Watching Breaking Bad before Better Call Saul makes you realize also that Los Pollos Hermanos debuted Spicy Curly Fries and then inexplicably took it off the menu in breaking bad and I wish spicy curly fries existed irl
I think it's important to notice not only how many people Gus harm to enact his revenge but also the extend of his revenge. Letting Hector die of a heart attack is too merciful. But dying of a heart attack is much more excruciating than a single gunshot to the head, as was the case of Max. Max dies a "clean" death. But Gus puts Hector through hell, both physically and psychologically, by incapacitating him and then exterminating his entire family one by one. In essence, Gus isn't avenging Max's pain. He is avenging his own pain.
Well killing somebody isn’t only wrong because of the pain. It’s wrong because you’re robbing them of their life. In Max’s case, Hector robber Max of possibly 50+ years of life. Gus robbed Hector of a few years (very possibly less) as a severely crippled man in a nursing home.
@N0TYALC That is not how any of this works, even because Max could have died much earlier from a disease or accident. Killing has to do with pain as well as ending another life without their desire. It is robbing people of their most precious possession, not years of time
What always bothered me was that Gus killed innocent people, just to torment one guilty one. In that sense, no, his revenge was absolutely not justified. So much so that you cheer when Hector takes both Gus and himself out.
@@orxy5316 There’s a reason why children are the first people saved during disasters. There’s a reason that most animals will gladly give up their lives to save their young, even when it’s not their offspring. A child’s life is inherently more valuable than the life of a dying old man. I don’t understand the defensiveness in your reply.
27:25 they actually do mention this in BCS! When Lalo and Bolsa meet in America for the first time, Lalo jokingly says to Bolsa something along the lines of: "My uncle has this crazy idea that Fring might still hold a grudge after he shot his boyfriend through the head". (S5 E1)
Like when Jack noir, had to wear different outfits he looked pissed, i had to since you have a Homestuck character pfp, and your comment makes me think of him.
"this gets them in trouble because drugs are illegal" fantastic commentary as always, broski. for real though, awesome video and I'm sad that these BCS videos are ending for a minute. Love your takes and in-depth analysis on the show, and I can't wait to see what you come up with next!
Better call Saul is okay, Breaking Bad is meh, but Slippin Jimmy, that's true artistic genius. An analysis of that show would be amazing, the moral complexity and deep philosophical interrogation on display is leagues more advanced and nuanced than any other BB property. It's not only the best animated show I've seen, it's the best piece of art I've ever experienced.
28:30 the murder of max is mentioned a number of times in the show too. I believe Hector mentioned it and I remember Lalo mention Hector killing “his boyfriend”.
The one person that truly was the embodiment of good, aka ethical, in this entire show was Nacho's dad and he clearly told mike he doesn't want more bloodshed by taking "revenge". A slap on the face of all the people that pretend to be really ethical and defend murder in the name of justified revenge.
20:36 I’m honestly surprised you didn’t mention how this scene with Mike and Manuel parallels the scene in “Waterworks” where Kim gives Cheryl a copy of her affidavit. Although they aren’t 100% alike, the dynamics between the characters in these 2 scenes have noticeable similarities - ie. Mike telling Manuel that the Salamancas with be brought to justice over nacho’s death only to be met with disgust parallels how Kim tries to comfort Cheryl by telling her Howard didn’t suffer, only for Cheryl to get angry at the falseness of the statement, since Howard was emotionally suffering from Kim and Jimmy’s antics. In both scenes, the main character (Kim and Mike) attempts to utilize consoling of a grieving person as a way to subconsciously reduce the guilt they feel for causing/enabling that person’s lost loved one’s death. In both scenes they are met with a response that immediately brings them back down to earth and reminds them that no amount of comforting will ever bring that person back. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Kim and Mike aren’t being genuine with their feeling of guilt and sorrow (they clearly are), but, just like any other human being, they are susceptible to unintentionally utilizing forms of defense mechanisms that they feel can kill two birds with one stone (provide closure while simultaneously preserving their self perception). Not to mention that both scenarios have a moment where the true depravity of the lives the Kim and Mike live(d) truly sinks in. With Kim, it’s fairly obvious I’m referring to the bus breakdown scene, where all her conflicting feeling of guilt, shame, and self pity all come out at once. Although we can’t 100% prove it, I like to think that part of what sparked the breakdown was the fact that Kim realizes that her attempts to atone for what she’s done are futile and have only proven Cheryl point that it will never make up for the cruelty she inflicted on Howard. It’s essentially a less cheesier version of a “how could let myself become such a monster” moment. With Mike, we get an extremely similar, yet much more subtle demonstration of the self awareness of his depraved life sinking in. This being when Manuel walks away from him, and we see Mike behind barbed wire, due to the fact that he is on the other side of the fence. Both of these men have lost their sons, yet Manuel is free because he doesn’t let meaningless obsession over retribution take over his life, while Mike is stuck in a cage, that cage being the twisted etiquette of the cartel world and the deep-seeded resentment that comes with obsessing over revenge. This is one of Mikes last few scenes in BCS (minus any flashbacks or breaking bad timeline scenes), and I think that was done to both setup his much more cold and indifferent personality in breaking bad, and to contribute to the narrative of Mike becoming more and more aware of the bleak and depraved life he is living now. This moment and Kim’s bus breakdown both achieve the same goal of having the character realize their reprehensible actions and paths of life, yet the former does so primarily visually while the latter focuses more of Rhea Seehorn’s portrayal of Kim’s breakdown.
fantastic analysis. my mom and i are huge BCS & BrBa fans, and she pointed out the major parallels with Mike and Manuel while we were watching S6. the framing of the two fathers on literal “opposite sides of the fence” in that scene, mirroring their opposite perspectives & paths in life (one as an honest man and one as a criminal). well done 👏🏼
Revenge is a key theme in sibling relationships. I speak from experience. Each sibling is mad about something the other did, which was revenge for something the other did, which stretches back to when they were small children. BOTH siblings feel like victims who are entitled to revenge and the circle never stops unless both sides decide to grow up and just let things go. Neither Jimmy nor Chuck was ever mature enough to do that, and so in that way, they are both equally to blame for everything that happened.
I feel remorse for throwing my big sisters teddy in the toilet before I could even form memories and the time later when I blamed drawing on the wall on my brother and hiding a game he liked to gain more screen time. I can not really comprehend how one could bare to hurt their siblings to avenge a slight.
@@JohnSmith-ox3gy I believe you would be in the minority in that regard. most of us go through at least a phase like that when we are young, and then we grow out of it.
I grew up absolutely HATING my little sister. She was not only better than me at most things, but my dad would NEVER punish us despite the fact my little sister made me miserable. (He would threaten to never see her again but never spanked her or even give her a time out) It got so bad I began denying that she got beat (We live in separate homes as were half siblings with different moms.) and tried convincing my dad she was faking it. It’s like I couldn’t comprehend the idea of her being a human with her own struggles. She then called me out on being a terrible big brother at a family reunion and I let my hatred bile out, and she just cried. I yelled at her to stop faking for sympathy but everyone looked at me like I was a monster, and then I realized what I have done. My dad basically disowned her recently (Both her and my dad were in the wrong IMO) so I haven’t seen her much but I hope to make amends.
@@zacharyriley4561 Try talking to her, man. Maybe she won't want to reconnect but if you think she deserves an apology you should tell her before it's too late. Consider messaging her that you're sorry and if she wants to talk tell her you're open to it. She might take a while to respond or not at all but focus on her knowing how you feel about her and validating her experiences.
Interesting how there are multiple comments expressing the opposite position on Mike’s ethics that both seem to disagree with you, despite how clearly you articulate your position. Love the way you highlight the nuances of ways of this show and it I genuinely want to thank you for opening my mind to so many things I would’ve otherwise likely never thought about. You’ve helped me appreciate so much about this show I already loved
I love analyzing media and watching analysis videos. However, your video essays on better call Saul are the only critical essays I’ve watched on the show. It’s not that I think others are bad or uninteresting, but your deep rooted connection with psychology and philosophy have amplified the quality your review/analysis. I’ve watched each video, loved it, and am looking forward to whatever you plan to put out in the future!
