had quite a domineering father who talked him out of going it alone -- he responded really well (ultimately) to Jimmy's challenge to hustle and I think perhaps that showed a belief in his abilities that few granted him and led to the, actually very generous and possibly misguided, offer in S5.  Also the death of Chuck for which he blamed himself for a long time was certainly a tough period, whatever his background -- most people don't feel personally culpable in another person's death.  The only time he really acted badly off his own initiative was putting Kim back in "the cornfields" after she handed him Mesa Verde and I'm not sure if that was because he felt threatened or because he wanted to make a point but I don't get the sense from the conversation with Chuck that she would have stayed there long.

Having said that, while Kim's choices are certainly unethical, I actually think you could make a case that they're morally defensible, albeit from a very Machiavellian viewpoint.  The cocaine thing is designed, as far as I can see, to scare Cliff into resolving the case early for fear that misconduct by Howard might topple the thing over.  Once Cliff pulls out and it's resolved, they don't actually need to pull the trigger on the cocaine -- and as Kim says, it would never stand up in court.  Howard will walk away, bruised maybe, but perfectly able to continue his business after a modest setback over a case which (after all) he never earned in the first place as Sandpiper to her mind is Jimmy's just as Mesa Verde's was "hers".  Meanwhile, Kim will use the proceeds to bring justice to goodness knows how many cases where people really need the help and would otherwise be ground up by the system.  As for the ethics of expediting the settlement, given the ages of most of the people involved there's certainly a case to be made that having a marginally smaller settlement sooner is preferable to a larger settlement after they're gone.  

Her intervention with the Kettlemans also had a great net benefit in that it forced them to correct hundreds of criminal misdeeds in a very direct manner without them going to prison.  They didn't like being blackmailed but they would have liked prison when they inevitably got caught a lot less.

I'm not saying a lawyer should act like this but I certainly think you can make a case that the actions she plans out are carefully measured so that there are no real victims (or any victims' consequences are theoretical and relatively inconsequential) but very real moral wins.  It only gets messy when people don't behave in line with Kim's ultra-rational strategy: if Kevin had simply made the smart financial choice to abandon Acker's lot, she had obviously taken trouble to ensure that the alternative was good and ultimately the bank would have made more money as after Acker's passing they would have had the extra land.  It was Kevin's decision to use the letter of the law to run roughshod over "the little guy" that forced it to get ugly -- and even then, she chose not to and Jimmy forced the issue.

The only time that Kim has really crossed a line in a way that primarily benefitted herself was when she expedited the planning for the Mesa Verde branch.  I think Jimmy's comment that helping a bank expand wasn't using their powers for good resonated with her: that one really was just taking a shortcut to bolster her career and her ego.

All the really unethical stuff she's into comes via Jimmy.  And here as well she has taken sensible steps to protect everyone -- not least, Jimmy!  By marrying Jimmy, she can protect his best interests and also is involved in his riskier decisions as she can see that the initiatives he takes on his own are hugely self-destructive: selling drop phones, accepting Lalo's business... even his response to Chuck's betrayal forced them into a sequence that led to Chuck's death which Kim sees as them tearing down a sick man.  I also think there is a part of her in 510 that looked at the situation like this: Jimmy has done something hugely dangerous.  She said, "You're not going to do it again, right?" and his lack of a convincing response basically confirmed that he likely would if the opportunity presented.  So she KNOWS that this cycle will repeat.  Absolutely no doubt in her mind.  That can't happen but she won't divorce him so what are the problems that can be solved?

He wants money, he wants an outlet for his mischief and he wants a way to stick it to Howard.  Then she delivers a plot which manages all three but which also steers him on a path that, for reasons above, she finds morally justifiable.  I'm not saying she doesn't have some animus for Howard herself but I tend to think she would have let it go if it weren't for Jimmy's activities.  I could even believe that her laugh in 510 when Howard confronts her about Jimmy's activities is almost a laugh of relief because Jimmy's apparent grudge against Howard gives her the missing piece of the puzzle: an incentive for Jimmy to get Sandpiper settled without having to confront his actions.  And looked at from the perspective of moral absolutes, stopping Jimmy from saving the likes of the Salamancas in future is a good in itself and certainly a more consequential one than a privileged lawyer being embarrassed about a misunderstanding and losing a case because of it.

