One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[Melancholy]

I thought the line was hilarious. I gotta say- as a restless kid, *I* thought going through the same repetitive morning ritual of the Pledge of Allegiance and the Star Spangled Banner was annoying. All due respect to the United States and patriotism, but EVERY DAY, same repetitive ritual where we're all held captive saying the same thing and all of the other students appear restless and distracted.

 

I could see Stars Hallow being quirky enough to have the Pledge of Allegiance in other languages recited every day, even if the speakers of that language aren't well represented in the school and the whole thing feeling emblematic of Jess's "This is hell" reaction to Stars Hallow. A community so high on its own quirkiness that everything feels like a performative waste of time to a restless kid like Jess who resented group traditions, and just constantly wanted to do his own thing.

[shron17]

The problem is, the more you look at the first four seasons, the more SHHS comes across as a school that in this day and age would be shut down from not following common core, having students skip and never notifying parents/guardians.

 

 

I always thought the reason Luke wasn't notified about Jess was because he'd turned 18, and the principal mentioned notifying Jess numerous times.  As far as saying the Pledge of Allegiance in six different languages I agree Stars Hollow is definitely quirky enough, especially if someone as crazy as Taylor was involved in the decision making.  Also, I really love that line.  Though maybe not so much as Luke's rant about selected pre-approved outings including freeway beautification and Color Me Mine pottery.  

[readster]

I always thought the reason Luke wasn't notified about Jess was because he'd turned 18, and the principal mentioned notifying Jess numerous times.  As far as saying the Pledge of Allegiance in six different languages I agree Stars Hollow is definitely quirky enough, especially if someone as crazy as Taylor was involved in the decision making.  Also, I really love that line.  Though maybe not so much as Luke's rant about selected pre-approved outings including freeway beautification and Color Me Mine pottery.  

 

 Doesn't matter if they are 18, if they are an attending student and have a legal guardian they are living with. That guardian is to be notified of any truancy or other related skipping or failing of school. If Jess had been on his own, then that is one thing but in this case even at a place like SHHS, it wouldn't have happened. Like I said, it was written as a plot to get the spin off with Jess and his Dad when the WB/CW decided they weren't going to go through with.

[amensisterfriend]

As a few of you know, my mom was diagnosed with cancer a month ago and had to have a pretty rough surgery. She's recovering better than expected but still can't leave her apartment much, so of course we decided to use this as a chance to rewatch GG :) Needless to say, this yielded a few UOs that I'm psyched to share with my long lost fellow GG fans!  

 

1) You guys, I really don't think I like S1 much overall. The thing is, I think there are GREAT things about it---not the least of which is watching the Rory/Paris dynamic first start to evolve, the fact that I never find the Sookie/Lorelai friendship more enjoyable than I do in this first season, the formation of the Rory/Richard bond, and the fact that for me Luke is BY FAR at his most appealing in this first season and has far stronger romantic chemistry with Lorelai here than at any subsequent point in the series. But for all the praise S1 gets for emphasizing familial relationships over romance, there's actually A LOT of Dean and Max, neither of whom I enjoy even the littlest bit. And there's just something kind of clunky, heavyhanded, too cutesy and precious and simplistic about this season...for lack of a better or more concise way of putting it :) A lot of the 'little things subtly symbolize a whole lot' flair that I adore about GG in its prime is mostly missing in this first season IMO, where too many things are explicitly spelled out, scenes are too long, and things sometimes veer towards the melodramatic. And even as someone who often likes Lorelai a lot more than most people here, she's just so conceited, juvenile and obnoxiously 'cute' for large stretches of this first season that I can barely watch her! 

 

2) Maybe talakotti has successfully brainwashed me, but as much as I adore Rory's chemistry and connection with Jess and get what the show was going for with her relationship with Logan, I'm starting to hold the UO that I wish she had dated Marty. (I often love Rory most when she's single, just as I do Lorelai, but in TV land that's rarely a viable option!) I initially dismissed Marty as dull and do think there's some validity to the fact that Rory thrived around people with more intense energy (Paris, Lorelai, Jess, Logan, etc.), but this show really needed more shy, adorably geeky, smart and wry men, and the part of me that has trouble suspending disbelief sometimes can't help but feel that Marty would have been the 'best' and most compatible boyfriend for her in real life, especially if he'd turned out to have some intensity underneath.  (And I'm conveniently ignoring the existence of S7 Marty, of course...not even I am unpopular enough to enjoy whatever the heck they did to his character in that final season!) I also feel like Rory would have been more her true, natural self around Marty than she (IMUO) was around Logan even when their relationship was going well. 

 

3) I wish so much that if they had to pair up Lane, it had been with Brian instead of Zach. 

 

4) Season 4, often named as people's very favorite, is...kind of boring to me at this point. It's consistent and rewatchable and I can completely see why many (especially java junkies!) adore it, and I even hold the UO of liking Digger a lot and thinking that he was the best match for Lorelai, especially if you somehow combined the visceral chemistry/connection she had with Christopher with the rapport/compatibility she had with Jason.  But S4 is just missing a certain sparkle and energy and vibrancy that S2, S3 and even the mightily flawed S5 have for me. Another S4 UO: I FAR prefer the first half of the season to the second. There's actually a lot about the second half of S4 that bugs me nearly as much as S5 and S6...and not solely the stuff that's Dean-related, though that certainly doesn't help my opinion :)  

 

5) I've realized that what makes the show so rare and special for me, and the thing that sustains me even through the sometimes irksome characterizations, frustrating depictions of certain relationships and mediocre to subpar plotting and pacing, is how unabashedly GG celebrates passions and joy and interests. So few shows really do that, you know?! Rory loves books and ideas, Lorelai adores pop culture and movies, Lane is obsessed with music, Sookie is dedicated wholeheartedly to cooking, even the surly Jess loves books, writing, music, etc., Babette loves cats, Miss Patty loves show business, Jackson loves produce/farming, Richard loves books/classics...etc. Many SH residents derive a ton of happiness from life's little pleasures, like snow and food and goofy festivals. It's what makes the show so unusual, charming and even life-affirming for me and why I still find myself deeply attached to GG despite the many things about it that irk me. I think it's also why I hold the UO of not much liking the few GG characters who don't exhibit that enthusiasm and interest in life. (I also love much of the show's witty, clever and snarky dialogue, of course, but among PTVers that probably goes without saying :)  

Edited November 5, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[takalotti]

As a few of you know, my mom was diagnosed with cancer a month ago and had to have a pretty rough surgery. She's recovering better than expected but still can't leave her apartment much, so of course we decided to use this as a chance to rewatch GG :) Needless to say, this yielded a few UOs that I'm psyched to share with my long lost fellow GG fans!  