Interesting and enjoyable video as always! *SPOILERS* I do wanna say on the point of Gus' motivation, I think that although a base motivation for money is likely always engrained at some point in our psyche, Gus' revenge is without a shadow of a doubt more important to him in my opinion. I think this is specifically shown through the story of the quati. He didn't seem to do it strictly because it attacked his tree and therefore cut off his source of income, he saw the tree as a point of pride, accomplishment and love. This is the same way he saw max. When that was taken away, his reaction is then to fully dedicate himself to inflicting harm on the culprit: keeping the quati as a "pet", just like he does with Hector. His moves against the cartel also stem back to this, because his ultimate goal is to defeat the Salamancas, not for the money and the power, but for revenge against Hector. I think this is shown in Breaking Bad. Only after he defeats them all does he decide to go and kill Hector, which Walt ends up pushing him to do anyway by having Hector talk to the DEA. I think Gus would've gladly kept Hector alive for much longer otherwise. I'm excited for you to watch Breaking Bad because I think it will provide more context in the little details overall.
I watch these as a Better Call Saul fan but also it really makes me reflect on how I conduct myself in life between one’s close to me and one’s I actually hate.
it seems like everytime i have an urge to rewatch all of your previous BCS content there is another video just around the corner. this has happened 3 times now and im so excited. happy new years!
Some observations: 1) interesting that Jimmy is lying on the floor when he’s lying to Kim about what happened with his back. 2) Mike suggesting to Nacho that he could teach Pryce a lesson - as if that’s Nacho’s motivation - is really ironic because it’s actually Mike’s motivation. Mike is trying to teach Nacho a lesson.
i binged all of your videos after finishing better call saul, it gave me a lot to think about and made me really fall even more in love with the show. thank you for all of it!!
Mike visiting Nacho’s dad wasn’t selfish, but he was projecting his own experience onto him. He was assuming everything Manuel was feeling was the same thing Mike felt when Matty was killed.
My personal opinion on revenge is that if someone wrongs you in a way where you want to seek revenge then they shouldn't be surprised. But then you also shouldn't be surprised of your act if vengeance incurs another act if vengeance from someone else. Its like the saying violence begets violence. Revenge begets revenge if that makes sense. I do like a bit of good old fashioned revenge though.
I want to make sure this is clear to you: Hector didn't just kill Gus's partner. Hector killed Gus's lover. They are gay. We can see evidence from this (aside from the acting) this because Hector kept making fun of them for being gay. Called them "butt-brothers." Gus went on a life-long revenge quest for his murdered love.
@@sonofabookkeeper8382 When someone says "partner" it is unclear if they are lovers or not. But the fact that they were lovers helps explian why Gus went on a life-logn quest for revenge over the murder. I think it's important to help understand the story,
@@William-the-Guy there is absolutely no necessity in concluding they were lovers. It's one way you can choose to interpret their relationship that is consistent with what the show tells you, but it's not the only one. People can have respect for each other and deeply care about each other without that connection being romantic or sexual in nature. I have friends and family members I care deeply about without there being anything sexual. Are you also concluding that Mike was sexually attracted to his son, since he went to such great lengths to avenge him? As for Hector's comment - if indeed it's true, I do not recall it but it very well might be - it can easily be seen as him being derogatory and insulting them, as that would certainly be something a man like him would consider insulting. Them being a young pair of guys, it would come as a natural insult. Personally I think it's rather clear Gus lacks emotional connection to others. I think he is a psychopath. At any rate, I think the idea of getting into the drug business and cartels as a gay couple is pretty ridiculous and not in tune with the world in the shows. But like I said, I think that there are several ways to interpret the relationship that are consistent with the material.
@@theWebWizrd Hector clearly called them gay. He said they were "butt brothers" and all the cartel guys laughed like it was an old joke. In theory it's possible that Hector was wrong, but Hector calling them gay is definitely in the show. The official cannon is that the cartel killed Gus's business. partner, who is the other "chicken brother" that the business is named after and who the show explicitly had other characters say was Gus's lover. Then Gus went on to devote decades to avenge that guy's death. Seems like he was avenging his murdered love to me. So sure, we never see them kiss or anything. But if you watch that flashback where the guy dies, it seems clear to me they were in love and that his murder is the reason Gus shut down his emotions in the first place. You mentioned how Gus's emotions are shut down like a psychopath, that was why we were shown that flashback, the murder of his lover is the turning point in his life when he shut down his emotions and devoted himself to revenge. Sure, it's subtle and you could find other ways to interpret the facts, But That seems like the most likely interpretation to me.
@Will Menta There are two things I'll want to address - one is quite important, since you are missing an important part of Gus' personality. In one scene, we are shown Gus telling a story to Hector about a coati that stole quite a bit of hard-earned fruit from Gus when Gus was 7 years old. The coati broke its leg when it escaped the snare Gus sat for it, and escaped into a hole. Gus waited for hours, single-mindedly waiting for the coati who had to come back out of the hole. He says 'The merciful thing would have been to kill it. I kept it. It lived for quite some time". In other words, at age 7 Gus was chasing cold-blooded revenge against an animal that stole and tried to take advantage of the fruits of Gus' hard work. The animal was in pain, and he kept it, clearly either indifferent to or delighting in its suffering. Seven years old. And Gus remembers and recounts this story as a way of telling us and himself who he is. He didn't get that way after his partner was murdered. There was no point where he lost contact with his emotions. He was always like that. Notice also that the story, which is to be taken as a very obvious analogy to Gus' fight against the cartel, is not about Gus taking revenge for the damage of a loved one. The story is about Gus taking revenge against someone coming to profit from and steal from the fruits of his hard and dedicated labor. That supports my second point - we don't know or even necessarily should believe that Gus is trying to avenge his partner due to the emotional loss. That might even be something Gus just tells himself that happens to align with his economic interests and his disdain for oppurtunists who seek to profit from him.
After binging all your better call saul videos, I just gotta say, I love your work so much. You do absolutely fantastic analysis of this amazing show, and I can't believe you only have 23k subs. I hope you do more videos on breaking bad and such, I also recommend shows like Mr. Robot, which many have described as being therapy in a way. I'm just a huge fan and I REALLY appreciate this sort of long form content for such a fantastic tv show.
I hope you know I'm eagerly anticipating that pryce video. I know you mostly meant it as a joke, but I think there's something to look at there as far as someone jumping into a world of crime seemingly without any knowledge of what they're getting themselves into. Like how he got that embarrassing car and didn't even think that he'd look suspicious to the cops when reporting his stolen baseball cards
If we hold Jimmy accountable for misconduct then Chuck and Howard should be held accountable for lying by omission to the insurance company about Chuck's degraded mental state. Suppose we hold Jimmy and Kim accountable for their revenge on Howard. In that case, we should hold Howard and Chuck accountable for the damage to Kim's reputation and standing in the firm because of their punitive actions aimed at Jimmy.
I don't believe Mike's outburst in therapy was actually motivated by him not being unable to move on. What Mike and Gus have in common is that they have accepted they will never move on. What made Mike so angry was that the moment Stacey got to express to him that she would be able to move on was shared with someone who was lying about having experienced what the people in that group have experienced. I don't think Stacey getting to move on bothered him at all, quite the opposite, what bothered him is to have this dishonest element which disgusted him speak to her about it. It made me personally feel so disgusted when this poor woman was opening up about this horrible thing she's had to process and there he is jumping on that to selfishly gain gratification. That is what I think caused Mike to lash out, which is why when he apologized to her, the first thing he said was that no one expects her to mourn forever because he worried that was her takeaway, which was not his intent. She then told him he doesn't have to mourn forever but that flat expression on his face is just saying "I already know that I will." It was again, the same drive for vengeance that caused him to do what he could against that man in the group therapy. Vengeance is not merely about making up for a wrong, or making up for a loss, it is saying "you have created such a monster within me of anger and rage that will never go away, so the least i can do is make you have to suffer the consequences of it, nothing will ever make up for it, I will still die alone and miserable, but at least I won't be alone in this fact." Vengeance is merely an expression of hatred. It's not about justice at all, in fact when you hate someone you actually want them to suffer injustice. It is an admission that good is impossible.
I think revenge is basically mandatory, until random people start getting hurt along the way. People that are innocent and had nothing to do with what you’re trying to get revenge for. I know nacho isn’t entirely innocent, and he works for Gus’ enemy, but…it’s a stretch to say he’s one of them considering he is actively trying to get out and tries to kill hector. Gus using him the way he did was wrong.
Mike absolutely didn’t think/care about the future when he killed the cops, at that point I think he hardly had a will to live and didn’t really care what happened as long as he got revenge. What happens in BCS kind of restores his will to live, but before then I think his mindset was “if I die at least I take them with me.”
