Better Talk Saul: BCS Only!

[editorgrrl]

I suggested "Grounded" or "Unplugged," but nobody liked those.

[wrestlesflamingos]

Executive action on the title, complaints or suggestions welcome.

[wrestlesflamingos]

My suggestion was in episode 1 but in a commercial for a different series. We've gone vanilla on the title, thanks for the heads up.

Edited March 7, 2015 by wrestlesflamingos
words!

[Umbelina]

I like it, it's clearer.

 

Better Call Saul Only, don't Break Bad Here!

 

could also work.

[Quilt Fairy]

I like the title change, it's much clearer. When it had 'the Breaking Bad  free discussion zone' it was mentioning the show you aren't supposed to mention. It seemed like a contradiction.

 

On the other hand, I don't think the writers can ever definitively say that it's a physical illness, for fear of viewers thinking that an "allergy to electricity" actually exists in the real world. And so far as I know, there's no such thing. Has anyone ever heard of something like this?

People can be sensitive to electro-magnetic fields (aka EMF fields).  Have you ever watched an episode of Ghost Hunters where they talk about a 'fear cage', an area with a concentration of electrical wiring resulting in a high EMF reading? It can cause some people to feel twitchy and paranoid, like someone is watching them or is behind them.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Quilt Fairy

[TVFan17]

To be honest, I don't think the new thread title is explicit or specific enough (in my opinion).  The point needs to be driven home from the title on down the line that there are absolutely no mentions of BB allowed, nor references to BB allowed, under any circumstances (except when we're trying to figure out a title for the thread through process of elimination!  Lol).  

 

This is the Better Call Saul forum, so it goes without saying that BCS is the show that is going to be discussed.  The title implies that we're not discussing any other show besides BCS, which is obvious.

 

However, the issue is that the BB references keep coming up (understandably) within the BCS chat because BB reminders keep popping up on the show, and that's where the clarity needs to come in to the title -- to keep those references and mentions out of this thread, I think. 

 

I like Umbelina's suggestion about adding on the "don't Break Bad Here" after the "Better Call Saul Only."

 

 

To me, something that says "Do Not Discuss Breaking Bad Here" gets the point across.  It's not cute or clever, but the message is straightforward.

[wrestlesflamingos]

Here's the rub: having Breaking Bad in the title doesn't discourage the cross talk. In fact, the only BB talk in here has been about the title change. I'm willing to change it, I'm less willing to put BB back in the title. I found it much more confusing to keep the content separate with the old title. I'd rather moderate the BB talk out than have a standing title that says the thing we wish to exclude.

 

If there's enough enthusiasm for a Better Call Saul only experience, this thread could be moved to a subforum. It would be in a different folder than the Better Call Saul threads. The code is being worked on for that feature, so it's a Season 2 option.

[TVFan17]

Here's the rub: having Breaking Bad in the title doesn't discourage the cross talk. In fact, the only BB talk in here has been about the title change. I'm willing to change it, I'm less willing to put BB back in the title. I found it much more confusing to keep the content separate with the old title. I'd rather moderate the BB talk out than have a standing title that says the thing we wish to exclude.

 

If there's enough enthusiasm for a Better Call Saul only experience, this thread could be moved to a subforum. It would be in a different folder than the Better Call Saul threads. The code is being worked on for that feature, so it's a Season 2 option.

 

It seems to me that BB was referenced in a previous comment in this thread, and the person who posted it was then asked to not mention BB -- even if they knew the answer. It's too easy to slip into BB references when giving answers.

 

The new title has barely been in effect for more than a couple of days, so it's hard to tell how much crosstalk there will or won't be in comparison to the previous title.

 

I don't know.  I am just telling you, because you wanted opinions -- from the standpoint of someone who has been a moderator on a totally different, popular website for the last 6 years (I use a different screen name there, and the topic is not TV) -- I think the title should be more explicit towards the goal of eliminating BB.  But... what do I know?

