1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Suits - Season 4 (spoilers)

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by cheesesteak, Jun 28, 2014.

  1. Aug 4, 2014 #61 of 136
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey

    40,093
    46
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    So go ahead and explain it, in language that those of us who aren't investment bankers can understand. I'm not the only one in the thread that found it confusing and convoluted.
     
  2. Aug 4, 2014 #62 of 136
    john4200

    john4200 Active Member

    4,522
    3
    Oct 31, 2009
    Explain what about it? I'm not going to write up a synopsis of the show, but I might answer specific questions.

    I don't see how you need to be an investment banker to understand most of what happened.
     
  3. Aug 4, 2014 #63 of 136
    rcandsc

    rcandsc Mark it 8 Dude.. TCF Club

    185
    1
    Feb 5, 2014
    Liberty, MO.
    My wife and I have similar discussions around this show.

    The one that is driving us nuts right now is the interactions between Jessica and Jeff. He lies about his motives for coming to Jessica for the position in Pearson Specter in the first place, and then gets upset with Jessica for not trusting him. In what ways has he proved himself to be someone that can be trusted?

    Secondly, Jeff gets upset when Jessica asks Louis to check Jeff's work on the stock purchase, because, once again, she doesn't trust his work. Louis finds a major mistake, so it seems that Jessica was actually smart in not trusting his work.

    So far, Jeff has proven to be a liar, inept at his job, and in serious need of some training in what is, and what is not sexual harassment in the workplace :D
     
  4. Aug 4, 2014 #64 of 136
    smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,136
    191
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    First season was awesome. 2nd season very good, this one and last one, not so much.

    I still watch it, and I do like it, but something is definitely missing.

    The original hook is missing now that everybody knows Mike's secret.

    Also, I miss the Mike who could recite pg 457 line 3 in Moby Dick or whatever.

    They are not using his smarts to solve problems, they are just using his dickishness.

    -smak-
     
  5. Aug 4, 2014 #65 of 136
    Dawghows

    Dawghows Active Member

    2,293
    6
    May 17, 2001
    NJ
    Exactly this. His character isn't interesting because he has/had a secret. What makes (or made) him interesting is his super-memory. Without that, he's just another lawyer on just another law show.

    But then again, this is the only law show with Donna, so I'll keep watching.
     
  6. Aug 4, 2014 #66 of 136
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give em Hell, Devils

    47,734
    136
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    That only happened toward the very end of the proceedings. I don't really know why Harvey was so involved in the deal up until that point, except that Logan was supposedly taking over his father's company but didn't know what he was doing, so Harvey was doing all the work that Logan should have been doing.

    Basically, Mike was an investment banker on one side of the deal, Logan was the investment banker on the other side of the deal. So why wasn't this a battle between Mike and Logan rather than between Mike and Harvey?

    And the answer is because the show needed to create conflict between Mike and Harvey. I just think they did a poor job of coming up with the mechanics of it. The beginning of the season, where Mike was using Pearson Specter, and then Logan was also using them and both sides are going after Gillis so there's a conflict of interest - that stuff made sense. But after that, Harvey's constant involvement was a little much.

    As for those of you who were confused by all the machinations, I can see how it could be confusing if you didn't have a basic understanding of hostile takeovers and some of the SEC regulations. And even if you did, the writers kind of botched the execution of it all.

    Basically, Logan wanted to buy Gillis and then strip away the overhead (employees) and sell off just the profitable part of the company. Mike wanted to buy Gillis and keep the employees intact. Gillis owed about $500 million to his employees pension plan, but wasn't using his money for that. When Logan made an offer to fund the pension plan, the only way Mike could stay in the game was to get Gillis to use his money to fund the pension. So that thwarted Logan's move, but it also used up all of Walter Gillis' resources. So Mike had to go find another source of money - enter Forstmann. Some third party was selling off its shares in Gillis. Buying that block of shares would put either Mike or Logan over the 5% threshold that would require them to disclose their ownership. But since Gillis was well aware of what Mike was doing, and Mike was well aware of what Logan was doing, I don't really see why the 5% threshold was really a big deal.

