Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Suits "Sucker Punch" (spoilers)
93 views
Skip to first unread message
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 5, 2012, 1:15:34 PM8/5/12
to
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
beyond any possible entertainment value. It sank to a new low this week
with the trial prep, focusing on personal question after personal question,
irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Nevertheless, this was an enjoyable episode because the cast took the
horrid, shitty plot and did something good with their characters. The
unsatisfying scene in which Jessica put Louis on the stand rose a few
inches above the muck thanks to the strength of the two actors.
Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
be in love with Donna?
Gabriel Macht did a nice job struggling to keep Harvey's emotions in check.
Mike was mostly superfluous in this episode. The character was merely
used to move the plot along. Rachel did even less. Poor Donna was forced
to play the pitiful girl left to die by the villain but no one rescues her.
The episode hit a brick wall in the final act, because there was no possible
way to resolve this idiocy in an entertaining fashion. Hardman just settled.
Somehow, he snuck a file out from under Mike's nose. Obviously, he knew
what there was to find. Mike's not supposed to miss things.
I'm not sure how Mike got all those files immediately. Eric Close never
practiced law anywhere but Manhattan?
Hardman used the settlement to rally the partners against Jessica, who
looked terribly weak. Gee. Who didn't see that coming, aside from Jessica
and Harvey?
Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
senior partner from the New York office, hah.
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
beyond any possible entertainment value. It sank to a new low this week
with the trial prep, focusing on personal question after personal question,
irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Nevertheless, this was an enjoyable episode because the cast took the
horrid, shitty plot and did something good with their characters. The
unsatisfying scene in which Jessica put Louis on the stand rose a few
inches above the muck thanks to the strength of the two actors.
Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
be in love with Donna?
Gabriel Macht did a nice job struggling to keep Harvey's emotions in check.
Mike was mostly superfluous in this episode. The character was merely
used to move the plot along. Rachel did even less. Poor Donna was forced
to play the pitiful girl left to die by the villain but no one rescues her.
The episode hit a brick wall in the final act, because there was no possible
way to resolve this idiocy in an entertaining fashion. Hardman just settled.
Somehow, he snuck a file out from under Mike's nose. Obviously, he knew
what there was to find. Mike's not supposed to miss things.
I'm not sure how Mike got all those files immediately. Eric Close never
practiced law anywhere but Manhattan?
Hardman used the settlement to rally the partners against Jessica, who
looked terribly weak. Gee. Who didn't see that coming, aside from Jessica
and Harvey?
Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
senior partner from the New York office, hah.
EGK
Aug 5, 2012, 1:24:42 PM8/5/12
to
On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 17:15:34 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
wrote:
>s
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>s
>p
>a
>c
>e
>
>This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
>beyond any possible entertainment value. It sank to a new low this week
>with the trial prep, focusing on personal question after personal question,
>irrelevant to the issue at hand.
>
>Nevertheless, this was an enjoyable episode because the cast took the
>horrid, shitty plot and did something good with their characters. The
>unsatisfying scene in which Jessica put Louis on the stand rose a few
>inches above the muck thanks to the strength of the two actors.
>
>Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
>performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
>put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
>be in love with Donna?
Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>Gabriel Macht did a nice job struggling to keep Harvey's emotions in check.
>
>Mike was mostly superfluous in this episode. The character was merely
>used to move the plot along. Rachel did even less. Poor Donna was forced
>to play the pitiful girl left to die by the villain but no one rescues her.
>
>The episode hit a brick wall in the final act, because there was no possible
>way to resolve this idiocy in an entertaining fashion. Hardman just settled.
>Somehow, he snuck a file out from under Mike's nose. Obviously, he knew
>what there was to find. Mike's not supposed to miss things.
If this is all there is to it, I would agree with you. I'm hoping that's
not the case and that Hardman orchestrated this whole thing to get the
partners to vote himself back in to power.
>I'm not sure how Mike got all those files immediately. Eric Close never
>practiced law anywhere but Manhattan?
When he was first introduced they made a big deal about him being from
Boston, I believe.
>Hardman used the settlement to rally the partners against Jessica, who
>looked terribly weak. Gee. Who didn't see that coming, aside from Jessica
>and Harvey?
>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
That was cool for those of us who watch both shows.
wrote:
>s
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>s
>p
>a
>c
>e
>
>This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
>beyond any possible entertainment value. It sank to a new low this week
>with the trial prep, focusing on personal question after personal question,
>irrelevant to the issue at hand.