[duVerre]

 

People can be sensitive to electro-magnetic fields (aka EMF fields).  Have you ever watched an episode of Ghost Hunters where they talk about a 'fear cage', an area with a concentration of electrical wiring resulting in a high EMF reading? It can cause some people to feel twitchy and paranoid, like someone is watching them or is behind them.

 

Thanks, Quilt Fairy!

[Umbelina]

Here's the rub: having Breaking Bad in the title doesn't discourage the cross talk. In fact, the only BB talk in here has been about the title change. I'm willing to change it, I'm less willing to put BB back in the title. I found it much more confusing to keep the content separate with the old title. I'd rather moderate the BB talk out than have a standing title that says the thing we wish to exclude.

 

If there's enough enthusiasm for a Better Call Saul only experience, this thread could be moved to a subforum. It would be in a different folder than the Better Call Saul threads. The code is being worked on for that feature, so it's a Season 2 option.

No one reads the top post, unfortunately, so I agree this is a better title, but also think you should add something TO THE TITLE (which all read) that makes it very clear.  Perhaps not being "cute" as my other suggestion was though.

 

Better Call Saul ONLY, No Breaking Bad Talk Here

Better Call Saul, DO NOT discuss Breaking Bad Here.

 

Or modifying my original

Better Call Saul ONLY, NO Breaking Bad Here

Edited March 9, 2015 by Umbelina

[Tabasco Cat]

People can be sensitive to electro-magnetic fields (aka EMF fields).

 

No they can't. There is no scientific or medical evidence that shows that to be the case. It is a psychosomatic condition, i.e. it's caused by mental factors such as stress. Nobody who claims to suffer from it can tell the difference between a real and a fake electromagnetic field. Proven fact.

[shapeshifter]

No they can't. There is no scientific or medical evidence that shows that to be the case. It is a psychosomatic condition, i.e. it's caused by mental factors such as stress. Nobody who claims to suffer from it can tell the difference between a real and a fake electromagnetic field. Proven fact.

Yes and possibly no. I did a little research (by "little" meaning I found the articles and leave it to others to read them--it's what I do in my day job too) and posted on the speculation thread:

...Although Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity is not a medically recognized condition, I was surprised to discover that there are some studies published in scientifically recognized journals that seem to support its existence, such as Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: biological effects of dirty electricity with emphasis on diabetes and multiple sclerosis and the linked Related articles and Cited articles in the right column of the article's page in PubMed....

Anyway, I just dropped over to this thread to see if anyone here had liked this week's episode, "Five-O," but I can't tell if everyone on this thread who posted in the episode thread has actually never seen Breaking Bad. I sometimes get the sense while watching that this show would not garner the ratings necessary to survive without BB alums, and this episode felt even more that way.

[editorgrrl]

I just dropped over to this thread to see if anyone here had liked this week's episode, "Five-O," but I can't tell if everyone on this thread who posted in the episode thread has actually never seen Breaking Bad. I sometimes get the sense while watching that this show would not garner the ratings necessary to survive without BB alums, and this episode felt even more that way.

A couple of non–Breaking Bad watchers have posted in the "Five-O" episode thread.

 

Edited March 10, 2015 by wrestlesflamingos
removed small talk request

[duVerre]

I thought this episode was superb. I always have trouble with broken chronology--I'm cognitively challenged that way--but in the end, it didn't matter. Mike has been a mystery to me, though there's something so ominous about Jonathan Banks that I figured a powerful back story would be revealed. (And wasn't he nominated for an Emmy for Breaking Bad? Something like that. At any rate, I knew he had had a big role in that story.) But I wasn't prepared for something this tragic. I particularly liked that Banks did not cry. He held back tears, which (to me) is much more moving. He was like a big, wounded animal in this episode, whereas in the previous ones he had seemed like a powerful personality who, for some reason, had shut himself down. Now I know the reason. 

 

I adored that Mike and Jimmy instantly fell into synch with each other, though Jimmy protested that he could not and would not spill that coffee. When he asks how Mike knew he would help with that trick, I asked myself when Jimmy knew, or, if he did it instinctively, if he was appalled at that instant reflex. I imagine the show will let me know in its own time, and I am ready to wait.

