S01.E03: Nacho

[kieyra]

Well you are of course entitled to an opinion and not like the show, but if "isn't going to make it" implies being cancelled, a few things of note: It's already been renewed for a second season. After three episodes it's the second highest rated show on cable after The Walking Dead (this is after the switch to the Monday time slot), it has a 100% positive review rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 91% positive review rating from the audience. In this case your opinion of the show probably isn't indicative of its long term viability.

I think all of that "highest rated show on cable" news PR refers solely to the premiere episode, which had the Walking Dead lead in. The next episode lost something like HALF its viewers from the premiere. If there are real numbers beyond that, I haven't seen them and they're not being posted in the ratings and scheduling thread, but I don't have much doubt that the third episode saw another drop. The pacing and repetition must be killing casual viewership.

I guess it doesn't matter much if they're already renewed for season 2, but I think they will continue to shed viewers for a while, maybe till binge time at the end of the season.

Edit: Wikipedia tells me the show has dropped from 6.88 million viewers to 3.23 million from episode 1 through 3, although the drop from 2 to 3 wasn't as steep, so it may find the floor soon. Which I suspect will consist mostly of hardcore BB viewers. :)

Edited February 19, 2015 by kieyra

[Subrookie]

Just a general question for the mods, are the BCS threads allowed to be full of talk about BB? I enjoyed that and this show but I'd rather not hear about BB in every episode thread especially since its not going to be about the main 2 characters in the first show.

[Ronin Jackson]

Edit: Wikipedia tells me the show has dropped from 6.88 million viewers to 3.23 million from episode 1 through 3, although the drop from 2 to 3 wasn't as steep, so it may find the floor soon. Which I suspect will consist mostly of hardcore BB viewers. :)

 

Yeah... because there's no shortage of those.  It had more viewers when accounting for on demand and DVR viewings after the initial airing:  http://uproxx.com/tv/2015/02/better-call-saul-ratings/

 

BTW, Breaking Bad was on for five and a half years before it actually became a ratings hit and it was never in danger of being cancelled.  But I mean, if you really are rooting for this show to crash and burn for some reason, I won't jam your vibe despite all indications that just ain't happening.

[kieyra]

Yeah... because there's no shortage of those.  It had more viewers when accounting for on demand and DVR viewings after the initial airing:  http://uproxx.com/tv/2015/02/better-call-saul-ratings/

 

BTW, Breaking Bad was on for five and a half years before it actually became a ratings hit and it was never in danger of being cancelled.  But I mean, if you really are rooting for this show to crash and burn for some reason, I won't jam your vibe despite all indications that just ain't happening.

That was an interesting conclusion jump there, w/r/t what I am rooting for. But thanks for leaving my vibe alone either way.

[Umbelina]

Just a general question for the mods, are the BCS threads allowed to be full of talk about BB? I enjoyed that and this show but I'd rather not hear about BB in every episode thread especially since its not going to be about the main 2 characters in the first show.

There is a whole thread up about it here.

 

Also, one thread where no BB talk is allowed.  General thread for all BCS talk, episodes, media etc.  If it gets traffic, they may reevaluate and make other threads.  Although ALL media that I've seen does reference BB.

[Irlandesa]

Edit: Wikipedia tells me the show has dropped from 6.88 million viewers to 3.23 million from episode 1 through 3, although the drop from 2 to 3 wasn't as steep, so it may find the floor soon. Which I suspect will consist mostly of hardcore BB viewers. :)

Some additional ratings info, that Wikipedia doesn't cover for some reason, is that BCS matched last Monday's demo of 1.6 which won the night on cable and made it tied with Castle as the second highest scripted drama of the night behind Gotham which aired two hours earlier. 

 

Who knows what the future holds but AMC has to be happy with the week-to-week hold.  Those are considered decent numbers for a Monday night on network TV.  They're even better for a cable channel.  I don't think they really care if they're Breaking Bad die hards or not.  (BTW, it's crazy to think about but Breaking Bad didn't break 3 million viewers until the final 7 episodes)

[Subrookie]

There is a whole thread up about it here.

 

Also, one thread where no BB talk is allowed.  General thread for all BCS talk, episodes, media etc.  If it gets traffic, they may reevaluate and make other threads.  Although ALL media that I've seen does reference BB.

