They have her sworn confession. That doesn’t go away based on Jimmy’s say-so. Neither do Jimmy’s earlier statements to prosecutors vanish.
I don't think the story or the ending rose anywhere near Mad Men or Sopranos. Those endings are quasi religious experiences for me. Seeing Jimmy and Kim share one last cigarette brought a slight tingle to the spine, but nothing like Don Draper lost in a spiritual oasis before finding his "real thing" in the coastal hills near Big Sur...or seeing Tony, Carm, AJ in their last supper as Meadow walks through the door and the screen goes black. So much more happened in those shows than in BCS Yep, I guess it was meant to show he had come full circle in his legal career and it had all gone in the trash. The diamonds slipping through his fingers reminded me of Marathon Man.
I’m still stuck on the idea that Saul is responsible for Walter White. I wonder if that’s what the writers want us to believe or just what Jimmy wanted the judge to believe? That Saul is ultimately the glue that makes everything happen the way it does. Interesting idea. Remember Mike is the one telling Saul to let Walt go. Walt would either end up arrested or shot dead. Saul couldn’t let the idea of Walt and his high end product go. Saul makes Walt possible. No Walt no breaking bad. It’s all about the consequences. When you invent the airplane you also invent the plane crash idea. Which actually works literally in Breaking Bad.
Not that anyone cares, but I’m on a 3 week road trip, so my wife and I watched the finale tonight (finally) on my phone while pulled off at a view point at the Grand Canyon during an epic monsoon storm. #memories
They have her confession, but as Kim said to Howard's widow (?), there is no physical evidence to corroborate the confession. Everyone is dead and all the evidence is destroyed. Kim will be open to a civil suit but the law likely won't prosecute. Kim is smart enough to have done the maths enough to know the dangers of writing that confession. Those same maths told her that Jimmy truly loved her, he would confess bring the pieces back together and rediscover communication.
I never thought the original Jeff was so menacing except in Gene's mind. That first encounter was a blunder. Did Jeff ever overtly threaten Gene with the leverage he could have if he were more attuned? Even later it was Marion who connected the dots in better fashion and realized she had something on Gene/Saul.
I kind of see Jimmy's courtroom scene a bit like Walts phone call to Skyler when he is getting her off the hook. "Im the one who did this! Im the kingpin" Of course that is true in some ways. But Skyler also helped launder the money and keep a front for the drug business. I think, like Walt, it is a bit of a mixture of trying to protect Kim by showing the court "See how ruthless I am? Kim is just some meek looking mouse over there" and ego. There is probably a part of Jimmy that wants to be known as the brains of outfit. But unlike Walt, I dont see Saul as the brains behind the entire thing. There are some things that we are suppose to see I guess when watching BB that BCS has now changed. Howard and Lalo, Sauls motivation, Mike and Gus character depth etc. But I think they failed if they were trying to make Saul as the real villain and head honcho of BB. Thats just silly IMO. Walt was like a bulldozer. He was either going to make it work or die trying. And he was smart enough to figure something out. Maybe not the 80 million he made but enough to meet his goal of 800K. Ive been watching a bit of BB the last couple of days. Am watching the "Better Call Saul" episode. And not once did I think about how much BCS has changed my understanding of Walt or the BB series. The characters are just too strong. And Saul, honestly is still much too different than the Saul of BCS or even the unseen BB scenes. BB Saul is just a uniquelty humorous character. Bob never caught that momentum in BCS or the BB unseen scenes. And thats ok. I dont think he had to. Its not important. Its funny I was always wondering "I wonder how they plan on tieing the two series together?" and as early on as when we saw Tuco a few of us started fearing that and how it would go all cartel. Which it did. Which is fine. But oddly enough, I dont feel the tie in with BB was that much accomplished. And that IMO is a good thing. Yes, they hit upon a few things with the BB unseen scenes but really it wasnt a linear tie to the BB timeline. At least it didnt feel like one. In that way, the more time machine/dreamscape device I think it worked well to not join the shows but to show they can coexist without being joined and still be connected in a sort of metaphysical sense. One in which the timelines kind of go in and out of each other. A rather time out of mind feeling. Sorry, not trying to sound all philosophical or deeper than what it really is. But I am left more with that sense rather than concrete connections between the two shows. Back to Saul though: Is he the real kingpin? No. Thats Walter. He is the one who knocks. Saul is the one who hides behind the door and says "Maybe we should try the window".
