S06.E03: Rock and Hard Place

[scenario]

2 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

I think they had Mike stationed at a distance in order to prevent Nacho from being tortured as well as to protect Gus' side from any unforeseen problems.

But Mike can only shoot when everyone else is shooting or it would be to obvious. He might not end up dead if he misses. 

[Bannon]

8 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

I like your theory - It's a good suggestion.😁
But I can't get past the idea that the writers were limited because all the characters in the scene are alive in BB. That knowledge makes me look at the scene differently and it then doesn't make as much sense to me.
A very angry Nacho was being forced to sacrifice himself and I think he would have wanted to at least take out Hector if the writer's weren't hobbled by the BB script.
I believe Mike was hoping Nacho would take out a Salamanca or two. 

But then again, if Nacho had shot at the others first it would have taken away from the shock of the immediate suicide. I'm just saying that this was an example (for me) of issues that can come up when writing for a prequel.

I dunno. The deal with Gus was that he sell the lie about the Peruvians being behind the move on Lalo, and in return Mike guarantees Manuel's safety. If he deviates from that plan, and starts shooting Salamancas, maybe that deal is off, and it certainly increases the possibility that Nacho only gets wounded, and not killed, before he's able to kill himself. That opens the door for days of torture, with Nacho revealing it was Gus behind the move on Lalo, which hugely increases the danger to Manuel. 

From the time Nacho was given permission to use the phone by the Good Samaritan, Nacho's only purpose was to trade his life for his father's safety, to the greatest extent possible. I think he maximized his odds, in the context of the very constrained window he had left available to him. His behavior seems very consistent with the general plot to me.

[Crashcourse]

Is Howard married?

[Bannon]

2 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

Is Howard married?

No indication has ever been given that he is married.

[Crashcourse]

Just now, Bannon said:

No indication has ever been given that he is married.

I didn't think so.  I wonder if Kim's hatred comes partly from the fact that he never showed any romantic interest in her, so she settled for Jimmy.   I think this shit is personal.

[Bannon]

20 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

I think they had Mike stationed at a distance in order to prevent Nacho from being tortured as well as to protect Gus' side from any unforeseen problems.

That's not a sure enough thing for Nacho to roll the dice on his father's life, once he's consigned himself to death, with his father's safety the only thing he cares about.

[Bannon]

4 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

I didn't think so.  I wonder if Kim's hatred comes partly from the fact that he never showed any romantic interest in her, so she settled for Jimmy.   I think this shit is personal.

Yeah, I don't see Kim as that type of person. If she ever cared about Howard's interest in her romantically/sexually,  which I think unlikely, I think it ended a long time ago. Howard was such a pretentious prick, before he got off his ass and started earning his keep.

[scenario]

Just now, Bannon said:

Yeah, I don't see Kim as that type of person. If she ever cared about Howard's interest in her romantically/sexually,  which I think unlikely, I think it ended a long time ago. Howard was such a pretentious prick, before he got off his ass and started earning his keep.

If Kim wanted someone she'd go for it. She's not the passive, I'll wait by the phone and hope he calls type of woman. And if she did we'd probably have heard about it. 

[Cinnabon]

2 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Yeah, I don't see Kim as that type of person. If she ever cared about Howard's interest in her romantically/sexually,  which I think unlikely, I think it ended a long time ago. Howard was such a pretentious prick, before he got off his ass and started earning his keep.

Yeah, I don’t think Kim would ever have been interested in him. Even beautiful women realize that all men they meet won’t be attracted to them, lol.

[qtpye]

42 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Yeah, I don't see Kim as that type of person. If she ever cared about Howard's interest in her romantically/sexually,  which I think unlikely, I think it ended a long time ago. Howard was such a pretentious prick, before he got off his ass and started earning his keep.

 

40 minutes ago, scenario said:

If Kim wanted someone she'd go for it. She's not the passive, I'll wait by the phone and hope he calls type of woman. And if she did we'd probably have heard about it. 

I think if Kim wanted Howard, he would have been game to try.

When they were having their first meeting with Mesa Verde (a business that Kim worked so hard to bring in) I noticed that they looked good together. In some ways, they made more sense than Kim and Jimmy.

Howard might have been a little put off by Kim's humble background but she would have no problem fitting in with the Country Club set.  Just look at how much Kevin adores her and respects her legal advice. 

By the way, you know how Mesa Verde began to aggressively build branches all around the Midwest and Southwest? I have been reading that banks are needing their brick-and-mortar branches less and less as most people are doing most of their complex and simple banking online. I wonder if this aggressive expansion would have eventually bite them in the butt as they trotted along into the 21st century?