Sorry to hear about your mom's diagnosis and rough surgery, but I'm so glad to hear that she's recovering well!

2) Maybe talakotti has successfully brainwashed me, but as much as I adore Rory's chemistry and connection with Jess and get what the show was going for with her relationship with Logan, I'm starting to hold the UO that I wish she had dated Marty.

Yes! My incantations are working!

[Guest]

Regarding Marty, I think they would have been a great match and I think it would have been realistic had they dated. But I also think it's fairly realistic that they didn't. I think it's pretty realistic for college students especially to not date someone just because of timing and circumstances and things not working out at the same time.

 

I like to pretend Marty never appeared in Season 7.  

[Taryn74]

So glad to hear your mom's doing better ASF!  Hang in there.

 

I've realized that what makes the show so rare and special for me, ...is how unabashedly GG celebrates passions and joy and interests.

 

Wow.  That is a truly excellent point.  I've never taken the time to really think about that before, but you are so right on all counts.  In a world that's becoming increasingly cynical and apathetic about - well, everything, it is refreshing to lose yourself in SH and feel like it's okay to just enjoy something.  Enjoy life.

[amensisterfriend]

Regarding Marty, I think they would have been a great match and I think it would have been realistic had they dated. But I also think it's fairly realistic that they didn't.

 

Agreed on both counts! Though it often seems like decisions with regard to who Rory dated and for how long were dictated more by actor availability than character-related concerns :) MV had other shows, Wayne Wilcox (Marty) had Broadway commitments, etc. If the actors who played Marty, Jess and Logan had all been able and willing to be on the show as frequently as needed, I wonder if Rory's relationship-related path would have taken different turns...? Just something fun to fruitlessly speculate about! 

 

I like to pretend Marty never appeared in Season 7.

 

I refuse to live in a world where this is unpopular :) 

 

In a world that's becoming increasingly cynical and apathetic about - well, everything, it is refreshing to lose yourself in SH and feel like it's okay to just enjoy something.  Enjoy life.

 

Exactly! I think that's the disconcerting thing about much of the later seasons for me---it's not even so much the specific choices they made with regard to character arcs, relationships, storylines etc., though obviously I was less than thrilled by many of them, but more that the infectious joy and life-loving energy had been largely cast aside for a comparatively grimmer feel in a misguided attempt to be more dramatic or 'edgy' or...something. Conflicts were too messy and long lasting, characters seemed far less happy, bigger issues and events replaced more relatable, everyday material to which we could relate. I'm all for some poignant, earned dramatic moments in between the fun fluff, but a generally less joyful GG is really not GG at all for me! 

[Guest]

I think that's part of why I dislike Season 7 in general, asf.  I felt like they were trying too hard to be edgy with some stuff and trying way too hard to be twee with other things.  

 

"Look at our conflict! Logan is in London because of his father! Rory thinks he wants her to come right now, but he really means Christmas!"

 

"Look at all the hay we can find! So much hay! But we all love the hay!"

 

"Look at our big balls of yarn! Yay!!!!!"

 

No. Just stop. 

[Taryn74]

I think that's part of why I dislike Season 7 in general, asf.  I felt like they were trying too hard to be edgy with some stuff and trying way too hard to be twee with other things.  

 

"Look at our conflict! Logan is in London because of his father! Rory thinks he wants her to come right now, but he really means Christmas!"

 

"Look at all the hay we can find! So much hay! But we all love the hay!"

 

"Look at our big balls of yarn! Yay!!!!!"

 

No. Just stop. 

 

I'm a little bit ashamed at how hard I am laughing at this right now.  Every single word.

 

And I agree with both of you about S6 and S7, for sure.  And that may be the thing about both of those seasons (plus quite a bit of S5) that just leaves me feeling so blah about them, but I could never quite put my finger on.  It's not just that Lorelai lost her "spark" (because of the April situation) -- everybody did.  How many times in S6 or S7 did we see Sookie cooking?  Jackson talking about gardening?  Rory reading?  Paris being passionate about anything (as opposed to just being way off the deep end of maniacal)?  Everybody lost having something they really cared about, it seems.

[Guest]

I thought of this in the Marty thread, but it isn't Martyish.  So here it is.

 

I don't think Season 1 and 2 Dean was that bad.  Was breaking up with her for not saying "I love you" a rational thing to do?  No. It was a 16 year old thing to do.  I don't think he was a bad boyfriend in any way.  He just was young and maybe immature. And so was Rory.  So it was a bad, but typical, combination.  If they hadn't brought him back and butchered him in seasons 4 and 5, I likely wouldn't think so negatively of Dean Season 1. I think it's the hindsight of what he does in later seasons that makes me think his behavior in earlier seasons was a precursor.

[Gilmorefan]

Yeah, season one and two Dean was actually not a bad character. One of my favorite moments was when he took her to the coming out ball, not really sure why that one sticks but I thought it was cute.

Sort of related (and if it doesn't belong in this thread let me know!) but what would you have liked for characters final appearances that was different from what we got? I think Dean's final appearance should have been closing the window in Rory's face.

[dustylil]

I like to pretend Marty never appeared in Season 7

 

I like to pretend Jackson also didn't appear in Season 7.

Two fairly nice guys the victims of hatchet jobs on their characters- for no particular reason that I can figure out.

 

All the best to your Mom, asf.

Edited November 6, 2015 by dustylil

[desertflower]

So, I finally finished the whole series. I had seen 1-5 in the original run and for some reason only saw 6 and 7 in bits and pieces. I had never seen the finale and was dreading it a little because I've seen so many people say they hated it. And you know what, I actually loved it! I don't like every storyline they did in the last season but I think in general they did a pretty good job of keeping the right vibe of the show. I loved Luke and Lorelai's big scene and thought it was done well. And I may have cried several times. :)

My only complaint is that Richard and Rory didn't have a special goodbye scene just between the two of them. But at least he had a nice moment with Lorelai.

So anyway I guess my UO is that I thought the ending was pretty darn good.

[timimouse]

@AmenSisterFriend Sorry to hear about your mom's diagnosis but happy she's recovering well and hope she continues on that path. :)

 

Unfortunately, I'm still not on that Marty train. It seems to be a popular opinion but I never liked him and wasn't surprised that he became that person in season 7. *meh*

Completely agree with your take on season 1! Obviously it is what made me fall in love with the show to begin with but as I re-watch, it falls lower and lower down on the list as it seems a bit over-the-top at times as they try too hard with certain character traits. I think ASP found her footing in seasons 2 and 3.

