One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[Guest]

I think Paris was best in very limited doses, much like many of the supporting characters.  There were times I thought she had far too much screen time.  Her character was amusing, but I didn't think she had any redeeming qualities.  I'm critical of Lorelei and Rory (especially Rory) but I see redeeming qualities in them.  Paris would turn on someone on a dime. She was rude to just about everyone. She had almost no self-awareness, no compassion, and didn't really develop any over the course of the series.

[readster]

I think Paris was best in very limited doses, much like many of the supporting characters.  There were times I thought she had far too much screen time.  Her character was amusing, but I didn't think she had any redeeming qualities.  I'm critical of Lorelei and Rory (especially Rory) but I see redeeming qualities in them.  Paris would turn on someone on a dime. She was rude to just about everyone. She had almost no self-awareness, no compassion, and didn't really develop any over the course of the series.

 

 Paris at times would also just go down crazy down alley all of a sudden. Her locking herself in and thinking everyone was against her at the Yale Daily News when she was editor. Plus, her entire affair with Professor Fletcher and why she broke up with Jaime and not to mention her problems with her freshman roommates. Her major break down on TV when she found out she didn't get into Harvard. That was too much.

[Guest]

 Paris at times would also just go down crazy down alley all of a sudden. Her locking herself in and thinking everyone was against her at the Yale Daily News when she was editor. Plus, her entire affair with Professor Fletcher and why she broke up with Jaime and not to mention her problems with her freshman roommates. Her major break down on TV when she found out she didn't get into Harvard. That was too much.

Those were some of the main ones but even just in minor ways, she was shown to be so selfish.  Insisting on having the bigger room in Season 5, being rude to the staff at the Dragonfly, insulting Sookie's cooking, etc.

[dustylil]

The following comments concern Paris up to the end of the fifth season only -

For whatever reason in the Gilmore Girls universe, being rude and inconsiderate was often a default position.  so I never viewed Paris as any kind of outlier in that respect. As well, given that she appeared to have no one in her family life beside a paid employee, I was willing to cut her some slack. After all, look at all the support Rory had in her world - adoring mother, doting grandparents, supportive townies - and by the end of the fifth season, she had really gone off the rails!

I wish her relationship with Asher Fleming had been allowed to continue beyond the early part of Season 5, he might have been able to provide her with the emotional security and support she so clearly needed.

Edited July 6, 2015 by dustylil

[junienmomo]

 

Amensisterfriend wrote about 2+ weeks ago

Speaking of which, I still hold the UO that Luke spontaneously marrying Nicole on that cruise is among the more ridiculous, annoyingly out-of-character storylines that AS-P ever wrote. (I mean this as a compliment when I say that a drunken impulsive marriage to someone he never even seemed to love is just NOT Luke, especially given that he himself admits one of his shortcomings is that he's too slow to make decisions and act---NOT too hasty and rash!)

 

I'm at that table, even as a confirmed Luke lover. 

When did GG jump the shark? My current and ever-changing opinion is that it happened with the Nicole storyline, but not when they went on the cruise, rather when Luke decided to not get divorced. 

I can fanwank the cruise as a hated-but-the-writers-needed-it plot point to keep L and L separate, and even marginally understand the drunken wedding (heck, someone even wrote a fanfic for L/L to do a drunken wedding, I think), but for Luke to give up his home, even in self-deception, and not try to integrate Nicole into SH at all puts a cap on the absurdity of the storyline as ASF so eloquently described earlier.

 

There was more shark-jumping, but for me this is the one that changed the tenor of the L/L 'One True Pairing' that TPTB seemed to think would kill the show if it ever happened. To extensively paraphrase and probably put words in Scott Patterson's mouth: <looking back on> Luke's hesitation and reticence to even ask Lorelai out was not something any remotely reasonable adult man would do.

 

(Other shark-jumping: no clear arc for Lorelai and Emily to grow together; Rory/Dean sex; S6 Pod Lorelai. By the time April came along the sharks were tired of being jumped and they just flailed in the water snapping at anything that floated by.)

Edited July 6, 2015 by junienmomo

[readster]

 

There was more shark-jumping, but for me this is the one that changed the tenor of the L/L 'One True Pairing' that TPTB seemed to think would kill the show if it ever happened. To extensively paraphrase and probably put words in Scott Patterson's mouth: <looking back on> Luke's hesitation and reticence to even ask Lorelai out was not something any remotely reasonable adult man would do.

Completely agree and even with Lauren Graham, Scott Paterson and other cast members said. Even if the main actors didn't really like themselves outside the set. They never once said they didn't be good employees and did their jobs on the set as professionals. Even Melissa McCarthy said she had problems with Alexis early in the series but they became friends later on, but they both said they had a job to do and they were professionals when they were on the set. It was the TPTB that had it in their heads the entire "Moonlighting Curse" which many shows have constantly used as an excuse when many critics and former stars of the show have said it was not about writing but about the actors themselves, writers, and the writers strike. It was like on How I Met your Mother when they put various characters together and then didn't know how to write them. They blamed the "Moonlighting Curse" instead of their inability to write good stories for the characters. 

[timimouse]

I still hold the UO that the rift between Lorelai and Rory was a brilliant storyline and it almost made season 6 my favourite season. What killed it for me however was introduction of April Nardini. I am not opposed to her presence. I actually think that it was an interesting twist also. What REALLY upset me was how Luke made such a HUGE issue about them being 100% honest with each other and it was "the only way things would work" between them, yet in that SAME episode he found out this life changing news and didn't tell his fiancé? Seriously? It was SO out of character! I will never understand why TPTB think it's impossible to have a functional happy couple on TV!

[txhorns79]

I still hold the UO that the rift between Lorelai and Rory was a brilliant storyline

 

I think the rift itself was a good idea.  It honestly could have been a real growth experience for both Rory and Lorelai to develop a more functional and adult relationship with one another.  However, I think the writers were unwilling to commit, and the whole thing just kind of petered out without a real resolution between the two. 