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by qtpye

[Penman61]

What/who is Kim “grieving”? I think Chuck is a bit of a motivational stretch. Someone else?

Edited April 29, 2022 by Penman61

[scenario]

6 minutes ago, Penman61 said:

What/who is Kim “grieving”? I think Chuck is a bit of a motivational stretch. Someone else?

Perhaps someone from before she came to New Mexico, her mom, a sibling or old boyfriend. Who knows?

[Penman61]

11 minutes ago, scenario said:

Perhaps someone from before she came to New Mexico, her mom, a sibling or old boyfriend. Who knows?

Posters keep mentioning her grief as part of her motivation for breaking bad, and  I couldn’t remember anyone in her circle dying except Chuck. Should we just assume she has grief to process, lol? Why?

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by Penman61

[Melonie77]

1 hour ago, Bannon said:

From the time Nacho was given permission to use the phone by the Good Samaritan, Nacho's only purpose was to trade his life for his father's safety, to the greatest extent possible. I think he maximized his odds, in the context of the very constrained window he had left available to him. His behavior seems very consistent with the general plot to me.

True, but why would Nacho anger Hector by telling him he is responsible for causing his stroke? I agree with those who said Hector could be enraged enough to seek revenge on Nacho's father.

[chick binewski]

 

7 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

IDK - he is a symbol for what many people hate. I don’t think something truly awful has to happen to someone personally for them to feel that way. But Kim is taking that hatred even further, and that’s the difference. Is it just because she can? (With Jimmy’s help) Because she sees it as the only way to get the money she needs to be able to fund her pro bono career? (By forcing the settlement) 

To me manipulating the closing of the settlement makes no sense bc it has too many parties involved (although it would be the best thing for senior clients, which Kim & Jimmy really don't care about at this point). But Kim of "I save me" is partly using it as an excuse which is laughable bc 1. its Jimmy's money and 2. she could have stayed at Schweikert for a couple of years making bank then sailed away to pro bonoland.

 

7 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

But that leads to the question about who really was "upper management" at HHM.  Suppose Howard didn't have the financial wherewithal to buy Chuck out.  Would he still be responsible for what was going on?  

This is not to say that I think Howard was right to enable Chuck and let him take work product home.  Just that I see Howard as another person who was between a rock and a hard place.

 

6 hours ago, Bannon said:

To be clear, I'm not saying any of this would have been easy for Howard. Not at all. However, Howard's the one major character in this story who (A) is of sound mind, and (B) honest claims to have ethical and legal legitimacy, and (C) has a great deal of power and money. He has less excuse for failing to step up,  and doing what's right, compared to anybody else. It is true that his failings are tiny, compared to many of the miscreants that surround him, but still, he's the guy with the power, money, and position of societal prestige. If he falls short, that bill ought to be paid, which doesn't, of course, make Saul and Kim the rightful vigilante bill collectors.

I think some of us (myself included) have different ideas of the dynamics of HHM pre-BCS. Pre-illness (and for some time after), Howard clearly deferred to Chuck and to me it really felt out of necessity. He was the legal mind who tackled these enormous cases and had the reputation. I extrapolated that into Howard not getting any support from the partners to act aggressively with Chuck. 

Howard was the salesman and correct or not firms like that need Howards. Chuck was the one who would not see a doctor and/or give HHM any kind of real idea what they could expect of him. Howard presented himself as supportive but did not push for a buyout possibly out of fear, but also bc it would have been an enormous cost to push out a key member of the firm who was basically on sick leave.

We watch many of the stars in the BB universe who have some of what Skylar referred to as Walt's "magic": Mike can see ten steps ahead of a situation, Gus is never out of ideas when a plan goes wrong, Kim & Saul are creatively working their intricate plots. I find it refreshing to see someone like Howard in this world who is not stupid but isn't maneuvering while making an excuse for it. 

46 minutes ago, Penman61 said:

What/who is Kim “grieving”? I think Chuck is a bit of a motivational stretch. Someone else?

Yeah I don't get grief with Kim. I just see anger at expectations not being satisfied. 

Edited April 29, 2022 by chick binewski

[scenario]

6 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

True, but why would Nacho anger Hector by telling him he is responsible for causing his stroke? I agree with those who said Hector could be enraged enough to seek revenge on Nacho's father.

He angered Hector to sell his lie. Nacho hated Hector enough to intentionally put him in a wheel chair. If he hated Hector enough to do that selling out wouldn't be that big a step. Hector understands hate and will react emotionally. He'll stop thinking. Hector is not a reflective man. Once he decides something, he doesn't look back. 