 

My only reservation was the performance by the actress who played Mike's daughter-in-law. I found her a little technical; she had all the right signals--moist eyes, tension--but I didn't believe they were coming from the heart. These flaws were especially apparent with Banks doing such off-the-charts acting (well, it didn't even seem like acting) right beside her. 

 

Loved the way Mike and his daughter-in-law were framed in darkness at the end, with Mike facing the viewer.

 

Can I live with it? Well, I can live with the series, that's for sure.

Edited March 10, 2015 by duVerre

[Eegah]

The AV Club reviewer called Five-O the first episode that people going in cold couldn't properly appreciate and would likely just see it as a clichéd revenge story. So thanks for proving that wrong.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Eegah

[duVerre]

The AV Club reviewer called Five-O the first episode that people going in cold couldn't properly appreciate and would likely just see it as a clichéd revenge story. So thanks for proving that wrong.

 

I read the AV Club reviewer and just shook my head. I had tiny reservations about "Alpine Shepherd Boy," but otherwise I've been completely in love with this series. I guess it is a compliment to "Breaking Bad" that some of its fans don't believe that newbies to the "BB universe" will be interested, or are getting that much out of it. I'm a big fan of" Mad Men," and I might feel the same way if there was a spin-off/prequel/what-have-you.

 

My view is that there is something positive in watching something completely fresh, just as there is something positive in watching it in the context of another experience. But Vince Gilligan is just that good that he can make it work for both audiences.... and besides, different strokes, you know? 

 

I have always loved a (now) old book called "Act One," in which the playwrights Kauffman and Hart struggle to open their play "Once in a Lifetime" on Broadway. They open it out of town, and after the first scene of Act Two, the audience stopped laughing (it's a comedy) and sat there, hating what they saw. So the playwrights closed it, re-wrote it, and then opened it again, out of town, the next season. That time around, the show played well til the end of Act Two, but the audience just stared at Act Three, hating it. K & H got busy and worked themselves to death, doing rewrites at night. But they just couldn't crack it. Two days before they opened on Broadway (they were doing previews), a friend saw the play, got drunk with Hart, and told him "You know the problem with this play? It's noisy. After the first scene, there isn't a moment where two characters just sit down and talk to each other." This had never occurred to anyone who'd been involved with "Once in a Lifetime" since the beginning. They knew the play well, and that was the problem. That night, Hart rewrote the play to include such a scene, placed exactly where the previous version of the script had gone dead. The play brought the house down all the way through, opened to rave reviews and became a classic.

 

Not an exact parallel to BB/BCS fans, I guess, but my point is that sometimes the outsider sees what others don't, just as people who are fans of Breaking Bad must see what I don't. The fact that these two audiences come together is a huge compliment to the series.

[wrestlesflamingos]

 

 

Not an exact parallel to BB/BCS fans, I guess, but my point is that sometimes the outsider sees what others don't, just as people who are fans of Breaking Bad must see what I don't. The fact that these two audiences come together is a huge compliment to the series.

 

 

I think this is very true and well phrased. I can tell the posters in this thread that have watched the other show even if they are not posting anything from the other show. Because there is parallel discussion, some things have repeated themselves in several threads. Such as the discussion of electromagnetic fields. For this thread, I'm asking everyone to move on from the discussion of Chuck's illness. You may continue to discuss in the Chuck thread or Small Talk thread. In the Chuck thread, there will be discussion of the other show. However, there are no spoilers and Chuck is a new character to BCS, so there is no 'insiderism.'

 

Lets leave the title alone for a week. If there's a contamination of this thread, I will flinch and tweak the title. So far, the other show has been mentioned responsibly and I really appreciate it.

Edited March 10, 2015 by wrestlesflamingos
words

[shapeshifter]

...Lets leave the title alone for a week. If there's a contamination of this thread, I will flinch and tweak the title. So far, the other show has been mentioned responsibly and I really appreciate it.

