S04.E02: Breathe

[Clanstarling]

5 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Gus Fring has never made much sense to me.  He has all this wealth and all this power and he has to hide it, 24/7.  He never seems to get a chance to enjoy it.  Instead, he's teaching new LPH employees how to use the fryer properly.  He's sweeping up the garbage in the parking lot, for heaven's sake! How is he different from Gene?  Has his whole life's work been to get revenge on Hector? What a waste. 

I've always seen it as a remembrance of his partner/lover. I believe it was this restaurant (or something like it) they were trying to get Don Eladio to help fund. So for me it's his touchstone both for love - and hate.

4 hours ago, Bannon said:

Pollos Hermanos is a wholly owned subsidiary of Madrigal. in BB, after Gus was murdered, and his drug distribution business was revealed, Madrigal's German Headquarters were shown, and it was revealed that Madrigal's CEO was in on it, and as German law enforcement arrived to question him, he commited suicide with a defribillator.

My guess is that Gus pitched Pollos Hermanos to Madrigal's CEO as an acquisition, so Gus and the cartel could get easy access to meth precursors, at this time used in Mexico, and was giving a cut of meth profits to the CEO. Walter White's superior manufacturing techniques eventually become available, and Gus decides to move manufacturing to the U.S., and begins his revenge plot on Don Eladio.

The plotting on this show and BB is really great.

 

(edit) Now that I remember better, I think it more likely that Gus planned to eventually move manufacturing to the U.S. all the time, and then wipe out Don Eladio's organization. Walter White's superior manufacturing techniques just arrived coincidentally with Gus getting his U.S. superlab constructed, and Gus just saw it as good fortune that he would be able to pair Walter with his own chemist, Gayle Boettinger. Oops.

Like I said, the plotting in this universe is ingenious.

I always imagined Gus owned Madrigal - through a dummy company in Germany. That the restaurant, Madrigal, etc., all serve both as a money laundering service, and to serve his drug business. Though, I guess at this point, he wouldn't have had that kind of money ponied up. But maybe his Chilean relatives do.

[Bannon]

9 minutes ago, Clanstarling said:

I've always seen it as a remembrance of his partner/lover. I believe it was this restaurant (or something like it) they were trying to get Don Eladio to help fund. So for me it's his touchstone both for love - and hate.

I always imagined Gus owned Madrigal - through a dummy company in Germany. That the restaurant, Madrigal, etc., all serve both as a money laundering service, and to serve his drug business. Though, I guess at this point, he wouldn't have had that kind of money ponied up. But maybe his Chilean relatives do.

It's all just guesswork by us, but my sense of it is that Madrigal is a huge multinational conglomerate, with a market cap well over 100 billion dollars, and thus it is publicly traded with well dispersed ownership. Gus at some point was introduced to the CEO, and identified him as someone he could gain influence over by blackmail and/or bribery, aided by the fact that Pollos Hermanos is a legitimately attractive fast food company to acquire. Gus could have been a multimillionaire purely via fried chicken!

It'll be fun if Gilligan and Gould give us a well written back story on this!

[shapeshifter]

The unintentional (not mentioned in the podcast) theme of the episode seems to be bad bosses: Gus, the Neffs, Howard, and Lydia.

 

Even more unintentional: Last week's episode of Elementary was also titled, "Breathe."

[SunnyBeBe]

2 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

I think all of the henchmen remained in place when Gus walked away.  There was an overhead shot.  There was no way Nacho was going to be allowed to help Arturo. 

Anyone who has ever had a laryngospasm or severe asthma attack or near drowning will attest that it is terrifying.  Sheer panic.

Yeah, I underestimated the distance from one dock to another in a lake once.  On the way back, swimming with friends, I realized that I was in trouble. It had been a few years since my college swim class and I knew to stop, calm myself....and called out to a friend to help me.  THANK goodness, she heard the panic in my voice, swam back and helped me back to the dock.  Way too far from shore.  It was scary and I learned my lesson.  You can tread water, but, it's not as easy in rougher water and when you're stranded. 

[SHD]

I'm enjoying this season but am starting to think that the storylines are at a point where not having seen BB is going to make it harder to put some pieces together. 

[SoMuchTV]

4 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

From moderator Dougal on February 11, 2015:  "The general guideline for the site is to try to avoid big spoilers for shows other than the one whose forum you're in, at least for a few years. There's not a formal policy about it as far as I know, but that's the polite thing to do.

In the case of a spinoff, though, it really seems ungainly to try to enforce that, and barely anyone in the episode threads and nobody here has said they haven't watched Breaking Bad. So, let's go with the obvious choice and declare no need for spoiler tags for Breaking Bad here, for anything."

There's also a thread called something like "Better Talk Saul" that's described as:

>>Here's a place for Breaking Bad-free talk. If you've watched any of the original series, you're welcome to post in here, but don't bring up Breaking Bad. (This is the equivalent of the Game of Thrones "No Book Talk" threads, not the Unsullied.)

It's not pinned and it's fallen down a bit on the page, but I think the intention was to have a spoiler-free place for anyone who hadn't watched BB (but apparently intended to?)

[DangerousMinds]

39 minutes ago, SoMuchTV said:

There's also a thread called something like "Better Talk Saul" that's described as:

>>Here's a place for Breaking Bad-free talk. If you've watched any of the original series, you're welcome to post in here, but don't bring up Breaking Bad. (This is the equivalent of the Game of Thrones "No Book Talk" threads, not the Unsullied.)

It's not pinned and it's fallen down a bit on the page, but I think the intention was to have a spoiler-free place for anyone who hadn't watched BB (but apparently intended to?)

There really isn't much discussion there, though.

[StatMom]

7 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

This makes more sense to me than the theory that he had too much disdain for the two men to work for them.  I didn't see his performance as a con but as a demonstration of what a fantastic salesman he would be and I thought they were smart to hire him on the spot -- providing they check his references that afternoon.  His spiel about the copier being the heartbeat of the office reminded me of Don Draper's performances for clients on "Mad Men," and while all advertising is a con in a very broad sense, it really isn't the same as Slippin' Jimmy's cons.

That is exactly what I thought of as well! The Kodak Carousel presentation in particular. In both scenarios, they relied on storytelling and emotion rather than a straight-up list of facts, features, or qualifications. Becoming a lawyer really was a perfect outlet for Jimmy: he could use his natural gift of gab in a legitimate context. 

[Quilt Fairy]

5 hours ago, SHD said:

I'm enjoying this season but am starting to think that the storylines are at a point where not having seen BB is going to make it harder to put some pieces together. 

Of the 3 characters that make the jump from BB to BCS, we first see the backstories of Saul(Jimmy) and Mike in this show, but the backstory of Gus was detailed in BB.  I guess that's why I brought up the spoiler issue, although I fully agree that it's unreasonable to expect a spin-off show forum to be spoiler-free 5 years after its parent show ended.

If you really haven't seen BB, you should.  Excellent writing, a coherent story-arc over all 6 seasons, the best cast imaginable and the craftsmanship in each episode (editing, directing, cinematography, music score, etc.) was amazing. 