[Bannon]

49 minutes ago, Penman61 said:

What/who is Kim “grieving”? I think Chuck is a bit of a motivational stretch. Someone else?

A person can be in grief over something other than the death of a person. I strongly suspect Kim grieves over the premature demise of childhood. I highly doubt it's even been close to fully acknowleged, much less resolved.

[Dev F]

2 hours ago, Melonie77 said:

A very angry Nacho was being forced to sacrifice himself and I think he would have wanted to at least take out Hector if the writer's weren't hobbled by the BB script.
I believe Mike was hoping Nacho would take out a Salamanca or two.

If there's one thing Nacho knows about Gus, it's that he desperately wants Hector to live. Nothing would have blown up Nacho's final arrangement with Gus more catastrophically than if he'd randomly started gunning down Salamancas. That would've served no one's interests, least of all Nacho's.

[Melonie77]

I wonder then what it was that Mike was hoping for when he saw Nacho free himself and get ahold of a gun. It seemed as if he (Mike) hoped he would take out someone else.

[Bannon]

10 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

I wonder then what it was that Mike was hoping for when he saw Nacho free himself and get ahold of a gun. It seemed as if he (Mike) hoped he would take out someone else.

I'm pretty sure Mike was hoping that Nacho would kill himself, thus ending any possibility of Nacho being tortured, of the trurh coming out, or Mike having to intervene with his .50 caliber sniper rifle.

[Bannon]

38 minutes ago, chick binewski said:

 

To me manipulating the closing of the settlement makes no sense bc it has too many parties involved (although it would be the best thing for senior clients, which Kim & Jimmy really don't care about at this point). But Kim of "I save me" is partly using it as an excuse which is laughable bc 1. its Jimmy's money and 2. she could have stayed at Schweikert for a couple of years making bank then sailed away to pro bonoland.

 

 

I think some of us (myself included) have different ideas of the dynamics of HHM pre-BCS. Pre-illness (and for some time after), Howard clearly deferred to Chuck and to me it really felt out of necessity. He was the legal mind who tackled these enormous cases and had the reputation. I extrapolated that into Howard not getting any support from the partners to act aggressively with Chuck. 

Howard was the salesman and correct or not firms like that need Howards. Chuck was the one who would not see a doctor and/or give HHM any kind of real idea what they could expect of him. Howard presented himself as supportive but did not push for a buyout possibly out of fear, but also bc it would have been an enormous cost to push out a key member of the firm who was basically on sick leave.

We watch many of the stars in the BB universe who have some of what Skylar referred to as Walt's "magic": Mike can see ten steps ahead of a situation, Gus is never out of ideas when a plan goes wrong, Kim & Saul are creatively working their intricate plots. I find it refreshing to see someone like Howard in this world who is not stupid but isn't maneuvering while making an excuse for it. 

Yeah I don't get grief with Kim. I just see anger at expectations not being satisfied. 

High cost, unwieldly dynamics, or not, the bottom line is this. Two guys are getting paid to be senior partners. One of them is obviously in the throes of severe mental illness. One is not. The guy who is healthy, and getting paid to be a senior partner, has a nonnegotiable responsibility to the firm and clients to step up and do his duty. That's what the money is for. Once the insurance company disturbed the status quo, Howard recognized this, and acted as he always had the ability to do all along.

[scenario]

1 minute ago, Bannon said:

High cost, unwieldly dynamics, or not, the bottom line is this. Two guys are getting paid to be senior partners. One of them is obviously in the throes of severe mental illness. One is not. The guy who is healthy, and getting paid to be a senior partner, has a nonnegotiable responsibility to the firm and clients to step up and do his duty. That's what the money is for. Once the insurance company disturbed the status quo, Howard recognized this, and acted as he always had the ability to do all along.

I assume that HHM has at least 3 owners. I assume that its Howard, Chuck and some other person or group of people. If Howard only own's 1/3rd of the firm, he may have needed someone else permission. Chuck stayed in his house and rarely talked to people. The firm might have felt that having a mentally ill partner might hurt the firm if it got out. Chuck refused to sell his shares. Chuck's harmless sitting in the dark. It's a problem you can put off for later until he comes out of his cave. 

Howard didn't want to fight both Chuck and any other potential owners who may believe that Chuck's going to get better any day now.

[Melonie77]

9 minutes ago, Bannon said:

I'm pretty sure Mike was hoping that Nacho would kill himself, thus ending any possibility of Nacho being tortured, of the trurh coming out, or Mike having to intervene with his .50 caliber sniper rifle.

I recorded the episode and I just went back to that part to recall exactly what Mike said...Nacho had the gun pressed to Bolsa's head and Mike says "Do it".