I probably won't visit this thread too often, but just to give an "outsider" (in this case, outsider to this thread) view: the current title is very intuitive to me in that this is the thread for no Breaking Bad references. FWIW.

Edited just to add a preposition in an attempt at clarity.

Edited March 10, 2015 by shapeshifter

[Nibbio]

Hi all! 1st post! Are the series any good? Haven't watched it but i heard some criticism also, do you recommend it?

[wrestlesflamingos]

I am really enjoying the show. I think the dialogue is sharp enough to keep me listening without being overly pretentious. I'd compare it to Arrested Development or Community in terms of adapting to it's style. It might take a little while to feel comfortable with how the stories are told or the characters presented but that learning curve is rewarded later. (They are otherwise unrelated - no pile ons please!)

 

If you try it and hate it, you still get a gift bag of Vince Gilligan's amazing directing. Each show is filmed and staged to tell it's own story without the actors.

[Quilt Fairy]

you still get a gift bag of Vince Gilligan's amazing directing

Well, his amazing creativity and show-running. He only directed one ep so far, IIRC. And if you can tolerate an occasional Breaking Bad reference, the insider podcasts are a master class in how to create a TV show. ( And they're funny.)

Edited March 14, 2015 by Quilt Fairy

[Conan Troutman]

If you're still looking for a thread title, I'd throw "Better Talk Saul" in the mix.

[wrestlesflamingos]

If you're still looking for a thread title, I'd throw "Better Talk Saul" in the mix.

 

Love it, thank you!

[Quilt Fairy]

Have you considered putting a pinned post at the top explaining the thread?

[wrestlesflamingos]

There was a note when the thread was started. I've pinned it now, thanks for the suggestion.

[lucindabelle]

Well fuck that AV Club reviewer. That is the kind of attitude that makes me so glad this thread exists.

Nothing against Breaking Bad, I just happen not to have watched it.  I know a little bit about it but when early on people were going on and aon about who Mike the guy in the booth was it was mega annoying because at that point, to me, he was still just an annoying authority figure in Jimmy's life.

 

I LOVED this episode. I come from theater, and this was like an amazing, very very well written play. WHAT a fabulous actor Banks was.

 

And "Act One" may be my favorite theater autobiography of all time, even if a lot of it was kind of fudged. I've never ever forgotten how hart got that advice from a random person in an office late at night (a producer, but it wasn't a formal meeting). Sometimes you do just get the best advice from someone randomly. I've long thought a lot of the trouble with theater today is plays stop when they are "good enough" but not really right. Btw, I thought the Broadway adaptation of the book was horrifically bad, and the set made me seasick, and that is not even an exagerration.

 

back to the show. I was riveted. Absolutely riveted. When Mike was suddenly sober and we realized he'd played them the whole time I was thrilled. I'd been saying to myself, no, don't get in the car with them! Nooooo! and that was his plan all along.

 

Great, great stuff.

[Umbelina]

Just a warning, I read almost all of the reviews.  I can't remember a single one that doesn't mention Breaking Bad.  So if you really don't want to hear anything about BB, I'd avoid all of them too.  If I happen across one, I'll post it here.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Umbelina

[lucindabelle]

I don't read gem... I do listen to the slate spoiler podcast and they don't mention it. I am just replying to what people have said here.

[duVerre]

 

And "Act One" may be my favorite theater autobiography of all time, even if a lot of it was kind of fudged. I've never ever forgotten how hart got that advice from a random person in an office late at night (a producer, but it wasn't a formal meeting).

Yes, it's a magical book. There's no other way to describe it. And I guess it feels that way because so much of it was wishful thinking on the author's part. But so far as I know, the scene with producer Sam Harris (I think we're discussing the same scene, re advice from the person who hadn't seen the show and who immediately sees the flaw) is a real one. I've always remembered it because it's such a great illustration of seeing something with "fresh eyes."

