# Breaking Bad S05E03 "Hazard Pay" OAD 7.29.12



## johnmoorejohn (Sep 13, 2001)

Didn't see a thread.

Can someone explain the Victor comment at the end?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

johnmoorejohn said:


> Didn't see a thread.
> 
> Can someone explain the Victor comment at the end?


Not me. I can't tell if Walt was talking about Mike or Jesse. I think Mike, but that would be a terrible strategic error.

I also don't like this tent idea. Much to risky.

Also, that means Aaron Paul's comments about cooking at "a blue collar location, right under our noses" makes no sense, or was a red herring. Or maybe they eventually end up at the car wash later in the season. But using people's houses while being exterminated isn't either "blue collar" or "right under their noses" since it's really a stretch that only Walt dreamed up. I hope they drop this idea soon. I really don't like it.


----------



## johnmoorejohn (Sep 13, 2001)

Bug fumigation is Blue Collar, and right under our noses, is in people's homes?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

The other thing that just seemed out of place is that Mike really should have told Walt and Jesse about the "hazard pay" deductions up front (as well as the 20% Mule fee), so there were no surprises later. It's called "setting expectations" and it's part of "Management 101".


----------



## johnmoorejohn (Sep 13, 2001)

Hank said:


> The other thing that just seemed out of place is that Mike really should have told Walt and Jesse about the "hazard pay" deductions up front (as well as the 20% Mule fee), so there were no surprises later. It's called "setting expectations" and it's part of "Management 101".


Thought the same thing.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Hank said:


> The other thing that just seemed out of place is that Mike really should have told Walt and Jesse about the "hazard pay" deductions up front (as well as the 20% Mule fee), so there were no surprises later. It's called "setting expectations" and it's part of "Management 101".


Yeah, I would have thought they worked all those details out ahead of time. It seemed odd that it was a surprise.

I did like the episode and was screaming along with Skylar at Marie to Shut Up!!!  I think Skylar is going to crack soon.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

betts4 said:


> I did like the episode and was screaming along with Skylar at Marie to Shut Up!!!


I turned to my g/f and said "it's about time someone told Marie to shut up!"


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

The nanny cam warning was a good one, and I'm not really sure how they will be able to work around problems like that from house to house. It seemed like such a risky and work-intensive solution. And would residential power be sufficient for their needs?

It sure seems like there are a lot of people who know about their operation now.

Skylar's breakdown scene would have been much more powerful had it been allowed to run another minute or so -- it seemed like it cut to commercial too abruptly and before the scene was really over.

Nice that Scarface footage made an appearance. Extra nice touch that Walt was watching it with his family. "Everybody dies in the end" is some pretty heavy-handed foreshadowing. I thought the audio segue from the sound of Pacino's machinegun fire into the sound of the money counting was very well done.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

danterner said:


> I thought the audio segue from the sound of Pacino's machinegun fire into the sound of the money counting was very well done.


I totally agree.. had to watch that twice.


----------



## rrrobinsonjr (Nov 26, 2004)

betts4 said:


> I did like the episode and was screaming along with Skylar at Marie to Shut Up!!!  I think Skylar is going to crack soon.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Hank said:


> I also don't like this tent idea. Much to risky.
> 
> Also, that means Aaron Paul's comments about cooking at "a blue collar location, right under our noses" makes no sense, or was a red herring. Or maybe they eventually end up at the car wash later in the season. But using people's houses while being exterminated isn't either "blue collar" or "right under their noses" since it's really a stretch that only Walt dreamed up. I hope they drop this idea soon. I really don't like it.


I'm thinking/hoping the fumigation/tent stuff is temporary. I think Walter wants to return to having a super lab again, but that is going to require a LOT of money. Let's say the partnership was all sunshine and smiles, if they cooked 1 batch a week for a couple of months each of them would have near a million dollars. Then they could have a meeting and each could reinvest some money into building a new lab where they could just do their thing. However Walter is becoming greedy with power so I'm not sure how long this partnership will last. I agree about the nanny cams.



danterner said:


> Nice that Scarface footage made an appearance. Extra nice touch that Walt was watching it with his family. "*Everybody dies in the end*" is some pretty heavy-handed foreshadowing.


That scene was awesome.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

This episode did answer the timing question. It's been about 1 year since Walt's cancer diagnosis. That means the opening scene from the first episode this season is about a year away.


----------



## bsnelson (Oct 30, 1999)

I think there's a great tie in to Linkin Park's "One Step Closer" with Skylar's rant. That'd make a great mashup video. 

I have to say, I'm as big of a fan of BB as almost anyone, but this season has some elements that I'm not fond of. I don't really know how to explain it, other than to say that it seems like they end up coming up with these grandiose solutions to big problems, and bam, they're implemented and bear fruit almost instantly. It's like there's not enough "real world" time or effort put into them. Maybe it's just that things are being rushed on screen. 

My two big examples are the magnet truck and the "new lab" arrangement. Those ideas seemed to go from initial thought to implementation, with few hitches, in very little time. The "new lab" was put together and seemingly overnight, and just like that, BAM!, fifty pounds of blue came out without a bit of trouble. 

I do like Mike getting more screen time; his character is absolutely awesome. I briefly thought he'd gone a little soft in S05E01, but I think he's found his balls again now.  

It's often been mentioned about Hank suspecting Walt (or lack thereof): My personal belief is that he's thought quite a bit about it, but has just dismissed it as not being possible. He's too close to the "old Walt" to be able to see him any other way. 

We also got a big clue as to timelines: We recall that S01 opened with it being Walt's 50th, and in this episode, it was mentioned that Walt has a birthday coming up. That must be his 51st, so we know that about a year has elapsed thus far in the whole series. Considering that the S05E01 flash-forward was on his 52nd birthday, a lot of water seems destined to go under the bridge yet. 

Finally, Saul. I haven't seen Bob Odenkirk in any other roles, but he just absolutely kills, kills, kills in that role. If it weren't for Aaron Paul being the main supporting actor, I'd heartily endorse him for some awards. So many great one liners, so many little barbs. 

Despite my "too fast, too easy" complaints above, I still love this show and think it's certainly one of the top five dramatic shows on TV in the last, oh, 20 years or so, maybe ever. It's absolutely effin' brilliant. 

Brad


----------



## mike_k (Sep 20, 2005)

bsnelson said:


> I do like Mike getting more screen time; his character is absolutely awesome. I briefly thought he'd gone a little soft in S05E01, but I think he's found his balls again now.


I think Mike's time on this earth is very limited.



bsnelson said:


> Finally, Saul. I haven't seen Bob Odenkirk in any other roles, but he just absolutely kills, kills, kills in that role. If it weren't for Aaron Paul being the main supporting actor, I'd heartily endorse him for some awards. So many great one liners, so many little barbs.


I agree with this 1,000%. Bob Odenkirk is awesome in that role. There is so much great acting on this show.

Do we think Brock recognized Walt? I'm not sure what Walt's motivation was behind the talk he had with Jesse about telling Andrea about what they do. Was he trying to get Jesse to break up with her?


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

mike_k said:


> Do we think Brock recognized Walt? I'm not sure what Walt's motivation was behind the talk he had with Jesse about telling Andrea about what they do. Was he trying to get Jesse to break up with her?


I wondered about that too, however Walter seemed so happy for Jesse I wasn't sure if he was being serious or doing another piece of manipulation. If Walter was manipulating Jesse, that was pretty subtle. Jesse explained that Andrea knew he did something illegal, and that she could probably guess as to what it was, but she never asked and he never told. Knowing that, and Walter's comment about how lies build barriers it seemed too genuine.
However knowing all the lies Walter has told Jesse it'll be interesting to see what happens if/when the truth comes out. It's very interesting to see how the truth has effected Skylar.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

bsnelson said:


> I have to say, I'm as big of a fan of BB as almost anyone, but this season has some elements that I'm not fond of. I don't really know how to explain it, other than to say that it seems like they end up coming up with these grandiose solutions to big problems, and bam, they're implemented and bear fruit almost instantly. It's like there's not enough "real world" time or effort put into them. Maybe it's just that things are being rushed on screen.
> 
> My two big examples are the magnet truck and the "new lab" arrangement. Those ideas seemed to go from initial thought to implementation, with few hitches, in very little time. The "new lab" was put together and seemingly overnight, and just like that, BAM!, fifty pounds of blue came out without a bit of trouble.


There were a lot of loose ends at the end of season 4 and they have been tying them all up in the beginning of season 5. They can't spend a lot of time on each one or the whole season would be wasted. I agree with you that things are moving more quickly than they used to but I can't imagine what it would be like if they took their time tying up the loose ends. They needed to get Walt and Jesse cooking again. Otherwise there would be no conflict and nothing for the characters to do.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

wouldworker said:


> There were a lot of loose ends at the end of season 4 and they have been tying them all up in the beginning of season 5. They can't spend a lot of time on each one or the whole season would be wasted. I agree with you that things are moving more quickly than they used to but I can't imagine what it would be like if they took their time tying up the loose ends. They needed to get Walt and Jesse cooking again. Otherwise there would be no conflict and nothing for the characters to do.


