S08.E01: Right-Hand Man

[Good Queen Jane]

Mike and Rachel are gone but Suits continues.

[Adultosaurus]

They can put Jessica's wardrobe on Kathryn Heigl but she's still Kathry Heigl.

[jette]

Now with a potty mouth!

And Harvey still can't honor committments or win anything *sigh*

But at least Louis was allowed to  be right about something and we didn't have to hear much about his sex life.

So there's that.

[Dezzdemona]

Kathryn Heigel is even more unwatchable in this role than in previous ones I've seen.   And there's all that weird filler in her face be fascinated/horrified by as well.  Quite aside from KH, the episode failed to grab me for some reason.   It felt like Harvey, Louis and Donna were going through the same old, same old.  I'm hoping for better next week now that we've settled Harvey back into his old office and Zayne into his role as managing partner.

[Chicago Redshirt]

Random-ish thoughts:

Someone still needs to tell the writers at Suits that pretty much no one cares about internal struggles of Zane Specter Litt. No one cares about whether person X is going to be a name partner, managing partner or if a minor recurring character like Brian is going to be fired or kept on. I think most of us came for the characters and the fashion and the snark and bromance. Bring that stuff back.

They didn't even really bother to try to explain what was going on with the main frigging plot, which makes it worse. Or at least, I didn't get much of it. Here's what I understood: because of the merger, there were areas where people from Zane's own firm represent Company A and people from Specter Litt represented Company B, and because Company A and Company B are in the same line, there is a conflict of interest and so Zane Specter Litt can't represent both. OK, with you so far. In particular, there was one Company A represented by Harvey and one Company B represented by Zane. Louis tells them that somehow these two companies have evolved to the point where if they can convince either Company A or Company B to sell off the one piece of overlap, Zane Specter Litt can continue to represent them both.

So the first thing I don't understand: what is the pitch to either company to get them to sell off a division that (as far as we know) is doing well for them? "Hey if you do this, we can continue to represent you!" That's nice, but isn't it easier to either a) waive the conflict if you're either company or b) just find a new firm?

The second thing I don't understand: If you have been represented by Harvey, what could someone who had recently been at another firm possibly say to get you to consider selling off the division, and vice-versa?

The third thing I don't understand: What was the legal gamesmanship that was supposed to be going on to force one of the companies to sell (or something?) Other than having a platform for Samantha to preen around and talk about how she kicked Alex's ass and what not, that made no sense to me.

Hopefully they mellow the Samantha character because she was pretty unbearable. I hope they do not try to ship her with Alex or Harvey or, really, pretty much any one).

Remember when Harvey was (deservedly) cocky and funny and in control and undefeated? Now he's pretty much none of those things. It is pathetic how easily he's willing to break his word over something that is really of no consequence. The Harvey I remember would have been like, "Robert, you've been around way longer than I have, running a firm longer than I have. You want to be managing partner? You got it. Let me get back to winning cases rather than pushing papers."

I can't decide if it's out of character for Louis to want to ignore objective criteria saying Brian should be fired, or if it's the most Louis-y thing for him to want to ignore that criteria.

One thing I noticed: it seemed like the gratuitous and unnatural swearing that has been a part of Suits for most of the past few seasons was not so much present in this season premiere.

[CaptainCranky]

I haven't  watched this show for a couple of years because the Mike and Rachel crap became unwatchable. 

This show has some possibilities so I'll try watching for a few more shows before I decide.

[catrice2]

I don't have an opinion about Katherine Heigl as an actress one way or the other because I can only remember her from Grey's which I watched the first one or two seasons, but she was horrible last night. That shade of blonde does not fit her and there's something weird about her whole face. I just could not put my finger on. I'm sorry, but she does not have Jessica's wardrobe. Even if she did I don't think that would help.

So are they going to try to replace the forced Rachel and Donna friendship with a forced Rachel and Katrina friendship? I can't really comment on much else because I didn't bother to watch the whole episode there was just way too many knows. Hopefully Dule Hill was at least interesting but somehow I doubt it.

Didn't get that about Harvey and the

Managing partner but that does make sense. We once had to attend an entire training by some outside company and basically the gist of it was about the mistakes that corporations make by promoting people to certain positions so that they can have more salary and power when they are ideally suited for another role and need to be compensated,

rewarded and offered growth  within their role which they're good at instead of promoting them to something else that they are not good at. For that reason I think  Harvey's choice  makes sense. 

