|
Finished the season and the thread. I didn't start reading posts until the season was almost over and It's been great reading the dead on accurate and way off predictions. Random thoughts: Chuck cashed the check I believe. I thought that was the whole point of showing off his house when Jimmy came to visit. like he'd bought a bunch of new stuff and remodeled. Or maybe it was just showing how much stuff was plugged in and how cleaned up it was? Jimmy seemed to look at everything like it was brand new though. I think it'd be hilarious if Chuck lived and his space blanket protected him from the fire. McKean absolutely crushed that role and deserves an Emmy nomination. If I understand these things right, the electric meter ALWAYS spins. It shows it's connected. The final slow spinning that Chuck couldn't stop was probably the electricity running the meter itself. Also, I tied the Chuck suicide decision into the "new stuff/remodeling" thing he'd done with the money and then his realization that he'd torn it all down. Nice touch with Chuck reading a book right before his meltdown after what his final words to Jimmy were and the cold open with him reading a book to his brother. Hadn't seen that mentioned. "Here Lies Chuck McGill; And Why Not?" Took me forever to figure out the Nacho ibuprofen scheme. Originally, I was wondering how he planned to kill Hector with it but then realized he was simply removing Hector's meds from the picture. Very clever reveal with Gus noticing the pills too. Michael Mando has been phenomenal on this series too. I love the way he plays cocky, smooth confidence with an undercurrent of nervousness and uncertainty. He's pretty and level expression wise but somehow manages to emote. Hamlin reminds me a lot of Anthony Michael Hall and I can never shake it. Watching the nursing home stuff, I had a funny idea for a cross over show with the Sopranos gals from Green Grove all set in the same facility. That's actually not a bad idea for a show in general: a drama set in a retirement facility that delves into all the politics. use hosed up visiting members as supporting characters. Golden Girls meets House of Cards. Someone get on that. Why did Gus call 9/11 so quickly? To feign allegiance? Cool Blockbuster call back. Really took me back. I noticed too that in the foreground when Kim is picking out movies that "Darkness Falls" was featured prominently in the foreground. It was actually the only title I could make out. Nice touch. Someone way back brought up (during the pill switch scene) "what are they doing counting thousands of dollars out in the open at a restaurant? What if the cops raid it?" but I got the impression that the place wasn't open yet and it was during prep hours. There was no waitstaff and the mex restaurant was a front anyway. If I remember right, someone was locking and unlocking the door even. DId Jimmy ever replace the rigged Bingo balls? Things are gonna get hairy when the same numbers start coming up every time. Thanks to the dude who linked the story about the PA lottery rigging. i never knew about that. Great loving show. I love good acting (and conversely loathe bad acting) and the level of it can make or break a movie or a show for me. Every single loving performer in this show is fantastic. More as it comes to me but that's enough for now.
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Thank you! I've been thinking this for years, and thought I was the only one. Either a drama or an Office-style comedy. I'd watch both. I unironically would watch this. Surprised it's never been done. And I meant to write "hosed up visiting family members as supporting characters". The more I think about it, the more i think it could work. "Golden Girls" proved there's a market for "old people doing old people stuff". I'm sure someone's thought of it before and you probably have TV execs talking about "not enough sexy characters" and poo poo but you could bring in well known actors who have aged too much to be in film but who people remember fondly and are still good actors. Also, you have the problem that one of the stars might die but that works itself right into the plot really. Ornithology posted:Do you guys also get super pissed off when there's a message saying no animals were hurt during the filming of the episode? Holy crap the sperging in this thread is on another level. What if the animal was a protagonist? BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Jun 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I'd imagine Chuck's estate would go to his ex-wife. No it wouldn't. Unless he had kids under the age of 18 and she were their guardian but pretty sure Chuck never had children. More: Good point that Jimmy wouldn't get Chuck's money since we KNOW he winds up skeeving and hustling for dough. Maybe Chuck didn't cash the check but he still obviously was worth a lot. I could totally see Chuck donating it to an EHS charity. Or, I'll say it again: Chuck lived and his space blanket ironically is what saved him. Maybe Jimmy becomes "Saul" by bringing a wrongful death suit agains HHM? Or the company that manufacturers lanterns? How are the ratings for this season DOWN? this is one of the best shows on TV. What the gently caress do people watch? Dancing with the Stars and poo poo still? beep by grandpa posted:God. I just finished the finale and I have to share my experience. Sorry about your little brother dude. I'm an only child but you made me choke up a little bit. Lastly, can everyone shut the gently caress about suicide hotlines and Skyler? The gently caress is wrong with you idiots?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
