Everything Walt did he did for the family
Because a man always provides for his family, even when he’s not appreciated
shareSo now you want to argue with Walt himself that admitted he did it because he enjoyed it...
shareHe enjoyed doing it for his family ya schmuck
shareNot to begin with. It was first around the time Jesse and him had a fallout in season 2 that he started to get more and more selfish.
shareYes he enjoyed providing for his family, before he was only making 43,000 a year, being able to give his family the money they needed made him feel good.
shareIn your eyes Walter White is a good moral man. You claimed he was a hero. I have heard you say he is like Batman from the Dark Knight trilogy. Interesting if that is the case then why does Vince Gilligan the writer/creator of the show not agree with that notion? In Vince's own words he said he changed and became the antagonist/villain of the show. Do not believe me here you go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y63gGNRVo5g
That doesn't make it true, no matter how many people say something that is irrelevant to the validity of the statement.
Walt was the hero, he knew he wasn't going to be around too much longer to provide for his family and he had to leave them with the money that they needed. Not only that but he was willing to plunge his hands into the filth so his whore of a wife could keep hers clean. Walt was a lot like The Dark Knight, he made the sacrifice that no one else could make. I see Hank as the true villain of the series.
Then why does Vince Gilligan the writer/creator of the show claim Walt is a villain? Answer that.
shareIt's his opinion/interpretation, that's all it is. Just because he says it doesn't make it true.
shareAh so then just because Tolkien said he did not intend for his LOTR books to be a trilogy doesn't make it true. I am glad we are free to disagree with the writer/creator thanks for that.
shareThe interpretation of a character (which was clearly left open to interpretation) and the story structure of a novel (which was blatantly obvious) are two completely different things. You can't compare the two.
shareNice try. Thing is you like to pick and choose what you find credible. Since it does not now fit your narrative you now are going to dismiss Vince Gilligan. I am rather sure Vince Gilligan has more credibility than you do. So I will gladly take what he says about Walter White over you. So in my book and in the eyes of Vince Gilligan Walt is not a good human being and is a villain.
shareAlso I believe that you were the one who made the claim that LOTR being a trilogy was an objective fact and you have not demonstrated that claim. The words of JR Tolkein provide more than sufficient doubt.
shareIf something fits the definition in the dictionary that means you are free to call it as such. LOTR is in the very dictionary definition example of trilogy. Therefore I am not wrong. I am free to call it a trilogy since it is in the dictionary definition lol.
shareNo you haven't proven your case, you are always going to have the words of JR Tolkein casting reasonable doubt upon your case. I however will never have the words of Vince Gilligan over me because the interpretation of Walt's character was always subjective.
shareExplain why it is in the dictionary then? That is all the proof I need bud. Go ahead try to dispute it.
shareBecause dictionary.com isn't an authority over JR Tolkein's work.
shareSays who? Does Tolkien have authority over the English language? Last time I checked he doesn't. Therefore sorry bud you lose.
shareAlso you are getting off topic, please don't troll my thread and stay on point.
shareI am and that is Vince Gilligan has more credibility than you do. Walt is a disgusting human being and he got exactly what he deserved.
shareI have my opinion and Vince Gilligan has his opinion. Now stop hijacking my thread (although rest assured that unlike you I would never rat on you to the admins like your buddy Jesse Pinkman)
shareYep and Vince Gilligan's opinion will always hold more weight than yours. You never corrected the rat so that means you agree with him. Which makes you a rat also. I am going by your logic chief.
shareActually it doesn't because whether Walt is a villain or not has always been a subjective opinion. You are the only one who ratted so therefore that term only applies to you.
shareOh it does I guarantee it. People care far more about Vince Gilligan's opinion than some random person online. Nope remember you claimed since I did not correct the haters of TDKR that I agreed with them. So therefore the same applies to you about ratting.
Since you did not correct the guy you agree with him. Now you are attempting to backpedal. So if it is only between that guy and me then I am not guilty of any of the complaints the haters made against TDKR. That would be between you and the haters. Pick one you do not get to play both sides of the fence bud.
