Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
I don't think there's a ton of evidence of that. Jimmy had a teenager step in front of a car for a payday. It wasn't until Jimmy was on the hook defending a client that was about to get blown out of the water that he made the morally correct decision to return his bribe (but only after he hired someone to break into their home). Even then, had he not known that he was going down as part of a conspiracy by accepting the bribe, he wouldn't have given that money back.
It's the sainthood of Jimmy that I don't quite understand here. This is a guy who, in BB, not so subtly encourages Walt to commit more than one murder.
Chuck might be a bad brother; I'll grant you. So far, that's the only bit of insight we have to his underlying character. Moreover, even as a bad brother, he helped Jimmy to the point that he was able to build that case into anything at all and then worked with Hamlin to get him a damn sweet deal.
I know he's supposed to be the black hat here and Jimmy's supposed to be the flawed anti-hero, but I don't see any reason to hold up Jimmy as virtuous here while blasting Chuck.
|
The setup with the "teenager" was with a couple of cons working against a couple of crooks. There were no innocents involved in that, if you'll remember. We've also seen Jimmy be charitable, honest, and even kind to the elderly as he's worked with them.
And the sainthood is because Jimmy hasn't become Saul Goodman yet. That's the whole point of the show: watching Jimmy break bad and become Saul Goodman. If he's already there, then he's a static character, and there's no real point or evolution.