None of this is to say Kim's in the right.  She's allowing her ego to think that she can twist the system to achieve a moral outcome, she clearly has deeper motives that she won't admit to and if people don't respond in the logical way she expects -- and they inevitably won't -- things could get really ugly.  But in a utilitarian sense, to date, the outcomes she's pursuing are in aggregate the most virtuous you can get given the cards she's been dealt.

[PeterPirate]

10 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

I agree with this.  Regardless of his privileged background, he is a decent person who hasn't lied (except when instructed to by Chuck).  

 

5 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't recall the lie. I know he didn't tell Jimmy that it was Chuck who prevented his getting a job at HHM but  I don't ever recall him saying it was him either---just that it wasn't going to happen.  Jimmy wasn't entitled to a job at his brother's firm.

 

There was also charade that Chuck made Howard play about keeping Jimmy out of the Sandpiper case.  

Later on in the episode Howard broke down and revealed the truth to Kim.  That really intrigued me about his character.  

[Lonesome Rhodes]

Howard is the epitome of privilege.  Yet, by BCS standards, he is practically a saint.

Howard's supremely dominant virtue is to take care of Howard.  The more toys he can acquire, the better.  A subset of this is to do so with a measure of decency, which is at least something.

Cliff is another beauty cut out of the same cloth.  Ziggy can play guitar all he wants.  He's still a huge hypocrite.

No way the Jewish incident would have not become a YOOGE deal within the club.  The social creature Howard would have been apprised, likely by Kevin himself.  It was another great feat of thinking on his feet, but went too far for his own good, imo.

My theory is that the D.A.'s office has decided to follow Jimmy.  If nothing else, he would lead them to some interesting individuals.

[JudyObscure]

Oh Gallimaufry, you argue such a good case for Kim. Get thee behind me Satan! ;)

Kim is playing God with her machinations and feeling perfectly justified because those old people need that money before they die and she's not hurting Howard all that much.  Maybe.

The thing is we don't know on what shaky hat stand someone like Howard is hanging his self esteem.  The 'he's a drug addict," whispers may follow Howard forever and make him think he himself is as permanently tarnished as his reputation.  I don't think Jimmy ever realized how much he hurt Chuck when he worked all night ("Nobody ever called Jimmy lazy") changing that address to make it look like Chuck misread it.  Chuck had prided himself all his life on his meticulous attention to detail, even Howard mentioned it and now, at the end of his career he had publically been called out on a huge mistake.

On the other side we saw how unhappy one old Sandpiper lady was when she suddenly had lots of money and all her friends shunned her.  Those Sandpiper residents aren't poor or they'd be in Medicare provided nursing homes.  They're comfortable and having fun with friends.  A huge windfall might just send them out doing crazy bucket list things and stroking out the first week.

It's just not Kim's job to manipulate lives and twist ethics because she thinks she knows who is most deserving.

[Crashcourse]

6 hours ago, gallimaufry said:

None of this is to say Kim's in the right.  She's allowing her ego to think that she can twist the system to achieve a moral outcome, she clearly has deeper motives that she won't admit to and if people don't respond in the logical way she expects -- and they inevitably won't -- things could get really ugly.

That bolded part pretty much sums up Kim's antics. 

[Penman61]

This is where Kim is in Walter White territory, in that she'd tell herself and Jimmy she's doing all this to benefit others, those who "deserve" it, but it's really just her letting her ego take over and do what thrills her.

Walter White finally figured that out. We'll see if Kim does.

[aghst]

It was great but I think I’m going to have to rewatch because I’ve forgotten all these backstories, like how Nacho came to betray the Salamancas — I guess they threatened his father at one point or wanted to use his modest restaurant for money laundering.

Or how Mike went from being a security guard at the parking lot to being Fring’s main security guy.  Yeah I know he was real police back in Philly but why come out of retirement other than to provide for grand daughter?

too long between seasons, all these people have aged and look 10 years older than they were on BB.

[PeterPirate]

1 hour ago, Penman61 said:

This is where Kim is in Walter White territory, in that she'd tell herself and Jimmy she's doing all this to benefit others, those who "deserve" it, but it's really just her letting her ego take over and do what thrills her.

Walter White finally figured that out. We'll see if Kim does.

I wonder if Kim subconsciously sees her clients as cathartic representations of her younger self, the one who grew up in relative poverty.  