As I said this thread is nothing more than my opinion about the character and I have demonstrated why my opinion is valid with evidence from the show. This thread is not about the opinion of the shows creator, it's about interactions between the characters within the context of the show. Now I have entertained your nonsense long enough, you are hijacking my thread and I don't appreciate it.
If you would like to start a thread about the analysis of the show's creators be my guest but as far as this thread this conversation is over.
You have trolled my thread long enough now its time to grow up.
Proving you wrong is just too easy. It shows you have no credibility. Walt got exactly what he deserved. He died alone and deserved to.
shareGlad you are able to get back on topic:
Walt died a hero, he was able to send the money that his family needed to them and he returned to free Jesse from the Nazis despite the fact that Jesse ratted on him. He defeated Todd, Jack and their crew and ensured that they would not hurt his family.
He did all of this with no support. Skyler did nothing but bitch, moan and judge him, Marie was a self righteous bitch who manipulated and brainwashed Junior against him, Hank was an evil scumbag that tried to ruin the lives of his own niece and nephew while Jesse ratted on him despite the fact that Walt saved his ass numerous times (I count at least 7 but there may be more) and made him a 50/50 partner when he didn't need to. As all of this unfolded Walt still continued to think of others and never himself.
Walt is a saint, Walt died a hero.
Not according to my opinion. In my book he was a trash human being. Killing Mike while knowing he had a grand daughter was terrible.
When Walt admitted that he did all of it for himself spoke volumes. I agree with Vince Gilligan on Walt being a villain.
If Mike had just given Walt the names he never would have killed him.
shareDoesn't excuse what Walt did he is evil. Furthest thing from a hero in my book.
shareHe didn't hurt anyone who wasn't already a criminal and when he did kill someone it was for noble reasons (to protect innocent people such as his children).
shareNope Walt is evil.
shareI hope you applied that same logic to Hank who is an evil, evil scumbag. He ruined the life of Hank's granddaughter and tried to do the same thing to Junior and Holly. I mean it can't possibly be that you're a complete hypocrite.
shareStay on topic this is about Walt not Hank. I agree with Vince Gilligan Walt is terrible.
shareThis is my thread and I will steer the conversation where I damn well please. The point of that comment was to ensure that you are applying the same standard to everyone. It was just to ensure that you aren't a hypocrite.
shareAnd you obviously don't hold yourself to the same standard you hold other people. Are you a rat since you never corrected the guy who did rat? Remember you told me I was guilty of agreeing with the haters of TDKR since I never corrected them. Therefore by that logic which you used that makes you a rat.
shareEverything you said about Walt is nonsense, his character was never written or performed to be up for interpretation, that's absolute BULLSHIT. The show was pitched as Mr. Chips transforms in to Scarface and that's exactly what happens. Meth is a terrible drug that kills lots of people, Walt was supplying it to thousand's if not millions of people. I don't think Batman ever became the biggest Meth kingpin in the U.S at any point in his superhero career. Walt started good and ended a villain, its that simple. BB is amazing because Gilligan did what Chase did for Sopranos and had has us all rooting for a scum bag.
shareWalt did cut some corners I admit that, he did make some minor mistakes along the way but every thing he did was for the right reasons
shareHank cut some corners too, also made some minor mistakes but at the end of the day he did it all for his family.
shareNo Hank did it because he wanted another promotion and it didn't matter to him at all if he hurt little children along the way. In the end Hank was no better than Gus Fring, both were willing to use children to achieve their objectives.
shareHmm kind of like how Walt poisoned a child?
shareHe wouldn't have had to if Jesse hadn't palled up with Gus (you know the guy who murdered a child). And who cares, poor whittle Bwock had an upset stomach, boo hoo.
shareNo excuse for causing harm to a child. Walt is an awful person. Thing is Walt has done plenty of other despicable things. Killing Mike was another case of him being the lowest form of a human being.
shareWalt didn't harm Brock, Brock was fine. Jesse palled up with Fring who murdered a child so his and your outrage is phony.
Mike was a murderer himself and he wouldn't give Walt the names, I don't blame Walt for that.
Does not matter if he ended up fine. He put the child at risk and in danger.