He is way more interesting when he is winning cases then the rest of them. I hope that they do not continue the whole fight for control. That's what kills the show for me in the first place.

When is Jessica's spin off premiering or is it still happening?

[mwell345]

Never watched Greys, so I don't know too much about Heigl, but I wasn't impressed.  I'm sure this will turn into another fling for Harvey as he meanders down the path to his true love, the all knowing dispenser of correct advice, Donna.   Spare me.  (And she bugs the boardroom.  Yeah, that's acceptable.)

I had trouble following the whole how the merger affects the 2 companies and someone has to give up a client and then there is that pesky question of who should get fired.

Overall, a blah episode for the season premiere, but IMO this show has been off for the last 2 seasons.  If this season turns into the Harvey/Donna show, which I think it might, I'm out.

10 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

One thing I noticed: it seemed like the gratuitous and unnatural swearing that has been a part of Suits for most of the past few seasons was not so much present in this season premiere.

I noticed that too, and hope it continues.

[NeenerNeener]

9 hours ago, mwell345 said:

I'm sure this will turn into another fling for Harvey

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that Harvey and Samantha will be dating at some point. I can take or leave Heigl; she's not enough to scare me off watching a show.

[Fen Tiger]

Well. So trite- oooh, look, she's edgy and she boxes.. blech. I'm done. Heigl is the straw that broke the camel's back for me with this show.

[seacliffsal]

i haven't watched the last couple of seasons as I was so over the Mike story lines and relationship drama.  But, I thought I would give it a go with the new season.  And...I liked it.  I will be watching this season and liked that they resolved the managing partner issue, but wish they had done it without Harvey undermining Alex.  In the older seasons I always enjoyed Harvey's brainstorming about how to win cases and hope that they will bring back cases for Harvey to win.  Donna promoted to COO?  I can handle that and it might even be interesting.  The Robert Zane character brings a real gravitas that I like.  

[backformore]

17 hours ago, Fen Tiger said:

Well. So trite- oooh, look, she's edgy and she boxes.. blech. I'm done. Heigl is the straw that broke the camel's back for me with this show.

Yep. It doesn't seem like the same show.  I have never liked heigl in anything.  I can't explain it, she just always has this self-conscious thing about her, where her "acting" is what I see, not the character.

And I'm glad I'm not the only one who didn't follow (or care enough to follow) all the merger stuff.  What a boring episode.

I predict this is the final season.

[ctlady]

My recap of of this episode:

 

Harvey:  "Trust me"

Alex: "Do I have your word?"

Harvey:  "You have my word."

Five minutes later.....

Alex:  "But you gave me your word, Harvey"

Harvey: "I know....but...."

Alex: "No buts, G-D**mmit!"

Harvey:  "I'll fix it."

Alex:  "No, it's my account.  I'll handle it."

Harvey: "You had your chance to get in the ring and fight, but instead you laid down" (or whatever smarmy boxing references they made last night

Ten minutes later.....

Harvey:  "This is MY firm, Robert."

Zane:  Pffft.  You mean...WAS your firm."

Louis:  "Can I just....?"

Harvey/Zane:  "NO!"

Pause.....

Harvey:  "At least we agree on something."

Zane:  "This is the beginning of a beautiful friendship"

But then......
 

Samantha:  "I want named partner."

Harvey:  "Bulls**t"

Samantha: "I deserve it"

Harvey:  "You've been here like......five minutes"

Samantha:  "But I rock my designer clothes and can kickbox like a bad-ass bitch.  Named partner is the least you can do....for now, until I decide I want my name on the wall."

Louis:  "But....."

Harvey/Samantha:  "SHUT UP"

 

Oh, I could go on and on and on and on like the script writers did with everyone giving and breaking their word and everyone but the janitorial crew wanting to be named partner.  Katrina was the only saving grace for me.  Donna can sashay herself right to her office, shut the door and stay there.  And when will they please stop treating Louis like the office buffoon?  If it wasn't for his idea Harvey and Zane wouldn't have come up with a way to go around their conflict of interest.  I'm really getting tired of Harvey and now Zane treating Louis like he's less than them. 

