TimetravellingBW

Just finished s1 and the book, and working my way through s2. I'm with everyone on the "torture porn." I didn't mind the hanging fakeout too much. (Yes logically we know they're not going to kill that many Handmaids, but the Handmaid's terror in-universe sold it for me and they can't know for sure what this regime will do to them next). And the rock punishment seemed suiting. But I lost it when they started burning Alma's hand. At that point it felt like shock value. Also - were they going to do that to all the Handmaids? Or just Alma as a warning or maybe because they knew she was June's friend? Ugh, June in the Boston Globe drove me crazy. Scraping that hammer around, turning on the lights, wandering around by the windows etc. A chilling and realistic part about last season was the constant tension in every scene and how unbelievably cautious everyone had to be. (At least most of the time). Hope they don't lose that now. I was also confused at the choice to go through the Handmaid's punishments, take June back to the Waterfords and then have her escape. We now know that Nick was engineering her rescue, but it wasn't anything to do with her being taken at the end of s1 - that was all the Guardians and Aunt Lydia. His escape plan was after she got back. So how could Nick assure June that she was going to be ok at the end of last season? Did he mean that's 'it ok you're only going to be horrifically tortured?' Was he the one who got news to Aunt Lydia that she was pregnant, which then "saved" her? It would have made more sense for her escape to have happened before going back to the Waterfords. The second episode was miles better - imo, one of the best episodes in the whole show.

I absolutely love that Rory-Emily scene, it's one of my top scenes for both those characters. I think it revealed so many layers about both of them that we don't normally see. Rory, we're so used to seeing being adored and viewed as the golden child by her mother, grandparents and the town, that it was a totally different side to see her feeling unloved and unwanted and questioning herself because her other grandparents were so brutal and disparaging. The only other time we see that vulnerability in Rory is in regards to Chris, and how he's neglected her over the years. @andromeda331 had a great post about storylines and aspects of characters that could have been expanded on, and I think that's an angle on Rory I'd liked to have seen more of. How much did Chris ignoring her impact her? Despite Lorelai's efforts did she feel unwanted or that she did something wrong that kept him away - is that why she tries to be so sweet all the time, avoids conflict and is passive-aggressive? Not to mention how that impacts her relationship with her boyfriends. And how much did her knowing she was a "mistake" [while Lorelai adored her, Rory knows that had anyone had the choice beforehand, they wouldn't have decided for Lorelai to get pregnant in high school], the pressure from her grandparents to make up for all her mother's screw ups, and being aware of how much her mother sacrificed for her growing up, impact her behaviour and need to be perfect? How much of her go to Harvard/get good grades etc. was influenced by the immense pressure she was under? A lot of that stuff is running below the surface, but it would be nice to explore it more explicitly. I'd have been a hell of a lot more sympathetic towards Rory if her s6 breakdown or even revival screw ups were framed as a culmination of years of pressure from being the "great white hope of the Gilmore clan" and knowing Lorelai put her whole life into Rory's dreams. On the Emily side, the scene and Chris's parents gave us such a contrast of how she could have reacted to Rory. While she was horribly ashamed and angry with Lorelai, she never once turned her back on Lorelai or Rory, and always wanted them in her life. Emily can be so overbearing and holds Lorelai's pregnancy over her for so long, but putting her alongside the "that child is dead to me, I will never acknowledge it ever, it ruined our family line forever" Haydens, does illustrate that her attitude of embracing Lorelai and Rory, and wanting to take care of them in every way possible -- even if it's was controlling and over the top -- is 100x more sympathetic than others in her circle. (Side note, on "things that could have been expanded on", I've always speculated that - given how much Emily values family and commits her life to Lorelai and Rory - whether she would have liked more children but for some reason just wasn't able to have more. I mean the 2.5-ish kids is the average in America, and as a woman who expected her life to be managing her husband and children, I do wonder why she and Richard only ever had one child. And there is her fairly extreme reaction in flashbacks when Straub suggested an abortion. Obviously she could have just been someone who opposed abortion in general, but it wasn't just a "no way" it was "that's horrifying, how could you even suggest that" response - if she'd wanted more children but couldn't have them, that would explain why she wouldn't even consider getting rid of a future grandchild).