 

[duVerre]

Re Bingo:

 

My go-to word for this show is "loopy." And that was one loopy episode, with one strangely-pitched scene after another, and it never loses energy as it goes along. Any series that can contain the farcical characters (Kettlemans) alongside the gravitas of Mike and Jimmy's tears at the end gets an A+ in my book.

 

I found the ending incredibly moving. I have felt like that. I haven't kicked a door like that, but I've never done it. 

 

I was so impressed that Jimmy really made a huge romantic gesture toward Kim in this episode, and it didn't seem daffy or too heart-on-his-sleeve. It was just taking care of someone he loved. So far the show has set me up to expect that kind of behaviour from him when it has to do with Chuck, but Kim has always been so together, so capable. On the other hand, that makes her worthy of a very great sacrifice from Jimmy. Lucky for him he has two good angels to keep him marginally close to ... well, not good, but goodishness.

Edited March 17, 2015 by duVerre

[lucindabelle]

I also loved how Jimmy was really proposing something a bit more and how she was oblivious... he needed to take a moment to hide his hurt.

 

I just heart Jimmy so much. He deserves a break.

 

duVerre I wasn't trying to imply that the Sam Harris scene didn't happen. I think a lot of the book did happen, though maybe not quite in that way. I loved his submitting a play under a pseudonymn and having it done, loved the stories of his tales as a camp counselor... back then loads and loads of talented musicians and performers took those jobs. In the days before air conditioning, summer camps and summer resorts were huge. My father remembers Pete Seeger at an adult summer camp. And Mike Wallace (yes, that one) was a camp counselor sort of thing when he was a kid. Did the salute to the sun.

Edited March 18, 2015 by lucindabelle

[Quilt Fairy]

I also loved how Jimmy was really proposing something a bit more and how she was oblivious... he needed to take a moment to hide his hurt.

I don't think Kim was oblivious, I think she knew exactly what he was proposing.

 

There was a lukewarm review of this ep ("Bingo") on some website called Vulture (I think) and I don't agree with the reviewer at all. He was complaining that the ep was all about those Kettlemans, and he finds them boring.

[duVerre]

 

There was a lukewarm review of this ep ("Bingo") on some website called Vulture (I think) and I don't agree with the reviewer at all. He was complaining that the ep was all about those Kettlemans, and he finds them boring.

 

I read that review in Vulture. It goes without saying that a viewer may disagree with a recapper, but that writer seemed incapable of figuring out the show on any level... the sort of person who would pan a production of "MacBeth" because "I didn't laugh, even once!" 

 

I'm missing Matt Zoller Seitz, a beautiful writer. I sometimes disagree with, him but at least when he reviews I know that he's plugged into the same basic universe as I am. 

Edited March 21, 2015 by duVerre

[Irlandesa]

I don't think Kim was oblivious, I think she knew exactly what he was proposing.

Exactly.  That's why she went into the kitchen.  "Oh look, they have stainless."  She really wasn't interested in stainless. She was deflecting. 

[lucindabelle]

You're right. I listened to the scene again on the slate spoiler (which I Recommend!) nd realized she was acting and doing a great job of it, the character and the actress both, she truly is stuck though,,, he doesn't have to feel so rejected. If the law company put her through school she does, literally owe them.

Jimmy could have done the Wrong Thing and got her and the office too, he didnt. I heart him.

My brother, a litigator, had the same reaction as the vulture reviewer, thought the kettle and went on too long, pacing off.

Not me. I love it to pieces.

ETA: there are funny bits in Macbeth....

Edited March 21, 2015 by lucindabelle

[TVFan17]

I have to admit that, at first -- when we first met the Kettlemans in this series -- I didn't care about them and I was bored by them.  The whole money storyline was not that interesting to me (although I suspect that this show has to start out with some criminals that are a bit less offensive on the overall scale of bad deeds, and then work up to the reallllllly unsavory types down the road). 

