S03.E10: Lantern

[shapeshifter]

On June 30, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Eulipian 5k said:

 

But Chuuck will be back, fully reincarnated like Ray :     .

I assume you're just poking fun at the return-of-Chuck theories, @Eulipian 5k, but I actually look forward to the time when unrelated, co-contemporary, high quality shows give nods to each other like this, whether for comic relief or to make the audience question the show's universe boundaries, and thereby question our own world views.

I suppose Fargo sort of does this with the appearances of Ray Wise in Twin Peaks reminiscent settings.

[Gobi]

13 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

I assume you're just poking fun at the return-of-Chuck theories, @Eulipian 5k, but I actually look forward to the time when unrelated, co-contemporary, high quality shows give nods to each other like this, whether for comic relief or to make the audience question the show's universe boundaries, and thereby question our own world views.

I suppose Fargo sort of does this with the appearances of Ray Wise in Twin Peaks reminiscent settings.

Fargo also had references to Ermentrout, although probably not  the same character. 

[JudyObscure]

I watched the first season of Fargo  and loved it almost as much as the movie but when season 2 started and there was Jesse Plemmons, I couldn't stay with it.  His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

[Ohwell]

7 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

As bad as Todd was, I felt the same way about Lydia.  

[Clanstarling]

11 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I watched the first season of Fargo  and loved it almost as much as the movie but when season 2 started and there was Jesse Plemmons, I couldn't stay with it.  His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

I agree, his general look of innocence combined with his casual evil was just chilling. Since I'd really only seen him on Friday Night Lights, it was stunning.

[smorbie]

43 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I watched the first season of Fargo  and loved it almost as much as the movie but when season 2 started and there was Jesse Plemmons, I couldn't stay with it.  His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

I loved the first season of Fargo, too.  I thought it was no less than brilliant television.  But, I suffer from forgetaboutitness if it's too long from one season to another.  This is particularly true if it's an anthology series.  And somehow or another I didn't find out about it till the season had already started and then it was just gone, out of my line of sight forever.

And you're right, Todd is an interesting character and the actor who played him got the creepy, oily, repellent feel of the character just right. He mixed him with Eddie Haskell from Leave it to Beaver, and voila something truly horrifying was born.

[buttercupia]

3 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I watched the first season of Fargo  and loved it almost as much as the movie but when season 2 started and there was Jesse Plemmons, I couldn't stay with it.  His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

You may want to revisit that in time. Fargo season two was amazing and Plemons more than redeemed himself.

[Eulipian 5k]

On 7/3/2017 at 10:04 AM, smorbie said:

And you're right, Todd is an interesting character and the actor who played him got the creepy, oily, repellent feel of the character just right. He mixed him with Eddie Haskell from Leave it to Beaver, and voila something truly horrifying was born.

I think a character on the show described him as "that dead eyed Opie f%*k". Plemmons really mined 50's & 60's TV for his work as Todd.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Eulipian 5k
TV eras

[Bryce Lynch]

On 7/3/2017 at 9:13 AM, JudyObscure said:

I watched the first season of Fargo  and loved it almost as much as the movie but when season 2 started and there was Jesse Plemmons, I couldn't stay with it.  His portrayal of Todd in Breaking Bad upset me more than any TV character, ever. 

Just think of him as "Lance", from FNL. :)

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Just think of him as "Lance", from FNL. :)

The mister used to call him "Landruu" (an old Star Trek reference - from an episode that didn't get repeated often, for those who don't know)

[PeterPirate]

9 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

The mister used to call him "Landruu" (an old Star Trek reference - from an episode that didn't get repeated often, for those who don't know)

Wowzers. The Landruu episode (The Return of the Archons) is a weird one. I haven't seen FNL, but if Plemons conjured up memories of Landruu then he is seriously good at being creepy.  

[Bryce Lynch]

13 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

Wowzers. The Landruu episode (The Return of the Archons) is a weird one. I haven't seen FNL, but if Plemons conjured up memories of Landruu then he is seriously good at being creepy.  

Plemons' FNL character was named "Landry" (though Coach Taylor usually yelled "Where's Lance?" the few times he decided to put him in the game. )  I think that is where the "Landruu" came from.  He wasn't creepy on FNL, except in a nerdy teenager, who likes Christian speed metal, and has crushes on girls who are out of his league (maybe) kind of way. :)

[Eulipian 5k]

On 7/5/2017 at 1:29 PM, Clanstarling said:

The mister used to call him "Landruu" (an old Star Trek reference - from an episode that didn't get repeated often, for those who don't know)

The "mister' is not of the body, he will be absorbed. We are now down the rabbit hole....waay off topic, lol.