Edited August 16, 2018 by Quilt Fairy

[FortKnox]

Here are my thoughts as the last scene plays out.

*Nacho and Arturo go to meet Gus's men*

Me: Oh something very bad is going to happen.

*Gus's men give them the rest of the drugs*

Arturo: Yeah that's what I thought.

Me: Dude watch your back.

*Nacho and Arturo are walking away*

Arturo: Told you it'd be a piece of cake.

Me: Hey dumbass watch your back.

*Gus's men attack them*

Me: SEE I TOLD YOU TO WATCH YOUR BACK YOU DUMBASS

*Arturo dies*

Me: Well that's what you get for being an arrogant dumbass.

[Captanne]

Tried to watch this on Tuesday and was interrupted.  Got to finish it last night -- so I'm going to resurrect the Kim observations we had a page ago.  I love Kim and I absolutely agree she is one of the best crafted women characters on television.  I am still stuck on the banishment to lawyer-siberia in the file room and her lack of ability to stick up for herself -- except passively by almost killing herself over-working to prove herself.  (I put a man in that role and I still have criticisms.)  

As gratifying as her anger with Howard was in this episode (the performance was amazing throughout the scene -- she was and is a consummate professional) - it was still on Jimmy's behalf. She is a lot of a martyr.  She will suffer the slings and arrows in silence but when it comes to Jimmy she comes out swinging.  Well done -- but that doesn't make the file room episode any better for me and my tastes (which are what form most of my opinion here.)

 

ETA:  Interestingly, in an otherwise visibly pretty passionless relationship, protecting Jimmy is what turns her on.  Try my mental gymnastic and change genders in that setup.  Woman is harmed behind her back, man races to her rescue, vanquishes the bad guy, and comes home to passionately embrace the woman without telling her why.  It's slightly patronizing.  

Which is what makes this show fascinating to me.  It's making me think and throw out ideas and toss things around.  I love that.  And I do love the character of Kim --she's complicated because she's female and being portrayed by the cast and crew in such a unique way for mainstream television.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Captanne

[ShadowFacts]

32 minutes ago, Captanne said:

Tried to watch this on Tuesday and was interrupted.  Got to finish it last night -- so I'm going to resurrect the Kim observations we had a page ago.  I love Kim and I absolutely agree she is one of the best crafted women characters on television.  I am still stuck on the banishment to lawyer-siberia in the file room and her lack of ability to stick up for herself -- except passively by almost killing herself over-working to prove herself.  (I put a man in that role and I still have criticisms.)  

As gratifying as her anger with Howard was in this episode (the performance was amazing throughout the scene -- she was and is a consummate professional) - it was still on Jimmy's behalf. She is a lot of a martyr.  She will suffer the slings and arrows in silence but when it comes to Jimmy she comes out swinging.  Well done -- but that doesn't make the file room episode any better for me and my tastes (which are what form most of my opinion here.)

 

ETA:  Interestingly, in an otherwise visibly pretty passionless relationship, protecting Jimmy is what turns her on.  Try my mental gymnastic and change genders in that setup.  Woman is harmed behind her back, man races to her rescue, vanquishes the bad guy, and comes home to passionately embrace the woman without telling her why.  It's slightly patronizing.  

Which is what makes this show fascinating to me.  It's making me think and throw out ideas and toss things around.  I love that.  And I do love the character of Kim --she's complicated because she's female and being portrayed by the cast and crew in such a unique way for mainstream television.

You make interesting points.  I can't say I disagree with your analysis, but would add two things.  Her explosion at Howard might not have been solely to defend Jimmy, it may be fueled by the cumulative effects of Howard's post-file room treatment of her where he continued to be dismissive and tried to marginalize her.  She had enough.  As to being turned on by protecting Jimmy, it is interesting that she did not want his help in fixing anything with her previous Howard-related problems, but she is eager to jump in on Jimmy's behalf.  She is doing what she didn't want Jimmy doing for her. 

[JudyObscure]

20 minutes ago, Captanne said:

Tried to watch this on Tuesday and was interrupted.  Got to finish it last night -- so I'm going to resurrect the Kim observations we had a page ago.  I love Kim and I absolutely agree she is one of the best crafted women characters on television.  I am still stuck on the banishment to lawyer-siberia in the file room and her lack of ability to stick up for herself -- except passively by almost killing herself over-working to prove herself.  (I put a man in that role and I still have criticisms.)  

As gratifying as her anger with Howard was in this episode (the performance was amazing throughout the scene -- she was and is a consummate professional) - it was still on Jimmy's behalf. She is a lot of a martyr.  She will suffer the slings and arrows in silence but when it comes to Jimmy she comes out swinging.  Well done -- but that doesn't make the file room episode any better for me and my tastes (which are what form most of my opinion here.)

 

ETA:  Interestingly, in an otherwise visibly pretty passionless relationship, protecting Jimmy is what turns her on.  Try my mental gymnastic and change genders in that setup.  Woman is harmed behind her back, man races to her rescue, vanquishes the bad guy, and comes home to passionately embrace the woman without telling her why.  It's slightly patronizing.  

Which is what makes this show fascinating to me.  It's making me think and throw out ideas and toss things around.  I love that.  And I do love the character of Kim --she's complicated because she's female and being portrayed by the cast and crew in such a unique way for mainstream television.

 I love complicated Kim, too, but I've never seen her as a martyr. I'm curious as to what you think she should have done to, "stick up for herself?"  She can scream at Howard now -- and I admit, I wasn't as impressed with that as most other people* -- but if she had done that during the banishment, I think she would have just been fired.  I didn't see sucking up the punishment as martyrdom, but as toughing out a rough patch.

I like your mental gymnastics on why she was turned on after protecting Jimmy ( I knew I wouldn't have been in the mood on that particular evening) but doing the same mental gymnastics on the Siberian exile, I don't think we would have seen a man in that position as a martyr but as someone who had chosen to grin and bear it.  I think we tend to charge women with the doormat label so much more often than men.

*As satisfying as it was for the Kim,  and the viewers,  to yell at Howard, I didn't need that to know Kim was strong.  I already knew that from how many embarrassing phone calls she was willing to make before she brought in a valuable client and how many hours she was willing to work, making sure every dash was improved by a semicolon and getting back to work while her arm is still broken.  I think I would have liked the Howard scene better with more controlled anger and less screaming.  I prefer Kim with her ponytail high and tightly wound.

[Captanne]

What she should have done?  (I'm a lawyer and worked in a niche law field for ten years in Washington, DC.)  First, stand up for yourself.  Change local firms.  If that doesn't work, move.  You never, ever have to suffer what she did.  We were not shown any strings on her that kept her suffering like that -- no kids, no crushing debt that couldn't have been paid for at another firm, no reason to put up with it.  My only rationale was that she refused to give up and felt (for some reason) that she couldn't leave Hamlin and Hamlin.

If the reason is that she can't leave Jimmy -- well, that's problematic for me, too.  (On a personal level, only in reverse.  X wanted to leave DC and I couldn't because of a law firm job and military service.  And other much more complicated RL reasons.)

