S02.E10: Klick

[RCharter]

I'm back.  I will have to give them credit for one thing, I don't think I've ever, and I mean EVER reacted as passionately, though negatively to a season finale of a TV show.  Well, maybe when Irina tried to kill Sydney, but that was only one scene, not the entire episode.  At least I've slept on it.

I'm just going to chime in here Umbelina to give you your due.  I love the passion you have for the show, whether I agree or disagree with your point of view.  I love that people have this passion.  I see it in some other topics (The 100) and I love it there too.  Reading this board is like eating a great meal.  You need the interesting and sensible explanations (like the main dish, or the vegetables) and you need the spicy and heated (like the sauces or the rubs), and every once in a while you need a little something on the plate that disagrees with you...but its new and different (like trying to eat that parsley after a meal!)

[Umbelina]

I just posted a couple of interviews that were very involved and cool to read in the Media thread.  They also answer the question "Who was going to be the cameo?" 

 

hint:  It's not who you think.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Umbelina

[TVFan17]

I'm just going to chime in here Umbelina to give you your due.  I love the passion you have for the show, whether I agree or disagree with your point of view.  I love that people have this passion.  I see it in some other topics (The 100) and I love it there too.  Reading this board is like eating a great meal.  You need the interesting and sensible explanations (like the main dish, or the vegetables) and you need the spicy and heated (like the sauces or the rubs), and every once in a while you need a little something on the plate that disagrees with you...but its new and different (like trying to eat that parsley after a meal!)

 

It's always much more interesting to read all kinds of thoughts and opinions, even if we don't all agree on all things all the time.  Most of the comments are thoughtful and made from people who are actually watching and paying attention to the show, trying to get to know the characters and following along with what's happening.  It's not as if anyone is just randomly posting, "This show is awesome" or "This show sucks" and saying nothing further.  Most people have reasons and logic supporting their opinions, whichever way those opinions sway. 

 

On IMDB I see a lot of comments to make the show either seem much, much, much better than it is, or much, much, much worse than it is.  There's a lot of "If you can't take the slow burn of the storytelling, you're stupid" and "You just want to see violence and bloodshed" insinuations and accusations on that board.   A lot of the conversations veer into insult-fests. 

[Blackie]

I have to say I disapointed with the last two episodes.  I don't think Jimmy would have been so sloppy in the previous episode and I don't think he would have confessed to Chuck, although I do think that is more possible then not covering his ass with the copy guy sooner.  I guess I am used to superior writing for this series and I feel they dropped the ball on these two episodes and also I wasn't thrilled by BO's acting in this episode.

[SoSueMe]

I just want to chime in and toss in my 2 cents in defense of Chris Hardwick. I think he does a heck of a job, he's smart and funny and really is a fan of the after-shows he hosts.  (At least it looks that way to me) I love Jonathan Banks' work too, but he wasn't an easy guest on Talking Saul. Hardwick has to keep things moving and Banks was doing an equivalent of prolonged mugging for the camera, imo. I don't think he's as comfortable in this type of appearance. 

 

As far as after-shows go, I watched part of a Sons of Anarchy after-show once and it was awful compared to the Chris Hardwick - Talking Dead.

[Umbelina]

Interesting.  I saw it a Banks trying to make a comment that wasn't fawning and Hardwick desperately trying to shut it down, to the point of getting physical to do it.

 

I doubt Vince Gilligan would be bothered by a criticism from Jonathon Banks, but that host certainly was.

[ShadowFacts]

 

The thing is, I don't remember him choosing his words all that carefully.  He said he bribed the guy, and he specifically said he changed the address to 1216.  I remember thinking "oh no!  don't Jimmy, don't give him all that detail!"  And when Chuck asked him "do you just realize you confessed to a felony" he said he did.  And he confirmed he didn't just say it to placate Chuck.

 

I definitely have to view it again, but it hit me differently, like Jimmy replied more like, "I guess so, do you feel better now?"  That is  open to interpretation if he actually did say words to that effect. 

 

I think it especially stung, because Chuck did EVERYTHING RIGHT.  Including denying himself food so he could be there by her side.  And even when he told her, with hope in voice, that he was Chuck, she was still asking for Jimmy.  Jimmy, who wasn't as dutiful a son and went out for cold cuts. 

 

And for that, to some degree, I blame the parents.  I realize Jimmy was lovable and Chuck maybe wasn't, but I suspect Chuck lived with that sort of favortism his entire life, and it seems wrong to have two children and to so obviously favor one over the other.

 

So far we don't really know how much favoritism there really was, and how much Chuck perceived it that way.  I realize perception is reality, but we have seen the way Chuck lets his irritations with Jimmy fester.  I really felt for Chuck when he broke down.  Maybe for him, getting his mother's love and approval was akin to how Jimmy wanted Chuck's approval so much.  And now she's gone, but spoke JImmy's name at the end (which could be pure delirium).  That was heartbreaking. 

[DrSpaceman73]

I am actually tired of the Chuck -Jimmy storyline.

Don't like CHuck at all. Jimmy could easily say it was a coerced confession, he stated just to make Chuck feel better, even if he did get a good recording.

For the most part though I am just sick of Chuck and this story. I'd rather see more of Jimmy and his law practice that we know from BB, which has been my complaint about this series from the beginning. The longer they drag this out the stronger I feel about it.

The series is Better Call Saul, not Better Call Jimmy.

I know otherwise disagree. Personal preference. I enjoy the show all right but the stuff with Jimmy and Chuck just seems like such a slow moving tedious plot line........it's boring me.

[RCharter]

I definitely have to view it again, but it hit me differently, like Jimmy replied more like, "I guess so, do you feel better now?"  That is  open to interpretation if he actually did say words to that effect. 

