If they had that, they could have just parked that underneath the train bridge without anybody seeing it, and driven off after without having to dig it up again. Which makes me curious, how much would that weigh when full? I can just imagine them screwing up and piercing the side of it when excavating, unless of coure they just pump it out into something else and remove the container when it's empty.
They buried it so the train conductors wouldn't see anything as they passed by and wonder what the heck was going on back there when they were forced to stop seconds later.
I don't know, I feel like the show is starting to lose its gritty down to earth vibe and starting to look too cliche, too Hollywood and ehmm... too unrealistic.
OK let me explain... at the beginning the story was about a regular guy pushed to venture past his boundaries. But even then, the story had a sense of "realism." Example: remember when they were cooking in RV and dissolving bodies in acid, they had to solve realistic problems (who knew, its quite difficult to find a plastic bathtub big enough if you want to give dead body an acid bath). It was a drama, it was a fiction, but you thought "yup I can see this happening in real life (in America
Now? They have the equipment, knowledge and manpower to do elaborate heists (the huge magnet, the equipment they use when they cook, the shenenigans in Hank's office, machinery, equipment and tools for the train robbery etc etc). Everything they need is conveniently within their arm's reach. I mean why don't you rob a bank and get it over with?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Flame Of Liberty For This Useful Post:
I fail to see how the conductor or engineer would be able to see the tanks if they were set directly underneath the bridge. It just wouldn't be within their field of view. It also looked like there was a lot of room between the bridge supports. They could have then just driven off after the heist, rather than the awkward task of removing those tanks and possibly being questioned (not that they anticipated killing the kid) by search teams.
It wouldn't be any more conspicuous than Walt was sitting off by the side with a hose stuck in the ground.
Anything other than killing the kid would have ruined the story, IMO. I didn't realize it at the time, but the past few episodes have been building up to that scene. Mike talking about the house fumigation crew and saying how professional they are and never leave untied ends. Mike's line saying "There are 2 types of jobs - ones where the guys get away with it, and one with witnesses".
It just made nothing but sense for "Landry's" first reaction to be to whip out the pistol and waste the kid without even a second thought. In my mind at least, that's what a real professional would do. It just further pushes along the fact that Walt and Jessie are no longer 2 wannabe dudes cooking in a basement somewhere and are now playing with the big boys.
All of that being said, however, it was a disturbing scene considering all of the effort they just went through to avoid killing the train engineer and conductor.
I agree. Killing the kid was obviously disturbing but I don't think the effort they went to in order avoid killing the train crew was really because of a very big moral hurdle. I think with a little more internal debate they would have all agreed to kill the train crew but they just found another plan that was cleaner and wouldn't draw attention to the robbery. It seemed to me like the conversation seemed to be headed towards "Ok what's the best way to pull this off? We have to kill the crew? Ok, I gues if we have to."
You're right though I think the fact the shooting of the kid was after the tension of the robbery ended peacefully made it a bit more shocking.
I don't know, I feel like the show is starting to lose its gritty down to earth vibe and starting to look too cliche, too Hollywood and ehmm... too unrealistic.
OK let me explain... at the beginning the story was about a regular guy pushed to venture past his boundaries. But even then, the story had a sense of "realism." Example: remember when they were cooking in RV and dissolving bodies in acid, they had to solve realistic problems (who knew, its quite difficult to find a plastic bathtub big enough if you want to give dead body an acid bath). It was a drama, it was a fiction, but you thought "yup I can see this happening in real life (in America
Now? They have the equipment, knowledge and manpower to do elaborate heists (the huge magnet, the equipment they use when they cook, the shenenigans in Hank's office, machinery, equipment and tools for the train robbery etc etc). Everything they need is conveniently within their arm's reach. I mean why don't you rob a bank and get it over with?
That could certainly be argued at many points in past seasons too. The degree of down-to-earth realism is somewhat subjective. I think they naturally had to lose some degree of realism because of how long the storyline has been developing. It has to either keep progressing or end. They can't take out all the drug drama or rehash earlier parts of the path they've been on. They said they always knew they'd have to end the show at a certain point no matter how successful it was because this pressure-cooker storyline can't just continue forever and still work. While it's lost some of it's realism, I think the amount of believability the show holds is still a huge part of the show's charm.
That could certainly be argued at many points in past seasons too. The degree of down-to-earth realism is somewhat subjective. I think they naturally had to lose some degree of realism because of how long the storyline has been developing. It has to either keep progressing or end. They can't take out all the drug drama or rehash earlier parts of the path they've been on. They said they always knew they'd have to end the show at a certain point no matter how successful it was because this pressure-cooker storyline can't just continue forever and still work. While it's lost some of it's realism, I think the amount of believability the show holds is still a huge part of the show's charm.
Yeah, acting is what sets it apart from other traditional tv/movie fare.
Does anyone really think Todd shot the kid just to injure him? No. The kid is dead. No half measures.
How the hell would they explain away a kid getting shot? They couldn't. The heist would be investigated, the people involved would be identified and they'd all be up crap creek.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BlackRedGold25 For This Useful Post:
Does anyone really think Todd shot the kid just to injure him? No. The kid is dead. No half measures.
How the hell would they explain away a kid getting shot? They couldn't. The heist would be investigated, the people involved would be identified and they'd all be up crap creek.
Todd is a pesticide guy and part-time theif. He isn't a professional hitman. He obviously intended to kill the kid. Whether or not he was successful has yet to be fully determined.
I agree. Killing the kid was obviously disturbing but I don't think the effort they went to in order avoid killing the train crew was really because of a very big moral hurdle. I think with a little more internal debate they would have all agreed to kill the train crew but they just found another plan that was cleaner and wouldn't draw attention to the robbery. It seemed to me like the conversation seemed to be headed towards "Ok what's the best way to pull this off? We have to kill the crew? Ok, I gues if we have to."
You're right though I think the fact the shooting of the kid was after the tension of the robbery ended peacefully made it a bit more shocking.
I think from Jesse's perspective it was about not killing anybody, he just had to convince Walt and Mike that a method that didn't involve killing anybody would work better than what they had been considering before.
Todd is a pesticide guy and part-time theif. He isn't a professional hitman. He obviously intended to kill the kid. Whether or not he was successful has yet to be fully determined.
Todd could go in for the kill shot, knowing that he only hit the kid's shoulder. It didn't look like he stopped walking towards the kid after he shot him despite Jesse's yelling.
I think from Jesse's perspective it was about not killing anybody, he just had to convince Walt and Mike that a method that didn't involve killing anybody would work better than what they had been considering before.
Yes they all fall on different parts of the scale but I was referring to them collectively as a group making the decision.
Yeah, acting is what sets it apart from other traditional tv/movie fare.
And the kid getting shot in the face. Hats off.
Indeed
That was the most brilliant part of the show. Nobody expected it when they've just went through all that work to smoothly pull off the heist. Even after the one minute "WTF is this crap a nobody kid?" build up before the title.
Bravo Breaking Bad writers! you have us all talking about the show
