jaytee1812 February 16, 2015 Share February 16, 2015 The finale will probably be an epic fail but the show could do worse than focus on the Original Five as a conclusion... And forget about Blam... Never gonna happen. I wish they would though, it would be fitting. Link to comment
fakeempress February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I have to say, with these spoilers, the Paleyfest event just got more interesting. I wonder if there'll be any references to the finale allowed there. Edited February 17, 2015 by fakeempress Link to comment
SadieT February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Wait, Santana and her mother are both singing on a song about sex? Fair enough, it still the most inappropriate mother/daughter song. Mothers and daughters singing inappropriate songs about sex is kind of a tradition for this show, remember Rachel and Shelby sang Poker Face together upon first meeting. No one really pays attention to anything but the chorus in I'm So Excited though so it's not really a big deal. Link to comment
tom87 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I have to say, with these spoilers, the Paleyfest event just got more interesting. I wonder if there'll be any references to the finale allowed there. Probably no writers or producers will show up and the cast will have to pretend like they do not know what order the last 2 episodes will be shown in. Edited February 17, 2015 by tom87 Link to comment
fakeempress February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Have there been Paleys for a show without any TPTB though, especially for the send-of? Link to comment
Cranberry February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 What the hell do they think they're doing with this 2009 episode at all, let alone as part of the finale? (Our finale liveblog thread is going to be so much fun, I can tell.) 5 Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 The 2009 ep is a ridiculous idea without Finn, but without the UHT or Mike it's even more stupid. At this rate the finale will be a race to see how many characters they ruin in under 90 minutes. 2 Link to comment
Myrna123 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I suppose there's part of me that's relieved almost all of the stupidness that will be the tepid, unearned, finally-out-of-our-misery end of Glee has been revealed. It can get stupider, of course, but not by much. Maybe instead if the Tony Awards, seven years in the future they'll be the Berry Awards on account of how Rachel Berry has revolutionized the world of theater; Sue will be Grand Poobah of the Intergalactic Federation and, in one final meta nod to the audience who indulge in fanfiction, Kurt will be mpreg and craving pickles. Soooooo funny... 1 Link to comment
Sara2009 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 You know what the best/worst part of all of this is? " Pony" will be the last song. Link to comment
shantown February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I kind of like "Pony" being the last song. This show is so far off the rails they might as well go for a completely nonsensical, unemotional ending. If they were going to do some bittersweet goodbye type of thing it would never live up to expectations and people would end up being more disappointed. If they're going to burn the whole thing down I'd prefer they pee on the ashes rather than sell me an urn. Link to comment
Sara2009 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I actually think it could be a cool episode, but I'm probably alone in that. Link to comment
SevenStars February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I actually think it could be a cool episode, but I'm probably alone in that. I think so too and it was the only episode I have been looking forward to since the spoilers started coming out for it. But I didn't want it for a finale. Link to comment
caracas1914 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 "2009" is such a FUCK YOU to some shippers.... thought of course I don't trust Ryan and company. Link to comment
Sara2009 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 "2009" is such a FUCK YOU to some shippers.... thought of course I don't trust Ryan and company. To which shippers? Finchel? Other than that, I don't think we have enough info to say which shippers( if any) will get screwed over. Link to comment
caracas1914 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Considering Samchel, samcedes, and Klaine did not exist then ,yes, its a big fuckyou. Finchel is another story and if addressed inevitably bittersweet and sad. Link to comment
ChaChaSlide February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Please correct me if i'm wrong, but when y'all say "Pony" will be the last song, are we talking By Ginuwine?! If that's the case, I propose a new term: "riding the pony", meaning driving what was once a hit show so deeply into the ground that it is impossible to revive or even recall fondly years later. Synonym: Jumping the sharkX1000000000000000000 2 Link to comment
