TheSecondSpitter
Member
Fucking hell. Stick to discussing the show please.
Kim has dislikable qualities like Jimmy.
She's morally ambiguous. She treats Jimmy like horseshit. She's far too career orientated for a stable relationship. I can go on.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Better Call Saul S2 |OT| The Truth Is Just A Point Of View - Mondays 10/9c
- Thread starter TheOddOne
- Start date
- Status
Fucking hell. Stick to discussing the show please.
Kim has dislikable qualities like Jimmy.
She's morally ambiguous. She treats Jimmy like horseshit. She's far too career orientated for a stable relationship. I can go on.
Sure but the hate for Chuck is a good equivalent. Chuck is basically the nagging wife to Jimmy.
when did she ever treat Jimmy like horseshit? and they are both career oriented.
minor effort
Banned
Just because Kim doesn't want Jimmy ruining both his and her law careers doesn't make her some buzzkill who "treats Jimmy like horseshit."
She's the more responsible lawyer of the two. She's the one who better knows what will get lawyers disbarred. She's not an awful person for wanting to protect a livelihood she worked hard to attain.
lol, I don't see how this is an unlikable quality unless you are Jimmy himself
your point doesn't make much sense though. [why am I not surprised] I don't really see how that is a huge mistake when he just wanted to take their money without, if possible, killing anyone.
funny that you mention Chuck because that either wouldn't have been very inconsistent. we know Kim knew it wasn't Chuck's fault but when you think about it, she had a point. if you consider his condition, where and how he works (no proper lights, for once), making a tiny mistake like that could have definitely been possible, no matter how good and meticulous he may be.
that's also true. as I said it just felt like he wanted to rob them, not necessarily screw them over with the police.
I'd like some receipts on that, please.
Skyler was, however, mostly a victim to Walt's actions, at least until the final seasons.
Chuck was much more slimy regarding his intentions towards Jimmy, especially with all the patronizing shit he pulled in the first season.
That said, i think people were unreasonably harsh towards both, just saying that Chuck is walking a much grayer area..
But that's not what's being said. Same universe, similar circumstances, gender of ball breaker is reversed, and people still hate the ball breaker...
People were WAY too quick to scream "MISOGYNY" at people who didn't like Skyler.
Kim is one of the few people, maybe the only person, who treats Jimmy with any sense of respect. There are times she's nice to him to a fault.
Cornballer
Member
Folks, let's stick to Better Call Saul discussion and knock off the Skyler White derail. I understand that it's somewhat germane given their shared creator, but that whole issue has poisoned many a thread and I'd prefer to not get into it here. There are plenty of other things to talk about with respect to BCS. Thank you.
I didn't worship Walt. But it's hard not to root for a guy who's been dealt a shit hand and starts acting like a boss instead of wilting.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
See below.
-- Come on, her shenanigans at the bar amount to borderline fraud and then she chastises Jimmy for the same thing.
-- Wilful blindness as to how HHM lost Mesa Verde is enough to get her disbarred. No attorney in their right mind would have kept Mesa Verde as a client under such circumstances
You can't play the "by the law" card and then do exactly the same thing yourself.
People how are overly focused on their careers are the least trustworthy people you can find. Trust me, I have experienced this first hand. In a legal setting too.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
I'd say she's treated Jimmy far too kindly given he nearly torpedoed her career
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
Kim pities Jimmy. She said it herself. I personally think she sticks to Jimmy because she's afraid of success. She comes from a humble background and has worked her ass off to achieve greatness, but she seems incapable of distancing herself from what she knows will be her downfall. Jimmy is toxic. She knows this and I believe it gives her what she needs.. An anchor to weigh her down.
The Skylar/Chuck comparison is very weak in my eyes. People take one aspect of the characters (that they cause problems for the main lead) and say they're the same. No. They do it in different ways and for different reasons.
I'll spend most of the post talking about chuck so as to keep to the topic, but I want to refute the idea that the two are analogous to each other. Skylar was actually very supportive of Walt and much of their conflict came from the fact that she didn't know what Walt was really about when he failed to meet his obligations to her as husband. And when she found out, her motivation was a matter of self preservation.
For a character to be analogous, most of their identity has to line up with another character. So their actions, motivations, and situation would would have to be mostly the same. For Chuck to be Skylar's stand in, he'd have to be actually supportive of Jimmy, and then only try to disengage from him later on because he's dangerous (as in physically so) to him. Also, much of the what what makes people dislike chuck is his actual motivations and beliefs. He's arrogant and proud and bitter and resentful. He's patronizing and self righteous. He's also independent from Jimmy and Jimmy is independent from him, aside from being blood relatives, so either one of them could leave whenever (unlike a married couple) and that's exactly what happens in season 1, and now they only occasionally see each other. He's highly respected by his peers to the point of almost reverence.