Dialogue from the episode at the parent-teacher evening: LORELAI: So this AP test, what are we going to do about it huh? MAX: Well the next test is scheduled for next month, um, the 25th, Saturday at 7:00 am. [Lorelai raises her hand] Ms. Gilmore? LORELAI: Uh, where is the test? MAX: It will be given here. I don't know if that was the same test Rory took in the episode or one planned for later down the line but clearly Chilton does have some tests on weekends. And while Chilton seems to start later than SHH with all the time Rory has before school, it just seems at odds with their strict scheduling (like tests on weekends, compulsory extra-circulars and out-of-class projects) and that Rory doesn't seem to get out of school much later than the SHH kids.

Lane and Dave were one of the funniest and sweetest relationships on the whole show. He totally leapt all-in with Lane's crazy shenanigans and hiding from her mother. His scene where he read the whole Bible in one night as part of his effort to take Lane to the prom was hilarious as well. I really wished he'd stuck around, Zach was sweet but never seemed to click with Lane in the same way or be on her level. And tbh I'd find her eventual "banged up at 20 with twins" fate less depressing if she ended up with the guy who was set up as her soulmate (and was by far the best boyfriend on the show imo). Yeah, the O.C was all over the place but he was great as Seth. I was kind of surprised he vanished as well, he felt a lot like a 2000's Dylan O'Brien (comedic timing, they look a lot alike, type cast as the snarky, geeky best friend role) and O'Brien has done really well after starting out on a teen drama. So it's sad Brody hasn't gone anywhere.

In the Deer Hunters episode I think they mentioned that the test would be on a Saturday morning - so Lane wouldn't have school that day. (But still got up oddly early anyway). But so with you on Rory's schedule driving me crazy. She seems to have time to chat with Lorelai at home, have a cooked breakfast at Luke's and hang out with her friends all before her 30+ minute bus ride. She must be getting up at like 5am to get all of that done. Any normal high school student would roll out of bed 15 minutes before the bus was due. Especially as Rory and Lorelai allegedly hate early mornings! And half the time you've got Lane, Jess and Dean leaving for school at the same time Rory is - even though Stars Hollow High is a 3 minute walk away. And I can't believe the super-academic, rigorous Chilton starts like an hour later than SHH.

Exactly, I've no doubt the revival was a success for Netflix financially but that was based on the hype of the original series, not the revival itself. Feedback for AYITL has been mixed to horribly negative. So while more optimistic fans might still watch the first few episodes, it's going to be way less than the numbers for the revival, and if the quality/characterization/writing is as crap as last year then there's going to be a big drop off. I'd be way more hopeful if someone else other than ASP was writing it. Hell, at this point I'd be more excited about the writers from s7 coming back, they had a lot of missteps but at least they don't actively enjoy pissing off their audience and telling them they're interpreting the show "wrong." Even if ASP does come back, Netflix needs to be a lot more hands on with/executive meddling to counterbalance her and Dan's....lesser impulses. (Like y'know, maybe suggesting that a 20 minute musical isn't the best of ideas). That basically sums up all of my worries about what s2 would look like. Two of the biggest ongoing arcs of the show - the Luke/Lorelai Will They Or Won't They and the Emily/Lorelai struggle - are concluded, and I have zero interest in them ruining that to add more drama. (I don't want to see L/L split up yet again so Luke can pine for a while and pull some undeserved romantic gesture to get her back. Or Emily and Lorelai having another screaming match about Lorelai running away at age 16 Just Let. It. Go). And yep, while Rory's story has been left totally wide open she's so unlikable now I can't get behind her being the main focus of the show. (And her character always played second fiddle to much stronger personalities anyway). And hardly anyone's excited about the pregnancy plot. Plus as discussed above, it doesn't look like Milo will be coming back so that eliminates possibilities of a Jess/Rory romance. Given Jess is still pretty popular and one of the few characters not ruined by the revival, losing him isn't going to help with getting viewers. And good luck trying to hype people up about Logan now. I mean maybe if they gave more stories to secondary characters? But Bonnie and Melissa won't be coming back as regulars, so no Paris or Sookie. Lane, Michel and Kirk are about the only hopefuls, but that's not enough for a whole show. The revival was designed to be a one-time thing - it was amazing they got so many returning cast members as it was - ASP had the chance to conclude everything well and she blew it. (For the fans anyway). They needed to tie up the loose ends and fix the screw ups from the original series, not open up a whole new mess of problems. Unless ASP drastically changes her outlook - unlikely given she had 10 years to look back on the original show and doubled down on the least popular aspects - a s2 is only going to make things worse imo.

