# Better Call Saul - Season 2 Finale- Klick - 4/18/16



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

So no "Fring's back."

And it's an "Emergency Temporary Guardianship" and not a "Temporary Emergency Guardianship." And that's not how it works, either.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Chuck is sneaky


I am guessing Nacho was on to Mike. But how did he get to the car to set off the horn??


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Great finale, jimmy was out conned

Anyone watch talking Saul? Much better than talking dead episodes. The show creators actually give information or confirm things, not like twd.

Frings Back/talking saul:



Spoiler



they confirmed the fan theory was right and were surprised it was figured out so soon


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

It's not a spoiler, it was always a marketing tool intended to promote season 3.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

So does that mean the person trailing Mike was Gus?


----------



## Chuck_IV (Jan 1, 2002)

NatasNJ said:


> So does that mean the person trailing Mike was Gus?


I'm guessing yes. No way Nacho gets to that car. Mike had his eye on the house pretty much the whole time.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

Would that recording provide any legal benefit for Chuck without Jimmy's prior acknowledgment? Chuck seems a very competent lawyer; what is his plan?


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

markp99 said:


> Would that recording provide any legal benefit for Chuck without Jimmy's prior acknowledgment? Chuck seems a very competent lawyer; what is his plan?


Pretty sure as long as one party is aware they are being recorded, it's legal. At least that would have been the case here in OH during that time as my boyfriend worked as a PI and did this to people for worker's comp cases.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

From my searches, New Mexico appears to be a one-party consent state in regards to recording conversations.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

If this were real life, Jimmy should be less concerned about the potential for prosecution and more concerned about the Bar.


----------



## Chuck_IV (Jan 1, 2002)

Here's my theory as to how things go to get to "Saul" (spoiler protected, even tho it's just my theory)...



Spoiler



I think Jimmy defends himself against Chuck and his tape in court and eventually wins by some shady story/technicality or the like. While he wins, it tarnishes the name Jimmy McGill, so he changes his name to Saul and comes to the realization that he is good at getting people off(Mike, the squat cobbler guy, himself) and thus Saul is born.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

I have to say that if Chuck actually uses that against him and not just uses it as a threat of some sort, then he's really a bad person. Jimmy was more concerned for him physically and mentally numerous times here. First running to the copy place knowing he was giving himself away. Second by not having him committed even though Chuck himself expected that. Third caring enough about Chuck's mental well being and career to confess everything to him and admitting it when Chuck says he just admitted to a felony. Oy. I know Jimmy has probably done a ton of shady things to/around Chuck over the years but at his core Jimmy cares more about his brother than anything else. I can't say that about Chuck.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

photoshopgrl said:


> I can't say that about Chuck.


...plus they went the extra measure to ensure we know Chuck is a real DB, not sharing his mom had called for Jimmy with her dying breath.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I watch the show on Google Play. Did it air unbleeped?


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

Yes it aired unbleeped. 

Unsure who trailed Mike. Gus is possible, but he hires Mike for security.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

photoshopgrl said:


> I have to say that if Chuck actually uses that against him and not just uses it as a threat of some sort, then he's really a bad person. Jimmy was more concerned for him physically and mentally numerous times here. First running to the copy place knowing he was giving himself away. Second by not having him committed even though Chuck himself expected that. Third caring enough about Chuck's mental well being and career to confess everything to him and admitting it when Chuck says he just admitted to a felony. Oy. I know Jimmy has probably done a ton of shady things to/around Chuck over the years but at his core Jimmy cares more about his brother than anything else. I can't say that about Chuck.


Chuck definitely has a toxic relationship with his brother. As the older sibling who had to struggle for everything he is offended that everything seems to come so easy to Jimmy, professionally and personally.

That everyone seems to love Jimmy, but people don't respond to him on a personal level is a major disappointment. The dinner with the GF, and Jimmy telling jokes and the GF laughing her ass off, and then Chuck tries to tell a joke and it falls flat. I still think that there is more with the GF that we don't know, her breaking up with Chuck and Jimmy passing the bar, I think both of those events are related to Chuck's EHS (electro hypersensitivity syndrome).

Chuck's relationship with his parents, that both (from Chuck's perspective) seemed to love Jimmy so much and ignore him. Chuck's story about how Jimmy stole 14k from the store, and then their dad died. It's certainly not ok for Jimmy to steal from his dad, but 14k did the store in? Never mind the fact that the father was just as likely to have given some of that money away, as we saw, he was an easy mark, so I consider it unlikely that Jimmy stole all that money.

Chuck is enormously jealous of Jimmy, and it colors his entire relationship with him.


----------



## type_g (Sep 9, 2002)

Has it been explained how Chuck got in the shape/condition he is in? I wouldn't be surprised if Jimmy had something to do with it and is shown in future seasons, maybe 3, in flashbacks. 

Reason I say so is Jimmy keeps taking care of his brother even though he is being a great *as to him. Not many people would feel so guilty when there brother keeps treating them this way. Yesthe whole copy shop incident time Jimmy should feel guilty but during first and second seasons there were many times where he did nothing wrong and Chuck still was a horrible person to him.

Just my two cents, I wouldn't put it past Jimmy that he is the cause to Chucks (mental) problems and he is just feeling guilty and hence still taking care of him.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

It was painful to watch that scene when Jimmy confessed. It was pretty obvious to me that Chuck was baiting him, and I was hoping Jimmy wouldn't fall for it. At the end of the day, though, Jimmy loves Chuck and didn't want to see him hurting.


----------



## Gerryex (Apr 24, 2004)

SeanC said:


> Chuck is enormously jealous of Jimmy, and it colors his entire relationship with him.


Yes, I agree and the fact that Momma's last words were calling out for Jimmy reinforces that.

As far as the tape does it really do anything all by itself? Jimmy could easily say that he made up the story to make Chuck feel better, which it did. There is NO hard physical evidence so its still one word against the other. However if Chuck were to scare the copy center worker into changing his story that would definitely be bad for Jimmy.

So it will be interesting how this all plays out. BUT WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL NEXT SEASON!!!! BUMMER!! I hope for next season we at least see why Chuck and his girl friend broke up and why Chuck developed his "sensitivity" to electricity.

Gerry


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Gerryex said:


> Yes, I agree and the fact that Momma's last words were calling out for Jimmy reinforces that.
> 
> As far as the tape does it really do anything all by itself? Jimmy could easily say that he made up the story to make Chuck feel better, which it did. There is NO hard physical evidence so its still one word against the other. However if Chuck were to scare the copy center worker into changing his story that would definitely be bad for Jimmy.
> 
> ...


You have two people that could potentially incriminate Jimmy - the copy center guy, and the young law clerk. It's one thing for them to lie to Chuck, but I think they would be foolish to lie during a deposition or trial.


----------



## bsnelson (Oct 30, 1999)

I'm pretty certain it wasn't Gus that did the thing to Mike. That wasn't even his MO in the BB days. Too much risk to be caught out there IMO. 