Giancarlo Esposito is really good in everything I've seen him in. I hadn't seen this posted but i heard an interview he did on NPR a few days ago. Found it. http://www.npr.org/2017/06/07/531840764/better-call-saul-actor-giancarlo-esposito-on-the-making-of-an-iconic-villain edit: here's the audio http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2017/06/07/531891009/fresh-air-for-june-7-2017
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Die Sexmonster! posted:^^^^^lol Big Bang Theory. Yeah. Weird to me. We're living in a golden age of really great television. A lot of it is better than what's in theaters, arguably most of it, and I can hardly keep with it to be honest. I have so much (apparently) good stuff on my Netflix list i'd have to quit my job to catch up with it all. Never mind. I just googled Neilsen Ratings and beginning ti understand my problem. Off to finally start watching Fargo now. RedSpider posted:Who else is happy that miserable gently caress Chuck is going to be absent next season in favor of more interesting characters? The Nacho/Gus relationship is going to be nothing less than superb, for starters. I loved the Chuck character and loved McKean in the role so, yeah, I'll miss him. My guess is that Howard will be in the mix either offering Kim her old job back or involved with Jimmy in a wrongful death lawsuit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:This is kinda where I'm at. The first season was fun, second season felt like they lied to me at the end of the first but was still enjoyable, and now this season Jimmy is still a long way away from becoming the character I thought I was going to be watching. I just don't find Jimmy interesting, and while the show is good it's everything that isn't Jimmy that keeps me watching it. I keep feeling the same way - that Jimmy is the least interesting character in his own show - but I don't think his arc is BAD. When I talk to friends about the show, it's always about Chuck, Nacho, Gus, Mike, Kim etc. before we get to Jimmy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:
Also, more violence. Maybe that's part of why people find this show plodding (I don't).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I'll keep watching no matter what, because I love this show. I'm just worried that they will keep telling a slow story until AMC says "that's it, you're done," and we don't get a conclusion. Netflix would take it in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:It's not just not very well done when you compare it to Breaking Bad, which was a much more gripping show. When a random person gets killed on that show (the kid), you actually see it, so it has a real effect on you. Here you don't see it. It doesn't tell you anything about anyone. It is literally just a plot device. I disagree with most of this post in general but I think the "lack of stakes" largely stems from the fact that we know certain characters live and die and also already know where they wind up.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:The problem is that they are writing as if Mike is undergoing a transformation, even though he isn't, and they're taking their sweet-rear end time with these long artistic shots of Mike being Mike, when what that part of the show really needs is a plot-driven storyline. Mike is trying to sock enough money away for his daughter and his grandkid but has to operate outside of the lines since he's not a cop anymore and now he brushes up constantly against people he'd rather not do business with and is careful about who he trusts. But he HAS to trust someone. He's careful, patient, a man of his word, and methodical as he goes about achieving what he needs to. His plot seemed pretty well explained and I enjoy the character a lot. I find his arc transformative in as much as it shows him beginning as an officer of the law to a person that has to operate outside of it, as criminal, and learning to use all the dirty tricks he learned and the contacts he'd made as a police officer. He's trying to stay off the radar and in the shadows but realizes he needs to be "in the system" to some extent to launder the money he''s made.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:*possibly* one season that covers the Breaking Bad era more from the perspective of Saul and Mike in an abbreviated fashion, but I don't know how that would play out. That could be an interesting direction to take the series and still be able to circumvent the obvious aging of the main actors while still shoe horning in a few popular cameos. "While Walt and Hank were doing x, Gus, Saul and Mike were doing y." I like it. As well as the idea of a sequel and setting some of it after the events of BB, maybe as snippets or as part of the cold open, but then you have no Mike, Hector or Gus to work with so mileage may vary with how much you can do.