[ShadowFacts]

17 hours ago, Eulipian 5k said:

The "mister' is not of the body, he will be absorbed. We are now down the rabbit hole....waay off topic, lol.

Yes, we've lost our way, we must have gone through the five stages of grief for Chuck.  Saints preserve us.

[PeterPirate]

Speaking of Chuck and Trek:

On 6/23/2017 at 1:35 PM, Eulipian 5k said:

After the flames rose, just before the fade out, I kept turning up the volume to see if I could hear Chuck say "Drat!".

If anyone hasn't seen the episode of Star Trek Voyager with McKean in it, I highly recommend it. It's one of the better Voyager episodes, especially the pre-Seven days. 

[Kel Varnsen]

Finally caught up on season 3, and I am not sure why but i was way more into it than season 1 or 2. Got to say though i felt bad for the set designers and builders who put together the Chuck's house set. The set was super nice and those built in shelves that he was tearing up looked awesome.

That said McKean's final decent into madness was done really welk by him. The way he played it super crazy, but just coherent enough to realize there was no coming back from this, to the point where he felt death wss his only option really worked for me. And of course an asshole like Chuck is going to go for the most attention grabbing death ever.

One thing i didn't get was the HHM deal. Why were the only options either the firm buying the shares and going bankrupt or Howard buying them and blowing all his saving?  Couldn't the shares get just spread out among other partners? I am sure there are a bunch of other partners who would love to increase their equity. I have never worked for a law firm, but i did used to work for an engineering firm where i owned a bit of equity. And that is exactly what happened when a senior partner retired; everyone else was given a chance to buy his shares.

[shapeshifter]

Has anyone read or heard anyone say whether the finale plot was in any way inspired by or symbolic of the legend of the Great Chicago Fire being caused by a lantern being kicked over? I was just thinking of Chicago being the origin of Jimmy, and now out of the ashes of the fire, Saul will be built. It's probably just coincidental, but…

[PrincessSteel]

Even in the depths of his mental illness, Chuck had to know that setting his house on fire could ONLY be seen as suicide (or an attempt at suicide). Chuck made such a show of how well he was doing to his doctor, to Howard and to Jimmy (although the doc probably suspects a thing or two). He must have realized that the people close to him would wonder why he fired up the lantern again in light (heh) of his ability to tolerate electricity throughout the house. And, even if the fire destroyed all of the evidence of battered walls and ripped up bookcases, I don't think it would erase the fact that he battered the meter on the outside wall. I think that the combination of knowing how far he had fallen, along with facing the fact that everyone else would know, produced the expression on his face as he kicked at the desk.

[ShadowFacts]

16 hours ago, PrincessSteel said:

Even in the depths of his mental illness, Chuck had to know that setting his house on fire could ONLY be seen as suicide (or an attempt at suicide). Chuck made such a show of how well he was doing to his doctor, to Howard and to Jimmy (although the doc probably suspects a thing or two). He must have realized that the people close to him would wonder why he fired up the lantern again in light (heh) of his ability to tolerate electricity throughout the house. And, even if the fire destroyed all of the evidence of battered walls and ripped up bookcases, I don't think it would erase the fact that he battered the meter on the outside wall. I think that the combination of knowing how far he had fallen, along with facing the fact that everyone else would know, produced the expression on his face as he kicked at the desk.

I think that absent a communication of his intentions, it will be almost impossible to rule as either a suicide or an accident.  The tearing up of his walls and outside meter will point toward a mental breakdown but it won't be conclusive.  However, when Jimmy finds out about how Chuck was humiliated by Howard's staging of Chuck's "retirement" in front of the whole firm, he will suspect suicide and will blame Howard forevermore. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

32 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

However, when Jimmy finds out about how Chuck was humiliated by Howard's staging of Chuck's "retirement" in front of the whole firm, he will suspect suicide and will blame Howard forevermore. 

I still feel that Howard handled Chuck's "retirement" in practically the most face-saving way possible.  Except for the partners, who knew the circumstances, everyone else from attorney to janitor thought that Chuck was choosing to retire.  I don't know of another way that would have accomplished Howard's goal while simultaneously making Chuck feel alright about it.