 

So far we don't really know how much favoritism there really was, and how much Chuck perceived it that way.  I realize perception is reality, but we have seen the way Chuck lets his irritations with Jimmy fester.  I really felt for Chuck when he broke down.  Maybe for him, getting his mother's love and approval was akin to how Jimmy wanted Chuck's approval so much.  And now she's gone, but spoke JImmy's name at the end (which could be pure delirium).  That was heartbreaking. 

I remember Jimmy saying that line at the end, but the rest of the statement seemed pretty voluntary and pretty damning.  I remember him specifically mentioning changing the address and I was like "no, no Jimmy!  Just stop!  Leave!"

 

I don't know, I sort of felt like calling out for one son over the other on your deathbed....even though the other son was sitting right there....sort of illustrated the level of favortism that the mother (and probably both parents) had for Jimmy.  I can see your point about how we didn't see their favortism in life.  It just all seems to make sense that way to me.  And it spills over into every relationship Chuck has.  Chuck does everything right, and yet it is Jimmy who is loved.  Chucks knows and follows all rules, yet Jimmy has the friends.  Chuck does everything right, yet Kim, Howard, Rebecca, his parents, and even Ernesto all prefer Jimmy....who is a total fuck up.

 

And Chuck is such a jerk that you can see why people dislike him, like the way he treats Ernesto.  Even when he was calling him into the hospital room, he wasn't even trying to be kind or decent to Ernesto, even though Ernesto was there because he cared (and because of his job).  Instead of treating with even a shade of humanity or kindness, Chuck just harshly questions him.  

 

I am actually tired of the Chuck -Jimmy storyline.

Don't like CHuck at all. Jimmy could easily say it was a coerced confession, he stated just to make Chuck feel better, even if he did get a good recording.

 

But I think this is specifically why Chuck asked (on tape) "are you just saying this to make me feel better?"  And Jimmy said "yeah, of course, but its also the truth" or something along those lines, and then proceeded to give even more detail.  I personally don't see how he could argue coercion, if he saw Chuck in distress and rapid mental decline over something Jimmy absolutely didn't do, wouldn't it make more sense to get another temporary guardianship if he was that concerned?

 

Maybe he can say he was under duress or coerced, but I don't know...it seems like it would be difficult.  

[LoneHaranguer]

 

And when Chuck asked him "do you just realize you confessed to a felony" he said he did.  And he confirmed he didn't just say it to placate Chuck.

The problem here is that if Jimmy really was just placating Chuck, he would have answered exactly the same way. No reasonable person would have expected him to say "you're right, I just made it all up to make you happy". Of course, Chuck is not a reasonable person and probably thinks he's got ironclad proof, when at best he might sell somebody on doing some digging.

[kieyra]

I don't have much original to add here. I listen to the weekly podcasts and it makes me feel like the show-runners are my buddies, which makes me want to see things their way, but their love for McKean is sucking the life from the show. They absolutely, 100% HAVE to get a new antagonist. Like many here, I saw every "twist" coming. Chuck is a miserable bastard, and he makes Jimmy act like a moron. While it's a vaguely interesting dynamic, I'm convinced now it never should have been more than a B-plot. They HAVE to start moving things forward now, towards Gus or whatever.

I really loved the front half of this season, and I am a huge fan of Rhea Seehorn now. But goddamn, I just don't ever want to see Chuck on my screen again, and no that doesn't mean he's a good antagonist.

And while I'm ranting, which I didn't realize I was going to when I started typing, not thrilled with them returning to the very, very, very long takes of nothing much happening. I didn't like it in season one and I was happy when they tightened things up a bit. There's building suspense, and then there's signalling to the viewer that they can go cycle the laundry and won't miss anything.

[RCharter]

The problem here is that if Jimmy really was just placating Chuck, he would have answered exactly the same way. No reasonable person would have expected him to say "you're right, I just made it all up to make you happy". Of course, Chuck is not a reasonable person and probably thinks he's got ironclad proof, when at best he might sell somebody on doing some digging.

But the answer Jimmy gave was "yes, of course I'm saying it to make you happy, but its also the truth."  If he had said "no, I'm not saying this just to make you happy, its the truth" I think your point would be more on the money.  And then he goes into the details...the changing of the address, the bribery, how Chuck got it all right.  

 

And, I think what I've heard others say...and what I agree with....is that with what Chuck had no one was going to really do any digging.  But if anyone did decide to dig, it might be easy to tear Jimmy's story apart.  

 

Before, Chuck had no evidence, just his ramblings that he doesn't make mistakes and Jimmy screwed him.  Now, he has Jimmy on tape admitting to what he did, he has Jimmy coincidentally at the copy shop (although that could be explained by Ernesto, but is there any proof of Ernesto's call?) and Lance, who may fold in the face of real trouble.  And given Jimmy's troubled history with the truth...and scamming......I just don't know.

 

I think its one thing to just say "whatever, you're right, I changed the documents"  but the details that Jimmy gave......I don't know....

[ShadowFacts]

 

I don't know, I sort of felt like calling out for one son over the other on your deathbed....even though the other son was sitting right there....sort of illustrated the level of favortism that the mother (and probably both parents) had for Jimmy.  I can see your point about how we didn't see their favortism in life.  It just all seems to make sense that way to me.  And it spills over into every relationship Chuck has.  Chuck does everything right, and yet it is Jimmy who is loved.  Chucks knows and follows all rules, yet Jimmy has the friends.  Chuck does everything right, yet Kim, Howard, Rebecca, his parents, and even Ernesto all prefer Jimmy....who is a total fuck up.

