One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[HeySandyStrange]

Since my last unpopular opinion turned out not to be so unpopular, here is another one that may fit the bill:  I couldn't believe Lorelai in the finale when she decided that she and Luke were over because Luke hadn't made a big enough gesture to prove his love.  Just a few episodes earlier he had spent the day driving all over God's creation and negotiating with everyone because she was whining about her heap of junk car like it was a death in the family.  All she did was write a weak letter to the court and sing him a song, but he is the one who needs to give more???  Luke deserved so much better than Lorelai, and I really felt sorry for him by the end.

 

 

Agreed. Sometimes I think Luke gets an unfair shake in regards to his relationship with Lorelai--he definitely made mistakes and it didn't help that he became more aggressive/gruff as the years wore on, but he made plenty of kind gestures towards her and the rest of the Gilmores, even.  Frankly I think Lor was herself an exhausting person at time as well as being thoughtless and insensitive and anyone in a relationship with her had their hands full.

Edited June 3, 2015 by HeySandyStrange

[txhorns79]

Frankly I think Lor was herself an exhausting person at time as well as being thoughtless and insensitive and anyone in a relationship with her had their hands full.

 

If she was real, Lorelai would be an extremely exhausting person to have to deal with.  Heck, if I had been Emily, I might have encouraged her to run away from home as a teenager, if only to get some peace and quiet. 

[solotrek]

Since my last unpopular opinion turned out not to be so unpopular, here is another one that may fit the bill:  I couldn't believe Lorelai in the finale when she decided that she and Luke were over because Luke hadn't made a big enough gesture to prove his love.  Just a few episodes earlier he had spent the day driving all over God's creation and negotiating with everyone because she was whining about her heap of junk car like it was a death in the family.  All she did was write a weak letter to the court and sing him a song, but he is the one who needs to give more???  Luke deserved so much better than Lorelai, and I really felt sorry for him by the end.

But that was always the crux of the problem with their relationship. Lorelai expected grand gestures, the ability to read her emotions, and spontaneous gestures/eloping from a guy who takes a bit to process things and buys white socks with red stripes in bulk.

[dustylil]

My own UO is that I  did not think there was anything done by either Luke or Lorelai in Season 7 that would cause the other to think there was any real likelihood of  a lasting romantic relationship between the two of them. There was too much damage and hurt. A revival of their friendship - not a small thing - was the best that they could expect.

[amensisterfriend]

I agree completely, Dusty. There was nothing that convinced me Luke and Lorelai would be any happier or better suited this time around. Even if someone could argue they had both become more conscious of their mistakes, styles of communication etc. and would therefore function better in a relationship than they used to (which I'm not sure I totally buy!), I just don't see Luke and Lorelai having that better relationship with EACH OTHER. They're still just way, way too different and fundamentally incompatible IM(U)O.  And it's not like they (again, IMUO!) have the intense romantic chemistry/passion to even initially distract them from how poorly suited they are :)   

 

A totally unrelated opinion sparked by the GG elimination game: I can't stand Cinnamon's Wake. I totally get why many love it, and there are other S1 episodes I like even less (P.S. I Lo..., I'm looking at you!), but that episode just irks me and encapsulates a lot about why S1 doesn't work for me nearly as well as S2 and S3. 

[junienmomo]

Since my last unpopular opinion turned out not to be so unpopular, here is another one that may fit the bill:  I couldn't believe Lorelai in the finale when she decided that she and Luke were over because Luke hadn't made a big enough gesture to prove his love.  Just a few episodes earlier he had spent the day driving all over God's creation and negotiating with everyone because she was whining about her heap of junk car like it was a death in the family.  All she did was write a weak letter to the court and sing him a song, but he is the one who needs to give more???  Luke deserved so much better than Lorelai, and I really felt sorry for him by the end.

Heehee CRS, you're going to have to keep looking for a UO, I fear. Lorelai had a tendency to not recognize the effort anyone put into anything. That was a ridiculous statement she made in the finale and really had me wondering if she had any ability to recognize extra effort made by others for her. The letter was something she did struggle to do well. And those of us who do appreciate Luke's efforts in general were NOT rewarded by the "I just like to see you happy" statement in the last minute of the series.

And don't get me started on the "I drove myself crazy to save the dog's life when we were living together, remodeling a house together and you COULDN'T EVEN DISCUSS the idea of getting a dog with me before you spent a ton of money on crap the dog's afraid of?" to which she responded, "I don't want to get married until my relationship with my daughter is fixed, but don't forget that I don't actually want to take any action to make it happen, she has to do it all."  That one scene drives me schizophrenically between WTF and "oh wait, this is supposed to be funny."

 

Oops. Stepping off my soapbox and kicking the box behind the sofa. 

