S02.E10: Klick

[Clanstarling]

Yeah it has to have started post-Rebecca because in the flashback teaser we saw with Rebecca meeting Jimmy for the first time, Chuck was having no problems and there were lights and other electrical appliances turned on.

And yet, with all those lights, the house was still oddly dark.

 

 

I think people are more likely to defend Jimmy as opposed to Chuck not because Jimmy's more "likable" (though that's admittedly a big reason), but because Chuck is such an odious hypocrite.

Indeed.

[Clanstarling]

Yeah it has to have started post-Rebecca because in the flashback teaser we saw with Rebecca meeting Jimmy for the first time, Chuck was having no problems and there were lights and other electrical appliances turned on.

And yet, with all those lights, the house was still oddly dark.

 

 

I think people are more likely to defend Jimmy as opposed to Chuck not because Jimmy's more "likable" (though that's admittedly a big reason), but because Chuck is such an odious hypocrite.

Indeed.

[shapeshifter]

Yes, except isn't there some lawyerly/philosophical thing about: The absence of evidence is not evidence of [whatever they're investigating] not existing?

If I'm understanding you correctly, that would only apply if the tape itself is missing. But what if the tape exists, but it's been altered to appear as though Jimmy was never in the copy shop that night? I'm no expert in digital forensics, but I think it's possible surveillance video can be edited and the timestamps can be altered too. It doesn't seem as though the clerk would make the tape itself disappear, as that would draw suspicion to himself.

Perhaps I'm overthinking it, but it seemed to me the show made a deliberate point of showing Jimmy paying the clerk to delete his videotaped appearance in the copy shop.

Sorry, I wasn't clear because in an earlier post replying to someone else I suggest/imply/hint/assume that Jimmy might either sneak out the tape from Chuck's house (assuming Chuck doesn't immediately have opportunity to view it and have it forensically analyzed because Jimmy creates a diversion, or else Jimmy gets to the tape at the copy store before Chuck gets the tape--admittedly a lot of assuming of the writers' intent) and then copies Purple Rain or Let it Be or something over it (hopefully using untraceable equipment, or, perhaps better yet using equipment at the same copy store) and puts it back.

What can I say? I have a devious mind with ideas that I don't implement. Heh.

Edited April 26, 2016 by shapeshifter

[Pike Ludwell]

Nice little cliffhanger there. I suspect it will be resolved very quickly next season and not have a major impact.

That said, why the recent downgrade of this site? This new interface is uglier, less intuitive and slower and clunkier than the old site. The old site was amazingly good. Why "fix" (ruin) what wasn't broken?

[glowlights]

I'm many days late (and many dollars short!) to this discussion, but I just finished all of Season 2 and imo the print shop's security tape will have been recorded over by the time Chuck brings charges and gets a subpoena for it. Many of those security tapes are recorded over, day after day. So footage doesn't survive very long unless there is a reason to salvage it immediately, such as cops responding to a burglary. I think Jimmy might get lucky or he already knows this and will ask the clerk to make sure it's recorded over.

And I agree that he can easily say he was simply agreeing with Chuck's allegations because he was trying to placate a crazy person who runs around in a tin foil suit. Jimmy will have the doctor's testimony that he was acutally very sympathetic to his brother and doing everything he could think of at the hospital to humor Chuck (such as demanding the lights be turned off) and avoid Chuck getting committed. If Jamie wanted Chuck out of the way the easist thing would have been to have Chuck commited. Right now it all looks like Jimmy is a loving, supportive, sane brother who would never hurt Chuck. And Chuck looks like a bing-bong lunatic.

Does anyone remember the infamous episode of Intervention in which a young aspiring actress claimed to have Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome but was able to run at top speed and jump on top of cars with a "dislocated" hip? She also claims to have what Chuck has - EMF sensitivity. And like Chuck, she is selectively able to cope with electicity when it suits her. I'm dying to know what precipitated Chuck's descent into tin foil madness.

p.s. sorry for the wall of text - I love this show!

[RCharter]

7 hours ago, glowlights said:

I'm many days late (and many dollars short!) to this discussion, but I just finished all of Season 2 and imo the print shop's security tape will have been recorded over by the time Chuck brings charges and gets a subpoena for it. Many of those security tapes are recorded over, day after day. So footage doesn't survive very long unless there is a reason to salvage it immediately, such as cops responding to a burglary. I think Jimmy might get lucky or he already knows this and will ask the clerk to make sure it's recorded over.

