S01.E02: Spring

[solotrek]

9 hours ago, Anela said:

I was kind of disappointed that she had a meltdown, but it's in-character. Even though she's successful, she's still Paris. I didn't like the bathroom part, until Francie showed that she was still just as petty - then I laughed.

Francies line about being back in 2003 cracked me up. And Rory trying to be polite to Francie and deal with Paris being crazy at the same time.

[takalotti]

There were the obvious gaffs in A Second Film by Kirk, but my favorite was a subtle one.

Right at the beginning, Kirk looks to his right and speaks to Petal. Then the shot cuts to Petal and she's standing on Kirk's left.

[cuddlingcrowley]

On 27/11/2016 at 0:46 AM, mledawn said:

Husbands/kids = success? Dude.

If I had a nickel... Didn't you hear? Lane is more successful than Rory AND Paris because she (still) has a husband and kids! LOL.

[dubbel zout]

15 minutes ago, cuddlingcrowley said:

Didn't you hear? Lane is more successful than Rory AND Paris because she (still) has a husband and kids! LOL.

Does more successful = happier, though? Remember, Zack got a promotion at work. The horror!

The message, she is mixed.

Edited December 2, 2016 by dubbel zout

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

Let's compare Lane and Rory:

Job: Lane is seemingly working at her mother's antique shop and her husband just got promoted. Rory doesn't know where her next paycheck is coming from. 

Living Situation: Lane has a roomy house in a beautiful town. Rory freeloads off her, as well as off Lorelai and Paris. 

Childhood Dream: Lane is a drummer in a rock band. Rory is a journalist. Neither played out the way they thought, but they did still make it happen. 

Relationships: Lane is married to the father of her children. Rory is forgets to break up with her boyfriend in between playing sidepiece to her engaged ex-boyfriend. 

In all aspects but childhood dream, which I'd say is a wash, Lane is clearly the more successful of the two. 

[cuddlingcrowley]

On 27/11/2016 at 0:46 AM, mledawn said:

54 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Does more successful = happier, though? Remember, Zack got promoted at work. The horror!

Not necessarily, imo. This is very subjective territory we got into of course, but I personally consider successful people those who achieve (some? most?) goals they set for themselves, in life. Happiness generaly follows that. Sometimes, not.

I also think you can be happy without being successful.

And, of course, happiness isn't a fixed thing. Everyone goes through good times and bad times.

As far as Lane goes, I would need more than what we got of her in the Revival to be able to make any real accessment of how she feels about her life nowadays. She could have found genuine joy in motherhood and being a wife, and is content in having her band as a hobby and doesn't seriously want for another life than the one she got.  Or she could feel trapped and at times more bitter than she's able to take. It could go either way, for me.

On the other hand, I wouldn't say either Paris and Rory are in particular happy times in their lives, considering they're struggling with divorce and career path, respectivelly, but I think they've both achieved a lot in what they set out to do, they've experienced happiness and that they will find happiness again.

Edited December 2, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[cuddlingcrowley]

22 minutes ago, ZuluQueenOfDwarves said:

Job: Lane is seemingly working at her mother's antique shop and her husband just got promoted. Rory doesn't know where her next paycheck is coming from. 

I can't fantom comparing working at your mother's antique shop with a career that allows you to have an exciting life, travelling, seeing the world and getting to write about it. Imho, it doesn't compare. But YMMV.

Quote

 

Quote

Childhood Dream: Lane is a drummer in a rock band. Rory is a journalist. Neither played out the way they thought, but they did still make it happen. 

Rory got to experience the life of a real journalist for TEN YEARS. Lane got a Church tour.

 

22 minutes ago, ZuluQueenOfDwarves said:

Relationships: Lane is married to the father of her children. Rory is forgets to break up with her boyfriend in between playing sidepiece to her engaged ex-boyfriend. 

Marriage isn't everyone's goal. Rory could have married Logan. She chose not to.

 

Quote

Living Situation: Lane has a roomy house in a beautiful town. Rory freeloads off her, as well as off Lorelai and Paris. 

Up until the revival Rory was living at Brooklyn, NY. Tiny apartment in NY trumps a castle in Stars Hollow, as far as I'm concerned. But again, having a steady living arrangement isn't important for everyone. Being "rootless" was clearly a big rush for Rory.

 

This is all very subjective, but I would gladly live Rory's life in the revival, hot mess, anxiety, bad choices and all over living a day at Lane's.

