Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life Season 1

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

21 hours ago, NumberCruncher said:

I don't think we can entirely say that Logan was gunshy because Rory turned down his original proposal because as far as ASP is concerned Rory and Logan never got to that point

That is just too bad because they did. It is cannon weather ASP likes it or not. Season 7 happened.

[dmc]

I didn't like it. 

The problem with revivals or the sort...is that to get the audience excited they feel they need to revisit  the same character angst.  All revivals do this and I always think it's unrealistic. 

Gilmore Girls would have us believe that in 10 years Rory and Lorelai are still mainly in the same spot as when we left them...where were you 10 years ago??? Is your life the same?  Are the same people in it?  Most of us would say NO. 

It's disappointing.

I wanted to see some actual character growth.  I did see it from Emily but really that's it.

Seriously Jess or Logan???

Okay I have never been a big fan of Rory or Lorelai's love interests except for Luke.  I find it hard to believe in 10 years...Logan or Jess (both quite insignificant) will still even be on the table.  Rory asking Mitchum for favors, sleeping with Logan while engaged, pregnant...what the hell happened to Rory?

Lorelai is basically acting the same...selfish and resistance to change.

[RoyRogersMcFreely]

A big problem is she didn't write this with the casual viewer in mind. Which always makes up the vast majority for any show. You have to go into this knowing she's not going to acknowledge a huge portion of the last season and why, then you have to be willing to fill in huge gaping holes of character development for yourself. That's not how you appeal to a broad audience who just catches re-runs or binge watches occasionally. I also don't think her writing style has ever tightened up enough for the binge watching in general. Her writing seems to count on the audience forgetting a good deal. I think it comes from her sitcom roots.

[NumberCruncher]

23 minutes ago, Deputy Deputy CoS said:

That is just too bad because they did. It is cannon weather ASP likes it or not. Season 7 happened.

Oh I agree with you. I'm quite displeased that she is ignoring S7 because the continuity errors are glaring but I'm just saying that the Logan gunshy argument ends up being wishful fan thinking because ASP didn't approach the revival from a place where he had propsed to Rory.  Of course it would have been nice for ASP to at least provided some character thoughts and motivations but apparently that had to be sacrificed so she could shove unnecessary musical numbers into the show and twist the plot to get to her contrived ending to make sense.

[TimetravellingBW]

4 hours ago, junienmomo said:

Rory's arc was great, and the best thing ASP did in the revival. 

Emily's arc was something out of a Lifetime movie, very cliched. Freshly widowed, someone close to her (Lorelai), says something awful and the widow lashes out. It's overdramatized with a long grudge and the therapy that Lorelai suggests honestly and out of caring, yet Emily manipulates it into another round of beat up on Lorelai, then bails completely as Lorelai tries to hold it together in spite of her mother's cruelty. The widow then does a couple of stupid things, namely getting rid of stuff and adopting a maid. Cue her realization that it was time to live her own life and she moves to Nantucket with her new best friends and people who need and appreciate her, has a rebound guy in tow and puts on the shoes from Dirty Dancing to show that she has found her new self. Yawn.

Rory's arc is great because it's really set in modern day. This is a world of thirty-somethings who have gigs and short-term contracts instead of union jobs or steady professional careers. 

I personally found Emily's arc far less cliche than Rory's. (Struggling writer isn't getting anywhere and realises her true calling is writing her own life. Story ends with the title of her memoirs being the title of the book/film. That I've seen a hundred time before).

Yes there are a lot of grieving widow stories out there but that's because it's a very real situation, and ultimately Emily's story worked imo because it felt authentic and unique to her character and she remained relatable and likeable. Of course she'd initially react by commissioning massive portraits of Richard and quibbling over his gravestone, it's not surprising his death would reignite issues with Lorelai, and Emily finally having enough of the DAR was dramatic but believable (and hilarious) as she's always been a spitfire underneath her sophistication. The original series indicated that Emily was somewhat restrained by only being a society wife so her being excited over buying her first house in her name and becoming a Whaling tour guide fitted that. And taking in the whole maid's family wasn't just "she found new best friends" but a contrast to her treatment of maid's in the past. Her leaving the Hartford house because it was haunted by Richard's memory felt so incredibly accurate of those situations and a sign that she was recovering, but choosing Nantucket where they still had memories together was a nice balance. Plus Kelly Bishop absolutely killed it and made you feel for Emily every step of the way. The whole thing felt thought out and meaningful. 

Contrast to Rory's storyline, yes the situation of a 30-something floundering due to world changes is all too accurate. But it didn't feel in character (ever-organised, stable Rory has been wandering for 10 years and has made few concrete plans to get herself a job or get a handle on things? What happened to her lists and binders??) It certainly didn't make her likeable (as others have said she was cheating, not in an open relationship). And it was filled with plot holes (her financial situation, how did she reconnect with Logan etc). I'd take Emily's story any day. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by TimetravellingBW

[dmc]

41 minutes ago, Deputy Deputy CoS said:

That is just too bad because they did. It is cannon weather ASP likes it or not. Season 7 happened.

this you don't get to ignore a season because you didn't write it.

[txhorns79]

Quote

That is just too bad because they did. It is cannon weather ASP likes it or not. Season 7 happened.

As far as I can see, the revival acknowledged Season 7 happened.  Lorelai noted that she was briefly married to Christopher, and that the marriage did not work out.  I think the problem with Rory and Logan's relationship during the revival was that they never explained how Rory and Logan got to the point they did.  I can certainly see them reconnecting at some point over the past decade that acknowledges the past, but moves on from it.  We just never saw it.  

Edited November 30, 2016 by txhorns79

[Viqutorious]

This is one of the best articles I've read regarding the revival.  Some really interesting theories and insight.

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/28/13760018/gilmore-girls-final-four-words-review-bad

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

4 hours ago, Lady Calypso said:

I don't think Rory/Logan were in an open relationship. They were in a secret relationship,

I am puzzled by a lot of the perception of this revival, the fact that she was in a secret relationship with Logan being one of them. Yes, she says what happens in Vegas but their actions dispels that notion. You aren't in a secret relationship when you are dining in full view in a family owned restaurant.  I think it was a passive aggressive move on Logan's part. He wants to be seen with Rory, especially by his father. The why is still a mystery to me but there is no way I believe he wanted to hide his relationship with Rory.

[tennisgurl]

I have been thinking about this revival a lot, and I think what gets me is that this whole thing seems almost...tragic. In ASP`s attempt at making things come "full circle", almost every character has gone back about a dozen steps from where we last left them, and they ended up in a place that an earlier version of them would hate. Worst is probably Rory, who became a shockingly amoral, un professional peaked in high school asshole, who is a mess both personally and professionally, and ends up single, pregnant, and without any job prospects outside of running her small tons paper for free. Logan, who wanted so much to not be like his dad and make his own way, ends up working for his dads company, marrying a woman he approves of, and playing around on his fiance, just like dear old dad. And while Jess has improved as a person far more than anyone else, they are still implying that he has spent the last decade pining after his high school girlfriend, and will continue to do so, even after she has another mans child. Its not full circle, its just really depressing. 

Especially Rory. The more articles I read about the revival, both by fans and professional critics (and professional critics who happen to be fans), the more I cant stand how Rory is here. She is the literal worst. 

[txhorns79]

Quote

And while Jess has improved as a person far more than anyone else, they are still implying that he has spent the last decade pining after his high school girlfriend, and will continue to do so, even after she has another mans child.

I don't think they implied Jess has spent the last decade pining for Rory.  Though, why would it matter that Rory had another man's child?  Obviously Jess should back off if she is pursuing a relationship with her father's child, but the mere fact that she a baby by someone else doesn't suddenly make her off limits if she is single. 

