One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[Taryn74]

I kind of love Rune. 

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

 

Totally agree.  I laugh hysterically at just about every Rune scene in DD.

[Guest]

Double Date Rune was funny. But to me, he was pretty much a one-trick pony. It wasn't necessary to have him make any further appearances in the series.

[dustylil]

Perhaps we could have seen the last of Rune at his nuptials with Drella :) They seemed to be a well matched pair.

Edited June 27, 2014 by dustylil

[JayInChicago]

I think nag hammadi is where the show starts to go south for me. It's not just TJ, but he's not helping things,

Though "handful of Barbie" caught me off guard.

[Anela]

Someone here mentioned that they liked Jason with Lorelai. I wasn't so keen on him at first, but I get it now, and I agree. The bit with his dog, and special commands that only he would know, made me laugh.. that, "move a little to the left". Silly/playful.

Edited July 1, 2014 by Anela

[mstaken]

Someone here mentioned that they liked Jason with Lorelai. I wasn't so keen on him at first, but I get it now, and I agree.

 

I didn't see much romantic/sexual chemistry between them, but otherwise ITA. On a show that often seemed intent on giving us personality-deficient significant others (Dean, Max, Nicole, Jamie, etc.), Jason was a well-defined, amusing character in his own right. More importantly, he was a rare example of AS-P putting aside her obsession with the 'opposites attract', 'nonstop bickering and clashing = chemistry', 'they have nothing in common and act like they can't stand each other, so it must be LOVE!' etc. tropes---he and Lorelai seemed to genuinely GET each other IMO, and it was fun to watch. 

[nolieblue]

I liked Jason as a character and I thought he and Lorelai were a good match in the short-term but could not see them together in the long-term. Jason would have been really out of place in Stars Hollow and I can't imagine Lorelai leaving for him. I also didn't see much romantic chemistry between them. 

 

My OU -- I liked Doyle in the early years but liked him less and less as the show went on. I think it's because I hated how everyone not Lorelai or Rory and their significant others had to be so over-the-top quirky all the time. 

[Athena]

So I just stumbled into this forum and found this topic quite interesting. I don't normally follow this board because I never "loved" this show enough to participate back in TWOP. I did see most of the show when it was on air. The show was a bit too loquacious for me at times. I think most of my opinions were not the common ones from what I can remember, but some maybe? It covers a few points already mentioned.

 

I never loved or related Rory that much. She was better pre-Yale. It's strange because we are similar; I was and am a total book nerd. I tried to like her. Rory was a bit too perfect for me in the beginning: she was intelligent, attractive, and well loved by the town, her family, and those cute teen boys. When she got to Yale, she became annoying. I think most of the blame was Bledel's acting or lack there of. 

 

Dean was OK until he got married. I didn't like Jess, but Rory had the most chemistry with him. I liked Logan a lot. I might have liked him more than I liked Rory. I'm glad she didn't marry him though just because I thought the ending worked for her character.

 

I liked the idea of Luke more than I actually liked him. I thought he was a jerk about April and not telling Lorelai. I found April a bit too precocious in the beginning, but she gets no blame for the storyline. I don't think Lorelai and Luke had chemistry. 

 

Agree with most opinions about Christopher in this thread. I thought Lorelai and Chris had a lot of chemistry. I can see how Chris would just accept Lorelai doing her own thing. Interestingly, I read Marcus Samuelsson's memoirs Chef     and he is a Christopher. The baby's mother just raised the baby on her own and told him not to worry, and he just let it happen. He talks about his feelings on it. I think the maturity between men and women at that age does matter, not that I am absolving either men. I think Chris was even going to do the right thing.

 

I completely forgot about Jason until this topic, but I watched some clips on Youtube. This was during the one of the periods when I didn't watch the show much. He seems cute and fun though.

[mstaken]

I didn't like Jess, but Rory had the most chemistry with him.

 

Ha! This makes perfect sense to me :) Objectively, Jess is the kind of character I'd hate, and (another possible UO...?) I don't even think MV is an especially good actor. But I did love his chemistry with Rory  and his interactions with Luke, so I find myself really liking his presence on the show despite not especially liking the character himself, you know? That made more sense in my weird little brain ;) Another UO here is that I thought the Rory/Jess breakup was very much in character and very effective. 

 

don't think Lorelai and Luke had chemistry.

 

Yeah, I'll always regret that the show didn't take the unpredictable, unique by TV standards but in this case (IMUO) highly sensical path of having them decide they really do work better as friends. I think that would have been a fascinating and far more earned and realistic ending for them: they would always care about each other, but too much had happened to realistically just 'get past'; they were just too different; they didn't bring make each other happy. The sad thing is that I can't even enjoy their pre-Trilogy friendship as much as I used to now that I know it culminates in what for me is such a joyless, uncomfortably incompatible, chemistry-free romance.

 

Rory was a bit too perfect for me in the beginning: she was intelligent, attractive, and well loved by the town, her family, and those cute teen boys.