The episode threads don't seem to have any restrictions about discussing BB though. I get that this is a prequel to BB and characters may appear in both shows but I'd be more interested in the discussion if it didn't revolve around the first show.

[Umbelina]

Again, the discussion about this issue is going on in the pinned thread in this forum.

[Tim Thomason]

Let me start by saying I love this show. I did not watch BB (the Couch Husband did, avidly) but because I admired Odenkirk's work in Fargo, and I love shows about how lawyers act in real life, I wanted to watch this one and I am loving it.

BUT no one embezzles $1.6 million dollars and ends up with it in a duffel bag. No bank allows you to cash more than $10,000 (?) at a time without alerting the IRS, so how did Mr. K get the money out of the county bank account and into cash? I could understand the cash in a bag if he was accused of taking bribes, but embezzling? No, that money would be in an offshore account under a LLC name controlled by a corporation that holds shares in another company that is owned by Mrs. K. Just saying.... I mean, no personal knowledge.....never mind......

 

It's not known (yet) how they embezzled the $1.6 Million. Remember this is around 2002 or so, so I think that the county modernizing its computer systems is somehow involved. Mrs. Kettleman probably found a loophole, but if they were somehow able to take out, say, $10,000 at a time without any reporting, that would mean 160 transactions over who knows how long. I have no idea how to embezzle funds, but a quick search of "county treasurer embezzlement" shows that this is a surprisingly common occurrence, with figures as high as $54 million.

 

And while that dufflebag had alot of money, it's probably no where near the million dollars they probably have left. It's probably a nest egg they prepared for situations where they would be on the run (since credit cards are a no go).

[TVFan17]

The episode threads don't seem to have any restrictions about discussing BB though. I get that this is a prequel to BB and characters may appear in both shows but I'd be more interested in the discussion if it didn't revolve around the first show.

 

I am not intending to sound rude, but am just being blunt (it's the moderator in me that's coming out -- I am not a mod on this forum, but I am a mod on another [non-TV-related] forum, and sometimes I have to step in and guide the discussions along.  Lol).  This subject of what is/is not allowed to be mentioned and where it can be mentioned (as far as BB in BCS threads) has been examined ad nauseam (in assorted threads) on this forum since BCS began. 

 

There is a whole separate thread that was created for people to discuss BCS as it unfolds, without any references to BB at all.  It's for those who have either never seen BB, or just for those who don't want any BB peppered into their BCS talk.  In order for that thread to pick up steam, some of the people who don't want to read about BB in their BCS discussions should start posting there.

 

For the rest of us, however -- and, seemingly, for many media outlets -- it is next to impossible to talk about BCS without referencing BB in some way, at some point.  People are not at the stage where they are ready to fully separate one series from the other -- because the shows are inextricably linked and have not yet become detached.   BCS takes place in the same universe as BB, just several years earlier -- but the show may be flashing forward at some point, and there have already been several characters from BB on BCS.  Events of the past may inform events of the future.

 

Sometimes the BB references in the BCS episode threads may be minor and subtle, or non-existent; sometimes they may be more in-depth.  I think that right now, at this early stage of the game, it is too restrictive to limit BB references, because those references evolve from the natural flow of thought and conversation.  As Better Call Saul steers further away from its Breaking Bad origins -- if that ever fully happens -- and makes us forget that Mike and Jimmy/Saul were big parts of BB, I think the BB references will fade off into the mist as well.  It's not time for that yet.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Sherry67

[Nashville]

The episode threads don't seem to have any restrictions about discussing BB though. I get that this is a prequel to BB and characters may appear in both shows but I'd be more interested in the discussion if it didn't revolve around the first show.

I'm sure it will, eventually - but heck, BCS has barely finished emerging from the birth canal yet, much less entered its infancy. We're only three episodes in.

In time, as BCS matures its own stories and plot lines, the discussion will inevitably shift to BCS-focused conversations. It will take some time for the baby to grow big enough to be interesting in its own right, however - so in the interim, it's not surprising if the early conversations stay centered around the parent. :)

[Kbilly]

Loving the show but finding myself not liking the blonde lawyer lady (Kim?)--either her acting or the character lacks a desired spark. 

