Amph Better Call Saul (Spoilers within)

Okay, given his reaction then, when Kim tells him Davis & Mayne is interested in him, his first response is, “Chuck wouldn’t like it.” If he has decided not to go into that meeting, is it more because he’s kind of embracing who he really is, especially after his vacation with Marco? Or is it more about — whatever he may feel about Chuck right now — he is unwilling to show Chuck up with this potentially huge new job?

I love everything that you’re saying. [Laughs] And I love the fact that you’re taking into account Jimmy’s remaining love and affection for his brother. Having said all that, I think that if you look at the season, there are clues as to how we are thinking in the scene, like the pinky ring [Marco’s] that Jimmy is now wearing, and the song [“Smoke on the Water”] that he’s singing at the very end. Those, I think, would lead you to believe that he’s got a new idea for who he’s going to be, and it doesn’t include being at Davis & Mayne.

Having said that, we reserve the right to reinterpret that scene with new information or to go back. This is, what you’re talking about, is one of the things that we spent the most time with at the beginning of the season, of Season 2, to understand truly what Jimmy is thinking and what his next move is going to be. I have to say, the answer that we came up with surprised me, and I think is pretty perfect, but you’ll have to wait for a year to see, so that shouldn’t be too much.

 

I somewhat agree. Jimmy spent the entire season trying to do everything right (minus the Kettleman bribe). Kim and apparently Howard are trying to open a great opportunity for him--an opportunity that is clear vindication of everything he's done so far--and at the last minute he turns away from it. The universe might finally have been rewarding him and he abruptly* chooses to ignore it.

*Granted, it might not seem entirely abrupt if you form the impression that Chuck's betrayal shattered him and destroyed his vision of himself becoming a standup lawyer. But his scene with Marco in the basement suggests that he still wanted to do right by his clients.

 

Interesting interview. I'm not arguing why Jimmy didn't go to the meeting or his 'true self', I just found the timing strange is all. I thought there were moments this season when his disappointment in life could have better justified that decision then when's he's sauntering up to the meeting pretending to accept their offer (in what to me seems a giggy way).

It was just too big of a reversal in that moment for me.

 

i assumed he turned around in the parking lot, but a scene of him turning down the offer would be a brilliant opening scene for S02. You may get your neat answer yet, person complaining about motivation.

 

That would be really cool if when he turned around in the season finale in the parking lot he had just forgot his keys or something. And then he goes to the meeting and gets screwed over one last final time, and THEN makes his decision to be a 'criminal' laywer and has his discussion with Mike. I would be totally on board with that!

If what we saw is what we get, that's fine, but less clear at least to me.

 

I have to admit, I had my problems with the ending as well, first because of my Kim-session, but far more because, well, I am a lawyer and I'd have been the first person at the judges chambers if I had that offer.

My take (assuming he really didn't go in) is that the week with Marco made him realize how much he missed the rush, if you will, and that he realized it was the best week of his own life, as well. And he isn't getting that same rush from representing senior citizens in a class action. Representing people like Nacho, on the other hand ...

 

You'd be the first one in the chamber, but you're not Slippin' Jimmy, which is the key difference.

 

I think (and this is not original because I read it somewhere else) that Jimmy realized Marco was the closest to what he wanted in a friend. Kim held back the truth about Chuck from him; Marco told him exactly what kind of guy Chuck was. Kim wanted to set Jimmy on a likely thankless "partner track"-- and have him deal with the same bull**** that she has to deal with (her getting set back just by telling the Kettlemans a truth they didn't want to hear). Unlike Chuck she definitely has his best interests at heart, but she's not treating Jimmy the way he thinks he should be treated.