[readster]

I think the rift itself was a good idea.  It honestly could have been a real growth experience for both Rory and Lorelai to develop a more functional and adult relationship with one another.  However, I think the writers were unwilling to commit, and the whole thing just kind of petered out without a real resolution between the two. 

I agree on both parts. I was originally excited about it too and then it just fell apart. Even worst was how Rory never really learned anything until the very end that just because she her family and friends thought she was great doesn't mean everyone would. Of course even when she was at Chilton that happened early on too. I think the real problem was that Lorelai didn't really do anything during the rift and Luke was the only smart adult in the entire thing. He said he was involved no matter what and he would support either of them. That was the Luke I knew and love, not the moron that then appeared when April came riding in on her bike. I also had the problem because Richard and Emily looked like they would get a wake up call to their world being the way it was. Then Wedding Bell Blues happened and Chris came back into the picture. Because remember: "The mother of his daughter walked out on him. Poor Christopher!" 

[amensisterfriend]

ITA that if any discernible growth or change had resulted from the Lorelai/Rory rift, I'd look back on it far more favorably! 

 

Maybe even more unpopularly: I think the infamous affair with Dean could have been incredibly interesting in theory also, and you guys know I harbor an irrational dislike towards Dean :) It would have been interesting to see the town view their erstwhile angel through a new and critical eye and Rory's subsequent reaction to that. It would have been interesting to see how Rory was forced to reassess her own view of herself as a 'good girl' in light of what she had done and even her ill-fated attempts to 'make things up' to Lindsay, only to realize that some things we do can't ever be taken back or forgiven. It would have been interesting to explore her reaction if Dean/Lindsay had opted to try to make their marriage work even in the wake of the affair (which happens quite frequently in real life!) and come to terms with the idea that she gravitated towards Dean in the first place because he represented a security, familiarity and unconditional adoration lacking in her new life at Yale.   It would have been gratifying to see her more gradually learn to forgive herself enough to move forward and the degree to which she now had trouble trusting her own judgment when it comes to men. 

 

A lot of the above could have been explored subtly and with humor---lord knows I didn't want GG to turn into a heavy, darker drama or a soap. But I do think the maddening part of the Dean/Rory nonsense for me isn't that she slept with him or that this meant he was back on our screens---it was that the fallout ranged from embarrassingly lame to totally nonexistent.  

 

That's why IMO GG should have stuck with their original philosophy that 'less is more' and stuck to wringing a surprising amount of emotion and humor from life's small, most everyday occurrences IMO---when they tried to tackle Big Events (Rory has an affair and Lorelai walks in on it! Emily overtly schemes to break up Lorelai and Luke by inviting Christopher to a huge fancy event and Lorelai tells her they're done for good! Rory steals a yacht, drops out of school, and the freakishly linked mom-daughter duo becomes totally estranged! Luke has a long lost daughter! Lorelai spontaneously marries Christopher!...etc.), they just seem so woefully unable to handle the aftermath that it always makes me wish they hadn't introduced those plotlines to begin with :)   

Edited July 8, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[timimouse]

Maybe even more unpopularly: I think the infamous affair with Dean could have been incredibly interesting in theory also, and you guys know I harbor an irrational dislike towards Dean :) It would have been interesting to see the town view their erstwhile angel through a new and critical eye and Rory's subsequent reaction to that.

 

Speaking of which, how does everyone else feel about Luke's behaviour towards Dean, during his post-divorce relationship with Rory? I found him to be hugely hypocritical with all that "he's not good enough" talk, mirroring exactly what Richard and Emily thought of him. Yet again, putting Rory on a pedestal and making Dean the villain. She DID after all sleep with a man she knew was married. And rationalised it with "he was mine first" -_- In no way was she innocent there.... 

[Anela]

Completely agree and even with Lauren Graham, Scott Paterson and other cast members said. Even if the main actors didn't really like themselves outside the set. They never once said they didn't be good employees and did their jobs on the set as professionals. Even Melissa McCarthy said she had problems with Alexis early in the series but they became friends later on, but they both said they had a job to do and they were professionals when they were on the set. It was the TPTB that had it in their heads the entire "Moonlighting Curse" which many shows have constantly used as an excuse when many critics and former stars of the show have said it was not about writing but about the actors themselves, writers, and the writers strike. It was like on How I Met your Mother when they put various characters together and then didn't know how to write them. They blamed the "Moonlighting Curse" instead of their inability to write good stories for the characters. 

How did they have problems?

[dustylil]

timimouse,I thought Luke was hypocritical for another reason. Like Dean, he  married a woman while infatuated with another and like the younger man, put little effort in his marriage. Happily for Luke, his wife was unfaithful so he was not required to seriously reflect on his own conduct during wedlock. Months later at the Pippi date, he certainly showed no self-awareness when he was criticizing Dean

He was pining for Rory, and he got married. That's unstable.

 

 I dearly wished Lorelai had then quietly asked him if he had had the horoscope in his wallet when he married Nicole. It might have given him a metaphorical kick in the pants and put their own relationship on a more realistic, even mature,  plane.

[Guest]

timimouse,I thought Luke was hypocritical for another reason. Like Dean, he  married a woman while infatuated with another and like the younger man, put little effort in his marriage. Happily for Luke, his wife was unfaithful so he was not required to seriously reflect on his own conduct during wedlock. Months later at the Pippi date, he certainly showed no self-awareness when he was criticizing Dean

 I dearly wished Lorelai had then quietly asked him if he had had the horoscope in his wallet when he married Nicole. It might have given him a metaphorical kick in the pants and put their own relationship on a more realistic, even mature,  plane.

 

Maybe that's (in part) why he was so hard on Dean.  A lot of times people will be hard on people who do something that they see in themself that they don't like.  Of course, the show never hinted at this because at that point consistency and characterization were after thoughts.

