"I am deeply concerned that we won't get resolution to the story." As am I. When your network adds an episode to your season, and then rescinds it, it's a signal that the viewers are bored. Pick up the pace.
Agreed. Watch your six Margaret...karma's gunnin' for ya with sharp teeth--and ain't no tetanus shot strong enough to cure it.
Caan is absent because his wife was expecting their first child and the due date coincided with filming so Danny's character was written out temporarily,
Yes...they are first-year law students (in the US, law school is usually for 3 years). The 5 students who are working as interns at the professor's own law firm are learning a bit more by working for her, but even so, they're still not allowed to practice law and the academic content of the class isn't completely appropriate for any first-year student, intern or not.
I've read books where the past catches up to the present--sorta the same thing as the present catching up with future. Usually the chapters alternated so it got a bit confusing character-wise until you got used to the style.
Interesting premise. In addition to "this week's case" we would also get "this season's homicide." The question is, can you really have multiple seasons of the same circle of people committing murder (or being an accessory to it) and then doing their best to try and get away with it? I don't know how sustainable that is--at some point, viewers are just gonna roll their eyes and stop watching.
Yes. The process is called "voir dire"--French words for "to see" and "to say/to tell." Each attorney has the right to question potential jurors to make sure their life experiences don't raise any bias. For example, if a potential juror identifies as gay and the case involves a "gay bashing", such a juror might be biased and would be excused. Each attorney is allowed a certain number of "challenges", either for cause or not, which would excuse a juror from serving on a particular case. It might also interest you to learn that although lawyers can be asked to report to court as potential jurors, they are usually "challenged" and therefore excused. What's even more interesting is that close contacts of lawyers could also be excused. A friend of mine has always been excused from serving as a juror because her sister is a lawyer. FYI, I'm not a lawyer, but I'm willing to bet that most of the folks reading this have served as a juror in the US at least once, or have at least seen the process firsthand, and would agree with me. What's not quite accurate is the class she teaches. To quote a commenter who did go to law school, presumably in the US: "I have never had nor ever seen a law professor like her and that is not a [first-year] criminal law class. You have to learn the law before you can practice it. It was more like an evidence class mixed with a criminal procedure class."--kris47 from episode 1
Comment modified at October 24, 2014 16:00
I wonder if the plan is to have us "catch up" to the flash-forwards and then proceed from there. Last week's episode was 7 weeks prior and last night's was 6 weeks prior. That means we might see all the flash-forwards as a single "linear" episode around episode 10 or 11, and see the subsequent events through the end of the season. Just a guess....
To quote Bonnie, though not aimed an anyone in particular, "Bitch, please" indeed (best line in the episode, BTW). Any resemblance between the legal proceedings on this show and legal proceedings in the real world are pure coincidence. We ALL know that Laurel and Connor were conveniently not identified as perpetrators of jury tampering. Glad to see a story line focus on Laurel. While I was starting to like her as one of the most genuine of the group, this episode kinda blew that impression for me. While her motives regarding the case seemed genuine, her actions were not--and then after she enjoys "foreplay" with Frank and does a quasi-walk of shame directly to "the main event" with Khan, her "nobility" goes out the window. And now that Frank owes her a favor, she's probably gonna use him to cover her ass. A question I had after this ep's big reveal is....if the nude selfie was taken in the house, how'd it get on Lila's phone? Oh sure...Sam could have taken it and SENT it to Lila....or did Lila take it herself while she was in the house? Hmmmmm....... Oh...and what did Rebecca mean by "They were in on it together?" Who? In on what? As for hot Nate, the writers are just dragging this out for all its worth. A representative of Annalise's firm ruined his career and he wants f*ck all to do with her, but she keeps showing up on his doorstep. You can practically smell the desperation through the screen--sure he's nice to look at, but it's gettin' to be overkill (no pun intended). Lastly, I agree with the other posters...the flash-forwards are getting too repetitive. While we get a new nugget of information during each one, it's not very earth-shattering (Anyone NOT think that Laurel would sleep with Frank?).
Comment modified at October 24, 2014 13:00
An enjoyable episode, but basically "filler"--the writers were "moving" things into place for the next episode(s). I agree with TiffanyO about Prom Queen--if she's not throwing hissy fits in real time, she's losing her shit during the flash-forwards. What's to like or get to know about her? Feel bad for Connor, but not too bad; apparently, his shenanigans are having consequences (as they should) and he's learning about accountability the hard way. Now, maybe my coffee hasn't kicked in or I'm just being obtuse or both, and I KNOW this'll probably a "face palm" moment when someone clarifies it for me, but.......was there really a crime? Shares were bought using Marren's computer (BTW, LOVES me some Elizabeth Perkins...always have) and we learn that three employees conspired to frame her by using her computer to buy the stock. However, were the shares traced to the employees' personal finances? I SUPPOSE hacking a computer, even a computer at your own place of employment, could be considered criminal, but other than getting the two brokers to roll on each other, I didn't see any "smoking gun" and I didn't hear what the charges were.
Sign up for our
and receive the latest tv news delivered to your inbox for
© 2014 TV Fanatic
TV Fanatic Plus
Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive personalized television news for