S01.E01: Winter

[chessiegal]

Rory was 16 in 2000, it is now 2016, so 16 + 16 = 32, so Rory is 32.

[WatchrTina]

I'm just echoing what has been said before.  I thought this was going to be a hot mess because that first Rory/Lorelai scene was NOT GOOD.  But I think it's like when you go to your 10-year reunion and everything is weird at first and you consider turning right around and leaving but then you run into someone you liked and you are hit with a wave of nostalgia and you stay.  The the good things are good and the bad things (though still bad) are, by definition, short term, so you overlook them to enjoy the good stuff.

I'm gonna binge my way through the whole thing and just look the other way when Rory freaks me out by doing un-Rory-like things like forgetting her plans with her boyfriend of two years or having an affaire with Logan on the side.

[Lady Calypso]

6 minutes ago, chessiegal said:

Rory was 16 in 2000, it is now 2016, so 16 + 16 = 32, so Rory is 32.

Oh, ok. Apparently, I can't math. Thanks! 

[snarktini]

While I think it's ludicrous to only be broaching the topic of kids at 48 and 10 years in, I do know 2 women IRL who have done this at the same age. Just two weeks ago my friend's wife -- out of nowhere AFAIK -- announced she wanted a kid. WTH. And a former colleague told me she and her husband hadn't really talked about it or made a decision yet despite a 15 year relationship. (I kindly told her she had may have already made that decision, on purpose or not. In the immortal words of Rush, "if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice".)

Even a decade later, I almost always side with Lorelei against Emily (even though I'm a lot more like Emily). Lorelei may be childish, but Emily's domineering. And they're both unreasonable and stubborn.

[hippielamb]

Loved the Rory and Lorelai bits (what a surprise lol). Michel's xanax line, and Lorelai comparing Stars Hollow to a snowglobe made me smile. 

Loved seeing Jason and his complimenting Lorelai and asking of her well being. Nice touch. 

It seems Lorelai doesn't know about Rory and Logan. I wonder if she will be Ms. Judgemental about their casual arrangement. I personally loved it. Rory has been with Paul for 2 years, is he that naive that no one in Rory's life cares about him? 

12 hours ago, cantbeflapped said:

(I hate to come across as griping on this happy day, so take this in the spirit it is intended...making note of a significant shortcoming, but not intended to trash this whole revival project.). I've mentioned before that I was 99% unspoiled.  But I did know that Luke and Lorelai would be unmarried and, I presumed, childless.  This is my main problem. Loreali said flat out she watnted more kids (in Partings).  They, even being poor communicators, would have discussed this.  I'm 45 years old.  Trust me, a 48 year old suddenly pondering kids, even if someone else carries it, is pretty far fetched.   Plus, neither Luke or Lorelai seem like the type to be happy just staying in a committed relationship without marrying...even if they were taking it slow.  It just makes no sense for them to be in this place nine years later.

 

I am a similar age and can't imagine wanting to have another baby. I know now why reviews said the storylines felt frozen in time. Lorelai should have had this plot after the finale when she was nearing 40, instead of almost 50. I do wonder how much of this is her wanting another kid, versus wanting to make Luke happy. It all came from Emily's words of Lorelai being selfish. Time will tell. 

9 hours ago, Eyes High said:

4. Calling out Lorelai's selfishness and self-absorption. ("You never do anything unless it's what you want to do. (...) Nothing matters to [Lorelai] except what she wants and feels.")

5. Pointing out how Lorelai plays the victim and is indulged by everyone in Stars Hollow. ("Go back to your beloved town with its carnies and misfits. Tell them how your intolerable mother yelled at you at your father's funeral. They can all console you and tell you what a witch I am and how perfect you are!" Again...DAMN.)

I recall Lorelai and Emily's exchanges being a little more even-handed in the original series. I don't recall seeing Lorelai ever verbally destroyed like that by Emily before. When Emily goes in, she goes in.

I seriously loved that part. Emily was speaking some real truth, and I like that it came from her. 

Also, the harping about the painting was too long. It's Emily's house! If she wants a huge portrait of her beloved husband, she should have it. 

I do empathize a bit with Lorelai. It is hard to be eloquent in memory of someone. I've been to funerals like that and they always make me uncomfortable. This was at least done after the service. I do think Lorelai was being too hard on her father. Yes, he was distant but he loved her and made sure she had everything she needed. Even her comment about her dad to Luke back in season 1 was better than what she said. I have (maybe too much) sympathy for distant fathers, especially ones who were always working to take care of their families.

5 hours ago, Taryn74 said:

 Interesting that it's canon now that Lorelai was sleeping with more guys than just Chris, and at the age when she would have gotten pregnant.  I really don't like that direction but okay.  It's a Netflix Original at this point, so whatever.

 

She made offhand comments to Rory during the series original run about boys at that time (the guy she pushed out her bedroom window, the guy who got her drunk & she threw up in his back seat, etc) so I wasn't surprised by that knowledge. 

[chessiegal]

Quote

Also, the harping about the painting was too long. It's Emily's house! If she wants a huge portrait of her beloved husband, she should have it. 

But Emily admitted it was her mistake - she didn't intend it to be so huge. For me, on re-watch it was indeed funny.

 

I loved the picture of Richard and Emily from "Wedding Bell Blues" at the funeral. Such a fitting tribute to Edward and love they dedicated this how to him.

[hippielamb]

18 minutes ago, chessiegal said:

But Emily admitted it was her mistake - she didn't intend it to be so huge. For me, on re-watch it was indeed funny.

