One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[hippielamb]

21 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I would think if you intend to be actively involved in the child's life and be a parent, it really is going to change everything.  I know it sounds cliche, but, particularly if they are younger, it can take over your life. 

It doesn't have to, particularly if they are the non-custodial parent. Luke could have seen April on the weekends like a lot of divorced dads do. I think it's honourable that he wants to be in her life. His relationship with April didn't have to be the main focus of his life, he chose for it to be. That's not a bad thing. Lorelai definitely makes Rory her number one focus. The difference is April already had Anna while Rory only had Lorelai.

3 hours ago, dustylil said:

Actually, of all the nonsense about sex in the series,  I found this to be totally believable - given their experience with Lorelai more than twenty years earlier and their inability to come to terms with all that ensued after it.

Plus, they were her grandparents. They have always treated her like the angel child. Even without considering Lorelai's history, there's not many grandparents that would be ok with their 20 year old granddaughter having sex in their home. I think it's a pretty bold move on Rory's part and very disrespectful. I guess Rory thought of the poolhouse as her apartment (that someone else was paying for).

[dustylil]

55 minutes ago, hippielamb said:

there's not many grandparents that would be ok with their 20 year old granddaughter having sex in their home. I think it's a pretty bold move on Rory's part and very disrespectful. I guess Rory thought of the poolhouse as her apartment (that someone else was paying for).

I agree. And for her to appear shocked at their attitude was absurd. How could she not know their views on the subject? Even if the subject was not explicitly discussed, she could pick up anvil-sized clues from their conversations and comments about others. Rory considered herself to be an adult and not answerable to anybody. Except when it came to paying the freight, of course. That had to come from someone else's wallet.

[readster]

23 hours ago, dustylil said:

I agree. And for her to appear shocked at their attitude was absurd. How could she not know their views on the subject? Even if the subject was not explicitly discussed, she could pick up anvil-sized clues from their conversations and comments about others. Rory considered herself to be an adult and not answerable to anybody. Except when it came to paying the freight, of course. That had to come from someone else's wallet.

See if that was the way they went with it, then I was fine with it. However, Richard and Emily acted like such a thing could not even be possible. It wasn't like they didn't know what type of person Logan was and especially after Emily gave Logan's mother the smack down on her own history and Richard telling Mitchum he crushed Rory and didn't give her needed feedback or creative criticism. Of course, the entire "angel child" was always in their heads. That's why I wanted to roll my eyes at how they didn't believe that the dinner smack down of Rory or Mitchum from what Lorelai told them. That just screamed of not only naivety, but also trying to continue to act like something in their type of society wasn't even possible. Yet, look what Richard did to Dean at dinner. Because you know, you want to say that to your "16 year old" granddaughter's boyfriend, when he is still a kid himself. But did it because he was from a "nobody family" when they turned such a blind eye to the Huntzburgers or Christopher's crap because they were from a "somebody family". Didn't make them either great or horrible people, just made Emily and Richard look like they couldn't see pass their nose. That was one thing that always got me with their characters, they never "got it!" Just like Lorelai didn't learn to stop trying to piss off her folks because she could, instead of of she she know better by now.

[elang4]

Don't know if this has been mentioned before but my UO is that I actually liked Jason. Don't get me wrong, I'm a strong L/L shipper but I did like Jason. He was witty and could keep up with Lorelai and I think his feelings for her were genuine as well. :)

[hippielamb]

On 5/26/2016 at 4:26 PM, dustylil said:

I agree. And for her to appear shocked at their attitude was absurd. How could she not know their views on the subject? Even if the subject was not explicitly discussed, she could pick up anvil-sized clues from their conversations and comments about others. Rory considered herself to be an adult and not answerable to anybody. Except when it came to paying the freight, of course. That had to come from someone else's wallet.

I think this storyline shows the evolution of Rory. In the rewatch, we are in season 3. Rory shows a little entitlement/lack of empathy when she doesn't consider what Dean's college arrangement will be but it's nothing compared to this. I think if someone had told season 3 Rory that she would have dropped out of university and stopped talking to her mom, joined the D.A.R., and was having sex with a boy at her grandparents home she wouldn't have believed you.

[JaggedLilPill]

I don't know if this really qualifies as an UO, but I always thought it was a missed opportunity that we never had Lorelai or Jess comment (separately of course) to Luke that they would be technically related once her and Luke tied the knot. 

I've never been a Jess fan, but Jess and Lorelai always had such a contentious relationship that I don't know, I guess I would have enjoyed Lorelai reacting to Jess being her nephew and Jess reacting to Lorelai being his aunt. Not that they would have necessarily spent much time together, but still. 

And seeing how Jess felt about Rory dropping out of Yale, I wonder if he would have agreed with Lorelai's decision to stop speaking to Rory.

[junienmomo]

8 minutes ago, JaggedLilPill said:

I don't know if this really qualifies as an UO, but I always thought it was a missed opportunity that we never had Lorelai or Jess comment (separately of course) to Luke that they would be technically related once her and Luke tied the knot. 

I've never been a Jess fan, but Jess and Lorelai always had such a contentious relationship that I don't know, I guess I would have enjoyed Lorelai reacting to Jess being her nephew and Jess reacting to Lorelai being his aunt. Not that they would have necessarily spent much time together, but still. 