This was my thought as well. I also thought they got the instalab up very quick, but then realized that it's probably about the time constraint they have to tell the story with just this season to go.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I'm perfectly content with the InstaLabs as a plot device, provided:

1. It backfires and causes them further complications

Or 

2. They move on to a different arrangement soon, coming to their senses just in time. I want to see Walt complete his transition into Scarface; so far this season, he is transitioning into Wile E. Coyote.

I still love the show, though. Fastest hour on tv.

I'm among those unsure as to whether Walt was being sincere to Jesse or manipulating him. Also insure about who Walt is suggesting is "flying too close to the sun" -- did he mean Mike, or was that a warning to Jesse?

When Walt was looking at his copy of Leaves of Grass, that was a callback to Gale and the whole notebook reference to "WW," right? My memory on that is hazy. Have we seen Walt's copy of the book before?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

mike_k said:


> I think Mike's time on this earth is very limited.


I disagree. I think Mike will be the last man standing -- ASSUMING that Walt doesn't kill him first. I think Walt will make enough enemies that he'll end up being the one hunted at the end. Maybe by Mike with help of a reborn cartel.

If you watch some of the videos on AMC, Vince G says that Walt was once again craftily manipulating Jesse to break up with Andrea.

I'm OK with the mini-lab (and the speed with which it was built). But I hope they find a permanent place for their lab set up and ditch the tent-house bit. (like under the car wash where they could vent the fumes with little or no detection.)


----------



## johnmoorejohn (Sep 13, 2001)

I think it was intended, but did anyone else feel uneasy about Jesse's friends getting in on the action. Not sure why the circle of 'people in the know' has to get so large. But maybe that is a theme this season. Also, who is supposed to clean up the lab? They started the fumigation before they closed up their inner tent.

I also miss the slow pace of earlier seasons, such as how much time and difficulty they spent on getting rid of a single dead body. I guess those days are far behind them.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

johnmoorejohn said:


> I think it was intended, but did anyone else feel uneasy about Jesse's friends getting in on the action. Not sure why the circle of 'people in the know' has to get so large. But maybe that is a theme this season. Also, who is supposed to clean up the lab? They started the fumigation before they closed up their inner tent.


I assume the fumigation works will take care of taking down the indoor tent when they untent the house.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

johnmoorejohn said:


> Also, who is supposed to clean up the lab? They started the fumigation before they closed up their inner tent.


I think you saw it wrong -- they turned on the foggers on their way out of the house after the cook was done, and I'm sure they closed up the inner tent before doing that.



SeanC said:


> I assume the fumigation works will take care of taking down the indoor tent when they untent the house.


Yeah, it seemed like the pest crew had a much larger roll in setting up the house internals that I would have suspected -- like setting up the entire inner tent, the toxic fumes vent, lighting, power, their haz-mat suits at the ready, etc. If it were Walt and Jesse, I would have had the workers roll in the lab rolling crates and just leave them, so there are few clues as to what's actually going on, so there's no temptation to "talk". The less people know, the better. If Dexter can set up and strike his own kill-room each time, Walt and Jesse can set up the house internals.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

johnmoorejohn said:


> I think it was intended, but did anyone else feel uneasy about Jesse's friends getting in on the action. Not sure why the circle of 'people in the know' has to get so large. But maybe that is a theme this season. Also, who is supposed to clean up the lab? They started the fumigation before they closed up their inner tent.
> 
> I also miss the slow pace of earlier seasons, such as how much time and difficulty they spent on getting rid of a single dead body. I guess those days are far behind them.


I loved having Badger and Skinny Pete in on it. I mean, they didn't seem to know until the delivery of the boxes and that was a great idea for transporting it all.

And Jesse came up with how to fit it all in! I think he is a lot smarter than Mr. White gives him credit for and maybe the meth effects are wearing off.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

This is funny

The Oatmeal: Violence vs Hair


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

Who would have thunk Skinny Pete would be a good pianist?


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

OMG, yeah, that was totally amazing.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

We're getting to the point where any sympathy we had for Walter is going to be gone, gone, gone. Walt is no longer Tony Soprano. More like JR Ewing.

He terrorizes Skyler, threatens Jesse TWICE - "Where is the relationship going? Do what you think is best." and "I was thinking about what happened to Victor."

The "Do you what you think is best" is the same as what Tony Soprano told Ralph about taking out his nephew(?)

"What happened to Victor" means "Don't side with Mike against me again."

I think the whole fumigated house plan is way too unwieldy and risky. All it takes is one neighbor calling the cops about the smell to blow it sky high.

And is every house going to have enough clear space for the tent? What about the floor or carpeting under it? What happens if the exterminator has no jobs a certain week?

Skyler is going to crack and tip off Hank.

Mike and Jesse have top know that Skyler knows what business Walt is in, even if they don't know how much she knows.

Consider that Hank knows that "Pinkman" is heavily involved, but is supposed to stay away from him. The DEA could still haul him in or tail him.

If the DEA had tailed Mike they would have been led directly to the new shop.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

I don't really know who Walter is threatening when it concerns the Victor statement. I think it's mike considering the bit of dialogue from the beginning of the Episode. Not exact.
Mike "I control the business"
..
Walter "He controls the business, I control him"

What I'm thinking is Mike is now showing that he wont be controlled by Walter, and as such is incurring the wrath of Heisenberg.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

wouldworker said:


> They needed to get Walt and Jesse cooking again. Otherwise there would be no conflict and nothing for the characters to do.


At this point, as far as Hank is concerned, Fring = Heisenberg, so no more Fring = no more Heisenberg.

But as soon as the blue meth starts reappearing on the streets, he's back on the trail, with fewer suspects. The noose will start to close in on Walt.

I also thought the Scarface scenes were awesome. As soon as I saw that machine gun in the trunk in the season premiere, that's what came to mind: "Say hello to my little friend!"



danterner said:


> I want to see Walt complete his transition into Scarface; so far this season, he is transitioning into Wile E. Coyote.


LOL! :up:


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

I don't think there is any question that Walt was talking about Mike at the end when he was ruminating on what had happened to Victor. He's clearly not happy with Mike's handling of the cash side, and he's looking to influence Jesse to how ultimately they are going to have do something about Mike.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

robojerk said:


> This is funny
> 
> The Oatmeal: Violence vs Hair


Too hilarious! Thanks for sharing. 

Greg


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

robojerk said:


> I don't really know who Walter is threatening when it concerns the Victor statement. I think it's mike considering the bit of dialogue from the beginning of the Episode. Not exact.
> Mike "I control the business"
> ..
> Walter "He controls the business, I control him"
> ...


My first impression was that his comments concerned Mike. However, it definitely was ambiguous, and made even more so by his talking about flying too close to the sun and getting burned. I don't recall the exact dialog, but I definitely took it as an allusion to the myth of Icarus and Daedalus, which concerned a father/son relationship, more closely fitting Walt/Jesse than Walt/Mike. So that caused me to think that maybe his statement was directed at Jesse.


----------



## mike_k (Sep 20, 2005)

robojerk said:


> I don't really know who Walter is threatening when it concerns the Victor statement. I think it's mike considering the bit of dialogue from the beginning of the Episode. Not exact.
> Mike "I control the business"
> ..
> Walter "He controls the business, I control him"
> ...


I think he was talking about Mike as well. That's why I don't think Mike will make it through the season alive.


----------



## mike_k (Sep 20, 2005)

nataylor said:


> Who would have thunk Skinny Pete would be a good pianist?


:up: That was awesome.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

mike_k said:


> I think he was talking about Mike as well. That's why I don't think Mike will make it through the season alive.


Having watched seasons 1 & 2, I think Mike is safe until Walter finds a supplier for the chemicals, and distributor to sell the product. However Walter's ego is so big right now he could go to the mattresses for any little thing once he has enough cash to be truly independent.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

That is just a ridiculous idea about cooking in the houses. All it is going to take is someone trying to sneak back into their home because they forgot or need something in there.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

They didn't need the added risk telling those addled goofs where Jesse's bizness has moved to. Why couldn't the exterminators themselves have gone to the music store and said they had the brillant idea of using the cases to haul around their tools and supplies?

Even better they could have used Knapp toolboxes but those are damned heavy.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

DeDondeEs said:


> That is just a ridiculous idea about cooking in the houses. All it is going to take is someone trying to sneak back into their home because they forgot or need something in there.


I think you would be pretty hesitant to go into your house while it's being fumigated. There were all those warnings about toxic chemicals....

I can see Walt's point about the hazard pay. None of those guys know anything about Walt or Jesse, so why should they have to pay them to protect Mike and that girl? Of course, Mike knows them, so I guess it's in their best interest to keep him safe. Am I right that Mike is the last link from them to any guys still alive? Not a safe position for Mike to be in.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> I can see Walt's point about the hazard pay. None of those guys know anything about Walt or Jesse, so why should they have to pay them to protect Mike and that girl? Of course, Mike knows them, so I guess it's in their best interest to keep him safe. Am I right that Mike is the last link from them to any guys still alive? Not a safe position for Mike to be in.


Right, but if any of Mike's guys roll and turn in Mike, he could easily roll over and rat out Walt and Jesse (turning in the all-mighty "Heisenberg" would be a great deal for Mike), so it is in ALL their interests that they're paid their hazard pay.