Either way, great finale. I really wonder how many seasons they have in mind for this show. It's obviously kind of tricky, because at some point, they have to start moving things blatantly towards the BB timeframe, but once they do, it moves into a different phase. 

Brad


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

photoshopgrl said:


> I have to say that if Chuck actually uses that against him and not just uses it as a threat of some sort, then he's really a bad person.


This is only now dawning on you? 

I think it's one of the great ironies of this show that despite their surface personae, Jimmy is a much better person than Chuck.


bsnelson said:


> Either way, great finale. I really wonder how many seasons they have in mind for this show. It's obviously kind of tricky, because at some point, they have to start moving things blatantly towards the BB timeframe, but once they do, it moves into a different phase.


I bet it's not as tricky as it might seem. They probably have a "final season" that takes them to the beginning of Breaking Bad, but in the meantime they can explore the world of Jimmy as much or as little as they have time for before they decide it's time for that final season.


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

I am firmly on Jimmy's side at this point and thought I would be in the vast minority here. I figured everyone here would be hating him. But, Ernesto seems to be siding more with Jimmy so I guess I should have seen that coming.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

goblue97 said:


> I am firmly on Jimmy's side at this point and thought I would be in the vast minority here. I figured everyone here would be hating him. But, Ernesto seems to be siding more with Jimmy so I guess I should have seen that coming.


Yeah, Jimmy may have been somewhat slimy in how he went after Chuck, but Chuck really started it with how he went after Kim...who was innocent. It's understandable that that upset Jimmy, who then felt compelled to use the only weapons he really has.

I think in the end, Kim's the one who suffers the most from the McGill Family Civil War.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> So no "Fring's back."
> 
> And it's an "Emergency Temporary Guardianship" and not a "Temporary Emergency Guardianship." And that's not how it works, either.


Yeah I sort of cringed when the Dr said "I know a judge." I am pretty sure you can't just pick your own judge like that and call them up.



goblue97 said:


> I am firmly on Jimmy's side at this point and thought I would be in the vast minority here. I figured everyone here would be hating him. But, Ernesto seems to be siding more with Jimmy so I guess I should have seen that coming.


Yeah Ernesto is really the one I feel bad for. Ernesto stuck his neck out for Jimmy by covering for him and giving him the insight that his brother was really out to get him. So then Jimmy ignores that important isight and then indirectly throws Ernesto under the bus for lying about the phone call.

As for who stopped Mike, my guess is either Gus (or an associate) or my wild 1:100 long-shot would be the DEA agents Gomez or perhaps Hank, because they are doing their own investigation and don't want Mike to mess it up.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

As to who Chuck could play the tape for? Kim.

Playing it to Kim would seriously damage Jimmy and Kim's relationship, so for maximum damage that would be a good target.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

SeanC said:


> As to who Chuck could play the tape for? Kim.
> 
> Playing it to Kim would seriously damage Jimmy and Kim's relationship, so for maximum damage that would be a good target.


I don't see how that's true considering Kim already knows this.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

DeDondeEs said:


> As for who stopped Mike, my guess is either Gus (or an associate) or my wild 1:100 long-shot would be the DEA agents Gomez or perhaps Hank, because they are doing their own investigation and don't want Mike to mess it up.


No way would the DEA handle the situation that way. They're law enforcement and they'd be ready to prosecute Mike just as much as Hector. Plus, for all they know, he's just a member of a rival cartel and wouldn't respond properly to the subtle note. It definitely has to be Gus (or an associate). Someone who also wants to do harm to Hector, but has a better plan in mind.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

photoshopgrl said:


> I don't see how that's true considering Kim already knows this.


I think she's made herself believe that Jimmy didn't do it, she says as much to Chuck, she specifically told Chuck that she thought it was more likely he had made a mistake.

I think she has so far chosen to believe that.

An admission by Jimmy, on tape, is a whole different thing.

I don't remember offhand, but didn't Kim specifically ask Jimmy in private, and he denied it then as well?

Jimmy is willing to lie, to anyone, at any time, to achieve his need at the moment. That can be a hard pill for loved ones to swallow when they realize they are no different from anyone else.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

SeanC said:


> I think she's made herself believe that Jimmy didn't do it, she says as much to Chuck, she specifically told Chuck that she thought it was more likely he had made a mistake.
> 
> I think she has so far chosen to believe that.
> 
> ...


No, she's fully aware. That's why she punched him in the car when they left. That's also why she told him that night to make sure he had all his I's dotted and T's crossed, which is what prompted him to go back to the copy store.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Oh yeah, good point.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

SeanC said:


> Oh yeah, good point.


I do however think that she fully believed everything she said to Chuck about his treatment of Jimmy.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Is there any reason they wouldn't just knock Chuck completely out for the CAT scan?


----------



## mrdbdigital (Feb 3, 2004)

heySkippy said:


> Is there any reason they wouldn't just knock Chuck completely out for the CAT scan?


For some types of scans you have to hold your breath.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Test said:


> Great finale, jimmy was out conned
> 
> Anyone watch talking Saul? Much better than talking dead episodes. The show creators actually give information or confirm things, not like twd.
> 
> ...


Given that they confirmed the fan theory was not merely a coincidence, and reading between the lines with the way they handled that question, I think it's fairly obvious that:



Spoiler



The horn honking and "DON'T" note was left by Gus or someone working for Gus.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

I left a DON'T note on the windshield of one of my coworkers today. He watches BCS but won't be watching the finale until tonight, so he has no idea what it means. LOL


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

GoPackGo said:


> I left a DON'T note on the windshield of one of my coworkers today. He watches BCS but won't be watching the finale until tonight, so he has no idea what it means. LOL


Did you also wedge a tree branch between the seat and steering wheel to make the horn go off?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Test said:


> Great finale, jimmy was out conned
> 
> Anyone watch talking Saul? Much better than talking dead episodes. The show creators actually give information or confirm things, not like twd.


I'm actually recording the replay early Saturday morning...

And, oh, that recording was so obvious that it really was the low point for me in the finale...


----------



## bsnelson (Oct 30, 1999)

DevdogAZ said:


> Given that they confirmed the fan theory was not merely a coincidence, and reading between the lines with the way they handled that question, I think it's fairly obvious that:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I just finished watching TS, and I'm in this camp now.

Brad


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

markp99 said:


> Would that recording provide any legal benefit for Chuck without Jimmy's prior acknowledgment? Chuck seems a very competent lawyer; what is his plan?


I guessed that Chuck was getting a tape recorder from the garage. Consider that means he found live batteries and installed them, and had to set it up with a tape to record.

I'd look for Chuck to let Jimmy know he has the confession on tape, and uses that to blackmail Jimmy to stop using the McGill name. Thus Jimmy becomes Saul.

I was thinking that the note could have come from Hank Schrader or Gomie, but I guess they're leading to one of Gus Fring's minions. It could be that Gus is keeping tabs on Hector Salamanca's crew. After all, Gus wants revenge on Hector when the time is right.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

mrdbdigital said:


> For some types of scans you have to hold your breath.


Yeah, for an MRI you have to lie totally still or they say "I'm detecting movement."

