S04.E05: Quite A Ride

[Bryce Lynch]

2 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yes, we know little about him as a lawyer or anything else.  I do remember at the regulatory meeting about Mesa Verde with Chuck, he at least acted confident, asking Chuck if he was sure he didn't need him to handle it, or something like that.  What has me puzzled is him telling Jimmy in the bathroom that he already said too much, when he barely said anything.  Could he be in a financial bind, after having to borrow money to pay Chuck?  I think something is going on there that we just don't know yet.  Or, we're just seeing a contrast between Jimmy who is burying everything and Howard who has it all right at the surface. 

I think, in addition to guilt over Chuck, Howard could be facing some serious financial struggles.  He paid Chuck $3 million, which he said came from his own funds and some loans.  The firm presumably owes Chuck's estate $6 million more.   The firm's reputation has probably been hurt by the loss of Chuck and by word getting around about his breakdown.  

Going into the season, I was thinking we might see HHM in serious trouble and might even see it fall apart.  The first 5 episodes of the season have shown very little about HHM and not that much of Howard.  I wouldn't be surprised to see some HHM drama in the 2nd half of the season.  

1 minute ago, peeayebee said:

I don't think that's necessary to know. It certainly adds to the characterization, but I think it's enuf to believe that Gus wants Hector out of the picture for business reasons. Of course a non-BB watcher might wonder why Gus would stop Hector from being killed by Mike and Nacho, but I wouldn't think that would impede someone's enjoyment. It's usual in TV shows and movies to leave things to be discovered.

I think Fring's actions regarding Hector make a lot more sense if you have seen the flashback in BB that explains it.   In fact, that incident is a prime motivation for Fring creating his entire operation.  

[Tikichick]

On 9/4/2018 at 8:20 AM, ShadowFacts said:

I don't agree public defenders on the whole harm society, at least I don't think it's easy to quantify.  In this case the kid had an attitude that said he wasn't going to listen to her advice, but she was right in telling him that if he doesn't, he'll be with criminals 24/7 and it's good she's trying to divert him from becoming a real 'scumbag' like Nacho (who lots of viewers like to pull for).  As for Denise, it's not predetermined that she's doomed to not turn her life around.  She looked like she could be amenable to drug treatment or other intervention, more so than the first client.  The interesting thing to me is that this kind of work, while it is currently firing up Kim, has the potential to be as soul-sucking as the regulatory humdrum she is fleeing from. 

Dismissing public defenders as harmful suggests the foundation of our justice system is flawed, which I certainly don't believe is true.  Knowing what the practice of criminal defense work has largely devolved into IRL does frustrate me though.  I struggle with the idea that it is considered honorable or acceptable for defense strategy to be based on the idea that the defense attorney banks on confusing at least one juror to the point where they are convinced that their ignorance in the face of the attorney's machinations is in fact a doubt that is reasonable.  I'm appalled on a regular basis that a group of adults cannot see through what is essentially broad comedy where the defense attorney is effectively nothing more than Wiley Coyote deploying ever more absurd devices cleverly cloaked in mind numbing and pointless minutiae and cleverly calculated "misspeaking" when stating what's already been testified to until jurors either zone out or become deceived about what they actually saw or heard previously.      

[Bryce Lynch]

21 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

Dismissing public defenders as harmful suggests the foundation of our justice system is flawed, which I certainly don't believe is true.  Knowing what the practice of criminal defense work has largely devolved into IRL does frustrate me though.  I struggle with the idea that it is considered honorable or acceptable for defense strategy to be based on the idea that the defense attorney banks on confusing at least one juror to the point where they are convinced that their ignorance in the face of the attorney's machinations is in fact a doubt that is reasonable.  I'm appalled on a regular basis that a group of adults cannot see through what is essentially broad comedy where the defense attorney is effectively nothing more than Wiley Coyote deploying ever more absurd devices cleverly cloaked in mind numbing and pointless minutiae and cleverly calculated "misspeaking" when stating what's already been testified to until jurors either zone out or become deceived about what they actually saw or heard previously.      

I think, on the macro level, criminal defense attorneys are a net positive force.  This is mainly because their presence prevents authorities who might otherwise abuse their power, to railroad innocent people from doing so.  I think this is mainly due to a deterrent effect.  Most would be persecutors won't even try to railroad innocent people, for personal or other reasons, because they know they won't get away with it, largely because of the presence of defense attorneys.

But, on the day to day, micro level, defense attorneys much more often help guilty people, many of whom have harmed others, escape punishment or at least the full punishment they deserve for their crimes, which can lead to more innocent people being victimized.   That is why, while in the abstract, a defense attorney can know they play a vital role in protecting freedom and justice, the tangible part of their role in the criminal justice system would probably not normally be very rewarding,    

That is why I think Kim will not find what she is looking for in public defender work.  David or one of her other clients will probably kill somebody and she will feel even more guilty. Actually knowing the BCS/BB writers it will probably be Denise, the one who seems much more sympathetic.  

Edited September 5, 2018 by Bryce Lynch

[Bryce Lynch]

http://postshowrecaps.com/tv-show/better-call-saul-season-4-episode-5-recap-quite-a-ride/

Here is the link to the Post Show Recaps (Rob Has a Podcast) podcast on episode 405.  

[Tikichick]

2 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I think, on the macro level, criminal defense attorneys are a net positive force.  This is mainly because their presence prevents authorities who might otherwise abuse their power, to railroad innocent people.  I think this is mainly due to a deterrent effect.  Most would be persecutors won't even try to railroad innocent people, for personal or other reasons, because they know they won't get away with it, largely because of the presence of defense attorneys.

But, on the day to day, micro level, defense attorneys much more often help bad people, who have harmed others, escape punishment or at least the full punishment they deserve for their crimes, which can lead to more innocent people being victimized.   That is why, while in the abstract, a defense attorney can know they play a vital role in protecting freedom and justice, the tangible part of their role in the criminal justice system would probably not normally be very rewarding,    

That is why I think Kim will not find what she is looking for in public defender work.  David or one of her other clients will probably kill somebody and she will feel even more guilty. Actually knowing the BCS/BB writers it will probably be Denise, the one who seems much more sympathetic.  

