Bob Odenkirk
Jonathan Banks
Rhea Seehorn
Patrick Fabian
Michael Mando
Michael McKean

Created by:
Vince Gilligan
Peter Gould

2015-
Crime, Drama
AMC
TV-14

“Better Call Saul,” a prequel (and, during parts of the first episode, sequel) to “Breaking Bad,” begins with a black-and-white sequence featuring the titular Saul’s life after this show’s predecessor … with no warning. (You have to know the story to figure that out.) Saul’s in hiding somewhere in the U.S. as a Cinnabon worker. The montage ends with Saul watching a tape of old commercials of his former law practice. The Ink Spots’ “Address Unknown” plays throughout the sequence. This is the best of part of its first two episodes.

After that sequence, the black-and-white images are jettisoned for color. So, is it going to be black-and-white for current events and color for past events? Who knows? That’s my general reaction to this show so far: I don’t quite know what they’re trying to accomplish.

Saul is a great character, and Bob Odenkirk does genius work in the role. He makes many of his lines sing. But the first two episodes of “Better Call Saul” don’t capitalize on that. It’s not funny enough. Creators Vince Gilligan (“Breaking Bad”) and Peter Gould (producer of “Breaking Bad”) have chosen to eschew comedy for drama and suspense during many of its moments. Why? One of the problems with relying on suspense in this context is that we know where it all ends. For instance, we know that Tuco doesn’t kill Saul, who still uses his real name, James “Jimmy” McGill, at this point. We’ve seen “Breaking Bad.” Hello?

On the other hand, if you haven’t seen “Breaking Bad,” then I don’t know how much enjoyment you’ll get from “Better Call Saul.” For the most part, you’ll miss the importance of the moments on display. For instance, when Tuco shows up at the end of the first episode, there’s no way that a person without knowledge of “Breaking Bad” will get it. Why did they construct it like this? They could easily tell this story in a way that doesn’t alienate viewers who haven’t been initiated into the world of “Breaking Bad.”

“Better Call Saul” simply requires too much work to follow it fully. I don’t mind thinking while I’m watching, but it better be for a reason. I can’t detect one yet. The structure is convoluted without a purpose. That confusion doesn’t add anything to the story.

Despite that, I’m going to stick with “Better Call Saul” for now, mostly because of Odenkirk and because of the brilliance that was on display during “Breaking Bad.” I have a feeling that they will find the right tone, eventually. But the pace better pick up, and the laughs better come. It just needs to be zippier, and the writing needs to be overhauled: stat! …

The third episode starts to make a turn for the better; but not fast enough. I’m still sticking with it. …

After finishing the first season, I’m not satisfied. It’s just so spotty. Why? Come on. I hope the problems will be ironed out during the next season. Perhaps “Better Call Saul” will soar once Jimmy finally becomes the titular character. Plus, that may lead to even more interactions between Jimmy and Jonathan Banks’s Mike Ehrmantraut. That relationship is the best part of this show. So I’ll reserve my final judgment for now … I guess.

Verdict: OK

About: (Source: bettercall)

Set six years before he became Walter White’s lawyer, Saul Goodman is known as Jimmy McGill, a small-time lawyer searching for his destiny.