Rory's ultimate problem imo was she was so passive. A lot of characters could be frustrating and unlikable but were strong-willed and proactive so whether you liked their behaviour or not, they were at least engaging. Lorelai, Emily and Paris are the most obvious examples: They did some not-so-nice things and were seriously flawed but carried it off with the force of their personality. (Lorelai may be self-absorbed and stubborn, but she achieved a lot and was interesting because of it, Paris is totally ruthless but you root for her because she works so damn hard). Whereas Rory came across as rather weak and insipid and rarely made her own decisions. Her flaws were less easy to forgive because she's not compelling outside of them. It's interesting to me that she surrounds herself with much stronger characters (like her mother and grandmother, sticking with Paris, her relationships with Jess and Logan) and basically feeds off them. I think it's why so many people blame or praise Jess or Logan for her actions - her behaviour is so dictated by whoever she's with. With Lorelai and SH she played the perfect daughter, with Paris and Chilton she got more competitive and driven, with her grandparents and Logan she was spoiled and comfortable with the elite lifestyle. I struggle to recall times she was driven by some internal strength rather than reacting to others. Maybe academics in early seasons, but it was partly competing with Paris and her journalism/Harvard dreams seemed heavily influenced by Lorelai. About the only thing she seems passionate about on her own is reading and literature. Honestly it's fascinating that she inherited so much from Christopher after all: A similarly weak character who never really figured out what he wanted or how to get it, spent years wandering aimlessly and clung to Lorelai's much stronger personality since he was young. Rory ends up more "like father, like daughter" than like her mother. (Which puts her final scene with Chris in a rather different light, albeit probably not on purpose, as ASP wants us to believe Rory is Lorelai 2.0).