 

I loved when Jimmy asked Mike if he was going to throw a poop-filled diaper at him! Messing with the wrong guy.

 

I liked the scene when Jimmy unrolled the paper towel roll for his homemade voice chango-matic , it reminded me of Walt working on BB--never knowing quite what he was up to.

 

The Kellerman's house looked like it was in Hank's neighborhood. What a gorgeous backyard beyond the fence, eh?

 

One of the cops was the baseball player on Nancy's crew on "Weeds".

Edited February 19, 2015 by Kbilly

[teddysmom]

I just hope the plots aren't stupid because I'm already getting that vibe from the Kettlemans storyline.  However, if they break bad...

 

Embezzling $1.6 million definitely puts one in the breaking bad category. 

[Bcharmer]

Loving the show but finding myself not liking the blonde lawyer lady (Kim?)--either her acting or the character lacks a desired spark. 

 

Funny, because I feel just the opposite. I liked her because her acting didn't seem "affected" in any way. I find the naturalness and normalcy in her character to be quite refreshing. Too easy to go the opposite way on a show like this. Of course, who knows what will be revealed about her later, but while watching her scenes in this episode, I really did think to myself how much I appreciated a female character on this show that wasn't over the top, in some way.

[TVFan17]

Has Rhea Seehorn, the actress who plays Kim, done any interviews on talk shows?  Maybe that's a question that I should pose in the Media thread, but I wanted to ask it because Kim was being discussed here.

 

Rhea did an interview on (of all things) Home and Family, on the Hallmark Channel.  It was yesterday, but I missed it.  It will be replayed today, at noon (PST).  H&F usually has the guests all sit together on a sofa at the start of the show, just for general banter and interaction, and then they interview the guests one by one over the course of the show.  Sometimes -- after the interview segments -- they get the guests involved in cooking segments, game segments, craft segments, etc.  So, Rhea may stick around beyond her actual interview -- I'm not sure -- if they rope her into a game of "Guess the Oscar Winner" or something (I just made that up -- I don't know what the game would be).   In any case, it won't be a hard-hitting, in-depth interview by any means, but it will be interesting to see what her personality is like when she is not playing Kim.

 

I tend to think that Kim's story will unfold as well -- or that we will find out some interesting things about her character at some point.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Sherry67

[editorgrrl]

I tend to think that Kim's story will unfold as well -- or that we will find out some interesting things about her character at some point.

 

You mean like the fact that Kim Wexler & Jimmy have phone sex? During which Jimmy sometimes does a "robot sex voice"?

 

I liked [Kim Wexler] because [Rhea Seehorn's] acting didn't seem "affected" in any way. I find the naturalness and normalcy in her character to be quite refreshing. Too easy to go the opposite way on a show like this. Of course, who knows what will be revealed about her later, but while watching her scenes in this episode, I really did think to myself how much I appreciated a female character on this show that wasn't over the top, in some way.

 

Before the premiere, Rhea Seehorn told Variety:

It’s such a slow burn as to why this character is important. Vince and Peter apologized for how minor my screen time was in the pilot. I’ve never been introduced with such mystery and intrigue and such incredible use of economy of language and gesture. That first scene when you see them alone in the garage tells a lot of history of a very complex but great intimacy. They have a knowledge of each other and a shorthand that was just so much fun to play. My character plays her cards a lot closer to her chest than Jimmy does which is a lot of fun to play. I wouldn’t say it’s a role reversal, but it’s fun that it’s the woman that’s more reserved.

 

Seehorn also said 

Everyone’s been asking, “Did they or did they?” “Are they or aren’t they?” She _is_ his love interest.

  (And I just learned you can't do italics inside a spoiler.)

[teddysmom]

 Funny how some people aren't feeling the chemistry between Jimmy & Kim. 

 

On the podcast Vince, Bob, Peter & Michelle McLaren all spoke about how Rhea & Bob have amazing chemistry, that it's obvious they have a real comfortable vibe together, and Bob even stated that he and Rhea spent some time hanging out in ABQ, just to get to know each other as they have a lot of scenes together, playing exes for the show.  He said she is a lot of fun and very low key, very funny and a very good actress. 

