# Suits - Season 6 (2016-17) *spoilers*



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

So the predicable show, the last dying breath of USA's "Characters Matter" lineup carries on. 

I wish they had jumped ahead in time a bit. The same terrible writing is still around, where the characters yell for each other for thirty seconds as if every conversation is the most important thing ever to happen. The problem in any yelling match is then resolved by a subsequent yelling match a few minutes later. 

Mike made a mistake in prison that could have been seen coming from a thousand miles away. For a really smart guy like Mike, a conman himself, to act so dumb in prison is rather absurd.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

yeah, watching just because I've watched since the beginning at this point. I kind of hope they call it a day after this season


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Season 6 is gearing up to be a version of Shawshank Redemption. The movie was already mentioned in the season premiere so I think it's more than just a passing mention. Mike will probably get his ass kicked for a while and then start helping the inmates with their appeals. What better place for him to be a lawyer illegally than in prison?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I would have made the same mistake Mike made in prison. Who would have thought his new roommate would cozy up to him to get blackmail info on Harvey? Not me.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> yeah, watching just because I've watched since the beginning at this point. I kind of hope they call it a day after this season


this +1

the scenes in the first episode with them arguing in the office were way stupid.

i am hoping Mike gets raped in prison - that would make it worth watching


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> i am hoping Mike gets raped in prison - that would make it worth watching


Oooookaaaayyyyy.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

aw c'mon Mike needs some good Oz-like scenes. 
Where's Chris Meloni and JK Simmons when you need them?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> I would have made the same mistake Mike made in prison. Who would have thought his new roommate would cozy up to him to get blackmail info on Harvey? Not me.


I didn't see the Harvey angle, but I was definitely suspect of the "cellmate" when he was so open on the first night, and then I knew there was some kind of scam going on when he offered the use of the phone and kept pushing it. I figured it was just a trick by the guards to see if they could get him to break the rules (by using the phone) right off the bat and then they could punish him.

All the stuff in the office so far the first two episodes has been beyond ludicrous. Get served with a lawsuit at midnight and settle it the next morning? Please. 

Jessica knew she couldn't personally give money to Soloff because it would open up the firm to a piercing the corporate veil charge. But then she personally "loans" money to Zane to give to Soloff right in front of Soloff and openly says that she's fine if she never gets paid back? Please.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I'm pretty sure that Mike's cellmate is a dead man walking.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

I guess I'm in the minority, I've liked both episodes so far this season. It's got to be tough keeping a show going this long and try to find the right balance of shaking things up so it doesn't get boring, but not shaking things up too much to annoy people.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

pendragn said:


> I guess I'm in the minority, I've liked both episodes so far this season. It's got to be tough keeping a show going this long and try to find the right balance of shaking things up so it doesn't get boring, but not shaking things up too much to annoy people.


I didn't say I disliked the episodes. I've always found the legal stuff in this show to be fairly ridiculous, and these last two episodes were even more ridiculous than usual.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

The legal issues are not the only thing that is ridiculous.

Mike has been a complete moron, over and over. Most recently, when the guard walked in just in time to keep him from getting stabbed, how stupid do you have to be to not tell the guard that Gallo has a knife on him and was about to stab Mike? That would definitely get Gallo out of there, and the no snitch rule hardly applies when the guy you are "snitching" on was about to have two other guys hold you while he stabbed you.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

john4200 said:


> The legal issues are not the only thing that is ridiculous.
> 
> Mike has been a complete moron, over and over. Most recently, when the guard walked in just in time to keep him from getting stabbed, how stupid do you have to be to not tell the guard that Gallo has a knife on him and was about to stab Mike? That would definitely get Gallo out of there, and the no snitch rule hardly applies when the guy you are "snitching" on was about to have two other guys hold you while he stabbed you.


Gallo might (probably) would have been disciplined for having the shiv, but 1. he's already shown that he has some of the guards in his back pocket, 2. even if he gets sent to solitary for a few weeks, he'll be back at some point and will be a danger to Mike, and 3. the accomplices would spread the word that Mike is a snitch, and then Mike's life in prison will be even more of a living hell than it already was.

Bottom line: you don't snitch unless you can be 100% certain that nobody will find out who snitched and/or you can be certain that the person you snitched on will never have any way to retaliate against you. Mike didn't have either of those assurances, so he was smart to keep his mouth shut.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> Bottom line: you don't snitch unless you can be 100% certain that nobody will find out who snitched and/or you can be certain that the person you snitched on will never have any way to retaliate against you. Mike didn't have either of those assurances, so he was smart to keep his mouth shut.


Nope. That's absurd. It was incredibly stupid to not tell the guard that Gallo had a knife. Mike was seconds away from being stabbed. You don't let someone who is about to stab you get away because of some vague rule about not snitching.

Besides, Gallo would have been out of there and back at a maximum security prison as soon as he was found with a knife, let alone being caught about to stab someone. He might be able to bribe some of the guards, but obviously he does not have all of them in his pocket, and getting caught with a knife in the middle of an assault on an inmate is not something that he can cover up. And even if Gallo could cover it up (which is ridiculous to believe), just letting an honest guard know (and also Mike should tell his counselor) would be enough to protect Mike, since while some guards might be willing to take a bribe, they would not be foolish enough to let a prisoner -- who had already reported an assault with a knife -- get seriously injured while they were supposed to be watching. That would lead to an investigation and then their cozy bribe situation would go away, and possibly get them fired and/or prosecuted.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Mike will be running the prison in about three episodes.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Nope. That's absurd. It was incredibly stupid to not tell the guard that Gallo had a knife. Mike was seconds away from being stabbed. You don't let someone who is about to stab you get away because of some vague rule about not snitching.
> 
> Besides, Gallo would have been out of there and back at a maximum security prison as soon as he was found with a knife, let alone being caught about to stab someone. He might be able to bribe some of the guards, but obviously he does not have all of them in his pocket, and getting caught with a knife in the middle of an assault on an inmate is not something that he can cover up. And even if Gallo could cover it up (which is ridiculous to believe), just letting an honest guard know (and also Mike should tell his counselor) would be enough to protect Mike, since while some guards might be willing to take a bribe, they would not be foolish enough to let a prisoner -- who had already reported an assault with a knife -- get seriously injured while they were supposed to be watching. That would lead to an investigation and then their cozy bribe situation would go away, and possibly get them fired and/or prosecuted.


I'm not going to argue with you about this. Let's just say I strongly disagree and leave it at that.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not going to argue with you about this.


Naturally, since what Mike did is completely ridiculous and there is no reasonable argument to the contrary.

I'm Mike and I just want to be stabbed! I'll let it happen as soon as Gallo wants to try again! Wheeee!


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Bottom line: you don't snitch unless you can be 100% certain that nobody will find out who snitched and/or you can be certain that the person you snitched on will never have any way to retaliate against you. Mike didn't have either of those assurances, so he was smart to keep his mouth shut.


I know two guys that have been to prison. Not jail, prison. Both of them were very clear that snitching was a very, very bad thing to do in prison. I believe them.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

pendragn said:


> I know two guys that have been to prison. Not jail, prison. Both of them were very clear that snitching was a very, very bad thing to do in prison. I believe them.


Do you know any guys who have been stabbed repeatedly with a knife or shiv? How many very's do they put before bad when they describe the experience?

Or if they died, how many very's is that worth?

The thing you need to understand is that snitching usually means telling that someone has contraband in their cell, or maybe telling that someone punched you or whatever.