Yes, I know but Lorelai kept going on about it. If Emily criticized anything in Lorelai's home, it would be a big deal. I guess it bothers me because it's so rude. I can't imagine going into anyone's home, even a family member's, and criticizing like that. I was waiting for Rory to tell her to shut up. 

My Lorelai love wavered a bit in this episode. (The painting criticism, the comments about Richard, the fight with Emily who plainly told her to back off, etc) I did like her scenes with Rory, which is my main reason for watching this. 

[dirtypop90]

Glad this show is back!! But super sad I didn't enjoy Winter AT ALL

I surprisingly enjoyed Rory more than Lorelei. Add me to the list of those that never truly understood why Lorelei held so much animosity towards her parents, who were not perfect, but damn sure loved their kid and tried to be there for her and help her.

I wasn't totally sure what boy I wanted for Rory when I started this ep but man o man Logan's surprise appearance confirmed for me that I am #TeamLogan. Really not looking forward to seeing the others....I have no issue with their casual relationship. I thought the Paul jokes were lame but I couldn't really tell if he and Rory were supposed to be exclusive so I didn't find them to be cruel. Please please please let Rory not end up with Jess.

This ep also confirmed I will never be team Luke and Lorelei. Literally nothing about their relationship has changed. I was hoping the revival would convert me into a LL shipper but I don't see that happening.

Richard was missed. I don't like what they're doing with Paris. I wonder what Christopher is up to.

Time for the next ep.....

[amensisterfriend]

Quote

This ep also confirmed I will never be team Luke and Lorelei. Literally nothing about their relationship has changed. I was hoping the revival would convert me into a LL shipper but I don't see that happening.

I think deep down I was hoping to finally fall for L/L during this revival and love them like nearly everyone else does, but it didn't happen for me, either. There's just this lack of chemistry, joy, and compatibility there, at least for me. I wish so much I didn't see them that way. 

Edited November 26, 2016 by amensisterfriend

[EarlGreyTea]

14 hours ago, ghoulina said:

Not really liking Paris as a fertility doctor/facilitator/whatever. Also hate that they're having her and Doyle split up. While not my favorite couple, I actually thought they were the best fit for each other. 

 

Agreed. I remember in S1 Paris said she wanted to work in cancer research. While people certainly change their minds, it seemed a bit too off the wall. ASP probably just wanted to make all those sperm jokes. Having said that, Paris is wildly successful with a kick ass wardrobe. Long may she wave.

I didn't care too much for Paris and Doyle, but I just absolutely loved his declaration that he would follow her wherever she went in the S7 finale. To have that go up in flames bummed me out.

Edited November 26, 2016 by EarlGreyTea

[dirtypop90]

34 minutes ago, amensisterfriend said:

I think deep down I was hoping to finally fall for L/L during this revival and love them like nearly everyone else does, but it didn't happen for me, either. There's just this lack of chemistry, joy, and compatibility there, at least for me. I wish so much I didn't see them that way. 

What gets me is the fact that they had the chance to fix them! Surely they heard the complaints about their joyless, drama filled relationship in the last seasons (even from some LL fans) and they kept them the same! I don't get it. A four episode revival should have showed the lead couple as stupidly happy! IMO I'm starting to think Amy just isn't a fan of them.

[junienmomo]

No relationship in the winter episode had any plot element that was a "stupidly happy" kind of romantic. (Love the term stupidly happy)

I think they are just writing what they know. There are plenty of little moments in this episode between Luke and Lorelai that would fall under my definition of a happy, loving established relationship. 

Edited November 26, 2016 by junienmomo

[MedievalGirl]

I expected that the episode called Winter would start out the new series in a cold and dark way. The one thing I missed was that I can't figure out how to do closed captioning on Netflix. Apparently that was important to my original enjoyment of GG. 

[FrumiusManxome]

I found Lorelai and Luke had cute moments, but I've never truly shipped them. I go along with it because I always knew it was in the cards (and in the beginning of the OG series they had quite a lot of chemistry imo), however, I've never felt passionately about them one way or the other. I'm used to them being together so I would mind if they were apart, but I'm not particularly invested. However, I feel that way about all of Lorelai's relationships. I was (and still am) most interested in Rory's love interests. 

[dirtypop90]

LL is THE couple of this show. Rory doesn't have one guy she's been destined to be with since the final so I didn't expect anything of any of her relationships (same for her friends Paris and Lane). But IA that they are probably just writing what they know.

[photo fox]

44 minutes ago, MedievalGirl said:

I expected that the episode called Winter would start out the new series in a cold and dark way. The one thing I missed was that I can't figure out how to do closed captioning on Netflix. Apparently that was important to my original enjoyment of GG. 

 

 

If you go up and hover over the top right corner, icons will show up.  If you click the second one from the left, you can pick the subtitles language you want.  :-)

 

I didn't mind the Paul joke*, insomuch as I don't see him and Rory having a serious relationship.  Yes, they've been "together" for a while, but I guess I have the unpopular opinion that length of a relationship doesn't always equal depth.  If Rory has been traveling as much as she says, how much time have they really even spent together?  Sometimes people stay in casual monogamous** relationships because they like "having someone".  I think it's kind of weak, but I don't think it's uncommon.

*I do mind it from the perspective that once again, Rory (and Lorelei) are basically closed off to the idea that anyone besides the two of them have legitimate feelings and needs.

**Obviously, this particular relationship isn't monogamous, but I can't think of another term for "non-open".

[DisneyBoy]

I have so much to say it isn't even funny but let's begin with how much I enjoyed returning to Stars Hollow. I had a big stupid grin plastered across my face and the shivers you get when you're having a really really really significant entertainment moment. It felt like a homecoming. It did not feel like a million years had passed. It felt like we never left and I really needed to go back to a place that felt super homey and welcoming today.

