One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[Iseut]

Yeah, I watched "Run Away Little Boy" this morning too, and didn't understand where Sookie was coming from with the "He's been waiting for you" thing. Yes, Lorelai was engaged, but Luke knew her and was obviously into her way before Max ever came into the picture, and in this episode they make a point of saying that it's been several months since the Max breakup. So what has Luke been "waiting so patiently" for? Sack up and ask her out, Grumpypants. 

That said, I do think S1-early S2 Luke was mostly sweet and likable among the rants. Even in this ep when Lorelai is asking if she can depend on him and he immediately says that she can, it's nice. It's too bad that he got grumpier and meaner as they finally got together. I know it's said that the actors didn't like each other, but don't the directors and producers have a say in how their actors are behaving? Like, "Hey Patterson, maybe you think Lauren Graham has bad breath or something, but you need to act sweet and in love with her NOW, or Luke may meet a terrible accident with his deep fat fryer."

[Taryn74]

-Luke had no right to punch Christopher for sleeping with Lorelai. She's an adult. She had broken up with you. Who she sleeps with is your business.

 

I guess I see that little situation a bit differently.  I never saw Luke's driving over there to punch Christopher as being about Luke and his jealousy over Lorelai.  I saw it as Luke being (justifiably) angry that Christopher took advantage of an extremely emotionally distraught woman.  There was no question that Lorelai was absolutely devastated that night - both from the expression on her face when she arrived, and when she woke up in his bed.  Christopher should never have slept with her that night.  (And this is coming from someone who likes Christopher and often defends him.)  I think he deserved what he got and I was cheering Luke on 100%.

Besides, it's not like Luke went over there with a baseball bat and beat the living sh*t out of him.  One well-aimed punch is not going to kill a man.  Sheesh.

[mstaken]

Besides, it's not like Luke went over there with a baseball bat and beat the living sh*t out of him.  One well-aimed punch is not going to kill a man.  Sheesh.

Well, no, but it's still assault :) (And, not to be annoyingly pedantic, but a single punch---particularly when thrown by someone as big as Luke---CAN do extremely serious damage.)  

 I saw it as Luke being (justifiably) angry that Christopher took advantage of an extremely emotionally distraught woman.

Heh---then someone should have punched Luke in the face for hiding April from her, screaming at her on the rooftop of her home in front of several people and a whole bunch of other transgressions. I guess I just see it as ironic that Luke would suddenly be all into enforcing proper treatment of Lorelai given that he, IMO, was not exactly the perfect boyfriend. 

I'm also not sure I'm on board with the popular opinion that Christopher 'took advantage' of Lorelai. I feel like that kind of strips Lorelai of agency and responsibility. It's not like she was chemically impaired or otherwise incapable of making decisions. SHE sought out Christopher, impulsively showing up at his home. Once she was there, we have no idea exactly what took place---what was said, how she represented her current state of mind and who instigated what. We do know that they'd been together many times before and that there was clearly a level of comfort, closeness and trust established between them. Just because Lorelai had some regrets afterwards (though certainly not too many of them---after all, she quickly started dating Christopher and then married him!) doesn't mean she was 'taken advantage of.' I remember some people saying that Christopher sleeping with her the night she broke up with Luke was tantamount to rape, which to me is a grossly unfair categorization that (unintentionally!) minimizes what victims of actual trauma endure.  (I totally know that YOU weren't calling Christopher a rapist, Taryn---it just reminded me of a "tree" we've all seen before!)  

A different UO: For many (many, many!) reasons, I wish Rory had never gotten back together with Dean after he angrily dumped her for not being able to declare her love for him after three months of high school dating. And hyper-independent Lorelai continually advocating for the increasingly possessive, stalker-y Dean in S2-S3  just never rang true to character for me. I get that they were trying to set up drama and conflict by having Rory eventually date the one her mother disapproved of---and, by the way, I totally get why Lorelai would disapprove of Jess as well!---but Dean lurking in their freaking trees waiting for Rory to come home, showing up at their home when he was specifically asked not to and throwing temper tantrums,  and calling her every seven seconds to check on her whereabouts are the kind of thing that even parents far less obsessed with independence than Lorelai would have been uncomfortable with---IMO, obviously! Even taking into account the show's propensity for exaGGeration, Dean was starting to make me genuinely uncomfortable---when he wasn't boring me to sleep, that is ;) 

Edited April 21, 2014 by mstaken

[CleoCaesar]

I'm also not sure I'm on board with the popular opinion that Christopher 'took advantage' of Lorelai. I feel like that kind of strips Lorelai of agency and responsibility. It's not like she was chemically impaired or otherwise incapable of making decisions. SHE sought out Christopher, impulsively showing up at his home. Once she was there, we have no idea exactly what took place---what was said, how she represented her current state of mind and who instigated what.

Co-signing all of this. Lorelai is a grown-ass woman and deliberately went to Chris. Earlier that evening, they’d had dinner with the Gilmores and bonded over their mutual boredom and had a lingering stare with Lorelai’s arm on Chris shoulder as they talked about how they always have each other’s backs. (If it had been an episode of Saved by the Bell, the audience would have been going “woooo!!” during that moment. It was more caliente than Luke and Lorelai’s full-on makeouts to me.) Clearly, there was history, chemistry, and bonding in place there, so it absolutely made sense that Lorelai would seek out Chris in a moment of weakness (see also: calling him at her bachelorette party pre-dumping Max). As mstaken points out, Lorelai had agency and responsibility in her actions there. She wasn’t a victim.

 

Besides, it's not like Luke went over there with a baseball bat and beat the living sh*t out of him.  One well-aimed punch is not going to kill a man.  Sheesh.

Verrrry slippery slope there, IMO. A well-aimed punch is okay but only if it’s one? Luke easily weighs 180 lbs. A person caught totally off-guard hit directly in the face by that kind of body can sustain a broken nose, fractured cheekbone, black eye, scratched cornea, bruising, and other not-fun things. Luke is a violent caveman in  many ways (putting Dean in a chokehold, attacking Nicole's car, punching Chris, literally throwing customers out of his diner onto the street, that menacing "we're not fighting...yet" to Lorelai after hearing Chris's voicemail), but that sucker punch was especially off-putting to me. Luke has a history of angry, violent behavior and for some reason it's always glossed over and never addressed by any of the characters.

[Taryn74]

If it had been an episode of Saved by the Bell, the audience would have been going “woooo!!” during that moment.

 

HA!  I think I might choke laughing right now.

And hyper-independent Lorelai continually advocating for the increasingly possessive, stalker-y Dean in S2-S3  just never rang true to character for me.

Even taking into account the show's propensity for exaGGeration, Dean was starting to make me genuinely uncomfortable---when he wasn't boring me to sleep, that is ;)

 

You know I'm with you on all of this!  I felt really and truly a little bit scared for Rory in There's the Rub when she was begging Jess to leave so that she wouldn't be "in a fight with Dean" after he called.