[amensisterfriend]

I thought Luke was hypocritical for another reason. Like Dean, he  married a woman while infatuated with another and like the younger man, put little effort in his marriage. Happily for Luke, his wife was unfaithful so he was not required to seriously reflect on his own conduct during wedlock. Months later at the Pippi date, he certainly showed no self-awareness when he was criticizing Dean

 

Please don't cyber-attack me for this one, but I hold the very unpopular opinion of thinking that Luke and Dean actually had A TON of similarities and that many of the common criticisms of the very unpopular Dean (and to a lesser extent even Jess, for that matter!) apply just as strongly to the immensely popular Luke as well (angry, negative, bitter, boring, jealous, etc), so Luke's typically over-the-top contempt for Dean was always both interesting and a little irksome to me. I totally get that the writers were trying to show that Luke was like the typical overprotective father to Rory, but if they wanted to sell me on the 'Luke as Rory's surrogate father despite the fact that we almost NEVER saw them interact independently of Lorelai and Jess!' thing, there were better ways to do it. (I hold the UO of not buying Luke/Rory as close enough to be de facto father/daughter as well, though I wanted to see it and really tried to!) And since Luke wasn't exactly prone to introspection, apologies, calm reflection, clear communication, acknowledgement of one's own role in problematic relationships, etc., the hypocrisy and oblivious emulation of the same behavior he condemned in others doesn't surprise me.  Then again, a lot of what I just described isn't unique to Luke, especially in S5-S6! 

Edited July 9, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[timimouse]

I hold the UO of not buying Luke/Rory as close enough to be de facto father/daughter as well, though I wanted to see it and really tried to!)

 

I wasn't sure if this was an UO or not but i surely agree with that. There were too many inconsistencies with that story.... how could they have been so close to Luke but didn't know about his "dark day"? and their interactions alwasy felt so... unnatural.

[txhorns79]

I wasn't sure if this was an UO or not but i surely agree with that. There were too many inconsistencies with that story.... how could they have been so close to Luke but didn't know about his "dark day"? and their interactions always felt so... unnatural.

 

Yes!  I totally agree.  They seemed to have a friendly relationship, but it wasn't like Rory was running off to Luke for fatherly advice, or Luke did parental-type things for her.  I honestly thought Luke giving Rory his mother's pearls was sweet, but probably over the top given their relationship. 

[amensisterfriend]

and their interactions alwasy felt so... unnatural.

 

Thank you! I felt like the surprisingly few Rory/Luke interactions we saw tended to come across as kind of stilted as well. A lot of adults in the community took an active interest in Rory's upbringing, and I always felt like Rory just viewed Luke as one of the many Stars Hollow adults of whom she was fond. And as far as non-Lorelai adults go, I always saw Rory as far closer to Richard and even Sookie than she was to Luke. You could even argue that during the ill-fated Lorelai/Max relationship she was much more eager to embrace Max as a father figure than she ever was with Luke, even while Lorelai/Luke were dating---which makes sense, given that Max and Rory share a love of literature, a passion for education, etc. I honestly never saw her viewing Luke as an adoptive father figure. As pointed out above, they didn't really even have a separate relationship that was independent of Lorelai and Jess.  (And, yes, tinimouse, our opinion on this issue is a very unpopular one---particularly among many Luke/Lorelai fans! Though TXhorns appears to concur, so we can enjoy our table for three ;) ) 

[dustylil]

asf, I never saw Luke as any kind of father-figure to Rory either. And I agree that Rory did not view him as such.

She had men in her family - her deadbeat father, one grandfather who considered her a  mistake and the other grandfather who had pretty much ignored her for the first fifteen years of her life - who could have but chose not to take on a real paternal role towards her. That simply was the hand she was dealt.

She was fortunate however in that she did have men in her world - like Luke and to an extent Morey and Jackson - who modeled kindly and decent male behaviour. That would likely stand her in good stead as time went on.

[solotrek]

She was fortunate however in that she did have men in her world - like Luke and to an extent Morey and Jackson - who modeled kindly and decent male behaviour. That would likely stand her in good stead as time went on.

 

Was Jackson very much involved in Rory's early life though? It didn't seem like Jackson was more than the vegetable guy until he got involved with Sookie. At the time of her growing up, he'd probably be on the level of Taylor or something. She seemed to be around Michele more than Jackson, for better or worse.

[Guest]

Yes!  I totally agree.  They seemed to have a friendly relationship, but it wasn't like Rory was running off to Luke for fatherly advice, or Luke did parental-type things for her.  I honestly thought Luke giving Rory his mother's pearls was sweet, but probably over the top given their relationship. 

 

I think I've said this before, but I'm not sure.  If they had such a fatherly relationship and he was so involved in her life, why was she shocked when he made her a  coffee cake and tied balloons for her on her 16th birthday?  It all seemed like retcon to me to contrast with how Chris was never there.

 

But it was unnecessary.  The core storyline as first presented was that a single mom raised her daughter practically alone and their relationship. To go back and rewrite it to seem like "you need a village" undermined a lot of that, as well as made a lot of Season 1 feel off.

[JayInChicago]

She seemed to be around Michele more than Jackson, for better or worse.

 

Can I just...the French male name for this character is Michel. It's a cognate of Michael.   Sorry for the correction. 

[solotrek]

Can I just...the French male name for this character is Michel. It's a cognate of Michael.   Sorry for the correction. 

No worries, I spelled Lorelai - Lorelei for years before I realized I was wrong. No one corrected me and it made me feel like no one read anything I had ever posted. So just the fact that someone read something, it's great!

[dustylil]

solotrek, no I did not think that Jackson was involved in her early life. Just that he was around when she was a teenager - after he became involved with Sookie - and even attended her Chilton graduation. That was a nice thing for him to do.

 

deeja, speaking of retcons, why if - as we were told in the seventh season - Luke had been giving Rory gifts (usually monogrammed or with a unicorn theme) for years, it is even more surprising that  she was so taken aback by the balloons and coffee cake for her sixteenth birthday. If we are to believe what we were told in the last season, Luke had been recognizing her birthday for some time at that point.