I thought Alexis was doing some really good acting. In fact I'd say that Winter restored my faith in her abilities and somewhat wiped clean the memory of her terrible cutesy wootsie acting in seasons 5 6 & 7.

Quote

That Emily/Lorelai fight was amazing. Loved it. Has Emily ever dragged Lorelai that hard before? That was brutal.

It was, but it also fulfilled one of my wishes for this revival by having someone call Lorelei out on her selfishness. That it ended up being Emily and that it ended up happening after Richard's funeral was just a stroke of genius I never would have considered. Kudos to Amy for thinking that up. And to the actors, obviously, for making it sting.

There are few things I don't especially like or that just left me confused. Paris running a surrogacy business is hard to swallow, as is Luke and Lorelai never discussing the issue of children in spite of them now being together approximately a decade.

I don't think they made enough of a case for Emily "who moved that ashtray? / The help will rob us blind!" Gilmore suddenly welcoming an immigrant family into her home and then giving away her possessions. If her grief had taken her that far, it certainly didn't show. I think Amy was trying to one-up her The Reigning Lorelai epic Emily meltdown and fell a little short.

But I don't think anything irritated me half as much as Rory's boyfriend being some joke that no one on screen has any respect for. That was a bit too far, especially since Rory became an insanely special snowflake by the time the show ended. I hope it's just a setup for Rory to end up choking down some Humble Pie after all these years. Still, I can't get over her failing to remember her boyfriend and him having to follow her around and explain himself. It was just too out there. Was he introduced to make Logan look like a fantastic option by comparison? And not only can she not remember him but she is also cheating on him with Logan?! Rory - you suck.

And why on Earth do you have your clothes scattered across various continents? In Stars Hollow alone you have three possible locations to use as a storage space: the Dragonfly Inn, your childhood home and Luke's apartment above the diner if need be. Why in God's name should Lane have to accommodate you when she's already dealing with a husband, two children and a band?? And don't tell me Emily wouldn't have stored some boxes in that massive basement of hers, which I assume is now free of all of Trix's unwanted gifts.

It was nice to see Lane, even if her scenes added absolutely nothing. I really wish Dave were in this revival.

Lorelai throwing out her new chef while he and his team were in the midst of preparing lunch for no reason other than the fact that he isn't Suki is incredibly upsetting and not at all funny. She can expect to get some seriously bad word of mouth among the culinary types who might have considered applying for the job. Frankly I'm surprised the guy didn't just start throwing things around the Inn on his way out. She was beyond rude.

One of the things I never felt the show did enough with was the concept of Lorelai running a new business. That place could very well have closed down within the first two years but once it was established, it was as if the show insisted it wasn't an interesting enough story to bother following up with. Maybe I'll be proven wrong when I watch Spring, Summer and Fall.

I do have to say that I was very happy the tone of the series was preserved. I was worried this would feel too out of step with the show but it doesn't at all and that is a bit of a miracle. How many revivals and reunion films fall apart because they cannot replicate the magic that was the original series? All too many. This one is managing to feel like an extension of the show and I am so happy for that.

I'm going to take my time before I watch the next 3. I want to make this last.

Edited November 26, 2016 by DisneyBoy

[Brn2bwild]

For Richard's funeral, I'm a little surprised they wouldn't have had loved ones giving speeches talking about their memories.  I suppose it's just as well -- as bad as Lorelai's brain freeze was during that informal get together, imagine how much worse it would have been if she had done it during the funeral itself.

[hiccup]

I just finished watching the revival, so I'll need a re-watch to get more specifics.  But my thoughts on winter are:

1.  Alexis Bledel is still very awkward when she hugs a man.  When Rory was younger, I understood the awkwardness, but not now.  I've never seen her act in anything else, so I don't know if this is an Alexis issue or a Rory issue.
2.  Alexis' general acting was horrible at first, but she found her groove.
3.  I did not like, at all, Rory treating her boyfriend like crap.  Rory as an adult, even in the original series, was never my favorite.
4.  Love that Paul Anka (the dog) is still alive!  :)
5.  Loved seeing Logan, and how supportive of Rory he is, but wish their relationship wasn't based on cheating.
6.  Everything about Richard was heartbreaking.  :(
7.  Was very surprised at the career choice of Paris, but it was great for laughs.
8.  I love Luke!
9.  The scenery was great!
10. Loved that Hep Alien is still together and playing.

Overall, even though there were parts about this episode and the whole revival that I didn't like, I'm just so glad to see it all!  I'll gladly do some nitpicking rather than have nothing at all.  And even though Lorelai is very selfish at times, I still love her!

[Diana Berry]

This kind of bugged me about the production.  The inside scenes looked like I was watching a play.  To me it looked like a fake set.  From watching on the CW, the inside scenes ( production wise) looked filmed and used a filter.  It just looked more real back in the day.

[Bec]

Possibly the real reason Luke and Lorelai didn't have kids: the show needs to limit how much they use child actors, and if Luke and Lorelai had kids, it would be a lot harder to avoid putting child actors in way too many scenes.

Yeah, it does seems crazy to me to never have a serious discussion about the topic of kids for 9 years of being together. But some people really live like this! A lot of people have kids without discussing it first, so not having kids without having a discussion about it seems not as bad in comparison. Heh. 

Thinking it over, I can totally buy this kind of major lapse in communication happening between Luke and Lorelai, based on their history of communication lapses.

