TiVo Community Forum banner
41 - 60 of 160 Posts

·
Mr. Rolleyes
Joined
·
7,577 Posts
One thing I would have liked to have seen, maybe it was cut, but it would be nice to see Carol Burnett get a big reward check. I believe this picture is from a teaser promo, but I assume it was shown in one of the episodes, or it is at least some kind of series canon.

 

·
Mr. Rolleyes
Joined
·
7,577 Posts
I just read that Burnett will not be eligible for the Guest Actor. There is a rule that you must be in less then 50% of the episodes under consideration. Since the BCS season was split up, the first half of the season falls under the 2022 Emmys and the second half in 2023.. Since she appeared in more then 50% of the 2023 season episodes, Carol Burnett's only chance for the Emmy is if she is nominated for supporting actress.
 

·
TV MA SLV
Joined
·
28,018 Posts
You guys seem to be missing that fact that Jimmy->Saul->Gene hated his new Cinnabon life. He even resorted back to scheming because he hated that life. Had he served his 7 years he would have still been in that life as there is no way he could be a lawyer again and he could easily see how he would screw up again.

At least in jail he has a purpose.
I think this was the reason for the scene on the bus to jail. He will be a big shot in jail. Everybody will be using him to try and get a new trial, etc...

To him this is a much better life than working at cinnabon.

-smak-
 

·
Give 'em Hell, Devils
Joined
·
62,370 Posts
She'll still get the nom; possibly the win, and Rhea Seehorn will move from the supporting actress category to lead actress.
I seriously doubt Rhea Seehorn will submit as lead actress for these final six episodes. Of all the episodes of the whole series, this is the stretch of episodes where she was least involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
I forgot to add Jim O'Heir is the candidate for guest actor, and I don't think individual actors submit for themselves; it's either Sony or the show runners who put that stuff together. For example for this year I think they were planning to apply for best lead actress for Rhea Seehorn because I saw a promotion tweet, but either Sony or the Academy realized the competition was just too overwhelming and changed the application to the supporting actress category.
 

·
Give 'em Hell, Devils
Joined
·
62,370 Posts
I forgot to add Jim O'Heir is the candidate for guest actor, and I don't think individual actors submit for themselves; it's either Sony or the show runners who put that stuff together.
No, it's the individual actors and their representation. They can choose to coordinate with the other actors and the studio if they want, but the choice is made by each individual nominee. For example, acting nominees have to decide which episode they want to submit as their entry. It's not judged based on their whole performance over the course of a season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,081 Posts
The rules say either producers or individuals can submit. Producers have the responsibility of notifying the actor/actress if they submit for them. Producers have the incentive of trying to increase the residual and marketing value of the show. There are 6 noms for lead categories and 8 noms for supporting, so that has to factor into which category producers/actors decide to apply for.
 

·
Give 'em Hell, Devils
Joined
·
62,370 Posts
The rules say either producers or individuals can submit. Producers have the responsibility of notifying the actor/actress if they submit for them. Producers have the incentive of trying to increase the residual and marketing value of the show. There are 6 noms for lead categories and 8 noms for supporting, so that has to factor into which category producers/actors decide to apply for.
Yes, it's possible the producers can submit on behalf of a performer in their show. But from my understanding, it's not usually done that way. Usually the individual performer (or more likely, their talent agent) submits an entry.
 

·
I am Groot!
Joined
·
64,381 Posts
Everybody keeps talking about seven years, but if I interpret things correctly, that was on its way out the window...according to his co-counsel's note, the judge was known for imposing statutory sentences, and it certainly seemed like she was headed in that direction before Jimmy derailed things. I don't know what that would have been for the crimes he was pleading to, but I get the impression it would have been a lot more than seven years...
 

·
This Space for Lease
Joined
·
8,925 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
Everybody keeps talking about seven years, but if I interpret things correctly, that was on its way out the window...according to his co-counsel's note, the judge was known for imposing statutory sentences, and it certainly seemed like she was headed in that direction before Jimmy derailed things. I don't know what that would have been for the crimes he was pleading to, but I get the impression it would have been a lot more than seven years...
I was thinking the same thing this morning. If he hadn’t said anything, he might not have gotten 86 years, but would have still been man old man when he got out. At least this way he got to redeem himself in Kims eyes.
 

