Red Mosquito

VinylGuy wrote:i miss this show so much...yeah its gonna be really hard when it finishes.

Spoiler: show

i always thought walter jr is going to die because of walter.

i still like the idea that walter jr. becomes a meth addict

elliseamos wrote:so i'm a bonehead for having a differing opinion than you? and yet you're making an admitted blind statement? classic platypus.

I didn't call you a bonehead, I called your argument boneheaded. I used the adjective to describe the argument put forward (as simplistic, asinine and ill-conceived, but now I add: poorly defended), not the person who presented it. And when did I make an "admittedly blind statement"?

And so again,

theplatypus wrote: I question your basic comprehension skills.

theplatypus wrote:

elliseamos wrote:so i'm a bonehead for having a differing opinion than you? and yet you're making an admitted blind statement? classic platypus.

I didn't call you a bonehead, I called your argument boneheaded. I used the adjective to describe the argument put forward (as asinine and ill-conceived, but now I add: poorly defended), not the person who presented it. And when did I make an "admittedly blind statement"?

And so again,

theplatypus wrote: I question your basic comprehension skills.

oh right, i'm not a bonehead, i'm just stupid. awesome conversation as usual.

i hate when my parents fight

I'd like to read you defend your argument instead of posting non sequiturs and throwing tantrums. Maybe that way we can have a conversation.

theplatypus wrote:I'd like to read you defend your argument instead of posting non sequiturs and throwing tantrums. Maybe that way we can have a conversation.

what's left to defend? it's just a bonehead remark... and i'm calmer than you are, dude.

Sure, okay.

i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

Although i love this show, and i think it the best one out there these days, some of this can be true. I dont think you can apply this to hank yet, but i can see your point being fair.

I dont think that makes the show less enjoyable or good.

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

I'm struggling to understand how someone could look at season 1 Jesse Pinkman, compare them with season 5 Jesse Pinkman, and think "yeah, this guy hasn't changed one bit." Same with Walter. Same with Skyler. Even Hank. These are all characters that have been through profound transformations-- some in a more obvious and outward way, others more quiet and subtly (like Hank's inner turmoil, the wear-and-tear of "chasing monsters" revealed in the season 5.1 finale vs. his over-the-top alpha dog swashbuckling demeanor in season 1).

theplatypus wrote:

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

I'm struggling to understand how someone could look at season 1 Jesse Pinkman, compare them with season 5 Jesse Pinkman, and think "yeah, this guy hasn't changed one bit." Same with Walter. Same with Skyler. Even Hank. These are all characters that have been through profound transformations-- some in a more obvious and outward way, others more quiet and subtly (like Hank's inner turmoil, the wear-and-tear of "chasing monsters" revealed in the season 5.1 finale vs. his over-the-top alpha dog swashbuckling demeanor in season 1).

all interesting ideas, but i feel more than content with my own assessment of things. especially my opinion that the characters show instances of learning something, only to disappoint me by returning to their most common personality. maybe i'm too superficial with things, but i found myself all too often annoyed by the characters (expected/predicted) mistakes.

elliseamos wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

I'm struggling to understand how someone could look at season 1 Jesse Pinkman, compare them with season 5 Jesse Pinkman, and think "yeah, this guy hasn't changed one bit." Same with Walter. Same with Skyler. Even Hank. These are all characters that have been through profound transformations-- some in a more obvious and outward way, others more quiet and subtly (like Hank's inner turmoil, the wear-and-tear of "chasing monsters" revealed in the season 5.1 finale vs. his over-the-top alpha dog swashbuckling demeanor in season 1).

all interesting ideas, but i feel more than content with my own assessment of things. especially my opinion that the characters show instances of learning something, only to disappoint me by returning to their most common personality. maybe i'm too superficial with things, but i found myself all too often annoyed by the characters (expected/predicted) mistakes.

so, you'd prefer it if characters acted out of character most of the time?

Mecca wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

I'm struggling to understand how someone could look at season 1 Jesse Pinkman, compare them with season 5 Jesse Pinkman, and think "yeah, this guy hasn't changed one bit." Same with Walter. Same with Skyler. Even Hank. These are all characters that have been through profound transformations-- some in a more obvious and outward way, others more quiet and subtly (like Hank's inner turmoil, the wear-and-tear of "chasing monsters" revealed in the season 5.1 finale vs. his over-the-top alpha dog swashbuckling demeanor in season 1).

all interesting ideas, but i feel more than content with my own assessment of things. especially my opinion that the characters show instances of learning something, only to disappoint me by returning to their most common personality. maybe i'm too superficial with things, but i found myself all too often annoyed by the characters (expected/predicted) mistakes.

so, you'd prefer it if characters acted out of character most of the time?

no. i'd believe it if they learned something and carried it with them. how's the saying go in the show, "no half measures," i feel like all the characters are constantly doing just that. how often did somebody say don't make the same mistake twice, and then they went right ahead and doubled-down on the mistake the 2nd time. it just weakened the story, which was good, i like the story, but as i've said, i think it's been told better.

elliseamos wrote:

Mecca wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

elliseamos wrote:i mean, skitch already summed it up pretty well, and you saw that fairly clearly in his post (immediately)... it's really not that complicated beyond that point. i see the characters as being very much the same throughout, showing signs of "learning" something, and then being annoying themselves.