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:Jimmy mainly does elder law and is just helping clients directly. He's also suspended. I could stand a little more court room stuff to be honest but I think the show is just fine as it is.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I don't understand why people have such a hard time with the use of alter-egos as a storytelling device in fiction. Same. Seems obvious to me that Walt and Heisenberg were pretty separate and that one was just what the character eventually became due to his sickness, his crimes, his fears and his sense of having nothing to lose once he becomes sick and desperate. Walt devolves over the course of 5 or 6 seasons and I wouldn't ever argue that what he became was "always who he was" at all. Similar to Jimmy really because it seems like they share the same motivations (desperation, having nothing to lose, constantly getting hosed over) and are at the core of how Jimmy eventually devolves into Saul. They also both shovel on piles of rationalization and denial for the things they do in response to the things that happen to them. Jimmy is shown to have a heart, some empathy, a capacity for shame and guilt, measures of self reflection, remorse and all the other things that make up a normal human being. We're seeing those things gradually being eroded, sometimes outright destroyed by others and often willfully sacrificed, again, gradually. But I think that's the point: that these characters didn't become "Who We Know Them As" overnight nor in some sort of a vacuum devoid of external influences. They adapt in their own ways and gently caress up constantly amidst their successes, often creating more problems for themselves than the ones they set out to remedy even when they "get it right" and solve something.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:It's interesting in Breaking Bad how, in the beginning, Walt always puts on black clothes when he wants to become Heisenberg, in order to signify that he's no longer Walter White. But in Season 5, when Walt makes a conscious decision to stop being Heisenberg for good, he conspicuously starts wearing all white clothing. By that point, it's as if Heisenberg has become the default self, and so instead of Walter White having to put on Heisenberg, Heisenberg now has to put on Walter White. i never noticed that stuff you wrote about in the first paragraph. Great post overall. I think we're largely in agreement and good point you made about the nature of identity. I was merely pointing out the slow, evolutionary, gradual shifts in what these characters ultimately become and how, even though it's not instantaneous like Jekyl and Hyde or the Incredible Hulk, that they're still different and largely controlled and determined by a lot of external influences and circumstances. Meaning I don't think that what Jimmy or Walt became were always "Who They Truly Were" and that it's not as simple as some external or even internal switch being thrown where the nature of their true character is suddenly revealed. Without the cancer diagnosis for Walt or Jimmy's issues with his brother, I don't think either of them wind up breaking bad like they did. It could have been different for either of them given a break or two.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Space blanket is fire resistant.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
Kuiperdolin posted:Jesse is introduced at the end of the first season, then spend the entire second one hanging out with Badger, Combo and Skinny Pete without meeting WW again. I know you're exaggerating but BB had plenty of slow burns and gradually developed story lines. Sure, the pace overall was faster, but I'm not sure that's why BB was "better". I didn't find BCS all that slow actually but I'm engaged by good writing, compelling characters and exceptional acting and I don't think it ever faltered in that regard so I was never bored.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:The Emmy Nomination committee gave him merely a two word review: it just said "poo poo sandwich". "They can't print that" McKean got hosed over big time. His was the most compelling performance I've seen on a TV show in some time, especially this season. Banks is great but has been rather "one note" for most of the series and I wouldn't call him exceptional. poo poo, Rhea Seehorn, Michael Mando and Giancarlo Esposito would be more deserving than Banks I think.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Vegetable posted:I mean, this just shows that Emmy voters literally don't watch any part of the shows they nominate. Not even, like, a For Your Consideration clip. Because they couldn't make this mistake if they did. Well, they didn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater because then all you have is a wet, critically injured baby. But yeah, as good as Banks was/is, he's like the 4th or 5th best performance in a show full of absolutely stellar acting. To me, the acting in BCS pretty much carries the entire show and McKean just wrecked that poo poo even though he was surrounded with so many other great efforts. I wonder if that fact actually worked to his detriment. Meaning, in practically any other show he'd be an obvious standout but in the context of BCS there were almost too many good choices.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2017 23:28
|
|