Edited December 2, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[txhorns79]

Quote

I still maintain that Rory wasn't happy with her life as a wandering journalist.

I have no doubt Rory would much rather have had a steady job for a newspaper or magazine than work on spec or freelance an article here or there.  She seemed very frustrated by getting meetings only to have those meetings cancelled or repeatedly pushed back.   

Edited December 2, 2016 by txhorns79

[cuddlingcrowley]

27 minutes ago, Melancholy said:

Cuddlingcrowley, you make a fair point. The true measure of a happy life is how an informed person views their own. Not arbitrary success markers.I still maintain that Rory wasn't happy with her life as a wandering journalist. She longingly looked at the stability and status enjoyed by the Condé Nast writers who know where their next paycheck comes from, who don't have to hustle, who have a social life provided by steady work. I don't think she wanted a husband either but I do think she wanted a committed relationship with a future because her relationship with Paul was just an annoyance to her and all reminders that she was the geisha to Odette's fiancé made her miserable. 

I think Rory was happy (not without its ups and downs) during the hiatus and we saw some of that in Winter but she wouldn't be able to keep it up forever.  Her lifestyle had reached a breaking point, journalism is a dying field (from what I gather) and she wasn't making money AT ALL. It's only natural she started craving more stability. Actually, a stable relationship and a stable job as journalist where she got to do plenty of travel would probably have been ideal from day one. Being a freelancer forever is no one's idea of a dream job. Nor being anyone's side dish.

 

Quote

Probably Rory wouldn't trade her life for Lane's exactly but staying in Stars Hallow as opposed to traveling was really looking good to Rory by the midpoint of the Revival and that continued through the end. 

Sure. She was exhausted, mentally, physically and emotionally. She needed to land somewhere to gather herself together. Stars Hollow was ideal! But I also very much doubt Rory would trade her life for Lane's. 

Edited December 2, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[dubbel zout]

I doubt Lane would trade her life for Rory's.

I think this is where the discussion got started:

On November 27, 2016 at 0:46 AM, mledawn said:

On November 25, 2016 at 2:04 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

Louise and Madeline should have been back...and the irony would have been that both were successful in their own right..plus having hisbands/kids.  the two 'underachievers' having more success then the two type A's.

Husbands/kids = success? Dude.

Edited December 2, 2016 by dubbel zout

[Kohola3]

Quote

As far as Lane goes, I would need more than what we got of her in the Revival to be able to make any real accessment of how she feels about her life nowadays

This is one of the most frustrating things for me. We spend countless, pointless hours on minutiae and Rory's love life while we get mere minutes on the other characters.  Why even bother to cast the twins for a 3 second shot?  Why even bring back Lane when we get a total time of, what, five minutes in the 360 minutes of the revival.  We spent more time with stupid Kirk than Rory's best friend.  I would have loved to get her perspective and know more about how she viewed her life.

[cmfran]

Haven't watched eps 3/4 yet, but best thing so far: no Christopher. I'm sure I'll be seeing him, but still.

Also, I was confused as to why they dressed Gil/Sebastian Bach in the cliche "rocker" clothes when he was a jeans and t-shirt guy in the original eps. Leather pants at rehearsal? Ha, ok.

[takalotti]

On 11/27/2016 at 0:46 AM, mledawn said:

On 11/25/2016 at 2:04 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

Louise and Madeline should have been back...and the irony would have been that both were successful in their own right..plus having hisbands/kids.  the two 'underachievers' having more success then the two type A's.

Husbands/kids = success? Dude.

I'm not JayJay so I can speak for him/her. But to me, the original post does not say that husbands/kids = success. It said that M/L could have been brought with the irony being that they actually were successful. And on top of that they would have spouses and kids, which don't necessarily factor in to the measure of their previously mention success.

[cuddlingcrowley]

Paris is unarguably successful in her professional life. So if Louise and Madeline also being successful in their own right PLUS having husband/kids would make them more successfull than Paris (a soon to be divorcee)... well, you see where I'm going with this right? 

Edited December 3, 2016 by cuddlingcrowley

[solotrek]

I think I would have laughed if Louise and Madeline were both surrogates working for Paris than anything else. Just photos of them in the books.

[wendyg]

As a freelance writer myself, what strikes me is that the GG writers have no idea that being a freelance journalist doesn't work the way being a freelance screenwriter does.