Most days my window into this is depressing, with nearly every cog in the machine merely going through the motions as if the entire exercise is abstract, devoid of meaning or consequences in a lot of lives.  I do have to say that for the most part my experience doesn't show a lot of either police or prosecutors trying to railroad innocent people.  More often the actual charges need to be more precisely tailored to the wrongdoing.  Most often society is deprived of justice and protection because accurate charges are plead down and then ultimately moving through the corrections system the sentences are winnowed down further for budgetary reasons -- rendering the whole protection of society, disciplining of the wrongdoer and deterring of others into complete drivel.  

I absolutely think Kim's world is going to suffer an avalanche on several fronts and I agree Denise is the better candidate to break bad in this universe. 

[aemom]

12 hours ago, Ellaria Sand said:

One last comment about this show...it is so visually interesting. The vistas, the perspectives, the framing. Nearly every shot is unique. For example, Jimmy sitting alone on the couch watching TV. He looked small and insignificant which was precisely the intent. The repeated shots of puddles at The Dog House and the laundry. The overhead shots of Jimmy in his PPD’s office. Brilliant!

I agree.  I loved the shot from the perspective of the hole he made in the wall to get the cardboard box.  I even looked on IMDB to check who the director was because Roxann Dawson typically has at least one interesting shot like this in the shows that she directs.  It wasn't her, but I really liked the work on this ep.

[shirazplease]

On 9/4/2018 at 9:04 AM, Bryce Lynch said:

It is a double-edged sword.  Defense attorneys help protect the rights of innocent people by protecting scumbags, but they also make life more dangerous for innocent people by putting scumbags back on the streets more quickly.

 So, everyone who ever in the history of the world that needs a PD or a defense lawyer is a scumbag?   

[Bannon]

I'm avoiding political commentary, except to note that to understand the criminal justice system  you need to understand that the machinery is designed and operated for the purpose of producing guilty pleas, due to the simple fact that actually having a substantial percentage of criminal charges result in trials would make the whole system grind to a halt, due to finite resources,  including the most basic resource of time. Grinding out guilty pleas is nearly the entire point of the exercise.

This cuts both ways. Guilty people get to plea down to lesser crimes, and thus avoid full punishment. What also happens with frequency,  however, is that prosecutors grossly overcharge the accused  especially those with limited resources, threaten them with life destroying sentences, and thus compel plea bargains for less punitive sentences. This inevitably gathers up people for whom guilt is at lesst somewhat ambiguous, when not clearly unlikely. When it gets to the Federal level, well, the vast resources of prosecutors in that system can even compel guilty pleas from the wrongly, or ambiguously, accused who have wealth, especially when the prosecutor can figure out a way to get a family member in the net.

Now factor how vast the criminal code is, how breathtakingly long the list of behaviors has grown, which are now considered criminal, and you can begin to appreciate how citizens who do not obviously have criminal intent can be ground to dust. You don't need to have Jimmy McGill's psyche or background to be skeptical  or even cynical, about the system.

[Bryce Lynch]

Just now, shirazplease said:

 So, everyone who ever in the history of the world that needs a PD or a defense lawyer is a scumbag?   

Of course not.  But PDs, mainly defend guilty people.     I would imagine it is hard to find your job rewarding when 90% or more of your time is spent trying to help criminals get away with their crimes.  The other 10% (or whatever %),  along with knowing you play a vital role in preserving justice, in a more abstract sense, might make it seem worthwhile.  But, on a day to day basis, it has to be dreary, frustrating and discouraging work for a lot of PDs.  I think there is a reason most lawyers avoid such work. 

[shirazplease]

1 minute ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Of course not.  But PDs, mainly defend guilty people.     I would imagine it is hard to find your job rewarding when 90% or more of your time is spent trying to help criminals get away with their crimes.  The other 10% (or whatever %),  along with knowing you play a vital role in preserving justice, in a more abstract sense, might make it seem worthwhile.  But, on a day to day basis, it has to be dreary, frustrating and discouraging work for a lot of PDs.  I think there is a reason most lawyers avoid such work. 

I'm sure the burnout rate is astronomical for PDs.  The bad always outweighs the good, and most of them probably don't ever know of the people they defended that went on to lead productive lives.  What I'm inferring is that your frequent use of the words "lowlife" and "scumbag" show that you are presupposing that anyone who needs the service of a PD is already doomed or somehow a defective human being.  Your statement that a first time offender for property damage (which I loathe thieves, don't get me wrong - I've been stolen from more times that I can count) should get prison time is ludicrous.  The rational part of the teen brain doesn't mature until they are 25 or so, if even then.  No one's life should be ruined by a permanent criminal record unless the offense is a violent one, which results in severe injury or death.  People CAN change.  It doesn't happen as often as it should but it DOES happen.  I know this.  You can dismiss it as anecdotal evidence, but it's a fact.  Funny, cause I don't really like humanity in general, but here I am giving them the benefit of the doubt.  I've also been a victim of violent crime and the perp got nothing close to what he should have gotten but I'm a little biased.

[qtpye]

The podcast makes a good point that Jimmy is usually his best self when he is a caretaker. Chuck when he was sick, Kim after her accident, and the elder community in his practice. Even as Saul, Jimmy does enjoy "taking care" of things for his clients.

[Bryce Lynch]

2 minutes ago, shirazplease said:

I'm sure the burnout rate is astronomical for PDs.  The bad always outweighs the good, and most of them probably don't ever know of the people they defended that went on to lead productive lives.  What I'm inferring is that your frequent use of the words "lowlife" and "scumbag" show that you are presupposing that anyone who needs the service of a PD is already doomed or somehow a defective human being.  Your statement that a first time offender for property damage (which I loathe thieves, don't get me wrong - I've been stolen from more times that I can count) should get prison time is ludicrous.  The rational part of the teen brain doesn't mature until they are 25 or so, if even then.  No one's life should be ruined by a permanent criminal record unless the offense is a violent one, which results in severe injury or death.  People CAN change.  It doesn't happen as often as it should but it DOES happen.  I know this.  You can dismiss it as anecdotal evidence, but it's a fact.  Funny, cause I don't really like humanity in general, but here I am giving them the benefit of the doubt.  I've also been a victim of violent crime and the perp got nothing close to what he should have gotten but I'm a little biased.