[KittyQ]

On 4/19/2022 at 10:28 AM, Spartan Girl said:

Rewatched the opening scene and I have to say I did love the way the rep woman picked up the pink bra with the end of her pencil and flicked it into the trash.

I watched this sequence twice and the second time around, I realized it wasn't a bra but a thong! That made more sense to me in terms of the pencil usage.

It seemed like a strange thing considering everything else we saw was being removed from neatly stored closets, drawers, etc. The random thong tossed over the faucet seemed strange.

[Ellaria]

13 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I think the story of Saul is ultimately going to be about how people influence one another.  For a long time, I thought Kim would be what prevented Jimmy from going full Saul but starting last season, I think she's going to be what pushes him over the edge.  Equally, I think Kim fought so hard to make something of herself but because of her involvement in Jimmy's schemes, she's going to destroy herself by giving into her dark side.

Because it's more than just a Robin Hood situation for her. Not after she manipulated her client into taking a plea just because she didn't like the decisions he was making. 

Well said! I love this interpretation.

8 hours ago, gallimaufry said:

None of this is to say Kim's in the right.  

And this is what I am struggling with right now. I love what she did to the Kettlemans, especially to Betsy. She tells herself - and Jimmy - that she is helping those that get lost and misrepresented in our legal system. However, I suspect that there is something darker that is driving Kim right now. When does "helping the little guy" turn into a vengeance against the system itself and a desire to win?

4 hours ago, Lonesome Rhodes said:

My theory is that the D.A.'s office has decided to follow Jimmy.  If nothing else, he would lead them to some interesting individuals.

That's a good guess. And if so, maybe it is Kim that eventually gets caught rather then Jimmy.

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, Penman61 said:

This is where Kim is in Walter White territory, in that she'd tell herself and Jimmy she's doing all this to benefit others, those who "deserve" it, but it's really just her letting her ego take over and do what thrills her.

Walter White finally figured that out. We'll see if Kim does.

Well, he figured it out a little too late. My guess is that will be the same for Kim.

[Wiendish Fitch]

5 hours ago, Lonesome Rhodes said:

Howard is the epitome of privilege.  Yet, by BCS standards, he is practically a saint.

Extremely fair point. 

I'm no fan of Howard, I think he's a spineless, fatuous twit... but I don't think he's a bad person, and he's done nothing to deserve not only the beyond shoddy treatment from last season, but this disturbing, elaborately conspiratorial scheme cooked up by Saul (he stopped being "Jimmy" to me when he pulled that cruel trick on poor Irene) and Kim. I'll be surprised if he emerges from this unscathed... but then, who from this show will?

A lot of people are saying Saul has been a bad influence on Kim and turned her to the dark side, a la the Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm going to respectfully disagree on both. I've never liked that explanation; it's too easy, and it absolves both characters of agency and responsibility. I don't think Kim and Harley are victims of the manipulations of bad men, I think they both got bored with life on the straight and narrow, and became willing accomplices. Like others, I suspect Kim had this darker side all along, she just wanted to hide it behind the veneer of righteousness.

But let's be real, it's more fun to be bad, and if you have a specific target in mind? All the better. Kim has made little secret of her contempt for wealthy, privileged people, but it's become way more explicit in recent years.

I'm not the first to point this out, and maybe I'm just riding my own high horse, but I've come to wonder if maybe Kim cares less about helping the poor and more about sticking it to the rich? On one hand, I certainly get it, but on the other hand, if that's your only objective (whether you want to admit it or not), then it comes off like sour grapes. It could even be argued that her trying to help Everett Acker was more about projecting her crappy childhood and present grievances onto him ("those rich snobs are picking on me- I mean, this guy!").

Other observations:

I find Mike's never-aging granddaughter boring and creepy. 

Not gonna to lie, seeing the Kettlemans put in their place was pretty darn satisfying. I hate how cute I found Betsy Kettleman's dress with the deer and hedgehogs on it.  

Giancarlo Esposito can make anything look terrifying, even picking up glass. Has he ever played a Shakespeare villain? If not, why not?

Poor Nacho. His life just continues to spiral down the crapper.

Edited April 21, 2022 by Wiendish Fitch

[Penman61]

35 minutes ago, KittyQ said:

I watched this sequence twice and the second time around, I realized it wasn't a bra but a thong! That made more sense to me in terms of the pencil usage.