 

This may be the wrong forum here so I apologise in advance, but inconsistencies really bug me and I recently watched the pilot where Rory tells dean about being named after her mother because Lorelai thought since men name their sons after themselves all the time, why couldn't women. It also came up in the next episode before Lorelai meets the headmaster. If that were the case however, why would she have been named after her grandmother? Rory is technically "Lorelai the third" not Lorelai Jr. so that explanation doesn't make much sense to me.

[dustylil]

And to add to the inconsistencies, Trix is apparently dead in the early episodes of Season 1.

 

Rory isn't even "Lorelai Jr." as far as I can tell. She and her mother may have the same first name but have different middle names. I believe the full names are supposed to be identical to qualify as Junior,  the Third or the Fourth.

 

Do we even know if Trix had a middle name and what it might be?

[Llywela]

I don't find the name thing inconsistent. Naming a child after a grandparent is pretty normal - and given how close Richard is to his mother, it's hardly surprising that he chose to name his daughter after her. It is, however, far more unusual for a mother to name a daughter after herself, whereas you hear of sons named after their father all the time. Lorelai is right about that.

 

I don't think Rory was ever intended to be 'Lorelai Junior', Lorelai simply chose to share her own first name with her, and then shortened it to Rory.

[Guest]

Trix is so formidable that she not only resurrected herself, she caused people to forget she was dead. I fail to see how that is inconsistent.  

[solotrek]

If that were the case however, why would she have been named after her grandmother?

 

Rory didn't even know that her grandmother's name was Lorelai, so at the time when she said that, she just knew that she was named after her mom.

 

Rory is technically "Lorelai the third" not Lorelai Jr. so that explanation doesn't make much sense to me.

 

That designation only works if the entire name is the same. But Rory's middle name is Leigh/Lee and Lorelai's is Victoria (or maybe vice versa).

[dustylil]

deeja, not only was Trix so formidable that she resurrected herself, the force of her being was so impressive that somehow she became a single parent who raised Richard. Although we were told in the third season that his parents were alive when he was attending Yale.

Now heaven knows many if not all of the Gilmores behave immaturely. However, I don't think having a father who died when one is in one's late teens or early twenties, constitutes being brought up by a single mom.

[timimouse]

Boy did I get schooled here. Comment rescinded.

 

I did notice the inconsistency with Trix apparently being resurrected from the dead but I think it's understandable when a series is just beginning and they're still trying to figure out the backstories of their characters.

 

@AmenSisterFriend: I just watched 'Lost & Found' and NOW I get your name! Haha!

[Eyes High]

My UO is that I hated how Mrs. Kim treated Lane when I watched GG as it originally aired, to the point where I secretly hoped Lane would rebel to the point of cutting all ties with her mother. This is probably a cultural issue, since I had a standard North American upbringing in terms of the freedoms I was afforded. Since GG has ended, I've met people raised in other cultures in a similarly strict fashion who didn't seem particularly bothered by this mode of parenting, but it really, really bothered me at the time. I remain disappointed that Lane didn't peace out on her mom, run off to some non-Christian college, drop out of that college, and hit the big time as a rock musician. It might not have made her happy, ultimately, but at least she would have been free. Nor am I particularly moved by the insistence of some I've seen that Mrs. Kim was doing what she thought was best for her child. A lot of parents do horrible things to their children under a misguided but honestly held belief that it's in their best interests.

 

Given Lane's unenviable and arguably tragic fate--trapped at home with twins at the tender age of 21 while her husband lives out her dream--it's hard not to view her as severely damaged by her conservative Christian upbringing. A great website (the-toast.net) posted this list of fictional characters whose lives would have been vastly improved by an abortion. Lane, not surprisingly, was on that list.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Eyes High

[dustylil]

And then there's me with little or no sympathy for Lane whatsoever. And I too was raised with most of the freedoms of a North American teenager - as was my own daughter. But then I never saw Lane as a victim. Rather as someone who wasn't willing to put all that much effort into achieving her goals.

 

Nothing was stopping her from leaving home at eighteen and attending a non-religious college or perhaps a community college if a Seventh Day Adventist school didn't appeal to her. Or working full-time and attending college part-time. Oh yes, she might  have had to  pay for her education herself.

 

I also don't recall anything (family obligations, health issues, romantic ties)  precluding her from moving to New York or wherever the music scene was that was most interesting to her. That would have required guts.

 

She also chose to get married, from my recollection. I am pretty sure that Zach would have been just as happy with them having a more informal living arrangement.

 

And although one  would never have known it by what happened to many of the series' characters, I am pretty sure  birth control is available in and around Connecticut. That Lane did not think to avail herself of effective contraceptives when she was about to go on her honeymoon, particularly when they did not intend to start a family immediately, was ridiculous.

 

It is not as if she didn't have role models for an independent life and making one's own choices despite her own conservative, religious upbringing. Lorelai, a woman she liked and admired, started off at seventeen - and with a baby on her hip. Jess, her own age, with a miserable family background and on his own, created a literary life for himself In Philadelphia. But Lorelai ad Jess were apparently willing to work towards what they wanted.

[Eyes High]

And then there's me with little or no sympathy for Lane whatsoever. And I too was raised with most of the freedoms of a North American teenager - as was my own daughter. But then I never saw Lane as a victim. Rather as someone who wasn't willing to put all that much effort into achieving her goals.

 

Nothing was stopping her from leaving home at eighteen and attending a non-religious college or perhaps a community college if a Seventh Day Adventist school didn't appeal to her. Or working full-time and attending college part-time. Oh yes, she might  have had to  pay for her education herself.

 

I also don't recall anything (family obligations, health issues, romantic ties)  precluding her from moving to New York or wherever the music scene was that was most interesting to her. That would have required guts.

 

She also chose to get married, from my recollection. I am pretty sure that Zach would have been just as happy with them having a more informal living arrangement.

 

And although one  would never have known it by what happened to many of the series' characters, I am pretty sure  birth control is available in and around Connecticut. That Lane did not think to avail herself of effective contraceptives when she was about to go on her honeymoon, particularly when they did not intend to start a family immediately, was ridiculous.

 

It is not as if she didn't have role models for an independent life and making one's own choices despite her own conservative, religious upbringing. Lorelai, a woman she liked and admired, started off at seventeen - and with a baby on her hip. Jess, her own age, with a miserable family background and on his own, created a literary life for himself In Philadelphia. But Lorelai ad Jess were apparently willing to work towards what they wanted.

