HeySandyStrange

Very, very true. Yes, Lindsay wasn't very sympathetic, but I'd I see why the writers did that. Once they went forward with the seeds of the adultery, they made sure she was as flat/spoiled as possible. If I remember right, in her first appearance Rory even said Lindsay was pretty sweet but we saw none of that later. And they must have know that the adultery storyline would have been next to impossible to swallow if Lindsay was shown to be sweet, understanding, and working or going to school instead of sitting at home and complaining.

Totally agree. I wasn't expecting something at all accurate or even with very high production values. I wasn't even expecting good acting! But I think we have a right to complain if it was boring as watching grass grow. I almost think the CW would have done more for the show then E!, to be honest. They at least seem to understand camp while on E! this show doesn't seem to know what it wants to be. I'm willing to give it one, maybe two more chances and then I'm out.

Very true, and they really could have made more out of the fact Lorelai and Luke were so different. Luke did have interests, they were just of the camping/fishing/outdoorsy variety, while Lorelai was of the snarky/pop-culture variety. It didn't help either that I think the Luke of Season's 1&2, the one that was knowledgeable of things like politics and the environment, seemed to have those traits rooted out of him in the intervening years. Maybe if they had kept those parts of Luke it might've have given Lorelai and him something to actually talk about. Or have them try to understand the others interests and maybe even learn to enjoy them together. Actually, to amend what I said earlier, I will say the most compatible relationship he was in was probably with Rachel. She seemed pretty relaxed and low drama, was possibly from a similar background as Luke,and seemed like she could have been outdoorsy type as well. The big thing dividing them was that she had wanderlust and Luke was very much rooted in one place.

I don't have much opinion about Paris/Doyle, but I hold the possibly very unpopular opinion that I was (overall) okay with Lane and Zach together. I'll admit, I felt at first that the characters were thrown together when Dave left the show and it might have made more sense for Lane to go for Brian if she had to be with someone in the band. But once they advanced Zach a little past the "dumb jerk" phase to still being dim but a bit more likable and who seemed to care a lot for Lane, I was better with it. I could even tolerate the pregnancy storyline, because unplanned pregnancies do happen and in GG land it seems to be an epidemic :). I'd like to think once the twins were a little older, Lane would go back on tour, along with the twins and Mrs. Kim to keep an eye on everyone. I'm a L/L shipper, but that would have been a interesting to explore, especially during the post season 6 breakup. I also wonder why the few former romantic interests of Luke's that we know about seemed so different, background and interests wise, then himself. Heck, if he had went on a few dates with Gypsy herself, that would have been entertaining.

When you put it like that, Kohola3, I would think Lorelai would've loved having a sibling--if only to get her parents off her back. I can't help but think that if she had a brother, though, he might have been a Logan type and Rich&Em would have been willing to look the other way as well at his behavior as long as he kept up appearances.

I'd say it was a little of all those things: Emily and Richard wanted both the girls back in their lives, but they naturally gravitated to Rory. She really was a good fit with them, mostly because she wasn't rebellious, was quiet, easily impressionable, and easy-going. Rory really didn't have to many of the surface traits of a Gilmore, however Lorelai was very much her parents' child in some ways. So while imo it wasn't strictly a "do over" I'm sure on some level the elder Gilmore's were very pleased to actually have a granddaughter they could relate to. I could see that they easy way they excepted Rory would have rubbed Lorelai the wrong way, particularly because they (whether they were aware of it or not) still took pot shots at Lorelai and may have set an unfair comparison between her and Rory. I don't think they did it totally on purpose, but Emily and Richard couldn't seem to find a way to relate to Lorelai, and she didn't always try very hard either. This is neither here nor there, but I wonder how the dynamic would have changed it Emily and Richard had another child, especially one that fit better into their world? I should search for some fanfics and hope for the best lol.

That would have been interesting, but I suspect the show didn't want to deal with the potential problem of the race aspect if Ophelia was multiracial with the Queen not liking her and all. If they could make her a gold digger that we could actually sympathize with I would be impressed, that might be out of range for this show and the actress, however. I'll bet, more likely, they will go for the trope that her extended family (possibly the American side) is somehow rich/prestigious and maybe she didn't even know. Was I the only one distracted about how frozen and/or unemotional Liz Hurley's face seemed?