It seemed like a strange thing considering everything else we saw was being removed from neatly stored closets, drawers, etc. The random thong tossed over the faucet seemed strange.

Thank you! As a gay dude, I have no experience with bras, but that did NOT look like a bra to me. Not enough structure!

[JudyObscure]

10 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

find Mike's never-aging granddaughter boring and creepy. 

And spoiled and smart-alecky.  That time she kept putting the stair covers on crooked and he kept telling her to stop and she kept right on doing it until he blew up at her?  Yes,  he got overly angry and frightening, but rather than burst into tears and run off for a minute like most kids would do,  she shut herself in her room and both she and her mother didn't forgive him for weeks. Now she's back to being sassy with him so I guess  she thinks he's learned his lesson.

[KittyQ]

24 minutes ago, Penman61 said:

Thank you! As a gay dude, I have no experience with bras, but that did NOT look like a bra to me. Not enough structure!

At first look, I thought it could have been an unstructured bra (bralette?) with very thin cups, but when I paid closer attention, I realized there was only 1 "cup". That would be a very unusual bra - haha!

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

Well, he figured it out a little too late. My guess is that will be the same for Kim.

TBF to Walt (or to not give him credit he didn't earn), it wasn't really too late for him since he didn't actually care that he was doing it for himself!

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

Kim is playing God with her machinations and feeling perfectly justified because those old people need that money before they die and she's not hurting Howard all that much.  Maybe.

I'm trying to recall the specifics but wasn't the original plan to frame Howard as if he were embezzling money from the Sandpiper legal fund?  I think the cocaine is the first step to make it believable he has money trouble.  I don't think this is simply about getting them to settle.

42 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I've never liked that explanation; it's too easy, and it absolves both characters of agency and responsibility.

I don't think there's anything easy about it.  They absolutely have choice.  That's why "oh Jimmy and Kim had a bad childhood" doesn't fly with me because I've seen them repeatedly make bad choices.  Hell, 99% of the bad things that happened to Jimmy have been because of situations he put himself in. 

But I do think people can bring out the worst in one another and egg each other on without someone there to say that this is a bad idea.  That's Jimmy and Kim. 

1 hour ago, KittyQ said:

It seemed like a strange thing considering everything else we saw was being removed from neatly stored closets, drawers, etc. The random thong tossed over the faucet seemed strange.

I think the implication is that he must have had a guest before he disappeared. 

[Zonk]

This was, for the most part, really good as always.

On 4/19/2022 at 5:41 AM, Penman61 said:

Nacho's safe: Wait, why would Mike & Co want Bolsa et al to get Nacho's motel location?

It seems like they wanted to get him killed. But that seems super risky. What if he's taken alive and rats them out? Would have been a lot safer to kill him themselves or actually get him out and set him up with a new identity.

I'd expect better from Guess Fring. So imo this is bad writing, at least for this shows standards.

 

[Penman61]

9 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

But I do think people can bring out the worst in one another and egg each other on without someone there to say that this is a bad idea.  That's Jimmy and Kim. 

There's even have a phrase for this particular dynamic of a couple fanning each other's similar bad trait: folie à deux.

Edited April 21, 2022 by Penman61

[Zonk]

On 4/19/2022 at 5:45 AM, SailorGirl said:

So I'm really starting to wonder if Kim makes it through alive or if she is the first of many who ends up needing a dust filter for a Hoover Max Extract® 60 Pressure Pro, because we are really skirting the edges of BB timeline now.

I said it for multipe season now and I'll stick to it. I think she is the famous "Mrs. Goodman" Saul always talked about during BB.

[chick binewski]

 

2 hours ago, aghst said:

It was great but I think I’m going to have to rewatch because I’ve forgotten all these backstories, like how Nacho came to betray the Salamancas — I guess they threatened his father at one point or wanted to use his modest restaurant for money laundering.

Or how Mike went from being a security guard at the parking lot to being Fring’s main security guy.  Yeah I know he was real police back in Philly but why come out of retirement other than to provide for grand daughter?

too long between seasons, all these people have aged and look 10 years older than they were on BB.

Hector's demand to take over the upholstery shop was indeed Nacho's catalyst - mostly bc he knew his father would ultimately protest in a way that would get him killed. But Nacho first wanted Tuco dead, just bc Tuco was a paranoid nut who would kill his people based on unfounded accusations.