 

NB:  I want to be careful that I don't get off on observations that really belong in a thread only devoted to Kim's character.  I think this is on topic because it really addresses her anger-scene in this episode with Howard.

[Bannon]

42 minutes ago, Captanne said:

What she should have done?  (I'm a lawyer and worked in a niche law field for ten years in Washington, DC.)  First, stand up for yourself.  Change local firms.  If that doesn't work, move.  You never, ever have to suffer what she did.  We were not shown any strings on her that kept her suffering like that -- no kids, no crushing debt that couldn't have been paid for at another firm, no reason to put up with it.  My only rationale was that she refused to give up and felt (for some reason) that she couldn't leave Hamlin and Hamlin.

If the reason is that she can't leave Jimmy -- well, that's problematic for me, too.  (On a personal level, only in reverse.  X wanted to leave DC and I couldn't because of a law firm job and military service.  And other much more complicated RL reasons.)

 

NB:  I want to be careful that I don't get off on observations that really belong in a thread only devoted to Kim's character.  I think this is on topic because it really addresses her anger-scene in this episode with Howard.

I don't disagree, but the employment options in Albuquerque, for ambitious lawyers, are on a much lower plane than larger American cities. Climbing out of the hole at HHM may have been the best choice. Now, after making some rain with Mesa Verde, THAT expanded her options, and was when Howard revealed himself to be a very poor manager, due to his insecurity. Like I said earlier, there is a storytelling opportunity here to now do something interesting with Howard, with Kim as the catalyst. I'll be interested to see if Gilligan and Gould go in that direction.

To add on, I'd really prefer to have Kim and Jimmy's relationship end on Kim's terms, at her discretion, and not due to some screw up or shennanigan by Jimmy that simply gives Kim no other choice.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bannon

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, Captanne said:

Tried to watch this on Tuesday and was interrupted.  Got to finish it last night -- so I'm going to resurrect the Kim observations we had a page ago.  I love Kim and I absolutely agree she is one of the best crafted women characters on television.  I am still stuck on the banishment to lawyer-siberia in the file room and her lack of ability to stick up for herself -- except passively by almost killing herself over-working to prove herself.  (I put a man in that role and I still have criticisms.)  

As gratifying as her anger with Howard was in this episode (the performance was amazing throughout the scene -- she was and is a consummate professional) - it was still on Jimmy's behalf. She is a lot of a martyr.  She will suffer the slings and arrows in silence but when it comes to Jimmy she comes out swinging.  Well done -- but that doesn't make the file room episode any better for me and my tastes (which are what form most of my opinion here.)

 

See, I totally get Kim in this. She has a course she's set on to prove herself (as much to herself as anyone else) and she'll do whatever it takes without complaint. The without complaint thing no doubt comes from something in her past - it doesn't make her weak or passive, in my opinion.  It shows a lot of strength to me. Action doesn't always equate strength. Now, when it comes to the people she loves, that's a different story. She's protective and when Jimmy's suffering, fiercely on his side.

42 minutes ago, Captanne said:

What she should have done?  (I'm a lawyer and worked in a niche law field for ten years in Washington, DC.)  First, stand up for yourself.  Change local firms.  If that doesn't work, move.  You never, ever have to suffer what she did.  We were not shown any strings on her that kept her suffering like that -- no kids, no crushing debt that couldn't have been paid for at another firm, no reason to put up with it.  My only rationale was that she refused to give up and felt (for some reason) that she couldn't leave Hamlin and Hamlin.

They paid for her law school, so she not only feels indebted, but is indebted.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Clanstarling

[Captanne]

That's right they did pay for her law school -- but a hostile work environment is justification for leaving.  If humiliation and being treated like an intern is not enough justification for Kim, well, that is the problem I had with her character.  (Which is limited, right?  I think she's a great female character if not one of the best on television.  This is what makes a relatively stoic character so fascinating for me.  Mike is stoic, too.  Come to think of it -- a lot of the style in this show is watching characters bottle up emotions in order to protect themselves.......)

[JudyObscure]

47 minutes ago, Captanne said:

What she should have done?  (I'm a lawyer and worked in a niche law field for ten years in Washington, DC.)  First, stand up for yourself.  Change local firms.  If that doesn't work, move. 

Oh, I understand you better now.  I thought you meant 'stand up for herself," within the firm and I couldn't see that helping her situation very much.  Clanstarling's point about Kim's indebtedness to Hamlin and Hamlin is reason enough to stay, to me,  but I am all for women changing jobs more often, particularly when sexual harassment is involved,  and I usually don't understand why they don't in those situations, but here, with Kim, I didn't see her treatment as something she shouldn't have put-up with for the short term.

[SunnyBeBe]

13 hours ago, SHD said:

I'm enjoying this season but am starting to think that the storylines are at a point where not having seen BB is going to make it harder to put some pieces together. 

Oh yes....I can't even imagine watching this show, without a very strong background with BB.  

[Bryce Lynch]

14 hours ago, Bannon said:

It's all just guesswork by us, but my sense of it is that Madrigal is a huge multinational conglomerate, with a market cap well over 100 billion dollars, and thus it is publicly traded with well dispersed ownership. Gus at some point was introduced to the CEO, and identified him as someone he could gain influence over by blackmail and/or bribery, aided by the fact that Pollos Hermanos is a legitimately attractive fast food company to acquire. Gus could have been a multimillionaire purely via fried chicken!

It'll be fun if Gilligan and Gould give us a well written back story on this!

I always assumed Fring entered an illicit strategic partnership with Peter Schuler, the head of Madrigal's restaurant division who killed himself with the defibrillator after Gus was killed and Madrigal's involvement in his drug ring was exposed.   I am wondering if Schuler assigned Lydia to work with Fring or if it was Lydia who introduced Schuler to Fring.  Maybe we will see Herr Schuler munching (less dejectedly) on some more food lab chicken nuggets this season.  

Has the current number of LPH locations been mentioned on the show.  On BB there were 14, but I don't recall seeing any indication that there are any in the current BCS timeline, besides the ABQ location.  It could be fun to see Gus's drug and chicken empires grow and his relationship to Schuler and Madrigal.  Maybe we'll even get to see a Luft Waffle mention.  In the scene at Madrigal headquarters, when the LPH logo was being taken down, you could briefly see a Luft Waffle sign on the wall, which was a gag by Gilligan.  There was also Burger-Matic  (BM) logo, which could be clearly seen.  That was a nod to the movie "Home Fries" which Gilligan wrote.  

[msrachelj]

On 8/13/2018 at 10:16 PM, benteen said:

I'll second that for Rhea Seehorn.  She was amazing in that scene with Howard.  Kind of felt bad for Howard there.

Definitely an improvement from last week.  Not perfect but better.

I still wish Jimmy's storyline revolved more around Gus, Mike and Nacho.  

I want to know what Chuck wrote Jimmy even though I know it's just going to be a final opportunity to demean and put Jimmy down.  

