MovieChat Forums > Breaking Bad (2008) Discussion > Good as it is, why I think BB is fading ...

Good as it is, why I think BB is fading to obscurity

posted 3 years ago by brux (14666)
31 replies | jump to latest

What makes this show maybe not as good as it could be is the failure to work into WW's character any reason behind the choices he makes - until some lousy fake apology in the last episode. This show could have had meaning to America far more than just a cheap organized crime action series. Maybe it's the difference here between the Godfather which did this better, and BB.

Clearly WW hates himself for being a failure, and relegating his wife and kid to a mediocre life, and uneventful death of cancer because he made a massive mistake in his business dealings. It would also be interesting if that could have been tied into other criminals, maybe Mike, Pinkman and even Saul Goodman.

Many of the people who buy politicians and run America today are virtual criminals who got past their self-hate and guilt and took over the country in the name of psychopathy.

The Koch brother's father made his money ripping off native Americans for oil. Behind every great fortune lies a great crime. Of course there are exceptions, but true in general.

[–] Ace_Spade (9361) 3 years ago

I think almost all pop culture fades, more or less, with a few rare exceptions, and I think the main cause is the massive turnover rate - especially in a medium like television.

As for Walt's motives, they aren't always obvious, but we get tonnes of hints throughout the show that he's becoming megalomaniacal, or re-igniting his past egomania.

Breaking Bad does, I think, present a lot of moral truth in the form of showing Walt tear his and his family's life apart for the sake of greed and ego.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

We do get those hints, but looking back it seemed to me that most of the time it was only there to make sure we don't absolutely think of Walt as a total monster, until they want us to, not to give us insight into his character or process. I am just speculating here. To me the show was very compelling and I probably would not have ever watched it if it had not been featured and talked about on PBS ... think it was Fresh Air, which gave it a hint of respectability. Nothing of course is perfect, especially TV, but it was an interesting entertaining show. It was all fun and games until the killing of Hank.

[–] Ace_Spade (9361) 3 years ago

They were definitely dialing in the amount of "monster" Walt hit, but I think that's necessary. If, in season one, he did the things he did later in the show, we'd never be on his side. His slide into evil is, to me, tied to his past as well as his character's arc. I think it does show us the why, and more to the point, I think the why is revealed to us almost as it is revealed to Walt. I think Walt lies to himself a lot about why he's doing what he's doing, and at some point we (the audience and Walter) both realize that he's not in this for family, he's in the "Empire Business".

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

Yeah. Did you at some point, and if so what point, detach from Walt as human being? I surely did when Hank was murdered by those scum, or when all of Mike's guys were murdered in concert. One good thing that the show does well is to show how that slide can be rationalized like the boiling frog thing.

[–] Ace_Spade (9361) 3 years ago

SPOILER ALERT

It was kinda gradual for me, but the point where I really thought he had clearly crossed a line was when he just watched Jane die. It was so cold. Plus, while she and Jesse were clearly in a self-destructive, co-dependent, enabling relationship, Walt really disliked her because she was demanding money and he didn't want to give up control. It was technically Jesse's money, but Walt was PO'd that somebody else was ordering Jesse around.

So, yeah, I think that was the moment I was like, "Mmm...it's getting hard to justify his actions as good or heroic." I still think he had more "good" moments in him, but I was pretty aware of it then.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

> where I really thought he had clearly crossed a line was when he just watched Jane die.

Yeah, that was a biggie.

[–] davebuffalo (3023) 2 months ago

If Walt hadn't been there, she may have died anyway. It's not like he caused her to die, he just didn't save her.

Big Difference.

[–] Ace_Spade (9361) 2 months ago

There is a difference, but it's not that big. "She would have died, anyway!" wouldn't work in most situations. For example: say a police officer watches some heavily-armed guys run into a bank. He does not pursue, does not draw his weapon, and just hangs around outside. Afterwards, he finds out that two people were killed. "Well, look, I just didn't prevent them from dying," the cop says, "It's not like I'm the one who killed them."

