here’s the trailer at the end of Ep. 10. I couldn’t find any teasers for Ep 11.
I saw that, the coming to a crossroads inference received loud and clear.
I think the heist is over as a plot line. There’s only so much time left in the series, and given how self-contained the heist story was (initiated and completed in the same episode - why, buttering up Jerry from Park & Rec alone took weeks of in-show time), we are now moving forward with Gene w/ his reluctant accomplice(s) headed on to the next scam.
No one is arguing against this. We just all completely disagree with your interpretation of what was shown on the screen.
Neat. Netflix UK doesn’t have Ep promo/previews. IMDB provides the synopsis:
The partners escalate their enterprise to new levels.
and the title is “Breaking Bad” – almost 13 years after the BB ep “Better Call Saul”
Odenkirk has been portraying Gene for 7+ years & always in brilliant monochrOmaha (I also love that word)
Yah, that’s where I saw it, too. I really enjoy Noir Alley.
This episode was very much about Jimmy/Saul/Gene coming to terms with who he is–the same guy who cowered in fear of making a fuss and drawing attention when he got locked out in the mall dumpster area is also the guy who will find any excuse to run a con to rip off that same mall and he will use anything in service to making a con succeed. Even the gut punch memory of his brother’s horrifying end. Yeah, that was relief at pulling it all off (“Man, I still got it!”) but also facing up to just how much he’s willing to throw under the bus to make a con work. Like his marriage, his family, his career, his friends. I think his crossroads is a three way one–which of his identities is he going to pick and stay with or maybe is he going to be able to integrate those three identities and go into the future as an amalgam of all his traits and personas?
The one thing I know about Vince & Crew is that they have never once let me down and I’m perfectly willing to trust myself to the vision they’re so painstakingly rolling out for me. My opinion (or anyone else’s, for that matter) of where the show is “supposed” to end up is moot–the artist is creating the work he envisions and is inviting us to see it along with him. With the track record of this show and BB I’m about 10000% sure I won’t be disappointed.
Thanks to this thread I watched “Bob le Flambeur” last night. It was great. Thanks Dopers!!
And thanks to this thread, I watched Nebraska this morning, and it also was great.
My thanks to the smart Dopers with good taste!
On edit: Crap. I think I saw that recommendation in an entirely different site.
Excellent!
Me, too. As far as I know it’s the only feature at TCM that gives 10 or more minutes of detailed information about the movie being shown (half before, half after), instead of the usual ‘minute or so before and 30 seconds after.’ Eddie Muller really knows his stuff!

Yeah, that was relief at pulling it all off (“Man, I still got it!”) but also facing up to just how much he’s willing to throw under the bus to make a con work.
I think this is on the road to being fair, but:
I finally got to re-watch the episode, and lo and behold: there is ANOTHER scene of Jimmy coming out of the security office, filmed in virtually identical style: same location, same camera angle, same lighting–everything. It occurs right after Jimmy’s first visit to the office–his first delivery of Cinnabons. Why are there two instances of showing him reacting to what’s just happened in the security office? Here’s a possible answer, set in the BCS writers’ room:
WRITER A: When Jimmy comes out of the office after the heist, and displays emotion once he’s out of range of the security cameras, some viewers are going to assume that the emotion he’s showing is ‘pure relief.’
WRITER B: That’s right–many viewers like to think of Jimmy as always ‘large and in charge; cool as a cucumber; king of all he surveys,’ etc. They like thinking of him as the guy who’s on top of it all–not as a vulnerable guy.
WRITER A: Right. Thinking of him as having made himself vulnerable–that’s a no-go for a lot of fans. They will want to believe he was carrying out a con coolly and professionally, with no emotional involvement. So they are going to want to interpret his expression in that scene right after the heist as “pure relief”—not as any kind of distress or anguish or regret about his life. Yet it’s important to establish that Jimmy is soul-sick. We can’t let viewers tell themselves they’re seeing nothing but Relief.
WRITER C: I’ve got a solution. We can film ‘Jimmy comes out of the office, leans against the wall, and reacts’ TWICE. We’ll film it in exactly the same way. But what we see the first time—which actually will be ‘pure relief’—will show the audience what Jimmy looks like when he expresses ‘pure relief.’
WRITER A: And what the audience will see the second time—by contrast—will clearly be ‘Jimmy in distress because he’s realized that his “fake outburst” actually ended up revealing the genuine emotional emptiness of his life.’
And so it turned out. Watch the episode again: the first of the two ‘Jimmy comes out of the security office and leans against the wall out of camera range’ scenes shows him displaying “relief.” (Odenkirk even busts out with a “whew”—and makes it work.)
In the second scene–the one that’s been argued about in this thread since the episode aired–Odenkirk-as-Jimmy is showing something quite different. He’s showing emotional distress and anguish.
Watch the two scenes.
Dude, let it go.