[ShadowFacts]

10 minutes ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

I still feel that Howard handled Chuck's "retirement" in practically the most face-saving way possible.  Except for the partners, who knew the circumstances, everyone else from attorney to janitor thought that Chuck was choosing to retire.  I don't know of another way that would have accomplished Howard's goal while simultaneously making Chuck feel alright about it.

Yes, I agree that everybody else in the firm doesn't know the full story and seemed very sincere and appreciative in saying goodbye, but the thing is Jimmy will know how Chuck most probably felt in the circumstances.  I think it will be fodder for Jimmy to be in conflict with Howard. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

5 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yes, I agree that everybody else in the firm doesn't know the full story and seemed very sincere and appreciative in saying goodbye, but the thing is Jimmy will know how Chuck most probably felt in the circumstances.  I think it will be fodder for Jimmy to be in conflict with Howard. 

Possibly, but a rational Jimmy would recognize that it was in the interests of the firm to get rid of Chuck, even at great expense, and, after all, he set that whole thing in motion when he informed the insurance company of Chuck's circumstances.  He knew there would be repercussions-that was the whole point.

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Possibly, but a rational Jimmy would recognize that it was in the interests of the firm to get rid of Chuck, even at great expense, and, after all, he set that whole thing in motion when he informed the insurance company of Chuck's circumstances.  He knew there would be repercussions-that was the whole point.

It was absolutely the point of dropping the dime on Chuck at Santa Rosa Insurance.  But he did regret it, I believe, hence him going to Chuck's that last day and wanting to make a clean breast of it.  It will be a source of tremendous guilt for Jimmy.  Also, I think Howard wouldn't be human if he didn't have a few regrets himself.  He's not to blame, it's not his fault, but how would he not feel awful.  Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I think he will be gutted. 

[Bryce Lynch]

On 7/9/2017 at 10:35 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

Finally caught up on season 3, and I am not sure why but i was way more into it than season 1 or 2. Got to say though i felt bad for the set designers and builders who put together the Chuck's house set. The set was super nice and those built in shelves that he was tearing up looked awesome.

That said McKean's final decent into madness was done really welk by him. The way he played it super crazy, but just coherent enough to realize there was no coming back from this, to the point where he felt death wss his only option really worked for me. And of course an asshole like Chuck is going to go for the most attention grabbing death ever.

One thing i didn't get was the HHM deal. Why were the only options either the firm buying the shares and going bankrupt or Howard buying them and blowing all his saving?  Couldn't the shares get just spread out among other partners? I am sure there are a bunch of other partners who would love to increase their equity. I have never worked for a law firm, but i did used to work for an engineering firm where i owned a bit of equity. And that is exactly what happened when a senior partner retired; everyone else was given a chance to buy his shares.

Good point about multiple other partners being able to purchase small chunks of Chuck's shares.  I guess more realistic writing doesn't always make good television.  

BTW, engineering?  I thought you sold latex and latex related products. :)

[benteen]

On ‎7‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 3:24 PM, PeterPirate said:

Speaking of Chuck and Trek:

If anyone hasn't seen the episode of Star Trek Voyager with McKean in it, I highly recommend it. It's one of the better Voyager episodes, especially the pre-Seven days. 

Thanks for the info.  I didn't know Michael McKean was on a Star Trek show.  Voyager is on Netflix so I will check it out.

[flotsette]

On 6/28/2017 at 0:29 PM, smorbie said:

My son, who follows BB like it's an obsession (God bless my long-suffering DIL), says Gilligan conceived Saul from the beginning planning to spin him off into a sequel.  And he really is a very fleshed out character, emphasis on "character".  He's intriguing in his own right.

Really? Because I'm not THE biggest BB fan in the world, but I did listen to all the podcasts, and I could have sworn this show grew out of a joke they were making on the podcast. It may have been a joke before the podcast too. But I remember them talking about it there as a pipe dream and it certainly seemed like the idea started out as a true joke! (That's why we were all so surprised this show is so amazing right?)

Edited August 9, 2017 by flotsette

[smorbie]

34 minutes ago, flotsette said:

Really? Because I'm not THE biggest BB fan in the world, but I did listen to all the podcasts, and I could have sworn this show grew out of a joke they were making on the podcast. It may have been a joke before the podcast too. But I remember them talking about it there as a pipe dream and it certainly seemed like the idea started out as a true joke! (That's why we were all so surprised this show is so amazing right?)