Speaking of, that shot looking up at Chuck... Here we have a senior lawyer screaming I DO NOT GIVE CONSENT! They can't ignore that. In fact they'd have him sign a consent form.

Imagine: I'm allergeric to....XXX "Relax, Mr. McGill, while we kill you for your own good. "


----------



## Martha (Oct 6, 2002)

A podcast I listen to speculated that


Spoiler



Ernesto is Gus's son....they look/dress alike, similar names: Ernesto/Gustavo....I can't remember if Gus even had kids or a family.


 I'm not really convinced, but it certainly is an interesting theory.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

We saw Jimmy's commercial, which was actually pretty good. But did you guys notice that Jimmy's image was immediately replaced with the word "Weasel" because of the Garden Weasel commercial that followed his? That had to be done on purpose by the writers.

Also, how cool was that upside-down shot of Chuck as they were working on him in the hospital? I listened to the Insider podcast and Vince said they actually shot that scene from multiple different angles just like you'd shoot a typical hospital scene, but they ended up liking the way the shot looked from that mounted camera that they didn't end up using any of that other footage and just used the single long take from that camera.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> We saw Jimmy's commercial, which was actually pretty good. But did you guys notice that Jimmy's image was immediately replaced with the word "Weasel" because of the Garden Weasel commercial that followed his? That had to be done on purpose by the writers.


ha

I didn't think of it that way.. But yeah...

Personally, I would have liked to have seen his commercial followed by or proceeded by this one


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

Kim could have simply heard "Chuck fell, hit his head and is in the hospital". From her reaction I doubt she knew the details and Jimmy's involvement.


----------



## Numb And Number2 (Jan 13, 2009)

He knows. She knows. He knows she knows and she knows he knows she knows. 

Chuck's hatred runs deep. He's haunted by the perceived betrayals of each parent and his wife. His mother's literal dying breath declaring him, Guilty! No further appeal.


----------



## Worf (Sep 15, 2000)

One wonders if the tape works. I mean, those recorders are cheap pieces of crap, and if you used them to record, well, they picked up more noise than anything. They're pretty useless unless you spoke loudly and into the unit as background conversations would get drowned out by the noise and sounds of everything else. Add to that the fact it was covered and there's a chance the recording is basically just all buzzes and noise with maybe a hint of burbling.

Chances are Chuck never tried it before to see how terrible those things actually were. And we know Jimmy does stay in law, so unless he magically gets out of his felony conviction (which would automatically disbar him) I doubt he'd be able to practice, even as Saul.

The other thing is we don't know how good those tapes are. Everyone knows cassettes were rather piss-poor and had a nasty habit of jamming up, especially in the heat. 

I'm sure Chuck wouldn't have it that easy - it would seem to be too easy for him especially since Jimmy basically said to get him disbarred. 

No, half the fun for Chuck is to take him down.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

GoPackGo said:


> I left a DON'T note on the windshield of one of my coworkers today. He watches BCS but won't be watching the finale until tonight, so he has no idea what it means. LOL


Oh wow I wish I had coworkers like you. Nobody I work with seems to watch any TV other than DWTS and NCIS. I'm forever trying to get someone, anyone to watch other shows.



Martha said:


> A podcast I listen to speculated that
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Ohh I like this theory.


Spoiler



But I'm uncertain if there was ever any mention of Gus having children.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Worf said:


> One wonders if the tape works. I mean, those recorders are cheap pieces of crap, and if you used them to record, well, they picked up more noise than anything. They're pretty useless unless you spoke loudly and into the unit as background conversations would get drowned out by the noise and sounds of everything else. Add to that the fact it was covered and there's a chance the recording is basically just all buzzes and noise with maybe a hint of burbling.
> 
> Chances are Chuck never tried it before to see how terrible those things actually were. And we know Jimmy does stay in law, so unless he magically gets out of his felony conviction (which would automatically disbar him) I doubt he'd be able to practice, even as Saul.
> 
> ...


You're way overthinking it.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

Worf said:


> One wonders if the tape works. I mean, those recorders are cheap pieces of crap, and if you used them to record, well, they picked up more noise than anything. They're pretty useless unless you spoke loudly and into the unit as background conversations would get drowned out by the noise and sounds of everything else. Add to that the fact it was covered and there's a chance the recording is basically just all buzzes and noise with maybe a hint of burbling.
> 
> Chances are Chuck never tried it before to see how terrible those things actually were. And we know Jimmy does stay in law, so unless he magically gets out of his felony conviction (which would automatically disbar him) I doubt he'd be able to practice, even as Saul.
> 
> ...


It's poor storytelling to introduce a major element like this and then not use it or hand wave it out of existence. The recording has a purpose in the story. There's no way that the recording will be bad. Jimmy might be able to destroy it or otherwise make it so that Chuck can't use it against him, but the recording is good because the Chekhov's gun principle says that it has to be good.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

MikeAndrews said:


> Speaking of, that shot looking up at Chuck... Here we have a senior lawyer screaming I DO NOT GIVE CONSENT! They can't ignore that. In fact they'd have him sign a consent form.
> 
> Imagine: I'm allergeric to....XXX "Relax, Mr. McGill, while we kill you for your own good. "


They didn't ignore him. They stopped and the doctor talked to Jimmy about getting a Temporary Emergency Guardianship so that Jimmy could direct Chuck's care.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

wouldworker said:


> They didn't ignore him. They stopped and the doctor talked to Jimmy about getting a Temporary Emergency Guardianship so that Jimmy could direct Chuck's care.


Which again, had me screaming at the screen, "That's not the way an Emergency Temporary Guardianship works!!"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> Which again, had me screaming at the screen, "That's not the way an Emergency Temporary Guardianship works!!"


Well, totes obvs they work differently in New Mexico, duh!


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

It's possible I just missed it, but could someone explain for me the way that Mike's transaction with the gun dealer concluded? Jim Beaver's character said "no offense, but...", and Mike replied "none taken" and they cordially parted ways. What was that about? I took it as an implied "I like you but this was a one-time transaction so don't come to me in the future; I don't know you anymore." Was that the subtext, or was it something else? Because the dealer didn't have a No Repeat Customers policy with Walt, right?


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

The gun dealer wiped his prints off the gun. That's the "no offense" part - he knew that Mike was going to do something illegal and didn't want his own prints on the gun.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

wouldworker said:


> The gun dealer wiped his prints off the gun. That's the "no offense" part - he knew that Mike was going to do something illegal and didn't want his own prints on the gun.


Thanks! I noticed that and just didn't put two and two together.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

danterner said:


> It's possible I just missed it, but could someone explain for me the way that Mike's transaction with the gun dealer concluded? Jim Beaver's character said "no offense, but...", and Mike replied "none taken" and they cordially parted ways. What was that about? I took it as an implied "I like you but this was a one-time transaction so don't come to me in the future; I don't know you anymore." Was that the subtext, or was it something else? Because the dealer didn't have a No Repeat Customers policy with Walt, right?


Forget that, what about the guardianship issues?!!