Also, we don't know which of those guys know about Walt and Jesse -- there's no reason they would not know. Guys like Victor and other "muscle" might very well know about W&J, but we just didn't see them on screen. Surely Dennis (the manager of the laundry) probably knows about W&J.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> I think you would be pretty hesitant to go into your house while it's being fumigated. There were all those warnings about toxic chemicals....


All it takes is an ordinary high-school chemistry or physics teacher with access to a gas-mask to enter a tented house like that. Or any occupation that needs haz-mat or gas masks. Certainly not common, but also not rare.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

DeDondeEs said:


> That is just a ridiculous idea about cooking in the houses. All it is going to take is someone trying to sneak back into their home because they forgot or need something in there.


I can see this happening, and the motivation to move the lab into the car wash.

After of course, either Walt or Jesse having to take care of the homeowner.

Or more likely, the homeowners teenage child sneaking back in for his iPod or cell phone.

phox


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

netringer said:


> And is every house going to have enough clear space for the tent? What about the floor or carpeting under it? What happens if the exterminator has no jobs a certain week?


Didn't Saul (or Mike) say that they had multiple bookings for weeks and weeks, or something to that effect?

phox


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

phox_mulder said:


> Didn't Saul (or Mike) say that they had multiple bookings for weeks and weeks, or something to that effect?


Yes, and they would pick the "best" house of the group to cook in.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

phox_mulder said:


> Didn't Saul (or Mike) say that they had multiple bookings for weeks and weeks, or something to that effect?
> ...


"Sorry, Mr. Jones, tell ya what, we're booked 6 weeks in advance. You'll just have to live with the roaches for another month and a half."


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

rrrobinsonjr said:


> [media]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7yfu3LFS71qdrcyyo1_500.gif[/media]


I'll be using this often.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I thought it was out of character for Walt to let Mike dictate the rules. But the comment about "I handle Mike" made sense. But Walt now knows that Mike's money is gone and he needs the operation to continue so he has money for the hazard pay. I see Walt now with leverage.

Mike was wrong not to outline the money distribution from the start. That made no sense. I also don't see why they have to pay the hazard pay in perpetuity. Pay them back the money they lost and that is enough. The whole thing is too contrived.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

robojerk said:


> If Walter was manipulating Jesse, that was pretty subtle


Everything Walt does is calculated. He was manipulating him.



nataylor said:


> Who would have thunk Skinny Pete would be a good pianist?


I kept watching for a cut, meaning they'd swapped in someone else's hands. I was shocked when they panned up and it was really him!



netringer said:


> If the DEA had tailed Mike they would have been led directly to the new shop.


I've seen similar comments in a couple of threads. If anyone can lose a tail, it's Mike. Following Jessie would make more sense.

I loved Jessie stumbling over how to introduce Walt to his girlfriend. Both how to describe their relationship (my HS chem teacher from 6(?) years ago) and what to call him ("Mr. White).

I laugh every damn time he calls Walt "Mr. White". Especially the last episode, the contrast is great.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Robin said:


> I kept watching for a cut, meaning they'd swapped in someone else's hands. I was shocked when they panned up and it was really him!


Maybe they kept the guys around who did the CGI work for Gus's head last season.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Robin said:


> I kept watching for a cut, meaning they'd swapped in someone else's hands. I was shocked when they panned up and it was really him!


Ditto.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Anubys said:


> Mike was wrong not to outline the money distribution from the start. That made no sense. I also don't see why they have to pay the hazard pay in perpetuity. Pay them back the money they lost and that is enough. The whole thing is too contrived.


I wonder if Mike is calling it one thing, but taking some of that money to build up a new fund for his granddaughter.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Anubys said:


> I also don't see why they have to pay the hazard pay in perpetuity. Pay them back the money they lost and that is enough. The whole thing is too contrived.


Did they make it clear that it would be paid in perpetuity? I thought they would just have to pay back whatever those guys lost.

Also a little thing with the overall math at the end. Most of those costs do seem to be on going concerns.

However, one big item was paying back Jesse, well that cost is done, that was 40k, so on the next cook, Walter should expect to bring in 179k instead of the 139k. Walter made a comment that 139 was less than they made with Fring, but from the inflection of his voice I would guess that 179 would be more.

And if they only have to pay back the other guys what they lost, then eventually they will be making even more per cook.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

The hazard pay amounts to several million dollars, right? I thought Mike was out $2 million. The other 9 (or is it 8?) people probably got paid less than Mike, but if they were out $1 million each then it's going to take a while to pay that all back at $350,000 per cook, assuming 1 cook per week.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

nataylor said:


> The hazard pay amounts to several million dollars, right? I thought Mike was out $2 million. The other 9 (or is it 8?) people probably got paid less than Mike, but if they were out $1 million each then it's going to take a while to pay that all back at $350,000 per cook, assuming 1 cook per week.


Weren't there 12 in all, including Mike?


----------



## Tyrion The Imp (Jul 11, 2012)

Great episode IMO. I love Marie flipping out, and I can't believe they would cook in a house like that. That is pretty scary.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

pdhenry said:


> Weren't there 12 in all, including Mike?


For some reason the number 9 is sticking in my mind too. I believe the total was 12, including Mike, of that 12, 2 are dead, so 9 without Mike.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Hank said:


> The other thing that just seemed out of place is that Mike really should have told Walt and Jesse about the "hazard pay" deductions up front (as well as the 20% Mule fee), so there were no surprises later. It's called "setting expectations" and it's part of "Management 101".


Also, take out expenses before the profit split. No one likes to see money come out of their share..


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)




----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

Mike didn't tell Walt about the money up front because he knew Walt wouldn't be happy about it. No sense pissing the guy off before he even makes some product. Walt was going to be unhappy either way.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Okay, I have to say it. When I saw the first shot of the big striped fumigation tent and Walt in the backseat of the car looking at it, I flashed to Malcolm in the Middle episode when they had to get their house fumigated and had to sleep in the backyard in a camper and tents. Just a quick flash.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Oh,that's great -- I totally forgot about that.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

betts4 said:


> I wonder if Mike is calling it one thing, but taking some of that money to build up a new fund for his granddaughter.


I think Mike's an honest guy (all things considered). I expect he takes a minimal salary for himself and the rest goes into the granddaughter's fund.



ct1 said:


> Also, take out expenses before the profit split. No one likes to see money come out of their share..


Seriously. I know it made for great television, whittling down piles of cash, but what the hell?

On second thought, maybe he did that on purpose to make Walt understand the expenses involved?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

That Half-Life poster is great!



betts4 said:


> Okay, I have to say it. When I saw the first shot of the big striped fumigation tent and Walt in the backseat of the car looking at it, I flashed to Malcolm in the Middle episode when they had to get their house fumigated and had to sleep in the backyard in a camper and tents. Just a quick flash.


I didn't watch Malcolm while it was on, but yesterday I happened to notice it was airing on IFC and I tuned in and caught an episode and a half. It's truly amazing how different Bryan Cranston is from role to role. His bearing, his manner of speech, his timing, his physical appearance. Wow.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Tyrion The Imp said:


> Great episode IMO. I love Marie flipping out, ...


It wasn't _Marie_ who flipped out. Marie was just all-knowing and clueless Marie. What is great writing is that how that went down is so real. Marie the motormouth would react by doing anything _except shutting up._


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

ct1 said:


> Also, take out expenses before the profit split. No one likes to see money come out of their share..


I think Mike did it to show exactly where the money was going.

"Here's the total pile. Here's out shares. Here's this taken out, here's that taken out. That is why you ended up with a bit over $100K."

Rather than "Ouf of the 1.X million, we each get 1/10th. Trust me."


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

I have a theory that Todd the exterminator employee who turned off the nanny cam went to the high school where Walt taught. He wasn't one of Walt's students, but he knows Walt's real name, possibly Jesse's too, and will stir up some crap later on.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

TheMerk said:


> I have a theory that Todd the exterminator employee who turned off the nanny cam went to the high school where Walt taught. He wasn't one of Walt's students, but he knows Walt's real name, possibly Jesse's too, and will stir up some crap later on.


:up:
Landry is always causing problems.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

It's interesting to see Walt's transformation from just a "cook" to being a boss. I was hoping that was the direction the final season would take. Cranston plays it soooooo well.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

robojerk said:


> :up:
> Landry is always causing problems.


Wait until he goes on a multi-state killing spree!


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Wait until he goes on a multi-state killing spree!


Remember, he's already killed once.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

danterner said:


> I didn't watch Malcolm while it was on, but yesterday I happened to notice it was airing on IFC and I tuned in and caught an episode and a half. It's truly amazing how different Bryan Cranston is from role to role. His bearing, his manner of speech, his timing, his physical appearance. Wow.


How about the Anti-Dentite episode of "Seinfeld" (S08E19) where Cranston plays the dentist (Tim Whatley) who turns Jewish so he can tell jokes to his patients without sounding like an anti-Semite?



TheMerk said:


> I have a theory that Todd the exterminator employee who turned off the nanny cam went to the high school where Walt taught. He wasn't one of Walt's students, but he knows Walt's real name, possibly Jesse's too, and will stir up some crap later on.


He probably stirs up trouble using magnets.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I just assumed that the "hazard" involved was prison, so the pay would have to continue however long they're in, mainly to keep their mouths shut.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

some clarifications:

Mike did say the hazard pay continues in perpetuity; which is preposterous.