[cantbeflapped]

6 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I don't think they implied Jess has spent the last decade pining for Rory

I don't either.  That would be way too sad and pitiful for a character I really like.  They left it open for interpretation, while still throwing the Jess/Rory shippers a bone.  Three possibilities...1) He really has been pining away for years.  2) He gets a little wistful and nostalgic when he sees her, as many of us do with exes....especially for a relationship that didn't have good closure.  This could include him being open to pursuing a relationship if it ever seemed right. 3) He is sad looking at what Rory has become.  This could be mixed with options one or two as well.  

I actually don't mind ASP throwing Jess/Rory shippers a bone....probably a good idea considering how passionate they are.  I sort of fit that category, though I liked Logan too.  It left the door open.  I tend to picture Rory meeting "the one" while she's teaching at Chilton.  But I can play around with possible Jess pictures in my mind too.  

[Melancholy]

If Jess was really pining, I feel like there'd be more focus on him seeking Rory out. He hops right up from talking to Rory when he sees Luke in the window of the SH Gazette. He is in Rory's house but he was focused on talking to Luke and he doesn't seek Rory out. He could have stayed at the Crap Shack but he sleeps at his mom's house.

 I bet he still has feelings and maybe they would grow into Jess either pining or doing something about if Jess now sees Rory more frequently if Rory moved back to Stars Hallow. However I don't think they're at that point. There was a distance in the revival because they clearly didn't rank the other as a big emotional priority- like not Top 5. Unlike say early seasons Luke/Lorelai. 

[maraleia]

ASP is a lot like Aaron Sorkin in that she has blinders on regarding many things but unlike Sorkin she hasn't learned her lesson with this revival.

I think (aside from the rocky first part of season 5) the John Wells years of the West Wing were great for character development (aside from Toby) and the same is true about GG's 7th season. This is where the revival fails. She refused to watch the 7th season and I hate that about her approach to this whole endeavor. Also, they ignored any real world things that have been going on regarding social justice issues and that pissed me off.

[txhorns79]

Quote

Also, they ignored any real world things that have been going on regarding social justice issues and that pissed me off.

It's Gilmore Girls.  It's not like the show is known for its realism, or strong stance on political issues. 

Quote

If Jess was really pining, I feel like there'd be more focus on him seeking Rory out. He hops right up from talking to Rory when he sees Luke in the window of the SH Gazette. He is in Rory's house but he was focused on talking to Luke and he doesn't seek Rory out. He could have stayed at the Crap Shack but he sleeps at his mom's house.

I agree.  I didn't see anything that really indicated Jess was looking for any type of relationship with Rory other than a friendly one. 

[TimetravellingBW]

1 hour ago, cantbeflapped said:

I don't either.  That would be way too sad and pitiful for a character I really like.  They left it open for interpretation, while still throwing the Jess/Rory shippers a bone.  Three possibilities...1) He really has been pining away for years.  2) He gets a little wistful and nostalgic when he sees her, as many of us do with exes....especially for a relationship that didn't have good closure.  This could include him being open to pursuing a relationship if it ever seemed right. 3) He is sad looking at what Rory has become.  This could be mixed with options one or two as well.  

I actually don't mind ASP throwing Jess/Rory shippers a bone....probably a good idea considering how passionate they are.  I sort of fit that category, though I liked Logan too.  It left the door open.  I tend to picture Rory meeting "the one" while she's teaching at Chilton.  But I can play around with possible Jess pictures in my mind too.  

So true that Jess's look was left open ended and that's a good break down of possible interpretations. As a former Jess/Rory shipper now turned pure Jess fan, I read it as a possibility 2 but I think the idea of Jess basically mourning who Rory used to be and saying goodbye to the girl he fell in love with during high school is very poignant. (What happened to the girl he met writing her article on the parking lot? Who persuaded the cynical teenage Jess she looked truthworthy and threw him Charles Dicken's references when he stole her book?)

Tbh that interpretation fits the tragedy that Rory's life became and how she spiralled over the series. I'm sure ASP didn't want us to view Rory as a tragic story and seems completely blind to how much most of the audience loathed the revival version of Rory. But that's what the ending felt like. 

[Melancholy]

The Revival didn't ignore social justice stuff so much as scoff at it. See Lorelai's whole "Body shaming! Trigger warnings! War on Christmas" addition to argue against Luke's healthy food rant. Or Paris firing her assistant with "Apologize to your parents. Tell them you'll pay them back for two years studying Buffy the Vampire Slayer's effect on the feminist agenda." Or the 30-something gang being "sensitive"

I did think while watching L/L's wedding that it's good it occurred before Election Day because Trump's election certainly put me in an unhappy mood for the rest of November. 

[BonnieD]

Unlike many, I was satisfied with the revival. It was neither better nor worse than the show has ever been IMO. There were always elements that bugged me and things I loved. I was happy to have that mixed bag of sweets back to paw through once more.

Quote

Yes there are a lot of grieving widow stories out there but that's because it's a very real situation, and ultimately Emily's story worked imo because it felt authentic and unique to her character and she remained relatable and likeable. Of course she'd initially react by commissioning massive portraits of Richard and quibbling over his gravestone, it's not surprising his death would reignite issues with Lorelai, and Emily finally having enough of the DAR was dramatic but believable (and hilarious) as she's always been a spitfire underneath her sophistication. The original series indicated that Emily was somewhat restrained by only being a society wife so her being excited over buying her first house in her name and becoming a Whaling tour guide fitted that. And taking in the whole maid's family wasn't just "she found new best friends" but a contrast to her treatment of maid's in the past. Her leaving the Hartford house because it was haunted by Richard's memory felt so incredibly accurate of those situations and a sign that she was recovering, but choosing Nantucket where they still had memories together was a nice balance. Plus Kelly Bishop absolutely killed it and made you feel for Emily every step of the way. The whole thing felt thought out and meaningful.

This summarizes my feelings exactly. I loved seeing Emily at the end, covering up her sick employee with an afghan, which displays how much she has grown at last. I loved how the entire series was strongly influenced by Richard's passing, both mother, daughter and to a lesser extent, granddaughter dealt with the loss of a huge presence in their lives. I loved it.

Quote

So true that Jess's look was left open ended and that's a good break down of possible interpretations. As a former Jess/Rory shipper now turned pure Jess fan, I read it as a possibility 2 

As a shipper, my heart began to sing when Jess made his second appearance, in the Fall episode. I'd thought he would be in and out after that one scene in the newspaper office. Hope began to flutter that they might actually write him as Rory's choice--even though she should actually be working on herself at this point in her life rather than casting around for a mate she's clearly not ready for. I always thought Jess was the best for her because he didn't treat her like a special snowflake and forced her to look at unpleasant truths about herself. No BF was better for her than Jess ultimately was, despite the rocky start. I took his final look at her as wistful more than anything else.

I liked Rory's story of unraveling and don't think it's completely out of character. Yes, she used to be scheduled and organized and ambitious, but in real life those things can fall by the wayside. She got smacked down by reality. That makes for an interesting story of actual growth. 

Question: does the ending suggest that there might be another special series if this one was well received? Any news on something like that?

[nolieblue]

I would certainly watch another season of the revival if they choose to do it. I was happy with how L/L ended up and for Emily figuring out how to live without Richard, but I didn't like Rory's ending at all.  I like the story of Rory struggling to find her calling but hate the idea of an unplanned pregnancy. Not only is it a cheap plot device but it would break Lorelai's heart. Plus Luke will probably want to kill Logan. :)

[poppy-]

3 hours ago, Melancholy said:

The Revival didn't ignore social justice stuff so much as scoff at it. See Lorelai's whole "Body shaming! Trigger warnings! War on Christmas" addition to argue against Luke's healthy food rant. Or Paris firing her assistant with "Apologize to your parents. Tell them you'll pay them back for two years studying Buffy the Vampire Slayer's effect on the feminist agenda." Or the 30-something gang being "sensitive"

I did think while watching L/L's wedding that it's good it occurred before Election Day because Trump's election certainly put me in an unhappy mood for the rest of November. 