 

Not everyone has the ability to break free from their toxic parents, or from abusive relationships in general. "Guts" has very little to do with it, and to assume that all one needs is "guts" is a pretty limited perspective. It's insulting to people who've suffered from these relationships to suggest that all they need to break free is a little bit of gumption, and if they fail to display said gumption then they're spineless, lazy cowards who deserve whatever they get. Your attitude reminds me of the "Why don't they just LEAVE" response to women stuck in abusive relationships. To be clear, I was disappointed that Lane failed to break free, as I said, but I don't blame her for it; to suggest that her failure is her fault for not being "brave" enough seems like victim-blaming to me. It's not her fault that she suffered from her mother's treatment of her. When you treat your children horribly, they suffer for it; it's not rocket science. The blame belongs with her mother's shitty parenting, not with Lane for not being tough enough to rise above her mother's shitty parenting and strike out on her own.

 

It's hardly fair to compare her to Lorelai. Lorelai and Jess weren't struggling with being raised by oppressively religious parents, and they didn't seem to suffer from the pernicious influence of conservative Christian religion the way that Lane did. You are right that Lane did make choices which led to her ruin, but when you look at those choices, it's obvious that her conservative religious upbringing led to those choices:

 

1. Choosing to marry an unsuitable man instead of living with him conjugally as a test drive of the relationship.

2. Abstaining from premarital sex and having a disastrous first sexual experience as a result (to the point where she laments that her mother was right that sex is horrible, suggesting a direct link between her mother's horrific parenting and her own poor decisions).

3. Failing to inform herself about birth control. (It's hardly "ridiculous" that a young woman raised in an oppressive religious environment by a mother who railed against the awfulness of sex would be hesitant about informing herself on the proper use of birth control.)

4. Refusing to contemplate an abortion.

5. Giving up her dreams for the sake of the family unit.

 

I mean, sure, she "chose" these things, but let's not pretend that those choices were made in a vacuum.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Eyes High

[Sara2009]

Lane had children before she wanted to, but I don't think that means her life was ruined. Just look at Lorelai.

[takalotti]

Maybe the unpopular opinion is the non-polarized one :)

Even if you don't see Mrs. Kim as toxic or abusive, I can still see a case for being sympathetic to and understanding of Lane's actions (without necessarily feeling she ended up with a shit life, too) rather than seeing her as taking advantage of her mom.

This may seem too simple, but Mrs. Kim is her mom. No matter how much you may disagree with your parents' strictness, discipline, or religion, they are still your parents and you want their approval.

I can understand seeing the way Lane hid her forbidden stuff/interests/behavior as just trying to avoid getting in trouble. Cheating the system, so to speak, and being disrespectful. But I just see it more as a young adult trying to find a balance between figuring out who she really was as an independent person while still respecting her parents opinions (if not their rules) enough to try things their way, if only on the surface.

I don't see Lane attending the SDA college as tricking her parents into funding her college education. I think she was just trying to be who her mom wanted her to be as much as she could, though it wasn't 100%.

While her disobedience can be viewed as disrespectful, I think she actually did respect her parents. When she listened to forbidden CDs, she wasn't laughing at her parents behind their backs for falling for her good girl routine. As she went to college on their dime, she wasn't like, "Haha, suckers!" She looked up to her parents, not down on them, and just struggled to find a way to be herself without disappointing them.

Edited November 14, 2015 by takalotti

[dustylil]

If we had seen Lane as a teenager struggling with allure of popular culture and rock music versus the confines of the known and restrictive life of a devout Seventh Day Adventist home, then I would readily agree there were complex  factors in her life and in how she made her choices. But that was not the case here. From the very beginning of the series, when she was fifteen or sixteen, we had seen Lane be dismissive of her family's religious practices, disrespectful of house  rules and  appear to spend a good  deal of her waking hours trying to deceive her mother about her activities. (Now why she felt the need to bring blasphemous contraband such as make up and rock CDs into her home as opposed to keeping them at the Gilmore house continued to puzzle me - but I digress.)This was not a young women wondering and worrying about leaving the conservative faith and restrictions of her home.  That ship had sailed - in her heart and mind she had long since left  restraints and strictures of  her  church and family. So I saw no reason for her not to be able and ready to act on her own thinking and beliefs once she left high school.

 

I certainly saw nothing abusive  in Mrs. Kim as a parent. Certainly she was strict and demanding. However,  she did permit Lane outlets for more  worldly, non-church interests. She allowed her to become and remain close friends with Rory, the child of an unwed mother; tolerated her spending time in the relaxed and secular home of Lorelai; and consented to her  pursuing  among the most frivolous of high school pursuits, cheerleading. Even after she recognized that Lane was no longer following the tenets of their faith, she was not vengeful and did  she seek to punish her. She did not use her position as a Stars Hollow businesswoman to try to prevent her from getting a job in the town or finding a place to live. And she continued to maintain lines of communication with her daughter.

[timimouse]

So I'm not sure how most people feel about Lorelai. Personally I think she's too self-centered and for the most part my tolerance for her antics is very slim. But my favourite Lorelai moment came in season 4 episode 6 - An Affair to Remember - when Sookie and Rory were being whiny brats and she said to them exactly what I was thinking... "Stop behaving like a 2-year old and make a new plan! People have being carrying babies around without a fancy new truck for years, he will be fine!".

I feel like Rory finally got a rude awakening at college that she wasn't the centre of the universe and that while she may have been a big fish in a small pond in Stars Hollow (and to some extent at Chilton) it all changed at Yale where she was now a small fish in that big pond. I think all of that attributed to her leaving Yale. She didn't know how to deal with being average and she fell apart. I'm REALLY glad they didn't make her valedictorian  at her graduation from Yale as that would have been EVEN more unbelievable than her earning it at Chilton. 

[dustylil]

I'm REALLY glad they didn't make her valedictorian  at her graduation from Yale

 

Can you imagine the headlines in the Connecticut newspapers if they had -

"Local felon named Yale valedictorian" !

[KateeBar]

So, I'm just now wrapping up a binge-watch of this show, having never watched it before. I think several of my opinions probably rank as unpopular.

1) I have an irrational dislike of Padalecki so I was never on board with Dean. He was BORING.

2) I liked Jess, and thought those two had great chemistry. I also liked Marty a lot when he first showed up, and wanted him to just ask Rory out.

3) I had to stop watching for a while because 80% of the time I found Lorelai really annoying.