[amensisterfriend]

I personally would declare the Luke/Lorelai blame game a tie---they were both dreadful at relationships in general and, IMUO, brought out the worst, unhappiest sides of each other while romantically involved. If I seem like I merrily gloss over Lorelai's missteps while coming down too hard on Luke (oh, dear, that sounded dirtier than I intended!!!), it's probably just because in my experience so many totally whitewash Luke's MANY major flaws and mistakes and make him out to be some sort of romantic ideal while crucifying Lorelai for every perceived error, so I guess I find myself trying to even the scales a bit :) Also, while I realize he's got a good heart, Luke's particular traits and issues just push my buttons---and not the good ones that he seems to press for almost everyone else! 

Edited June 3, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[candall]

New viewer here, about ten or twelve episodes in on ABC Family Channel, Season One.

 

I can't find it now, but somewhere in the first few pages of this UO thread, someone says that she didn't really care for the goofy flibberty gibbit Season One Lorelei and appreciated her more after she settled down in later seasons.  To that person, I say:  THANK YOU!!!  I think I get it now.

 

I've been watching and watching and trying to figure out why this show is cherished by so many when the main character is, to me, almost unbearable.  In the first place, she's weirdly possessive of her daughter.  When Rory had her first kiss, Lorelei had a meltdown watching Rory happily telling her best friend--which is what young girls do--and guilt-tripped her about it.  Nice.  Happy ending because Rory finally agrees to share all the details with her mother.   A couple of episodes later, Lorelei literally pushes Rory and Lane apart when they have their heads together, giggling together on the couch, and plops down between them.  The girl can't have a friend, crush on a boy, take an AP test or petsit the neighbor's cat without Lorelei inserting herself into the action.

 

But then she rarely makes life easier for her BFF daughter.  When Rory saw her paternal grandparents for the first time in years, Lorelei made fun of her for curtseying.  She couldn't wait to goof on that privately on the way home?  Then there's meeting the headmaster in shorty shorts, being inappropriate with Rory's teacher in the classroom, etc.  Encouraging her daughter to have a good relationship with her grandparents, when Lorelei does not, is unthinkable.

 

Plus, in every episode Lorelei carelessly insults or hurts someone and then gasps and makes a lame excuse.  "Oh.  Did I say that out loud?"  "Oh.  Blame the caffeine levels."  "Oh."  "Oh."  "Oh."

 

I was thinking the whole show must be about how the 16-year old is the parent to her immature mother, but how could that be interesting for seven seasons? 

 

But anyway, enough.  So apparently the characters change later on and Rory becomes less self-possessed and Lorelei steps up.  Right?

*******

ETA:  I guess what boosted my exasperation to the point of writing this essay-post was just now watching Lorelei crawl out the window because she didn't like the blind date her parents arranged.  I mean, really?  And another person gets to feel like crap thanks to Lorelei.  "Oh."

Edited June 4, 2015 by candall

[solotrek]

But anyway, enough.  So apparently the characters change later on and Rory becomes less self-possessed and Lorelei steps up.  Right?

 

Long story short. Kind of. I won't give any spoilers except one hidden under the spoiler tag (it is quite a spoiler though).

 

They kind of tone Lorelai down a little and she becomes more introspective, but at the same time she's still kind of selfish, appalling in behavior at times, and possessive of people (her interaction with any of Luke or Chris' girlfriends

or how she handled the April situation by being completely not understanding as to why Luke needed to get to know his daughter and didn't want to get eloped randomly(Luke handled shit poorly as well, but dealing with his even more messed up ex who was basically manipulating him with his daughter can do that to a person) and not sitting down and having a serious discussion before issuing ultimatums

; her reactions during her and Rory's issue in S6 are pretty ridiculous mother behavior and kind of jilted lover behavior IMHO). Rory grows as a character, a lot of people seem to not necessarily like how she developed, but I always thought it fit with what we saw in S1 and her environment. Emily as a character makes some great strides until the writers gave up and took all the strides back and then some. Thank goodness Emily Bishop is a great actress or Emily would have been completely unbearable. The real mother/daughter development seems to come from the Kims. Richard probably grows the most in terms of the Gilmore family. (RIP Ed Herrmann)

 

I do think if you have an intense hatred of Lorelai now, it seems like you'll probably still dislike her by the end of the show. I know that my later rewatches (after graduating high school, college, getting married, etc...) definitely put her in a more negative light. "Oh, grown up shouldn't behave like that." "Holy crap, who does that?" "I'd never want someone like that in my life." Are a few of my reactions to her nowadays.

 

However, Paris is a fun character even though she seems like the antagonist in S1. So enjoy her crazy journey.

