Better Call Saul

Maybe break up with the guy, resign, get back on the bus, go be someone else---

or just go be her well-behaved self, now with some irrigation company office experience back in Titusville. "Why'd you leave?" She'll think of something.

More Goodfellas-like resignation: Henry Hill wants marinara sauce, he gets ketchup; Kim wants mayonnaise, her husband brings home Miracle Whip.

Move on in some way... feel more feelings and make more decisions. It seemed pretty clear she had not managed to move on whatsoever and the bus episode after the confession was the start of some release.

Clearing Hamlins name would probably help ease her conscience but ultimately I suspect where this is going is she’s gonna have to turn in Jimmy, knowing the sort of harm he’s gonna cause if he’s on the loose

But now it looks like they have him, so will she come forward as witness for prosecution--?

Maybe. I think there’s a chance he gets away but who knows if he’s gonna be able to take any of his stuff with him.

Wow, just go off to the hobos, start over from nuthin? "Pick a card---" That could be a good ending!

Gene is moving to move to Tarsus, Turkey, and will refer to himself as

idk why but seeing Jesse reminded me of this age old meme which still makes me laugh every time I see it

https://i.imgur.com/uzR2G0T.jpg

just remembered that Kim Wexler was into Stereolab. man she is the coolest

Imagining her crawling into the attic to her secret CD stash to dig out Refried Ectoplasm whenever her husband goes to a football game or whatever

Having to deal with the endless banality must have been torture. Don't think the guy she wound up with looked much like he was an indie rock nerd but obviously not so easy to tell.
The torture never stops.

Enjoyed this. Kim's deliberate attempt at living in dullsville, almost fearful of presenting any opinion, reminded me a bit of the Kate flashback episode in Lost where she's settling down with a guy and doing 'taco night' in an attempt to stop the FBI or whatever continuing to go after her.

BTW I also enjoyed this take from a commenter on another site:

Something I just realized after finishing this episode: Jimmy is always at his most vengeful when people attempt to hold themselves accountable. Note how his true rage at Howard started when Howard confessed that he felt responsible for Chuck’s death. When Kim comes in to sign the divorce settlement, his performance of stone-cold indifference—“Well, have a nice life, Kim!”—is because she’s actually trying (somewhat) to take responsibility for what they’ve done. Jimmy’s actually not too bothered when people try to hold him accountable, with the exception of Chuck. He’ll still do everything in his power to weasel out of the consequences, but he generally doesn’t take it too personally. But when people try to answer for their own bad actions, that’s when Jimmy feels truly, personally attacked. That is the only kind of choice that makes him feel genuinely morally implicated because he knows it’s the one thing he’ll never voluntarily do himself. It’s even worse if Jimmy can tell himself the other person’s choice is actually just an act of self-serving hypocrisy—as when Buddy refuses to rob a man battling cancer after having robbed so many others, or when Kim resigns as a member of the bar association and turns down the Sandpiper money, but doesn’t actually turn herself in. (It’s the mark of how complex the BCS/BB ethical matrix is that the writers actually allow those kinds of actions to be both self-serving and genuinely driven by conscience at the same time.)

I think the reason for this is because of a feeling that started creeping up on me while watching “Nippy”: it doesn’t matter how sweet and kindhearted Jimmy can be at an interpersonal level, his addiction to pulling off these kinds of schemes reveals the con artist’s basically malevolent orientation toward the universe. What I mean is that, in order to do this over and over again, you have to believe, deep down in your soul, that a person’s willingness to trust you isn’t just a reason, but a justification for lying to them, stealing from them, and taking things that aren’t yours to take. If somebody trusts you, it means they deserve to be hurt by you. Remember the flashback scene where a young Jimmy watches his father get conned and then starts stealing from the register that very day? That looked an awful lot like the birth of a lifelong contempt for the world, and the thing about contempt is that it has nothing to do with affection or attachment. Contempt is about an absence of respect, not an absence of liking—you can like people just fine and still have no respect for them, or conversely, absolutely despise someone and still have a basic respect for them. (Recall what Jimmy says to Cliff Main after he manages to scam his way into getting fired and still keeping his severance: “For what it’s worth, Cliff, I think you’re a decent guy.” Cliff: “Yeah, well, for what’s it’s worth, Jimmy, I think you’re an asshole.”) What makes Jimmy’s contempt for the world different from Chuck’s is that Chuck’s vengeance and pettiness is activated when people don’t defer to him (he’s a lot like Walt that way), whereas Jimmy’s is activated by its opposite, when people act in good faith and assume he is as well.