4) I loved Logan and Paris. I actually thought they did a good job portraying Logan as a person who grew up rich, entitled and conflicted.

5) They could have jettisoned Lane early on with no ill effects.

6) I'm still on the fence about Lorelai's love life. She had great chemistry with Max, IMO, and decent chemistry with Christopher. I never enjoyed Luke so...that's disappointing.

I'm still interested in the mini-series at least.

[Taryn74]

Welcome kateebar!

 

1) I agree.  Well, about Dean, not JP as a person.  (He actually makes me see Dean a little more favorably than I would otherwise.)  I actually see Dean as borderline abusive, but I really don't think that's what ASP was going for, so I'll be kind and say 'boring' covers it.

 

2)  Wholeheartedly agree on both points.

 

3)  I never stopped watching, although it has been a while since I've been able to do a rewatch, but I agree that Lorelai can drive a person nutty.  She's so childish about so many things.

 

4)  Did not like Logan at all, at first.  He really, really grew on me though and I agree that he was a very interesting and conflicted character.

 

5)  Aw, that makes me sad.  I love Lane.  Mrs. Kim too.  She's one of my favorite characters.

 

6)  Eh...I hated Max, agree about Christopher, and I love Luke so there you go LOL.

[amensisterfriend]

Yay--numbers make it so much easier for someone as disorganized as I am to reply! :) 

 

1) I was never on board with Dean either. I don't agree with the very popular opinion that they assassinated his character, because I thought his character ranged from deadly dull to sulky/petulant/angry/jealous/possessive etc. from the outset. I'll admit it got worse, but, seriously, all that stuff was very much evident in the first season. Plus, you know that scene in Bracebridge where Jess asks Rory what she and Dean even talk about? I'd always wondered the exact same thing! What did they connect on, bond over and have in common? And I'm torn on JP. Based on his off camera demeanor and a throw away role he had in an awesomely dreadful film called Cry Wolf, I think he can be likable if they give him a cheery, exuberant, jokester-y role to play...but, alas, he just made Dean seem even more unpleasant and dour than he had to be. 

 

2) I, too, see a ton of chemistry and natural connection between Rory and Jess and am pro-Marty...well, S4-S5 Marty, but we've already covered that :) 

 

3) I have to be in the right mood for Lorelai---for the show in general, in fact! At times I think she's a really distinct, vibrant, layered and even lovable character who's a surprisingly compelling mixture of both admirable strengths and human flaws...other times, I just find her maddening :)  

 

4) I'm always psyched to see fellow Paris fans! As for Logan, he and his relationship with Rory gives me whiplash. Sometimes I really dislike him/them, sometimes I really like him/them, and other times I'm somewhere in between. I think it would help my opinion of him if the actor were a little less smirky, which made it tough for me to buy him as sincere even when he was clearly supposed to be. It's an admitted pet peeve of mine :)

 

5) I actually love the Lane and Lane/Mrs Kim stuff in S4, but I agree with the UO that, in retrospect, I would have been fine with her popping up only occasionally after that. I really didn't enjoy her pairing with Zach (my UO is that if they had to stick her with someone, I'd much rather it have been Brian!), and it just felt like they had no real idea what to do with her. Plus, is it unpopular to think that Hep Alien's music is painfully AWFUL?! :) 

 

6) Max seems to elicit a wide range of opinions---maybe because he wasn't very distinct or well-defined by the writers or actor so we all fill in the considerable blanks differently?! I'd love to hear more about why you liked him with Lorelai. I always start S1 hoping I'll like him, but somehow he just comes off as dull and a little pompous and smarmy to me. 

 

I am, however, totally with you on Lorelai having chemistry with Chris and on disliking Luke. Luke and the Luke/Lorelai romance are very, very popular, but you're not alone in not thinking much of Luke or of their chemistry/connection/relationship/ability to make each other happy/etc., as you can see from my (and a few other people's!) posts :) 

Edited November 16, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[KateeBar]

Yes, my issue with Dean was primarily that he and Rory really seemed to have little in common, but then I guess that a lot of teen first loves are based on physical crushes. Jess was an intellect, and as awkwardly good a kid as Rory was, I bet his rebellious side was attractive too, a little thrilling. Dean was...tall.

 

Logan's smirk was off-putting at first, totally agree. I just found myself really liking him because some of the things he did for Rory seemed larger and more meaningful than the typical romance stuff on this show. Maybe just more nuanced. Even though I found the whole Life and Death Brigade stuff pretty irritating, I do think Rory really needed to jump off that scaffold once in her life. I'm probably just projecting as a former sheltered, risk-averse teenage nerd. And though he coasted a lot on his money, when he had to start working, he worked hard it seemed.

 

I guess I didn't really dislike Lane and Mrs. Kim, just that too much time with them grated on me more than some of the other quirky townsfolk, and the whole show could have happened without them anyway. I did find it kind of sweet when Mrs. Kim wrote the song with Zach and told them both not to give up on music.

 

I can't put my finger on what I liked about Max, really. Maybe it was because he was an intellectual, and Lorelai was less able to beat him a battle of words? Because her word battles were what would turn me off for a few weeks at a time. In retrospect, I feel like Jess could have grown up into a Max, so maybe because I binge-watched there was a halo effect and I liked him better because of it.

 

Luke lost me completely on the Vineyard. His constant state of ranting discontent made me want to kick him off a cliff.

[Guest]

At the beginning, Dean was portrayed as a reader.  It wasn't until later on that he became more one-dimensional.  Even in the first season, he certainly had his flaws, but they portrayed him as deeper, in my opinion.

[Eyes High]

Lane had children before she wanted to, but I don't think that means her life was ruined. Just look at Lorelai.

 

What did Lorelai want at the time, though? She wanted not to marry Christopher, to be free from her toxic parents, to raise her child away from her parents' influence, and to be an independently successful person. Done. She got everything that she wanted.

 

What did Lane want? To NOT have a horrible first sexual experience. To NOT get pregnant her first time out. To NOT become a mother, much less a mother to twins, at the age of 21. To NOT be stuck in Stars Hollow. To NOT give up her dream. Lane got everything she didn't want. She made her peace with her fate the same way people who suffer horrible fates make their peace with it, but that doesn't mean it's not a terrible outcome for her. She's the anti-Lorelai.

