This. So much this.
You are arguing my point for me…which makes me confused about what the point is you intend to make?
Breaking Bad is a story about Walter White, who discovers he has terminal cancer and as a result elects to cook meth.
This story includes other people and what happens to them as a result of Walter White developing cancer and cooking meth: his family, and his associates and competitors in the drug business.
All to say… no, not overlooking state of the marriage… the marriqage was deeply affected by the fact that Walt had cancer and had become a meth cook.
Your argument at first was that Walt’s decision to break bad made everything happen. You used those exact words at least twice. I said you were overstating the case and that the show was all about Walt, but not quite that much. There were some stories that didn’t have much to do with Walt the criminal and which were primarily intended to deepen our understanding of the supporting cast.
My argument has not changed. Whatever the writers intended us to understand about the characters, they showed it to us by showing us how Walt’s break was affecting their lives. So far there hasn’t been anything beyond what I originally said as far as stories/character actions that werein no way driven by Walt’s actions, and that’s Marie’s theft of the tiara. Even her real estate thefts were her way of acting out her pain around Hank’s injuries, which of course were because of Walt.
Perhaps it’s just a matter of expression, since I see on second reading that you seem to be conflating “Walt’s decision to break bad made everything happen” with the show being “all about Walt”. Both statements are true, but the second is incomplete.
“Everything happened because Walt got cancer and broke bad” is a bit different from “everything happened because Walt broke bad,” though. They’re related but not the same. Skyler didn’t go back to Beneke because Walt broke bad. She did go back there because he got cancer. Walt’s decision also didn’t make Jesse’s family situation what it was.
I’ve taken the position that the show is all about Walt, and I’ve done so for the reason you mentioned: just about everything that illuminates something about Walt or what he’s doing even if it happens to another character. But I think you made your statements a little too broad. The other characters get a little more space to breathe than you suggested.
I agree that the original statement may have been too broad a brushstroke. However, the difference in this subtle point does nothing to diminish the awesomeness of the show- I think there is room for subtle interpretations like Marley’s that do not distract from the original message- the writers stayed more laser-focused on the themes and stories that made the show great, and managed to keep it at such a high level for the run of the show.
I don’t think it detracts from the show at all. I’m just interpreting this a little differently from Stoid. To give another example I don’t think they had to show us Gus’ back story - although it was relevant to the present - but they did, and it seemed to me that everybody loved it because it gave us a deeper understanding of a major character.
Completely agree. I don’t think having slightly different interpretations is a problem at all. Personally I don’t think the Skyler-Marie relationship was all that great. I think they are close in some senses, but were distant in many others.
Guess I won’t try to get into the Wire. (The “bite the hand that feeds you” condescension PISSES ME OFF!!)
I think his point is that, for shows like *The Wire *& Breaking Bad, the casual fan isn’t “the hand that feeds you”. Catering to the casual fan will cause you to produce a sub-par show, because too much is invested in catching everyone up.
I don’t find his remark to be condecending at all.
He was insulting people who don’t really watch his show, so he’s not really biting the hand that feeds him. 
David Simon is a very opinionated guy who wants his show to be watched and appreciated in a very specific way: he wants you to think about what it all means and get out there and do something instead of arguing about who’s more badass than who. He set out to make something he felt was Very Important. His attitude may well have hurt the show in the ratings when it aired, but it’s less of a problem now and it probably produced a better show. There’s certainly a line to walk between catering to casual viewers and rewarding dedicated fans instead of repeating yourself or talking down to them. Simon definitely chose one over the other and most TV shows are conscious of not deliberately alienating viewers. The default on most shows is smaller plot arcs and stuff that’s easier to pick up. Breaking Bad isn’t quite that hard to get into, really, because it has a pretty small cast and there’s one basic story - I don’t think it’s hard to figure who everybody is and what they’re doing, for example - but I think networks are figuring out that not every show has to be for everybody. You don’t need to try to make every show palatable for 20 million viewers.
Lab-You DON’T find the “people who can’t be bothered to watch EVERY minute of every episode of my magnum opus can sod off” attitude arrogant and condescending? People with that attitude don’t deserve fans because WE are the reason they have jobs in the first place!
It sounds like the opposite attitude of condescension, actually. His attitude is that if you don’t want to invest a hefty amount of your time and attention into his show, then his show is not for you and he won’t change the show to suit you at the cost of doing something better for people who are giving it their full attention. For whatever it’s worth, etv78, your attitudes on gratitude can be kind of unusual and I think maybe you should recognize that a lot of people don’t share them. You are not a fan, so he doesn’t owe you anything.
a) That’s not what he said, and…
b) no
Agree. Remember when Hank came over to ask for Skyler’s help with getting Marie some help? Skyler was all, “I’m 9 months pregnant with a husband with cancer and a son with Cystic Fibrosis and am just hanging on here; can at least one thing not be about my little bitch sister?!” There’s a limit to how close they are.
I would say they’re close, but Marie in particular is a lot to deal with. I think her kleptomania was news to Skyler but I bet the lying isn’t. She probably doesn’t know about the scope of the lying but that can’t be the first time she’s caught Marie lying about something significant. Even if they’re very close that doesn’t mean Skyler would be open about what was going at that point because I don’t think she’d admitted it to herself.
Right. Lots of people speculate that Gus and Max were more than just business partners. There’s also a lot of curiosity about Gus’s history in Chile. So it seems to me fans liked having a character who was fleshed out. The show wouldn’t have been as good as it was if we had never gotten to see Gus apart from his interactions with Walt.
Sure there is: She doesn’t want Hank, Walt, the neighbors, their friends and their friends’ cats to know. Would you trust Marie to keep secrets?
That’s why you don’t tell her anything in the first place, not why you make up a story or only tell part of the story or change the details of the story. If the goal is to avoid Marie saying anything, you don’t give her anything to say.
Like it’s always that simple.
Marie: what’s wrong. You seem off.
Sky: nothing
M: really, something’s weird. What’s going on. Kids? Walt? Work? Wait- whats that look when I said work?
S: nothing. Really.
M: don’t try that on me. I’m your sister. I can tell.
S: fine. My boss, um, he made a pass at me.
Etc.
I have three sisters. I know of what I speak.
Maybe there’s a little wiggle room in that black and white view you’re sticking to.