My interpretation is that Mike wanted Nacho to at least take out Bolsa.

[Bannon]

12 minutes ago, scenario said:

I assume that HHM has at least 3 owners. I assume that its Howard, Chuck and some other person or group of people. If Howard only own's 1/3rd of the firm, he may have needed someone else permission. Chuck stayed in his house and rarely talked to people. The firm might have felt that having a mentally ill partner might hurt the firm if it got out. Chuck refused to sell his shares. Chuck's harmless sitting in the dark. It's a problem you can put off for later until he comes out of his cave. 

Howard didn't want to fight both Chuck and any other potential owners who may believe that Chuck's going to get better any day now.

There were more than three owner/partners, but there were two senior partners, and what's been presented is that the two had a mutual buyout agreement between themselves, that either could execute. in the height of Chuck's delusions, he made no appeal to other partners, in an effort to outvote Howard. It's pretty reasonable to assume that while all the other partners get some share of the profits, Chuck and Howard had the voting shares.

[Bannon]

19 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

I recorded the episode and I just went back to that part to recall exactly what Mike said...Nacho had the gun pressed to Bolsa's head and Mike says "Do it".

My interpretation is that Mike wanted Nacho to at least take out Bolsa.

It's fine for us to disagree, but I don't understand what Gus or Mike gets out of having Bolsa killed by Nacho at this time, at the risk of the Salamancas, and also Eladio, discovering that it was Gus behind the move on Lalo. Why doesn't " do it " mean "kill yourself"?

[Melonie77]

5 minutes ago, Bannon said:

It's fine for us to disagree, but I don't understand what Gus or Mike gets out of having Bolsa killed by Nacho at this time, at the risk of the Salamancas, and also Eladio, discovering that it was Gus behind the move on Lalo. Why doesn't " do it " mean "kill yourself"?

If you have the chance to rewatch that portion of the episode, let me know what you think. Mike said "do it" while the gun was pressed to Bolsa's head. And he looked not only sad but disappointed when Nacho only took himself out. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just have some problems with this episode in certain places. We can certainly agree to disagree.😁

[Bannon]

15 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

If you have the chance to rewatch that portion of the episode, let me know what you think. Mike said "do it" while the gun was pressed to Bolsa's head. And he looked not only sad but disappointed when Nacho only took himself out. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just have some problems with this episode in certain places. We can certainly agree to disagree.😁

Yeah, I just think Mike's sad and disappointed that Nacho killing himself was the optimal outcome. 

People can see things differently, of course.

[PeterPirate]

49 minutes ago, Melonie77 said:

If you have the chance to rewatch that portion of the episode, let me know what you think. Mike said "do it" while the gun was pressed to Bolsa's head. And he looked not only sad but disappointed when Nacho only took himself out. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just have some problems with this episode in certain places. We can certainly agree to disagree.😁

Well, I just watched the scene again, and I concur.  Mike wanted Nacho to shoot Bolsa when he said "Do it".    

I started thinking about why Mike would want that to happen.  And then I remembered that during my initial viewing, I was hoping Nacho would back away into the cabin and somehow make his escape.  Which would have put Papa Varga in Gus' crosshairs.  

But if Nacho shoots Bolsa, he loses his human shield and four people take him out, thereby bringing the plan to fruition.  So it would make sense for Mike to want Nacho to shoot Bolsa.  

Edited April 29, 2022 by PeterPirate

[Penman61]

2 hours ago, Bannon said:

A person can be in grief over something other than the death of a person. I strongly suspect Kim grieves over the premature demise of childhood. I highly doubt it's even been close to fully acknowleged, much less resolved.

Of course. But I guess I’m wondering why so many here have settled on “grief” as a Kim explainer/motivator, as opposed to, say, “trauma,” “lax parenting,” or anything else. I mean, speculating is fun; I’m just making sure I didn’t miss something in the show.

So: Why, specifically, “grief”?

Edited April 29, 2022 by Penman61

[Melonie77]

10 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Well, I just watched the scene again, and I concur.  Mike wanted Nacho to shoot Bolsa when he said "Do it".    

I started thinking about why Mike would want that to happen.  And then I remembered that during my initial viewing, I was hoping Nacho would back away into the cabin and somehow make his escape.  Which would have put Papa Varga in Gus' crosshairs.  

But if Nacho shoots Bolsa, he loses his human shield and four people take him out, thereby bringing the plan to fruition.  So it would make sense for Mike to want Nacho to shoot Bolsa.  

Thank you Mr. Pirate!
I don't know how else to interpret that scene with the gun pushed into Bolsa's head. And Mike saying "do it" with a rather intense eagerness. 