Edited June 4, 2015 by solotrek

[amensisterfriend]

I'm not sure I agree with solotrek's assessment of how Lorelai handled events in S6, as Luke was also verrry much at fault in that whole mess as well, but overall he/she makes some good points: Lorelai's manic immaturity never totally fades :) That said, I've said here often that I do think she was markedly worse in S1---incredibly vain and childish and cutesy---and I'm definitely among those who feel she improves by S2. They tone down the vanity and precious immaturity a bit and give you more and more examples of her being a very good mother. (Which seems to be a bit of a UO around here, but, yes, I think she was a great mom despite her obvious flaws and the whole 'we're best friends first!' problem!) She's also a competent businesswoman, an involved and valuable member of the community, etc. And there are times when you may even find her energy more admirable rather than irksome. Just heed solotrek's warning not to expect TOO radical a change---she never sheds those flaws that are driving you crazy, but at most points in the series they are a little more toned down and better counterbalanced by her strengths. She still drives me nuts, but never as much as she did in S1 :) 

Edited June 4, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[solotrek]

as Luke was also verrry much at fault in that whole mess as well,

 

Spoiler tags in case candall is reading and it's a pretty big storyline.

It was definitely both their inabilities to communicate like normal people in a normal relationship. Particularly for two adults who were engaged. But in the end, I personally think issuing ultimatums in a situation like that is phenomenally immature and choosing that night to sleep with an ex to be deplorable. Especially after hiding from and ignoring the person for the entire episode or two (don't remember how many days that comes out to be). It's a personal thing, but if someone unilaterally breaks off an engagement and then chooses to sleep with someone else within a few hours, it kind turns me off from that person and it says a lot to me about how they viewed their relationship. So while Luke shares a lot of blame, in the end, it's just my personal issue with what Lorelai did on her end. And that's on top of her actions earlier that season.

 

Which seems to be a bit of a UO around here, but, yes, I think she was a great mom despite her obvious flaws and the whole 'we're best friends first!' problem!

 

Lorelai wasn't a perfect mom, but no one is unless it's a Disney movie and the mother is dead and the flashbacks are about how wonderful the mother was. She had her parenting issues for sure, but I don't think anyone could really say she was a bad mother. A lot of parents put their kids in bubbles, coddle them, hold them up on non-existent pedestals, and blame others for their child's mistakes. But in the end of the day, Lorelai gave Rory a nurturing and loving environment and allowed her to pursue what she wanted.

Edited June 4, 2015 by solotrek

[amensisterfriend]

orelai wasn't a perfect mom, but no one is unless it's a Disney movie and the mother is dead and the flashbacks are about how wonderful the mother was. She had her parenting issues for sure, but I don't think anyone could really say she was a bad mother. A lot of parents put their kids in bubbles, coddle them, hold them up on non-existent pedestals, and blame others for their child's mistakes. But in the end of the day, Lorelai gave Rory a nurturing and loving environment and allowed her to pursue what she wanted.

 

Wonderfully (and hilariously!) said, and ITA. I've seen a lot of arguments that Lorelai is actually a bad mom, but I share your opinion wholeheartedly here :) 

 

Recent posts have me thinking that I hold the UO of loving this show as much despite the characters as because of them. I'm in for the witty dialogue, the overall energy, warmth and quirky charm, etc. And while the characters and their relationships with one another are often a part of that, they're just as often a reason why I can feel my blood pressure rising ;) Even some of the ones I absolutely LOVE as fictional characters, like Paris, are people I'd flee from in real life! 

Edited June 4, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[dustylil]

I agree with asf and solotrek, Lorelai was not a bad mom. And considering their earliest circumstances - her as a very young mother and working as a low wage maid - she did a wonderful job creating an encouraging, stimulating and happy homelife for Rory.

While she may indeed have viewed her daughter much of the time  through rose-coloured glasses, I cannot blame her for all of the flaws and failings of Rory. Rory made her own choices.

[candall]

Okay!  Good stuff here, thanks so much!

 

I'm envious that some of you got to see this show filtered through various stages of your own lives--I can see where that particular litmus test would be a blast. [i feel mad that Meredith Grey has become so peremptory and self-centered and then I go back twelve seasons and--uunh?--turns out she hasn't really changed so very much. . . .   : )  ]

 

So now I'm all in and looking forward to the Gilmore journey.  As impatient as I feel with Lorelei, it's a very compelling show.  I watch those two new episodes every night while everything else on my DVR is moldering away.

 

P.S>very considerate with the spoiler tags, but please don't go to any trouble--at least on my account.  I start with the last three pages of mysteries and never met a spoiler I didn't like.

Edited June 4, 2015 by candall

[alexa]

I agree with the others.... and say give Lorelei a chance!  She really created a great life for her and her daughter given the fact she came from a rich family, had a baby young, didn't accept help, and went from a maid to managing the inn.  And she has a home, friends, and a great town full of people to support her.  I love her relationship with Rory.  I love how she raised her in a way that allowed her to feel safe but not too sheltered.  And I love they are able to be friends along with mom and daughter.  Adding to this that Rory's father was only present off and on throughout.