[mstaken]

 In honor of S4 airing now on ABC Family, I have to say that I think Luke's drunken, impulsive marriage to do-they-even-LIKE-each-other?! Nicole, immediate decision to divorce, subsequent and wholly inexplicable decision to try dating after all while we once again watch Luke totally not being in the relationship despite being technically in the relationship, and then hastily and sloppily ending it with "um, so, turns out Nicole's a cheater!", making Luke seem like an innocent victim and without addressing any of the myriad reasons they weren't working anyway, is one of the dopiest storylines the show ever did. And this is a show that often gave us dopey storylines!  I don't think this one gets enough credit for its eye-rolling awfulness :) 

 

Another one is that I don't love s4 as much as most fans. I do really like it, but nowhere near as much as I do S2 and the (IMUO!) sadly underrated S3. And, to make this even more unpopular, I like the first half of the season far better than the second. Liz and TJ are highly unwelcome additions for me; the return of Dean and subsequent 'affair' is even worse; and Zach is particularly annoying to me this season. Plus, I don't enjoy the Luke/Lorelai buildup now that I now how little I enjoy them as an actual couple. I tend to really like the S4 episodes most skip past: The Hobbit..., Die Jerk, etc.! And as much as I like watching Lorelai realize her dream of opening an inn, I've grown not to like the much-loved trilogy much at all. Rory is a bigger factor in my GG enjoyment (or lack thereof)  than she seems to be for most people, and her stuff with DullandDopeyDean is just too much of a train wreck for me to even watch! I also didn't appreciate them making my Digger a sudden stalker...and heaven forbid any man ever not obsess for all of eternity about a Gilmore girl! ;) 

[scarynikki12]

I'm bringing a UO from TWOP over here in light of the Christopher love: if the show genuinely wanted Christopher to be a love interest for Lorelai, no matter how temporary, they should never have made him Rory's father.  If they'd made him a life long friend of Lorelai's, who never acted on a crush until they were adults, then I would never have had an issue with him.  I can handle that scenario, but I cannot ever root for any character to get involved with someone who was shown onscreen to be negligent to his/her child, especially if the protagonist is such a devoted parent themselves.

 

Also, since the show never had any interest in exploring how Christopher's neglect affected Rory, there really wasn't any need for him to be her father and all of the stories involving him could have played out the same.  His parents could still have disapproved of Lorelai getting pregnant, Emily and Richard could still have placed him on a pedestal (and them overlooking his neglect of their beloved granddaughter is no longer an issue), he still could have moved to California at a young age before moving back, he still could have chosen is pregnant girlfriend over being with Lorelai, they still could have done the ill-advised (and not legal) wedding in Paris, and so on.  Rory's father could have been like Lane's: an unnamed and unseen ex-boyfriend of Lorelai's who dumped her the second he learned of her pregnancy and never wanted anything to do with them after that.  The effect on Rory still could have been avoided, like we saw on the show, and we wouldn't have been asked to swallow Lorelai not caring about Chris' neglect of Rory when she went off on anyone else who might cause her harm.

[mstaken]

Christopher hate, feeling he neglected Rory and wishing Lorelai had never viewed him as a viable love interest for that reason are probably the single most popular GG opinions I've ever come across. I'm usually in a very small minority for feeling the extent to which Christopher "neglected" Rory was very inconsistently depicted and extremely exaggerated by fans who want another excuse to vilify him. The show also presents some very strong evidence that part of why Lorelai isn't horrified by Christopher's neglect is because she CHOSE to raise Rory with only very minimal involvement from Christopher. I'm certainly not rushing to nominate Christopher as Father of the Year and think he had definite flaws as a father and as a person, but for me calling it 'neglect' minimizes the experiences of kids out there who have truly  been neglected by their parents. 

[scarynikki12]

 

but for me calling it 'neglect' minimizes the experiences of kids out there who have truly  been neglected by their parents.

I think that's a fair argument but, by that extension, couldn't we say that describing Dean as a stalker and Luke as violent and potentially abusive, no matter how much evidence we have to support those claims, also minimizes the experiences of real life victims?  If we can't describe what we see on our screens as _____, with the evidence to back it up, then there's no point in getting invested in the characters and stories at all, and sites like this one become obsolete.

 

And I stand by my assessment that Christopher neglected Rory.  He didn't abuse her, he didn't think poorly of her, and he didn't have a problem being around her when they were in the same place, but he was absent physically and emotionally and that's neglect.  One of the first things we learned about him was that he never visited Stars Hollow until that episode in season 1.  Not damning on its own until we consider that there was no indication that Rory ever visited him in California.  All we had was that she saw him on a rare visit to Connecticut and that she spoke to him occasionally on the phone.  That's physical absence.  

 

There's also the fact that no one gave voice to asking him for financial help with Chilton, when we know they all believed he was a success in business.  It was a big surprise during his season 1 visit when he couldn't afford to buy Rory that dictionary.  If his financial troubles were something that Lorelai was privy to, I could easily understand her not asking him, but the pilot showed her also being convinced that he was doing very well.  A simple line indicating that he was successful, but without liquid assets would have done an excellent job of establishing that he was involved in important decisions/events even while offscreen.  The fact that he asked Rory to lie to Lorelai about his money troubles is appalling (undermining their relationship) and I'm glad she went off on him for it.  I'm also glad that the show made it clear how Christopher viewed family in season 1: people living together.  I get that view, as his own parents were emotionally neglectful and generally shitty, but it also informs his approach to parenting Rory offscreen.  Lorelai saying that being a family takes commitment, responsibility, and coming home every night tells me that Christopher never acted like this prior to the show.  That same episode she made the comment about leaving the door open to him and he admits that he makes the choice to not take advantage of that.  

 

These examples were all in season 1, so there was plenty of opportunity for the character to grow and his relationship with Rory to strengthen and I think season 2 looked to be heading in that direction with the coming out ceremony, his moving to the much closer Boston, Christopher and Sherry requesting Rory visit them, and him driving to check on Rory in person after Lorelai's overreaction to the accident.  Even his pre-pregnancy assessment that he had broken up with Sherry and wanted to finally commit to Lorelai and Rory was a good sign.  All of that was undone when Sherry told him she was pregnant and he couldn't be bothered to tell Rory himself.  She wasn't going into labor right then and there was no indication that she was experiencing pregnancy related medical problems yet he couldn't wait thirty minutes (or, however long the ceremony was) to pull Rory aside and explain the situation.  

 

He tried to reach Rory that summer, so I'll give him that much credit, but he didn't seem to understand why she was upset with him and, frankly, seemed way more focused on keeping Lorelai in his life than Rory.  That would end up being the standard behavior of Christopher: he shows up to pant around Lorelai and pay no attention to Rory.  

 

And actor availability shouldn't ever have affected his relationship with Rory if the show truly wanted us to believe that they had one at all, much less a decent one.  Lines indicating that Chris and Sherry were sitting elsewhere at the graduation ceremony, that he attended Parents Weekend every year while Rory was at Yale, that he started taking her out to dinner for her birthday every year after her sixteenth, that they talked on the phone often enough that he knew which classes were her favorite and why, that he followed her work with the paper like Emily and Richard (and them being the better parents in this case grosses me out), that they sent each other postcards when they traveled, that she went up to visit him once in a while, and so on.  Availability shouldn't have precluded any of this from happening, yet we were explicitly told that Christopher wasn't at the graduation (not even mentioning him could allow us to fanwank that he was present but offscreen) and he was barely mentioned in season 4 (and I'm convinced he and Lorelai would have made a go that season if he'd been available as Digger was basically Christopher without the shitty parent baggage-which is why I wouldn't have had an issue with him if he hadn't been Rory's father since I didn't have an issue with Digger).  

