SparedTurkey

Okay, so I have no idea about years - it may very well being wrong. Unless it is possible that Winter took place in 2015? But I thought the wedding was supposed to be on the Sunday - but because Luke had "made" plans in addition to the flash mob - it was a surprise wedding for Lorelai on the Saturday night? I mean, she had no idea and Luke sent the text to Kirk saying it was perfect or whatever. And that was why it was with just those two, Rory and Lane (+ the reverend). I had assumed the "real" wedding, with all the townies was supposed to be on the Sunday? That's how I took it to make it make sense. Of course, I don't believe for a second Emily wouldn't have been there - tense relationship or no

I didn't think Rory had that first trust fund from Trix? Didn't Trix decline to set it up after watching Lorelai and Emily fight at the Independence Inn that time? I thought at the end of the episode that was why Lorelai ended by telling Rory the story of how she lost her thousands of dollars or something to that effect? Not that it makes it any easier to understand how Rory was affording her life. Unless Logan was paying? Or Dr Greene's wife from ER? Or probably her father I guess?

Personally I would comment on what she is doing rather than trying to shame her for what she does with her body. That said, I wish I had half the confidence she does to do that. Anyone heard if her album is any good?

Please watch First Contact on SBS Australia. There have been previous seasons but this one is currently airing. If for nothing else I want David Oldfield called out. He is a complete embodiment of all that is wrong with the way Australia thinks about race and more importantly, Aboriginal Australians. He is disgusting. Trump without the votes. I can only hope the channel that airs the mardi gras in the face of Fred Nile is airing him to prove that those views need to die out. Otherwise, if it is for shock value that is equally revolting. I know Aussie TV doesn't get a lot of air time of this site but this is worth it.

It really doesn't. Being academically smart and falling pregnant at 15 are not equal indicators of intelligence. Even if, on that one night, birth control was ignored - that doesn't make her dumb or invalidate her intelligence. Would you want your intelligence level to be judged on one mistake you made when you were 15? Well she did find it didn't she. She knocked on the door. She asked for a job. Aside from having a baby in her arms that's pretty much like dropping off your resume. Mia didn't have to give her a job. Could have shut the door and forgot about it. Doesn't mean Rory wasn't safe. She could have gone to a shelter, a friends. Maybe that was her plan if she didn't get a job. But she got a job. I don't think that is a reason to negatively judge her. But she tried and suceeded. Doesn't seem that stupid. And to quote Bill Adama, sometimes you gotta roll the hard six.

I disagree. Lorelai kept their granddaughter out of their lives by choice and on purpose. I thought Lorelai was selfish to ask for help, she had no plans to pay for private school, she knew her parents would bail her out. I don't think just because your grown kids ask for help, you are required to help. They.are.adults. I don't think Emily or Richard were obliged to help Lorelai pay for Chilton either. But they could have said no. They didn't. Aside from the money, and Richard letting Lorelai sneak out of the window they didn't match her halfway. Sure if I were Lorelai I wouldn't have gone back to them. But then, there would be no show.

Not in that first post you weren't. Not sure where it says Lorelai wasn't on the pill or Christopher didn't bring a condom so not sure where the assumption she is so dumb that of course it was unprotected sex came from. Also, pretty sure she ran away and found a job in less than 24 hours? And provided for Rory since that second. What was she supposed to do? Stay with toxic parents because it is 'smarter'? I also think she did finish high school because there was no suggestion she had to complete her GED before business school but I don't think the show made a point of it. I think Lorelai does some massively dumb things. But a marker of low intelligence isn't having a baby at 16.

Can we not judge a woman's intelligence based on her reproductive system? Who said birth control didn't fail? Must have missed that in the script... Lorelai has many, many flaws but this? Really?