 

That is totally valid what you are saying.  Except I wouldn't describe Jimmy as a total fuck up, we just saw him in this episode once again demonstrating a level of sincere concern to the the elders in his office. He hasn't lost his soul like Chuck has.   But yes, it does make sense that Jimmy has been favored.

 

Here's what I wonder about the flashbacks - from whose perspective are they supposed to be?  Just an objective narration, like a camera was in the hospital room/waiting room/Jimmy's Dad's store?  I'm assuming that's the case, but it occurred to me that maybe this one was from Chuck's memory, and the earlier one was from Jimmy's. 

[Umbelina]

Honestly guys, if you were dying and had Chuck and Jimmy as your only sons?  Who would you want to be the last face you saw?

 

Ha.

 

I have a problem with the whole "Chuck does everything right" thing too.  I didn't before, but I do now.  He treats people like crap, and treats himself as barely less than a God.  He's vindictive.  He's jealous.  He sabotages.  He undermines.  He is completely selfish.  He's mean.  He's resentful.  He doesn't believe in redemption for anyone but himself.  He's the very definition of an asshole.  He's pompous.  He's pretentious.  He's a bore.  He's demanding.  He's unconcerned with others.   He's a know it all.  He has no friends.

 

How is that someone who "does everything right?" 

 

Jimmy, on the other hand, does most things "right."  Or, let me say it this way, he does the important things right.  He cares about others.  He has friends.  He treats others well.  He's lovable.  He's funny.  He's smart.  He's capable of evolving.  He's selfless.  He's loyal.  I could think of more here.

 

Jimmy's biggest flaw, the one that makes him "not do everything right" is that he cuts corners legally, and defends guilty people, or will, eventually?  Oh wait, it was that he used to run cons, stole from daddy, and stole mommy's love from Chuck? 

 

If I had to have one of them in my life, or had to place a bet on which one God would let through the pearly gates (if I believed in that, which, yeah, no, but Chuck probably does) then it would be Jimmy.  Every single time.

 

ETA

Jimmy could know the details he was "confessing to" because Chuck already told them to Jimmy.

 

Honestly, if the writers like to dig themselves a hole, this one was very shallow, and not only that, it comes equipped with a built in ladder.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Umbelina

[TVFan17]

I just want to chime in and toss in my 2 cents in defense of Chris Hardwick. I think he does a heck of a job, he's smart and funny and really is a fan of the after-shows he hosts.  (At least it looks that way to me) I love Jonathan Banks' work too, but he wasn't an easy guest on Talking Saul. Hardwick has to keep things moving and Banks was doing an equivalent of prolonged mugging for the camera, imo. I don't think he's as comfortable in this type of appearance. 

 

As far as after-shows go, I watched part of a Sons of Anarchy after-show once and it was awful compared to the Chris Hardwick - Talking Dead.

 

Last year there were after-shows during Shark Week on the Discovery Channel!!  Those were ridiculous, because the people had to basically comment on what the sharks were doing (swimming, killing and eating).  In a regular after-show the guests are commenting on what the people said or did, where they went, etc.  There isn't much you can say about sharks in the grand scheme of things, but you can say a lot about people and characters on shows. 

 

The Bachelor recently tried out 6 after-shows with celebrity guests for the first half of the season, and then stopped them.

 

I can't remember when this whole after-show phenomenon began in general, but I know that it really picked up a lot of steam on Bravo, when Andy Cohen started doing his Watch What Happens Live show (in 2009) after the assorted Real Housewives installments.  That show turned into more than just a Housewives after-show, and now he has all sorts of guests.  Chris Hardwick has been at the helm of all of the AMC after-shows for the last 5 years (Talking Dead for both TWD and FTWD, Talking Bad for BB and Talking Saul), and while he is extra enthusiastic and probably won't ever say anything negative on the air about any of the shows, at least he does his homework and watches them.  He is not simply sitting there and saying, "So yeah... that was a cool episode, huh?" 

 

I think that the Talking shows on AMC fill a need -- especially when it comes to The Walking Dead, which can be very harrowing and traumatic.  Sometimes some of the things that happen are so shocking or disturbing to people that I guess they use Talking Dead as a catharsis, or comfort, in a way.

 

I just wish there had been an after-show on ABC during the Lost years (2004 - 2010).  I could have used one to help me sort out that confusing (but entertaining) mess!

[kieyra]

Argh, and sorry for rapid-fire posting, but ARGH I just realized they may very well be envisioning Chuck as the SERIES-long antagonist in a way that Hank was in opposition to Walter White throughout most of BB. But Hank was likeable. I can't do five seasons of these two locked in an eternally mediocre struggle. It had all the payoff it was ever going to at the end of season one. You can't escalate this, you did "Mom asked for Jimmy on her death bed", and you already teased us that Jimmy might cause Chuck's death, and then you backed away from it. You can't go to that well again, especially when most of us have no idea why Jimmy still spends time around Chuck in the first place.

Sorry--evidently the first half of the season got me more invested than I realized, and I suppose I feel bait and switched back into the Chuck Show. Maybe it's been obvious all along that Chuck is going to be the Big Bad for the whole series, and I blinded myself to it the way I blinded myself to, for example, the shit The 100 pulled.

Edited April 20, 2016 by kieyra

[Ohwell]

Oh gawd, you might be right.  Chuck might be with us for the long haul.  Suddenly my head hurts.

[ByTor]

Yet he takes up so very much screen time.  Why not at least make him interesting?  Hide his plot driven sole reason for being, just a little tiny bit?