Funnily enough I didn't mind Rory's early break downs, because they felt like reasonable reactions for what she was going through and she pulled herself together afterwards. A lot of teenagers would crack at the teasing and workload she dealt with at Chilton and most students have some meltdown or other during their first year of college. Rory's struggles humanized her more than if everything had gone perfectly, and she was sympathetic because she pulled herself up again. But with Mitchum her reaction was totally out of proportion and she didn't learn from it. Maybe if she'd struggled more during s5 (Mitchum, her classes, YDN fitting in with Logan's friends) and built her to her dropping out to reevaluate her life. Instead it was: Things are fine --> Receives one piece of criticism --> Commits a felony/drop out completely --> Lazes around being adored by Logan's friend and the DAR with no introspection for months. The YDN editorship and Vice-President were the two biggest examples of Rory getting things she didn't deserve or even aim for. Her academic achievements we at least see her working for and wanting very badly, so I don't resent them. (Though Paris should have got Valedictorian). But too many other things just fall into her lap. Bahaha, I complain about GG so much I have to ask if I ever enjoyed it. But honestly, I wouldn't still be dissecting the characters and trying to fix everything if the show hadn't been good in the first place. It's a sign of how great the early seasons were (mostly 1-4) that I still care about the characters and am invested in their stories even after years of terrible writing. There are a lot of shows that didn't end develop nearly as badly but I gave up on out of disinterest. GG may drive me crazy, but it's still got wonderfully complex characters and my early love keeps me going :D That's always why I come back to Luke and Jess as well: They brought out the best in Lorelai and Rory. While Lorelai was self-absorbed with whoever she dated and bossed Luke around, he was good at keeping her grounded, called her out on her bullshit and actually enjoyed snarking with her. (Keeping Lorelai on her toes is pretty essential if you want to date her). And on the flipside she was good for him, got him to lighten up and not isolate himself. With the exception of the s6 toxic mess and their flat dynamic in the revival, it's obvious they enjoy the whole "Lorelai babbles and Luke grumps about it" routine and it works for them. Imo the two most telling exchanges about their relationship are Luke building her an ice rink because he doesn't like seeing her sad even though he's Mr Grumpy Grumps, and Lorelai sending Luke off camping only for him to admit he likes her dragging him along to her shenanigans. They're not perfect but imo they're very compatible and enjoy being together, even if they bicker on the surface. With Jess, there's a pattern of him bringing out the best in Rory, especially when she's at her lowest. (Triggering her returning to Yale, breaking her writers block etc.) I might be in a minority here, but think he had a positive impact on her in s2 and 3, even when their actual relationship was a mess. Unlike literally everyone else in her life, he wasn't blind to her flaws and called her out on them. (E.g. questioning whether she's too sheltered to be a foreign correspondent, pointing out she was in the wrong for kissing him and running). At the same time he was still supportive and truly believed she was capable of achieving her goals and unlike Dean wasn't threatened by having such an intelligent girlfriend (there was a lot of tension from Dean about her Harvard plan, while Jess stepped back and let her make that call herself). Basically Jess managed to rare feat of being realistic about Rory's strengths and weaknesses, but not turning on her whenever she screwed up. Too many people in her life idolized her and then couldn't deal with it when she failed (Lorelai, Richard & Emily, Stars Hollow residents). I also think it was important that Rory first began bucking expectations because of Jess. Her remaining friends with him over everyone's objections and standing up to Lorelai over the car crash, was pretty significant in learning to become her own person separate from her mom. Yes it was uncomfortable for Rory at the time and she didn't deal with it well, but it was necessary. And unlike her rebellious, "finding myself" period with Logan, her choices regarding Jess weren't destructive or impacting her life negatively. She was still focused on school and hobbies, didn't change herself for him, kept close relationships with her family and friends, and was secure in herself. The worst Jess-related consequence was missing Lorelai's graduation (which wouldn't have happened if she'd picked literally any other day to rebel and see him) and the break up with Dean. (And tbh that split was always going to happen, whether it was because of Jess, her leaving for college or meeting another more compatible guy down the line).