>
>Nevertheless, this was an enjoyable episode because the cast took the
>horrid, shitty plot and did something good with their characters. The
>unsatisfying scene in which Jessica put Louis on the stand rose a few
>inches above the muck thanks to the strength of the two actors.
>
>Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
>performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
>put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
>be in love with Donna?
making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>Gabriel Macht did a nice job struggling to keep Harvey's emotions in check.
>
>Mike was mostly superfluous in this episode. The character was merely
>used to move the plot along. Rachel did even less. Poor Donna was forced
>to play the pitiful girl left to die by the villain but no one rescues her.
>
>The episode hit a brick wall in the final act, because there was no possible
>way to resolve this idiocy in an entertaining fashion. Hardman just settled.
>Somehow, he snuck a file out from under Mike's nose. Obviously, he knew
>what there was to find. Mike's not supposed to miss things.
not the case and that Hardman orchestrated this whole thing to get the
partners to vote himself back in to power.
>I'm not sure how Mike got all those files immediately. Eric Close never
>practiced law anywhere but Manhattan?
Boston, I believe.
>Hardman used the settlement to rally the partners against Jessica, who
>looked terribly weak. Gee. Who didn't see that coming, aside from Jessica
>and Harvey?
>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 5, 2012, 1:35:22 PM8/5/12
to
EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>s
>>p
>>o
>>i
>>l
>>e
>>r
>>
>>s
>>p
>>a
>>c
>>e
>>This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
>>beyond any possible entertainment value. . . .
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>s
>>p
>>o
>>i
>>l
>>e
>>r
>>
>>s
>>p
>>a
>>c
>>e
>>This story arc with Eric Close trying to destroy Harvey has been stupid
>>The episode hit a brick wall in the final act, because there was no possible
>>way to resolve this idiocy in an entertaining fashion. Hardman just settled.
>>Somehow, he snuck a file out from under Mike's nose. Obviously, he knew
>>what there was to find. Mike's not supposed to miss things.
>If this is all there is to it, I would agree with you. I'm hoping that's
>not the case and that Hardman orchestrated this whole thing to get the
>partners to vote himself back in to power.
made sense. Hardman could have told Eric Close what to do, clearly,
but Eric Close had no reason to do any of it.
>>I'm not sure how Mike got all those files immediately. Eric Close never
>>practiced law anywhere but Manhattan?
>When he was first introduced they made a big deal about him being from
>Boston, I believe.
gotten so many files, even if they were just from Manhattan. Courthouses
are massive paper repositories, and they keep only recent cases readily
available. Older cases have to be obtained from warehouses. Expect cases
would be paged from the warehouse to the main courthouse anyway; they
don't often let the public pick up from the warehouse. It takes weeks.
If Mike wanted to extort the guy, he'd review everything.
Dano
Aug 5, 2012, 2:12:49 PM8/5/12
to
"EGK" wrote in message news:7qat18pm006qpav9i...@4ax.com...
===========================================
I agree that Hardman may have engineered this entire event...perhaps even
slipping the info to Tanner discreetly to set things in motion. Maybe I'm
giving him too much credit. It would be quite the "long con". Perhaps Mike
DIDN'T miss the files. Hardman might have had them all along.
I agree that Hardman may have engineered this entire event...perhaps even
slipping the info to Tanner discreetly to set things in motion. Maybe I'm
giving him too much credit. It would be quite the "long con". Perhaps Mike
DIDN'T miss the files. Hardman might have had them all along.
Ian J. Ball
Aug 5, 2012, 4:47:09 PM8/5/12
to
In article <jvm9nm$17u$1...@news.albasani.net>,
--
"Surf-crazed aliens... Of course." - Amber, "Alien Surf Girls",
Episode #1.1, "Wipeout".
Wait a minute... "Of course"?! "*Of course*"?!! Did I miss a step here??!!
> Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
> senior partner from the New York office, hah.
I barely noticed him over Shiri Appleby on F&B... ;p
> senior partner from the New York office, hah.
--
"Surf-crazed aliens... Of course." - Amber, "Alien Surf Girls",
Episode #1.1, "Wipeout".
Wait a minute... "Of course"?! "*Of course*"?!! Did I miss a step here??!!
