EPT[TV] Suits - Page 167
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
NOTE: This thread contains spoilers. Do not read the thread if you are not caught up. If a new episode has already officially aired, you are allowed to discuss what happened without posting in spoilers. | ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
| ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
Also, to be clear, are there no more senior partners in the firm except Harvey and Louis? And no Katrina. T_T But it was good to see Harvey back to making a deal with a clever win-win solution rather than bullying and browbeating his way to it. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8695 Posts
how can rachel run the associates when shes not even a first year herself. by the same logic donna was also given senior partnership, which is absolutely ludicrous. fact that shes ahead of mike is stupid enough as it is. only highlight was mike putting harvey in his place tbh | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 13 2017 17:04 evilfatsh1t wrote: yeah a couple of things in this ep which dont make sense. how can rachel run the associates when shes not even a first year herself. by the same logic donna was also given senior partnership, which is absolutely ludicrous. fact that shes ahead of mike is stupid enough as it is. only highlight was mike putting harvey in his place tbh rachel got an offer to start as a third year | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18056 Posts
On July 15 2017 08:26 ticklishmusic wrote: rachel got an offer to start as a third year That's fine, but she's still an associate. A 3rd year associate running the associates is... well.. just really weird. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6235 Posts
| ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
Anyway, I think Donna becoming senior partner is a set up for more disappointment for her. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10011 Posts
| ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8695 Posts
also im calling it now. donna gets pissed that harvey is with his shrink and people have a problem with her senior partnership so the partnership gets traded for being with harvey. i still think donna and harvey are gonna end the show as a couple | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On July 15 2017 23:23 RvB wrote: Donna as senior partner is one of the dumbest things ever. She's a secretary why the hell would she get senior partner lol. Where does she get 500k from anyway... Aside from what they got last season, she is getting paid a LOT of money since that was an entire plotline for one of the episodes last season how Louis didnt want to pay her salary so when you combo that AND the money she got last season having 500k isnt even that shocking. While I think they could have done more to set it up then the one conversation where Donna points out that half the top legal firms arent lead by lawyers in reality its not that shocking that she could make senior partner without being a lawyer. To do so from her position is shocking but then again she has been shown to be more than just a secretary since S1. For Rachel running the associated seems like a default move since she is the 4th most experienced lawyer they have left. I have to assume her lack of a legal pedigree will be the cause of storylines but if Louis cant do it and Harvey wont do it that basically leaves Rachel by default. | ||
|
nayumi
Australia6499 Posts
i think the idea behind Donna - Senior Partner is that they needed a new powerful female character to balance out the male dominance at the firm, as well as throughout the series ... | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8695 Posts
On July 16 2017 14:04 Adreme wrote: Aside from what they got last season, she is getting paid a LOT of money since that was an entire plotline for one of the episodes last season how Louis didnt want to pay her salary so when you combo that AND the money she got last season having 500k isnt even that shocking. While I think they could have done more to set it up then the one conversation where Donna points out that half the top legal firms arent lead by lawyers in reality its not that shocking that she could make senior partner without being a lawyer. To do so from her position is shocking but then again she has been shown to be more than just a secretary since S1. For Rachel running the associated seems like a default move since she is the 4th most experienced lawyer they have left. I have to assume her lack of a legal pedigree will be the cause of storylines but if Louis cant do it and Harvey wont do it that basically leaves Rachel by default. i dont remember properly but did EVERY partner/experience lawyer up and leave? i dont think the series clarified this that well but if theyve got a brand new class of associates surely they have other paralegals, experienced associates and partners in the firm left. in that case rachel wouldnt be the best one left, its just that shes the only character thats known to the audience | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44654 Posts
 I understand that Donna was itching for a promotion, but I feel like making her senior partner really trivializes the amount of effort that Harvey and Louis- and even Mike- had to put in as lawyers. Is Donna no longer going to be Harvey's secretary? Is Donna going to get her own Donna now? I'm really happy that Harvey stepped up and that Louis swallowed his pride by the end of the episode. I hope that Louis gets closure soon; I like seeing him kicking ass with Harvey and Mike | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On July 16 2017 17:30 evilfatsh1t wrote: i dont remember properly but did EVERY partner/experience lawyer up and leave? i dont think the series clarified this that well but if theyve got a brand new class of associates surely they have other paralegals, experienced associates and partners in the firm left. in that case rachel wouldnt be the best one left, its just that shes the only character thats known to the audience We know they lost EVERY senior partner and the associates which means unless a few random junior partners who have literally never been on camera (even in a passerby role) exist then they had no one. Now they got a new class of associates (Some from Robert Zane) but I would assume hiring partners is far harder since you would have to poach them from other firms which means she might very well be the only person who they can give the job to. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18056 Posts