 

Although Lorelai has her flaws, I have always seen far more good from her than bad.  And when she is "complex" I feel that is real life rearing its head.  I think given her past, and basic human behavior, it is to be expected.

[amensisterfriend]

I may be at a table for one on this one, but I don't really want a GG movie. Way too much time has elapsed by now. And, honestly, most of what we'd be likely to get on screen is either stuff I'm not especially interested in seeing or stuff that I think is more interestingly done in fanfic and our collective imaginations :) 

[Taryn74]

It's at least a table for two, ASF.  I've never cared about a movie.  I don't even read fanfic.  I'm fine with where we left off in their lives.

[dustylil]

That would be at least a table for three. I agree, far too much time has transpired. Rory would be in her early thirties - the age of Lorelai when the show began.

And personally, I would afraid that such a  movie would turn out like that ghastly Dick Van Dyke Show  reunion special from some years back where Mary Tyler Moore seemed to be unfamiliar with the character Laura Petrie. However, being a good sport, she was willing to give the role a shot. Depressing did not begin to describe it.

[Aloeonatable]

Set the table for 4. I'm so not interested in a movie. 

[Taryn74]

Rory would be in her early thirties - the age of Lorelai when the show began.

 

 

Wow.   That's a weird thought.

[solotrek]

I'm not sure how I feel about a movie. But it'd be incredibly hard for me to watch one without Ed Herrmann.

[timimouse]

I would watch the movie but with serious hesitation. Because i think sometimes when they do that after so long, they forget the innate nature of the characters. For example, (and i know this is probably a very unpopular opinion) but i HATED the sex and the city movie. The first one. Because they changed everything about the nature of the characters and the fantastic way the show ended. Steve we knew was a good guy - he would never have cheated on Miranda. Charlotte grew a lot to become the person she did that accepted her inability to procreate; only to be blessed with a "miracle"? -_- And Samantha also grew to the point where she was in a loving committed relationship - and they took her back to her "old" season 1 self.

I'm dreading the Entourage movie for these same reasons. But I'm a loyal fan so I will watch. As I would do if they ever decided to do a GG movie. (and Friends too! )

[HeySandyStrange]

I also have mixed feelings about a GG movie, tbh. The optimistic GG-lover in me would love to see how they are doing now plus the nostalgia factor is huge. There hasn't really been anything like GG since it went off the air. The more pessimistic side realizes that the magic probably could never be captured again, especially after so many years. Plus I know I felt that the show started losing steam around season 6, so it had a chance to run its natural course the first time. I would probably (definitely) watch a movie either way, but if it meant being disappointed I'd rather a sequel never come to fruition.

Edited June 7, 2015 by HeySandyStrange

[amensisterfriend]

Plus I know I felt that the show started losing steam around season 6,

 

Heh---my UO is that GG's decline started by the end of S4...and that S7 was actually an overall improvement over both S5 and S6, albeit maybe not all that much of one ;) 

[HeySandyStrange]

 

Heh---my UO is that GG's decline started by the end of S4...

 

LOL actually I pretty much agree with this as well--I guess I was trying to be diplomatic. Honestly after season four my GG interest went down considerably and I have yet to do a complete rewatch of the last three seasons. Seasons 1-3 were gold, though, and the real reason I still put GG at the top of my list.

[junienmomo]

The nail in the coffin that allows me to claim a reserved seat at the "no sequel" table were the responses by the actors to questions about their characters during the ATX reunion. To a woman or man, they were remarkably clueless about many of the special moments that we fans cherish.

It's fair enough, we're talking 150 episodes with such a large quantity of dialog that no one had much time to reflect and file away the special things. Actors are also justifiably notorious for not watching their own work.

Also, given that ASP struck me as still (a little/somewhat/very?) bitter, I question the ability of the writing team to respond to fans' wishes, which to me is the only real reason for a sequel for GG.

I mean, what if ASP decided to go one of her original ways and never bring L/L together?  Do we really want to sit and watch 50 y.o. Lorelai telling mid-thirties Rory that Luke never responds when she make a gesture? Was there really a series boyfriend strong enough to be the One True Pairing (OTP) for Rory? (actually I can see either Jess or Logan succeeding at that).

Of course I would enjoy Dave Rygalski (sp?) coming back and taking Lane away from it all once Zach is arrested for drug possession on tour and Mrs. Kim decides to raise the babies herself.

Also finding out what truly unique and bizarre future Paris will have.

Hmm, maybe just a sequel of the secondary characters.

[txhorns79]

The nail in the coffin that allows me to claim a reserved seat at the "no sequel" table were the responses by the actors to questions about their characters during the ATX reunion. To a woman or man, they were remarkably clueless about many of the special moments that we fans cherish.