I don't know because I don't listen and certainly don't read as much about it as he does.  But, I do remember hearing very early after Saul's initial appearance on BB that Gilligan wanted to do a sequel with him.

[smorbie]

On 7/9/2017 at 10:35 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

Finally caught up on season 3, and I am not sure why but i was way more into it than season 1 or 2. Got to say though i felt bad for the set designers and builders who put together the Chuck's house set. The set was super nice and those built in shelves that he was tearing up looked awesome.

That said McKean's final decent into madness was done really welk by him. The way he played it super crazy, but just coherent enough to realize there was no coming back from this, to the point where he felt death wss his only option really worked for me. And of course an asshole like Chuck is going to go for the most attention grabbing death ever.

One thing i didn't get was the HHM deal. Why were the only options either the firm buying the shares and going bankrupt or Howard buying them and blowing all his saving?  Couldn't the shares get just spread out among other partners? I am sure there are a bunch of other partners who would love to increase their equity. I have never worked for a law firm, but i did used to work for an engineering firm where i owned a bit of equity. And that is exactly what happened when a senior partner retired; everyone else was given a chance to buy his shares.

The firm was completely owned by Howard and Chuck.  I'm not sure what the setup was with the other partners, but they weren't partner enough to have their names added to the firm's.

[Kel Varnsen]

3 hours ago, smorbie said:

The firm was completely owned by Howard and Chuck.  I'm not sure what the setup was with the other partners, but they weren't partner enough to have their names added to the firm's.

Did they actually say that somewhere? Most of my knowledge of legal firms comes from law shows but isn't it pretty common for law firms to make their senior lawyers partners in the firm? Obviously not named partners, but i would think other lawyers would own a piece of the firm wouldn't they?

[Gobi]

23 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Did they actually say that somewhere? Most of my knowledge of legal firms comes from law shows but isn't it pretty common for law firms to make their senior lawyers partners in the firm? Obviously not named partners, but i would think other lawyers would own a piece of the firm wouldn't they?

Law firms often have partners who are not named in the firm name. They would have a smaller share in the firm.

[Parker]

On ‎6‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 11:24 PM, Bryce Lynch said:

Did Gus give Hector the real CPR or the Nacho's switched pills version of CPR? :)  The show was getting really depressing until we finally got some good news with Hector having his heart attack/stroke.

It was heartbreaking to see Chuck tear his house apart looking for the stray current.  It reminded me of the final scene of "The Conversation" when Gene Hackman tore apart his apartment looking for the bug.  I hope he survives the fire, but I am not optimistic.

Kim has gone from workaholic to slacker.  Hopefully she can find a middle ground after she recovers.

Good for Jimmy for making things right with Irene.  I guess he hasn't completely given himself over to the dark side after all.  

The Cinnabon scenes have always been in the season premieres, not the finales.

And I think it's meant to show where Jimmy ends up and then flash back to how he got there.  No reason to do that on a finale.

[INailedRogerRabbit]

Chuck.He wanted to be filled around with colleagues, wish granted where he actually smiled to some people. I mostly enjoyed the unheard but handshaking of both hands by the janitor whom I forgot the name and I don't want to say what I think it is because I will butcher it, it is not a spanish name people think of easily. Anyway, he seemed to ask "did you get fired?" and Chucks facially says "no no, don't worry". That was touching that the likely less paid person in the building was the most preoccupied by Chuck leaving this way. He likely heard the orders passed down before Howard cancelled an upbeat jazz band for his retirement party. Maybe he didn't.

 

Reading about 9 pages, no, I watched over and over and he's not attached to the couch with cables or ropes or anything, he's just catatonic except for that right foot he kept on kicking. It was a metaphor brought to life, he kicked the bucket(lantern), nothing more far fetched.

I throughly enjoy the Mike/cartel/funny crooked vet and also how Saul tried to help him, which he did but not in the way he expected. I think he just was used to listen to tapes of Mike's bug where the whirling of Jimmy's messed up Suzuki (or is it Isuzu) Esteem. That's how he will become a P.I., I expect season 4 to have a lot more time on Mike (if season 4 is the last, maybe Mr. Banks' last role so...that'll be his time to be in the sunshine). The Jimmy part will be rough as all hell, but maybe at least for half a season Kim will be able to do like Jimmy, who's renewed love and heart which was less blackened after taking on Chuck and winning, something he never did since Chuck started to treat him badly, so, I expect their relationship to be more solid than ever and no more going to bars where he said he would offer Gizelle St-Claire's land in South Africa "mining rights" to that guy, that was like, screw whoever you want Kim, I don't care. Which was a heartbreaking scene but from a previous episode.