15 hours ago, ghoulina said:

She's 32, the same age her mother was when this show started. She seems worse off than before the show ended. She seems to have no idea what she's doing in life, and she feels a bit too old for that. 

It looks to me like she's not aimless, though. She's trying very hard to establish herself as a writer. That's something that can take years - a whole lot of writers never ever get established enough to have steady work, and it's not for lack of trying.

Add to that, these days actual journalism is not exactly a growth industry. If she wants to have a future working in media, she has to work on things like getting more twitter followers and knowing exactly what makes the best clickbait - that's not necessarily something you can accomplish by being a book-smart hard-worker. Some people just have the knack for it, some people just don't.

So where she's at, career-wise, makes perfect sense to me.

[hiccup]

48 minutes ago, Bec said:

It looks to me like she's not aimless, though. She's trying very hard to establish herself as a writer. That's something that can take years - a whole lot of writers never ever get established enough to have steady work, and it's not for lack of trying.

Add to that, these days actual journalism is not exactly a growth industry. If she wants to have a future working in media, she has to work on things like getting more twitter followers and knowing exactly what makes the best clickbait - that's not necessarily something you can accomplish by being a book-smart hard-worker. Some people just have the knack for it, some people just don't.

So where she's at, career-wise, makes perfect sense to me.

Except for the fact that at the end of season 7, she was going to be a reporter on the Obama campaign trail.  That alone would have given her lots of experience, I would think.  I know that ASP wants to forget that season 7 happened, since it was without her, but continuity wise, it should have been mentioned.  Perhaps Rory was an epic failure as a campaign reporter, but it was never talked about, so we don't know.  That bugs me.  I wonder if there is an article somewhere with ASP that addresses it.  

[Frelling Tralk]

10 hours ago, chessiegal said:

Paul Anka is kind of jarring as the original is probably retired or in doggy heaven.

That's actually the same exact same dog believe it or not, in the spoilers before the revival they confirmed that the original dog would be used :)

And I'm guessing that's one of the season 7 plots that Amy decided to fudge a bit, I remember reading her saying that Rory's ending was apparently the most different from what she originally had in mind, so presumedly she's not taking that into account too much. I'm surprised though, for all of Rory's easy success and becoming editor of the paper in season 6, even after skipping a semester, I would have guessed that Amy did plan for it to end with Rory becoming a success in her chosen progression in the end, but maybe not

Edited November 26, 2016 by Frelling Tralk

[Frelling Tralk]

7 hours ago, junienmomo said:

No relationship in the winter episode had any plot element that was a "stupidly happy" kind of romantic. (Love the term stupidly happy)

I think they are just writing what they know. There are plenty of little moments in this episode between Luke and Lorelai that would fall under my definition of a happy, loving established relationship. 

Luke and Lorelai came across as pretty boring and joyless together IMO, but I do think that Amy is a fan of them as a couple, it just seems like that's the only way she can write an older settled couple. I guess that's either something that works for viewers or it doesn't, as the scene of them in the bed together was pretty comfortable and I can see why shippers would enjoy how intimate that felt for them, but the lack of more passionate demonstrations of affection has always stood out to me with those two in a bad way tbh. At least it fits more now that they've been a couple for over nine years though, in the original series I was really bemused at the brief pecks on the lips and lack of more overt passion when they had just only become a couple in season 5, but I can more easily buy them not kissing and being all over one another as much at this point in their life's 

[alexvillage]

I was never a big GG fan and didn't watch the last seasons but I remember thinking that Lorelai was the severe case of arrested development. Never got a chance to be a teenager, or got stuck in her teenage years until she was in her 30's. Now I see that this is a plot of the creator: arrested development as a genetic factor. Lorelei is almost 50, still acting like a teenager, and Rory is in her 30's, acting like a teenager.

It was boring and ridiculous. I don't mind the "aging" and how the actors look. The problem is the bad writing, trying to be "cutesy" and coming out flat. Not funny, not good, not appealing. It took me three attempts and two breaks to go through the first episode and I think I will just spare myself of more of the same silliness. 

[Bec]

2 hours ago, hiccup said:

Except for the fact that at the end of season 7, she was going to be a reporter on the Obama campaign trail.  That alone would have given her lots of experience, I would think.

That can still fit in the current story. She had some success, like the New Yorker article. But that doesn't always mean continual success in everything after that. Media can be a fickle business.

[CoolMom]

14 hours ago, msani19 said:

On a shallow note, I had to track down the pink coat Lorelai was wearing. I think I found it...if it's the same coat, it's made by Guess and right now it's on sale at Nordstrom :-)

I liked that coat so much that my husband searched for weeks to find it for me.  He didn't find Lorelai's but he still got me a pink coat a few years ago for Christmas.  I might tell him the "real" one is at Nordstrom.

[wonderwoman]

I've only watched "Winter," and found it exacerbated much of what I found frustrating in the series overall: the utter lack of awareness on the part of both Rory and Lorelei. Over the course of 7 seasons, if was offset by other aspects of the characters and their relationships. But here, it was stuck out and, at least for me, allowed me to lose sight of what made me love the show. 

Forgetting a boyfriend? Pure plot; ASP never even went through the motions to show us why he was so forgettable; I don't think the guy had more than 5 lines. 

Same with Lorelei and the chef. He moved the coffee pot? He's not Suki? Well, Suki's not there; it's been a year. Grow up!