 

I would say in fairness to the actors, it's been eight years since the series went off the air.  It's entirely possible they don't revisit their old work very frequently, and moments that were special for fans might look very different when you are the person who has to act out the scene.   

[junienmomo]

I would say in fairness to the actors, it's been eight years since the series went off the air.  It's entirely possible they don't revisit their old work very frequently, and moments that were special for fans might look very different when you are the person who has to act out the scene.   

Oh, I didn't mean it in any mean way, sorry if it came across that way. I had read that LG said she doesn't watch her work and SP in the podcast couldn't remember all the names of Rory's boyfriends. Seriously, 150 episode ten years ago - must be impossible to remember tons of things.

[amensisterfriend]

I found it a little offputting as well, juniemomo, so you're not alone! I certainly don't expect them to have the encyclopedic memory of the show that many of us do, but at times they seemed totally clueless about their own show and even indifferent. Didn't Alexis say she couldn't remember ONE episode other than the Pilot?! And Scott Patterson declaring on that podcast that Rory should have ended up with Dean, whom he rather bizarrely described as "a poetic soul"?!  DEAN?! LOL. No...just no. :) It's fine if someone thinks Dean was the best of Rory's boyfriends, though I happen not to agree, but you could just tell that SP had little to no idea of who/what he was talking about.  

 

And, yeah, AS-P is still...AS-P, though at least she seems to have mercifully kicked her addiction to wearing embarrassing, attention-desperate hats ;) Whenever people talk about how the show disappointed in its final season, I think they tend to forget that S7 was stuck cleaning up the mess AS-P had made of S6 and that S5 had its share of major blunders as well. 

 

Also, I felt like Kelly Bishop seemed to be the only one who was really eager to do a GG movie anyway---well, her and the awesomely sweet actor who plays Brian, though I doubt the poor guy would have much of a role!

 

 

 

One True Pairing (OTP) for Rory? (actually I can see either Jess or Logan succeeding at that).

 

I'm not sure that Milo/Alexis would be as enthusiastic about a Rory/Jess reunion as I would be :) I'm thinking that's among the many, many aspects of the show that's now better dealt with in fanfic. Speaking of which...

 

 

Of course I would enjoy Dave Rygalski (sp?) coming back and taking Lane away from it all once Zach is arrested for drug possession on tour and Mrs. Kim decides to raise the babies herself.

 

You NEED to turn this into a fanfic---STAT! :) 

Edited June 8, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[solotrek]

I found it a little offputting as well, juniemomo, so you're not alone! I certainly don't expect them to have the encyclopedic memory of the show that many of us do, but at times they seemed totally clueless about their own show and even indifferent.

 

It's pretty normal, especially for shows that've been off air for awhile. I watch convention videos for some shows that ended around the time, before, and after GG did and those actors are pretty much the same. One of the actors explained that you need to be able to forget lines as easily as you remember them, otherwise the job would become impossible. For a show like Gilmore Girls where their scripts are longer and faster, that probably has to be doubly true. When it comes to main cast members, they tend to remember filming locations, anecdotes from filming , or maybe even how they were feeling. Unless they wrote/directed the episode it's like a huge sieve in terms of plot points and episode names. It always seemed like the recurring actors or background actors remembered episodes a bit better. Some exceptions for sure (Amanda Tapping is a fantastic convention guest because she remembers so much it's crazy)(You'd also think that a convention guest who remembers nothing about the show would be awful, but that's surprisingly wrong. And often hilarious.). LG said during the reunion that she has a terrific memory and that's both helped and hurt her, I assume for the same reasons. But I can't see how remembering episodes or specific arcs of Gilmore Girls is ever going to help Danny Strong write HBO movies about the financial crisis or Empire. Or help Matt Czuchry with the next episode of The Good Wife, or Jared with the next episode of Supernatural - both shows having pretty long runs and a ton of episodes and arcs in themselves. To them it's a job that's long since passed, to us it's an obsession.

 

Also, I felt like Kelly Bishop seemed to be the only one who was really eager to do a GG movie anyway---well, her and the awesomely sweet actor who plays Brian, though I doubt the poor guy would have much of a role!

 

Scott seemed pretty gung ho about the idea as well. Seems like it's the actors playing characters that had a pointless S7 experience really want something to give their characters a proper goodbye. Emily was some sort of preS1 caricature Emily in S7, Luke was stuck in the April plot, did we see Brian much?

 

I think I liked the series finale because it was so open ended. Rory could end up with Dean-Jess-Logan-a new guy the world was really her oyster by that point, Lorelai and Luke could become awesome awkward BFF or husband-wife, Richard's death could have made Emily re-evaluate how she treated Lorelai and they could have a great relationship or it'd make her more insufferable, Lane will be happily married or happily divorced as the next Lorelai or Mrs Kim, etc etc. It's all up to fans and we can choose what we want. A movie that makes a final decision will please only a specific % of fans for every characters plot point. I wouldn't say no to a movie, but I guess I was always surprised when people said the series finale wasn't a planned series finale. It felt right.