Each cook nets them about $1.2 million, not $350,000

Don't forget the cost of the stuff the woman gets. Only the first barrel was free. I wonder how many cooks they make before they need another barrel.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Anubys said:


> some clarifications:
> 
> Mike did say the hazard pay continues in perpetuity; which is preposterous.
> 
> Each cook nets them about $1.2 million, not $350,000


some clarifications:

Each cook _grosses_ them about $1.2 million. Net is after the deductions. Each cook _nets_ about $540k (based on the first cook, but not including Jesse's one time $120k investment payback).


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

Anubys said:


> some clarifications:
> 
> Mike did say the hazard pay continues in perpetuity; which is preposterous.
> 
> ...


Mike took about (not sure the exact number) $350k out of the total for the hazard pay. I was assuming he was going to pay back all of Fring's guys who had their money seized, then stop. I didn't remember him saying it was going to go on forever.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

nataylor said:


> I didn't remember him saying it was going to go on forever.


He said something like "This is the way it's going to be..." which is pretty vague as to how long it will actually go on.

I suspect (a) that Mike would only continue it as long as it needs to make those 9 guys "whole", and (2) that we'll never actually find out how long it goes on for.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

TheMerk said:


> I have a theory that Todd the exterminator employee who turned off the nanny cam went to the high school where Walt taught. He wasn't one of Walt's students, but he knows Walt's real name, possibly Jesse's too, and will stir up some crap later on.


I think it's pretty obvious something will happen with him other than him just being an employee.

-smak-


----------



## MrGreg (May 2, 2003)

phox_mulder said:


> I can see this happening, and the motivation to move the lab into the car wash.


I've heard several people mention the car wash as a potential cook location. Where exactly? I don't see any reason the car wash would have any sort of basement or storage large enough.

As for the in-home cooks, I'm wondering about power requirements. At best, a residential house might give you easy access to a few 20 amp 110V circuits. I have no idea how much juice their equipment needs, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if they had several devices that need 220V, or maybe even more. They could maybe get a 220V line from an oven, and another from a dryer, I suppose. Jesse mentioned electrical supply when they were looking at potential locations, so I was surprised that didn't come up when they were discussing the exterminator option.

Although I'm not apparently as bothered by the exterminator solution as other people here seem to be.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

MrGreg said:


> I've heard several people mention the car wash as a potential cook location. Where exactly? I don't see any reason the car wash would have any sort of basement or storage large enough.


It's a fictional TV program, so I have no problem with a fictional basement under the car wash. We have no idea what was there before that the car wash could have been built upon. Say it was a deserted hotel/motel, or gas station. It's well within reason that there is a basement or other location at/near the car wash to cook. Now if it were Florida where nobody has a basement, I could see it.

I'm also willing to let the power requirements slide for the home-cooking lab - that really doesn't bother me as much as the entire idea is stupid and extremely risky.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Hank said:


> some clarifications:
> 
> Each cook _grosses_ them about $1.2 million. Net is after the deductions. Each cook _nets_ about $540k (based on the first cook, but not including Jesse's one time $120k investment payback).


you're right. Bad choice of words on my part. Someone earlier posted that they make $350k per cook (or at least that's what I recall). I was correcting that and made a poor choice of words (net instead of revenue).



nataylor said:


> Mike took about (not sure the exact number) $350k out of the total for the hazard pay. I was assuming he was going to pay back all of Fring's guys who had their money seized, then stop. I didn't remember him saying it was going to go on forever.


I remember he said the hazard pay was $110k (or around that number). It wasn't clear to me if it was total or each. I wish I could remember the breakdown.

20% for the mules
$18k (each?) for the pest guy
How much for Saul? $40k each or so?
The Hazard pay
Anything else?

Mike's grand daughter's account had $2 million. Assuming he was paid more than the others AND that he saved more than the others (2 very safe assumptions), I can't imagine the hazard pay being more than $1 million each to make them whole.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Hank said:


> It's a fictional TV program, so I have no problem with a fictional basement under the car wash.


same reason the corrugating plant was a no-go. The humidity would ruin the cook!


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Got the breakdown:

All talk is "after Dealers' cut". So we don't know what the dealers' cut is.

Gross revenue after Dealers is $1,379,560

Mules get a flat 20% which gives them $367K each.

Ira gets $110K for his piece of the business plus $25K each per cook. So Ira gets $45K each. Those numbers don't add up so either I didn't understand or they made a mistake. Sounds to me like it will be $25K from now on; but it's not clear. I am sure about the $45K each.

Ira's guys get $10K each per cook.

Saul gets $18K each per cook.

Hazard Pay is $117K *each* per cook.

Mike regarding the legacy/hazard pay: "This is how it's going to be from here on out. My guys are an ongoing expenditure".


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

oh, Mike did say 9 guys.

And, changing topics, loved how Walt threw Skyler under the bus with Maria!


----------



## brianric (Aug 29, 2002)

MrGreg said:


> I've heard several people mention the car wash as a potential cook location. Where exactly? I don't see any reason the car wash would have any sort of basement or storage large enough.


One of my first jobs in the 1960ies was at Rapid Car Wash in Lawrence Massachusetts, and there was a full basement there.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Anubys said:


> Ira gets $110K for his piece of the business plus $25K each per cook. So Ira gets $45K each. Those numbers don't add up so either I didn't understand or they made a mistake. Sounds to me like it will be $25K from now on; but it's not clear. I am sure about the $45K each.


Ira's cut _this time_ is 110+25= $135k, which is $45k per share.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

smak said:


> I think it's pretty obvious something will happen with him other than him just being an employee.
> 
> -smak-


He's really familiar. Has anyone IMDBd him?


----------



## MNoelH (Mar 17, 2005)

robojerk said:


> :up:
> Lance is always causing problems.


Fixed your post.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

Y'all have major OCD. You should create a spreadsheet.

Thumbs up to Wiley Coyote. Perfect comment.


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

fmowry said:


> I think Mike did it to show exactly where the money was going.
> 
> "Here's the total pile. Here's out shares. Here's this taken out, here's that taken out. That is why you ended up with a bit over $100K."
> 
> Rather than "Ouf of the 1.X million, we each get 1/10th. Trust me."


But he didn't really do that. He had already withdrawn the mule fee and had to explain it. If he did that, he should have just withdrawn it all and explained all the expenses when Walt asked.


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

Im pretty sure Walt was ambiguous at the end on purpose. He wants Jesse to think the worst. It's all about grabbing power. It doesnt matter that Jesse gets some point Walt was making. What matters is Jesse now has to think about what Walts thinking about. The worm has been inserted into his brain. It's classic manipulation. Whatever the worst case explanation is, Jesse will think it. The scene where Jesse is peeling the beer bottle is key. He's screwed in the head right now and Walt intends to keep it that way. Power and control.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

mostman said:


> But he didn't really do that. He had already withdrawn the mule fee and had to explain it. If he did that, he should have just withdrawn it all and explained all the expenses when Walt asked.


The mules had possession of the money. They're not going to give that money to Mike so he can do a show-and-tell with Walt. They're going to want their 20% when the cash is in front of them.


----------



## mostman (Jul 16, 2000)

nataylor said:


> The mules had possession of the money. They're not going to give that money to Mike so he can do a show-and-tell with Walt. They're going to want their 20% when the cash is in front of them.


Ah. Good point. That makes a lot more sense.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

MNoelH said:


> Fixed your post.


I was going to do the same thing, but I thought it might be too obscure.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

brianric said:


> One of my first jobs in the 1960ies was at Rapid Car Wash in Lawrence Massachusetts, and there was a full basement there.


It's extremely rare to have a basement in the Southwest. They're unheard of in CA, for instance.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

They're only making about 1/4 of the product that they used to make for Fring; if they can get that back up then money should not be a big deal overall to them.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Anubys said:


> oh, Mike did say 9 guys.
> 
> And, changing topics, loved how Walt threw Skyler under the bus with Maria!


That perturbed me. Skylar is again the bad guy and Walt gets off.


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

Beryl said:


> That perturbed me. Skylar is again the bad guy and Walt gets off.


It's not like he technically lied.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

pdhenry said:


> Ira's cut _this time_ is 110+25= $135k, which is $45k per share.


yep. I woke up this morning thinking "the math works if it's not $25K *each*"



mooseAndSquirrel said:


> Y'all have major OCD. You should create a spreadsheet.




you're assuming I didn't create a spreadsheet


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

Robin said:


> He's really familiar. Has anyone IMDBd him?


Jesse Plemons. IMDB away. 

His most famous role was Landry on 'Friday Night Lights.'


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Anubys said:


> loved how Walt threw Skyler under the bus with Maria!





Beryl said:


> That perturbed me. Skylar is again the bad guy and Walt gets off.


You know, that bit is good for both Walt and Skyler, because Skyler is in on the entire gambit, if Hank and/or Marie find out the truth, it's curtains for the White family. So while Skyler did take the fall, nothing Walt said was false, and it takes the heat from Marie off of them for a while so it's less likely for Marie to tip off Hank, and even the opposite, if Hank starts sensing something odd, Marie can explain that to Hank without Walt or Skyler getting involved.