I don't see Howard as having a solely plot driven reason for being. In season 1, Howard was the arrogant HHM partner who we were supposed to believe was responsible for Jimmy's lack of professional success, so in essence I'd say Howard drove the plot of Jimmy being a down on his luck public defender (who can't even score himself a  cucumber water!!).  In Season 2, his poor people skills is what drove Kim to leave HHM, which in turn caused Kim to share an office with Jimmy. Once again, I'd say Howard drove that plot and not vice versa.  In my opinion, I'm not sure why it would be necessary to delve much more into Howard's character.  He isn't a major player in the story like Jimmy and Mike (obviously) or even like Kim and Chuck, Howard is more the one who caused things to happen behind the scenes.  So do we really need to know why he is arrogant?  Or why he's not very good at managing people?  Or even if he has a wife/kids/dog/cat?  in the grand scheme of things, the whys and whats of what makes Howard who he is (IMO) don't really matter; in fact, I'd go as far as to say it would drag things down since we barely have enough shows in the season to further Jimmy's story.  In that sense, I don't think Howard needs so much to be "interesting" as he needs to be "relevant," and I think the showrunners are doing an excellent job at that.

[Starchild]

I think I'm remembering this correctly - Chuck was talking to Kim, maybe, and discussing how much he hated Jimmy from the time the parents brought him home from the hospital. 

No one on the show ever explicitly said that. Though I think Umbelina's said it a few times. ;)

 

Personally, I love the dynamic between Jimmy and Chuck, I think it's fascinating. I watch the show for this relationship; everything else is incidental.

 

Additionally, I don't think it's a lather/rinse/repeat situation, I see slow but clear progression in their dynamic. It's still not clear to me whether Jimmy will evolve into Saul, or whether Saul will be born of some big brotherly bang. And I love that.

[knaankos]

Was Kim in this episode? Oh wait barely. I guess we have to wait for her and Jimmy working through issues of the new place

[qtpye]

I hate the way they are trying to make Chuck a mustache twirling villain.  The dynamic was much more interesting last season, because even though Chuck was a snob about Jimmy's potential, I thought he did care and want to protect his younger brother to some degree.

 

I looked at it as Chuck trying to protect Jimmy from the worst of himself (which eventually leads to the Cinnabon life).  Also, I do not need for Jimmy to look like such a naive sad sack.

 

Yes, Chuck is right about everything (Jimmy did set him up), but he is now so odious, very few people care.

[RCharter]

Honestly guys, if you were dying and had Chuck and Jimmy as your only sons?  Who would you want to be the last face you saw?

 

Ha.

 

I have a problem with the whole "Chuck does everything right" thing too.  I didn't before, but I do now.  He treats people like crap, and treats himself as barely less than a God.  He's vindictive.  He's jealous.  He sabotages.  He undermines.  He is completely selfish.  He's mean.  He's resentful.  He doesn't believe in redemption for anyone but himself.  He's the very definition of an asshole.  He's pompous.  He's pretentious.  He's a bore.  He's demanding.  He's unconcerned with others.   He's a know it all.  He has no friends.

 

But he does.  Look at it from an outsiders perspective.  Chuck has a law degree, founded a prestigious law firm, follows all the rules, is an upstanding citizen, dutiful to his parents, denied himself food to be by his mothers bedside.  He has done everything right, followed all the rules.  And thats what I mean by he has done everything right, he has followed all the rules.  A heart, a soul, human kindness, those are so nebulous to me.  Whatever Jimmy's charm is, its natural, to me, Chuck has had to work harder, because he would have been hungry at the bedside, but he put it off to try to do the right thing.  And when he does he is slapped down for it.  It wouldn't surprise me to learn that it was Chuck who financially took care of his parents after the store closed down, and was always there.  Should Chuck be blamed because he wasn't naturally as engaging as Jimmy?  Because he didn't naturally have the same kindness, but was more logical?  

 

For Chuck, the rules are there so you can know the boundaries, so you can know whats right and wrong.  And that Jimmy can basically ignore those rules, the one Chuck has to work hard to follow but still benefit, has to hurt.  Following the rules isn't fun, or else they wouldn't need to be rules and everyone would do them.

[knaankos]

Oh and the invincible car stalking appeared again in this episode. Mike tails Hector and the gang in the middle of nowhere, pulls up behind them less than a minute after they arrive and nobody notices thing? Nobody notices the only other car within a hundred miles?

[Conan Troutman]

*shrug* I thought his purpose was to find something to hang himself with.

Yeah, the camera clearly featured some sort of rope or cable hanging from the ceiling very prominently. That had to be intentional. Then I thought his lantern would fall of the hook and set the garage on fire. Cut to Jimmy getting a call from Howard... But no, still not dead.

Chuck isn't only doing the Lucy to Jimmy, the show is doing the same to the audience. He hit his head, took forever in the CT scanner, fell into what might have been a permanent catatonic state, went into a garage with a perfectly fine rope, hung his lantern onto a shaky hook etc. and yet, he's still alive.

 

I think we will see some of Gus' men that we recognize next year, like Victor and/or Tyrus.  Maybe Nacho knows Victor and not necessarily Gus.  It could all play out a lot of different ways.

 

Yeah, Gus might be back, but only off screen and we'll just see his henchmen next season. I mean,it makes sense. He doesn't seem to be the guy who would get involved with low level criminals all the time. So maybe he'll talk to Mike and then disappears for a while, or the whole thing will run through his HR department and we never get to see him next season. I guess it also depends on Giancarlo Esposito's availability.

 

You know what you call 4 guys with pistols, who decide to give pursuit to a highly trained sniper with a good rifle for the task, a box full of bullets, the high ground, and cover to shoot behind?  Dinner for the buzzards.

 

The idea that Mike was under serious threat from 4 guys with pistols, in that setting, defies credibility.

I agree for BB Mike. But this early version of Mike is still half measures Mike. He clearly does NOT want to kill everyone.