Bahahaha. I don't even want to imagine what would come out if ASP and Julian Fellowes co-wrote a show. I would have thought the scene was highlighting how little Chris knew Rory and just saw her as a Lorelai clone, if not for headmaster Charleston making similar comments. (His "you've always been internally stronger than everyone else" compliment and comparing her to Lorelai). The show really wants us to believe Rory is this driven, empowered heroine whose genius and talent just isn't ~appreciated properly~ (To be fair on Charleston, high school Rory was more independent and happier to go against the flow compared to most Chilton students, and he watched her go up against bullying, isolation and catching up years worth of schooling to top her class. So that comment about 16/17 year old Rory lines up - but not for 32 year old Rory). Ultimately both men's comments and comparisons with Lorelai were obviously driving towards the "full circle, like mother like daughter" ending. We're meant to believe Rory is Lorelai 2.0 in order to justify her ending up in exactly the same situation as her mother and implied to deal with it in the same way. (Her "can't ever quit you" relationship with Logan, seemingly not wanting to tell the father and raise the baby alone). Unfortunately Rory is much limper and weaker than Lorelai ever was, and revival Rory would be much more likely to turn up at Logan's demanding a house, full time nanny and private jet to support them rather than run away to raise her baby in a potting shed. (And as covered a lot here, trying to fit Logan/Rory into the Lorelai/Chris mould of being unable to either quit or commit to each other didn't work or mesh with their character arcs in the OS). I agree that Logan's "rebellion" against his parents didn't match up to Lorelai's. Logan bitched about them a lot but never made the total clean break and truly survived on his own like Lorelai did. Maybe if DR had written a s8, but as it is he just whined a lot through s5/6, had a brief burst of independence in s7, and was back with the family in the revival. Lorelai - for all her faults- completely walked away, abandoned all the luxuries of her upbringing, survived on her own merits, worked incredibly hard for years and built a life for her and her daughter. Logan never achieved that. I'd say he's more comparable to Chris, or even Tristan-type behaviour, where he'll rebel in small, petty ways and complain but it comes down to it, doesn't manage to truly seperate himself and make a life of his own. And in the GG's world, a lot of rich kids resent their parents/lifestyle but Lorelai is the exception in actually walking the talk and accepting the consequences of leaving that life. (Yes she later came back for Rory's tuition but that was for her daughter not her and she absolutely intended to pay it back. I have to give props to everything she achieved on her own before that).

Oh god, I'd watch because I couldn't help myself but it wouldn't be a hopeful experience. It makes me so sad because I've actually given up on a happy ending for the characters, particularly Rory. The revival had so many hopes and opportunities, and squandered literally all of them. Emily is the only character that developed, it was nice Lorelai and Luke got married but they were so lackluster for the rest of it, Rory - as discussed enough - was a total mess, and secondary characters like Lane, Paris, Logan and Jess either weren't given storylines or left hanging. I just can't go into another revival hoping anything will get concluded when chances are it will only get worse. (Luke and Lorelai split up again? Rory rehashes the L/L/C triangle with Logan and Jess? Emily and Lorelai start fighting again? Ughhhh. For ASP the characters being happy = death of the show, so it's only ever going to be melodrama. Just give it to the fans now). That said, if I heard someone else was writing another GG season I might actually feel optimistic....

I found Naomi hilarious as well, I get why she was so difficult to work with and the memoir may never get written but she was a really entertaining character. But yeah, the problem was Rory was so apathetic about about so many opportunities. Stopping working with Naomi on it's own was understandable but it was part of a pattern of Rory refusing to make an effort with anything: Sandee Says, grad school, Chilton, the thirty-something gang, the Lines piece, she even seemed to get tired of the Gazette. And a lot of those were chances other people would kill for. And seriously ASP, GG is a show made for pretty bow tying and happy endings: In the OS Rory was practically the town princess, and achieved an unrealistic number of goals from Ivy League acceptances, student VP and editor of the YDN. And Lorelai did a riches-to-rags-to-riches fairytale story (complete with questionable finances, home ownership and business success), and lived in a town that is literally referred to as living in a snow globe. Not to mention ASP's take on how the elites apparently live in the stratified social classes of 19th century Europe. This was never a show that was gritty and serious - it wan an idealized, romanticized version of life. You can't turn around at the last minute and change your mind. Know your audience, or for that matter know your freaking genre. That bit really stuck out to me too and I wish they'd explored it more in the original series. Framing Lorelai as something of a weirdo and misfit growing up totally changes my perception of her and makes her much more sympathetic. Based on the OS it seemed like she'd been just as popular and adored growing up as she was as an adult in Stars Hollow. (The episode where she hung out with the Chilton mom's and they fawned over her comes to mind). It felt like she chose not to fit into that upper class life rather than not being able to. But Lorelai growing up being teased and looked down upon by her peers because she's "loud and weird" utterly changes that. It makes her finding a home and friends with the weirdos in Stars Hollow much more heartwarming and her discomfort with her parent's world more about insecurity rather than petulance.

