One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

I don't think Rory ever wanted to be on tv. She wanted to do what Christiane Amanpour did, but in print. 

[Melancholy]

42 minutes ago, ZuluQueenOfDwarves said:

I don't think Rory ever wanted to be on tv. She wanted to do what Christiane Amanpour did, but in print. 

That's certainly backed by how Rory ran her education and career. But it's counterintuitive when she said that she wanted to do what Christiane Amanpour did but without qualifying that she didn't want to be on TV or citing any famous print wartime correspondents as more accurate role models. Jess and Lorelai also seemed to gather that Rory meant TV when Jess joked about Rory reporting live from Stars shallow while Jess speeds by in a car screaming in a foreign language or Lorelai scolded Rory into doing the CSPAN speech as practice for being Christiane Ananpour. 

Frankly, it's kind of a waste. Respect and all for everyone's choices, but I always thought one of Rory's key assets was that she was drop dead gorgeous and photogenic and she had a Lara Logan or Isobel Yeung highly watchable quality where they dive into the war zone but they're so cute and feminine while doing it. 

[shron17]

3 hours ago, Melancholy said:

But it's counterintuitive when she said that she wanted to do what Christiane Amanpour did but without qualifying that she didn't want to be on TV

Well, she did mention it a couple of times:

Quote

HEADMASTER: Why do you wish to be Christiane Amanpour?
RORY: Well, I don't wish to be her, exactly. I just want to do what she does.
HEADMASTER: Which is?
RORY: Travel, uh, see the world up close, report on what's really going on, be apart of something big.
HEADMASTER: And to be part of something big you have to be on TV? Why not lead the police on a high-speed chase? That's a quicker way to achieve this goal.
RORY: Being on TV has nothing to do with it. Maybe I'll be a journalist and write books or articles about what I see. I just want to be sure that I see. . .something. [he glances down at her papers] You'll notice the debating team's also missing from my resume.

Quote

RORY: Oh, thank you. I want to pursue a career in journalism.

Christiane Amanpour: That’s good, is it print you want? Television? CNN, maybe?

RORY: Oh, I'd love to work for a major daily.

Edited May 18, 2017 by shron17

[Melancholy]

Eh, the S1 quote didn't speak to me that Rory didn't want to be on TV. It's just that it wasn't a deal breaker and her interest in being a journalist wasn't about some shallow desire to be a TV star, as Headmaster Charleston implied. However based on the examples named above, I got the impression that being on TV like Christiane Amanpour was part of Rory's plans. As for the finale, when Rory told Christiane that she just wanted to work for a newspaper- that's exactly what I'm talking about. The plans pivoted without any story explaining why. 

[shron17]

First off, I guess I see Rory as too introverted to want it to be her job to report on TV.  Secondly, she seemed much more attracted to print than other media.  Also, mainly due to work environment, I see career as a much more fluid thing that changes and grows depending on each individual's experiences, personality, and preferences as they go out into the world.  Expecting a high school or college student to know exactly what they want to do and go straight for that seems rather impossible.  I saw Rory's quote from season 1 as being more focused on the experiences she wanted to have rather than a role she specifically wanted to fill.

[Melancholy]

I guess I have a more cynical opinion. The show initially made Rory's dream Christiane Amanpour because that's an amazing public figure that many people watch as opposed to a newspaper wartime correspondent that most people didn't hear of and because TV is the most glamorous news field. By identifying Rory with Christiane and those lines from Jess and Lorelai, the show gave the impression that Rory wanted to do TV. 

But here are the issues with TV. It logistically demands that Rory perform and hold herself up to judgement from the audience on whether she's as talented as the OS said. The Studio 60 problem. Even if ASP wrote magnificent TV broadcasts, the very nature of college and especially high school TV news is lame even with smart people working on it. Better to have us imagine that she somehow wrote a transformative parking lot paving piece. Then when Rory entered the real world in the Revival, the whole notion of her as a wartime correspondent was dropped by the wayside. Rory didn't even report hard news. Instead, she wrote think pieces about society. That's how ASP could keep GG a fluffy fantasy and not bring down the audience with the problems of the world. Print is the only way this soft news about society comes across as erudite. Non-hard news plays as silly on TV. However ASP never wrote a bridge story on Rory's career. She just wanted the grabby dream of TV that more Americans recognize and see as glamorous but also the logistical ease of Rory ultimately writing Think pieces instead of like traveling to Syria to reporter on Assad or even to have her English trips be about Brexit. 

Edited May 19, 2017 by Melancholy

[whateverhappened]

I think my unpopular opinion is that the nitpicky things don't bother me much? Most of the minor inconsistencies brought up here about things like how college admissions actually work differently in the real world don't detract from my enjoyment of the show. I think on some shows they would, but to me it's clear from the outset that Gilmore Girls isn't striving to be strictly realistic - a lot of character traits are extremely exaggerated, dialogue is written to be clever rather than as an attempt to capture how real people actually talk, and Stars Hollow is purposefully depicted as an overly quirky and sometimes surreal place rather than a revealing look at a New England small town. I think the Palladinos care about showing real relationships and emotions, but I never expected them to be sticklers about accuracy and mindful of small details, so it doesn't bother me as much when they fall short. 

Maybe it's because I took a break from the internet criticism of GG and because I've blocked out most of the revival by now, but I'm back to loving this show more than any normal person should. I even love both Lorelai and Rory again, which is very unpopular around here. I understand why many fans don't like one or both of them and I'm not blind to their major failings, but I still love and connect with them anyway. I'm sure I'd be less tolerant of them if I knew them in real life, lol. 

I'm even liking the later seasons a lot more than I'd remembered!

But on a negative note, I realized that I don't like Max. I think I used to, or at least wanted to, but there's something about him that really rubs me the wrong way, and I don't see anything between him and Lorelai. I can see how she connects with Luke, Christopher and Jason in different ways, but I don't really see her connecting with Max much at all. He's also weirdly pushy at times. I have to skip most of their scenes to keep loving S1.   

[Smad]

So I still haven't seen the Revival. And I don't plan to ever watch it. That's unpopular around here, right? Right?

[FictionLover]

1 hour ago, Smad said:

So I still haven't seen the Revival. And I don't plan to ever watch it. That's unpopular around here, right? Right?

I think it's understandable. I know of a popular GG fanfiction writer that won't watch it either.

[Smad]

17 hours ago, FictionLover said:

I think it's understandable. I know of a popular GG fanfiction writer that won't watch it either.

It's just, from everything I have read about it...it sounds like a horror. All the characters were in a good place at the end of S7. Paris & Doyle, Rory seemed to have finally come to her senses again, Lane had the babies (still hate that) and her mom and Brian, Luke and Lorelai would use that boat trip to finally hash out their crap etc.. AYITL sounds more like ASP's own version of S7 except it takes place in the Twilight Zone or Bizarro World.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Smad said:

It's just, from everything I have read about it...it sounds like a horror. All the characters were in a good place at the end of S7. Paris & Doyle, Rory seemed to have finally come to her senses again, Lane had the babies (still hate that) and her mom and Brian, Luke and Lorelai would use that boat trip to finally hash out their crap etc.. AYITL sounds more like ASP's own version of S7 except it takes place in the Twilight Zone or Bizarro World.

What?  I'm drawing a total blank on this part.

[FictionLover]

53 minutes ago, Smad said:

It's just, from everything I have read about it...it sounds like a horror. All the characters were in a good place at the end of S7. Paris & Doyle, Rory seemed to have finally come to her senses again, Lane had the babies (still hate that) and her mom and Brian, Luke and Lorelai would use that boat trip to finally hash out their crap etc.. AYITL sounds more like ASP's own version of S7 except it takes place in the Twilight Zone or Bizarro World.