Telling the guards about being held by two guys while a third is about to stab you with a knife is not snitching. It is self defense.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I think the writing is getting ********* bad.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

It makes me think when the people who created this show came up with the idea to have a guy with a photographic memory be an imposter lawyer they had no clue as to what to do if he got caught.

The whole thing is ridiculous including Harvey being able to get in to see Mike not once but twice in a couple of days. Can *any* inmate in any prison see their lawyer that much that easily?


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

john4200 said:


> Telling the guards about being held by two guys while a third is about to stab you with a knife is not snitching. It is self defense.


That is an important distinction, I agree. And certainly when we were talking about it it wasn't about situations as dire as that. Prison is such a weird, specific environment I'm not sure how well our outside world views hold up. If I'm ever hanging out with either of those guys again (they've both moved away) I'll ask. It's very fascinating to me. 


Cainebj said:


> It makes me think when the people who created this show came up with the idea to have a guy with a photographic memory be an imposter lawyer they had no clue as to what to do if he got caught.


They're on season 6 now. I think it's all gravy at this point. I wonder how many shows, especially cable shows, make it this far. In the writers' minds, this is a great problem to have.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

pendragn said:


> They're on season 6 now. I think it's all gravy at this point. I wonder how many shows, especially cable shows, make it this far. In the writers' minds, this is a great problem to have.


ehhhh hmmmmm no.

In my mind - good TV shows go into it having a beginning, middle and END.

My point is the creators didn't have a plan, which for me = fail.

The result is the craptastic writing we are getting now.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> ehhhh hmmmmm no.
> 
> In my mind - good TV shows go into it having a beginning, middle and END.
> 
> ...


Do you realize that's almost unheard of for a TV show writer to have a plan for the entire series before it starts?

The LOST writers always claimed they knew how the series would end, but as we found out, all they really knew was the final scene. They had no idea how they would actually get there.

Even Vince Gilligan, who created Breaking Bad and had a general idea of where he wanted the show to end up, has said that it's a mistake to go into the writing process thinking you know how the the story will play out because it could prevent you from being open to better story ideas that might come later.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Another thing that did not make sense about that knife scene is that there are certain to be surveillance cameras all around that common area. It is unlikely there is any portion of the common area that does not have a camera on it, and the middle of the room probably has multiple cameras.

And you have to figure that the guards do not have the ability to turn off the cameras or stop them recording. Because the Warden is going to want to have video whenever something goes down, so that if a guard can be blamed, then he has video of it, since if there is no scapegoat, then the Warden takes the heat when something goes wrong.

Even in the unlikely event that the guards are able to cut the video for a while, you have to figure that they did not know Gallo was going to stab Mike. They must have thought he was going to rough him up a bit, but nothing too serious. Because they would have never agreed to cut the video if they thought Gallo was going to send Mike to intensive care or kill him. Since if that happened, and the investigation found that the guards were away from their post and the video had been cut, those guards would be toast. Getting fired would be the least of their problems.

So, the only way I can see that whole situation coming about is if:

1) The Warden is a fool and has a surveillance setup where the guards are able to cut the video

2) The guards Gallo bribed were duped into thinking Gallo was just going to gut punch Mike a few times, no serious or visible damage. The guards were also rather foolish to actually leave -- that does not really protect them from repercussions. If they were going to cut the video anyway, it would have been smarter to stay and make sure things did not go too far.

3) Gallo is an idiot. This is the most plausible of the conditions, since he does seem to let his emotions rule his reason when it comes to Harvey. Gallo should have jumped Mike somewhere that has a camera blindspot, quickly knifed Mike, and then slipped away. Or better yet, get another prisoner to do it. It's not like there would be any doubt in Harvey's mind who is responsible, and hurting Harvey seems to be Gallo's main goal.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Didn't they mention earlier on about some cameras being out? Or am I remembering from another show? Also, Gallo had no intention of killing Mike because he wanted to stretch things out. It's easy enough to stab someone in the arm without risking killing them. Or maybe he's a GoT fan and figured a couple gut shots would just slow Mike down a bit.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

So Gallo has been in for 13 years of a 15 year term. Clearly he has not gotten out for good behavior, yet somehow he can transfer to a minimum security prison? And if he only has 2 years left, would he really risk being caught now? Wouldn't he be able to do much more to get back at Harvey after getting out?


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

And do we really need another corrupt prison guards trope.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

wprager said:


> Didn't they mention earlier on about some cameras being out? Or am I remembering from another show? A


I did not notice any mention of cameras at all. It is like the writers completely forgot that a prison has lots of surveillance cameras.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> Mike will be running the prison in about three episodes.


I could see that...lol Heck, maybe he could get his law degree from prison taking online courses.

I just watched the second episode and the bit about saving the company and such was boring. I did enjoy Louis hiring actors to look like interns. And weird guy touching Harvey's balls....lol.

Rachel needs to just chill out some. Mike was only in for 24 hours, and things work differently timewise in prision. Ugh. She is one character I will be happy not to see again when the show finally ends.

I will keep on watching till the end and it will be interested to see where it goes.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

betts4 said:


> Rachel needs to just chill out some. Mike was only in for 24 hours, and things work differently timewise in prision.


Ironically, she was right to be concerned so quickly. Mike was tricked by his "cellmate" into giving up information about Harvey and the rest of the group, and then was almost stabbed, all within his first few days inside.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Just when I thought this season couldn't get much worse, Jack Soloff reappears, needing money. This character needs to transfer to Siberia or some other place where we will never see him again.


----------



## cditty (Jun 8, 2003)

I was talking with someone about this show as a whole. If in the beginning, instead of hiring Mike as a lawyer, couldn't Harvey have hired him as a consultant? Wouldn't Mike had been able to sit in on trials and all and just chimed in with legal mumbo-jumbo?

Just curious. I know it's too late being 6 seasons in.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Gallo might (probably) would have been disciplined for having the shiv, but 1. he's already shown that he has some of the guards in his back pocket, 2. even if he gets sent to solitary for a few weeks, he'll be back at some point and will be a danger to Mike, and 3. the accomplices would spread the word that Mike is a snitch, and then Mike's life in prison will be even more of a living hell than it already was.
> 
> *Bottom line: you don't snitch unless you can be 100% certain that nobody will find out who snitched and/or you can be certain that the person you snitched on will never have any way to retaliate against you. Mike didn't have either of those assurances, so he was smart to keep his mouth shut*.


Yup. As Biggie once rapped, "If dealers think you're snitchin', they ain't tryin' to listen, they will be sittin' in your kitchen, waitin' to start hittin.'"


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cditty said:


> I was talking with someone about this show as a whole. If in the beginning, instead of hiring Mike as a lawyer, couldn't Harvey have hired him as a consultant? Wouldn't Mike had been able to sit in on trials and all and just chimed in with legal mumbo-jumbo?
> 
> Just curious. I know it's too late being 6 seasons in.


Yes, we've discussed this before. Harvey could have hired him as a legal clerk or paralegal and the only difference between that an an actual lawyer is that the lawyer is supposed to "oversee" the actions of the clerk and the lawyer is the one that would have to sign the docs and speak in court. But as a clerk, Mike could have done all the research, prepared all the docs, and even sat next to Harvey in court. So the whole premise falls apart right in the pilot because Harvey would never be stupid enough to do what he did, when he could have had all the benefit of Mike with none of the downside.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yes, we've discussed this before. Harvey could have hired him as a legal clerk or paralegal and the only difference between that an an actual lawyer is that the lawyer is supposed to "oversee" the actions of the clerk and the lawyer is the one that would have to sign the docs and speak in court. But as a clerk, Mike could have done all the research, prepared all the docs, and even sat next to Harvey in court. So the whole premise falls apart right in the pilot because Harvey would never be stupid enough to do what he did, when he could have had all the benefit of Mike with none of the downside.