I moved this whole discussion from the nitpicking thread to here because it's not quite a nitpick, limited to Lorelai, Emily, Richard or Unpopular opinions. I don't think that that there was no justification for Lorelai moving out, that she shunned them for no reason, that she was needlessly cruel. Emily and Richard were well thought out, brilliantly acted characters. But hugely self-absorbed. I think the show was pretty clear Richard had no time for her and Emily paraded Lorelai around like a doll. (This isn't the show for any other kind of child abuse so I'll leave that alone). Their response to her pregnancy was that she marry Chris and live there and eventually have the life they wanted. If that is not how Lorelai wanted to live then what was she supposed to do? Stay for them? She moved out, got a job and raised her kid. She didn't mooch off them, use a trust fund or otherwise rely on them for money while she didn't want to deal with them. If all Richard and Emily can focus on is Emily not getting out of bed for a month and nothing of how hard it would have been for Lorelai then yeah, thats pathetic. Parents don't have to live just for their kids or enable them. But they have a responsibility. Why is the onus on a 17 year old child to suck it up and maintain a shit relationship instead of the adults to look at the situation and actively improve it? If Emily or Richard wanted a better relationship during those first 16 years, why didn't they reach out? Listen? Clearly they didn't try, as precious as their grandaughter was to them. They were in their 40s, their child 17. Who was acting their age really? And really, 16 years has past and what do we see from Emily and Richard regarding Lorelai? The first time she ever asks them for help, not even for herself, they attach strings. They don't listen. They badger. They are cruel about her every ending relationship. After season 3 and Lorelai repays the loan and still comes to dinner - they badger. They patronise. They collude with Christopher to break up her relationship, one she is more attached to, because it doesn't work for them. Now if that is how they behave after all those years, I don't think it's difficult to extrapolate how they were when Lorelai was completely under their control. I don't think that Lorelai is the best character i this show. But I don't agree with the glorification of Emily and Richard over this when things were largely their fault. Even if the actors are fantastic.

I love Michael and Fi. And Michael and Sam. And Sam and Fi. That was a pretty good cast they got. And I like they were all within spitting distance of eachother's ages. You know when they remake it Fi will be like 25 years younger. And blond probably. I also liked the addition of Jesse. I thought they pulled it off really well having a new person come into the cast. Didn't force you into likng him immediately but let him grow on you. More shows could take a leaf out of this book.

This. Stella may have been obsessed with catching Spector but considering he was a serial killer, so yeah that's okay. But it wasn't sexual - and much of the reason this series wasn't quite as good was the continual suggestion from the show it was. Last season, when the thought was put to her, she dismissed it pretty clearly. Sure, but it's not sexual. Or love. Or puppy dog eyes. It's a female detective who went after, and caught, a murderous psychopath who hated women. This isn't a romantic comedy.

Stella is not in that list

So why didn't Paul just go to his own room after getting the belt from the doctor? No interruptions then. He didn't accidently go into that other patient's room. And yes I get that he was using the other patient for a distraction. Just killing him didn't seem in Paul's wheelhouse. Would have made more sense to have killed the old psych. It just seemed like something random that hadn't been set up bar one scene with the nurse telling Paul what he did and just to make Paul violent in the last 5 minutes of the show. Which, pretty sure they acheived that with him breaking Anderson's arm and beating Stella. In a police station.

Just wanted to point out you summed up my entire feelings about this decision both clearly and succintly. I would also add that this series shamed Stella for every decision she made in seasons 1-2 that made her so different than the Olivia Bensons of the world. I seriously, Sally-Anne lived and if they continued to press charges (I'm not sure if they said they would or not) that is a terrible ending, Similarly, with Katie, as annoying as she was the whole time - if she is pining away at juvie while Paul killed himself on his terms - thats messed up. So, are we to understand from the 'previously' segment of this ep, that Paul killed the other psych patient because that patient had raped and killed his own sister? Because otherwise it seems completely random. And not in Paul's MO. He's never given a shit about kids before thins - aside from Sarah Kay's foetus that is.

