Better Call Saul - Season Three Discussion

I totally disagree, but then Saul has never been about non-stop hilarity anyway.

Guess you're not on-board for a new season. Your loss.

 

While I appreciate precise attention to detail (ex: Mad Men), I won't let this age issue keep me from enjoying BCS. That would be like turning down a date with Sofia Vergara because she was wearing white after labor day.

BCS is a well-written, well-acted, and perfectly casted show that is a spin-off of one of my all-time faves. Good enough for me!!

 

Ruh -roh....

 

I totally agree. It's a great show and I've never missed an episode. I really like the performances and I particularly appreciate that Jonathan Banks ("Mike Ehrmentraut") has been able to shine so well. The entire show from start to finish is pretty amazing, and no matter how I may seem to pick it apart -- like on the toupee deal -- I think Bob Odenkirk is an amazingly talented guy. Also a very fine writer as well as an interesting actor.

 

Me too. He is fantastic.

 

I was one of those people who never got around to "Breaking Bad", assumed it *had* to be overrated, and then binged the whole thing on Netflix and immediately realized it was one of the best TV shows I had ever seen.

So I was immediately on board for "Better Call Saul", and yet when some early pre-release reviews were already throwing around "better than 'Breaking Bad'" assertions, I was very skeptical. But I have to say, while I'm unsure which way I would go, I think it's totally plausible and not outlandish at all to assert it's as good or better than "Breaking Bad." Just beyond riveting; amazing edge-of-your-seat drama and also great comedy. Great actors.

As for the aging thing, I don't think it's a big deal. The only time I thought it was bordering on hilarious was when they did the flashbacks on "Better Call Saul" to stuff like Jimmy getting out of jail. They were clearly trying their best, but couldn't do much more than give Chuck and Jimmy different hair, spackle on some makeup, and shoot it in *very, very, very low light*.

But otherwise, the show within itself is fine. If you're in the middle of the second season of Saul and still hung up on how Saul looks older than he did on "Breaking Bad", then you're probably just not into "Saul" in the first place. I'm sure if you A/B'ed every "Saul" episode immediately with an old "Breaking Bad" episode and forced yourself to remember that they're supposed to be younger in "Saul", it would often be noticeable.

But other shows ran into this as well. I recall even "Lost" having problems with flashbacks late in their run, when actors had only aged 5-6 years.

 

Yeah, the flashbacks with Jimmy and Chuck are funny. They just put a different wig on them like that makes them look young enough. Especially funny with Michael McKean because we all know what he looked like when he was younger. But the show is so good I can get over it quickly.

 

I avoided Breaking Bad because the premise was just too ridiculous. We eventually got around to watching it a couple years ago -desperate for something on TV worth watching. I thought it was a very good show. Not Sopranos or Mad Men good, but one step below. BCS, on the other hand, is a totally plausible plot (maybe Chuck is a bit of a stretch), with terrific acting and writing. I put Saul on the Sopranos level. They have done a beautiful job of letting his character evolve into the one we know is coming.
IMHO the best show on TV by a lot.

 

I can't wait, it's been too long since last season!!!!

 

I wonder if Huell is still waiting for Hank?

 

She sure is.

I'm taking a wild guess here but I get the feeling that Kim will get killed and it'll be Saul's fault.

 

A mild-mannered HS chemistry teacher manufactures and sells meth to pay for his cancer treatment. Nothing unusual about that premise

 

No, you got the plot totally wrong. A mild-mannered high school teacher is given a terminal cancer diagnosis where he'll be dead in less than a year, and after he discovers he won't be covered by insurance, he turns to crime in order to build up a large nest egg to leave to his wife and son. In the context of the show (largely due to great writing and casting), I can completely buy into the concept.

I think Better Call Saul is a more difficult show, because we see a ne'er-do-well con artist who tries to go on the straight and narrow as a lawyer, but he ultimately decides that his true nature is to be a criminal anyway, so he abandons any pretense of honesty and becomes a criminal attorney. I think it's tougher to show the range of emotions Jimmy McGill has to go through in order to eventually sink to the depths of Saul Goodman. His brother Chuck is an even more interesting character, and I think again we have great writing and brilliant acting by Michael McKean to thank for that.

 

I kind of agree. But BB probably doesnt. That is, Id think that such a tragedy would have been mentioned in Saul Goodmans character. At least some reference or depressive attitude of a mysterious loss. Something. Yet I cant recall Saul ever being regretful about a thing.

 

I think you missed my point. I avoided this show because I saw the premise as ludicrous. We did finally watch the entire five seasons. I am pretty certain that I understand the complexities of the show.

Completely agree.

 

I'm fully willing to say "Breaking Bad" is one of the best TV shows I've ever seen. Really not a single "bad" episode in the run.

The overall premise of the show wasn't *that* far-fetched.

But the specific aspect of health insurance and needing to make the drugs to pay for that I did find rather implausible, in terms of the initial motivation that sets it all off. As a teacher for a public school district, he would actually likely have very solid insurance that would typically cover cancer treatments.