To see Jimmy argue for the skateboard twins and then know a few years later he becomes saul goodman who would just get out of dodge and leave them to die really makes you think
The show is so strange. Both series are lamentations on revenge, maybe before they can reasonably be labeled any other way. Almost every move by all the principals is motivated first by revenge. And the ultimate product of all of it - From Boston Sunroof, to Walt first seeking out Jesse and everything after those two points - is desolation, horror, disgrace, and ruination. The message seems simple enough: avoid revenge, kids. It’s bad!! Then, at the very last, and after the entire adventure leaves us in a bleak, black and white wasteland of angst and recrimination, the revenge lesson is abandoned for an entirely different kind of conundrum. We know what revenge brings, but now we’ve got to consider redemption. Specifically: what does it look like? Who deserves it? What does that person have to do to get it? Here I think the answer is far more open ended. It’s interesting that Jimmy, on top of being the only criminal left around to answer for the conspiracy and its mayhem, is also given the opportunity to be the judge of his actions AND the arbiter of his own punishment. We know what he choses, but what any of it means there’s simply no time left to consider. Should Jimmy have engineered a more lenient sentence? What part did Kim play and is it justice that she avoids legal recourse? How about Howard? Jimmy didn’t pull the trigger and he never invited Howie or Lalo to his house, nor did he wish Howard dead. Is it justice that he assumes responsibility? Or is it a useless martyrdom designed to look good in Kim’s eyes? If Jimmy’s only options were bargaining for a few years in a minimum security farm, or signing the rest of his life away, which option hews closer to true justice and why? I don’t know the answers, but a show that so deftly and artfully posses the questions is one we probably won’t see again for a long long time.
On the topic of Gus's motives and how much of it was based in financial gain vs revenge, are we just going to forget the fact that he blew up his own restraunt?
@@unusualusername8847 plus, it's worth remembering just how much money cornering the meth drug trade would net Gus and how adamant he is about having the foresight to accept short term losses in exchange for longterm gains. That's kinda the great thing about Gus as a villain. There's always a financial angle. Which is why so many of his enemies convinced themselves he was willing to let bygones be bygones.
Mike told Manuel that the justice will happen to the Salamancas who killed Nacho. But the point is…Nacho died because of Fring, who is Mike’s boss, and Mike was supposed to kill Nacho as planned if Nacho didn’t kill himself first so the Salamancas are less responsible to Nacho’s “trip to Belize” than Fring and Mike. This might explain that Mike’s morality was so twisted at this point and he became too loyal to Gus that he’s willing to overlook Gus and his own sins (because for him, they are the “good” side of the cartel) and put the blames on Salamancas, whom he considers to be the “evil” side of the cartel.
At the end of thr day Mike knows he's just another hired gun. He's a valuable advisor but he's a strategist and chief of security for a drug lord plain and simple. It's just business. There's no sentiment to who dies when or how when big money is on the line.
Love these series of videos. You bring so much to the 'table' beyond a simple recap/overview of episodes and character arcs, it's such a breath of fresh air. Exciited to see what's next :)
So if no more BCS videos for a while, do you think you’re gonna watch Breaking Bad and make thoughtful videos on that show? Would love to see how you analyze Walt, Skyler, and the other characters
Mike is one of my favorite characters, and I'm understanding and sympathetic towards his decision. However, when you consider the road that choice put him on, that's when you have to ask if it was the right move. Don't forget, killing those cops ended with Mike in a barrel. So maybe while it was an UNDERSTANDABLE decision, it wasn't a healthy decision, or the best one. Maybe he coulda done something different. Gotten them arrested instead. Mike's smart, he coulda done it. He could've stayed in Philly, and started his new chapter on a better note.
I feel like what is left unsaid in that discussion is that the two dirty cops clearly were willing to kill to silence anyone who would threaten them. They drove Mike out to try to kill him, after all. Are we really to believe that the best thing for the world would be to let them go on like that, killing whomever they feel like threatens their operation and lifestyle and certainly taking advantage of people as cops? Is that really in any way best for the world? There clearly wasn't a way to have them face repercussions or stop them inside the boundaries of the law, which I think is a point the show is making with the whole story. Yes, their families suffer for their deaths. But how many families are saved future suffering that they would have caused? We can't just ignore who they are and what they would have brought to the world if left alive. I actually think Mike's killing of them is one of the morally least ambiguous acts in the show.
So grateful for your Better Call Saul series - legitimately some of the toppest tier BCS content around. I'll definitely stick around to see what else you dig into!
I'm probably in the minority of those who feel that what Mike did wasn't Justice. We often conflate what *is* justice with what *feels* like justice. Mike lost a son, so of course he feels like the only way to get justice is to take the life of his killers, and often those who justify what he did do so with the argument you brought up in the video: "what if it was your son?" This, however, isn't a good argument. What does the death of those cops do? It won't bring back Mike's son, it won't help the cops learn their lesson (they're dead), it won't discourage more of that kind of senseless crime (this was done in secret, and that's not how you reduce crime anyway), and won't help reduce the trauma of losing a loved one. I think real justice here would have been to out the cops for what they did, have systemic reform to hold future cops accountable for this kind of corruption by independent third parties. Hold the cops accountable both to Mike and to society for what they did through restorative justice. I'm glad you brought up these points in the video, and really expanded on the nuances and complexities of revenge as a concept.
I think you'd benefit a lot in analyzing Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul through the lens of hatred, rather than through the lens of justice. There is no such thing as justice. It's merely a construct we strive toward and the closer we get, the better everyone's lives has gotten, and this is what makes it's pursuit worthwhile. Even if it's a lie. We will never ever arrive at a world of justice.
If/when you watch breaking bad it would be amazing if you could do some psychology based videos linking the themes of the two shows. If you enjoy breaking bad, of course. Your work is so good
Arguably Mike put himself in that situation on purpose so he could make it justified but all of it was pretty planned out. He planted the gun and had the intentions. So it's a pre-planned self-defense murder which is just murder.
The lesson i learned from your video is people dont change if they dont want to, and no one wants to, we like being sedated, it keeps the head voice quiet (the reasonable part of our brain)
When im in dark places i struggle with my morality, i pray and read the bible but living in this godless country with conmen living amongst us really makes a person wanna lash out ynow, feels like some people cant be reasoned with
I been to some places in america, i was accepted in new mexico, because i look mexican, and i was constantly happy, empty but happy fufilling life, without people looking at me like im about to take over their bloody walmart or sumn
I can't believe you're making these for the sheer love and not pure youtuber grindset. It's insanely inspiring to see fulfillment in youtube. I am trying myself but need for money overshadows personal desire. So do I do nothing but work, and give up on TH-cam, or do I risk it at my age (late 20s) to utilize time making youtube videos but maybe not have enough money for my immediate bills but at least have a chance at growing in the long term AND pursue what I really know I want to do regardless of real life getting in the way.
I'm sure there ARE people who think "everything would've been fine if Lalo hadn't killed Howard", and that's like saying everything would've been fine with Gene if Jeff just hadn't run into the parked car. The chickens were always gonna come home to roost one way or another. We know from Howard's big speech to the two of them that if he hadn't died, there was absolutely no way in hell he was ever gonna let this go, he probably would've been even more vindictive and obsessive than Chuck was after the number-switching scheme. Cliff Davis even seems to kinda buy Howard's side of the story when he explains his theory on what happened, which kinda feels like a parallel to Bill Oakley and the "proving vs. knowing" comment: Cliff KNOWS that Howard might actually be right, but unfortunately for both of them, the situation comes down to what they can actually prove. I think it's very likely Howard would've ended up exposing the truth somehow, he was a person with considerable resources at his disposal and their scheme was so elaborate that there's no way they left every single possible track covered. But even if they did end up ultimately getting away with it, they'd made an extremely bitter enemy who would no doubt dedicate a considerable portion of the rest of his life towards making their lives as difficult as possible, and they would've been deserving of this consequence of their actions. Howard getting killed was just the most blunt and brutal possible way for the story to present the two of them with very immediate consequences, and for that matter, consequences that they can't simply react to with a narcissistic self-righteous indignation, which is probably how they would've reacted to a world in which Howard didn't die and continued to hound them.
Midway through and loving this one. Based on what you are talking about here I have to highly recommend an episode from the fourth/final season of the show Atlanta called ‘The Homeliest Little Horse’. Touches on the consequences of using spite as a sort of fuel or motivation and the way a lot of people, unfortunately, prematurely view one realization in therapy as an indication that they are ‘cured’ and decide to stop when they clearly have a lot of work to do on themselves. Atlanta is an amazing show that I highly recommend watching all the way through, but, as is the case with this episode and most episodes of the show, it can totally be viewed and enjoyed out of context as a stand-alone episode of tv. Anyhow, it’s an exploration of a similar topic and, in my view, does a pretty good job of honoring what therapy is actually like.