 

If Lorelai had had a "Lane" outcome, she would have begrudgingly married Christopher and raised Rory under the toxic influence of her parents. She would have been trapped in what was for her a horrible life just as Lane was trapped.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Eyes High

[readster]

 

 

What did Lane want? To NOT have a horrible first sexual experience. To NOT get pregnant her first time out. To NOT become a mother, much less a mother to twins, at the age of 21. To NOT be stuck in Stars Hollow. To NOT give up her dream. Lane got everything she didn't want. She made her peace with her fate the same way people who suffer horrible fates make their peace with it, but that doesn't mean it's not a terrible outcome for her. She's the anti-Lorelai.

If Lorelai had had a "Lane" outcome, she would have begrudgingly married Christopher and raised Rory under the toxic influence of her parents. She would have been trapped in what was for her a horrible life just as Lane was trapped.

 

 Very good points, even if Mrs. Kim had a lot of Emily's flaws by being over bearing in her beliefs. I'm not talking about their religion, just that Mrs. Kim had a clear vision on how Lane was going to live and be raised. However, just as Lane made peace with her fate, so did Mrs. Kim. Her support of Lane's band, living arrangements and even getting married and having kids early. She realized that she couldn't control her daughter's life and as they say: "God has other plans." The only problem was, I really wouldn't have minded Mrs. Kim getting a taste of her own medicine with her own mother finding out and we was revealed during Lane's wedding. Then having her mother go: "Its cool." Which was the opposite of Mrs. Kim's reaction as she said: "Children aren't suppose to make the rules." If they would have had it where her mother who she believed she had to hide her religion and be traditional Korean would have seen everything else and been: "Its your life, be happy." Then her reaction would have been priceless.

[JayInChicago]

I try to ignore it because overthinking it isn't going to change things, but after Lane dropped out of college, what really is her motivation to stay living in Stars Hollow? So she can share per the show's standards, a terrible apartment with her former or soon to be former band mates, waitress at Luke's, and avoid the mother whose rejection she has clearly always found as painful?

 

Was it here or in another thread we were going around about Mrs Kim and Lane? I don't think Mrs Kim was abusive, but there's a wide gulf between "not abusive" and "a good parent". I think in real life a parent so strict would be gambling their future relationship with their child in exchange for rules obedience. 

[JayInChicago]

Then again, there's also no reason for Lorelai to have made up with Emily after wedding bell blues, so...

[amensisterfriend]

Then again, there's also no reason for Lorelai to have made up with Emily after wedding bell blues, so...

 

Heh--yeah, the otherwise goosebump-inducing "You and me, we're done!" line packs less of a punch once you know that "done" means "taking a slight break for one or two episodes." :) It's actually kind of annoying that Emily and Lorelai's rift lasted for so brief a time while Lorelai and Rory's lasted for what felt like an eternity (and, as has been pointed out here, without an apparent purpose since no one changed or grew or learned lessons that altered the dynamic of their relationship.) 

 

Luke lost me completely on the Vineyard. His constant state of ranting discontent made me want to kick him off a cliff.

 

Ha!!! It's funny, because so many people point to this as the one episode where Luke's relentless, joy-killing negativity starts to grate and he's totally devoid of charm, basic pleasantness, etc., but my UO is that Luke is like that all too often, not just on the vineyard. "Constant state of ranting discontent" is par for the course for Luke, at least IM(U)O :)

 

It reminds me of how nearly every fan except me singles out Road Trip to Harvard as the episode where Lorelai and Rory are cliquey and selfish and totally unconcerned with people other than themselves and each other to an extent that's kind of offensive...and I'm always thinking, yeah, they totally are, but how does that differ from how they are in, like, at least 40-50% of the series' episodes?! And, actually, Lorelai just coming off a breakup makes some of their behavior and need to blow off interaction with other people more understandable to me here than in some other episodes. Suffice it to say I'm not at my best post-breakup, either :) So I guess my UO is that I don't find them any worse in Road Trip to Harvard  than many other episodes---and actually still view that one as a cozy, highly rewatchable "go to" episode for me, though lord knows why! 

 

In retrospect, I feel like Jess could have grown up into a Max, so maybe because I binge-watched there was a halo effect and I liked him better because of it.

 

So now I''m totally fascinated by this insight, especially as Jess is so often compared to his similarly surly, manners-challenged Uncle Luke instead :) I would absolutely love to hear more about how you see Jess and Max as similar! 

[Eyes High]

Ha!!! It's funny, because so many people point to this as the one episode where Luke's relentless, joy-killing negativity starts to grate and he's totally devoid of charm, basic pleasantness, etc., but my UO is that Luke is like that all too often, not just on the vineyard. "Constant state of ranting discontent" is par for the course for Luke, at least IM(U)O :)

 

 

Agreed. Luke crossed the line from "curmudgeonly but sweet" to "constantly hateful and perpetually irritated" fairly early on the show, in my opinion. He seemed annoyed by pretty much everything, ranging the spectrum from "mildly bothered but letting it go" to "angrily ranting at length over some perceived injustice." Even when he was courting Lorelai, he seemed put out at the effort and resentful of her for putting him to all this effort (his rant at her in the Raincoats episode was pretty telling, in my opinion). He was grimly and doggedly determined, as if fulfilling a distasteful obligation, rather than enthusiastic and excited. On another show, Luke might have the revelation that he's struggling with depression. (In fact, on another show airing this year, one of the leads who was also pretty hateful and negative towards everything and everyone revealed that she was suffering from clinical depression.) It would explain a lot about his behaviour, in my opinion.

 

I don't blame him for acting as if he was annoyed by Lorelai in general. In my opinion, for all her good points, she's pretty annoying: selfish, entitled, rude, deliberately goads people to get a rise out of them (she and Jess had that in common, actually), talks too much about too little, in love with her own wittiness while not being particularly witty, overly fond of deliberately obscure pop culture references, and so on. Acting annoyed by Lorelai is a wholly reasonable reaction. However, most people don't choose to associate with people whose personalities irritate them, all other things being equal. People spend time with people who make them feel better about themselves, not worse. It's baffling to me is that he seemed so put off by Lorelai and still continued to pursue and date her. In real life, where people who genuinely like and are attracted to each other are not irritated by the other's presence, Luke and Lorelai would have maintained a cordial but distant relationship, with their interactions limited to a bit of light banter that would be politely but swiftly cut short the minute Lorelai got on Luke's nerves. It's only in TV/movie world that two people who annoy each other are destined for one another.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Eyes High

[dustylil]

Actually, I kinda think  Lorelai and Emily ending their rift fairly quickly made sense. Certainly they had a  complex and problematic connection - pretty much since Lorelai was a child. However, the core of this particular breach was Lorelai's involvement  with Luke (and Emily's fervent desire for it to end). However, after her return from her second honeymoon.  Emily went to Luke and vowed to no longer interfere in their romance - a promise she kept. So that particular issue was resolved - and Lorelai  won. Why not go back to their longstanding mother/daughter relationship - prickly and volatile as it was?