Starting with season 5, the show was even more explicit that everything Christopher did was centered around Lorelai with Rory as an afterthought.  I actually fondly remember our disgust over on TWOP whenever we learned that he would show up.  It was so predictable: Chris focuses on Lorelai, flirts with her, and there is nothing that indicates he and Rory have any kind of relationship unless she's standing right there.  Chris comes into a fortune and Lorelai is the one to mention Rory and ask for financial assistance in paying for Yale.  In season 7, when he visits Rory at Yale, he's all upset because of everything HE missed from being absent in her life.  Neither he nor Lorelai show any concern at what RORY missed.  Then there's that stupid France proposal where they were in such a hurry to "get married" that they didn't try and get Rory on a flight to be there and celebrate with them.  I know she wasn't there because Lorelai knew she might be talked out of it (it wasn't legal anyway, so Lorelai could have walked away easily), but it would have been nice if Chris had mentioned getting Rory on a plane and Lorelai saying no, she wanted it done ASAP, demonstrating how in denial she was.

 

So, yes, I stand by my assessment of Chris as a neglectful father.

 

And I agree, by the way, that the way the show presented Dean often came across as him being Rory's stalker and that she often acted like she was afraid of him.  I also agree that Luke's behavior once he and Lorelai were a couple was over the top and indicative of abuse potential.  I believe that the former was done to make it clear that Jess was the next love interest for Rory and that the latter was done because ASP has no idea how to write relationships well and neither character needed to be taken to those extremes.  Even on the short-lived Bunheads, the basic premise was that Sutton Foster got drunk and married her stalker (and her character describes him as such), and no one ever seemed concerned for her safety.  

 

Rory losing interest in Dean and falling for Jess happens to high school kids all the time.  One day, they're convinced they're in the middle of True Love That No One Could Possibly Understand or Relate To and the next, they've dumped said True Love for another pretty face.  There's no reason the same couldn't have happened with Rory and Dean.  Luke being insecure about Lorelai's feelings is believable, but freaking out over a voicemail that she had no control over should have lost him the relationship and earned a suggestion for therapy.  That actually would have made for a more interesting story for Luke, but I got the impression (with Rory's and Lorelai's "therapy sessions") that ASP doesn't think well of psychology, so it probably wouldn't have worked out well.

[CleoCaesar]

The show also presents some very strong evidence that part of why Lorelai isn't horrified by Christopher's neglect is because she CHOSE to raise Rory with only very minimal involvement from Christopher.

 

Preach it. It's canon that Lorelai deliberately took Rory away from her family and, by extension, Christopher, to raise Rory her own way. She emphatically didn't want to marry him, and went so far as to essentially say "Fuck you" to her parents by taking her child and surreptitiously moving to another town. That sends a very clear message: Stay out of my life, this is my child, you can have input but this is my show and I am running it. Especially to an immature 16-year-old at the time like Chris.

 

The senior Gilmores also seemed to hold the opinion that Lorelai wasn't letting Christopher in as much as she could be. (I remember one of them, Richard I think, saying that Christopher would have married Lorelai, the implication being ...if you hadn't run off with Rory and he even made a comment along the lines of Christopher finding someone who will let him be a father. [i'm not imagining this, am I?]).

 

Lorelai doesn't resent Christopher for not being around. It'd be odd if she did - she fashioned her and Rory's life in a way that all but assured he wouldn't be a daily presence (moving to an obscure tiny town far with no major job market or much of anything). She doesn't hold a grudge. Neither does Rory for the most part, and always seemed pleased to see him (Sherry baby debacle aside). So yeah, I am inclined to agree that painting Chris as an evil deadbeat is a little overblown.

[Taryn74]

The senior Gilmores also seemed to hold the opinion that Lorelai wasn't letting Christopher in as much as she could be. (I remember one of them, Richard I think, saying that Christopher would have married Lorelai, the implication being ...if you hadn't run off with Rory and he even made a comment along the lines of Christopher finding someone who will let him be a father. [i'm not imagining this, am I?]).

 

 

Yes, Richard did say that.  From Lazy Hazy Crazy Days -

EMILY: I want to know why. I want a reason. I don’t want any of this ‘just because’ and ‘it just didn’t work out’ nonsense. I want a solid, adult reason why the father of my granddaughter and her mother can’t seem to put a family together.

 

LORELAI: His girlfriend is pregnant.

 

EMILY: What?

 

LORELAI: Sherry is pregnant, and when Christopher found out, he went back to her and that, Mother, is the reason.

 

EMILY: Are they getting married?

 

LORELAI: I don’t know – probably.

 

RICHARD: Oh, of course they’re getting married.

 

EMILY: How do you know?

 

RICHARD: I know because I know Christopher, and Christopher always tries to do the right thing.

 

EMILY: The right thing is for him to be with his family. Lorelai and Rory are his family. He met this woman two minutes ago.

 

RICHARD: Emily, he is going to be a father.

 

EMILY: He already is a father!

 

LORELAI: I really really don’t wanna discuss this anymore.

 

EMILY: Lorelai, you have to talk to him.

 

LORELAI: There’s nothing to talk about.

 

EMILY: Tell him you wanna get married.

 

LORELAI: Okay, Mom, please stop.

 

RICHARD: Yes, Emily, please stop. You know that Lorelai never does anything unless she wants to – no matter the consequences to anyone else.

 

LORELAI: What’s that supposed to mean?

 

EMILY: Lorelai wants to be with Christopher, she told us that at the wedding.

 

RICHARD: Yes, and now the wind has changed.

 

LORELAI: Excuse me?

 

RICHARD: Christopher is living up to his responsibilities as he tried to do many years ago with Lorelai, then she turned him down and turned him away.

 

LORELAI: I was sixteen.

 

RICHARD: If Christopher has found someone who will actually allow him to be a father to his own child, then of course, that’s what he’s going to do.

 

EMILY: So you support this?

 

RICHARD: I understand this.

 

EMILY: I am appalled by your attitude.

 

RICHARD: And I am shocked by your naïveté. Did you really expect this to work out? Did you really have pictures of Norman Rockwell family Christmases dancing in your head? Lorelai had her chance for a family, she walked away from it. That was her choice. He has a chance to be a father. I applaud him.

 

EMILY: Then you’re an idiot.

 

RICHARD: If you’ll excuse me, I’m going into my study.

 

EMILY: Richard! You do not walk out on me when we are having a discussion. Richard!

 

[Taryn74]

Sorry, I hit enter and it replied before I was finished.

 

Nikki, you make a very good argument and I can see your points.  I just don't think we were shown that Christopher really was a neglectful, deadbeat dad.  As Emily so acutely pointed out in Come Home, he was just weak.  Maybe he should have been strong-willed enough to overrule Lorelai's wishes when Rory was younger so that they could have a different relationship, but he wasn't.  It just is what it is.