There is such a casual disdain for pop culture dilettantes.    "I'm doing Wild" says 25 identical woman.  Townies do Hamilton badly while the one savvy ASP clone in the room looks on disapprovingly.  That sharp edge was always, though. I'd  just kind of forgotten about it in the hazy memories of la la la.

This was exactly what GG always was, warts and all.

[wonderwoman]

2 hours ago, BonnieD said:

I always thought Jess was the best for her because he didn't treat her like a special snowflake and forced her to look at unpleasant truths about herself. No BF was better for her than Jess ultimately was, despite the rocky start. I took his final look at her as wistful more than anything else.

In total agreement. I always lsaw the potential in Jess, and would have loved to Rory see it as well.

[Bumblebee Tights]

7 hours ago, CheeseBurgh said:

This is one of the best articles I've read regarding the revival.  Some really interesting theories and insight.

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/28/13760018/gilmore-girls-final-four-words-review-bad

This article was really interesting, thanks for sharing.

However, wow, I just want to yell at it because I disagree with so much of it..so much so that I feel compelled to respond to some of it here.

Before I do though, let me preface my remarks with this disclaimer: One of the only things in this article I agree with (and one of the only truly negative reactions to the revival that I find myself agreeing with) is that if Rory's storyline in the presumptive season 8 had played out the way her storyline in the revival played out, and if she had ended up pregnant at 22 instead of 32 it would have been awful (though strangely I have seen some saying they would have preferred it that way?), and it would have had majorly negative implications regarding the overall message of the show and ASP's worldview in general. Also, as much as I'd like to believe that in S8 ASP would have arrived at those four words in a different way, (like with a flash forward or something? Please?), everything I know about ASP leads me to believe that we did indeed get the story she intended for 22 year old Rory in S8 here. Only, I disagree with the premise made in the article that Rory's storyline in the revival only works if you view it as belonging to a 22 year old.  Maybe I'm just projecting because Rory is close in age to myself, but I honestly believe this whole thing works much better with a 32 year old Rory. And this is where we arrive at my disclaimer: ASP's intentions might have been for this to happen 10 years ago, but that's not the story we got. We got season 7 and we got this revival, and my reactions are based on the story as it was actually told, and yes, I include the events of season 7 here. In fact, (and I apologize if this comes off a little starry-eyed, but I am so over the moon about the revival that I am viewing things with a rose colored bent) I am appreciating the whole sequence of events that led to ASP's exit and return..for me, it's almost as though it was meant to happen the way that it did.

Ok, so onto some commentary ( quotes from the article in bold italics and my responses below)

"Sherman-Palladino’s big pregnancy reveal now takes place 10 years later, at the end of the revival, but it’s no less disturbing to realize that this was her vision ...Not only would it have derailed her professionally, it would also tie her to a boyfriend who had consistently attempted to manipulate her emotionally, socially, and financially."

-I must have missed Logan consistently manipulating Rory. I really don't think we can put that on him. Rory made choices based on what she wanted...and I really didn't see Logan trying to change her..ever. In fact, part of his attraction to Rory was definitely her bookishness and perfectionism and naivety-all quintessential 'Rory' traits. Rory's attraction to and interactions with Logan certainly broadened her world view and influenced her, but Rory herself was the driving force behind all of this...it wasn't some nefarious plan of Logan's. 

"The only significant career milestone that Rory has achieved since we last saw her a decade ago is that she’s published a single feature in the New Yorker."

-I guess it's open to interpretation and people can infer what they want, but I didn't see it this way. I am more of the opinion that the New Yorker piece was her most recent, and yes, maybe one of her most high profile...but she also refers to having written for The Atlantic when she's talking to Headmaster Charleston, and Lorelai makes a comment in Spring when she's encouraging her to go to Sandee Says that "You haven't had anything permanent for awhile".  I think it's more that she has moved around a lot, maybe chasing her dreams and thinking the grass is greener, (like in S7 when she turns down the ProJo to go for the fellowship)  or maybe she found that she just liked that vagabond life..like the girl who dreamed of Fez and being sure she "saw something" in S1 might be expected to. I think she's becoming dissatisfied and hitting a dry spell, but that doesn't mean she hasn't worked..

"The revival shows Rory revisiting moments with all of the men who represent milestones in her mother’s emotional development. Her first boyfriend, Dean (Jared Padalecki), represents safety and the comfort of home the way her grandfather did to Lorelai; he’s also a parallel to Max, Lorelai’s first boyfriend on the show, whom she essentially uses for his safety and familiarity but ultimately leaves heartbroken."

-- Whatwhatwhat? This is just a really weird, sort of Oedipal reference.  Ok, it's true that Dean does end up representing comfort and safety to Rory.. however, I'm not sure Richard EVER represented those things to Lorelai. Lorelai's relationship with Max was actually marked by instability and immaturity, and was only anchored in an intense mutual infatuation. Comfort and safety that is not. Although she did break his heart, sure, so...points there?

 

"Rory isn’t alone, of course. Rory’s best friend Lane (Keiko Agena) trades in her rock dreams to become a harried mother of two, living in Stars Hollow and working for her own mother in the same small-town antique store she grew up in. For both of these millennial women, children equal destiny, and destiny means becoming, to an extent, their mothers."

-This is a long held UO of mine, but: I don't think Lane is harried, I think she's happy. Can't Lane live in SH and have an eccentric life, still full of rock and roll and the things and people she loves, if that's what she wants? Hey, I loved Dave Rygalski too, but does Lane have permission to not "make it" as a rock star, and still find value and meaning in her life? Can she live in SH without becoming Mrs.Kim? Did I miss her working at Kim's antiques in the revival? (This last question is a serious one- did I?!.. because idk how I feel about THAT)

Alright, I've gotta stop, because this is insanely long, but bullet points of other things I disagree with:

-The idea that SH is "a weirdly Lynchian fairy revel from which there is no escape": this is actually a really interesting and creative idea,..but I am confident this is not what ASP is going for.

-Christopher is not Logan, Jess is not Luke, Lorelai is not Rory...I think it's fair to say that they may play similar roles in each other's lives, but none of these people have a characterization that matches this on the nose comparison....for starters, no way would Logan Huntzburger be an absent father. ( I will admit that these comparisons are invited by the revival, but I think there's way more nuance than is being accounted for, ESPECIALLY with Lorelai and Rory.)

-Stars Hollow doesn't feel like a real New England town: Well I live in the Northeast, and there are a few towns I know of that feel remarkably similar to SH. Also, aren't there blogs and things ranking the SHollowiest towns in CT?

- That "Rory will have the illusion of happiness, surrounded by community and family"- why does it have to be an illusion?

That ".Stars Hollow, in this view, becomes a pro-life argument for the need to continue the legacy of Stars Hollow at any cost — even if it means dismantling the dreams of one of Stars Hollow’s finest."-I just really don't think this has as much to do with SH as this author seems to think. Honestly, we don't even know if she's going to live there ...I mean, she mentions Queens and the "space" it would provide during Fall.

Ok, ok, I'll stop now. Apologies for the length.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Bumblebee Tights

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

12 minutes ago, Bumblebee Tights said:

Spoiler

 

This article was really interesting, thanks for sharing.

However, wow, I just want to yell at it because I disagree with so much of it..so much so that I feel compelled to respond to some of it here.