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I like how knowledgeable and friendly the gun seller is. Throwing in free ammo, not charging Mike the first time for wasting his time. For whatever reason it's a nice juxtaposition to have a nice guy who happens to sell illegal stuff.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

goblue97 said:


> I am firmly on Jimmy's side at this point and thought I would be in the vast minority here. I figured everyone here would be hating him. But, Ernesto seems to be siding more with Jimmy so I guess I should have seen that coming.


Ernesto and Jimmy were friends in the HHM mailroom, so that helps. Also, Ernesto has witnessed how Jimmy has cared for his brother as they shared the duties.

There won't be any trial. Chuck wouldn't want the family (and his) name dragged through the mud. More important, there's no way Chuck could survive days on the witness stand. He barely survived a short court hearing about Mesa Verde.

My guess is that Chuck will use the tape as leverage to threaten Jimmy and Jimmy will offer to change his name (to Saul Goodman) and stay out of Chuck's life.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

SeanC said:


> As to who Chuck could play the tape for? Kim.
> 
> Playing it to Kim would seriously damage Jimmy and Kim's relationship, so for maximum damage that would be a good target.


Kim already knows the truth. She's the one who warned Jimmy to clean up his tracks.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Bob Coxner said:


> He barely survived a short court hearing about Mesa Verde.


That wasn't a court hearing (it was a regulatory board meeting), but your point certainly stands.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> Forget that, what about the guardianship issues?!!


That it was called a Temporary Emergency Guardianship instead of an Emergency Temporary Guardianship didn't bother me at all - I just assumed New Mexico calls it a TEG instead of an ETG. I did a quick check this morning and it looks like that is indeed so.

That the doctor "knows a judge to call" didn't bother me either. Though that's not how it works, maybe the doctor doesn't know that.

It wasn't clear to me whether in the episode they actually established the ETG and then terminated it by the end of the episode, or whether it was all just talk about how they would maybe have to do it. If the former, then THAT would bother me. I took it as the latter, though.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

danterner said:


> It wasn't clear to me whether in the episode they actually established the ETG and then terminated it by the end of the episode, or whether it was all just talk about how they would maybe have to do it. If the former, then THAT would bother me. I took it as the latter, though.


Pretty sure it was the former, because when Jimmy told Chuck he was going home, Chuck said "what about the TEG?", and Jimmy said "The first word is temporary".


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Wouldn't Jimmy have a Power Of Attorney(?) for health care for Chuck, and Chuck knew it? Then there would be no temporary anything, as long as a doctor said that Chuck was not competent to make his own decisions. I guess Chuck could have revoked it when he changed the locks.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Wild. If the note on Mike's car meant he was being watched by Gus Fring's crew, it means that Gus is watching Hector, and is willing to wait 10 years to finally get his revenge on Hector.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

wouldworker said:


> It's poor storytelling to introduce a major element like this and then not use it or hand wave it out of existence.


I think Worf can be right and the tape is bad and it still not be bad storytelling. I could see Chuck going off on another of his rants about Jimmy and playing the tape for someone. But nobody else can hear the dialog clear enough, or worse, they only hear Chuck's voice. This finally pushes everyone to be convinced that he really should be committed. And of course, this causes Jimmy to have another moral dilemma regarding his brother.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Bob Coxner said:


> There won't be any trial. Chuck wouldn't want the family (and his) name dragged through the mud.


Chuck would happily destroy his own career if it meant preventing Jimmy from ever practicing law again.

That said, I don't think there will be a trial. I think the producers will find some other way around that.


----------



## headroll (Jan 20, 2003)

Turtleboy said:


> Which again, had me screaming at the screen, "That's not the way an Emergency Temporary Guardianship works!!"


As an attorney myself, I've had much difficulty watching many show/movies that have legal aspects because there is generally a very liberal interpretation (or complete disregard) about how the law works.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

Numb And Number2 said:


> He knows. She knows. He knows she knows and she knows he knows she knows.
> 
> Chuck's hatred runs deep. He's haunted by the perceived betrayals of each parent and his wife. His mother's literal dying breath declaring him, Guilty! No further appeal.


I still don't believe that Kim knows that in his coverup, he caused Chuck's collapse and hospitalization. She wouldn't have been so supportive at the hospital, and smiling at his commercial. She certainly knows he did something to cause the address "mistake" and she asked Jimmy to make sure he cleaned it up.

The desert scene with (a) Mike following so closely in what has to be open terrain and (b) Mike getting a rifle and calibrating it all in the time it took them to torture then kill the truck driver was pretty unbelievable.

And I keep on thinking - oh, this is where Hector ends up in a wheel chair. This time I thought it would be an errant shot. I wonder what the writers have in store for that?


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I still don't believe that Kim knows that in his coverup, he caused Chuck's collapse and hospitalization.


Jimmy didn't cause it. That's Chuck being Chuck.

As you point out, Kim directly told Jimmy to clean up loose ends. By implication that would involve ensuring the services Jimmy used didn't talk. Kim may not have known Jimmy was out there watching as it went down, but Kim certainly knew the types of things Jimmy would have to do.



mooseAndSquirrel said:


> The desert scene with (a) Mike following so closely in what has to be open terrain and (b) Mike getting a rifle and calibrating it all in the time it took them to torture then kill the truck driver was pretty unbelievable.


I thought so too. You'd think these guys would be a little bit paranoid after Mike had just successfully cased them and hit their driver. Yet there he is, able to follow them, stake out their hideout, and setup a sniper nest.

I too thought this was going to be where Hector ends up in the wheel chair, though back in Breaking Bad, I thought Hector's condition may have been due to natural causes (did they ever say during BB?)


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

midas said:


> I think Worf can be right and the tape is bad and it still not be bad storytelling. I could see Chuck going off on another of his rants about Jimmy and playing the tape for someone. But nobody else can hear the dialog clear enough, or worse, they only hear Chuck's voice. This finally pushes everyone to be convinced that he really should be committed. And of course, this causes Jimmy to have another moral dilemma regarding his brother.


I think we can assume that Chuck will play the tape to make sure that he captured the confession before he tries to use it for whatever purpose he has in mind. Just as he would never go to court unprepared, he's not playing the tape for the first time in front of someone else.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

wouldworker said:


> I think we can assume that Chuck will play the tape to make sure that he captured the confession before he tries to use it for whatever purpose he has in mind. Just as he would never go to court unprepared, he's not playing the tape for the first time in front of someone else.


True, but if this show remains as well done as it's been, the result should not be perfectly clear dialogue for the reasons mentioned earlier. Even assuming the recorder works properly and the tape itself has not degraded, the mike is covered and not all that close to Jimmy, especially when he actually admits to committing a felony - he was walking out and, IIRC, his back was turned. No way that would be clear, if audible at all, on that recording.

I see a scenario where it's partially audible, perhaps to the point where we hear Chuck ask if Jimmy is only saying these things to make him feel better but after that it becomes cloudy.

I also thought Mike would shoot and injure Hector resulting in the condition we saw on BB.

