Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
1
Examining the transformation of Walter White from a
protagonist to an antagonist, in relationship with viewers'
enjoyment, through media entertainment theories
"He's well on his way to badass" - Brian Cranston
The first moment viewers are exposed to Walter White - the main
character of Breaking Bad, we thought and presumed that he is such
a miserable man. Viewers showed sympathy to him without
acknowledging that through five magnificent seasons of Breaking
Bad, show creator Vince Gilligan and his writer team will twist
the whole idea of a simple "50-year-old man who makes a very modest
middle-class income" (Romano, 2013) into a dark, violent and complex
narrative journey arc of a master-mind criminal, Walter White.
Undeniable, Walter White is an amazing, irrational and
unconventional character in TV history. From the very infamous
quote of Gilligan "turning Mr.Chipps into Scarface" from Cranston's
statement "Never in television history" (Romano, 2013), we admit that
exploring Mr.White's process of changing from a protagonist to an
1
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
2
antagonist has been always an interesting case. Through a great
number of interviews, reviews and critical essays on magazines
and media, such "transformation of a hero into a villain" is treated as the
central theme and topic. This show is not totally about chemicals
or how to cook crystal methamphetamine; but it also embraces the
question "What makes a man "bad" - his actions, his motives, or his conscious
decision to be a bad person?" (Douthat, 2011). Interestingly, those
questions also play an extremely crucial role in entertainment
media study; and are used to evaluate and explain why viewers (in
general term) and individuals (in specific term) reach highest
enjoyment when they are exposed to morally ambiguous characters
narrative presentation, such as Walter While in Breaking Bad. For
that reason, my agenda in this paper is suggesting a different
way to examine the transformation of Walter White from a
protagonist to an antagonist in which entertainment media
theories, such as Affective Deposition theory (ADT) and Moral Disengagement
(MD), can be applied to through a moral spectrum of Walter White,
includes his motive, action and multiple conscious decisions.
2
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
3
Recently, media entertainment scholars pay attention to the
character complexity type instead of simple one. All previous
researches (Krakowiak, 2008; Shafer & Raney, 2012; Krakowiak &
Tsay Vogel, 2013; Janicke & Raney, 2014) focus on the explanation
of viewers' enjoyment toward morally ambiguous characters by
using different theories. Among those theories, both ADT and MD
have one similar point that focuses on the relationship between
viewers and media characters, include television fictional
characters. The difference between those two is while ADT takes
morally clear characters as central of the theoretical core
(process and outcome of media), MD switches to the new direction
which tries to explain why viewers accept good guys do bad things
(outcome only). In brief, the type of morally ambiguous character
like Walter White always is an interesting case from the point of
view of ADT and MD. According to ADT, viewers come to highest
media enjoyment when good characters get reward, bad characters
get punished and vice versa (Zillmann, 2000; Raney, 2004).