Well, we will have to agree to disagree.  People absolutely can change, but they should be held accountable for their actions.  Being held accountable is probably the most common catalyst for change, while getting away with crimes is going to be an impediment to change for most people.   Part of the reason young people commit crimes in the first place is that they have no fear of the minor consequences to their crimes.  

[nodorothyparker]

3 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

What has me puzzled is him telling Jimmy in the bathroom that he already said too much, when he barely said anything.  Could he be in a financial bind, after having to borrow money to pay Chuck?  I think something is going on there that we just don't know yet. 

The thing about all that is that we still don't know where Chuck's death left HHM.  Howard used his "personal funds plus a few loans" as the first of three payments to force Chuck out at the end of last season.  If Chuck cashed that $3 million check, making it part of his estate, there's still the rest of his share of HHM that hadn't yet been paid for when Chuck offed himself.  We're only told that Chuck cut Jimmy out of the will and left the house and property to Rebecca.  I don't know enough about estate law to speculate too much on this, but I assume Chuck's share is considered part of his estate and now belongs to whoever was named as inheritor.  An inheritor might prefer several million dollars in cash to owning part of a law firm, which we've been told over and over that HHM could not afford and remain solvent.  

We also don't know how much of that $3 million check was Howard's vs. borrowed money, just that Howard was pretty desperate to be done with Chuck by that point.  So he may not be in great financial shape now either.

[ShadowFacts]

5 minutes ago, shirazplease said:

I'm sure the burnout rate is astronomical for PDs.  The bad always outweighs the good, and most of them probably don't ever know of the people they defended that went on to lead productive lives.  What I'm inferring is that your frequent use of the words "lowlife" and "scumbag" show that you are presupposing that anyone who needs the service of a PD is already doomed or somehow a defective human being.  Your statement that a first time offender for property damage (which I loathe thieves, don't get me wrong - I've been stolen from more times that I can count) should get prison time is ludicrous.  The rational part of the teen brain doesn't mature until they are 25 or so, if even then.  No one's life should be ruined by a permanent criminal record unless the offense is a violent one, which results in severe injury or death.  People CAN change.  It doesn't happen as often as it should but it DOES happen.  I know this.  You can dismiss it as anecdotal evidence, but it's a fact.  Funny, cause I don't really like humanity in general, but here I am giving them the benefit of the doubt.  I've also been a victim of violent crime and the perp got nothing close to what he should have gotten but I'm a little biased.

I don't think either of Kim's clients were scumbags or lowlifes, not in my understanding of those terms.  I would at most call them offenders, if convicted.  Characters like Gus, Nacho, all of the Salamancas, and BB Mike and Saul are more along the lines of contemptible in their behavior than a drug user and a kid attempting robbery.  Harsh sentences are not necessarily good deterrents.  We know Tuco is going to get sprung from jail and commit plenty of mayhem.  Someone with a criminal conviction on their record is going to be a good bet for having trouble with finding decent jobs, making for more potential societal harm and knowing that will happen is sometimes beyond the grasp of a young person who, as indicated, is not fully physiologically mature. 

[shapeshifter]

2 hours ago, peeayebee said:

2 hours ago, Blakeston said:

Kim recently yelled at Howard for telling Jimmy too much - that is, for sharing his suspicion that Chuck committed suicide. 

I think that's what Howard was referring to. He was saying that he had already done enough damage by unburdening himself on Jimmy, and he wasn't about to do it again.

I don't see it that way. Howard looked disgusted with Jimmy as he stopped himself from explaining himself. He didn't look like he was taking pity on Jimmy or trying to avoid hurting him more (according to Kim).

It also occurred to me that Howard's therapist probably gave him insight into Jimmy's reaction to Howard's confession, and that would explain why Howard stopped himself from spitting into the wind, so to speak.

Both of these posts are very insightful regarding Howard's remark about having already said too much, and I don't think they are mutually exclusive. Way up thread I (and somewhere on this page, someone else) speculated about Howard being under financial duress, which could also be true, in addition to him either not wanting to incur any further the Wrath of Kim should he verbally unburden himself onto Jimmy again, or if he is just not going to waste his breath with Jimmy, or if he is being wary of sharing anything with Jimmy.

And now I'm imagining that because Howard does not share something with Jimmy, somehow other dominoes fall that lead to Howard's untimely end, or, the opposite could happen (Howard does share with Jimmy and this ultimately leads to misfortune for Howard).

Basically: In the context of the dialog of the show, "I've said too much already" sounds very Chekhovian to me.

Edited September 5, 2018 by shapeshifter

[Blakeston]

10 hours ago, Miles said:

I don't think that had much to do with it. The guy didn't reveal any details. Yes "down town El Paso" might have been a bit more specific than he needed to be, but not that much.

Gus would be completely mortified if someone worked on this project, then went around bragging to people that he helped build a big underground meth lab in New Mexico. Let alone one in Albuquerque.

It wouldn't matter that he didn't mention any names or the specific location - it would still be unacceptable. Gus is incredibly careful about confidentiality. They emphasized that in this episode by showing him flying these experts into Denver and making them wear blindfolds for hours, just so that they'd have no clue where they were.

[qtpye]

2 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

Both of these posts are very insightful regarding Howard's remark about having already said too much, and I don't think they are mutually exclusive. Way up thread I (and somewhere on this page, someone else) speculated about Howard being under financial duress, which could also be true, in addition to him either not wanting to incur any further the Wrath of Kim should he verbally unburden himself onto Jimmy again, or if he is just not going to waste his breath with Jimmy, or if he is being wary of sharing anything with Jimmy.