I thought for sure there would be memories that Lorelai would talk about in her funny manner to catch us up. But it was more like the last 9 years never happened except for when Luke and Lorelai talked about being together for that long. And season 7 didn't happen for Logan because he didn't get himself together...he was still a womanizing jerk and under his family's thumb. I liked a few things but it was disappointing.

[itgetseasier]

Hi to my fellow Gilmore Girls junkies! I just signed on and wanted to add my own UOs to this very interesting and diverse mix of views. 

I still love Lorelai, I still love Luke, and I still love Luke and Lorelai as a pairing. I've been watching from the pilot and felt convinced they were soulmates from the very first scene. It would take even worse writing than AS-P's and someone even more indifferent to romance than she seems to be to convince me otherwise, but I'll admit that she did seem to get off on testing fans' patience and loyalty. It's hard not to wistfully think about how epic they could have been if written and directed by someone who allowed them to touch and smile more, to uncover more of their commonalities and to learn from each other's differences rather than seeming annoyed and confused by them.  But that's why fanfic was invented! 

To add to what a few others have noted, I've always seen Gilmore Girls as being deliberately surreal and even farcical in many ways, so the lack of realism and the exaggerated characterizations don't bother me for the most part. I do think AS-P sometimes sacrificed her show's goodhearted decency, warmth and charm at the altar of quirk and whimsy, which does annoy me sometimes. 

Lorelai is a really problematic person, but I still love her and believe in her. And I'm in that nearly invisible minority who has far higher regard for Lorelai than I do for Rory, who manages to be both simpering, dull and insipid yet also ruthlessly entitled and strangely coldhearted in ways the show rarely acknowledges, even in the revival.  I always thought Lorelai had the far better heart, even back when Rory was more securely perched on that angelic pedastal her family and town had placed her on. I think Lorelai is not only a better human being but far more interesting and nuanced as a fictional character. I recently realized that there are surprisingly few things I love about Rory Gilmore. If you took away the fact that she loves to read, I'm not sure there's much I'd like or relate to at all. 

I actually wish Paris had been Lorelai's daughter from the beginning and that Rory had been a minor character or not on the show at all. Paris is vastly more interesting than Rory to me. I love what little we saw of Lorelai and Paris's dynamic and think their relationship could have been far more complex but also more authentically touching, especially since the actress who plays Paris has got the acting chops to keep up with Lauren Graham. I would also live to see Paris as Richard and Emily's grandchild, Luke as one of the primary males in Paris's life and Lane as her close friend. I am more or less describing my dream fanfic scenario here! 

Give that dislike of Rory, it's probably not surprising to learn that I don't care about any of her romantic relationships either.  

Someone else verbalized this one already, but I dislike Logan even more than I dislike Christopher. That's not a typo. :) I am no Christopher fan, but I agree that most of his issues stem from how weak he is, blundering his way through life and inadvertently causing some damage along the way. Like someone else pointed out, there is something much more deliberately cunning and manipulative about Logan.  He is far more self aware and just aware in general than Christopher and chooses his path (one that ultimately and, for me, not too surprisingly ends in the revival with him becoming Mitchum Jr.) He comes off as a smug, smirky, manipulative phony who operates only according to the pleasure principle---his pleasure---and even when we are obviously supposed to believe his love for Rory is deep and sincere, I just didn't believe in it or in him. So despite understanding the argument that Logan grew and that he's actually a good person in many ways, I just personally cannot stand him. The funny thing is that I didn't mind him as much in Season 5, before he supposedly grew and matured, because he added a different type of energy to the show and seemed to serve a purpose by bringing Rory deeper into her grandparents' high society world that she had always flirted with but never before truly been a part of. By the time she returned to Yale in Season 6,  I was hoping their break would become a permanent one for so many reasons. As discussed, I never liked Rory much, but by surrounding her with Logan and his eminently slap-worthy friends, the writers highlighted everything I disliked about her and seemed to obliterate the few things I did. 

 Before you all kill me for these, I should stress that I do know how unpopular these opinions are and just wanted a place to vent them but don't expect anyone to agree!  

Edited July 3, 2017 by itgetseasier

[Smad]

5 hours ago, deaja said:

What?  I'm drawing a total blank on this part.

Remember at the end of S7 Luke had the boat trip planned with April which she cancelled when she got into science camp. And Lorelai was set to spend the summer with Rory but that was cancelled too because Rory got her job. I've always figured what with all the reservations Luke had already made and L/L sort of reconciling and their original summer plans not happening, they would go on the boat trip instead. It's my head canon and I'm sticking to it.

 

4 hours ago, FictionLover said:

I thought for sure there would be memories that Lorelai would talk about in her funny manner to catch us up. But it was more like the last 9 years never happened except for when Luke and Lorelai talked about being together for that long. And season 7 didn't happen for Logan because he didn't get himself together...he was still a womanizing jerk and under his family's thumb. I liked a few things but it was disappointing.

Yeah I have no regrets not watching it. L/L sound like are still as dysfunctional as before their second break up, Rory's story sounds extra horrible, Paris and Doyle split (right?), I was never much interested in Logan but at least I liked how he got himself together in the end. At least Jess, Dean, April and Lane sound fine. But also wasting 20 minutes on a musical just so ASP can give her non-GG actors loads to do, urgh. The characters were much better off at the end of S7 and I prefer it that way.

 

4 hours ago, itgetseasier said:

Lorelai is a really problematic person, but I still love her and believe in her. And I'm in that nearly invisible minority who has far higher regard for Lorelai than I do for Rory, who manages to be both simpering, dull and insipid yet also ruthlessly entitled and strangely coldhearted in ways the show rarely acknowledges, even in the revival.  I always thought Lorelai had the far better heart, even back when Rory was more securely perched on that angelic pedastal her family and town had placed her on. I think Lorelai is not only a better human being but far more interesting and nuanced as a fictional character. I recently realized that there are surprisingly few things I love about Rory Gilmore. If you took away the fact that she loves to read, I'm not sure there's much I'd like or relate to at all

I don't think you are a minority there. There is a lot I hate about Lorelai's personality but I can't deny her achievements. Rory post-high school has nothing likeable about her (to me) and the only achievements in her plus column are finishing high school and college. Which really isn't much.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Smad

[itgetseasier]

I've spent all day reading these threads and had to come back to bless the poster who mentioned Jess/Paris as a possible relationship. I truly thought I was the only viewer to have that idea lodged in my mind since There's the Rub and then seeing how Jess evolved and improved while Rory's character spiraled from mediocre to appalling. It appeals to me more than any canon ship other than Java Junkie and maybe Sookie/Jackson.  It's so validating to read through here and see how even the most unpopular opinions are nearly always shared by at least one or two other viewers. 

I can't tell yet which seasons are the most popular but it seems like possibly S2 and S5? I do love S2 but S4 is my favorite. I sometimes just watch it over and over. I won't try to calculate how many times I've watched it because it probably qualifies me as clinically insane! I love the buildup to LL, enjoyed Jason more than Luke and Lorlai's other soporific significant others, and watching Lorelai, Sookie and Michel fulfill their dream of building their own inn fills me with joy. Lorelai is more lovable to me this season than any other, with the massive inn undertaking highlighting her determination, creativity and energy while also showing us how vulnerable and unsure she can be. I also like watching her adjust to the slightly altered dynamic with Rory.

Some think S4 is when Rory became unbearable, but I thought she was pretty bad as early as S2. I really dislike her role in the Dean and Jess mess and started how noticing back in S2 how she always seemed relatively indifferent to Lane, Paris, Luke and nearly every single person other than Lorelai compared to how much they gave to and cared about her. Even when she gets anxious about doing The Right Thing, it always comes off like it stems from her own fear of being disliked or getting in trouble than out of a genuine concern for anyone other than her mom and herself. So that was a long way of saying that my problems with Rory started well before S4. I actually liked her for parts of S4 because watching her adjust to Yale, filled with some people who didn't quite so readily adore her, was more interesting and easy to relate to. The Dean thing was a disaster, but not surprising and, as people here have argued, actually very much in character.