Gus had to act this way so that nothing seemed suspicious. I wonder what he thinks Nacho did though. There's no proof, as he was busy doing CPR, that he didn't just put back just enough and not all of the pills in the bottles since many went flying and just put in enough so that it wouldn't be suspicious. Yet Gus looked at him and it seems like it cut before Gus said "He had better live.". Otherwise Gus has no reason to suspect Nacho of anything so complicated.

Nacho's story which came from one line in BrBa from Saul....it's bound to end badly and I fear for him, he's the kind of drug dealer every pothead appreciates, the calm, no talking shit, no violence, no fronting kind of guy, unnecessary violence for 20 dollars or so missing from Krazy-8 when one of his guy pulled a Skinny Pete he listened, like Walt would have and politely told him to make it up next week (Walt would have been a hardass as we all know) but Tuco? Would have been...maybe Krazy-8 would be dead for 20 bucks (if anything, it seemed like an amount less than 100 dollars). He's gonna have to explain himself for some reason to "Lalo" whom Saul also mentions in Season 2 Episode 8 "Better Call Saul". He thinks Lalo (Eduardo said in a kid who learning to talk's way of spelling) sent him regarding a certain thing a "Ignacio" did. Nacho is Ignacio, we all know that.

I bet s04 will be very strong. As for Kim, I could see her work from her home for a while at least like Jimmy suggested, and he will be delighted to see her home when he comes  home during his what, 11 months of purgatory left? My bet is that he will find a way to get out of that purgatory, while going to war against Howard whom he will blame for Chuck's death and likely start proceedings to get Chuck's estate +what Howard was going to give Chuck + the Sandpiper settlement. And that's how he will have enough money to hire Mike permanently as a P.I., once he gets his license and all, I imagine he starts doing so in Colorado, if Pollos Hermanos has a restaurant there already, it seemed to me like there is only one in 2003 and it's in Albuquerque.

We might also get some interesting scenes from Hector who will try to take decisions even when crippled and it'll be sad even for someone as horrible as Tio Hector Salamanca to see him ignored by Bolsa and Eladio, likely giving him some kind of buyout. I was seeing parallels between Hector and Chuck all season, something for some reason I find obvious, especially when he mentions that he bought Eladio's house, he started their cartel, etc. like how Chuck turned a tiny practice into one of the largest firms in NM.

I feel it's going to be good and better than 95% of what's on TV right now. What is it, the sentence people used in the late 90's/early 2000's when people were saying of the Simpsons, it's still the best show on TV. To people bashing season 7 episodes. Hah, looking in archives of newsgroups, people were bashing the show on season 3 of the Simpsons saying it lost its ways. The golden years for that one were season 4 to 8 and with some good episodes in 9-10. That's mostly when people would throw that line. Feelin' nostalgic tonight, oh well. I just have nothing to watch, finished watching Billions and before that Fargo. The show I still find myself doing rewatches the most remains BrBa, proving how superior it was, to me, at least.

I'm also wondering what Gene pulling a Walt in the Cinnabon leads....I hope he doesn't die, the arc of the story wouldn't make if he was just to die in those black and white crappy future he predicted he would have, also, he thought you got to pick the state you moved in, Jesse could have ended up in Kentucky.....that wouldn't have worked for him. It's funny how he got his future predicted like that, unless he knew right after the photo taking for the fake ID  but we didn't get to see that.

[INailedRogerRabbit]

And I'm new here, sorry about that, it doesn't seem I can edit my post but. If I had an arm broken in multiple fractures like Kim. A joke about the "proverbial good stuff" from a friend asking if they gave me anything for the pain and of course they would have in such an accident and at least 2 fractures or more in one arm. She was given a script with no refill, because you don't get refills unless you're at a pain clinic for a chronic problem. This is an acute problem anti-inflammatories alone like Ibuprofen (Advil/Motrin but if you're not a goof you buy the generics). Studies upon studies show that people although they enjoy the little high what one in her position would get, either codeine+tylenol or hydrocodone+tylenol, a 30 count max. I'm sorry but people who go into harder stuff bought elsewhere in the streets, don't do so from an oral medication like this for moderate pain. Likely like most people she will not even finish her script and it will stay in the bathroom in a drawer with about 8-10 left. Most people do that in case they hurt themselves bad and that would help right away if they have to wait it out at the ER. She didn't get oxycodone, or if she did, it was the 5mg ones, 10mg tops. Oxycontin goes up to 80mg, to be released on 12 hours yes. She likely didn't get Morphine or Dilaudid if my research about the US's prescription habits as they are weak orally and 5mg morphine tablets do absolutely nothing to a grown adult, they are for kids. Oral is different than IV'ing.

