I finally finished this season.
One of the things that make a great drama great is not just the creation of a compelling story with characters you care about but also the writers being perpetually aware of
what the audience knows,
when they know it and
why, and what the audience is (probably) thinking
at any given point.
That sounds absurdly obvious, I know. That's fundamental shit. You should always be thinking about those things while writing. But before Breaking Bad I had never seen a show where it was so clear the writing staff was consciously aware they needed to stay several steps ahead of an intelligent audience using all the tools at their disposable. And Better Call Saul continues in that vein.
A lesser show would tell a prequel story with a similar structure, maybe, with new characters. It might do a solid job and be enjoyable and even worthwhile. But Better Call Saul is clearly the product of people asking themselves all the right questions.
"What, in this show, is the central source of tension for/greatest unanswered question of the audience?" (The answer: "what happens to the new characters?")
From there, the events of every episode are structured with this in mind:
"How do we get the audience to care about these new characters?"
"What does
this scene/plot point imply about the future of these characters?"
"How do we ramp up the tension as time goes on given that we know these events already took place?"
"If one of the characters were to actually die
now, could the story (as we know it eventually plays out) feasibly and believably continue?"
Etc.
Aside from some Saul storyline-based lulls across seasons 2 and 3, this has been a hell of a ride. (Not as great as Breaking Bad, it should be admitted. But very close.) If only everyone writing for television was so conscious of and capable of utilizing storytelling fundamentals.
And I want to give special recognition to the character of Kim. They could easily have made her an innocent but naively trusting party to Jimmy's chicanery. A lesser show would have done that, setting her up to suffer because of his hubris. But instead they've given us an appropriately layered, complicated, and damaged person, a woman we could actually see being in a long-term relationship with Jimmy and who isn't being tricked into it. I
believe that.
It has grim connotations in BCS, too. It's a corrupting influence on Kim, she had it in her desk when she came up with the Mesa Verde plan with Saul, she took it with her when she left and gave Lalo a verbal beatdown. I have a theory on what it means to her but I'm too dumb to put it into words, lol.
I have to disagree with that characterization. As the show continues, we're learning that Kim isn't a "straight-and-narrow" innocent who is being corrupted. She may not even be aware of it, but she's with Saul for a reason, and it's not because she mistakenly thought he was a boy Scout.
The dynamic is (somewhat) reminiscent of the one between Walt and Skyler. A lot of people see Breaking Bad and feel sorry for Walt's family because of the decisions he makes and the roads it leads them down. They're right to feel that way... but Skyler is not a fully innocent party like her children. She is with Walt, who has this dark side, for a reason, and it's not because she didn't know, on some level, that he had a dark side. That's a baked-in (though perhaps subconscious) part of their relationship dynamic.
My point is saying or implying that Kim is being corrupted is infantilizing her character. She's an adult who is making choices, and many of them aren't good ones, but she's not an agency-free victim. That's good writing.