More than a year later but i just wanted to share how much my partner and I waited for jimmy or kim say "i love you" to each other for sooo looong, only for him to say it on that moment
I wondered if it would come up and it didn't, my favorite, or least favorite revenge example, the pizza tip, that was the first time that made me just immediately think "Oh jimmy no don't be that guy". While each circumstance is its own, that pernicious purposeless drive to give the world back the hurt it gives us, that I feel we all have on some level, is ultimately what the analysis caused me to interrogate most throughout. The actions guided thus were the most difficult to process, most contributory to destructive consequences, and naturally more frequent as things went on. Still, great work, nice to have it essentially complete so I can rebinge as a big whole piece of itself, and looking forward to future projects!
I don't think revenge is necessary to justify hanging the guys up. It's not even really a punishment, more of a threat. You could argue it's self defense or something, but needs to be extreme for him to go about his business in peace.
I LOVE your BCS videos - your thought processes are very intelligent and always make me appreciate the show even more. Your analyses go into the kind of detail that I really appreciate as a fan - great videos!! And you are an actual Therapist - I suspected as much from your ability to analyze characters.
To be honest, I was quite surprised with how often you ran with the assumption of revenge being justified. I don't think Mike's revenge motive was justified, and I don't think Gus' was either. You're right that Mike's revenge isn't really strongly justified by the harm reduction argument, but what you said afterwards about "am I supposed to believe the harm reduction group is distinct from the revenge group?" is a yes in my case. In my opinion, Nacho's dad is correct, and I also think he speaks for the writers of the show.
Looking closely at the scene where Mike killed the two corrupt cops, he actually did everything by the book. He waited until he heard their confession that they really did kill Matt before revealing himself, and he pointed his gun at them to wait for them to either surrender for arrest or try to attack Mike, and then he only shot when they opened fire at him. My guess is that he expected and wanted it to play out that exact way, but he did it by the book anyway so his revenge in killing them was still entirely within his legal rights.
i think when comes to revenge it largely depends on not on the person but the moment talk is talk but as soon as you actually genuinely get the chance... THEN we can see the person have a "make or break" moment (cant really explain properly)
Just commenting on the "compulsory revenge" ethic section. I like that topic. In the Hagakure it is an integral part of a warrior, but still calls on your subjective opinion in the context. On the other hand, just being rude and violent (unprovoked) in public was a good enough reason to decapitate someone. That would be a great improvement to most cities, actually. "Cutting a man down in revenge is honorable, if the crime committed against you warrants it."
I don't like measuring the tragedy of someone's death by how many other people would be sad for them, because if we accept that yardstick, then lonely people are implied to have no value. Someone dying who nobody cares about is in a way even more sad.
I like to brag to my friends about the quality of the show and it's discussion worthy themes, that I've watched BB & BCS close to 10+ times each, then watched the several hour long analysis videos 10+ times each.
25:45 to add more to that we know mike was a soldier during the vietnam war and then went onto becoming a cop... he quite literally has never experienced a life outside of danger so to speak
it’s so interesting to me that you haven’t talked about when Jimmy lambasted the two men for offering him a job so easily, it seems so out of character for him to me, seeing these two sheep for him to wolf, he clearly sees them as foolish, so they would be so easy to exploit and con, made even more so by being a potentially trusted employee. it’s almost so wolfish to turn down the opportunity to exploit these men, as he looks down on them and sees it as too easy, almost like at this point he wants a challenge, a way to prove that, on his own merit he can be a wolf, after being wolfed by chuck when he loses his license, so he takes the just ever so slightly harder path to get job at the phone store. i think the way he almost seems sickened by how much these men resemble his idea of a sheep, like he sees his dad in them and wants to teach them a lesson as a way of repenting for not doing that well enough for his dad. but then he robs them anyway lol, am i overanalysing? i truly would love some input on this because it’s a moment in the show that i truly don’t understand
It’s always cool to see analysis videos on Better Call Saul and this on, as well as the others you’ve made, are truly well done and truly unique. I wouldn’t have thought too much about revenge being as major theme with the show beyond the big notable examples of getting even with Howard and Chuck after Jimmy had been wronged by them or at least feels like he’s been wronged to where he has to either even the playing field or get one up on either of them as well as with the Salamancas regarding Mike and Gus. And then of course when Kim wants her revenge on Howard, with Jimmy’s assistance, that really goes south once he confronts the two as to why they went out of their way to ruin his career. I also like how Jimmy was never really interested in doing anything to Howard after what he did and said to Howard in season 5, but he wants Kim to be happy and so he goes along with it for her only to be truly horrified once Lalo shows up and after the next few episodes he becomes Saul Goodman as a way to cope with all that happened throughout Better Call Saul that he doesn’t want to have to really acknowledge. I knew these other moments of revenge existed, but I guess I didn’t exactly see them being revenge such as the Chicago Sun Roof and the slip and fall at the guitar store, but it does make sense when rethinking and rewatching those moments. And I like how you looked at when said revenge is or can be justified as well as when it isn’t. Keep up the great work man!
I've heard before that the rights of the living, their wants, their needs, all outlive those of the dead. It's an agreement with that notion, even if partial, which makes it so, for instance, people's bodies' destinations, here in Brazil, are first and foremost up to their families, and the secondly, up to them. Say you want to give your body up for science - if any of your family would rather you be buried and have a "proper" funeral, that's what's happening.
I think it's interesting that at the end you mention their long term resentment and how that relates to their revenge because I never saw their actions as revenge because it doesn't seem to be motivated by anything beyond long term resentment, and to that effect it's mindblowing and tragic that the same long term resentment manifests later with Kim, transforming him fully into Saul Goodman/Gene and a husk of his former self. Jimmy is a man of a thousand chips on his shoulder and I think many of his actions are motivated by resentment. I think in the end when James McGill finally takes accountability for his actions it's because he's finally able to let go of the resentment, maybe only bc it led him down a path where he was about to strangle mary tyler moore, but i guess some people's bottoms can get pretty low.
Personally, i feel like BCS Is a show about parallels, everything has a parallel that makes you think about something from another angle, although some of them are only found in BB
*Learns that this is your last BCS video (for a while at least.) *
...........is revenge ENOUGH?
*learns there will be a pryce video*
…..REAL redemption???
@@wackyjim4160 What's Therapy: Can People Change?
His last? Dammit, I just found this channel 😞
Does What's Therapy deserve to have rocks thrown thru his window because he's stopping the BCS series?
Yup
Watching Breaking Bad before Better Call Saul makes you realize also that Los Pollos Hermanos debuted Spicy Curly Fries and then inexplicably took it off the menu in breaking bad and I wish spicy curly fries existed irl
Gus's worst crime was taking them off the menu fr
They do exist just have to make them
Jack in the box curlys with spicy good food sauce
I think it's important to notice not only how many people Gus harm to enact his revenge but also the extend of his revenge.
Letting Hector die of a heart attack is too merciful. But dying of a heart attack is much more excruciating than a single gunshot to the head, as was the case of Max. Max dies a "clean" death. But Gus puts Hector through hell, both physically and psychologically, by incapacitating him and then exterminating his entire family one by one.
In essence, Gus isn't avenging Max's pain. He is avenging his own pain.
Well killing somebody isn’t only wrong because of the pain. It’s wrong because you’re robbing them of their life. In Max’s case, Hector robber Max of possibly 50+ years of life. Gus robbed Hector of a few years (very possibly less) as a severely crippled man in a nursing home.
@N0TYALC That is not how any of this works, even because Max could have died much earlier from a disease or accident. Killing has to do with pain as well as ending another life without their desire. It is robbing people of their most precious possession, not years of time
What always bothered me was that Gus killed innocent people, just to torment one guilty one. In that sense, no, his revenge was absolutely not justified. So much so that you cheer when Hector takes both Gus and himself out.
Exactly! He shoulda just let Mike snipe him. That would have already been worse than a bullet.
@@orxy5316 There’s a reason why children are the first people saved during disasters. There’s a reason that most animals will gladly give up their lives to save their young, even when it’s not their offspring. A child’s life is inherently more valuable than the life of a dying old man. I don’t understand the defensiveness in your reply.
27:25 they actually do mention this in BCS! When Lalo and Bolsa meet in America for the first time, Lalo jokingly says to Bolsa something along the lines of: "My uncle has this crazy idea that Fring might still hold a grudge after he shot his boyfriend through the head". (S5 E1)
always appreciate that in all of your thumbnails every character looks disgruntled that they even have to be there
Profile Picture.
Like when Jack noir, had to wear different outfits he looked pissed, i had to since you have a Homestuck character pfp, and your comment makes me think of him.
"this gets them in trouble because drugs are illegal" fantastic commentary as always, broski.
for real though, awesome video and I'm sad that these BCS videos are ending for a minute. Love your takes and in-depth analysis on the show, and I can't wait to see what you come up with next!