 

I only see political views inserted by...viewers who choose to insert this view for no reason other than to annoy anyone who works in the medical field. I won't say exactly what it is that I do, but, I'm the step over the Pharmacist, and not that's not doctors, doctors do not get many pharmacology classes so my GP is pretty straight up with me,we can talk about things I'm sure he never speaks of with many of his patients. I just said what my field was. I tend not to armchair police forums about how you have to be dying of aids and cancer at the same time to get 15mg of codeine on your death bed. Snark aside, I assume from others that they don't speak of what they don't know anything about except fearporn stories in the news. The reason there's so many heroin deaths is because the US rescheduled hydrocodone when with tylenol or ibuprofen, which made it schedule IV. Up north we only have pure hydrocodone tablets, many people get it or the syrup as an antitussive, there's no news for the ratings about opioids.

Please keep that in mind, as a pain patient, who has to go to the pain doctor every month, for 3 pain conditions at once, that only got worse from steroid injections....oh boy do they love those marcaine, lidocaine (topical anaesthetic) + cortisone and will give them so much that one of the person I met at the pain clinic waiting room, he had 19 and 21 shoulder injections of cortisone in his osteoporosis ruined shoulders and he was a construction worker before he was put on full on disability, which he hates, he's a the kind of guy that works with his hands and I went to his house a few times to repair his computer and he would swear so much against technology and how everyone who claims to repair his computer just breaks it. But he would have his bookmarks as files all over his desktop, not using the bookmarks menu. He wouldn't understand it. And no, it wasn't the 60mg of Hydromorphone he was on a day that made him not get it. So for that guy, it's even worse, no prospect of a job, nothing. I think compassion has to be put back into the medical field, some doctors are full of good intentions. I say, before showing up at the doctor and ask for pills right away, ask for x-rays, scans of any kind because something in your body really hurts, may it be the back or other things. They can find things there like hernias and you can have them taken out, and when they are found you are prescribed NSAIDs and painkillers because hernias, multiple hernias like an uncle I know, he walks with his head perpendicular to the floor at times, doctors won't attempt removing them claiming its too dangerous and he's only given NSAIDs, and this is up north, no DEA watching over the doctor's shoulder, which there shouldn't be. Cortisone injections help him but he's gonna end up at 50 year old unable to work on muscle relaxants and painkillers, because that's what highly physical jobs do the body when one does 16 hour shifts 6 days a week.

[Bryce Lynch]

On 8/9/2017 at 3:59 PM, smorbie said:

The firm was completely owned by Howard and Chuck.  I'm not sure what the setup was with the other partners, but they weren't partner enough to have their names added to the firm's.

A partner in a firm, is by definition a part owner.  Some large accounting firms have thousands of partners, but only 2 or 3 partners (usually ones who are dead) are in the name of the firm.  It is possible for a partnership to be effectively controlled by 1 or 2 partners, if those partners own over 50% of the equity and voting rights.  That might be the situation with HHM.  It is also possible that the Howard has the backing of partners with a sufficient percentage of voting power to effectively control the firm.

[axlmadonna]

On ‎6‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 8:56 AM, Eyes High said:

While I do believe Howard fancies himself a mannered old-school gentleman lawyer in the style of Atticus Finch, he, like all people, has limits. He has put up with a lot of bullshit from Jimmy, Chuck, and yes, even Kim over the course of the series, and he has a whole law firm to protect. I don't get the sense that he's petty and vindictive so much that he's 1,000% done with their nonsense and not afraid to say so.

(Bolding mine, for emphasis.)

Really? Not even when he passive-aggressively humiliated Kim in front of her clients at the restaurant? Or when he kept her stuck in doc review, even after she worked her ass off to bring in a new multi-million dollar client? Or the way he treated her with complete contempt and condescension, such as walking down the hallway to meet those new clients while rudely ignoring her? I think he's been extremely petty and vindictive toward Kim, at the very least. And he was complicit in quite a bit of Chuck's petty vindictiveness toward Jimmy.