And I agree that he can easily say he was simply agreeing with Chuck's allegations because he was trying to placate a crazy person who runs around in a tin foil suit. Jimmy will have the doctor's testimony that he was acutally very sympathetic to his brother and doing everything he could think of at the hospital to humor Chuck (such as demanding the lights be turned off) and avoid Chuck getting committed. If Jamie wanted Chuck out of the way the easist thing would have been to have Chuck commited. Right now it all looks like Jimmy is a loving, supportive, sane brother who would never hurt Chuck. And Chuck looks like a bing-bong lunatic.

Does anyone remember the infamous episode of Intervention in which a young aspiring actress claimed to have Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome but was able to run at top speed and jump on top of cars with a "dislocated" hip? She also claims to have what Chuck has - EMF sensitivity. And like Chuck, she is selectively able to cope with electicity when it suits her. I'm dying to know what precipitated Chuck's descent into tin foil madness.

p.s. sorry for the wall of text - I love this show!

Wait, what episode of Intervention was that.....that sounds interesting!

[editorgrrl]

8 hours ago, glowlights said:

Does anyone remember the infamous episode of Intervention in which a young aspiring actress claimed to have Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome but was able to run at top speed and jump on top of cars with a "dislocated" hip? She also claims to have what Chuck has—EMF sensitivity. And like Chuck, she is selectively able to cope with electicity when it suits her. I'm dying to know what precipitated Chuck's descent into tin foil madness.

 

56 minutes ago, RCharter said:

Wait, what episode of Intervention was that.....that sounds interesting!

Linda: http://intervention-directory.com/2011/10/episode-100-linda/

http://www.aetv.com/shows/intervention/season-7/episode-2

[RCharter]

^^Thank you.  That clip was wild, it was just a long series of beeps followed by people running.  How did I not know about this...I love Intervention!

[Quilt Fairy]

On ‎6‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 11:59 AM, glowlights said:

I'm many days late (and many dollars short!) to this discussion, but I just finished all of Season 2 and imo the print shop's security tape will have been recorded over by the time Chuck brings charges and gets a subpoena for it. Many of those security tapes are recorded over, day after day. So footage doesn't survive very long unless there is a reason to salvage it immediately, such as cops responding to a burglary. I think Jimmy might get lucky or he already knows this and will ask the clerk to make sure it's recorded over.

And I agree that he can easily say he was simply agreeing with Chuck's allegations because he was trying to placate a crazy person who runs around in a tin foil suit. Jimmy will have the doctor's testimony that he was acutally very sympathetic to his brother and doing everything he could think of at the hospital to humor Chuck (such as demanding the lights be turned off) and avoid Chuck getting committed. If Jamie wanted Chuck out of the way the easist thing would have been to have Chuck commited. Right now it all looks like Jimmy is a loving, supportive, sane brother who would never hurt Chuck. And Chuck looks like a bing-bong lunatic.

And yet, at some point there has to be a pivotal event that turns Jimmy McGill into Saul Goodman, and I think this could be it.

[glowlights]

On 6/24/2016 at 11:21 PM, Quilt Fairy said:

And yet, at some point there has to be a pivotal event that turns Jimmy McGill into Saul Goodman, and I think this could be it.

I'm not sure what counts as spoilers here, since there is some cross-over from BB, but I could swear that either in an ep of BB or in a Bob Odenkirk interview it was said that Jimmy changed his name to Saul because

Spoiler

the "home boys" his slimy strip mall practice catered to preferred to have a Jewish lawyer.

That wouldn't really fit with Jimmy changing his name to get around charges of misconduct pertaining to falsifying those documents at the copy store.

Spoiler

Also, "Saul Goodman" is practicing in plain sight in Albuquerque, with loud t.v. ads to boot. He's also representing clients in the same jail and at the same court house where he used to be a public defender. Everyone involved could see it's Jimmy McGill.

Personally, I think the name change is tied to what Jimmy told Mike at the end of Season 1, when he said he wasn't being held back any longer (I forget the exact line), as well as the first ep of Season 1 when Nacho told Jimmy he's "in the game".  We're seeing Jimmy's long slide into "fuck it" territory, as well as being "in the game". The way Saul Goodman operated throughout BB is the logical conclusion of what Jimmy said to Mike at the end of Season 1. 