 

Respectfully, I must say that I never found the series showed any evidence of  it taking a village to raise Rory. I saw it as  Lorelai doing  it pretty much on her own. Certainly her circle of friends - Sookie, Jackson,  the Dells, Luke, Patty, Mia, and perhaps a handful of others within the town -

- took an interest in her daughter. But I thought that was in keeping what one might expect from friends. I saw nothing of the townies showing any more concern for Rory than they might Lane or any other young girl in the community. Now if Stars Hollow had held fund-raisers to help send Rory to Chilton or to Yale, then I would be inclined to change my mind ;)

Edited July 10, 2015 by dustylil

[junienmomo]

Respectfully, I must say that I never found the series showed any evidence of  it taking a village to raise Rory. I saw it as  Lorelai doing  it pretty much on her own. 

That's what I observed as well, and I believe Lorelai liked it that way. She wanted to make all the decisions about Rory herself, and her dad and other relatives were mostly pushed away by Lorelai. She 'wanted' Christopher in Rory's life, but not in the way that she would lose control. 

Max ran up against that wall with the Rory/Dean on the porch thing. 

Luke got in under Lorelai's radar when he came in to ask Rory to tutor Jess. He didn't ask Lorelai if that were OK, and she really didn't like that, but gave him her passive-aggressive benefit of the doubt. That of course went to pot after the accident when she blamed Luke for bringing Jess to SH.

What I think she was really upset about was Jess' influence on Rory, an area that Lorelai really had no control over.

Suddenly Rory has gone from Dean, the Ken doll boyfriend to Jess, the dangerous guy who can't be controlled. Makes me wonder sometimes if Lorelai and Mrs. Kim weren't more alike than I thought.

[txhorns79]

But it was unnecessary.  The core storyline as first presented was that a single mom raised her daughter practically alone and their relationship. To go back and rewrite it to seem like "you need a village" undermined a lot of that, as well as made a lot of Season 1 feel off.

 

I don't know if it was a retcon.  I think the "it takes a village" theme was always there.  I mean, just from a practical sense, it would be extremely difficult for Lorelai to have raised Rory without a lot of help.  Heck, without Mia's benevolence, Lorelai's running away would have lasted about a day, because most jobs aren't going to give you free room and board, let you carry your baby around with you while you work and have your boss serve as a surrogate mother.   

[takalotti]

I won't get too deep into this because it's the OitLN thread, where UOs are supposed to be backed up, not torn down, but here's how I saw the "Luke is like a father to Rory" thing.

First, I agree with most of what's been said here: Luke and Rory did not have a cuddly close daddy's little girl type of relationship or even an advisory mentor kind of deal.

However, I always took the "Luke is like a father to Rory" thing to mostly be about stability, security and dependability. Luke took care of the GGs the best way he knew how: by fixing things around their house and feeding them. He could always be counted on for that kind of stuff. He showed up, whether it was a graduation, a town event, or whatever.

[txhorns79]

However, I always took the "Luke is like a father to Rory" thing to mostly be about stability, security and dependability. Luke took care of the GGs the best way he knew how: by fixing things around their house and feeding them. He could always be counted on for that kind of stuff. He showed up, whether it was a graduation, a town event, or whatever.

 

I appreciate the perspective.  I guess I always saw Luke doing things like going to Rory's graduation, feeding the girls and fixing things around their house as a sign of his affection for Lorelai.  That isn't to say he didn't care about Rory, just that his actions were more for Lorelai's benefit. 

[Anela]

I didn't see Luke as a father figure, either, but he did panic when Lorelai said she'd run away, and went into one of his vents when he found out that she'd dropped out of college. He also flipped when she was alone with Jess (upstairs). He did seem protective of her, at times.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Anela

[JayInChicago]

I personally kind of disregard the "Luke made me a coffee cake!! and balloons??!?!?" as being sort of early first seaon's don't-quite-know what the characters are gonna be about. I think in later seasons we are supposed to assume that despite that blip, Luke really was some sort of quasi father figure type to Rory.  

 

I also read that scene a little differently than maybe some here do...I thought it was more a commentary on how Luke almost never shows his softer side, so balloons would especially be kind of ridiculous. 

Or hell, maybe Lorelai straight up lied in her character letter or whatever it was.

Edited July 11, 2015 by JayInChicago

[pawneerangers]

Hi Gilmore Girls fans! I just binged this whole series for the first time over the past month and now it's one of  my favorite shows. Getting to watch it all the time was the best part of being sick. I can tell from reading this site that a lot of my opinions are unpopular but since you all seem so nice I thought I would share them anyway! 

 

I ended up loving Logan and got really into the Rory and Logan relationship despite disliking him at first. I don't even usually like those type of guys, but they ended up my favorite couple on the show! I still can't believe that even as I'm writing it, lol. I think I like the end seasons a lot more than most do because I just really enjoyed Rory and Logan a lot except of course for the bridesmaid thing and Logan being a drunken jerk when Jess came back to town. 

 

All of Lorelai's relationships depressed me for some reason and I just wanted her to be single and loving it. 

 

I tried to love Jess like almost all of you do but thought he was kind of a jerk. I actually thought Jess and Dean were kind of similar, and not in a good way. And I think I agree with whoever said that both of them were a lot like Luke in terms of the worst sides of their personalities. Luke was okay, but I didn't like him as much as most people do and thought his relationship with Lorelai was disappointing even before April showed up. Lauren Graham looked miserable around the guy who plays Luke most of the time. At least she got all glowing and happy around Christopher even though he was kind of a jerk. But sometimes I thought that if Christopher were poor and Luke were rich a lot more people would want her to be with Christopher. Someone else said it better a while back than I just did but there was kind of a weird thing with class and money on this show, like in the end you were supposed to believe almost all working class people are great and almost all rich people are the worst. 

 

I love Lorelai. She could be so annoying and has a lot of issues, but I love her anyway. I think she was an amazing mom and great at her job. I get a little sad when I read how much she's disliked around here because I really thought she had some amazing qualities and was a very interesting character. She was just a much better person and character when she was single, lol! 