I definitely didn't expect Gus to be the one to carry out that killing at the end.  Nacho is the wild card of this show and his storylines are the most suspenseful of the show.

I enjoyed seeing hummels pop up but I can attest from personal experience that they aren't worth anything anymore.  This current generation doesn't collect like previous ones and the internet pretty much killed the market for them.

hummels are worthless. i don't think even whatever year this is supposed to be, that they were worth anything near what that said. i had a  a bunch from my m.i.l. that the consignment shop wouldn't even take.  good episode though. i want to know what is int he letter also.

[Bannon]

The more I think about this, the more I marvel at the skill in the story telling. Gilligan and Gould & Co. have now set up this interesting little parallel between Jimmy and Howard, who are both in the process of being humbled, which of course is nothing new for Jimmy, (although he still has a ways to go) but is something previously unknown for Howard. How will Howard react,  in comparison to Jimmy? What will Kim observe and influence? Kim's quite familiar with being humbled, of course,  and her response to it has been in some ways quite noble,  along with effective. What will her reaction be to these two persons response to being humbled? Will she make overt comparisons to her own response to being humbled, and find these two men entirely lacking? Just one? Will she decide that the specific application of her skill set at this time is beneath her, when she looks at Jimmy, Howard, and her Mesa Verde client?

It's a good thing that hardly any other television is this well written; I'd neglect too much of the rest of my life.

[Bryce Lynch]

54 minutes ago, Captanne said:

That's right they did pay for her law school -- but a hostile work environment is justification for leaving.  If humiliation and being treated like an intern is not enough justification for Kim, well, that is the problem I had with her character.  (Which is limited, right?  I think she's a great female character if not one of the best on television.  This is what makes a relatively stoic character so fascinating for me.  Mike is stoic, too.  Come to think of it -- a lot of the style in this show is watching characters bottle up emotions in order to protect themselves.......)

There was no "hostile work environment" at least not based upon any sort of discrimination of sexual harassment.  Kim had screwed up BIG TIME by badgering Howard into recommending to Davis & Main that they hire her, unethical, out of control boyfriend.   This caused a huge amount of embarrassment to Howard, damaged his reputation, and also caused him to no longer trust Kim's judgment. 

She also failed to tell Howard that Jimmy hadn't told her that he went rogue with the commercial and that the D&M partners were furious with him.  (He mislead her into believing Cliff was thrilled.)  So, as far as Howard knew, she withheld an important piece of information from him and hung him out to dry with D&M.  

 If you have no trust in an associates judgement and no trust that she will be open and honest with you,  it doesn't make a lot of sense to assign her to key roles on important cases.  

It was admirable the way Kim worked her butt off in doc review and spending her lunch breaks searching for new business, and finally landing Mesa Verde.  But, I think it was a bit presumptuous of her to think that it would automatically get her out of Howard's dog house.  Howard's issue was with her work ethic or ability to bring in business, it was about trust, and only he could decide when and if he would ever fully trust her again.  

[Bryce Lynch]

20 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

There was always a hint - and just a hint - that he was related to a powerful Chilean family, perhaps a dictator or ex-dictator.  That's why Hector killed his partner ( and likely lover) rather than Gus.  It's also why the Mexican cartel bosses never entirely trusted him. 

It occurs to me that we're getting into BB spoiler territory.  Does anyone care anymore? 

In one of the BB cold open flash forwards, Hector is on early brick cell phone discussing Fring with another cartel member (Bolsa?).  He mockingly refers to him as "Grand Generalissimo", which hints that he might have been a very, high ranking military commander in the Pinochet regime.   

Also, after Max is killed by Hector by the pool, Don Eladio tells him that the only reason that Max was dead and Gus was alive is that "I know who you are." and then reminds him that he is not in Chile anymore.  

It is also strongly suggested during Hank's questioning of him, that Gustavo Fring is not his real name, as they could find no records under that name in Chile.  Gus, attributed that to poor record keeping in 1980s Chile.  

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bryce Lynch

[Bannon]

31 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

There was no "hostile work environment" at least not based upon any sort of discrimination of sexual harassment.  Kim had screwed up BIG TIME by badgering Howard into recommending to Davis & Main that they hire her, unethical, out of control boyfriend.   This caused a huge amount of embarrassment to Howard, damaged his reputation, and also caused him to no longer trust Kim's judgment. 

She also failed to tell Howard that Jimmy hadn't told her that he went rogue with the commercial and that the D&M partners were furious with him.  (He mislead her into believing Cliff was thrilled.)  So, as far as Howard knew, she withheld an important piece of information from him and hung him out to dry with D&M.  

 If you have no trust in an associates judgement and no trust that she will be open and honest with you,  it doesn't make a lot of sense to assign her to key roles on important cases.  

It was admirable the way Kim worked her butt off in doc review and spending her lunch breaks searching for new business, and finally landing Mesa Verde.  But, I think it was a bit presumptuous of her to think that it would automatically get her out of Howard's dog house.  Howard's issue was with her work ethic or ability to bring in business, it was about trust, and only he could decide when and if he would ever fully trust her again.  

Good grief, then you just start out trusting her to bring in new business,  and pay her for it! This is what is known as managing the talent, which Howard is quite willing to accept a large salary for. You don't send her back doc review, unless you are an insecure blithering idiot,  who is abandoning your responsibilities to your partners, and other employees. The fact that Kim shortly  received an attractive offer from Schweikert is proof enough of Howard's ineptitude, and I suspect Howard knows it. Whether Howard will remain an insecure dolt is an interesting question going forward.

Frankly  the entire idea that Kim bears any responsibility for Howard's decisions, about an employee that Howard managed for 7 years, is very dubious. This wasn't a referral from Kim to Howard, about a person unknown to Howard.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bannon

[Bryce Lynch]

9 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Good grief, then you just start out trusting her to bring in new business,  and pay her for it! This is what is known as managing the talent, which Howard is quite willing to accept a large salary for. You don't send her back doc review, unless you are an insecure blithering idiot,  who is abandoning your responsibilities to your partners, and other employees. The fact that Kim shortly  received an attractive offer from Schweikert is proof enough of Howard's ineptitude, and I suspect Howard knows it. Whether Howard will remain an insecure dolt is an interesting question going forward.

Frankly  the entire idea that Kim bears any responsibility for Howard's decisions, about an employee that Howard managed for 7 years, is very dubious. This wasn't a referral from Kim to Howard, about a person unknown to Howard.

 

Lots of untrustworthy people can bring in business.  But, if you can't trust them, you can't trust them.  Kim showed extreme ineptitude in the area of judgment by pushing Howard to to push for Jimmy.   And based upon what she led Howard to believe, she couldn't be trusted to keep her senior partners informed of important information.    

Schweikert wasn't privy to what went on with Kim and Howard.

I love Kim, but she embarrassed Howard and then, as far as he knew, stabbed him in the back. She earned the cornfield, though it was largely Jimmy's fault.  She let her affection for Jimmy badly cloud her judgment, and then Jimmy totally screwed her over by pretending Cliff loved the add, when he was furious.  