Mike had only asked the vet for certain kinds of underhanded work, but his guilt over his son's death became one of the drivers in getting in deep. That and freaking Stacey who claims she's being shot at and doesnt ask questions about Mike's weird hours.

1 hour ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I'm no fan of Howard, I think he's a spineless, fatuous twit... but I don't think he's a bad person, and he's done nothing to deserve not only the beyond shoddy treatment from last season, but this disturbing, elaborately conspiratorial scheme cooked up by Saul (he stopped being "Jimmy" to me when he pulled that cruel trick on poor Irene) and Kim. I'll be surprised if he emerges from this unscathed... but then, who from this show will?

A lot of people are saying Saul has been a bad influence on Kim and turned her to the dark side, a la the Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm going to respectfully disagree on both. I've never liked that explanation; it's too easy, and it absolves both characters of agency and responsibility. I don't think Kim and Harley are victims of the manipulations of bad men, I think they both got bored with life on the straight and narrow, and became willing accomplices. Like others, I suspect Kim had this darker side all along, she just wanted to hide it behind the veneer of righteousness.

But let's be real, it's more fun to be bad, and if you have a specific target in mind? All the better. Kim has made little secret of her contempt for wealthy, privileged people, but it's become way more explicit in recent years.

I'm not the first to point this out, and maybe I'm just riding my own high horse, but I've come to wonder if maybe Kim cares less about helping the poor and more about sticking it to the rich? On one hand, I certainly get it, but on the other hand, if that's your only objective (whether you want to admit it or not), then it comes off like sour grapes. It could even be argued that her trying to help Everett Acker was more about projecting her crappy childhood and present grievances onto him ("those rich snobs are picking on me- I mean, this guy!").

Other observations:

I find Mike's never-aging granddaughter boring and creepy. 

Not gonna to lie, seeing the Kettlemans put in their place was pretty darn satisfying. I hate how cute I found Betsy Kettleman's dress with the deer and hedgehogs on it.  

Giancarlo Esposito can make anything look terrifying, even picking up glass.

The Irene con was incredibly low but Jimmy seemed to get that he had gone too far and eventually corrected the situation, so for me I always saw the malpractice coverage meeting as the Saul reveal. Jimmy is begging for a refund (which we can see he's desperate for) and suddenly turns it around to a tearful act about his poor infirm lawyer brother. Jimmy may have been stealing from his family since he was a kid but that look on Odenkirk's face when walking out of the office seemed like pure cruelty & revenge.

I'm really torn on Kim. I'm not sure I'm understanding her motivations but I definitely believe they are more driven by disdain of a certain status.

And Giancarlo IS so intimidating, which is why I love the scenes where Mike contradicts him. Banks is firm but doesn't push while Esposito, instead of lashing out, sort of shades his approach a hair.  I will miss watching them both.

[Crashcourse]

2 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I find Mike's never-aging granddaughter boring and creepy. 

Yeah, just like her mother.

[Cinnabon]

3 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

I wonder if Kim subconsciously sees her clients as cathartic representations of her younger self, the one who grew up in relative poverty.  

I read a review that speculated that Kim may be feeling a lot of self hatred, for spending her entire career (up until now) working for and enriching guys like Kevin and Howard. She’s betrayed herself and her core values and now she’s trying to atone for that. I’ve felt similarly about decisions in my life.

[Spartan Girl]

3 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Giancarlo Esposito can make anything look terrifying, even picking up glass. Has he ever played a Shakespeare villain? If not, why not?

I know, right?!

3 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

A lot of people are saying Saul has been a bad influence on Kim and turned her to the dark side, a la the Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm going to respectfully disagree on both. I've never liked that explanation; it's too easy, and it absolves both characters of agency and responsibility. I don't think Kim and Harley are victims of the manipulations of bad men, I think they both got bored with life on the straight and narrow, and became willing accomplices. Like others, I suspect Kim had this darker side all along, she just wanted to hide it behind the veneer of righteousness.

But let's be real, it's more fun to be bad, and if you have a specific target in mind? All the better. Kim has made little secret of her contempt for wealthy, privileged people, but it's become way more explicit in recent years.

Definitely. Kim knows right from wrong, I think she’s just going dark because she wants to.

2 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

That's why "oh Jimmy and Kim had a bad childhood" doesn't fly with me because I've seen them repeatedly make bad choices.  Hell, 99% of the bad things that happened to Jimmy have been because of situations he put himself in. 