I did a search for "lefties in bed" and found articles indicating left-handed people are better in bed. I don't know if that pertains to Janelle or not, nor do I want that visual in my head. The bare hand thing I don't quite get, either.

Oh most definitely, Anna and April were the less charming clones of Lorelai and Rory. I would probably chalk that up to lazy writing tricks, which I guess is easier then creating completely new characters. The only real difference was that April was more serious and into science then Rory, and Anna was a colder, less likable version of Lorelai. It would have been interesting if Anna was, say, an outdoorsy or active person and maybe April was a creative girly-girl or a tomboy. But, in my possibly unpopular opinion, that was one of the shows biggest weaknesses: Any character that wasn't one of the Gilmore's or closely associated with them (Luke & Sookie, for example) was usually flat and/or underwritten.

Well I'll be darned, let it not be said that Janelle doesn't know how to plan for her future;)

I guess to me it depends on the type of control being exercised. Over how late you kid stays out, the kinds of company they keep, if they are following rules meant to protect their safety, then of course a parent need to lay down the law to their teens. But trying to control the child's way of thinking/feeling or their preferences? That is overdoing it. The elder Gilmores did the latter to an extant, not unlike Mama Kim. Plus they were still trying to control Lorelai way into her 30s, way after it was necessary. I do agree that Lorelai was nothing if not her parents child in many ways, whether she saw herself that way or not. I'm guessing that is part of the reason why ,for instance, her relationship with Emily was so contentious. They were both so stubborn and self-involved that they couldn't see things from the other's perspective.

They were also (imho) cold, critical, narrow-minded, unaffectionate, and controlling. Does that make Emily and Richard horrible parents or people? No. Did Lorelai exaggerate how terrible they were? Yup. But I can see why Lorelai might have really felt suffocated by the two. As for dating high-achieving men...I don't know about that. They did everything to get Lorelai with Christopher, based more on his background then his actual "success" in life. Yet Luke, who had his own business and seemingly plenty of money to loan out, wasn't good enough. Em&Rich were nothing if not all about the appearances of something rather then the actual content.

I have to agree with Kodi Smit-McPhee. Looking at his features, kind of odd and striking at the same time along with is lanky body type really seem like they would work for a younger Nightcrawler. My biggest bitch about X2 Nightcrawler was that Alan Cumming just really didn't fit the comic character looks wise, imo. Plus, I have heard good things about Kodi Smit_McPhee's acting so he's got them going for him to.

Maybe because there are children in much, much worse situations then living in a converted shed with all there needs being met by pretty much everyone in town? With a loving, hard-working, clean living mom? I mean, I think it is safe to assume that even in fairytale Gilmore Girls land that there might have been others who had it worse-Jess and Paris both had pretty messed up families, for instance. I'd take growing up in a shed with Lorelai to putting up with screwy, irresponsible Liz any day of the week.

In theory this almost wouldn't sound like a bad idea. I would love to see the Jenelle's of the world not to be able to pop out kids that they have no intention/capability to raise, nurture, and provide for. But I do feel that any laws that could be made to restrict the drug addicts/criminals of the world could end up fostering abuse of the entire concept. Like trying to ban people with different lifestyle's then the norm from having children. For instance, would a lesbian couple who wanted biological children be forced to go on birth control because some people making the laws didn't agree with their lifestyle and thought they would be unfit parents? Or that people with physical disabilities and mental problems shouldn't be allowed to have children despite otherwise being productive members of society? I know, it sounds extreme and almost like science fiction, but reading the news you find actually lawmakers in this country supporting very out there, extreme concepts. Sorry for being off topic and such, I just felt the other side of the equation needed to be presented. If this is too heavy and off topic for this forum (though the Teen Mom girls are the great thinkers of our time, y'all) I understand if the moderators feel the need to delete this.