You will do anything to justify Walt's actions. Funny how even the creator himself disagrees with you. Obviously what Vince Gilligan was trying to convey went right over your head.
Brock was never in any danger. He had a mild flu and an upset stomach, and if Jesse hadn’t been palling around with a child murderer then Walt never would have had to poison him
shareAre you suggesting Walt should have just let Gus murder his family?
shareAre you implying that Vince Gilligan's view on Walt is incorrect?
I trust Vince Gilligan over you.
Allowing a person to choke on their own vomit when you are perfectly capable of helping them which would save their life is despicable.
It is okay though Walt died and he got what he deserved.
Are you going to answer my question? As for Jane one less junkie slut in the world is a good thing
shareNo Hank had PTSD from the turtle explosion and didn't want the promotion because he didn't think he could do the job. This imaginary scene where Hank hurts or uses children like Gus doesn't exist. Hanks entire life was destroyed by Walt because Walt was an evil bastard who only cared about himself. RIP Hank Schrader
shareHank was a pussy with his ptsd. And he sent mikes granddaughter to the poor house and now she’ll probably end up a meth whore like Wendy, he tried to do the same thing to junior and holly but fortunately they had a guardian angel in Walt. I’m glad hanks dead, I just wish he was tortured first
shareMikes granddaughter Kaylee was saved by Hank as was his niece and nephew. Had Walt not been stopped everyone's lives would've been ruined. Hank died a hero and definitely did not deserve torture.
shareHank stole her inheritance and now kaylee is more than likely going to be a meth whore. At the very least hank should have given her all his money, his house and all of his assets. He did all of that for a promotion which is evil. He tried to destroy the family and tried to do the same thing to junior and holly, he deserved to eat his own testicles and be burned alive
shareKaylee was the grand daughter of a criminal, his money was dirty and the cops had the right to take it. Hank doesn't owe the largest Meth operation in the USA anything. Hank died a hero.
shareHe hurt an innocent girl, hank is a scumbag at the very least he owed kaylee all of his possessions
shareHe didn’t care about that little girl at all, it didn’t matter to him that she was now in the poorhouse, that money could have gone to her college education . All hank wanted was a promotion and it would mean so much to me if they went back and filmed a scene of hank getting tortured with electroshock treatment to the testicles
shareHe couldn’t even would a single nazi, he died a coward
shareWhy don't you guys split the difference and settle on "anti-hero"? 😅
shareSorry but no. The stuff Walt ended up doing made him a very low form of human being. There is a limit to how far you can go.
There are good people who do bad things. Then there are bad people who do good things. Walt became a bad person. When the writer of the show says he is a villain and that he is despicable I do not know how much more obvious it can get.
Could just be some like that he "broke bad" for real. Personally I don't give a single fuck what label people want to attach to him. I do agree he became bad.
Just thought I could alleviate the bickering in this thread.
Carry on!
See that is just it you understand he became evil. People like Ultimatehippo think Walt never did anything wrong. I like Walter White as a character of fiction because even though he is a sumbag, he is very well written.
Thing is it stops there. I know he is a terrible person. I do not sympathize with him. Ultimatehippo does. He honestly thinks Walter White is a noble human being. To me that is quite um disturbing.
Some can't admit they like
walking examples of human darkness. Hence all the justification.
Well and it is also a distorted sense of morality. Just because you enjoy a fictional character does not mean they are a good person. It is okay to recognize that. I mean who doesn't enjoy a good villain? They are often more fun to watch than heroes are.
He literally told me that there was nothing wrong with Walt letting Jane choke on her own vomit to die. I mean my goodness.
Even if I dislike somebody I never wish death on them, and would never let somebody choke to death when I am fully capable of stopping it.
Personally, I agree with Walt's decision to suddenly pretend he "wasn't in the room". He basically stepped back and allowed her fate to take her.
Yes it's awful. Had she been a decent person herself, he probably would have saved her from her own fate.
I also think Walt would be fine with his own fate. He knew he had it coming.
Sorry but not for a person to decide. Even bad people can be redeemed. I would hate if a family member of mine went through a rebellious phase and someone saw them choking and went meh they are not a good person anyway.