I'd have to go back and watch again to confirm the precise *initial* reasoning they use, but I recall it was either that his insurance didn't cover the treatments (which is unlikely in terms of *standard* treatments), or that for some reason they felt the need to go to a "better" doctor that would not be covered by his insurance. I think it was the latter if I'm recalling correctly, and what made that seem unrealistic is that Walter ultimately undergoes what seems to be standard cancer treatments. He doesn't use any new, experimental drugs or treatments. What he ends up paying a huge premium for is what he would have likely got through his work insurance.

Eventually, it becomes about overall future financial stability for his family, which is a more plausible reason to make the drugs. And obviously, eventually a main crux of the show is that he continues to do it for totally different, ego-driven reasons.

 

The premise to me was pretty straightforward. A chemistry teacher finding out he can make an ungodly amount of money by making drugs that he found out about through his brother-in-law. He's a chemist. It should be easy for a chemist to make drugs. He gets cancer and can't pay for the treatment. It made sense to me from the beginning, so that was never an issue for me.

 

It wasnt the treatment payments he was worried about. It was financial security for his family. Thats why initially we saw him as a likable character. Then we found out his real true character. A ruthless criminal who loves the thrill and fills some selfish desire to be seen as successful at all costs.

With Jimmy its just the opposite. We see him as a sleezeball. A likable sleezeball but a sleezeball just the same. I wonder if in the end we will be conflicted on just how we see Saul and what it will reveal about our own character.

 

Walter White might have had enough money to make it through some of the cancer treatments, but it wouldn't cover the house payments, it wouldn't pay for their cars, and it wouldn't pay enough towards their general overhead. If Skyler had (say) $5 million in the bank, that would be more than enough to put their children through school and let her pay all the bills for another 30 or 40 years and live comfortably but not extravagantly.

Vince Gilligan said from day one, "this show is going to be about how Mr. Chips turns into Scarface over a period of time." And that's exactly what happens: a mild-mannered high school teacher slowly turns into a ruthless criminals who really enjoys the job.

I think the telling scene was the one where Hank the FBI brother-in-law realized that Walter could possibly be Heisenger, and Walter leaned towards him and said, "tread lightly." Man, that just sent chills up my back.

Gilligan said several times that he thought of several different occupations somebody could have that would give them the knowledge necessary to actually make blue meth: a pharmacist, a scientist, a chemist. He ultimately chose a high school chemistry teacher, because that person would make less money than all of them and have the greatest financial challenges in a serious illness. It made total sense to me.

The key of adding the former student, Jesse, as a streetwise drug dealer/user who knew the ways of the drug world, was absolutely crucial. I thought it was pretty interesting that in the entire 62-episode run, Jesse always referred to his former teacher as "Mr. White."

 

Yep, I think why "tread lightly" sent chills is because the mask of sweet Walter was so easily removed and you are now stuck in the haunted cave with the monster. At first when the garage door closes one thinks "Oh crap, duck Walter". But Walter isnt the fly. Also one realizes how such a person could be right in your midst where you work, where you shop, where you eat...and you never knew. ...Brrr..eek.

 

'Better Call Saul' Season 3 Will Offer First Look at Saul Goodman

“It will be Saul Goodman, but not the way you know him from 'Breaking Bad,'” said star Bob Odenkirk in Berlin on Wednesday.
After two seasons playing well-meaning, if morally compromised Jimmy McGill in Better Call Saul, Bob Odenkirk said he will be unleashing the true Saul Goodman, slime ball lawyer extraordinaire, in the upcoming season three of the AMC series.

“For the first time, we get to see Saul Goodman,” Odenkirk announced at an event in Berlin on Wednesday. “But not the way you think. You'll get to see Saul Goodman, but he is not what you saw in Breaking Bad. That character will appear but in a slightly different form than you've seen it.”

In another mini-spoiler for season three, Odenkirk said that Giancarlo Esposito's return as revenge-bent drug kingpin Gus Fring from Breaking Bad will not be just a short cameo.

“Not only is Gus back, but there is a story with him,” Odenkirk said. “We get to know more about his empire building, more about Gus' empire and how he built it.”

Better Call Saul returns to AMC in the U.S. and on Netflix worldwide April 10.





'Better Call Saul' Season 3 Will Offer First Look at Saul Goodman

Read More
Confirmed With Chicken: Gus Fring Is Coming to 'Better Call Saul'

 

When they needed to, both series did a good job at re-aging the actors. McGill/Saul looked convincingly younger in some of the flashback episodes in BCS, as did Gus in one of the BB episodes. Not sure if this is make up or computers doing the work.

 

I agree with all of your points, but would further point out the pretty far-fetched notion that Hank, a federal DEA agent, would not have gotten proper PT after suffering a severe line-of-duty injury and that he needed the money from the Whites in order to be able to walk again.

On a different note, am I the only one who watched both seasons of Better Call Saul then watched all of the Breaking Bad episodes? (I only decided to watch Better Call Saul after I saw a subway advertisement for season two. I was a Bob Odenkirk fan, so I thought I'd give it a try. I was entirely unfamiliar with Breaking Bad, for some reason thinking it was the show Arrested Development!) That might have given me a perspective on both shows that is/was different than most people here.

 

Given what happened in the final episode, I thought (after watching Breaking Bad) this was definitely where the series was heading. I'm assuming we might get a glimpse or two of Hank (unless the actor was totally unavailable).