Jimmy had a bad childhood? I don’t think so. As Chuck pointed out, his parents adored him, coddled him, enabled him to point of idiocy. He was stealing money from his dad’s shop, but his dad refused to believe he did it. That might have have had a hand on his current path, but you can only blame parents for so much.

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Jimmy had a bad childhood? I don’t think so. As Chuck pointed out, his parents adored him, coddled him, enabled him to point of idiocy. He was stealing money from his dad’s shop, but his dad refused to believe he did it. That might have have had a hand on his current path, but you can only blame parents for so much.

Yeah, iirc, Jimmy didn't have a bad childhood. It was more that he watched his dad be a pushover with everyone and it basically taught him to be the conman rather than the mark. But he also made his parents happy. Chuck wanted Jimmy to be the person soley responsible for the store's financial problems to make it all more black and white.

Edited April 21, 2022 by sistermagpie

[Spartan Girl]

If anything, Chuck’s betrayal might have set Jimmy down the path to becoming Saul, but I still wonder…if Chuck hadn’t meddled, would Jimmy have tried to stay clean? Or would he have gotten bored with the legit life and backslid back into his ways? We’ll never know because Chuck did what he did, and Jimmy did what he did.

[PeterPirate]

7 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

A lot of people are saying Saul has been a bad influence on Kim and turned her to the dark side, a la the Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm going to respectfully disagree on both. I've never liked that explanation; it's too easy, and it absolves both characters of agency and responsibility. I don't think Kim and Harley are victims of the manipulations of bad men, I think they both got bored with life on the straight and narrow, and became willing accomplices. Like others, I suspect Kim had this darker side all along, she just wanted to hide it behind the veneer of righteousness.

But let's be real, it's more fun to be bad, and if you have a specific target in mind? All the better. Kim has made little secret of her contempt for wealthy, privileged people, but it's become way more explicit in recent years.

 

I agree with your opinion, but to be fair to those other people, they are riffing on the cue from the title of the first episode.  

 

Edited April 22, 2022 by PeterPirate

[Starchild]

38 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

If anything, Chuck’s betrayal might have set Jimmy down the path to becoming Saul, but I still wonder…if Chuck hadn’t meddled, would Jimmy have tried to stay clean? Or would he have gotten bored with the legit life and backslid back into his ways? We’ll never know because Chuck did what he did, and Jimmy did what he did.

He would simply be a chimp. Instead, now he is a chimp with a law degree.

[Bannon]

28 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

If anything, Chuck’s betrayal might have set Jimmy down the path to becoming Saul, but I still wonder…if Chuck hadn’t meddled, would Jimmy have tried to stay clean? Or would he have gotten bored with the legit life and backslid back into his ways? We’ll never know because Chuck did what he did, and Jimmy did what he did.

Jimmy chose to grind it out in the mail room for 6 years, while going to mail-order law school.  We have nothing to tell us that he ran any cons in that period of time. That's strong evidence of a willingness to defer gratification for a long period. His dream was to work alongside the brother he idolized, and to be with Kim. These are normal desires.

The fact that Chuck was utterly dishonest with him doesn't excuse Jimmy's behavior at all, but the behavior of human beings is inevitably the result of both the internal and external, and the degree to which either is determinative is impossible to know. Saul is a rage machine however, and Jimmy, at least early in the show, was not.

[Bannon]

It really comes down to nobody being better than Gilligan, Gould, and Company at writing tragedy, in the classical sense, for heavily serialized television. They have been knocking it out of the park for 16 years now. It's ridiculously remarkable.

[Bcharmer]

37 minutes ago, Bannon said:

It really comes down to nobody being better than Gilligan, Gould, and Company at writing tragedy, in the classical sense, for heavily serialized television. They have been knocking it out of the park for 16 years now. It's ridiculously remarkable.

They have created two incredible works of art. And it's astonishing, beautiful, well-crafted art.

[Cinnabon]

52 minutes ago, Starchild said:

He would simply be a chimp. Instead, now he is a chimp with a law degree.

And what does that make killers like Mike, Nacho, etc?

[Starchild]

Gorillas with machine guns?

[Scout Finch]

On 4/19/2022 at 7:00 AM, SailorGirl said:

I didn't catch this, but one of the recaps I read (and I read a few!) noted that the HG Wells novel shown in the mansion clean-out was on Jimmy's bedside table in episode two. No significant meaning other than continuity from one iteration of life to the next, but its these little continuity details that make this show so damn masterful.