And seeing how Jess felt about Rory dropping out of Yale, I wonder if he would have agreed with Lorelai's decision to stop speaking to Rory.

LOL, if Luke thought his sister and TJ were annoying, imagine thanksgiving with an unresolved Jess-Lorelai as Luke's wife relationship. 

I have a dream in my head of Jess, Paris, Luke and Logan teaming up to get Lorelai and Rory back together. We need a redux of Jess and Paris. 

[JaggedLilPill]

4 minutes ago, junienmomo said:

LOL, if Luke thought his sister and TJ were annoying, imagine thanksgiving with an unresolved Jess-Lorelai as Luke's wife relationship. 

I have a dream in my head of Jess, Paris, Luke and Logan teaming up to get Lorelai and Rory back together. We need a redux of Jess and Paris. 

LOL.

Right? Poor Luke. "Drop another sucker in this mess."

Bwahaha. Jess, Paris, Luke and Logan pulling a sort of Parent Trap on Lorelai and Rory would have been hilarious.

Jess and Paris were interesting in their dynamic. 

[dustylil]

4 minutes ago, JaggedLilPill said:

but I always thought it was a missed opportunity that we never had Lorelai or Jess comment (separately of course) to Luke that they would be technically related once her and Luke tied the knot. 

As Jess was living in another state and Rory was romantically involved with Logan by the time she and Luke were engaged, I doubt Lorelai cared all that much. Had I been Lorelai, I would have been far more concerned about being technically related to Liz.  She was quite gracious to Liz and TJ, even hiring the imbecilic TJ to be the faux contractor on her house renovation so he could acquire some work experience. Of course, that kindness was never returned.

[JaggedLilPill]

3 minutes ago, dustylil said:

As Jess was living in another state and Rory was romantically involved with Logan by the time she and Luke were engaged, I doubt Lorelai cared all that much. Had I been Lorelai, I would have been far more concerned about being technically related to Liz.  She was quite gracious to Liz and TJ, even hiring the imbecilic TJ to be the faux contractor on her house renovation so he could acquire some work experience. Of course, that kindness was never returned.

While it's true that I doubt Lorelai would have really cared, I could have seen her making a sarcastic comment (or two) about it. Even in season 4, you could tell there was no love lost between them. I'm not saying it would have been up there on her list of things to obsess about, but you know Lorelai and her quips. 

But yeah, Liz would definitely be the sister-in-law from hell. Add TJ to that mix and I am not sure Lorelai would be getting off so easy in the in-law department after all, haha.

[dustylil]

58 minutes ago, JaggedLilPill said:

But yeah, Liz would definitely be the sister-in-law from hell. Add TJ to that mix and I am not sure Lorelai would be getting off so easy in the in-law department after all, haha.

And Lorelai would likely have had Doula dumped on her on a regular basis. I can hear Liz whining now, "But Lorelai is so good with little girls..."

[AllyB]

Especially if Luke and Lorelai's relationship had stayed on track and they'd made a start on those 'more kids' that that they both thought sounded good. Liz would have had a perfect excuse. Oh Doula wants to spend time with her little cousin, they're so close in age, we have to make sure they're close.

Speaking of people who would have been related if Luke and Lorelai had married. When Rory met April and Luke introduced them I kept waiting for April to say, 'wow, so we'll be step-sisters.' It was the obvious next comment from her, instead she said 'you've got a nice face.' Every time I watch it I am all WTAF?!? at what a weird comment the writers put in April's mouth instead of the obvious.

[clack]

While ASP/DP can write "comedy" if we think of comedy as a tone (light, amusing), they can't write funny. Broad, laugh out loud funny. Their attempts at farcical situations and characters are painful to behold.

Kirk was bearable in small doses, but what the hell were they thinking with TJ? He doesn't work as a credible character, and he doesn't work as comic relief. He's just an annoying idiot. He does stupid, annoying things, and says stupid, annoying things. Just being stupid isn't funny. Where are the good jokes?

[junienmomo]

10 hours ago, dustylil said:

As Jess was living in another state and Rory was romantically involved with Logan by the time she and Luke were engaged, I doubt Lorelai cared all that much. Had I been Lorelai, I would have been far more concerned about being technically related to Liz.  She was quite gracious to Liz and TJ, even hiring the imbecilic TJ to be the faux contractor on her house renovation so he could acquire some work experience. Of course, that kindness was never returned.

Luke did the hiring of TJ after Liz' public crying jag in the diner and on the street. He also apologized, which Lorelai did accept gracefully after the "HOLE!" incident. Just the first of what would have been a long line of impositions on LL by Liz and TJ if they had stayed together. Luke at least got Liz' number later when she kept trying to offload Doula in S7.

[dustylil]

You're quite right, junienmomo. I was confusing that  with another time when Lorelai was encouraging  Luke to have closer ties with TJ.

6 hours ago, AllyB said:

When Rory met April and Luke introduced them I kept waiting for April to say, 'wow, so we'll be step-sisters.' It was the obvious next comment from her, instead she said 'you've got a nice face.' Every time I watch it I am all WTAF?!? at what a weird comment the writers put in April's mouth instead of the obvious.

