As I am sure many of y'all already know, a spinoff of "Breaking Bad" titled "Better Call Saul" will be airing in 2014. This is going to be a prequel to Breaking Bad and will be based on the character of Saul Goodman from "Breaking Bad."
I, for one, will be watching. I'm sure the majority of all of you other "Breaking Bad" fans will be as well. Might as well get the discussion going sooner rather than later.
So... what are your hopes, expectations and/or concerns with the show? Here are some of mine:
Hopes: I hope to see Saul do his thing in the courtroom. I hope to see strong, unique supporting characters. I hope to see Breaking Bad foreshadowing. I hope he has an intriguing paralegal and/or assistant. I hope to see Breaking Bad characters such as Fring, Mike, etc...whoever. I hope the show kicks ass.
Expectations: I don't expect it to be as good as "Breaking Bad" (because nothing else is, really), but I expect it to be good since Vince Gilligan is writing. I somewhat expect it to have an even balance of comedy and drama...since Saul undeniably provides a substantial amount of comedic relief in "Breaking Bad." I expect to see "courtroom Saul." I expect the "Breaking Bad" references and character cameos to be less than what I hope. If it isn't even a fraction as good as "Breaking Bad," I expect it to be better than 95% of everything else on TV, since there is some shitty shit on TV these days.
Concerns: I'd be a liar if I were to say that I didn't think this show has potential of flopping and certainly failing to meet the presumed high expectations of the audience. Don't get me wrong, I think it will be good... but I think it COULD suck if not executed properly. My main concern is Saul ultimately proving himself to be a "little dab will do ya" type of character, which would lead to a show centered around his character not working out. I am hoping that the character of Saul will not be so over-used and constantly over the top, that he becomes annoying to me, thus ruining his character for me altogether... Not saying I think this will be how it goes down...just saying I think there is a CHANCE of this being the case, which prompts me to believe that a strong supporting cast is VITAL in terms of the amount of success/quality this show will accumulate. All in all, I don't think VG will steer us in an unfortunate direction though...I think they'll pull it off.
To me Chuck is the most annoying, unlikeable character I can ever remember in any series or movie. He's just a straight up punk. He's nerdy to the point of being impractical, rigid to the point nobody can be around him, a pussy, a teachers pet type tattletale, and jealous to an extreme of his brother, the only person that really cares about him. I'm not gonna feel 1 bit sorry for him when he gets institutionalized permanently. [Reply]
I'm thinking it has something to do with Chuck lying on the statement about the tape being the only one in existence or maybe it is to attempt to get him disbarred for illegally taping a conversation with a fellow lawyer. [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
First thing I thought of when I saw the lamp on the financial times is "fire hazard". They can show this photo and explain that Jimmy said the things on the tape to save his brother from himself, yet his brother is so crazy that he keeps going on some psycho quest, trying to blame Jimmy for everything.
Basically they want to show that Chuck is a hazard to himself and others and have him committed.
I think so too. But I also wonder what happens if they use the photo and chuck realizes the date of that newspaper. I'm sure he will ask how Jimmy was able to take that photo. [Reply]
He warned Kim that they will have to play the tape if they challenge him at the bar. Then Chuck will have to explain how they have a tape if it was destroyed. Then entrapment comes into play.
Also, Jimmy can just tell them he was trying to save his brother. His brother has been on a rampage, checking in and out of the hospital, etc. They will probably bring in the black assistant to back everything up.
Chuck is will be seen in a VERY bad light, and he is too smart to see something so obvious. [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
Chuck is in a trap.
He warned Kim that they will have to play the tape if they challenge him at the bar. Then Chuck will have to explain how they have a tape if it was destroyed. Then entrapment comes into play.
Also, Jimmy can just tell them he was trying to save his brother. His brother has been on a rampage, checking in and out of the hospital, etc. They will probably bring in the black assistant to back everything up.
Chuck is will be seen in a VERY bad light, and he is too smart to see something so obvious.
I'm thinking there's something more. I don't see the characters [Kim, Jimmy, Chuck or Howard] as dumb enough to be foiled by anything that's actually been expressed [ie, the existence of the 'original 'tape], or any reasonably discernible consequence. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Baby Lee:
I'm thinking there's something more. I don't see the characters [Kim, Jimmy, Chuck or Howard] as dumb enough to be foiled by anything that's actually been expressed [ie, the existence of the 'original 'tape], or any reasonably discernible consequence.
I agree. Chuck made a specific comment that Jimmy's actions will hurt someone along the way. Something Jimmy/Kim do will have consequences. And judging by Chuck's comments, it probably sets in motion Kim getting hurt. It doesn't seem like the writers to set up a clean victory where Jimmy emerges as an undisputed hero. And even though Chuck seems evil, I think the writers are more complex than that. Before Chuck slips away (if he does) they're going to want to prove that he was right about Jimmy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I agree. Chuck made a specific comment that Jimmy's actions will hurt someone along the way. Something Jimmy/Kim do will have consequences. And judging by Chuck's comments, it probably sets in motion Kim getting hurt. It doesn't seem like the writers to set up a clean victory where Jimmy emerges as an undisputed hero. And even though Chuck seems evil, I think the writers are more complex than that. Before Chuck slips away (if he does) they're going to want to prove that he was right about Jimmy.