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 6, 2012, 2:43:03 AM8/6/12
to
Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
>I barely noticed him over Shiri Appleby on F&B... ;p
She was cuter than she was on Life Unexpected. It helped a lot that
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
>I barely noticed him over Shiri Appleby on F&B... ;p
she wasn't playing that often awful character. I was trying to remember
if she was ever in a John Hughes movies, but I don't think so.
Then Reed Diamond turned up on Common Law...
Ian J. Ball
Aug 6, 2012, 9:20:46 AM8/6/12
to
In article <jvnp1n$pou$1...@news.albasani.net>,
People are still watching "Common Law"?!
I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 6, 2012, 9:53:00 AM8/6/12
to
Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>>>>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
>>>I barely noticed him over Shiri Appleby on F&B... ;p
>>She was cuter than she was on Life Unexpected. It helped a lot that
>>she wasn't playing that often awful character. I was trying to remember
>>if she was ever in a John Hughes movies, but I don't think so.
>>Then Reed Diamond turned up on Common Law...
>People are still watching "Common Law"?!
>I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
>"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
>interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
>nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
I can't speak for "people", but I've been watching it, even though it
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Freaked me out when David Constabile turned up on Franklin & Bash as a
>>>>senior partner from the New York office, hah.
>>>I barely noticed him over Shiri Appleby on F&B... ;p
>>She was cuter than she was on Life Unexpected. It helped a lot that
>>she wasn't playing that often awful character. I was trying to remember
>>if she was ever in a John Hughes movies, but I don't think so.
>>Then Reed Diamond turned up on Common Law...
>People are still watching "Common Law"?!
>I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
>"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
>interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
>nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
was below average most weeks. However, this week's episode was hysterical;
one of the partners started having sex dreams about the psychologist. It's
unfortunate they weren't all this good.
Next week, they promise to reveal the back story.
I hadn't heard that the show won't be renewed.
Steve Bartman
Aug 6, 2012, 2:39:17 PM8/6/12
to
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
>making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
>more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
>admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
Just watched this on Tivo.
>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
>making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
>more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
>admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
"Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
Classic Louis.
Steve
Obveeus
Aug 6, 2012, 3:08:45 PM8/6/12
to
"EGK" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 17:15:34 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
> wrote:
>>Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
>>performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
>>put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
>>be in love with Donna?
>
> Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
> making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there
> was
> more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
> admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
Lewis recognizing how fantastic Donna is and hating Harvey for not
recognizing it. How could anyone not love Donna and how could anyone not be
grateful for the chance? Basically, Harvey gets everything easily (the job
and Donna are two examples) and Lewis is jealous of the ease with which
Harvey falls into such good fortune.
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 6, 2012, 3:56:35 PM8/6/12
to
Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
>>>performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
>>>put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
>>>be in love with Donna?
>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out
>>there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with
>>his admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>I don't think it is a case of 'Lewis loves Donna'. Instead, it is a case of
>Lewis recognizing how fantastic Donna is and hating Harvey for not
>recognizing it. How could anyone not love Donna and how could anyone not be
>grateful for the chance? Basically, Harvey gets everything easily (the job
>and Donna are two examples) and Lewis is jealous of the ease with which
>Harvey falls into such good fortune.
Another way to describe wanting to protect Donna, wanting other men to
protect Donna, hating other men for appearing to have Donna but not
working to protect her or keep her, being jealous of other men who have
Donna, is love.
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
Leave the spoiler space intact, asshole.
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
>>>Hats off, as always, to Rick Hoffman for turning in yet another fine
>>>performance. Harvey thought he was going to smack Louis, but Louis
>>>put him in his place, and expressed his love for Donna. Ah. Who wouldn't
>>>be in love with Donna?
>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out
>>there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with
>>his admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>I don't think it is a case of 'Lewis loves Donna'. Instead, it is a case of
>Lewis recognizing how fantastic Donna is and hating Harvey for not
>recognizing it. How could anyone not love Donna and how could anyone not be
>grateful for the chance? Basically, Harvey gets everything easily (the job
>and Donna are two examples) and Lewis is jealous of the ease with which
>Harvey falls into such good fortune.
protect Donna, hating other men for appearing to have Donna but not
working to protect her or keep her, being jealous of other men who have
Donna, is love.