Given how awkwardly Luke had introduced the pair  - to say nothing of the fact that he apparently had not mentioned to his daughter that he was planning to marry - I was surprised April was able to utter anything more than "Huh?". If anything, I thought Luke should have mentioned they were going to be  step-sisters, not either of the two girls.

[amensisterfriend]

Quote

1. Even outside of their great natural chemistry their relationship works so well and is wonderful compared to season 5 and 6 with Luke. It seems insane that in just a few more episodes it all ends badly.

Quote

Quote

2. "It's almost as if the writers/producers remembered that they had to break them up in order for her to reconcile with Luke. 

I have a fondness for early season 7 because we get to see how Lorelai and Chris are in a day to day life together. I love French Twist because they are so happy together"

I agree with both of these UOs! I thought Lorelai/Chris seemed GENUINELY happy, in love and learning to communicate well (especially by this show's standards, haha), and the whole 'Chris regresses and Lorelai has actually still wanted Luke the entire time despite the fact that to many viewers they never seemed to enjoy being together while they were in a relationship' stuff felt so jarring and out of nowhere to me. There's just this giant gap between what the writers wanted me to see and what I actually did. To be fair, I blame the acting as well---LG seriously lights up and glows around David Sutcliffe and tends to look moderately miserable around Scott Patterson throughout most of their dreadfully depressing relationship, so it makes the idea that she knows the whole time she doesn't love Christopher and still loves Luke thing an even harder sell for me. Plus, IMUO the Lorelai/Chris relationship was written TOO well in S7 if they were so clearly and quickly headed for a breakup. As others have noted, they had far more chemistry, compatibility, communication and just apparent happiness than Luke and Lorelai ever had. Stop showing me how surprisingly well they talk and work through conflicts, how genuinely happy and affectionate they seem, etc. if you know they're doomed within a few episodes, Show!  Maybe DR is just better at writing romantic relationships that aren't miserably dysfunctional in general. Given how AS-P writes romantic relationships, that would be quite a low bar :) I actually liked (mostly) the way he wrote Rory/Logan and Lane/Zach compared to how AS-P did as well, so maybe I would have liked the way DR wrote L/L as a couple---or at least disliked them less than I did under AS-P's watch. I just know that due to some combination of the acting, writing and directing, I hold the very UO of thinking Lorelai/Christopher seemed far happier and better matched in S7 than L/L did at any point in their relationship. Watching Lorelai with Christopher and Luke single convinced me that both Luke and Lorelai seemed much happier and better off NOT together, which is clearly not what the show intended :)  

 

ETA: ---The quote function on this board is my sworn nemesis, so I put quotation marks around the two posts I was trying to quote. The rest is my reply. I'm sorry that I'm too techno-challenged to fix it properly! 

Edited May 28, 2016 by amensisterfriend

[amensisterfriend]

Quote

Don't know if this has been mentioned before but my UO is that I actually liked Jason.... but I did like Jason. He was witty and could keep up with Lorelai and I think his feelings for her were genuine as well. :)

 

Yes, this comes up a lot here, and rest assured that it seems to be among the most popular of all unpopular opinions :) I actually kind of adored Jason. He was one of the  few 'love interests' who had a distinct personality of his own (as opposed to, say, Dean, Max, Nicole, Alex, Jamie, etc.) and had this naturally quirky, neurotic wit that made him a great fit for the show. Plus, he and Lorelai were a terrific blend of I-get-you similarities and complementary differences. 

My UO is that Christopher AND Jason and maybe even Max (who I'm not crazy about) were much, much better matches for Lorelai than Luke, though a big part of me will always prefer her single :) For me, Luke/Lorelai became the quintessential example of why polar opposites may initially attract (though the actors never sold me on much actual attraction!) but aren't necessarily well suited to make each other happy. 

Edited May 28, 2016 by amensisterfriend

[Leonana]

My unpopular opinion would be that Lorelai and Christopher would be a better match in real life, if he were a tad more dependable. However, I found it boring to watch in season 7. She actually asked him if he was using her conditioner. There was just nothing that interesting in their relationship, until they broke up that is. I found the break up to be more entertaining.

Even though Luke and Lorelai might not have been a more realistic real life relationship, I found their banter and chemistry (which I believe they had in some seasons) to be so much more interesting.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Leonana

[amensisterfriend]

Quote

I found the break up to be more entertaining.

Ha---one of my major UOs about this show is that literally ALL of the GG breakups and their immediate aftermaths were better written, acted and just generally a lot more engaging than the actual romantic relationships :) This show was terrific at depicting breakups. It's writing and directing the romances preceding those breakups that AS-P struggled with pretty mightily, IMO.

Quote

There was just nothing that interesting in their relationship, until they broke up that is.

Interesting! I think in some ways we're conditioned to feel like compatible couples who have a lot in common are boring, at least in fiction. I've always been the weirdo who prefers that easy, natural getting-each-other rapport to tiresome bickering and an inability to connect, but I do totally get why that would make for less entertaining TV for some :) ITA with you that L/C would be a lot better suited in real life than L/L, though! There are some opposites attract couples who I can at least buy have enough love, passion, determination, communication skills etc to make it work in the long term despite their differences, but with L/L I honestly couldn't ever see them lasting any longer this third time around. 