 

However, I think that the Kettleman story is leading somewhere.  I would be surprised if it didn't.  The more we have gotten to know them, the more we've seen that Betsy is the real unhinged mastermind, or the one wearing the pants.   I can easily picture her killing off her husband (maybe having him killed in prison) and running off with a secret lover that she has had all along.  Or I can envision her trying to kill Kim or Jimmy, or both.

[ShadowFacts]

I definitely think we will see the Kettlemans again in a shocking sort of scenario, probably involving Betsy doing something violent or retaliatory, and Jimmy will be in a bind because of it.  They wouldn't have spent so much time on their crime, their family, her craziness for it not to play out beyond them going back to Kim.  Blowback is coming.

[duVerre]

It's a few days since RICO aired, and I find that the after-effect, for me, is all Jimmy and Chuck. I guess their dammed-up emotion and unexpressed thoughts--or what I assume to be those things--ring too close to home. I felt like I was looking at an ink blot test. I was most affected by that moment when Jimmy told Chuck he’s secretly taken law and passed the bar. I think Chuck feels things as much as anyone, but he isn’t very physically expressive, and so Jimmy went without a hug or slap on the back or some other gob-smacked behavior.

 

Jimmy also went without even an understated but sincere "congratulations." I think Chuck was truly at a loss--instantly full of misgivings when he hears about the bar exam, e.g. can someone so good at scamming the system change his stripes and serve it honorably and defend it? (I guess I see this moment that way because a friend of mine once asked me to recommend him for a job--a job he would have been really bad at. Terrible moment, a very unfortunate pause, and eventually a terrible decision.)

 

And of course, both brothers seem to have a competitive streak a mile wide--I imagine Chuck is used to being the only lawyer in the family, and the one who saves his little brother, rather than his little brother saving himself. 

 

But when they were working with each other, completely in sync, it was a joy to behold. Sort of a little portrait of “what might have been.” 

 

I have felt since the beginning that the Jimmy-Chuck scenes were good but not the best thing about the series. But I realize now that they've had a sneaky, cumulative effect on me.

[lucindabelle]

I just got to see this.ll been a long week!

I felt so much dread at the beginning ut then came to love the episode and everything about it from the lawyer who tried to shut them down then offer hush money to where it went.

I loved chuck forgetting he as sick and just going outside himself, I was even afraid he might have dropped dead at the end.

And loved mike wanting to do whatever it takes to help his daughter in law and baby granddaughter.

I wonder if it's safe to go back to the other threads now. It's got to be clear by now that the show really stands by itself...

[wrestlesflamingos]

It's mostly safe to be in the other threads, if you're curious, go look. Occasionally, we get sentimental and share little BrBa moments but it's just a thought or two. No one is deeply comparing and contrasting the shows. For season 2, I'm going to ask some of you to assimilate.

[lucindabelle]

Thank you! Seems like it was only really unsafe at the very bwginning... Had a look last night and found most of the talk was indeed about the episode.

[TVFan17]

This thread was created for people to discuss BCS without BB thrown in (specifically for people who have not seen BB).  If the people who have never seen BB now go back to the other threads and expect conversation there to be stifled, frankly I think that is unfair.

 

Here is the thing -- it's not about whether or not BCS stands on its own.  The fact is that BB references and 'inside jokes' (Easter eggs) come up quite often in these BCS episodes -- locations in BCS that we've seen in BB; certain things about Mike's past that were referenced or hinted at in BB; things that the non-BB viewers would not know.  Those things will occasionally be mentioned or discussed in BCS episode threads as they pertained to BB  -- it is unrealistic and unnatural to the flow of conversation to think otherwise.  I highly, highly doubt that we are done with seeing BB Easter eggs and inside jokes thrown into this series, but they may not be seen in every single episode.

 

I think it was Umbelina (correct me if I'm wrong, Umbelina) who said that even all of the reviews, podcasts, media, etc. pretty much still mention BB in everything.  The series (BCS) is too new for it to not be that way. 

Edited March 26, 2015 by Sherry67

[ToastnBacon]

This thread was created for people to discuss BCS without BB thrown in (specifically for people who have not seen BB).  If the people who have never seen BB now go back to the other threads and expect conversation there to be stifled, frankly I think that is unfair.