And now I'm imagining that because Howard does not share something with Jimmy, somehow other dominoes fall that lead to Howard's untimely end, or, the opposite could happen (Howard does share with Jimmy and this ultimately leads to misfortune for Howard).

Basically: In the context of the dialog of the show, "I've said too much already" sounds very Chekhovian to me.

 

Does anyone know if Howard is older or younger than Jimmy? I think Howard always looked at Chuck as a wise father/older brother (until his sickness) and Jimmy as the irascible younger brother that he can't help but like. I think Howard kind of needs Jimmy's support right now because he is the only one who will understand what it was like being Chuck's kid brother. Howard is feeling guilty as hell and Jimmy is the only one that can give him absolution. However, Kim yelling at him made him realize that he was being kinda of self-centered and now just is trying to leave Jimmy alone.

Edited September 5, 2018 by qtpye

[Joimiaroxeu]

Nice use of "Street Life." Street life in Albuquerque, NM, is probably not remotely close to what that song originally had in mind though.

Edited September 5, 2018 by Joimiaroxeu

[PeterPirate]

Since we're five episodes into the season, if issues about HHM and Howard's debt were going to be part of narrative, I think they would have been brought up by now.  And not just those issues, but also about whether Jimmy was going to try to get a piece of the $3 million, or whether Howard was going to try to force Jimmy to change his name.  Things may change, but right now my feeling is that HHM is still a viable enterprise, and Howard's part of the story is more about how he is dealing with things on a personal level. 

Frankly, I prefer it if things work out that way.  I have a slogan, "Don't let the mustard overwhelm the dill".  This goes back to a time when I ordered a sandwich that came with pesto sauce and asked to have mustard on it, only to be told that was not a good choice because the mustard would prevent me from tasting the dill in the pesto sauce.  So I should either forgo the mustard, or order a different type of sandwich that didn't feature pesto.  

My point being that if Howard was dealing with a bunch of distractions, such as fighting with Jimmy over the firm, or trying to save HHM from collapse and avoid personal bankruptcy, it would keep him from facing the ramifications of Chuck's death and his role in it.  If HHM is healthy and he isn't fighting with Kim and Jimmy, he has more time alone with his own thoughts.  He's even showing outwardly the effects of his internal struggles.  And that's what makes Howard an interesting character to me.  

Edited September 5, 2018 by PeterPirate

[Bannon]

6 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

Nice use of "Street Life." Street life in Albuquerque, NM, is probably not remotely close to what song had in mind though.

It's a great melody, with a fabulous arrangement. The musicianship by The Crusaders is terrific, as are the vocals. The lyrics, however, are a nonsensical portrayal of street level prostitution, and pretty much complete bullshit, with regard to any city in the United States, coast to coast.

[Bryce Lynch]

6 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

Nice use of "Street Life." Street life in Albuquerque, NM, is probably not remotely close to what song had in mind though.

I was thinking the scene made the Dog House look like Times Square circa 1975.   I'm sure being on BB and BCS has been great for business.  But, this episode made it look like the seediest location in America.  I looked online, and IRL, the Dog House closes at 9:30 PM, so Jimmy couldn't really be selling burner phones, to the dregs of humanity, there in the wee hours of the morning.   

[ShadowFacts]

28 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Since we're five episodes into the season, if issues about HHM and Howard's debt were going to be part of narrative, I think they would have been brought up by now.  And not just those issues, but also about whether Jimmy was going to try to get a piece of the $3 million, or whether Howard was going to try to force Jimmy to change his name.  Things may change, but right now my feeling is that HHM is still a viable enterprise, and Howard's part of the story is more about how he is dealing with things on a personal level. 

I have a slogan, "Don't let the mustard override the dill".  This goes back to a time when I ordered a sandwich that came with pesto sauce and asked to have mustard on it, only to be told that was not a good choice because the mustard would prevent me from tasting the dill in the pesto sauce.  So I should either forgo the mustard, or order a different type of sandwich that didn't feature pesto.  

My point being that if Howard was dealing with a bunch of distractions, such as fighting with Jimmy over the firm, or trying to save HHM from collapse and avoid personal bankruptcy, it would keep him from facing the ramifications of Chuck's death and his role in it.  If HHM is healthy and he isn't fighting with Kim and Jimmy, he has more time alone with his own thoughts.  He's even showing outwardly the effects of his internal struggles.  And that's what makes Howard an interesting character to me.  

I think that Howard facing Chuck's death and his role in it and HHM's solvency are connected and he could therefore be in a lot of angst about all of it.  He seems to be the administrator, he would know that one of the assets of the estate is Chuck's partnership share, he has to deal with that regardless if Jimmy or any heir is challenging anything.  I think it will return to the forefront, or else Howard is superfluous unless Kim suddenly wants to go back to the grind there. 

[nodorothyparker]

That's what I was getting at.  I honestly don't see Jimmy challenging Chuck's will or anything like that.  The Jimmy we're currently seeing believes he is absolutely positively 100 percent done with anything that has to do with Chuck on any level.  People keep suggesting that Kim will end up back at HHM before this is over, and maybe she will, but something about that doesn't ring true for the story we've been shown that will ultimately result in the crass bottom feeder that is Saul Goodman.  I've thought all the way along that the operatic mutually destructive grudge match between the brothers McGill could only end with death and the probable destruction of everything around them.  Well, they've pulled off the death part.  For HHM to be fine and Howard to just be sad feels anticlimactic.   There really isn't much story left for Howard beyond crying in a men's room if that's all it is.

I'm usually not one given to a ton of speculating, especially on this show, and it's entirely possible that it won't amount to anything.   I just don't think they're done yet.

[Bannon]

24 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

That's what I was getting at.  I honestly don't see Jimmy challenging Chuck's will or anything like that.  The Jimmy we're currently seeing believes he is absolutely positively 100 percent done with anything that has to do with Chuck on any level.  People keep suggesting that Kim will end up back at HHM before this is over, and maybe she will, but something about that doesn't ring true for the story we've been shown that will ultimately result in the crass bottom feeder that is Saul Goodman.  I've thought all the way along that the operatic mutually destructive grudge match between the brothers McGill could only end with death and the probable destruction of everything around them.  Well, they've pulled off the death part.  For HHM to be fine and Howard to just be sad feels anticlimactic.   There really isn't much story left for Howard beyond crying in a men's room if that's all it is.