I see why Walt did it but that does not mean I condone it. So I have to disagree there.
I wasn't asking for anyone to agree with me. I'm a recovering misanthrope. 😅
I blame the girl for her own death. Walt wasn't supposed to even be there.
Sorry, have to go into edit post mode to fix the sentence formatting on mobile. The replies are now too many and the mobile site can't deal.
.
I am not saying Jane was not responsible for it. However if you could prevent a death from happening by a small action in my book you should.
Look at what happened after she died. Jane's dad an air traffic controller was so far inside his own head after her death that he spaced out. Thus causing a plane crash. Am I saying Walt did that no but it goes to show even small actions can have a domino effect. That does not happen if he just stops her from choking. I have a distaste for humanity in tons of ways also. You can not let that consume you and stop your from doing what is right.
He was merely choosing not to save her. Until there's an enforced Samaritan law in the USA you can't force anyone to help their fellow man.
This is where it could be argued she sealed her fate by not being a nice person herself. Then I'd buy the outcry. But not as it stands. She got hers, just like Walt got his.
Are all laws just then? There is an old saying. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. Just because it is not a law to help someone does not mean you shouldn't. You are correct I can't force anyone but that does not make it morally right just because there are no legal issues.
Again just because someone is not an upstanding person does not mean they deserve death. She was not a murderer simply a drug addict.
I found her absolutely repulsive. So much so, I can't watch the actress in anything else. I'll take the serial killers, thanks. 😅
shareThat is too bad the actress behind her is actually rather talented.
shareI know, a bit sad about that as I can't watch Jessica Jones (even though I'd told I'll love it for the villain). I just can't. I hated Jane that much.
shareWell suit yourself. I do not buy into that closed minded way of thinking.
shareOh, it's only this actress that has this effect on me. Like I said before, it's actually a compliment to how she played Jane. It's perfect really. Made me hate her so much I was rooting for Walt doing something morally bankrupt. WOOHOOO!
share"Just because you can do somethng doesn't mean you have to" can apply to Walk saving Jane, too. Just because he could, doesn't mean he HAD to. Works
both ways...
As for the second point, I see it as a reap what you sow kind of thing. Had she been a nice person, I'd bet Walt would have saved her. She made it so that it's FAR more convenient for him to just let fate take its course like it would have were he not in the room.
No you are missing the point. You said legally he does not have to. I can't stand that kind of mentality. Being blinded by the law is silly. I never said he had to save Jane but it is not moral to stand back and do nothing. Law does not come before morality. Cheating on your wife is not illegal but it is immoral. You can do it but you shouldn't do it. It comes down to what is morally right.
As for the second point again so someone not being nice means it is perfectly fine to let them die? She was a drug addict nothing more. Just because a person may not be a nice person does not mean their life is worth nothing.
I guess I don't get your point as for me it works both ways. You can't force someone to help. They either do or they don't. A Samaritan law makes it illegal to NOT help.
Walt was under no obligation to save Jane's life.
He was under a moral obligation. I never said you could force someone to help. It does not say much about their morality if they do not though.
Also who caused Jane to role on her back? If you remember he shook Jesse which caused Jane to role on her back.
Rolling someone on their back isn’t a crime, shooting heroin is, Jane killed her self and I was so happy when she was dead. Walt had neither a legal or a moral obligation to do anything.
shareAgain hiding behind the law. Cheating on your wife is not a crime does that make it morally right?
He did have a moral obligation to help her and he did not because Walt is a scumbag.
How did he have a moral obligation to help her? She wasn't his daughter or his spouse, she was just some random junkie who died because of her own actions. I have a great idea maybe she shouldn't have shot heroin, then she definitely would be alive.
And besides there's an old saying "Karma's a bitch"
Also I’m guessing that means Skyler was an immoral cunt for cheating on Walt?
share(aI have no problem at all with drug addicts, btw. Jane was just so awful she made me despise my own gender for ever minute she was on screen. I can't remember when last I hated a TV character so much. I almost threw a party when Walt let her die.)
shareI threw a party when Walt rubbed it in jesses face right before he was taken away to begin his slavery
share