S4 is also when I finally started liking Jess, and S4 is great for those of us who care about the Jess and Luke relationship. S4 also happens to have some of the best moments for my three favorite supporting characters: Paris, Lane and Michel. (I don't really consider Luke a supporting character, but if we do, then please add him to that list!) The stuff with Lane and her mom is particularly great. 

And I saved the most unpopular reason that S4 is my favorite for last: I actually like Liz and TJ in S4. For the most part. :) They're annoying, but they're supposed to be, and I feel like they both had good hearts. And I loved seeing Luke interact with family other than just Jess. Seeing him as Liz's loving big brother brought out a side of him that I really love. 

Sorry for the dissertation! It's just very exciting to find a place where people care about this show as much as I do and don't start yawning when I yammer on about it. Or if you are yawning, at least I can't see it. ;) 

Edited July 3, 2017 by itgetseasier

[elang4]

12 minutes ago, itgetseasier said:

I've spent all day reading these threads and had to come back to bless the poster who mentioned Jess/Paris as a possible relationship. I truly thought I was the only viewer to have that idea lodged in my mind since There's the Rub and then seeing how Jess evolved and improved while Rory's character spiraled from mediocre to appalling. It appeals to me more than any canon ship other than Java Junkie and maybe Sookie/Jackson.  It's so validating to read through here and see how even the most unpopular opinions are nearly always shared by at least one or two other viewers. 

I can't tell yet which seasons are the most popular but it seems like possibly S2 and S5? I do love S2 but S4 is my favorite. I sometimes just watch it over and over. I won't try to calculate how many times I've watched it because it probably qualifies me as clinically insane! I love the buildup to LL, enjoyed Jason more than Luke and Lorlai's other soporific significant others, and watching Lorelai, Sookie and Michel fulfill their dream of building their own inn fills me with joy. Lorelai is more lovable to me this season than any other, with the massive inn undertaking highlighting her determination, creativity and energy while also showing us how vulnerable and unsure she can be. I also like watching her adjust to the slightly altered dynamic with Rory.

Some think S4 is when Rory became unbearable, but I thought she was pretty bad as early as S2. I really dislike her role in the Dean and Jess mess and started how noticing back in S2 how she always seemed relatively indifferent to Lane, Paris, Luke and nearly every single person other than Lorelai compared to how much they gave to and cared about her. Even when she gets anxious about doing The Right Thing, it always comes off like it stems from her own fear of being disliked or getting in trouble than out of a genuine concern for anyone other than her mom and herself. So that was a long way of saying that my problems with Rory started well before S4. I actually liked her for parts of S4 because watching her adjust to Yale, filled with some people who didn't quite so readily adore her, was more interesting and easy to relate to. The Dean thing was a disaster, but not surprising and, as people here have argued, actually very much in character.

S4 is also when I finally started liking Jess, and S4 is great for those of us who care about the Jess and Luke relationship. S4 also happens to have some of the best moments for my three favorite supporting characters: Paris, Lane and Michel. (I don't really consider Luke a supporting character, but if we do, then please add him to that list!) The stuff with Lane and her mom is particularly great. 

And I saved the most unpopular reason that S4 is my favorite for last: I actually like Liz and TJ in S4. For the most part. :) They're annoying, but they're supposed to be, and I feel like they both had good hearts. And I loved seeing Luke interact with family other than just Jess. Seeing him as Liz's loving big brother brought out a side of him that I really love. 

Sorry for the dissertation! It's just very exciting to find a place where people care about this show as much as I do and don't start yawning when I yammer on about it. Or if you are yawning, at least I can't see it. ;) 

I agree with you. Definitely a standout moment in S4 for me was Jess thanking Luke for everything he had done. They had Jess come back earlier and obviously he had a fight with Luke but I think we could see the start of maturity there. I loved the moment when Luke deliberately went to Nicole's so Jess wouldn't have to sleep in his car and Jess actually accepting that and going into the diner. And then we had Jess coming back for the wedding because it was important to Luke and then the thank you speech. :) And also a side note, I loved that Jess picked out the tie Luke wore for the wedding. I think he secretly knew that Luke was finally plucking up courage to ask Lorelai out and this was his way of saying he approved. :)

Anyway, sorry for the rambling but I do love Jess and Luke! :D

[Smad]

1 hour ago, itgetseasier said:

Some think S4 is when Rory became unbearable, but I thought she was pretty bad as early as S2. I really dislike her role in the Dean and Jess mess and started how noticing back in S2 how she always seemed relatively indifferent to Lane, Paris, Luke and nearly every single person other than Lorelai compared to how much they gave to and cared about her. Even when she gets anxious about doing The Right Thing, it always comes off like it stems from her own fear of being disliked or getting in trouble than out of a genuine concern for anyone other than her mom and herself. So that was a long way of saying that my problems with Rory started well before S4. I actually liked her for parts of S4 because watching her adjust to Yale, filled with some people who didn't quite so readily adore her, was more interesting and easy to relate to. The Dean thing was a disaster, but not surprising and, as people here have argued, actually very much in character.

 

I don't think S4 is when I start outright disliking her although this is when her sense of entitlement really starts to come out bigger than before. Unless she is a scene with Lorelai, Emily or Paris she is however fast forward material for me starting in S4. Alexis needs strong actors opposite her in scenes because when she is isn't that's when it really becomes obvious how little screen presence she has and how boring to watch she is. For me at least.

1 hour ago, itgetseasier said:

S4 is also when I finally started liking Jess, and S4 is great for those of us who care about the Jess and Luke relationship.

Don't think that's really an unpopular opinion. Lots of people love Jess/Luke. And start changing their opinion about Jess in S4.

1 hour ago, itgetseasier said:

And I saved the most unpopular reason that S4 is my favorite for last: I actually like Liz and TJ in S4. For the most part. :) They're annoying, but they're supposed to be, and I feel like they both had good hearts. And I loved seeing Luke interact with family other than just Jess. Seeing him as Liz's loving big brother brought out a side of him that I really love. 

Now that might be unpopular although there are plenty people who like Liz and TJ (though maybe not on this board). I will never like Liz, not even the retconned version we see in S4. Deadbeats or parents who are neglectful or abusive will always be on my sh*t list. And Liz was all 3 of those.

[Guest]

I think you might be wrong about Season 5 being the board's favorite, @itgetseasier. I feel unpopular in how much I like Season 5! :) Overall, I think it is disliked. My personal favorites are 2 and 4, but it's pretty much a tie between those. 

[Smad]

9 hours ago, deaja said:

I think you might be wrong about Season 5 being the board's favorite, @itgetseasier. I feel unpopular in how much I like Season 5! :) Overall, I think it is disliked. My personal favorites are 2 and 4, but it's pretty much a tie between those. 

I wonder if it has to do with generations. Or a person growing up. Back during TWoP times people seemed to have loved S5, I think. I did too back then (except for the end of S5), but I was both much younger and a L/L shipper. So I was probably willing to overlook some of the glaring story and characterization mishaps. Re-watching the show while I got older over the years my opinion changed a lot. Luke's and Emily's characterization, the Emily/Richard separation which had clear reasons in S4 that weren't even touched upon in S5, Rory's character arc, storylines that went nowhere, the L/L relationship and how it was depicted, Chris is now fully just plot device, lack of story and so on.

[clack]

Paris is a horrible person -- rude, cruel, ruthless, narcissistic. She rivals Michel and Emily as being the most obnoxious character on GG.

[Guest]

I think Paris is pretty horrible and I wouldn't want to know her or be friends with her in real life, but I think she's entertaining.  I'd say the same for Michel, but my views are more nuanced on Emily.