As for Heigl, I didn't mind her as much as I thought I would.  Yeah, the 'I box so I must be bad ass' was over the top.  I want more legal/court room scenes and client interaction and not just the office staff barging in and out of each other's office whining about what they want or flinging a file folder with a 10 page document at someone who speed reads it in a matter of seconds or making a host of 'you better or I'll...." threats

[thecdn]

6 hours ago, ctlady said:

or flinging a file folder with a 10 page document at someone who speed reads it in a matter of seconds

I hadn't watched Suits until about a month ago when I binged watched the 7 seasons. When you watch these shows back to back to back some things stand out.

The above mentioned speed reading ability to look at a folder someone has presented as the answer to a difficult problem and know at a quick glance that it indeed has the answer.

Do these people ever sleep or get to use the scads of money they make? It seems they are in the office when it is dark outside more often then when it is light outside. It made me wonder if they are filming in real offices that they use after business hours.

They can almost never be happy. The solving of one crises is followed by the next one almost immediately.

My memory sucks, I wish I had Mike's.

Why all the fuss over Meghan Markle? Yes, she is a pretty young lady - I'm old. But on a show with Scottie, Katrina, Donna, Paula, Claire, and Jenny she's not particularly special other than being the nice girl with the nice guy.

[catrice2]

Who said there was a fuss over her? Other than the fact that she was written as the girlfriend of one of the main lead characters and was a main character unlike most of those you listed.  If we are talking about looks beauty is in the eye of the beholder and people are entitled to believe whomever they please is wildly attractive and everyone has individual tastes. Personally I don't think any of the people you listed are as beautiful as Gina Torres who I see was left off the list although they are all attractive women. If we are talking about acting none of them are turning in Oscar worthy performances.

[Joimiaroxeu]

And there's Katherine Heigl, the showkiller herself. I'm amazed they didn't play the first few notes of O Fortuna from Carmina Burana every time Sam appeared in a scene. Good grief, talk about trying too hard to seem like a badass.

I wonder if firing the Asian woman is going to become a problem later the season? Brian being involved in the decision given that he was her peer and was the one originally intended to be fired has bad optics to say the least. There's already a big case against Harvard for allegedly discriminating against Asian applicants even when they have the best qualifications based on quantifiable criteria. If Brian was kept mainly because he had a higher score on something nebulous like "personality" the firm could be looking a lawsuit.

Edited July 22, 2018 by Joimiaroxeu

[catrice2]

I really hope that they nix the Donna and Harvey Saga this year. I realize that's one of the reasons I will never want that couple is just too much like Carrie and mr. Big in Sex and the City. That man used her as his mistress and married someone else but we were still supposed to accept him as the love of her life.

 

Donna is shown as not really having any long-term relationships and it's almost like she's sitting around waiting for Harvey, worse she has been in the position where she has had to help him woo his girlfriends with flowers, presents setting up dates excetera. They want us to believe that these are strong professional women, especially Donna (who is supposed to have her stuff together to the point that she can tell everybody else what to do), but they show her as that kind of 50s  or Romance novel idea of the woman sitting around waiting for the man to realize that she's the one and after all these other women have put up with his anxiety and mommy issues he's supposed to come back to her as a mature and realized man and she will just welcome him back with open arms because it was meant to be. This pretty much undermines her whole supposed presentation as such a strong together woman that she would be willing to just sit around and wait for Harvey to decide what is going to happen with their relationship.

 

Harvey has never been shown as a man that I would want... he's kind of whiny arrogant and selfish. The whole premise of the show was Harvey selfishly sacrificing Jessica's business and everybody else on a whim or a joke. Keep in mind that all he knew about Mike at the time was that he could memorize information. He had no idea at that time that he would be be able to apply it to the right situations at the right time but he was childish enough to put everybody at risk, including his friend  Jessica who had done so much for him, just for a childish ego driven stunt. He has never been made to pay for that. Both he and Mike should have gone to jail.  

When I really think about it he's the character that has made the least amount of growth.

Edited July 26, 2018 by catrice2

[Chicago Redshirt]

6 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

I wonder if firing the Asian woman is going to become a problem later the season? Brian being involved in the decision given that he was her peer and was the one originally intended to be fired has bad optics to say the least. There's already a big case against Harvard for allegedly discriminating against Asian applicants even when they have the best qualifications based on quantifiable criteria. If Brian was kept mainly because he had a higher score on something nebulous like "personality" the firm could be looking a lawsuit.