 

The problem here is that if Jimmy really was just placating Chuck, he would have answered exactly the same way. No reasonable person would have expected him to say "you're right, I just made it all up to make you happy". Of course, Chuck is not a reasonable person and probably thinks he's got ironclad proof, when at best he might sell somebody on doing some digging.

He might be able to sell Mesa Verde on it. Maybe they won't come back to HHM, but at least he could rip them away from Kim. Which is frankly far worse than Jimmy just losing his license, which isn't going to happen anyway. Chuck may go hard after Kim's reputation and/or clients just to hurt Jimmy, because that's the kind of asshole he is.

 

Oh and the invincible car stalking appeared again in this episode. Mike tails Hector and the gang in the middle of nowhere, pulls up behind them less than a minute after they arrive and nobody notices thing? Nobody notices the only other car within a hundred miles?

Yes, the whole setting kind of bothered me. Maybe there's some good explanation, but if there is, the show didn't do a great job of making it intuitive. Maybe it would've worked better if Mike knew about the place and waited there for them. Usually, I don't really care about those minutiae, but BB/BCS is always so great at those little details, so it kinds of sticks out.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Conan Troutman

[Sentient Meat]

I think because people find Jimmy such a fun loving enjoyable character that they forget how fundamentally lonely he truly is... This is more clearly portrayed in the present day scenes where he is older, living a rinse repeat life that consists of shifts at the Cinnabon counter and then going directly back home to watch movies where he feels safe from being discovered.  Although his affection for Kim is currently requited... there always seems to be a desperation behind his grand gestures that go beyond simply someone trying to lock down a serious relationship and feel more like a general struggle for survival.  He clings to Chuck not because he wants to but maybe because he has nowhere else to turn and that perhaps is what allows an otherwise clever man to buy into such a delusion.

[millennium]

On Talking Saul (we don't have a thread for it because there were only 2 episodes), Jonathan Banks seems as though he is having a hard time adjusting to Chris Hardwick's personality and energy.  He doesn't seem as amused by Chris as some are.

 

Kudos to Jonathan Banks then.   Hardwick is a moron.   I watched Talking Bad once or twice during BB's final season but that's all I could stomach. 

 

This episode season was a terrific disappointment.   It felt like watching two separate shows, and nothing momentous happened on either of them.   The story didn't advance by much which seems unwise because the actors aren't getting any younger.   Pretty soon it will be impossible to suspend disbelief sufficiently to accept that this is a prequel.

 

I think BCS would have been a far more interesting show if Jimmy was already Saul Goodman criminal lawyer at the outset, with any of the boring backstory that currently forms the main plot reserved for flashbacks or whatever.   It would be more fun watching him handle criminal cases each week.

Edited April 20, 2016 by millennium

[shapeshifter]

...Chuck declining to tell Jimmy that their Mother had asked for him with her dying breath. I am not exactly sure how to take that. Was he punishing Jimmy out of jealousy, or trying to protect him from the guilt he would feel from knowing he was out getting a sandwich when his Mom wanted to say goodbye.

I lean toward the latter as if I were in Jimmy's shoes, I would not want to know.

I think both. And it could serve to illustrate that Chuck's psychological disorders stem from an un-integrated personality--which I think typically stems from trauma and abuse, which Chuck doesn't have in his background (that we know of). I don't see them going towards a complete psychotic breakdown with Chuck, but they could.

Here's what I wonder about the flashbacks - from whose perspective are they supposed to be? Just an objective narration, like a camera was in the hospital room/waiting room/Jimmy's Dad's store? I'm assuming that's the case, but it occurred to me that maybe this one was from Chuck's memory, and the earlier one was from Jimmy's.

Probably just "author omniscent."

But I do wonder about the brothers' earliest and formative relationship. Maybe the earliest dynamic was just a Smothers Brothers scenario (60s singing duo with a comedic patter about how "Mom always loved you best").

In the 80s, I didn't do a very good job preparing my middle child for the entry of a new sibling into the family. To be fair to myself, it wasn't until later that I stumbled upon a book titled "The Difficult Child" and read about how she needed new clothes to hang in the closet for a couple of weeks before they were acceptable to wear, and I said, "Oh! They've written a book about M-------!" So I see Chuck as that kind of person, and I suspect the triggering event to his animosity towards his brother was just Jimmy's birth, and the typical ooooing and ahhhhing that is fawned upon newborns.

I think BCS would have been a far more interesting show if Jimmy was already Saul Goodman criminal lawyer at the outset, with any of the boring backstory that currently forms the main plot reserved for flashbacks or whatever. It would be more fun watching him handle criminal cases each week.

I would watch the hell out of that show too (although I've enjoyed the one we got). Maybe next season will go there. Edited April 20, 2016 by shapeshifter

[RCharter]

In the 80s, I didn't do a very good job preparing my middle child for the entry of a new sibling into the family. To be fair to myself, it wasn't until later that I stumbled upon a book titled "The Difficult Child" and read about how she needed new clothes to hang in the closet for a couple of weeks before they were acceptable to wear, and I said, "Oh! They've written a book about M-------!" So I see Chuck as that kind of person, and I suspect the triggering event to his animosity towards his brother was just Jimmy's birth, and the typical ooooing and ahhhhing that is fawned upon newborns.

I would watch the hell out of that show too (although I've enjoyed the one we got). Maybe next season will go there.

As a middle child I can tell you it would have been helpful, but not deadly.  My brother was born after me.....the son that my dad had been dying for (and really, why?  this isn't Tudor England.)

 

 I specifically remember being told to hold him for a picture and my mom kept saying "he's sliding, he's sliding, you're gonna drop him!"  and I thought "what do you think I'm trying to do?"