 

I think this is a pretty common criticism, and one that I understand completely! I guess for me there were JUST enough consistent flaws in her character to save her from dull Mary Sue-dom: she was a little socially awkward and often even emotionally  oblivious despite being book smart; she was often not honest about her real feelings (with others OR with herself);,she was tense and uptight; she was confrontation-avoidant and eager to be the 'good one' to the point of wimpy patheticness...etc.! (Ironically, she was actually more assertive and less eager to be liked in S1-S2 IMO...one of the reasons I hold the UO of liking Tristan was that I liked how sharp and comparatively candid and assertive Rory was in his presence!) 

 

My OU -- I liked Doyle in the early years but liked him less and less as the show went on. I think it's because I hated how everyone not Lorelai or Rory and their significant others had to be so over-the-top quirky all the time.

 

Amen, sister friend! I really wanted to like Doyle and the Doyle/Paris relationship, but he just irked far more than he entertained me. I could never bring myself to feel remotely invested in him or in their pairing. 

[Athena]

Ha! This makes perfect sense to me :) Objectively, Jess is the kind of character I'd hate, and (another possible UO...?) I don't even think MV is an especially good actor. But I did love his chemistry with Rory  and his interactions with Luke, so I find myself really liking his presence on the show despite not especially liking the character himself, you know? That made more sense in my weird little brain ;) Another UO here is that I thought the Rory/Jess breakup was very much in character and very effective. 

 

Yeah, I'll always regret that the show didn't take the unpredictable, unique by TV standards but in this case (IMUO) highly sensical path of having them decide they really do work better as friends. I think that would have been a fascinating and far more earned and realistic ending for them: they would always care about each other, but too much had happened to realistically just 'get past'; they were just too different; they didn't bring make each other happy. The sad thing is that I can't even enjoy their pre-Trilogy friendship as much as I used to now that I know it culminates in what for me is such a joyless, uncomfortably incompatible, chemistry-free romance.

 

I think this is a pretty common criticism, and one that I understand completely! I guess for me there were JUST enough consistent flaws in her character to save her from dull Mary Sue-dom: she was a little socially awkward and often even emotionally  oblivious despite being book smart; she was often not honest about her real feelings (with others OR with herself);,she was tense and uptight; she was confrontation-avoidant and eager to be the 'good one' to the point of wimpy patheticness...etc.! (Ironically, she was actually more assertive and less eager to be liked in S1-S2 IMO...one of the reasons I hold the UO of liking Tristan was that I liked how sharp and comparatively candid and assertive Rory was in his presence!) 

 

I know what you mean about the chemistry. I think Jess/MV did have it Rory and to an extent Luke. Not surprised that Alexis and Milo dated as long as they did. I've watched and supported a lot of ships purely for chemistry alone, but this one didn't quite work for me. I didn't think either actor was particularly talented to carry it. Though, intellectually and objectively speaking, I could see Rory always going back to Jess. It was the show's OTP however much I adored Logan in the end.

 

One of my old friends and I were talking about the show today. She was a Dean/Rory shipper. She didn't really see the end so I told her about the proposal and Rory's rejection of it. To be fair, I never saw the last couple of eps, but read the recaps. My friend exclaimed, "That figures! Rory was always a commitment phobe" then she went on about how Dean wanted her to be exclusive early. Ha!

 

Luke and Lorelai were uncomfortable. I thought Lorelai had more chemistry with Max (whom I adored from 10th Kingdom), Christopher, and Jason.

 

Ahh yes, Tristan. I like to block it out because of my aversion to Chad Michael Murray. Back to Rory, I do concur those were her traits which just annoyed me a bit about her rather than endeared me to her. This is why I found it strange because I too was a socially awkward book nerd. I thought the Yacht stealing arc was both good and bad for Rory in the sense that it made her more real as a character that she was stupid. Bad because we got some angsty and silly episodes out of it. It did show how sheltered Rory was. Then again, I feel like Lorelai and Rory live in this weird bubble reality.

[blueray]

I honestly like the arc that leads to Rory stealing the boat. Because it finally breaks the "she's perfect and gets everything". I also liked how it was set up by  the episode in season 5 when Rory comes home obviously drunk from the party her grandmother threw. The look on Loreli's face is clear that she isn't liking the direction Rory is going. I however hated the whole thing with Dean in season 5, it clearly was going to end badly for both characters. And that whole thing led me to hate Dean.

[dustylil]

With respect, As far as I could tell the end of "she's perfect and gets everything" was at most a temporary blip for Rory.

Within a matter of months she was back at Yale and soon editing the Yale Daily News. As well she was no longer under any financial (i.e. loan) obligation to her grandparents

for her college costs. Her father - now richer than Scrooge McDuck - was footing the bill.

By the seventh season, once again the darling of all her family, she was graduating with

her original class.

The felony conviction seemingly happily forgotten. She was inducted into the prestigious honour society Phi Beta Kappa. Nor did her criminal history appear to impact on her job

job search - indeed I don't think the subject ever came up.

Edited July 7, 2014 by dustylil

[Aloeonatable]

 

Another UO here is that I thought the Rory/Jess breakup was very much in character and very effective.

Agree with this. Jess had major trust issues. In his very first episode, NN/SN, when Rory casually asks him to trust her that the meal Sookie cooks at the girls' house will be good, he says he may believe she is trustworthy. 

 

 

(Ironically, she was actually more assertive and less eager to be liked in S1-S2 IMO...one of the reasons I hold the UO of liking Tristan was that I liked how sharp and comparatively candid and assertive Rory was in his presence!)