 

And for what it's worth, even though the show sometimes was inconsistent with how much contact the Girls had with Christopher (to put it mildly, LOL) it is canon that they saw him at the holidays and spoke on the phone often, even before Sherry was in the picture (for those who tend to feel he was just showing off for her sake with the "every Wednesday at 7 o'clock phone call" thing).  From Christopher Returns -

 

I mean I have not seen this man since last Christmas right. We hear from him maybe once a week - maybe. And then all of a sudden he’s here in my town and Rory’s running around all excited and he’s sleeping on the couch and I’m thinking ‘should I be mad, should I send him to a hotel’ but then he smiles and it’s....Christopher.

 

 

A deadbeat parent doesn't call once a week or so.  A deadbeat parent doesn't even call once or twice a year.  A deadbeat parent disappears and has to be tracked down by the law to cough up back child support, kwim?

[cleo]

It always seemed to me that Christopher wanted things on his own terms- so at the time Lorelai was pregnant he wanted to accept responsibility -I guess through marriage - Lorelai didn't want this so he bailed rather than try to find a different way to be there and be involved with Rory. That I suppose is assumption on my part, but is based on his return in season 1, when he is happy to stay if he can have Lorelai as well, and have both of them in the way that he wants, and when she doesn't go along with it, he bails.

 

It always came across to me as he had had a narrow idea of what being there for them, and making a family would be like. And when the situation proves to be more complex, requiring more work and a more creative solution, he just bails.

 

I don't know why in season 1 when he leaves again- to me taking responsibility and being there is saying- okay Lorelai, we don't have to jump into bed again or live together or get married, but I'm going to make some changes, maybe move to Stars Hollow, and start a more consistent relationship with Rory and be here for you in any way that I can. I will show you I can be more reliable and that I am dedicated to this. I understand the logistics of someone shifting their life around is tough but there is no sense he even wants to try.

 

Lorelai also wants things on her own terms, but she seemed more willing to have him involved in Rory's life and open to that in some way, she just didn't want it to necessarily = marriage and a relationship with him. 

 

*tiptoes back to lurkdom*

[Taryn74]

No reason to tiptoe away cleo!  You raise good points as well.

 

It always came across to me as he had had a narrow idea of what being there for them, and making a family would be like. And when the situation proves to be more complex, requiring more work and a more creative solution, he just bails.

 

Which is why Emily was dead-on when she called him 'weak'. 

 

Lorelai also wants things on her own terms, but she seemed more willing to have him involved in Rory's life and open to that in some way, she just didn't want it to necessarily = marriage and a relationship with him.

 

I think Lorelai sent a lot of mixed signals when it came to what she wanted from Chris.  It may seem like I'm harping on that point, and if so I apologize for beating a dead horse, but I think Chris has been deferring to what Lorelai wants ever since they were teenagers and he just never figured out how to stop.

[Tooch]

 

I tend to really like the S4 episodes most skip past: The Hobbit..., Die Jerk, etc.

 

Oh man, The Hobbit just re-ran on ABC Family this morning, and I forgot how much I hated it, haha. I hated how stupid they made Sookie, making raw salmon, brie, and "blanched vegetables" for a children's birthday party.

 

Actually, that leads into my UO! I....sometimes really hated Sookie. I should have loved her. Melissa McCarthy was so charming in the role, I loved seeing a woman my size on TV when her whole character wasn't about being fat, and I liked her and Jackson's banter in the first couple seasons.

 

But damn she could also be so irritating! And for no particular reason, I hated how they gave her a neverending supply of fancy, expensive food. Like, who paid for all those fancy treats she made for Lorelai's bridal shower, and all the various other non-Inn parties she made tons of incredible food for? How could the Inn even afford all the fancy food she made in her capacity as chef, anyway? What the heck did they charge people? This is the sort of thing I obsess about after seeing every episode so many times, I suppose.

[CleoCaesar]

But damn she could also be so irritating! And for no particular reason, I hated how they gave her a neverending supply of fancy, expensive food. Like, who paid for all those fancy treats she made for Lorelai's bridal shower, and all the various other non-Inn parties she made tons of incredible food for? How could the Inn even afford all the fancy food she made in her capacity as chef, anyway? What the heck did they charge people?

 

I think about that stuff too. I get that it's TV convention for no one to really be struggling, but the endless gourmet food sometimes really took me out of the scenes, haha. A good example: in season 6 Richard and Emily are visiting Stars Hollow and Lorelai asks Sookie to make some food and Sookie just brings over huge platters of homemade mac and cheese, taquitos, and hot dogs. That had to have cost something. And the Dragonfly's ridiculous kitchen always has mountains of gourmet food artfully arranged like in a magazine spread. Maybe the Dragonfly charged $500 a night. We'll never know.

[mstaken]

Actually, that leads into my UO! I....sometimes really hated Sookie. I should have loved her. Melissa McCarthy was so charming in the role, I loved seeing a woman my size on TV when her whole character wasn't about being fat, and I liked her and Jackson's banter in the first couple seasons.

 

Table for two, please! I found her mostly endearing and moderately amusing the first few seasons, but sometime around S4 I started to outright dislike her until maybe S7. Like most GG characters, her "quirks" were exaggerated to the point of insufferableness, and she became insanely shrill, selfish and irksome IMO. When Lorelai is the comparatively grounded, rational, selfless and prudent friend and business partner, the calm and sane foil to Sookie's ridiculousness, you know something is amiss :) Actually, at certain points pretty much every GG character crossed that thin line from amusingly, relatably and entertainingly flawed to 'ugh, why the hell should I root for these ridiculous, supremely annoying narcissists?!"

 

the latter was done because ASP has no idea how to write relationships well

 

Hee! On this, we agree wholeheartedly :)

 

I also agree that Luke's behavior once he and Lorelai were a couple was over the top and indicative of abuse potential.

 

While I know most GG characters were written as over-the-top, and I realize Luke's perpetual anger and temperamental nature were played almost entirely for laughs and because that conveniently makes him cheery, vivacious Lorelai's 'opposite', I'll actually be more unpopular here and say that I have a lot of problems with Luke's behavior even before he and Lorelai started dating. He and his connection with Lorelai were better during those first few seasons IMO, but now in retrospect I have trouble recalling why I ever really enjoyed his character or thought he and Lorelai might make a remotely compatible couple. And just to be woefully shallow as well as unpopular: I don't even find Scott Patterson remotely attractive :)

[Taryn74]

When Lorelai is the comparatively grounded, rational, selfless and prudent friend and business partner, the calm and sane foil to Sookie's ridiculousness, you know something is amiss :)

 

 

HA!  So glad I had already swallowed my drink of tea.

[JayInChicago]

This might not be unpopular, but if I die and there is a hell, it will included the "TURN THE TV DOWN DAVY" Jackass and Sookzilla scene on a loop, probably played directly into my brain.

 

On this my 3rd or 4th ABC Family watch through, I finally learned I can just fast forward stuff I don't like.  Like, Francie/Francine whatever the heck her name is and her boring machinations, or Paris announcing the loss of her maidenhood on CSPAN. 

