BocoDragon said:
Disagree.
In fact, at many points I think it's mocked the simplistic morality of Hank or Skylar. Recently it mocked the simplistic morality of Tom Beneke.
"Breaking Bad" implies a bad path.... From the beginning of getting into meth and lies, no one has ever questioned whether Walt is on a "bad path"... but the necessity of each crisis situation has maintained a rational motivation. Given the same circumstances, many of us might do what Walt did in his situation..
I have no doubt that Breaking Bad is moving Walt from a family character into a Scarface "badguy" character..
. but nowhere in that did they ever imply he made a "stupid", "impulsive", "emotional" or "greedy" choice that led him along that path. He was not a wannabe player. It was all in rational defense of his family's safety.
The beauty of this show is that we are discussing our own morality right now.
1. Not taking the medical treatment money from his friends - emotional
2. accepting Gus's offer after he made enough money to provide for his family - greedy
3. Demanding Jesse not sell blue stuff - greedy and emotional
4. Telling Hank that Gale wasn't Heisenberg - emotional and stupid
5. Not heeding Jesse's advice in box cutter than they were safe because they have no other Cook. Everything in season 4 with Jesse and Gus reinforced this fact - stupid
6. Killing those 2 dealers at the end of season 3 - impulsive
Pretty much everything Walt did in season 4 up until the finale was fucking stupid, too, except diverting Hank just enough.
So no, you're dead wrong here too. There are 2 things you're missing in your claim of rationality and what we would do in his situation.
1. One of the main themes of the show is that Walt is not powerless and stuck in a bad situation, but rather that he is responsible for every action he takes and the consequences of those actions are his and his alone. He has a lot of power and chooses this path continually. Vince Gilligan has gone so far in the past to say he doesn't want people to think he's a product of crappy circumstances. Missing this point is kind of a big deal, IMO.
2. What we would do in this situation is one of the themes of the show. The point of taking a Joe Schmoe and turning him into Scarface is asking us, the viewer, if we could break bad like Walt.
Perhaps what you've conflated are the notion of morality (what is bad and good) and the notion of inherit goodness (are we inherently good or bad). That is, Vince Gilligan is showing us Walt is clearly bad, very fucking bad, but he's asking us
is he bad because Walter White is bad or do we all naturally have the capacity to be bad?