One of the things I love about this show, and loved about Breaking Bad, is that I'm still thinking about it well into the next day (at least), if not longer. 

Yep, I noticed it and was coming here to ask if anyone else had!

[PeterPirate]

12 hours ago, Starchild said:

He would simply be a chimp. Instead, now he is a chimp with a law degree.

Jimmy would not have pursued a law degree had Kim treated him with the same respect she showed Chuck.  

So this is all her fault.  🤪

[MarthaEllisanne]

The opening sequence to The Days of Wine and Roses is a thing of beauty, memorizing. I've re-watched it several times. I stumbled onto an article discussing the careful choreography and the use of a dance troupe as the packers. Also interesting was how  they filmed the opening with falling neckties using conveyor belts.
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/04/better-call-saul-cinematographer-ant-ties-drain-pipe-shot-1234718184/

[gallimaufry]

13 hours ago, Scout Finch said:

Yep, I noticed it and was coming here to ask if anyone else had!

Thanks for pointing this out, both of you.  I also love that the book is "The Time Machine" -- appropriate for an out-of-sequence shot and perhaps a hint that Jimmy would like have some of his time over?

 

3 hours ago, MarthaEllisanne said:

The opening sequence to The Days of Wine and Roses is a thing of beauty, memorizing. I've re-watched it several times. I stumbled onto an article discussing the careful choreography and the use of a dance troupe as the packers. Also interesting was how  they filmed the opening with falling neckties using conveyor belts.
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/04/better-call-saul-cinematographer-ant-ties-drain-pipe-shot-1234718184/

This is super.  It's interesting too that Michael Morris is an executive producer this year - well deserved as he's always been fantastic.  I often wonder why more shows don't have regular directorial staff just like they have regular writing staff.  Most seasons of "24" had two or three directors doing almost all the episodes.  It must add consistency although I guess with BCS they're so ambitious visually getting lots of high-calibre directors in must keep things interesting.

From what I've seen this year (and I'm hesitant to look more because of spoilers), all the directors that have been listed are already working on the show in other capacities - I wonder if this is because of Covid or just because it's the final season and the last chance for people to spread their wings in a safe environment.  I really hope Melissa Bernstein gets another go as her episode last year was terrific.

[Lonesome Rhodes]

5 hours ago, MarthaEllisanne said:

https://www.indiewire.com/2022/04/better-call-saul-cinematographer-ant-ties-drain-pipe-shot-1234718184/

Fabulous article.  Thank you.

I still would like to know the meaning/intention of the cascading ties.

[BC4ME]

Just rewatching and had a question I had the first time. Why didn't they just have whomever was bringing Nacho food poison him? Clearly, Fring set that hotel situation up. It seems like they wouldn't have wanted him caught alive so why not kill him then when they had the chance?

I mean, I get the way they did it made for better drama. I'm just looking for a better explanation I hadn't thought of. 

[Cinnabon]

3 minutes ago, BC4ME said:

Just rewatching and had a question I had the first time. Why didn't they just have whomever was bringing Nacho food poison him? Clearly, Fring set that hotel situation up. It seems like they wouldn't have wanted him caught alive so why not kill him then when they had the chance?

I mean, I get the way they did it made for better drama. I'm just looking for a better explanation I hadn't thought of. 

Yes, it seemed like a lot of effort that wasn’t needed to attempt to kill him.

[gallimaufry]

4 minutes ago, BC4ME said:

Just rewatching and had a question I had the first time. Why didn't they just have whomever was bringing Nacho food poison him? Clearly, Fring set that hotel situation up. It seems like they wouldn't have wanted him caught alive so why not kill him then when they had the chance?

I mean, I get the way they did it made for better drama. I'm just looking for a better explanation I hadn't thought of. 

I think the point was that they knew the Cousins were combing the area so Gus just had to keep Nacho there until they found the lead in the safe, turned up and killed him.  It's true there was a risk that Nacho might have implicated Gus but he had no proof to that effect, the transfer to the mercenaries in Nacho's safe would presumably be investigated and not lead anywhere to Gus... plus, the Cousins aren't exactly subtle, nuanced individuals.  Even if they harboured suspicions, Bolsa would likely have written this off as the Salamanca enmity for Gus re-emerging.