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bryce Lynch

[Bannon]

11 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Lots of untrustworthy people can bring in business.  But, if you can't trust them, you can't trust them.  Kim showed extreme ineptitude in the area of judgment by pushing Howard to to push for Jimmy.   And based upon what she led Howard to believe, she couldn't be trusted to keep her senior partners informed of important information.    

Schweikert wasn't privy to what went on with Kim and Howard.

I love Kim, but she embarrassed Howard and then, as far as he knew, stabbed him in the back. She earned the cornfield, though it was largely Jimmy's fault.  She let her affection for Jimmy badly cloud her judgment, and then Jimmy totally screwed her over by pretending Cliff loved the add, when he was furious.  

It is simply contrary to reality to state that "lots" of any kind of people are good at bringing in business, in extraordinarily complex transactions like creating a major legal client on retainer. This is a very, very, very, rare skill, which is absolutely critical to the future of any firm, and if you are a senior partner in a large firm, and one of your associates has given indication that she may have it, your undeniable responsibility to your partners and other employees is to further explore that possibility,  and to nuture that talent. There is no other professionally responsible alternative. To send that employee back to doc review (and she shouldn't even be trusted with that, if Howard's legitimate level of distrust is that large) and invite her successful recruitment by a competitor, is simply dereliction of duty by Howard.

[ShadowFacts]

11 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Lots of untrustworthy people can bring in business.  But, if you can't trust them, you can't trust them.  Kim showed extreme ineptitude in the area of judgment by pushing Howard to to push for Jimmy.   And based upon what she led Howard to believe, she couldn't be trusted to keep her senior partners informed of important information.  

Schweikert wasn't privy to what went on with Kim and Howard.

I love Kim, but she embarrassed Howard and then, as far as he knew, stabbed him in the back. She earned the cornfield, though it was largely Jimmy's fault.  

There was no arm-twisting by anyone to get Jimmy over to D&M.  Howard knew Jimmy's "style" and kind of liked it.  Everyone was happy to share in the spoils of Jimmy's Sandpiper cases.  Howard was just pissy with Kim because he could be, he felt his image tarnished and she was the easy target.  This was not a matter of trust, and even if it was, what trust is earned back by doing document review?  In any case, Kim soldiered on, left HHM and here we are in this episode with Howard a little bit grovel-y, asking her what he can do to make things better.  Nice role reversal.  I enjoyed it, anyway.

[Bannon]

8 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

There was no arm-twisting by anyone to get Jimmy over to D&M.  Howard knew Jimmy's "style" and kind of liked it.  Everyone was happy to share in the spoils of Jimmy's Sandpiper cases.  Howard was just pissy with Kim because he could be, he felt his image tarnished and she was the easy target.  This was not a matter of trust, and even if it was, what trust is earned back by doing document review?  In any case, Kim soldiered on, left HHM and here we are in this episode with Howard a little bit grovel-y, asking her what he can do to make things better.  Nice role reversal.  I enjoyed it, anyway.

What is great about Gilligan and Gould's writing is that they go in both directions with characters. Sure, we mostly think of the characters that devolve in their Albuquerque universe, Walter, and then Skyler. Jimmy becoming Saul, of course. Even Mike. But they also have characters go in the other direction. Hank starts out as a largely unlikeable blowhard, endures terrible experiences, and by the time of his death has achieved a hugely greater sense of self awareness and large degree of nobility. Marie becomes a better person via her own and Hank's travails. Will Howard experience growth in self knowledge and thus become a better person? Kim is already a more evolved person, compared to most in this show, but will we she continue on that path, or will the destruction of her relationship with Jimmy involve her backsliding? How about Nacho?

Just magnificent storytelling, by writers confident enough to not rush things.

[Tikichick]

2 hours ago, Bannon said:

Good grief, then you just start out trusting her to bring in new business,  and pay her for it! This is what is known as managing the talent, which Howard is quite willing to accept a large salary for. You don't send her back doc review, unless you are an insecure blithering idiot,  who is abandoning your responsibilities to your partners, and other employees. The fact that Kim shortly  received an attractive offer from Schweikert is proof enough of Howard's ineptitude, and I suspect Howard knows it. Whether Howard will remain an insecure dolt is an interesting question going forward.

Frankly  the entire idea that Kim bears any responsibility for Howard's decisions, about an employee that Howard managed for 7 years, is very dubious. This wasn't a referral from Kim to Howard, about a person unknown to Howard.

I absolutely see Howard as extremely insecure, very ineffectively fronted with his wealth, education and position -- including his meticulous dress and office decor that Jimmy famously emulated.  Everybody knows he's at daddy's firm.  We know Chuck was incredibly intelligent and fanatically detail oriented -- and not a bit shy about schooling those he saw as beneath him.  We saw how Howard absolutely deferred to Chuck.   Whether Howard is able to confidently emerge from the shadow of his father or Chuck remains to be seen. 

Kim understands all of this about Howard.  She had no problem understanding that diminishing Howard's image or reputation in any way as his underling was going to be responded to strongly.  If he decided to be punitive about her leaving HHM at that point and demand full payment of her loans, which is a standard component of the tuition benefit at many companies, she knew it was beyond her grasp.   Making the choice to remain at HHM meant she had to prove herself more than worthy.

[smartymarty]

On 8/14/2018 at 4:44 PM, SunnyBeBe said:

I thought that when Kim stayed back to talk to Howard she was going to tell him they were going to contest the will.

Except that the will reflected exactly his demeanor. He loved his wife (ex-wife?) and was angry with his brother. Rebecca could contest it had he given everything to Jimmy, who had just fought him in front of the Bar. Chuck would not have given Jimmy anything regardless of Chuck's fear of electricity.

[Bryce Lynch]

3 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

There was no arm-twisting by anyone to get Jimmy over to D&M.  Howard knew Jimmy's "style" and kind of liked it.  Everyone was happy to share in the spoils of Jimmy's Sandpiper cases.  Howard was just pissy with Kim because he could be, he felt his image tarnished and she was the easy target.  This was not a matter of trust, and even if it was, what trust is earned back by doing document review?  In any case, Kim soldiered on, left HHM and here we are in this episode with Howard a little bit grovel-y, asking her what he can do to make things better.  Nice role reversal.  I enjoyed it, anyway.

When Howard told Chuck that Jimmy was with D&M he said, "Truth be told Kim Wexler pushed for this hard. "  I wouldn't call it arm twisting, but she clearly worked hard on Howard on Jimmy's behalf.  Even Kim blamed Jimmy, not Chuck or Howard.   

In  episode 206:

Jimmy:  I'm telling you Chuck is behind this.

Kim: No, you are behind this. I told you this would happen, and now I'm paying the price. I shoulda known better. So now I'm keeping my head down, and I'm getting through this. 

When you vouch for someone as strongly as Kim did, you put your own reputation on the line.  You are saying, "Trust me, this guy is a great fit!".  