Luke and Lorelei together for almost 10 years and they've never discussed having a child? Part of the problem was with so much else going on in the episode there was no time to lay the emotional groundwork, as there would have been in a series. So, it felt forced. Of course, had there been a little less Kirk (a little Kirk goes a long, long way:)

And, much as I always loved Paris, I found this characterization, while certainly true to the character, more in service to the plot than anything else. 

I did love the Emily-Lorelei confrontation. Tha emotional complexity of that relationship is the foundation upon which GG was built, even more so than Lorelei and Rory. 

Edited November 26, 2016 by wonderwoman
spelling, amplification

[Otherkate]

11 hours ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

Favorite reference: "He's a superhero, but his power is no matter how much time you spend with him, you can't remember him. Kinda like every Marvel movie ever!"

Lorelai spoke to my soul with that one.

Me too! I'll join the minority in that I laughed more than a few times at the Paul thing. I genuinely thought it was funny, especially considering the meta aspect of how much people focus on Rory's boyfriends in the series. 

[Petunia13]

On 11/25/2016 at 5:47 AM, deaja said:

Doyle as a screenwriter amuses me given that the actor is a producer.

Danny Strong is also a screenwriter. 

[WatchrTina]

15 minutes ago, Petunia13 said:

Danny Strong is also a screenwriter. 

He won an Emmy for writing "Game Change" for HBO in 2012.  At the time I only knew who he was from his recurring role on "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" (I had forgotten him being on GG) so I was pretty impressed by the breadth of his talent.

Edited November 26, 2016 by WatchrTina

[Petunia13]

The villains from Buffy have to be he most kind, witty, and creative people in LA ...Tom Lenk and Juliet Landau are also v sweet and dynamic

[Kohola3]

Gosh. what a major disappointment to me.  I echo so many things including the use of Paul which I assume is supposed to be funny but is ludicrous.  Surrogate plot - stupid.   Too much Kirk.  Lorelai's story at the funeral - ridiculous.  Family speaking in a alien tongue - WTF.

Watched with my MUCH younger goddaughter and her mom and we all needed to used the closed captioning.  Not only has the rapid fire speech back in full force, the enunciation has deteriorated to the point where we had no idea what was being said.

Hopefully the next one is better.  If not I won't waste my time.

[Lady Calypso]

3 minutes ago, Kohola3 said:

Watched with my MUCH younger goddaughter and her mom and we all needed to used the closed captioning.  Not only has the rapid fire speech back in full force, the enunciation has deteriorated to the point where we had no idea what was being said.

 

I gotta admit that I had to close caption Michel's dialogue because I couldn't quite understand what he was saying on the first try. And I just kept CC on the entire time. 

[Leonana]

23 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

Part of me was prepared to outright dislike this, another part hoped I'd love it, and the reality proved to be somewhere in between...though a bit more to the 'dislike' side. I'm just kind of indifferent to it. I think I'd give it a C. My view of this episode could definitely change once I view the subsequent ones. Taken on its own, though, it just felt kind of off, kind of dark, kind of trying-too-hard-ish. And I agree with whoever felt vaguely depressed by it. For me, this show was always at its best when it was sparkly and life-affirming, not when they placed too much of an emphasis on drama. And I get that drama, sadness, confusion, anger etc. are all part of life and part of this show, but it just felt like in this installment that wasn't counterbalanced by the positive energy, warmth and hope that the best GG episodes gave us.

Oh, Rory. I loved you so much for the first few seasons of this series. And I don't think you've grown and changed over the years so much as pitifully regressed, becoming your less likable self and losing a lot of what made me once love you. Sigh. I mean, look, I've been lost personally and professionally a lot too, so I should be able to really relate to Rory's storyline, but she somehow acts like a passive, vaguely petulant victim of her own life rather than a proactive participant, and it really bugs me.  

 Luke and Lorelai still seemed flat and joyless to me. There was too much forced emphasis on the every-so-preciously quirky townies for me. Some of the pop culture references felt really strained. 

I liked seeing Paris again, Emily/KB had some amazing material and...well, that's about it for the stuff I really liked. Maybe Spring will spark a rebirth of my GG love :) 

That sums it up for me, too dark and joyless.

I was also bugged by the dismissing of S7 plot points. When Emily asked Lorelai for a memory of Richard, that amazing speech he made in the S7 finale, at Rory's going away party, immediately sprang to my mind. It made the fight between Lorelai and Emily seem unrealistic, as I couldn't believe Lorelai wouldn't remember that.

I was disappointed that Rory's job on the Obama campaign trail wasn't mentioned, especially since Alexis Bledel did a cute Snapchat with Michelle Obama.

I'm a big L/L shipper, but there was no chemistry between them. I felt they had chemistry in the original series, but they weren't able to get it back. Also, they learned to communicate in S7, and now that has all seemed to disappear. I know Amy refused to watch S7, but it's jarring to watch the revival as if we were picking up at the end of S6.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Leonana

[takalotti]

6 hours ago, Diana Berry said:

This kind of bugged me about the production.  The inside scenes looked like I was watching a play.  To me it looked like a fake set.  From watching on the CW, the inside scenes ( production wise) looked filmed and used a filter.  It just looked more real back in the day.

Not to be funny, but did you get a new TV in the past 10 years?

Any time I watch a movie or show at someone else'a house who has a different kind of TV than we do* it looks completely different to me. It looks like a cheesy low budget production, very fake, like when you see "behind the scenes" clips and can tell it's on a fake set.

* We still have a DLP, and I think most of our friends/family have LCD, maybe plasma)

[VCRTracking]

It's one of the reasons people who've seen The Hobbit in 48 fps thought it looked bad. The extreme clarity makes movie sets look like sets.