 That will come when TM2 is no longer around. She (and the other TM girls) have been getting huge paychecks and fame since they were teenagers solely because they got knocked up in high school. No wonder Leah and most of the rest of them are so delusional about the real world. And you just know Leah hasn't saved a dime for rainy day, hell last I heard she owes money. That's one of the big things that pisses me off about the Teen Mom franchise in general, and Leah in particular: had I gotten those MTV paychecks at that age, I would have been in and out of college by now, kid or not. But most of them can't be bothered with that, no siree. Leah not even having the energy and fortitiude to finish beauty school is pretty sad, imho.

Speaking of Leah and freakiness...I had a dream last night in which I saw Leah in the flesh and in passing. She looked horrible, her skin was terrible and old looking, and her teeth were yellow and cracked. She looked like your typical Rocky Mountain Meth head. Which, with all the rumors swirling, isn't far off. Anyway, I was wondering how long Leah and Co. rogue beauty salon was going to go undiscovered by the authorities. You'd think they'd know that they had to be licensed before they could run a legit business.

It seemed to me, that on top of Walter being a long suffering victim of bullying, he had other problems as well. As Jessica pointed out, it was weird that he claimed to have a 40 year old friend. Whether his issues are a reflection of the bullying or other aspects of his life would be interesting to see. I would really like to see the dynamic between him and Eddie explored more, I could see them forming a tentative friendship. On the subject of physical discipline, speaking as a 90's kid, I think it is also a reflection on how times have changed. I was roughly the same as the real Eddie Huang, and things were definitely different for 70's,80's, and 90's kids. The types of discipline that was common back then are mostly frowned upon now, if not outright considered abusive. It isn't really racial or cultural either, at least in my experience, because I have heard similar things from people of different backgrounds growing up back then.

While I can understand Eddie Huang's frustration with how his writing has been toned down for tv, I'm surprised that he seems surprised that it happened. After all, ABC is not know for cutting edge programming. For that you have to go to cable tv, Netflix, or maybe Amazon now. ABC is worried about ratings and appealing to the family friendly crowd. I would love to see an honest story on tv about child abuse in an otherwise normal family, since you really don't see one that isn't on some crime show. But I highly doubt it will happen, since they didn't even hint at it once so far.

Well, that was one of the many unrealistic aspects of GG, that there seemed to be little to no middle ground between OMG Ivy Leagues! and high school graduates who usually managed to be successful. It would have been interesting to see Lane go to a 2 year college and complete some degree/career training that would set her up with a secure job, but that doesn't have the fairy tale aspect of her being in a underground band and waitressing on the side.

Wow, I think it is funny that Nipples doesn't have one positive comment on that entry. People really seem to dislike/hate him. Karma, I guess. Now if only Janelle didn't have defenders, her twitter would be worth reading.

Though the question isn't one I have pondered a whole lot, it is pretty interesting to think about. Other then what you said about the writers never taking the time to define Sookie and Luke's relationship, amensisterfriend, my head cannon would be that they both grew up in the Hollow, where possibly different ages and in different classes so they didn't interact that much, but knew each other growing up. I could image tiny bubbly Sookie annoyed the younger stoic that was Luke, and vice versa. That could've established the vague dislike that was glimpsed when one or the other was stepping on each other's toes, especially about cooking. They probably grew to respect one another from afar and slowly interacted more once they were adults and out of school. That is just my opinion, I would love to read a fanfic that explored the pre-Lorelai and Rory lives of Sookie and Luke.

That was Katie Yeager, not a dancer but one of the only girls I actually like in the whole TM mess (not just like to hate watch). She was the one most into her education, and I believe is on track to get her bachelor's in the near future. I guess TM2 success can be chalked up to the fact the girls are "characters" and tend to be full of drama, esp. Leah and Janelle.

True that. Using some of my finely tuned Medic skills, I would theorize that in the military Nathan was a top grade sick hall ranger with a chronic case of whineritis. Unfortunately those types tend to prevail the one it comes to getting military compensation. No doubt in my mind he was never a stand up guy.

I'm also no fan of Nathan's and I can't help but wonder what his real "issues" are, if any...but on the other hand (wife of a disabled Veteran here) I know for a fact they don't just hand out benefits without thorough back-checking of the person's history. You have to have records and evidence built up to help prove you have an issue, that you did see combat, etc. So one would think Nipples had something to back up his claims. And if he did exaggerate his problems, sooner or later it will probably catch up to him and the gov't will snatch those benefits away.