Professor Bubba
Aug 6, 2012, 3:57:13 PM8/6/12
to
In article <ol3028p0hmb7i5fso...@4ax.com>, Steve Bartman
Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
Ian J. Ball
Aug 6, 2012, 4:04:35 PM8/6/12
to
In article <jvoi7s$77f$2...@news.albasani.net>,
I don't think "Common Law" has been official cancelled. But USA moved
the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
know about the show's prospects.
the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
know about the show's prospects.
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 6, 2012, 4:14:25 PM8/6/12
to
Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Then Reed Diamond turned up on Common Law...
>>>People are still watching "Common Law"?!
>>>I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
>>>"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
>>>interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
>>>nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
>>I can't speak for "people", but I've been watching it, even though it
>>was below average most weeks. However, this week's episode was hysterical;
>>one of the partners started having sex dreams about the psychologist. It's
>>unfortunate they weren't all this good.
>>Next week, they promise to reveal the back story.
>>I hadn't heard that the show won't be renewed.
>I don't think "Common Law" has been official cancelled. But USA moved
>the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
>midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
>know about the show's prospects.
My recollection has been that it's been at 10 pm ET Friday for its
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Then Reed Diamond turned up on Common Law...
>>>People are still watching "Common Law"?!
>>>I forced myself through the pilot a couple of weeks ago - it wasn't
>>>"awful awful", but it certainly wasn't "good". I really didn't have
>>>interest in more episodes after that, esp. considering USA views it as
>>>nothing more than 'burnoff' anyway.
>>I can't speak for "people", but I've been watching it, even though it
>>was below average most weeks. However, this week's episode was hysterical;
>>one of the partners started having sex dreams about the psychologist. It's
>>unfortunate they weren't all this good.
>>Next week, they promise to reveal the back story.
>>I hadn't heard that the show won't be renewed.
>I don't think "Common Law" has been official cancelled. But USA moved
>the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
>midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
>know about the show's prospects.
entire run. I don't mind the timeslot as there aren't typically conflicts.
thefutoncritic says it was supposed to air 10 pm Thu starting 1/26/2012,
but the show was held till 10 pm Fri 5/11/12, after In Plain Sight ended.
trotsky
Aug 6, 2012, 4:43:25 PM8/6/12
to
really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
icebreaker
Aug 6, 2012, 5:32:21 PM8/6/12
to
"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote in message
news:jvp8j1$kka$5...@news.albasani.net...
> Ian J. Ball <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>I don't think "Common Law" has been official cancelled. But USA moved
>>the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
>>midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
>>know about the show's prospects.
>
> My recollection has been that it's been at 10 pm ET Friday for its
> entire run. I don't mind the timeslot as there aren't typically conflicts.
Exactly. It's been on at the same time each and every week thus far. 10/9 is
>>I don't think "Common Law" has been official cancelled. But USA moved
>>the airing of new episodes to, I think, 11pm (or it may have even been
>>midnight) after the first few episodes, which tells you all you need to
>>know about the show's prospects.
>
> My recollection has been that it's been at 10 pm ET Friday for its
> entire run. I don't mind the timeslot as there aren't typically conflicts.
a traditional USA time slot. Not a great show, but it's original
programming. The Good Guys was better and USA should have scooped that one
up after Fox gave it the heave ho.
Steve Bartman
Aug 6, 2012, 11:44:17 PM8/6/12
to
An amazing, plastic face. The guy just inhabits the character.
Steve
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 7, 2012, 1:11:15 AM8/7/12
to
trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
>>Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out
>>>>there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse
>>>>with his admission (without really saying it) that he was in love
w>>>>ith Donna.
>On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
>>Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out
>>>>there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse
>>>>with his admission (without really saying it) that he was in love
>>>Just watched this on Tivo.
>>>Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>>"Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>>Classic Louis.
>>Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
>He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that I'm
>really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
He's not ever "just playing a weasel", no matter how cardboard the
>He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that I'm
>really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
character is.
chicagofan
Aug 7, 2012, 5:07:25 PM8/7/12
to
Professor Bubba wrote:
> <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
>>> making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
>>> more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
>>> admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>> Just watched this on Tivo.
>>
>> Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>
>> "Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>
>> Classic Louis.
>>
>> Steve
Wasn't that great?!! He adds so much fun to this show.
> <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're not
>>> making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found out there was
>>> more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a glimpse with his
>>> admission (without really saying it) that he was in love with Donna.
>> Just watched this on Tivo.
>>
>> Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>
>> "Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>
>> Classic Louis.