Great season - over too soon!!!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Worf said:


> One wonders if the tape works. I mean, those recorders are cheap pieces of crap, and if you used them to record, well, they picked up more noise than anything. They're pretty useless unless you spoke loudly and into the unit as background conversations would get drowned out by the noise and sounds of everything else. Add to that the fact it was covered and there's a chance the recording is basically just all buzzes and noise with maybe a hint of burbling.
> 
> Chances are Chuck never tried it before to see how terrible those things actually were. And we know Jimmy does stay in law, so unless he magically gets out of his felony conviction (which would automatically disbar him) I doubt he'd be able to practice, even as Saul. The other thing is we don't know how good those tapes are. Everyone knows cassettes were rather piss-poor and had a nasty habit of jamming up, especially in the heat.
> 
> ...


I agree with the others. No way the writers introduce that plot point only to have it foiled by a crappy recording or jammed tape.



Turtleboy said:


> Forget that, what about the guardianship issues?!!


I have issues with the way legal procedure is depicted on most TV shows, but this one didn't bother me. It wouldn't be done in a matter of hours and the court would appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to represent Chuck's interests, but if the GAL agreed that Chuck needed the tests, then the TEG could be granted fairly quickly. No need for the show to introduce all that extra legal stuff. They just showed the result which is all they needed for telling the story.



mooseAndSquirrel said:


> The desert scene with (a) Mike following so closely in what has to be open terrain and (b) Mike getting a rifle and calibrating it all in the time it took them to torture then kill the truck driver was pretty unbelievable.


I think we have to assume that either (a) the gun purchase/sighting scene was a flashback to before Mike watched them go through the locked gate, or (b) Nacho took the driver to this remote location and then he was there for a couple of days before Hector was able to come out and oversee the interrogation/execution.

I don't think there's any way Mike just happened to buy a sniper rifle and hiked up the mountain that would give him the proper vantage point. He definitely had time to do a prior scout of the layout and knew exactly where to park, where to hike, where his position would be, what he'd be aiming at, etc.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

I think everyone assumes that Jimmy is forced, likely by Chuck, to change his name. I just think that it would be great if Jimmy changed his name because he was too embarrassed to be associated with the name after Chuck goes off the deep end.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

headroll said:


> As an attorney myself, I've had much difficulty watching many show/movies that have legal aspects because there is generally a very liberal interpretation (or complete disregard) about how the law works.


Yeah, I the same difficulties with almost anything technological in a TV show or movie. They usually have a very liberal interpretation of physics!


----------



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

photoshopgrl said:


> Oh wow I wish I had coworkers like you. Nobody I work with seems to watch any TV other than DWTS and NCIS. I'm forever trying to get someone, anyone to watch other shows.
> 
> Ohh I like this theory.
> 
> ...


Hmm.


Spoiler



For some reason I want to remember Gus having small children(not sure why. Probably way off there.) Maybe Ernesto is the brother? Los Pollos Hermanos/The Chicken Brothers?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

midas said:


> I think everyone assumes that Jimmy is forced, likely by Chuck, to change his name. I just think that it would be great if Jimmy changed his name because he was too embarrassed to be associated with the name after Chuck goes off the deep end.


In BB, he said that he changed it so that the "homeboys" would think they're hiring a Jewish lawyer. OF course, I'm sure there is more to it than that.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> No way the writers introduce that plot point only to have it *foiled* by a crappy recording or jammed tape


I see what you did there. 



thebigmo said:


> Hmm. * SPOILER *





Spoiler



I recall Gus once mentioning having children, but not anything very specific about them. I also half-recall a scene set in Gus' home where there was a framed photo of a family. Can't remember anything more specifically. Memory is hazy but I seem to recall him making pasta in a red pot? And that there was a safe combination or wifi password or something on the back of the photo, maybe?


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I also would wonder about the tape. For one thing, the recorder was 'way over there' and it was covered up. It's been eons since I used a cassette recorder but from what I can remember it seems that there is no way it picks up much of anything in the way this one was used. Heck, the batteries were probably dead, if you want to really get nitpicky. 

Maybe that's more detail than they want to play but it seems like it would be pretty funny if he went to all that extent to screw over Jimmy and the tape didn't even pick up the conversation, especially Jimmy's part since he was nowhere near the covered recorder - or the batteries were dead. ha!


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> In BB, he said that he changed it so that the "homeboys" would think they're hiring a Jewish lawyer. OF course, I'm sure there is more to it than that.


Well sure. But who's going to say they changed their name because their brother threatened to have them disbarred or because he wanted to disassociate himself from the family name?

Besides, who doesn't want to be Jewish?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

sharkster said:


> I also would wonder about the tape. For one thing, the recorder was 'way over there' and it was covered up. It's been eons since I used a cassette recorder but from what I can remember it seems that there is no way it picks up much of anything in the way this one was used. Heck, the batteries were probably dead, if you want to really get nitpicky.
> 
> Maybe that's more detail than they want to play but it seems like it would be pretty funny if he went to all that extent to screw over Jimmy and the tape didn't even pick up the conversation, especially Jimmy's part since he was nowhere near the covered recorder - or the batteries were dead. ha!


I'm sure Chuck replaced the batteries before Jimmy came over. I'm also sure he tested the recording capabilities of the recorder while underneath the foil. Remember, Chuck is extremely thorough and meticulous. He wouldn't leave something like that to chance.

Also, the recorder was on the coffee table in front of the couch. The majority of the conversation took place with Chuck on the couch and Jimmy on the chair, with the coffee table between them, so the recorder wasn't 'way over there.'


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

If it did go to court I think Jimmy would have a good defense by saying he was just telling Chuck what he needed to hear because he was having a major meltdown and feared for Chuck's well being. Plenty of evidence that Chuck is loony tunes so the story would be very believable.

I don't think it will go to court or play out like that though. 

Hang on to your hats, we only have to wait until March 2017 to find out more!


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Odenkirk and McKean in law school together (on Mr. Show) -


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Johnny Dancing said:


> If it did go to court I think Jimmy would have a good defense by saying he was just telling Chuck what he needed to hear because he was having a major meltdown and feared for Chuck's well being. Plenty of evidence that Chuck is loony tunes so the story would be very believable.


Except for the copy store guy, who will almost certainly cave.


----------



## Numb And Number2 (Jan 13, 2009)

mooseAndSquirrel said:


> I still don't believe that Kim knows that in his coverup, he caused Chuck's collapse and hospitalization.


Jimmy didn't cause Chuck's collapse and hospitalization and is in no way responsible.

Not any more than getting in a car accident on the way to the supermarket is your hunger's fault.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Feb 3, 2004)

DancnDude said:


> I like how knowledgeable and friendly the gun seller is. Throwing in free ammo, not charging Mike the first time for wasting his time. For whatever reason it's a nice juxtaposition to have a nice guy who happens to sell illegal stuff.


Just goes to show how you can be a professional and a criminal at the same time.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

Numb And Number2 said:


> Jimmy didn't cause Chuck's collapse and hospitalization and is in no way responsible.
> 
> Not any more than getting in a car accident on the way to the supermarket is your hunger's fault.