I think the original plan was that Nacho would try to run and Gus's guy would take him out.
But I agree that upon shooting Bolsa, Nacho would have been killed instantly to prevent him from taking out anyone else. So no concern for torture, one bad guy down, story still intact, Mike will still protect Nacho's father. Scene makes more sense.

But of course that brings us back to BB and to problems when writing prequels.🙃

[Ellaria]

1 hour ago, Penman61 said:

Of course. But I guess I’m wondering why so many here have settled on “grief” as a Kim explainer/motivator, as opposed to, say, “trauma,” “lax parenting,” or anything else. I mean, speculating is fun; I’m just making sure I didn’t miss something in the show.

So: Why, specifically, “grief”?

I believe that grief is one possible explanation along with rage and anger. As mentioned above, it may not be grief over the loss of a person. Grief can be a reaction to loss of different kinds: a way of life, a loss of possibility/hope.

Kim's motivations are complex and not necessarily triggered by one event or one person. Right now, we don't have an explanation for what drives Kim's soul. I'm sure that we will learn more but it may never be truly satisfying. 

Edited April 29, 2022 by Ellaria Sand

[Cinnabon]

7 hours ago, chick binewski said:

But Kim of "I save me" is partly using it as an excuse which is laughable bc 1. its Jimmy's money and 2. she could have stayed at Schweikert for a couple of years making bank then sailed away to pro bonoland.

Kim and Jimmy are married, so it would be their money.

[Emma Snyder]

Maybe I don't get dramatic subtleties, but I took Kim's dead-eyed comment of "you're either a friend of the cartel or a rat" as disgust leveled toward Jimmy for getting into his mess. Of course I also thought Nacho was in the sewer and the goo all over him was sewage, so what do I know??? 🤪

3 hours ago, Ellaria Sand said:

Right now, we don't have an explanation for what drives Kim's soul.

It's so long between seasons that I can't remember which, but there was a scene that showed a young Kim with who appeared to be not the best mother in the world. I thought that was supposed to be an explanation. 

[Bannon]

5 hours ago, Penman61 said:

Of course. But I guess I’m wondering why so many here have settled on “grief” as a Kim explainer/motivator, as opposed to, say, “trauma,” “lax parenting,” or anything else. I mean, speculating is fun; I’m just making sure I didn’t miss something in the show.

So: Why, specifically, “grief”?

Partially because ir's consistent with other characters' experience, and because I see unmitigated anger in Kim's behavior, and anger is a common emotion stemming from grief. I think it's indisputable that Jimmy not only grieves Chuck's death, but also the death of his dream of an idealized relationship with his brother, and those deaths came at his brother's hand. Mike is absolutely consumed with grief and self loathing, due to his son's death, and what he perceives to be his role in that death. I greatly suspect that a profound sadness and grief, over a premature demise of something held dear in childhood,  maybe just an idealized desire for security, safety, and love, lies at the center of Kim's motivations. She's getting something fundamental on her current path that, however dysfunctionally,  that is a response to that feeling of loss and profound sadness. That's the "more".

[Bannon]

6 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

Well, I just watched the scene again, and I concur.  Mike wanted Nacho to shoot Bolsa when he said "Do it".    

I started thinking about why Mike would want that to happen.  And then I remembered that during my initial viewing, I was hoping Nacho would back away into the cabin and somehow make his escape.  Which would have put Papa Varga in Gus' crosshairs.  

But if Nacho shoots Bolsa, he loses his human shield and four people take him out, thereby bringing the plan to fruition.  So it would make sense for Mike to want Nacho to shoot Bolsa.  

Maybe they kill Nacho immediately, but maybe they just wound him, leading to an extended, agonizing death, with the possibility of the true plot on Lalo being revealed. Also, Gus very much wants Bolsa alive, as an intermediary between the Salamancas and Eladio, until that time that Gus no longer needs drugs imported from Mexico. Mike really doesn't want to interfere with Gus' business model, because Mike's entire motivation is to extract enough money from Gus' business, to secure a financial future for his granddaughter. The cleanest resolution was for Nacho to kill himself, and since orchestrating Nacho's death while selling the lie was what Mike, Nacho, and Gus were working for, I think "do it" meant "kill yourself".

You might be right, of course, in that Mike is human, and not a pure calculating machine. It could be that he was, in that moment, just disgusted with the whole bloody mess, and wanted to see somebody else dead along with Nacho.

[Bannon]

6 hours ago, Melonie77 said:

Thank you Mr. Pirate!
I don't know how else to interpret that scene with the gun pushed into Bolsa's head. And Mike saying "do it" with a rather intense eagerness. 