Yes, it is the actual representing himself as an attorney before the court is what got him in trouble, which is why the whole premise is far-fetched to begin with, even if it had materialized in a more plausible fashion. No law firm in the world would take the risk of having Mike sign documents and appear in court. But there wouldn't be a show then, would there?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

The writing has REALLY gotten bad. This show used to be fun, even if not plausible. Now it's just stupid and like many here, I'm watching just because I have always watched. I'm hoping this is the last season and they wrap it up. To me the writing went downhill when they allowed the writers to use s**t as often as they wanted and they started abusing the privilege. Then the writing itself got stupid, and completely unrealistic. They started introducing characters out of the blue (like Soloff) who supposedly was a partner at the firm for a long time.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The s-boms don't bother me. Louis bothers me. He should have been fired 5011 times already.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

it's been years since I saw the first episodes, but IIRC Harvey didn't know Mike was a fraud right away, so it would have been pretty awkward for him to admit he got fooled and that Mike wasn't an attorney.


----------



## rcandsc (Feb 5, 2014)

cheesesteak said:


> The s-boms don't bother me. Louis bothers me. He should have been fired 5011 times already.


It would be nice if he could find a suit that fits as well. This annoys my wife to no end...


----------



## cditty (Jun 8, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yes, we've discussed this before. Harvey could have hired him as a legal clerk or paralegal and the only difference between that an an actual lawyer is that the lawyer is supposed to "oversee" the actions of the clerk and the lawyer is the one that would have to sign the docs and speak in court. But as a clerk, Mike could have done all the research, prepared all the docs, and even sat next to Harvey in court. So the whole premise falls apart right in the pilot because Harvey would never be stupid enough to do what he did, when he could have had all the benefit of Mike with none of the downside.


Thanks. When my friend asked why they didn't do that, I simply said that if they had, then the show would have stopped right then.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

rcandsc said:


> It would be nice if he could find a suit that fits as well. This annoys my wife to no end...


I assume this is a character trait at this point since Mike and Harvey always have suits that fit great. Then we have Louis with an unflattering suit on that is puffing out at his chest and simultaneously too tight at his stomach.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ElJay said:


> I assume this is a character trait at this point since Mike and Harvey always have suits that fit great. Then we have Louis with an unflattering suit on that is puffing out at his chest and simultaneously too tight at his stomach.


I don't know about that. Louis is very conscious of how he looks and how he is perceived. And he can certainly afford nice suits. So I don't think they're intentionally making him look schlubby because that's his character. I just think Rick Hoffman's body is different and therefore the suits aren't so flattering on him, even if they're expertly tailored.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The conversations between Lous and the new stock trader guy was some of the worst television I've ever watched.


----------



## rcandsc (Feb 5, 2014)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't know about that. Louis is very conscious of how he looks and how he is perceived. And he can certainly afford nice suits. So I don't think they're intentionally making him look schlubby because that's his character. I just think Rick Hoffman's body is different and therefore the suits aren't so flattering on him, even if they're expertly tailored.


I always thought they did it consciously as a way to show Louis as inferior to Harvey and how "perfect" Harvey is. Like everything else on this show, I figured it was as subtle as a sledgehammer.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Are they setting Mike up to be the Shawshank lawyer guy? Maybe if he gets Galloway out he will start working on others. Better than peeling potatoes.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

They have to find a way to spring Mike early (without him turning snitch). You can't have Harvey running off to the prison twice every episode.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> They have to find a way to spring Mike early (without him turning snitch). You can't have Harvey running off to the prison twice every episode.


My prediction is that Mike's roommate will voluntarily give the information required to get Mike out early.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

rcandsc said:


> I always thought they did it consciously as a way to show Louis as inferior to Harvey and how "perfect" Harvey is. Like everything else on this show, I figured it was as subtle as a sledgehammer.


In the most recent episode, Louis said his suit was a Brioni, which is one of the nicest suit manufacturers in the world. So I think it's clear Louis' suits are just as expensive and just as custom tailored as Harvey's.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Azlen said:


> My prediction is that Mike's roommate will voluntarily give the information required to get Mike out early.


And then Mike, in turn, will get him off on a brilliant legal move.

P.S. _Cell_mate.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

I thought it would go a different direction.

I thought mike would get the necessary info from the cellmate,
accidentally leak it,
successfully get that out and the cellmate gets harsher punishment or attacked.

>Surprise twist!< Cellmate had connections to someone important to Mike (Zane, Forstman, Hardman, McCoy, Carver, Arduino, Wasserman...) who then swears to make Mike's life a living Hell for 10 more episodes.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> In the most recent episode, Louis said his suit was a Brioni, which is one of the nicest suit manufacturers in the world. So I think it's clear Louis' suits are just as expensive and just as custom tailored as Harvey's.


that doesn't mean the wardrobe is an actual Brioni...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Mikeyis4dcats said:


> that doesn't mean the wardrobe is an actual Brioni...


But it does mean the costume design people are not intentionally making him look schlubby, which is what's been insinuated in this thread.


----------



## Mikeyis4dcats (Oct 2, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> But it does mean the costume design people are not intentionally making him look schlubby, which is what's been insinuated in this thread.


true, though with Louis' demeanor, it wouldn't be out of character for him to boss around the tailor


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Renewed for 7th season.

eh....


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

rcandsc said:


> I always thought they did it consciously as a way to show Louis as inferior to Harvey and how "perfect" Harvey is. Like everything else on this show, I figured it was as subtle as a sledgehammer.


Exactly


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> But it does mean the costume design people are not intentionally making him look schlubby, which is what's been insinuated in this thread.


Sure it does. You can still look schlubby even in the nicest suits. They could certainly make him look a bit better if they wanted to - but they don't cause that's not his character.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> Renewed for 7th season.
> 
> eh....


Unless something really amazing happens during this season (which currently seems unlikely), I don't think it's going to be renewed at our house.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Another season? I don't know if I'm going to make it to the second half of this one.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

ElJay said:


> Another season? I don't know if I'm going to make it to the second half of this one.


The weird thing is that as dissatisfied as I am with this show, I still watch each episode within a day or two of it airing.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> Renewed for 7th season.
> 
> eh....


I'm not sure I'm in for another season, but we'll see. I tend not to quit shows that I've watched for a long time and once liked.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> The weird thing is that as dissatisfied as I am with this show, I still watch each episode within a day or two of it airing.


At this point we mainly watch because my wife, who was a jewelry designer and metalsmith for 35 years, wants to see what Jessica is wearing. All through the latest episode, she (my wife) kept saying, "I can't believe she's not wearing any jewelry." I finally said, "She had to pawn it all because the firm was out of money."


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Dawghows said:


> At this point we mainly watch because my wife, who was a jewelry designer and metalsmith for 35 years, wants to see what Jessica is wearing. All through the latest episode, she (my wife) kept saying, "I can't believe she's not wearing any jewelry." *I finally said, "She had to pawn it all because the firm was out of money.*"


Which brings me to this silly point. If the firm is out of money, how can they afford to redesign the space to block off the traders? Or afford to have a driver for Harvey and Jessica? Or a few other things that firms would normally not be able to afford if they are broke?


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Apparently they all have some personal wealth. I think they're using that to keep the firm afloat.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Yeah, they are rich people broke not poor people broke.

If they can't get the Whatsisname who keeps threatening Mike transferred to another prison then why can't they get Mike transferred?


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> If they can't get the Whatsisname who keeps threatening Mike transferred to another prison then why can't they get Mike transferred?