As long as Walt tells Skyler what happened, so she can now play along.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

Anubys said:


> Got the breakdown:
> 
> All talk is "after Dealers' cut". So we don't know what the dealers' cut is.
> 
> ...


Those numbers add up. Ira gets $110k plus $25k per cook. That's a total of $135k. Divide that by 3 and you get the $45k they each paid out. I'm thinking the $110k is a one-time expense.



> Ira's guys get $10K each per cook.
> 
> Saul gets $18K each per cook.
> 
> ...


Mike also said he was going to "make them whole" which implies to me that the cost will stop at some point. But assuming the 9 guys are each due $1 million and Mike is collecting $351,000 total from each cook (giving each of the 9 guys $39k per cook), it's going to take a while to make them whole (about 6 months with 1 cook per week).

So for this cook here are the numbers:

Gross after dealer's cut: $1,367,560
Mules: -$275,912
Gross after mules: $1,103,648 (rounded to $1,101,000)
Ira's "piece of the business": -$110,000
Ira's per cook cost: -$25,000
Ira's guys per cook (3 guys at $10k each): -$30,000
Saul's take: $54,000
Legacy cost: $351,000

Net after all costs: $531,000

Divided by 3, that's $177,000 each. Then Mike and Walt gave Jessie $40k each for fronting the money. That left Walt with the $137,000 he stated.

For ongoing cooks, I think the costs will be (assuming the same yield):
Gross after dealer's cut: $1,367,560
Mules: -$275,912
Gross after mules: $1,103,648 (rounded to $1,101,000)
Ira's per cook cost: -$25,000
Ira's guys per cook (3 guys at $10k each): -$30,000
Saul's take: $54,000
Legacy cost: $351,000
Methylamine: ??? (Mike said the first batch was free, but the next was going to cost big)

Net after all costs: $641,000 ($213,666.67 each, minus methylamine cost)

After Mike's guys are "made whole", they should be getting $330,666.67 each per cook (minus methylamine cost). That works out to a yearly income of $17,194,666.84 each (minus methylamine cost), assuming 1 cook per week. That's more than the $15 million per year he was getting under Fring.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

David Platt said:


> Jesse Plemons. IMDB away.
> 
> His most famous role was Landry on 'Friday Night Lights.'


Thanks! I knew him from Bent.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Breaking Obsessive Compulsive Disorder


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

robojerk said:


> Breaking Obsessive Compulsive Disorder


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

nataylor said:


> Those numbers add up. Ira gets $110k plus $25k per cook. That's a total of $135k. Divide that by 3 and you get the $45k they each paid out. I'm thinking the $110k is a one-time expense.
> 
> Mike also said he was going to "make them whole" which implies to me that the cost will stop at some point. But assuming the 9 guys are each due $1 million and Mike is collecting $351,000 total from each cook (giving each of the 9 guys $39k per cook), it's going to take a while to make them whole (about 6 months with 1 cook per week).
> 
> ...


Thank you for doing that. Now I don't have to. Seriously. I was going to.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

robojerk said:


> Breaking Obsessive Compulsive Disorder


jeez...there's an extra row for Ira, some costs are per cook and some are flat fees, there's no total, every other row should be shaded, ...

um...oh...you were making fun of OCD?

ah...never mind!


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Anubys said:


> jeez...there's an extra row for Ira, some costs are per cook and some are flat fees, there's no total, every other row should be shaded, ...
> 
> um...oh...you were making fun of OCD?
> 
> ah...never mind!


To be honest, I left most of it blank and what not. I want to see if someone fills it out.


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

nataylor said:


> Who would have thunk Skinny Pete would be a good pianist?


The actor that plays Skinny Pete used to be a music major. He apparently sings as well.


----------



## mchasal (Jun 6, 2001)

MrGreg said:


> As for the in-home cooks, I'm wondering about power requirements. At best, a residential house might give you easy access to a few 20 amp 110V circuits. I have no idea how much juice their equipment needs, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if they had several devices that need 220V, or maybe even more. They could maybe get a 220V line from an oven, and another from a dryer, I suppose. Jesse mentioned electrical supply when they were looking at potential locations, so I was surprised that didn't come up when they were discussing the exterminator option.


To my knowledge, the "standard" for modern construction is 200amp 220v main service. That's actually a good amount of power and since their lab equipment is built/modified specifically for this application, I don't have any issues with it. Also remember that they are scaled way down from what the Superlab was.

As far as access, yes they could tap into the dryer & oven circuits. I also wouldn't find it unbelievable that they just tap directly to the main breaker as well. One of the lab crates could have their own breaker box with a pigtail to tap into the breaker in the house. It would only take a few minutes to do that. Hell, I could see Walt doing it with a couple of sets of jumper cables.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

MrGreg said:


> I've heard several people mention the car wash as a potential cook location.


Why would Walt want to combine the two? He needs to keep Heisenberg and White as separate identities.

Also, couldn't they bring a generator to power each cook without tapping into each house?



mooseAndSquirrel said:


> Y'all have major OCD. You should create a spreadsheet.


LOL! :up: And they WERE GOING TO ... and DID! :up:



mostman said:


> Im pretty sure Walt was ambiguous at the end on purpose. He wants Jesse to think the worst. It's all about grabbing power. It doesnt matter that Jesse gets some point Walt was making. What matters is Jesse now has to think about what Walts thinking about. The worm has been inserted into his brain. It's classic manipulation. Whatever the worst case explanation is, Jesse will think it. The scene where Jesse is peeling the beer bottle is key. He's screwed in the head right now and Walt intends to keep it that way. Power and control.


Exactly. Even though Jesse, Walt & Mike are equal partners, the money guy may appear to be the boss (in Jesse's mind), but Walt needs Jesse to understand that Mr. White is "more equal" and the actual "boss" of the gang.



dswallow said:


> They're only making about 1/4 of the product that they used to make for Fring; if they can get that back up then money should not be a big deal overall to them.


Yeah. With Fring they were cooking 200 lbs. every cook (per week?), and currently they were only producing just less than 50 lbs. of meth. So the money is still pretty sweet.

I expect Saul to be the last man standing ... just like a cockroach emerging after a nuclear holocaust.


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

Everyone keeps saying theyre going to use the car wash. They passed up one of those places because of moisture. That would surely be an issue at the car wash. I guess they could buy industrial size humidifiers but that seems like a huge risk and loose end. Remember Hank became suspicious of Gus over some piece of equipment he had purchased.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

David Platt said:


> Jesse Plemons. IMDB away.
> 
> His most famous role was Landry on 'Friday Night Lights.'


You mean Lance.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

Pretty sure if they can wire a bunch of batteries to operate a giant magnet, supplying power to the machinery to cook should be pretty trivial.

They could even run a quiet generator inside and pump the exhaust out the same way they pump the fumigant and/or meth vapor out.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

KungFuCow said:


> Everyone keeps saying theyre going to use the car wash. They passed up one of those places because of moisture.


I believe it was the salt in the moisture that really was the issue, wasn't it?


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

DreadPirateRob said:


> You mean Lance.


Lead singer and guitarist in the awesome band, Crucifictorious!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

bsnelson said:


> I have to say, I'm as big of a fan of BB as almost anyone, but this season has some elements that I'm not fond of. I don't really know how to explain it, other than to say that it seems like they end up coming up with these grandiose solutions to big problems, and bam, they're implemented and bear fruit almost instantly. It's like there's not enough "real world" time or effort put into them. Maybe it's just that things are being rushed on screen.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> ...


I think you basically answered your own issue within your post. We've had nearly 50 episodes before this season to cover less than a year in real time. We now know that the final 16 episodes will cover more than a year in real time. So the timeline of each episode has to be ramped up quite a bit. In fact, I suspect this episode took several weeks from when Walt got the idea to the time when they actually got everything set up and ready to do the first cook.


nataylor said:


> <snip>
> 
> After Mike's guys are "made whole", they should be getting $330,666.67 each per cook (minus methylamine cost). That works out to a yearly income of $17,194,666.84 each (minus methylamine cost), assuming 1 cook per week. That's more than the $15 million per year he was getting under Fring.


I don't think Walt is going to be happy with that. Walt didn't kill Gus so he could get a 15% raise. I think Walt expected that taking Gus out of the equation and becoming his own boss would result in at least 2x as much money, if not more.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think Walt is going to be happy with that. Walt didn't kill Gus so he could get a 15% raise.


Let's be clear -- Walt killed Gus before Gus killed Walt. Gus had pretty much what he needed from Walt -- his cook recipe. With Walt dead, Jesse could likely take over. I re-watched "Face Off" a few days ago, and there was the Victor replacement watching Jesse cook that last batch, and even he knew the steps.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> ...I don't think Walt is going to be happy with that. Walt didn't kill Gus so he could get a 15% raise. I think Walt expected that taking Gus out of the equation and becoming his own boss would result in at least 2x as much money, if not more.


I think Walt thought that taking Gus out of the equation would keep Walt, Walt Jr., Skyler, Baby, and Hank alive.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Hank said:


> Let's be clear -- Walt killed Gus before Gus killed Walt. Gus had pretty much what he needed from Walt -- his cook recipe. With Walt dead, Jesse could likely take over. I re-watched "Face Off" a few days ago, and there was the Victor replacement watching Jesse cook that last batch, and even he knew the steps.