I'm usually not one given to a ton of speculating, especially on this show, and it's entirely possible that it won't amount to anything.   I just don't think they're done yet.

I was one who thought Kim back at HHM made sense, because of the devastating effect it would have on Jimmy, and the annihilation of Jimmy McGill is the central plot element of the show.

Now, in light of Kim's self sabotage in her interaction with Paige, I don't think it makes sense. Kim is rejecting, it seems, that entire type of legal career, so there is no point in going back to HHM. What will finish Kim and Jimmy off, and thus be the final piece of the Saul puzzle? Hell if I know, but I can't wait to find out!

[LoneHaranguer]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I looked online, and IRL, the Dog House closes at 9:30 PM, so Jimmy couldn't really be selling burner phones, to the dregs of humanity, there in the wee hours of the morning.

What time of year was this episode set? Restaurants like that often have extended hours for a few weeks in the Summer.

[JudyObscure]

14 hours ago, Miles said:

She is still traumatised from the car accident and she is worried that if she works as hard again, she won't survive it

Yes, I think everything came to a screeching halt for Kim with the accident.  Over night, she went from the obsessive, sleepless, work machine we had always known to a laid back movie watcher who is just doing the minimum for the bank. Her comment to Jimmy that her powers of concentration were legend was disproved the next day when it was revealed that she had missed her assistant's mistake -- and she didn't much care.  The Mesa Verde models shook her up, but I think she had already decided to quit,  she just doesn't know it yet.

I always thought one of Chuck's best comments about Jimmy was , "No one ever accused Jimmy of being lazy."  It was such a huge understatement because not only is he not lazy,  he finds boredom absolutely intolerable and he is at his best with something hurried and difficult to do.  The  new job was  the very worst thing for him, even sitting on the couch watching TV by himself is unbearable.  I think that's what will make it impossible for him to last the nine months, no matter how often he repeats his goals to himself. Poor thing.

Edited September 5, 2018 by JudyObscure

[smartymarty]

6 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

What I thought was egregious was Kim essentially hanging up on Paige.

Why didn't Kim just call her paralegal from the cab to direct her to where to find whatever file?? I guess that's the self-sabotaging.

[Gloriole33]

Nice use of "Street Life." Street life in Albuquerque, NM, is probably not remotely close to what that song originally had in mind though.

Hello, Joi. "Street Life" was also montage music in "Jackie Brown".

[Eulipian 5k]

On 9/4/2018 at 7:46 AM, shapeshifter said:

On 9/4/2018 at 2:46 AM, DangerousMinds said:

Illegals?

Whoops. One of the problems of sleep-typing at 1 a-hem is that you might make up a word that actually is a word that means something else. I was going for a brief way to say "those involved in illegal enterprise," but clearly the moment in linguistic history has long passed to creatively use "illegal" as a noun in this way.
Thank you, @DangerousMinds, for tactfully drawing my attention to it!

Isn't this the same time period as The Americans? Those "illegals" could sure use some of Jimmy's burner phones.

[PeterPirate]

3 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

For HHM to be fine and Howard to just be sad feels anticlimactic.   There really isn't much story left for Howard beyond crying in a men's room if that's all it is.

I'm usually not one given to a ton of speculating, especially on this show, and it's entirely possible that it won't amount to anything.   I just don't think they're done yet.

Howard, I think, still has some unfinished business with Kim, in that he can confront her about her aiding and abetting Jimmy in the Mesa Verde case.  Yes, he told Chuck that the tape didn't have any value from a legal perspective (before the break-in), but that doesn't mean that he thinks that exonerates Jimmy and Kim from a personal, human perspective.  Indeed, I would say that it will be key to Howard's recovery for him to realize that they are guilty of a crime and therefore have their own share of culpability in Chuck's death.  He might also decide to seek out some sort of retribution. 

Edited September 5, 2018 by PeterPirate

[Bryce Lynch]

8 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Howard, I think, still has some unfinished business with Kim, in that he can confront her about her aiding and abetting Jimmy in the Mesa Verde case.  Yes, he told Chuck that the tape didn't have any value from a legal perspective (before the break-in), but that doesn't mean that he thinks that exonerates Jimmy and Kim from a personal, human perspective.  Indeed, I would say that it will be key to Howard's recovery for him to realize that they are guilty of a crime and therefore have their own share of culpability in Chuck's death.  He might also decide to seek out some sort of retribution. 

While Jimmy committed some felonies in the MV fraud, I don't think Kim committed any crime.  She technically didn't know that Jimmy did it, though she punched him in the car after Chuck made the accusation.  Later, she become his attorney, so it was her job to defend him.  I think the one probably illegal thing that she did was calling every handyman in the phone book to find out which one was supposed to fix Chuck's door and then cancelling the appointment so Jimmy could send Mike to take photos and get Rebecca's contact information. 

Kim blames herself for Chuck's death already, so I wouldn't be shocked if she admitted her guilt to Howard.  Of course what neither of them know is that Jimmy set the events leading to Chuck's suicide in motion by ratting to the insurance company about him.  Unlike Howard and Kim, who were trying to protect their firms or friend when the hurt Chuck, Jimmy did that out of pure malice.  Since he undid the horrible thing he did to Irene, that was probably the worst thing we've seen Jimmy do.  

[PeterPirate]

27 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

While Jimmy committed some felonies in the MV fraud, I don't think Kim committed any crime.  She technically didn't know that Jimmy did it, though she punched him in the car after Chuck made the accusation.  Later, she become his attorney, so it was her job to defend him.  I think the one probably illegal thing that she did was calling every handyman in the phone book to find out which one was supposed to fix Chuck's door and then cancelling the appointment so Jimmy could send Mike to take photos and get Rebecca's contact information. 