>>
>> Steve
> Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
bj
chicagofan
Aug 7, 2012, 5:08:58 PM8/7/12
to
bj
Professor Bubba
Aug 7, 2012, 5:28:42 PM8/7/12
to
In article <jvs05b$oom$2...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
I recently noticed him as the guy who bribes his way onto a city bus
just before the tsunami hits Manhattan in The Day After Tomorrow.
wrote:
just before the tsunami hits Manhattan in The Day After Tomorrow.
Steve Bartman
Aug 7, 2012, 5:31:09 PM8/7/12
to
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:07:25 -0400, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
Much better than Season 1, which was all Mike is Great and Harvey is
Handsome. They're showing a lot more facets of the characters. The
scene where Jessica dug at Harvey demanding to know what had happened
to him in his past to make him so closed-off was great and says
there's a lot going on under the surface there.
I expect to really enjoy the "five years ago" ep on Thursday.
Steve
wrote:
Handsome. They're showing a lot more facets of the characters. The
scene where Jessica dug at Harvey demanding to know what had happened
to him in his past to make him so closed-off was great and says
there's a lot going on under the surface there.
I expect to really enjoy the "five years ago" ep on Thursday.
Steve
Steve Bartman
Aug 7, 2012, 5:47:08 PM8/7/12
to
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:28:42 -0400, Professor Bubba
<bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>I recently noticed him as the guy who bribes his way onto a city bus
>just before the tsunami hits Manhattan in The Day After Tomorrow.
Excellent! I know that scene! Never would have made the connection.
<bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>I recently noticed him as the guy who bribes his way onto a city bus
>just before the tsunami hits Manhattan in The Day After Tomorrow.
Steve
Bob Grimes
Aug 7, 2012, 6:32:24 PM8/7/12
to
Iraq on NCIS a few years ago.
--
"If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy!"
trotsky
Aug 8, 2012, 9:21:37 AM8/8/12
to
any show I've seen. Is there any character on there where the actor
isn't totally right for the part?
chicagofan
Aug 8, 2012, 7:34:07 PM8/8/12
to
movie the Professor mentioned though.
I think where I remember him from most, would be "Philly" or "The Practice". He's certainly shown me something new in
this role. :)
bj
chicagofan
Aug 8, 2012, 7:40:36 PM8/8/12
to
trotsky wrote:
> On 8/7/12 4:08 PM, chicagofan wrote:
>> trotsky wrote:
>>> On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
> On 8/7/12 4:08 PM, chicagofan wrote:
>> trotsky wrote:
>>> On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
>>>> <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>>> Just watched this on Tivo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Classic Louis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
>>>
>>> He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that
>>> I'm really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
>>>
>>
>> I know I have seen him before, but I can't remember where. Guess I'll
>> have to check him out on IMDB. :)
>
> I'll tell you one thing: the casting on that show is about as good as any show I've seen. Is there any character on
> there where the actor isn't totally right for the part?
>
Not that I can think of! That's exactly how I feel. I was wondering if I was the only one who felt that way. In
>>>>> Just watched this on Tivo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Classic Louis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
>>>
>>> He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that
>>> I'm really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
>>>
>>
>> I know I have seen him before, but I can't remember where. Guess I'll
>> have to check him out on IMDB. :)
>
> I'll tell you one thing: the casting on that show is about as good as any show I've seen. Is there any character on
> there where the actor isn't totally right for the part?
>
total, I think it's the best I've seen for regular TV casting... not specials, etc.. In other roles, they may not be
so special, but these actors have these characters nailed. :)
bj
chicagofan
Aug 8, 2012, 7:48:13 PM8/8/12
to
his facial expressions. They had a lot of compelling scenes in that episode I thought. I really love the brutal
honesty between Donna/Mike/Harvey/Donna/Lous in their confrontations. I admitted elsewhere, that I watched this episode
3 times, because the first 2 times, other things kept interrupting me... and I had to be able to see the WHOLE thing,
because I thought it was so good. :)
> I expect to really enjoy the "five years ago" ep on Thursday.
>
> Steve
bj
Steve Bartman
Aug 8, 2012, 10:00:38 PM8/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 19:48:13 -0400, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
>I agree that was a great scene, and I think Macht did a wonderful job showing Harvey's alternating emotions with just
>his facial expressions. They had a lot of compelling scenes in that episode I thought. I really love the brutal
>honesty between Donna/Mike/Harvey/Donna/Lous in their confrontations. I admitted elsewhere, that I watched this episode
>3 times, because the first 2 times, other things kept interrupting me... and I had to be able to see the WHOLE thing,
>because I thought it was so good. :)
I saved it for #2, and not just for Donna in the sun dress!