·
I'm back!
Joined
·
35,880 Posts
according to his co-counsel's note, the judge was known for imposing statutory sentences
The note said "Don't worry, Judge S. always follows gov sentencing recs."

IOW, she always imposes the Government prosecutors' recommended sentencing. Jimmy would had served seven years if he hadn't spoken up.
 

·
Give 'em Hell, Devils
Joined
·
62,370 Posts
Everybody keeps talking about seven years, but if I interpret things correctly, that was on its way out the window...according to his co-counsel's note, the judge was known for imposing statutory sentences, and it certainly seemed like she was headed in that direction before Jimmy derailed things. I don't know what that would have been for the crimes he was pleading to, but I get the impression it would have been a lot more than seven years...
That's not how I interpreted it. The note from Bill Oakley said that she always goes along with the sentencing recommendations from the government. So he was basically saying to Jimmy not to be worried about how she's trying to make it look like she's not on board.
 

·
I am Groot!
Joined
·
64,381 Posts
The note said "Don't worry, Judge S. always follows gov sentencing recs."

IOW, she always imposes the Government prosecutors' recommended sentencing. Jimmy would had served seven years if he hadn't spoken up.
Ah, I misunderstood when it flashed across the screen (and didn't rewind to look closer). It sure sounded like she was objecting to the proposed sentence...
 

·
Give 'em Hell, Devils
Joined
·
62,370 Posts
Ah, I misunderstood when it flashed across the screen (and didn't rewind to look closer). It sure sounded like she was objecting to the proposed sentence...
That was the point of the note. Bill Oakley knew from the way she was starting to question the agreed-upon sentence that she was going to beat up on the government lawyer for having agreed to that given the circumstances, but Oakley wrote the note to reassure Jimmy that even though it sounded like she wasn't going to accept it, she always ended up accepting it.

Reminds me of a tweet I saw today:

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
28,323 Posts
Kim didn't need to be saved, and I don't think Saul implicated her in anything. He really didn't even mention her until the last second in the negotiations when he thought he could use the Howard Hamlin thing to get the sentence even lower, and then it turned out they already knew everything.
Respectfully, I think you're discounting the entire conversation on the plane with Bill Oakley (this happened after the scene you are referring to) with the US Marshal "listening" and can "pass along anything he says to help the govt's case...and pass along to the prosecution" and then says that Saul has "more to trade" (about Hamlin) and just remembered something that will "make their toes curl". Prior to that, Bill Oakley says that the DA has nothing on Kim, no witnesses, no hard evidence, etc and probably won't do anything. Bill then says "anything that makes their toes curl is bound to bind Kim up" and "if you give the Gov't more, maybe they bring the hammer down".

Then the very next scene a few days later, Kim is in the law office late at night and she gets a call that tells her that Saul "has given testimony that affects you personally". So he very clearly supplied some sort of damning testimony about Kim in the Hamlin case. So yeah, I think Kim needed to be saved from that testimony -- and in fact in the next scene in the courtroom sentencing hearing, he purgers himself over that sworn testimony to "save Kim" and throws his 7 years away. In his speech, he says "I lied to the gov't about Kim Wexler -- I gave them a load of BS about her involvement in the Hamlin murder"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
58,086 Posts
One of the fakest things that TV shows do about the law is compress the time that things take. How long was it from Gene's arrest to the sentencing hearing? In the show, it looks like it's less than a week. In reality, it would be several months. But all TV shows do that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
28,323 Posts
Saul speaking up on the plane was a ruse to get Kim into the courtroom to hear his full and complete confession. He told her as much. I don't think he really had anything on her that would have withstood scrutiny.
Except that he is a witness to her confession and can corroborate her entire story, which would jam both of them up.

The only reason he had to confess was to save Kim from the BS story he told the feds previously.

If he was going to confess anyway, he could have found some way to get Kim to the courtroom without implicating her in the Hamlin murder and putting her life in jeopardy.
 
41 - 60 of 160 Posts
Top