Better call Saul is okay, Breaking Bad is meh, but Slippin Jimmy, that's true artistic genius. An analysis of that show would be amazing, the moral complexity and deep philosophical interrogation on display is leagues more advanced and nuanced than any other BB property. It's not only the best animated show I've seen, it's the best piece of art I've ever experienced.
I know this is satire but it hurts to read
@@John34bruh yeah I want to like but it hurts my soul
What
So true! I can't wait for the animated prequel coming out: Kid Named Finger!
honestly i'd be interested in seeing what's therapy struggling to find deeper meaning in slippin jimmy
28:30 the murder of max is mentioned a number of times in the show too. I believe Hector mentioned it and I remember Lalo mention Hector killing “his boyfriend”.
Babe wake up, new What’s Therapy just dropped
I’m awake
Babe wake up, someone is overusing popular TH-cam comments.
Also, first.
Babe wake up Justin Bieber isn't real music, X is. Or whatever shallow ploy for social media likes gives me meaning
Why are you talking to a doll
The one person that truly was the embodiment of good, aka ethical, in this entire show was Nacho's dad and he clearly told mike he doesn't want more bloodshed by taking "revenge".
A slap on the face of all the people that pretend to be really ethical and defend murder in the name of justified revenge.
20:36 I’m honestly surprised you didn’t mention how this scene with Mike and Manuel parallels the scene in “Waterworks” where Kim gives Cheryl a copy of her affidavit. Although they aren’t 100% alike, the dynamics between the characters in these 2 scenes have noticeable similarities - ie. Mike telling Manuel that the Salamancas with be brought to justice over nacho’s death only to be met with disgust parallels how Kim tries to comfort Cheryl by telling her Howard didn’t suffer, only for Cheryl to get angry at the falseness of the statement, since Howard was emotionally suffering from Kim and Jimmy’s antics.
In both scenes, the main character (Kim and Mike) attempts to utilize consoling of a grieving person as a way to subconsciously reduce the guilt they feel for causing/enabling that person’s lost loved one’s death. In both scenes they are met with a response that immediately brings them back down to earth and reminds them that no amount of comforting will ever bring that person back. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Kim and Mike aren’t being genuine with their feeling of guilt and sorrow (they clearly are), but, just like any other human being, they are susceptible to unintentionally utilizing forms of defense mechanisms that they feel can kill two birds with one stone (provide closure while simultaneously preserving their self perception). Not to mention that both scenarios have a moment where the true depravity of the lives the Kim and Mike live(d) truly sinks in. With Kim, it’s fairly obvious I’m referring to the bus breakdown scene, where all her conflicting feeling of guilt, shame, and self pity all come out at once. Although we can’t 100% prove it, I like to think that part of what sparked the breakdown was the fact that Kim realizes that her attempts to atone for what she’s done are futile and have only proven Cheryl point that it will never make up for the cruelty she inflicted on Howard. It’s essentially a less cheesier version of a “how could let myself become such a monster” moment.
With Mike, we get an extremely similar, yet much more subtle demonstration of the self awareness of his depraved life sinking in. This being when Manuel walks away from him, and we see Mike behind barbed wire, due to the fact that he is on the other side of the fence. Both of these men have lost their sons, yet Manuel is free because he doesn’t let meaningless obsession over retribution take over his life, while Mike is stuck in a cage, that cage being the twisted etiquette of the cartel world and the deep-seeded resentment that comes with obsessing over revenge. This is one of Mikes last few scenes in BCS (minus any flashbacks or breaking bad timeline scenes), and I think that was done to both setup his much more cold and indifferent personality in breaking bad, and to contribute to the narrative of Mike becoming more and more aware of the bleak and depraved life he is living now. This moment and Kim’s bus breakdown both achieve the same goal of having the character realize their reprehensible actions and paths of life, yet the former does so primarily visually while the latter focuses more of Rhea Seehorn’s portrayal of Kim’s breakdown.
Excellent point. There's quite a bit the author of the video left out in his analysis.
I aint readin allat
fantastic analysis. my mom and i are huge BCS & BrBa fans, and she pointed out the major parallels with Mike and Manuel while we were watching S6. the framing of the two fathers on literal “opposite sides of the fence” in that scene, mirroring their opposite perspectives & paths in life (one as an honest man and one as a criminal). well done 👏🏼
Please use paragraphs. I literally cannot read indecipherable text walls.
@@WobblesandBean I keep forgetting that you have to double space in order to separate them sorry lol I just edited it now
Revenge is a key theme in sibling relationships. I speak from experience. Each sibling is mad about something the other did, which was revenge for something the other did, which stretches back to when they were small children. BOTH siblings feel like victims who are entitled to revenge and the circle never stops unless both sides decide to grow up and just let things go. Neither Jimmy nor Chuck was ever mature enough to do that, and so in that way, they are both equally to blame for everything that happened.
I feel remorse for throwing my big sisters teddy in the toilet before I could even form memories and the time later when I blamed drawing on the wall on my brother and hiding a game he liked to gain more screen time. I can not really comprehend how one could bare to hurt their siblings to avenge a slight.
@@JohnSmith-ox3gy I believe you would be in the minority in that regard. most of us go through at least a phase like that when we are young, and then we grow out of it.
@@JohnSmith-ox3gy bear
I grew up absolutely HATING my little sister. She was not only better than me at most things, but my dad would NEVER punish us despite the fact my little sister made me miserable. (He would threaten to never see her again but never spanked her or even give her a time out) It got so bad I began denying that she got beat (We live in separate homes as were half siblings with different moms.) and tried convincing my dad she was faking it. It’s like I couldn’t comprehend the idea of her being a human with her own struggles.
She then called me out on being a terrible big brother at a family reunion and I let my hatred bile out, and she just cried. I yelled at her to stop faking for sympathy but everyone looked at me like I was a monster, and then I realized what I have done.
My dad basically disowned her recently (Both her and my dad were in the wrong IMO) so I haven’t seen her much but I hope to make amends.
@@zacharyriley4561 Try talking to her, man. Maybe she won't want to reconnect but if you think she deserves an apology you should tell her before it's too late. Consider messaging her that you're sorry and if she wants to talk tell her you're open to it. She might take a while to respond or not at all but focus on her knowing how you feel about her and validating her experiences.
Interesting how there are multiple comments expressing the opposite position on Mike’s ethics that both seem to disagree with you, despite how clearly you articulate your position. Love the way you highlight the nuances of ways of this show and it I genuinely want to thank you for opening my mind to so many things I would’ve otherwise likely never thought about. You’ve helped me appreciate so much about this show I already loved
I love analyzing media and watching analysis videos. However, your video essays on better call Saul are the only critical essays I’ve watched on the show. It’s not that I think others are bad or uninteresting, but your deep rooted connection with psychology and philosophy have amplified the quality your review/analysis. I’ve watched each video, loved it, and am looking forward to whatever you plan to put out in the future!
Interesting and enjoyable video as always!
*SPOILERS*
I do wanna say on the point of Gus' motivation, I think that although a base motivation for money is likely always engrained at some point in our psyche, Gus' revenge is without a shadow of a doubt more important to him in my opinion. I think this is specifically shown through the story of the quati. He didn't seem to do it strictly because it attacked his tree and therefore cut off his source of income, he saw the tree as a point of pride, accomplishment and love. This is the same way he saw max. When that was taken away, his reaction is then to fully dedicate himself to inflicting harm on the culprit: keeping the quati as a "pet", just like he does with Hector. His moves against the cartel also stem back to this, because his ultimate goal is to defeat the Salamancas, not for the money and the power, but for revenge against Hector. I think this is shown in Breaking Bad. Only after he defeats them all does he decide to go and kill Hector, which Walt ends up pushing him to do anyway by having Hector talk to the DEA. I think Gus would've gladly kept Hector alive for much longer otherwise. I'm excited for you to watch Breaking Bad because I think it will provide more context in the little details overall.
SPOILERS
It’s funny that the coati somehow has a bomb under its wheelchair.
I watch these as a Better Call Saul fan but also it really makes me reflect on how I conduct myself in life between one’s close to me and one’s I actually hate.
it seems like everytime i have an urge to rewatch all of your previous BCS content there is another video just around the corner. this has happened 3 times now and im so excited. happy new years!
Some observations:
1) interesting that Jimmy is lying on the floor when he’s lying to Kim about what happened with his back.
2) Mike suggesting to Nacho that he could teach Pryce a lesson - as if that’s Nacho’s motivation - is really ironic because it’s actually Mike’s motivation. Mike is trying to teach Nacho a lesson.