Item: Why is Rory meeting "Conde Nast"? Conde Nast is the publisher of The New Yorker, Wired, GQ, and many other titles. If you want assignments, you talk to the editors of those titles. Freelance screenwriters do meet studio suits to pitch idea; freelance journalists do not do the same with *publishers*.

Item: The "lines pitch" was incredibly vague. There's no *story* there. Accurate enough that Rory actually didn't get an assignment; write it "on spec" (on speculation) is perfectly valid, but a freelance with credits from Slate, The Atlantic, and The New Yorker, doesn't do it that way. Instead, she chats to a few people she sees hanging around onlines, finds a *story* idea, and pitches that to get a commission before spending more than a couple of hours on it. (What, are we British now? Since when do New Yorkers have the patience to stand online for anything?)

Item: Her interview skills are *terrible*. It's one thing to interview someone as background research for, say, a TV series or a movie, but for journalism you usually don't whip out the tape recorder two seconds after  introducing yourself. Instead, you chat for a bit, establish some rapport, and wait until the person starts to say something acctually interesting, and *then* you say, actually, I'm collecting some personal stories for a piece I'm writing, do you mind if I record this? And *then*, later still when they're still comfortable, you ask their name and whether you can quote them. I can't remember what show it was now, but last week I saw something wherre a supposed journalist interviewing a hostile source calleed up and immediately blurted out the most contentious question. Immediate hang-up, of course. You're suposed to boil the frog, not electrocute it!

Item: As for the Buzzfeedish interview, I actually think Rory let herself be played. If a site had been chasing me for a *year* (what hot, new, fast-moving website would do that? A year is probably six business models to them) and started demanding that I produce ideas when I finally said I'd come in to talk about the possibility, I'd say, "You've been chasing me for a year. What did you have in mind for me to do? Which pieces that you read made you think I was a good fit for this site?" And by the time they finished telling me I'd probably have an idea or two. Again, I think this is Hollywood really not understanding how publishing works as a business. Writers are low on the totem pole in Hollywood, and being gamed in that way is (I believe) very common. But really good writers who can attract readers in large numbers are always in demand, and even an arrogant twerp with an inflated position is probably not going to be quite so cavalier about pissing them off. I was headhunted once, to freelance for a national newspaper that was launching a section on internet-related stuff, and the editor took me out for a meal and explained what he was planning. It wasn't a job interview; he knew he wanted me to write for him. Same should have gone for this, so a) the writers are clueless and b) Sandee was supposed to be something of the kind of bitch who just likes to see people grovel. Rory should have reacted very differently.

However, her lack of confidence could be down to a lull in finding work. It happens to every freelance, and we all always panic. After nine years, I'd expect her to be better at handling it, though. I assume the book lunatic bought her plane tickets.

Edited December 5, 2016 by wendyg

[Lady Calypso]

23 minutes ago, wendyg said:

Item: As for the Buzzfeedish interview, I actually think Rory let herself be played. If a site had been chasing me for a *year* (what hot, new, fast-moving website would do that? A year is probably six business models to them) and started demanding that I produce ideas when I finally said I'd come in to talk about the possibility, I'd say, "You've been chasing me for a year. What did you have in mind for me to do? Which pieces that you read made you think I was a good fit for this site?" And by the time they finished telling me I'd probably have an idea or two.

As much as I can agree that the CEO for Sandee Says, or whatever the BS website is, definitely handled the process wrong in getting Rory to join her website, Rory made very amateur moves by not being prepared in any way and expecting too much. They got her hopes up, yes, but it's not like Rory was smart in any way with how she handled the confusion/mix-up. I blame the CEO about 25% for the failed job because the CEO did make it seem like she'd have the job and that she was wanted and everything was good. Rory thought she automatically got the job because the CEO had been pursuing her and making it seem like she'd have the job no matter what. Plus, the way she called right after Rory left to rub it in her face that she didn't get the job? Rude, and I'd never want to work at a place like that. It seems entirely pompous and classless, like they're trying to be so hip but it made me question the integrity of the website and if it was actually as successful behind the scenes. I'll bet that CEO gets into a lot of trouble with other companies and within that company as well. 

But not researching the website at all? Not preparing any ideas just in case? Not presenting herself as a humbled prospective employee and adding fuel to the fire when she got the call two minutes after the interview ended? That was all on Rory and her assumption that she had a job without knowing exactly what it was. All Rory seemed to know was that it was a hip, young website. She should have been prepared. She should have had ideas. She shouldn't have reacted the way that she did. She understandably got upset when her high hopes were dashed, but she also lost a contact that could have been important. 