 

Why do you think she changed? Do you think it was just to serve the story lines (the writers rebooting her character) or do you see something happening to her in early season 2 that made her more passive/agressive and less assertive?

[nolieblue]

 

 

Within a matter of months she was back at Yale and soon editing the Yale Daily News. As well she was no longer under any financial (i.e. loan) obligation to her grandparents

for her college costs. Her father - now richer than Scrooge McDuck - was footing the bill.

 

Oh Lord, I'd forgotten the scope of the stupidity in the second half of S6. How they turned Paris into a lunatic so Rory could become editor. ugh. Honestly, as big a shipper I was of L/L, I sometimes think what they did with Rory was so much worse. She was a sweet charming girl turned into an entitled spoiled brat. 

[mstaken]

Within a matter of months she was back at Yale and soon editing the Yale Daily News.

 

 I'm a Rory lover but, seriously, has there ever been a character presented with so many ridiculously unearned 'wins'?! And, yes, the editor-in-chief stuff is cringe-inducingly awful. I'd have found it at least remotely interesting if newly desperate-to-overcompensate-for-lost-time Rory deliberately went after the editor in chief job and then had to grapple with guilt over how she treated Paris. Instead, the show hammers us over the head with how innocent-as-the-driven-snow Rory didn't do anything wrong in her treatment of Paris because, of course, the Yale Daily News staff BEGGED Rory to take the position after missing an entire semester of work on the paper while they were toiling on it daily. (And she missed that semester not due to illness or a death in the family or to study abroad, but because she reacted to a piece of criticism by...stealing a yacht and dropping out of college entirely. Yup, that's totally who I'd want as my leader!) My possibly unpopular opinion is that I was thrilled when she didn't get the NY Times internship. For one thing, I don't see her as a fit for the journalism field at all. More importantly, though, it just seemed so eye-rollingly ridiculous that anyone---even attractive, smart, likable Rory---would get pretty much everything she ever wanted and even a bunch of wins she apparently DIDN'T want before they were eagerly thrown her way. 

[AlinaRay]

I agree with you a lot about Rory not being fit to be a journalist. She may have been a good creative writer, but I don't think she has the guts to do the kind of things Christiane Amapour and Anderson Cooper do...and I've never seen her interested enough in politics to be pegged for following Obama around. I think she should have gotten her Master's in Library Science...heck, I think she should have gone with Logan out to Cali and done that, just to get some breathing room from her mom and grandparents and actually carving out her own life and not one that was chosen from her at birth. Then she could go work in a research or a law library...that kind of thing seems more her speed. Or at least early Rory.

Edited July 7, 2014 by AlinaRay

[dustylil]

Yeah, MsTaken, that Rory. Innocent as snow - then she drifted :)

I confess to having chortled when she didn't get the  New York Times internship. I could certainly understand Rory being interviewed

for the position - having been Editor of the Yale Daily News  would likely have entitled her to some consideration for the job. But all she really had to offer was her prep school and college newspaper work, She had done no writing for a real world newspaper - not even for her own hometown paper. Nor had she done much - if any - magazine work,  on-line writing or blogging.

I must say I found it somewhat surprising for a young woman of her supposed intellect and perspicacity that she didn't seem to recognize how limited her journalistic experience was. It reminded me of her shock  as a high school junior (less than two years before she hoped to attend)  at learning that her long aspired to  Harvard expected more than academic excellence of its incoming students.

 

[txhorns79]

I confess to having chortled when she didn't get the  New York Times internship. I could certainly understand Rory being interviewed

for the position - having been Editor of the Yale Daily News  would likely have entitled her to some consideration for the job.But all she really had to offer was her prep school and college newspaper work, She had done no writing for a real world newspaper - not even for her own hometown paper. Nor had she done much - if any - magazine work,  on-line writing or blogging.

 

I think Rory actually worked for the Stamford paper during the sixth and seventh seasons.  But more to the point, my understanding is the Yale Daily News publishes five days a week during the school year, and operates as any regular newspaper would do so, with real deadlines, editors, fact checkers, budgets, ad sales, etc.  I'm not sure why that would be seen as something less than a "real world" newspaper.  I can certainly agree that a diversity of experiences is helpful, but it did seem as if Rory had the necessary background to get the internship, if a paper like the Providence Journal was willing to hire her in a full time, paid position. 

Edited July 8, 2014 by txhorns79

[Athena]

I agree with you a lot about Rory not being fit to be a journalist. She may have been a good creative writer, but I don't think she has the guts to do the kind of things Christiane Amapour and Anderson Cooper do...and I've never seen her interested enough in politics to be pegged for following Obama around...

 

I never saw it either which is why again, I have mixed feelings about the boat plot. I agreed with Mitchum that Rory just didn't have it at that time. It was tactless, and to be honest, I can see Rory doing some writing. I just couldn't see her as an overly political one who goes to war zones, political demonstrations, or the exciting bits. On the way, she never displayed the drive of the kind of journalist she aspired to be.  I could blame this on the acting. Rory is objectively attractive enough to be on TV, but she never looked like a news journalist. The idea of her reporting from another country did not seem credible. I think California would have been great for her if she had gone out there. 