Edited May 28, 2016 by amensisterfriend

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

My unpopular opinion would be that Lorelai and Christopher would be a better match in real life, if he were a tad more dependable. 

I agree with the above and I think your UO goes right along with canon if you keep in mind that's a mighty IF. 

I give the show a lot of credit for putting in the text that lingering feelings towards Luke could have been worked through, but the bigger problem was that Christopher was not "the one" and the reason for that, IMO, was that his history of flakeyness, his lack of dependability, were never really far from Lorelai's mind, which explains a lot of her ever present ambivalence towards him in S7.

It definitely explains her freaking out at the possibility of having another child with Christopher, when it had been established she was definitely ready to have another child.But the thing that ultimately doomed their marriage was Christopher proving he hadn't changed in that aspect when he fled after their first fight, same as when he was an all around selfish child about Richard being in the hospital. I definitely got why, after that, Lorelai realized she couldn't have a future with him, for all their personalities do seem to click a lot better than L/L, he could never give her what she needs and wants.

Edited May 28, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[amensisterfriend]

Quote

I definitely got why, after that, Lorelai realized she couldn't have a future with him, for all their personalities do seem to click a lot better than L/L,

But is Luke REALLY more dependable than Christopher? He suddenly goes from "all in" to "out" after the incident at her parents' vow renewal, which wasn't even that big a deal or Lorelai's fault, showing that he can't be relied upon to stick around when things get tough. He deceived her for TWO MONTHS about having a long lost daughter, showing that he can't be relied upon to communicate very vital information with the person who supposedly matters most to him. His ridiculously passive-aggressive treatment of Nicole and Rachel further shows he can't be relied upon to be forthcoming in relationships, with others and perhaps even himself. He certainly can't be relied upon to manage his temper like a sane human being or behave politely and appropriately in any given situation, as he's often like a toddler in desperate need of anger management therapy. So I hold the very UO of thinking that Luke ISN'T actually dependable, at least not in the ways that would matter to me most.

But even if he were dependable, I think the apparently common line of thinking even among some L/L fans that kind of amounts to "well, she has way more chemistry with Christopher, seems happier around him and clicks better with him than she ever did with Luke, but Luke is the one she can rely on" kind of makes it sound like Luke is the human equivalent of taking the medication that's allegedly good for you even if it's highly unpleasant to do so. It just seems like she'd be way better off single than being with Luke for those reasons while Luke is with her for reasons that remain unclear...?! 

I'm obviously biased, because I just don't see Luke as that 'lovably cranky curmudgeon with a heart of pure gold' that most do and that we're supposed to---for me, he's an angry, bitter, dopey brute who would be deadly depressing (and at times borderline scary) to be around and who can't communicate or control his temper any better than a young child. And he and Lorelai tried and failed rather miserably to have a romantic relationship, so I just don't get why we're supposed to think this time they'll have more in common, more chemistry, more compatibility, and more basic happiness this time around. Honestly, I want so much to board the wildly popular L/L ship, but this ridiculously ill-suited, joyless, passion-free pairing back together just doesn't feel like a happy ending to me. It's actually kind of depressing.  

Edited May 28, 2016 by amensisterfriend

[hippielamb]

2 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

ETA: ---The quote function on this board is my sworn nemesis, so I put quotation marks around the two posts I was trying to quote. The rest is my reply. I'm sorry that I'm too techno-challenged to fix it properly! 

I had to switch browsers after the update. The quote icon didn't show up on my other one.

 I knew it was doomed to fail because they had already decided Luke was her love interest. Lor and Chris had a effervescent spark that was sorely lacking. I enjoy it while it lasts and watch it many times.

1 hour ago, amensisterfriend said:

Interesting! I think in some ways we're conditioned to feel like compatible couples who have a lot in common are boring, at least in fiction. I've always been the weirdo who prefers that easy, natural getting-each-other rapport to tiresome bickering and an inability to connect, but I do totally get why that would make for less entertaining TV for some :) ITA with you that L/C would be a lot better suited in real life than L/L, though! There are some opposites attract couples who I can at least buy have enough love, passion, determination, communication skills etc to make it work in the long term despite their differences, but with L/L I honestly couldn't ever see them lasting any longer this third time around. 

Guess I'm a weirdo too because that to me is an ideal relationship. It's such a common thing in tv/films. There's a few times I like it but overall it turns me off.

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

But is Luke REALLY more dependable than Christopher?

You raise very important points and to answer your question: I have no idea. Possibly? I think peharps Luke has shown himself to be more reliable than Christopher, over the years, as a friend to both Lorelai and Rory and also as a father to April. But does that mean he's as dependable as Lorelai needs her partner to be? By the time end of S6, the answer is obviously: no. But I think we're supposed to think there's at least some room for him to become that guy, unlike Christopher.

I'm mostly just thinking outloud because this is a really awkward subject for me to get into given I'm at best really indifferent to Luke. I would much rather Lorelai ended up with a new guy (or Max!!) but at this point I'm quietly relieved it's Luke because that means I won't have to put with his side-stories which bore me to death.

I also under the opinion L/L weren't as terrible you think they were. Through S5 and the start of S6 they were perfectly tolerable to me, mostly because Lorelai seemed so happy with him. S6 onwards Logan and Rory annoyed me more.