Exactly. The biggest problem with the cheating and why I have zero sympathy for Rory and Logan is there was no justification or even exploration of why they were having an affair. While cheating is problematic, good writers can still make the characters sympathetic if they explain why they're acting this way. ASP could have at least provided a perspective and understandable motivation for their actions. But there was no insight from either of them. And as said, GG isn't a show where the audience will buy wild passion as enough justification for cheating. Any of @andromeda331's suggestions would be good: Tie Rory's motivation with losing Richard and needing security, tie Logan's perspective to how he ended up trapped back with his family and Rory reminds him of wanting to be independent again. They even could have excluded Paul and Odette altogether, but - if they wanted to justify why Rory and Logan weren't properly "together" or compatible long term - made it clear they were using each other as coping methods and escapism. Using the other to avoid dealing with their issues (Rory's grief and career, Logan's job and family). It could have ended with a genuinely heartwarming situation where they acknowledge they can't use each other as outlets anymore but push each other to move on and change their situations. But that's too mature for ASP. Yes to all of this. The only justification we do get for why Rory and Logan "have" to cheat is the bizarre *dynastic plan* line. Which as everyone has pointed out, does not work in a 21st century setting. It feels like some kind of Tudor Court/Game of Thrones/Titanic/Medieval Romance mash up. These forced marriages just don't exist these days, not even in the elite circles. The most Mitchum could do is cut Logan off, but as @dubbel zout pointed out there are still ways for Logan to get around that - like getting an actual job. And it would be x10 easier for him than normal people thanks to his background and position. Even in the original series, I could never buy Logan's *there's one door and I'm being pushed through it* spiel. He could easily have found a way out. He was at college and seemed to have access to an almost unlimited supply of Huntzberger money. Instead of throwing it at crazy-expensive LDB events, he could have saved money and used the four+ years of College to explore what kind of career he wanted to go into, and used his families' connections to break into it. (Like, y'know what normal people go to college for). That way if he graduated and announced "hey Dad, I'm going to be a writer/firefighter/gardener/accountant/toy shop owner/IT specialist rather than go into the family business" and Mitchum still cut him off, he'd have a career and savings to fall back on, and could live his own life. (Hell, he could probably put a deposit on an apartment with Huntzberger leftover change or the cost of just one the LDB events. Even if his parents withheld his trust fund/allowance he could have been in a much better financial situation than 90% of his peers if he planned in advance). Instead he did nothing for 5 years except waste money partying, getting drunk and crashing yachts and then complained he was being forced into a job. You can't have it both ways Logan: If you want to be a normal "free" person then you'd have to get a job anyway (and one probably a lot harder than a cushy position at Daddy's company). Or if you're going to live off your family fortune then yeah you're dependent on your parents. (Granted Mitchum was a major ass and horrible to Logan, but given Logan showed no initiative in doing something with his life it's not surprising Mitchum was trying to control his future). I know it wouldn't have been entertaining for the show to go into the details of Logan's financial situation "Oh look, an episode where Logan sets up a separate bank account" but the problem was Logan's "entrapment" fell apart on a practical, logical level. While it's not ASP's job to teach lessons, I think there's something to be said for not taking ASP and DP's messages lying down but calling them out for romanticizing poor behaviour. (Cheating, fat-shaming, racism etc.) And because it's a show that mirrors reality we do bring in society's values and standards when judging the characters.