Before I do though, let me preface my remarks with this disclaimer: One of the only things in this article I agree with (and one of the only truly negative reactions to the revival that I find myself agreeing with) is that if Rory's storyline in the presumptive season 8 had played out the way her storyline in the revival played out, and if she had ended up pregnant at 22 instead of 32 it would have been awful (though strangely I have seen some saying they would have preferred it that way?), and it would have had majorly negative implications regarding the overall message of the show and ASP's worldview in general. Also, as much as I'd like to believe that in S8 ASP would have arrived at those four words in a different way, (like with a flash forward or something? Please?), everything I know about ASP leads me to believe that we did indeed get the story she intended for 22 year old Rory in S8 here. Only, I disagree with the premise made in the article that Rory's storyline in the revival only works if you view it as belonging to a 22 year old.  Maybe I'm just projecting because Rory is close in age to myself, but I honestly believe this whole thing works much better with a 32 year old Rory. And this is where we arrive at my disclaimer: ASP's intentions might have been for this to happen 10 years ago, but that's not the story we got. We got season 7 and we got this revival, and my reactions are based on the story as it was actually told, and yes, I include the events of season 7 here. In fact, (and I apologize if this comes off a little starry-eyed, but I am so over the moon about the revival that I am viewing things with a rose colored bent) I am appreciating the whole sequence of events that led to ASP's exit and return..for me, it's almost as though it was meant to happen the way that it did.

Ok, so onto some commentary ( quotes from the article in bold italics and my responses below)

"Sherman-Palladino’s big pregnancy reveal now takes place 10 years later, at the end of the revival, but it’s no less disturbing to realize that this was her vision ...Not only would it have derailed her professionally, it would also tie her to a boyfriend who had consistently attempted to manipulate her emotionally, socially, and financially."

-I must have missed Logan consistently manipulating Rory. I really don't think we can put that on him. Rory made choices based on what she wanted...and I really didn't see Logan trying to change her..ever. In fact, part of his attraction to Rory was definitely her bookishness and perfectionism and naivety-all quintessential 'Rory' traits. Rory's attraction to and interactions with Logan certainly broadened her world view and influenced her, but Rory herself was the driving force behind all of this...it wasn't some nefarious plan of Logan's. 

"The only significant career milestone that Rory has achieved since we last saw her a decade ago is that she’s published a single feature in the New Yorker."

-I guess it's open to interpretation and people can infer what they want, but I didn't see it this way. I am more of the opinion that the New Yorker piece was her most recent, and yes, maybe one of her most high profile...but she also refers to having written for The Atlantic when she's talking to Headmaster Charleston, and Lorelai makes a comment in Spring when she's encouraging her to go to Sandee Says that "You haven't had anything permanent for awhile".  I think it's more that she has moved around a lot, maybe chasing her dreams and thinking the grass is greener, (like in S7 when she turns down the ProJo to go for the fellowship)  or maybe she found that she just liked that vagabond life..like the girl who dreamed of Fez and being sure she "saw something" in S1 might be expected to. I think she's becoming dissatisfied and hitting a dry spell, but that doesn't mean she hasn't worked..

"The revival shows Rory revisiting moments with all of the men who represent milestones in her mother’s emotional development. Her first boyfriend, Dean (Jared Padalecki), represents safety and the comfort of home the way her grandfather did to Lorelai; he’s also a parallel to Max, Lorelai’s first boyfriend on the show, whom she essentially uses for his safety and familiarity but ultimately leaves heartbroken."

-- Whatwhatwhat? This is just a really weird, sort of Oedipal reference.  Ok, it's true that Dean does end up representing comfort and safety to Rory.. however, I'm not sure Richard EVER represented those things to Lorelai. Lorelai's relationship with Max was actually marked by instability and immaturity, and was only anchored in an intense mutual infatuation. Comfort and safety that is not. Although she did break his heart, sure, so...points there?

 

"Rory isn’t alone, of course. Rory’s best friend Lane (Keiko Agena) trades in her rock dreams to become a harried mother of two, living in Stars Hollow and working for her own mother in the same small-town antique store she grew up in. For both of these millennial women, children equal destiny, and destiny means becoming, to an extent, their mothers."

-This is a long held UO of mine, but: I don't think Lane is harried, I think she's happy. Can't Lane live in SH and have an eccentric life, still full of rock and roll and the things and people she loves, if that's what she wants? Hey, I loved Dave Rygalski too, but does Lane have permission to not "make it" as a rock star, and still find value and meaning in her life? Can she live in SH without becoming Mrs.Kim? Did I miss her working at Kim's antiques in the revival? (This last question is a serious one- did I?!.. because idk how I feel about THAT)

Alright, I've gotta stop, because this is insanely long, but bullet points of other things I disagree with:

-The idea that SH is "a weirdly Lynchian fairy revel from which there is no escape": this is actually a really interesting and creative idea,..but I am confident this is not what ASP is going for.

-Christopher is not Logan, Jess is not Luke, Lorelai is not Rory...I think it's fair to say that they may play similar roles in each others lives, but none of these people have a characterization that matches this on the nose comparison....for starters, no way would Logan Huntzburger be an absent father. ( I will admit that these comparisons are invited by the revival, but I think there's way more nuanced than is being accounted for, ESPECIALLY with Lorelai and Rory.)

-Stars Hollow doesn't feel like a real New England town: Well I live in the Northeast, and there are a few towns I know of that feel remarkably similar to SH. Also, aren't there blogs and things ranking the SHollowiest towns in CT?

- That "Rory will have the illusion of happiness, surrounded by community and family"- why does it have to be an illusion?

That ".Stars Hollow, in this view, becomes a pro-life argument for the need to continue the legacy of Stars Hollow at any cost — even if it means dismantling the dreams of one of Stars Hollow’s finest."-I just really don't think this has as much to do with SH as this author seems to think. Honestly, we don't even know if she's going to live there ...I mean, she mentions Queens and the "space" it would provide during Fall.

Ok, ok, I'll stop now. Apologies for the length.

 

I couldn't agree more. I stopped reading at them accusing Logan of being a manipulative boyfriend. We all have our bias as die hard fans but geez. 

I am in the process of rewatching S6/7 and Logan was a damn good boyfriend once they decided to commit to a relationship. There was one episode where they invited Luke and Lorelai to Logan's family home and Luke acted like his sour grapes throughout. It took Logan -- whom he criticized for simply existing --  lending him a gift for Lorelai to get him to stop ruining the trip for Lorelai and suddenly being team Logan. 

Edited December 1, 2016 by Deputy Deputy CoS

[blueray]

Quote

-This is a long held UO of mine, but: I don't think Lane is harried, I think she's happy. Can't Lane live in SH and have an eccentric life, still full of rock and roll and the things and people she loves, if that's what she wants? Hey, I loved Dave Rygalski too, but does Lane have permission to not "make it" as a rock star, and still find value and meaning in her life? Can she live in SH without becoming Mrs.Kim? Did I miss her working at Kim's antiques in the revival? (This last question is a serious one- did I?!.. because idk how I feel about THAT)

In my opinion Lane seemed to be the only one completely happy throughout it. I also missed that she was working for her mother, was that mentioned or shown? I personally was hoping that she would be working for the music store. Either way, it showed her happily still married to Zach, with two great kids. I loved the scene with the band playing in the living room (might have been my favorite part). It shows that while they have stressful jobs and are raising kids, they can still rock :).

Other then that, I can see the author's point in that article, however that is a really dark way of taking it. However, Rory in my opinion was left trapped there in a bad situration. I'm starting to realize how much I honestly hated the ending of this and loved the ending of season 7 much more for Rory's storyline anyway (happy about L &L getting married). Someone mentioned, I'm not sure if it was on this board, that in her show there was always two groups of people, the ivy league Hartford people and the maybe community college Star's Hollow. Why couldn't Lane or Dean have got in to a state university?

Edited December 1, 2016 by blueray

[stillshimpy]

Quote

In my opinion Lane seemed to be the only one completely happy throughout it.

Parenthood was a show that always tried to ram the notion that, if someone wasn't living their dream professionally, then they were just some huge sellout, so sure! Risk losing your house to pursue that dream, you only have a dependent family! Woo!! Dreams or bust! Do not settle.  