Edited May 28, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[shron17]

5 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

As others have noted, they had far more chemistry, compatibility, communication and just apparent happiness than Luke and Lorelai ever had.

Regardless of anyone's chemistry or compatibility, I find much of the writing in season 7 to be really bad.  Some of the dialogue, particularly in Bulldogs and French Twist, makes it almost unwatchable for me.   Some of the things I find completely ridiculous include--1) Lorelai being impressed with Christopher using his money to open the restaurant early. Didn't she grow up hating the "entitlement" of her parents? And she actually said "do people really...do this?" 2) The idea that Chris escorting Gigi to Paris and staying with her for what? not quite two days? is better than sending her with the nanny; 3) Lorelai marrying anyone without Rory there; 4) Any devoted single parent committing themselves to someone who's disappointed their 21-year-old daughter so many times she describes accepting college money from him as a slippery slope; 5) Any couple who gets married 6 months after one of them broke off an engagement without any discussion or question about being emotionally ready to make a commitment.  But if you pretend it's a completely different show with unfamiliar characters, and like schmoopy romance, sure, I guess it works.

Edited May 28, 2016 by shron17

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

As others have noted, they had far more chemistry, compatibility, communication and just apparent happiness than Luke and Lorelai ever had.

I've always been more partial to L/C than L/L but I'm kind of "heh" about that statement.

L/C do have better communication and overall compatibility, and they also had incredible chemistry for the first three seasons but, imo, by the time Christopher got "loaded!" and started being writen like a tool it all but evaporated.

As far as being happy goes, as much as it pains me to say because I really rooted for them the first time I watched the show, Lorelai generally looks completely miserable during her relationship with Christopher in S7, often ambivalent and rarely happy (maybe in Paris?). In contrast, she's notably happy with Luke during S5, to the point Rory mentions it, so I don't know. My interpretation of Lorelai's relationships changes with each rewatch and I tend to lean more towards neither guy being the right guy.

[Smad]

34 minutes ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

My interpretation of Lorelai's relationships changes with each rewatch and I tend to lean more towards neither guy being the right guy.

Mine is, and it's possibly an UO, that no guy is the right guy for Lorelai. She's not capable of sustaining long lasting romantic relationships. And not just because of her utter inability to compromise. IMO what Lorelai needed was a couple of years of therapy to work through her chilhood issues. What she needed was to just be ok with herself and what she has done with her life. And come to some kind of peace and understanding regarding her parents.

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

Mine is, and it's possibly an UO, that no guy is the right guy for Lorelai. She's not capable of sustaining long lasting romantic relationships. And not just because of her utter inability to compromise. IMO what Lorelai needed was a couple of years of therapy to work through her chilhood issues. What she needed was to just be ok with herself and what she has done with her life. And come to some kind of peace and understanding regarding her parents.

Table for two! Back when I first watched the show, I remember being sad when the narrative around Lorelai's character became all about not dying alone!/marriage/not becoming a spinster!/lonely!. God forbid a woman can have a full, happy life without getting married. And some people really aren't made for that and, like you said, Lorelai is so incredibly set in her ways...couldn't she just date someone?

Edited May 28, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[dustylil]

13 minutes ago, Smad said:

IMO what Lorelai needed was a couple of years of therapy to work through her chilhood issues. What she needed was to just be ok with herself and what she has done with her life. And come to some kind of peace and understanding regarding her parents.

I have thought that for years. Of course, I think a therapist would find steady work with a number of characters in the show -  those in Stars Hollow, Hartford and Boston. Oh, and wherever Jason ended up. 

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

Oh, and wherever Jason ended up. 

Aw, poor Jason. I always go back to him. He was the closest to an ideal guy/relationship for Lorelai, imo. He loved his space even more than she loved hers; they had fun and they got it each other so well.

[Smad]

19 minutes ago, dustylil said:

I have thought that for years. Of course, I think a therapist would find steady work with a number of characters in the show -  those in Stars Hollow, Hartford and Boston. Oh, and wherever Jason ended up. 

I wouldn't wish all those characters on one shrink. They'd make a fortune sure but would probably need all that money to get therapy themselves after.

6 minutes ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

Aw, poor Jason. I always go back to him. He was the closest to an ideal guy/relationship for Lorelai, imo. He loved his space even more than she loved hers; they had fun and they got it each other so well.

I have the same problem with L/J that I do with L/C. Their vibe is just too buddy/buddy for me. It's like watching siblings go at it and that's just a big no. I like Jason way more as a character than Chris since he's not a deadbeat (far as we know). He is however just as incabable of being a romantic partner as Chris and Lorelai are. Jason is useless in terms of emotional support, Chris is a spineless, weasely flake that always puts himself first and we already covered Lorelai. I would have been fine with Lorelai 'dating' a guy long term while never actually getting serious. That way she has fun dates and all the sex she wants while she gets her emotional support from her friends. Basically a 'no strings attached' kind of deal. However I can see how that wouldn't really work on a family show.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Smad

[shron17]

17 minutes ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

Aw, poor Jason. I always go back to him. He was the closest to an ideal guy/relationship for Lorelai, imo. He loved his space even more than she loved hers; they had fun and they got it each other so well.