Steve
wrote:
>I agree that was a great scene, and I think Macht did a wonderful job showing Harvey's alternating emotions with just
>his facial expressions. They had a lot of compelling scenes in that episode I thought. I really love the brutal
>honesty between Donna/Mike/Harvey/Donna/Lous in their confrontations. I admitted elsewhere, that I watched this episode
>3 times, because the first 2 times, other things kept interrupting me... and I had to be able to see the WHOLE thing,
>because I thought it was so good. :)
Steve
chicagofan
Aug 9, 2012, 3:53:26 PM8/9/12
to
Steve Bartman wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 19:48:13 -0400, chicagofan<m...@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that was a great scene, and I think Macht did a wonderful job showing Harvey's alternating emotions with just
>> his facial expressions. They had a lot of compelling scenes in that episode I thought. I really love the brutal
>> honesty between Donna/Mike/Harvey/Jessica/Louis in their confrontations. I admitted elsewhere, that I watched this episode
> On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 19:48:13 -0400, chicagofan<m...@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that was a great scene, and I think Macht did a wonderful job showing Harvey's alternating emotions with just
>> his facial expressions. They had a lot of compelling scenes in that episode I thought. I really love the brutal
>> 3 times, because the first 2 times, other things kept interrupting me... and I had to be able to see the WHOLE thing,
>> because I thought it was so good. :)
> I saved it for #2, and not just for Donna in the sun dress!
>
> Steve
LOL... I overlooked that, but I get your point! ;)
>> because I thought it was so good. :)
> I saved it for #2, and not just for Donna in the sun dress!
>
> Steve
bj
Steve Bartman
Aug 9, 2012, 5:56:31 PM8/9/12
to
On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 15:53:26 -0400, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
Given the negative waves going on between Donna and Mike in the scene
there was no way, but I would have loved it if she'd asked him to come
up to her apartment to talk.
What would Donna Decor consist of? :)
Steve
wrote:
there was no way, but I would have loved it if she'd asked him to come
up to her apartment to talk.
What would Donna Decor consist of? :)
Steve
Hunter
Aug 10, 2012, 3:05:31 AM8/10/12
to
YES! The bathroom scene in which he got emotional for trashing Donna
on the stand and he yelled at Harvey surprised me! I can't say he
never done that before because obvously I have not seen every role he
has played but this is the first role I have seen a character he has
played that way that I can remember.
BTW I have been saying he would make a grreat President Nixon, but I
have been looking at old "Dragnet" episodes ("Dragnet 1967-70" I hope
they put on the orginal TV show from the 1950s) on Antenna TV and I
think he would make an even better Joe Friday. They practically sound
alike. And look resonably similar in terms of being dark skinned and
having a pepetual five o'clock shadow. I am sure Hoffman can nail Jack
Webb's dead pan staccato style.
------>Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
Hunter
Aug 10, 2012, 5:29:02 AM8/10/12
to
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:39:17 -0500, Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com>
wrote:
-----
I wonder if the writers and prodcers had a scene like that in mind
when they chose the name of the character, or did they write that
after someone realized it when writing the episode; or-best of
all-Hoffman ad libbed the line? :-)
wrote:
I wonder if the writers and prodcers had a scene like that in mind
when they chose the name of the character, or did they write that
after someone realized it when writing the episode; or-best of
all-Hoffman ad libbed the line? :-)
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 10, 2012, 10:35:07 AM8/10/12
to
Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 15:43:25 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
>>>Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>>On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>>>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found
>>>>>out there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a
>>>>>glimpse with his admission (without really saying it) that he was
>>>>>in love with Donna.
>>>>Just watched this on Tivo.
>>>>Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>>>"Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>>>Classic Louis.
>On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 15:43:25 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>On 8/6/12 2:57 PM, Professor Bubba wrote:
>>>Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>>On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:24:42 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>Definitely one of the best scenes in the episode. I like that they're
>>>>>not making Louis a caricature. Last week it was Rachel that found
>>>>>out there was more to him than people thought. Now Harvey got a
>>>>>glimpse with his admission (without really saying it) that he was
>>>>>in love with Donna.