It was infuriating and kind of dangerous to suggest.  There are lots of ways to be happy.  Most people will dream a dream they will never achieve.  Almost every fanciful kid can dream up amazing adventures....and then you grow up and it isn't that your dreams die.  They change.  Your priorities change and what makes you happy, changes.   That's not selling out.  That's love.  When you're young and you're  dreaming,  you're dreaming for you.  Some people, that's how it always is and that's fantastic and equally valid as a fulfilling experience.   

Lane's dream just morphed into something different  that wasn't about being a rock star, and she seemed content, as well as happy. 

Edited December 1, 2016 by stillshimpy

[hippielamb]

1 hour ago, Bumblebee Tights said:

 

"The revival shows Rory revisiting moments with all of the men who represent milestones in her mother’s emotional development. Her first boyfriend, Dean (Jared Padalecki), represents safety and the comfort of home the way her grandfather did to Lorelai; he’s also a parallel to Max, Lorelai’s first boyfriend on the show, whom she essentially uses for his safety and familiarity but ultimately leaves heartbroken."

-- Whatwhatwhat? This is just a really weird, sort of Oedipal reference.  Ok, it's true that Dean does end up representing comfort and safety to Rory.. however, I'm not sure Richard EVER represented those things to Lorelai. Lorelai's relationship with Max was actually marked by instability and immaturity, and was only anchored in an intense mutual infatuation. Comfort and safety that is not. Although she did break his heart, sure, so...points there?

 

"Rory isn’t alone, of course. Rory’s best friend Lane (Keiko Agena) trades in her rock dreams to become a harried mother of two, living in Stars Hollow and working for her own mother in the same small-town antique store she grew up in. For both of these millennial women, children equal destiny, and destiny means becoming, to an extent, their mothers."

-This is a long held UO of mine, but: I don't think Lane is harried, I think she's happy. Can't Lane live in SH and have an eccentric life, still full of rock and roll and the things and people she loves, if that's what she wants? Hey, I loved Dave Rygalski too, but does Lane have permission to not "make it" as a rock star, and still find value and meaning in her life? Can she live in SH without becoming Mrs.Kim? Did I miss her working at Kim's antiques in the revival? (This last question is a serious one- did I?!.. because idk how I feel about THAT)

 

I had a major wtf moment when I read that bit about Richard too. It made no sense.

The criticism about Rory being pregnant, and also Lane's choice to stay in Stars Hollow and be a mom bother me because there's this attitude of how much that will suck. Lane is happy, her life doesn't suck, especially when you compare it to Rory's story in these episodes. It's not what either one of them envisioned when they were kids but they can still have a happy life. There's this theme throughout the series of life doesn't always turn out how you expect, and it's a good thing. Luke says it in the diner, Lorelai has said it several times on the show, Rory and Lane's storylines show this. 

39 minutes ago, blueray said:

In my opinion Lane seemed to be the only one completely happy throughout it. I also missed that she was working for her mother, was that mentioned or shown? I personally was hoping that she would be working for the music store. Either way, it showed her happily still married to Zach, with two great kids. I loved the scene with the band playing in the living room (might have been my favorite part). It shows that while they have stressful jobs and are raising kids, they can still rock :).

 

It was *very* brief, blink and you miss it. When Lorelai is delivering papers, she goes to Kims Antiques and we see Lane thanking a customer. I love her all small scenes too. It was honest of a 30 something couple who have dreams but have to work to support their family. 

[pennben]

8 hours ago, maraleia said:

. Also, they ignored any real world things that have been going on regarding social justice issues and that pissed me off.

Of course they did.  That was never this show.

i think this show caught magic in a bottle the first couple of years. In my opinion, it was perfectly cast and I can't imagine a single better replacement cast member. It was a fun and a different voice and cadence and content.  It wore ever thinner to the end, but that doesn't negate what it was.  Nor, in my opinion does it negate what I thought was a wonderful revival.  

I thought it interesting that a NYT tv critic posited on twitter that a fan (perhaps one referred to as a casual fan) of the show generally enjoyed the revival, but a super fan did not.  That's probably far too general, but likely approaches the mark.  

[TimetravellingBW]

12 hours ago, Melancholy said:

The Revival didn't ignore social justice stuff so much as scoff at it. See Lorelai's whole "Body shaming! Trigger warnings! War on Christmas" addition to argue against Luke's healthy food rant. Or Paris firing her assistant with "Apologize to your parents. Tell them you'll pay them back for two years studying Buffy the Vampire Slayer's effect on the feminist agenda." Or the 30-something gang being "sensitive"

I did think while watching L/L's wedding that it's good it occurred before Election Day because Trump's election certainly put me in an unhappy mood for the rest of November. 

Ugh, ASP/Lorelai & Rory's disdain for social justice and human rights issues left a horrible taste in my mouth. Especially as Rory is a wanna-be foreign correspondent and features writer. Shouldn't she be interested in societal issues rather than dismissing them? I work in the media/PR field and am doing my Masters in Communications - admittedly not in journalism or the U.S - and almost everyone I encounter is very aware of social justice issues and politically correct. (And I mean p.c in the most positive way possible as in they're aware of problems like body shaming, racism etc.) And a lot of us did B.A's in undergrad like Rory did. Yet she can't see beyond her own nose. I can't imagine Rory covering pieces like the refugee crisis, hate crimes or even the election campaign if she's so insensitive and ignorant. 

On 11/30/2016 at 1:50 PM, TimetravellingBW said:

We're back to Logan being the the guy who makes Rory spoiled, entitled and selfish.

On 11/30/2016 at 2:02 PM, msani19 said:

The part that I bolded got me thinking about how we discuss Rory and what I think are the flaws we see in her. It seems like someone else is directing her life and her actions and she has, to use a word I loathe, no agency. Does Logan "make" Rory worse or is Rory comfortable expressing her awfulness (spoiled, entitled, selfish) when she's with Logan? I think that circumstances can amplify or encourage characteristics that we already have within us, they don't create them. Rory blows in whatever direction someone, usually a guy, points her in. 

I probably phrased the original post badly - in that I don't think Logan "makes" Rory do anything - but you raise a really interesting point about us pinning her behaviour on other people. 

I agree that circumstances amplify rather than create particular characteristics - other people's behaviour naturally rubs off on you. I think it's easy to "blame" other characters for Rory's actions because she's such a passive character and changes to follow whoever is most prominent in her life: In SH she was the town princess, at Chilton she was a diligent student, with Lorelai she follows her lead mocking and judging everyone, with her grandparents she embraced their privilege and status, with Logan she suddenly became a spoiled party girl. It's easier to blame Logan because "hey, she wasn't like that without him!"

That said, the key thing is Rory still chooses who to hang out with. ("You can judge a man by the company he keeps.") Even if she was overpowered by Logan's lifestyle/personality, she still chose to stick with him - in both the original show and the revival - despite realizing he was a massive douche. And that's all on her. 

On that topic, I wonder if the haziness around who Rory "really is" is why fans reacted so badly to her in the revival. Yes her 2016 character - a cheater, wrapped up in privilege, zero work ethic - was consistent with later seasons Rory but a lot of fans viewed that as a "phase" for her. (At least most people I talked to did, interested if others felt the same way). Her LDB shenanigans, stealing a yacht, dropping out of Yale was often criticized as being out of character and I prefer to remember sweet, studious, high school Rory as the "real" one. But the revival reinforcing her worst behaviour - ten years later - means it wasn't just a phase, it's who she really is. (Was she even seen reading an overly-large nerdy book in the whole revival? RIP Original Recipe Rory). 

Personally, that's why I found the LDB bit so sickening. I went in hoping she'd grown out of the LDB stuff and viewed it as dumb things she did when she was younger. But ASP framed the whole thing with nostalgia and longing - it was the happiest we saw Rory for the whole 6 hours. And was Colin buying anything in his power meant to be endearing not yuck? I don't know if other people felt the same way about Logan/LDB but that endless LDB sequence was the nail in the coffin for any Rory redemption imo. 