[TVFan17]

Well, I just watched the Rhea Seehorn segments of Home & Family, which included the opening intro (with all the guests sitting together), her separate interview and then a painful hairstyling segment.  She is laid back and relaxed, and yet I don't think she's entirely comfortable with the talk show process just yet.  She has one of those types of demeanors that make you question whether she is happy to be there or miserable, even when smiling.  (It kind of reminded me of Katherine Heigl's demeanor when she does interviews.)  Then again, to Rhea's credit, she probably wondered what kind of show she was on -- was it a talk show, a crafting show, a hairstyling show, a cooking show, a show about Hallmark programming only, etc.

 

So I can see how Rhea is a good choice to play a sort of emotionless attorney on BCS.

 

Oh wait!  I thought they were done with Rhea on Home and Family!  Now she's back in a baby-related segment, and they just handed her a fake infant and put Rhea in a bed!  Lol.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Sherry67

[Clanstarling]

My husband and I were late joiners to the BB universe (we basically ended up watching it all in a marathon before the last season began). We had serious reservations about BCS, but liked the character so we made sure to watch it.

 

We were sold from the get-go (which is not how I felt about BB at this point). I enjoy origin stories, and look forward to finding out how Jimmy (no saint, but generally good-hearted) becomes Saul. The brother I'm not so interested in, but I trust there'll be a pay off. Which is unlike me - I'm not a trusting soul in general.

Edited February 19, 2015 by clanstarling

[Ohwell]

Embezzling $1.6 million definitely puts one in the breaking bad category.

I mean if they get desperate enough to kill somebody.

[Umbelina]

This is the thread to discuss BB spoilers in BCS threads.  http://forums.previously.tv/topic/21909-what-to-do-with-breaking-bad-discussionspoilers/?view=getnewpost

 

This is the thread to discuss BCS with NO Breaking Bad talk allowed.

http://forums.previously.tv/topic/22170-breaking-what-breaking-bad-free-discussion-zone/?view=getnewpost

[queenanne]

It's early for me to have an opinion on Kim, but I'm intrigued enough by her to trust the creators, I think it was a good introduction.  Let us infer interesting and mysterious things, less is more.

[DangerousMinds]

I'm enjoying the show, but I don't understand why Jimmy seems more stupid than Saul.  This is a character that started out as a teenage con artist and then had an epiphany in his twenties to become a better person thanks to his brother, and is now a practicing attorney in his thirties.  If he's not yet familiar with specific legal or political machinations then that would make sense... but Jimmy doesn't seem to think as quickly on his feet as Saul and that was largely the appeal of that character.

I can understand if he were a naive, bookish kid that gradually became Saul that this difference would make sense, but it doesn't make sense that Jimmy would lose his street smarts when he became a law student, then regain them when he started to become Saul.

 

This being said, I don't get the people that bail on this show after two or three episodes.  If you do a search by user rating on Breaking Bad on Imdb, you will find that out of the nearly 60,000 films and tv shows with over 200 votes... it is ranked number #2 and Saul is ranked #13.  I'm not saying that all of us should have the same tastes nor am I saying that imdb ratings are the definitive arbiter of quality, but I'm thinking if you're not satisfied with shows at this level (99.9 percentile) what do you do for entertainment in the meantime... wait ten years until David Simon or David Chase come up with a new show?  I don't mean to troll, but I truly wonder what shows they would leave to watch that would be at the same level of quality?

I imagine they do something other than watch TV.

[shapeshifter]

This is the thread to discuss BB spoilers in BCS threads.  http://forums.previously.tv/topic/21909-what-to-do-with-breaking-bad-discussionspoilers/?view=getnewpost

 

This is the thread to discuss BCS with NO Breaking Bad talk allowed.

http://forums.previously.tv/topic/22170-breaking-what-breaking-bad-free-discussion-zone/?view=getnewpost

Just to clarify, the thread to discuss BB spoilers in BCS threads is a meta-discussion. I don't think there are any actual spoilers in the thread itself (right?), so those who want to remain free of Breaking Bad spoilers but still discuss where and when such "spoilers" should exist, should feel free to read and post there. Right?

[DangerousMinds]

And there is still an actual Breaking Bad forum on PTV, so anything more than a quick mention can still be discussed there, instead of here.