The culture he was trying to fit in with demanded he act in good faith, but everywhere he turned there were lawyers (Hamlin, Chuck, the firm representing the nursing home) who didn't do that at all. Marco was a small-time con artist, and he didn't pretend to have an ethical code that he constantly broke or circumvented. The cons we see Jimmy and Marco play mainly prey on the stupid and the greedy (the latter more than the former). In contrast, Jimmy was reluctant to accept-- or at least conflicted about it-- full price for honest work from a sweet, broke old lady. He then encounters lawyers who are happy to accept money from and lie for a corporation that cons thousands of people like her out of their meager incomes, dwarfing anything he and Marco pulled.

I think he sees the nonsense of playing the game the "right" way even though many people do not or get screwed for trying, and that will push him further toward amorality and greed. Breaking Bad had similar themes (e.g., Walt being a honest, hardworking educator who nonetheless struggles financially so much that even a second job can't pay all the bills).

 

There is certainly something to that, but I don't think it was that thought out, something more from the gut.

And where the hell is the podcast!!!!

 

Kelley tweeted she is waiting for notes, and it's an extra long episode. I'm thinking maybe from the legal dept?

 

yankee8255 the podcast is available.

 

Just downloaded. It's an hour and fifty minutes! Unfortunately no Bob Odenkirk, though.

 

Yes, that was disappointing. Great laugh about a plot hole pointed out by Patrick Fabian about eight minutes in.

 

I'll think this show definitely has to win the award for most pleasantly surprising show in years. Like a lot of people, I really thought it would suck. Because lots of great writers have gone on to make terrible sequels or spinoffs that their heart usually isn't in, I thought AMC's obvious motivations behind making this show would lead it astray or cause them to meddle more.

But thank God Vince Gilligan agreed to run the show, and thank God his heart is actually in it. This show has been awesome. I feel like for me it fills the hole Justified has vacated -- a smart, fun crime drama that thrives on interesting characters but which also has the ability to carry real dramatic weight. I'm so, so thrilled about this show, especially since so many of my favorite shows ended this season.

It never occurred to me that Jimmy could have gone inside... I guess we will see, though there's not a lot of suspense to how that might have gone.

I for one am just annoyed this was a short first season. I'm sure by the time AMC started seeing a few completed episodes, they'd probably already outlined the season to fit into ten. But still... I guess it's a good sign for the future of the show that I'm dying for more.


My *one* criticism of the finale is that, while it was a good script, I did think Peter Gould's direction left something to be desired. The 90s-esque con montage felt a little over the top and took me out of it in a way the bizarre montages in BB never did. Those were always a very distinct style established by the show itself... This was more like a director imitating an existing (and terrible) floating heads montage style. And I get that it may have been intended as tongue in cheek and as "Saul Goodman-esque"... I just think it was a failed experiment and distracting.

 

I loved the montage.

 

The montage was brilliant.

 

Huh, I remember the old news that Peter Gould was running the show by himself and I thought that was still the case. I thought Vince Gilligan was in a different role and not co-showrunner.

 

Nope.

 

Really? In the opening sequence of every show, Vince and Peter's names blink, man. I don't recall hearing that Gould was running the show by himself.

 

"Created By" aren't (necessarily) showrunner credits. It just means... created by. The showrunner is usually credited under "Executive Producer," but there are plenty of EP's who don't do anything.

 

I don't know... I always assumed he was co-running.... glad he is. Like I said, I don't remember ever reading that Gould was running the show by himself (that doesn't mean it wasn't so, at one point, though... I just didn't hear about it. lol).

 

I'm pretty sure they are co-showrunning, at least for the first (maybe second) season. It's common for a co-creator of the show to not stay on as show runner... But not when he's working there day to day. My guess is he's planning to hand over the reigns fully eventually. But I got the impression they were co-showrunning.

This is pretty common practice early on when you have someone like Gould as a show's creator but who's never been a showrunner before. You almost never get trusted with that kind of power in season one if you have no prior experience.

 

So is there any truth to the thing I heard about BCS being on Netflix already? I'm too lazy to actually turn my television on and check.

 

Netflix distributes it outside of the United States (due to AMC's minimal international presence, I assume), but it won't be on U.S. Netflix until next year.

 

Things you may have not known about the TV series, Better Call Saul.