Applies that theory to Walter White's case, we can clearly see
why viewers form the root for this character from the beginning
of the show. In the pilot episode (1.01), Mr.White first time3
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
4
appears in "a burst of darkness and violence: Walt driving that R.V. through a desert
in a crazed dash, wearing nothing but tighty-whitey briefs and a gas mask. Two males
bodies roll in a soup of liquid, broken beakers and cash in the cabin" (Segal,
2011). Viewers wonder "Who is this guy? What is happening?". The
first impression about White is a mess. Through the pilot, Walter
White's first identity is revealed:
...a high school chemistry teacher who has fallen into some
financial trouble. When White learns he has terminal lung
cancer, something inside him snaps, and he decides to use his
familiarity with lap equipment to provide for his medical
expenses as well as his family's future: He teams up with a
former students, played by Aaron Paul, and starts dealing
crystal meth" 1
It seems to viewers that Gilligan starts the show in a normal
way: he pitches the first impression of Walter White to viewers
in a way that we do not have another choice except showing the
empathy toward him. There are several scenes which writers want
1 "Breaking Bad": Vince Gilligan On Meth And Morals http://www.npr.org/2011/09/19/140111200/breaking-bad-vince-gilligan-on-meth-and-morals
4
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
5
to lead viewers into Walter White's miserable world: Skyler - his
wife brings to him a traditional breakfast with faked bacons is
arranged as number 50, his age. It is not even real bacon,
according to his son, Walter Jr. In the next scene, we continue
to know the fact that he is a high school teacher, who does not
gain any respect from his students (the male student drags the
chair and creates annoying sound, shows a bad attitude while
Walter is speaking). Thus, he is overshadowed by his brother-in-
law, Hank, during his 50th birthday party by Hank's success as a
DEA agent. Latter, in the bed scene, viewers witness the
shocking, freezing and disappointed face of Walter when he got a
"hand job" from his wife, as a birthday gift. It is full of
humor, but the moment when Skyler yells "Keep... Yes! Fifty-six. Oh!" is a
final string on camel's back, makes viewers have to like this
character. In the end of pilot episode, as Gilligan said "... when I
came up with the idea for Breaking Bad, I was about to turn 40 years old, and perhaps I
was thinking in terms of an impending midlife crisis... To that end, I think Walter White,
in the early seasons, is a man who is suffering from perhaps the world's worst midlife
crisis" 2
2 "Breaking Bad": Vince Gilligan On Meth And Morals http://www.npr.org/2011/09/19/140111200/breaking-bad-vince-gilligan-on-meth-
5
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
6
From that moment, we root for Walter White's "success" when he
decides to become a drug cook. As ADT predicts, once we judge
Walter White as a good character from the beginning, we start
loving, liking him and whatever he is doing and is going to do,
we root for it. We enjoy watching him get "rewarded" from getting
into drug empire in the first season. At this moment, Walter
White is not simple as a purely good, a truly protagonist, a non-
vague perfect softy male character anymore. When he decides to
step in to drug business, he turns into a type of character who
does bad things (sometimes) for good reason. To explain for this
enjoyment of Walter White at this point, WD suggests that:
When individuals see another person perform an immoral act,
it is typical for them to condemn this action. However, at
times, such as when the individual commits the immoral act
him- or herself or when the perpetrator of the act is well liked,
individuals may be motivated to excuse or justify the bad
behavior in order to maintain cognitive consistency.
(Festinger, 1957)
and-morals
6
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
7
In Raney (2004), he expanded "on this idea and suggested that because
individuals are motivated to enjoy entertainment content, they will justify the bad
behaviors of protagonists through a process of moral disengagement". In short,
whatever the protagonist do or will do, viewers will find an
excuse or a reason to make it acceptable. In Walter White's case,
that is exactly what we are doing after witnessing his miserable
life, include killing people, cooking meth, lying to his wife,
his son, manipulating and blackmailing his formal student - Jesse
Pinkman to work with (and then for) him, to name a few. In deed,
we, as viewers, play moral judge role in Breaking Bad. We can judge
Walter's actions base on various moral perspectives and jump to
conclusion that he is doing immoral things for good reason. Takes
the first time he kills a person for example. In Episode 1.03
"...And the Bag's in the River", Walter has to decide to let
Krazy-8 go or kill him. From the beginning of that episode,
Walter is still a miserable man, again. We see him clean all the
disgusting, nasty remain from the dead body on the floor, which
is caused by Jesse, who refused to listen to his instruction. On
one hand, we acknowledge that Walter gets stuck in another bad
situation. He cannot decide what to do. He is struggling: got7
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
8
fight with Jesse, his only partner at this time. More
importantly, he cannot share or talk with anyone about this. On
the other hand, he shows his good side by taking care of Krazy-8,
his enemy: cleaning his waste and preparing sandwich carefully.
That is the perfect idea of a protagonist. Viewers know this and
hope for a resolution, a way for him to get out. Not only does
Walter get confused about Krazy-8, but so do we. The scene when
he notes down the reasons to kill or release his enemy to two
columns is a clearly proof that he is stuck, and he is still a
good person. Walter, at this point, still acts morally. For that
reason, when he kills Krazy-8 in a brutal way, viewers still
stand on his side because he kills (for the first time in his
life) to protect him and his family. He kills for self-defense.