That's fine. Everyone has their own view. Mine is that the female characters were treated demonstrably worse. Sue was awful to all students except Becky, yes, but so was Will to anyone who wasn't Finn. Who was shown as awful? Sue. Kurt being threatened by Karofsky - awful. Santana being outed by Finn - totally fine once blackmailed into having him sing to her about it. Blaine has a crush on Sam - cute. Tina having a crush on Blaine - Creepy. Finn was a simpering, weak mess who had everything handed to him for no reason. Rachel - worked her guts out and got most of what she wanted but was made to look like an awful person for it. Perhaps it was that Ryan Murphy hated Glee - but he only had himself to blame for what it became. He decided it had to become a show with teaching lessons every week. As for Brittany, it was never really clear what she was supposed to be. I don't think she got away with everything - she lost the presidency to Blaine of all people and failed her senior year - but she may be the closest female to be treated the way the boys were. But one female character written like the boys doesn't negate the rest of it. Maybe Ryan Murphy, and all the Glee writers don't hate women. I don't know them. But I don't think it is an unfair call to make based on this show. And I don't think Glee should be lauded the way it has been. Unless you're a gay male or a white male. Unrelatedly, I am torn over the latest season of The Fall. While the acting was of the usual high quality I can't help but feel the season was nothing but an exercise in pulling Stella Gibson down and (spoilers for the reasons why because I'm not sure it has aired in America yet). Which was nothing like she was in the first 2 seasons.

I don't know - perhaps being unable to write a female character as anything else as a despicable character while the male characters are either the best things ever (or if they are they villans they are tragically misunderstood)? Ryan Murphy isn't writing responsible for writing anti-female lesgislation, but then this is a site to just discuss television and aside from the first 13 episodes of Glee, and possibly a handful of other episodes everything I have seen points to a creator putting out a pretty hateful representation of women - that wasn't wrapped in a Game of Thrones shell I guess. Whether or not he personally hates women I am not commenting. But I don't think suggesting there is a level of misogyny based on his work is out of the question. Misogyny does mean the dislike of, contempt for or ingrained prejudice against women. Is that present in his work - I think so. Misogyny is and can be so pervasive that I think it is worth calling it out when it should be.

I dont think the complaints of him being sexist is solely based on him not writing a female character decently. More that the female characters and male characters can do exactly the same thing - only the female will be punished, criticised and will otherwise loose while the male is put down to a 'boys will be boys' or it's not even a thing. E.g. Rachel and Finn. Rachel kissed Puck, Finn goes ballistic, she looses him etc. Fair. Finn cheats with Rachel, then Quinn, Santana even - No big deal. Add in 4-5 years of that on the same show - sexism is a fair call in my opinion. (It was a missed opportunity that he didn't keep Glee what it was supposed to be originally and made it so "family friendly" and a constant "teaching moment")

I think it is because while he may hire an equal amount of women (or more than) the stories he writes are, or turn into, something hugely sexist. Or at least his past shows have. There was bad writing on Glee - and he was responsible for a lot of that. There were a (probably) equal amount of women as men on that show and every woman was reduced to a boy-loving, crazy, selfish, awful person. See: Rachel, Tina, Quinn etc.. While the men were glorified. So I think that is where his sexism really shone. Prior to that there was Nip/Tuck, where the majority of women were poorly written as self-involved, psychopathic or sexless. And while he may have had a preference for the gay-male stories in Glee, the way he treated lesbians on that show was appalling. Bullying of a gay male was the Worst!Thing!Ever but he had no qualms portraying his most beloved straight, white QB bulling a POC lesbian. In that case the double standards are obvious and should be called out. I dont want to comment on Scream Queens or American Horror Story because I dont like to watch his shows - mostly because the previous ones went rapidly downhill when he found something new and shiny to play with. Maybe he has got better - I certainly hope he has.

I swear to god, if Sally-Anne, assuming she lives to the next episode, is the only one who suffers any legal consequences for this whole thing, I will call total crap on this being a well made show. Does anyone know if any serial killers wives, who were unknowing and not active participants, were ever brought to trial? Anywhere. I did agree with Stella - she was naive possibly but not criminally so. And I am done with the nurse. I don't want to be watching her heart-eyes at Spector for the next 3 episodes.