It feels ASP is still in denial about the disconnect between how she writes Rory vs. how the audience sees her.   

Edited December 1, 2016 by TimetravellingBW

[Rhodes]

17 hours ago, Deputy Deputy CoS said:

That is just too bad because they did. It is cannon weather ASP likes it or not. Season 7 happened.

I don't understand this constantly coming up. Lorelai herself confirms 7's existence in the therapy scene.

[cantbeflapped]

7 hours ago, hippielamb said:

t was *very* brief, blink and you miss it. When Lorelai is delivering papers, she goes to Kims Antiques and we see Lane thanking a customer. I love her all small scenes too. It was honest of a 30 something couple who have dreams but have to work to support their family.

Ha!  Forgot about this, but I loved it.  Didn't she say, "We appreciate your business" just like her mom?  I agree that Lane seemed quite happy.  

I'm enjoying the discussion of the article that Bumblebee Tights started.  I didn't read the article for a couple of reasons.  1) I loved the revival.  I'm not opposed to hearing from those who didn't love it, but I get that here, and probably better quality responses.  2). I feel like any time I read an article, it is written by someone who hasn't watched the show as carefully and thoughtfully as the commenters here....Logan manipulative?  Please.  Just reading Bumblebee Tight's reaction to the article makes me glad I didn't read it.  

[cantbeflapped]

Forgot to mention, I did read one article about GG that was linked in the Media thread here.  It had "Lauren Graham responds to revival backlash" in the title.  I was curious what the backlash was, so I clicked on it.  She seemed to be responding to negative reaction to some of the humor...things like the Paul gag, I think.  I thought it was very insightful of her to compare the shows humor to Donald Trump....not to be taken literally.  I think she hit the nail on the head.  That also helps explain why people have such wildly different reactions to it.  I think the whimsical bent of this show helps me excuse the most extreme behaviors of some of the characters (Luke getting into a physical altercation with young Dean in season one or even the crazy child servant thing going on at the pool in the revival...okay that one may have been too much...lol).  

[Lady Calypso]

2 hours ago, Rhodes said:

I don't understand this constantly coming up. Lorelai herself confirms 7's existence in the therapy scene.

In my opinion, I think ASP acknowledged what she might have had to acknowledge, but there's so much she left out, particularly in regards to Logan/Rory, that it brings up the question about season 7 in the revival. I do appreciate that she brought up Lorelai/Christopher's marriage, but it felt more like it was used as a snide joke than anything. 

But ASP has confirmed that there's one storyline in season 7 that she left out in the revival (I can't find the interview, so I hope you can take me for my well intentioned word!) and I strongly believe now it was the Logan plotline that progressed his character. There's a lot in the revival that does make it seem like GG ended after season 6 as well. The problem is that because ASP didn't write season 7 and has alluded to the fact that she may have not even watched it, we don't know how much she considers canon in her world. Obviously she considers the failed marriage canon, but is it because it provides a good one liner, or is it because that's what she pictured for Lorelai herself in her own season 7? 

So only parts of season 7 seem to exist in ASP's world. I think because she doesn't mention anything else in the revival about season 7 that it can be argued that everything in season 7 is canon and they didn't have time to mention Logan's failed endeavour in San Francisco, or Rory's Barack Obama campaign trail, or Luke's custody battle with April, but it also leaves a lot of questions as ASP has made it very clear on how she feels about season 7. 

[Melancholy]

I just operate as if S7 is compliant with the Revival. I've read about the backstage drama but as Kirk said, I'm not as interested in how the sausages are made- I just want to eat. Some of the Revival stuff makes more emotional sense to me with S7. Like I buy Lorelai being hesitant to marry if she failed at it before or Luke retreating from his wish for children with Lorelai if he lived out the split custody arrangement with April that he won in S7.

With Logan, it makes sense that he'd backslide. I liked Logan's S7 growth even though I thought it could get sappy and Marty Stuish. However his Revival failures add an interesting dimension. Logan did backslide into irresponsible playboy crap when he failed at business. He picked himself back up but only at the end of the season. He was just starting to look at figuring out how he'd support himself as his own man living as a mere mortal without mega bucks and privilege enabling him to do whatever he wants. It's plausible that Logan would come to hate that after a few months and revert to his father's way of doing things because that's how Logan keeps the billionaire lifestyle as an adult with an adults expectations instead of as a child. 

As for Rory, I'm sure there are a bunch of reporters who covered presidential primary campaigns for small outlets who later floundered in their careers. 

[Rhodes]

1 hour ago, Lady Calypso said:

In my opinion, I think ASP acknowledged what she might have had to acknowledge, but there's so much she left out, particularly in regards to Logan/Rory, that it brings up the question about season 7 in the revival. I do appreciate that she brought up Lorelai/Christopher's marriage, but it felt more like it was used as a snide joke than anything. 

But ASP has confirmed that there's one storyline in season 7 that she left out in the revival (I can't find the interview, so I hope you can take me for my well intentioned word!) and I strongly believe now it was the Logan plotline that progressed his character. There's a lot in the revival that does make it seem like GG ended after season 6 as well. The problem is that because ASP didn't write season 7 and has alluded to the fact that she may have not even watched it, we don't know how much she considers canon in her world. Obviously she considers the failed marriage canon, but is it because it provides a good one liner, or is it because that's what she pictured for Lorelai herself in her own season 7? 

So only parts of season 7 seem to exist in ASP's world. I think because she doesn't mention anything else in the revival about season 7 that it can be argued that everything in season 7 is canon and they didn't have time to mention Logan's failed endeavour in San Francisco, or Rory's Barack Obama campaign trail, or Luke's custody battle with April, but it also leaves a lot of questions as ASP has made it very clear on how she feels about season 7. 

Why would they need to mention all those things  to confirm its existence further though? That would just come off as forced considering it's been ten years since then and the show is picking up in the midst of several developments.

 

To further confirm S7's obvious  inclusion, Lane still  (unfortunately ) has her kids and Christopher refers to Gigi as a "full on Parisian" 

[absnow54]

That's how I feel. 10 years have passed since season 7, and I don't need them referencing specific events to acknowledge its existence. I do feel like there were huge blanks in establishing why the characters were where they were at the start of AYITL, but that didn't have as much to do with how season 7 ended, but the fact that 10 years had passed, which is a long time to be away from characters. Logan, for example, went out on his own at the end of season 7 on the cusp of the financial crisis. He had limited holdings and lacked the savvy to make the right decisions, I think it's entirely reasonable to see independent season 7 Logan make nice with the family business after facing such a tough economy. Gilmore Girl's lives in a whimsical bubble, so none of these hardships existed. The most glaring exclusion to me was Rory starting her career on an election trail (I'm sure Amy is most bitter about Rory following Obama when he was running against Hillary, than anything else that occurred in season 7) yet there was not a single mention of the huge media circus that was the election in 2016. I mean if Rory needed a reason t be disillusioned by the profession, there was plenty to juxtapose against, but since this was written and filmed so long ago, it was probably safer not to try to integrate current events.

[stillshimpy]

Quote

Ugh, ASP/Lorelai & Rory's disdain for social justice and human rights issues left a horrible taste in my mouth. Especially as Rory is a wanna-be foreign correspondent and features writer.

 

 

 

 

I don't think it's disdain for actual social justice issues but rather disdain for word policing and feelings of victimhood, if that makes sense?  Amy was always pretty obviously anti-war, pro-choice (those posters in Rory's dorm room) and had Lorelai watching the Daily Show before Jon Stewart was a household name.  I think she actually cares a lot about causes, she just has no patience for perceived slights.  