 

 I'm a Rory lover but, seriously, has there ever been a character presented with so many ridiculously unearned 'wins'?! And, yes, the editor-in-chief stuff is cringe-inducingly awful. I'd have found it at least remotely interesting if newly desperate-to-overcompensate-for-lost-time Rory deliberately went after the editor in chief job and then had to grapple with guilt over how she treated Paris.

 

They basically sacrificed the Paris character and their friendship to prop Rory up. I began to really dislike Rory around the Dean situation, but it really amplified after Yale and the boat incident. She really is entitled. Even when she gets kicked out of school, she gets to live in a well-decorated pool house in her grandparents backyard. Even her community service was seemingly easy. it was hard to relate to Rory because she lived in an ivory tower. All of her misdeeds were swept under a rug or not mentioned again. Unlike Lorelai who (exceptionally) had worked her way up at the inn and raised Rory as a single mother, Rory just got things handed to her. It got irritating. If Rory was on Gossip Girl, I'd probably be less annoyed because then you expect that in that kind of rich environment, but Rory was suppose to be a townie or firmly middle class. She got more and more upper class benefits as she grew older.

 

I took a QuizUp on Gilmore Girls and I learned that there were six weddings in seven seasons on this show.

[dustylil]

Slightly more weddings  than unplanned babies then!

 

I am not sure how unpopular this opinion is but It still puzzles me that given the frequency of oopsie offspring on the show,  it was not a plot point for Dean and Lindsay. The early marriage that  broke down in a matter of months, Dean's focus on work rather than his earlier college ambitions, the avid domesticity of LIndsay (I think she was the only Stars Hollow young person we got to know who didn't appear to work outside the home), Dean's pining for and then his adulterous affair with his first love, etc. would have made much more sense to me had the two decided to marry because there was a baby on the way.

[txhorns79]

On the way, she never displayed the drive of the kind of journalist she aspired to be.  I could blame this was the acting. Rory is objectively attractive enough to be on TV, but she never looked like a news journalist. The idea of her reporting from another country did not seem credible. I think California would have been great for her if she had gone out there.

 

I agree.  The show was much more about telling us that Rory was supposed to be a journalist rather than showing us why she would make a good journalist.  Though, I thought as the show went on, Rory became a less relevant character and it felt like the writers struggled to justify her continued presence.  But I will admit, I thought the Emily/Lorelai relationship was much more interesting than the Rory/Lorelai one.  Though that may have been because I thought Kelly Bishop and Lauren Graham were much stronger actresses than Alexis Bledel. 

[nolieblue]

I think the writers were torn about what to do with Rory. Most kids struggle a bit when they go off to college but since she was the golden child they rushed through it and made her struggles ridiculous (boat stealing) and as @mstaken noted, her rewards seemed unearned. They did Rory's first day at Yale really well and I would have liked to see Rory have more mixed feelings about leaving Stars Hollow at the end of her college years. I also have no idea why she never seemed to consider grad school seriously. There are few journalists nowadays who don't have multiple degrees. 

 

I don't know if this is an UO but I really hated that Rory lived with Logan and no one blinked an eye. Maybe I'm an old fuddy-duddy but I thought it should have been a bigger deal, particularly for Lorelai.

[jjj]

I think Lorelai blinked a few times, especially when Rory moved out then moved back -- it wasn't the morality of it, but that Lorelai felt Logan was not good for Rory.  (And who would be good for her, in Lorelai's eyes?)  I actually would have expected Christopher to be more bothered, bad boy bonding aside, because, well, he is the dad!  I also think Lorelai was walking on eggshells with Rory after the Rift at the start of season six. 

[solotrek]

I don't know if this is an UO but I really hated that Rory lived with Logan and no one blinked an eye. Maybe I'm an old fuddy-duddy but I thought it should have been a bigger deal, particularly for Lorelai.

 

I think they downplayed it a bit, but there was definitely a reaction. When Christopher found out he "deer in headlights'd" and he told Lorelei before Rory did so that's why she didn't freak out. She didn't look happy with it, but she never looked happy with anything regarding Logan anyways.  I think it's kind of normal for her to be living with Logan? Most my friends ended up living with their SOs in college.

 

I guess my UO is that I can see Rory as a journalist.  I can see her in print writing opinion pieces, editorials, reviewing things, or being a political reporter on Slate or Huffpost or any of the myriad of blogs out there or being on staff of whatever newspaper is still hiring people. I don't see her being a foreign correspondent for any newspaper/blog or even doing much investigative journalism.  Obviously not Christiana Amanpour or Anderson Cooper or Shep Smith or Rachel Maddow. She is not TV material, maybe Rory was supposed to be written that way, but Alexis Bledel definitely made her a non-TV journalist - not even a contributor that pops up once in a while on MSNBC or BBCA material. Those people have larger than life personalities, can be cut throat when needed, and can take a ton of criticism in addition to their skills at journalism (or sometimes they just bank on their personalities). I've been watching a lot of VICE news which I think is the new outlet for news, and those people are just insane. They do a better job than any of the major news outlets and put themselves in a lot of risk. IE, the reporter in Ukraine was abducted for a few days, one of their cameramen was standing next to someone who was shot in killed, etc....Rory needed her mom to stay with her the first night at Yale. But as a writer? Especially with the internet and all the blogs out there? Definitely.