Trust can be regained, but it usually takes time.  She was putting in good work in doc review and recruited Mesa Verde, which was a great start.  A few more months without any trust related problems and she might have been back in good standing.    Maybe if the next time she heard something that Howard would want to know she told him, instead of letting him twist in the wind, his trust would be fully restored.  (Of course Kim really didn't know the TV ad was unauthorized and that Jimmy was in deep trouble with D&M, but she allowed Howard to believe that was the case, so he reasonably believe she had screwed him over on that.)

[Bryce Lynch]

9 minutes ago, smartymarty said:

Except that the will reflected exactly his demeanor. He loved his wife (ex-wife?) and was angry with his brother. Rebecca could contest it had he given everything to Jimmy, who had just fought him in front of the Bar. Chuck would not have given Jimmy anything regardless of Chuck's fear of electricity.

I don't know.  I think before the Mesa Verde fiasco, Chuck might have left Jimmy a significant inheritance, out of gratitude for all Jimmy did for him during his "illness".  I could actually see him calculating the cost of all the ice, bacon, juice, tea, steaks, newspapers, etc. that Jimmy brought him over that year or so, along with the value of Jimmy's time, and then maybe adding a generous tip.   :)

[Bannon]

5 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

When Howard told Chuck that Jimmy was with D&M he said, "Truth be told Kim Wexler pushed for this hard. "  I wouldn't call it arm twisting, but she clearly worked hard on Howard on Jimmy's behalf.  Even Kim blamed Jimmy, not Chuck or Howard.   

In  episode 206:

Jimmy:  I'm telling you Chuck is behind this.

Kim: No, you are behind this. I told you this would happen, and now I'm paying the price. I shoulda known better. So now I'm keeping my head down, and I'm getting through this. 

When you vouch for someone as strongly as Kim did, you put your own reputation on the line.  You are saying, "Trust me, this guy is a great fit!".  

Trust can be regained, but it usually takes time.  She was putting in good work in doc review and recruited Mesa Verde, which was a great start.  A few more months without any trust related problems and she might have been back in good standing.    Maybe if the next time she heard something that Howard would want to know she told him, instead of letting him twist in the wind, his trust would be fully restored.  (Of course Kim really didn't know the TV ad was unauthorized and that Jimmy was in deep trouble with D&M, but she allowed Howard to believe that was the case, so he reasonably believe she had screwed him over on that.)

Again, Howard managed Jimmy for 7 years. The idea that her endorsement is meaningful, in terms of where the responsibility lies for insecure Howard's embarassment, is frankly ridiculous. Howard is getting paid to ignore his precious feelings, and pay attention to what serves the interests of HHM best. What clearly served the interests of HHM best was to not drive an associate who had displayed the rare talent of obtaining new major clients, to being recruited by a major competitor. Howard needs start earning his pay.

[Bannon]

33 minutes ago, smartymarty said:

Except that the will reflected exactly his demeanor. He loved his wife (ex-wife?) and was angry with his brother. Rebecca could contest it had he given everything to Jimmy, who had just fought him in front of the Bar. Chuck would not have given Jimmy anything regardless of Chuck's fear of electricity.

People can sue for anything, of course, and often do, but I kind of look at contesting the will as a real long shot. It is not as if leaving nearly all of your net worth to an exwife with whom you had an amicable divorce, mostly cutting out a brother with whom you had a very up and down relationship, is on its face evidence of incompetence.

Jimmy isn't above a long shot lawsuit,  of course, but it would surprise me in this instance.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bannon

[Tikichick]

I don't think the Jimmy before the blowout with Chuck would have contested Chuck's will.  The current occupant of the shell that was Jimmy McGill, I'm not sure either way.

The fact Jimmy and Chuck had the blowout during the time when it can be demonstrated that Chuck may have been incapacitated regarding his judgment about various subjects could bolster Jimmy's case should he choose to contest the will.  Chuck's chosen lifestyle strongly bolsters the argument that he may not have had capacity.  The fact that Jimmy had extensive access to Chuck's home and provided strong support for Chuck's daily living for an extended period of time bolsters a potential claim Jimmy could make.  The fact that Jimmy provided said support for no compensation would speak volumes in a legal challenge.  Were Chuck to have died intestate Rebecca did not stand to inherit anything, only Jimmy stood to inherit strictly by operation of law in the case of intestacy.

Howard could find himself in quite the pickle as the managing partner of HHM and the executor of Chuck's estate.  Jimmy and/or Kim could expose Howard's flanks on various fronts if they chose to do so.  Ethical matters over client representation and concealment of Chuck's condition,; employment issues regarding Kim, Ernesto and Jimmy could all be held out under very unflattering microscopes.  

ETA  That letter could be a wild card in estate litigation -- contents, condition of the author at the time of writing, etc. 

Edited August 16, 2018 by Tikichick

[Bryce Lynch]

16 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Again, Howard managed Jimmy for 7 years. The idea that her endorsement is meaningful, in terms of where the responsibility lies for insecure Howard's embarassment, is frankly ridiculous. Howard is getting paid to ignore his precious feelings, and pay attention to what serves the interests of HHM best. What clearly served the interests of HHM best was to not drive an associate who had displayed the rare talent of obtaining new major clients, to being recruited by a major competitor. Howard needs start earning his pay.

Howard managed a firm where Jimmy worked in the mail room.  He knew little about Jimmy except that he seemed to work hard and knew how to make a copy.  

Kim was the one who let her feelings get in the way and pushed hard for Howard to convince D&M to hire Jimmy.  She quickly realized it was a mistake.  As far as Howard knew, she caused him and the firm embarrassment by pushing for Jimmy (which seems like an honest mistake) and then deliberately withheld information about Jimmy running a rogue TV ad from him.  (Of course that's not what happened, but she let him believe it was).  That is 2 strikes.   

Instead of firing her, he essentially put her on probation in the cornfield, in hopes that the trust might be restored.  It probably would have happened in a few months, but then she got the offer from S&C, which got her thinking about leaving and then she foolishly decided to share an office with Slippin' Jimmy instead, though by then she was wise enough to know that being part of the same practice as him was a terrible idea.  She clearly now realized that no reputable lawyer should want Jimmy to be part of his/her firm  or recommend that a reputable firm hire him.  

Kim brought in  at total of one client, and she had to go through her entire address book to do it.    It was a great start in redeeming herself, but in no way a guarantee of future performance. 

[Bannon]

4 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I don't think the Jimmy before the blowout with Chuck would have contested Chuck's will.  The current occupant of the shell that was Jimmy McGill, I'm not sure either way.

The fact Jimmy and Chuck had the blowout during the time when it can be demonstrated that Chuck may have been incapacitated regarding his judgment about various subjects could bolster Jimmy's case should he choose to contest the will.  Chuck's chosen lifestyle strongly bolsters the argument that he may not have had capacity.  The fact that Jimmy had extensive access to Chuck's home and provided strong support for Chuck's daily living for an extended period of time bolsters a potential claim Jimmy could make.  The fact that Jimmy provided said support for no compensation would speak volumes in a legal challenge.  Were Chuck to have died intestate Rebecca did not stand to inherit anything, only Jimmy stood to inherit strictly by operation of law in the case of intestacy.