 

Here is the thing -- it's not about whether or not BCS stands on its own.  The fact is that BB references and 'inside jokes' (Easter eggs) come up quite often in these BCS episodes -- locations in BCS that we've seen in BB; certain things about Mike's past that were referenced or hinted at in BB; things that the non-BB viewers would not know.  Those things will occasionally be mentioned or discussed in BCS episode threads as they pertained to BB  -- it is unrealistic and unnatural to the flow of conversation to think otherwise.  I highly, highly doubt that we are done with seeing BB Easter eggs and inside jokes thrown into this series, but they may not be seen in every single episode.

 

I think it was Umbelina (correct me if I'm wrong, Umbelina) who said that even all of the reviews, podcasts, media, etc. pretty much still mention BB in everything.  The series (BCS) is too new for it to not be that way.

The BB Easter eggs are going to be too numerous to avoid entirely in here.

The warning at the top of the thread is too ambiguous and definately stifling conversation. Two pages of conversation and most of it dedicated to what to call the thread?

I'm not too sure what is the benefit of having a total ban on BB references is in the first place.

I can see discouraging in depth discussions of BB, but if in an upcoming episode of BCS we meet the owner of a laser tag arcade, we won't be able to comment on the significance of it?

What is the value added in that?

[lucindabelle]

I'm not expecting anyone to stifle anything. i don't mind the occasional allusions but in the first episodes there was almost no discussion of the episode at all except of characters wo we would see later. It was very tedious. Whether nacho becomes important just interested me so much less Han the actual episode itself.

I listen to the slate spoiler podcast on he show every week and guess what, they discuss the show, yes, I know saul and mike will be in bb. But I want to discuss what happened, not what they will do six years onl slate had on someone who runs a blog about the legal ethics of bcs. That was fascinatingl they discussed advertising lol the jello cups, for example, would not be legal in the state of New York. There's plenty to discuss in the episodes without just constantly discussing bb. That's all I'm saying, I recommend that podcast a lot,

There's plenty going on in the episodes that are all Bcs.l. Chuck, the kettlemans, etc.

Also toastnbacon, why are you here if you feel stifled? The other threads exist. I enjoy getting show on its own merits and I know at least three other people who watch it who never did watch bb. Again, the occasional allusion, fine. But let's discuss the show!

So... In this show.l back on topic... ,I love jimmy so much, "play my ,agin flute." But I can't help feeling this is not going to end well. I love that chuck just forgot and while he forgot he was fine, he's not faking it ut his psychosomatic ness runs deep.

The smarmy lawyers were totally trying to buy them off,

I also like that while jimmy could make money of this what really got him to turn back was just decency, I mean lets face it $140 for a will was very low anyway and he wasn't going to take that womans last penny. He was concerned.

Edited March 27, 2015 by lucindabelle

[ShadowFacts]

 

So... In this show.l back on topic... ,I love jimmy so much, "play my ,agin flute." But I can't help feeling this is not going to end well. I love that chuck just forgot and while he forgot he was fine, he's not faking it ut his psychosomatic ness runs deep.

 

It's beginning to look like he has some kind of heavy-duty phobia mixed in with maybe obsession-compulsion.  Whatever it is, it is looking like he can overcome it, and I never thought he was faking it, he really suffered when went outside to fetch the newspaper across the street.  It will be interesting to see this unfold.

[TVFan17]

I'm not expecting anyone to stifle anything. i don't mind the occasional allusions but in the first episodes there was almost no discussion of the episode at all except of characters wo we would see later. It was very tedious. Whether nacho becomes important just interested me so much less Han the actual episode itself.

I listen to the slate spoiler podcast on he show every week and guess what, they discuss the show, yes, I know saul and mike will be in bb. But I want to discuss what happened, not what they will do six years onl slate had on someone who runs a blog about the legal ethics of bcs. That was fascinatingl they discussed advertising lol the jello cups, for example, would not be legal in the state of New York. There's plenty to discuss in the episodes without just constantly discussing bb. That's all I'm saying, I recommend that podcast a lot,

There's plenty going on in the episodes that are all Bcs.l. Chuck, the kettlemans, etc.