 

But I love my brother dearly now.  I just think that eventually, if you have parents that mean well you find a comfortable place in the dynamic :)

[Captanne]

I'm not familiar with Chris Hardwick and/or his connection to either BB or BCS.  I can always Google his position with the show but that won't tell me why people here have a problem/don't have a problem with him.

 

What's the deal?  If any kind soul has the time or inclination to explain?  (Thanks in advance!)

[ShadowFacts]

I don't know if we know the exact age difference, but it seems like more than ten years.  That would mean that Chuck had been an only child for a long time, and that's hard to be de-throned from.  But it would also mean that during the pre-school/elementary school years of Jimmy, Chuck would have been in high school and college.  Kids that age aren't usually terrifically interested in little kids, they have other preoccupations.  I think whatever sibling rivalry there would have been has been magnified and nursed by Chuck who uses it as an excuse to be a total ass.  It was probably not a kindness that he brought Jimmy to New Mexico and gave him a job in his firm's mailroom.  They needed a few states between them. 

[revbfc]

Jimmy'll be fine.

[Bunnyhop]

Jimmy isn't bailing on Chuck because I don't think that Jimmy has any idea of how deep the loathing Chuck feels runs.  Chuck has spent a lifetime collecting complaints and crimes, real and imaginary.  I'm not sure that Jimmy knows that Chuck blames him for their father's death or that he holds that sandwich at their mother's deathbed against him.  In fact, we're only getting Chuck's memories.  We may well find out that the truth is something maybe not shaped by a lifetime of resentment.

These two have been playing parts that they wrote years ago.  Jimmy may have thought he was making a joke when he said that Chuck couldn't retire until he ruined Jimmy.  What Jimmy doesn't fully realize is that this is probably true.  Jimmy's script reads that if he keeps trying, Chuck will come around.  Chuck's script reads that anything other than the total destruction of his brother is unacceptable.

[qtpye]

These two have been playing parts that they wrote years ago.  Jimmy may have thought he was making a joke when he said that Chuck couldn't retire until he ruined Jimmy.  What Jimmy doesn't fully realize is that this is probably true.  Jimmy's script reads that if he keeps trying, Chuck will come around.  Chuck's script reads that anything other than the total destruction of his brother is unacceptable.

 

 

That is certainly what it seems like.  However, Gilligan and company usually are the masters of surprise.  The big clue for me was when sweet gentle Ernie actually came out and told Jimmy that Chuck was trying to destroy him.  Heck, Ernie even put himself on the line to save Jimmy, because he was so put off by Chuck's attitude.  You are not going to get a better warning then that.

 

This is just speculation, but the finale was so cliche that I am just hoping we get a good explanation next season.

[RCharter]

Jimmy isn't bailing on Chuck because I don't think that Jimmy has any idea of how deep the loathing Chuck feels runs.  Chuck has spent a lifetime collecting complaints and crimes, real and imaginary.  I'm not sure that Jimmy knows that Chuck blames him for their father's death or that he holds that sandwich at their mother's deathbed against him.  In fact, we're only getting Chuck's memories.  We may well find out that the truth is something maybe not shaped by a lifetime of resentment.

Or...maybe Jimmy thinks he deserves the deep loathing that Chuck feels for him.

 

As you said they both probably played a part in their dynamic.  Chuck as the "good son" that is always bailing Jimmy out, and Jimmy, the eternal screw up who always needs Chuck's help even though he doesn't deserve it.  I'm sure Chuck has found ways to constantly remind Jimmy of all the ways he failed their parents, failed in his relationship, failed him as a brother, failed at living an honest and decent life.

 

I've always felt that a big part of Jimmy wants to be slippin' Jimmy, but there is another....smaller part that feels he doesn't deserve to be anyone but slippin' Jimmy.  He must have figured "how long until I fuck up D&M anyways....I'm not a great attorney like Chuck, I don't deserve to be on partner track anywhere, Chuck is so much better than me.....if I really put my all into D&M, I'm going to mess it up anyways."  "How long until I fuck up this relationship with Kim?"

Edited April 20, 2016 by RCharter

[peeayebee]

I hate the way they are trying to make Chuck a mustache twirling villain.  The dynamic was much more interesting last season, because even though Chuck was a snob about Jimmy's potential, I thought he did care and want to protect his younger brother to some degree.

 

I looked at it as Chuck trying to protect Jimmy from the worst of himself (which eventually leads to the Cinnabon life).  Also, I do not need for Jimmy to look like such a naive sad sack.

 

Yes, Chuck is right about everything (Jimmy did set him up), but he is now so odious, very few people care.

I care. I dislike him, yet I also feel bad for him when he's struggling with his electricity phobia. Heck, I even felt bad for him when his dying mother's last thoughts were of Jimmy.

 

I also don't see Chuck as a mustache-twirling villain because his actions are understandable. I don't mean that I agree with them, but they are character-driven.

 

I don't see Jimmy as a naive sad sack. The only thing he's naive about is Chuck's capacity for revenge. Jimmy loves his brother, and that love blinds him. He obviously cares about Chuck. Jimmy is not a sad sack either. He may become that when he ends up at Cinnabon, but not now.

[ByTor]

Oh and the invincible car stalking appeared again in this episode. Mike tails Hector and the gang in the middle of nowhere, pulls up behind them less than a minute after they arrive and nobody notices thing? Nobody notices the only other car within a hundred miles?

Whoever left the "Don't" sign certainly noticed.

[Boilergal]

No one on the show ever explicitly said that. Though I think Umbelina's said it a few times. ;)

 

Personally, I love the dynamic between Jimmy and Chuck, I think it's fascinating. I watch the show for this relationship; everything else is incidental.