Of course. I'm not saying Walt killing Gus was solely so Walt could take over. It was primarily a self-preservation move. But my point is that with Gus out of the picture and Walt now thinking he's the new boss, I don't think he's going to be satisfied with taking all that extra risk yet only making a tiny percentage more money.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

dswallow said:


> I believe it was the salt in the moisture that really was the issue, wasn't it?


I think it was more about the steam than it was about the salt. At least that's how I understood it when Walt repeated himself and emphasized "STEAM and salt."


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Of course. I'm not saying Walt killing Gus was solely so Walt could take over. It was primarily a self-preservation move. But my point is that with Gus out of the picture and Walt now thinking he's the new boss, I don't think he's going to be satisfied with taking all that extra risk yet only making a tiny percentage more money.


In my opinion, when Walt took out Gus, it was to protect himself and his family. I don't think taking over and becoming the new boss really entered the picture until the dust settled and he was broke and needed to rebuild his nest egg. Only then did he know he could be the new boss.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Hank said:


> In my opinion, when Walt took out Gus, it was to protect himself and his family. I don't think taking over and becoming the new boss really entered the picture until the dust settled and he was broke and needed to rebuild his nest egg. Only then did he know he could be the new boss.


Again, I understand that and agree with you. I'm simply pointing out that now the Walt is the "boss," and no longer answers to Gus because (insert whatever reason you want here), he's not going to be satisfied with taking on substantially more risk, yet only making 15% more money.

With Gus' operation, it made sense that Gus got the lion's share of the profits. He had a well-established distribution network, he built the SuperLab and outfitted it with all the state-of-the-art equipment, he provided security, he took all the risk. Walt and Jesse simply had to show up, cook a batch, and go home.

Now Walt is in charge of the operation, he's going to have to provide all of those things that Gus used to take care of, and yet he's not going to be making much more than he was before. I can imagine that this is not going to sit well with Walt.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Now Walt is in charge of the operation, he's going to have to provide all of those things that Gus used to take care of, and yet he's not going to be making much more than he was before. I can imagine that this is not going to sit well with Walt.


I agree with you on Walt's thinking, but is Walt really in charge? He doesn't have "men" for security, he doesn't have access to the chemical supplier, he doesn't know anyone or have any involvement in the distribution. Mike is the real guy in charge now, however Walter just wants to treat him as middle management. If Mike is smart, he'll keep Walter in the dark on who everyone else in this new enterprise is, so that Walter will just be in charge of manufacturing.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

robojerk said:


> I agree with you on Walt's thinking, but is Walt really in charge? He doesn't have "men" for security, he doesn't have access to the chemical supplier, he doesn't know anyone or have any involvement in the distribution. Mike is the real guy in charge now, however Walter just wants to treat him as middle management. If Mike is smart, he'll keep Walter in the dark on who everyone else in this new enterprise is, so that Walter will just be in charge of manufacturing.


I'm simply pointing out Walt's mindset. We saw this when Walt said to Saul, "Mike handles the business, and I handle Mike." As viewers, we know Walt is not in charge, and that things will go very badly when he is. But from Walt's point of view, he is Heisenberg, and Mike is just a hired gun, and Walt isn't going to let an underling dictate terms to him and take away such a huge share of his money. The last scene of this episode basically gave us the roadmap for the rest of the series, and we now know that Walt and Mike are going to eventually be against each other and it's not going to end well.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> The last scene of this episode basically gave us the roadmap for the rest of the series, and we now know that Walt and Mike are going to eventually be against each other and it's not going to end well.


Pretty much agree.
I used to think Jesse might be the one to kill Walter, but I am beginning to think Jesse will be Walter's victim and never see the manipulation up until the end when Walter for some reason or another (probably because Jesse knows the recipe intimately as much as Walter) kills Jesse. Why would the show do that? As said before, at some point or another the viewers will start to see Walter White is a bad man that needs to be stopped. Walter killing Jesse would turn the last few people rooting for him against him for sure.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

On another note, it surpises me that Walt -- who calculates and maps everything out in advance -- would say something like "that's less than with Fring" when it's clear they were only making 1/4 the amount of meth in their first cook AND there are many other costs involved. Like Jesse (and Mike) know, it is a larger cut of a much smaller pie. Heisenberg should have known well in advance, to set his own expectation. Sure, be surprised at the unexpected "legacy" costs, but other than that, the net he takes home was a calculatable number well in advance. Perhaps Heisenberg is losing his logical reasoning for the greed of the business, and the further downslide to Scarface.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

Is it me or is Mike the Moral Compass of this show?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Gunnyman said:


> Is it me or is Mike the Moral Compass of this show?


I'd say its you. A cold-blooded killer cannot be a "moral compass" in my book.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

It's all relative.

He's compassier than the rest of them.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Jesda said:


> It's not like he technically lied.


You are right and the gambling bit is a big lie (and I abhor lies). However, for once I would rather he had stuck with that lie.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

john4200 said:


> I'd say its you. A cold-blooded killer cannot be a "moral compass" in my book.


It's all relative. Compared to Walt, yes, Mike is a moral compass. So is Jesse.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I don't think it is that he's the moral compass so much as it is that he is Lawful Evil as compared to Walt's Neutral Evil (tending toward Chaotic Evil).


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Jesse had a big 'ole waver when he came up with his brilliant plan to sell meth to addicts.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

danterner said:


> I don't think it is that he's the moral compass so much as it is that he is Lawful Evil as compared to Walt's Neutral Evil (tending toward Chaotic Evil).


:up:


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

DreadPirateRob said:


> You mean Lance.


I see what you did there.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Robin said:


> Jesse had a big 'ole waver when he came up with his brilliant plan to sell meth to addicts.


Not just addicts. Members of an addicts-anonymous-type group that Jesse was participating in.

Personally, I have no problem with people selling, buying, or taking drugs, as long as it is a voluntary transaction and no violence is involved. But even I would draw the line at selling drugs to people who have joined an addicts group to try to break the habit.

Also, on the subject of Mike's morality...until Walt poisoned the kid I would not have placed Mike's morals above Walt's. Remember that the reason Walt got Jesse to kill Gale was that Mike was about to kill Walt. Gale certainly did not deserve to die, but neither did Walt deserve to die at that point (Gus was just having him killed to make a point and/or to prevent future trouble).

If Mike had not been about to kill Walt, then Walt would not have been responsible for Gale's death. But Mike WAS about to kill Walt, so in my book that counts as two murders against Mike (Walt and Gale), but only one murder against Walt (Gale).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

dswallow said:


> They're only making about 1/4 of the product that they used to make for Fring; if they can get that back up then money should not be a big deal overall to them.


But would that happen....unless they get back into a comparable superlab? And even then, it's iffy at best. Fring had the supply infrastructure finely tuned. These guys will NEVER approach that type of organization, even in a larger lab.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Their profit margin increases considerably when each cook generates more product. I suspect Walt will attempt to make bigger cooks.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Anubys said:


> Their profit margin increases considerably when each cook generates more product. I suspect Walt will attempt to make bigger cooks.


But, again, isn't that limited to a certain extent, by the size of their lab? Seems to me that there's a finite amount of meth that could be cooked with this "mobile lab" procedure...


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> But, again, isn't that limited to a certain extent, by the size of their lab? Seems to me that there's a finite amount of meth that could be cooked with this "mobile lab" procedure...


But they can cook longer, right?


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> But, again, isn't that limited to a certain extent, by the size of their lab? Seems to me that there's a finite amount of meth that could be cooked with this "mobile lab" procedure...


Yeah the size of the lab matters, though with how mobile it is, why couldn't they keep it moving? If there are 3-4 houses being fumigated per week, why only 1 cook a week? Why not 2 or 3?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

SeanC said:


> Yeah the size of the lab matters, though with how mobile it is, why couldn't they keep it moving? If there are 3-4 houses being fumigated per week, why only 1 cook a week? Why not 2 or 3?


They can't just do any house (they went through the selection criteria). But once they do have a house, they can cook a second time.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Anubys said:


> They can't just do any house (they went through the selection criteria). But once they do have a house, they can cook a second time.


Not so sure about that -- from what I can tell, each cook takes about 24 hours. (based on time-lapse of this cook and when they cooked in Mexico). They're already up against the clock due to the expected time to fumigate the house.. in order to cook longer, they would need the owners out of the house another full day. That's bound to raise some suspicion when the time to bomb houses like that is pretty well established. If they require 4 days, and everyone else only requires 3 days, that's a big difference. I can't see them going to 5 days just so they can cook longer. But as I suspect this tent cooking won't last long. They just need to find a semi-permanent place for their mini-lab where they can cook around the clock.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

I have never once in my life seen a house tented for fumigation. How common could that really be? And ABQ is small. Won't somebody recognize a chemistry teacher walking in to a fumigation job?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I have never once in my life seen a house tented for fumigation. How common could that really be? And ABQ is small. Won't somebody recognize a chemistry teacher walking in to a fumigation job?


I've never seen one either (I live in the Northeast). I suspect it's more prevalent in other parts of the country (drier climes?)

And I don't think the homeowners will ever see Walt.