Edited July 8, 2014 by maculae

[Athena]

But I will admit, I thought the Emily/Lorelai relationship was much more interesting than the Rory/Lorelai one.  Though that may have been because I thought Kelly Bishop and Lauren Graham were much stronger actresses than Alexis Bledel. 

 

I concur. I always found Emily's scenes entertaining and she made Rory more interesting when they were in scenes together. Similarly, I found Richard the same and the show became more boring when we saw less of him and Emily.

 

I think the writers were torn about what to do with Rory. Most kids struggle a bit when they go off to college but since she was the golden child they rushed through it and made her struggles ridiculous (boat stealing) and as @mstaken noted, her rewards seemed unearned. They did Rory's first day at Yale really well and I would have liked to see Rory have more mixed feelings about leaving Stars Hollow at the end of her college years. I also have no idea why she never seemed to consider grad school seriously. There are few journalists nowadays who don't have multiple degrees. 

 

it was more exciting for them to end the show with Rory going off to be a political journalist following Obama. Unearned, but it worked. Not a lot of TV kids/youth go to graduate school even though most educated young people do. It's probably less interesting as a plot point for them. I'm going to link her Dean struggles with her Yale one which was also ridiculous. It's difficult for writers to write it believably because it did seem Rory over reacted to everything at Yale.

 

 

I think Lorelai blinked a few times, especially when Rory moved out then moved back -- it wasn't the morality of it, but that Lorelai felt Logan was not good for Rory.  (And who would be good for her, in Lorelai's eyes?)  I actually would have expected Christopher to be more bothered, bad boy bonding aside, because, well, he is the dad!  I also think Lorelai was walking on eggshells with Rory after the Rift at the start of season six. 

 

I rewatched this episode recently and they did a fake out given how Christopher and Logan first meet. Then I realized Logan and Christopher were the same guy so I could see it. Also under the circumstances, Rory was "homeless". It made sense that she would move in with Logan at least temporarily. He had space and she would save money (not that Rory cares/knows about money). I do think Lorelai was trying to make the peace since they had a rough time earlier in the school year post-boat.

 

 

I guess my UO is that I can see Rory as a journalist.  I can see her in print writing opinion pieces, editorials, reviewing things, or being a political reporter on Slate or Huffpost or any of the myriad of blogs out there or being on staff of whatever newspaper is still hiring people. I don't see her being a foreign correspondent for any newspaper/blog or even doing much investigative journalism.  Obviously not Christiana Amanpour or Anderson Cooper or Rachel Maddow. She is not TV material, maybe Rory was supposed to be written that way, but Alexis Bledel definitely made her a non-TV journalist - not even a contributor that pops up once in a while on MSNBC or BBCA material.

 

Yeah, I'm with you. I think in time, I could see her as a type of journalist or writer, but not the one she aspired to be. To be honest, Rory always looked too awkward to be someone who even aspired for it. I could see Rory as an academic more than I see her as a foreign correspondent or an investigative journalist. Seeing her as editor also seemed far fetched. Rory is not really a leader.

[nolieblue]

I think the best career for Rory would have been as a book editor. All through high school and college they showed her reading a lot of fiction and literature (well not so much in college) but she never seemed to have any interest in politics. Most Washington political reporters are total nerds (even the ones on TV) who know all the background and minutia of every politician in town. Rory never seemed at all interested in politics at all. She probably would have been a good Rolling Stone kind of writer -- long interview pieces on music or books, but definitely not a political or overseas correspondent.

[txhorns79]

I concur. I always found Emily's scenes entertaining and she made Rory more interesting when they were in scenes together. Similarly, I found Richard the same and the show became more boring when we saw less of him and Emily.

 

I agree.  I hated when Emily and Richard would vanish for episodes at a time.  Granted, often it felt like the Emily/Lorelai/Richard relationship would just get stuck in a rut, as if the writers had no clue what do with the three unless they were in some kind of opposition to each other.

 

 

I think the best career for Rory would have been as a book editor. All through high school and college they showed her reading a lot of fiction and literature (well not so much in college) but she never seemed to have any interest in politics.

 

I am with you.  She seemed best in a management type position, rather than being the reporter.  I honestly have no idea why she kept talking about wanting to be like Christiane Amanpour.  Rory never seemed like someone who could handle a particularly volatile situation, much less do basic reporting in a war zone.  And that's nothing against Rory, I doubt I could do that either.  

Edited July 8, 2014 by txhorns79

[dustylil]

Getting back to Rory moving in with Logan for a moment -  and again I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion or not -  but the point that bothered  me - and I thought more might  come of it in the show over time - was Rory had specifically told Christopher that she was planning on telling Lorelai later that day of her new living arrangements, recognizing that her mother might have some concerns about a number of aspects of the situation. Christopher  acceded to this and told her he was going shopping. Yet within hours and without informed Rory of his changing his mind, he called Lorelai to tell her the news. When Rory telephoned her mother- on the same day, as promised - she quickly realized that Christopher had already informed her.

 

Now if Rory had gone some time - say several days or a week -  without informing her mother of her new situation, then I could understand Christopher taking it upon himself to tell Lorelai about what might have been a delicate family matter. But he didn't even give Rory a chance to talk to her mother before spilling the beans himself. Playing the  "parent" card of all things! Once again,  his word to his daughter appeared to mean little. However nothing further came of it. But then perhaps Rory was simply used to it.