[Melancholy]

Yes, Emily has three main roles in this show. She's controversial and difficult as a mother but I find her pretty outstanding and generous as a wife and grandmother. Paris and Michel do have their nice points, on a Doylist level, but they are difficult and toxic in every substantive role in life. I do think Rory and Lorelai made deliberate deals to keep their Angry Friend. Rory will put up with Paris's temper and weirdness in exchange for the fierce devotion and love of an accomplished friend and powerful ally. Michel wasn't even much of a friend to Lorelai in the series- it was more that she retained a misanthropic employee because he brought a cosmopolitan panache to his role as a concierge at a small country inn and she was his boss so she could order him where it counted. So, I agree that Michel and Paris are difficult but I don't think the girls were that saintly to keep them on. (Well, Rory in the Chilton days was OTT nice to keep on Paris.)

[itgetseasier]

I see Paris as a genuinely unstable person, so it gives me a little more sympathy and understanding for her behavior. I know someone who has serious clinical anxiety issues and general neuroses who's a lot like Paris, though of course a real world version who's not as over the top awful. She's extremely bright, driven and does have a good heart but is also extremely defensive, lashes out whenever she feels threatened and has that same combination of deep insecurity and a ruthless determination to prove her parents and the rest of the world wrong about how great she can be. So I feel like I can understand and relate a bit to Paris, and like others have said, in some ways I feel like I can explain most of her dysfunction even though I can't excuse it. And she is a very multi-layered, entertaining and interesting character to me. 

To me Michel and Emily are in a different slightly different category. They seem less like they have legitimate emotional problems and more just choose to be nasty. I'm guessing some of Michel's snotty behavior stems from being unhappy, like he fancies himself this sophisticated, worldly guy who's somehow found himself in a small town and is a little bitter with his lot in life, but then I find myself wondering why he doesn't just move or at least try to find a different job. His snarkiness is amusing, but unlike Paris, it's not balanced out by many moments of vulnerability or examples of how loyal and devoted a friend he can be, so I sympathize with him less even though I really enjoy his scenes.

Emily is someone I have very jumbled and  consistently changing feelings about. Maybe that's the mark of a very multi-layered and complex character.  In the span of just one or two episodes, I can go from admiring her to borderline hating her to sympathizing with her to feeling like she and I are two different species and I'll never understand her. 

But just to make sure this is suitably unpopular, while I always see the relationship between Lorelai and Emily listed as among Gilmore Girls' greatest assets, I have to admit that I ended up finding it very exhausting to watch. It followed the exact same dysfunctional pattern over and over, which may be realistic but at a certain part ceases to be enjoyable to watch. And it seemed to highlight the worst sides of both women far more often than it allowed for any real growth. 

Edited July 5, 2017 by itgetseasier

[ghoulina]

On 7/2/2017 at 3:43 PM, Smad said:

So I still haven't seen the Revival. And I don't plan to ever watch it. That's unpopular around here, right? Right?

I kind of wish I hadn't. I haven't had the desire to watch it again, I'll tell you that. 

[Katy M]

3 minutes ago, ghoulina said:

I kind of wish I hadn't. I haven't had the desire to watch it again, I'll tell you that. 

I don't have Netflix, so I can't watch it.  But, I saw in the commercials there was a scene where Kirk was at Friday night Dinner.  That, I want to see.

[itgetseasier]

I win the prize for most unpopular opinion then, because I'm really glad I saw the revival! (Please tell me that prize is free coffee at Luke's for the next several decades? That is all I desire out of life.)

I think it helped that I had been disillusioned with Rory for years, so I wasn't surprised or taken aback by her choices in the revival. Even though I can understand why people found it frustrating to watch, I found it in character. Moreover, once I remembered that almost all of the growth in Logan came during the season AS-P wasn't around and therefore didn't reflect her vision of the character and their relationship, I didn't find him or their selfish arrangement in the revival out of character either. AS-P tends to view most rich people as fatally flawed in nearly identical ways, so to her I always felt Logan = Christopher regardless of whether many viewers agreed, and now in their adult lives Logan was the funloving, charming, adoring but ultimately spoiled and weak guy from Rory's past who she still clung to just as Lorelai had clung to funloving, charming, adoring but ultimately spoiled and weak Christopher. Even Rory ending up with a surprise pregnancy didn't seem that outrageous to me and made sense given AS-P's focus from the very beginning of the show about how family history and patterns repeat themselves. Full Circle writing feels a little lazy and contrived, but it's the type of storytelling that ASP has always loved. 

This is all an awkward way of saying that in my unpopular opinion the revival wasn't dramatically inconsistent with the rest of the series. It had most of its same strengths and shortcomings to me.  Some of the characters' and the show's weaknesses just felt worse because many of us felt they should have matured past them by now, but neither AS-P nor her characters were ever renowned for their maturity!

I have to admit that I got chills during LL's wedding and did love revisiting Stars Hollow. I'm not claiming the revival measures up to the original series at its best, but I found it a worthwhile watch overall. As some have noted, with GG it's always all about the brilliance of individual scenes and enjoying its special moments rather than objectively assessing how well the structure, plotlines and character arcs hold together when taken as a whole. My expectations wree modest, and the revival measured up to them overall. If I had expected more, I probably would have been disappointed. As it was, I'm among the only people who was I saw it and will definitely watch certain parts of it again. But don't worry, the musical is NOT one of the parts I'll be re-watching! 

[Smad]

1 hour ago, itgetseasier said:

But just to make sure this is suitably unpopular, while I always see the relationship between Lorelai and Emily listed as among Gilmore Girls' greatest assets, I have to admit that I ended up finding it very exhausting to watch. It followed the exact same dysfunctional pattern over and over, which may be realistic but at a certain part ceases to be enjoyable to watch. And it seemed to highlight the worst sides of both women far more often than it allowed for any real growth. 

Don't think that's all that unpopular. I've said it myself before. Dysfunction makes for interesting TV and LG/KB together in scenes is dynamite. However when it's the same over and over again, it's exhausting. Lane and Mrs. Kim is the better Emily/Lorleai style, mother-daughter relationship. Because that relationship changed.

 

18 minutes ago, itgetseasier said:

Moreover, once I remembered that almost all of the growth in Logan came during the season AS-P wasn't around and therefore didn't reflect her vision of the character and their relationship, I didn't find him or their selfish arrangement in the revival out of character either.

See I don't care if S7 Logan is ASP's version of Logan or not. S7 Logan is canon. If ASP hadn't abandoned the show and finished it how she wanted, then Logan might not have gotten himself sorted out. So just because snotty ASP is all 'I don't care about S7 because it's not my S7' is irrelevant to me. She tanked the show in S6, deliberately, and the poor people of S7 had to deal with that mess. I give them their props, because for some things they rightfully deserve it. And ASP should have stayed true to that, instead of the only canon that she kept being Lane's twins.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Smad

[Melancholy]

I don't defend how ASP dealt with Logan because S7 Logan wasn't her Logan. I defend her because Logan's "reformation" occured over a short enough time period, early enough in his life, and didn't come with permanent life changes that it was always subject to backsliding. Just because a spoiled lazy 23-year old playboy declares that he wants to make it on his own and takes some job interviews to get his own job, doesn't mean that's his life. At least for career purposes, I'd basically *expect* Logan to backside. Once Logan decided that he did want to work seriously in the media business, it makes more sense that he'd want to do it as the heir/scion where he starts out ahead in terms of money, position, job security, type of work assigned instead of as unaffiliated hustler competing against all of the other smart young people who'd love to be in such a glamorous cool business. So he has to swallow his dictorial, obnoxious father's edicts. We all gotta serve somebody. 

Edited July 5, 2017 by Melancholy

[Bumblebee Tights]

41 minutes ago, itgetseasier said:

I win the prize for most unpopular opinion then, because I'm really glad I saw the revival! (Please tell me that prize is free coffee at Luke's for the next several decades? That is all I desire out of life.)

 

I have to admit that I got chills during LL's wedding and did love revisiting Stars Hollow. 