[solotrek]

When Lorelai is the comparatively grounded, rational, selfless and prudent friend and business partner, the calm and sane foil to Sookie's ridiculousness, you know something is amiss :)

 

Sookie was the business partner from hell. Wasn't there an episode where they had an uber expensive custom sink from France (I can't fathom why it'd have to be so special, just buy any suitable sink and upgrade when you have money) and Sookie insisted on being the one to sign for it, only to flake out without even letting Lorelei know? Then when Lorelei rightfully freaked the fuck out, Sookie decided that the only responsibility she'd ever have for the inn was to cook? What? 

 

And just to be woefully shallow as well as unpopular: I don't even find Scott Patterson remotely attractive :)

 

I don't think we were supposed to find him physically attractive. We were supposed to find his personality attractive. Who doesn't love a constantly grumpy almost toxic man who once you're in a relationship gets jealous and possessive at the drop of a needle? Though oddly enough, if I lived in Stars Hollow, he'd probably be the person I'd end up being friends with. Everyone else there is just crazy. I can deal with snarky people angry people because I do find it amusing in doses and we'd have a mutual hate of Taylor. So I think my UO is that the citizens of Stars Hollow are all just too much to deal with. I like the feel of the town in terms of how accessible everything is, but living in a place like that with people like that would drive me crazy.

 

Actually I have another UO. I think Lorelei and Sookie treated Luke like shit a lot too. When the Inn burned down, they invaded his diner, literally said to take everything Luke was cooking and toss it in the trash, and then kicked him out of the kitchen. All this without asking him first. Since they knew he'd cave eventually, all they had to do was send Lorelei in first, tell him what happened, and then ask permission. And then there's all those times where they'd go behind the counter without asking, or deliberately flaunting the "no cell phone" rule. Or when Lorelei decided she'd conduct business meetings at Luke's and gave Luke's phone number as her contact number all without asking. After writing this all out, I think I understand why Luke is so grumpy and snarky all the time. He has to deal with really rude and invasive Stars Hollow people everyday.

Edited June 13, 2014 by maculae

[mstaken]

Sookie was the business partner from hell. Wasn't there an episode where they had an uber expensive custom sink from France (I can't fathom why it'd have to be so special, just buy any suitable sink and upgrade when you have money) and Sookie insisted on being the one to sign for it, only to flake out without even letting Lorelei know? Then when Lorelei rightfully freaked the fuck out, Sookie decided that the only responsibility she'd ever have for the inn was to cook? What?

 

Ha! Your description amused me far more than the actual episode :) But, see, she's being cute and quirky!!! I want the same gross degree of selfishness, irresponsibility and immaturity from my friends and business partners...don't you?

 

 

 

We were supposed to find his personality attractive. Who doesn't love a constantly grumpy almost toxic man who once you're in a relationship gets jealous and possessive at the drop of a needle?

 

HEE! Yeah, it's an interesting gender issue in a way----dating back to Bronte's Heathcliff and, to a slightly lesser extent, Austen's Darcy, angry, negative, joyless men are often depicted as ideal romantic "heroes" while those same traits are generally frowned upon in females. But Luke's temper tantrum issues and relentless enthusiasm-squashing were way, way exaGGerated IMO, to the point where I'd be more likely to suggest a court mandate him to anger management therapy than suggest anyone I know actually date him. Even when he was within the realm of healthy, normal, snarky human crankiness, though, I think he and Lorelai were ridiculously chemistry-free from the moment they started dating and and incompatible in so many ways. 

 

And you're totally right, by the way, that Lorelai wasn't always a proverbial walk in the park herself. I hold the UO of thinking, for so many reasons I've already bored you guys with, that she should have ended the series contentedly single. 

Edited June 13, 2014 by mstaken

[Guest]

But you're forgetting..... Sookie had a baby!!!!!! She had a baby!  Once women reproduce, they are totally entitled to not do anything else in the world other than take care of that child.  Lorelai should have been a good friend and understood!

 

I liked Seasons 1-3 Sookie. She had her irritating moments, such as telling her guys to throw out all of Luke's food, etc. but overall, I liked her so much more. Then once she was a terrible business partner, a terrible wife (who orders their husband to have surgery without first discussing it?), and then a terribly shrill pregnant lady with her second pregnancy.  I grew very tired of her antics.

[nolieblue]

I think almost all the characters became too caricaturish (sp?) as the years went on. ASP tried too hard to drum up drama so grumpy Luke became Dark Day Luke; Rory became a spoiled brat, Sookie and all the townies became increasingly irritating, etc. It's weird that the creator of the show seemed to forget that the little stories were the most rewarding, not the big overblown drama (ahem, long-lost daughters). There was certainly enough innate drama in putting Luke and Lorelai together -- both worked long hours, were very independent and used to having their own way, her parents -- that she didn't need the other crap.

 

This isn't really an UO but it's a different spin on why I detested Christopher so much. I think he was a bad father, but Rory didn't seem to suffer too much from that -- she had her mother and the town and all the stability they provided. But Christopher was just a bad person. He seemed like a charming, attractive guy but he was lazy, irresponsible, undependable and unwilling to do the work to have any sort of real relationship with anybody. He just wanted to skate through life and whenever anyone called him on his bullshit, he would whine about how hard things were. give me a break. 

[mstaken]

But you're forgetting..... Sookie had a baby!!!!!! She had a baby!  Once women reproduce, they are totally entitled to not do anything else in the world other than take care of that child.  Lorelai should have been a good friend and understood!

 

Ha! Yeah, I think another UO I hold is that for such a proudly 'feminist' show, they perpetuated a lot of uncomfortably backwards myths and tropes related to women sometimes (and I swear that I'm not nearly as hypersensitive and soapbox-y about this stuff as I probably sound based on my past couple of posts!) In AS-P's world, excessive jealousy, temper tantrums and anger management issues= a sexy hero and a sign that the guy in question truly cares about you. It's nearly always the women who desperately apologize to those angry men (Lorelai with Luke, Rory with Dean and Jess, etc.) even when they haven't done anything wrong. Pregnancy makes womenfolk totally irrational and hysterical every waking moment. Dean/Lindsay, Zach/Lane etc. marry extraordinarily young, as if it were still the '50s, with Lane pretty much derailing her professional dreams and passions to raise their twins at about the same time she can legally order a drink. The vast majority of characters seemed to feel they needed to be in a relationship in order to feel happy and complete. 

 

I just think it's funny that AS-P identifies herself (and her work) as so diehard feminist when GG was in many ways, IM(U?!)O, not as progressive and woo-hoo-Girl-Power! as it made itself out to be. And while I happen to be straight, it irks me a little that they didn't give us a single openly gay character. No one will ever convince me that Michel was heterosexual!  

Edited June 13, 2014 by mstaken

[John Potts]

OK, I don't know how unpopular this is, but I wish the series had been about Paris. Unlike Rory (who for all her supposed poverty, had grandparents - and later, a father - who could and would bail her out of financial trouble) she worked for her achievements. Sure she was obnoxious and pushy, but damn it if she didn't deserve her achievements. When Rory had set backs (like getting punished for stealing a boat - how terrible for the law to actually punish her for that!) she seemed to regard it as completely unfair. When Paris had set backs, she might complain about it in the moment, but she bounced back and said "I'll just have to try harder!" (and maybe force everyone around her to do so too). Paris could go on to be the first female President (if Hillary Clinton or Sarah Pallin don't get there first) - Rory would complain about how terrible it was that the Primaries didn't see how she was just the most special candidate ever as she dropped out after New Hampshire Primary.