So it makes sense that Jimmy is so infuriated by other people’s attempts to take responsibility for themselves, especially if he considers them to be just as compromised as he is. To admit that you’ve done wrong, or that there are lines you won’t cross is to agree that there are ethical and moral standards that go beyond interpersonal kindness, and that adherence to those standards might require some kind of sacrifice. When you’re willing to cross a line and the other person isn’t, who looks like the asshole?

Tony Soprano has that problem too. And Don Draper: "Whenever I'm really unsure about an idea, first I abuse the people whose help I need, and then I take a nap."

Apparently the moment where black and white “Gene”sees that glimpse of his old commercial, but it has a full colour reflection - it’s a call back to a similar moment in the pilot. Definitely seems to symbolize that he will never regret being Saul. https://screenrant.com/better-call-saul-commercial-color-gene-meaning/

Reflection in his glasses that is.

I figured it’s just that the overall color system in the show is that color scenes represent the past and that’s where that was from, so it was just a neat impactful visual device for a pivotal scene.

Claims of symbolism that don’t come straight from the creators always scan as reaching to me. Worst offenders are those little information cards next to paintings in museums. Unless there is a quote from the artist themselves corroborating the claim, I remain suspicious and catalog it as a “fun theory”. Because almost every time someone has the luxury to actually ask an artist about a symbolic reading, the actual reasoning seems to turn out to be due to a more simplistic, practical reasoning. Fans and critics romanticize all the finer details of popular art.

2nd “reasoning” meant to write “explanation” or “idea”

And that's fine, that's part of the process. Dave Hickey, wrote fiction and songs as well as critical essays, said that he subscribed to the evolutionary, rather than the Creationist, theory of art: that it begins, rather than ends, with what's presented as this iconic object. The smarter artists mostly keep their heads down, let the audience fill in the gaps re a particular work, even the ones who are volubly philosophical about the Big Picture.
Even on my little level of published writing, I've had readers point out something I wasn't aware of, and it's probably happened to the BB/BCS team as well. Even if it seems off the rails, can be good to see what you're doing from another perspective, and test your own view that way. This thread has often been otm.

*who* wrote

For sure, I only respond negatively when it is asserted without question that "this is what it means", which is a cheap way for the writer to establish themselves as the authority on someone else's work.

Just gonna breeze past intentional fallacy/death of the author chat somehow going on in 2022 if that’s ok

I rewatched this ep and it needs to be said again, Rhea Seehorn deserves so many letters from Anthony Hopkins for this. Even before the waterworks there are a few moments where she lets go just a little (“you want me to say something?”) and it looks physically painful

So much going on in the phone call, they are still poison for each other: I think Kim inadvertently sets Jimmy off with “however you’re living, it can’t be much”, after which he determinedly leaves his own sprinkler-company existence on a suicide mission back into the bigsmall time, & “you’re the one with the guilty conscience” prompts Kim’s trip to Albuquerque and the amazing scene with Cheryl — & the heart-sinking thing there is that she’s still dissembling by not mentioning that the other witness is alive & in contact

Plus “Saul goodman” is largely Kim’s creation (something I think he is throwing in her face in the divorce papers scene) and horrible as geneviktor is at this stage I was feeling for Jimmy at the start of the call (on his birthday!) there is still something of the kicked puppy about odenkirks performance

Solid lols at gene singing along to “the tide is high” (v funny ~significant~ song choice) and doing the classic starting to sing the wrong bit bit

also I know the point is to show the awfulness of Kim’s bullshit job but I could have spent another 10 minutes in that office

Well gee, ok. Wasn’t trying to assert anything “without question”. I just thought it was a neat detail that is clearly intentional of *something* - since they did it twice to bookend the show.