Stop making sense.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> If they can't get the Whatsisname who keeps threatening Mike transferred to another prison then why can't they get Mike transferred?


My guess is that this is the closest Federal prison to NYC and they don't want Mike to be any farther away unless that's a last resort.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> Which brings me to this silly point. If the firm is out of money, how can they afford to redesign the space to block off the traders? Or afford to have a driver for Harvey and Jessica? Or a few other things that firms would normally not be able to afford if they are broke?


They're getting a lot of money from leasing part of their offices to this trading firm.

-smak-


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

jessica saying 'i dont have time for whatever you want' when someone comes into the room is getting old. also the same phrases keep popping up over and over. harvey saying 'i need it yesterday' for instance. maybe since i watched these all in a row there was bleedover. 

and while i get why that guy wanted harveys painting, does it really fit in the story? seemed to come out of nowhere. i guess the self sacrifice aspect is what they were going for. 

to the above poster that gets annoyed by the legal stuff...dont ever watch 24 expecting real time 

i liked louis hiring the movie extras. bit of comedy relief. the prune juice and coffee cup things i could do without.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

I thought the 8/10 "Trust" episode had a refreshingly low amount of yelling scenes. The warden scenes were pretty cringe-worthy though, and I still can't get over these times when these lawyers become experts in all law matters.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ElJay said:


> I thought the 8/10 "Trust" episode had a refreshingly low amount of yelling scenes. The warden scenes were pretty cringe-worthy though, and *I still can't get over these times when these lawyers become experts in all law matters.*


At least Harvey acknowledged that Louis is the true expert on financial issues and went to him to craft a strategy to get around the canceled trading license.

I can't believe Donna gave in to Louis on his request to help him find a house in the Hamptons just so he can get close to the architect. She made a good case to him that the woman would never trust him if she found out he lied about having a beach house just to meet her, then she just gave up and helped him buy one. Ridiculous. Plus, any decent architect will look at the property records and find out Louis didn't even own the property at the time he asked her to renovate it. So it's not like he's going to be able to conceal his d-baggery.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

All Louis scenes are ridiculous.

Why is it such a mystery as to why Mike's cell mate was locked up? Wouldn't that be a public record?


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> All Louis scenes are ridiculous.
> 
> Why is it such a mystery as to why Mike's cell mate was locked up? Wouldn't that be a public record?


If Mike gets the cellmate to tell him, then he knows he has his confidence to probe for the answers that the Fed wants. I think.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Louis is really starting to grate on me. He's such a ridiculous character. Whoever writes his part should be fired. I think I like Rusty from Major Crimes better than him.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Why is it such a mystery as to why Mike's cell mate was locked up? Wouldn't that be a public record?


They're not trying to find out why Kevin is in prison. They think he knows something about Sutter's illegal trading. And there's no way Mike is going to get Kevin to spill Sutter's secrets without first feeling comfortable enough with Mike to tell him why he's in prison.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

i continue to enjoy the harvey anytime day or nite in the prison. also the going home to boink his gf actually working is surprising. i guess mike doesnt have the higher code he thought he had. 

the architect thing was over the top but the stock trader /cup/prune juice thing was worse if you ask me. i do think there has to be a separate writer that is someones nephew so they just put these parts in for the actor. 

i would have liked to see jessica toss lewis off the roof

is there anyone that will speak against the bad man when he comes up for parole in 6 weeks? cant that tank everything?


----------



## Frylock (Feb 13, 2002)

I just wonder when Harvey makes a comment about how many people in this federal prison he is representing. I mean, he is spending 1/2 his day commuting to and from there now!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

This might be the dumbest Louis subplot yet and all of the Louis subplots are stupid.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Anyone else catch MJW's little dig at Cosby?


----------



## efilippi (Jul 24, 2001)

wprager said:


> Anyone else catch MJW's little dig at Cosby?


Who's MJW?


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

efilippi said:


> Who's MJW?


Malcolm Jamal Warner (From The Cosby Show) - the prison counselor -

and no, I didn't notice his dig at Cosby-

What was it?


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Regina said:


> Malcolm Jamal Warner (From The Cosby Show) - the prison counselor -
> 
> and no, I didn't notice his dig at Cosby-
> 
> What was it?


He said when he was growing up they had it good -- good family, nice neighborhood, good values -- then he finds out that all of that was an act and that his father was a criminal. Or something to that effect.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> This might be the dumbest Louis subplot yet and all of the Louis subplots are stupid.


The "stroking ebony wood" scene was amusing, at least.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

How can Louis be so dumb and yet be a practicing (and successful) lawyer? And there's no way in the world a woman would do anything other than run and maybe take out a restraining order when she found out how she'd been stalked.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

JETarpon said:


> The "stroking ebony wood" scene was amusing, at least.


I thought that was maybe the worst scene in the show. And I don't mean this episode of the show; I mean in the whole show, ever.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Dawghows said:


> I thought that was maybe the worst scene in the show. And I don't mean this episode of the show; I mean in the whole show, ever.


It was cringe-worthy, and not at all in a good way.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

I am really _this_ close to deleting the season pass.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

wprager said:


> He said when he was growing up they had it good -- good family, nice neighborhood, good values -- then he finds out that all of that was an act and that his father was a criminal. Or something to that effect.


Oh! I didn't put that together-thanks! :up::up:


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

My wife LOL'd at that. She said, "Theo found out Mr Huxtable's a crook!"

I hadn't even realized that was MJW. I knew I knew him, but was also playing on the Internet and hadn't put it all together.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> I am really _this_ close to deleting the season pass.


I'm pretty much just hate watching now. This season will definitely be it for me. (I hope).


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

wprager said:


> Anyone else catch MJW's little dig at Cosby?


I caught that immediately and just went Wow... Did he really just say that?

Has MJW ever said anything publicly regarding the allegations against Cosby?


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm pretty much just hate watching now. This season will definitely be it for me. (I hope).


Yeah, even a threesome of the three female leads wouldn't save the show ... or would it?


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Craigbob said:


> I caught that immediately and just went Wow... Did he really just say that?
> 
> Has MJW ever said anything publicly regarding the allegations against Cosby?


http://www.etonline.com/news/183864..._taken_off_air_taking_money_out_of_my_pocket/



> I am in no position to defend him because I can't. But nor will I throw him under the bus.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm pretty much just hate watching now. This season will definitely be it for me. (I hope).


Ditto. I am watching but really just fastforwarding. I want to rewatch season one to remember the good times.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

I'm enjoying this season, but I like the actor Erik Palladino, so that helps.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

JETarpon said:


> The "stroking ebony wood" scene was amusing, at least.


This is the perfect example of how bad the writing has gotten on this show. That whole bit seems like it was written by a bunch of high school kids, or stoners. I felt my skin crawl as they went though that dialogue.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

wprager said:


> Anyone else catch MJW's little dig at Cosby?





Craigbob said:


> I caught that immediately and just went Wow... Did he really just say that?
> 
> Has MJW ever said anything publicly regarding the allegations against Cosby?


You do realize that it was the writers who wrote that, not MJW.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> This is the perfect example of how bad the writing has gotten on this show. That whole bit seems like it was written by a bunch of high school kids, or stoners. I felt my skin crawl as they went though that dialogue.


It seems like they bring in a wholly different writing team, scripting an entirely different show for the Louis based subplots.


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

Steveknj said:


> You do realize that it was the writers who wrote that, not MJW.


Yes, and If it had been said by any other character it would have not raised an eyebrow. But since it was MJW...