Kim blames herself for Chuck's death already, so I wouldn't be shocked if she admitted her guilt to Howard.  Of course what neither of them know is that Jimmy set the events leading to Chuck's suicide in motion by ratting to the insurance company about him.  Unlike Howard and Kim, who were trying to protect their firms or friend when the hurt Chuck, Jimmy did that out of pure malice.  Since he undid the horrible thing he did to Irene, that was probably the worst thing we've seen Jimmy do.  

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but in Law And Order they talk about accessories-after-the-fact.  Could this not apply to Kim?

Let me put it this way.  Suppose Howard is able to prove that the phone call that cancelled the door repair appointment came from Kim's phone, and thus prove she helped cover-up Jimmy's alterations of the Mesa Verde documents.  Could she go to prison?  

Edited September 5, 2018 by PeterPirate

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

Hello, Joi. "Street Life" was also montage music in "Jackie Brown".

Quote

I was thinking the scene made the Dog House look like Times Square circa 1975.

Yeah, Jackie Brown was a nod to the blaxploitation film era and Pam Grier's particular prominence during it. The song originally came out when those films were running on fumes and had already seen their heyday. I think the song was intended to invoke that era (as well as the rising disco era) and the big city mean streets often depicted in blaxploitation movies. I imagine at the time Albuquerque did have a block or two where street criminals hung out but it's just hard for me imagine. I think the song was excellent choice though if that's the atmosphere Vince et al were trying to invoke.

Edited September 5, 2018 by Joimiaroxeu

[Clanstarling]

8 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

You're probably right.  I think the idea being driven home was that Paige questioned Kim's dedication, rightly.  What I thought was egregious was Kim essentially hanging up on Paige.  That would have been the corker for me if I were her.  Who does that and thinks it will end up well?  She's deep-sixing herself.  (Now I'll stop with the antiquated lingo.)

Could be.  If so, I'm having a bit of a moment with Howard.  He is suffering and he cares about Jimmy's suffering.  Sniff.

I do agree that Kim hanging up on Paige was egregious, and yeah, Paige reacted somewhat better than I would have. I think Kim, in her current state of being overwhelmed, grieving, and re-evaluating her life, doesn't want to make an active decision to quit. I think she wants to be fired, because that takes the decision off of her shoulders.

When Jimmy was peddling the phones it struct me that these are Jimmy's people (ruffians aside). He's in his element. These are people he feels most comfortable with (with due caution for those on the more violent portion of that group). People he doesn't have to impress, people who won't judge him for being a huckster. As much as I think Jimmy could have been an upright citizen given the right support and incentives, I think it would always have been an uncomfortable fit. Maybe he's not so much falling as becoming who he has always supposed to be. As sad as that is.

[MBayGal]

3 hours ago, LoneHaranguer said:

What time of year was this episode set? Restaurants like that often have extended hours for a few weeks in the Summer.

Plus, this was set several years ago and they might have had very different hours then.  I have some relatives in ABQ, and have made the pilgrimage to the Dog House a couple of times.  Food is about what you would expect, and atmosphere fits the menu.  Not in the best part of town, nor the worst.  

[Bannon]

Jimmy's speech to the parole officer really did a nice job of framing how soul crushing it is going to be when his personal and professional partnership with Kim is destroyed. Has any television drama ever so thoroughly crushed the hopes and dreams of a central character that wasn't killed off? It just amazes me that they can tell this story while frequently writing stuff that makes me laugh out loud!

[Bannon]

4 hours ago, Eulipian 5k said:

Isn't this the same time period as The Americans? Those "illegals" could sure use some of Jimmy's burner phones.

The Americans takes place in the early to mid 80s,  20-25 years earlier.

2 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

Yeah, Jackie Brown was a nod to the blaxploitation film era and Pam Grier's particular prominence during it. The song originally came out when those films were running on fumes and had already seen their heyday. I think the song was intended to invoke that era (as well as the rising disco era) and the big city mean streets often depicted in blaxploitation movies. I imagine at the time Albuquerque did have a block or two where street criminals hung out but it's just hard for me imagine. I think the song was excellent choice though if that's the atmosphere Vince et al were trying to invoke.

Movie music trivia: "Street Life" was also used in the opening credits sequence in a mediocre Burt Reynolds action/cop flick from the early 80s, "Sharkey's Machine".

Edited September 6, 2018 by Bannon

[tennisgurl]

That cold open was awesome, it was great to see Saul again in the Breaking Bad era. Of course when everything went to shit, he would have a plan ready to go for skipping town. And now in BCS era, Jimmy is getting back to his old cons, and establishing himself as The Guy for sketchy criminals and gangs and people who hang out at late night hot dog places. Nice to see him back in action (its fun to watch Jimmy/Saul do his own thing), but its also rather sad. Jimmy really did try to be a good lawyer, but it just went to crap. This will probably also lead to the end of his relationship with Kim. 

Speaking of Kim, what of what are you doing? I get that she wants to make a difference, and loves to be a crusading lawyer looking for that amazing savior case, but putting Mesa Verde on the back burner, especially after she worked so hard to get them on Team Kim, and based most of her career on them. 

[MrWhyt]

20 hours ago, Miles said:

I don't think that had much to do with it. The guy didn't reveal any details. Yes "down town El Paso" might have been a bit more specific than he needed to be, but not that much.

Gus values discretion and secrecy, look at the efforts they took to arrange their interviews. Yes this guy was too optimistic, didn't once mention any of the challenges of the job and his inspection wasn't as thorough as the winning candidate but you'll notice the interview was over immediately after he mentioned the El Paso job. Gus does not want anyone to know his business. Gus is a cautious, deliberate, discreet motherfucker, he has that in common with Mike and it's one of the reasons why the two respect each other (IMO).

[Kel Varnsen]

On 9/3/2018 at 10:23 PM, Starchild said:

I think they knew he was giving an unrealistic estimate.

The guy was also doing all his designs on a computer. That becomes a lot of valuable evidence that you can never really be sure have been deleted. Just another thing gus would never accept. I can totally picture the German guy hand drafting all his project drawings.