Sara2009 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Considering Samchel, samcedes, and Klaine did not exist then ,yes, its a big fuckyou. Finchel is another story and if addressed inevitably bittersweet and sad. Is it a big FU if it doesn't actually retcon the series, though? We know so little about this episode. Link to comment
spiritof76 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Ok. It wasn't just me! I was thinking the Ginuwine song too! That's the only song named Pony I know. Is there another one? Link to comment
Agent Dark February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Jesus Christ on a crack (to quote a previous poster) that is awful. And it ain't Artie, Jane and Madison, it's pretty much an Artie solo, and it possibly his worst, although I fear he may do worse in this episode. I was expecting the acoustic slow version of Hey Ya (a la Scrubs). And also, yikes at the version they did do. Hmm? This cover of Hey Ya sounds basically like a straight up cover of the original to me. I'm not sure how you can say its terrible without saying the original is terrible too. I think better criticism of it would be that it *is* just a straight up cover, in that it doesn't show any musical talent in putting an original spin on it (however that is true for almost all of Glee's covers). The other thing is that Hey Ya is actually a song that is talking about the disillusionment with modern romantic relationships, and how people fall into the expectations of love that modern society shoves down our throats, and ultimately end up in unhappy and unfulfilling relationships. It's disguised in an upbeat and catchy tune, because that represents the "fake smile" so to speak that people put on in order to say "yes, I have found TRUE LOVE". It doesn't surprise me at all that Glee has probably completely missed that point, especially if this is being sung at a wedding where Kurt and Blaine are getting married.... Ok. It wasn't just me! I was thinking the Ginuwine song too! That's the only song named Pony I know. Is there another one? Maybe they're singing the theme song to My Little Pony. 1 Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Hmm? This cover of Hey Ya sounds basically like a straight up cover of the original to me. I'm not sure how you can say its terrible without saying the original is terrible too. I think better criticism of it would be that it *is* just a straight up cover, in that it doesn't show any musical talent in putting an original spin on it (however that is true for almost all of Glee's covers). Kevin McHale sounds awful, that's why it's horrible. Link to comment
phoenixrising February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I'm like 90% sure they're only doing "Hey Ya" because Heya is Heather and Naya, and the meta is worse than usual this season. I normally love Kevin's voice, but Hey Ya is terrible (but the original is too). Link to comment
fakeempress February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Considering Samchel, samcedes, and Klaine did not exist then ,yes, its a big fuckyou. Finchel is another story and if addressed inevitably bittersweet and sad. Depends. Finchel is hard to do so they'll be screwed. In an AU, Klaine though can at least set eyes on each other, Darren is supposedly in the episode. Samchel or Samcedes (could be from one to the other, Sam doesn't waste time lol) may also be on board if Sam is in the episode. If he isn't physically, he still can be a facebook/ youtube pal of Rachel's reduced to lines of text shown on screen, lol. Or - -we can get Puckberry! Edited February 17, 2015 by fakeempress Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I don't mind them doing Klaine setting eyes on each other briefly, I think that would be quite sweet. Link to comment
spiritof76 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Or - -we can get Puckberry! I could be down with that, so it won't happen. Samchel or Samcedes (could be from one to the other, Sam doesn't waste time lol) may also be on board if Sam is in the episode. If he isn't physically, he still can be a facebook/ youtube pal of Rachel's reduced to lines of text shown on screen I guess I'm not understanding the premise of the 2009 show. How could Sam be in it? He wasn't even in Ohio at the time. I can get, maybe how they can shoehorn Blaine in. At least he lived in the state, just went to a different school. I mean, it's still a stretch. Is it supposed to be a "what if" type episode? Or are we supposed to be seeing things that actually happened in 2009, but are just now being revealed? Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I actually think it could be a cool episode, but I'm probably alone in that. I don't know why you think you are alone in that. Plenty of people have said the premise sounds interesting. The complaint has been making it the series finale. I guess I'm not understanding the premise of the 2009 show. How could Sam be in it? He wasn't even in Ohio at the time. I can get, maybe how they can shoehorn Blaine in. At least he lived in the state, just went to a different school. I mean, it's still a stretch. Is it supposed to be a "what if" type episode? Or are we supposed to be seeing things that actually happened in 2009, but are just now being revealed? Here is the episode description. GLEE goes back in time to see why the original members of New Directions signed up for glee club in the first place in the all-new “2009” episode of GLEE If it hasn't changed that means the premise is they are focusing on the stories of the original 5 before the cannon of Glee began. I am guessing it will be the set in the first weeks of their sophomore year of high school. As for Blaine and Sam Blaine fans complained to Joaquin that he wasn't in this episode and Joaquin confirmed he was. It wouldn't be hard to write a small scene with him in it. My guess is it will be a near miss between him and Kurt. Like they pass each other on the street or something like that Sam is more difficult because it is going to be set in a time when he wasn't even in Ohio. Since they seem hell bent on making it seem like there was always something between him & Rachel I could easily see "Sam Evans" being the one person who leaves positive comments on her MySpace page. That way he has a presence without actually being there As for other spoilers in this episode we know Puck, Matt, Dave, and Mike? (I can't remember for sure) are in it. I assume they are the bullies they were at the beginning of the series. I still think they will have one of them play the Finn role i.e. the bully who isn't really comfortable with it and if I am right I think that will be Puck. Finally no idea how they will write around Finn. He should be hanging with the football players but obviously he won't be. They probably will completely ignore his existence like they did in "Previously Unaired Christmas" and as a Finn fan that will tick me off. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie 1 Link to comment
Sara2009 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I could be down with that, so it won't happen. I guess I'm not understanding the premise of the 2009 show. How could Sam be in it? He wasn't even in Ohio at the time. I can get, maybe how they can shoehorn Blaine in. At least he lived in the state, just went to a different school. I mean, it's still a stretch. Is it supposed to be a "what if" type episode? Or are we supposed to be seeing things that actually happened in 2009, but are just now being revealed? Tbh, we don't know. One source said it was a " what if?" episode, but the PR( that came out briefly before the episode was moved to the finale) said it was a flashback episode about why the original 5 joined the glee club. We also know that Ryan ordered re-writes while they were filming the episode. Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I don't think Mike is back, which is annoying, it's retconning his past. He was one of the bullies, he and Matt were pretty much there only as Puck's friends in season one. And they all bullied the losers. Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Yeah it will be weird to not see Mike at all as it will be not having Brittany, Quinn, and Santana in "2009." It wasn't only the jocks who bullied the underdogs. It was the Cheerios as well. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Yeah that will be weird as it will be not having Brittany, Quinn, and Santana in "2009." It wasn't only the jocks who bullied the underdogs. It was the Cheerios as well.They were much worse to Rachel, Mercedes and Tina than Puck and the football team. Mercedes says in Home the only words Quinn had said to her previously were 'you' and 'suck'. I don't get it, I mean it looks like all the actors were available. Edited February 17, 2015 by jtrattray Link to comment
Ceeg February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I don't get it, I mean it looks like all the actors were available. Heather and Naya only signed for 4 episodes. I don't know about the others, though. Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Heather and Naya only signed for 4 episodes. I don't know about the others, though. Jenna was only four episodes. But if that was the case, were they really necessary in the earlier episodes? Link to comment
caracas1914 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I don't get the appearances anyways for the old Regulars, I mean why use Mark Salling that way as a throwaway appearance in the 4 episodes they did use him? I suspect FOX insisted they use the older characters and RIB did the bare minimum to comply with that request. Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 The cast for 2009 just goes to show how stupid this show is. So you only have Naya, Heather Dianna and Harry for a certain amount of episodes. Surely you put them in 2009 and then see what other episodes they can be used in. But no, Glee's big gay wedding and Rachel's pity party are bigger priorities. Link to comment