I think the original plan was that Nacho would try to run and Gus's guy would take him out.
But I agree that upon shooting Bolsa, Nacho would have been killed instantly to prevent him from taking out anyone else. So no concern for torture, one bad guy down, story still intact, Mike will still protect Nacho's father. Scene makes more sense.

But of course that brings us back to BB and to problems when writing prequels.🙃

Ir's surprising how often people die slowly from multiple gunshots, not quickly. Mike wouldn't be surprised, because he's been in combat. Someone with Mike's experience would be unlikely to simply assume that Nacho shooting Bolsa in the head guarantees an immediate death for Nacho. A barrel placed to the skull, by the holder of the pistol, then the trigger pulled, is a much more certain fast death, and the fast death of Nacho was what Mike, Gus, and Nacho desired.

[JudyObscure]

9 hours ago, chick binewski said:

Howard was the salesman and correct or not firms like that need Howards. 

He's the Pete Campbell of his firm. 

 

2 hours ago, Emma Snyder said:

Of course I also thought Nacho was in the sewer and the goo all over him was sewage, so what do I know???

Hee.  Sewage isn't that shiney.

I really don't think he could have been under that oil as long as he was and even the slightest, tinyest inhale would have just ruined his lungs.  We're all left with things that keep us awake after watching this show.  For, clean freak me it was Nacho covered in that oil.  I wanted that nice man who ran the shop to come out and squirt him all over with Dawn.

[chick binewski]

 

8 hours ago, Bannon said:

There were more than three owner/partners, but there were two senior partners, and what's been presented is that the two had a mutual buyout agreement between themselves, that either could execute. in the height of Chuck's delusions, he made no appeal to other partners, in an effort to outvote Howard. It's pretty reasonable to assume that while all the other partners get some share of the profits, Chuck and Howard had the voting shares.

But again, we're all making different reasonable assumptions about details that never aired.  What we do know is Howard ultimately had to go out of his own pocket to oust Chuck.

I think Howard is slow to learn and he takes things very personally, but he's also shown consideration to three people after they've put him in terrible positions.

2 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

Kim and Jimmy are married, so it would be their money.

Possibly and I might accept this as an explanation for someone other than Kim but she's gone out of her way (despite her seemingly very real concern for Saul during Bagman) to declare they were not marrying for any kind of traditional reasons. They've for the most part kept the union under wraps. Kim has wanted nothing to do with Saul's business, which was her big catalyst for approaching Schweikart. And again, "I save me". Kim's situational convictions just bug me.

21 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

He's the Pete Campbell of his firm. 

Ha! Also, this may be the most hostile comment I've ever read about Howard. 

[PeterPirate]

1 hour ago, Bannon said:

Mike is human, and not a pure calculating machine. 

That's how I look at it.  Mike was thinking about completing the mission and not looking ahead to the possible ramifications of taking out a cartel leader.  

 

7 hours ago, Melonie77 said:

Thank you Mr. Pirate!

You are most welcome.  But please, call me Peter.  Mr. Pirate was my father.  

[Bannon]

7 minutes ago, chick binewski said:

 

But again, we're all making different reasonable assumptions about details that never aired.  What we do know is Howard ultimately had to go out of his own pocket to oust Chuck.

I think Howard is slow to learn and he takes things very personally, but he's also shown consideration to three people after they've put him in terrible positions.

Possibly and I might accept this as an explanation for someone other than Kim but she's gone out of her way (despite her seemingly very real concern for Saul during Bagman) to declare they were not marrying for any kind of traditional reasons. They've for the most part kept the union under wraps. Kim has wanted nothing to do with Saul's business, which was her big catalyst for approaching Schweikart. And again, "I save me". Kim's situational convictions just bug me.

Ha! Also, this may be the most hostile comment I've ever read about Howard. 

Yes, we know Howard could produce a sum of money, and thus terminate Chuck's participation in the firm, and Chuck had no recourse. That's my point. Howard's had significant power all along, that he didn't exercise, despite his duty to effectively address what was clearly an intolerable situation. Instead, we know that he's tried, for a very long time, to avoid paying what Chuck wanted to leave the firm.

[peeayebee]

I'm not so sure that Mike wanted Nacho to shoot Bolsa because Mike wanted Bolsa dead. Maybe he wanted Nacho to shoot so that would give Mike an excuse to shoot Hector and the Cousins.