 

10 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

The thing about all that is that we still don't know where Chuck's death left HHM.  Howard used his "personal funds plus a few loans" as the first of three payments to force Chuck out at the end of last season.  If Chuck cashed that $3 million check, making it part of his estate, there's still the rest of his share of HHM that hadn't yet been paid for when Chuck offed himself.  We're only told that Chuck cut Jimmy out of the will and left the house and property to Rebecca.  I don't know enough about estate law to speculate too much on this, but I assume Chuck's share is considered part of his estate and now belongs to whoever was named as inheritor.  An inheritor might prefer several million dollars in cash to owning part of a law firm, which we've been told over and over that HHM could not afford and remain solvent.  

We also don't know how much of that $3 million check was Howard's vs. borrowed money, just that Howard was pretty desperate to be done with Chuck by that point.  So he may not be in great financial shape now either.

The whole thing with Howard struggling and have to come up with the money to buy out Chuck never made much sense. HHM was a decent sized firm. All he would have to do is send o ut an email to all the equity partners and ask if anyone was interested in owning a bigger share of the firm.

[Irlandesa]

11 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Well, we will have to agree to disagree.  People absolutely can change, but they should be held accountable for their actions.  Being held accountable is probably the most common catalyst for change, while getting away with crimes is going to be an impediment to change for most people.  

A jail sentence isn't the only type of accountability that exists nor is it the most effective prevention in regards to recidivism, especially when it comes to first time offenders. Both of Kim's clients were first offenders.  And recidivism for first time offenders is low.  There are a lot of people who fuck up at least once in their lives, especially when they're young.  And that's why the consequences are lighter for first time offenders and diversionary programs, like the one Jimmy is doing, exist.  Should Kim continue on this path, she will have some clients who do repeat their crimes but she will have a lot more who do not.  The murky area comes with repeat offenders and there's no known magic bullet to prevent that group from reoffending. I think that's one thing Kim needs to consider.  She can't build a practice on first timers.

10 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

The thing about all that is that we still don't know where Chuck's death left HHM.  Howard used his "personal funds plus a few loans" as the first of three payments to force Chuck out at the end of last season.  If Chuck cashed that $3 million check, making it part of his estate, there's still the rest of his share of HHM that hadn't yet been paid for when Chuck offed himself. 

Given that they had a process in place for ending their partnership, I'm guessing they probably have a buy-sell agreement and possibly even firm life insurance on Chuck.  I don't know how the beginning of buying Chuck out might affect the status of such an agreement but since the firm still had financial liability wrapped up in Chuck, my guess is that it was still in effect.

8 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

People keep suggesting that Kim will end up back at HHM before this is over, and maybe she will, but something about that doesn't ring true for the story we've been shown that will ultimately result in the crass bottom feeder that is Saul Goodman.  I've thought all the way along that the operatic mutually destructive grudge match between the brothers McGill could only end with death and the probable destruction of everything around them.  Well, they've pulled off the death part.  For HHM to be fine and Howard to just be sad feels anticlimactic.  

I don't know where Kim's story is going.  I also don't know where Howard/HHM are headed if they aren't headed for a reunion (and this past episode did make it seem like that's not where they're going.)

But I will say that I don't think having Kim and HHM/Howard end up fine would be anti-climatic and I hope they find fine given what we know about the other half/two-thirds of the show.  The thing is, I've already seen absolute death and destruction of everything in this show's sequel.  I would hope this show does something different. 

4 hours ago, PeterPirate said:

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but in Law And Order they talk about accessories-after-the-fact.  Could this not apply to Kim?

Let me put it this way.  Suppose Howard is able to prove that the phone call that cancelled the door repair appointment came from Kim's phone, and thus prove she helped cover-up Jimmy's alterations of the Mesa Verde documents.  Could she go to prison?  

If Jimmy didn't go to prison as the one who actually broke into the house, it's very unlikely that Kim is any danger. And I don't think Howard even cared that much.  He was a reluctant witness and, from what I can recall, encouraged Chuck to let it go.  And so far we haven't seen him put too much blame on Kim for taking on Mesa Verde as a client even though he knows she knows it was ill gotten gains.

[shapeshifter]

14 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

Basically: In the context of the dialog of the show, "I've said too much already" sounds very Chekhovian to me

And now I'm thinking that Howard's "I've said too much already" tells us that he's worried about a wrongful death law suit from Jimmy and Kim based on his admission of guilt over Chuck's suicide.
Furthermore, Howard's insomnia tells us that he's obsessing about something — probably guilt and worry. Is Howard going to commit suicide too?  :-( 
If he does, maybe Jimmy will leave Kim for what he perceives to be her own good and mental well being.

OTOH, Kim gravitating towards being a criminal lawyer might suggest at least a few good years for Kim and Jimmy as partners.

[Ailianna]

7 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

 I think that's one thing Kim needs to consider.  She can't build a practice on first timers.

In fact, if she does actually want to build a practice in criminal law, she NEEDS repeat offenders.  The guys who call her every time they get arrested, so she gets future business from them too.

[Bryce Lynch]

5 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

And now I'm thinking that Howard's "I've said too much already" tells us that he's worried about a wrongful death law suit from Jimmy and Kim based on his admission of guilt over Chuck's suicide.
Furthermore, Howard's insomnia tells us that he's obsessing about something — probably guilt and worry. Is Howard going to commit suicide too?  :-( 
If he does, maybe Jimmy will leave Kim for what he perceives to be her own good and mental well being.

OTOH, Kim gravitating towards being a criminal lawyer might suggest at least a few good years for Kim and Jimmy as partners.

I can't see any basis at all for a wrongful death suit by Jimmy against Howard.  I'm not sure Jimmy would even have standing as he was only left $5,000 in the will.  Chuck's estate would probably be the plaintiff in any such suit.  But, Howard did absolutely nothing unlawful or negligent to cause Chuck's death.  He played hardball, but he legally forced Chuck out of the firm.  At any rate, Chuck's decision to commit suicide was his own.  If he thought Howard wronged him, he could have taken legal action against Howard and HHM.  

