txhorns79

I think Dean wasn't a particularly well developed character to begin with. His role seemed to essentially be "Rory's boyfriend." Once he lost that title, he really had no purpose. And while I don't mind the actor, it wasn't like either he or Alexis Bledel were lighting up the screen with their passion for the other. The comments about Dean coming off as angry and possessive are spot on.

I thought the juxtaposition between Chalky and Van Alden's deaths were almost too much. Chalky was given an almost Harrow like send off (which truly was the most touching death this show has done), while Van Alden died liked he had lived for the past few seasons, an almost farcical death. I just figured that Chalky had to do what he did because his only choice was kill Narcisse, but get Daughter and Daughter Jr. killed, or let them go and die himself. He couldn't let another of his children die in service of his goals. It's sad that the only way to give some of these characters closure seems to be to kill them.

I think it is more like denial, which is a very powerful thing and pretty darn common amongst many people. It has little to do with mental acuity. For example, in my life, I've seen very intelligent people who, when dealing with a loved one who is clearly dying, will deny what is happening. They will then treat the whole situation as though it is not happening. They will act as though their loved one, who is very elderly and has multiple deteriorating conditions, will soon return home and be fine. Rory had, in some ways, become a lot like the people she wrote about, but I doubt she would ever want to admit to herself she had become like those people. Heck, look at the way her mother reacts when she has to deal with people from "that world." I doubt Rory would want to think she was included amongst that bunch. That does seem plausible, but I guess I would ask why it was needed at that point. I think Marty had not appeared for two seasons when he was reintroduced.

The bleeping is absolutely bizarre to me. I don't understand how that language was appropriate for network television 15 or more years ago, but is too much for basic cable. If it was strong sexual content, I might see the justification, but if the point of the episode was to show some kind of bigotry, bleeping out the language ruins it.

I can't believe I'm doing this, but I'll defend Lorelai a small bit on that. If I remember right, she thought Traci Lords had told Emily about Sookie's pregnancy, and went to a crazy place where she believed Traci would be reporting what was happening with Lorelai to Emily. I'm not justifying Lorelai's actions, but I understood her thought process on that one.

Perhaps it is like January Jones. She is perfect as Betty Draper, but has been terrible in other roles. I would agree that I've been less impressed with Lauren Graham as time has gone on. After seeing her in Parenthood, I feel like her acting range is much more limited than I originally thought. Her character on that show has an entirely different background than Lorelai Gilmore, but I feel as though she plays the character exactly the same. As to plotting, I think there were some overall arcs that ran through the early seasons, particularly getting Lorelai from daydreaming about owning an inn, to making that a reality. Otherwise, I would agree that the storylines could be somewhat haphazard.

You are entirely right. I never understood what they were trying to do with Rory in her relationship with Logan. You would think she would have been a lot more empathetic with Marty, or at least realized that Logan and his friends weren't people she wanted to associate with.

In fairness, unless you attend the school, or have some kind of specific knowledge as to that one university, you aren't going to know either way whether sophomores live in the dorm or not, so I can't really fault them over such a small point. At least for me, it doesn't seem like all that big a deal on a show where we are supposed to believe Kristina is running a school.

That might be entirely true for your own dealings, but there was nothing in the episode to suggest the menu was coming from the client. As it was, it appeared that Lorelai was suggesting foods for the party, and Sookie disregarded those suggestions. Otherwise, I think the later conversation between Sookie and Lorelai at the party would have been much different. I did think it was odd that Sookie seemed to become more immature as the series went on. Perhaps that came from hanging around with Lorelai.

I'm not certain that is how it went down. I recall Lorelai and Sookie discussing the party, with Lorelai suggesting to Sookie which foods she prepare. I don't recall that it was suggested the client had specifically asked for those foods. Instead, it was Lorelai making the assumption because it was a party for children. I could be wrong, but I don't think the issue was Sookie willfully disregarding a specific client requested menu. That would be a much bigger deal. Rather, it was Sookie not understanding what kind of food children would eat, and nearly wrecking the party because of that.

I think that may just piss her off. Hank doesn't have a diagnosis, and we really have no idea why their relationship didn't work. It feels like that would be a way for him to retroactively excuse whatever he did, while she gets left on the hook for her behavior. One thing I find interesting is that Amber doesn't really seem to be considering that Ryan can make things very difficult for her if he wanted to. It's his baby too, and he can easily go to court to establish his rights, custody arrangements and a visitation schedule, whether she likes it or not. I would agree that Ryan is not in the best place to be a parent, but I did feel like Amber just showed up at his house, dumped all this information on him and did a whole emotional hit job where she vacillated between "we can do this together!" and "you and I both know that you can't do this right now." I didn't think that was particularly fair to him.

In fairness to her, it isn't as though she told him to break up with Sarah. She just said that Hank had to be focused on Ruby when Ruby was with him, and to not have Sarah around when Ruby was over. I could agree that her demand is somewhat over the top, but Hank is pretty disengaged with his daughter, and it seems obvious that he has to dramatically change his focus and work on his parenting, which would mean his girlfriend should take a backseat temporarily.

I think it would have been extremely cruel for Rory to leave in the same manner her mother did, complete with a "Dear Emily and Richard"-style letter. Rory knows what happened with her mother, so I can't imagine she would try to recreate that moment for her grandparents. I'm not saying Rory wasn't thoughtless and rude, but I suppose you could also say Emily was close to going off the deep end (complete with slipping and confusing Rory for Lorelai), so it did not make much difference in the grand scheme of things.