But, to me, a big part of the reason here is due to Bryan Cranston's stellar acting. He conveys (to my reading) a clear decision by Walt to deliberately let this person die. Why? Convenience. Jane was a pain in Walt's neck and he didn't care what she meant to Jesse, he didn't care what she meant to her father, he didn't care about her wasted potential or about trying to make things right. No, he just didn't want to deal with her anymore so he sat three feet from her while she choked to death on vomit. That's inaction to the point of evil.

Now, Walt wasn't irredeemable because Cranston also gives us his breakdown that shows he was at least conflicted about it. But, while this extends a modicum of empathy for Walt, it also underlines my point: Walt *knows* this is evil, which is why he breaks down, but he does it anyway for his own, selfish reasons. At best, he might have thought he was eliminating an enabler to save Jesse, but the fact of the matter is that Jesse dragged Jane down, not the other way around. So, maybe Jesse's culpable, too. But, at least Jesse's culpable in ignorance. At least he was just trying to cope with big losses in his life and accidentally pulled Jane down. Walt made inaction an action and allowed Jane to die horribly.

[–] moviechatterer (13382) 3 years ago

for me, it was probably when he had 10 of his own guys killed in prison to make sure they kept quiet.
but theres probly other psycho moves prior to that ive forgotten about

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

That was a big one too.

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 3 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean about failing to work in a reason behind his choices. I felt like the reason for his choices was the whole foundation of the show. For most of the show, it seems like he's been pushed into this by circumstance: needing to make more money to support his family, provide for their futures, etcetera. He's a good person who is a victim of circumstance. But then you realize that, no, Walt has ALWAYS had a dark seed in him. He's not doing this to help his family. That's a pretense. He's destroying his family to serve his ego.

[–] moviechatterer (13382) 3 years ago

yeah but it well before the end when Jesse said "you've got enough money - the amount you said you needed"

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 3 years ago

That's true.

[–] ccr1633 (1424) 3 years ago

You seem to be arguing that this show should have had more political messaging with regard, say, to the nature of the health care system in the USA. So far as entertainment value is concerned I think that's a horrible idea. Messaging of that sort almost invariably sticks out like a sore thumb to the detriment of the story. What, you wanted a whole season devoted to Walt haggling with Anthem Health Insurance functionaries denying him coverage? Actually, the show did address this kind of stuff at the beginning and that was plenty enough.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

That's very funny. I am a product of the last century where movies usually could be depended on to have a point or a moral of sorts. So, I feel that dragging us through the life of Walter White for 5 years to tell us only at the last minute this guy is a psychotic creep is problematic in some way. I would speculate that in the ways society has changed has been in large part to media that is the psychological equivalent of junk food to the body.

[–] ccr1633 (1424) 3 years ago

Maybe, but like Tarantino films it's very clever, entertaining junk food. That aside, I don't think Walter White is nearly as amoral or immoral as you claim. It's true that he slipped into the role of meth cook with no qualms, but he had a very obvious reason for doing so. By the end he treated his family, once his legitimate reason for getting into it, as an excuse for his pursuit to be the best cook and to have everyone know it. That transition from a dying man desperate to leave something for his family into megalomaniacal drug kingpin was the main morality tale. It was explicit and hardly an afterthought. It sounds to me that your problem is exactly the one I had with the show before I gave it a chance. At first glance I thought it was drug glorification whilst pretending not to be so. I was pleasantly surprised to see I was incorrect.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

It sounds to me that your problem is exactly the one I had with the show before I gave it a chance. At first glance I thought it was drug glorification whilst pretending not to be so. I was pleasantly surprised to see I was incorrect.

I think that is an astute observation, but one that can be expanding to cover a huge amount of movies, and yes, in general, I have a problem with the hero of the movie, or protagonist if you want being a criminal.

I am sure there where other movies before this, but the one I remember becoming aware of this was Clint Eastwood, "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot". Going back from there was "The Dirty Dozen", but that seemed handled a little better. Today it seems a mark of distinction, almost a challenge to create the most disgusting criminal and turn them into a sympathetic hero.

Is all that wiped out if in the last episode or the last minutes of the movie they manipulate the story so that they come out sympathetic or understandable?

