TV series review: Suits S1

Season 1 of Suits came out in 2011. I’m just writing that so you know that I know that I’m reviewing old TV. Thing is, I started watching it one weekend when P was away, based on a random Netflix recommendation and I was immediately hooked. I never watch more than a couple of episodes of anything in a single sitting and it’s rare for me to watch more than two hours of TV in a single week. I watched the entire season over one weekend.


TV series review suits season 1
Gabriel Macht as Harvey Specter and Gina Torres as Jessica Peason in season 1 of Suits.


Thing is, I can’t explain exactly what about it kept me going. I think part of it is how pretty it all looks. Like, the clothes were pretty in Madmen, but the show Madmen annoyed me. The clothes are also pretty here and I’m not annoyed. Possibly because it’s also not set in the 1960s. Seriously, the 60s looked awful and no amount of floral print scarves is going to change that.

So, Suits is a legal drama. Season 1 starts out by introducing two of the main characters, college dropout Mike Ross and successful law associate Harvey Specter. After some general shenanigans, Mike accidentally stumbles into an interview with Harvey and reveals an impressive memory and a decent knowledge of law. Harvey hires him, in spite of the fact that Mike has no license to practice. Much of Season 1 then has the two of them working together whilst trying to keep Mike’s lack of qualifications a secret.

Along the way, we meet Jessica Pearson who runs the law firm Harvey and Mike work for, played by the always amazing Gina Torres. Ok, I’ll admit it, as soon as I discovered that Torres was going to feature prominently it became way more likely that I’d keep watching. This was only further compounded by Sarah Rafferty as Donna Paulson, Harvey’s secretary, and Meghan Markle as Rachel Zane, a senior paralegal.

The only recurring character I found off-putting in S1 was Louis Litt, the third named partner alongside Pearson and Spectre and just an awful slimeball. Still, even Litt manages to be occasionally endearing and is, at worst, a minor antagonist.

This is all character-driven drama, so it’s important that the characters are likeable and fun. The friendship between Harvey and Mike develops quickly even as Harvey has to occasionally remind Mike who the boss is and Mike does his best to impress Harvey and muddle his way through practising law. It turns out that there’s more to it than just knowing things.

Meanwhile, complications arise with Mike’s old roommate and friend, as well as his friend’s girlfriend and paralegal Rachel Zane. Oh no, not a love triangle?! Well, yeah, of course, this is a 2011 drama, after all. That said, it’s actually done fairly well as these things go with the women involved smart enough to know that they’re only in this stupid situation because Mike is an idiot (which he is).

So it’s a fun series, weirdly compelling and regularly heart-warming. There’s entertaining dialogue, a good balance of serious issues dealt with tastefully alongside some occasionally much-needed comic relief. For the life of me I don’t know why it isn’t more popular and I have no doubt that I will soon be wading through the next few seasons.

5 thoughts on “TV series review: Suits S1

  1. Seriously, the 60s looked awful

    Now wait just a Paisley-patterned minute. You’re going to have to unpack that one a little, Can you give us your definitions and narrow the field. Are you talking about fashion? Technology? Engineering? Building? I’ll grant that the 60s produced some truly awful buildings (we’ve just knocked one of them down on-campus) but I think the look of the technology and the people was great.

    (in saying that, I may be viewing the 60s from a very particular lens.)

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Ahaha, yeah fair enough.

      Well, on the one hand, I get the distinct impression that the glamorous, free-love (and perhaps even Paisley-pattern) side of the 60s didn’t actually happen to most people. On the other hand, lack of technology and awful treatment of women and minorities is just unappealing, no matter how lovely the fashions of the day looked.


      1. That’s fair enough, I can see where you’re coming from. Although I think if I had to live in a decade of the 20th century, the 60s would probably be given serious consideration. It was probably the most optimistic decade of the century and the one where people thought serious change was going to happen. We know that ultimately, it didn’t, but it must have been an invigorating time to be alive.

        (For completeness, my other choice would probably be the 90s, for much the same reason. We see the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall and the start of peace in Northern Ireland. Things on the run up to the year 2000 are looking mostly great)

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s