Edited June 27, 2016 by glowlights
gah! to spoil or not to spoil

[Ohwell]

3 hours ago, glowlights said:

I'm not sure what counts as spoilers here, since there is some cross-over from BB, but I could swear that either in an ep of BB or in a Bob Odenkirk interview it was said that Jimmy changed his name to Saul because

  Reveal hidden contents

That's what I remember as well.

[Quilt Fairy]

At the time he said that, I doubt that the character of Saul Goodman had much of a backstory. He was supposed to be the comic relief and that was a throw-away line to get a laugh.

In this show Vince Gilligan is creating - and re-creating - Saul Goodman from the ground up.

[ghoulina]

10 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

At the time he said that, I doubt that the character of Saul Goodman had much of a backstory. He was supposed to be the comic relief and that was a throw-away line to get a laugh.

I also think he could have said that just to keep things light and fun. It's not like you want to get into some rambling speech about how bad things went with your brother. I think there might be a bit of both to the reason behind his name change.

[qtpye]

2 hours ago, ghoulina said:

12 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

At the time he said that, I doubt that the character of Saul Goodman had much of a backstory. He was supposed to be the comic relief and that was a throw-away line to get a laugh.

I also think he could have said that just to keep things light and fun. It's not like you want to get into some rambling speech about how bad things went with your brother. I think there might be a bit of both to the reason behind his name change.

Knowing Saul, he probably just wanted to help Walter White trust him by telling him they were both Irish.  He might have just been trying to establish a connection with his client.

[glowlights]

I've tried three four times to reply with quotes and the site keeps freezing and booting me out, and now I'm grumpy.

I've seen no evidence of any of these characters being "recreated". It's a prequel. By definition it needs to jibe with the original, and I think they've done a great job so far. It's an expansion on the original themes, not a do-over.

There will eventually be a nail in the coffin for James McGill, Esquire that causes Jimmy to give up and embrace his old alter ego of Saul Goodman, but my money is on Kim. The relationship with Chuck is duty-bound and has always been a shit show (and Chuck is easily neutralized thanks to his psych problems - for that matter, there is security tape evidence of Chuck acting like a loon and scaring customers), but imo Kim has Jimmy's heart.

Seriously, if you were changing your name to avoid being associated with past troubles, would you really continue to practice in the same city, at the same court house, and splash yourself all over local tv, while openly telling new clients  your real name? That's why I believe it's more like a dba and he's comfortable playing that old alter ego - it certainly fits with the style of law he practices!

Out of idle curiosity: are lawyers allowed to use a dba or do they have to do a full legal name change?

This is all disjointed but fuck it, I'm hitting "submit" before the site freezes again...

[RCharter]

On 6/29/2016 at 11:00 AM, glowlights said:

I've tried three four times to reply with quotes and the site keeps freezing and booting me out, and now I'm grumpy.

I've seen no evidence of any of these characters being "recreated". It's a prequel. By definition it needs to jibe with the original, and I think they've done a great job so far. It's an expansion on the original themes, not a do-over.

There will eventually be a nail in the coffin for James McGill, Esquire that causes Jimmy to give up and embrace his old alter ego of Saul Goodman, but my money is on Kim. The relationship with Chuck is duty-bound and has always been a shit show (and Chuck is easily neutralized thanks to his psych problems - for that matter, there is security tape evidence of Chuck acting like a loon and scaring customers), but imo Kim has Jimmy's heart.

Seriously, if you were changing your name to avoid being associated with past troubles, would you really continue to practice in the same city, at the same court house, and splash yourself all over local tv, while openly telling new clients  your real name? That's why I believe it's more like a dba and he's comfortable playing that old alter ego - it certainly fits with the style of law he practices!

Out of idle curiosity: are lawyers allowed to use a dba or do they have to do a full legal name change?

This is all disjointed but fuck it, I'm hitting "submit" before the site freezes again...

I don't believe attorneys are -- I feel like its an ethics rule -- but I could be wrong.

[Jextella]

On 6/30/2016 at 2:32 PM, RCharter said:

I don't believe attorneys are -- I feel like its an ethics rule -- but I could be wrong.

I'd also guess that independent contractors (including sole practitioner attorneys) in general can't use DBA names...only businesses can.   

[Bryce Lynch]

On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Quilt Fairy said:

At the time he said that, I doubt that the character of Saul Goodman had much of a backstory. He was supposed to be the comic relief and that was a throw-away line to get a laugh.

In this show Vince Gilligan is creating - and re-creating - Saul Goodman from the ground up.