Brian was kept because Louis first got unnaturally mad at Brian for being a father when it looked like Louis would never get to be one (the notion that a multimillionaire hotshot lawyer would never find someone who wanted to marry him and have children with him, or that he could not adopt as a single man, is of course ridiculous). I think Louis actually tried to fire Brian over his wanting too much paternity leave or something stupid. Anyway, they became bros, and when Louis heard that his bro was being fired, he ordered Katrina to save Brian's job. No mention of how Brian had a better score or whatever. 

Donna threw out the notion that Brian's some sort of glue that makes the people around him better in a way that doesn't show in  his stats...but that sounds like a rationalizatio by the writers to cover for Louis preserving a spot for his boy that Brian does not objectively deserve. 

[lorbeer]

Well... About Brian.. There's something that Dr. House saod that could apply "Work smart, not hard" :D. And I agree that hours spent in the office might not be the best measurement. 

About Katherine Heigl.. Why don't you like her so much? She wasn't bad. She looks differently but she's older now than she was in Grey's.. For me she's fine in the show.

[nitrofishblue]

I used to look forward to watching this show but it sure has lost its way. This episode was a prime example. It isn't about winning cases in court. It has become all about the drama between the people at the firm. I am sick of all the scenes of two "lawyers" walking down the hallway and arguing over whatever. Don't fire me or I want my name on the wall is getting very old.

To be honest I could care less about Katherine Heigl. I can only assume she is there to show off the latest fashionable dress that no ordinary person can afford.

I wish they could get back to the writing from the first seasons

[Chicago Redshirt]

2 hours ago, lorbeer said:

Well... About Brian.. There's something that Dr. House saod that could apply "Work smart, not hard" :D. And I agree that hours spent in the office might not be the best measurement. 

About Katherine Heigl.. Why don't you like her so much? She wasn't bad. She looks differently but she's older now than she was in Grey's.. For me she's fine in the show.

The show talked about how they rated the associates on 16 different objective criteria. I'm not sure what all those criteria might be besides billable hours.

Re: Katherine Heigl herself: I liked her in Grey's. I read, though, that she was somewhat of a diva, and that she bashed one of the movies she did well in, Knocked Up. I don't have anything against the actress herself though.

I do have something against the character in our first introduction to her: too obnoxious, too cliche, and I'm so not here for the will-they-or-won't-they between her and Harvey (or her and Alex or whoever). She is (so far) the embodiment of the tendency to focus on internal drama at the firm rather than have interesting court cases. 

[xtwheeler]

On 7/22/2018 at 3:01 PM, Joimiaroxeu said:

And there's Katherine Heigl, the showkiller herself. I'm amazed they didn't play the first few notes of O Fortuna from Carmina Burana every time Sam appeared in a scene. Good grief, talk about trying too hard to seem like a badass.

I wonder if firing the Asian woman is going to become a problem later the season? Brian being involved in the decision given that he was her peer and was the one originally intended to be fired has bad optics to say the least. There's already a big case against Harvard for allegedly discriminating against Asian applicants even when they have the best qualifications based on quantifiable criteria. If Brian was kept mainly because he had a higher score on something nebulous like "personality" the firm could be looking a lawsuit.

Objective criteria like "higher score" is precisely the kind of thing that makes the choice of one employee over another legally justifiable, and "personality" while obviously subjective, is also a justifiable reason to keep an employee over another. There was nothing in the show that would support the notion that firing her over him was based on some racial criterion, and the scores and personality are sufficient to overcome a prima facie case of discrimination.

On 7/23/2018 at 10:22 AM, Chicago Redshirt said:

The show talked about how they rated the associates on 16 different objective criteria. I'm not sure what all those criteria might be besides billable hours.

Re: Katherine Heigl herself: I liked her in Grey's. I read, though, that she was somewhat of a diva, and that she bashed one of the movies she did well in, Knocked Up. I don't have anything against the actress herself though.

I do have something against the character in our first introduction to her: too obnoxious, too cliche, and I'm so not here for the will-they-or-won't-they between her and Harvey (or her and Alex or whoever). She is (so far) the embodiment of the tendency to focus on internal drama at the firm rather than have interesting court cases. 

I thought Heigl was dreadful. The character was poorly written. They gave us "she boxes so she's a badass" rather than showing her being a basass at, you know, her job. They showed her sashaying, preening, and posing to show "she's sexy" rather than actual appeal or charism. All her "personality" felt like shortcuts rather than character beats. A better actor might have been able to give the character some life off of the page, but Heigl is not that actor. She's working so hard for so little payoff in her performance.