 

mstaken No one will ever convince me that Michel was heterosexual!

 

I remember being stunned when Michel declared he had a girlfriend (I don't think it was just to distract his mother from the "obvious" truth).

[mstaken]

Paris could go on to be the first female President (if Hillary Clinton or Sarah Pallin don't get there first) - Rory would complain about how terrible it was that the Primaries didn't see how she was just the most special candidate ever as she dropped out after New Hampshire Primary.

 

Ha! It's funny because it's true :) I think Paris lacks the diplomacy and, er, likability to get elected to office, but I could SO see her as a high-ranking appointed official or even a supreme court justice.

 

Actually, I hold the UO of feeling vaguely disappointed with both Rory and Paris's choice of professions. I think Paris was a much, much better fit for law school than med school, and I wish Rory's S5-S6 arc had been about her realizing that despite being locked into this idea of herself as a journalist, she was actually far better suited for other fields: publishing, research, teaching, etc. Instead, we the only thing anyone learned was that eeevil Mitchum was so very WRONG, because Rory is the very best ever at---well, everything. Sometimes plans and dreams change, either by choice or necessity. In fact, the very premise of the show makes that a major theme: Lorelai's original conception of her life was changed by a surprised pregnancy, Emily and Richard's plans and dreams for their daughter were derailed, etc. I think the show could have done a lot of interesting, relatable and amusing stuff around Rory reassessing her skills and talents and figuring out a new life plan, but alas... :) 

 

While I'm not one to handwave away how egregiously mean she could be, I actually think Paris was the most layered, compelling, unique, vibrant and consistently defined character on the whole show. 

Edited June 14, 2014 by mstaken

[JayInChicago]

I actually like that they represented Michel as a vain, fashion and body obsessed straight man. Such guys do exist. Also, while it was obviously played for laughs, he really did want to keep his private life separate (did he even live in Stars Hollow or not?) and you really can't blame him when the Babbette Dells and Miss Patties of the world are trying to keep up with East Side Tillie's gossip.

 

Tobin on the other hand...it would have been a treat if this show had just made him an out gay man and not made a big deal about it--though if anything he has an asexual vibe.

 

Not to rapidly change the subject, but should Rory really have been Chilton's Valedictorian? I realize in the show's universe it was written in the stars, but ... eh. It's hard to imagine Paris ever got a final grade lower than an A, though perhaps she blew it with her post-CSPAN debacle depression.

[Taryn74]

Not to rapidly change the subject, but should Rory really have been Chilton's Valedictorian? I realize in the show's universe it was written in the stars, but ... eh. It's hard to imagine Paris ever got a final grade lower than an A, though perhaps she blew it with her post-CSPAN debacle depression.

 

 

 

I always kind of assumed that the students chose the Valedictorian and Salutatorian, since it was a posh private school and (I assume) many of the students would have the same GPA.  Lorelai even uses the term "named" Valedictorian when she questions Rory about it in HCTS.

[bettername2come]

I like Dean. Instead of getting mad at Dean for being a jerk, I get mad at the writers for making Dean a jerk to excuse the Rory/Jess pairing. Also, Dean and Jess are practically the same person. Lorelai thinks the new guy in town will be a bad influence on Rory, they fall for Rory and her book-loving ways, they bond over music and books and get introduced to the strangeness that is Stars Hollow, both get their hearts broken when she falls for the new guy and they think she's way out of their league, both have anger management issues and are prone to fighting. 

[solotrek]

Also, Dean and Jess are practically the same person.

 

I don't know how Dean became a city boy from Chicago to townie so quickly. They dropped all the cool Dean attributes pretty early as well. For instance you're right, he was into a lot of cool music AND reading just like Jess, except he was very well adjusted. Somehow he became the creepy boring antithesis of that. From Augustus Waters early on to Edward Cullen later.

 

I get mad at the writers for making Dean a jerk to excuse the Rory/Jess pairing.

 

I get mad at the writers for their inability to write normal males in a relationship. I think Jason may have been the only man capable of not becoming a horrifying jealous overly possessive man-child with a 180 degree personality change from the courting phase. 

[mstaken]

I think Jason may have been the only man capable of not becoming a horrifying jealous overly possessive man-child with a 180 degree personality change from the courting phase.

 

But don't forget that they randomly turned him into a creepy stalker at the end of S4 to pave the way for Luke/Lorelai! Remember, in AS-P's world creepy jealousy, possessiveness and a tendency towards childish and just plain frightening temper tantrums are signs that a guy REALLY loves you :)  

 

Inspired by our current Episode Elimination game: While most seem to feel that the first half of S6 was far superior to thes econd half, I hold the unpopular opinion that it was a lot worse. For me, the titular Gilmore Girls not even speaking (and not even learning, growing or changing any discernible way as a result of their estrangement!) was far, FAR more detrimental to my enjoyment of the show than any Luke/Lorelai angst. Though to make this even less popular: I think Luke/Lorelai seemed utterly miserable in S6 even before April made her unwelcome appearance.  I've never seen a more joyless engagement celebration in my life, Lorelai seemed so desperate to come up with excuses to postpone the wedding date that I actually felt embarrassed for her, and both characters (helped along by some very unenthusiastic acting) seemed to view their upcoming nuptials with all the enthusiasm of a court-mandated execution date. 

[solotrek]

But don't forget that they randomly turned him into a creepy stalker at the end of S4 to pave the way for Luke/Lorelai! Remember, in AS-P's world creepy jealousy, possessiveness and a tendency towards childish and just plain frightening temper tantrums are signs that a guy REALLY loves you :)

 

I never understood the timeline for the end of S4. Didn't she end up with Luke like...a few days after breaking up with Jason? I mean, I could sort of see how Jason wasn't creepy because Lorelei was very whim-ey and Jason was very tenacious (it's how he got her to start dating him in the first place).  It was just really weird to see how quickly they got into the Luke/Lorelei thing because Jason and Lorelei were a pretty good couple before the whole lawsuit debacle.

 

Though to make this even less popular: I think Luke/Lorelai seemed utterly miserable in S6 even before April made her unwelcome appearance.

 

But they were. They had that incredible cringe worthy dinner with Sookie and Jackson over Christopher. They had an even more cringe worthy "makeup" session in Luke's apartment that's just uncomfortable to watch because Luke comes off as so angry with his beer and just on the brink of becoming abusive and Lorelei comes off as scared. Not scared like "he's going to break up with me", but just physically scared. Maybe the actors just chose the exact wrong way to act it, but it came off so close to a domestically abusive relationship, I just can't watch the scene. And I think it was all a misunderstanding on Luke's part in the first place, so WTF?  And didn't the Valentine's Day fiasco at Logan's beach house happen before April as well? I don't know what the writers were smoking that particular day. The Luke they wrote was so dumb and so blind I don't even understand. I mean yeah Luke was always emotionally stunted, but he was never stupid.  By the end, Lorelei was always walking on eggshells and Luke was always angry. I think the great thing about early S6 was that they did have a stronger relationship. Luke was actually being really supportive and helpful to Lorelei.