I'm glad I watched the revival too, and will go so far as to say that I LOVED Fall. I thought Winter and Spring were both strong, if a bit more melancholy than the original series, and that Summer was...not great, but honestly any time I get to spend in SH with these characters is probably going to be worthwhile for me. I also didn't mind Rory's storyline, partially because I agree with you that it was in character, and partially because, as I've discussed elsewhere, I don't necessarily view Rory as a failure and I'm not quite as disillusioned with her as most people seem to be, though I do understand why people would have those views.

I guess my UO is that I preferred the L/L wedding we got to the big one with the townies. I know, I know. I just thought it was perfect. Loved that Reflecting Light was playing, loved Kirk's decorations and the fact that it WAS Kirk who did the decorating, loved that it was the middle of the night and that Rory was in her pajamas... just loved it. I can get behind criticisms that Emily or Jess weren't there, fair enough. To me though, the private night wedding felt right for L/L and right for GG in general.

37 minutes ago, Smad said:

 

 

See I don't care if S7 Logan is ASP's version of Logan or not. S7 Logan is canon. If ASP hadn't abandoned the show and finished it how she wanted, then Logan might not have gotten himself sorted out. So just because snotty ASP is all 'I don't care about S7 because it's not my S7' is irrelevant to me. She tanked the show in S6, deliberately, and the poor people of S7 had to deal with that mess. I give them their props, because for some things they rightfully deserve it. And ASP should have stayed true to that, instead of the only canon that she kept being Lane's twins.

I also agree with this though, pretty much entirely. I think the reason I tend to look at S7 in a better light than S6 is that S6, at least the back half of it, just seems so mean spirited. I have a hard time buying Logan in the revival. I actually think the affair is in character for Rory but not for Logan. I've been reading through your posts, @itgetseasier, and I agree with much of what you said, but Logan seems to be the main place that we differ in opinion. 

Now, let me say that if I knew Logan in the real world, I would want nothing to do with him. I agree that he is smug, smirky, and operates according to the pleasure principle, as you very eloquently put it. I generally find people with that personality type to be completely off putting.  And it's true that his friends are AWFUL.  I just can't get behind this idea, (and I've seen it everywhere, so really I guess this is another UO of mine), that he's manipulative. I actually think one of his redeeming qualities is that he's fairly open and upfront. He's honest with Rory from the beginning that he's not 'boyfriend material', he's honest about his lifestyle as far as his antics and his lack of interest in the paper or academics, he's pretty direct with everyone he comes across about his family dynamic and the way he feels about his father's expectations for him, etc.  Even the incident with the bridesmaids, problematic as it was, didn't strike me as manipulative-I think he genuinely believed he and Rory had broken up. There are even times when he challenges Rory to be honest with herself- like when he points out that she's a trust fund kid too, whether she likes it or not...though I will grant that that is in S7.

I also completely agree with this (except I do like Rory, although to varying degrees depending on the season)

On 7/3/2017 at 0:38 PM, itgetseasier said:

 

I  I never liked Rory much, but by surrounding her with Logan and his eminently slap-worthy friends, the writers highlighted everything I disliked about her and seemed to obliterate the few things I did. 

 

And I think a lot of people feel this way, but for me this says a lot more about Rory than it does Logan. I can see Logan as a symptom of Rory's behavior, but I can't blame him for it.

 I've also mentioned that I see similarities between Lorelai and Logan in the past, in their general personality traits, in their relationships with their parents, and maybe most importantly, in the role they play in their relationships with Rory. They both draw her out of her shell, and play the extroverted wild card to her introverted straight man. I see this much more than the superficial similarities to Christopher, although I admit that they're their and that the writers did showcase them.

ANYWAY, all this is to say that I see Logan as a rather upfront person, and a strong one, and I don't see anything in his past behavior that makes the affair seem in character. I also think that he was probably the best match for Rory, despite my personal distaste for certain aspects of his personality.

I do agree with you that Lorelai has a better heart than Rory and I also have watched season 4 over and over and over, so we have those things in common for sure ?.

[Bumblebee Tights]

44 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

I don't defend how ASP dealt with Logan because S7 Logan wasn't her Logan. I defend her because Logan's "reformation" occured over a short enough time period, early enough in his life, and didn't come with permanent life changes that it was always subject to backsliding. Just because a spoiled lazy 23-year old playboy declares that he wants to make it on his own and takes some job interviews to get his own job, doesn't mean that's his life. At least for career purposes, I'd basically *expect* Logan to backside. Once Logan decided that he did want to work seriously in the media business, it makes more sense that he'd want to do it as the heir/scion where he starts out ahead in terms of money, position, job security, type of work assigned instead of as unaffiliated hustler competing against all of the other smart young people who'd love to be in such a glamorous cool business. So he has to swallow his dictorial, obnoxious father's edicts. We all gotta serve somebody. 

This is actually a fair point. I can see his behavior in the revival as in character as far as career, I just have a hard time with the affair based on his behavior even in S5. He was a playboy, sure, but he seemed to always be open about his ways. I guess it could just be that age has changed him...or it's the curse of all Rory's boyfriends to find her irresistible forever..

[Taryn74]

I'm completely torn about the Revival.  On the one hand, I'm glad I watched it just because it was nice to see where some of the characters were at in their lives . . . but to be completely honest, that applies more to the secondary characters than to the main characters.  I've always loved Kirk and Lulu, so it was nice to see them at such a good point in their lives, with their pig and all.  (Plus, we got another Film By Kirk, which alone is worth the price of admission.)  It was great to see Jess doing so well (I'm pretending the longing look at Rory never happened, because dude, really?) and as much as I hated Dean during the series, it was lovely to see him settled down with a nice little family and completely over Rory.  We got to sit in on Hep Alien at band practice, which is always fun, and Lane was happy with her little life.  It was also fascinating to me to see Emily adjust to life without Richard.

But on the other hand, I pretty much hated Rory, hated Logan, Lorelai was full-on everything I hate about Lorelai (so manic all the time, and don't get me freaking started on the 'can't even say something nice about your father AT HIS FUNERAL' debacle), Luke was pushed to the back burner and STILL being weird and closed-off about April (and I'm a big Luke fan!), and just UGGGGGHHHHH.  /rage building

[Melancholy]

17 minutes ago, Bumblebee Tights said:

This is actually a fair point. I can see his behavior in the revival as in character as far as career, I just have a hard time with the affair based on his behavior even in S5. He was a playboy, sure, but he seemed to always be open about his ways. I guess it could just be that age has changed him...or it's the curse of all Rory's boyfriends to find her irresistible forever..

Logan wasn't a playboy in the Revival. He was having a love affair with his old girlfriend. It's a different animal than his S5 behavior. I'm of the belief that having an affair is a mistake that most anyone is capable of, even people who didn't show a proclivity in the past. It's bad- but it's not a crime. Its easy to be unhappy but feel stuck in a relationship. And then on the other hand, the draw of fun and magic is powerful. Logan was open about being a playboy when there were no consequences. He was a college boy- an age where no one is expected to settle down and a boy out nailing every girl is winning. The older you get, the more that looks pathetic and tawdry. 

[Smad]

1 hour ago, Melancholy said:

I don't defend how ASP dealt with Logan because S7 Logan wasn't her Logan. I defend her because Logan's "reformation" occured over a short enough time period, early enough in his life, and didn't come with permanent life changes that it was always subject to backsliding. Just because a spoiled lazy 23-year old playboy declares that he wants to make it on his own and takes some job interviews to get his own job, doesn't mean that's his life. At least for career purposes, I'd basically *expect* Logan to backside. Once Logan decided that he did want to work seriously in the media business, it makes more sense that he'd want to do it as the heir/scion where he starts out ahead in terms of money, position, job security, type of work assigned instead of as unaffiliated hustler competing against all of the other smart young people who'd love to be in such a glamorous cool business. So he has to swallow his dictorial, obnoxious father's edicts. We all gotta serve somebody. 