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I have never once in my life seen a house tented for fumigation. How common could that really be? And ABQ is small. Won't somebody recognize a chemistry teacher walking in to a fumigation job?


Ive seen them in Florida before. Its not super common but its enough that its more of a "haha" moment than a WTF moment.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I have never once in my life seen a house tented for fumigation. How common could that really be? And ABQ is small. Won't somebody recognize a chemistry teacher walking in to a fumigation job?


Albuquerque is not that small. It has a population of almost 600,000.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

nataylor said:


> Albuquerque is not that small. It has a population of almost 600,000.


But, according to Vince Gilligan, tenting is not common there -- a fact they didn't realize until after they had crafted the storyline. It is more common in other parts of the country.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

I've only seen tenting done for termites. At least, that's what my neighbors down the street said when they got their house tented. What kind of infestation is it primarily used for?


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Carlucci said:


> I've only seen tenting done for termites. At least, that's what my neighbors down the street said when they got their house tented. What kind of infestation is it primarily used for?


Termites
Cockroaches
Beatles
etc...


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

*20 Neat Facts, Cool Allusions, Instances Of Foreshadowing, And Theories On 'Breaking Bad'*
http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/08/breaking-bad-allusions/

Some spoiler speculation. If it's true I'll be sick to my stomach.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I have never once in my life seen a house tented for fumigation. How common could that really be? And ABQ is small. Won't somebody recognize a chemistry teacher walking in to a fumigation job?


Heisenberg (bald, craggy, angry, sourpuss) bears little resemblance to Mr. White the high school Chemistry teacher (brown-haired, younger). Plus, he enters the house quietly when crowds are not around to watch him. No music, no fanfare, no parade. Just coveralls and maybe a hardhat.



robojerk said:


> Termites
> Cockroaches
> Beatles BEETLES
> etc...


FYP. 

Also, bedbugs.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

I guess Walt is no longer worried about the quality of his product. Since he was worried about a single fly but now it doesn't seem to be a problem to have a house full of bugs.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

netringer said:


> *20 Neat Facts, Cool Allusions, Instances Of Foreshadowing, And Theories On Breaking Bad*
> http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/08/breaking-bad-allusions/
> 
> Some spoiler speculation. If it's true I'll be sick to my stomach.


What a waste of time... 19 of those are really loose, hail-mary, guesses at what things mean. Ever since those damn oranges appeared in the Godfather, EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A FREAKING ORANGE in a movie, people have to say "oh, that's an homage to the Godfather". BULL$#!T! Sometimes an orange is just an orange!!!



> the opening episode of the fifth season, Live Free or Die, was also the title of a Sopranos episode. (Some have also likened Skyler to Carmelo Soprano).


Give me a freaking break. How many things have been called or mentioned "Live Free or Die"??? It's the NH state motto, forcrissakes! And that's where Walt has his driver's license from in S05E01. Coincidence?

It really bugs me when people take something like BrBa and actively look for relationships and clues like this when they really aren't there! It's all fabricated! It's like all the crappy discussion at series finale of The Sopranos when people listed the 20 reasons why Tony is dead, including the door chime not ringing, more oranges, blah, blah blah. Some me REAL connections. Show me REAL clues the writers put in there. Not made up ones.

</rant>


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

KungFuCow said:


> The actor that plays Skinny Pete used to be a music major. He apparently sings as well.


They did a great job capitalizing on the actor's skill in that scene. Well done.

tk


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Hank said:


> What a waste of time... 19 of those are really loose, hail-mary, guesses at what things mean. Ever since those damn oranges appeared in the Godfather, EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A FREAKING ORANGE in a movie, people have to say "oh, that's an homage to the Godfather". BULL$#!T! Sometimes an orange is just an orange!!!
> </rant>


Yeah. There is the issue that we now know that Ted didn't die in that oranges scene.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

netringer said:


> Yeah. There is the issue that we now know that Ted didn't die in that oranges scene.


Perhaps they were tangerines. As everybody knows, tangerines symbolize "only mostly dead."


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Robin said:


> He's really familiar. Has anyone IMDBd him?


Didn't look him up, but I know for sure he was in the short lived show BENT last year.

-smak-


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Robin said:


> Thanks! I knew him from Bent.





smak said:


> Didn't look him up, but I know for sure he was in the short lived show BENT last year.
> 
> -smak-


Does everyone have me on ignore today?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

robojerk said:


> Termites
> Cockroaches
> _*Beatles*_
> etc...


 I thought half the Beatles were already dead?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Robin said:


> Does everyone have me on ignore today?


just today?


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

One person is reading!

(This was the second time yesterday I was "inadvertently" ignored.)


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Robin said:


> Does everyone have me on ignore today?


NEVER.


----------



## moondoggie (Jul 19, 2000)

DreadPirateRob said:


> It's extremely rare to have a basement in the Southwest. They're unheard of in CA, for instance.


DPR, Quite a few homes in Cal Heights, Bixby Knolls and VCC have basements.


----------



## BradJW (Jun 9, 2008)

moondoggie said:


> DPR, Quite a few homes in Cal Heights, Bixby Knolls and VCC have basements.


My aunt had what she called a basement in Beverly Hills. there were stairs going downstairs to a very tine small room. Maybe large walk-in closet size, but not much bigger than that. Ceilings were probably 6 1/2 feet or so.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Hank said:


> What a waste of time... 19 of those are really loose, hail-mary, guesses at what things mean. Ever since those damn oranges appeared in the Godfather, EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A FREAKING ORANGE in a movie, people have to say "oh, that's an homage to the Godfather". BULL$#!T! Sometimes an orange is just an orange!!!
> 
> Give me a freaking break. How many things have been called or mentioned "Live Free or Die"??? It's the NH state motto, forcrissakes! And that's where Walt has his driver's license from in S05E01. Coincidence?
> 
> ...


why do you assume they aren't real? I k now on Mad Men, for instance, wardrobe color IS specifically picked for various reasons.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> why do you assume they aren't real? I k now on Mad Men, for instance, wardrobe color IS specifically picked for various reasons.


Because you can read that it's all pure speculation/fabrication/quesswork (except where noted that V.G. had directly indicated otherwise). Just because some freak somehow connects two things together, doesn't mean that there is ANY actual correlation. I'm happy to read all that stuff, but it actually has to be validated, not some nutball's guesses.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Well, Jessie's last name is PINKman...


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

pdhenry said:


> Well, Jessie's last name is PINKman...


And Walter's last name is WHITE!


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Hank said:


> Because you can read that it's all pure speculation/fabrication/quesswork (except where noted that V.G. had directly indicated otherwise). Just because some freak somehow connects two things together, doesn't mean that there is ANY actual correlation. I'm happy to read all that stuff, but it actually has to be validated, not some nutball's guesses.


then you'll LOVE this

http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/07/te...ecurring-motif-breaking-bads-pink-teddy-bear/


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> then you'll LOVE this
> 
> http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/07/te...ecurring-motif-breaking-bads-pink-teddy-bear/


OMG, my head is about to explode. You can pick ANYTHING from ANY EPISODE, and I can find at least 5 other instances that match or have some sort of "foreshadowing". Give me a freaking break.

Did you notice that the pizza that Walt threw on the roof was round, and Heisenberg's Pork Pie hat is also round! Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius!

But wait!!! It's also a PEPPERONI PIZZA! And what is pepperoni made from -- PORK! PORK PIE HAT! OMG, Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius!


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> then you'll LOVE this
> 
> http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/07/te...ecurring-motif-breaking-bads-pink-teddy-bear/


The picture of Mike made me snort.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

netringer said:


> *20 Neat Facts, Cool Allusions, Instances Of Foreshadowing, And Theories On Breaking Bad*
> http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/08/breaking-bad-allusions/
> 
> Some spoiler speculation. If it's true I'll be sick to my stomach.





Hank said:


> What a waste of time... 19 of those are really loose, hail-mary, guesses at what things mean. Ever since those damn oranges appeared in the Godfather, EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A FREAKING ORANGE in a movie, people have to say "oh, that's an homage to the Godfather". BULL$#!T! Sometimes an orange is just an orange!!!
> 
> Give me a freaking break. How many things have been called or mentioned "Live Free or Die"??? It's the NH state motto, forcrissakes! And that's where Walt has his driver's license from in S05E01. Coincidence?
> 
> ...


18. Foreshadowing: Heres a picture of the young Hector Salamanca, sitting on a chair of wheels, years before the old Hector Salamanca would be relegated to a wheelchair.










Is that really foreshadowing? Didn't we first meet this character when he was already old and in a wheelchair?


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> then you'll LOVE this
> 
> http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2012/07/te...ecurring-motif-breaking-bads-pink-teddy-bear/


That's actually pretty cool


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Hank said:


> OMG, my head is about to explode. You can pick ANYTHING from ANY EPISODE, and I can find at least 5 other instances that match or have some sort of "foreshadowing". Give me a freaking break.
> 
> Did you notice that the pizza that Walt threw on the roof was round, and Heisenberg's Pork Pie hat is also round! Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius!
> 
> But wait!!! It's also a PEPPERONI PIZZA! And what is pepperoni made from -- PORK! PORK PIE HAT! OMG, Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius!