 

And Scott Patterson declaring on that podcast that Rory should have ended up with Dean, whom he rather bizarrely described as "a poetic soul"?!  DEAN?! LOL. No...just no. :)

 

To be fair, at the reunion he declared none of them good enough for Rory. Also during Matt's reddit AMA, he said he was Team Logan. But at the reunion, he said he was Team Jess. It feels like if you ask any of them at a different time/location, they'll eventually be team everyone or no one.

Edited June 8, 2015 by solotrek

[amensisterfriend]

It's weird, because pretty much everyone refers to the series finale as being very open ended with regard to Luke and Lorelai, but for some reason I thought it was pretty understood they were getting back together...and I say this as a member of the tiny minority who didn't even WANT them to get back together, so that wasn't wishful thinking on my part! I agree that we didn't know the exact when and what---(married, 'just dating', resuming immediately vs. rebuilding more trust first, etc.)---but I thought it was really clearly headed in that direction.  

 

I do totally agree with solotrek about thinking the finale was actually a nearly ideal end to the series, though---some loose ends were tied up while others were left to our imagination. I just don't think a movie would be necessary or even all that desirable at this point. 

Edited June 8, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[solotrek]

It's weird, because pretty much everyone refers to the series finale as being very open ended with regard to Luke and Lorelai, but for some reason I thought it was pretty understood they were getting back together

 

My opinion of it being open ended is that it's been a long time since the finale and they both have awful track records when it comes to relationships. One call from Christopher or one summons from Anna Nardini and it seems like the whole thing would fall apart. And then come back together, fall apart, come back together, etc etc. Probably easier to settle giving them each a daisy and tell them to pull of petals. If they both have "he/she loves me" at the end ,stay together; if not, end it.

[amensisterfriend]

I totally get it, solotrek---and I edited my above post after first writing it to agree wholeheartedly with your UO re the finale :)

[Aloeonatable]

 

Scott seemed pretty gung ho about the idea as well. Seems like it's the actors playing characters that had a pointless S7 experience really want something to give their characters a proper goodbye. Emily was some sort of preS1 caricature Emily in S7, Luke was stuck in the April plot, did we see Brian much?

 

I think it is more of reliving a big part of their career. I know to us Scott is Luke and probably is his most iconic role, the one character he is best known for portraying. I know that Kelly is a Tony winning actress, but on television (or the movies for that matter) her fan base know her as Emily Gilmore. Matt, Milo and Jared have moved on to more roles. Jared is more commonly associated with Supernatural, Milo with Heroes, and Matt with The Good Wife. 

 

I think many actors like to move on from the roles they've done before.

[lottiedottie]

Wow.   That's a weird thought.

Not only that, but  since everyone has aged a bit, it's quite likely that Rory might have a child or two of her own...and having Lorelai be a grandma might be strange! (assuming they don't mess with the time line and pretend that just a few years have passed--although the cast overwhelmingly looks good, it seems like a stretch to do that)

[blueray]

Not only that, but  since everyone has aged a bit, it's quite likely that Rory might have a child or two of her own...and having Lorelai be a grandma might be strange! (assuming they don't mess with the time line and pretend that just a few years have passed--although the cast overwhelmingly looks good, it seems like a stretch to do that)

Maybe this is an opinion for one but I don't think the cast aged that much. They all look the same mostly. And it seemed to me most of them would agree to do something. I'm sure it would be hard to get Melissa to agree to do something since her career took off, however you never know.

 

I would totally watch a movie if they made one, however if it were up to me I'd a mini-series (3 episodes max though). It would take place a few years after the show ended (but less than 8). I'm not sure what the plot would be but somehow it would give more or better direction the characters went. I can see Luke and Lorelei's wedding being in it, but that is because I want them together.

Edited June 8, 2015 by blueray

[Kohola3]

One of the actors explained that you need to be able to forget lines as easily as you remember them, otherwise the job would become impossible.

 

Which makes sense for the actors.  We, however, have the dialog for the entire series mostly memorized after multiple viewings!

[JayInChicago]

I like the ending as is, with Lorelai and Rory both winding up not in romantic relationships (though obviously Luke/Lorelai could be easily viewed as restarting in the finale) and ending up separated from each other by Rory's life and career. I do wonder if they would still have Rory in the active journalist role which seemed pretty ill-fitting for her. 

 

Not saying that I wouldn't watch a movie. I would. I'd be first in line.

[lottiedottie]

Maybe this is an opinion for one but I don't think the cast aged that much. They all look the same mostly. And it seemed to me most of them would agree to do something. I'm sure it would be hard to get Melissa to agree to do something since her career took off, however you never know.