Howard could find himself in quite the pickle as the managing partner of HHM and the executor of Chuck's estate.  Jimmy and/or Kim could expose Howard's flanks on various fronts if they chose to do so.  Ethical matters over client representation and concealment of Chuck's condition,; employment issues regarding Kim, Ernesto and Jimmy could all be held out under very unflattering microscopes.  

Those are good points, and Howard really is terribly exposed here, given how he has failed to fulfill what are pretty unambiguous duties. 

[Bannon]

4 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Howard managed a firm where Jimmy worked in the mail room.  He knew little about Jimmy except that he seemed to work hard and knew how to make a copy.  

Kim was the one who let her feelings get in the way and pushed hard for Howard to convince D&M to hire Jimmy.  She quickly realized it was a mistake.  As far as Howard knew, she caused him and the firm embarrassment by pushing for Jimmy (which seems like an honest mistake) and then deliberately withheld information about Jimmy running a rogue TV ad from him.  (Of course that's not what happened, but she let him believe it was).  That is 2 strikes.   

Instead of firing her, he essentially put her on probation in the cornfield, in hopes that the trust might be restored.  It probably would have happened in a few months, but then she got the offer from S&C, which got her thinking about leaving and then she foolishly decided to share an office with Slippin' Jimmy instead, though by then she was wise enough to know that being part of the same practice as him was a terrible idea.  She clearly now realized that no reputable lawyer should want Jimmy to be part of his/her firm  or recommend that a reputable firm hire him.  

Kim brought in  at total of one client, and she had to go through her entire address book to do it.    It was a great start in redeeming herself, but in no way a guarantee of future performance. 

 Chuck was telling Howard for years about Jimmy. Howard was not ignorant about Jimmy in any way.

Kim's recruitment by Schweikert, in the wake of her success by Mesa Verde, was as predictable as sunshine in Albuquerque, and Howard gets paid to effectively manage people, who have indicated that they may have rare talents, right now, not a few months from now.

We aren't going to agree about this. You see Howard's behavior as tolerable. I see an overpaid, privileged benefactor of his father's and Chuck's previous work, who has allowed his insecurity to color his judgement to the point where he has really failed in his duties to his partners, his employees, and his clients. To me, one of the most interesting questions is whether he remains this person.

[Bryce Lynch]

4 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I don't think the Jimmy before the blowout with Chuck would have contested Chuck's will.  The current occupant of the shell that was Jimmy McGill, I'm not sure either way.

The fact Jimmy and Chuck had the blowout during the time when it can be demonstrated that Chuck may have been incapacitated regarding his judgment about various subjects could bolster Jimmy's case should he choose to contest the will.  Chuck's chosen lifestyle strongly bolsters the argument that he may not have had capacity.  The fact that Jimmy had extensive access to Chuck's home and provided strong support for Chuck's daily living for an extended period of time bolsters a potential claim Jimmy could make.  The fact that Jimmy provided said support for no compensation would speak volumes in a legal challenge.  Were Chuck to have died intestate Rebecca did not stand to inherit anything, only Jimmy stood to inherit strictly by operation of law in the case of intestacy.

Howard could find himself in quite the pickle as the managing partner of HHM and the executor of Chuck's estate.  Jimmy and/or Kim could expose Howard's flanks on various fronts if they chose to do so.  Ethical matters over client representation and concealment of Chuck's condition,; employment issues regarding Kim, Ernesto and Jimmy could all be held out under very unflattering microscopes.  

ETA  That letter could be a wild card in estate litigation -- contents, condition of the author at the time of writing, etc. 

I agree that Chuck's whacky behavior could be fairly strong evidence for invalidating any will he wrote during that period.  I think we probably became a bit desensitized to his lunacy, but a judge looking at his behavior might easily conclude that he was totally out of his mind.  

I agree that Howard might have a conflict of interest, if HHM owes Chuck's estate a large amount of money.   I also wonder if he might face insurance fraud charges, if he filed the homeowners insurance claim on behalf of the estate, and failed to disclose his suspicion that it was arson by the policy holder.  He might slide based on the fact that it was conjecture without any solid evidence, but who knows.

The concealing of Chuck's condition seems dubious, ethically, but Howard was also constrained by privacy laws, and Chuck was doing very little legal work while he was on sabbatical.  I think the concealment might be more of a client relations issue than a legal one.  

I see zero employment issues regarding Jimmy.  He worked in the mail room for several years, got an online law degree from a 3rd rate school and the declined to make him an attorney.  They were under no duty at all to promote him, and I doubt they ever hired a lawyer with such a shoddy resume and prior legal issues. 

I don't see much of a case regarding Kim, either.  They fronted her law school tuition and promoted her from the mail room to an attorney.  She made some mistakes that cost her the trust of her boss, so they reassigned her, temporarily, to lower level legal work, and she eventually resigned, at which time they forgave her tuition debt.

Ernesto might have a case, but he doesn't seem like the litigious type.  Also, he disclosed what he heard on the tape to Kim after being strictly ordered to tell nobody.  That could well be grounds for termination, though the fact that he was manipulated as part of a setup of Jimmy might not go over so well.  

[Delete]

Gus Fring's is a stone-cold killer. However, he's not the typical bad guy. That is the beauty of this show. They finess the characters in such a way to show that good and evil can indeed brew within one individual. It is beautifully subtle. Gus can murder Arturo, and watch him slowly die, but in another scene he answers the phone in his upbeat restaurant manager voice. 

That's what I love about this show. Bad guys aren't necessary all unlikeable. 

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I don't know.  I think before the Mesa Verde fiasco, Chuck might have left Jimmy a significant inheritance, out of gratitude for all Jimmy did for him during his "illness".  I could actually see him calculating the cost of all the ice, bacon, juice, tea, steaks, newspapers, etc. that Jimmy brought him over that year or so, along with the value of Jimmy's time, and then maybe adding a generous tip.   :)

I don't think Chuck had an ounce of gratitude in him. I think he thought it was what he was due. 

28 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

 

Kim brought in  at total of one client, and she had to go through her entire address book to do it.    It was a great start in redeeming herself, but in no way a guarantee of future performance. 

To be fair, it was a very large account. Not a penny ante one.

[Bannon]

21 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I agree that Chuck's whacky behavior could be fairly strong evidence for invalidating any will he wrote during that period.  I think we probably became a bit desensitized to his lunacy, but a judge looking at his behavior might easily conclude that he was totally out of his mind.  

I agree that Howard might have a conflict of interest, if HHM owes Chuck's estate a large amount of money.   I also wonder if he might face insurance fraud charges, if he filed the homeowners insurance claim on behalf of the estate, and failed to disclose his suspicion that it was arson by the policy holder.  He might slide based on the fact that it was conjecture without any solid evidence, but who knows.

The concealing of Chuck's condition seems dubious, ethically, but Howard was also constrained by privacy laws, and Chuck was doing very little legal work while he was on sabbatical.  I think the concealment might be more of a client relations issue than a legal one.  