 

Additionally, I don't think it's a lather/rinse/repeat situation, I see slow but clear progression in their dynamic. It's still not clear to me whether Jimmy will evolve into Saul, or whether Saul will be born of some big brotherly bang. And I love that.

 

Maybe I have it mixed up with Cersei and Tyrion  - haha.

 

I love the dynamic too - not all families are lovey dovey,my sibs are my BFF's kumbaya kinda crap.  There was a comedian  that had a bit about families, asked if you weren't related to these people would you ever have anything to do with them?  

 

I agree it is a progression - when Jimmy found out how Chuck was sabotaging his career and how little respect Chuck had for him turning his life around that really opened Jimmy's eyes.  It also seemed to allow Chuck to openly sabotage Jimmy instead of using Howard as a middle man.  When Chuck questioned Jimmy in the Sandpiper meeting about his tactics on getting the Old Timers to sign up - it wasn't meant to tell Jimmy to tone it down and make sure he was approaching legally, he did it to make sure everyone in the room knew that Jimmy is a shyster and clearly not in their morally superior league.

 

I think it just continues to progress to the point where Jimmy makes the decision that his relationship with Chuck is toxic and they need to part ways.  I'm interested in finding out what Jimmy's breaking point finally is. 

[qtpye]

I've always felt that a big part of Jimmy wants to be slippin' Jimmy, but there is another....smaller part that feels he doesn't deserve to be anyone but slippin' Jimmy.  He must have figured "how long until I fuck up D&M anyways....I'm not a great attorney like Chuck, I don't deserve to be on partner track anywhere, Chuck is so much better than me.....if I really put my all into D&M, I'm going to mess it up anyways."  "How long until I fuck up this relationship with Kim?"

 

 

It is interesting that this is supposedly a common phenomenon among successful people.  I think it is called "Imposter Syndrome", where someone feels like a phony totally undeserving of their success.  People thought that it would mostly affect females, but many men also have these types of thoughts.

[benteen]

This is so true, I want to refer to him as Lucy.

 

Lucy is a very good comparison but I think Frank Grimes, Homer's enemy from that episode of The SImpsons, might be an even more fitting comparison.

[qtpye]

Lucy is a very good comparison but I think Frank Grimes, Homer's enemy from that episode of The SImpsons, might be an even more fitting comparison.

 

 

Lol, and wasn't Frank Grimes killed by electricity?

 

Of course, we have to keep in mind that until his recent issues, Chuck has been a pretty successful person, by superficial standards.

[ShadowFacts]

Whoever left the "Don't" sign certainly noticed.

 

Right, and Mike didn't notice that person, either.  Which he should have, if he heard his horn.  Unless the person arrived by Prius I guess.

[Captanne]

I think the dialogue between Jimmy and Chuck before the great "taping" was revealing.  I think, personally, while Jimmy clearly has a blind spot about Chuck, he knows that Chuck is out to undermine him at every turn.  He says so, point blank, when he's teasing him about not retiring -- "You haven't gotten me disbarred yet or run me out of town on a rail!", says Jimmy.  We now know he is completely aware of Chuck's goals.  And, I really don't think Jimmy was kidding either himself or Chuck about the reality of what he was saying -- even though it was with a light-hearted tone.

 

So, I think Jimmy is all too aware of Chuck's goals.  I just don't think he really cares.  His goals, Jimmy's goals, are to take care of Chuck and to still need his approval at every turn.

[SoSueMe]

I'm not familiar with Chris Hardwick and/or his connection to either BB or BCS.  I can always Google his position with the show but that won't tell me why people here have a problem/don't have a problem with him.

 

What's the deal?  If any kind soul has the time or inclination to explain?  (Thanks in advance!)

I am only familiar with CH from the after-shows for The Walking Dead, Fear the Walking Dead and Better Call Saul. I am pretty sure that he is well known to younger kids from MTV or Comedy Central maybe.

I like him, he seems very smart and witty and on the ball. Fairly sincere as these types go. I can only venture that some might think he is glib and benefiting unfairly from the success of the main shows?  Different strokes, I guess.

[Uncle Benzene]

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that it was Chuck who financially took care of his parents after the store closed down, and was always there.  Should Chuck be blamed because he wasn't naturally as engaging as Jimmy?  Because he didn't naturally have the same kindness, but was more logical?

 

Perhaps I'm forgetting some previous clues as to Chuck's relationship with his parents which might undermine what I'm about to say here, if so please feel free to set me straight...

 

While I definitely see where you're coming from, I could also see Chuck never missing an opportunity to make his parents keenly aware of just how much a burden they were on him. Constantly talking about his being the first in the family to go to college (and on a full ride, no less, "without ANY HELP FROM YOU!") and how he FINALLY got out of Cicero and was gonna "finally make something of the McGill name" and other such assholery. I could see him constantly berating his father for losing the money (and eventually the store) and constantly guilting his mom for his own perceived "you love Jimmy more!" issues. I could see Chuck leaving them behind for the most part, once he "escaped" his miserable life and became a high falutin' big time success, and having only minimal contact out of obligation (and making no effort whatsoever to disguise that.) Their mom called Chuck to get Jimmy out of the Chicago Sunroof predicament, right? Wouldn't surprise me if it had been the first contact Chuck and his mom had in quite some time, and she only called him because he was the only option. And Chuck's response was something along the lines of "*sigh* OF COURSE your precious little boy is in trouble again, and of course you call me to pull your ass out of the fire AGAIN. You do realize it's YOUR fault he's this way. (etc. etc. etc.)" I could be wrong, but I definitely think those kinds of things fit with the characterization of Chuck that the show has given us so far. And I think it would more deeply explain Mom's last words.

