What is the big deal about Breaking Bad?
- Thread starter dtownreppin214
- Start date
genius!!!
HARLEM AL
Your broad loves me.....
You bugging. BB is fukking piff.
As much as I love GOT there are plenty skippable Eps.
As much as I love GOT there are plenty skippable Eps.
Black Ball
Superstar
I thought the show was both great and overrated. The show had alot of high points and alot of dull/subpar shyt also. Going through it once is a great ride for the high levels of tension & suspense that it builds. The story isn't nearly as captivating once you know what happens though. I think due to the storyline being so simple and singular, it's harder to fill the time with actual story content as opposed to prolonged sequences in one setting that's disguised as character building where nothing much happens.
Don't get it wrong though, I would definitely recommend the show to anybody that hasn't seen it, it's a great ride to take. I just don't think it's the Goat or anything.
Don't get it wrong though, I would definitely recommend the show to anybody that hasn't seen it, it's a great ride to take. I just don't think it's the Goat or anything.
Why is this a problem though? Let's have a serious discussion, breh.
There is no burden on fiction to be realistic, regardless of whether or not the setting is. Nobody ever said "eh, Franz Kafka's 'Metamorphosis' would be a cool story about a struggling middle class family if the protagonist hadn't turned into a monstrous insect"....which is never even explained, it's just randomly dropped into the story.
No one ever said "eh, 'The Tell-Tale Heart' by Poe was some cool shyt up until the killer heard his victim's heart beating beneath the floor boards".
Yet both of these are considered high water marks in literature.
In the Golden Age of TV people call these heavily serialized dramas "the visual novel". But I disagree, because nobody places these arbitrary boundaries on novels. Nobody says John Grisham is a better author than H.P. Lovecraft, because his shyt is more realistic. Realism isn't even a subject, because it's all fiction.
Anyway, "BB" never sold itself as realistic. The premise is "a 50 year old high school chemistry teacher becomes a drug king pin". Season 1 he's blowing up dope houses with fulminated mercury, on some MacGuyver shyt. Earlier in the thread a guy was talking about, he's been in the streets and "Walt and Jesse would be dead"....no shyt. This ain't "the streets" though, it's a TV show that's going for over the top operatic moments, moreso than realism. Season 2 should've been a massive clue in that regard.
Season 2....where to even begin. The airplane shyt. Jesse falls in love with a druggie girl that blackmails Walt, who then watches her die, which causes her air traffic controller dad to collide two planes....precisely over Walt's house....and a pink teddy bear falls into his pool, which becomes a reoccurring symbol for death in the series.
No offense breh....but that wasn't a big ass clue the show wasn't remotely attempting realism? You'd win the lottery 10x in a row before events would unfold in that exact sequence.
Now, if you can't vibe with some unrealistic shyt, that's a different topic. And ultimately
But realism has never....literally never....been a yardstick for the quality of fiction. So why start now, with this TV show?
Fred.
Last edited:
Why is this a problem though? Let's have a serious discussion, breh.
There is no burden on fiction to be realistic, regardless of whether or not the setting is. Nobody ever said "eh, Franz Kafka's 'Metamorphosis' would be a cool story about a struggling middle class family if the protagonist hadn't turned into a monstrous insect"....which is never even explained, it's just randomly dropped into the story.
No one ever said "eh, 'The Tell-Tale Heart' by Poe was some cool shyt up until the killer heard his victim's heart beating beneath the floor boards".
Yet both of these are considered high water marks in literature.
In the Golden Age of TV people call these heavily serialized dramas "the visual novel". But I disagree, because nobody places these arbitrary boundaries on novels. Nobody says John Grisham is a better author than H.P. Lovecraft, because his shyt is more realistic. Realism isn't even a subject, because it's all fiction.
Anyway, "BB" never sold itself as realistic. The premise is "a 50 year old high school chemistry teacher becomes a drug king pin". Season 1 he's blowing up dope houses with fulminated mercury, on some MacGuyver shyt. Earlier in the thread a guy was talking about, he's been in the streets and "Walt and Jesse would be dead"....no shyt. This ain't "the streets" though, it's a TV show that's going for over the top operatic moments, moreso than realism. Season 2 should've been a massive clue in that regard.
Season 2....where to even begin. The airplane shyt. Jesse falls in love with a druggie girl that blackmails Walt, who then watches her die, which causes her air traffic controller dad to collide two planes....precisely over Walt's house....and a pink teddy bear falls into his pool, which becomes a reoccurring symbol for death in the series.
No offense breh....but that wasn't a big ass clue the show wasn't remotely attempting realism? You'd win the lottery 10x in a row before events would unfold in that exact sequence.
Now, if you can't vibe with some unrealistic shyt, that's a different topic. And ultimately
But realism has never....literally never....been a yardstick for the quality of fiction. So why start now, with this TV show?