Nah, you're good.
“Saul goodman” is largely Kim’s creation How d'ye mean, winsamp?
Her office is comic strip hell ov mundane---her hair, on other hand, is scary self-punishment.

She did reinforce him, encourage him, for sure, back in the day. But he brought that out in her, that thing that her Mom encouraged in her.

I mean it literally: in the first half of this season she is shown to be the one to come up with the details of the goodman persona: this is what Saul would drive, this is the kind of office he would have &c

She's helpful, encouraging, but it's the idea, and the propensity for being the gleeful, shady Robin Hood, that he already had, right? Which becomes her own justification: fight for the little guy, screw the big guy---but for both of them, the big guy becomes less The Man, The System, and more---Howard, the righteous complacent etc.

But yeah, she's got her own Lady Macbeth tendencies, going beyond Skylar responding to Walt, which at first I thought Kim-Jimmy-Saul was just gonna rehash. The BCS writers continue to bang dents into otherwise predictable or somewhat familiar arcs.

Gene aping Walt aping gus in the scene with Marion, even if he pulls back at the last minute… shit this guy’s toast

(This and nearly braining the cancer patient with his dead dog are low points for sure but re the post upthread about these being his first violent acts, it was p heavily implied that he gave the poison to brock though they sort of disavow it later iirc)

xp sure, I’m not saying she made him who he is but that she literally took the lead in constructing this specific persona, as we saw

forgot about Brock!

this b otm

So it makes sense that Jimmy is so infuriated by other people’s attempts to take responsibility for themselves, especially if he considers them to be just as compromised as he is. To admit that you’ve done wrong, or that there are lines you won’t cross is to agree that there are ethical and moral standards that go beyond interpersonal kindness, and that adherence to those standards might require some kind of sacrifice. When you’re willing to cross a line and the other person isn’t, who looks like the asshole?

― kinder, Saturday, August 13, 2022 5:57 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

Tony Soprano has that problem too. And Don Draper: "Whenever I'm really unsure about an idea, first I abuse the people whose help I need, and then I take a nap."

― clemenza

Yeah when he says “we’re both too smart to throw our lives away for no reason” it’s clear he hates the idea of her choosing to face consequences when she should know that she is better than that just like himself

Well gee, ok. Wasn’t trying to assert anything “without question”. I just thought it was a neat detail that is clearly intentional of *something* - since they did it twice to bookend the show.

― Kim, Sunday, August 14, 2022 3:39 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

Oh, I wasn't aiming anything at you! It was just a thought on symbolism interpretations. I was already speaking generally at that point.

Just gonna breeze past intentional fallacy/death of the author chat somehow going on in 2022 if that’s ok

kind of, but- never mind whatever

not really death of the author just how this stuff works, people come up w their own takes/shadings even when omg The Author

Like when Emily Nussbaum worried in The New Yorker about "bad fans" of Breaking Bad, the ones who were really really Team Walt all the way through---there's always something like that, and not nec. predictable: like Mark David Chapman gets autograph from Lennon, shoots him, and sits down on sidewalk to read his sacred text, The Catcher in The Rye.

john lennon *was* a phony tho

The records will show that I voted for breezing past

also I know the point is to show the awfulness of Kim’s bullshit job but I could have spent another 10 minutes in that office

As ever, this show and its progenitor are just superb on the texture and details of work, whether it’s criminal or mundane.