----------



## SleepyBob (Sep 28, 2000)

We just started this series and have gotten partway through Season 2. 
Is the whole "I'm not really a lawyer and everything could come crashing down" still looming over the series, or does it get resolved at some point?


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

SleepyBob said:


> We just started this series and have gotten partway through Season 2.
> Is the whole "I'm not really a lawyer and everything could come crashing down" still looming over the series, or does it get resolved at some point?


You have about 2.5 more seasons of that... And then once they get rid of that crutch, it still doesn't get any better.


----------



## SleepyBob (Sep 28, 2000)

Okay, thanks.


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

This show is in it's 6th season and we have 2+ pages covering half this season saying how bad this show has been for 5.5 years. But you are still watching. Why? There must be something compelling about it. What is that for you?

I can't figure it out for myself other than a little eye candy and wondering what's going to happen to Mike. I have to say that Mike's character is intriguing to me in that he is a law breaker but has a "heart of gold."


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

teknikel said:


> This show is in it's 6th season and we have 2+ pages covering half this season saying how bad this show has been for 5.5 years. But you are still watching. Why?


I don't think it was bad for 5.5 years. We enjoyed it for quite a while, but it was always just a highly-polished throwaway show for us -- fun to watch but not really high on our priority list. It's never been very believable, but in the last couple seasons or so it has gotten progressively more ridiculous, to the point that now it's kind of hard to watch. My wife and I are only sticking with it because most of our "real" shows are on hiatus at the moment, and we have both agreed that unless something extremely, unexpectedly fantastic happens, we are done with it at the end of this season.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I watched originally because the story was intriguing and the characters gave off an "LA Law" kind of vibe, if you remember that show. I think it was actually pretty good for about 4 years, and then started to go downhill. It is definitely the writing that has ruined this show for me. Part of it is that they really started to use the SH** word to the point where it just seems to be used, just because, with little real reason to use it. And the writing has gotten very sophomoric as the Luis / decorator conversation mentioned in the thread is an example. The stories have always been convoluted and make little sense, but the characters were fun. Now, I'm not even sure that's the case. Still I'm in, as I tend to stick with shows I've liked in the past with the hope that it will improve (they rarely do).


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

We've been with it since the beginning and were drawn in by the fake lawyer thing but even more so, Mike's photographic memory, although that didn't come into play all that often.

I agree about the gratuitous use of Sh** and G-D (I don't mind language when it serves a purpose but it seems they stick these into sentences because they can and they even sound out of place most of the time) but at this point it's just mindless entertainment and want to see it through.


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

jr461 said:


> We've been with it since the beginning and were drawn in by the fake lawyer thing but even more so, Mike's photographic memory, although that didn't come into play all that often.


I've said before that's always been my biggest complaint about the show, even when during the better seasons. The fact that Mike is secretly not a lawyer isn't really all that interesting, especially given that he's so good at lawyering. What is really interesting about him is his photographic memory and that, as he says, he can understand anything he reads. But they rarely give that more than a passing comment. I suppose maybe it's harder to write that angle, but to me that's the real meat of the character.


----------



## efilippi (Jul 24, 2001)

I'm ready for this series to end, like many here. Pretty much watch now because of inertia, eye candy, and the fact that not much else is on right now.

As for the photographic memory thing, I'm happy that they do not use it much. To do so would make it too cartoonish (even more than now? }giving it a superhero vibe. There can be little dramatic tension if one guy has the entire universe of law available instantly at his fingertips, so he can't be allowed to actively use it very often.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

It hasn't been bad for 5.5 years. I would say just in the last 1.5. It started sliding last year but this year has really been bleh. Up till then I was into it and for the first 3 seasons looking forward to what would be next. I think it was when Mike started really going off on his own and the Harvey/Mike dynamic changed. the two of them solving the problems and working off each other thru the show against all odds and such really kept me interested.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I keep hoping somebody beats the crap out of Harvey because of the way he treats people.

I'll vomit if Louis and Donna end up with each other.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> I keep hoping somebody beats the crap out of Harvey because of the way he treats people.
> 
> I'll vomit if *Louis and Donna end up with each other*.


Noooooooooo!!! Although OTOH it might be worthwhile just for Harvey's reaction/disgust


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I'm glad this whole ridiculousness with Mike and the prison and Sutter will now be over. 

But I actually shouted at my TV when Mike said he was going to represent Jill. "YOU'RE IN PRISON FOR PRETENDING TO BE A LAWYER!! HOW CAN YOU REPRESENT SOMEONE IF YOU'RE NOT A LAWYER?!?!"


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm glad this whole ridiculousness with Mike and the prison and Sutter will now be over.


I felt the same way when they first told him he was getting out. Then as they showed him standing in his cell talking to Rachel, I got a sinking feeling. My new fear is that because we didn't actually see Mike leave the prison, something will happen at the beginning of next week's episode that will keep him in there.



DevdogAZ said:


> But I actually shouted at my TV when Mike said he was going to represent Jill. "YOU'RE IN PRISON FOR PRETENDING TO BE A LAWYER!! HOW CAN YOU REPRESENT SOMEONE IF YOU'RE NOT A LAWYER?!?!"


We didn't yell, but my wife and I both said the same thing.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> But I actually shouted at my TV when Mike said he was going to represent Jill. "YOU'RE IN PRISON FOR PRETENDING TO BE A LAWYER!! HOW CAN YOU REPRESENT SOMEONE IF YOU'RE NOT A LAWYER?!?!"


He was not representing her in court. He was just negotiating a deal for her. I don't see why he cannot be a negotiator, as long as he tells her he is not a credentialed lawyer (which he did).


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

john4200 said:


> He was not representing her in court. He was just negotiating a deal for her. I don't see why he cannot be a negotiator, as long as he tells her he is not a credentialed lawyer (which he did).


Yes, you're technically right, but just the whole way he said it, referring to her as his client, just smacked of him doing the exact thing that landed him in prison in the first place.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I've wondered about this...and I don't mean to offend anyone. Why can't you be a lawyer if you can pass the bar, whether you went to law school or not? Mike seems to know as much or more than others that are accredited. In real life, I've personally known a few people that breezed through law school but had trouble passing their states' bar exams. I must admit though, that I've never known anyone that took the bar without going to law school. I suppose you have to show proof of graduation before you're allowed to take it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Howie said:


> I've wondered about this...and I don't mean to offend anyone. Why can't you be a lawyer if you can pass the bar, whether you went to law school or not? Mike seems to know as much or more than others that are accredited. In real life, I've personally known a few people that breezed through law school but had trouble passing their states' bar exams. I must admit though, that I've never known anyone that took the bar without going to law school. I suppose you have to show proof of graduation before you're allowed to take it.


It's all up to each state's bar association. There may be a couple states that allow you to take the bar exam without attending law school. Other states require that you attended law school, but it doesn't have to be an accredited school. And I think the majority of states require you to have attended an accredited law school.

As for why, I'm sure it's just a way for people in the profession to protect the profession. If they made it easier for people to become a lawyer, then that would mean more competition, and probably more "underqualified" lawyers that would give the profession a worse reputation.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> Yes, you're technically right, but just the whole way he said it, referring to her as his client, just smacked of him doing the exact thing that landed him in prison in the first place.


Not the "exact thing", since before he did not tell his clients that he was not a credentialed lawyer. Here, he did tell her.

It is really too bad that the system has evolved the way it has. People like Mike should be able to practice law if they want, as long as they don't misrepresent their credentials to clients. If the government wants to accredit schools or professions, that is fine. But they should not also require someone to be credentialed in order to represent a client (as long as they do not misrepresent themselves).