 

When Rory announced to the family  her new job as a political reporter covering the Obama campaign, I  kind of expected  Richard to make some bloviating comment about how Rory was taking after Trix with her interest in political affairs. Of course this would assume the Season 7 showrunners had a keen knowledge of what went on previously in the series :)

[jjj]

I actually thought Christopher was afraid of pissing off Lorelai if she learned he knew about the new living arrangements and had not told her.  And they were enjoying a slighter better relationship at that point (Lorelai and Christopher), so I took this as being super cautious on his part.  I did not think he was ratting out Rory.  Lorelai was pretty famously proprietary about knowing things about Rory and controlling what perks Rory received (cars, cable for Internet, etc.).  Remember how crazy it made Lorelai when Richard/Emily would know things about Rory before Lorelai?

[txhorns79]

Lorelai was pretty famously proprietary about knowing things about Rory and controlling what perks Rory received (cars, cable for Internet, etc.).

 

I don't know if I would say she was "controlling" so much as she was just acting like a parent of a teenager.  Both are pretty big gifts, so I think Lorelai was within her rights to refuse them on behalf of Rory when they were initially offered.  If Lorelai had kept the act up after Rory was in high school, then I would agree that her actions were more along the lines of controlling.  

 

I agree totally as to Lorelai's control over knowing what was going on with Rory.  I did kind of love when Emily would occasionally know about something going on at Chilton from reading the newsletter, and Lorelai would be immediately flustered by the idea that Emily knew something that Lorelai did not, even if it was some nothing event. 

[dustylil]

Given how well connected Emily was at Chilton (through her friendship with Biddy, her avid readership of the school newsletter, her devotion to all things Rory), it  struck me as odd that Lorelai was taken aback on learning her mother knew of the heated kiss with Max on Parents' Day. Bearing in mind the nature of the event and how quickly we viewers saw news of it spread throughout  the school, It would have been amazing had Emily not known.

 

Actually considering  how proprietary and involved Lorelai was in so much of Rory's life, I found it surprising how little interest she took in Chilton. In light of her own prep school history, it is not as if she naively would view it as a safe oasis of intellectual activity for her daughter. No doubt - and reasonably so in light of their close relationship - she trusted Rory to behave appropriately and confide any serious problems to her. That said,  I would have expected her take more than a passing notice of what was going on in the place

where Rory spent so much of her time and was stepping stone for Harvard.

However, other than to stand up for her daughter - often in a pushy, Gilmore manner -  when Rory  was punished or subject to criticism, she made little effort to partake in school activities or get to know others (well. beside Mr. Medina) in the Chilton community. And frankly I was hard pressed to believe that in the first decade of this century she was the only single parent in the school or the only parent with significant work or other responsibilities.

[AlinaRay]

I feel the interest she took in Chilton, or lack thereof, is more of an extension of her personality. She's never been completely driven, except when it comes to her own inn, and even then, she never took the opportunity until circumstances made her; the inn burned down, she got Richard's money, the Dragonfly property fell into her lap because of the death of Fran. She never had to really work for any of it. Except for Luke's money, she never sought out a loan, she never talked about scrimping and saving to get an inn....she never even considered another property. She didn't even ask Mia if she would cut her a deal on the Independence Inn, she just assumed it would be too much.

 

She has always been more hands-off with Rory and her upbringing, at least what we saw. The only time she jumped in was when she, personally, would be offended...even if Rory was completely fine with whatever was going on. At least at Chilton, she was called out for her laziness, for lack of a better word.

[mstaken]

A random one: I love dogs, but I was never crazy about the way that Paul Anka was used. And I HATE the name Paul Anka---I feel like it's one of many examples of Lorelai and the overall show trying way too hard to be quirky and cute and not coming across as amusing as planned! 

 

I enjoyed Jess very much in S2-S3  for reasons I've already rambled about, but I never enjoy his return visits as much I wish I did. It's great to know he turned out well and all that, but somehow seeing again just never thrills me. Maybe it's due to my deep dislike of Milo V.'s post-S3 hair :) 

 

Given that nearly everyone I know lists it as their very favorite season of the series, I actually find S4 somewhat overrated. It really doesn't hold up as well for me with repeated rewatch as S2 and my beloved (and, IMUO, very underrated!) S3. 

[nolieblue]

I always thought that Lorelai didn't want to be more involved with Chilton because she didn't like the people or the social strata that most of the students and parents came from. She knew that Rory needed to go there to get to Harvard so saw it as a means to an end, rather than a place that Rory would make lifelong ties and friendships. I guess she felt Rory was there for the transcript and that's it.

[Athena]

I always thought that Lorelai didn't want to be more involved with Chilton because she didn't like the people or the social strata that most of the students and parents came from. She knew that Rory needed to go there to get to Harvard so saw it as a means to an end, rather than a place that Rory would make lifelong ties and friendships. I guess she felt Rory was there for the transcript and that's it.