But here is the thing for me. The S7 PTB had a completely different approach than ASP. Mainly that such things as character development  and growing up exist. And they managed to humanize characters like Sookie instead of her being nothing but a shrill and neurotic hyena. Lorelai and Emily are probably the only two who didn't have any development that Season. I don't count Lorelai getting Chris out of her system as development, largely because it had no effect on the dynamic between her and her parents after being a thorn in the family's side for 2 decades. Emily was still Emily, though perhaps that is true to life. The speech that Richard gave in Bon Voyage should have been Emily's because Emily is the one who had a problem with how Lorelai lived her life. Richard didn't care enough about Lorelai and IMO had long accepted the fact that Lorelai wouldn't be part of their privileged world. And I would have loved those words coming from Emily, instead of Emily's final words still being all about using money to get Lorelai to come over.

Luke had great character development that I'm convinced wouldn't be temporary because he wanted to be a better father. Rory not cow-towing to Logan when he was being a moron and at the end not giving up despite not getting the fellowship, was a good direction for the character after the previous 2 years of blech. The S7 PTB also seemed to change the Logan=Christopher parallel that ASP had going into Logan=Lorelai. Sure they did it in baby steps but if there had been a S8 and Logan would have been part of that, we would have seen him continue in that direction IMO. Lane's story with pregnancy was repugnant and I hate it but they continued to develop the relationship between her and Mrs. Kim and her and Zach were a stable couple. Sookie and Jackson, despite the whole vasectomy nonsense, actually talked to each other towards the end like normal people (thinking here of the 'riding a bike' episode) instead of always yelling at each other ala ASP. I guess I just preferred the humanizing nature of the S7 writing over ASP's clichéd, stereotype and caricature approach.

[Melancholy]

Well Smad, then it sounds to me like you concede there wasn't a canon/continuity issue with Logan but that you prefer David Rosenthal's writing style to the Palladinos. That's a separate conversation. I think there's merits to both but I tend to prefer ASP's sharper, more cynical characterization to balance out the twee of the world. I do think ASP's writing got too mean in S6 and part of S5. Like, Lorelai having-looong- to-the-death conflicts with Rory, her parents, and Luke in 1 season. But I do like some edge. S7 had none and I definitely think it was the most boring season. The Revival may have been hard to watch (mainly on Rory stuff) but it was interesting. 

[Smad]

42 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

Well Smad, then it sounds to me like you concede there wasn't a canon/continuity issue with Logan but that you prefer David Rosenthal's writing style to the Palladinos. That's a separate conversation. I think there's merits to both but I tend to prefer ASP's sharper, more cynical characterization to balance out the twee of the world. I do think ASP's writing got too mean in S6 and part of S5. Like, Lorelai having-looong- to-the-death conflicts with Rory, her parents, and Luke in 1 season. But I do like some edge. S7 had none and I definitely think it was the most boring season. The Revival may have been hard to watch (mainly on Rory stuff) but it was interesting. 

It is a canon/continuity issue. S7 is canon, no matter what ASP says. This isn't like Buffy, where Whedon went off to play with Firefly but by his own admission still looked over all the scripts for S6 and 7. ASP might have been the creator of GG but she wasn't there at all in S7. Just because she had nothing to do with it doesn't mean it's not canon.

I prefer edge in my viewing too and I actually like dark shows more (hence my preference for Angel over Buffy for example) and while I appreciate Amy's dialogue and the cynical writing, that's about all ASP has to offer. She is horrible at storytelling and continuity. A lot of her characters (main ones aside) are clichés or stereotypes. Nevermind her gay and shrink phobia. The main characters in the later years became caricatures or one note. More and more characters were yanked around for story purposes, stories that often lead nowhere. A lot of people don't see S1 as a favorite because it was all too cutesy but I put it right behind S2 as a fave. And that's because the character were probably at their most complex in those Seasons.

S7 might not have that edge but again I give the people a pass for that. ASP left one hell of a mess behind on purpose. Some of which wasn't easy to fix. IMO the whole L/C crap kept it from being resolved sooner because so much screen time was wasted on them. But still, with what little the other characters got they managed to do a lot with it. They only managed to sort of get the show back to what it used to be towards the very end and it would have been interesting to see what they could have done in an 8th Season. Maybe they would have been able to get that edge back (with new writers blood or something).

[Bumblebee Tights]

2 hours ago, Melancholy said:

Logan wasn't a playboy in the Revival. He was having a love affair with his old girlfriend. It's a different animal than his S5 behavior. I'm of the belief that having an affair is a mistake that most anyone is capable of, even people who didn't show a proclivity in the past. It's bad- but it's not a crime. Its easy to be unhappy but feel stuck in a relationship. And then on the other hand, the draw of fun and magic is powerful. Logan was open about being a playboy when there were no consequences. He was a college boy- an age where no one is expected to settle down and a boy out nailing every girl is winning. The older you get, the more that looks pathetic and tawdry. 

Oh, sure. I didn't mean to imply that anyone having an affair should automatically be villianized. In fact, I agree with you that almost anyone can be capable of doing so under the right circumstances. Life isn't black and white, and that's part of the reason (though far from the main reason) I'm not as down on Rory in the revival (and earlier) as everyone else seems to be. I also agree that being a playboy and having an affair are completely different animals, which is exactly why I think it's more in line with Rory's character development than Logan's- not just because 'Rory's had an affair before', but because Rory has always had some trouble with boundaries in her relationships. It's a fair enough point though, to say that maybe time and circumstance have made Logan more apt to engage in this behavior-after all, it's been nearly ten years since we as the audience have seen him.  

I can't help but prefer ASP's writing style to DR's, but I did enjoy the direction DR moved some of the characters. I think I would most prefer some kind of combo-ASP's sharpness and wit, together with the warmth and development that DR brought. Then again, I think this is mostly what we had in S1-S4.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Bumblebee Tights
Couldn't stand the typo.

[clack]

I like the way Rory was portrayed in the revival. For me, it felt true to life. Someone who seemed full of promise at 16 finds herself in the usual adult muddle in her 30's : a career that has failed to live up to her dreams, and a compromised romantic life. 

In sum, Rory is a disappointment, to herself and to those who idealized her teenage self. Lorelai thought that Rory would go off to conquer the world, but the world conquers us all. 

[Anela]

20 minutes ago, clack said:

 

20 minutes ago, clack said:

I like the way Rory was portrayed in the revival. For me, it felt true to life. Someone who seemed full of promise at 16 finds herself in the usual adult muddle in her 30's : a career that has failed to live up to her dreams, and a compromised romantic life. 

In sum, Rory is a disappointment, to herself and to those who idealized her teenage self. Lorelai thought that Rory would go off to conquer the world, but the world conquers us all. 

It felt true to me, too. 

I was disappointed by the affair, though. I thought she'd learned from that when she was younger, and she also wasn't pleased when Logan had many, many blondes for Thanksgiving. 

Edited July 5, 2017 by Anela

[Melancholy]

2 hours ago, Smad said:

It is a canon/continuity issue. S7 is canon, no matter what ASP says. This isn't like Buffy, where Whedon went off to play with Firefly but by his own admission still looked over all the scripts for S6 and 7. ASP might have been the creator of GG but she wasn't there at all in S7. Just because she had nothing to do with it doesn't mean it's not canon.

I prefer edge in my viewing too and I actually like dark shows more (hence my preference for Angel over Buffy for example) and while I appreciate Amy's dialogue and the cynical writing, that's about all ASP has to offer. She is horrible at storytelling and continuity. A lot of her characters (main ones aside) are clichés or stereotypes. Nevermind her gay and shrink phobia. The main characters in the later years became caricatures or one note. More and more characters were yanked around for story purposes, stories that often lead nowhere. A lot of people don't see S1 as a favorite because it was all too cutesy but I put it right behind S2 as a fave. And that's because the character were probably at their most complex in those Seasons.