Fred.
A lot of good points here, I think this is the discussion we've all been trying to have for 3 pages. My issue isn't with lack of realism, it's with freedom from consequence. Take the least realistic piece of quality fiction you can find - Lord of the Rings, The Tempest, whatever - the worlds are fantasy, but consequences exist. Breaking Bad inverts that. The world is real, but consequences don't exist. Walt consistently painted himself into absurd situations and was always awarded a magic "out." This happened with such frequency and carelessness that my suspension of disbelief was shattered at times. This is my primary criticism of Breaking Bad.
I'm glad you brought up MacGyver because that type of television figures into this discussion quite a bit. We watched shows like MacGyver and 1960s Batman for the ride. We knew there was never any chance MacGyver would not escape or the Joker would manager to lower Batman into the pot of acid. Because we knew this, our emotional investment in the characters was minimal. Breaking Bad on the other hand begs us to become emotionally invested in the characters. The sick, downtrodden family man, the handicapped son, the pregnant wife. It lays it on pretty thick from the start. Then, in addition to the request for emotional investment, it presents us with a hyper realistic world - I am not talking about Walt's feats, I am talking about the lives of Walt, Hank, Marie, Skylar, Walt jr. and Jesse. Hell, breaking bad is far more realistic than the Sopranos in that sense. I'm not sure if s1e1 Tony Soprano really exists, I fully accept that s1e1 Walter White does.
I fully agree with you realism has never been the measure of good fiction. That it should be is the worst, most juvenile kind of argument. However, plausible reaction to action is a foundation of quality fiction (and chemistry
). Breaking Bad denies us that and that is my problem.
The only show better than BB is The Wire...BB was beautifully written and well acted...idk what you all are talking about. Even the camera work was nice. Walter White started out as a school teacher and by 4th season he was a full fledged gangsta. The way they showed how all his actions affected his and everybody around him's life was tight. BB #2 all time 
Black Ball
Superstar
A lot of good points here, I think this is the discussion we've all been trying to have for 3 pages. My issue isn't with lack of realism, it's with freedom from consequence. Take the least realistic piece of quality fiction you can find - Lord of the Rings, The Tempest, whatever - the worlds are fantasy, but consequences exist. Breaking Bad inverts that. The world is real, but consequences don't exist. Walt consistently painted himself into absurd situations and was always awarded a magic "out." This happened with such frequency and carelessness that my suspension of disbelief was shattered at times. This is my primary criticism of Breaking Bad.
I'm glad you brought up MacGyver because that type of television figures into this discussion quite a bit. We watched shows like MacGyver and 1960s Batman for the ride. We knew there was never any chance MacGyver would not escape or the Joker would manager to lower Batman into the pot of acid. Because we knew this, our emotional investment in the characters was minimal. Breaking Bad on the other hand begs us to become emotionally invested in the characters. The sick, downtrodden family man, the handicapped son, the pregnant wife. It lays it on pretty thick from the start. Then, in addition to the request for emotional investment, it presents us with a hyper realistic world - I am not talking about Walt's feats, I am talking about the lives of Walt, Hank, Marie, Skylar, Walt jr. and Jesse. Hell, breaking bad is far more realistic than the Sopranos in that sense. I'm not sure if s1e1 Tony Soprano really exists, I fully accept that s1e1 Walter White does.
I fully agree with you realism has never been the measure of good fiction. That it should be is the worst, most juvenile kind of argument. However, plausible reaction to action is a foundation of quality fiction (and chemistry
Great points. What I've said in the past to Hex's absolute minimizing the realism criticism is that Breaking Bad was not consistent with the rules of it's world. Realism in fictional TV is about staying within the rules that writer has presented. So in a Superman flick, we know that Superman can fly but that other regular people can't. Just like if they ever had an episode where Walt all of a sudden could fly, that would be completely absurd and ridiculous even though we understand that the show is fictional and not completely realistic. The world of Breaking Bad still has rules.
I accept that Walt is brilliant and can do brilliant shyt with chemistry & his mind, even if some of the chemistry is not completely based in fact like the TV show CSI. The biggest criticism is that the ways in which Walt & Jessie are always able to escape death and consequences was a lot of bs when you take into account the world in which BB was set in. Part of the problem was that the show leaned on the drama & suspense created from Walt's impending doom on some Soap opera shyt. There were other angles that could have been explored besides those ones.
Is just me or ANY thread where "Breaking Bad" is being discussed, @hexagram23 has the most posts in that thread?Please tell me he's not 1 of those dumb cacs I see on twitter that foolishly thinks "Breaking Bad" is better than "The Wire".