In Walt's case we had the brainless Jesse Pinkman to detour disgust onto, or the much worse drug dealers and kingpins, like Tuco, the Nazis, Don Eladio, the cartels, assassins, etc.

It's like Walt is an OK guy if he would have stopped earlier, or not gotten Hank killed, but in general it was "American cool" to be a drug dealer, to make a lot of money any way you could. Hell, I watch the Bill Maher show fairly regularly, and at some point he bragged about being a drug dealer - the extent of which he never quite talks about.

Good analogy to SOME of Tarantino's movies, though the ones I like are usually fairly morality tales, like Inglourius Basterds.

[–] BeaSouth (2793) a year ago

Good post and good thread as well Brux. I appreciate these thoughtful comments as I’m working my way through the show. It’s uncomfortable watching the impact of methamphetamine trauma on all the child characters in the show. It’s tough to be entertained when you see the drug trade causing one trauma after the next on kids.

[–] FarmerTed (180) 4 months ago

The more intelligent among us see that but I can also see with many it IS about drug glorification.

[–] TheReccher (343) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

I see why you say that, but to me all of those moments conflict and are kind of contrived. Obviously they have to do what for a TV show, but to me this is such a touchy subject because the hero is a super-criminal, that it should be deeper study of his character. It's not that far off, but when I re-watch it enough to not really see the show as dramatic more than action series.

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 3 years ago

I don't know if it will completely fade to obscurity. I think screenwriters really like and respect it and it is an example of really well-done tv. So I think it will remain "famous" as an example of amazing tv and certain aspects of it will continue to be discussed and emulated. But I do agree that it is "of its time" in the sense that I don't know if future generations will watch it. My late-teenage son tried it and gave up quickly because he said it's too sad to watch. He'll watch all kinds of bloody stuff and play the usual shoot-em-up video games but Breaking Bad didn't appeal to him because it was too dark. I think that's really interesting. If the shift in tastes of this generation portends a future where we get brighter, more optimistic tv stories, I'll be happy.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

> it is an example of really well-done tv.

It was, but not all TV is a classic ... in fact so very little of it actually is.

I admire your son. As a kid I witnessed this turning-dark to the dark side of media and movies, and unless it is really good and classic, I've never like it or been comfortable with it. To me it works on a political level to justify the dark abuses of our society. Nice comment.

[–] Kowalski (58706) 3 years ago

THE AMOUNT OF BUMPER STICKERS,T SHIRTS AND TOYS I SEE EVERYWHERE WOULD SAY OTHERWISE...I MYSELF OWN 3 SHIRTS AND HAVE A "I AM THE ONE WHO KNOCKS" STICKER ON MY CAR.🤔

[–] ATG6 (3000) 2 years ago

Mine say "I'd rather be eating at Los Pollos Hermanos."

[–] yvesyves (632) 2 years ago

i would have loved to have had a bit more explanations on what happened to the company he created with the couple that turned out to become super wealthy; of course it's hinted that he is the one that invented whatever new product that the company produces but he sold his shares very early when he thought the company was gonna fail; and then it turned out to be a huge success; i would have liked to see a bit more of that period of his life.

Also, it seems clear that him and the woman were lovers before she got married to his friend; so his friend / former associate in the end really got it all; and this is why for him ego and pride are so important.

[–] ATG6 (3000) 2 years ago

I think it's better when a show doesn't try to explain every little thing or make stuff too obvious.
Walt starts dabbling in crime because he finds out he will die soon, and needs cash. He realizes his mad chemistry skills could make a nice nest egg for his family. And if he gets arrested and sentenced to a long prison term, he won't live that long anyway.

But then momentum and his own moral and personality flaws propel him deeper into crime. He still resents that his business associate got rich off his ideas, while Walt himself did not (because he was bought out early.) There's a bit of revenge motivating him, and wanting to show that he can do big things and be somebody. And then his ego drives him to make the best meth in the country, and to become a feared and masterful crime lord (partly to protect himself and his family, but partly just because he likes the power and prestige.)

But I see it more as a mid-life crisis, accelerated because the rest of his life is suddenly going to be much shorter than he had planned. It just would have been more realistic if he had picked up a hot new girlfriend at some point.