[amensisterfriend]

Agreed. Luke crossed the line from "curmudgeonly but sweet" to "constantly hateful and perpetually irritated" fairly early on the show, in my opinion. He seemed annoyed by pretty much everything, ranging the spectrum from "mildly bothered but letting it go" to "angrily ranting at length over some perceived injustice." Even when he was courting Lorelai, he seemed put out at the effort and resentful of her for putting him to all this effort (his rant at her in the Raincoats episode was pretty telling, in my opinion). He was grimly and doggedly determined, as if fulfilling a distasteful obligation, rather than enthusiastic and excited.

 

YES. This. I hold the UO of disliking that widely beloved Raincoats and Recipes scene, especially since in retrospect it was reflective of their relationship overall: Him being perpetually annoyed and angry and ready to just stomp away when something doesn't go exactly like he wanted, her seeming more upset and tense than happy and relaxed, desperate to calm down the never-not-angry Luke and not able to even feign much romantic affection and attraction when the scenes call for it. Both of them bickering, not getting and understanding each other, annoying both each other AND me...etc. :) 

 

 

 

On another show, Luke might have the revelation that he's struggling with depression. (In fact, on another show airing this year, one of the leads who was also pretty hateful and negative towards everything and everyone revealed that she was suffering from clinical depression.) It would explain a lot about his behaviour, in my opinion.

 

I've actually said this exact thing! Granted, many GG characters would have met the criteria for various psychiatric diagnoses in real life, but Luke really did have some very legitimate issues that most seem to hand wave away as Luke just being an adorable curmudgeon. Since depression does sometimes manifest as nonstop negativity and anger (especially in males), that would make sense, though I agree the show would never go there. They could, however, all too realistically have had him attend mandated anger management therapy at a few different points in the series---when he got arrested over "the sock man", when he punched Christopher, etc. Few characters could have used it more. And, honestly, seeing him in therapy could have been both interesting and amusing.

 

 

 

Acting annoyed by Lorelai is a wholly reasonable reaction. However, most people don't choose to associate with people whose personalities irritate them, all other things being equal. People spend time with people who make them feel better about themselves, not worse. It's baffling to me is that he seemed so put off by Lorelai and still continued to pursue and date her. In real life, where people who genuinely like and are attracted to each other are not irritated by the other's presence, Luke and Lorelai would have maintained a cordial but distant relationship, with their interactions limited to a bit of light banter that would be politely but swiftly cut short the minute Lorelai got on Luke's nerves. It's only in TV/movie world that two people who annoy each other are destined for one another.

 

And, again, I bow to your insight. (And to the degree that your unpopular opinions about Luke and Luke/Lorelai are similar to mine!) The opposites attract trope is never a favorite of mine anyway, but few pairings illustrate why more effectively than Luke and Lorelai do. Instead of proving complementary, their differences just make them so depressingly incompatible. They have nothing in common. They don't get each other. They rarely seem to even LIKE each other. Instead of being impressed and challenged by each other's differences, they're confused and irritated by them. The bickering that's supposed to pass for chemistry just highlights how annoyed (and annoying) they are and how incapable each is of making the other happy on a day-to-day basis. We said above that a few of us never got what Rory and Dean had in common or could actually connect and talk about, and, honestly, the same holds true of Luke and Lorelai for me. And even the oft-dour Dean was never as intent on squashing everyone's enthusiasm and complaining about every little aspect of life as Luke was. Luke and Lorelai didn't make each other happier or better people, IMO. They just annoyed each other, baffled each other and all too often brought out the less appealing aspects of each other's personalities. In real life, they'd be that couple who everyone else dreads having to hang out with as a unit unless it's to make you feel a little better about your own relationship by contrast. And, the thing is, the opposites attract trope can only work if you're really convinced the two people in question do in fact attract. Personally, I almost never saw any romantic chemistry between them past Season 1. More often than not, the actors looked pained when having to exchange even chaste pecks or share a lengthy scene.  

Edited November 17, 2015 by amensisterfriend

[JayInChicago]

I definitely hit Luke's grumpyness level a few times a day, but at least I don't stalk around like a hot headed grouch. And I don't know, I guess I have self-awareness and stuff that I need to up my meds lol!  

Luke on antidepressants would have been an interesting story line

[Eyes High]

YES. This. I hold the UO of disliking that widely beloved Raincoats and Recipes scene, especially since in retrospect it was reflective of their relationship overall

 

 

Agreed, and nicely put.

 

They could, however, all too realistically have had him attend mandated anger management therapy at a few different points in the series---when he got arrested over "the sock man", when he punched Christopher, etc. Few characters could have used it more. And, honestly, seeing him in therapy could have been both interesting and amusing.

 

I agree. It seems like a missed opportunity.

Instead of proving complementary, their differences just make them so depressingly incompatible. They have nothing in common. They don't get each other. They rarely seem to even LIKE each other. Instead of being impressed and challenged by each other's differences, they're confused and irritated by them. The bickering that's supposed to pass for chemistry just highlights how annoyed (and annoying) they are and how incapable each is of making the other happy on a day-to-day basis. We said above that a few of us never got what Rory and Dean had in common or could actually connect and talk about, and, honestly, the same holds true of Luke and Lorelai for me. And even the oft-dour Dean was never as intent on squashing everyone's enthusiasm and complaining about every little aspect of life as Luke was. Luke and Lorelai didn't make each other happier or better people, IMO. They just annoyed each other, baffled each other and all too often brought out the less appealing aspects of each other's personalities. In real life, they'd be that couple who everyone else dreads having to hang out with as a unit unless it's to make you feel a little better about your own relationship by contrast. And, the thing is, the opposites attract trope can only work if you're really convinced the two people in question do in fact attract. Personally, I almost never saw any romantic chemistry between them past Season 1. More often than not, the actors looked pained when having to exchange even chaste pecks or share a lengthy scene.

 

 

This is all so, so true. The opposites attract trope really only works where the bickering is not genuine but the result of a desperate desire to avoid having to deal with strong mutual attraction. With Luke and Lorelai, not only did I see no strong mutual attraction, but their frequent irritation and frustration with each other seemed genuine.

 

Also, if I were matchmaking for Lorelai and Luke, they are not the type of partners I would pick for each other. Lorelai I think would fare better with a mate who was optimistic and lighthearted while still being sufficiently grounded, stable, and reliable. Luke I think would fare better with someone calm and mellow to balance out his dark moods (and maybe get him the psychiatric help he so desperately seems to need?).