I don't think Kim would see it that way. But whatever. I was wrong in thinking that Chuck would be dead, so I'm probably wrong about all of this.

I kept on thinking Howard or some officer of the court would be behind the aluminum foil wall.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

There doesn't need to be a trial. I don't see the local D.A. or the Feds being too interested in this. But the Bar will be. Plus, Kim knew of Jimmy's behavior afterwards, and she didn't report it. All Chuck has to do is threaten to report Kim to the Bar, and Jimmy will fall on his sword.

But we know that Jimmy, as Saul, is still practicing law, and didn't get permanently disbarred, so who knows.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

jsmeeker said:


> Chuck is sneaky
> 
> I am guessing Nacho was on to Mike. But how did he get to the car to set off the horn??


Someone else did. But who? Or whom? Or quien?


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

photoshopgrl said:


> I have to say that if Chuck actually uses that against him and not just uses it as a threat of some sort, then he's really a bad person. Jimmy was more concerned for him physically and mentally numerous times here. First running to the copy place knowing he was giving himself away. Second by not having him committed even though Chuck himself expected that. Third caring enough about Chuck's mental well being and career to confess everything to him and admitting it when Chuck says he just admitted to a felony. Oy. I know Jimmy has probably done a ton of shady things to/around Chuck over the years but at his core Jimmy cares more about his brother than anything else. I can't say that about Chuck.


Chuck sucks.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Johnny Dancing said:


> Hang on to your hats, we only have to wait until March 2017 to find out more!


BCS usually starts in mid-Feb, so we actually only have ten months to go!

Whoop! :up:


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

DeDondeEs said:


> my wild 1:100 long-shot would be the DEA agents Gomez or perhaps Hank, because they are doing their own investigation and don't want Mike to mess it up.


I like that.

If it was anyone in Nachos gang, they would have simply killed Mike. He's nothing to them and they've said and proven that they just kill people who might ruin their operations.

Now you might say "well Nacho is friends with Mike and doesn't want him dead" to which I say "horse feathers". Nacho may see a benefit to keeping Mike alive, but if Mike was close to blowing things up Nacho would kill him without batting an eye.

And the device used to tell Mike not to kill the guy? A note on the car? Hmm... not the most fool-proof way to do it. How did they know he'd hear the horn? Or acknowledge it? Or hear it before he shot? Lots could have gone wrong there.

I like the idea that it's a third party.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Numb And Number2 said:


> Jimmy didn't cause Chuck's collapse and hospitalization and is in no way responsible.
> 
> Not any more than getting in a car accident on the way to the supermarket is your hunger's fault.


If not for Jimmy, Chuck would have been home in bed and not exposed to the stress and electricity in the copy shop. Whether you want to view it as a direct cause or an indirect cause, it's Jimmy's fault that Chuck was in the position he was in.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

midas said:


> I think everyone assumes that Jimmy is forced, likely by Chuck, to change his name. I just think that it would be great if Jimmy changed his name because he was too embarrassed to be associated with the name after Chuck goes off the deep end.


I think Jimmy's at his happiest when he's running a con, skirting the law, just being that person.

And that person needs a different name than the one he's been using.

Jimmy just finally breaks bad and becomes Saul. I don't think Chuck forces him to change his name.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

I was surprised they did not show more of him working at the mall in the future. I thought I heard they won't always stick to the past timeline.


----------



## MacThor (Feb 7, 2002)

zalusky said:


> I was surprised they did not show more of him working at the mall in the future. I thought I heard they won't always stick to the past timeline.


IIRC, the only scenes at the Omaha mall/Cinnabon were in the two season premiers, so *spoiler alert* for S3E1!


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Numb And Number2 said:


> Jimmy didn't cause Chuck's collapse and hospitalization and is in no way responsible.
> 
> Not any more than getting in a car accident on the way to the supermarket is your hunger's fault.





DevdogAZ said:


> If not for Jimmy, Chuck would have been home in bed and not exposed to the stress and electricity in the copy shop. Whether you want to view it as a direct cause or an indirect cause, it's Jimmy's fault that Chuck was in the position he was in.


It's a good 1L Torts exam question. Jimmy certainly breached his duty of care to Chuck by doctoring the documents and then covering it up. Was it reasonably foreseeable that Chuck would go to the copy shop? It was to Kim who told Jimmy to be careful. And it was to Jimmy, because he went there to cover it up.

But were Jimmy's actions the proximate cause of Chuck's injuries?

Like I said, it's a good 1L torts exam question.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Cf. Walt as the cause of the mid-air plane collision. Extra credit for using IRAC when answering.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

headroll said:


> As an attorney myself, I've had much difficulty watching many show/movies that have legal aspects because there is generally a very liberal interpretation (or complete disregard) about how the law works.


We all have occupations and/or hobbies that effect shows we watch. I just remember that they're TV shows (or movies) and don't worry about it. I don't find it very difficult.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

spartanstew said:


> We all have occupations and/or hobbies that effect shows we watch. I just remember that they're TV shows (or movies) and don't worry about it. I don't find it very difficult.


Yeah, I watch Vikings, even though it covers exactly the period of my historical research back when I was a medieval historian, and although they get a lot of stuff "wrong," I still enjoy it. A lot.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> Which again, had me screaming at the screen, "That's not the way an Emergency Temporary Guardianship works!!"


There's your problem! They were talking about a Temporary Emergency Guardianship, not an Emergency Temporary Guardianship! Obviously two very different things!


----------



## Worf (Sep 15, 2000)

Everyone's saying the tape is legit. Is it? I mean, the season ended with Chuck hitting the stop button on the recorder. 

Now, the writers will generally assume the viewers will think it was recorded. It is a standard TV trope - you show a recorder being stopped, you assume it was recorded. Given the brilliant writing of BCS, that is not a safe assumption because the writers have routinely challenged our assumptions, which is why we keep coming back to watch it.

We, the viewer, assumed Chuck recorded the confession. The episode closes, and we think Chuck has got his conviction, since it's revealed the whole thing was recorded. But that's the brilliance of BCS - it's left as an assumption. 

Possibilities include using the tape to just threaten Jimmy. Again, we assume the tape has a clear conversation, but it could be Jimmy agrees to Chuck's demands takes the tape and finds out it's rubbish. (we can carry this into thinking Chuck gave Jimmy the wrong tape - on purpose and is still holding onto the right tape).

The straightforward path of using the tape to get a felony conviction on Jimmy is the easy path, and Chuck doesn't do easy. Or he would have had Jimmy disbarred for many other reasons already. (Plus, with the conviction, he wouldn't because Saul).

So it's all up in the air. And you can even bet the writers might not even bother with the contents of the tape - they'll let the viewers assume, and just rely on the fact there is a tape carry the story. The viewers know Chuck recorded something. It may be a clear confession, or it may be complete garbage. A good writer will leave the viewers guessing and just work on the fact there's a tape of something that's going to play a part without actually needing to play it.