One thing I've learned from BB and Saul: There is never an undisputed hero or clean victor. Every action has a price to be paid, and it's usually not foreseen by the temporary victor.
All of the characters dwell in the gray area, which is what makes them so damn interesting. [Reply]
Surprised the ratings for this show continue to go down. First season even after the initial 1st 3 episode bump still averaged strong at 2.6 million viewers per episode. Season 2 was around 2.1 million viewers. This season it's about 1.7 million viewers. Such a good show for dwindling viewership. Compare that to BB which continually gained steam and ratings every single season as it went ESPECIALLY by season 5. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Surprised the ratings for this show continue to go down. First season even after the initial 1st 3 episode bump still averaged strong at 2.6 million viewers per episode. Season 2 was around 2.1 million viewers. This season it's about 1.7 million viewers. Such a good show for dwindling viewership. Compare that to BB which continually gained steam and ratings every single season as it went ESPECIALLY by season 5.
Not ridiculing or complaining, but listening to the BCS aftershow podcast, it's a fascinating world the rules and regulations of content creation.
The last episode, they went on at length about all the extra precautions they had to take with the new camera tech, . . . because they could shoot in lower light, and crew were stumbling over themselves and set pieces.
Then there was lightning regulations. In the premiere, there was a scene with a lightning flash, and people not on set wondered if it was CGI, because apparently if there's visible lightning anywhere, there's a mad scramble to determine the distance, and if it's closer than 6 miles, everything shuts down immediately, no matter what.
And the whole union thing with gaffers being called on for anything that creates light. But then you have to get a grip for anything that blocks or shades light.
Finally, not a safety or union thing, but they went on and one about how cold it was during the Don Eladio swimming scene, and what a trooper he was diving into the pool. It always seems that any scene in any medium that isn't on a stage set, the actors go on and on about either how cold or how hot it was, and how much they endured to 'get the shot.' [Reply]
I'm actually re-watching the series and I've got to say that some of the best acting I've ever seen in BCS and BB was on the episode 5-0 with mike getting revenge. When he breaks down and tells his Daughter in law about the incident I still get blown away.
Mike is the best thing ever. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Baby Lee:
Not ridiculing or complaining, but listening to the BCS aftershow podcast, it's a fascinating world the rules and regulations of content creation.
The last episode, they went on at length about all the extra precautions they had to take with the new camera tech, . . . because they could shoot in lower light, and crew were stumbling over themselves and set pieces.
Then there was lightning regulations. In the premiere, there was a scene with a lightning flash, and people not on set wondered if it was CGI, because apparently if there's visible lightning anywhere, there's a mad scramble to determine the distance, and if it's closer than 6 miles, everything shuts down immediately, no matter what.
And the whole union thing with gaffers being called on for anything that creates light. But then you have to get a grip for anything that blocks or shades light.
Finally, not a safety or union thing, but they went on and one about how cold it was during the Don Eladio swimming scene, and what a trooper he was diving into the pool. It always seems that any scene in any medium that isn't on a stage set, the actors go on and on about either how cold or how hot it was, and how much they endured to 'get the shot.'
If I'm Steven Bauer at this point, I think I'd probably jump into a lava pit to keep working. He had a serious dry spell after the Scar Face love wore off. He's getting hot again with BB, BCS and Ray Donovan. He's got to keep it going or he'll be doing reverse mortgage commercials with Alex Trebek. [Reply]
Originally Posted by raybec 4:
If I'm Steven Bauer at this point, I think I'd probably jump into a lava pit to keep working. He had a serious dry spell after the Scar Face love wore off. He's getting hot again with BB, BCS and Ray Donovan. He's got to keep it going or he'll be doing reverse mortgage commercials with Alex Trebek.
To be fair, it was Gilligan and an AD talking about the temperature. There weren't any actors on the most recent podcast. [Reply]
Originally Posted by eDave:
I've been struggling all day trying to figure this out. What did Kim accomplish there. A duplicate helps Jimmy how.
/feeling stoopid.
I'm just curious how Chuck thinks it would be admissible. I don't know what the evidentiary thresholds for a Bar hearing would be but if there's anything at all, this is a clear "prejudicial impact outweighs probative value" issue. The substance of that tape has NOTHING to do with Jimmy's bar complaint. It's completely outside of the scope of the inquiry.
There's no way that tape should get played. And I think Chuck protected the original for chain of custody issues but as has been noted, it implies malice aforethought and pre-planning. Now how that all ties together with the photographs Mike took is completely beyond me. [Reply]