One other thing I forgot about the BCS/BB tie in... As I was watching the BB "Better Call Saul" episode there was a part where Saul is explaining to Jesse and Walt about the life time crimimal that would eventually get Badger off the hook. As Saul is showing the pics of the professional prison flopper, Walt says in reaction to the story..."Entire life behind bars"...to Saul I have to admit it kind of sent goosebumps knowing that Jimmy would pretty much spend the rest of the entireity of his life behind bars. Jesse then asks in disbelief "On purpose? The guy goes to prison on purpose?" Saul replies "He's actually more comfortable inside. The outside world hasnt been to kind to him" Some have mentioned how Jimmy McGill will probably be just fine in prison. And even better than running and hiding in fear on the outside. Sure sounds our BCS Jimmy doesnt it? A little fun mirroring there. I also found it kind of interesting what this BB "Ill go to prison for a price" characters name was.. "Jimmy In 'n Out" ...of course Jimmy McGill went by "Slippin' Jimmy" Nothing revelatory there. Just grinned watching the scene. And liked the feeling of what we do know about Saul/Jimmy and his eventual fate. Didnt change the way I think of BB. Just kind if enhanced the fun some Id say. Made the character of Saul have even more depth and dimension. Watch the scene again in BB, its kind of fun to feel your mind go "Oh yeah, that is kind of cool"
Same scene. He says he is at the opera as as excuse for why he is whispering, leading to a Magic Flute joke. First appearance of Rick Schweikart if I am not mistaken.
I only had two criticisms about the entire series of BB. One was the fly episode. The other was the plane crash plot, which I thought was over the top, but I know most people were fine with it.
Yes, that was the one thing that left me puzzled. I guess he decided he deserved to be behind bars till death.
I didn't believe he was, Chuck was mentally ill. It's unlikely he would of been able to continue much longer, wasn't Howard getting tired of the arrangement anyway ? It was also doubtful anything Jimmy said would absolve Kim, but clear he wanted to come clean in front of her about everything.
The stuff about time travel and regrets in the last episode was beautifully done. And there's no doubt that the writers of these shows were able to weave in a lot of philosophical and metaphysical elements without being obtrusive with them.
I agree with you, mpayan, doesn't change way I see BB either. Besides the cartel tying in to this eventually and it being the beginning and ending of Saul, it's still separate entities to me.
No, but those shows are so very different from each other. All I have to describe the finale is "underwhelming", intend to watch again to see if I get more out of it, but don't imagine I will. Their intention wasn't bad but I didn't personally like him taking such a big sentence , and how he got caught so quickly. Peter Gould did mention it was a callback to Marathon Man.
I don’t understand the requirement of “physical evidence”. People are convicted all of the time based on circumstantial evidence, and Kim’s confession is direct evidence of her guilt. There’s a difference between purported confessions later recanted or confessions made that have no indica of reliability and Kim’s situation. But I think Kim merely said she was not sure a prosecution would go forward because of the lack of physical evidence. If the prosecutors were to put together evidence surrounding the disappearance of Howard and top it off with Kim’s affidavit, I see a definite path to a fraud conviction even if Kim does not testify. Murder would be more difficult, but there would be a possibility of a conviction of after-the-fact crimes. But in the BCS world where prosecutors are milquetoast and criminal defendants get their way merely by flexing their muscles and spouting idle threats, Kim of course would win and get an apology and a big cash settlement from the government.
I'm not a lawyer but have read and followed lots of cases , agree with you. Rhea Seehorn,by the way, was interviewed after and said they were responsible for Howard's death. I know that was a point of contention here, but way it was written and the fact that he never would of been there if not for their malicious scam..
It certainly passes the “but for” causation test for a civil tort action. But was Howard’s death a “foreseeable” result of their conduct? It’s an imprecise standard, and lawyers would merely say it’s a question for the jury (after an imprecise “instruction” by the judge). I’d argue his death was foreseeable in that, as I recall, the standard is not the precise manner of death but that Howard would be killed in some way as a result of Kim’s and Jimmy’s conduct. But the above would be the standard in a civil action for damages. For criminal liability, intent would be required. Kim and Jimmy didn’t intend to kill Howard (though they certainly intended to aid in the cover-up).
I'm sure getting a conviction or even civil liability would be another matter. Purely as a viewer they set it in to motion as he would of been unlikely to cross paths with Lalo .
Unlikely to cross paths with Lalo, but they drugged Howard and perhaps engaged in other conduct (I’d have to rewatch the pertinent episodes) exposing Howard to a risk of death.
Kim being a lawyer at the time does lend some validity to her statements. But since there is no evidence of anything other than her statement they have to take her word that Howard was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. As for the after the fact disappearing of all the evidence, her knowledge of a coverup and not coming forward to the authorities at the time I would think she has a little worry there, I'm presuming Jimmy took the fall for the aftermath which would explain why they would just let the case lie. Which would also weaken the case for a civil suit to a good degree, but she had the knowledge of what happened, so there is some cause for a suit but Cheryl would probably beg off.
Much would be uncertain, but IMO Kim would be exposed to criminal prosecution (but not murder - I think we all agree on that).
Lots of great posts above. I wish I had the time to read, let alone respond to, them. But I’m on vacation!!!