I agree.  Plus, Saul was probably honestly telling Walt part of the reason he chose a Jewish sounding name to practice under.  

My theory is Chuck will end up making a deal with Jimmy that he won't press charges or take him before the ethics board if he agrees not to practice under the family name.  That has always been a goal of Chuck's since the pilot, when he tried to get him to rename his practice Vanguard or Gibraltar.

Plus, Chuck pressing charges against Jimmy would embarrass him professionally embarrass HHM and Davis and Main and perhaps jeopardize the Sandpiper case.  

Also, Chuck would not want his "condition"and his bizarre behavior that results from it to become more widely known.

I think Jimmy would feel liberated without carrying the burden of the McGill name and having to worry about Chuck's reputation.  It would be a win-win for everyone.

[ByTor]

On 1/5/2017 at 6:48 AM, Bryce Lynch said:

My theory is Chuck will end up making a deal with Jimmy that he won't press charges or take him before the ethics board if he agrees not to practice under the family name.  That has always been a goal of Chuck's since the pilot, when he tried to get him to rename his practice Vanguard or Gibraltar.

Plus, Chuck pressing charges against Jimmy would embarrass him professionally embarrass HHM and Davis and Main and perhaps jeopardize the Sandpiper case.  

Also, Chuck would not want his "condition"and his bizarre behavior that results from it to become more widely known.

I think Jimmy would feel liberated without carrying the burden of the McGill name and having to worry about Chuck's reputation.  It would be a win-win for everyone.

I like it!

[JudyObscure]

Forgive me for being about a year late with this, but I just got the season as a DVD for Christmas.  I love this original, unpredictable, beautifully written show!

I also love every character, including the deliciously evil bad-guys and the one so many of you hate -- Chuck.

Chuck:  I feel your frustration, Chuck.  It must have been so hard for him growing up to be the kid coming home with straight "A's" only to have the parents go nuts with praise over Jimmy's "improvement."  How awful for him to know that his mother liked Jimmy best even though he had ruined their father's business.  Finally, all Chuck's hard work ever won for him was the respect of his co-workers as a near perfect lawyer with an exemplary attention to detail and Jimmy had to ruin even that.  The two have this jacked-up sibling rivalry from hell and it's extended into their adult life and is so. much. fun. to watch. 

Mike:  One of the most fascinating characters ever and played by an amazing actor.  I love how the writers have slowly drawn us in to seeing why a man might become a hit-man, while still having morals and a basic decency.  All his story with the cartel have been hair raising.  I've never been so terrified of a cheerfully painted  truck.

Kim:  Finally, a strong female lead who shows her strength through her own self-respect and steadfast moral compass -- rather than some version of acting like a stereotypical tough man.  I feel all her frustration, too.  I worked in a business with even more prissy rules than the law (banking) and I know how horrified I would have been if some one tried to "help," me by breaking those rules.  I see her unconditional love for Jimmy, but also her uncompromising standards.  Interesting dilemma, great love story.

Jimmy:  His love for Kim -- and sometimes for Chuck -- is wonderful to watch, even if his actions aren't always as pure as his motivations.  No matter what he does I'm firmly on his side, so I must be like his mother -- loving him best because he always makes me laugh.

[ByTor]

I'm with you about Chuck, @JudyObscure.  I'm not sure if it's the character or the fact that he's played by Michael McKean that does it for me, but the character just works, IMO.

[SlackerInc]

On 1/5/2017 at 5:48 AM, Bryce Lynch said:

I agree.  Plus, Saul was probably honestly telling Walt part of the reason he chose a Jewish sounding name to practice under.  

My theory is Chuck will end up making a deal with Jimmy that he won't press charges or take him before the ethics board if he agrees not to practice under the family name.  That has always been a goal of Chuck's since the pilot, when he tried to get him to rename his practice Vanguard or Gibraltar.

Plus, Chuck pressing charges against Jimmy would embarrass him professionally embarrass HHM and Davis and Main and perhaps jeopardize the Sandpiper case.  

Also, Chuck would not want his "condition"and his bizarre behavior that results from it to become more widely known.

I think Jimmy would feel liberated without carrying the burden of the McGill name and having to worry about Chuck's reputation.  It would be a win-win for everyone.

This is smart!  Really, almost any other outcome would defy plausibility, as any big court case that splashes around the facts as we know them would be very damaging to HHM.