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

There was nothing in the show that would support the notion that firing her over him was based on some racial criterion, and the scores and personality are sufficient to overcome a prima facie case of discrimination.

I didn't say her firing was based on some racial criterion. What I suggested was that it could look that way given that a White guy was kept over a POC who had better metrics, except perhaps on something fuzzy like personality. Plus Brian being involved in the decision seems fishy since of course he wasn't going to fire himself if he could point to somebody else. What if the woman who was fired had been asked for her input? Things likely would've worked out differently.

I think it's entirely possible that they deliberately cast an Asian actress to try to make a discrimination case against the firm a story arc given that it's a topical issue and show is always name-checking Harvard anyway. We'll see if that happens.

[love2lovebadtv]

On 7/23/2018 at 11:19 AM, nitrofishblue said:

I used to look forward to watching this show but it sure has lost its way. This episode was a prime example. It isn't about winning cases in court. It has become all about the drama between the people at the firm. I am sick of all the scenes of two "lawyers" walking down the hallway and arguing over whatever. Don't fire me or I want my name on the wall is getting very old.

To be honest I could care less about Katherine Heigl. I can only assume she is there to show off the latest fashionable dress that no ordinary person can afford.

I wish they could get back to the writing from the first seasons

The first seasons with actual cases? There's a thought. I'm so bored with the whole goddamn name-on-the-wall discussion and solving cases by threatening people. 

On 7/23/2018 at 1:22 PM, Chicago Redshirt said:

The show talked about how they rated the associates on 16 different objective criteria. I'm not sure what all those criteria might be besides billable hours.

Re: Katherine Heigl herself: I liked her in Grey's. I read, though, that she was somewhat of a diva, and that she bashed one of the movies she did well in, Knocked Up. I don't have anything against the actress herself though.

I do have something against the character in our first introduction to her: too obnoxious, too cliche, and I'm so not here for the will-they-or-won't-they between her and Harvey (or her and Alex or whoever). She is (so far) the embodiment of the tendency to focus on internal drama at the firm rather than have interesting court cases. 

I agree re Alex. Would rather see quirky Katrina get more involved in legal work. She's been bumped up to series regular so I hope to see more of her.

[marcee]

Based on what I've read about her, Katherine Heigl is a not-so-great-person and based on what I've seen her in, she's a terrible actress. Her character in this show is awful and I just want her to go away. Quickly.

I was also very disappointed in how Harvey was written in this episode.

On 7/21/2018 at 4:19 PM, ctlady said:

Harvey:  "Trust me"

Alex: "Do I have your word?"

Harvey:  "You have my word."

Five minutes later.....

Alex:  "But you gave me your word, Harvey"

Harvey: "I know....but...."

This. I can't understand how Harvey, who's all about *loyalty*, would go back on his word, literally, less than 24-hours later. I get that he's competitive. I get that he wants to win, but he gave his word not only to Alex but also to Zane. I feel like this about-face was completely out of character and it sucked.

[statsgirl]

I wanted to like this season, and I wanted to like Katherine Heigl's character. But she's written as a bad cliche where the plot is glaringly obvious and Heigl is not a good actress to keep me interested.  Gina Torres/Jessica was miles better as a female lead.k If she and Harvey start dating, I think I'm done.

I too am really tired of the infighting at the firm.  A little I could take but it seems like that's most of what the episodes are about.

There is a lot I could be interested in on this show but they seem to be focus on the worst.

[backformore]

On ‎7‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 11:55 AM, marcee said:

Based on what I've read about her, Katherine Heigl is a not-so-great-person and based on what I've seen her in, she's a terrible actress. Her character in this show is awful and I just want her to go away. Quickly.
 

Suits is one of the shows my husband and I have both liked, and watched every episode together .  But Heigl joining the show just might be the end.  what is this show about any more?  a bunch of lawyers jockeying for position isn't interesting.  there doesn't seem to be a story to make me care about anybody.    If this current slop was the initial season, the show would have been canceled immediately. 

[CTrent29]

Quote

So are they going to try to replace the forced Rachel and Donna friendship with a forced Rachel and Katrina friendship? I can't really comment on much else because I didn't bother to watch the whole episode there was just way too many knows. Hopefully Dule Hill was at least interesting but somehow I doubt it.

 

Don't you mean a forced Donna and Katrina friendship?