[dubbel zout]

46 minutes ago, wendyg said:

Item: Why is Rory meeting "Conde Nast"? Conde Nast is the publisher of The New Yorker, Wired, GQ, and many other titles. If you want assignments, you talk to the editors of those titles. Freelance screenwriters do meet studio suits to pitch idea; freelance journalists do not do the same with *publishers*.

I wondered about this, too, and thought maybe it was a clearance issue. But then she has the meeting with the GQ editors specifically—and as someone who worked at GQ, I found it especially amusing that Dan Bucatinsky played Jim Nelson, the name of the real GQ editor—so there went that.

51 minutes ago, wendyg said:

What, are we British now? Since when do New Yorkers have the patience to stand online for anything?)

When something is free, marked down, or considered trendy. Same reasons as people wait in other places, I imagine.

[cuddlingcrowley]

wendyg your entire post was a marvelous read! Thank you so much for the info. This part is my absolute favorite because as I watched the revival I could not wrap my head around what "on spect" actually meant:

1 hour ago, wendyg said:

Item: The "lines pitch" was incredibly vague. There's no *story* there. Accurate enough that Rory actually didn't get an assignment; write it "on spec" (on speculation) is perfectly valid, but a freelance with credits from Slate, The Atlantic, and The New Yorker, doesn't do it that way. Instead, she chats to a few people she sees hanging around onlines, finds a *story* idea, and pitches that to get a commission before spending more than a couple of hours on it. (What, are we British now? Since when do New Yorkers have the patience to stand online for anything?)

[GreenScreenFX]

I love that E and L's therapy sessions caused the therapist to begin smoking again.... mid session. And that appently, Emily went outside to join her.

Edited December 6, 2016 by GreenScreenFX

[Kohola3]

To me, this was the most memorable moment.  The rest - totally forgettable.

 

[solotrek]

15 hours ago, wendyg said:

(What, are we British now? Since when do New Yorkers have the patience to stand online for anything?)

The lines for cronuts when those were the thing were insane. And currently the lines outside Shake Shack. Though I don't know how many of the Shake Shack people are tourists.

[Bringonthedrama]

On 12/2/2016 at 6:22 PM, Kohola3 said:

 We spent more time with stupid Kirk than Rory's best friend.  I would have loved to get her perspective and know more about how she viewed her life.

So much THIS. Too much time with Kirk, when we should have heard more about Lane's life, and hints about how she and Rory have maintained their friendship.

[takalotti]

Up until Rory was leaving the GQ meeting, I thought Condé Nast was a person. When she said goodbye to Jim and Denise, I was like, "Oh, I guess that wasn't the meeting with Condé Nast."

Then I started to suspect I was mistaken and looked it up. Oops.

[cuddlingcrowley]

Lol! That was a great! It does sound like a person.

Never in my life before I had heard of "Condé Nast" so I immediately googled it before Rory and Logan had finished their conversation. I hated how pretentious it sounded and I hated even more after learning that:

On 05/12/2016 at 5:28 PM, wendyg said:

Conde Nast is the publisher of The New Yorker, Wired, GQ, and many other titles. If you want assignments, you talk to the editors of those titles. Freelance screenwriters do meet studio suits to pitch idea; freelance journalists do not do the same with *publishers*.

[dubbel zout]

Condé Nast was a real person.

Edited December 8, 2016 by dubbel zout

[takalotti]

1 hour ago, dubbel zout said:

Condé Nast was a real person.

So I was right AND wrong ? Thanks!

I guess my misunderstanding is reasonable, then, but she still wasn't talking about having a meeting with a particular person like I thought. 

[Bec]

Did Rory throw all her phones in the garbage near the end there? Seems wasteful if that's the case.

[junienmomo]

13 hours ago, Bec said:

Did Rory throw all her phones in the garbage near the end there? Seems wasteful if that's the case.

Aw, c'mon. Wasteful? In GG? A couple of iPhones is nothing compared to the amount of food abandoned in the diner or at FND. 

Anyway, we can count on Kirk to retrieve the phones and reconstruct Rory's whole life on the SH website.

[Bec]

Oh man, the wasted food drives me crazy too!