I didn't find this finale as satisfying as the episodes leading up to it, or the season as a whole, but that's only because they set such a high bar.  Last season was a 4 out of 5 star type deal for me: a clear step down from Breaking Bad, but worthwhile viewing.  This season attained 5 out of 5 star status, and many episodes were better than the median BB episode, I thought.

[Dev F]

It doesn't look like there's a "season 2"  thread or an "all episodes" thread, so I guess this is the best place to post this . . .

I recently rewatched all of season 2 on Blu-ray with the cast/crew commentaries, and it was great to both revisit the show and hear the creators' thoughts about it. Some points I found particularly interesting:

1. The season holds up really well; I think I actually liked it better on rewatch, in fact. As others have mentioned, one of the real high points is Rhea Seehorn as Kim. This was a true breakout season for her -- which is especially impressive given that season 1 sort of lost track of her at the very end. Kudos to the writers for realizing their error and promptly initiating a course correction, basically rewriting the final scenes of the first season at the beginning of the second to reflect the role Kim needs to play in Jimmy's slow transformation into Saul.

2. The first time through the season, it wasn't until the last few episode that I really came to an understand of what was going on with Jimmy's character -- how the season figured him as a pendulum swinging back and forth, a switch that you flip off and back on, to reflect the way in which he's always pinging between decency and sleaziness. It's interesting on rewatch to realize how much that's reflected throughout the entire season. For instance, I of course remembered the scene in the first episode where "Gene" is locked in the trash room of the mall where he works and writes "S.G. was here" on the wall. But what I'd forgotten is that Gene is trapped between two doors -- the inner door that locks shut behind him, and the outer door that he refuses to open because it'll set off an alarm and notify the authorities. It seems like, figuratively speaking, that is where and how Saul Goodman ends up trapped -- he'll carelessly stumble too far in one direction and get into trouble, but also recoil from going too far in that direction for fear of getting in over his head.

3. One of the main reasons I liked the season better or rewatch is that this idea does a better job than I realized of tying together Jimmy's storyline and Mike's storyline, which on first viewing seemed a little disjointed. But now I realize that Mike gets trapped in the same way Jimmy does -- by trying to find that middle way, contriving how to take Tuco out of the picture without going too far and killing him. The only problem with this is that it doesn't seem to quite jibe with what Mike told us in Breaking Bad, when he warned Walt not to resort to half measures and shared a story from his days on the police force that suggested he'd already learned that lesson prior to this point. I feel like the only way I can make sense of it is to assume that Mike wasn't being completely honest with Walt -- that he didn't want to tell him "You shouldn't resort to half measures with the cartel, because I did the exact same thing with them a few years ago and they completely fucked me" -- so he pretended that an earlier experience in his cop career had been the revelatory moment for him.

4. The most interesting moment in the commentaries was when they talked with the writer of the season premiere about why he decided that the real name of Pryce, Mike's nerdy drug-dealing employer, would be "Daniel Wormald." The writer said that he chose "Wormald" after a relative, but that "Daniel" had to do with some unspecified future plans for the character. So I looked around the Interwebs and discovered that I'd missed the connection that other viewers apparently realized -- Pryce is Danny, the man Saul mentioned in Breaking Bad as the essential "guy who had a vision" to keep his Laser Tag franchise afloat with dirty money from Walt's meth enterprise. And as subtle confirmation, the actor who plays Pryce even refers to his character as "Danny" in a later commentary track.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Dev F

[ByTor]

13 hours ago, Dev F said:

3. One of the main reasons I liked the season better or rewatch is that this idea does a better job than I realized of tying together Jimmy's storyline and Mike's storyline, which on first viewing seemed a little disjointed. But now I realize that Mike gets trapped in the same way Jimmy does -- by trying to find that middle way, contriving how to take Tuco out of the picture without going too far and killing him. The only problem with this is that it doesn't seem to quite jibe with what Mike told us in Breaking Bad, when he warned Walt not to resort to half measures and shared a story from his days on the police force that suggested he'd already learned that lesson prior to this point. I feel like the only way I can make sense of it is to assume that Mike wasn't being completely honest with Walt -- that he didn't want to tell him "You shouldn't resort to half measures with the cartel, because I did the exact same thing with them a few years ago and they completely fucked me" -- so he pretended that an earlier experience in his cop career had been the revelatory moment for him.

I agree with you here that the half-measures story he tells Walt now seems to be invalid.  The way I make sense out of it (which may or may not make sense LOL) is that Mike genuinely did think he was doing the smart thing in how he dealt with Tuco.