[Jextella]

I don't pick up on pettiness on Howard's part at all.  He has been more than patient with Jimmy, Chuck, and Kim, IMO.  I think there was a bit of vindictiveness, however, in how he treated Kim.  Frustrated by the brothers, Kim supporting Jimmy more than Howard, etc. She was an easy and available target on whom he could unleash his frustrations.

I also think that Howard sends messages to all his attorneys that this is serious business.  Mess up and you're in doc review.  I've never worked in a law firm, so I guess I don't know for sure, but it would seem that performance standards are higher than the average office.

Regardless, at this juncture, it seems Howard is cognizant and respectful of the human element but that at the end of the day, he is protecting his clients and his firm.

I love the Howard character and hope he doesn't go away on the heel's of Chuck's demise!  BCS is fascinating because all the main characters are intriguing - at least to me.   I'd watch spin-offs of Nacho, Howard, Kim, and Chuck!

Edited August 23, 2017 by Jextella

[lucindabelle]

what was Mike doing to the gas cap?

 

Jimmy isn't going to become Saul because he turns BAD, I think, but because he needs new clients and the way the con doing community service reacted with admiration shows that Jimmy has a whole untouched clientele out there.

 

Kim adoring "To Kill a Mockingbird" suggests she may rethink her career path. I sure didn't see her as a slacker for being realistic about her need to heal, and as someone who had foot surgery last summer, I absolutely agree with INailedRogerRabbit that her "the good stuff" is just a stray comment. I have pills left from last summer...I think one or two oxycodone left. Similarly every time we see a character on TV enjoying a drink it is not a sign that they are becoming an alcoholic.

 

I hated Chuck and am glad to see the end of him though a little sad he never saw into himself at all. I agree that he said Jimmy didn't matter to him because it was the most hurtful thing he could say. It very clearly isn't true, so clearly that it made him sick. All of his illness is his conscience manifesting, in my opinion. He has repressed his emotions so terribly. I usually am onto myself but once I kept working right after a beloved pet died, then a few hours later threw up, got a migraine, and within a few days got pleurisy. I get it.

 

ETA: realized also today while driving to work that Chuck began to heal once he had decided to leave his vendetta behind. When he pulled it back in, all of his subconscious illness came swarming back.

 

As for what Jimmy did when he was 9-- nothing, in my opinion. I think that's just Chuck's jealousy. He probably always thought Jimmy "got away" with stuff. I don't think the age difference is greater than 10 years. Bob Odenkirk is 54 and looks it. Even in this series when he's meant to be younger he looks mid-40s. 15 years at the outside. The reading in the tent flashback looked like a difference of 10-12 years.

Edited September 11, 2017 by lucindabelle

[ByTor]

On 9/10/2017 at 11:16 PM, lucindabelle said:

I absolutely agree with INailedRogerRabbit that her "the good stuff" is just a stray comment. I have pills left from last summer...I think one or two oxycodone left. Similarly every time we see a character on TV enjoying a drink it is not a sign that they are becoming an alcoholic.

Good for you for not becoming addicted to your painkillers, not everyone is that fortunate, but being that this is a show about a lawyer who in the future profits from illegal drugs, I can see his getting his start by defending someone close to him like Kim.  Similarly, if Jimmy's future as Saul were to be a defender of drunk drivers, a character enjoying a drink may be a tip-off.  All just my opinion, of course, and I can't wait to see how this next season plays out, whether I'm right or dead wrong!

[Irlandesa]

4 hours ago, ByTor said:

I can see his getting his start by defending someone close to him like Kim. Similarly, if Jimmy's future as Saul were to be a defender of drunk drivers, a character enjoying a drink may be a tip-off.

It's hard to know because I don't think the writers are even 100% of where they are going next.  The "good stuff" could mean something or it could mean nothing.  I will say, though, that defending a user (as in your DUI example) and defending a dealer are two different things.  Kim, if she becomes addicted, would be a user. Saul has already gotten his start in season 1 when he defended Nacho.  I think Nacho needing a lawyer again is the quickest way for him to enter that milieu again.  I will admit that if drugs destroy Kim, I have a hard time believing Saul would defend the dealers.