Quote

1.  Alexis Bledel is still very awkward when she hugs a man.  When Rory was younger, I understood the awkwardness, but not now.  I've never seen her act in anything else, so I don't know if this is an Alexis issue or a Rory issue.

There are the two Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants movies. I haven't watched them but I do like that the 4 actresses in the cast are such good friends IRL and have been to each other's weddings.

Alexis had a couple of appearances on season 5 of Mad Men where she met and played opposite her future husband Vincent Kartheiser. 

At first I was surprised at Paris' line of profession but then I realized it was the closest she can come to playing god.

[hippielamb]

14 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

I think deep down I was hoping to finally fall for L/L during this revival and love them like nearly everyone else does, but it didn't happen for me, either. There's just this lack of chemistry, joy, and compatibility there, at least for me. I wish so much I didn't see them that way. 

I wasn't bothered by them honestly. Luke and Lorelai's romantic relationship always felt like an old married couple, even when they were dating. Comfort is an important part of their dynamic. They do seem to be friends that love each other and are fine with that arrangement. I find them pretty boring as a couple but if Lorelai is truly happy with her life, then ok. I guess this is what she wanted all along. 

But you know, I loved Jason telling her she was hot and calling her umlauts. ;) 

[Daisy]

Things I missed in "Winter"
No Town Meeting. I think it would have been awesome to have one - those were always awesome. 

No Grandpa. I know he's gone in real life (sniff) but i think he was the anchor to everyone's swirling energy. I am actually amazed they didn't tie in the "He promised me I would go first." from when Richard had the heart attack in season 1. 

That's it

Winter solidified I am totally, and utterly Team Emily.  I always feel that no matter how people explain why Lorelai didn't like Richard and Emily (ie: demanding, overbearing etc) - it always came from a place of love and simply wanting to be the best. and Lorelai always approached it in a 'well screw this, I'm SO not you and this." Which is fine but you'd think that now, finally now, they could have crossed some kind of bridge, but no. And I know that i'm supposed to see something with Lorelai's "Full Freaking Circle" but I don't, because Emily was Muhammed Ali, and that whole fight was Rumble in the Jungle, and Emily was the greatest. Because it was all true (though the one thing she was dead wrong about - though I liked the decision as I don't like Luke - was her interferring with Christopher. and even then she ALWAYS took Lorelai's side in the end. ALWAYS).

Paul joke - did not like. Like it was funny, the first time but 2 years? No. (I would date you Paul. you seem sweet). Vegas Time with Logan. did not like. 

Missed the Townies (lol on the Pig to prevent Lulu + Kirk from having Kids). 

So Luke + Lorelai did not have a kid because they didn't communicate. so very, very Luke and Lorelai.

[kieyra]

Just a quick note for those who may be skimming the episode 1 thread before deciding whether to watch and being disheartened by posts--I'm an original viewer (and fic writer) and I'm really enjoying the revival (on episode 3 now). It feels very authentic to the original source material, but updated, and with some extra flexibility due to not being on a broadcast network. It does mean that if there were things that bothered you about the Palladinos' version of Stars Hollow, they're still going to bother you now. (No spoilers, but there's an extended self-indulgent Daniel Palladino bit that's just as tiresome as it ever was.)

I think there's always been an alternate version of the show (the "Snowglobe Town") that only existed in people's minds, which was much sweeter and more like a "normal" TV show. That show still doesn't exist on the screen. But if you loved the show for what it really was, it's still *that* show and you should jump in without fear. 

[JodhaBai]

All I have to say is I LOVED it!

[SlackerInc]

@kieyra, that's an interesting point about the way people might remember the show vs. what it actually was.  You've aroused my curiosity about the "extended Daniel Palladino bit".  Is this in an upcoming episode?  Because it's not a spoiler to talk about it if it's in this one.

18 hours ago, HooHooHoo said:

Maybe her relationship with Paul was supposed to be a good thing?  Like, "look at wonderful Rory. So kind and thoughtful she doesn't want to hurt Paul's feelings and break up with him"??? I don't see it that way, but trying to figure out what ASP was going for  

I suppose you could be right, but my operating theory is more that she (and Daniel) have finally accepted that those of us who always said Rory and Lorelai were terrible people were right all along, and they are just leaning into it now.

17 hours ago, snarktini said:

While I think it's ludicrous to only be broaching the topic of kids at 48 and 10 years in, I do know 2 women IRL who have done this at the same age. Just two weeks ago my friend's wife -- out of nowhere AFAIK -- announced she wanted a kid. WTH. And a former colleague told me she and her husband hadn't really talked about it or made a decision yet despite a 15 year relationship. (I kindly told her she had may have already made that decision, on purpose or not. In the immortal words of Rush, "if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice".)

Nice line, very apropos.  And I agree: many people are very naive about the biology of childbearing, and it doesn't help when they see famous women well into their forties having children, not realizing how much money was involved and that the babies they bore are likely from "donated" eggs, meaning not genetically related to the mother.  It also doesn't help that there is a tendency for many feminist writers to shout down any discussion of biological clocks as sexist.  And I say this BTW as a politically progressive person who considers myself feminist in many traditional respects, but I think sometimes it is applied unthinkingly.  Tanya Selvaratnam discovered this the hard way: she had a long and distinguished career as a professional feminist activist (working for the Ms. Foundation and World Health Organization among others), before starting too late to try to have a baby and then writing about her frustrating and painful experience in her 2014 book The Big Lie: Motherhood, Feminism, and the Reality of the Biological Clock.  It's obviously not fair that women have this timetable that conflicts with modern social tendencies around careers and relationships, while men don't, but it's just the way it is.