Jason was okay, but I found his relationship with his dog really weird.  Judging from the way Lorelai was with Paul Anka later, I doubt it would have worked for her either.  Also, I agree they had more of a sibling/cousin vibe.

Edited May 29, 2016 by shron17

[cuddlingcrowley]

Quote

Their vibe is just too buddy/buddy for me. It's like watching siblings go at it and that's just a big no. 

What you see as buddy/sibling-like I see as fun and light which personally appeals to me in a relationship and that's also the kind of relationship I would want for a charismatic character like Lorelai.

I don't think that L/L were joyless and miserable together like some fans see them, but Luke definitely was overall too dull for my tastes and I have a hard time seeing Lorelai remaining interested in him on the long run. The episode they go to the Martha's Vineyard is basically what I saw happening more and more often between them in the future.

Quote

I would have been fine with Lorelai 'dating' a guy long term while never actually getting serious. That way she has fun dates and all the sex she wants while she gets her emotional support from her friends. Basically a 'no strings attached' kind of deal. However I can see how that wouldn't really work on a family show.

Yup. Hell, they could have had her have a long term boyfriend but not made a big deal out of it and kept it drama free. Like Jason (up until the end, that is).

Edited May 29, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[dustylil]

While Emily and I have little in common regarding our views of people, I did share her opinion of Jason. She didn't like or trust him.

What kind of mature adult goes into business in direct competition with his father in partnership with his business rival, Richard Gilmore? Now if wanted to provide clients with different services or use more efficient, up-to-date methods, then that was understandable if  somewhat tacky. But I don't recall anything like that. Was Floyd Stiles an abusive or absentee parent? There was no evidence of it. Apparently he did  have the gall to clothe, feed and raise Jason in keeping with the standards of the Hartford elite, educate him at an Ivy League college and then provide him with a job in his insurance firm, on a career track to succeed him as head of the firm. The cruelty! The horror!

Edited May 29, 2016 by dustylil

[Smad]

1 hour ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

The episode they go to the Martha's Vineyard is basically what I saw happening more and more often between them in the future.

So basically more character assasination? Well can't argue with you there.

What never made sense to me was that Luke went to Broadway shows, skiing and a cruise and who knows what else with Nicole. So apprently Luke has no issues with travel (as someone insunated before). And also dates that include anything from movies to musicals. Too bad he had to date Lorelai who is never allowed to leave Stars Hollow or the show wouldn't work. So there was no way to have that kind of dating with her. Damn you ASP.

[FictionLover]

I am a LL shipper however I do understand why some don't care for Luke, especially after season 6.  But I can't understand anyone shipping Christopher.  From the first season I saw him a loser. The first scene when he sees Lorelai and his daughter he yells to Lorelai to take off her shirt...real mature.  He couldn't keep a job and had declined credit cards. But the real deal breaker for me was when he asked Lorelai to marry him and she said no; why couldn't he stick around for his kid?  The chemistry that so many see between the two seemed superficial to me.  

[dustylil]

10 minutes ago, Smad said:

And also dates that include anything from movies to musicals. Too bad he had to date Lorelai who is never allowed to leave Stars Hollow or the show wouldn't work. So there was no way to have that kind of dating with her.

We do know that Lorelai and Luke had tickets for Spamalot. So seemingly they were permitted to be out of Stars Hollow for at least one brief interlude :)

[HeySandyStrange]

Quote

I have the same problem with L/J that I do with L/C. Their vibe is just too buddy/buddy for me. It's like watching siblings go at it and that's just a big no.

I have to sit at this table with you. The "great" chemistry between Chris and Lorelai always seemed to me more like two childhood pals who grew into teenage friends with benefits that just happened to have a baby together. Their just never seemed to be anything particularly romantic or deep about their connection, imo. If it wasn't for having the connection between each other through Rory, I wonder if either of them would have been so hung up on the other. Chris maybe, because he was a manchild, but I tend to think Lorelai might've moved on if she had been able to experience a typical young adulthood instead of being a mother to Rory. I think they were both pretty immature and romanticized their relationship.

[shron17]

4 minutes ago, dustylil said:

We do know that Lorelai and Luke had tickets for Spamalot. So seemingly they were permitted to be out of Stars Hollow for at least one brief interlude :)

They also apparently had a good time at the party in New York in season 5. 

4 minutes ago, HeySandyStrange said:

I think they were both pretty immature and romanticized their relationship.

I agree.  Nothing was keeping them apart and they could have been together years earlier if that's what they both wanted.  The fact that they never actually got together yet were still connected through Rory must have kept the possibility alive.  It also gave them both an out from becoming mature enough to make a relationship work with anyone else.

[Smad]

1 hour ago, HeySandyStrange said:

I have to sit at this table with you. The "great" chemistry between Chris and Lorelai always seemed to me more like two childhood pals who grew into teenage friends with benefits that just happened to have a baby together. Their just never seemed to be anything particularly romantic or deep about their connection, imo. If it wasn't for having the connection between each other through Rory, I wonder if either of them would have been so hung up on the other. Chris maybe, because he was a manchild, but I tend to think Lorelai might've moved on if she had been able to experience a typical young adulthood instead of being a mother to Rory. I think they were both pretty immature and romanticized their relationship.