Amazing vid as always. Thanks for the content
Thanks so much Brad, love your work :D
i binged all of your videos after finishing better call saul, it gave me a lot to think about and made me really fall even more in love with the show. thank you for all of it!!
Its been a year where is the price video?
Mike visiting Nacho’s dad wasn’t selfish, but he was projecting his own experience onto him.
He was assuming everything Manuel was feeling was the same thing Mike felt when Matty was killed.
My personal opinion on revenge is that if someone wrongs you in a way where you want to seek revenge then they shouldn't be surprised. But then you also shouldn't be surprised of your act if vengeance incurs another act if vengeance from someone else. Its like the saying violence begets violence. Revenge begets revenge if that makes sense.
I do like a bit of good old fashioned revenge though.
Needed this. The videos title, it’s significance and timing could not have come better for me. This show always heals it seems. Thank you
Please never stop creating BCS content ❤
I want to make sure this is clear to you: Hector didn't just kill Gus's partner. Hector killed Gus's lover. They are gay. We can see evidence from this (aside from the acting) this because Hector kept making fun of them for being gay. Called them "butt-brothers." Gus went on a life-long revenge quest for his murdered love.
Is "partner" completely separate from "domestic partner"?. Seemed like he used one word to convey both lover and associate.
@@sonofabookkeeper8382 When someone says "partner" it is unclear if they are lovers or not. But the fact that they were lovers helps explian why Gus went on a life-logn quest for revenge over the murder. I think it's important to help understand the story,
@@William-the-Guy there is absolutely no necessity in concluding they were lovers. It's one way you can choose to interpret their relationship that is consistent with what the show tells you, but it's not the only one. People can have respect for each other and deeply care about each other without that connection being romantic or sexual in nature. I have friends and family members I care deeply about without there being anything sexual. Are you also concluding that Mike was sexually attracted to his son, since he went to such great lengths to avenge him?
As for Hector's comment - if indeed it's true, I do not recall it but it very well might be - it can easily be seen as him being derogatory and insulting them, as that would certainly be something a man like him would consider insulting. Them being a young pair of guys, it would come as a natural insult.
Personally I think it's rather clear Gus lacks emotional connection to others. I think he is a psychopath.
At any rate, I think the idea of getting into the drug business and cartels as a gay couple is pretty ridiculous and not in tune with the world in the shows.
But like I said, I think that there are several ways to interpret the relationship that are consistent with the material.
@@theWebWizrd Hector clearly called them gay. He said they were "butt brothers" and all the cartel guys laughed like it was an old joke. In theory it's possible that Hector was wrong, but Hector calling them gay is definitely in the show.
The official cannon is that the cartel killed Gus's business. partner, who is the other "chicken brother" that the business is named after and who the show explicitly had other characters say was Gus's lover. Then Gus went on to devote decades to avenge that guy's death. Seems like he was avenging his murdered love to me.
So sure, we never see them kiss or anything. But if you watch that flashback where the guy dies, it seems clear to me they were in love and that his murder is the reason Gus shut down his emotions in the first place. You mentioned how Gus's emotions are shut down like a psychopath, that was why we were shown that flashback, the murder of his lover is the turning point in his life when he shut down his emotions and devoted himself to revenge.
Sure, it's subtle and you could find other ways to interpret the facts, But That seems like the most likely interpretation to me.
@Will Menta There are two things I'll want to address - one is quite important, since you are missing an important part of Gus' personality.
In one scene, we are shown Gus telling a story to Hector about a coati that stole quite a bit of hard-earned fruit from Gus when Gus was 7 years old. The coati broke its leg when it escaped the snare Gus sat for it, and escaped into a hole. Gus waited for hours, single-mindedly waiting for the coati who had to come back out of the hole. He says 'The merciful thing would have been to kill it. I kept it. It lived for quite some time".
In other words, at age 7 Gus was chasing cold-blooded revenge against an animal that stole and tried to take advantage of the fruits of Gus' hard work. The animal was in pain, and he kept it, clearly either indifferent to or delighting in its suffering. Seven years old. And Gus remembers and recounts this story as a way of telling us and himself who he is. He didn't get that way after his partner was murdered. There was no point where he lost contact with his emotions. He was always like that.
Notice also that the story, which is to be taken as a very obvious analogy to Gus' fight against the cartel, is not about Gus taking revenge for the damage of a loved one. The story is about Gus taking revenge against someone coming to profit from and steal from the fruits of his hard and dedicated labor. That supports my second point - we don't know or even necessarily should believe that Gus is trying to avenge his partner due to the emotional loss. That might even be something Gus just tells himself that happens to align with his economic interests and his disdain for oppurtunists who seek to profit from him.
After binging all your better call saul videos, I just gotta say, I love your work so much. You do absolutely fantastic analysis of this amazing show, and I can't believe you only have 23k subs. I hope you do more videos on breaking bad and such, I also recommend shows like Mr. Robot, which many have described as being therapy in a way. I'm just a huge fan and I REALLY appreciate this sort of long form content for such a fantastic tv show.
"Man, this is a grown man and he can't stop himself from making more problems" would've been a great alternate title for the show.
“This channel isn’t stopping” “look out for sopranos content in the future” lol
I hope you know I'm eagerly anticipating that pryce video. I know you mostly meant it as a joke, but I think there's something to look at there as far as someone jumping into a world of crime seemingly without any knowledge of what they're getting themselves into. Like how he got that embarrassing car and didn't even think that he'd look suspicious to the cops when reporting his stolen baseball cards
If we hold Jimmy accountable for misconduct then Chuck and Howard should be held accountable for lying by omission to the insurance company about Chuck's degraded mental state. Suppose we hold Jimmy and Kim accountable for their revenge on Howard. In that case, we should hold Howard and Chuck accountable for the damage to Kim's reputation and standing in the firm because of their punitive actions aimed at Jimmy.
This was a terrific TH-cam video. It’s the first video of yours I’ve seen, and I’ll certainly be checking out the rest. Thanks
I don't believe Mike's outburst in therapy was actually motivated by him not being unable to move on. What Mike and Gus have in common is that they have accepted they will never move on.
What made Mike so angry was that the moment Stacey got to express to him that she would be able to move on was shared with someone who was lying about having experienced what the people in that group have experienced. I don't think Stacey getting to move on bothered him at all, quite the opposite, what bothered him is to have this dishonest element which disgusted him speak to her about it. It made me personally feel so disgusted when this poor woman was opening up about this horrible thing she's had to process and there he is jumping on that to selfishly gain gratification. That is what I think caused Mike to lash out, which is why when he apologized to her, the first thing he said was that no one expects her to mourn forever because he worried that was her takeaway, which was not his intent. She then told him he doesn't have to mourn forever but that flat expression on his face is just saying "I already know that I will."
It was again, the same drive for vengeance that caused him to do what he could against that man in the group therapy.
Vengeance is not merely about making up for a wrong, or making up for a loss, it is saying "you have created such a monster within me of anger and rage that will never go away, so the least i can do is make you have to suffer the consequences of it, nothing will ever make up for it, I will still die alone and miserable, but at least I won't be alone in this fact." Vengeance is merely an expression of hatred. It's not about justice at all, in fact when you hate someone you actually want them to suffer injustice.
It is an admission that good is impossible.
I think revenge is basically mandatory, until random people start getting hurt along the way. People that are innocent and had nothing to do with what you’re trying to get revenge for. I know nacho isn’t entirely innocent, and he works for Gus’ enemy, but…it’s a stretch to say he’s one of them considering he is actively trying to get out and tries to kill hector. Gus using him the way he did was wrong.
Mike absolutely didn’t think/care about the future when he killed the cops, at that point I think he hardly had a will to live and didn’t really care what happened as long as he got revenge.
What happens in BCS kind of restores his will to live, but before then I think his mindset was “if I die at least I take them with me.”
I love that opening edit.
To see Jimmy argue for the skateboard twins and then know a few years later he becomes saul goodman who would just get out of dodge and leave them to die really makes you think
I love these videos so much. I love how deeply you think about the story and characters and their motivations, conscious and unconscious
After a really tough 2 days at work and being hella depressed... this video will be a brilliant ray of light
The show is so strange. Both series are lamentations on revenge, maybe before they can reasonably be labeled any other way. Almost every move by all the principals is motivated first by revenge. And the ultimate product of all of it - From Boston Sunroof, to Walt first seeking out Jesse and everything after those two points - is desolation, horror, disgrace, and ruination. The message seems simple enough: avoid revenge, kids. It’s bad!!