When this came up in the episode, and Luke asked "isn't it too late?" and Lorelai answered "I don't know", I did a huge facepalm.  But they at least partially saved it by having them go to a surrogate service.  Still, it was borderline too late (or at the very least, they had to get on it immediately) even when they got together at the end of the original series run, and I bet they would have completely handwaved that away then, if it had been brought up at the time.

17 hours ago, chessiegal said:

But Emily admitted it was her mistake - she didn't intend it to be so huge. For me, on re-watch it was indeed funny.

But when people make mistakes, it's not necessary to relentlessly rub their noses in them.

16 hours ago, amensisterfriend said:

I think deep down I was hoping to finally fall for L/L during this revival and love them like nearly everyone else does, but it didn't happen for me, either. There's just this lack of chemistry, joy, and compatibility there, at least for me. I wish so much I didn't see them that way. 

I hear ya.  Luke is cranky, and that can in theory be played off of in an affectionate way, but they don't pull it off IMO.

14 hours ago, dirtypop90 said:

LL is THE couple of this show. Rory doesn't have one guy she's been destined to be with since the final so I didn't expect anything of any of her relationships (same for her friends Paris and Lane). But IA that they are probably just writing what they know.

It was obviously set up in the pilot that they were "meant to be", but it never really crystallized as the show went on. I seem to be the only person on Earth who liked Max the best (remember him?) My second choice would be Jason/Digger, but I just love Chris Eigeman in general. Christopher is the worst, though.

13 hours ago, DisneyBoy said:

I have so much to say it isn't even funny but let's begin with how much I enjoyed returning to Stars Hollow. I had a big stupid grin plastered across my face and the shivers you get when you're having a really really really significant entertainment moment. It felt like a homecoming. It did not feel like a million years had passed. It felt like we never left and I really needed to go back to a place that felt super homey and welcoming today.

I thought Alexis was doing some really good acting. In fact I'd say that Winter restored my faith in her abilities and somewhat wiped clean the memory of her terrible cutesy wootsie acting in seasons 5 6 & 7.

It was, but it also fulfilled one of my wishes for this revival by having someone call Lorelei out on her selfishness. That it ended up being Emily and that it ended up happening after Richard's funeral was just a stroke of genius I never would have considered. Kudos to Amy for thinking that up. And to the actors, obviously, for making it sting.

[snip]

I do have to say that I was very happy the tone of the series was preserved. I was worried this would feel too out of step with the show but it doesn't at all and that is a bit of a miracle. How many revivals and reunion films fall apart because they cannot replicate the magic that was the original series? All too many. This one is managing to feel like an extension of the show and I am so happy for that.

I'm going to take my time before I watch the next 3. I want to make this last.

You and I are very closely aligned on our viewpoints, looks like.  I cosign all of what's quoted there.  I really wish Netflix had gone with ASP's wishes, though, and actually staggered the release of the "movies" or whatever they are.  They claim the fans wouldn't have stood for it, but I don't get that.  "Here's a Gilmore Girls movie.  We'll have more later."  And then, what, a riot?  I don't think so.  The problem as it stands is that while I'd like to join you in making them last, I enjoy coming on here and other sites and talking about them with people.  And if I wait too long, the herd is going to have moved on.  So I'm not going to watch more than one per day, but I probably will be done with them within a week or less, alas. 

10 hours ago, Bec said:

It looks to me like she's not aimless, though. She's trying very hard to establish herself as a writer. That's something that can take years - a whole lot of writers never ever get established enough to have steady work, and it's not for lack of trying.

Add to that, these days actual journalism is not exactly a growth industry. If she wants to have a future working in media, she has to work on things like getting more twitter followers and knowing exactly what makes the best clickbait - that's not necessarily something you can accomplish by being a book-smart hard-worker. Some people just have the knack for it, some people just don't.

So where she's at, career-wise, makes perfect sense to me.

 

7 hours ago, Frelling Tralk said:

I'm surprised though, for all of Rory's easy success and becoming editor of the paper in season 6, even after skipping a semester, I would have guessed that Amy did plan for it to end with Rory becoming a success in her chosen progression in the end, but maybe not

I'm puzzled by all this talk about Rory as some kind of failure.  If getting a piece in the New Yorker and being hired to co-write a book with some sort of Oxford bigshot is failure, sign me up to fail!  The TV Line review actually sees it just the opposite from how so many here do: that Rory's success is actually too great to be realistic ("Rory’s zero-to-Susan Orlean career trajectory seems a little suspect to me...")  My take is somewhere in between: I don't think it's unreasonable for the character as presented, having been editor of a very prestigious Ivy League paper, to have the amount of success she has had.  But to expect her success at age 32 to be much greater does seem unreasonable.

3 hours ago, takalotti said:

Not to be funny, but did you get a new TV in the past 10 years?

Any time I watch a movie or show at someone else'a house who has a different kind of TV than we do* it looks completely different to me. It looks like a cheesy low budget production, very fake, like when you see "behind the scenes" clips and can tell it's on a fake set.

That's because TV makers have determined that the majority of customers prefer the way TV looks when a "motion smoothing" effect is used, so they make it the default and most people who buy those new TVs don't bother to turn it off or change the settings at all.  A minority of viewers, like you and me and almost anyone who is really serious about TV (so probably the majority here) hate the "soap opera effect" this creates.  Fortunately, it can almost always be turned off, and the directions (specific to the make of TV) for how to do so can be found here.

