“It’s showtime, folks!”
What They Say:
Better Call Saul is the prequel to the award-winning series Breaking Bad, set six years before Saul Goodman (Bob Odenkirk) became Walter White’s lawyer. When we meet him, the man who will become Saul Goodman is known as Jimmy McGill, a small-time lawyer searching for his destiny, and, more immediately, hustling to make ends meet. Working alongside, and often against, Jimmy is “fixer” Mike Ehrmantraut (Jonathan Banks), a beloved character introduced in Breaking Bad. The series will track Jimmy’s transformation into Saul Goodman, the man who puts “criminal” in “criminal lawyer.”
The Review:
Content: (please note that content portions of a review may contain spoilers)
“Better Call Saul” serves less as a prequel and more as a spin-off: so far the series follows the spirit of “Breaking Bad”–the use of dark humor, convincing characterization, and unique filming techniques all remain the same–but as typical with spin-off shows, those who go into the first episodes expecting “Breaking Bad” itself will find disappointment. Rather, “Better Caul Saul” takes a microscopic look at Saul Goodman’s trajectory from a nobody (pre-“Breaking Bad”) to a somebody (mid-) to a nobody again (post-). The pacing slows down considerably in this series: the writer, Vince Gilligan, milks as much characterization out of Saul as possible, drawing out mundane scenes to the limit: from making cinnamon rolls at a Cinnabun store to a waiting court room to unfolding a couch bed in a closet office. While at times these scenes may have stretched my patience, the slowness allows Saul to almost immediately establish himself as a real human being, easy to empathize with yet gushing with his own faults. With such a believable character driving the show, I found it easy to immerse myself in each episode.
Episode 1 may not have much going on, but the ending leaves with one stickler of a cliffhanger: Saul, out of cash and out of options working as a low-paid public defender, enlists two skateboarders for help in a scam. When the scam fails, the skateboarders angrily follow their would-be victim into her house. Saul follows them to said house, but at the door he is answered at gunpoint by Tuco, a character from Breaking Bad well-known for his psychotic behavior. This is where the episode ends: at gunpoint, and it’s a surprising enough moment to propel the next couple of episodes along quickly.
Episode 2 continues with nonstop, nail-biting anxiety as Saul tries to save himself and the two skateboarders from Tuco’s wrath. After several tense minutes of Saul attempting to persuade Tuco and his crew that he is not police or FBI, but a mere lawyer, he manages to save his own skin. He must also, however, talk down Tuco from killing the skateboarders. Saul saves their lives but must bargain Tuco down to a broken leg for each of them, and the scene in which Tuco gleefully breaks the skateboarders’ legs is gruesome. Perhaps even more gruesome is the scene directly after, which fast-forwards to Saul eating dinner with a woman later that day. The dinner is rendered in perfect silence other than the chipper, 60’s elevator music and the stomach-curling snap of breadsticks at another table. Such techniques work perfectly in illustrating Saul’s affected state of mind as he recalls the bone-snapping brutality from earlier that day.
Episode 3 had less impact, and I have difficulty understanding how all of the events that occur will play out in a bigger picture. In fact, the only major problem I can find with the show is its seeming lack of focus: each episode makes a foray into a different subplot—in other words, using an episodic structure—yet Gilligan treats the subplots like linear progression of a single plot. This results in a lot of confusion, in that I don’t know whether to treat what happens in each episode as significant or insignificant to the larger plot. It’s likely Gilligan plans to tie everything together near the end of the season, as many television writers like to do nowadays, but I have trouble seeing how he can accomplish such a task. Regardless, what happens in the show feels less integrated and focused than “Breaking Bad,” as if “Saul” dabbles in various aspects of its protagonist’s life without committing to a central plot.
In Summary:
Gilligan understands what made “Breaking Bad” so successful and utilizes those same filming and writing techniques in the first three episodes of “Better Call Saul.” While the unfocused plot totters a bit, particularly in episode 3, the show portrays stunningly real characters that draw the audience in, making every scene illuminating and intriguing. Bob Odenkirk in particular grabs the spotlight with his complex rendition of Saul Goodman as both scam artist and victim, cheesy comic relief character and somber, relatable protagonist. Such a great starting point promises a show of continuing growth.
Grade: A-