[Dessert]

On 4/28/2022 at 8:33 AM, Adiba said:

Jimmy was perfectly fine with letting Howard feel the guilt over Chuck’s death, even though he knew the truth. Then Jimmy went on to feign fake sorrow at Chuck’s memorial and in court—so I don’t have a big problem with Howard saying that Chuck committed suicide. He did. Howard was at least going to therapy and work through Chuck’s death.

Was Howard a sanctimonious douche sometimes? Yes. I get that Kim does not like Howard, that she holds a grudge. However, to plan to ruin his career, while risking her own? After all Kim went through to become a successful lawyer, to become one of them, to risk throwing it all away? I don’t know. I agree that grief and love can make people do crazy things, but I’m going to need a whole lot more insight/backstory about Kim for it to be satisfying for me as a viewer..  

Kim is a fascinating character - brilliantly written and acted. The writers have laid the groundwork for the dark, self-destructive turn she’s taken.The only way Kim’s rage makes sense to me is as self-hatred projected onto Howard.

First of all, she (with the possible exception of Chuck) is the least self-aware character in the BB universe. Jimmy knows who he is - flaws and all. So do Mike, Nacho, Gus, and, probably Lalo. Not Kim.

The first hint that something was seriously wrong was her almost pathological blind spot for Jimmy. It’s one thing to like him and be charmed by him, or to admire the way he took care of his brother, but the degree to which she has rationalized and downplayed the terrible things he’s done is shocking. She insists on seeing him as someone who has been treated unfairly. That blind spot has turned into a chasm.

It’s also odd that she has no friends besides Jimmy - only business acquaintances. 

I think Chuck’s suicide was the turning point in Kim’s downward spiral. The  brothers’ insane battle to destroy each other, in which she played a major part, was horrifying. Once Jimmy alerted the insurance company that Chuck as a liability risk, the end was inevitable. Jimmy caused Chuck’s death and he knows it. Rather than admit that, Kim blames Howard. Some of her anger and contempt may be justified, but this is out of all proportion.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Dessert
Typos

[chick binewski]

6 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Yes, we know Howard could produce a sum of money, and thus terminate Chuck's participation in the firm, and Chuck had no recourse. That's my point. Howard's had significant power all along, that he didn't exercise, despite his duty to effectively address what was clearly an intolerable situation. Instead, we know that he's tried, for a very long time, to avoid paying what Chuck wanted to leave the firm.

This is one part of your point that I'm not clear on - Howard didn't actually have the money when he paid off Chuck himself. He handed Chuck a check for a third and was going to cover the remaining installments of the 9 million through personal loans. That to me doesn't seem like a position of power but rather one with limited choices.

And now revisiting season three and Chuck's demise I'm not clear exactly WHAT we're supposed to assume about that payout. We never saw papers being drawn up. Would any kind of continuity insurance policy cover a business if the partner committed suicide? Would Chuck still be considered a partner? I have confusion.

[Bannon]

1 minute ago, chick binewski said:

This is one part of your point that I'm not clear on - Howard didn't actually have the money when he paid off Chuck himself. He handed Chuck a check for a third and was going to cover the remaining installments of the 9 million through personal loans. That to me doesn't seem like a position of power but rather one with limited choices.

And now revisiting season three and Chuck's demise I'm not clear exactly WHAT we're supposed to assume about that payout. We never saw papers being drawn up. Would any kind of continuity insurance policy cover a business if the partner committed suicide? Would Chuck still be considered a partner? I have confusion.

If one partner can unilaterally end another partner's ownership position, through installment payments, that's power, which is not to say it is power exercised without difficult costs. But again, a senior partner at a closely held firm is getting paid to do difficult things. That's the senior partner's duty. If doing what is hard, but necessary, is too great a burden, then don't take the money associated with the position. 

Any insurance payout from Chuck's death is difficult to assess. There's a lot going on there, and technically, Chuck may no longer have been a partner at his time of death, thus rendering coverage on his life void.

[Bannon]

14 minutes ago, Dessert said:

Kim is a fascinating character - brilliantly written and acted. The writers have laid the groundwork for the dark, self-destructive turn she’s taken.The only way Kim’s rage makes sense to me is as self-hatred projected onto Howard.

First of all, she (with the possible exception of Chuck) Kim is the least self-aware character in the BB universe. Jimmy knows who he is - flaws and all. So do Mike, Mando, Gus, and, probably Lalo. Not Kim.

The first hint that something was seriously wrong was her almost pathological blind spot for Jimmy. It’s one thing to like him and be charmed by him, or to admire the way he took care of his brother, but the degree to which she has rationalized and downplayed the terrible things he’s done is shocking. She insists on seeing him as someone who has been treated unfairly. That blind spot has turned into an chasm.