Kim's direction seems to be all over the place.  But, it does seem possible that she will partner with Saul.  I keep going back to the facts that a) Saul's firm is called, "Saul Goodman & Associates"  and that he used Kim's invention of Ice Station Zebra Associates, supposedly as his loan out to avoid taxes, and possibly as a shell company to hide illegal activity.  

[EtheltoTillie]

12 hours ago, Bannon said:

The Americans takes place in the early to mid 80s,  20-25 years earlier.

Movie music trivia: "Street Life" was also used in the opening credits sequence in a mediocre Burt Reynolds action/cop flick from the early 80s, "Sharkey's Machine".

 

Yes, Sharkey's Machine!  

Did they use it in The Deuce too?  I almost feel I heard it there, but I have no specific memory. It would be appropriate. 

Edited September 6, 2018 by GussieK
Sharkey not Shirley.

[Bryce Lynch]

11 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

If Jimmy didn't go to prison as the one who actually broke into the house, it's very unlikely that Kim is any danger. And I don't think Howard even cared that much.  He was a reluctant witness and, from what I can recall, encouraged Chuck to let it go.  And so far we haven't seen him put too much blame on Kim for taking on Mesa Verde as a client even though he knows she knows it was ill gotten gains.

I agree, Howard is not trying to nail Jimmy, much less Kim on any criminal charges.  He never wanted Jimmy to go to jail, he seemed to just want him disbarred, though he was not anywhere near as passionate about it as Chuck was.  The way I saw it, if it was better for HHM for Jimmy not be be charged or disbarred, he would prefer that.  He was more concerned about HHM's reputation than anything else.  

Jimmy's breaking into Chuck's house and destroying the cassette has already been dealt with through the PPD.  Kim was in no way a party to those crimes.  She is no more an accessory after the fact than any defense lawyer is when defending a client.

The Mesa Verde document doctoring involved felonies on Jimmy's part, and there could be a very, weak circumstantial case to falsely implicate Kim (he was her lover and she gained from his crime), but there isn't even a strong enough case to prosecute Jimmy, much less Kim.

The only crime that Kim may have committed was canceling Chuck's door repair so that Mike could go instead to take photos and get Rebecca's contact info.   Even with that, it sort of seemed like Kim knew Jimmy wanted her to cancel the appointment, but he did not give her specifics on why.  Besides that only Mike, Jimmy and Kim know anything about it.  It is extremely unlikely that anyone gets charged for that.  

Edited September 6, 2018 by Bryce Lynch

[Tikichick]

23 hours ago, Blakeston said:

Kim recently yelled at Howard for telling Jimmy too much - that is, for sharing his suspicion that Chuck committed suicide. 

I think that's what Howard was referring to. He was saying that he had already done enough damage by unburdening himself on Jimmy, and he wasn't about to do it again.

I agree.  

Kim didn't only yell at him, Kim completely dressed him down and hung him out for saying something so potentially devastating to someone in Jimmy's shoes.  Howard was already grappling with guilt over his possible role in Chuck's actions.  The blistering attack he received from Kim likely hit some very soft spots and only increased his anxiety about inflicting more damage on the remaining brother.  Howard knew that Jimmy had real feelings for Chuck because Howard knew how well Jimmy had taken care of Chuck during his issues.  Obviously he knew there had been a clash, but I think he still assumes Jimmy loved Chuck deeply and is crushed by his death.

[Tikichick]

22 hours ago, Bannon said:

I'm avoiding political commentary, except to note that to understand the criminal justice system  you need to understand that the machinery is designed and operated for the purpose of producing guilty pleas, due to the simple fact that actually having a substantial percentage of criminal charges result in trials would make the whole system grind to a halt, due to finite resources,  including the most basic resource of time. Grinding out guilty pleas is nearly the entire point of the exercise.

This cuts both ways. Guilty people get to plea down to lesser crimes, and thus avoid full punishment. What also happens with frequency,  however, is that prosecutors grossly overcharge the accused  especially those with limited resources, threaten them with life destroying sentences, and thus compel plea bargains for less punitive sentences. This inevitably gathers up people for whom guilt is at lesst somewhat ambiguous, when not clearly unlikely. When it gets to the Federal level, well, the vast resources of prosecutors in that system can even compel guilty pleas from the wrongly, or ambiguously, accused who have wealth, especially when the prosecutor can figure out a way to get a family member in the net.

Now factor how vast the criminal code is, how breathtakingly long the list of behaviors has grown, which are now considered criminal, and you can begin to appreciate how citizens who do not obviously have criminal intent can be ground to dust. You don't need to have Jimmy McGill's psyche or background to be skeptical  or even cynical, about the system.

I'm keenly aware of the overload of cases straining our court systems to the absolute limits and my comments regarding plea bargains was not in any way to suggest that I would ever begin to entertain that more, let alone most or all cases should proceed to trial.  I stand by my comment that charges should be more carefully tailored at the outset.  My experience does not support your contention of consistent gross overcharging. 

[Eulipian 5k]

14 hours ago, Bannon said:

Has any television drama ever so thoroughly crushed the hopes and dreams of a central character that wasn't killed off?

TV based a lot of series on desperate characters with crushed hopes: The Fugitive, Kung Fu, Battlestar Galactica (crushed every character's hopes),, and of course, master thespian, Chuck Connor's Branded. They all started off where Cinnabon Gene is now. BB & BCS of course were not "westerns " with the characters moving from place to place. The Shield was closer to the death spiral of BB & BCS.

[Eulipian 5k]

On 9/4/2018 at 10:20 AM, RedBaron said:

I do agree with SunnyBeBe in that the conversation between Kim and the DA was not realistic.  They went back and forth from 7 years in prison to 4 mos. probation.  Most sentencing guidelines would not allow that type of leeway.

They weren't bargaining on a post-conviction sentence. Kim was saying the DA would lose and be censured if they went to trial. The bargaining was to avoid a trial because of  statements collected before Mirandizing that sweet  kid  who was just bouncing cinder blocks against a storefront window.