S02.E05: Rebecca

[ByTor]

That would be much too much of a fortuitous stroke of luck to be believed though.  I'd rather Mike rescue himself, than have God suddenly step in.

Pun intended??? :)

[Umbelina]

Ha Tor!

Agreed, but maybe because I currently don't view Howard as a "major" character (more like a major minor character, if that makes sense). IMO, to compare to BrBa, delving into his past and his motivations would be the equivalent of delving into Badger & Skinny Pete's pasts (except for the fact that they were low level dealers and junkie friends of Jesse, we really knew nothing about them and didn't need to, but I loved them just the same).

I'm the one complaining about lack of development, thus interest in characters, so I wanted to respond to this, maybe clear something up.

 

I don't NEED them to "delve into them, or their past and motivations."  I don't necessarily even want that.  I want to see whole people, not simply plot points to move Jimmy into becoming Saul.

 

That doesn't mean knowing everything, or even very much about Howard (etc.)  It does mean seeing little glimpses of his life outside of the office, just to make him real, driving to work, hanging up the phone after talking to his mom, whatever!  He exists in a vacuum, yet he does fairly important (plot) things, is on screen quite a bit, and we know nothing about this dude.

 

Personally I think it's that the writers never wrote a whole character there, because he was never supposed to even be around come second season.  As they said, they planned to have Saul on screen by now, found out they were enjoying Jimmy, so to keep Jimmy around longer. 

 

Now that Howard (and others) are still around though?  I wouldn't be surprised if they give the actor some kind of a breakthrough episode, maybe he's gay, who knows, something interesting though. 

 

Look at the way they've developed Nacho, my supposition is that it's because Nacho will still be around when Saul emerges, so they wrote him a story, gave him a really interesting dad, and because they did, Nacho has layers and is more interesting.

 

Anyway, I'm in.  I hope tonight's good!

[Ohwell]

Ha Tor!

I'm the one complaining about lack of development, thus interest in characters, so I wanted to respond to this, maybe clear something up.

 

I don't NEED them to "delve into them, or their past and motivations."  I don't necessarily even want that.  I want to see whole people, not simply plot points to move Jimmy into becoming Saul.

 

That doesn't mean knowing everything, or even very much about Howard (etc.)  It does mean seeing little glimpses of his life outside of the office, just to make him real, driving to work, hanging up the phone after talking to his mom, whatever!  He exists in a vacuum, yet he does fairly important (plot) things, is on screen quite a bit, and we know nothing about this dude.

 

 

If we saw "whole people" for every recurring character on the show, there wouldn't be time for much of a show.  

 

Anywho, you've made your case several times, but I think this horse has been beaten to death.

[Umbelina]

Yes, I responded because the "case" I made was being misstated.  Repeatedly.  Also to add a new point, which you omitted when quoting me, about how this may have happened and may be corrected.

Edited March 22, 2016 by Umbelina

[ByTor]

Umbelina...for what it's worth I understood your point. And, knowing how TPTB operate, I think your guess about Howard having a breakthrough episode may happen. Look at Gus Fring...we knew really nothing about him personally, but then we had the flashback episode which basically explained all we needed to know about his character. Like you, I trust these writers to do a great job.

[Hanahope]

He was brand spanking new to the Bar.  But, yes, he was bringing a juicy client with him.  Their placement of him as a 4th year is not unreasonable

 

 

I didn't think Jimmy was "brand spanking new" attorney.  I had the impression that  he had been doing PD-type work for some time.  Whether it was really 4 years?  I'm not sure.  Certainly it seemed that Chuck had been out of work for at least some time too, his condition didn't happen the day after Jimmy announced he had passed the bar.  Its somewhat hard to gage how much time passes, since the weather in ABQ is usually nice most months of the year.  But I'm not sure that any firm would arbitrarily assigned an attorney to a certain year (first year, second year, etc.) just because he brought in a client.  I always assumed that whatever year the associate was mentioned to be, that was actually how many years he had been practicing.  So if they said Jimmy was a 4th year, I assumed Jimmy actually had been scraping a living together for four years. 

 

So, I was a bit surprised to hear that both Jimmy and Kim were 4th years.  It certainly seemed like Kim passed the bar before Jimmy.  Since I believe we were told it took Jimmy a few tries, I assume that both Kim and Jimmy took the bar exam in July (which may have been Jimmy's second or third try), she passed, he did not.  Jimmy then retook the exam again in February.  Since Kim had been 'groomed' by the firm, they were paying her law school tuition, she probably had been working as a clerk or paralegal since she got out of lawschool (May/June) until she got the results (November), and then as an associate.  Jimmy, however, always worked the mailroom.  So even when he did pass the bar (getting results around May/June), Kim had more working legal experience than he had, but both could still be called "first years" until the following January, when they would be considered "second years."