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Not the "exact thing", since before he did not tell his clients that he was not a credentialed lawyer. Here, he did tell her.


Again, my response came when Mike initially said that she was going to be his client. It wasn't until later in the episode that he clarified that he disclosed to her that he wasn't a lawyer.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> ... and probably more "underqualified" lawyers that would give the profession a *worse reputation*.


Unpossible!


----------



## Frylock (Feb 13, 2002)

I am also afraid we are going to replace the beating the dead horse of Mike not being a lawyer and will he get caught with the even more annoying beating the dead horse of Mike being in prison and maybe getting out.

It's like the writers of this show have a drinking game. They drive for every stupid new plot device they come up with to keep things going alone, and take 2 drinks for each new episode they somehow seem to push out and keep people watching.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

How many clients does the firm still have? Did they all leave once Mike was exposed as a fraud? I'm curious because Harvey just framed their most recent big client get. I think Jessica recently signed the stock broker guys but I'm curious if there are still others.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> How many clients does the firm still have? Did they all leave once Mike was exposed as a fraud? I'm curious because Harvey just framed their most recent big client get. I think Jessica recently signed the stock broker guys but I'm curious if there are still others.


Harvey threw Sutter under the bus, but they also signed his trading firm, and I suspect that's a pretty big client whether Sutter is in jail or not.

We haven't heard a lot about the rainmaking in the last few episodes, but Jessica made it sound like getting Sutter's firm would help bring in other clients, so maybe that has happened.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

So what happens to Mike now? He gets out of jail, and now what? Would he even be allowed to attend law school to become legit? He certainly cannot practice with Harvey and Jessica. I just don't know what they can do with the character now. I thought that he'd go to jail, study law in prison, pass the bar and come out accredited. In fact, I figured they'd skip to the end of his sentence and that would be where the show resumed this season (and it probably would have been better).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Huh? Of course he could go to law school. Whether he would be allowed to take the Bar exam is another question.

But he could still work at the firm. Just not as a lawyer. As several people have pointed out before, there is a lot he could do there without being a lawyer. Just look at Rachel.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Huh? Of course he could go to law school. Whether he would be allowed to take the Bar exam is another question.
> 
> But he could still work at the firm. Just not as a lawyer. As several people have pointed out before, there is a lot he could do there without being a lawyer. Just look at Rachel.


Would a law school accept him? That's the question. Honestly, in real life, I don't know.

As far as the firm. They are trying to build back up their reputation, and rehiring Mike, in whatever capacity is not going to help there. That said, with this show, who knows?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Would a law school accept him? That's the question. Honestly, in real life, I don't know.


I'm sure he'd be able to find a school that would let him in. I know several years ago there was a big controversy here in AZ because a guy had served time for murder, then went to law school, and was trying to take the bar exam but the state bar association wouldn't let him.

(I don't remember all the details. He might have completed law school coursework while he was in prison.)


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Maybe Mike could get his law degree from the University of American Samoa like Jimmy McGill/Saul Goodman


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I keep hoping somebody beats the crap out of Harvey because of the way he treats people.
> 
> I'll vomit if Louis and Donna end up with each other.


ahh mud baths. they do strange things.



john4200 said:


> Huh? Of course he could go to law school. Whether he would be allowed to take the Bar exam is another question.
> 
> But he could still work at the firm. Just not as a lawyer. As several people have pointed out before, there is a lot he could do there without being a lawyer. Just look at Rachel.


kayhill will get mike his law degree as part of some deal where he proves louis is the mastermind behind enron.

-------------
sorry been so long but i just got out of rehab. everytime someone entered jessicas office and she said 'whatever it is, you have to wait' , i drank a medicine dropper full of booze. i was so drunk i was asleep for months.

when you watch a few of these in a row you really see the overused lines.

louis and the vacation house was just soooo lame. they really could have done something better there. i hope they do get married though.

i wish we had an idea what long term happened with all the people that left the firm when whats her name took them all. including that one bearded guy that constantly threated to leave then left then took this deal or that deal. i think he wound up with rachels dad?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Interesting interview with series creator Aaron Korsh about the mid-season finale. Don't read until you've watched episode S06E10.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/suits-midseason-finale-departure-scrapped-928128


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

I don't know if this has already been mentioned here, but Suits has been renewed for season 7, to air in 2017: http://tvline.com/2016/08/03/suits-renewed-season-7-usa-network/


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Well that's that. Can we safely talk about what happened or still spoilerize it? Better safe than sorry:



Spoiler



So she left, big whoop. Not that she did very much there except tell people she was too busy (or actually too *goddamn* busy) and to figure it out themselves. If this was real life Harvey would be doing a jig in celebration as he is now the managing partner.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

wprager said:


> Well that's that. Can we safely talk about what happened or still spoilerize it? Better safe than sorry:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just to continue being on the safe side:



Spoiler



The dumb thing about this is she didn't have to give up her stake in the firm and have her name removed. She could simply take a leave of absence or even completely retire, and she'd still retain her equity stake in the firm and the name of the firm wouldn't change. I'll bet if you looked at the names of the majority of the top law firms in this country, the named partners have long since retired or died.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

I think it's safe to discuss the two previous posts openly, since the title of the thread warns about spoilers. I'll wait before responding in case someone else has a different viewpoint on the matter.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I say good riddance. She's been of very little use as a character for quite a while.

Imagine, Mike can still do what he did in the first five seasons by just calling himself a "consultant". Of course if that little brain gem had occurred to any of the principals early on we wouldn't have had a show.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

frombhto323 said:


> I think it's safe to discuss the two previous posts openly, since the title of the thread warns about spoilers. I'll wait before responding in case someone else has a different viewpoint on the matter.


There's no reason why we can't discuss the episode openly. I just kept my response in spoiler tags since it was relatively soon after the episode aired and I didn't want anyone to get spoiled.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

wprager said:


> I say good riddance. She's been of very little use as a character for quite a while.
> 
> Imagine, Mike can still do what he did in the first five seasons by just calling himself a "consultant". Of course if that little brain gem had occurred to any of the principals early on we wouldn't have had a show.


Maybe we would have had a different show. I get the idea that I'm in the minority, but I would have liked to have an episodic procedural that frequently used Mike's memory - like "Psyche" or "Unforgotten."
I thought the pilot let Mike show off without going overly broad.

These days, I pretty much skim the show. I call my method, "Donna plus one."


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

They pretty much continued the silly plot last night.

Is the actress playing Jessica leaving the show (which is why they had her leaving the firm)?

Is it legally ethical to put a witness on the stand, tell the witness lies to get them to admit something? Of course I'm referring to how they handled the dead girl's father who put a witness in Rehab so she wouldn't testify. I get doing that in deposition, but on the stand?

I think Louis' fiance is so far out of his league that in Real Life, she'd never consider him, especially with bun in the oven.

The use of Donna all season has been ridiculous. But glad she's still there.

The stock broker guy....does he have the kind of money to buy a majority stake in that firm? And since he mentioned bosses, would he be able to do this without their consent, and overnight? Both seem HIGHLY unlikely. Another silly plot point.

And I'll be back for more when the series resumes. I still find the characters fun to watch, and I've stuck with it this long, might as well see it out. They did seem to write this episode as if it MIGHT be a series finale.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> They pretty much continued the silly plot last night.
> 
> Is the actress playing Jessica leaving the show (which is why they had her leaving the firm)?
> 
> ...


