peter goodman

2

Bob Odenkirk On How ‘Accidentally Being The Right Guy’ Brought Him From Comedy to Drama by Liz Shannon Miller (Indiewire)

It was Odenkirk’s first big Breaking Bad scene, though, that led to the idea of Saul beyond a one-off character — it’s something Gould told IndieWire about in 2015, calling out a very specific moment in the action:

There was a moment that told me that there was more to Saul, and basically what happens in the scene is he walks in and there’s a cop interviewing his client. And he more or less chases the cop out, ‘You can’t talk to my client without me! Go get a juicebox, baby face!’ And then the cop leaves, and Bob added this little moment where he takes this little breath like ‘Whew, I’m glad I got away with that,’ and then he gets down to business with Badger. At that moment I knew, well, there’s more to this guy than I thought. He is not just a slickster, there is an inner life to him.

Two years later, Odenkirk’s reaction to that observation was a bit stunned. “What a neat thing to notice,” he said. “That’s pretty cool. I guess if there was any way to characterize that, potentially — I don’t want to speak for Peter, but it suggests that Saul’s bravado is a front, and he has to make an effort to put that front on, and as a result it means he’s a person making a choice that isn’t entirely organic to his entirety of his being.”

Odenkirk also remembered another moment that indicated there was more potential to Saul’s character, beyond that one second season episode. “It was literally after that first episode on Breaking Bad that somebody in the crew made a joke, ‘Can I get a job on the sequel?‘” he said. “I don’t know who, because there were too many bright lights in my face, and everyone laughed. But everybody sort of sensed that there was more to this guy than the clown on display.”

nytimes.com
Peter Goodman, French Markets Surge as Euro Withstands Attack From the Right
With the prospect that Marine Le Pen could claim the presidency sowing concerns about the currency, the results of the election’s first round provided some respite.
By Peter S. Goodman

Peter Goodman on the Euro:

Many argue that the euro was doomed from inception. It was conceived more as an idealistic reach for European cooperation than as a reasoned plan to manage a currency. The assumption was that shared money would spur greater European political integration.

Instead, the euro has devolved into a major source of political acrimony across the Continent.

In countries with their own money, bad economic times typically prompt governments to spend more to generate jobs and spur growth. Their currencies fall in value, making their goods cheaper on world markets and aiding exports.

But countries in the eurozone cannot fully avail themselves of those benefits. The currency comes with rules limiting the size of budget deficits. Faced with hard times, governments using the euro have been forced to intensify the hurt on ordinary people by cutting pensions and other public outlays.

The Nobel laureate economist Joseph E. Stiglitz has indicted the euro as a leading source of economic inequality that has divided European nations into two stark classes — creditor and debtor.

As Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain have slid into debt crises in recent years, they have accused Germany of self-serving inflexibility in demanding strict adherence to debt limits while refusing to transfer wealth to those in trouble. Germany and other northern countries have accused their southern brethren of failing to carry out changes — like making it easier to fire workers — that would make them more competitive.

The crises have time and again exposed the structural flaws of the eurozone, and its tendency to generate more recrimination than action.

“You have a basic situation in the eurozone now where it’s like a half-built house,” said Jacob F. Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. “As long as that persists, a large number of investors are going to have existential doubts about the euro.”

The European crisis of confidence continues, and even an outright defeat of Le Pen will not put an end to that.

Q: Despite their conjoined worlds, each of your Albuquerque series has its own flavor. How did you conceive of tone going into the prequel?

A - Gilligan: “It’s interesting that you say there are differences. I’m sure glad to hear it, because our hope is always to give the audience something they haven’t seen before. That’s just a good basic philosophy for any television show, any movie, any novel. As we progressed on Better Call Saul, it dawned on Peter and I more and more that there were a whole lot of similarities to the two shows, and I’m not talking about the setting or the fact that the two worlds overlap, with the meeting of Saul Goodman and Walter White. I’m talking on a more fundamental level.

When you think about it, both shows are the story of one particular character’s devolution from good to bad. When it finally dawned on me that at heart, we’re doing the same story over again, it scared me, it made me lose some sleep. We did everything we could in the meantime, on a more surface level, to make the shows feel as different as possible. We shot Breaking Bad on film; we capture Better Call Saul digitally. In the shooting of Breaking Bad, we would have this steady, handheld, cinéma verité sort of look, so we purposely went the opposite way with Better Call Saul—locked in the cameras and made the movements smoother and more mechanical.

We’re always actively trying to make the two shows look different, but at heart, we’re telling a very similar story. We kind of fell into that, because as I’ve been joking lately, “I guess we’re one-trick ponies.” At the end of the day, I think that [devolution] fascinates us.

The hopeful potential for Better Call Saul is that it doesn’t necessarily have to end as sad or as badly as Breaking Bad did, for the main character and his family. There is a possibility for some sort of redemptive moment. I’m not promising that to viewers, and I don’t know exactly where it’s all going to end myself, but I like to think that we have the possibility for redemption for the character of Saul Goodman/Jimmy McGill.

– from ‘Better Call Saul’ Co-Creator Vince Gilligan On “Sticking It To The Sandwich Makers” With Visual Approach To Storytelling (Deadline)

Optimus Prime: Calling all Autobots! Calling all Autobots!
Hound: Oh yeah! HELL YEAH! He’s back! He’s alive! OPTIMUS IS HERE!
Drift: At last, there is hope after all…
Crosshairs: Mister “Leader of the Free Galaxy” is back! I never doubted you for an instant…
Drift: We got your warning. We’ve been waiting.
Hound: Hell yeah! Booya! We got the gang back together.
Optimus Prime. Humans have asked us to play by their rules. Well, the rules have just changed.
Hound: Human beings, buncha back-stabbin’ weasels!
Drift: Hound. Find your inner compass. Loyalty is but a flower in the winds of fear and temptation.
Hound: What the hell are you sayin’?
Drift: It’s a haiku.
Hound: Cut the crap before I drop a grenade down your throat!
Drift: Try it and you’ll be dead.
Hound: Oh please pull it. Please do it.
Bumblebee: You know to save so much time…..
Crosshairs: Well raise you’re hand if you’re thoroughly disenchanted with our little earth vacation. So who’s the stowaways?!
Cade: Woah! Hey! What’s with the gun?!
Optimus Prime: Stop Hound! Both of you! They’ve risked their lives for mine. We owe them.

Dis-function family much?

Chance

Season 2, “The Flitcraft Parable"


Director: Carl Franklin

DoP: Itai Ne'eman