Ceeg February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Eh, as a Naya and Brittana fan, I'd MUCH rather them have the focus they did in 603, 606, and 608, than have to watch them in a 2009 flashback episode. Especially since in 2009, Santana was still deeply in the closet, and Glee has always been problematic wrt Santana's sexuality, so I cringe to think how they'd retroactively write her as straight. I'm glad my faves are nowhere near this episode. ETA: Also, this episode seems like a pointless mess anyway. Like, I literally do not understand the point in rehashing or rewriting or expanding on things that happened 6 years ago. Edited February 17, 2015 by Ceeg 1 Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Eh, as a Naya and Brittana fan, I'd MUCH rather them have the focus they did in 603, 606, and 608, than have to watch them in a 2009 flashback episode. Especially since in 2009, Santana was still deeply in the closet, and Glee has always been problematic wrt Santana's sexuality, so I cringe to think how they'd retroactively write her as straight. I'm glad my faves are nowhere near this episode. I get that, but the fact is she existed at McKinley in 2009 and was a major part of the 'in crowd' that bullied the originals. I understand why you would prefer those episodes but not having her and the rest of the UT there is just bad storytelling. Link to comment
Ceeg February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I get that, but the fact is she existed at McKinley in 2009 and was a major part of the 'in crowd' that bullied the originals. I understand why you would prefer those episodes but not having her and the rest of the UT there is just bad storytelling. When has Glee ever been good at storytelling? Finn existed in 2009 too, but obviously they can't show him either. Blaine and Sam didn't exist in 2009, but I'm sure they'll be shoehorned in somehow. The whole idea behind 2009 is dumb, in general, completely separate from any casting issues IMO. What part of fandom or even the GA was clamoring for an hour-long flashback episode that has no relevance or bearing on anything happening on this show anymore? And then who decided to make that the series finale? It's just typical Glee. 2 Link to comment
SNeaker February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I don't think Mike is back, which is annoying, it's retconning his past. He was one of the bullies, he and Matt were pretty much there only as Puck's friends in season one. And they all bullied the losers. Not really? Dijon and Harry weren't in those first two episodes. They first showed up as members of the football team in "Preggers" who joined glee club along with Puck at the end of the episode after dancing helped them win a game. They all came in together, but I didn't get the sense they were Puck's lackeys.They were never shown to bully anyone. Which isn't to say they definitely never did (thought it's hard to imagine), but there's no proof of it as of now. Edited February 17, 2015 by SNeaker Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Not really? Dijon and Harry weren't in those first two episodes. They first showed up as members of the football team in "Preggers" who joined glee club along with Puck at the end of the episode after dancing helped them win a game. They all came in together, but I didn't get the sense they were Puck's lackeys.They were never shown to bully anyone. Which isn't to say they definitely never did (thought it's hard to imagine), but there's no proof of it as of now. Then why bring Dijon back? Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Matt is in the episode so I think he will be a jock who bullies the underdogs. I don't think that is necessarily a retcon because while he wasn't in that first Kurt scene that doesn't mean he never bullied them. As far as Mike he wasn't in that original group of bullies so it is easy enough to say he never got into that but I still think it will be weird not to see him at all. Same with the cheerios, especially Quinn, who was definitely at the forefront of bullying the underdogs. Then of course there is the whole Finn thing. Beyond all of that the flow of the last two episodes is still weird. To me it would make more sense to have "2009" first to say this is our past and then "Dream Come True" last to say this is our future. I assume there will be some sort of framing mechanism around "2009" but it seems to me it will be anti-climatic to have that after we see Rachel win her Tony, etc. The only way it would seem to work is to have it be one big episode but that messes up syndication. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie 1 Link to comment