 

I would totally watch a movie if they made one, however if it were up to me I'd a mini-series (3 episodes max though). It would take place a few years after the show ended (but less than 8). I'm not sure what the plot would be but somehow it would give more or better direction the characters went. I can see Luke and Lorelei's wedding being in it, but that is because I want them together.

I think enough of them look their age that it would be implausible to have them only be a few years older if they did some sort of reunion movie. Keiko and Liza in particular, to me look their age--don't get me wrong, I think they are both stunning and look great (love Liza's short hair!) but I just think they can't make it seem like these characters are 26-ish). They would have been about 22 when they graduated from college.

 

At any rate, it would be interesting to see what storyline they would come up with for a reboot (whether a movie or limited series). 

[desertflower]

Have I got an unpopular opinion for you guys! Please don't run me off, but I actually liked Luke's sister Liz. Granted, I'm in season 4 right now so they haven't moved in with the baby yet, and I haven't seen those eps in awhile so maybe she gets worse and I just forgot. But I think she's sweet and I like her scenes with Luke. Maybe it's just that the actress is a lot less shrill and annoying than she was as Chloe on ER, so in comparison she's a lot more pleasant!

[Taryn74]

I liked Liz too!  I even liked TJ, heh.

[eledgy]

I was watching A Family Matter and Nag Hammadi over the weekend and was thinking the same thing---I liked Liz and even TJ much better when first introduced (TJ esp became super grating to me later).

 

I think the Liz/Luke scenes over these 2 eps are good at capturing the awkwardness/hope/bitterness/discomfort of the reunion of a family/siblings with a lot of trauma/dysfunction in their past. And I like it when TJ calls Luke a dick--he was indeed being a dick, even though I can see where Luke was coming from. I think the subtle thing that comes through is that TJ is the newcomer--he doesn't know, or at least hasn't experienced, all the past, all the problems. He knows Liz now, loves Liz now.  And that can be a good thing, and I think Luke comes around to that a bit--that he can let go of some of the past anger and hurt, give Liz a chance, and even TJ.

Edited June 9, 2015 by eledgy

[Taryn74]

I think the Liz/Luke scenes over these 2 eps are good at capturing the awkwardness/hope/bitterness/discomfort of the reunion of a family/siblings with a lot of trauma/dysfunction in their past.

 

 

They really are.  Liz so desperately wants Luke to know she really is doing well this time, she's not just putting on a front, and he's so used to being disappointed by (in) her that he'll have none of it.  It makes me so sad.

[dustylil]

I didn't dislike TJ as much as I did Liz . Of course, I had thought Liz and Christopher would have made a lovely, whiny match ; ) They had so much in common. But I digress. 

I certainly did think  though that TJ - not Luke - was the "dick" in that first episode where we met him. Who the hell rummages through another person's refrigerator  uninvited? It wasn't as if this was Liz's family home where he might feel some sense of entitlement as her fiancé. This was her brother's apartment.

I know ASP often played rudeness for laughs. Drella comes to mind. But why she chose to do this with a character that I believe was intended to show a warmer, more sympathetic side of Liz I never understood.

Edited June 9, 2015 by dustylil

[amensisterfriend]

I know ASP often played rudeness for laughs. Drella comes to mind

 

Heh---just Drella?! I would say that applies to, like, 98% of characters in the GG-verse...and that might be a conservative estimate ;) 

 

I, too, hold the opinion of disliking Liz even more than TJ for reasons already rambled about at length. But I could very, very happily have done without TJ as well!

[amensisterfriend]

ETA: I recently rewatched parts of S6 (I know...masochistic much?!), and it spawned a few UOs:

 

1) I thought Luke and Lorelai seemed so mutually unethusiastic (and that's a very gentle way of putting it!) about their engagement from the very start that in retrospect I'm kind of surprised any of us thought they had a better chance of going through with it than Lorelai/Max. Actually, Lorelai/Max seemed far happier and more excited during their short-lived engagement...and you guys know I can't stand Lorelai/Max. 

 

2) Despite my annoyance with all things Anna and April, I think the latter half of S6 is much better than the first half overall. Lorelai/Rory estranged is much more detrimental to the show than Luke/Lorelai tension for me, especially since, as noted above, L/L so rarely seemed happy and connected even pre-April anyway. 

 

3) Maybe this relates to the fact that my expectations of S5 were and still are higher of S5 than S6 so that when the latter gives us even a few great scenes, lines and moments I find myself so happily surprised whileas S5 just continues to disappoint, but right now I think I'd rank S6 above S5 by a millimeter or two. I can't even justify this one! I do think that S6 had a surprising number of interesting ideas and themes...as poorly executed as they may have been :) 

Edited June 13, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[Taryn74]

Actually, Lorelai/Max seemed far happier and more excited during their short-lived engagement...and you guys know I can't stand Lorelai/Max.