On July 16 2017 21:05 Adreme wrote: We know they lost EVERY senior partner and the associates which means unless a few random junior partners who have literally never been on camera (even in a passerby role) exist then they had no one. Now they got a new class of associates (Some from Robert Zane) but I would assume hiring partners is far harder since you would have to poach them from other firms which means she might very well be the only person who they can give the job to. That doesn't sound like a functional firm. You can't have everybody walk away except the 3 ppl at the very top, and then fix your firm by getting a bunch of glorified interns. They have quite a lot of big clients, who are big clients because they give a lot of work = billable hours= money. If you don't have people to put in the hours, those clients leave. And that's that. I always assumed there were still duizend of people who were just not interesting enough to get on screen filling all the middle levels, because without them, you don't have a functional company... | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8695 Posts
you can make it look like literally everyone left except the named partners and the main characters, but then you have a massive plot hole in the sense that an actual law firm doesnt function without the grunts doing the work in the background. if youve got people doing actual work for the remaining clients in the background you have candidates that are much more suitable for both the associates and senior partnership, hence the stupidity of donna and rachel's scenarios | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On July 16 2017 21:14 Acrofales wrote: That doesn't sound like a functional firm. You can't have everybody walk away except the 3 ppl at the very top, and then fix your firm by getting a bunch of glorified interns. They have quite a lot of big clients, who are big clients because they give a lot of work = billable hours= money. If you don't have people to put in the hours, those clients leave. And that's that. I always assumed there were still duizend of people who were just not interesting enough to get on screen filling all the middle levels, because without them, you don't have a functional company... They very clearly lost clients in between which is why Jessica had to say to Louis "we dont have the money to hire associates paralegals and support staff". So they went from being a massive firm to a mid tier one but they likely kept all there own clients which is still enough in the short term but lost the clients that were the other partners. Obviously that was why they were so worried about losing one more client and having everything cave in and why Jessica was running around trying to get new business. | ||
|
chrisolo
Germany2607 Posts
What exactly is her job now? She cannot do any law-associated stuff, because she has no degree. She cannot do any secretary stuff, because she is a senior partner now. That leaves only organizational stuff, but to be fair isn't this the task of the name and managing partners? So she cannot do that either (unless she pressures Harvey again and abuses their friendship to get into power). That leaves a big questionmark for me... what is her job now? I really liked Donna in the first few seasons, but her plot line in the last season and in this season (as it seems) got/gets really ridiculous. I know that she mentions that there are big companies in New York that have "unqualified" people in partner positions, but I HIGHLY doubt that these companies she meant are law firms. Sure you can work your way up and when you learnt all the stuff while working in the company, you can get into a very high position in the firm. BUT in a law firm, you will need a law degree of some kind to get into a similar position like from a regular industrial company (at least from my point of view). To me personally, it just seems like Donna hammered down on Harvey and in the end also on Louis to kind of "black-mail" them to let her into that position. She kind of between the lines said "if you don't give me senior partner, then I'll leave", for me that is not only a douchebag move to pull off onto your "second family", but it is an emotional black-mailing and that is why I seriously started to dislike Donna in that episode. I hope this plot ends with her leaving the firm. To be completely honest, I thought that she got kind of boring and repetitious. Yea we get it, you are Super-Donna and everything you touch turns into gold, bla bla. As I said I liked her in the first two seasons, but it got really annoying since the last season and especially in that first episode. The rest was okay, even if I agree that Rachel taking over the first-year associates is kind of dumb, but it seems for me that this is only temporary and Louis will take them back later, at least I hope so... And I can see that this might result into a nice plot line for Rachel, which could have been an annoying side kick the whole season, if she would not get a real plot line. Mike not going to Oliver was also what really bothered me. He promised him, he will not get into corporate law again, but just days and one convincing discussion with Harvey later, he completely shits on that promise. I would be really pissed off as Oliver, doesn't matter how much that would help the clients of pro-bono cases. You don't promise one thing and then just days later do not give a fuck about your promise, but I keep saying that Mike is not that "good-boy" like he sees himself. He often acts very egoistic and narrow-minded, even if he thinks he does a good thing, but it is nice to see him not being so one-dimensional. Even if he makes stupid stuff like that. I hope Louis will not need the whole season to process that Tara stuff and will come back soon to kick some ass. Also where was Katrina?  | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
But I am skeptical about her current role right now in her big office. If she's not Harvey's secretary anymore, then what is she doing? Purely managing/executing role? And I do agree with you chrisolo on Mike. The show still tries to portray him as the morally good character, the "nice guy" counterpart to Harvey, but also constantly must have him stray into the morally gray, and lie to people's faces for no other reason than personal gain. To me Mike feels at least as self-serving as Harvey, while being less honest about it, and I have a hard time believing his love of defending "the little guy" and true justice and whatnot. Why the fuck would you go into a corporate law firm if you wanted to do that? That has always been the biggest flaw in the premise since day 1. I still like the character, but I don't buy him, if that makes sense. I quite liked that he had decided to go to prison because that was a natural way for him to get redemption, but then the creators found a roundabout way of making him escape not one month in :D. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44654 Posts
I don't think Mike is being deliberately dishonest with Oliver and Rachel and others; I just think he's being naive. At least Harvey is clear on his purpose in the firm and what the firm realistically and pragmatically does. | ||
| ||