I get that, I do. But at the same time the lie Paul told was that he was shagging a 15 year old. Which is not only repulsive but also illegal. While it wasn't true, if I were Sally I'd be thinking that if he is choosing THAT as a cover-up lie, then whatever the truth is can only be much worse than that. Plus, I don't think Sally at all believes he has been wrongly arrested. She may be going as far as to not demonise him to Olivia, but has seemed to have washed her hands of hiim in a way. But yes, her world has gone to shit and it shows. She'd be better off changing names and moving far far away.

I completely agree with all of this. The problem with Glee was that the slightest bit of positive feedback and it turned into a super-serious 'drama' when it came to some gay kids and was farcical all the other times. If they had kept on with the way the show was written and heading from the first 13 episodes, it would have much more value. I liked Kurt in the first episode. Throwing his Prada bag at the football bullies before getting thrown in a skip and telling them one day they'd work for him - gold. Having him sainted for the next 5 seasons just for existing - not so much. To say nothing that in that show a gay man was worth so much more than a gay lady. I think the show is dated certainly. When rewatching it now, it comes across as straight out of the 90's - specifically the trans jokes, the gay man = girl jokes etc. The Vote For Clinton Revival special was exactly the same in that respect. But I think at the same time the continuing value of it lies in the fact it was made in the late 90's and did have 2 main characters being gay men. That was worth a lot back then. It was the time when gay characters were purely used as shock value or for sweeps or weren't allowed to be fully gay by their network (see Xena). It was also on a main network, while other shows like Queer as Folk and OZ were on cable and not viewable by the whole population (and more expensive for other countries to buy). It wasn't the best show, or the smartest or the best representation that could be asked for. But I think it was a bit of positivity when there was very little else going on and probably contributes a lot to the nostalgic 'this is a great show' sentiment. I will admit that I did like Karen and that I did also like Jack because he reminded me of a lot of people I grew up with. That said - at the time, didn't the actor playing Will go to lengths to acknowledge in every media thing that he was a total straight dude? And he was totally just playing a role? Because that particular attitude does come through I agree with the OP - Kind of like the actor in Dawson's Creek who played Jack?

Any chance Spector is bunging on this amnesia crap to get out of the trial? It would be if this was a L&O: SVU episode. I couldn't see properly - was that lemon juice Katie sprayed in Daisy's eye? Or alcohol? Either way can she get shoved in detention now? The police saw her at the hospital and presumably she has a curfew. Time to go. Olivia is going to be one messed up individual. I feel like all the non-arrested Spectors should be in therapy. And I don't even like therapy. Although I did like the headmaster saying she had no idea what to do - it had never happened before. At least they get some things right. And personally if I were Sally-Ann I couldn't have cared less if Paul got a solicitor or not. And I certainly wouldn't be making a call to get him one. Or asking anyone else to do it. Considering the ICU Nurse and now Legal Associate - one of them is going to get sucked in like a grown up Katie or will be dead.

The only thing that bugs me about the show, is that Stella seems to have such crap taste in men - which doesn't seem at all the affect they were going for. There was the first one (the ultimately dirty(?) cop - I think Olson?) who turned needy and continually sext-ed Stella, Jim - which enough said - and now Anderson who could not sound like more of a sook in this episode - "you sounded anguished" (You slept with her once, you weren't about to be popping down to the registry office buddy). Stella really needs to look at her choices here because she is much better than that. Unless she low-key likes the drama they bring. But at this point, she really needs to give Reed a call because she was by far the best of all options Stella has at her disposal. With a runner-up being Dani and then the admin lady of the team (Mary? I think). Just because they are by far less ridiculous.

This actually makes me love her a little bit - how I dream of saying this to my boss on a daily basis.

Yeah no, I think they were very much pushing her Texan roots in the first few episodes she was in to be honest. Abortion, death penalty - they hit them all. Then I think they settled down with that stuff, and Angie Harmon was charming enough to make you kind of ignore the odd crap thing she would say every now and then. I'm kind of glad she wasn't there when Branch was - I think they would have doubled down on it and made her less of what she was. She was big on personal responsibilty for all - witnesses, defendants, bloody stupid jury forepersons. I appreciated that more than anything.