In the movie, the Crosby-like character abandons his son after his father catches him trying to sell off the father's prized antique car to pay his gambling debts. I want to say the father agrees to pay the debt, but wants the son to settle down and take a normal job. The son refuses, leaves his kid with the grandparents and flees. Though I would say the character of Crosby is nothing like that particular character was in the movie. If I remember right, that character was more of a drifter who gambled and invested in get rich quick schemes. Here, Crosby may be immature at times, but he also has a business, is married and has two children. I can't imagine for a moment that he would abandon them, particularly without any real reason. I agree, but I think this is a very Amber thing to do. Her decision making hasn't exactly shined in the past (applying only to Berkeley despite having so-so grades, getting into a relationship with her boss on that campaign Kristina was running, blowing up her job with Julia by doing drugs and being generally unreliable, etc.), so for her to suddenly drop everything and drive for hours to see Ryan seems to fit her pattern. However, I'd also say that this was not emergency surgery, and Zeek wasn't under imminent threat of death. In this case, the risk of complications was very low, and while I understand the worry and concern, it wasn't a situation that had to be treated as though Zeek's chance of death was equal to that of his being fine.

I wanted Cyrus to ask why someone who looks like they are in their mid to late 30s is in a position where they have to hook their way through business school. That's nothing against Matthew Del Negro, but it felt like that cover would be more plausible for someone ten years younger. And I can't even start with how naive Cyrus seems in this plotline. I mean, this is the same guy who arranged to have someone killed when they got in his way, so that he can't see what is going on here is just incredible. I thought the NRA guy made some comment about the law actually passing? Though it is totally ridiculous that the Attorney General is the person arguing the case in front of an appeals court.

Well, unless she lacked a head for most of the series, I'm sure she realized that her grandparents weren't supportive of premarital sex. After all, she saw what it did to her mother's relationship with her parents. She may have just been surprised at how openly Emily and Richard were going to insert themselves into her sex life. I would agree that in their house, Rory should have been respectful of their views, but otherwise, it's not really their business.

I thought the episode was kind of a mess. There was too much going on during this episode, when I thought just keeping it on Zeek and the family reactions would have been better. I will say there are way too many other main characters on the show who barely get a line during an episode for the writers to give so much time to a side character and his problems. I'm not going to pretend the Bravermans are always fascinating, but Hank's essentially on another show, barely connected to everyone else by Sarah. There's no reason to dedicate so much time to his relationship with his daughter. And yes Hank, you are a really terrible parent. And while I don't think Ruby was "pawned off" on Sarah, Hank could at least pretend he has an interest in his daughter. It seems pretty obvious to anyone that he doesn't, and it isn't surprising Ruby acts out in reaction to that. And damn writers, decide what you want for Joel and Julia, and stick to it. I'm also not really sure why the Crosby motorcycle accident was necessary for the episode. It felt like someone realized the episode was running short and just threw that in to make up the time.

Miss Patty would obviously be a nymphomaniac. Paris might have borderline personality disorder, combined with daddy issues.

She definitely has her moments. For me, one of the worst moments of the series is Sookie and Lorelai disrupting Fran's funeral procession so they can make a play for the Dragonfly property. I mean, the whole thing is just so mind-bogglingly inappropriate and wrong, but it's played very cutesy.

Honestly, I had no idea who that was until it was mentioned here. The Lindsay Lohan/Amanda Bynes/Bryan Singer connection seems to me what they were going for. And did anyone notice that Paul from The Wonder Years (who I think is now an actual attorney) was playing the perp's lawyer at the end? It took me a moment to recognize him, but that was definitely him. And I, like many others here, rolled my eyes at "Noah is in the ER!"

I agree. Given doo-wop's heavy association with black culture, they could be referring to black people, but it is never clear because we never get to see the people to whom they were referring. Obviously, there are a number of cringe-worthy gay jokes sprinkled throughout the series, so it isn't as though you could claim the writers or showrunners had some kind of heightened sensitivity regarding those kind of comments.

I'm right there with you. It's a terrible scare, but in no way was Lorelai's behavior justified.

I can imagine your child dying shortly after birth could undo even the strongest person. Childbirth takes a lot out of a person to begin with, and it is possible Mabel was already depressed due to postpartum depression, made significantly worse by her child dying. So in her mind, the child dying was confirmation she's a horrible mother and she sees nothing beyond that darkness. Having said all that, I agree that the 1897 version of Mabel seems insufferable, but perhaps she came off differently to other people. And I really enjoyed both Margaret and Gillian tonight. Margaret was all kinds of awesome in that boardroom, and I will say I felt Gillian's terror in her sheepish attempts to declare herself cured, and the dread she must be feeling as to what that doctor is going to do to her.

I want to say Michel makes a comment very early in the show about wanting to look good for the ladies, but he essentially becomes an asexual character at some point. Maybe the network or perhaps the writers themselves figured it would be easier if the issue was never dealt with. I get ya. My thought was that Lorelai would never present that kind of bill in the first place. She would cut something from Sookie's costs and present what she thought would be a reasonable bill.

I doubt it has been disregarded. Dash's spell is probably strong enough to block her abilities until some time next season when twu wuv makes her see the truth. (That's not a spoiler, I just don't view the show as that creative on this point.) And it goes without saying, but who can't love a goofy scene where one guy hold another's head while telling him to let go and open his mind to him. And so a thousand fan fictions were born!