>>>>Just watched this on Tivo.
>>>>Add to the Louis Litt Sayings Hall of Fame:
>>>>"Somebody want's ta git LIT UUUUUP!!!!"
>>>>Classic Louis.
>>>Rick Hoffman has been doing an outstanding job here as Louis.
>>He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that I'm
>>really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
>>He has because he's played a weasel in so many different roles that I'm
>>really shocked at how multifaceted his character on "Suits" is.
>YES! The bathroom scene in which he got emotional for trashing Donna
>on the stand and he yelled at Harvey surprised me! I can't say he
>never done that before because obvously I have not seen every role he
>has played but this is the first role I have seen a character he has
>played that way that I can remember.
If you're now becoming a Rick Hoffman fan, then track down the single
>on the stand and he yelled at Harvey surprised me! I can't say he
>never done that before because obvously I have not seen every role he
>has played but this is the first role I have seen a character he has
>played that way that I can remember.
season of Philly. Not a great show, but he was second lead.
>BTW I have been saying he would make a grreat President Nixon, but I
>have been looking at old "Dragnet" episodes ("Dragnet 1967-70" I hope
>they put on the orginal TV show from the 1950s) on Antenna TV and I
>think he would make an even better Joe Friday. They practically sound
>alike. And look resonably similar in terms of being dark skinned and
>having a pepetual five o'clock shadow. I am sure Hoffman can nail Jack
>Webb's dead pan staccato style.
discouraged his cast from acting on both radio and tv to get through
scenes in one take. On tv, they were often reading off cue cards to
cut down on rehearsal time, because he thought he could produce tv
almost as cheap as radio.
Steve Bartman
Aug 10, 2012, 2:19:25 PM8/10/12
to
On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 07:05:31 GMT, Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com>
(Hunter) wrote:
I am sure Hoffman can nail Jack
>Webb's dead pan staccato style.
He could, but would Joe Friday crave raspberry bran bars?
(Hunter) wrote:
I am sure Hoffman can nail Jack
>Webb's dead pan staccato style.
Steve
Professor Bubba
Aug 10, 2012, 4:50:25 PM8/10/12
to
In article <k0366r$mk9$3...@news.albasani.net>, Adam H. Kerman
There are episodes of it that were done in a single day. Harry Morgan
once said the work was uninspired drudgery, but it was also a steady
paycheck, and in any case he liked Webb.
It's strange, because the contemporary Adam-12 (also produced by Webb)
had lots of expensive location shoots and even did a season of night
exteriors.
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> Uh, Jack Webb couldn't act, hence the ultra-wooden performance. He
> discouraged his cast from acting on both radio and tv to get through
> scenes in one take. On tv, they were often reading off cue cards to
> cut down on rehearsal time, because he thought he could produce tv
> almost as cheap as radio.
Oh, yes. Dragnet was by far the cheapest show on TV at the time.
> Uh, Jack Webb couldn't act, hence the ultra-wooden performance. He
> discouraged his cast from acting on both radio and tv to get through
> scenes in one take. On tv, they were often reading off cue cards to
> cut down on rehearsal time, because he thought he could produce tv
> almost as cheap as radio.
There are episodes of it that were done in a single day. Harry Morgan
once said the work was uninspired drudgery, but it was also a steady
paycheck, and in any case he liked Webb.
It's strange, because the contemporary Adam-12 (also produced by Webb)
had lots of expensive location shoots and even did a season of night
exteriors.
chicagofan
Aug 15, 2012, 7:43:01 PM8/15/12
to
thing in the room. ;)
bj
William December Starr
Aug 16, 2012, 1:31:44 AM8/16/12
to
In article <100820121650258594%bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid>,
(1952[1] through 1959) or the second one (1967 through 1970, from
which "Adam-12" was sort of spun off in 1968)?
> It's strange, because the contemporary Adam-12 (also produced by
> Webb) had lots of expensive location shoots and even did a season
> of night exteriors.
-----------
*1: Actually its first episode just sneaked in to December of 1951.
-- wds
Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> said:
> Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> Uh, Jack Webb couldn't act, hence the ultra-wooden
>> performance. He discouraged his cast from acting on both radio
>> and tv to get through scenes in one take. On tv, they were often
>> reading off cue cards to cut down on rehearsal time, because he
>> thought he could produce tv almost as cheap as radio.