    But anyway, Mike and Harvey were going to bid on the third-party block of Gillis stock, with the winner basically winning the right to take over Gillis. Mike and Harvey agree to postpone the auction while Rachel is in the hospital, and Jessica swoops in and buys the shares as the only bidder at the scheduled auction. And the plan was to simply act as a third party owner of the shares (parking, which is illegal) so that Logan wouldn't own over 5% and therefore wouldn't have to disclose anything. But because of Cahill at the SEC breathing down their neck, he knew about Jessica's purchase of the shares, meaning that Pearson Specter could never sell them to Logan's company, or Cahill would bust Pearson Specter for parking. So now Pearson Specter has shares in Gillis that it doesn't really want, and Louis Litt figures out how to nullify the purchase and gets Forstmann to buy the shares.

    Now Forstmann sells the shares to Sidwell, and then apparently renegs on his deal and sells them to Logan, meaning Mike lost his bid to take over Gillis. And at the same time, Forstmann tells Sidwell that Mike was going to cut Sidwell out of the deal, which gets Mike fired.

    Did that make any sense? Did I miss anything? Did I screw anything up?
     
  7. Aug 4, 2014 #67 of 136
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give em Hell, Devils

    47,734
    136
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    I agree with all of this, except for the idea that everyone know's Mike's secret. Only four people know (Harvey, Jessica, Donna, Rachel) and there's still a very real danger to the firm if anyone else (like Louis) finds out. My problem is that the whole peril of Mike keeping a secret is just totally played out. I don't want to go back to that being the central theme of the show.

    And as for Mike's super memory, that was kind of a gimmick early in the series to allow him to perform well as Harvey's associate despite no real training. But now that Mike's apparently been a practicing "attorney" for a few years, he shouldn't have to win every case by simply being able to recall some obscure fact or statute that nobody else would be able to remember. He should have developed some skills that will serve him even when he can't deploy his secret weapon. I agree that the show was much more "fun" when Mike was getting over on people simply because he was smarter than them, or recalled something that gave him an advantage. But that was S1 and S2 of the show. That's kind of played out. So if they go back to that, then the character hasn't really progressed.
     
  8. Aug 4, 2014 #68 of 136
    wprager

    wprager Active Member

    2,714
    4
    Feb 19, 2006
    Ottawa, Canada
    DevDog, thanks for the explanation. A few things I still don't really understand.

    1. What did Forstman mean by cutting out Sidwell? How was Mike going to accomplish that?

    2. Why did Forstman want to cut out Sidwell? Was it something personal?

    3. Why did Forstman then go ahead and make the deal with Sidwell when Sidwell came asking, instead of cutting him out as he wanted?

    4. Mike wasn't really going to use Forstman's money -- he was going to use the threat of having the money -- to do what, exactly? And what would that do, how would it help?

    5. And this question I asked before, how could Forstman become so rich and successful when every deal looks to hinge on screwing someone. And giving huge signing bonuses to unproven (and defeated) rookie investment bankers. I mean, really, is there a better way to attract employees than getting them fired from their current employer by betraying their trust?
     
  9. Aug 5, 2014 #69 of 136
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give em Hell, Devils

    47,734
    136
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    They never really explained the mechanics of how exactly this would work. But presumably, Forstman was going to require Mike to put some kind of language in the agreement that took whatever commission Sidwell was supposed to get and gave it to someone else or to Forstman himself.

    I don't think so. I think Forstman just likes being a dick, just likes to stir up trouble. He was willing to give Mike the money but only if Mike would take the money with conditions that would put Mike in a no-win situation.

    Forstman had already committed to give the money, Sidwell didn't know about the deal to cut him out. So when the shares became available, and Mike couldn't be reached, Sidwell went ahead and bought the shares using Forstman's money under the previously agreed-to terms. It was at that point that Forstman decided to throw Mike under the bus and tell Sidwell about the terms of the deal.

    Mike needed money to buy shares. That's why he went to Forstman in the first place. But then when Forstman attached the no-win condition, Mike didn't want to use the money. Mike thought he could just bluff and simply use the fact that he had access to the money in order to get Harvey/Logan to back down and let Mike win the takeover bid without Mike actually having to buy that next round of shares. But Harvey figured out what Mike was up to and called the bluff. And IIRC, that's when Mike and Harvey were going to have the auction to buy those shares and then Jessica went and bought them instead. So Mike never actually needed Forstman's money until Louis unwound that deal, sold the shares to Forstman, and then Forstman called Sidwell to sell them.