Edited November 26, 2016 by SlackerInc
Added a tag to make it clear to whom I was responding

[ghoulina]

6 hours ago, wonderwoman said:

Same with Lorelei and the chef. He moved the coffee pot? He's not Suki? Well, Suki's not there; it's been a year. Grow up!

What was with that coffee pot anyhow? It looked like the Black and Decker I have in my kitchen. I could have sworn they had something fancier, more industrial, at the Dragonfly. 

[Clanstarling]

22 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

When this came up in the episode, and Luke asked "isn't it too late?" and Lorelai answered "I don't know", I did a huge facepalm

Me too. I had my last child at 38 and I was always the oldest mom around. I can't imagine having, much less wanting to have, an infant at 48 - or having a teenagers when you are in your 60's. Not to mention that even at 38, my pregnancy was considered a 'geriatric' pregnancy, and the risks get increasingly higher the older you get. Science is great, but there are day to day realities technology can't manage for you.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Clanstarling

[Kromm]

10 hours ago, Diana Berry said:

This kind of bugged me about the production.  The inside scenes looked like I was watching a play.  To me it looked like a fake set.  From watching on the CW, the inside scenes ( production wise) looked filmed and used a filter.  It just looked more real back in the day.

I didn't mind that actually.  And it wasn't just inside vs. outside. The town square often looked like a set/play too. And not to get too off the subject of this one episode, but I think it's necessary to answer this comment, I think we saw even more of this tendency as we went along in each episode. A lot of "we're presenting this to you on a stage" kind of setups, often backed up with tricky camerawork, some special FX to transition and add some dreamlike moments on certain of the scenes, etc.

To me visually it was a flair that reminded me (maybe as a production decision quite intentionally) of Wes Anderson.  But I LIKE Wes Anderson. Some people loathe him.

[Leonana]

1 hour ago, kieyra said:

Just a quick note for those who may be skimming the episode 1 thread before deciding whether to watch and being disheartened by posts--I'm an original viewer (and fic writer) and I'm really enjoying the revival (on episode 3 now). It feels very authentic to the original source material, but updated, and with some extra flexibility due to not being on a broadcast network. It does mean that if there were things that bothered you about the Palladinos' version of Stars Hollow, they're still going to bother you now. (No spoilers, but there's an extended self-indulgent Daniel Palladino bit that's just as tiresome as it ever was.)

I think there's always been an alternate version of the show (the "Snowglobe Town") that only existed in people's minds, which was much sweeter and more like a "normal" TV show. That show still doesn't exist on the screen. But if you loved the show for what it really was, it's still *that* show and you should jump in without fear. 

Snowglobe Town is a really good way to describe it. However, I think the first season was more the Snowglobe Town, and had the best combination between that and the dark humor. Each progressive season lost that more and more, until we ended up with Season 6. Season 7 put some of the Snowglobe Town vibe back. I was hoping that AYITL would be more like Season 1, but it seemed we mostly ended up with Season 6 on steroids.

[zxy556575]

1 hour ago, SlackerInc said:

I don't think it's unreasonable for the character as presented, having been editor of a very prestigious Ivy League paper, to have the amount of success she has had. But to expect her success at age 32 to be much greater does seem unreasonable.

My problem is that the Palladinos couldn't spare a couple paragraphs of dialog in six hours to explain exactly what Rory has been doing for nine years.

I assume she followed through with political reporting on the Obama campaign, but then what? Did she continue with current events journalism for a certain number of years before abandoning that for freelancing spec articles? If so, I'd expect Lorelai (and Rory herself) to have a thick binder full of clippings, but all we hear about is the New Yorker article* that Luke is super proud of. Which to me indicates there haven't been a lot of others.

Whatever the past nine years have been like professionally, when we meet up with Rory here, she doesn't have a job as a journalist or seem to have many freelance options aside from the ghost writing gig.

 

 

* Which, by the way, are WAY too long to fit on the back of a menu.

Edited November 26, 2016 by lordonia

[Petunia13]

15 minutes ago, lordonia said:

My problem is that the Palladinos couldn't spare a couple paragraphs of dialog in six hours to explain exactly what Rory has been doing for nine years.

I assume she followed through with political reporting on the Obama campaign, but then what? Did she continue with current events journalism for a certain number of years before abandoning that for freelancing spec articles? If so, I'd expect Lorelai (and Rory herself) to have a thick binder full of clippings, but all we hear about is the New Yorker article* that Luke is super proud of. Which to me indicates there haven't been a lot of others.

Whatever the past nine years have been like professionally, when we meet up with Rory here, she no longer has, or is able to get, either freelance work or a journalism job with established media companies.

 

* Which, by the way, are WAY too long to fit on the back of a menu.

Maybe the font was really small

[Kohola3]

25 minutes ago, lordonia said:

If so, I'd expect Lorelai (and Rory herself) to have a thick binder full of clippings, but all we hear about is the New Yorker article* that Luke is super proud of. Which to me indicates there haven't been a lot of others.

Exactly.  The whole premise is full of a lot of holes.

[Jack Shaftoe]

So many awfully unfunny jokes and forced developments, I see the Palladinos have continued right from where they left off ten years ago. Paris assessing fertility potential by staring at men's crotches? Emily not even knowing what language her maid was talking in? Luke being portrayed as so dumb that everything had to be explained to him three times (at least)? Sewers or septic tanks - the great debate! Really funny. Not.

And if I hear one more time someone saying with over-the-top enthusiasm how amazing Rory is I think I am going to scream.

Emily calling out Lorelai was the only moment of real quality and I say that as someone who is usually on Lorelai's side in their arguments.