S7 might not have that edge but again I give the people a pass for that. ASP left one hell of a mess behind on purpose. Some of which wasn't easy to fix. IMO the whole L/C crap kept it from being resolved sooner because so much screen time was wasted on them. But still, with what little the other characters got they managed to do a lot with it. They only managed to sort of get the show back to what it used to be towards the very end and it would have been interesting to see what they could have done in an 8th Season. Maybe they would have been able to get that edge back (with new writers blood or something).

But on a canon/continuity thing, how do you argue the Revival couldn't have happened as it did if ASP respected S7? Because from where I'm sitting, everything in the Revival occurred with S7 occurring. There's immutable history in S7 like Lane and Zack having twins or Lorelai having been married to Christopher. That was the case in S7- and the Revival continued those. Then, there's elastic/formative things that were just getting started in S7- a Logan bent on growing into an independent, accomplished person and Rory going to work for the Obama campaign. However, the very nature of those trends were elastic and formative. S7 presented no guarantees that 10 years down the line, Logan wouldn't be working for his dad. As a result, everything in the Revival could occur with S7 occurring. 

Well, I like ASP's edge and love her writing. I know I'm in the minor- but I love that she takes risks on the weirdest things like the Revival musical or the townie insanity (which DR wasn't able to execute nearly as hilariously.) I find most of her stories interesting. That's a huge one- I'm hardly ever bored even rewatching the show. I find a lot of her emotional scenes genuinely affecting. Her world building isn't logic- but it's compelling and dramatically differentiating between the upper crust WASP world and Stars Hallow. Even though I can find a LOT to criticize in Lorelai and Rory, I still love them. I like Angel the Series too- but since you brought up, I have a harder time reconciling how Angel is the hero with the show with how I find him a moral monster with a dull personality. I always loved the main characters. ASP has weaknesses but I think she's spectacularly talented. 

2 hours ago, Bumblebee Tights said:

I can't help but prefer ASP's writing style to DR's, but I did enjoy the direction DR moved some of the characters. I think I would most prefer some kind of combo-ASP's sharpness and wit, together with the warmth and development that DR brought. Then again, I think this is mostly what we had in S1-S4.

That really hits the nail on the head for me. ASP's writing got too cartoonish and mean in S6 and parts of S5. However, I think it was in the sweet spot in S1-4 and frankly, the Revival as well. 

[Smad]

46 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

Then, there's elastic/formative things that were just getting started in S7- a Logan bent on growing into an independent, accomplished person and Rory going to work for the Obama campaign. However, the very nature of those trends were elastic and formative. S7 presented no guarantees that 10 years down the line, Logan wouldn't be working for his dad. As a result, everything in the Revival could occur with S7 occurring.

But only because they were cut short. Most were counting on even a short S8 happening so the writers had everything on a slow burn because that's realistic. And the whole DS committed to A storyline thanks to ASP kind of threw a wrench in a lot of things they could have done instead, not just with Lorelai. IMO they would have continued with the character trajectories in S8, otherwise why go there in S7, they aren't ASP after all.

 

46 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

Well, I like ASP's edge and love her writing. I know I'm in the minor- but I love that she takes risks on the weirdest things like the Revival musical or the townie insanity (which DR wasn't able to execute nearly as hilariously.) I find most of her stories interesting. That's a huge one- I'm hardly ever bored even rewatching the show. I find a lot of her emotional scenes genuinely affecting. Her world building isn't logic- but it's compelling and dramatically differentiating between the upper crust WASP world and Stars Hallow. Even though I can find a LOT to criticize in Lorelai and Rory, I still love them.

I'm bored as soon as it hits S3. I'm currently doing a re-watch (been a few years) and there wasn't much in S1/2 that I skipped or fast-forwarded. But there is lots of boring starting in S3. And the show never makes me emotional, heck I've never once cried. Not even during 'Say Something'. A character might make me angry for a second or I empathize with them in the moment but that rarely happens. I don't know if the whole WASP thing was realistic (some people have said yes, some no) but I was offended how Luke was thrown under the bus because suddenly it mattered which class Lorelai's b/f comes from. I also rebel against manipulative storytelling which is why I'm Team Luke in both S5 and S6. I'm one of the few people ASP couldn't manipulate into hating Luke no matter how many sad faces Lorelai made. Also for someone who is supposedly so progressive ASP sure liked to use every damn trope in the book.

46 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

I like Angel the Series too- but since you brought up, I have a harder time reconciling how Angel is the hero with the show with how I find him a moral monster with a dull personality.

It's not about Angel the character it's about Angel the show. And the show IMO never presents Angel as a hero. Viewers and characters inside the show do. But the show always presents Angel as someone who tries to be good but often stumbles and makes the wrong decisions, some so bad they can be considered evil. But I love the show more than Buffy because it's more adult, it's darker, the characters have adult relationships, they go through so much more and lose more than those on Buffy. And I love the themes it touches on. And Wesley has arguably one of the best character arcs ever written. Something ASP would never be able to pull off.

 

46 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

ASP has weaknesses but I think she's spectacularly talented. 

Yeah she is good with dialogue. And she can think up unique characters. But that's pretty much it for me.

Edited July 6, 2017 by Smad

[andromeda331]

I might have been sympathetic to Rory's storylines in the Revival if Amy had expanded more on her career. Yes, she names a few articles but other then that we don't get a sense of what Rory did in the past ten years. What newspaper did she work at or newspapers? From what we do see she's unprofessional she sleeps with someone she is interviewing, she seemed really surprised to be asked what stories she was working on, and being dismissive of a job offer. Yes, they did chase her. But Rory acting like it was beneath her. Ah, Rory, its the only job offer you had. You may think your a great writer/journalist but the fact no one is beating down your door should tell you something. I do get its in character for Rory to think she's going to get handed stories. It never occurred to her to go after the Editor of the Yale Daily news and that got handed to her. It never occurred to her to run for student council until Paris pointed out it would look good to Harvard. I wanted to see her grow up or at very least show us that Rory really tried as journalist. It didn't have to work out and she could still end up with a career tanking, but at least show us she tried.  Same with her affair with Logan or whatever it was. Again it was in character Rory had no problem sleeping with the married Dean or being interested in another boy while dating someone usually Dean but this time Paul, she couldn't be bother to treat well or remember to break up with him.  Had Rory ran into Logan at her grandfather's funeral or even a few weeks afterwards and they ended up sleeping together. It would have made sense. Rory loved her grandfather and Logan knew that plus he was there for her when he had a stroke. Logan could be having second thoughts about his life maybe he crashed and burned out in San Francisco and he went back into the family fold but suddenly he wasn't so sure. We don't really get told why Rory and Logan are together.

Lorelai's bad qualities were ramped up. Starting chair hopping as a reaction to being asked to give a story about her father. I'd understand if Lorelai was too upset to say anything or something but that wasn't the case. There were plenty of reasons for an Emily-Lorelai fight. Lorelai and Luke's relationship apparently they didn't talk once in ten years about anything. It really made no sense they wouldn't have talked about getting married or not, or having kids at some point. In the end so many of Lorelai's storylines were either stupid or a waste of time. She suddenly wants a baby and drags Luke to a fertility doctor. That gets dropped. She wants to do Wild despite never being a character with any interest in anything like that before and she ends up not doing it. Yes, we got to hear a great story about Richard and Lorelai calling Emily to tell her the story, she could have had that realization anywhere else, firing chefs wasn't funny. It would have been nice if the therapy had gone somewhere. Emily-Lorelai relationship could have used it and it would have been a good time to finally work on their relationship. Instead Emily quits and Lorelai continues but nothing really comes from it either. It also bugged me that Lorelai didn't really seem to check on her mother at all after Richard's death. Rory didn't really either.