Kill or to be killed. Hence, killing at this point for Walter and
viewers is acceptable.
MD is right in this Krazy-8's case. However, when we discuss
about another killing that is done by Walter later, we ask
ourselves if there is any excuse for Walter's actions! Not
8
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
9
directly kill Jane, Jesse's girlfriend in Season 2, but
obviously, Walter has to take full responsible for her death:
Jane flops onto her back when Walt tries to rouse Jesse.
Moments later, Jane starts retching. Walt moves to help her -
she's still passed out — but he pauses. Walt watches Jane
struggle as she asphyxiates on her vomit until she finally lies
still and dies. Shaken, Walt puts a hand to his mouth and tries
to recompose himself.
Breaks down this action in a careful way, viewers already know at
this point, Walter is not completely morally clear anymore. The
fact that Walter makes himself sink deeper and deeper into a
criminal's world still makes us root for every time he does not
get caught by his wife, Hank or DEA agents. On the contrary, we
begin questioning his motive. Walter decides to return to
"business" even after he said "I'm out" on Episode 2.10 "Over";
and he has a conflict with Jesse about the share of payment.
Jane, who now knows Jesse is a drug dealer blackmails Walter to
give back Jesse's that money. In the end of "Phoenix" episode
2.12, Walter watches and stares at Jane, witnesses her death
9
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
10
without helping her. There are two possibilities: first, if we
stand on Walter's side, we can come up with an excuse that he
does that for protecting Jesse. Previous episodes show us Jane is
not a good influence for Jesse since she leads him to heroin:
more addictive, more powerful and more dangerous. Walter found
out about that when he picked up the needle in Jesse's bedroom.
Moreover, Walter never wants Jane die from the first place. Jane
falls to other side while he is shaking Jesse. Second, if we, as
viewers, stand against Walter, we will hold on to the selfish
side of Walter this time: Jane is blackmailing him. She is an
absolute threat to his money and his secret. Besides, she is
turning Jesse against him and sooner, Jane will take him away
from Walter's "wing". Instead of finding a way to save Jane when
Walter panics, he shows us a cold look at her first, then mercy
expression later. Actually, Walter's action also leads indirectly
to the disaster, the mid-air collision, which is caused by Jane's
father in the end of Season 2. In brief, Jane becomes the first
but not the last "innocent" victim whom Walter "kills" to get
what he wants.
10
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
11
If taking Jesse's safety as an excuse, viewers can easily find
the scene when Walter drives over two gang members of Gus to save
Jesse in Episode 3.12 "Half Measures" familiar. He continues to
shoot another one in the head with cold blood and tells Jesse
"Run". Base on the narrative presentation of this episode, there
is a chance we can interpret that Walter's killing is making up
for his previous action, which leads to the dead of Tomás,
Andrea's young brother before. In another way, we can defense for
Walter's act that he actually kills these two men (bad guys, drug
dealers, killers, villains, gang members, "not worth to live") to
save Jesse from gun fighting 3. Furthermore, viewers continue to
question Walter's moral when in the end of Episode 4.13 "Face
Off", the close-up scene of a Lilly of the Valley plant implies
that he had poisoned Brock from the beginning to manipulate Jesse
into his plan. At this point, is poisoning an innocent child
still acceptable, even it leads to Gus's death - a death of a
super villain in Breaking Bad? Once again, the right to decide
3 In an interview with Bryan Cranston by Merle Ginsberg on The Hollywood Reporter magazine, Cranston reveals that "the way we shot that scene was he gets out of the car, one man is dead, and he sees the other man badly injured.He looks at Jesse and laments the fact that there's no choice for him, he has to kill him. The way Vince Gilligan edited was that I did not hesitate at all,I just shot him. I was shocked. I recoiled, watching that"
11
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
12
belongs to us, the viewers. For those reasons, we can jump to
conclusion that whatever Walter does, we as viewers always find a
suitable, reasonable excuse to defense him. We ask ourselves
since when killing people is acceptable, even when they are bad
men. Viewers keep coming back to this presentation, this argument
and this interpretation whenever Walter kill people (or does
immoral things): when he kills Mike in Episode 5.07 "Say My
Name", when he hires Jack's White Supremacist Gang kill ten guys
in jail or when he returns to kill Jack's Gang for revenge, and
so on. Comes back to Tomás's death and two men are killed by
Walter. We find these bad guys' death just so acceptable since
they used children to sell drug. Moreover, they killed Tomás, who
was just a child (but do not forget Tomás was the one who
murdered Combo, Jesse's formal friend before). Viewers have no
problem with these deaths since all of them are interpreted in a
reasonable way: it is karma.