 

Rory is a great character too and so underrated in my opinion. I even love her when she changes later on but don't think she changes as much as some people make it seem like she did.

 

Season 4 was weird to me, kind of boring and aimless at points like they didn't know how to shift to college years while still keeping the show what it used to be. I was surprised that so many people think it's a favorite so maybe I need to watch it again and see why! 

 

I love Season 5, even the end episodes. I think it's even my favorite season.  

 

Such good thoughts around here. I don't think I'm smart enough to hang with you guys but love reading your posts! 

[amensisterfriend]

Welcome! I can't even express how psyched I get to see that our show still attracts new fans after all these years :) 

 

I don't think I'm smart enough to hang with you guys but love reading your posts!

 

If it makes you feel any better, I'm a blithering idiot! 

 

Season 4 was weird to me, kind of boring and aimless at points like they didn't know how to shift to college years while still keeping the show what it used to be. I was surprised that so many people think it's a favorite so maybe I need to watch it again and see why!

 

I like S4, but the more I've rewatched it the more I can totally understand this opinion. The tone really does feel different compared to S2-S3 and maybe a little flat and 'off'---or at least less sparkly :) 

 

Rory is a great character too and so underrated in my opinion. I even love her when she changes later on but don't think she changes as much as some people make it seem like she did.

 

As you can see by my posts, I'm a huge Rory fan too! I vacillate on the degree to which she changed by S4/S5. Sometimes when I watch later seasons I find myself seeing more of the Original Rory I know and loved than expected. Other times I end up wondering whether Original Rory was always a lot more like New Rory than I had let myself believe :) 

 

I love Lorelai. She could be so annoying and has a lot of issues, but I love her anyway. I think she was an amazing mom and great at her job. I get a little sad when I read how much she's disliked around here because I really thought she had some amazing qualities and was a very interesting character. She was just a much better person and character when she was single, lol!

 

Well said, and I especially agree with the last line! 

 

Luke was okay, but I didn't like him as much as most people do and thought his relationship with Lorelai was disappointing even before April showed up. Lauren Graham looked miserable around the guy who plays Luke most of the time.

 

Ah, someone else to sit with me at the very tiny table for those who didn't fall in love with Luke Danes and L/L as a couple! :)

 

At least she got all glowing and happy around Christopher even though he was kind of a jerk. But sometimes I thought that if Christopher were poor and Luke were rich a lot more people would want her to be with Christopher. Someone else said it better a while back than I just did but there was kind of a weird thing with class and money on this show, like in the end you were supposed to believe almost all working class people are great and almost all rich people are the worst.

 

Such interesting comments, and I think I may agree :) 

 

I tried to love Jess like almost all of you do but thought he was kind of a jerk.

 

Weirdly enough, even as Jess/Rory fan, I never have any trouble understanding this opinion. On paper, I wouldn't like Jess either! 

 

I ended up loving Logan and got really into the Rory and Logan relationship despite disliking him at first. I don't even usually like those type of guys, but they ended up my favorite couple on the show! I still can't believe that even as I'm writing it, lol. I think I like the end seasons a lot more than most do because I just really enjoyed Rory and Logan a lot except of course for the bridesmaid thing and Logan being a drunken jerk when Jess came back to town.

 

The more I watch, the more I enjoy Logan as well. I don't feel like he and Rory totally clicked and 'got each other' as well as Rory/Jess, but they did have some excellent moments :) 

 

All of Lorelai's relationships depressed me for some reason and I just wanted her to be single and loving it.

 

Ha---I can't even explain how much this line amused and resonated with me! In other words, ITA :) 

 

Many of your opinions aren't all that unpopular at all---I hope you'll be back! 

[JayInChicago]

The thing is with Jess is he's kind of billed as someone who can see through Rory's bullshit and see the "true her"--but I kinda think the true her is someone who is used to a relatively comfortable life with lots of respect and a degree of coddling, and someone who ultimately was going to go Ivy League and graduate. How could their relationship have survived Rory going to Yale and living there while Jess as a high school dropout bumbled around being a bike messenger (no offense to either groups!) I know a lot of people love Jess and love Milo and Alexis's true rapport/chemistry--I actually have a lot of sympathy at times for Jess...like in the attempted backdoor pilot when he yells at Jimmy Mariano "you have nothing?  I have NOTHING!"  It really does seem like he basically has nothing.  But I don't think that means he magically understands Rory. He really doesn't.

 

My current up to the minute weird Unpopular Opinion (TM?) is that I really like the last half of season 7. The townies seem restrained, especially Sookie, and there's very little Taylor besides the Hay Bale Maze, which actually goes really well. Luke seems pretty friendly towards Zack and Lane, and I have respect for how the April custody drama played out. Emily's evil machinations are mostly subdued, and Lorelai is just single. Why couldn't a single woman with a lot of friends just be single and happy?  Sure, there's an ambiguous ending with Luke, but I think canonically it shouldn't be assumed that they got back together, though it also shouldn't be assumed that they didn't, I guess. I love 'Gilmore Girls Only' and the way Logan shows up but Rory literally and factually tells him "this isn't going to sweep me off my feet" even if that wasn't what he was going for. I even like Richard in a jogging suit. :)

[amensisterfriend]

The thing is with Jess is he's kind of billed as someone who can see through Rory's bullshit and see the "true her"--but I kinda think the true her is someone who is used to a relatively comfortable life with lots of respect and a degree of coddling, and someone who ultimately was going to go Ivy League and graduate. How could their relationship have survived Rory going to Yale and living there while Jess as a high school dropout bumbled around being a bike messenger (no offense to either groups!) I know a lot of people love Jess and love Milo and Alexis's true rapport/chemistry--I actually have a lot of sympathy at times for Jess...like in the attempted backdoor pilot when he yells at Jimmy Mariano "you have nothing?  I have NOTHING!"  It really does seem like he basically has nothing.  But I don't think that means he magically understands Rory. He really doesn't.