Ugh, so with you on the "life isn't like that" condescending front and - aside from being hugely hypocritical given GG has always been an idealized, shiny version of the world - it's not like life doesn't come together in some ways. People reach satisfying stages of their careers, they settle down into steady relationships and overcome personal baggage. But like you said Rory's life was a mess on every front and none of it pulled together: By the end she still had no career, no relationship answers and hadn't learned from her mistakes. ASP could have brought her to a somewhat conclusive point and still left some ambiguity. Rory could have given up on journalism, started a new career teaching at Chilton/writing her book and settled down permanently near Stars Hollow (fulfilling the "life isn't perfect/go the way we want" quota) and still had the shock pregnancy ending. That way fans at least got answers to part of her life. Alternatively, they could have cut out the pregnancy ending but still left her relationship status ambiguous. They could have had more explicit Rory/Jess hints: Have scenes with them reminiscing, hanging out, talking about books, the actors playing it more romantically, Rory gazing at Jess etc. before he had his longing look. (Bonus: It makes Jess look less pathetic and isn't as out of the blue). End with them dancing together at Luke and Lorelai's wedding or something, so it's more obvious. That way the show still ends on a question mark for Rory, she doesn't just neatly end up with a guy with her life all tied up but it's at least a more hopeful ending on the relationship front. (And doesn't end with her bogged down in cheating drama with an engaged guy). Preferably this version of events would involve some guilt and reform on Rory's end. I'm glad I'm not the only one who disliked the Wild storyline! It was disconnected from GG world and out of character. Yes Lorelai's story about Richard was beautiful and it was good getting some insight with her talking to the other women but the process was inorganic. (Right down to her being a book rather than movie person). Jeez, if Lorelai was going to go on some journey of self-discovery it would be a roadtrip of the best coffee places across America. (Idk, she tries all these different coffees and realizes that Luke's coffee is the only stuff she wants and that's her big realization moment?? Super corny, but at least in character and relates to the show). And I felt disconnected from her big monologue about standing still because it was to these random women we never met. I didn't care about those lives and them bonding with Lorelai. It would make more sense in a conversation to a known character - Michel, Emily, Rory, Sookie, Lane, hell even Kirk. I agree Lorelai not being able to say anything about Richard would have been better than her awkward stories. (Which didn't really fit their relationship or the back story anyway). And imo Lorelai would have been more sympathetic if she didn't spend ages trying to escape saying anything. She could have literally just woken up as Emily asked her for a story, was disconcerted, on the spot and couldn't think of anything. Instead she spent 5 minutes trying to sneak away when she had time to think of something. (Plus the scene gave the audience 5 minutes to remember things she could say and get annoyed). Not being able to produce something in 20 seconds is understandable - a few minutes not so much. It made Lorelai look horrible that she had the energy to plot her escape but not pull up a memory of her father. And her "mistake" seemed more deliberate and actively anti her parents.

It's implicit, As you said Logan was a cheater - and therefore a liar as well. He lied to his future wife about the fact he was sleeping with another woman. That's a pretty major lie in my book, I don't know about anyone else. Yes, it's possible Logan and Odette had some open relationship system but nothing indicated that was the case. (Logan was going to put Rory up in a hotel with all the connotations of having a secret mistress, was uncomfortable when his Dad found them and went out onto the balcony to avoid Odette while he was on the phone with Rory). That's continual dishonest and underhand behaviour. I really don't see how being "straightforward" with Rory about the terms of their sex matters when he's that dishonest to the woman he's promised to spend the rest of his life with. Honestly, I can't not get bothered about it. Sure the impact of empathizing with Odette is lessened because we never see her. But she still exists in universe. Logan and Rory are still cheaters and liars and acting horribly, just because they have more screentime and are known characters doesn't cancel out the wrongness of their actions imo. It might mean we cut them more slack or try to understand their perspective more than an objective situation with two unknowns, but they're still doing a despicable thing. Yes Rory and Logan are fictional so their actions obviously aren't as serious as real people's (as discussed here, you do go easier on fictional characters than in real life). But the show is still based in a realistic setting and in-universe holds up standards on honesty, cheating etc. This isn't some GoT's universe with totally different morality and outlook, GG norms are similar to RL society and expected behaviour. I"m actually curious how bad other people find the cheating. For me cheating and lying is a massive line to cross in terms of being a good or sympathetic person and people that do it - even if they're fictional - I'll judge harshly. Especially in the context of Rory and Logan with no understandable motivation. But maybe other people see it differently?

