The first 3 episodes of Better Call Saul were solid enough. But by now, after episode 4, the stakes are too low, compared to Breaking Bad standards especially. The lead character’s life is not on the verge of collapse (socially or biologically – think Walt in BB), no new or urgent aspect of society is being plumbed (think lack of health insurance, meth outbreak, DEA & drug “war” in BB and real life), no supreme violence aka murder let alone by the lead character (think Walt killing in BB). In fact the stakes and plot are so thin in Better Call Saul that it’s necessary to have the dynamo tragicomic character McGill/Goodman in every scene. It’s thin.
The main characters of Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul are different, and their situations are different, so the plot arc should be different, possibly radically different. Seems to me that the Better Call Saul main character – as a kind of public defender, the people’s defender, rather than the people’s dope dealer – should have a plot that arcs up, rather than down like Walter White. Most reviewers and commenters are either missing or mistaking this basic context. Saul’s story has to move in a different direction than Walt’s story. Could still happen in BSC but by now there seem to be precious few hints of this.
Jimmy McGill aka Saul Goodman is not a thin character. He’s a character worthy of a novel, a great story. But where is that story, where is the rest of the novel? Like most towering works of narrative, Breaking Bad laid out the basic elements of a great story within the first few episodes at the latest, a tragic, dark, disturbing story. Seems to be not so with Better Call Saul. The key elements of a great story would have to be added on at this point.
Curious, the many references by reviewers and commenters to Saul as a “sleaze ball”. Is Saul any more of a “sleaze ball” than the Kettlemans? than the slimy cop characters? than Walt’s zealous and bigoted drug cop brother-in-law, Hank? than ex-cop Mike? It could be useful to check some assumptions and do some data crunching on who are the biggest sleaze balls on these shows. Jimmy/Saul is no saint. He’s a lawbreaker. However, he’s far from the biggest sleazeball on these shows despite being called it the most by reviewers and commenters. The “Why not kill Badger?” line might be the biggest piece of evidence in a counterargument to this point but doesn’t amount to a very strong counterargument.
Cory Roth notes in his interesting ongoing lawyer’s blog reviews of the series: “Better Call Saul is essentially a lawyer joke. Saul Goodman is the epitome of a slimy, sleazy, shark of a lawyer that hits most most of the negative stereotypes possible.” In narrative terms, Better Call Saul is little more than a character sketch, of a lawyer joke. If Saul aspires to be more than a sketchy joke, it will have to build story, and it will have to do so in ways far deeper than what has been to this point foreshadowed, let alone put in place.
——–
**Cory Roth: “Just to clarify the mispersection (sic) that Saul/Jimmy is a public defender, he is not. He IS supposed to be the stereotypical bottom of the barrel public defender. In reality, he is a private lawyer taking court appointments.”
Better Call Saul Guts 