If applying ADT and MD to explain the enjoyment of viewer in
Breaking Bad and Walter White's narrative presentation, sooner or
later, we are able to figure out that there is a gap in those
12
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
13
theories. Since ADT only applies to the narrative presentation of
morally clear characters and MD explains to the acceptance of
immoral behaviors of good characters, what will happen when the
changing process of Walter, from Mr.Chipps to Scarface, from a
protagonist to an antagonist happens in front of viewer's eyes?
In the end, who is Walter White? Is he a protagonist, an
antagonist or an antihero? In Janicke & Raney's research, they
defy "antihero" in both literary study and media study as are
morally complex characters whose actions range on a continuum
from good to bad, in contrast with clearly moral heroes and
clearly immoral villains (2014). Bases on this definition, at
some point of Breaking Bad, Walter White used to be a protagonist,
an antihero and then an antagonist. The reason why we cannot defy
him in a clearly, non-vague way is that he is a complex
character, whose moral is not easy to judge. As I pointed out
above, judging him as good or bad is depended on viewers' moral
judgment. During more than 50 hours of Breaking Bad's story, the
narrative presentation more than one time makes us as viewers
ambiguous or feel uncertain about Walter and his actions.
Gilligan tells himself that "even though this is a time in television of darker
13
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
14
anti-heroes, to me, Breaking Bad is very much an experiment" (Romano, 2013). In
deed, Walter White is an experiment case too. "Walt is a case study. He
is a very interesting, complex, damaged individual with a lot of wonderful facets..."
(Romano, 2013). Describes about Walter's evilness, Douthat argues
in his review article
"this is a series in which the main character has actively
become evil, but we still want him to succeed. At this point,
Walter White could do anything and I would continue to
support his case. In fact, his evolution has been so deft
that I feel weird describing his persona as "evil", even though
I can't justify why it would be incorrect to do so (2011)".
As viewers, there are some interesting questions which are raised
along with Walter's process of changing: How many times he does things
for no excuse and Since when he actually transforms to another type of character?
To answer those questions, we need to trace back to an argument
that I find very precise. In Meslow's article on The Atlantic
website named "On "Breaking Bad", Family is a Motivation and a Liability", he
emphasized that "One of the most disturbing aspects of the Breaking Bad universe
is the idea that caring about people is just a weakness to be exploited" (2012). It
14
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
15
is absolutely true. What is the ultimate excuse Walter uses for
his series of damaged actions: family. From the beginning of this
show, family and responsibility for family's members has become
the most reasonable excuse for every action in Breaking Bad. Walter
starts cooking meth "for the (ostensible) good of Family was
once, at least in theory, the reason for Walt's actions."
