Scripting News
Scripting News, the weblog started in 1997 that bootstrapped the blogging revolution...
Breaking Bad has gone off the rails
Spoilers, spoilers, spoilers -- we got tons of them! If you haven't seen all of Breaking Bad up to this point you have been warned.
What I'm going to say in this post will seem like heresy to most Breaking Bad fans. I would have thought it heretical just a couple of weeks ago, until I did something that popped the bubble. I went back to the beginning and watched every episode through season 4. Until you do that, and start watching season 5, I don't think you can see the problem. So if you love Breaking Bad, even the current season, I suggest not watching it again from the beginning until this season is over. Me, I'm going to have a hard time watching any of it. And I find it hard to believe anyone is taking it seriously.
With that out of the way, let me say that the first four seasons are wonderful, cohesive, consistent, and develop the plot and characters in a way that left me in awe much of the time. Incredible acting, writing, editing. Nice touches like Steve Jobs' story about the wood on the back of a fine piece of furniture. Breaking Bad had that kind of quality.
[Jobs] said that his father refused to use poor wood for the back of cabinets, or to build a fence that wasn’t constructed as well on the back side as it was the front. Jobs likened it to using a piece of plywood on the back of a beautiful chest of drawers. "For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through."
I wrote a couple of pieces here on my blog as I was working my way through it.
The second time through there were no cliff-hangers for me. I knew how every crisis was going to be resolved. It was still great. The end of season 3, with the meetup between Gail and Jesse was probably the best 5 minutes of television ever. In every way. Even so, season 4 was wonderful, but the finale left the writers with nowhere to go. I can see now it should have ended there. The final scene with Walter White on top of the world, his nemesis dead, his family safe, cancer in remission, out of the meth business, with a great legal business to return to, everything was wrapped up except for Hank. Maybe you could make an episode out of the face-off between Hank and Walter, but first you have to try to make a bunch of ridiculous things make sense. It stopped working with the first episode of season 5.
I was trying to figure out what the problem was, other than the show was already over. Then I remembered this great piece about the state of science fiction movies by Ryan Britt in The Awl about the awful sterile movie Elysium. He said, and he's absolutely right, that the problem with science fiction these days is that the movies don't respect their own premises. Here's a small excerpt.
In Contact, Jodie Foster’s Ellie worries that everyone is okay with installing a chair into the nifty spacepod the aliens told us to build, even though the schematics said nothing about a chair. The real-world answer is 'because it’s a movie,' but the fact that the script addresses the chair at all is part of what makes it a serious science fiction film. The chair also serves to introduce more doubt about whether the spacepod functions -- but mostly, the movie actually wonders about how the science fiction would function in a real-life situation.
The characters in season 5 of Breaking Bad do things that they would never do, based on what we know about them. Walter hugs Jesse. Jesse figures something out and flies into a rage. Sorry that's what Walter does. And what Jesse figures out makes no sense. It seems they needed quickly to get to a cliff-hanger so they waved their hands quickly and hoped we wouldn't notice it was nonsense. One minute Mike is insisting on killing Lydia, and a few minutes later, well okay she can live. Sorry Mike is always right. And Mike, Jesse and Walter as the three amigos? No. No. No. It. Does. Not. Fucking. Work. Every five minutes the characters emote, the acting is great, but it has nothing to do with who they are. Why exactly does Walter want to get back into the meth business? We have no clue. Saul even says it makes no sense. Walter just waves it off. This is the same writing staff that came up with the scene with Walter and Jesse in the RV who got Hank to leave to tend to his wife in the hospital? No.
There are a few good moments that make you wonder. Skyler showing Walter the huge pile of cash and asking if this isn't enough, what will be enough? That's something Skyler might do. But most of it has no respect for who the characters are, based on what we know about them from the previous four seasons.
I wonder sometimes what happened. Did they have a massive reorg on the staff? Is there a new show runner? This seems like very ordinary TV, not the breakthrough series Breaking Bad was in its first four seasons.
I have a vague idea that it's getting close to time for me to make a decision about enrolling or not enrolling. I have health insurance now, but it's hugely expensive because I have a pre-existing condition. I wonder if I'll do better if I get a new policy through an exchange. I live in New York. I have a few questions.
The way insurance works now if I keep paying they have to keep me on, even if something bad happens. Will that work for ObamaCare too?
What happens if the law is overturned in the future? I know the Republicans want to do that. Is there some circumstance where I won't be able to get insurance?
I guess I only have to plan for 7 years, because I'm 58 now. In seven years I'll be 65 when I'll qualify for Medicare. Is that correct?
I actually like my doctor. I want to keep seeing him. Right now I have a PPP policy. Can I buy that kind of policy under ObamaCare?
Maybe you have questions too? If so, feel free to post a comment, and maybe we can all get answers to our questions at the same time.
The Atlantic on diffs betw genders
Thanks to Nathan Ferguson for posting a link to this piece by Derek Thompson on the Atlantic website. Here are some bits from the piece, including the title and sub-title:
1. Women prefer working together and men prefer working alone.
2. Men think they're better off solo, even when they aren't.
3. Men are part of a clubby nepotism system.
4. Women are more attracted to cooperation than men.
5. Men demonstrate overconfidence in their own abilities.
6. Men distrust in their colleagues' aptitude, except under key situations.
7. Women prefer to work in teams, men prefer to work alone.
8. Women perform worse in competitive environments, even when their performance was similar to men in noncompetitive environments.
9. Women demonstrated less confidence about their own abilities and more confidence in their potential partners' abilities.
10. Women are less comfortable with their colleagues making dramatically different salaries.
11. Men are more sensitive than women to small tweaks in team-based compensation.
12. It's not enough to focus on making brilliant women feel confident. It's also key to make overconfident men trust that their colleagues just might be competent.
This is not an up-with-men sort of piece, but that's not my point in citing it.
I don't even disagree that men tend to be loners, and women tend to organize and cooperate. I've seen this with my own eyes, as a team member and team leader in business, and as a volunteer in political and charity organizations, and in self-help workshops I've participated in. Women are better at working together. And imho, men are better at.. I think I'll just stop there.
People who got mad at me for saying what I thought men were better at should take a look at their anger. Because if you were mad at me for saying something you perceived as negative about women, it seems to me you should be equally angry with Mr. Thompson, the author of the Atlantic piece, for suggesting there are things women are better at.
Of course you'd be very busy, because there are lots of articles saying women are good and men are bad. This is a pervasive theme in our culture, and it goes back a long time. Women, because they do work better together, and often on behalf of their gender as a whole, have better PR than men, who are often left to fend for themselves as individuals.
Before commenting, please review the commenting policy. This is not one of those exceptional pieces. Play by the rules or post somewhere else. Thanks!
PS: I'm one of those men who yearn for more working-together. The people who stand in the way of that, no matter what their gender, prevent me from doing my work. So I understand that none of these things are absolute and all-inclusive. We have to be able to discuss trends, as adults, and understand and welcome exceptions.
It's even worse than it appears. © 1997-2013 Scripting News, Inc.
