Breaking Bad in 2009, however, Saul Goodman (aka Jimmy McGill) is still on screens thirteen years later. The gap between the two shows in the Breaking Bad universe is smaller, with Breaking Bad set between 2008 and 2010, and its prequel Better Call Saul takes place between 2002 and 2004. Nonetheless, some of Better Call Saul's main characters, namely Jimmy (Bob Odenkirk), Mike Ehrmantraut (Jonathan Banks), and Gus Fring (Giancarlo Esposito) do all look noticeably older in the prequel, despite their characters being several years younger than when they first appeared on screens.
As such, the use of digital de-aging VFX for Better Call Saul characters was considered for the show but as producer Thomas Schnauz explained, they "don't have the time or money for that." De-aging VFX has become somewhat of a staple in modern TV and movies, especially with the current landscape's fondness for prequels. Despite the advancements in technology, not all examples of de-aging CGI have been met with universal acclaim. In Martin Scorsese's The Irishman, CGI transforms Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, and Joe Pesci into younger versions of themselves but while their faces looked believable, the discrepancy between their blemish-free faces and older bodies was obvious.
According to Schnauz, Better Call Saul's aversion to de-aging VFX is for purely financial and practical reasons, but the show's choice to not use it works wonders for the show. Sure, it may be more believable for some viewers to see Mike, Gus, and Bob Odenkirk's Jimmy looking younger than they did in Breaking Bad. However, it's important to acknowledge that if Better Call Saul chose to use de-aging CGI, it could have resulted in longer gaps between seasons due to the additional time needed in post-production. Furthermore, the financial costs of using such technology would have resulted in sacrifices being made elsewhere. This could have meant characters, locations, or expensive sequences, such as shootouts, could have been taken out of the scripts to adhere to budgets.
Beyond practicality, the lack of VFX in every frame of Better Call Saul allows its actors to shine. The most important aspect of Better Call Saul is its character-orientated drama, and VFX can detract from that. De-aging VFX when at its worst, such as the aforementioned de-aging CGI of Netflix's The Irishman, can be easily spotted by most audiences. By drawing attention to the effect, the CGI actually opposes its own purpose. De-aging is supposed to make actors look more believable in their roles, but in certain instances when not executed correctly, it takes the audience out of the movie or TV show and into the uncanny valley.
Even when done well, de-aging VFX often fails to capture the entirety of an actor's performance. Even with lots of money poured into the technology, it would be more powerful for viewers to see Jonathan Banks' authentic performance as Mike, rather than a lesser performance of a younger-looking Mike Ehrmantraut. And ultimately, with a character-driven show like Better Call Saul, where motivation and subtext reign supreme, and most of the action is characters talking in rooms, the cameras must capture every last twitch in an actor's face. It's the minutiae where the show thrives - Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul are so good because of the little details, rather than their visual presentation. Better Call Saul may seem like a prime candidate for de-aging CGI, but it was definitely the right decision not to utilize it.
Better Call Saul returns on July 11th on AMC.