indeed February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Then why bring Dijon back?To make the flashback more "authentic"? He was only in season 1, so that alone sells the time frame! They actually went to some effort to refresh peoples' memories about him this season. *That* is where they expended all their creative energies. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised by 2009 and appearances from other cast. They were available and on set, and some filming seemed to take a bit longer. They could easily sneak some appearances in. Although, not everyone can pull off looking six years younger now...but then that's what meta's for! Edited February 17, 2015 by indeed Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) The one person who really can't pull off looking 6 years younger, Mark Salling, is in the episode and yes this is one time they should use some meta. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 The one person who really can't pull off looking 6 years younger, Mark Salling, is in the episode and yes that is one time they should use some meta. He will literally be playing someone half his age. Harry could actually pull that off, yeah Mark, not so much. Link to comment
Cranberry February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I hate the idea of this episode for multiple reasons. First, it's ridiculous to do a 2009 episode without Quinn, let alone without Finn. Second, everyone looks so much older/so different now that they can't possibly be made to look like they did at the beginning of season one, and that always takes me out of the story when shows do flashback episodes. Third, they're going to shoehorn Blaine and Sam in there and almost certainly retcon other stuff, which I hate. Finally, there's no need for an episode like this as part of the finale, or even this season. This is some filler crap that you shove in when your show is in season 10 and you've got 22 episodes to fill. Link to comment
Danielle87 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I think everyone in the cast can pull off looking the same as back then with the right wardrobe and hair with the exception of Mark and Chris. 1 Link to comment
caracas1914 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 The most they can go for is a well written melancholy and maybe "hoping for a better future" type of episode, which is bizarre for a series finale. \ The "well written" part we can probably throw out the window, but the only thing I can think of is that it harkens back to why the arts matter, but that seems refuted by the fact there seems so little singing in the episode. Link to comment
jaytee1812 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Finally, there's no need for an episode like this as part of the finale, or even this season. This is some filler crap that you shove in when your show is in season 10 and you've got 22 episodes to fill. Exactly. NCIS has done a few, but they're on season 12. Also it's often used in long running series to show how people ended up in their jobs. Does anyone really not know why these people joined glee? They liked to sing, they loved the arts. It was probably their only opportunity to participate. Btw, do you think they'll remember Artie used to play the bass? Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I hate the idea of this episode for multiple reasons. I don't mind it but I am wary. First on how they will handle the Finn and to a lesser degree the other original popular kids. Even before Will blackmailed him he was a noticeable presence to the underdogs. Next on how they shoehorn in Sam & Blaine. Blaine wouldn't be hard as he lived in Ohio during that time. Give him and Kurt a near miss (they pass each other on the street or in The Lima Bean ) and Blaine is realistically included. Sam is much more difficult and I am wary that they will play up his presence in Rachel's life while ignoring Finn. Since spoilers from around the time this was filmed indicate Chord was not in the episode I could easily see them making Sam Rachel's only Myspace fan or something like that to show they always had a connection. I am also wary about it being the last episode instead of the episode before "Dreams Come True." I don't think it will flow well at all. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie Link to comment
tom87 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Are we sure there are no presents day scenes to bumper in and out the flashbacks? Blaine and Chord could be in those. Link to comment
caracas1914 February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Are we sure there are no presents day scenes to bumper in and out the flashbacks? If there is, it makes Blaine and Chord easy to incorporate but leaves them out of the main storyline. TBH, I can understand the concern of Blaine and Sam stans that two leading characters are marginalized for the series finale. As a Kurt stan, I know the feeling. And my inner Santana stan doesn't give a fuck. Edited February 17, 2015 by caracas1914 Link to comment
camussie February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) I am sure there will be some sort of framing mechanism and they could be in those but I still don't get how this will work with "Dreams Come True" already showing where everyone is 7 or so years into the future. ETA: I agree with Glorifindel. I hope there has been some sort of mistake in the episode listings because it doesn't make sense to me at all that "Dreams Come True" isn't the last episode. Edited February 17, 2015 by camussie Link to comment
Recommended Posts