The straightforward tape exists, Jimmy's convicted or changes name to Saul is too quick and neat and tidy and ends the show within a few episodes into the third season. The let's drag it out tape exists and Chuck will blackmail Jimmy lasts longer. Maybe we'll even find out at the end of the season finale the tape was junk and Jimmy will spend the 4th season getting back at Chuck.

Edit: I also like the theory that Chuck knows the tape is crap, but still strings Jimmy (and us, the viewer) along through the entire season.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

We know Jimmy isn't going to be convicted of a felony. And I seriously doubt that if he got disbarred he'd be able to change his name and keep practicing, since he's already somewhat well known in the legal community and has aired commercials with his name and picture. 

We don't know how the tape will be used. All we know is that it would be crappy writing if it were to turn out that Chuck has no leverage over Jimmy or Kim because you can't make out the voices on the tape.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Worf said:


> We, the viewer, assumed Chuck recorded the confession. The episode closes, and we think Chuck has got his conviction, since it's revealed the whole thing was recorded. But that's the brilliance of BCS - it's left as an assumption.


The lawyers in this thread keep saying that we DON'T think that there is going to be a "conviction."


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Jimmy seems to have a much stronger moral compass than Saul ever did. This is continually exploited by Chuck and gets in the way of him succeeding. I think Jimmy's arc will be his eventual intentional destruction of Chuck (one way or another) and then Darth Saul will kill him, from a certain point of view.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> There doesn't need to be a trial. I don't see the local D.A. or the Feds being too interested in this. But the Bar will be. Plus, Kim knew of Jimmy's behavior afterwards, and she didn't report it. All Chuck has to do is threaten to report Kim to the Bar, and Jimmy will fall on his sword.
> 
> But we know that Jimmy, as Saul, is still practicing law, and didn't get permanently disbarred, so who knows.


How is it a felony for Jimmy changing copies that only Chuck saw? Jimmy didn't file the papers legally.
[EDIT] Oh. Tortious interference, huh?

I can see that it should get Jimmy disbarred.

As far as Gus:


Spoiler



In BB, they left several hints about Gus's previous life unanswered.
Gus is from Chile, "The Generalissimo" according to Hector. So there's some background, maybe with Guis being associated with Allende.
They also strongly hinted that Gus's former Polos Hermanos partner/chef was his lover. Wasn't he shot just to warn Gus not to go into business on his own?


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> I can see that it should get Jimmy disbarred.


and civilly sued, big time. Well, if he had any assets worth going after...



TAsunder said:


> Jimmy seems to have a much stronger moral compass than Saul ever did.


Did Saul ever intentionally harm anyone in BB? My memory of the series has faded, but it seems to me he was more sleazy than he was evil. A few times it seemed like he genuinely wanted to help people.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

smbaker said:


> Did Saul ever intentionally harm anyone in BB? My memory of the series has faded, but it seems to me he was more sleazy than he was evil. A few times it seemed like he genuinely wanted to help people.


On the other hand, he was cheerfully willing to do the wrong thing, which seems to be something that Jimmy is only building toward.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

Worf said:


> Everyone's saying the tape is legit. Is it? I mean, the season ended with Chuck hitting the stop button on the recorder.
> 
> Now, the writers will generally assume the viewers will think it was recorded. It is a standard TV trope - you show a recorder being stopped, you assume it was recorded. Given the brilliant writing of BCS, that is not a safe assumption because the writers have routinely challenged our assumptions, which is why we keep coming back to watch it.
> 
> ...


Pretty much everything you said has already been stated. You just took more words to do so.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> On the other hand, he was cheerfully willing to do the wrong thing, which seems to be something that Jimmy is only building toward.


Very true, and illustrated by his conversation with Mike early this season:



> Help me out here. Did I dream it, Or did I have $1,600,000 on my desk in cash? No one on god's green earth knew we had it. We could've split it 50/50. We could've gone home with $800,000... each! Tax-free!
> 
> ...
> 
> Yeah. Well, I know what stopped me. And you know what? It's never stopping me again.


In the D&D taxonomy of things, Jimmy started out Chaotic Good, and Saul will finish out Chaotic Neutral.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

spartanstew said:


> Pretty much everything you said has already been stated. You just took more words to do so.


You say that to people a lot. Although this time you used more words to do so.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> Jimmy seems to have a much stronger moral compass than Saul ever did. This is continually exploited by Chuck and gets in the way of him succeeding. I think Jimmy's arc will be his eventual intentional destruction of Chuck (one way or another) and then Darth Saul will kill him, from a certain point of view.


I think you're suffering from selective memory  I don't recall Saul having a much "weaker" moral compass than Jimmy does in this series....



Rob Helmerichs said:


> On the other hand, he was cheerfully willing to do the wrong thing, which seems to be something that Jimmy is only building toward.


I beg to differ  Seems to me he's cheerfully doing the wrong things for the right reasons (Kim)...


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

hefe said:


> You say that to people a lot.


I know. Everyone thinks their thoughts are more important than everyone else's and folks rarely read threads - they just jump in and post (assuming, I guess that nobody else could possible have the same insight they do). But alas, it doesn't work that way.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

My irony meter just got overloaded.


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

I've been reading over on Reddit that people noticed a "zap" sound when Jimmy grounded himself which apparently indicates he had some sort of electronics on him when he went in to see Chuck. Anyone else think this could be the case and Jimmy was recording the conversation as well?


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

goblue97 said:


> I've been reading over on Reddit that people noticed a "zap" sound when Jimmy grounded himself which apparently indicates he had some sort of electronics on him when he went in to see Chuck. Anyone else think this could be the case and Jimmy was recording the conversation as well?


A zap would only indicate that static electricity was discharged. That's what he's doing by grounding himself.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

Why would Jimmy want to record the conversation?


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

I have to re-watch the scene but Chuck may have said some not so favorable things early on during the conversation.

I don't know. The reddit guys were a lot more convincing than I'm being.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Yeah, the zap is the entire point of the grounding. He's discharging electricity built up in his body (you can do the same if you shuffle your feet on carpet, especially while wearing socks). If there had NOT been a zap, it would have been out of place.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Ereth said:


> Yeah, the zap is the entire point of the grounding. He's discharging electricity built up in his body (you can do the same if you shuffle your feet on carpet, especially while wearing socks). If there had NOT been a zap, it would have been out of place.


But you don't get a static charge from consumer electronic devices. Except perhaps in Chuck's mind.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

ej42137 said:


> But you don't get a static charge from consumer electronic devices. Except perhaps in Chuck's mind.


It's not about the devices. It's about avoiding another potential source of electrical energy.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

exactly. It's about ANY electric field, no matter the source or cause.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

goblue97 said:


> I've been reading over on Reddit that people noticed a "zap" sound when Jimmy grounded himself which apparently indicates he had some sort of electronics on him when he went in to see Chuck. Anyone else think this could be the case and Jimmy was recording the conversation as well?


You think the lawyers have issues?