I think Rory threw the phones away in New York (if that's what she was doing, hard to tell with those jump cuts). So no Kirk there, but probably plentiful enterprising dumpster divers. Does she realize breaking the phones doesn’t destroy the data? It only means the hardware can only be scraped for parts instead of reused. The broken parts have to go to the landfill. I suppose it wouldn’t have been as dramatic to watch her reset her phones to factory default. Maybe she did do that during a jump cut.

One other thing I noticed was that Rory had her face glued to the phones anytime she was babysitting. Way to babysit. Sheer dumb luck she didn’t lose one or both kids.

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

One of the bright spots in the revival is Rory and Paris' still being BFFs. I knew they'll be friends for life but the confirmation was nice.

[takalotti]

9 hours ago, Bec said:

One other thing I noticed was that Rory had her face glued to the phones anytime she was babysitting. Way to babysit. Sheer dumb luck she didn’t lose one or both kids.

Dude! During the scene in the park, when Paris' son was slightly behind Rory's field of vision AND she was dealing with her phones I was tense the whole time. I was convinced he was going to wander off.

[movingtargetgal]

2 hours ago, takalotti said:

12 hours ago, Bec said:

One other thing I noticed was that Rory had her face glued to the phones anytime she was babysitting. Way to babysit. Sheer dumb luck she didn’t lose one or both kids.

Dude! During the scene in the park, when Paris' son was slightly behind Rory's field of vision AND she was dealing with her phones I was tense the whole time. I was convinced he was going to wander off.

I would have paid good money to watch Paris go off on Rory if she had lost one of the kids.  Paris would have called Rory out on all of her self absorbed woe is me, special snowflake "Bullshit" (Trade Mark Emily Gilmore). 

Edited December 18, 2016 by movingtargetgal

[Eeksquire]

You know, it's really too bad that we didn't see Paris's reaction to the Logan affair.  She was never Huntzberger's biggest fan and I bet she'd have some choice words for Rory on the matter.  That's a shame.

[Taryn74]

18 minutes ago, Eeksquire said:

You know, it's really too bad that we didn't see Paris's reaction to the Logan affair.  She was never Huntzberger's biggest fan and I bet she'd have some choice words for Rory on the matter.  That's a shame.

I thought the same thing!

[Kohola3]

I would have loved to see that scene as well.

[Enigma X]

That was boring.

[TeeVee329]

I have two nitpicky questions:

1) At the end of "Winter", Emily tells Lorelai that the therapy appointment is at 3 pm.  But throughout "Spring", the appointment is always at 10:30 am.  And then later in "Spring", when Luke is deep into his day getting dragged to franchise locations by Emily, he makes noise about her being late to the therapy appointment, but it had to have been way past 10:30 am at this point.  A stupid thing to notice, but I did.

2) I get that the "lines" idea wasn't the best and Rory admitted she had no real take on it, but after spending some time working on it, she wasn't even going to bother trying to write up a pitch and bring it back to Conde Nast?  All because of the Wookie?  I also didn't understand the point of her falling asleep during that first interview.  A weird, go nowhere moment.

[Kohola3]

1 minute ago, TeeVee329 said:

 A weird, go nowhere moment.

One of many in this mess.

[alexa]

I liked spring much better than winter. Winter was awkward --all of the interactions seemed forced and unnatural and then in spring it felt like it was back to the old Gilmore Girls. I also thought Lauren looked much better in spring. She looked older and off in winter but more Lorelei like in spring. Rory's storyline seems fitting for her imho. But I can't figure out why Lane's character seems so distant from everyone. It just seems so different how she interacts with everyone. Like even with Rory and Lorelei it is as if she hardly knows them. 

[junienmomo]

In a flash of WTHWIT (see * below), I started watching Spring today. 

Rewatching the therapy scene, it became even more obvious that Emily was simply mean and deceitful in her tricking Lorelai to come. There was nothing coming out of her mouth that wasn't designed to hurt her daughter. I admire Lorelai's willingness to hang in there And try to give her mother space.

Wooden acting. Primary character dialogue was horrible. Taylor was giving it his all, but believing that the few hundred attendees *needed* to see all countries represented was weak even for him. I wished dearly for a "Rat's tooshie" comment.

Then came the "tick off the list of must-shows."

• Rory and Lane together at a booth.
• Lorelai and Luke bantering (oh wait, that didn't happen)
• Mr. Kim in the flesh
• 2 second cameos of townies looking shocked at what Taylor says (was that the only time we saw Jackson?)