 

Interesting! I don't see Rory as quite as materialistic as some, but I do have trouble seeing S5-S7 Rory leading the more 'indie', alternative, bohemian Jess-ish lifestyle, even once he was presumably financial stable enough to not always have to worry about where the next month's rent money would come from. Then again, I never saw her as a globe trotting, assertive international correspondent either! Speaking just for myself, when I say that Rory seemed most 'herself' around Jess, I basically just mean that she seemed most genuinely relaxed and comfortable around him---which, as has been said enough to probably count as the popular opinion by now, probably has a whole lot more to do with the MV/AB chemistry since the actors were dating in real life than it does the scripts or characterizations :) Most of the time when I marvel at how Rory and Jess seemed to just naturally click and connect, it was probably because AB and MV did. I have to admit that I'd probably be a whole lot less in favor of Rory/Jess if different actors had played the role. 

 

 

 

My current up to the minute weird Unpopular Opinion (TM?) is that I really like the last half of season 7. The townies seem restrained, especially Sookie, )

 

You're not alone! I'll take it a step further and say that I genuinely like the majority of S7, albeit with a few glaring exceptions. I like Rory (and, actually, Rory/Logan) in this season so much more than the last two, and I agree that the minor characters were mercifully less shrill. 

 

 

 

. Luke seems pretty friendly towards Zack and Lane

 

I always forget how much I like his interactions with them in S7. Zack in general is a lot more likable in S7 IMO.

 

 

 

...and  Lorelai is just single. Why couldn't a single woman with a lot of friends just be single and happy?  

 

Ah, the eternal question! As I've made clear, I think Lorelai ending up truly, contentedly single would have been the best ending for the show and made so much sense given what we had seen of the character. It would have been an awesomely original ending given how many TV shows define happily ever after as having to end up with a partner---but I also think it would have been a satisfying and earned one (for me and maybe three other viewers out there!) 

 

 

 

Sure, there's an ambiguous ending with Luke, but I think canonically it shouldn't be assumed that they got back together, though it also shouldn't be assumed that they didn't, I guess.

 

This is the one place we disagree---I actually thought it was pretty indisputable that the series ended with Luke and Lorelai knowing they were getting back together, though I agree that the timetable was flexible and that they were going to try to take it slow. 

 

 

 

I love 'Gilmore Girls Only' and the way Logan shows up but Rory literally and factually tells him "this isn't going to sweep me off my feet" even if that wasn't what he was going for.

 

I liked that as well. There's actually a surprising amount that I like about Rory/Logan in S7. I really think, based on the admittedly limited sample size, that DR did a better job of writing romance than ASP, who excelled at buildups and breakups and tended to suck at everything that comes in between :)  It would have been really interesting to see if he would have written Luke/Lorelai as a more connected, semi-compatible, genuinely in love couple than IMO AS-P ever did. 

Edited July 12, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[Aloeonatable]

 

The thing is with Jess is he's kind of billed as someone who can see through Rory's bullshit and see the "true her"--but I kinda think the true her is someone who is used to a relatively comfortable life with lots of respect and a degree of coddling, and someone who ultimately was going to go Ivy League and graduate. How could their relationship have survived Rory going to Yale and living there while Jess as a high school dropout bumbled around being a bike messenger (no offense to either groups!) I know a lot of people love Jess and love Milo and Alexis's true rapport/chemistry--I actually have a lot of sympathy at times for Jess...like in the attempted backdoor pilot when he yells at Jimmy Mariano "you have nothing?  I have NOTHING!"  It really does seem like he basically has nothing.  But I don't think that means he magically understands Rory. He really doesn't.

 

I don't think that Jess's state of mind when he left Stars Hollow has anything to do with understanding Rory. He had his own issues at that time. When Jess tells her that he knows her better than anyone, he did know how important her education was to her and told her so. Logan didn't encourage her (granted, he was mired in his own troubles), her grandparents didn't do anything to encourage her, in fact enabled her to not go. Lorelei, whose feelings were hurt, gave Rory a wide berth. Only Jess told her she was wasting her time. I think she was ready to hear it, but it was Jess who jolted her into going back. 

 

 

Speaking just for myself, when I say that Rory seemed most 'herself' around Jess, I basically just mean that she seemed most genuinely relaxed and comfortable around him---which, as has been said enough to probably count as the popular opinion by now, probably has a whole lot more to do with the MV/AB chemistry since the actors were dating in real life than it does the scripts or characterizations :) Most of the time when I marvel at how Rory and Jess seemed to just naturally click and connect, it was probably because AB and MV did. I have to admit that I'd probably be a whole lot less in favor of Rory/Jess if different actors had played the role.

 

MV's & AB's relationship outside of the show definitely gave the Jess/Rory couple chemistry and probably helped AB (notoriously shy) relax in the romantic sense. 

[dustylil]

I cannot find my old copies of Modern Screen and Photoplay to confirm this, but I thought Milo and Alexis ended their relationship during the run of the series. If their romantic scenes were convincing when they were together, I cannot see the pair  -  Ms  Bledel in particular - being able to carry them off when they were no longer an item.

That said, if Rory and Jess were to end up together, I do not think they would be able to make a go of it while they were in their twenties. I could see them having a happy middle though.

[Aloeonatable]

MV & AB broke up in the spring of 2006 after almost 4 years as a couple. They were together off screen during their last scenes together in TRPA. 

[amensisterfriend]

That said, if Rory and Jess were to end up together, I do not think they would be able to make a go of it while they were in their twenties

 

I'm curious as to why you think this...as already noted, I love the Jess/Rory connection but am pretty sure I agree :) 

[dustylil]

asf  - given the troubled upbringing that Jess had and the cosseted life that Rory has led, I do not think either one, while in their twenties, would have the interpersonal tools and emotional stamina needed for a successful and enduring marriage. As well,  Rory was soon to come into a boatload of money from her trust fund and that  could  difficulties for the two. Rory would likely be most willing to share and as she has generally been empathy-challenged,  she might be unable  to see that the fiercely independent Jess could view himself as a kept man.