Yes, it is, if the lies do not contradict the evidence that has already been established. Of course, in real life the prosecutor would demand authentication of the rehab facility application before Jessica was allowed to use it to impeach the witness. Note that Jessica did not offer it into evidence before or during the cross-exam. When the witness was caught lying, the application's authenticity became irrelevant.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Is Robert Zane the only partner in his law firm? Can he offer to merge with Pearson, Spector, Litt with no one else's consent?

I grew weary of the all knowing, all powerful Donna a while ago.

Harvey spent almost as much time at the prison as Mike.

Gallo was the world's least scariest bad guy.

The Louis plot lines keep getting stupider and stupider. How long has he known this woman, a month or two? Well, she's dumb as a bag of rocks for putting up with Louis' shenanigans for that long.

Would Harvey want to be the managing partner? Seems like a lot of office paper work and little legal work.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> They pretty much continued the silly plot last night.
> 
> Is the actress playing Jessica leaving the show (which is why they had her leaving the firm)?


Yes, Gina Torres is joining the cast of another show.



Spoiler



Suits Star Gina Torres Joins The Catch


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

markz said:


> Yes, Gina Torres is joining the cast of another show.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But she's not leaving Suits because she joined that show. She's available to join that show because she asked for her character to be written out of the show so she could spend more time with her family in LA (the show shoots in Toronto). Prior to joining the show mentioned above, she starred in a pilot that was ultimately not picked up, but part of the agreement to allow her to be in that pilot was that she'd be in first position on that new show and that would mean her availability to Suits would be based on the shooting schedule of that new show. It became easier to just have her character leave rather than deal with the scheduling issues.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> But she's not leaving Suits because she joined that show. She's available to join that show because she asked for her character to be written out of the show so she could spend more time with her family in LA (the show shoots in Toronto). Prior to joining the show mentioned above, she starred in a pilot that was ultimately not picked up, but part of the agreement to allow her to be in that pilot was that she'd be in first position on that new show and that would mean her availability to Suits would be based on the shooting schedule of that new show. It became easier to just have her character leave rather than deal with the scheduling issues.


True, I just read that in an article after I posted. What I posted, my wife told me last night while watching suits. Gina said that if Suits shot in LA, she'd stay on it forever.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

theres no way harvey can be leader of this firm, no louis. has to be a new player or someone out of the past. 

zane doesnt fit what i'd expect from this show. 

maybe louis' gf can take over.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Could Mike end up running the firm without being a lawyer?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> Could Mike end up running the firm without being a lawyer?


unless its life or death i dont have time for questions like this


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

newsposter said:


> unless its life or death i dont have time for questions like this


You also don't have time for capitalization or punctuation.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

newsposter said:


> maybe louis' gf can take over.


The designer?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

JETarpon said:


> The designer?


yes why not toss in a wild card and make the show even more crazy than it is now. 

or the death row inmate can come on board as a spokesman


----------



## justen_m (Jan 15, 2004)

I thought the "Louis' girlfriend" you were talking about was his last one, the lawyer that works at Harvard, Sheila Sazs, played by Rachel Harris.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

i totally forgot about her. maybe she will crash the wedding he's gonna have with the designer. the can jello wrestle and fulfill yet another one of his fantasies

did anyone notice the absence of even skeleton staff in the post apocalyptic law firm?


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I think I'm going to have to cut this show loose. I've watched it from the beginning and the endless bickering and yelling intermingled with the constant use of the "S" word has gotten extremely tiresome. Conversations held at a normal volume and friendly attitude are becoming increasingly rare. If I want to listen to angry people all I have to do is tune into any one of the talking heads shows on a 24-hour news channel.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

I skipped 3 or 4 episodes and just watched the last one
(and really... i missed nothing).

I have no idea how Mike got out of prison nor do I care! He should have taken the job offer - that was odd.

I thought Gina Torres leaving was a plot point, I didn't realize she was actually leaving the show. Interesting. Maybe.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

id love mike to open a competing firm. or consult with one , rather. mike got out of prison by an on again off again on again off again deal . i think i'm actually accurate there. it was totally crazy. one minute he's getting out then says i wont go unless the other guy goes. i still dont know if that father is gonna kill his daughter and son in law because of them narking and i think harveys visit to the bad mans house leads me to believe that the guy will be going to jail himself.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> I skipped 3 or 4 episodes and just watched the last one
> (and really... i missed nothing).
> 
> I have no idea how Mike got out of prison nor do I care! *He should have taken the job offer - that was odd.*
> ...


It wasn't odd if you remember the last couple episodes of the previous season, where he quit the firm and was determined to use his abilities to actually help people rather than just helping millionaires get richer. So going back to the firm means he'll be doing largely the same stuff he was doing before, which wasn't fulfilling for him.

Maybe with Rachel doing some pro-bono innocence project work, Mike can join the firm and help with that kind of stuff and that will be enough to keep him satisfied so he can help Harvey with other stuff on the side.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

what was the name of the show that ran law firm out of a shoe store?


----------



## efilippi (Jul 24, 2001)

newsposter said:


> what was the name of the show that ran law firm out of a shoe store?


Harry's Law. Kathy Bates.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

mr.unnatural said:


> I think I'm going to have to cut this show loose. I've watched it from the beginning and the endless bickering and yelling intermingled with the constant use of the "S" word has gotten extremely tiresome. Conversations held at a normal volume and friendly attitude are becoming increasingly rare. If I want to listen to angry people all I have to do is tune into any one of the talking heads shows on a 24-hour news channel.


I decided this was a good spot to bow out. Mike's out of prison and Jessica is gone. I have zero expectations that this show is going to improve, and USA's silly split seasons do not help my interest in it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ElJay said:


> I decided this was a good spot to bow out. Mike's out of prison and Jessica is gone. I have zero expectations that this show is going to improve, *and USA's silly split seasons do not help my interest in it.*


What difference do the split seasons make? Why would it be better for the show to run 16 weeks straight, then be off for 36 weeks? What's wrong with being on for 8-10 weeks, off for 20ish weeks, then on for 6-8 weeks and off again for 16 weeks? You ultimately get the same number of episodes, it allows the writers to do a better job structuring mini arcs, and it allows USA to air the show during times when competition from the broadcast networks is not as intense.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I wonder how much better this show would have been if the Louis character never existed.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> What difference do the split seasons make?


I forget what the heck is going on. Broadcast networks or Netflix shows typically come along to us once a year (which seems natural to give the crew a break) while USA/AMC/et al now do long breaks twice as often. Although with this show that admittedly doesn't mean much because core plot points change on a whim constantly.

Bingeing is my preferred way to watch stuff at this point.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ElJay said:


> I forget what the heck is going on. Broadcast networks or Netflix shows typically come along to us once a year (which seems natural to give the crew a break) while USA/AMC/et al now do long breaks twice as often. Although with this show that admittedly doesn't mean much because core plot points change on a whim constantly.
> 
> Bingeing is my preferred way to watch stuff at this point.


But shouldn't two shorter seasons per year actually be better for helping you remember what's going on, rather than making you wait 9+ months between episodes?

As for bingeing, nobody's stopping you from doing that. You're welcome to binge a half season, or wait for the full season to be over and then binge the whole thing.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Well, I finally decided to get caught up and started S6 this week. Two eps in I thought things were just still too bananas, so I started reading this thread, saw it wasn't going to change, and made the executive decision to Delete and Cancel Onepass. (I didn't make that decision lightly. I generally watch to the end after I've invested this much time.)

This thread answered most questions I still had so I'm good.  I'll keep checking in to see what S7 brings so I'm not really going cold turkey but I'm saving myself many hours...