 

Oh, to add, I've worked in several 'mid sized' and small firms, and while some individual lawyers have certain formats they like, I don't think I've ever heard or seen someone or a firm be so nit-picky and micro-managing on brief styles.  Jimmy had more patience for Miss Annoying Detail" than I sure would have.  Maybe that's a good thing I don't work in a 'biglaw firm.' 

 

I'm also surprised that there are "big law" type firms in New Mexico.  None of the cities there are very large, not at all like NY, LA, Chicago, Philly, Wash DC. I guess though any larger firm in a small pond like ABQ or Santa Fe, likes to lord it over others and act like they own the place.

 

Yes, Kim brought in new business and she wasn't immediately put on it or taken off of doc review.  But what message would it have sent if she was?  That all past transgressions are forgiven if you bring in business?  You can do whatever you like as long as you're bringing in money?  I

 

Honestly, I always had the impression that rainmakers in lawfirms, especially those that brought in the big fish, could really do whatever the hell they wanted.  That's why they are so sought after, because they bring in the clients that make the firm money.  Its the rest of schmucks that don't have that gift, or contacts, that have to watch their toes.  That's why even though Harry still sent Kim back to the doc review dungeon basement, he can't keep her there long.  She'll leave and take her new client with her.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Hanahope

[RCharter]

 

Oh, to add, I've worked in several 'mid sized' and small firms, and while some individual lawyers have certain formats they like, I don't think I've ever heard or seen someone or a firm be so nit-picky and micro-managing on brief styles.  Jimmy had more patience for Miss Annoying Detail" than I sure would have.  Maybe that's a good thing I don't work in a 'biglaw firm.' 

 

 

Honestly, I always had the impression that rainmakers in lawfirms, especially those that brought in the big fish, could really do whatever the hell they wanted.  That's why they are so sought after, because they bring in the clients that make the firm money.  Its the rest of schmucks that don't have that gift, or contacts, that have to watch their toes.  That's why even though Harry still sent Kim back to the doc review dungeon basement, he can't keep her there long.  She'll leave and take her new client with her.

No one in a law firm can do whatever the hell they want.  You can, and will get disbarred for certain behavior no matter who you are.  The business you bring to a firm is worth nothing if the firm ends up with a bad reputation and little respect in the legal community.  Kim can leave, but at this point I don't know if she could even take her new business with her or what sort of contract the bank has signed with HHM.

 

And I don't even know that bringing in one client, unless its Apple or Samsung is really going to qualify you as a rainmaker.

 

I think a lot of firms have a "firm style,"  even most courts have a particular style when putting out opinions.  I remember getting edits about adding a space after a period, or taking a space out.  And as nitpicky as it sounds when I would go through and make the edits I could see that the document just looked tidier and more uniform.  It's often about making the document simply look clean, neat, tidy and making it readable. Many lawyers/judges/clerks are detail oriented and so their eye is naturally drawn to something that is out of place.  Additionally there is an idea that your argument carries more force if it is professionally presented.  But, I think that is standard in a lot of industries, you may have a sales presentation with great information, but if your power point looks a mess who is going to take you seriously?  And using harsh words is often a no no, so using a lot of "obviously's" would be frowned upon, you should be able to make a persuasive argument that is based on logic/case law and not passion, and words like obviously tend to look more passionate.  not saying that there isn't a place for passion, but I suspect Jimmy was using the word way too much and was quoting case law instead of coming up with his own arguments that were specific to this case.  Because I could see the slippin' Jimmy style of brief writing would mirror the same slippin' Jimmy style of doing everything else....a reliance on charm and force of personality and very little on actual substance.

[shapeshifter]

That's why even though [Howard] still sent Kim back to the doc review dungeon basement, he can't keep her there long.  She'll leave and take her new client with her.

Taking my response to the Bali Ha'i thread

[MaryPatShelby]

Lots of people keep talking about what Mike would "know" because he's an ex-cop, like the length of response times, and the Saltamancas (which I'm sure I've spelled wrong), etc. But, wasn't Mike a cop in Philadelphia? If so, how would that mean that he knows everything about ABQ police and the local drug cartel players?

[SignGuy77]

Lots of people keep talking about what Mike would "know" because he's an ex-cop, like the length of response times, and the Saltamancas (which I'm sure I've spelled wrong), etc. But, wasn't Mike a cop in Philadelphia? If so, how would that mean that he knows everything about ABQ police and the local drug cartel players?

If anything, Mike knows how to learn the stuff he doesn't know through patient observation. Very rarely is he not a step ahead of the competition by simply gathering facts ahead of time.

[PeterPirate]

I'm on my first re-watch of the series since it ended.  This is the best episode so far.  

I'm not sure what is the purpose of the opening flashback sequence.  We don't see Rebecca again in this episode. I suppose it sets things up for Chuck's discussion with Kim later in the episode.  I still think he told her the stone cold truth as he knew it.  Whether he intended to undercut Jimmy, or just give frank advice to Kim, I think his words would have been the same.  

Kim shows her work ethic, lands a big client, and is still kept in the Cornfield.  

And that vile Hector Salamanca shows up at the end.