>
> Oh, yes. Dragnet was by far the cheapest show on TV at the time.
> There are episodes of it that were done in a single day. Harry
> Morgan once said the work was uninspired drudgery, but it was also
> a steady paycheck, and in any case he liked Webb.
Are you talking about the first tv incarnation of "Dragnet"
> Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> Uh, Jack Webb couldn't act, hence the ultra-wooden
>> performance. He discouraged his cast from acting on both radio
>> and tv to get through scenes in one take. On tv, they were often
>> reading off cue cards to cut down on rehearsal time, because he
>> thought he could produce tv almost as cheap as radio.
>
> Oh, yes. Dragnet was by far the cheapest show on TV at the time.
> There are episodes of it that were done in a single day. Harry
> Morgan once said the work was uninspired drudgery, but it was also
> a steady paycheck, and in any case he liked Webb.
(1952[1] through 1959) or the second one (1967 through 1970, from
which "Adam-12" was sort of spun off in 1968)?
> It's strange, because the contemporary Adam-12 (also produced by
> Webb) had lots of expensive location shoots and even did a season
> of night exteriors.
*1: Actually its first episode just sneaked in to December of 1951.
-- wds
Steve Bartman
Aug 16, 2012, 10:56:32 AM8/16/12
to
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:43:01 -0400, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
Sort of like Harvey's office? I see her as having more Broadway-esque
pieces. She really wants to be an actress in her next life.
Not for nothing, but my wife, who watched the show with as much ardor
as I do, but for different reasons :) thinks the actress is pregnant
(Sarah Rafferty I think is her name.) Not far along, but her posture
has changed and they're costuming her in chiffon and sundresses a lot
more than in Season 1. I believe Ms. R. has two children already.
Steve
pieces. She really wants to be an actress in her next life.
Not for nothing, but my wife, who watched the show with as much ardor
as I do, but for different reasons :) thinks the actress is pregnant
(Sarah Rafferty I think is her name.) Not far along, but her posture
has changed and they're costuming her in chiffon and sundresses a lot
more than in Season 1. I believe Ms. R. has two children already.
Steve
Hunter
Aug 19, 2012, 6:15:57 PM8/19/12
to
Whatever Webb's acting ability, I am sure that Hoffman can immitate
him faithfully..
chicagofan
Aug 21, 2012, 4:31:46 PM8/21/12
to
Steve Bartman wrote:
> chicagofan<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Steve Bartman wrote:
>>> Given the negative waves going on between Donna and Mike in the scene
>>> there was no way, but I would have loved it if she'd asked him to come
>>> up to her apartment to talk.
>>>
>>> What would Donna Decor consist of? :)
> chicagofan<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Steve Bartman wrote:
>>> Given the negative waves going on between Donna and Mike in the scene
>>> there was no way, but I would have loved it if she'd asked him to come
>>> up to her apartment to talk.
>>>
>>> What would Donna Decor consist of? :)
>> Hmm... maybe Manhatten chic, contemporary... the kind of cool, unadorned look in which she would shine, as the only warm
>> thing in the room. ;)
> Sort of like Harvey's office? I see her as having more Broadway-esque
> pieces. She really wants to be an actress in her next life.
LOL... You're probably right, I hadn't thought about that. :)
>> thing in the room. ;)
> Sort of like Harvey's office? I see her as having more Broadway-esque
> pieces. She really wants to be an actress in her next life.
> Not for nothing, but my wife, who watched the show with as much ardor
> as I do, but for different reasons :) thinks the actress is pregnant
> (Sarah Rafferty I think is her name.) Not far along, but her posture
> has changed and they're costuming her in chiffon and sundresses a lot
> more than in Season 1. I believe Ms. R. has two children already.
attention.
I suspect your wife and I share the same reasons for enjoying this show. ;)
bj
Steve Bartman
Aug 21, 2012, 5:30:59 PM8/21/12
to
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 16:31:46 -0400, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
>I suspect your wife and I share the same reasons for enjoying this show. ;)
>bj
She thinks he's OK looking, but a little too pleased with himself.
She's more a Clooney Girl.
She, like me, really loves the Louis scenes. The character has taken
over the show to an extent.
Steve
wrote:
>I suspect your wife and I share the same reasons for enjoying this show. ;)
>bj
She's more a Clooney Girl.
She, like me, really loves the Louis scenes. The character has taken
over the show to an extent.
Steve
0 new messages