Edited February 20, 2015 by DangerousMinds

[Umbelina]

This is the thread to discuss BB spoilers in BCS threads.  http://forums.previo...view=getnewpost

This is the thread to discuss BCS with NO Breaking Bad talk allowed.

http://forums.previo...view=getnewpost

 

Just to clarify, the thread to discuss BB spoilers in BCS threads is a meta-discussion. I don't think there are any actual spoilers in the thread itself (right?), so those who want to remain free of Breaking Bad spoilers but still discuss where and when such "spoilers" should exist, should feel free to read and post there. Right?

I had to go back and read through that thread to check.

 

Oh, and good point.  I'd say there ARE a couple of "general" spoilers about BB there.  Very general, such as thread titles taken from (obscure) Episode Titles from BB, and some events with no context.  A reference to Acid, for example.  I did post your concern/point there though, but if you are reading here, certainly nothing more explicit than that.  ???

 

The 2nd link I posted isn't discussing BB at all, last I checked.  I won't post in it again, because I could inadvertently slip.  Really, no one is posting in it now.  So it's free and open to all posters who want to know nothing about BB.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Umbelina

[Sentient Meat]

I imagine they do something other than watch TV.

If said demographic cares enough to post on a television message board... I would say possible but unlikely that they don't consume a fair amount of tv.

[ghoulina]

Upon rewatch I discovered a line I missed the first time that really cracked me up. When Jimmy was let out of the police dept, he told the detectives that when he was proven right, he expected an Edible Arrangement - "heavy on the pineapple", or something like that. LOL

[Bannon]

Stealing 1.6 million from a county with a large city, and poor accounting controls, isn't a stretch in the least, and if you've spent any time in New Mexico, poor accounting controls is the norm. The biggest issue I had with the scene in the tent was that the bills were too crisp. It would have made more sense for the theft to have taken place without the cash ever entering into the County's bank account, to be transferred into some dummy account, and then withdrawn. If the country treasurer put in place a system where a lot of the the county's cash proceeds from various sources was pooled in a central location, prior to deposit,with him being given access to the cash and receipts, then stealing 1.6 million over several months is very plausible.

[myname2use4now]

I didn't want to end up loving this show just because of the BB connection and I realized today that I love it based on what it offers all on its own. I just loved the little boy in the tent who clearly is not on board with his parents way of doing things. The whole scene cracked me up. I'm also loving the scenes between Mike and Jimmy. Oh, and for a bad guy, Nacho is hot. I'm not entirely sure about the Kim character. So far, her acting sticks out as something I'd see on CSI or some other network show, but it's early she may grow more comfortable with the role going forward. I'm looking forward to the next episode and I have to admit, I think that Bob Odenkirk's acting is amazing. He's got the "man down on his luck" look down pat. I think he's going to do great things with this role.

[editorgrrl]

Upon rewatch I discovered a line I missed the first time that really cracked me up. When Jimmy was let out of the police dept, he told the detectives that when he was proven right, he expected an Edible Arrangement - "heavy on the pineapple", or something like that. LOL

 

From the "Quotes" thread: Jimmy to the two cops: "Hey Cagney, Lacey. When you realize how wrong you are about all this, I'll take an Edible Arrangement as a sorry. Heavy on the pineapple."

[wrestlesflamingos]

Folks - its going to take a while for the BB comparisons or observations to stop. BB was an amazing show and the only reason BCS exists. Lets be patient with each other and try our best.

[WicketyWack]

No clarification. He was up against assault, property damage, and sex offense charges, and he was disputing the sex offense, calling it a simple "Chicago sunroof" (a term invented for the show). It's presumably connected to his career as a street-level con man.

 

Yes. He told Kim first, then called the Kettlemans.

 

Nacho's car had been spotted for two nights prior by a neighbor and his license plate was written down. Since Nacho wasn't guilty, he was probably easy to track down from that license plate. He had blood in his van from the skateboarders and the APD had him arrested and were beginning to build a case and start looking for accomplices and the Kettlemans whereabouts.