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

​I keep watching because I'm invested after all these years. But the writing this season is the worst. Sloppy, convenient (for them), and ridiculous. Crises are created and then averted in the most asinine manner imaginable - absolutely no concern for reality or logic at all. Donna has become a caricature of herself and has gone from a second tier character with whom we could put up for a couple of scenes per episode with to a main story line and simply annoying.


----------



## The Spud (Aug 28, 2002)

But Donna was pretty much put in her place this week. Much as I love her and hate what she has become this season. Those comments about her were pretty spot on.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

The Spud said:


> But Donna was pretty much put in her place this week. Much as I love her and hate what she has become this season. Those comments about her were pretty spot on.


Yeah, this. But, Donna was never like this, at least not to this extent. Donna has become unlikable and no longer charming. Her screen presence alone is not enough for me anymore. I'm so glad she was put in her place. Go back to being Harvey's faithful assistant. Much better place for her character.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Why am I still watching?

The "The Donna" subplot is totally unbelievable. At first I thought it was just a way to give Donna a boyfriend but they're actually going ahead with it. Dumb plot lines like that should be reserved for Louis. 

Speaking of Louis and dumb plot lines, don't tell me that Louis' new girlfriend is somehow going to be an impediment to Mike becoming a lawyer. I'm still surprised that Mike is even eligible to become a lawyer.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Why am I still watching?
> 
> The "The Donna" subplot is totally unbelievable. At first I thought it was just a way to give Donna a boyfriend but they're actually going ahead with it. Dumb plot lines like that should be reserved for Louis.
> 
> Speaking of Louis and dumb plot lines, don't tell me that Louis' new girlfriend is somehow going to be an impediment to Mike becoming a lawyer. I'm still surprised that Mike is even eligible to become a lawyer.


One episode to go for the season, so I can stick it out one more and determine if I want to continue. I'm fine with the Mike plotline, and his legal case, but this stuff about him become a lawyer via blackmail just rubs me the wrong way. The whole thing could never work in real life.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Yeah, PSL isn't exactly the world's most ethical law firm.


----------



## CraigK (Jun 9, 2006)

I thought the shows plot(s) had been convoluted in past seasons, but this season has taken it to a whole new level.

Still watching.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

harvey, i need to talk to you about xyz

lewis, i dont have time for this now, unless the earth is crumbling under us i have no time

i cannot believe with jess gone that they still do these lines. they are so over used! the tennis match going on as to whether mike is in or out of getting to be an atty has my neck hurting, i need a massage. 

maybe rachaels dad can help out with all this.  

or wait, maybe the IT guy can make mike an atty, he can do everything else. i know the firm is on a skeleton crew but they dont even pretend anyone else works there anymore via background people walking around.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Is it inevitable that Mike becomes a lawyer, and PSL takes on this legal clinic as a subsidiary? That way Mike can both work at PSL and do legal clinic type cases.

-smak-


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Where's the DA lady who said Mike would work in the legal profession again over her dead body?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cheesesteak said:


> Where's the DA lady who said Mike would work in the legal profession again over her dead body?


Dead?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> Where's the DA lady who said Mike would work in the legal profession again over her dead body?


lunch with jack bauer


----------



## rcandsc (Feb 5, 2014)

cheesesteak said:


> Where's the DA lady who said Mike would work in the legal profession again over her dead body?


She's in the tease for this week's episode... Seems to tell Harvey she will trade Harvey for Mike. This show gets more unbelievable by the episode.

My wife and I thought about starting a Suits drinking game by taking a shot with every use of G.D. or sh*t(and all of its derivatives) but we realized that we would be alcoholics in no time.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

dont forget to add "i dont have time to talk to you now ' in your search for alcoholizm


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

rcandsc said:


> She's in the tease for this week's episode... Seems to tell Harvey she will trade Harvey for Mike. This show gets more unbelievable by the episode.
> 
> My wife and I thought about starting a Suits drinking game by taking a shot with every use of G.D. or sh*t(and all of its derivatives) but we realized that we would be alcoholics in no time.


Wife and I, last season counted the number of sh*t and I think we hit about 15 in the first 10 minutes and gave up.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Is it bad that I don't even notice it? EEK.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> Yeah, PSL isn't exactly the world's most ethical law firm.


But it is a tasty fall Starbucks beverage.


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

sushikitten said:


> Is it bad that I don't even notice it? EEK.


I don't even notice it either, and I also don't understand this forum's obsession about the characters using the word sh*t. I hear that and worse more times in my first hour at work each day than I do in this show.


----------



## rcandsc (Feb 5, 2014)

Flop said:


> I don't even notice it either, and I also don't understand this forum's obsession about the characters using the word sh*t. I hear that and worse more times in my first hour at work each day than I do in this show.


For me it's that it seems to be shoehorned into the dialogue, not natural in any way. Actually, the way they have added G.D. to the dialogue doesn't ring true either. Cursing for the sake of cursing.

Of course, compared to this week's episode of The Detour, Suits seems pretty tame right now.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Seemed kinda odd to me that Mike and Harvey can make a deal about how the legal clinic's relationship with PSL will work without talking to the guy who actually runs the legal clinic.

For some reason, people on this show seem to spend a lot of time waiting outside another person's house. Nobody calls ahead to see if it's ok to visit. They just show up.

Pearson, Specter, Litt has the world's worst receptionist. Non-PSL people always just walk into Harvey's office without him being informed about it.

I don't give anything resembling a crap about The Donna. Actually, Donna and the inventor should be disciplined for working on it during PSL office hours and using PSL resources. I also didn't like Donna's attitude to Louis after the other firm refused to bend to her will. I'm tired of "perfect" Donna anyway. If, for some reason, I still watch this show next season, she'll probably get the ffwd treatment I currently give Louis' subplots.

It's hard to feel compassion for Louis losing his girlfriend when he's such an idiot in just about every single episode.


----------



## rcandsc (Feb 5, 2014)

cheesesteak said:


> For some reason, people on this show seem to spend a lot of time waiting outside another person's house. Nobody calls ahead to see if it's ok to visit. They just show up.


And it seems that none of them own a cell phone. Aside from just showing up, Harvey will walk into his office, sit down for 30 seconds, Donna will bring him the newest crisis, and voila, he is headed out to see Robert Zane, or whoever...Seriously, not going to call first?

One more annoyance is the plot advancements made through simply handing someone a manila folder. They open the folder and bam, everything they need to know is right there.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Or how they open up the envelope, take out a thick document, scan it for two seconds and immediately understand all the intricate brilliances of the legal manoeuvrings detailed inside.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

You guys are cracking me up.

This thread is much better than the show has been lately!


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

wprager said:


> Or how they open up the envelope, take out a thick document, scan it for two seconds and immediately understand all the intricate brilliances of the legal manoeuvrings detailed inside.


I know. They should read the whole thing out loud. Or, better yet, do a split screen so we can read it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Seemed kinda odd to me that Mike and Harvey can make a deal about how the legal clinic's relationship with PSL will work without talking to the guy who actually runs the legal clinic.
> 
> For some reason, people on this show seem to spend a lot of time waiting outside another person's house. Nobody calls ahead to see if it's ok to visit. They just show up.
> 
> ...


The whole Donna thread in the show is completely ridiculous. I've been in quite a few corporate lawfirms over the years and I've never seen one as disfunctional as this one. For a firm that is supposed to be completely high end, with ONLY Harvard graduates, it's run like a third rate local law firm that barely gets clients. I don't know how they stayed in business this long (and it's only gotten worse and worse). Also, does anyone every work during the day there? It ALWAYS seems that everything happens when it's dark out (excuse to look out of Harvey's office window to show the skyline?)


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

maybe its EST and it's really only 5pm and dark out?


----------