 

I mean, you could understand why there was the distance between Lorelei and Rory, there was a reason for it. So even though the situation sucked to watch, it made sense.  The characters had reasons that made sense sort of.  The end of S6 just sort of tore Luke and Lorelei apart before April and then after April just became this ridiculous trainwreck. But it didn't make sense. I never understood why the characters were doing what they were doing. I couldn't figure out their thought process. And the writing just thought that writing Luke as angry and Lorelei as scared would make up for everything. They just couldn't be themselves with each other and it was confusing and dumb. 

 

The weird thing, I kind of liked April. I don't think she's to really blame for the end of L/L even though she's an easy scapegoat. I think L/L shippers should actually thank her because taking care of her helped Luke grow as a person emotionally and mentally. And the end of S7 with the happier more accepting emotionally open Luke is due to his time raising her and fighting for her.  Without that, the last L/L scene wouldn't have happened and whatever relationship they would have had in the future would fail horribly.

Edited June 17, 2014 by maculae

[Guest]

Valentine's Day was after April.  He had to drop her bike off at Lorelai's or something for that weekend. Also, he knew about her at Thanksgiving. Lorelai found out 2 months later, so probably mid to late January.

[bettername2come]

Somehow he became the creepy boring antithesis of that. From Augustus Waters early on to Edward Cullen later.

 

Oh, this made me laugh so hard. Especially since a friend and I described the first meeting staredown from The Fault in Our Stars as being like a non-creepy version of Edward Cullen. And yet, Dean predates both of them.

 

And because I feel I should post opinions every time I visit this thread:

 

Whenever Dean and Jess actually fight, I'm on Dean's side. Whenever they almost fight, I'm always on Jess's. 

 

This is probably a popular opinion, but I'm always shocked at how much of the cast I prefer in other roles. Couldn't stand April, love Vanessa Marano on Switched at Birth. Hate later seasons Rory, love Alexis Bledel's movies from the same time period. Logan's super annoying at times, charmed by Matt Czuchry in every other role. 

[mstaken]

How's this for unpopular: despite my deep, much ranted about frustrations about what they did with her in S5-S6, overall I love Rory more than I do Lorelai. As a bookwormy introvert with a fondness for sarcasm, I relate to her far more despite being much closer to Lorelai's age (well, maybe even closer to Emily's age, but who's counting?!) I find myself enjoying Rory's S1-S4 scenes, interactions and storylines (especially because, well, PARIS!) even more than I do Lorelai's. She's a huge factor in determining whether I love a given episode, and her relationships with Lorelai (and Paris!) remain my very favorite of the series. Lorelai is a more dynamic and unique character, but if I'm not in the right mood for her, Lorelai annoys me more than she charms and entertains me.

 

My related UO is that I think Alexis Bledel was really underrated in the role. Aside from her total and bizarre inability to convincingly hug or cry, I thought she was a perfect fit for Rory, and her facial expressions and line deliveries are often priceless. 

Edited June 23, 2014 by mstaken

[Taryn74]

How's this for unpopular: despite my deep, much ranted about frustrations about what they did with her in S5-S6, overall I love Rory more than I do Lorelai. As a bookwormy introvert with a fondness for sarcasm, I relate to her far more despite being much closer to Lorelai's age (well, maybe even closer to Emily's age, but who's counting?!) I find myself enjoying Rory's S1-S4 scenes, interactions and storylines (especially because, well, PARIS!) even more than I do Lorelai's. She's a huge factor in determining whether I love a given episode, and her relationships with Lorelai (and Paris!) remain my very favorite of the series. Lorelai is a more dynamic and unique character, but if I'm not in the right mood for her, Lorelai annoys me more than she charms and entertains me.

 

My related UO is that I think Alexis Bledel was really underrated in the role. Aside from her total and bizarre inability to convincingly hug or cry, I thought she was a perfect fit for Rory, and her facial expressions and line deliveries are often priceless. 

 

Yes to all of this!  We can be unpopular together LOL.

 

AB's facial expressions really are great.  Three examples I always think of right off (and usually laugh hysterically when I do think of them) are Rory glancing around to see who's listening when Lorelai's singing her 'painting song' in TDDR, her expression as she takes in what Richard is implying about his and Emily's "reconciliations" in Come Home, and her pointed stare at Lorelai when Emily says a drunken psychopath took a stab at her seating arrangements in WBB.  Heeeee.

[nolieblue]

I'm not sure how UO this is but I hated how Lorelai and the g'rents reacted to Rory getting her big campaign job at the end of the series. It was a HUGE get for a 22-year old just out of college but they all acted like she was shipping off to 'Nam (tm Jess). i wanted them to be so much happier for her but they barely celebrated and instead were incredibly mopey. Yes, she'd be on the road, but it's not like she was going overseas. 

[mstaken]

I'm not sure how UO this is but I hated how Lorelai and the g'rents reacted to Rory getting her big campaign job at the end of the series. It was a HUGE get for a 22-year old just out of college but they all acted like she was shipping off to 'Nam (tm Jess).

 

Ha! Well, I imagine they were just immune to Rory's triumphs by now, 'cause, you know...she's RORY. Of course she's going to get the best first post-college job in the history of ever! ;) (I love Rory to death, but, really, would it have killed them to show her facing a few more relatable struggles and obstacles?!)

 

Here's one that seems to be really unpopular here: I genuinely enjoyed Tobin. His sicky-sweet passive-aggressiveness amused me more than the screechy over-the-top shrillness of most of the other townies, and I love that there was someone who could so successfully needle Michel. I'd rather have seen more of him than about 90% of the show's other minor characters. 

[Taryn74]

Here's one that seems to be really unpopular here: I genuinely enjoyed Tobin.  

 

Yep, this is where we part ways.  Heh.

[nolieblue]

I think there was just the right amount of Tobin. :) I did love how insecure Michel was around him but boy that voice and tone -- a little went a very long way for me.

[mstaken]

I did love how insecure Michel was around him but boy that voice and tone -- a little went a very long way for me.

 

Hee---fair enough! I think I have a lot of UOs about the townies/minor characters in general. I could do with a whole lot less of Kirk, Babette, Bootsy etc., am mostly indifferent to the widely loved Miss Patty, and enjoy people like Tobin, Beau, Rune, etc. (albeit in fairly small doses!) And while Taylor sometimes bugs me beyond the telling of it, I can see how a town like Stars Hollow 'needs' a Taylor and feel he serves more of a purpose than the townies who just go around squawking and carrying on at a ridiculously loud volume.  

 

Here's a weird one---I think Luke and Lorelai had BY FAR the most romantic chemistry back in S1....3-4 seasons before they actually got together and despite the fact that Lorelai spent the season with Max (and briefly involved with Chris) and Luke spent part of it dating Rachel. Luke in general was by far the most compelling to me in S1, and I'm always surprised all over again by how much I feel he changed as a character. (Another UO within a UO). Yes, even back in S1 he was moody and negative and temperamental, but IMUO he was also markedly sharper, smarter, more interesting, comparatively compelling and, even from someone who doesn't find SP/Luke attractive, IMO by far his sexiest and most appealing. And these things are always hard to pintpoint and justify, but for whatever combination of reasons, S1 (and the beginning of S2) is the time of the series during which I most believed that Luke and Lorelai truly 'got' each other as opposed to being two perpetually bickering people who became (for me) just too depressingly opposite and incompatible to connect romantically. Maybe it's partly because in S1 and S2 Lorelai was still very much rooted in SH and hadn't yet become a bit more integrated into her parents' world...? 