I'm sure it's not ALL planned, but if you believe that there was just randomly a painting on the wall with the same pink bear in it.....obviously there was an attempt of some type to include it.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Test said:


> 18. Foreshadowing: Heres a picture of the young Hector Salamanca, sitting on a chair of wheels, years before the old Hector Salamanca would be relegated to a wheelchair.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it's not foreshadowing in the traditional sense, but it was a call-back for the character to where we saw him first. Whether by the director or writers or set dressers, a lot of these "easter eggs" are intentional.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> it's not foreshadowing in the traditional sense, but it was a call-back for the character to where we saw him first. Whether by the director or writers or set dressers, *a lot of these "easter eggs" are intentional*.


No doubt this was intentional, but I wasn't sure if we first met this character in a flashback and that was foreshadowing of him ending up in a wheelchair. I guess just poor wording on the part of the articles author. Your phrase "easter egg" is more fitting.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

This is pretty freaky/cool COINCIDENCE!! This really happened to me yesterday.

I was on the couch with my g/f channel surfing yesterday afternoon, and came across Scarface playing on cable. I said to the g/f that I really want to watch the entire movie because it was at least in part, part of Vince Gilligan's inspiration for Breaking Bad. (I have never seen Scarface, but it was already about an hour into it.)

So we're watching Scarface, and when it got to a commercial, I went up one channel to watch Bill Maher's _Religulious_ (which I have seen before), and within 2 minutes, as part of _Religulious_, there were two or three clips from Scarface (for comedic affect). Really freaked me out for a second.. we're flipping between these two movies, and one movie was featured in the other!

But that's not the strangest part! We flip back to Scarface and the part where Tony Montana is meeting with Sosa, and Sosa is called away for a telephone call by Alberto i.e. "the Shadow". And who was that -- none other than Héctor Salamanca (Mark Margolis) -- a young Hector Salamanca, anyway. My g/f recognized him first, and I thought it was just someone who looked like Hector, but nope, we looked it up and it's the same actor.

OMG, Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius!


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Okay, I'll bite.

Quite often, symbolism in stories is, in fact, quite intentional and deliberate. Storytelling is an art. As with all art forms, there are certain conventions practitioners follow. Some practitioners are more in tune with the conventions than others. Sometimes, an element in a story will indeed be there purely coincidentally, entirely by happenstance. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and assume that everything in a story is there randomly. It is not. Colors ARE used to signify specific things by many many authors. As are events. Think about all of the many instances where you've seen a story that, at its start, has the protagonist fall from a height. That's not done randomly -- it is a storytelling convention, symbolic of the protagonist passing a point of no return. Often, they fall into water. That's intentionally symbolic, as well -- symbolic of rebirth. Writers do this KNOWINGLY. It is not coincidence; it is writers applying the rules and conventions of their craft. Think of the thousands of stories that track the "Hero's Quest" storypoints delineated by Joseph Campbell. Stories don't just happen to fall into that form, any more than a haiku randomly happens to have a certain set number of syllables per line.* Writers do it intentionally, for the most part. I would be astounded if it turned out that the design of Hector's flashback wagonwheel chair was just coincidental. While you can read into everything and not all of it is intentional, that doesn't mean that none of it is.

While I don't believe that all of the "hints" listed at the uproxx site were intentional, I do believe some were.

And although some may scoff, I do personally think Vince Gilligan is a F*@#!#& genius.

Take a listen to the "Breaking Bad Insider" podcast sometime, which gives a good view into the level of thought that goes into making an episode. I'll give one recent example: the scene a few episodes ago, where Mike goes to Chow's house: Chow is shown sitting dead on the sofa at the end of the scene. Briefly, seen entering and leaving the frame, is a fly. It was added digitally in post. It wasn't randomly there on set; it was intentionally added by an author applying his craft. And, I would argue, not just "because dead bodies attract flies," but rather for symbolic reasons.

*(Actually, Joseph Campbell himself might beg to differ on that point given his views on Jungian archetypes and the collective unconscious, but my point is that many authors, post Campbell, have used the model as explained by him as a framework and outline for their own works).


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

danterner said:


> While I don't believe that all of the "hints" listed at the uproxx site were intentional, I do believe some were.


I totally agree. I just want to find all the real ones (however subtle they are) and ignore all the fan-fic fabricated ones. But you have to admit, crazed fans are more likely to find relationships that were not intentional than the ones that were. This is what pisses me off.

I also think V.G. is a genius, but not for all the reasons listed in these blog posts.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Hank said:


> I totally agree. I just want to find all the real ones (however subtle they are) and ignore all the fan-fic fabricated ones. But you have to admit, crazed fans are more likely to find relationships that were not intentional than the ones that were. This is what pisses me off.
> 
> I also think V.G. is a genius, but not for all the reasons listed in these blog posts.


I guarantee had someone told you the fly was fake and added later, you'd have one of your little meltdowns and start screaming about how they were nuts.

Don't care, then don't read it.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> I guarantee had someone told you the fly was fake and added later, you'd have one of your little meltdowns and start screaming about how they were nuts.


Wrong. You can't compare the two. The CGI-fly is a provable fact, it's not a guess or fabrication. What I have a problem with is when people fabricate relationships or clues or foreshadowing that's NOT ACTUALLY THERE or not actually placed there by the writers.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

Hank said:


> Wrong. You can't compare the two. The CGI-fly is a provable fact, it's not a guess or fabrication. What I have a problem with is when people fabricate relationships or clues or foreshadowing that's NOT ACTUALLY THERE or not actually placed there by the writers.


your missing my point - had someone not posted about the fly, and someone else had told you that, there's no way you'd believe it.

just because Vince Gilligan hasn't been reported as saying that many of the things in the article were intentional doesn't mean they weren't.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> your missing my point - had someone not posted about the fly, and someone else had told you that, there's no way you'd believe it.
> 
> just because Vince Gilligan hasn't been reported as saying that many of the things in the article were intentional doesn't mean they weren't.


And you're missing my point. Nobody can deny the fly was there, CGI or not. It's there, you can SEE IT. What I have a problem with is people making connections for things that AREN'T THERE. They are entirely fabricated in their own mind. The fact the fly was CGI or not is not the same thing at all. I could care less if the fly was CGI'd in by VG or not. Like I said, you can't compare the two. For instance, that article said the ding in the elevator was a foreshadowing of Gus's ultimate demise by Hector's bell. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Maybe it was JUST A BELL IN THE ELEVATOR!. There's no way to prove it one way or another unless VG comes out and says "yes, we added the elevator ding". The fly? There's no argument, because IT'S ACTUALLY THERE.


----------



## The Flush (Aug 3, 2005)

Test said:


> 18. Foreshadowing: Heres a picture of the young Hector Salamanca, sitting on a chair of wheels, years before the old Hector Salamanca would be relegated to a wheelchair.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is foreshadowing more than that.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Sorry, who is that? What movie?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Hank said:


> Sorry, who is that? What movie?


A character from the tv series Arrested Development -



Spoiler



he loses his hand during the series.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

danterner said:


> A character from the tv series Arrested Development -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ahhhhhhhhhhhh you got me. I just started season two. I don't know why I clicked that tag!!! Hahaha


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

pdhenry said:


> Well, Jessie's last name is PINKman...





TheMerk said:


> And Walter's last name is WHITE!


Ohh, ohh, oh! And then we have SKYler (Blue)! And HOLLY (Red). And Walt JUNE-yer. And Hank ShRAIDER. And Gus F-RING. And Hector SALMONica.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> But that's not the strangest part! We flip back to Scarface and the part where Tony Montana is meeting with Sosa, and Sosa is called away for a telephone call by Alberto i.e. "the Shadow". And who was that -- none other than Héctor Salamanca (Mark Margolis) -- a young Hector Salamanca, anyway. My g/f recognized him first, and I thought it was just someone who looked like Hector, but nope, we looked it up and it's the same actor.


Did you see the scene where they're counting the money? It may look familiar as well.






Greg


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

gchance said:


> Did you see the scene where they're counting the money? It may look familiar as well.


I'm not sure I see what you're talking about. If you're just saying that counting a ton of cash with a cash counting machine is what is "familiar", that's happened in plenty of movies/TV shows, etc. I don't see a direct relationship between that scene and BrBa other than they're counting cash.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> I'm not sure I see what you're talking about. If you're just saying that counting a ton of cash with a cash counting machine is what is "familiar", that's happened in plenty of movies/TV shows, etc. I don't see a direct relationship between that scene and BrBa other than they're counting cash.


You're always confused. That's just how it is. Or you haven't seen Scarface.

Greg


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

gchance said:


> You're always confused. That's just how it is. Or you haven't seen Scarface.


No, I get that Scarface is also a drug dealer/drug lord, and he's counting out the drug money. Is there anything more than that?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> No, I get that Scarface is also a drug dealer/drug lord, and he's counting out the drug money. Is there anything more than that?


With a money counting machine very similar to the one they're using in Breaking Bad. At first I thought they'd matched the shot, but they didn't.

Greg


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Hank said:


> No, I get that Scarface is also a drug dealer/drug lord, and he's counting out the drug money. Is there anything more than that?


Don. Look at brother Montana.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Yes, matching the shot would have been a nice callback to Scarface.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> Yes, matching the shot would have been a nice callback to Scarface.


Thanks.

Greg


----------