Edited July 12, 2015 by dustylil

[takalotti]

Rory would likely be most willing to share and as she has generally been empathy-challenged,  she might be unable  to see that the fiercely independent Jess could view himself as a kept man.

(There's an AU Literati fanfic where the main conflict is that type of financial dynamic.

https://www.fanfiction.net/s/3049463/1/Sex-or-Love )

[Anela]

I don't think that Jess's state of mind when he left Stars Hollow has anything to do with understanding Rory. He had his own issues at that time. When Jess tells her that he knows her better than anyone, he did know how important her education was to her and told her so. Logan didn't encourage her (granted, he was mired in his own troubles), her grandparents didn't do anything to encourage her, in fact enabled her to not go. Lorelei, whose feelings were hurt, gave Rory a wide berth. Only Jess told her she was wasting her time. I think she was ready to hear it, but it was Jess who jolted her into going back. 

 

 

MV's & AB's relationship outside of the show definitely gave the Jess/Rory couple chemistry and probably helped AB (notoriously shy) relax in the romantic sense. 

That was one thing that I liked about Jess. Dean assumed that he and Rory would break up, once she graduated, and went to college. Jess, on the other hand, looked it up, to see how far he would have to travel to see her. :) 

[amensisterfriend]

Yeah, that's the thing...everyone talks about how Dean was the 'perfect' first boyfriend who was so supportive and all that, but he tended to make it all about HIM like the sulky, temperamental baby that he is IMO, melting down when her school or extracurricular activities interfered with his mission to obsessively spend every second with her and pouting angrily about how her college plans were likely to affect HIM before it was even a reality. As we've chatted about, though, the actor overdid that stuff to the point where Dean probably came off as more petulant and angry than the scripts usually intended! 

 

And even though I hold the UO of thinking that Dean and Luke had a whole lot of similarities, that's the way in which Luke has it all over Dean IMO---he always supported Lorelai's dreams and ambitions, particularly when it came to opening her inn. See, I'm capable of complimenting Luke when it's due...which you guys might want to keep in mind as you read below :)  

 

Something came up in the Ep Elim game thread that I have a really unpopular opinion about, but I'm struggling with how to phrase this without descending into the tiresome Luke vs Lorelai blame game, so wish me luck! Okay, so many pick on Lorelai's passivity while Luke excluded her from the April-related portion of his life to be the really frustrating aspect of S6, but my UO is that her not being more assertive makes a weird sort of sense to me.

 

For one thing, as a general rule it upsets me when Lorelai/female characters in general get more criticism for not sufficiently defending themselves against thoughtless behavior more than Luke/male characters in general are blamed for exhibiting that thoughtless behavior in the first place! For another, Luke had kept April's very existence a secret from his fiance for two whole months, (honestly, I don't know any woman who would have been as forgiving of that as Lorelai was, but whatever) so I can see why she got the message that open, honest communication in their relationship---particularly when it came to April---was not the way Luke was comfortable operating. (His weirdly passive-aggressive relationships with Rachel and Nicole seem to bear this out as well, as did the way he stormed out of her parents' vow renewal ceremony and froze her out for days without even allowing her to speak and explain) And, finally, she had just reconciled with Rory, so I can see why she was unusually fearful of alienating another person she cares about by voicing her anger about something.

 

Honestly, while I am the first to point out Lorelai and Rory's myriad flaws, the males on this show were surprisingly unappealing characters IMUO, especially in the context of romantic relationships---except maybe Dave Rygalski, primarily because he wasn't on the show long enough for AS-P to assassinate his character :)    

Edited July 18, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[solotrek]

The thing is, both of them had their reasons for doing what they did both good and bad. But the fact that neither could deal with their choices and each other's choices/each other like normal people showed why getting married at the time was a bad idea. Lorelai seemed to think marriage would be some great band-aid for their issues which is basically similar to a married couple having kids to save their marriage. Luke was insensitive and in his own little world, ignoring the fact that Lorelai had emotions/thoughts/opinions.

I will say that Lorelai sleeping with Christopher was inexcusable. Sort of justifies Lukes paranoia about that relationship. People got mad that Logan horn dogged it up after he and Rory "broke up ". What Lorelai did was worse and since that's how the whole engagement ended, I can see why more people would side with Luke. Seriously, who sleeps with an ex the same night after ending an engagement?

[cheezwhiz346]

For one thing, as a general rule it upsets me when Lorelai/female characters in general get more criticism for not sufficiently defending themselves against thoughtless behavior more than Luke/male characters in general are blamed for exhibiting that thoughtless behavior in the first place! For another, Luke had kept April's very existence a secret from his fiance for two whole months, (honestly, I don't know any woman who would have been as forgiving of that as Lorelai was, but whatever) so I can see why she got the message that open, honest communication in their relationship---particularly when it came to April---was not the way Luke was comfortable operating. (His weirdly passive-aggressive relationships with Rachel and Nicole seem to bear this out as well, as did the way he stormed out of her parents' vow renewal ceremony and froze her out for days without even allowing her to speak and explain) And, finally, she had just reconciled with Rory, so I can see why she was unusually fearful of alienating another person she cares about by voicing her anger about something.

I think your last reason gets the most to what bothered me about Lorelai's attitude in the April season 6 arc, which was that it felt so unusual (to me, at the time) for Lorelai to react so passively. Now, that might not in fact be the truth; I would have to go back and watch her with her other love interests throughout the show to see if she tended to be more passive, but at the time when I was first watching it felt out of character, as I normally associate Lorelai with being more outspoken. When put in the context of her friction with Rory at that point, though, even aside for how she might generally respond to conflict in romantic relationships, it definitely makes a lot more sense (also obviously agree about female characters tending to get blamed for these things more).

[amensisterfriend]

A few random UOs about S5, which I watched parts of today for the first time in awhile:

 

It's been said before (often by me!) and will no doubt be said again, but I honestly don't have half as much problem with the Dean affair as I do with the ridiculous lack of fallout from said affair. 

 

I would rather have seen Paris in the odd (but also in my UO understandable and strangely amusing!) relationship with a still alive Asher and/or single for the season rather than getting together with Doyle. 