Walter: "I just want you to know that, no matter how it may
look, I only had you in my heart." Episode 1.01 "Pilot"
To be honest, since then whenever Walt has needed justification,
or a reason, or an excuse for his dangerous, extreme, outrageous,
immoral actions, he is turned to "family". There is more than one
time in Breaking Bad, Walter defenses his actions by taking
"Family" as an excuse. For instance, Episode 1.03 "...And the
Bag's in the River", Walt has little confession with Krazy-8
about his situation: he has to cook meth to earn money quickly
for his family. In many conversations with his wife, Skyler, he
states that family is matter to him and all he has been doing is
for them. Let's recall to the real reason why Walter kills Krazy-
8 in Season 1. In the scene when he is sitting in bathroom and
15
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
16
writes down to two columns "Let him live" and "Kill him", no
matter what or how many convincing the "Let him live" reasons
are, only "He'll kill your entire family if you let him go"
reason in "Kill him" is strong enough to make viewers as moral
judgment feel satisfy after Krazy-8 is killed. In addition, one
of reasons why Walter decides to kill Gus is his terrible threat
to Walt's family "I will kill you wife. I will kill your son. I will kill your infant
daughter" (Episode 4.11 "Crawl Space"), and "that set Walt on his path to
triumph" (Meslow, 2012). That is the reason why Walter changes
from a protagonist (who is so miserable in the pilot episode) to
an antihero in the middle of his transformation. Not only Walt,
but Jesse, Mike, Skyler or even the clearly antagonists such as
Gus and Lydia also root for family issue. As Walter says in the
final of Episode 5.02 "Madrigal": "There's no better reason than family".
Obviously, through entire series Breaking Bad, viewers have seen
virtually every character betray their morals and their best
judgment in an attempt to protect the ones they love the most.
Comes back to Walter's excuse, he usually gets the approvement
from viewers since we all agree with him that protecting and
acting bad things for family is acceptable. On the contrary,16
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
17
viewers are not naive if we just root for Walter's excuse
forever. At some point in Walter's story arc, we come to
realization that he performs immoral acts consciously and for no
excuse but himself. Walter has more than one chance to get out of
drug business but he did not do it. In Episode 1.05 "Gray
Matter", Walter walked away from both Elliott's job offer and
Hank's assistant financial help that would cover his treatment
financial. He decides proudly to come back to cook meth to
protect his own pride. Viewers can see at this particular moment,
Walter has been breaking bad and officially puts one of his foot
to the illegal side, because he takes no reason, no excuse to
come back to cooking meth. In the first Episode 2.10 "Over", he
said "I'm out" to Jesse in the restaurant but in the end, he gets
into bad mood in his own party for no reason. In my opinion, his
face expression when Walter Jr. throws up in the pool is
priceless. It shows us another Walter's characteristic,
personality that does not belong to Mr.White as a teacher, a
husband or a father. Later, Walter finds out that he needs to
come back to drug business. The statement he gives in the end of
that episode in the parking lot "Stay out of my territory" is a clearly17
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
18
proof for his conscious mind: he is acting for himself. Walter
shaves his head in Season 1 because of the chemo. However, the
bald head, the goatee mustache, the wrinkles on his forehead
become his personal favorite look and the identical
characteristic for Heisenberg. In season 2, he decides to shave
his head for purpose, because he gets use to that look. In the
final episode, Walter finally admits with Skyler, with viewers
that "I did it for me. I liked it. I was good at it. And, I was really... I was alive."
(Episode 5.16 "Felina"). Gilligan said:
"So I think that does mean that with every season, with
every episode perhaps, there are people who shake loose and say,
you know what, this guy is too damn dark. I can't root for
him anymore. I liked it better when he was doing what he was
doing for his family. But now I think that's an empty statement
and a lie, and I think that what's he's doing is for his own
personal benefit, and I just don't buy the reason that he does
what he does anymore" (Romano, 2013)
"If there's a larger lesson to "Breaking Bad", it's that actions have consequences"
Gilligan said during lunch one day in his trailer (Segal, 2011).
18
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
19
This is a key statement, a crucial point that attaches to the
transformation from Walter White to Heisenberg. Walter's actions
actually defy who he is, and viewers are the one who judge that.
In deed, Walter White is a challenge for viewers to judge or defy
him in a moral way. At first, we were introduced to this man in a
way that made him impossible to dislike; and because we
experience this show through whichever character we understand
the most - the audience is placed in the curious position of
continuing to root for an individual who is no longer good. Since
Walter's actions defy his own image and identity, Walter White
from Season 1 to Season 4 has changed, not because of social
environment, but it is an absolute perfect product of his own
consciousness. "He changed himself. At some point, he decided to become bad..."