Excatly what I would describe L/C (and L/J) as, pals. For me both realtionships were similar in that there was a shared background (coming from the same world), the way they quip and a smiliarity in certain personality traits. Pretty much like old buddies or even siblings. And 90% of Lorelai and Chris consisted of 'remember when' stories, much the same way you would expect old pals or siblings to be when they are together. And IMO neither L/C nor L/J had any sort of romantic tension due to that vibe.

Without Rory in the picture L/C would have been done and done decades earlier. They might have gone to the same college but Lorelai would have stayed and made it through while Chris would have dropped out. And they would have parted ways because Lorelai would have outgrown Chris by miles at that point.

[Smad]

1 hour ago, shron17 said:

They also apparently had a good time at the party in New York in season 5. 

And where Luke apparently knew how to dress appropriately. Funny how he only forgets that he knows how to do that when ASP wants to either turn him into a bum or assasinate him.

[readster]

35 minutes ago, Smad said:

Excatly what I would describe L/C (and L/J) as, pals. For me both realtionships were similar in that there was a shared background (coming from the same world), the way they quip and a smiliarity in certain personality traits. Pretty much like old buddies or even siblings. And 90% of Lorelai and Chris consisted of 'remember when' stories, much the same way you would expect old pals or siblings to be when they are together. And IMO neither L/C nor L/J had any sort of romantic tension due to that vibe.

Without Rory in the picture L/C would have been done and done decades earlier. They might have gone to the same college but Lorelai would have stayed and made it through while Chris would have dropped out. And they would have parted ways because Lorelai would have outgrown Chris by miles at that point.

I'll pull up a seat too, that's how I've always seen L/C. They were long time friends who had benefits and were dating and if Rory wouldn't have happened then they would have move don. I do believe Lorelei would have moved on in college. Despite Straube and Francine blaming everything on Lorelei and Rory. Chris saying to them he would have dropped out anyhow just rang true. Christopher had this problem with really taking responsibility and looked for a reason for an excuse. I mean right after Rory was born Chris response: "I guess this means have to get married now." He didn't say: "We have to raise her right." or "Guess its time to grow up." He took that Richard's plan was the right thing to do. He might have gone running back to Sherry when she told Chris she was pregnant with Georgia, but he still acted like he wanted Lorelei on the side and why Rory was so mad at him. He wanted to be the "step up" dad for her future half-sibling but could never get his shit together for her. Then as we saw, Chris was not present really in Georgia's life at all to the point he didn't know how to change diapers, which was just too much. 

  He was like the result of helicopter parenting, but in his case everyone always did everything of him or made up an excuse of him, so when the walls were down. Chris was a child lost in a sea of adult decisions he not only knew how to make, but had no idea of what to do when forced to make a decision. 

[junienmomo]

Don't forget in the L/C and L/J relationships, the fact that they were teenagers together was the bond. 

With the exception of Emily's idealized notion of Christopher, oddly similar to Lorelais idealization of Dean, the children and parents did not like or even hated each other. In other words, they could keep living in the teenage fantasy world of evil parents where the kids were not only teenage-invincible, but they were also always right.  With those guys, Lorelai always had a boyfriend who completely supported her sense of victimization.

Luke, on the other hand, didn't directly know Lorelai's parents well, only what he got from her over the top summaries. "I had a flagellation to go to." To his credit, he took her complaints seriously without giving in to the 'teenagers are always right' notion. 

Before the golf outing and roadkill dinner, he encouraged her to keep some form of relationship with them, probably due to the fact that he had had a good relationship with his parents. Afterward, he accepted her need for distance, but still acknowledged that they would be in her life and tried to make do until the character assassination took over completely. This was a damn sight closer to a mature relationship than with either of the other two guys. 

Learning multiple times that Lorelai was spending time alone with a guy who encouraged her immaturity, even when Rory was an adult and could manage her own relationship with her father, and that she willingly hid it from Luke, was a repeated statement of her unwillingness to grow up. Luke should have run for the hills. 

[Sweet Tee]

In addition to my many problems with Christopher, I do think he brought out the worst in Lorelai.  And Lorelai wasn't all that stellar to begin with.  But, at least she showed bouts of maturity sometimes.  I feel like Chris was her safe place.  When something (a relationship) wasn't going the way she wanted, she'd just go running to him because he wouldn't reject her.

I think the show let Christopher's character down by having him be so focused on Lorelai.  If the show had tried to balance him out more by having him take an interest in Rory and struggle to be a better father, I'd be more forgiving of him.  But, I just can't like someone who treats their kid as an afterthought.  It does Rory no good for him to try to do better with GiGi.

[hippielamb]

16 hours ago, shron17 said:

 3) Lorelai marrying anyone without Rory there; 

That's when I knew it wouldn't last. Rory wasn't part of it. I like Lorelai's explanation later on but that was very inconsiderate of her not to include Rory. Come to think of it, she wasn't going to include Rory in her manic elopement plan to Luke either. But I think that was her Hail Mary pass, she knew it was over. 