None of this is anything like Skylar. Their sole shared attribute is that they disapprove of the main leads ways of doing things partially for ethical reasons, but if you are going to ignore that much context, then you may as well also say that Kim is Jimmy's Jesse because they're both the protagonists supporting character.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
How did he torpedo her career?
++ The demotion for Jimmy's ad has, so far, been the most unbelievable and poorly written story-line in the entire series. (The writers even contradicted themselves: In one episode Kim says she can't sue because another law firm will never hire her and five episodes later she decides to become a sole practitioner anyway).
Kim and Jimmy are an exact mirror image of each other -- they are both on the precipice of legality -- on chooses to transgress it every now and then but at least Jimmy does not live under the illusion that he's actually acting according to the law. Kim, on the other hand, does.
Nah, Jimmy and Kim are both cut from the same cloth (she admitted her humble origins herself). She just lives under the delusional belief that she can transcend her corrupt tendencies which Jimmy on the other hand has accepted.
How is that a contradiction? There is a MAJOR difference between suing your parent company and just disengaging from it.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
The contradiction is that she could have sued them for constructive dismissal and then left to become a sole practitioner. She would have been up at least 2 years salary and be at exactly same point.
Grinchy
Banned
The people who hate Chuck are misandrists! Honestly though Chuck isn't a completely bad guy. He has his reasons.
Technosteve
Banned
Chuck is a marry sue character he got what was coming to him!
please be alive, one of the best character performances on show!!
It's perfectly reasonable not to burn all bridges even if she's becoming a sole pratictioner. There's good chances she won't be one forever.
RustyNails
Member
These skylar comparisons are bad. Two completely different characters. Chuck is intimately familiar with Jimmy's shenanigans and he knows who/what he's dealing with. Skylar however is an audience device for revelation/reaction to Walt's second life.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Why are you yelling at me but not the people who actually started the idiotic derail...? Eh, weird.
Great post as always Veelk.
Again, I don't see a contradiction. First, at the time she was questioned about suing them, she was still working for them and intended to hold out hope that she could be forgiven. Solo practice wasn't even in her mind at the time.
Second, even with solo practice in consideration, the logic of never being hired by anyone still applies. Yeah, she's going into solo practice now, but what if in the future she wants to work at another firm?
Lastly, despite that she decided that it's time to set out on her own, I don't think she bares any ill will toward HHM. Howard was being a douche nozzle, true, but that's not why she's leaving HHM, it's because she realized she wanted to be independent. Her departure of HHM was ignited by Howard's ill treatment of her, but she left HHM because she has outgrew it, not because she thinks they're in the moral/legal wrong in their treatment of her (or atleast enough that she thinks she should sue them). I mean, for all the crap that went down, Howard and Kim's final conversation was amicable.
You mean she isn't a secret space ranger?
TheSecondSpitter
Member
I'm talking about when they tossed her in doc review and took away her office; she explicitly stated: I can't sue them because no law firm will hire me.
With a medium sized bank as a client, she could walk into any law firm she wants, but she's not going back into a large firm in her mid to late forties.
Yeah, but there is also another reason she doesn't sue them, that I edited in: She doesn't want to. Despite how they did her in there, she obviously has more good memories than bad and doesn't actually have ill will toward HHM.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
It's not about "ill will". It's about correcting the injustice of her losing income because of what somebody working in another firm, who just happens to be an acquaintance of her did.
Dangerblade
Member
I always found it weird how she was named that. I'd never heard of anybody called that before, and if I did I figured it'd be a teenager rather than somebody in their late 30s/early 40s (is there a canon age?)
RecRoulette
Member
Wait until season 3: IFC
They also kept her student loan debt instead of handing it back to her. You should just take the L on this brah. Suing HHM would have tied her up in litigation against powerful potential future acquaintances in a relatively remote area, and they gave her an enormous gift despite her leaving.
People named Skyler actually don't age, it's one of those things science can't explain.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
Do you actual believe this? Kim's salary at HHM would have been circa $250-400K. Her student loans would been 1/5 of this. Because she did nothing wrong she could have received more than 5 years in salary otherwise a judge may have dealt out bigger damages against HHM.
HHM would have given her a large settlement and the matter would never have gone to court.
Again the whole "demotion-for-advertisement" plot has been the most ridiculous aspect of the show.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Suing HHM would've been a surefire way for Kim to be blackballed from working for another firm ever again.
triplestation
Member
One more day!
Imagine the cold open is in Chile and its a scene with Gus and max
Imagine the cold open is in Chile and its a scene with Gus and max
TheSecondSpitter
Member
She has a large client. Any firm will lap her up like a Wendy special!
giancarlo123x
Banned
I feel the same way. Such an amazing character.
Yeah. Skylar sucked. Kim
and Chuck
CharminUltra
Member
One more day!
You can't really separate that from ill will in that case. It's an injustice that is lesser than the feelings she has for HHM as a whole. If she sues them, it's going to be because she no longer cares for the firm and wants them to suffer.