Then, at the very last, and after the entire adventure leaves us in a bleak, black and white wasteland of angst and recrimination, the revenge lesson is abandoned for an entirely different kind of conundrum. We know what revenge brings, but now we’ve got to consider redemption. Specifically: what does it look like? Who deserves it? What does that person have to do to get it? Here I think the answer is far more open ended.
It’s interesting that Jimmy, on top of being the only criminal left around to answer for the conspiracy and its mayhem, is also given the opportunity to be the judge of his actions AND the arbiter of his own punishment. We know what he choses, but what any of it means there’s simply no time left to consider. Should Jimmy have engineered a more lenient sentence? What part did Kim play and is it justice that she avoids legal recourse? How about Howard? Jimmy didn’t pull the trigger and he never invited Howie or Lalo to his house, nor did he wish Howard dead. Is it justice that he assumes responsibility? Or is it a useless martyrdom designed to look good in Kim’s eyes? If Jimmy’s only options were bargaining for a few years in a minimum security farm, or signing the rest of his life away, which option hews closer to true justice and why?
I don’t know the answers, but a show that so deftly and artfully posses the questions is one we probably won’t see again for a long long time.
On the topic of Gus's motives and how much of it was based in financial gain vs revenge, are we just going to forget the fact that he blew up his own restraunt?
Yes but he was opening two more later in the timeline, not to mention the insurance he probably got from it.
@@unusualusername8847 plus, it's worth remembering just how much money cornering the meth drug trade would net Gus and how adamant he is about having the foresight to accept short term losses in exchange for longterm gains. That's kinda the great thing about Gus as a villain. There's always a financial angle. Which is why so many of his enemies convinced themselves he was willing to let bygones be bygones.
Mike told Manuel that the justice will happen to the Salamancas who killed Nacho.
But the point is…Nacho died because of Fring, who is Mike’s boss, and Mike was supposed to kill Nacho as planned if Nacho didn’t kill himself first so the Salamancas are less responsible to Nacho’s “trip to Belize” than Fring and Mike.
This might explain that Mike’s morality was so twisted at this point and he became too loyal to Gus that he’s willing to overlook Gus and his own sins (because for him, they are the “good” side of the cartel) and put the blames on Salamancas, whom he considers to be the “evil” side of the cartel.
Nacho crossed hector and lalo and gus crossed nacho.
At the end of thr day Mike knows he's just another hired gun. He's a valuable advisor but he's a strategist and chief of security for a drug lord plain and simple. It's just business. There's no sentiment to who dies when or how when big money is on the line.
What… so nacho was going to die no matter what!??😢 why does fring needed to kill nacho😮
Love these series of videos. You bring so much to the 'table' beyond a simple recap/overview of episodes and character arcs, it's such a breath of fresh air. Exciited to see what's next :)
So if no more BCS videos for a while, do you think you’re gonna watch Breaking Bad and make thoughtful videos on that show? Would love to see how you analyze Walt, Skyler, and the other characters
I hope so too
Mike is one of my favorite characters, and I'm understanding and sympathetic towards his decision. However, when you consider the road that choice put him on, that's when you have to ask if it was the right move. Don't forget, killing those cops ended with Mike in a barrel. So maybe while it was an UNDERSTANDABLE decision, it wasn't a healthy decision, or the best one. Maybe he coulda done something different. Gotten them arrested instead. Mike's smart, he coulda done it. He could've stayed in Philly, and started his new chapter on a better note.
I feel like what is left unsaid in that discussion is that the two dirty cops clearly were willing to kill to silence anyone who would threaten them. They drove Mike out to try to kill him, after all. Are we really to believe that the best thing for the world would be to let them go on like that, killing whomever they feel like threatens their operation and lifestyle and certainly taking advantage of people as cops? Is that really in any way best for the world? There clearly wasn't a way to have them face repercussions or stop them inside the boundaries of the law, which I think is a point the show is making with the whole story. Yes, their families suffer for their deaths. But how many families are saved future suffering that they would have caused? We can't just ignore who they are and what they would have brought to the world if left alive. I actually think Mike's killing of them is one of the morally least ambiguous acts in the show.
"It was the best television" Never have truer words been spoken
love to listen to these while on my overnight shifts - makes the last hour fly by
So grateful for your Better Call Saul series - legitimately some of the toppest tier BCS content around. I'll definitely stick around to see what else you dig into!
I'm probably in the minority of those who feel that what Mike did wasn't Justice. We often conflate what *is* justice with what *feels* like justice. Mike lost a son, so of course he feels like the only way to get justice is to take the life of his killers, and often those who justify what he did do so with the argument you brought up in the video: "what if it was your son?" This, however, isn't a good argument. What does the death of those cops do? It won't bring back Mike's son, it won't help the cops learn their lesson (they're dead), it won't discourage more of that kind of senseless crime (this was done in secret, and that's not how you reduce crime anyway), and won't help reduce the trauma of losing a loved one.
I think real justice here would have been to out the cops for what they did, have systemic reform to hold future cops accountable for this kind of corruption by independent third parties. Hold the cops accountable both to Mike and to society for what they did through restorative justice. I'm glad you brought up these points in the video, and really expanded on the nuances and complexities of revenge as a concept.
The edit at the end with characters' responses is so cool! Outro has improved :)
Damn these are excellent points. 👍👍💪💪
I think you'd benefit a lot in analyzing Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul through the lens of hatred, rather than through the lens of justice.
There is no such thing as justice. It's merely a construct we strive toward and the closer we get, the better everyone's lives has gotten, and this is what makes it's pursuit worthwhile. Even if it's a lie. We will never ever arrive at a world of justice.
If/when you watch breaking bad it would be amazing if you could do some psychology based videos linking the themes of the two shows. If you enjoy breaking bad, of course. Your work is so good
The cops that killed Mike's son were going to kill him, so arguably he acted in self-defense first and revenge second.
it was more of a bait, mike wasn't actually drunk
Arguably Mike put himself in that situation on purpose so he could make it justified but all of it was pretty planned out. He planted the gun and had the intentions. So it's a pre-planned self-defense murder which is just murder.
But at the same time, they were still going to kill him, even if he WAS drunk just to keep Mike from talking
The lesson i learned from your video is people dont change if they dont want to, and no one wants to, we like being sedated, it keeps the head voice quiet (the reasonable part of our brain)
“How much does that justification justify”? Beautiful words
When im in dark places i struggle with my morality, i pray and read the bible but living in this godless country with conmen living amongst us really makes a person wanna lash out ynow, feels like some people cant be reasoned with
White people in america
I been to some places in america, i was accepted in new mexico, because i look mexican, and i was constantly happy, empty but happy fufilling life, without people looking at me like im about to take over their bloody walmart or sumn
Lived in a trailer there, 95 degrees if lucky, and no ac (trailer) and i was still happy
Thank you so much for everything you did with this BCS series. I learned so much from you and this awesome comment section 🙌🏻
I can't believe you're making these for the sheer love and not pure youtuber grindset. It's insanely inspiring to see fulfillment in youtube. I am trying myself but need for money overshadows personal desire. So do I do nothing but work, and give up on TH-cam, or do I risk it at my age (late 20s) to utilize time making youtube videos but maybe not have enough money for my immediate bills but at least have a chance at growing in the long term AND pursue what I really know I want to do regardless of real life getting in the way.
So if this is your last Better Call Saul video, can this be your chance to make an 8 part series on Breaking Bad?
I'm sure there ARE people who think "everything would've been fine if Lalo hadn't killed Howard", and that's like saying everything would've been fine with Gene if Jeff just hadn't run into the parked car. The chickens were always gonna come home to roost one way or another. We know from Howard's big speech to the two of them that if he hadn't died, there was absolutely no way in hell he was ever gonna let this go, he probably would've been even more vindictive and obsessive than Chuck was after the number-switching scheme. Cliff Davis even seems to kinda buy Howard's side of the story when he explains his theory on what happened, which kinda feels like a parallel to Bill Oakley and the "proving vs. knowing" comment: Cliff KNOWS that Howard might actually be right, but unfortunately for both of them, the situation comes down to what they can actually prove. I think it's very likely Howard would've ended up exposing the truth somehow, he was a person with considerable resources at his disposal and their scheme was so elaborate that there's no way they left every single possible track covered. But even if they did end up ultimately getting away with it, they'd made an extremely bitter enemy who would no doubt dedicate a considerable portion of the rest of his life towards making their lives as difficult as possible, and they would've been deserving of this consequence of their actions. Howard getting killed was just the most blunt and brutal possible way for the story to present the two of them with very immediate consequences, and for that matter, consequences that they can't simply react to with a narcissistic self-righteous indignation, which is probably how they would've reacted to a world in which Howard didn't die and continued to hound them.
