Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Gilmore Girls 20 Questions


Recommended Posts

(edited)

1.  Not wearable

2.  Not owned by any Gilmore, girls or older generations.

3.  Not owned by anyone in the opening credits.

4.  Seen in only one episode.

5.  Not edible.

6.  Not seen in the Hollow.

7.  Seen in the Yale years.  (seemed like we owed them a visit!)

8.  Seen prior to the yacht joyride.

9.  Not seen at Yale (nor on Yale-related properties like apartments or New Haven restaurants).  So, not in the vicinity of Yale.

10. Could fit inside Bert.

11. Seen in the state of Connecticut.

12.  Not seen at the Dragonfly

13.  Seen at Richard & Emily's home.

14.  Not a gift.

15. It has a function, but also has style.

16. Has nothing to do with Jason or the Jason year.

17.  Richard and Rory are both near the object and part of the conversation about this object, but neither handles it. 

18.  It does involve Logan.  You could say he INFLAMED the situation.  (Trying to help here!)

Edited by jjj

1.  Not wearable

2.  Not owned by any Gilmore, girls or older generations.

3.  Not owned by anyone in the opening credits.

4.  Seen in only one episode.

5.  Not edible.

6.  Not seen in the Hollow.

7.  Seen in the Yale years.  (seemed like we owed them a visit!)

8.  Seen prior to the yacht joyride.

9.  Not seen at Yale (nor on Yale-related properties like apartments or New Haven restaurants).  So, not in the vicinity of Yale.

10. Could fit inside Bert.

11. Seen in the state of Connecticut.

12.  Not seen at the Dragonfly

13.  Seen at Richard & Emily's home.

14.  Not a gift.

15. It has a function, but also has style.

16. Has nothing to do with Jason or the Jason year.

17.  Richard and Rory are both near the object and part of the conversation about this object, but neither handles it.

18.  It does involve Logan.  You could say he INFLAMED the situation.  (Trying to help here!)

19.  Yes, it was the object Logan placed in the house in exchange for the one he, um, re-appropriated. 

Thanks for moving things along! I'm without power and Internet, and it took a while to find the dialup modem! Have fun!

Just to get things started before I depart: (1) Was this political figure seen in person or on a television screen within a GG episode?

And (2) "is his face too small for his head"? (I think that's the right quote, can't look it up!)

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini!  

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!   

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini! 

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!

6.  Yes.  This person is male. 

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini!

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!

6.  Yes.  This person is male.

7.  No.  This person is not Ari Fleischer. 

(edited)

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini!

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!

6.  Yes.  This person is male.

7.  No.  This person is not Ari Fleischer.

8.  Yes.  This person is mentioned during a Friday night dinner scene (I don't believe it was during the actual dinner.) 

Edited by txhorns79

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini!

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!

6.  Yes.  This person is male.

7.  No.  This person is not Ari Fleischer.

8.  Yes.  This person is mentioned during a Friday night dinner scene (I don't believe it was during the actual dinner.)

9.  No.  This person is not an American politician. 

1.  No.  This political figure was not seen in person or on a television screen within an episode.

2.  His face is not too small for his head, i.e. this is not George W. Bush.

3.  Yes.  Lorelai does mention this person.

4.  No.  This person is not Italian.  Sorry Mussolini!

5.  No.  This person is not Russian.  Sorry Stalin!  Lenin!  Trotsky!

6.  Yes.  This person is male.

7.  No.  This person is not Ari Fleischer.

8.  Yes.  This person is mentioned during a Friday night dinner scene (I don't believe it was during the actual dinner.)

9.  No.  This person is not an American politician.

10. If the "plaid years" mean the seasons when Rory attended Chilton, then no, this person was mentioned during the Yale years.

 

If any kind of hint is allowed, let me know and I'll give you one.   

(edited)

Lulu, you are too much!  And you are exactly right.  Great job! 

 

For a reference, Lorelai refers to Emily as Pol Pot in the magazine interview she gives concerning the Dragonfly.  In Blame Booze and Melville, Emily gets a chance to read the article and confronts Lorelai.  Mind you, I'm trying to imagine why the readership of a travel magazine is going to be all that interested in an article reviewing an inn where a good portion of the article is apparently dedicated to the the inn owner trashing her mother.  Even as gossip, it would only seem good if you knew Lorelai and Emily.   

Edited by txhorns79

Mind you, I'm trying to imagine why the readership of a travel magazine is going to be all that interested in an article reviewing an inn where a good portion of the article is apparently dedicated to the the inn owner trashing her mother.  Even as gossip, it would only seem good if you knew Lorelai and Emily.   

 

Preach it.

 

New one - is it seen in someone's home?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...