    We don't know how Forstman got to be so rich. But I think what we're supposed to take away from all this is that he's incredibly shrewd and extremely ruthless, and that he'll use whatever underhanded tricks he has available to him in order to win. He doesn't care who he has to screw over or who gets hurt. Emotions are not something he worries about.

    And he saw something in Mike that he wanted to exploit for his own gain. So that's likely why he put the no-win condition on the money and why, when Mike didn't use it, Forstman made sure the deal happened anyway and that Sidwell found out. Because Forstman wanted Mike to get fired so Forstman could have leverage on Mike to get Mike to come work for him.
     
  10. Aug 5, 2014 #70 of 136
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh.

    29,364
    133
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

    Did you do that synopsis off the top of your head or did you take notes?
     
  11. Aug 5, 2014 #71 of 136
    wprager

    wprager Active Member

    2,714
    4
    Feb 19, 2006
    Ottawa, Canada
    Maybe he just pays more attention to the plot and not to Donna or whoever, like the rest of us :eek:
     
  12. Aug 5, 2014 #72 of 136
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey

    40,093
    46
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    No explain the whole Gillis deal to us, with all of the intricacies that happened. That's all I'm asking. You claim it was easy to follow and understand.

    Edit, I guess DevdogAZ explained it as best it could be explained. I guess if you have some understanding of what they were trying to do, it makes all kinds of sense. Not to me.
     
  13. Aug 5, 2014 #73 of 136
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey

    40,093
    46
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    I think you got it, but as you said, it's just not all that simple to understand unless you understand what they were trying to do. And there were so many moves and counter moves that after awhile, I got lost, and frankly got to the point where I just didn't care anymore and wanted it resolved. The best parts were the battles between Mike and Harvey. Other than that, it was a confusing mess.
     
  14. Aug 5, 2014 #74 of 136
    betts4

    betts4 I am Spartacus!

    27,916
    2
    Dec 26, 2005
    A Galaxy...
    I read all that and still didn't get it but glad someone did.

    I got up to here - in the show -
    And just concentrated on Mike/Rachel/d-bag and Louis. Oh and what did he sign at the end there? He looked like he was making a deal with the devil.
     
  15. Aug 5, 2014 #75 of 136
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give em Hell, Devils

    47,734
    136
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    You're welcome. I did it from memory, but I'm an attorney and have dealt with some securities matters, so it was all relatively familiar to me.
     
  16. Aug 5, 2014 #76 of 136
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Lost in New Joisey

    40,093
    46
    Mar 10, 2003
    New Jersey
    That's me too. I got the original premise of what Mike was trying to do. To try and keep Gillis as the owner and invest with him, but then it got confusing and the back and forth was drawn out over the season that eventually I lost it (maybe if I binged this show, I might have understood it better). Throw in the legal stuff with the firm and the SEC and all the games between Mike and Harvey trying to screw each other, and Logan trying to screw Rachel and it got my head spinning.
     
  17. Aug 6, 2014 #77 of 136
    smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,136
    191
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    Although as we see here the plot mechanisms are pretty hard to follow, I'm glad to see this type of law as a show, rather than the usual kind we see.

    I find this and The Good Wife's "cases" much more interesting, than the cases on your typical lawyer show.

    -smak-
     
  18. Aug 8, 2014 #78 of 136
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh.

    29,364
    133
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    Does Donna actually do any work other than get all up in other peoples' business?
     
  19. Aug 8, 2014 #79 of 136
    TIVO_GUY_HERE

    TIVO_GUY_HERE I miss the ocean

    6,388
    2
    Jul 10, 2000
    Dallas Texas
    yes she does it even before Harvey asks. I think 2x this past episode :)
     
  20. Aug 8, 2014 #80 of 136
    SeanC

    SeanC ECT

    9,616
    6
    Dec 30, 2003
    Someplace
    I'm just disappointed that Mike being a fraud is back as a major plot point. It's very tired and boring. I wish they would just put that to bed, hell retcon the whole show to get rid of it, it is tedious.
     

Share This Page