[readster]

I carried this from the Netflix thread since it does make more sense here:

 

 

I kind of felt sorry for Sherry. Besides being a walking cliché they showed her to be blind and dumb in regards to Christopher. He only showed an interest in more contact with Rory to make an impression on Sherry (guess that makes Lorelai and Rory just as dumb) which really should have occured to her. The subject of child-support apparently never came up during the months they were together which makes no sense given Sherry's personality. Of course if it had that might have clued her in as to how much of a faker Chris is. It might also have given her a warning that having a child with Chris might not be the best idea. I could see Sherry considering abortion or adoption but Chris working his 'charms' with platitudes like 'we can do this together' and her giving in. While it was abhorrent that she just up and left her child I can understand it somewhat. In an actual partnership where both parents have jobs they figure out together how to do the parenting and working.

If ASP thought I would suddenly feel sorry for poor widdle Chrissy poo then she miscalculated. She tried to turn Sherry into a bad mother and human being by having her up and leave but the episode also made it clear that Chris had abandoned his child for 2 years already at that point. How the hell does he not know how to change a freaking diper? Oh right, he wasn't there.

I really never thought about Chris doing that but looking back, I agree, it did seem that Chris was doing it more for Sherry than for Rory and Lorelai. In fact, that's why Lorelai started getting so upset at Sherry's baby shower and started messing up the bathroom. She was so upset that Chris got his shit together for Sherry but never did the same for her those years. Of course, looking it over now, in some small way, I think Chris was trying to make up for past wrongs but then when he told Lorelai after Sherry bolted what it was like after Georgia was born. I was like: "I think they were both morons." I know it was a plot point to throw a wrench in Luke and Lorelai's relationship, AS-P even admitted it. Same with April showing up, all of a sudden we had to see that Luke had this horrible ex and that he was apparently an "irresponsible" person when he was younger. Which made no sense but amazing how much we had to have these 180 turns to make characters look better when Sherry had been established and even Luke had been established in several seasons as a guy who went out of his way for people and got trampled on by others. All in to throw wrenches in a relationship the creator and showrunners didn't want because they didn't know how to write Luke and Lorelai as a couple.

[33kaitykaity]

I started to really not like Rory from about the middle of S4 on.  I can't quite figure out why exactly -- having to drop a class, oh, boo, hoo, poor baby, falling for Dean's BS about the state his marriage, what a dumb shit, unless like Lorelai said, she wasn't ready and she knew it, the short hair -- she was just so "special," not as in eating the paste, but everybody always went out of their way for her.  The older she got, the more it started to grate.  By the time we got to the Valentine's weekend at Martha's Vineyard, I actively despised her.  

[timimouse]

The hypocrisy of these characters REALLY gets to me sometimes.

So Emily finds out that Trix didn't think she was good enough for Richard and Emily is livid.

Luke doesn't think that Dean is good enough for Rory (because apparently 'Princess Rory' deserves a prince) and because of how he treats Dean, Rory is livid. 

Emily and Richard don't think Luke is good enough for Lorelai... Wedding Bell Blues... Lorelai is livid.

 

HOW is it that Emily can't see she did the same thing to Lorelai that Trix did to her and Luke did the same thing to Dean that Emily did to him?!?!?!?!

[dustylil]

it did seem that Chris was doing it more for Sherry than for Rory and Lorelai.

 

Yup.It is not that I am a naturally cynical person (ha!). But Christopher did go from not bothering to  ensure that Lorelai and Rory his current telephone number (or for that matter, let them know where he was living)  to instituting a weekly phone call between father and daughter. The only new factor in the situation was the arrival of Sherry.

 

timimouse, and all the Gilmores were livid (and astonished)  that the very well-to-do, highly prominent and accomplished Huntzbergers  thought Rory wasn't suitable for Logan.

Edited November 18, 2015 by dustylil

[timimouse]

 

If ASP thought I would suddenly feel sorry for poor widdle Chrissy poo then she miscalculated. She tried to turn Sherry into a bad mother and human being by having her up and leave but the episode also made it clear that Chris had abandoned his child for 2 years already at that point. How the hell does he not know how to change a freaking diper? Oh right, he wasn't there

 

I never really thought of it this way but that's a good take on it. I didn't really feel sorry for Chris as they intended but that was because I felt that Sherry was being used as a convenience to make Chris look good. When we first met Sherry she was giving the impression that their relationship was serious and they were thinking long-term marriage and children because that's what she wanted and was ready for. So I found it pretty unbelievable that she would just get up and leave GiGi behind. Not that she wasn't career driven, but the Sherry we met would've taken her daughter WITH her. So I felt that she was just being used as a prop to paint Chris in a better light which I did not buy. He really was a loser dad.

timimouse, and all the Gilmores were livid (and astonished)  that the very well-to-do, highly prominent and accomplished Huntzbergers  thought Rory wasn't suitable for Logan.

 

HAHA! I forgot about that one. Thanks. Yet another example of somebody thinking that somebody else isn't good enough for said person and drama ensues. *sigh* I wonder is ASP was running out of ideas at that point?

[Minneapple]

He only showed an interest in more contact with Rory to make an impression on Sherry (guess that makes Lorelai and Rory just as dumb) which really should have occured to her.

 

I actually disagree with this. And I disagree with the notion that Christopher showed an interest in Rory when he wanted an in with Lorelai, too. Chris just struck me as immature, kind of clueless and not having it all together, and Lorelai enabled him. I don't think he was a bad guy though. 

 

In fact, that's why Lorelai started getting so upset at Sherry's baby shower and started messing up the bathroom. She was so upset that Chris got his shit together for Sherry but never did the same for her those years.

 

That's exactly how I read the situation. But Lorelai again didn't see it as a failing on Christopher's part, but on her own. What did she do that I didn't to make Chris get his shit together? So once again enabling Christopher's actions by putting everything on herself.

 

So Christopher had the pattern of coming into Lorelai's life and fucking everything up. And Lorelai always got over it, because like her relationship with her parents, her relationship with Chris was stuck in that 16-year-old phase, when the guy has a motorcycle and is cute and charming so it's okay that he fucks things up. And maybe one day I can make him better and he'll organize his CDs and get a sedan and stay with me.

 

As for Luke. Well, I liked his friendship with Lorelai but hated their romantic relationship. I honestly don't think Luke was cut out for a romantic relationship, like with anyone.