 

That's my view. I do think Lorelai lacks drive about certain things. I think that aspect of her personality was a reaction to Emily's upbringing. Lorelai didn't like Chilton or its community and she believed she and Rory were townies. Rory had Lane, Dean and Lorelai when she got home from school. Since Lorelai hated prep school, she'd assume Rory would to and just have a social life in Stars Hollow. No need for Lorelai to be involved except for the Max situation.

[txhorns79]

Except for Luke's money, she never sought out a loan, she never talked about scrimping and saving to get an inn....she never even considered another property.  She didn't even ask Mia if she would cut her a deal on the Independence Inn, she just assumed it would be too much.

 

In fairness, from the termite situation, it seemed as if Lorelai simply didn't have the means to really have been able to put away anything for a potential Inn.  I mean, if Luke or Emily hadn't been able to rescue Lorelai, she would never have been able to get a loan on her own to fix her home.

 

As for the Independence,  Lorelai had worked there for years in a management position.  I'm guessing she knew the value of the place, which seemed much larger than the Dragonfly, and appeared to be well established with a good reputation, and realized even if Mia could offer a deal, it would still cost too much to be practicable. 

 

 

Lorelai didn't like Chilton or its community and she believed she and Rory were townies. Rory had Lane, Dean and Lorelai when she got home from school. Since Lorelai hated prep school, she'd assume Rory would to and just have a social life in Stars Hollow. No need for Lorelai to be involved except for the Max situation.

 

I think this basically is right.  Lorelai really reacted badly to things she viewed as being within her parents' "world."  I thought she viewed Chilton as a necessary evil, and tried to stay as far away from those people as much as she could.  This probably got stronger for Lorelai as Emily made clear she was going to be very involved in Chilton and was on personal terms with the headmaster. 

Edited July 13, 2014 by txhorns79

[mstaken]

Is it unpopular to think this show was really abysmal in its depiction of money and socioeconomic status? I used to admire them for taking it on as a consistent theme and topic, but now I kind of wish they hadn't even bothered. They were just so lazy and sloppy about it! Nearly every single wealthy GG person was impossibly snotty, lazy and spoiled. 'Working class' was synonymous with 'heart of gold', only on this show 'blue collar' characters like Luke just happen to have, like, several tens of thousands of extra dollars lying around to loan out to their friends with no expectation of return...in my world, that's closer to being Trump-esque than the reality of being working class :)  

 

Lorelai and Rory would suddenly fret about money 1-2 episodes per season, apparently in some attempt to make them more relatable, but these 'struggles' were always hastily put aside and forgotten about by the next episode. For all intents and purposes, they lived like they were comfortably upper middle class (if upper middle class even existed on this show, of course---AS-P seems to think America consists only of the working class and of obscenely wealthy millionaires!), and that's not even taking into account that Emily, Richard, Logan, Christopher and even Trix were at various points in the series all ready and eager to give them limitless amounts of cash at any time. If only my own financial struggles were similar :)

 

I actually think this stuff was tackled best in The Third Lorelai, an S1 episode for which you guys know I have a deep and unpopular affection :) I thought they did a really nice job of conveying the frequent connection between money and emotional dependence/control. Otherwise, though...ugh. And don't even get me started on the episode where a suddenly 'skint' Rory had to get a card swiping job at the cafeteria for a grand total of, like, three hours, all of which she spent whining on the phone and ignoring her customers. And then her consequence for stealing a yacht and dropping out of college was to live rent-free in a luxury poolhouse, complete with with maid service, which, yeah, suffice it to say would not have been most people's reward :) And how no one ever brought up any potential discomfort associated with living rent free in her wasn't-even-with-him-that-long-or-consistently boyfriend's apartment while he lived and worked in another state. Oh, how the poor girl had to suffer! ;)  

Edited July 12, 2014 by mstaken

[dustylil]

@mistaken  - related to your comment on money and socio-economic status, I always wondered how Emily was able to see herself and the Gilmore family as being peers of the Huntzbergers. Exactly, how many houses did the Gilmores own?  The number of paintings by the great artists? How many  vacation homes? What number  of business enterprises did Richard operate? How many employees did he have?  The Gilmore family may have supported the arts in Hartford but how many of the literati did they socialize with?

Certainly Emily gave great importance to the female Gilmores having  the cachet of DAR membership but then Shira, the uppity Huntzberger, also belonged. And given the requirement for membership is lineal blood descent from an ancestor  who demonstrably assisted in achieving American independence during the Revolutionary War, it   seems likely that many women in Connecticut - perhaps even those in and around Stars Hollow! -  might similarly qualify.

[txhorns79]

I always wondered how Emily was able to see herself and the Gilmore family as being peers of the Huntzbergers. Exactly, how many houses did the Gilmores own?  The number of paintings by the great artists? How many  vacation homes? What number  of business enterprises did Richard operate? How many employees did he have?  The Gilmore family may have supported the arts in Hartford but how many of the literati did they socialize with?

 

I don't think it really has anything to do with those things.  Obviously, the Huntzbergers appeared to be much wealthier than the Gilmores.  However, when you get to a certain level these relationships are rarely about a tit for tat measure of various assets against one another.  It's why you still hear about con artists who try to pass themselves off as being a Rockefeller or Dupont, not because every member of those families is wealthy, but because the name itself has cachet.  Emily viewed them as peers because they socialized in the same circles, attended the same events, apparently they were close enough in that Shira mentioned attending Emily and Richard's vow renewal, and things such as that.  The Gilmore name was enough to open the door, even if the Gilmores' didn't have the same kind of money.   