 

17 hours ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

I'm mostly just thinking outloud because this is a really awkward subject for me to get into given I'm at best really indifferent to Luke. I would much rather Lorelai ended up with a new guy (or Max!!) but at this point I'm quietly relieved it's Luke because that means I won't have to put with his side-stories which bore me to death.

 Hahaha! That's why I love my fast forward button. I can zoom right by those scenes. The only Danes family member I remotely like is Liz and she's not very Danes-like. 

 

Add me to the chorus that likes Jason. I didn't think he had particularly great chemistry with Lorelai but I enjoyed their interactions. They seemed like they could have dated and stayed friends if it wasn't for the lawsuit. I thought they had a good relationship and liked seeing them be kind of a power couple. Jason was just as invested in his business as Lorelai was in hers so I thought he was the right guy for her at that time. I liked how his neuroses and her quirks played off each other.  
 

13 hours ago, dustylil said:

While Emily and I have little in common regarding our views of people, I did share her opinion of Jason. She didn't like or trust him.

What kind of mature adult goes into business in direct competition with his father in partnership with his business rival, Richard Gilmore? Now if wanted to provide clients with different services or use more efficient, up-to-date methods, then that was understandable if  somewhat tacky. But I don't recall anything like that. Was Floyd Stiles an abusive or absentee parent? There was no evidence of it. Apparently he did  have the gall to clothe, feed and raise Jason in keeping with the standards of the Hartford elite, educate him at an Ivy League college and then provide him with a job in his insurance firm, on a career track to succeed him as head of the firm. The cruelty! The horror!

I think that it was implied that Floyd forced Jason to work in his business, similar to the Logan and Mitchell conflict. The difference being that Jason never stood up to his father. I could be remembering it wrong but that was my impression. I do remember Jason telling Richard that he really hated his father and wanted to get back at him. Maybe that should have given Richard pause but I think he also had issues with Floyd. 
 

[dustylil]

10 minutes ago, hippielamb said:

I think that it was implied that Floyd forced Jason to work in his business, similar to the Logan and Mitchell conflict. The difference being that Jason never stood up to his father. I could be remembering it wrong but that was my impression

It was my understanding that indentured servitude went out of style in the United States some time ago. There was nothing stopping Jason (or for that matter, Logan) from striking out on his own and making a life and a career for himself. Of course, that would require standing on one's own two feet, taking risks and foregoing a cushy lifestyle - at least temporarily.

[clack]

The problem with discussing L/L compatibility or lack thereof, is that there are several "Lukes".

Are we talking the Luke who has never seen a movie, or the Luke who could give a short lecture on the difference between 'the Outer Limits' and 'the Twilight Zone'? The Luke who has dated a number of beautiful, professional women or the Luke who doesn't know how or when to dress up? Luke the small-town rube, or Luke the successful owner of a business located in an historic town, a town that is an international tourist destination?

[JayInChicago]

I was patiently waiting for the topic to turn back to Dean and well I can't wait anymore lol

Mostly season two related: i really don't get anything out of his being in this show. There isn't one second of the show I think is enriched by him being on it. The second he suspected accurately that Rory had a crush on Jess he should have ran. Also this is probably early middle age talking but I can't access that teenage wanting to be with and/or talk to someone every waking second thing. I mean I vaguely recall feeling that way about someone but Christ. Smothering moody clingy is not a good look.

[Leonana]

2 hours ago, clack said:

The problem with discussing L/L compatibility or lack thereof, is that there are several "Lukes".

Are we talking the Luke who has never seen a movie, or the Luke who could give a short lecture on the difference between 'the Outer Limits' and 'the Twilight Zone'? The Luke who has dated a number of beautiful, professional women or the Luke who doesn't know how or when to dress up? Luke the small-town rube, or Luke the successful owner of a business located in an historic town, a town that is an international tourist destination?

Yes! I was a die hard shipper of L/L for Seasons 1-4. During 5-7, I kept hoping that couple would come back, and I did enjoy the last few eps of S7. And to be completely honest, I had a crush on Scott Patterson at the time, and just wanted to see him act in a relationship, lol.

[dustylil]

2 hours ago, clack said:

Are we talking the Luke who has never seen a movie, or the Luke who could give a short lecture on the difference between 'the Outer Limits' and 'the Twilight Zone'

I am not sure what knowing a great deal about two ancient television shows has to do with familiarity with movies. It seems to me  quite reasonable to be familiar with one type  of entertainment and not another. It is quite likely there are a number of people who are knowledgeable  about  movies but  do not know anything of television programs.

Of course, we do know that Luke actually has seen some films - among them Love Story, one or more of the Star Wars epics, and of course the noted classic Queen of Outer Space.

[Leonana]

23 hours ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

 

On 5/28/2016 at 0:29 PM, amensisterfriend said:

But is Luke REALLY more dependable than Christopher?

 

23 hours ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

You raise very important points and to answer your question: I have no idea. Possibly? I think perhaps Luke has shown himself to be more reliable than Christopher, over the years, as a friend to both Lorelai and Rory and also as a father to April. But does that mean he's as dependable as Lorelai needs her partner to be? By the time end of S6, the answer is obviously: no. But I think we're supposed to think there's at least some room for him to become that guy, unlike Christopher.

 

I think the last half of S7 showed that Christopher wasn't going to grow and become more reliable, but that Luke was capable of that growth.