[Kohola3]

10 hours ago, Smad said:

Yeah she is good with dialogue. And she can think up unique characters. But that's pretty much it for me.

Ditto.  Although the dialogue crossed the line to inane at times (and downright nasty) and the characters from unique to bizarre as well.   Her character assassinations in the revival were eye rolling (see Lorelai and Rory at the pool as examples) and seemed to be designed to make them not quirky but downright obnoxious.  

[Lady Calypso]

3 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I might have been sympathetic to Rory's storylines in the Revival if Amy had expanded more on her career. Yes, she names a few articles but other then that we don't get a sense of what Rory did in the past ten years. What newspaper did she work at or newspapers? From what we do see she's unprofessional she sleeps with someone she is interviewing, she seemed really surprised to be asked what stories she was working on, and being dismissive of a job offer. Yes, they did chase her. But Rory acting like it was beneath her. Ah, Rory, its the only job offer you had. You may think your a great writer/journalist but the fact no one is beating down your door should tell you something. I do get its in character for Rory to think she's going to get handed stories. It never occurred to her to go after the Editor of the Yale Daily news and that got handed to her. It never occurred to her to run for student council until Paris pointed out it would look good to Harvard. I wanted to see her grow up or at very least show us that Rory really tried as journalist. It didn't have to work out and she could still end up with a career tanking, but at least show us she tried. 

Very true. The main issue with the Revival lies within the lack of holes being filled with explaining what's been going on the last ten years. It's not that I need a play-by-play on their lives since we last saw them, but I felt like I needed something to go off of. Rory's career, especially is something that I wanted to hear about. Besides one article and Sandee Says chasing after her, we don't know what kind of successes that she had. So we were left trying to fill the gaps, but nothing I could come up with matched where Rory was in the revival, because she was acting like such a brat, acting high and superior, but didn't seem to be putting in the work while being rude. I'm sorry, but her attitude toward Alex Kingston's character was pretty nasty and unprofessional. You may not like her, but you're being hired by her to do a job. The fact that she deliberately talked back and then didn't care that she pretty much got fired said a lot about her character. There was never really any growth there, and it's a damn shame. 

3 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Same with her affair with Logan or whatever it was. Again it was in character Rory had no problem sleeping with the married Dean or being interested in another boy while dating someone usually Dean but this time Paul, she couldn't be bother to treat well or remember to break up with him.  Had Rory ran into Logan at her grandfather's funeral or even a few weeks afterwards and they ended up sleeping together. It would have made sense. Rory loved her grandfather and Logan knew that plus he was there for her when he had a stroke. Logan could be having second thoughts about his life maybe he crashed and burned out in San Francisco and he went back into the family fold but suddenly he wasn't so sure. We don't really get told why Rory and Logan are together.

Oh yeah, I also agree with this. Instead, they heavily implied that this affair was not a one time thing, that they had been doing this for a while, especially before her grandfather's funeral (her whole "I gotta get to London" was probably not because of a job) and she had no issues with knowing about Logan's "other woman", so to speak. It put her in a very bad light, but it was also in character for her to not care about being in an affair. She had done it before, and she may have felt guilty when she slept with Dean while he was married, but she still went through with it back then! She was cheating on Paul, she was emotionally cheating on Dean the first time with Jess, and now she was doing it with Logan. All of her relationships literally had some sort of affair-type situation. 

If they hadn't had Rory and Logan both comfortable with the affair, and if they hadn't implied that the affair had been going on for months, then they could have made them both look better. There are basically ways to have made them both look better, and ASP took the worst route possible. 

[Taryn74]

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I might have been sympathetic to Rory's storylines in the Revival if Amy had expanded more on her career.

 

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Same with her affair with Logan or whatever it was.

 

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Lorelai's bad qualities were ramped up.

 

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Lorelai and Luke's relationship apparently they didn't talk once in ten years about anything.

 

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

It also bugged me that Lorelai didn't really seem to check on her mother at all after Richard's death. Rory didn't really either.

 

Yes to EVERYTHING you said.  

I've really been mulling over my thoughts about the Revival these past couple of days, and I think what's the saddest to me is that THIS is where ASP planned for these characters to end up, all along.  She never intended for Rory to move on from spoiled, entitled, Princess of Stars Hollow; she never intended for Lorelai to move on from manic, self-centered, my-way-or-the-highway Queen of Stars Hollow; she never intended for Luke and Lorelai to have a healthy relationship where they actually talk things over; she never intended for Logan to be anything but a smug, rich frat boy; she never intended for Lorelai to have a real relationship with her parents; etc etc.  It's like she created this magical world with characters we couldn't help but love, and then she snatched them all away, turned them all into the worst possible caricatures of themselves, and laughed at our naivety.  

"Squee on this, bitches."

Sigh.

[Katy M]

20 hours ago, Smad said:

A lot of people don't see S1 as a favorite because it was all too cutesy but I put it right behind S2 as a fave. And that's because the character were probably at their most complex in those Seasons.

I love S1 and S2. It's after that, I don't love so much. S3 is OK.  I think they should have ended it when Rory graduated from HS, IMO.

[Kohola3]

17 minutes ago, Taryn74 said:

"Squee on this, bitches."

 

Much like what I said after the revival aired.  Except it was more along the lines of "screw you" like she deliberately decided to dump on the fans.

[Crs97]

 I must admit that my watching the revival was more like skimming, but did anyone else get the feeling that Rory was driving the "casual" nature of her relationship with Logan? The way he responded to every phone call and tried to help solve every issue she had suggested to me that he would have dumped fiancée in a heartbeat if Rory had wanted to pursue things further.  Or did I FF a scene that suggested otherwise?

[JayInChicago]

I never actually finished watching the Revival. More than hating it, I found it dreadfully boring. I fell asleep during the scene with Rory and her mommy (for some reason?) chasing down story ideas in New York.

what got me most is Rory is clearly living off her inheritance/trust fund *and* Lorelai never shows a hint of judgment about this. That is not canonical. Lorelai is judgmental af. I don't care much that Rory must have been making ends meet this way (cuz she didn't earn NYC living expenses from very sporadic published pieces) but did Lorelai not care? Did she not notice? I mean, I know in the Revival they play around with Rory being broke (and shall we say skint? Lol) but "broke with a trust fund" is not actually broke. What other options are there? Was Logan giving her an allowance? Was Lorelai supporting her in her 30s daughter's independent living? 

 

Rory should have been a teacher or academic or both. Journalism is not her career. She hasn't got it.

[Anela]

1 hour ago, JayInChicago said:

I never actually finished watching the Revival. More than hating it, I found it dreadfully boring. I fell asleep during the scene with Rory and her mommy (for some reason?) chasing down story ideas in New York.

what got me most is Rory is clearly living off her inheritance/trust fund *and* Lorelai never shows a hint of judgment about this. That is not canonical. Lorelai is judgmental af. I don't care much that Rory must have been making ends meet this way (cuz she didn't earn NYC living expenses from very sporadic published pieces) but did Lorelai not care? Did she not notice? I mean, I know in the Revival they play around with Rory being broke (and shall we say skint? Lol) but "broke with a trust fund" is not actually broke. What other options are there? Was Logan giving her an allowance? Was Lorelai supporting her in her 30s daughter's independent living? 

 

Rory should have been a teacher or academic or both. Journalism is not her career. She hasn't got it.

She probably didn't mind, since Rory was running around looking for work, and flying to London for work she already had. She was also her angel child, and didn't know about Logan for most of it (I know she judged her for the affairs, emotional and physical, in the original series). I'll have to watch it again, but Rory only seemed to really panic once the book fell through (I liked the way she started tap dancing when she was on the phone - an indication that she was stressed). 

[Crs97]

Lorelei was only judgmental about how other people spent their money, like the audacity of Luke wanting to help out his daughter.  According to Lorelei, Rory and she could do no wrong.