So that was my one attempt to defend her because her humor has not aged well and she's gone from edgy to flat-out mean in some of the ways she brings that up as being her point.  Sookie was a character throughout the series, she was also always a person of size.  That was never brought up.  Not even once was her weight alluded to, mentioned as a source of anything -- and it was so refreshing.  Sookie was a chef, loved food, was an adorable person on many levels.   They never implied that Sookie needed to fix anything about herself.  She never ate a salad, white being worried about skinnying down to please a dude, or because of societal pressure, none of the things that series seem to think is the point of having a heavier character.   Most writers can create the "fat best friend" cliche but ASP didn't do that.  Now there was the ungainly ballerina but they gave that same ballerina an awesome, blistering takedown of Rory in Die, Jerk.  

Which is why that bizarre attempt at humor with the guy at the pool went over like a trapdoor in a canoe, as far as I'm concerned.  She acknowledges "fat-shaming" as something both are aware of and then proceeds to do it.  Eh? Wha....? Huh??? 

She seemed to think she was making a point about how she wasn't going to give any faux-deference to issues that are current buzzwords and then went on to flout it.  It didn't go over well, I thought.  It was just snot-mean and unworthy of the show. 

But she seemed to be taking aim at political correctness that is, in its own way, a contributing factor to issues that really are very important.  If you have people using words like, "microaggression" in ways that have nothing to do with racism, that then diminishes the actual, outraged response to true inequality and mistreatment.   

I think her point is that we've sort of carpeted society with a "set phasers to outrage....go forth and find something over which to be outraged!  You aren't doing your duty as a person if you can't figure out why you're offended by someone else's approach to you.   It is kind of a nefarious thing, when people are outraged over everything, it sets up a Boy Who Cried Wolf kind of reaction to the stuff we should really be fucking plotzing over, you know? 

So I think that's what she was shooting for, it's just she picked one thing that was so stupidly cruel and immature to illustrate:   Rory and Lorelai being mean kids about a guy who, granted was not doing the speedo any favors, but it was a speedo.  Only Greek gods and overly buff actors (so all of Rory's boyfriends, I guess) can pull that off.  

In other news, someone elsewhere pointed out something that made me stare in horror:  Paul was Rory's longest relationship.   Oh, have mercy. 

Edited December 1, 2016 by stillshimpy

[dubbel zout]

12 hours ago, stillshimpy said:

Lane's dream just morphed into something different  that wasn't about being a rock star, and she seemed content, as well as happy. 

Exactly. I also think she and Zach don't hate his success as much as they say they do. I think it's just a way to stay a little rock 'n' roll. (But I totally buy Zach hating that he has to wear a tie, heh.) 

3 hours ago, cantbeflapped said:

 I thought it was very insightful of her to compare the shows humor to Donald Trump....not to be taken literally.  I think she hit the nail on the head.

If the Paul joke hadn't run throughout the four seasons, I could have laughed it off. But it didn't. And the fat-shaming in "Summer" was inexcusable no matter what. 

7 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

In other news, someone elsewhere pointed out something that made me stare in horror:  Paul was Rory's longest relationship.   Oh, have mercy. 

WHAT?!

[stillshimpy]

24 minutes ago, Rhodes said:

To further confirm S7's obvious  inclusion, Lane still  (unfortunately ) has her kids and Christopher refers to Gigi as a "full on Parisian" 

I have to agree, ASP is clearly not pretending season 7 didn't happen.  There's actually very few graceful ways to introduce "Hey, remember that time I proposed to you, thinking we were ready to start a lifetime commitment at the ripe old age of 22 and 23?  Man, did I feel like a chump.  Good times.  Good times.  Wonder if it had anything to do with my reversion to my former self?  Oh probably, I'm sure.  I took my shot, my ship sank and it hurt.  So I went back to being the guy who got hurt less....and that guy kind of sucked, good times, good times...only....not."   

Sure, they could have line-checked that when Rory said, "Are you really going to marry Odette?" but unless Logan's line is, "Well, you turned me down all those years ago, so ....yeah" which would then imply that he still wanted to marry her and the story didn't want to go there.  

Also, Amy did not watch season 7 but she did actually have someone tell her about the events of it.  The one character not brought up or appearing that I think that might have pertained to?  Anna.  April's mom.   That was the one character I felt like DR took to the back of beyond with no hope of return.  She was always kind of an ass but in season 7 she Spinal Tapped that up to 11. 

But Logan was already committed to Rory at the end of season 6, so even she wrote it that Logan's love for Rory was different from how he felt about other women.  Again, doesn't make that healthy or good....because....behold: yikes.  

I liked the story though.  I still like Rory.  Sure, most people I know cleared their phase of having truly tragic taste in men by the age of about 27 or so but I think ASP wanted to show Rory being made stronger by finding out she was pregnant.  

12 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

WHAT?!

I know, right?  When we meet him, they've been together for 2 years.  They don't break up until a year later.  That's three years.  Whatever friends with benefits thing Rory had with Logan, he was not deemed her boyfriend for that time period.   So Paul was her longest, official relationship.   

I, too, greeted that with a side of "What? OH GOD NO.  Sure, on a technicality but....yeah, yeah, fine.  Math wise but....FUCK." 

ETA: by the way, I apologize for having to edit forty thousand times.  My husband has been having to make calls to India for his work, and so he's been up and on the phone at 4 a.m. every day this week.  Apparently, lack of rest has broken my ability to hit something resembling proper structure in all of my first attempts.  And second.  Sometimes third.  I need more coffee.  In an IV. 

Edited December 1, 2016 by stillshimpy

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

4 hours ago, Rhodes said:

I don't understand this constantly coming up. Lorelai herself confirms 7's existence in the therapy scene.

I was responding to a poster who said the perception that  Logan might be gun shy becsuse  of Rory's rejection is fanwanking because ASP doesn't acknowledge season 7 happened.

[tennisgurl]

Looking back on it, I think I was a little harsh on Jess, saying he was still hung up on Rory. I actually wish we had spent more time with him, so we could have gotten more of his perspective. It just seems like ASP seemed to be setting Jess up as Rory's Luke, and Logan as her Christopher, even if those characters arent as much alike as that comparison might be. I do think they might have been implying a "Jess still misses Rory" thing when he looked at her, but I guess Pinning was a strong word. Jess is too cool to pine. 

I was perfectly happy with Lanes ending, even though we hardly got anything from her. Honestly, Hep Alien was probably never going to be huge. The music industry is ridiculously competitive, and, while they were certainly good, they weren't exactly the next Rolling Stones (they honestly sounded better this season than they ever did!). It would have been sadder to see Lane desperately trying to make it as a rock star while neglecting her kids and swearing she was going to make it big any day now. She seems perfectly happy working with her mom, her marriage to Zack seems like its going well, and she sounds happy to be raising her kids, plus she is still with her band, playing music for fun and to make some extra cash. Lane was never obsessed with being rich and famous anyway, she just loved music. She seems happy, and maybe its not fancy, but it works for her.

As for Rory and social justice, her lack of interest does not really surprise me. Rory paid some lip service to being interested in civic and social issues, but it never seemed like something she was super passionate about. Which, for another characters, thats fine, but for someone who saw themselves as a big shot journalist? Kind of an issue. 

[Bumblebee Tights]

13 hours ago, stillshimpy said:

Parenthood was a show that always tried to ram the notion that, if someone wasn't living their dream professionally, then they were just some huge sellout, so sure! Risk losing your house to pursue that dream, you only have a dependent family! Woo!! Dreams or bust! Do not settle.  

It was infuriating and kind of dangerous to suggest.  There are lots of ways to be happy.  Most people will dream a dream they will never achieve.  Almost every fanciful kid can dream up amazing adventures....and then you grow up and it isn't that your dreams die.  They change.  Your priorities change and what makes you happy, changes.   That's not selling out.  That's love.  When you're young and you're  dreaming,  you're dreaming for you.  Some people, that's how it always is and that's fantastic and equally valid as a fulfilling experience.   