Also toastnbacon, why are you here if you feel stifled? The other threads exist. I enjoy getting show on its own merits and I know at least three other people who watch it who never did watch bb. Again, the occasional allusion, fine. But let's discuss the show!

So... In this show.l back on topic... ,I love jimmy so much, "play my ,agin flute." But I can't help feeling this is not going to end well. I love that chuck just forgot and while he forgot he was fine, he's not faking it ut his psychosomatic ness runs deep.

The smarmy lawyers were totally trying to buy them off,

I also like that while jimmy could make money of this what really got him to turn back was just decency, I mean lets face it $140 for a will was very low anyway and he wasn't going to take that womans last penny. He was concerned.

 

 

We are discussing the show (BCS), but the people who were not BB viewers are not going to realize that certain inside jokes, familiar locations and Easter eggs that pop up in BCS are references and allusions to BB, and those of us who are very familiar with what those inside references mean or represent will probably be discussing them in the episode threads from time to time. 

 

Could there be an occasion in which a future BCS episode evokes more in-depth discussion/analysis about something that happened on BB -- perhaps something Mike-specific, or specific to a character we knew well on BB?  Quite possibly.  Maybe it won't happen this season, but possibly in the future.  So, tedious or not, the non-BB viewers have to understand that these kinds of discussions will happen in the episode threads now and then.

 

Basically, as long as the BCS writers are still giving us the BB Easter eggs and inside references and jokes, there will be discussions or mentions of them.  When and if they ever stop doing that for good, then the BB talk will probably disappear from BCS threads and from all other media.

 

The reality is, most people here have seen BB.  There is no getting around that.  I'm sure there are more people who have seen BB in this BCS forum than there are people who have not seen it.  And we can't view BCS through a BCS-only lens in certain cases, because we can't pretend that we didn't see or learn about certain BCS things in BB.  We're all trying to focus on BCS only (especially in this thread), and that is very easy to do when there are no BB Easter eggs thrown in anywhere -- but conversations are going to flow how they're going to flow when those Easter eggs pop up. :-)

[lucindabelle]

This thread is for those who haven't watched bb and I can't help feeling hat the tone of your two posts is to attack those of us, again, who just want to watch the show, so, why are you here? There's plenty of room for you to have those discussions elsewhere. Please stop berating those of us who haven't seen your show.

And by the by your posts fail to comment AT all On the episode, just on the thread itself which defeats the purpose, again, I listen to podcasts which are capable of talking about the show on its own merits. Apparently you think Ats not possible but guess what? It really is. I don't understand he hostility.

I'd love to talk about the show but this meta discussion you are having? Not so much,

Edited March 28, 2015 by lucindabelle

[walnutqueen]

To be fair, I think wondering "if it's safe" to venture into other threads also opens an unnecessary can o' worms.  :~)

[Umbelina]

I'll try to answer it.  No.  It's not "safe" in any other threads if you don't ever want to hear a word about Breaking Bad, and I doubt it ever will be.  That's why there is this thread, which is getting almost no traffic, so there is plenty of room to discuss whatever you like about Better Call Saul ONLY.

 

As has been mentioned, the shows share directors, writers, locations, and characters, as well as the show runner.  Crossover talk is inevitable from the vast majority of posters who either have watched both, or don't mind BB talk.

 

Expecting everyone else to change because a very few people don't want to be spoiled, or whatever it is about Breaking Bad is kind of strange.  If this thread begins getting a lot of traffic from "unspoiled" BB only people, I'm sure the mods will create another for you.

Edited March 28, 2015 by Umbelina

[halgia]

Let's keep it to show talk in here, please. There's no need to keep saying the same things in the meta conversation about this thread's existence, and if you actually think you have something new to say, put it in the thread for that.