I see zero employment issues regarding Jimmy.  He worked in the mail room for several years, got an online law degree from a 3rd rate school and the declined to make him an attorney.  They were under no duty at all to promote him, and I doubt they ever hired a lawyer with such a shoddy resume and prior legal issues. 

I don't see much of a case regarding Kim, either.  They fronted her law school tuition and promoted her from the mail room to an attorney.  She made some mistakes that cost her the trust of her boss, so they reassigned her, temporarily, to lower level legal work, and she eventually resigned, at which time they forgave her tuition debt.

Ernesto might have a case, but he doesn't seem like the litigious type.  Also, he disclosed what he heard on the tape to Kim after being strictly ordered to tell nobody.  That could well be grounds for termination, though the fact that he was manipulated as part of a setup of Jimmy might not go over so well.  

Howard assisted in Chuck having a recruitment meeting with a potential client where Chuck was wearing, with Howard's knowledge, a suit coat lined with aluminum foil, to allow Chuck to be in the office, where Chuck represented himself as fully participating in the operation of the firm. Despite Howard knowing that this was tenuous at best. He knew Chuck was storing client documents in a fire trap. There is nothing to mitigate this.

[Bannon]

One of the reasons I'd be surprised about Jimmy contesting the will is that  I think he'd want to avoid being deposed about his relationships with his brother, HHM, and D&M.

[ShadowFacts]

We don't know when the will was written.  If it was before his inability to work in environments with electricity, there's not a problem.  People of completely sound mind do not have to leave anything to a brother over an ex-wife, a friend, a charity or anybody else.  I think the unopened brother-to-brother letter is the wild card.  How Jimmy reacts to it may determine a lot.  There's so much it could say including Chuck telling him what their mother's dying words were.  I am really interested to know what happens to lead Jimmy to shed the McGill identity.  Probably more than what happens to Kim or Nacho I want to know that, because it's a pretty big thing to get rid of your name and 50 or so years of identity. 

[Bryce Lynch]

39 minutes ago, Clanstarling said:

I don't think Chuck had an ounce of gratitude in him. I think he thought it was what he was due. 

To be fair, it was a very large account. Not a penny ante one.

Chuck seems like a man who pays his debts.  Obligation might be a better word than gratitude.  That is why I think he might figure out how much he "owed" Jimmy financially.  It would be more to say, "We're even." than "Thanks, little brother, for all you did for me."

MV was a large account but there is no way to know if she could replicate it.   I always got the sense that Paige had a bit of a crush (though perhaps a non-sexual one) on Kim.   I think if she brought in 4 new clients, at a total of only half the billings, that would have better proven her ability to recruit clients was real, and that she didn't just get lucky with one big account.

[Bannon]

53 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

 

MV was a large account but there is no way to know if she could replicate it.   I always got the sense that Paige had a bit of a crush (though perhaps a non-sexual one) on Kim.   I think if she brought in 4 new clients, at a total of only half the billings, that would have better proven her ability to recruit clients was real, and that she didn't just get lucky with one big account.

 That's the point. Howard, if he is to fulfill his duty to HHM, needs to find out, as quickly as possible, whether she can replicate the performance. He can't do that by sticking her back in doc review for 3 months, until his oh-so-important feeling of embarassment recedes. Doing that makes her a prime candidate for poaching, allowing a major competitor to find out whether she can replicate it. This is management 101 stuff, and Howard so far is flunking.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bannon

[Bannon]

2 hours ago, Barbara Please said:

Gus Fring's is a stone-cold killer. However, he's not the typical bad guy. That is the beauty of this show. They finess the characters in such a way to show that good and evil can indeed brew within one individual. It is beautifully subtle. Gus can murder Arturo, and watch him slowly die, but in another scene he answers the phone in his upbeat restaurant manager voice. 

That's what I love about this show. Bad guys aren't necessary all unlikeable. 

Yep, our understanding of Gus makes his quiet demeanor in the restaurant (for me, especially with the employees) kind of unnerving.

[Bryce Lynch]

27 minutes ago, Bannon said:

 That's the point. Howard, if he is to fulfill his duty to HHM, needs to find out, as quickly as possible, whether she replicate the performance. He can't do that by sticking her back in doc review for 3 months, until his oh-so-important feeling of embarassment recedes. Doing that makes her a prime candidate for poaching, allowing a major competitor to find out whether she can replicate it. This is management 101 stuff, and Howard so far is flunking.

 

Meh, if someone wants to poach the former mail room clerk, who has recently shown twice that she can't be trusted and who shacks up with the sleaziest lawyer in Albuquerque, you put an add online and get 50 resumes of lawyers with equal or better qualifications who are not known to hang out with undesirables. 

I am overstating the case a bit, and I love Kim.  But, she ain't that special, and she has serious character flaws, though Hamlin is not aware of many of them.  She has committed multiple acts of fraud, and at least one of them with in the scope of her legal practice, when she called every handyman in town, impersonating Chuck's assistant, to cancel his door repair, so her client could sent a murderer into Chuck's house to invade his privacy.  

It just struck me how far her ethical standards have fallen.  She was mortified by Jimmy fabricating evidence with the squat cobbler video, but she has done even worse, defending Jimmy.  She really seems to be the frog, not noticing that the water temperature is gradually rising and is about to hit the boiling point.  

I also think Kim needed a fresh start, though she chose the wrong fresh start option.  Who knows if Howard would ever fully trust her and trust her judgment again.  Plus, the Chuck/Jimmy feud would always be a concern for her as long as she was at HHM, and she might always be seen as the girl from the mail room by some of the partners.   A change of scenery was just what she needed.  

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bryce Lynch

[Bannon]

5 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Meh, if someone wants to poach the former mail room clerk, who has recently shown twice that she can't be trusted and who shacks up with the sleaziest lawyer in Albuquerque, you put an add online and get 50 resumes of lawyers with equal or better qualifications who are not known to hang out with undesirables. 

I am overstating the case a bit, and I love Kim.  But, she ain't that special, and she has serious character flaws, though Hamlin is not aware of many of them.  She has committed multiple acts of fraud, and at least one of them with in the scope of her legal practice, when she called every handyman in town, impersonating Chuck's assistant, to cancel his door repair, so her client could sent a murderer into Chuck's house to invade his privacy.  

It just struck me how far her ethical standards have fallen.  She was mortified by Jimmy fabricating evidence with the squat cobbler video, but she has done even worse, defending Jimmy.  She really seems to be the frog, not noticing that the water temperature is gradually rising and is about to hit the boiling point.  

You are just objectively inaccurate about being able to find 50 associate lawyer resumes in Albuqerque which state that the lawyer at one time picked up a phone, and ground out call after call, until she landed a very large, very lucrative, client. This is a rare event, one that can make a huge difference for the future of a firm. Yes, it may be random, and it is Howard's job, one that he is being paid very handsomely for, to begin finding out whether it is, right now, not 3 months from now. This is towering ineptitude.

I promise, I'm done with this topic. We will agree to disagree.