I'm struggling to understand how someone could look at season 1 Jesse Pinkman, compare them with season 5 Jesse Pinkman, and think "yeah, this guy hasn't changed one bit." Same with Walter. Same with Skyler. Even Hank. These are all characters that have been through profound transformations-- some in a more obvious and outward way, others more quiet and subtly (like Hank's inner turmoil, the wear-and-tear of "chasing monsters" revealed in the season 5.1 finale vs. his over-the-top alpha dog swashbuckling demeanor in season 1).

all interesting ideas, but i feel more than content with my own assessment of things. especially my opinion that the characters show instances of learning something, only to disappoint me by returning to their most common personality. maybe i'm too superficial with things, but i found myself all too often annoyed by the characters (expected/predicted) mistakes.

so, you'd prefer it if characters acted out of character most of the time?

no. i'd believe it if they learned something and carried it with them. how's the saying go in the show, "no half measures," i feel like all the characters are constantly doing just that. how often did somebody say don't make the same mistake twice, and then they went right ahead and doubled-down on the mistake the 2nd time. it just weakened the story, which was good, i like the story, but as i've said, i think it's been told better.

I don't know how to tell you the characters have learned and changed and make you change your mind. Platy showed some good examples of that earlier in his quote pyramid. I would never believe Walter capable of poisoning a child as a means to an end until killing Gayle. Even watching Jane die, I wouldn't believe it, but he evolved into that over time.
If you are talking about Walter making the same mistake twice, he does that out of hubris. If any learning happens, he learns what he did wrong the first time or is just acting emotionally (killing Gus's thugs to save Jesse). The whole persona of Heisenberg is based on portraying himself as the answer to everything because he is a pretty smart guy when it comes down to it. Season 1 Walter White would have never fallen victim to hubris; he was too meek to believe he could succeed over anything. Heisenberg keeps winning, so why should he feel he can't win at any game after being set back once when he has come back even harder and won against many of his antagonists? It just sets up his eventual downfall.

The characters may be making the same mistakes over and over (in some cases), but that to me is part of what is compelling-- watching and realizing they are not in control. I feel like when you can look at a set of plot circumstances and reasonably predict basic character behavior, it illustrates that the characters are well-written. I couldn't argue with someone who says the characters are sometimes predictable, but I think that's only viable in snapshots-- and I think the biggest leaps in character (Jesse killing Gale, for example) signify utter transformations of what is "standard." Season 5 Jesse may still be an idiot to some extent, but he's a seasoned idiot. The transformations are often seamless. That's remarkable to me, given how dark some of this stuff is.

I just want to add, I really do love Breaking Bad.

As someone who has re-watched certain episodes and gone back to see how everything sort of fits together...you're wrong Ellis. At least in my opinion.

Orpheus wrote:As someone who has re-watched certain episodes and gone back to see how everything sort of fits together...you're wrong Ellis. At least in my opinion.

and that's fine by me if you want to have that opinion. what bugs me the most (on this board specificially, platypus seemingly most often) is that people feel compelled to convince other people that their opinion is "wrong." please, as often happens, correct my spelling and my facts, but don't try and convince me of something i've decided for myself. i personally choose to believe that these characters demonstrated a range of behaviors, but ultimately, I don't believe they ever really learned anything. take Bubbles from The Wire as an example of somebody that learns something over 5 seasons of a series.

elliseamos wrote:

Orpheus wrote:As someone who has re-watched certain episodes and gone back to see how everything sort of fits together...you're wrong Ellis. At least in my opinion.

and that's fine by me if you want to have that opinion. what bugs me the most (on this board specificially, platypus seemingly most often) is that people feel compelled to convince other people that their opinion is "wrong." please, as often happens, correct my spelling and my facts, but don't try and convince me of something i've decided for myself. i personally choose to believe that these characters demonstrated a range of behaviors, but ultimately, I don't believe they ever really learned anything. take Bubbles from The Wire as an example of somebody that learns something over 5 seasons of a series.

I love the show, i think its the best show out there at this time, and that the characters are really well written.
Still, you have a point. Not entirely agree with this, but i can see you have the arguments to back this up.

And yeah, this board is pretty boring when it comes to " your ideas are stupid"...

I think you're interpreting events/actions differently than a lot of viewers. Nothing wrong with that, but for those of us who have witnessed the changes and see how those changes (whether growth or regression) have affected the lives of the characters in the show, it's hard to see things your way, ellis.

Again, nothing wrong with your opinion. That's the way you see it, the way the show has communicated to you. But I have to agree with your opposition on this. Jorge gave a few great examples of the real changes these characters have gone through. While I do agree that characters make the same mistakes often, I also agree with whomever pointed out that it's part of what makes the show so compelling. To me it isn't lack of growth, it's the very real portrayal of the failures of being human.

But, I do agree with Skitch, that there is a circular element that pulls the show down a bit, for me. I don't think Breaking Bad is the best show ever (I don't even think it's the best show on TV right now). There are times when the show gets in its own way; when the writers force things rather than letting the characters tell the story. Too many plot devices, too many events dictate the story. I prefer the show when the characters drive the action, instead of the action driving the characters. The show is more gimmicky than I prefer.

Still, it's phenomenally acted, gorgeously design and shot, and well directed.