A lot of good points here, I think this is the discussion we've all been trying to have for 3 pages. My issue isn't with lack of realism, it's with freedom from consequence. Take the least realistic piece of quality fiction you can find - Lord of the Rings, The Tempest, whatever - the worlds are fantasy, but consequences exist. Breaking Bad inverts that. The world is real, but consequences don't exist. Walt consistently painted himself into absurd situations and was always awarded a magic "out." This happened with such frequency and carelessness that my suspension of disbelief was shattered at times. This is my primary criticism of Breaking Bad.
I'm glad you brought up MacGyver because that type of television figures into this discussion quite a bit. We watched shows like MacGyver and 1960s Batman for the ride. We knew there was never any chance MacGyver would not escape or the Joker would manager to lower Batman into the pot of acid. Because we knew this, our emotional investment in the characters was minimal. Breaking Bad on the other hand begs us to become emotionally invested in the characters. The sick, downtrodden family man, the handicapped son, the pregnant wife. It lays it on pretty thick from the start. Then, in addition to the request for emotional investment, it presents us with a hyper realistic world - I am not talking about Walt's feats, I am talking about the lives of Walt, Hank, Marie, Skylar, Walt jr. and Jesse. Hell, breaking bad is far more realistic than the Sopranos in that sense. I'm not sure if s1e1 Tony Soprano really exists, I fully accept that s1e1 Walter White does.
I fully agree with you realism has never been the measure of good fiction. That it should be is the worst, most juvenile kind of argument. However, plausible reaction to action is a foundation of quality fiction (and chemistry
Very good posts, brehs. I'm gonna address them at the same time. Maybe it'll clarify why "BB" is written the way it is....maybe it won't.
Are you familiar with the term "clockwork universe"? It basically means, no matter how 3 dimensional or deep a character seems, ultimately they're only a function of the plot. Or more specifically, any side character or sub plot is only important in direct relation to the actions the protagonist takes.
Most fiction, movies, TV, novels, whatever, try to hide this, for obvious reasons. "BB" went in the extreme opposite direction, and embraced it completely.
You say there's no consequences for Walt's actions. I disagree 100%. There was severe consequences, just not for Walt. Which is probably
to read, but let me explain.By the end of "BB" 270 people had died, most of them directly (or indirectly) due to the plot armor Walt has. So let's say they kill Walt in season 1. Or season 2. Or season 3. The shorter Walt's life, the more people survive.
So the point wasn't, Walt is in danger. The point literally was, Walt IS the danger. It wasn't just a cool line.
The writers even not-so-subtly pointed this out, via Jesse in the season 5B episode "Rabid Dog":
He's flat out telling them "Walt is the protagonist, you are side characters". They smugly assure him they have it under control. Within two episodes of that exchange they're both dead, and Jesse is being tortured. They didn't know their place in the clockwork universe.
Even the most ridiculous, cartoonish "outs" Walt was given, like the giant magnet, had horrific consequences for literally everyone but Walt. It directly lead to the deaths of Mike, his 11 guys, Peter Schuler, Drew Sharp...and set in motion the rest of season 5B, too.
So yeah, Walt was able to escape death and consequences....at the expense of everyone around him. That's the point of the show. That's why his admission "I did it for me" was so powerful in the finale.
Fred.
Last edited:
Very good posts, brehs. I'm gonna address them at the same time. Maybe it'll clarify why "BB" is written the way it is....maybe it won't.
Are you familiar with the term "clockwork universe"? It basically means, no matter how 3 dimensional or deep a character seems, ultimately they're only a function of the plot. Or more specifically, any side character or sub plot is only important in direct relation to the actions the protagonist takes.
Most fiction, movies, TV, novels, whatever, try to hide this, for obvious reasons. "BB" went in the extreme opposite direction, and embraced it completely.
You say there's no consequences for Walt's actions. I disagree 100%. There was severe consequences, just not for Walt. Which is probably
By the end of "BB" 270 people had died, most of them directly (or indirectly) due to the plot armor Walt has. So let's say they kill Walt in season 1. Or season 2. Or season 3. The shorter Walt's life, the more people survive.
So the point wasn't, Walt is in danger. The point literally was, Walt IS the danger. It wasn't just a cool line.
The writers even not-so-subtly pointed this out, via Jesse in the season 5B episode "Rabid Dog":
He's flat out telling them "Walt is the protagonist, you are side characters". They smugly assure him they have it under control. Within two episodes of that exchange they're both dead, and Jesse is being tortured. They didn't know their place in the clockwork universe.
Even the most ridiculous, cartoonish "outs" Walt was given, like the giant magnet, had horrific consequences for literally everyone but Walt. It directly lead to the deaths of Mike, his 11 guys, Peter Schuler, Drew Sharp...and set in motion the rest of season 5B, too.
So yeah, Walt was able to escape death and consequences....at the expense of everyone around him. That's the point of the show. That's why his admission "I did it for me" was so powerful in the finale.
Fred.
Great posting. I can fukk with your reasoning. I feel like we really built something here brehs