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

It's hard to know because I don't think the writers are even 100% of where they are going next.  The "good stuff" could mean something or it could mean nothing. 

Certainly IRL, it might not mean anything significant, but in a script, each word should count. So it could point towards Kim developing a drug problem, or it could be there just to throw us off so we don't notice something that's just barely hinted at. Or maybe Kim gets framed for dealing drugs or drugging someone.

[ByTor]

2 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I will say, though, that defending a user (as in your DUI example) and defending a dealer are two different things. 

True, but in defending Kim, it might be how he gets "in" with some of the bigger players.  Or maybe it's not Kim he defends, but her dealer.  I do agree, I don't think even the showrunners are 100% sure about where they're going next.

Edited September 18, 2017 by ByTor

[Irlandesa]

8 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Certainly IRL, it might not mean anything significant, but in a script, each word should count. So it could point towards Kim developing a drug problem, or it could be there just to throw us off so we don't notice something that's just barely hinted at.

It can still count even if it doesn't lead to a bigger problem.  For instance, just the kind of joking way she talked about "the good stuff" could be important simply as a way to nod at a simpler time when prescription pill addictions existed but weren't as widely acknowledged to be the epidemic it is now.

[Bryce Lynch]

I have been rewatching seasons 1 and 2, and noticed that Dr. Cruz more or less called Chuck's cause of death back in Season 1 Episode 5.  "Coleman lanterns indoors, a camp stove? I mean, he could burn his house down or the entire neighborhood, and then you're looking at a commitment of 10 to 20 years. "

[Captanne]

Is Dr. Cruz the same one who proved that Chuck's illness was mental when they were in the hospital?

[Clanstarling]

4 hours ago, Captanne said:

Is Dr. Cruz the same one who proved that Chuck's illness was mental when they were in the hospital?

Yes. 

[Captanne]

Thanks!  The minute that happened, I was over Chuck and just in it for McKean's performance.  The brother dynamics (frustration and all) were worth the price of admission.  But I never gave Chuck another inch on his illness other than being mental manifesting itself physically.  (As proven for a second time in the hearing.)

I never warmed to that character at all.

[Clanstarling]

2 hours ago, Captanne said:

Thanks!  The minute that happened, I was over Chuck and just in it for McKean's performance.  The brother dynamics (frustration and all) were worth the price of admission.  But I never gave Chuck another inch on his illness other than being mental manifesting itself physically.  (As proven for a second time in the hearing.)

I never warmed to that character at all.

I'm not sure we were supposed to. Michael McKean's performance, throughout, was brilliant though. 

His character wasn't wrong about Jimmy, but was so bitter, negative, and devious in his own right, even though we knew he was right, we hated him. (we, as in those who responded to the character that way. As with everything, mileage varies.) 

[qtpye]

On 2/21/2018 at 9:20 AM, Clanstarling said:

I'm not sure we were supposed to. Michael McKean's performance, throughout, was brilliant though. 

His character wasn't wrong about Jimmy, but was so bitter, negative, and devious in his own right, even though we knew he was right, we hated him. (we, as in those who responded to the character that way. As with everything, mileage varies.) 

Not to mention, quite an entitled special little snowflake.  McKean's performance was on point to make us feel all these complex emotions.  Also, Jimmy has been looking good by comparison and not anything like the low life we first meet in Breaking Bad.

[ByTor]

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 9:20 AM, Clanstarling said:

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 6:25 AM, Captanne said:

Thanks!  The minute that happened, I was over Chuck and just in it for McKean's performance.  The brother dynamics (frustration and all) were worth the price of admission.  But I never gave Chuck another inch on his illness other than being mental manifesting itself physically.  (As proven for a second time in the hearing.)

I never warmed to that character at all.

I'm not sure we were supposed to. Michael McKean's performance, throughout, was brilliant though. 

His character wasn't wrong about Jimmy, but was so bitter, negative, and devious in his own right, even though we knew he was right, we hated him. (we, as in those who responded to the character that way. As with everything, mileage varies.) 

That's the weird thing.  I did hate Chuck, but at the same time I couldn't, because Michael McKean was so damn good that you (at least I) saw something beyond a one-note jackass.

[Clanstarling]

8 hours ago, ByTor said:

That's the weird thing.  I did hate Chuck, but at the same time I couldn't, because Michael McKean was so damn good that you (at least I) saw something beyond a one-note jackass.

He was - but I can hate a multi-layered ass as well. :) You're a better person than I.