Beyond weird:

• Rory in a sleeveless top; Lorelai wearing a duster jacket and scarf
• Koreans singing 
• Lorelai bidding on Cassie's basket was just weird but at least they didn't go into gay jokes
• The compost pile joke. Where was Lorelai's physical humor? All she did was walk around.

On the other hand, I stopped watching after the only thing that gave me a laugh during those first minutes: Luke and Kirk as Kirk realizes what the B in BLT means and that he ate it. Laughed right out loud at that one.

* WITHWIT: What The Heck Was I Thinking

[FictionLover]

18 hours ago, junienmomo said:

In a flash of WTHWIT (see * below), I started watching Spring today. 

Rewatching the therapy scene, it became even more obvious that Emily was simply mean and deceitful in her tricking Lorelai to come. There was nothing coming out of her mouth that wasn't designed to hurt her daughter. I admire Lorelai's willingness to hang in there And try to give her mother space.

Wooden acting. Primary character dialogue was horrible. Taylor was giving it his all, but believing that the few hundred attendees *needed* to see all countries represented was weak even for him. I wished dearly for a "Rat's tooshie" comment.

Then came the "tick off the list of must-shows."

• Rory and Lane together at a booth.
• Lorelai and Luke bantering (oh wait, that didn't happen)
• Mr. Kim in the flesh
• 2 second cameos of townies looking shocked at what Taylor says (was that the only time we saw Jackson?)

Beyond weird:

• Rory in a sleeveless top; Lorelai wearing a duster jacket and scarf
• Koreans singing 
• Lorelai bidding on Cassie's basket was just weird but at least they didn't go into gay jokes
• The compost pile joke. Where was Lorelai's physical humor? All she did was walk around.

On the other hand, I stopped watching after the only thing that gave me a laugh during those first minutes: Luke and Kirk as Kirk realizes what the B in BLT means and that he ate it. Laughed right out loud at that one.

* WITHWIT: What The Heck Was I Thinking

Hated spring almost as much as summer. But  I can watch the whole revival in just over an hour by skipping to the parts that were okay. GG would have been better without it IMHO.

[Keywestclubkid]

How is Rory broke in this? like for real? her grandfather would have left her money and what about her great gran the girl was flying black in. forth to another country to see a man she was cheating with but she didn't have clean underwear and had no other money? 

[Llywela]

10 hours ago, Keywestclubkid said:

How is Rory broke in this? like for real? her grandfather would have left her money and what about her great gran the girl was flying black in. forth to another country to see a man she was cheating with but she didn't have clean underwear and had no other money? 

I mean, the underwear thing was because she was so disorganised (Rory! Little Miss Organisation!) that after giving up her apartment she sent all her belongings to be stored in a bunch of different places and didn't think to make sure her clean clothes went to the same place she was going, and apparently also didn't have the brains to think of buying a pack of fresh knickers to tide her over. So her lack of clean underwear was about stupidity rather than lack of funds. For the rest of it, I agree with you entirely.

[Keywestclubkid]

3 hours ago, Llywela said:

I mean, the underwear thing was because she was so disorganised (Rory! Little Miss Organisation!) that after giving up her apartment she sent all her belongings to be stored in a bunch of different places and didn't think to make sure her clean clothes went to the same place she was going, and apparently also didn't have the brains to think of buying a pack of fresh knickers to tide her over. So her lack of clean underwear was about stupidity rather than lack of funds. For the rest of it, I agree with you entirely.

Its like they just forgot who they were writing when they got to the revival with some of these characters .... in no way does your personality traits that you had your entire life  change that drastically... And no matter what her and her mother would have had money at all times esp with the trust from Grams ... (did she totally not give Lorelei a trust herself even tho she was presented as one of Grams favorites?) If not her father would have left her one himself .. I like to pretend that a year in the life didn't happen just like they liked to have pretended that everyone on this show froze in time from season 6 and just got thawed out for the revival

[Taryn74]

1 hour ago, Keywestclubkid said:

they liked to have pretended that everyone on this show froze in time from season 6 and just got thawed out for the revival

Ha! Maybe they went into cryosleep with the characters of The 100.

[readster]

4 hours ago, Keywestclubkid said:

I like to pretend that a year in the life didn't happen just like they liked to have pretended that everyone on this show froze in time from season 6 and just got thawed out for the revival

Right and aged while they were frozen. 

[Keywestclubkid]

40 minutes ago, readster said:

Right and aged while they were frozen. 

see what happens when you use a Groupon for your cryogenic chamber .....