It's really not that complicated. She likes HHM enough that even though what they did was shitty and she's basically done with them, she has no interest in enacting retribution for that injustice. It's not a contradiction, it's just prioritizing something other than money.
Theoretically, yes, but unusually things have been known to happen. Schwikart and cokely were convenient because they were already interested in Kim. How long would it take to find another firm? What if Mesa Verde leaves? What about if she goes into solo practice for a while, the Mesa Verde case is done, and now Kiss doesn't have the massive client ticket to cash in? Mesa Verde is a limited resource, while suing her own parent company will leave a black mark on her forever.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
There's no ill-will involved. When you don't pay phone bill and the phone company threatens to sue, they don't feel any "ill will" against you. It's just business.
If you were on $300K/year and your employer gives you shitty work to do to make you quit (because of something your girlfriend did at some other job) would you not take them to court?
When you leave a law firm in you mid-40's to go solo, you are generally finished in any Top 20 law firm's eyes unless, like I said, you can bring in a big client.
The whole point of Kim leaving and entering a sole practice was to show how much like Jimmy she is. Many people are blinded by her nice legs and missed that.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
The power of showmanship in advertising?
Seriously, Mike knows his former alias and it doesn't affect his relations in BB.
Most people weren't personal friends with your phone company. I don't understand what is so difficult to understand about this. She knows people at HHM, she was friends with them, and their recent shitty treatment isn't enough to overturn that goodwill. That would require ill will toward them. It's not some random person filing some other random person.
And what I would or what you would do or what anyone else would do in that situation is irrelevant isn't analogous because you're not lining up the other variables. Who is the employer in question? Is it my best friend of 20 years? Is it some random dickhole? And how vindictive am I feeling over this? All those things are a factor that would determine whether a person (you, me, Kim, someone else) sues, because this situation is intrinsically defined by personal attachments. For Kim, it doesn't add up to being worth suing HHM over shitty treatment. That's her personal decision. It's really that simple.
Uh....okay, first off, I don't think I ever said she wasn't like jimmy. I'm very much aware that her character arc this season was about finding her own independence, which is similar to Jimmy. However, that doesn't make her Jimmy with nice legs. She isn't out to screw anyone and isn't willing to do it for an upperhand (atleast not until Chuck forced the situation in the confrontation). Just because Jimmy would screw over HHM or even a firm that did right by him (Davis and Main) doesn't mean Kim would.
Second, I'm not sure what your getting at anymore. You seem to have a knowledge of the legal system, and while that's cool, the entire point of fiction means that you can bend the rules. Kim can sue, and Mesa Verde can leave her mid transition, and then what reason will any law firm have to take her? What if she wants to join a law firm years down the line? What if she simply CAN'T get another big client? The narrative is in the hands of the writer, and if it's possible, then Vince Gilligan can generally work it to make plausible. What are the chances of a big, respected law firm hiring a lawyer with a shady past and a pathetic law degree? Well, it happened with Jimmy. So, alternatively speaking, there isn't a real reason another law firm can't just see her and how she handles herself and offer her a job. I mean, Schwikart and cokely did this.
So I'm not sure what your going for anymore in regards to the original discussion of a contradiction. She gave her reasons, both explicit and implicit, for why she's not interested in suing HHM, but is willing to leave them. Even if you disagree with her that what she's doing is a good idea, that you would sue HHM for being a bag of dicks, that's not a contradiction of any kind.
They go out of their way to have Nacho point out how lucky they were that the cops didn't get involved.
I think the average person see's that on the side of the road and they call 911, they don't rush to go help. Mike miscalculated the odds, but they made it clear that both MIke and Nacho thought the odds were in favor of the cops getting involved.
TheSecondSpitter
Member
what evidence did you see of Kim and Chuck/Howard's "friendship"? Kim even takes exception to the fact Chuck forces her to drink coffee with him. It was a purely professional relationship.
My whole point about Kim being like Jimmy demonstrates she couldn't handle working a large firm like Jimmy. She was just in denial. The smallest of things makes her snap (The partner at the interview getting her name wrong). Therefore, a person like Kim isn't going back to that oppressive environment anytime soon.
The final conversation where they parted on amicable terms, and how they interact in season 1. I agree it's not a strong friendship, but Kim has expressed multiple times how HHM has taken care of her. I agree that Kim is obviously closer to Jimmy than anyone else, but she doesn't have to feel especially close to feel that doing them like that would be wrong.
And you're still not pointing out the contradiction. We all know she's not interested in working at a large firm. Explain why this means that there is no sense of gratitude or appreciation.
No disagreement there. However, that doesn't mean she was chomping at the bit to sue them either, both because it'd be impractical ("any time soon" does not mean "never") and against her personal feelings toward HHM.
Why would characters who know his previous identity or real name need to be dead or way far away? I don't think them being there would stop him from becoming someone else, or just changing his name/brand.
- Status