 

Anyway, while I respect the opinions of others who aren't quite as fond of this here show as I am, I guess I don't really understand the "rinse and repeat" complaints, or the view that the show is running in place or in circles or whatever. Especially coming from people who enjoyed BB. Because I think BCS is pretty much a carbon copy of the slow burn storytelling people so loved and admired on BB. There were any number of BB episodes that were talky to the extreme, and where very little actually happened/progressed. I mean... "The Fly" anyone? Hell, I would assert that Jesse's whole series-long storyline was a case of rinse and repeat. Walt/Jesse, Walt/Skyler, the ever-increasing badness of the neverending parade of big bads... all that stuff was -- at its core -- just a seasons-long tug of war. Back and forth, back and forth. Yet it was riveting like few other shows before or since. But I do remember that in the early days (let's just say for purposes of this particular discussion... oh, around the end of season two) lots of folks weren't so sure the whole thing wasn't destined to end up being a big ol' ball of crap. Well, we see how that turned out. But I know that many of my friends got frustrated enough with BB to have tuned out, only to tune back in for the final season and say things like "Holy mother of crap was that a bad call. I can't believe I've been missing out on THIS all this time." Anyway, I would assert that the particular Gilliganesque™ method of storytelling is the one thing BCS shares most with BB, moreso than even the characters of Jimmy/Saul, Mike, the Salamancas, etc. And in my personal opinion, BCS has been every bit as riveting as BB ever was. A whole different show, no doubt. Different, but... the same. Does that even make sense? Not just because they're "in the same world" and share characters and setting, but because they share such similar tone, similar pathos, similar "feel."

 

With both shows, I often feel(/felt) like I -- myself, as a viewer -- am standing in quicksand. Or struggling to trudge through knee-deep mud. Something like that. It's just that I consider that a good thing, not at all an annoyance. I think it's 100% intentional, it's what we're supposed to feel, it's supposed to be frustrating, because we are in fact trudging through the mud of these characters' lives and struggling to get anywhere, just like they are. I think it's brilliant, and I love that Gilligan is so skilled at being able to put us there, and that he has the balls to dare to make his viewers feel that way. Because I can't imagine it's "good for business" to go that route. But it's why his shows are so goddamned compelling and unique. (In my opinion, anyway.)

[RCharter]

^^I could see that, except Chuck seemed so desperate for attention from his mother and seemed genuinely upset that his parents seemed to (in his opinion at least) favor Jimmy.  If Chuck felt the whole lot of them were useless I feel like he wouldn't have been that concerned about not being their favorite.  And when he was talking about his dad (to Kim) he did seem to have some reverence for him.

 

However, this is Chuck, so reminding people that they should be in awe of him for being so amazing doesn't seem out of character at all, so you could be right.

[Ohwell]

I just wish that once a complaint or observation is made, that the poster can move on from it, instead of repeating it over and over and over and over and over........
 

[Dobian]

So Chuck exploited Jimmy's weak spot - his basic human decency - with his cunning passive-aggressiveness.  Point Chuck.  However, when I thought about what his secret recording of Jimmy's confession would yield, it softened the blow of this cliffhanger.

 

If Chuck brings the tape into the office and plays it for Howard, he of course will be vindicated.  Howard will no longer think he's incompetent, suffering from the onset of Alzheimer's, think he's finally gone over the edge with his disorder, or whatever.  However, Howard will also know that Chuck was easily compromised by Jimmy, which still makes Chuck look bad.  And he'll probably seriously reconsider allowing sensitive documents to be taken out of the office, which hinders Chuck's ability to work from home.  So it's a tainted vindication.

 

If Chuck makes the tape available to Mesa Verde, Kim probably loses the account, and Chuck is again vindicated for being labelled incompetent.  But he now has a new label as the lawyer who lets his documents get doctored by his crazy brother.  So Mesa Verde won't be coming back to HHM and Chuck still looks bad.

 

If Chuck brings the recording to the authorities, Jimmy gets disbarred, and gets sent up the river.  Sweet revenge.  Now Chuck is alone, Ernesto won't help him anymore, and his downhill spiral accelerates.

 

So all-in-all, Chuck really gains very little if anything from bringing Jimmy down with that recording, and he stands to lose a lot more.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Dobian

[ByTor]

Right, and Mike didn't notice that person, either.  Which he should have, if he heard his horn.  Unless the person arrived by Prius I guess.

I assumed the person who left the sign walked. In fact, I never even thought about Fring...it's far-fetched, but I had it in my head that Nacho sneaked out of the cabin from some door Mike didn't notice, walked to Mike's car, and left the note, because 1) shooting Hector would probably make things worse (like the hose scheme) and 2) Nacho wants to take care of the Salamancas himself.

[RCharter]

I just wish that once a complaint or observation is made, that the poster can move on from it, instead of repeating it over and over and over and over and over........

 

I've always felt this is why god created the person that created the page down/scroll down button on the laptop.

 

It lets ME be the boss of what I read!

[ShadowFacts]

I assumed the person who left the sign walked. In fact, I never even thought about Fring...it's far-fetched, but I had it in my head that Nacho sneaked out of the cabin from some door Mike didn't notice, walked to Mike's car, and left the note, because 1) shooting Hector would probably make things worse (like the hose scheme) and 2) Nacho wants to take care of the Salamancas himself.

 

I think we saw Nacho through Mike's eyes just before the horn started sounding.  He might have gotten somebody else to do it, but that would probably be too dangerous, he wanted no one to know of his connection to Mike.  The person might have walked from a car parked more distantly.  I don't know who it is, but a note wasn't really necessary, the jammed branch to the horn did the job.  I have a feeling that type of piece of paper will come into play and Mike will get a clue as to who did it.