Every time they showed the grouding rod at Chuck's front door I laughed that the clamp is connected to the _wood_ fence rail.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

MikeAndrews said:


> You think the lawyers have issues? Every time they showed the grouding rod at Chuck's front door I laughed that the clamp is connected to the wood fence rail.


True, but you can also see a think cable running from the grounding rod, presumably to a cold water pipe or a another grounding rod actually in the ground.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Feb 3, 2004)

MikeAndrews said:


> Every time they showed the grouding rod at Chuck's front door I laughed that the clamp is connected to the _wood_ fence rail.


It's not wood. It is made from square metal tubing. The welds at some of the joints are visible, and you can see the plate on the end of the upper rail where it is attached to the house.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I searched the thread but didn't see a mention that the writers had considered having Hank Schrader's wife Marie be the radiologic technician during Chuck's CAT scan. They decided it would have broken the mood of Chuck's hospital experience to show her there.

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/22/breaking-bad-betsy-brandt-marie-better-call-saul-cameo


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

GoPackGo said:


> True, but you can also see a think cable running from the grounding rod, presumably to a cold water pipe or a another grounding rod actually in the ground.





mrdbdigital said:


> It's not wood. It is made from square metal tubing. The welds at some of the joints are visible, and you can see the plate on the end of the upper rail where it is attached to the house.


The rod is in the ground, as it should be. The clamp is where you attach a wire going to what you're grounding, like an antenna or the service entrance inside the house.

Chuck has the wire going to a clamp around the wood top rail of the porch.

I'd give Chuck a pass if the idea was that you touch the metal ring going around the wood.


----------



## swyman18 (Jan 7, 2016)

702 said:


> Yes it aired unbleeped.
> 
> Unsure who trailed Mike. Gus is possible, but he hires Mike for security.


I'm a little behind here, but here in Hawaii, the west coast AMC feed dropped the audio on the F bombs. No bleeps, but the audio cut out. Did the east coast feed keep it unedited?


----------



## mrdbdigital (Feb 3, 2004)

MikeAndrews said:


> Chuck has the wire going to a clamp around the wood top rail of the porch.
> 
> I'd give Chuck a pass if the idea was that you touch the metal ring going around the wood.


I guess that you have discovered a new property of wood. If you go back and look at a couple of close ups in other episodes, you can plainly see several places where the "wood" is rusting and has an exposed metallic sheen where the paint is missing.

Not to mention the fact that a wood railing small enough to pass through one of those pipe style grounding clamps would not be strong enough to serve as an effective porch railing.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

wouldworker said:


> It's not about the devices. It's about avoiding another potential source of electrical energy.


True enough, but I was addressing the idea proposed in this thread that a "zap" sound betrays a recording device secreted on Jimmy's person.

The grounding is clearly a metal rod pounded into the ground and clamped to a metal railing; it would be an effective ground if that were important. But Vince Gillian showed us in Chuck's previous visit to the hospital that the "electrical sensitivity" is completely psychosomatic and Jimmy knows it. Jimmy touches it to assuage Chuck's anxiety, and that he won't have to lie if Chuck asks him about it. The rules of the magical system electricity follows in Chuck's mind can neither be explained nor discredited by the rules electricity follows in the real world.


----------



## wouldworker (Sep 7, 2004)

ej42137 said:


> True enough, but I was addressing the idea proposed in this thread that a "zap" sound betrays a recording device secreted on Jimmy's person.


Again, it doesn't work that way. Unless his recording device is powered by a flux capacitor, it's not going to generate an electric charge in Jimmy simply by dint of him carrying it. If that were how it worked, wouldn't everyone with a phone be statically charged all the time?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Some foley artist inserted a zap sound. Nothing more.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

spartanstew said:


> We all have occupations and/or hobbies that effect shows we watch. I just remember that they're TV shows (or movies) and don't worry about it. I don't find it very difficult.


Yep. I'm a pinball guy, and I always find it funny that whenever there is someone playing a pinball machine in a TV show or a movie, it always has mechanical chimes no matter what era the game is from. Virtually no solid state machines built from the 80's onward have chimes, but I guess the sound engineers just assume that chimes are what most people associate with pinball.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

gweempose said:


> Yep. I'm a pinball guy,


Hey, what'ya got?

I only have room for 2 machines at the moment: Jurassic Park & Game of Thrones Premium. An EM will be next.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

swyman18 said:


> I'm a little behind here, but here in Hawaii, the west coast AMC feed dropped the audio on the F bombs. No bleeps, but the audio cut out. Did the east coast feed keep it unedited?


I'm in Minnesota, and I didn't hear the actual audio of the f-bombs, either. Just the audio drop outs like you experienced.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm surprised at how many cable shows are censored on the network they're made to air on. Syfy does that a lot lately. Why don't they just tell the producers what they can and cannot do?


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

The producers may be looking beyond the original US network broadcast.

On Google Play the two ratf**ks weren't censored. I expect if it airs in the UK it wouldn't be censored.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm surprised at how many cable shows are censored on the network they're made to air on. Syfy does that a lot lately. Why don't they just tell the producers what they can and cannot do?


The producers will often film a scene with the cursing and allow it to be bleeped on original airing but know that the streaming/disc/international versions will be uncensored. We live in a world where the original airing on the producing network is only a small fraction of how the show will eventually be viewed.


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

Chuck will tell Jimmy, "I'm not going to get my own brother disbarred or sent to prison. But you're going to quit being a lawyer or I *will* call the Bar about Kim, who knew about your criminal behavior and didn't do anything about it."

Kim will end things once Jimmy becomes too much of a liability.

And Jimmy will agree that Jimmy McGill will stop practicing law. Then Saul Goodman will start.

But Chuck still has to die or go crazy, otherwise he'd see Saul Goodman's advertising on benches, in commercials, et cetera.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

swyman18 said:


> I'm a little behind here, but here in Hawaii, the west coast AMC feed dropped the audio on the F bombs. No bleeps, but the audio cut out. Did the east coast feed keep it unedited?


I watch via the Sling TV service, and I'm fairly certain that nothing was bleeped/cut.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

ej42137 said:


> But you don't get a static charge from consumer electronic devices. Except perhaps in Chuck's mind.


Yeah, exactly. I ground myself often -- rarely get a zap. Though in the South West I do get a lot of zaps.


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> Some foley artist inserted a zap sound. Nothing more.


I merely brought it up to spark conversation. My job is done here. But no, I'm not leaving.....sorry.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

wouldworker said:


> It's poor storytelling to introduce a major element like this and then not use it or hand wave it out of existence. The recording has a purpose in the story. There's no way that the recording will be bad. *Jimmy might be able to destroy it* or otherwise make it so that Chuck can't use it against him, but the recording is good because the Chekhov's gun principle says that it has to be good.


Yeah *****, Magnets!!!!


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

I think I like "Better Call Saul!" more than "Gimme Jimmy!".


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I found myself much more interested in Mike's subplot than in Jimmy's story. Jimmy is a train wreck. I know he's eventually going to screw up whatever he's doing so it's just waiting for the inevitable pile of dog crap he's going to step in.

Oh, and Chuck is an a-hole.


----------