(Douthat, 2011).
In the end, who is the characters viewers root for: Walter White
or Heisenberg? We cannot separate any identities since they exist
in a same character. However, the more Walter becomes or enjoys
being Heisenberg, the more viewers get away from him since
Heisenberg presents for immoral act, an antagonist, a "second
19
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
20
Gus" in Breaking Bad. In Episode 2.12 "Phoenix", Walter shows his
infant daughter the money he hides behind the wall with proud
voice "Daddy gets that". In Episode 3.04 "Green Light", Walter gets
angry with Jesse not because Jesse decides to return to cook
meth, but he feels offensive when seeing the pure crystal Jesse
made without needing his help. Walter's pride is threaten by his
own formal high school student, who knew nothing about basic
chemical before working with him. Walter wants to address his
name, his product and his reputation "This. This. This is my product. This is
my formula. This is mine." Walter continues to come back to Heisenberg
identity when he says to Skyler in Episode 4.06 "Cornered":
"Who are you talking to right now? Who is it you think you
see? Do you know how much I make a year? I mean, even if I
told you, you wouldn't believe it. Do you know what would
happen if I suddenly decide to stop going in to work... It ceases
to exist without me. No... I am not in danger, Skyler. I am
the danger... I am the one who knocks"
Walter literally states that he is the danger. In fact, Walter
successfully makes his life more dangerous, exciting and darker
20
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
21
so many times than his life before he was diagnosed with lung
cancer. Bryan Cranston said about what Walter is feeling in the
very first moment viewers are exposed to his look, in his
tightie-whities and is holding up a gun: "To feel wanted... To feel
dangerous. Danger is cool... for the first time in 25 years he's feeling again. And even
fear is better than numbness. So he's willing to accept it, and possibly encourage it."
(Newman, 2008). Not only proudly presenting his identity to his
wife, in Episode 5.07 "Say My Name", Walter addresses with
Declan, dares him to say his name, not Walter White, but the
legendary meth cook Heisenberg and he is so proud of that. The
final scene when Walter falls down in the lab, we can argue that
he dies as Heisenberg, as Gilligan said "In my mind, the ending is a
victory for Walt" (Brown, 2013). Walter can die and brings his
reputation and drug empire as Heisenberg with him.
Looking at the transformation of Walter White, viewers like and
show sympathy for Walter from the beginning. We hope and enjoy
watching Walter reaches success in his drug empire. During his
changing to Heisenberg, viewers switch to another side. We
develop opposite feeling and different kind of enjoyment toward
21
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
22
Heisenberg: we wait for the day Walter gets punishment and the
enjoyment is lowest when Heisenberg takes all the victory.
Nevertheless, in the final episode of final season, when Walter
decides to come back to town and seeks revenge for Hank's death,
viewers re-form the liking relationship toward him and show the
same sympathy as we did from the beginning: Walter returns to an
antihero role who acts immoral to get justice. That is ADT. On
the other side, we can also interpret that the enjoyment of
Walter's vengeance according to MD, which is finding any excuse,
reasonable explanation to Walter/Heisenberg's immoral acts.
Gilligan, the creator of Walter White and Heisenberg defenses him
as:
"...a very rational mind. He's a scientist. He wants to be
in control of situations. More often than not, he's not in
control. But so much of his desire for change stems from a lack
of control. And yet he also has this hubris that he can control
things. As we often do from time to time--these are all our
live, and we can all sympathize with that."
22
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
23
We can come up with an alternative excuse that the reason Walter
becomes Heisenberg (or really broke bad) is that the first time
ever in his life, he does something he is good at it and be proud
of it, even when it is illegal.