Lane's dream just morphed into something different  that wasn't about being a rock star, and she seemed content, as well as happy. 

 

13 hours ago, hippielamb said:

The criticism about Rory being pregnant, and also Lane's choice to stay in Stars Hollow and be a mom bother me because there's this attitude of how much that will suck. Lane is happy, her life doesn't suck, especially when you compare it to Rory's story in these episodes. It's not what either one of them envisioned when they were kids but they can still have a happy life. There's this theme throughout the series of life doesn't always turn out how you expect, and it's a good thing. Luke says it in the diner, Lorelai has said it several times on the show, Rory and Lane's storylines show this. 

Yes. Thank you both. These are the feelings that have sort of been buzzing around in the back of my head since the revival, but I haven't been able to find a way to articulate them like this. I wonder if this is maybe getting to the heart of the issue of why so many seem to be unhappy with the ending, and the revival in general, and some of us are either not so unhappy or (like me) totally loved it? I think many people find this idea that dreams change and people move on and that you can't have everything you want in life, but you can still be pretty damn happy,( or hey, even happier and stronger in the knowledge that this is the truth) to be a harsh reality, and depressing. Not so, for me. I actually find this line of thinking to be born from wisdom and completely life affirming. Which I guess also explains to me why I found the revival, and Fall especially, to still have that warmth and love that I so loved about GG in its early years.

I will give you that maybe Rory is not at that place yet, (though Lane definitely is), but she seemed to be on her way there..and I was happy for it.

1 hour ago, stillshimpy said:

I don't think it's disdain for actual social justice issues but rather disdain for word policing and feelings of victimhood, if that makes sense?  Amy was always pretty obviously anti-war, pro-choice (those posters in Rory's dorm room) and had Lorelai watching the Daily Show before Jon Stewart was a household name.  I think she actually cares a lot about causes, she just has no patience for perceived slights.  . 

But she seemed to be taking aim at political correctness that is, in its own way, a contributing factor to issues that really are very important.  If you have people using words like, "microaggression" in ways that have nothing to do with racism, that then diminishes the actual, outraged response to true inequality and mistreatment.   

I think her point is that we've sort of carpeted society with a "set phasers to outrage....go forth and find something over which to be outraged!  You aren't doing your duty as a person if you can't figure out why you're offended by someone else's approach to you.   It is kind of a nefarious thing, when people are outraged over everything, it sets up a Boy Who Cried Wolf kind of reaction to the stuff we should really be fucking plotzing over, you know? 

 

In other news, someone elsewhere pointed out something that made me stare in horror:  Paul was Rory's longest relationship.   Oh, have mercy. 

Another big YES to all of this. Except the Paul as Rory's longest relationship. I'm going to go ahead and reject that reality.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Bumblebee Tights

[absnow54]

Looking back on it, I think I was a little harsh on Jess, saying he was still hung up on Rory. I actually wish we had spent more time with him, so we could have gotten more of his perspective. It just seems like ASP seemed to be setting Jess up as Rory's Luke, and Logan as her Christopher, even if those characters arent as much alike as that comparison might be. I do think they might have been implying a "Jess still misses Rory" thing when he looked at her, but I guess Pinning was a strong word. Jess is too cool to pine.

Yeah, since we got so few scenes with Jess, it's hard to interpret (hell, we got a ton of scenes with Logan, and his POV is hard to interpret!) My interpretation was that Rory had just gotten her spark back and Jess was some combination of (a)wistful at seeing a flash of the girl he was drawn to and inspired by to be a better person, (b)happy to play a part in Rory getting her life on track because he cares about her as a person, and (c)still attracted to the spark of Old!Rory. I do think that Jess is like Luke in that he keeps a relatively hard outer shell around most people, but once you're in, you're in forever, and while he's not actively dragging around his torch for Rory every place he goes, she's someone that he'll always care for.

[ShadowFacts]

14 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

Jess is too cool to pine. 

Way too cool.

14 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

As for Rory and social justice, her lack of interest does not really surprise me. Rory paid some lip service to being interested in civic and social issues, but it never seemed like something she was super passionate about. Which, for another characters, thats fine, but for someone who saw themselves as a big shot journalist? Kind of an issue. 

Yes, wasn't her idol Christiane Amanpour? 

[Melancholy]

I agree that Rory didn't seem particularly interested in politics or current international or national affairs in the OS. Comparing her to Paris, Paris was the one with a picture of Noam Chomsky in her room, who'd fiercely leap up because of the Yale students' apathy to prisoners in Myanmar, using her time at a networking breakfast with congress to harangue congress people about her policy POVs, who we saw watching CSPAN as opposed to defensively saying she liked it too after Paris said her love of CSPAN entitled her to the big Chilton speech, who dragged Rory to the International Affairs Club at Yale and intensely debated Israel v. Palestine on its own merits as opposed to just some project-y metaphor on her love life ala Rory, who was experiencing Ramadan through fasting as opposed to writing the cliche music download story and then switching to journalism connected with her courtship with Logan. 

In the series as a student, this made Rory look particularly correct and amiable. Like, she's celebrated for saying "I don't know what I'd do" when she's sitting on a panel of Ivy League newspaper editors asked specifically what they'd do if a federal judge ordered them to give up an anonymous source. Even though the panel, by its nature, required more engagement with the question beyond faux-humble punting. 

The Revival does show that what seemed proper in Student Rory is a disaster in the real world or at least in a profession like journalism is often hustling to be the voice in a cacophony that gets attention. Especially in today's media world. 

Edited December 1, 2016 by Melancholy

[stillshimpy]

Another big YES to all of this. Except the Paul as Rory's longest relationship. I'm going to go ahead and reject that reality.

I respect that as an entirely valid choice because, for real, what an entirely horrifying thought.   

[tennisgurl]

1 minute ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yes, wasn't her idol Christiane Amanpour? 

Yeah, she always made a big deal about how she wanted to be the next Christiane Amanpour. She even showed up in the series finale! I felt they were telling and not showing with a lot of Rory's supposed passion for world issues. She name dropped these famouse people, but we never really saw HER interest, beyond reading about them. 

[cuddlingcrowley]

13 hours ago, pennben said:

I thought it interesting that a NYT tv critic posited on twitter that a fan (perhaps one referred to as a casual fan) of the show generally enjoyed the revival, but a super fan did not.  That's probably far too general, but likely approaches the mark.  

Ha, I very much disagree with that statement. From what I've seen, the most passionate criticisms are things people didn't like in the original show in the first place that carried over or got enhanced in the revival. Be it the girls' personalities/flaws, be it ASP's inability handling social issues. The revival stayed very true to the flavor of Gilmore Girls. The good and the bad. I'd find it hard to call superfans those who felt the original show didn't get changed enough to enjoy the revival.

[dubbel zout]

2 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

Yes, wasn't her idol Christiane Amanpour? 

Yep, and she had a birthday-dream cuddle with Madeleine Albright.

[stillshimpy]

Gosh, I've been a fan of this show for so long and I liked the revival.  At the risk of sounding like a complete goober, for the first episode, I couldn't watch more than 10 minutes at a time of the first episode because I was just so happy to have the show back.  I'd watch ten minutes, then get up and walk around the house, sort of savoring what had just happened.  

My husband was so delighted with how happy it was obviously making me, he kept coming into the living room to watch me, watch the show.  

It's not that I think it was perfect, it wasn't, but it was the most viewing fun I have had in years...and years. 

[shron17]

15 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

I'd watch ten minutes, then get up and walk around the house, sort of savoring what had just happened.  

I've had loved to savor it more but was on a deadline.  Had to leave the house mid morning for a family thing so set the alarm for 3 am and watched pretty much straight through.  It seemed like a better option than having to leave before I was finished!