[SlackerInc]

@DEV F, what a great post!  Very incisive analysis there.  

1. I agree with you about Rhea Seehorn, and think she has really been criminally overlooked in terms of award nominations.
2. Who knows if the writers were consciously thinking of the two doors metaphor, but it's brilliant in any case.

3. I think your take makes sense.  I would add that the robbery of the ice cream truck is another "half measure" that went bad, at least from a utilitarian moral framework.  Had he shot and killed the driver, only the driver and not (presumably) the Good Samaritan would be dead.  By tying up the driver, the end result was for both the driver and the Good Samaritan to die.

4. Huh, interesting.

6 hours ago, ByTor said:

I agree with you here that the half-measures story he tells Walt now seems to be invalid.  The way I make sense out of it (which may or may not make sense LOL) is that Mike genuinely did think he was doing the smart thing in how he dealt with Tuco.

I just can't see that being possible, not after the Cousins threatened his granddaughter, the Good Samaritan got killed, he had to go and lie to the D.A., etc.  You can see on his face that these developments have been far from positive for him.

ETA: I just listened to the podcast for the S2 finale, and the director expressed the hope that the audience was surprised when Chuck pulled out the tape recorder.  Really?  After he went and fished around in his garage with all the electronic equipment in it, and then led his brother into confessing?  Hard for me to believe very many people would have been surprised there.

Edited January 18, 2017 by SlackerInc

[Dev F]

3 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

I just can't see that being possible, not after the Cousins threatened his granddaughter, the Good Samaritan got killed, he had to go and lie to the D.A., etc.  You can see on his face that these developments have been far from positive for him.

Yep, I tried really hard to work out another way to make sense of it, but the details are just so close to what Walt did that it's hard for me to imagine that Mike thinks his plan was substantially different. In both cases, an unstable criminal is marked for death, and Walt/Mike arranges to have him arrested to spare him from being killed, because he's trying to do the "right thing." In fact, when Mike refuses to help Walt with his plan, Walt expresses his disbelief by saying, "Saul said you've done things like this before." He's basically mentioning the Tuco plan specifically, so it doesn't make sense that Mike would fail to make the connection. Especially since it's so much more of a straightforward argument: "Yeah, I did something exactly like this before, and in response the cartel almost murdered my family."

Now, I suppose it's still possible that when Mike came up with the plan in the first place, he didn't think he was resorting to half measures. It's certainly conceivable that Mike believed that you shouldn't just threaten to kill a terrifying abuser in the hopes that he'll stop beating his wife, but that framing an unstable drug dealer for assault rather than murdering him just might work out. Unlike the Tuco and Jesse situations, they're not totally parallel situations. And the episode in which Mike puts his Tuco plan into action is called "Gloves Off," which suggests someone embracing extreme measures for the first time, not shying away from them.

But then in retrospect, when the Tuco situation went sideways and his family was in jeopardy, Mike would've realized that he'd made the same terrible mistake over again. And perhaps the horror of the abuser's case came rushing back as a vision of what could happen to Kaylee and Stacey ("so much blood, you could taste the metal . . ."), so that by the time Walt proposed the same dumb idea, the two scenarios had become connected in his mind in a way they hadn't been initially.

So I can sort of make sense of it, but it requires a lot of heavy lifting on my part to put the pieces together; I basically have to assume a lot of things that haven't even been hinted at on screen. I hope that eventually the writers make the connections clearer, maybe by giving us a flashback to the abuser's case or drawing some explicit parallels between it and the current situation.

Edited January 18, 2017 by Dev F

[ByTor]

9 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

I just can't see that being possible, not after the Cousins threatened his granddaughter, the Good Samaritan got killed, he had to go and lie to the D.A., etc.  You can see on his face that these developments have been far from positive for him.

5 hours ago, Dev F said:

Now, I suppose it's still possible that when Mike came up with the plan in the first place, he didn't think he was resorting to half measures. It's certainly conceivable that Mike believed that you shouldn't just threaten to kill a terrifying abuser in the hopes that he'll stop beating his wife, but that framing an unstable drug dealer for assault rather than murdering him just might work out. Unlike the Tuco and Jesse situations, they're not totally parallel situations. And the episode in which Mike puts his Tuco plan into action is called "Gloves Off," which suggests someone embracing extreme measures for the first time, not shying away from them.

That's exactly what I meant.  I may have forgotten, but didn't the threatening happen after Mike framed Tuco?