 

No. Jimmy didn't do anything except make some phone calls (to Kim drunkenly saying that the Kettlemans were in danger, to the Kettlemans warning them that they were in danger, and then to Nacho trying to smoothe things over). Jimmy thought that Nacho was guilty up until the point that he was face-to-face with him and being accused of setting him up. He didn't figure out that the Kettlemans had staged their own kidnapping until he was allowed to visit their home and go over the crime scene.

 

Nacho was being accused of kidnapping, and perhaps worse, based on the blood in his van and the observation that he had been parked outside their home for two nights.

 

I think the Kettlemans planned to stay up in the mountains for a few days or weeks (maybe getting supplies from their home in the meanwhile), and would either hike their way out of the country or return to civilization with a fake story about their kidnapping. If Jimmy didn't show up, they would eventually get arrested by the FBI or whoever and the whole case comes crumbling down.

 

Now that our protagonist is involved, they might get a chance to get away scot-free. Either way, I think Jimmy is just about to get a substantial "finders' fee".

 

The first thing I thought when Hamlin said the Kettlemans had gone missing was that they fled in the night with the money. 

 

I figure they were planning to stay in the woods for a while, hike to a neighboring town and then maybe quietly take a series of taxi or bus rides to a Mexican border town where they could pay someone to sneak them across. After that, it's a matter of getting some faked documentation and making the $1.6 million last for a long, long time.

 

The Kettlemans returning with a fake kidnapping story would be too risky with the kids as old as they are. If they had a couple of babies or pre-verbal toddlers, sure, but kids that age are not savvy with keeping up an elaborate web of lies, especially with all the police and media attention they would draw.

 

I don't know if there IS a way that Jimmy can help them get away with their faked kidnapping -- he's already alerted Kim that he found the family and they're happily singing dumb kids' songs, not traumatized in any way. Unless they got Kim on board, which I don't think would happen. 

 

I think he's going to bring the family back, thus earning Nacho's gratitude for being able to spring him before the cops caught onto the activities he IS guilty of. And this is how he's going to start developing his new client base. He'd also get a whole lot of media attention for being the ones who found the embezzling treasurer who tried to fake his own death, putting Jimmy one up on both the cops and on his brother's current/former law partners. His "I told you so" will be spectacular, much better than a pineapple-heavy Edible Arrangement.

[WriterWriter]

Doesn't need to be any fancy explanation for the Kettleman's flight. Could merely say they fled for a time because scared by a caller who sounded like a psycho taxpayer. Maybe they wrecked their house for added effect, maybe they didn't. Maybe someone else wrecked their house. Would build plot.

[Nashville]

Doesn't need to be any fancy explanation for the Kettleman's flight. Could merely say they fled for a time because scared by a caller who sounded like a psycho taxpayer.

Exactly. This wasn't a well-planned exit strategy; this was two parents getting their kids out of the way of potential harm. Under normal circumstances, I'm sure their initial reaction would be to call the police and/or check into a hotel in town; unfortunately, Ma and Pa Kettle are also laboring under the added constraint of being guilty as hell.

Maybe they wrecked their house for added effect, maybe they didn't. Maybe someone else wrecked their house. Would build plot.

In truth, this was my first thought when the Kettles disappeared; who BESIDES Nacho might've had the same idea, and got to the family first? Or - showed up first to take the family, found them gone, and tore the place apart looking for the cash?

[Dobian]

I loved Mike in this episode.  I always love Mike, with his no-nonsense demeanor and that side eye roll when he's being annoyed by Saul's BS.  This show is living up to the promise so far, lots of quirky characters and dialogue like you would expect from Gilligan.  If it consistently pulls in over 2.5 million viewers then expect a nice long run.

[editorgrrl]

In the "Insider" podcast for episode 5, they said Chuck is wearing a wedding ring in this episode's flashback scene.

[ByTor]

I really think they need to have Chuck written out fairly soon,  in a way that drives Jimmy to adopt his new identity, and makes the new Saul a bit darker character, of the type that would eventually use the term "rabid dog" when discussing with Waller White how Jesse Pinkman might be handled. Certainly it will be done by the end of season 1; is McKean on the credits for every episode?

Do you mean Saul's transformation would change by the end of season 1 (which would not make me happy, I'm looking forward to the transformation being quite a lengthy process), or you think Chuck will be gone be the end of season 1 (which I wouldn't mind, I don't find myself especially invested in his story)?