Great episode overall, especially the Kim parts, but that Kim/Jesse scene was one of the worst 5 minutes in the entire BB/BCS run. Embarrassing.

My take is that the entire episode is intended to draw the distinction between Saul, who is completely remorseless, and Kim, who is absolutely remorseful and has attempted to redeem herself by leading a "good life". The (terrible) scene with Jesse highlights this - at that point in her journey, she is not yet able to realize how bad it was what she and Saul did. The phone call from Saul makes her realize that her "good life" is not enough - it hasn't tipped the scales for her or assuaged her feelings of guilt. She realizes the only way forward for her, the only way she can live with herself, is to come clean (at least as to her part in everything - the fact that she doesn't turn Saul in shows she still loves him on some level). The next step on her journey would be for her to realize that Saul is still out there hurting people and to turn him in.

Also, the two ends we see of the Kim-Gene phone call are interesting - last episode we see Gene reacting in anger because Kim doesn't buy Saul's act. This is crucial, because it highlights that Kim never bought Jimmy/Saul/Gene's act - she wasn't another mark who got roped into their scams - she was a willing participant the entire time, bears just as much culpability as Saul, and her realization of this spurs her to confess.

If Kim hadn’t had the cautionary upbringing and conflicted view of her mother and hasd been the Jimmy character in this series, it would have been so much crazier and worse. He’s the natural con, she is the natural liar plus so much else

I thought I might like the Jesse scene better on rewatch but if anything it struck even more of a bum note (almost worth it for the last line/shot tho). It’s all down to Paul who is excruciating, his movement & delivery is so forced I felt like I was watching a beautifully shot Kevin smith film or something. I was just remembering how funny he was in that classic bb scene where he has dinner with mr & Mrs white which I think is kind of the vibe they’re going for here, Jesse running his mouth trying to fill the silence, but for whatever reason Gilligan just couldn’t get the performance out of him

(Speaking of, with all the cameos we’ve had it might have been nice to see Anna Gunn in the breaking bad episode — Skyler did know Saul, & their dynamic was pretty fun)

Paul is in his early 40s, it just wasn’t going to work no matter how many big hats you put on him.

Part of it boils down to the motivation for why he's talking.

Gilligan's known for legendary one-liners, but the best ones were generally earned.

Here, you could have had anybody ask Kim if Saul was a good lawyer and got the same quality response.

But because they decided to make it Jesse, then they tried too hard to legitimize why he'd talk to her AND why he'd ask the question he did, especially since she's the type of person he'd have just glanced at and shrugged. Felt entirely exposition, not a character moment or a good hybrid

It'd be almost as if the say my name scene went like this

Declan : Who the hell are you?

Walter White : You know. You all know exactly who I am. Say my name.

Declan : Do what? I don't... I don't have a damn clue who the hell you are.

Walter White : Yeah, you do. I'm the cook. I'm the man who killed Gus Fring.

Declan : Bullshit. Cartel got Fring.

Walter White : Are you sure?

Mike: That's a common misconception. Lots of people think the cartel got Fring, but as much as it begrudges me to say it, Walt did. See he outsmarted me and threw me a curveball. And I'll always be wondering how I let him why I killed him when I got the chance.

Declan: are you done?

Mike: really it was a betrayal of my police training in Philly. There was a time I let an abusive spouse kill his wife. Walt remembers that story. I took a half-measure. And now all that's left of Gus is eyes without a face

Walter White : That's right. Now, say my name.

Declan: I forgot what we were talking about

idk maybe I'm the only one who got this impression but that Jesse/Kim scene still felt significant because Kim, in theory, could have talked Jesse out of hiring Saul

obviously you're right in that it didn't have to be Jesse there but this series has earned a bit of fanservice here and there. I did think it was very cool when Hank & Gomez popped up for a quick scene in BCS

xp

"Ok, ok, I'll say it. You're the one who knocks."