A general claim of influence needs specific examples. Gilligan has pointed to particular techniques; examining them does not mean attributing every shot in his series to Kubrick.
The first image raises a question before explaining the scene
In 2017, in DGA Quarterly, Vince Gilligan connected Kubrick with the attention paid to a scene’s first image, central perspective, certain slow pull-back zooms, and the ironic use of music. His statement identifies techniques, not an exhaustive list of episodes. The first step is to distinguish this acknowledged influence from comparisons we might propose while watching the series.
The opening of the Breaking Bad pilot offers an example of how an image can foreshadow a situation without making it immediately understandable. The pants falling in the landscape and the vehicle crossing the space introduce an event whose causes we do not yet know. The sequence does not begin by explaining who Walter White is. It presents effects and requires us to reconstruct afterward the path that led to them.
The question of the first image does not mean that every scene must begin with a close-up. It refers to the first element the viewer sees, whatever its scale. A landscape, an object, or a face can set up a different expectation. Equating the first image with a tight shot would reduce a narrative decision to a technical choice that does not, by itself, pose the same question.
The opening of A Clockwork Orange offers a comparison with another way of managing revelation: a figure that initially dominates the frame is placed within a space and a group. The movement changes what we know about him. The connection to Breaking Bad here is analytical, not a claim that one opening copies the other. Both are interested in how an image acquires context; the added information and the effect it produces are different.
A shot can reveal a relationship without changing scenes
The perspective and symmetry organize attention before a character acts. A central axis can make an institutional space legible or make a figure seem part of a structure larger than them. But the same order can be used for a joke, a pause, or a threat. Geometry has to be considered in relation to duration and to the positions of the people in the frame.
The pull-back zoom offers another possibility: expanding the context without breaking temporal continuity. The viewer starts close to a detail and gradually discovers the conditions surrounding it. The revelation does not necessarily depend on introducing completely new information. It can change the proportion between something already known and the space that now contains it, altering how we judge the situation.
One documented case is a reminder to avoid automatic attributions. In a 2022 conversation with David Canfield, Gilligan and cinematographer Paul Donachie explained that the pull-back from the Jimmy and Kim scene in Carrot and Stick referred to the opening of The Godfather. The domestic setting transforms the initial solemnity. A technique that also recalls Kubrick has another explicitly stated reference here.
The distinction matters because it prevents technical similarity from becoming an infallible detector of influence. A slow zoom does not belong exclusively to any one director. What one scene shares with another may be the technique, the contrast between beginning and ending, or the dramatic situation. To identify a specific homage, it is worth preserving the relevant testimony rather than replacing it with the reference that seems most familiar to the critic.
Collaboration is also visible in this example. Discussing a choice described by Gilligan and Donachie does not mean assigning every decision between them in advance, but it does keep us from describing the result as an image produced without a team. Series bring together directing, cinematography, performance, design, and editing. Recognizing Kubrick’s influence within that process does not erase the contributions of those who turn an idea into a scene that can be made.
Music can separate what we see from how it is presented
The musical counterpoint allows an action to take on a tone different from the one its images would create on their own. A laborious task can seem effortless; harmful behavior can be presented with a pleasant surface. A comparison with Kubrick should specify that relationship rather than call any familiar song ironic. The contrast can come from the rhythm, the lyrics, the situation, or the song’s cultural associations.
The montage of Jimmy and Kim set to “Something Stupid” in Better Call Saul offers a useful comparison. The split screen lets us watch parallel routines while the song creates continuity in the soundtrack. Sharing the same listening time does not mean fully sharing an experience. The visual arrangement makes connections and separations perceptible in a way the music alone cannot resolve.
At the end of Dr. Strangelove, the song and images can also come into conflict, but the scale and function are different. There, a familiar promise is set against collective destruction; in the Saul sequence, a relationship is explored through everyday habits. This comparison describes techniques and differences. It does not claim that the series’ montage is a documented reproduction of that ending.
The editing and pacing make this collaboration between techniques possible. A song does not work alone: what matters is which actions are selected, how long they last, and when the scene cuts from one to another. The same is true of perspective or a zoom. Gilligan’s testimony lets us recognize a conversation with Kubrick; the specific scenes show that this conversation exists alongside other influences and the distinct challenges of ongoing television storytelling.
References: Robert Koehler, “Kubrick’s Outsized Influence,” DGA Quarterly, Fall 2017. David Canfield, “The Images of Better Call Saul: Vince Gilligan on Homage, Patience, and Payoffs,” Vanity Fair, June 21, 2022. Works discussed: Breaking Bad, “Pilot” (2008); Better Call Saul, “Something Stupid” (2018) and “Carrot and Stick” (2022); A Clockwork Orange (1971); Dr. Strangelove (1964).
View all articles in Kubrick in Other Filmmakers and Visual Culture