9 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

ETA: I just listened to the podcast for the S2 finale, and the director expressed the hope that the audience was surprised when Chuck pulled out the tape recorder.  Really?  After he went and fished around in his garage with all the electronic equipment in it, and then led his brother into confessing?  Hard for me to believe very many people would have been surprised there.

I was.

[qtpye]

On 1/17/2017 at 1:00 AM, Dev F said:

The season holds up really well; I think I actually liked it better on rewatch, in fact. As others have mentioned, one of the real high points is Rhea Seehorn as Kim. This was a true breakout season for her -- which is especially impressive given that season 1 sort of lost track of her at the very end. Kudos to the writers for realizing their error and promptly initiating a course correction, basically rewriting the final scenes of the first season at the beginning of the second to reflect the role Kim needs to play in Jimmy's slow transformation into Saul.

2. The first time through the season, it wasn't until the last few episode that I really came to an understand of what was going on with Jimmy's character -- how the season figured him as a pendulum swinging back and forth, a switch that you flip off and back on, to reflect the way in which he's always pinging between decency and sleaziness. It's interesting on rewatch to realize how much that's reflected throughout the entire season. For instance, I of course remembered the scene in the first episode where "Gene" is locked in the trash room of the mall where he works and writes "S.G. was here" on the wall. But what I'd forgotten is that Gene is trapped between two doors -- the inner door that locks shut behind him, and the outer door that he refuses to open because it'll set off an alarm and notify the authorities. It seems like, figuratively speaking, that is where and how Saul Goodman ends up trapped -- he'll carelessly stumble too far in one direction and get into trouble, but also recoil from going too far in that direction for fear of getting in over his head.

You have blown my mind.  The analogy of Gene being trapped between two worlds is brilliant and never even occurred to me, even though I loved that scene.  I thought it perfectly show cased how sad and alone the character was at that point of this life.

If Walt can be defined by two phases-Walt White/ Heisenberg then Jimmy can be defines as follows:

 Slippin Jimmy, Jimmy McGill, Saul Goodman, and finally Gene.

All four of these identities represent distinct phases in the character's life.

I also agree with the Kim love.  I was so afraid in the first season that they were going to turn her into Skylar 2.0.  Now, I am just as fascinated with her arc as I am with Saul's.  I am so happy that Gilligan can write solid female characters.

[SlackerInc]

I'm not sure it's Gilligan writing them.  He's obviously a genius as showrunner, but he comes across in the podcast as a little retrograde when it comes to his attitudes about women.  But a lot of the episodes are written by women, although of course there's lots of input in the writer's room and I'm sure ultimately Gilligan signs off on all scripts.

On 1/17/2017 at 11:56 PM, Dev F said:

In fact, when Mike refuses to help Walt with his plan, Walt expresses his disbelief by saying, "Saul said you've done things like this before."

He said that, in the episode "Half Measures"?  Wow.  I should go back and watch that again.  It's really a pivotal episode for the entire series anyway.

[ByTor]

15 hours ago, qtpye said:

 Slippin Jimmy, Jimmy McGill, Saul Goodman, and finally Gene.

Do you think, though, that Saul Goodman is just Slippin' Jimmy with a different name?  Or are you thinking more in line with Saul being involved in more serious crimes than Slippin' Jimmy?

[qtpye]

1 hour ago, ByTor said:

Do you think, though, that Saul Goodman is just Slippin' Jimmy with a different name?  Or are you thinking more in line with Saul being involved in more serious crimes than Slippin' Jimmy?

This is how I see it:

Slippin Jimmy- Conman

Jimmy McGill- Former conman who through hard work got out of the mail room, got through law school, and passed the bar.  Practicing attorney who is trying to do the right things, though it sometimes goes against his nature and judgment.

Saul Goodman-Conman lawyer or as Jessie would put it "Criminal Lawyer".  He has no fucks to give and can finally practice law the way he wants.  This is the character at his zenith.  Of course, his personal life might be in shambles, because you do not roll around in the dirt and not get filthy, but this tacky and clever persona is who he really is.

Gene- We, of course, know the least about Gene.  From what we have seen leading the life of a "Criminal Lawyer" will end in one of two ways-death or having to go into hiding.  Gene is a sad shell of a man, who seem to spend his evenings watching tapes of his former glory as Saul Goodman.  However, as I said, we have no idea what the future holds for him.  Right now he is living in fear, under a fake identity that he probably hates, far away from anyone and anything he has ever cared about.

