When a Prequel Defies Expectations: Why Better Call Saul Surprised Everyone
When a Prequel Defies Expectations: Why Better Call Saul Surprised Everyone
Prequels are tricky business.
By definition, they arrive with an expiration date. We know where the characters end up. We know who survives. We know the final form of the world they’re building toward. Suspense seems limited. Stakes feel predetermined. Too often, prequels rely on nostalgia, cameos, and Easter eggs rather than genuine storytelling momentum.
And yet, every so often, a prequel series doesn’t just work — it surpasses its source material in emotional depth and thematic richness.
Few television series embody that surprise more completely than Better Call Saul, the prequel to Breaking Bad.
What began as a spinoff centered on a comic-relief lawyer evolved into one of television’s most nuanced character studies — and a masterclass in how to make a prequel feel urgent, unpredictable, and devastating.
The Risk of Expanding a Perfect Ending
When Breaking Bad concluded in 2013, it was widely regarded as one of the greatest dramas ever made. Its arc felt complete. Walter White’s transformation from mild-mannered teacher to ruthless kingpin had been executed with operatic precision.
So when creators Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould announced a series about Saul Goodman — the flamboyant, morally flexible attorney played by Bob Odenkirk — the reaction was mixed.
A comedy about the sleazy lawyer?
It sounded lighter. Smaller. Maybe unnecessary.
Instead, what emerged was a slow-burn tragedy about identity, insecurity, ambition, and the corrosive power of resentment.
A Shift in Tone — and Ambition
Unlike its predecessor, Better Call Saul refused to rely on adrenaline as its primary engine.
Where Breaking Bad often escalated through explosive set pieces and life-or-death confrontations, Saul was patient. Meditative. Almost literary. It lingered in silence. It examined facial expressions. It allowed tension to simmer in small rooms rather than explode in deserts.
The show traced the transformation of Jimmy McGill — a struggling public defender with a gift for persuasion — into the morally compromised Saul Goodman we already knew. But the journey wasn’t a straight descent. It was layered with longing and heartbreak.
The genius of the series lies in making us root for Jimmy even when we know he becomes someone ethically compromised.
And somehow, that knowledge makes it worse.
Turning a Comic Side Character Into a Tragic Hero
In Breaking Bad, Saul Goodman functioned as comic relief — fast-talking, sleazy, opportunistic. He was survival personified, always calculating angles.
Better Call Saul peeled back that persona.
Jimmy McGill wasn’t born Saul. He was shaped into him.
The series reveals Jimmy as a man desperate for validation — especially from his older brother, Chuck. That sibling relationship becomes the emotional core of the early seasons, transforming what could have been a simple criminal origin story into a devastating family drama.
Chuck, brilliant but emotionally rigid, believes Jimmy is fundamentally incapable of ethical behavior. That belief — whether accurate or self-fulfilling — becomes the gravitational force pulling Jimmy toward darkness.
The tragedy isn’t just that Jimmy falls.
It’s that he might have been different under other circumstances.
Expanding the Universe Without Feeling Like Fan Service
Many prequels fall into the trap of constant winking references: “Remember this? Recognize that?”
Better Call Saul avoids this for much of its run.
Yes, familiar faces appear — Mike Ehrmantraut, Gus Fring — but their inclusion serves narrative development rather than nostalgia. Their arcs deepen, complicate, and in some cases reframe their roles in Breaking Bad.
Take Mike, portrayed by Jonathan Banks. In Breaking Bad, he is stoic, disciplined, and efficient. In Saul, we see the grief and guilt driving him — the moral code that both separates and entangles him in criminal enterprise.
Rather than shrinking the universe into fan service, the show makes it larger.
The Kim Wexler Factor
Perhaps the greatest surprise of the series is Kim Wexler.
Not a character from Breaking Bad, Kim becomes the emotional axis of Better Call Saul. Played with astonishing subtlety by Rhea Seehorn, she is disciplined, ambitious, and principled — yet drawn to Jimmy’s rebellious charisma.
Their relationship is one of the most complex romances in modern television.
They love each other deeply. They enable each other destructively.
And because Kim does not appear in Breaking Bad, her fate becomes one of the show’s greatest sources of tension. Every season raises the question: Where is she? What happened?
The audience knows Jimmy survives. Kim is the wild card.
That uncertainty injects real suspense into a story whose endpoint otherwise feels fixed.
Reframing the Original Story
One of the most remarkable achievements of the series is how it reshapes the emotional meaning of Breaking Bad.
After watching Better Call Saul, Saul Goodman in Breaking Bad no longer feels like a one-note hustler. He feels like a man hiding pain behind showmanship. Every garish suit and exaggerated catchphrase becomes armor.
The prequel retroactively deepens the original.
It’s rare for a prequel to enhance its source material rather than lean on it.
A Masterclass in Visual Storytelling
Stylistically, the show matches its thematic ambition.
Cinematography is deliberate and symbolic. Long, static shots emphasize isolation. Reflections in glass underscore fractured identities. Empty spaces dominate frames, reinforcing loneliness.
The pacing, too, is bold. Entire sequences unfold with minimal dialogue. Legal maneuvering becomes as suspenseful as cartel operations.
The show trusts its audience.
That trust pays off.
The Courage to Slow Down
In an era of binge-watching and cliffhanger-driven plotting, Better Call Saul often resisted instant gratification.
Some viewers initially found it too slow.
But that deliberate tempo becomes its strength. It allows the series to explore incremental moral erosion rather than sudden collapse. Jimmy’s transformation doesn’t hinge on a single catastrophic choice. It’s death by a thousand rationalizations.
That nuance feels startlingly mature for a spinoff.
A Prequel That Becomes Its Own Story
By its final season, Better Call Saul stands independently of Breaking Bad.
It is not merely an origin story. It is a meditation on regret, reinvention, and the cost of self-deception.
The black-and-white sequences set after the events of Breaking Bad — following Jimmy in hiding — transform the show into something even more reflective. The prequel structure dissolves. The timeline folds inward.
It stops being about how Saul Goodman was born.
It becomes about whether Jimmy McGill can face himself.
Why It Surprised Us
The surprise wasn’t that the show was good.
It was that it was different.
It refused spectacle as its primary tool.
It built tension through silence.
It replaced bombast with introspection.
It introduced a character — Kim — who became essential to the emotional architecture of the universe.
It made inevitability feel tragic rather than predictable.
Most prequels answer questions.
Better Call Saul asks new ones.
Redefining What a Prequel Can Be
Prequels often feel like obligations — commercial extensions of beloved IP.
But Better Call Saul demonstrates that a prequel can:
-
Expand moral complexity
-
Deepen emotional stakes
-
Reinterpret familiar characters
-
Stand alone artistically
-
Surpass expectations
It transforms hindsight into suspense.
And that is no small feat.
The Legacy of a Surprising Prequel
Today, Better Call Saul is widely considered among the greatest television dramas of the 21st century — not merely as a companion to Breaking Bad, but as its equal.
It proves that inevitability does not eliminate tension.
That character studies can be as gripping as thrillers.
That prequels don’t have to feel secondary.
In fact, sometimes they feel revelatory.
And in an entertainment landscape crowded with spinoffs and franchise expansions, that kind of surprise is rare.
It reminds us that storytelling isn’t about what happens.
It’s about how — and why — it happens.
No comments