I know what you mean here but I didn’t read that as being sincere. It was very reminsicent of how Jimmy landed Chuck in trouble with the insurance provider - in his meeting with the agent, he had a big breakdown about how he’d screwed up his career and his relationships, in which he just happened to mention that Charles McGill was delusional. Cue insurance company removing coverage, Chuck’s hearing etc. etc.
It seemed like a really heartfelt breakdown! But it was in service of a scam. And Gene’s breakdown was the same. Is he only capable of genuine introspection in the context of manipulating other people? Can he even distinguish between genuine emotion and manipulative performance? Is the con the only way he can even cynically express his true feelings?
Belatedly, I should clarify that when I say I didn’t read the “my life is empty, my brother dead” as being sincere, I don’t mean that Gene hasn’t had these thoughts, or isn’t aware that he is living a monochrome empty life with no meaningful relationships. I mean that he is only vocalising them - perhaps is only able to vocalise them - as a desperate move in a high-stakes scam that is about to go catastrophically wrong.
Compare not only the insurance office breakdown that smeared Chuck, but also the disbarment hearing speech at the end of Season 4 - the scene that preceded the birth of Saul Goodman. Jimmy had convinced most of the panel, but one member kept pushing for an emotional response instead of the boilerplate contrition Jimmy was serving up. So he makes this big speech about what Chuck meant to him, his high standards, how he, Jimmy, had let Chuck down. It was very emotional. Kim was shaken by the vulnerability and honesty Jimmy displayed. It looked like a moment of genuine catharsis. But it was nothing of the kind. Jimmy used that raw material simply to hoodwink the last panel member. Was it real? Yeah, sure, Jimmy had thought these thoughts. Did he really mean it? No - the next scene has him crowing (perhaps too emphatically? Maybe.) about how those rubes bought it. (And yes, compare and contrast with Jimmy’s post-con reaction in this episode.) This episode isn’t the first time Jimmy/Gene has used his feelings for Chuck in a scam, and didn’t exactly lead to a revelation about his lifestyle the previous two times.
Let’s remember what a shocking, knife-edge, high wire situation Gene was in. What happens if he gets caught? Game over is what happens. Jerry sees Jeffy, Jeffy gets caught. Does Jeffy quietly do his time? No, he drops Gene in it. And not in a “this guy was ringleader and accomplice” way. In a “remember that Albuquerque lawyer who was wrapped up in that high school teacher drug lord thing a while back? Well, make sure you’re sitting down for this next bit!” way. Gene is exposed, jailed, stripped of his diamond horde and back on the anthill at the mercy of whatever criminal elements want to take an interest. This is everything on the line, and all it takes is for Jerry to turn round.
So yes, in his desperation, with no time to make up a story, Gene reaches for the closest thing to hand. He knows that only “honesty” - some deep human appeal for attention and care - is going to keep Jerry’s eyes on him. So he talks about Gene’s miserable life, and he brings in some of Jimmy’s as well by referencing his brother. And he only does this because he has literally no other play to make. So yes, he has peeled back the Gene layer and revealed/accessed something deeper. But - only ever as part of the con. He would never had gone that deep without it, and he will put those feelings back in their box as soon as his heart rate comes down. If Jerry ever asks him about his brother, what response is he going to get? Which is “real”?
So - the relief after Gene’s whole life nearly falls apart is visibly much more intense than the relief after Gene walks into the security office and hands out some tasty snacks. Of course it is - first time he was just dipping a toe in the water, second time he clawed his way out of a shark-infested rip-tide. Higher stakes, higher intensity.
But the great thing about the show is that it’s rich enough to have these debates. Like I said:
Is he only capable of genuine introspection in the context of manipulating other people? Can he even distinguish between genuine emotion and manipulative performance? Is the con the only way he can even cynically express his true feelings?
These are questions we can all have different answers to - but how great to have writing and performances that raise these questions.

They like thinking of him as the guy who’s on top of it all–not as a vulnerable guy.
WRITER A: Right. Thinking of him as having made himself vulnerable–that’s a no-go for a lot of fans.
This is, yet again, an incorrect interpretation of what anyone in this thread is telling you. I don’t think anyone who has participated in this thread would describe Jimmy as “invulnerable” or unwilling to open up. Let it go.
Why would Gene say that Nippy came home? Let imaginary dogs die.

One thing I realised was that if we’re going to be all Gene all the time, the scope for a Walter White cameo is somewhat limited…
Assuming all the remaining episodes are in the “Gene timeline”, I presume any Walt/Jessie cameo will come in the form of a flashback.

Assuming all the remaining episodes are in the “Gene timeline”, I presume any Walt/Jessie cameo will come in the form of a flashback.
In Breaking Bad Season 2, there were several flash forwards in black and white, hinting at the plane crash at the climax of the season. When the Breaking Bad timeline caught up though, the plane crash scenes were in color.
I think the Gene scenes are still in the future from the “main” BCS timeline’s perspective. I think we’ll get more scenes of Saul before and during BB (which is the only timeline I can see Walt and Jesse realistically showing up), and the Gene scenes will be in color by the end of this season, when the timeline catches up.
Though it’s possible of course they’re using black and white in a different way on this show. Using it to highlight the boredom and monotony of Gene’s existence in Omaha, and they’ll bring back the color when he decides he’s done being Gene and puts on his Saul suit to defend himself.
But also both of these ideas could be true at the same time. I just don’t think we’re entirely in the Gene era yet, and I don’t think we’re done with the before and during Breaking Bad timelines.
I’m just wondering how the Breaking Bad cameos will fit story wise? Maybe as Gene is morphing back into Saul, he’ll remember how he got to the point where he had to be Gene? Well, I guess we’ll know soon enough.
I wondered that too. I also wondered why Jeffy took the time to cut off the anti-theft tags as he was grabbing the merchandise. My understanding was that the front entrance where the detectors are stationed remained locked, and he took all the stuff out the back door to the loading dock, so the tags wouldn’t have set off an alarm. But even if I’m wrong about that, what’s he doing with the tags once he removes them? Surely he has to get them out of the store or they would raise suspicion immediately the next morning. Where does he put them?
He probably flushed them when he was hiding in the toilet stall
In some stores, the expensive coats are secured to the rack with a steel cable. Perhaps that’s what he was cutting?

In some stores, the expensive coats are secured to the rack with a steel cable.
That’s what it looked like to me. Not a price tag.