Midway through and loving this one.
Based on what you are talking about here I have to highly recommend an episode from the fourth/final season of the show Atlanta called ‘The Homeliest Little Horse’. Touches on the consequences of using spite as a sort of fuel or motivation and the way a lot of people, unfortunately, prematurely view one realization in therapy as an indication that they are ‘cured’ and decide to stop when they clearly have a lot of work to do on themselves.
Atlanta is an amazing show that I highly recommend watching all the way through, but, as is the case with this episode and most episodes of the show, it can totally be viewed and enjoyed out of context as a stand-alone episode of tv.
Anyhow, it’s an exploration of a similar topic and, in my view, does a pretty good job of honoring what therapy is actually like.
More than a year later but i just wanted to share how much my partner and I waited for jimmy or kim say "i love you" to each other for sooo looong, only for him to say it on that moment
Nacho is such a nice guy
The Better Call Saul therapy never ends, and god damn I hope it never does. I will certainly stick around for future analysis
I wondered if it would come up and it didn't, my favorite, or least favorite revenge example, the pizza tip, that was the first time that made me just immediately think "Oh jimmy no don't be that guy". While each circumstance is its own, that pernicious purposeless drive to give the world back the hurt it gives us, that I feel we all have on some level, is ultimately what the analysis caused me to interrogate most throughout. The actions guided thus were the most difficult to process, most contributory to destructive consequences, and naturally more frequent as things went on. Still, great work, nice to have it essentially complete so I can rebinge as a big whole piece of itself, and looking forward to future projects!
I don't think revenge is necessary to justify hanging the guys up. It's not even really a punishment, more of a threat. You could argue it's self defense or something, but needs to be extreme for him to go about his business in peace.
every time i watch one of your videos, my interest in better call saul is fully renewed
I LOVE your BCS videos - your thought processes are very intelligent and always make me appreciate the show even more. Your analyses go into the kind of detail that I really appreciate as a fan - great videos!! And you are an actual Therapist - I suspected as much from your ability to analyze characters.
I disagree with many things you said but you surely gave me a lot to think about. Great video, im subscribing!
To be honest, I was quite surprised with how often you ran with the assumption of revenge being justified. I don't think Mike's revenge motive was justified, and I don't think Gus' was either. You're right that Mike's revenge isn't really strongly justified by the harm reduction argument, but what you said afterwards about "am I supposed to believe the harm reduction group is distinct from the revenge group?" is a yes in my case.
In my opinion, Nacho's dad is correct, and I also think he speaks for the writers of the show.
A Chicago Sunroof is NEVER just revenge. It is art.
Looking closely at the scene where Mike killed the two corrupt cops, he actually did everything by the book. He waited until he heard their confession that they really did kill Matt before revealing himself, and he pointed his gun at them to wait for them to either surrender for arrest or try to attack Mike, and then he only shot when they opened fire at him. My guess is that he expected and wanted it to play out that exact way, but he did it by the book anyway so his revenge in killing them was still entirely within his legal rights.
I've been waiting for this episode 😁 The final scene with Nacho's dad's and Mike really stuck with me
I'll miss these videos. I'll miss this franchise.
I verbally exclaimed in excitement when I saw this video on my recommended - Bless your existence What's Therapy
i think when comes to revenge it largely depends on not on the person but the moment
talk is talk but as soon as you actually genuinely get the chance... THEN we can see the person have a "make or break" moment (cant really explain properly)
I’m more pumped than a cobbler squatter on banana creme pie for this video 😤
unfortunate that the series is ending the week I find it and the day after I finish watching the others, but thank you for the excellent analysis!
Just commenting on the "compulsory revenge" ethic section. I like that topic.
In the Hagakure it is an integral part of a warrior, but still calls on your subjective opinion in the context. On the other hand, just being rude and violent (unprovoked) in public was a good enough reason to decapitate someone. That would be a great improvement to most cities, actually.
"Cutting a man down in revenge is honorable, if the crime committed against you warrants it."
I don't like measuring the tragedy of someone's death by how many other people would be sad for them, because if we accept that yardstick, then lonely people are implied to have no value. Someone dying who nobody cares about is in a way even more sad.
I like to brag to my friends about the quality of the show and it's discussion worthy themes, that I've watched BB & BCS close to 10+ times each, then watched the several hour long analysis videos 10+ times each.
This is genuinely such an interesting and thoughtful video, not to mention entertaining!
22:51, bruh when Jimmy slips on the drumstick fits perfectly with you saying DEBT!
25:45 to add more to that we know mike was a soldier during the vietnam war and then went onto becoming a cop... he quite literally has never experienced a life outside of danger so to speak
Great Video👍🏾
This is the greatest analysis video I've ever seen and it just so happens to be on one of my favorite TV shows of all time. ❤❤❤ Thank you for this
Some people are really good at Gustificying their actions.
Oh man, the way I freaked out when I saw this! Thank you so much for this series, it’s SO interesting and thought-provoking!
it’s so interesting to me that you haven’t talked about when Jimmy lambasted the two men for offering him a job so easily, it seems so out of character for him to me, seeing these two sheep for him to wolf, he clearly sees them as foolish, so they would be so easy to exploit and con, made even more so by being a potentially trusted employee. it’s almost so wolfish to turn down the opportunity to exploit these men, as he looks down on them and sees it as too easy, almost like at this point he wants a challenge, a way to prove that, on his own merit he can be a wolf, after being wolfed by chuck when he loses his license, so he takes the just ever so slightly harder path to get job at the phone store. i think the way he almost seems sickened by how much these men resemble his idea of a sheep, like he sees his dad in them and wants to teach them a lesson as a way of repenting for not doing that well enough for his dad. but then he robs them anyway lol, am i overanalysing? i truly would love some input on this because it’s a moment in the show that i truly don’t understand
I have a sort of non killing aesthetic. It's kind of my brand
-well written depictions of Superman
Revenge is one of the biggest theme in both shows
omg cant wait to watch this. i just finished watching all other parts of the series and got food ready
It’s always cool to see analysis videos on Better Call Saul and this on, as well as the others you’ve made, are truly well done and truly unique. I wouldn’t have thought too much about revenge being as major theme with the show beyond the big notable examples of getting even with Howard and Chuck after Jimmy had been wronged by them or at least feels like he’s been wronged to where he has to either even the playing field or get one up on either of them as well as with the Salamancas regarding Mike and Gus. And then of course when Kim wants her revenge on Howard, with Jimmy’s assistance, that really goes south once he confronts the two as to why they went out of their way to ruin his career. I also like how Jimmy was never really interested in doing anything to Howard after what he did and said to Howard in season 5, but he wants Kim to be happy and so he goes along with it for her only to be truly horrified once Lalo shows up and after the next few episodes he becomes Saul Goodman as a way to cope with all that happened throughout Better Call Saul that he doesn’t want to have to really acknowledge. I knew these other moments of revenge existed, but I guess I didn’t exactly see them being revenge such as the Chicago Sun Roof and the slip and fall at the guitar store, but it does make sense when rethinking and rewatching those moments. And I like how you looked at when said revenge is or can be justified as well as when it isn’t. Keep up the great work man!
I've heard before that the rights of the living, their wants, their needs, all outlive those of the dead.
It's an agreement with that notion, even if partial, which makes it so, for instance, people's bodies' destinations, here in Brazil, are first and foremost up to their families, and the secondly, up to them.
Say you want to give your body up for science - if any of your family would rather you be buried and have a "proper" funeral, that's what's happening.
I think it's interesting that at the end you mention their long term resentment and how that relates to their revenge because I never saw their actions as revenge because it doesn't seem to be motivated by anything beyond long term resentment, and to that effect it's mindblowing and tragic that the same long term resentment manifests later with Kim, transforming him fully into Saul Goodman/Gene and a husk of his former self. Jimmy is a man of a thousand chips on his shoulder and I think many of his actions are motivated by resentment. I think in the end when James McGill finally takes accountability for his actions it's because he's finally able to let go of the resentment, maybe only bc it led him down a path where he was about to strangle mary tyler moore, but i guess some people's bottoms can get pretty low.
Justice is crowd sourced revenge.
That camera flash at 0:35 is a perfect way to subtly cut off the music. Don’t think I didn’t notice
"I have a sort of non-killing-people aesthetic; it's sort of my brand."
😂😂😂
Personally, i feel like BCS Is a show about parallels, everything has a parallel that makes you think about something from another angle, although some of them are only found in BB
Heck yes! I've been waiting for this all year!
Gus's reason for wanting revenge against Hector is explicitly mentioned in one of Lalos first episodes. You don't need to watch Breaking Bad to know