"He certainly could lie to his family, and he can lie to
himself, and he can make these lies stick. He can make
himself believe, in the face of all contrary evidence, that he is
still a good man. It really does feel to us like a natural
progression down this road to hell, which was originally
paved with good intentions." - Vince Gilligan (Brown, 2013)
In conclusion, Breaking Bad is not only one of the greatest series
of all time (John, 2013), but it also creates one of the most
ambiguous character of all time, Walter White. Talking about the
relationship between him and viewers, "Walter White progresses from
unassuming savant to opportunistic gangster - and as he does so, the show dares you
to excuse him, or find a moral line that you deem a point of no return." (Segal,
2011). Interestingly, when we apply two media entertainment
theories in Walter's case, somehow we can explain and find a
reason why we have such a complicated relationship with Walter.
23
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
24
Breaking Bad is a story of a protagonist who decides to walk away
from the halo of purely good light or purely bad to the dark side
of a complex antagonist/villain. That is the important point
differentiates Walter and other antiheroes characters, such as
Tony Soprano or Dexter Morgan: "Walter changes himself" (John, 2013).
Viewers are drawn into Breaking Bad's narrative presentation world,
Walter's transformation; and we accept Breaking Bad's writer's
challenge: we dare to judge Walter in any way we can, but in the
end, we become attach consciously to his moral/immoral acts,
motive and decision. Moreover, we come to acknowledgement that as
viewers, we enjoy his process of changing as well as judging him.
The show is dark and intense, however, in my opinion it never is
the real intention, but the single transformation arc of Walter
White is.
24
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
25
Work Citation
Brown, Lane. "In Conversation: Vince Gilligan on the End of
Breaking Bad" Vulture 12 May. 2013. Web. 19 April. 2014.
Douthat, Ross. "Good and Evil on Cable" The New York Times 28
July.2011. Web. 19 April. 2014.25
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
26
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press
Janicke, Sophie H., & Raney A. A. (2014). How Moral Schemas Impact
our Liking and Moral Acceptance of Antiheroes. Annual International
Communication Association Conference Press.
John, Allen St. "Why "Breaking Bad" Is The Best Show Ever And Why
That Matters" Forbes 16 Sep. 2013. Web. 19 April. 2014.
Krakowiak, K. M. (2008) When Good Characters Do Bad Things: Examining The
Effect of Moral Ambiguity on Enjoyment. The Pennsylvania State
University
Krakowiak, K. M., & Tsay, M. (2013) What makes Characters' Bad Behaviors
Acceptable? The Effects of Character Motivation and Outcome on Perceptions,
Character Liking, and Moral Disengagement. Mass Communication and
Society, 16:179-199
Ginsberg, Merle. "Breaking Bad" Star Bryan Cranston on Walter
White: "He's Well on His Way to Badass" (Q&A)" The Hollywood
Reporter 16 July. 2011. Web. 19 April. 2014.
26
Dao Minh NguyenFinal Paper - Breaking Down "Breaking Bad"
27
Meslow, Scott. "On "Breaking Bad", Family Is a Motivation and a
Liability" The Atlantic 23 July. 2013. Web. 19 April. 2014.
Neuman, Clayton. "Q&A: Bryan Cranston (Walter White) - Part I&II"
AMC TV 12 Feb. 2008. Web. 19 April. 2014.
Raney, A. A. (2004). Expanding disposition theory: Reconsidering
character liking, moral evaluations, and enjoyment. Communication
Theory, 14, 348–369.
Romano, Andrew. "Breaking Bad Finale: Lost Interviews With Bryan
Cranston & Vince Gilligan" The Daily Beast 29 Sep. 2013. Web. 19
April. 2014.
Segal, David. "Art Of Darkness" Sunday Magazine The New York
Times 10 July. 2011: MM18. Print.
Shafer, Daniel M., & Raney. A. A. (2012). Exploring How We Enjoy
Antihero Narratives. Journal of Communication, 62, 1028 - 1046
Zillmann, D. (2000). Basal morality in drama appreciation. In I.
Bondebjerg (Ed.), Moving images, culture, and the mind (pp. 53–64).
Luton, UK: University of Luton Press.
27
Top Related