Edited June 24, 2014 by mstaken

[nolieblue]

I was a big L/L shipper and nearly gave up the series for good when Lorelai started dating Jason in S4 (I figured TPTB were never going to put L/L together) but I agree with you about Luke. In earlier seasons -- even as far as S4 -- he was portrayed as smarter and more interesting as an individual character. So  much of his personality got thrown by the wayside with all the drama that ASP was trying to cook up.  Vineyard Valentine is one of my least favorite episodes of the entire series mostly because of how the writers IMO betrayed Luke as a character. It wasn't just the stupidity of him bring his "backwoods" kit and his keeping April away from Lorelai The real kicker for me was Luke agreeing to be bailed out by Logan with the gift -- there's no way anyone will ever convince me that Luke would do something like that. 

 

Wow -- I'm STILL mad! 

[AlinaRay]

I know you said you can't be convinced, but I'd like to try anyway! :) I can kind of see that particular quirk of his, because he's been bailed out with gifts before. Season One, Lorelai bailed him out of the kitten pot holders by getting a more appropriate gift for Rachel. And yes, it was his credit card, but he's done a lot of things to impress Lorelai before. He fixes her house, she shovels her walk, he helped teach her how to fish for a date with another guy. I can see how his guy mentality would forget a gift, and then feel inferior when Logan has a gift for Rory...especially an extravagant one. I can see him paying back Logan on the side after the fact. Also, this is after he's been introduced to Lorelai's world...and as much as she tries to run away from it, he may think there's a small part of here that buys into it. Otherwise, she would never have gotten involved with Jason, nor would she have stuck out the FND after Rory's graduation from Chilton.

 

Now, all that being said. I do agree that it doesn't make up for his stupidity surrounding April.

[mstaken]

Now, all that being said. I do agree that it doesn't make up for his stupidity surrounding April.

 

The April stuff was ridiculous all around, but I hold the UO of thinking that him neglecting to tell Lorelai about April right away and then continuing to 'hide' April from Lorelai was more in character than I had realized. For all his gruff rudeness, Luke was actually never a very direct communicator...and that's putting it tactfully :) He remained  technically in relationships with both Rachel and Nicole despite not truly wanting to be with either, behaving passive-aggressively and waiting around for them to just figure it out and get rid of him rather than being honest about how he felt. Throughout the series (and this is one of the few things the writers depicted very consistently, IMO!), Luke dealt with any conflict with Lorelai by freezing her out, ignoring her attempts to talk things through and multiple apologies, and then finally, eventually relenting---though, even then, not apologizing for his own role or discussing what went wrong. So when the delightful, loud little problem known as April arose, I actually don't see his deceiving Lorelai (and himself) about the reality of it and then passive-aggressively avoiding a meeting between them to be out of character.

 

x

Edited June 24, 2014 by mstaken

[JayInChicago]

I kind of love Rune. 

I love that he treats the prospect of going out with Lorelai as akin to ingesting poison. I don't normally have much against Lorelai--but something about that tickles me. 

[mstaken]

I kind of love Rune.

I love that he treats the prospect of going out with Lorelai as akin to ingesting poison. I don't normally have much against Lorelai--but something about that tickles me.

 

Oh, great, now I feel compelled to watch the fabulous Double Date yet AGAIN. Thanks ;) Yeah, I find Rune a lot of fun as well, and I, too, love how they subverted expectations by making him repulsed by Lorelai rather than the other way around. I remember bracing myself for an awkward "I just don't find you attractive in THAT way..." letdown from Lorelai before watching the episode and feeling very pleasantly surprised. Also---and this is related to a UO expressed above---I'm not sure I ever think Luke and Lorelai have more romantic chemistry than I do in that particular episode. Whenever I rewatch it, I'm happily reminded me of why I once liked Luke and the prospect of Luke/Lorelai together. 

 

Chemistry is a weirdly subjective thing, though. My UO is that ALL of the romantic pairings on the show lacked romantic chemistry other than (*ducks*) Christopher/Lorelai and Jess/Rory. And those relationships certainly had their share of issues, but at least I felt the romantic connection and affection was there even after they started dating. As much as I personally adore Digger (is that a UO?! I can never tell!) and feel like he and Lorelai clicked very well and had a ton in common, I didn't see any romantic chemistry between them. I see even less between her and Max and, well, we've covered how sadly devoid of chemistry and compatibility I found her and Luke! I never saw romantic chemistry between Rory and Dean---not even back in S1, when most seemed to adore them---and in fact still struggle to see how they connected or what they even talked about. I saw a little more chemistry between Rory and Logan than I did between her and Dean, but even then I never felt that inexplicable 'click', like they truly got each other on every level, and AB looked profoundly uncomfortable to me in many of the kissing scenes. Luke and Rachel were fine, though I never saw them as connecting all that well or brimming with much chemistry either and, oh my god, don't even get me started on the time-wasting headscratcher that was Luke and Nicole. Paris and Jamie were also devoid of chemistry IMO (how could they put Paris with someone so dull?!), and Paris and Doyle worked better as bickering friends than romantic partners to me.

 

When Paris/Asher was, if only by default, one of the more interesting and 'hmmm...I kind of get them and see how they'd get each other' couples of the series for me, you know that AS-P sucks at writing romance :) 

Edited June 25, 2014 by mstaken

[JayInChicago]

I'm too scarred by Paris/Asher's makeout at the end of TKBNO aka Pennilyn Lott Is A Great Name Thanks ASP to even consider it right now...

 

also, like, does anyone really like the episode where Lorelai approaches/corners Max after the booster club meeting and he basically is like "stay away from me, forever"?  Was that necessary?

[mstaken]

also, like, does anyone really like the episode where Lorelai approaches/corners Max after the booster club meeting and he basically is like "stay away from me, forever"?  Was that necessary?

 

That's my favorite scene of the entire series! ;) Seriously, I've seen S3 a million times and STILL manage to block out the fact that Max makes a brief, unwelcome and utterly pointless return. What's with this show's obsession with getting back together with people you broke up for yet another ill-fated try? Do none of these people remember the very valid reasons they broke up in the first place?! Then again, my UO is that I wish Max and Lorelai had never gotten together even the first time around :)  

[blueray]

I honestly liked April. I hated the way her story was handled like how would Luke not tell Lorali. But as a character I found her quirky and nerdy which is always good.

 

I also agree with what someone said above (to lazy to go search for it) about the show being about Paris. I was always interested in how she starts off super rich but lacks a relationship with her parents. She was basically raised by her nanny. Then when they loose their money she has to actually has to get a job to support her education and never gives up.

[nolieblue]

I might have agreed that Lorelai and Christopher had chemistry if I also didn't feel that both the characters and the actors always seemed to be trying so hard to show just how wonderfully quippy and quirky and darling they found themselves and each other. Except for their dance in PLG I often found them plain obnoxious even when I knew the writers wanted me to find them charming.