Yes to all of this. I never bought that Logan was meant to be Rory's end game precisely because their early relationship was so uneven, Rory wasn't her best self with him and he so much represented her grandparents/wealthy world while Rory seemed to need to find a way between the two sides of her. And while they were a happy couple in Season 7 there still wasn't any *they're end game/soulmates/meant to be together* indications. It was just a healthy relationship that's rarely seen on GG and largely due to DR's writing. (In contrast LL weren't always written as happy or healthy but the show constantly hinted they'd be End Game for most of the series). So imo Logan and Rogan fans were screwed over because Logan's character reverted to pre-s7 (pre-s6 even) and because the Rory/Logan relationship was much unhealthier and more toxic than s7. However even s7 never gave any guarantee or justification that they'd end up together. They had a good college-aged relationship but that didn't promise they'd be together forever or in the revival a decade later. Even taking into account s7, Rory/Logan not ending up together made complete sense on a lot of levels and for a lot of reasons. But the way it happened - Logan's characterization and their behaviour together didn't make sense in the context of s7. Basically the revival was inconsistent not because Rogan didn't end up together but because Rory and Logan's dynamic was butchered. They could have not ended up together without their relationship being so horrible Logan's development between s6 and s7 makes a lot more sense than Logan's development between s7 and the revival. Even in s5 and s6 Logan made sweeping changes in his life to accommodate Rory ("Ok, I'll be your boyfriend! All other girls gone!") and grand romantic gestures to woo her. That was present in s7. (As a whole I side-eye the whole "pure, perfect girl tames the wild playboy" thing but that's how Logan was written for all three seasons). Revival Logan is a liar and a cheater - something he wasn't even in earlier seasons - and lost all his development. (Again, I still don't think s7 Logan/Rory were set up to be end game and I'm not actually a huge Logan fan. I still have issues with some of his overall behaviour in the OS, even under DR. But he was the worst of the worst in the revival with no justification why). Yes to this too. Sometimes you're just not a good or best version of yourself around certain people. That's not on them, that's just the dynamic. And imo Rory was never her best self around Logan. She was on a downhill spiral in terms of entitlement and lacking any backbone through s5 and 6. In s6 yes she was "productive" in doing court ordered community service and admittedly the DAR which was an actual job, but she wasn't figuring out her life or making a plan or considering new career options. She was living off her grandparents and Logan and at odds with her mom. That's not a good state. And even in s7, imo she still wasn't "thriving" (as a person rather than study/job) the way she was in early seasons. As most fans comment - she was much more likable, down to earth, hard-working, dorky, humble and appealing in early seasons. She was better in s7 and her relationship with Logan was healthy, but Rory herself was still fairly entitled and out of sync with her earlier character. I also got the impression Rory and Logan were a pair who loved each other, and eventually had a good relationship at that stage of their life but it would eventually run its course/they were incompatible long term. I always saw the Chris/Logan parallel as super obvious, even before they met.. (And their conversation wasn't just "we both went to prep school" they talked about similar interests in technology, gaming (I think) and rebelling against their parents/being expelled. It wasn't very subtle). Logan ended up being a lot more dependable than Chris regarding Rory but their personalities/interests were very similar. The kiss looked pretty mutual imo and - more importantly - only happened after Jess asked if Rory had sorted things and she told him it was "all fixed." Which was an incredibly blatant "are you still with the guy?" Rory chose to imply she wasn't with Logan anymore and - as Jess pointed out - turned up alone, acting like she was single. Rory 100% led Jess on there and he was right to be pissed off. That's a crappy thing to do, especially to a guy whose been hung up on you for years. If Rory didn't want Jess to think she was into him then freaking mention you're still with your boyfriend when he asks.