 

 

I think, for me, it's just that Lorelai never really seemed all that serious about Max, even when they were engaged.  She was like Rory during the dinner in TDDR - playacting at being married but as though even she knew it was only for a short while.

 

L/L, on the other hand, weren't as "happy" but I really felt like they were both trying.  There was just too much other stuff to wade through, for it to work.

[junienmomo]

1) I thought Luke and Lorelai seemed so mutually unethusiastic (and that's a very gentle way of putting it!) about their engagement from the very start that in retrospect I'm kind of surprised any of us thought they had a better chance of going through with it than Lorelai/Max. 

 

LOL, who would WANT to marry POD Lorelai? Oh wait, that would be Christopher.

Looking back on S5 from a distance (haven't seen it in a while), it simply wasn't satisfying from a javajunkie perspective, even though it was the best we got.  The deliberate continued separation of L/L, from the idiotic renaissance fair to the cider parade, now seem to be more signs of weakness in writing than simply funny mishaps. 

I say this as I sit here really really enjoying Friday Night Lights S1, the incredible chemistry of Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton and the wonderful intimate writing that supported them. That's good romance writing. GG S5 was not. GG all episodes was not. 

 

Hmm. After pondering the Emily/Lorelai relationship bobbles, I wonder if the inability to write romance was more an inability to write intimacy.

[amensisterfriend]

To be fair, IMUO marrying S5-S6 Luke isn't too appealing a prospect either---he could only communicate when yelling or bickering or complaining or freaking out about answering machine messages, he was even more negative and bitter and evasive than usual, he squashed everyone's enthusiasm for sport, he stranded her at her parents' wedding ceremony without even bothering to make sure she had a ride or cab fare to get home and completely froze her out like a child giving someone the 'silent treatment' before even allowing her to speak, he always threw fits before even allowing her to explain things, he's still allergic to the words 'I'm sorry' regardless of the circumstances, he's initially mean and bitter about her dog, he hollers at her on a rooftop in front of random construction workers, (and IMUO she wasn't putting him 'in the middle' at all---he barely had any individual relationship with Rory by then, and even if he did, Lorelai certainly hadn't insisted that he stop communicating with her!) etc...and all that is before the Long Lost Daughter debacle!  I think it's fair to say that nearly ALL the characters were at their worst for me in S5-S6 (IMO, S7 brought back a certain measure of likability to many of them!): Lorelai, Luke, Emily, Richard, Sookie, etc. were all at their least likable then. At least I could still count on Paris being awesomely Paris-esque...but you know it's a rough stretch of GG when I get ridiculously excited to see the obnoxious Beau, who became one of my favorites by default :)   How's THAT for an unpopular opinion?! (And I love Beau even more now after becoming addicted to Parks and Rec!) 

 

Hmm. After pondering the Emily/Lorelai relationship bobbles, I wonder if the inability to write romance was more an inability to write intimacy.

 

That is a fascinating hypothesis! It did seem like in depicting familial relationships and romantic relationships they were a whole lot better at writing fantastic breakups and makeups (romantic and otherwise!) than the day-to-day intimacy that comes in between, with the S1-S4 Lorelai/Rory relationship as the happy exception, at least for me. 

 

I think part of it is just the inevitable downside of being on the air for more than a couple of seasons: you need to try to show some sort of change, growth and evolution while not straying too far from what made the characters and their relationships so uniquely THEM (which, in GG's case, often means amusingly flawed and mildly dysfunctional!) So in some ways I get why Emily/Lorelai were written as 'one step forward, two steps back'---what bugged me was just how often they did that dance of dysfunction and how it started to feel like they took seven or eight steps back for every single step forward!

 

Since 'conflict drives story' and all that, even on a show like GG which barely cares about plot at all, I get why the writers felt like they had to keep introducing 'obstacles'---sadly, the obstacles they selected and the way they implemented them left a whole lot to be desired! 

 

...all this is bringing me back to my UO that Paris/Rory was probably the most skillfully depicted dynamic on the whole show. :) 

 

---Oh, and you guys, I found another reason to support my weird UO re currently preferring S6 to S5 (albeit by a really thin margin): Zack is definitely more tolerable to me in this sixth season. I can't stand him in S5 and even S4, but by S6 he's...tolerable to me. And tolerable is a marked improvement! Plus, S6 has even more awesome Paris moments than S5.  And did I mention my fondness for Beau?! Yeah, I'll show myself the door ;)

 

ETA: Is it a UO that my heart still swells at the Lorelai/Rory reconciliation in S6 despite thinking the rift was horribly executed and knowing that there was no real learning, change or growth?! 

[Taryn74]

Hee.  I kinda floved Beau in Godmother.