[ByTor]

Very good assessment @qtpye!  UGH I just want the new season to start already!!!

[Dev F]

9 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

He said that, in the episode "Half Measures"?  Wow.  I should go back and watch that again.  It's really a pivotal episode for the entire series anyway.

He does indeed. There are a lot of examples of that, passing references in Breaking Bad that turn into major plot points in Better Call Saul, so it's clear that somebody went through the original series pretty closely looking for references to the characters' earlier life.

So it's interesting that they don't have things like the wife-beater story stitched up a little more carefully. I can only assume that they used the Breaking Bad references more as something to build off than as strict guidelines to which they felt obligated to conform.

(In the same vein, I've mentioned before that I strongly suspect the character of Chuck originated as the "stepdad" Jimmy mentions in one episode of Breaking Bad as having slept with his second wife, but then the writers decided that an older brother figure would have more resonance than a stepfather.)

Edited January 19, 2017 by Dev F

[SlackerInc]

Speaking of which, where are these wives coming into play?

[Dev F]

2 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

Speaking of which, where are these wives coming into play?

We know Jimmy has been married at least once already, as the reason he crapped in that guy's sunroof back in Chicago was because he slept with his wife, "before she became my ex-wife." But we don't know whether that was wife #1 or wife #2, so it's possible there's another one still upcoming.

A lot of us have speculated that Kim will turn out to be the second wife who sleeps with Jimmy's stepdad, and have wondered if there's a way for the "stepdad" to turn out to be Chuck. It occurs to me just now that one explanation could be Jimmy's name change. Once he becomes "pipe-hitting member of the tribe" Saul Goodman, an old WASP named Chuck McGill can't be his brother. So he might end up identifying Chuck as his stepdad when introducing him to his new clientele. Perhaps, especially if there was some "He's no real brother of mine" resentment involved as well, it just became a habit.

[ghoulina]

I just don't know if I see Kim sleeping with Chuck. Under ANY circumstances. Jimmy and Chuck couldn't be more opposite, and I don't see Chuck doing anything that would woo/charm Kim. She's been pretty disgusted with his behavior at times too, IIRC. I am excited to see how it all plays out, though. 

Does anyone know when season 3 is airing? I seem to remember seasons 1&2 starting in January, but I could be wrong. 

Edited January 20, 2017 by ghoulina

[kieyra]

On 1/19/2017 at 2:25 PM, Dev F said:

He does indeed. There are a lot of examples of that, passing references in Breaking Bad that turn into major plot points in Better Call Saul, so it's clear that somebody went through the original series pretty closely looking for references to the characters' earlier life.

I feel like the podcast mentioned that they had an assistant (or, sorry, some Hollywood term I don't know) go through every single episode of BB to pull out every single scene with Saul or references to Saul in it. I can't remember if they just used transcripts from the scenes, or literally compiled every piece of video, but either way it was definitely done. 

We were nitpicking the podcast a bit in another thread, but if nothing else it makes you realize how very thorough that team is, and how when something slips past them it's not for lack of trying. Down to lengthy reasoning behind the costume choices for each character in each scene. Highly recommend the episode with their costume director. (Again, forgive the imprecise titles.)

[Quilt Fairy]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 1:37 PM, ghoulina said:

Does anyone know when season 3 is airing? I seem to remember seasons 1&2 starting in January, but I could be wrong. 

Monday, April 10th.

[ghoulina]

Thank you!

[peggy06]

On 4/21/2016 at 3:15 AM, Lonesome Rhodes said:

So...why was Mike moved to murder Hector?  He was well satisfied that he settled his account with him.  Then, someone (not necessarily Hector himself) made some excellent business decisions.  The innocent was murdered.  Why is that on Hector?  He wasn't even there!  It was made very clear that Mike has not yet become the force of destruction he was to be.  A very big deal was made of this by G&G and JB fully agreed.  What was Mike's motivation to get back into it with Hector????  Again, accounts were satisfactorily settled.  Mike was jovial.  Jovial!!!!  

I would say it's because Hector threatened his granddaughter. He can never really feel safe about that as long as Hector is around.

[Anela]

This is a good episode, but I don’t know why chuck has to shit all over his brother, all the time.  The man has taken care of him, screwed up his own plan in order to help him, when nobody was doing anything, and he can’t just let it go.  

Edited August 22, 2022 by Anela