It’s also odd that she has no friends besides Jimmy - only business acquaintances. 

I think Chuck’s suicide was the turning point in Kim’s downward spiral. The  brothers’ insane battle to destroy each other, in which she played a major part, was horrifying. Once Jimmy alerted the insurance company that Chuck as a liability risk, the end was inevitable. Jimmy caused Chuck’s death and he knows it. Rather than admit that, Kim blames Howard. Some of her anger and contempt may be justified, but this is out of all proportion.

Good analysis, especially about Kim's lack of self awareness. I tend to think her "more" in the interview with Schweikert was not so much deliberately vague, and more that it reflected her genuine inability to precisely describe what is missing in her life, that she feels compelled to find.

[Penman61]

3 hours ago, Bannon said:

Partially because ir's consistent with other characters' experience, and because I see unmitigated anger in Kim's behavior, and anger is a common emotion stemming from grief. I think it's indisputable that Jimmy not only grieves Chuck's death, but also the death of his dream of an idealized relationship with his brother, and those deaths came at his brother's hand. Mike is absolutely consumed with grief and self loathing, due to his son's death, and what he perceives to be his role in that death. I greatly suspect that a profound sadness and grief, over a premature demise of something held dear in childhood,  maybe just an idealized desire for security, safety, and love, lies at the center of Kim's motivations. She's getting something fundamental on her current path that, however dysfunctionally,  that is a response to that feeling of loss and profound sadness. That's the "more".

Thank you for this. Thoughtful, as always. :)

For me, the big difference is that the show itself made Mike's grief part of the narrative: We know his son was killed. It's part of his story, we're shown how he's dealing (and not dealing) with it as, explicitly, grief. We're not speculating.

My question was (and still continues to be) what in the show accounts for Kim's "grief"? And the answer is "Nothing...yet. (Oh, and it may not be grief.)" 

 

[PeterPirate]

1 hour ago, Dessert said:

Kim is a fascinating character - brilliantly written and acted. The writers have laid the groundwork for the dark, self-destructive turn she’s taken.The only way Kim’s rage makes sense to me is as self-hatred projected onto Howard.

First of all, she (with the possible exception of Chuck) Kim is the least self-aware character in the BB universe. Jimmy knows who he is - flaws and all. So do Mike, Mando, Gus, and, probably Lalo. Not Kim.

The first hint that something was seriously wrong was her almost pathological blind spot for Jimmy. It’s one thing to like him and be charmed by him, or to admire the way he took care of his brother, but the degree to which she has rationalized and downplayed the terrible things he’s done is shocking. She insists on seeing him as someone who has been treated unfairly. That blind spot has turned into an chasm.

It’s also odd that she has no friends besides Jimmy - only business acquaintances. 

I think Chuck’s suicide was the turning point in Kim’s downward spiral. The  brothers’ insane battle to destroy each other, in which she played a major part, was horrifying. Once Jimmy alerted the insurance company that Chuck as a liability risk, the end was inevitable. Jimmy caused Chuck’s death and he knows it. Rather than admit that, Kim blames Howard. Some of her anger and contempt may be justified, but this is out of all proportion.

Excellent post.  This puts me firmly in the "I don't need to know more about Kim's backstory" camp.  The totality of all the terrible things Jimmy has done--especially the things he did to further her own career--is enough for me to understand why she has gone off the deep end.  

[Bannon]

It's interesting that Lalo wasn't there to hear Nacho's confession. He was well enough to murder two people with a scissors blade, so it's not likely his wounds were the cause. If it's the jumping bail and outstanding murder charge that keeps him in Mexico, then it means Lalo needs help to get to Mike, and Lalo has to know that Mike is the key to proving to Eladio that Gus made the move on Lalo. He might send the Cousins, but we know they and Mike survive into BB. Do Mike and the Cousins have another direct encounter that stops short of a full blown firefight?

I kind of love the fact that when Mike finished off a cousin in the hospital in BB, the audience, and even the writers, had no idea that Mike and the Cousins had an extensive, enmity-filled,. history with each other.

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, Bannon said:

Yes, we know Howard could produce a sum of money, and thus terminate Chuck's participation in the firm, and Chuck had no recourse. That's my point. Howard's had significant power all along, that he didn't exercise, despite his duty to effectively address what was clearly an intolerable situation. Instead, we know that he's tried, for a very long time, to avoid paying what Chuck wanted to leave the firm.

I’ve forgotten - who received the $ from Chuck’s estate after his death?

[Bannon]

Just now, Cinnabon said:

I’ve forgotten - who received the $ from Chuck’s estate after his death?

I think most of it went to charity and his ex.