Edited July 13, 2014 by txhorns79

[Guest]

Not to mention, the Gilmore fortune was another thing on the show that was laughable consistency-wise. 

 

Trix? Rich enough to donate hospital wings. 

Richard and Emily?  Rich enough with a settlement to build the Lorelai Gilmore Planetarium

Richard and Emily? Poor enough to rely on a company sponsored pension and only go to Europe when it is cheaper to do so

[Athena]

I think this topic up came up at TWOP as well, but I still can't figure out how much the Gilmores are worth. It was very inconsistent. Maybe Trix held all the money. I'm quite curious about this aspect.

[dustylil]

Maybe Trix  did indeed hold all the money. But where did it go after she died? One would assume most of it went to Richard. Of course, a good chunk may have gone to that fellow in the purple velour jogging suit Trix was seeing back in Season 3 :)

[Athena]

We can fanwank that Trix donated most of her money to the hospitals and charities. Rory had a trust fund. Did Lorelai? Trix would have left something for her too. I'm a bit surprised that both Trix and Emily only had one child each.

[txhorns79]

We can fanwank that Trix donated most of her money to the hospitals and charities. Rory had a trust fund. Did Lorelai? Trix would have left something for her too. I'm a bit surprised that both Trix and Emily only had one child each.

 

I don't think it will ever make sense.  Sometimes I felt like things like Lorelai's spending and the Gilmore wealth changed to satisfy the plot.  I mean, with the termite situation, Lorelai appeared to be living on the edge in terms of her finances, but you'd never know it from Lorelai and Rory's ability to regularly eat out every day, and no mention of that loan ever again.  Then you have Lorelai apparently having money so tight that she was *gasp* buying groceries and cutting down on her cable channels, right before Luke bailed out the Dragonfly with his secret hermit tens of thousands of dollars, but again, you never hear of Lorelai having money issues after that.   

[Athena]

Sometimes this show was a bit of a fantasy show for me like other genre CW shows except instead of supernaturals, this one had inconsistently wealthy people and Stars Hollow townies.

[dustylil]

I completely agree about money and financial issues on the series being on the fantastical side. That Rory's adoring and intrusive grandparents had apparently never given much - if any - thought to how Rory would pay for Yale until after she finished Chilton. Although it was their fondest wish for her to attend that particular school and they had some knowledge of their daughter's financial situation they had never set up any kind of college fund for her was one of my favourites. That Liz and TJ - itinerant jewelry makers and sellers - were  able to buy a house in Stars Hollow was another. I recall that on TWOP the issue of "liar loans" was raised concerning that home purchase :)

 

As to Luke having  a fair bit of money, I could  accept that. Presumably he and Liz inherited the family home,  their father's business premises and whatever other assets the senior Danes' had. Until the sixth season, he had no dependants to support.  He didn't attend college so there were no college loans hanging over him. Living above the diner he had no housing costs to speak of. His lifestyle was frugal - he didn't appear to do any travelling until he began dating Nicole,  dressed simply and comfortably, drove an ancient truck and had inexpensive hobbies.

 

Certainly the show didn't make a big point of Lorelai's  financial issues. Nevertheless, I thought

it did make clear  that she had had some money struggles over the years. Her years as a low wage maid were referenced more than once. There was also the time she was unable to afford to buy replacement cotton candy for a  young Rory when they went to the circus. It was specifically mentioned in Secrets And Loans  that she had taken out (and repaid) a number of loans over the years. And still had a considerable mortgage on her house. Many of the plot points concerning getting the Dragonfly up and running in Season 4 concerned her - not her and Sookie - finding the  money to pay  Tom and other goods and services providers.

[txhorns79]

Certainly the show didn't make a big point of Lorelai's  financial issues. Nevertheless, I thought it did make clear  that she had had some money struggles over the years.

 

I think the issue was more that the show would sometimes throw big financial problems at Lorelai, then never mention them again or do anything to suggest Lorelai had learned anything from the issue.  I don't think there was any suggestion that the show didn't make clear that Lorelai had financial struggles over the years.  Heck, they showed us that she lived in a freaking shed for some period of time.      

Edited July 17, 2014 by txhorns79

[JayInChicago]

so i realized today i'm still following the current ABC family rotation (last week fights, this week TJ loves Tights was what I watched today) because I specifically am looking for nitpicks or unpopular opinions to post here.

Is that pathetic?

[nolieblue]

I've been watching the re-runs on ABC Family too and today I realized that I really really hate I Jump You Jump Jack. I don't know if that is an UO but I think I originally like it but now think it's terrible. The Life and Death Brigade stuff is ridiculous and Emily is simply a cartoon villain. Ugh.

[txhorns79]

The Life and Death Brigade stuff is ridiculous and Emily is simply a cartoon villain. Ugh.

 

You are so right.  The whole encampment seems ridiculously elaborate and silly for a group of college students. 

 

I'm mixed on Emily and Richard.  They treated Luke terribly to the point of absurdity (and that was not really forgivable), but I think they were ultimately right that he would only serve to hold Lorelai back.  Though I suppose that is Lorelai's mistake to make.