 

Logan, Colin and Finn's prank in But Not As Cute As Pushkin is amazingly lame and unfunny to me.  And the class bursting into applause and hooting and hollering and then, according to Rory, apparently unable to settle down for the entire rest of the period purely because of THAT just underscores the gap between how entertaining we were supposed to find it vs how entertaining I did find it. (Or in this instance DIDN'T find it, but you get the gist!)  I'm about a million years older than Rory and her fellow Yailies are supposed to be in this scene, but I know a fair number of people their age and honestly can't imagine any of them reacting to that prank with more than a quick grin and an eye roll. It felt more like what this group of guys I knew would do back in junior high.

 

And it's kind of annoying just how quickly Rory goes from sincerely thinking Logan is a fratty "buttfaced miscreant" who she just doesn't like or understand at all to so eagerly becoming romantically involved him...but, then  again, on GG constant annoyance with each other and not getting each other is often AS-P's idea of foreplay :) And this is the same season where Rory goes from LOVING Yale with a geeky passion while showing around Anna to dropping out of school entirely after stealing a yacht, so clearly she went through a lot of rather rapid and extreme changes this season!  

 

And as long as I'm ranting...while watching S5 I started to think my problem is less with the writing for Luke and even deadly dull Dean than the acting and/or directing, because both Scott Patterson and Jared Padalecki just go so overboard with the anger. (As do Jackson, Richard, etc...if I single out Luke, it's probably in part that we just see much more of him than we do the others!) I get that AS-P thinks that's just how males show passion and emotion, but it often becomes off putting and even uncomfortable for me. As you probably guessed from the above paragraphs, I just rewatched Pushkin, and Luke hollering at that elderly woman and even the degree to which he freaks out on Lorelai after discovering his boat in her garage (and I get his side here---it's how he expresses it!) is actually a little hard for me to watch. I know GG is unrealistic in a lot of ways so I try to remind myself that the freakouts most of the male characters engage in at various points are deliberately exaggerated for comedic or dramatic effect...but there's still part of me that wishes people told Dean, Luke et al. that they really need to calm the hell down and seek some sort of anger management therapy.  Or just that the directors told the actors to tone down the scowling and yelling and occasional vaguely menacing body language. 

 

Luke going from being "all in" in Written in the Stars and seeming perfectly happy in the relationship right up to Emily and Richard's vow renewal to suddenly being ready to break up entirely after the events in Wedding Bell Blues (events which he didn't even have a grasp on since he wouldn't allow Lorelai to explain them) is just ridiculous to me. If anything, Luke has always stayed in relationships too long even after knowing they weren't working and that he didn't love the woman involved---and we're supposed to believe that even after he's calmed down a bit from his latest temper tantrum and given the matter some thought that he's just ready to end a relationship with a woman he adored and pined over all that time despite what happened in WBB not even being her fault?! I just don't buy it at all and, even as someone who holds the very UO here of thinking that Luke has more than his share of pretty serious flaws, I thought the writers were being unfair and untrue to his character here. Storming out of the ceremony like a furious toddler without even seeing if she had another ride home or money for a cab, let alone allowing her to explain? That feels in character for Luke to me, though they probably exaggerated his reaction a bit more than they might have in the earlier seasons. But being ready to just call the whole thing off and give up on the relationship entirely? That actually didn't feel in character for him to me at all. 

 

Overall, I keep hoping to love S5 but end up realizing all over again that it was actually a pretty disappointing season for me overall---arguably just as much so as the far less popular S6, and I personally find most of our characters less likable/more maddening here than I do through most of S7. S5 has its great scenes and moments, of course---but in literally every episode there are also things (note the plural!) that irk me beyond the telling of it :)  

[dustylil]

asf,  I share your disappointment in Paris not having a longer term relationship with Asher Fleming. But then I always did like him a great deal more than I did his college pal, Richard.

 

And speaking of Written in the Stars - now that another cohort has been exposed to Gilmore Girls and its contemporary quips through Netflix, I wonder how many people are saying to themselves "Who on earth is Lizzie Grubman?"

[timimouse]

AmenSisterFriend, I agree with everything you said there. But I still love season 5 for some strange reason!

I don't know if this is a nitpick or an UO, but I'm confused by Lane and her decision to keep Henry quiet. He was the guy her parents would love. And she liked him. Wouldn't their relationship actually have stood a chance? By keeping it quiet, she ruined it herself!

[Aloeonatable]

 

Logan, Colin and Finn's prank in But Not As Cute As Pushkin is amazingly lame and unfunny to me.  And the class bursting into applause and hooting and hollering and then, according to Rory, apparently unable to settle down for the entire rest of the period purely because of THAT just underscores the gap between how entertaining we were supposed to find it vs how entertaining I did find it. (Or in this instance DIDN'T find it, but you get the gist!)  I'm about a million years older than Rory and her fellow Yailies are supposed to be in this scene, but I know a fair number of people their age and honestly can't imagine any of them reacting to that prank with more than a quick grin and an eye roll. It felt more like what this group of guys I knew would do back in junior high.

 

I cringe watching those scenes. I don't know if their "acting" is supposed to be awful, but IMO it is just that. Horrible.

[dustylil]

Lord, those pranks were sappy! The pranks I helped plan  in high school - I admit to them now freely, secure in the knowledge that statutes of limitations on those transgressions have long since given me immunity from possible charges - were far cleverer. Sheesh.

That the other students were so impressed by the imbecility made me doubt Ivy League admission criteria :)

[Taryn74]

I don't know if this is a nitpick or an UO, but I'm confused by Lane and her decision to keep Henry quiet. He was the guy her parents would love. And she liked him. Wouldn't their relationship actually have stood a chance? By keeping it quiet, she ruined it herself!

 

Yeah, it was silly, but she was 16 years old and afraid that if she dated a guy her parents would actually approve of, that it would be a turn-off for her and she would decide she didn't like him anymore.  She's like Lorelai in that respect, heh.