Appearance
photo 2 options
  • Logo

    Uploading…
    Photo Uploaded
    Error!
  • Footer Logo

    Uploading…
    Photo Uploaded
    Error!
color 6 options

Success!

Your settings have been saved.

Television PopWrapped | Television

Why I Don't Want More Gilmore Girls

Sydney Lanier Burke | PopWrapped Author

Sydney Lanier Burke

03/14/2017 12:55 pm
PopWrapped | Television
Why I Don't Want More Gilmore Girls | Gilmore
Media Courtesy of Saeed Adyani/Netflix

Mutters to self: Take a deep breath.

I'm about to let you in on a secret. It might make you hate me.

I don't think we should get any more episodes of The Gilmore Girls.

I'm bracing for impact.

My love for all things Lorelai, Rory, and even Emily has been well-documented through the years. Back in November, when the new episodes of A Year in the Life dropped, I wrote about 12,000 words on the Girls in a span of five days. (Any of you who have written a thesis before will understand what I mean.) I even swore back then I'd be back for more. It's certainly not for a lack of love that I say this.

Netflix announced last week that they are starting talks on bringing the revival back for another run. It's still in will-they-won't-they territory, but I think it's more like should-they-shouldn't-they.

I just don't think we need more. Hear me out...

They had too much money

Gilmore

Netflix had a lot of faith in The Gilmore Girls, and it probably paid off for them. I learned I knew a lot more Gilmore fans than I thought when I saw them all fangirling (and fanboying!) all over Facebook and Twitter. Some countries reported brief outages when their servers were overwhelmed with viewers. That sounds like a win-win.

Only it didn't feel so much like our old Gilmore Girls. It was now in HD, and, while I'd rarely turn my nose up at improved resolutions, it lost the soft edges that made Stars Hollow so cozy. They had even more modern music, which was a staple of the series, but it took over and meant that we lost our la-las -- though it could have been a stylistic choice for their big return, it didn't work for me because we waited nearly SIX HOURS to feel their warm embrace.

And the biggest issue with the money from Netflix that they could just throw around was (you probably guessed it): The Life and Death Brigade. I've always had a love-hate relationship with the LDB. They were always poncey and overly privileged, but, at the start, they were also fun. They had that ridiculous camping trip where they didn't use certain letters and jumped from a high platform with umbrellas just to feel like they were cheating death. They were all secret society-y, and it was amusing to watch Rory try to unfold it all. Then, they somehow narrowed their ranks from many dozen to four or five, and Rory was their queen. When we saw them in A Year in the Life, I thought it was a dream sequence. Then I hoped it was a dream sequence. Then I just wanted it over.

Rory was struggling with her own ineptitude. She had been built up for so many years as being perfect and able to do anything, and that just wasn't the truth. It was nice to see that things weren't just being handed to her ... until Logan literally handed her the key to a house to help her avoid reality for even longer. The LDB break into Doose's Market just because they can. They buy an underground dance club just to spite the regulars. This sequence was excess defined, and I would have loved to see what Amy Sherman-Palladino would have done with more constraints. How to make the ultra wealthy look excessive when you haven't got money -- now that's a writerly challenge!

We finally ended where ASP wanted

 Gilmore

For years, Amy Sherman-Palladino talked about the 'final four words' of HER Gilmore Girls. She never got to tell the ending story that she had intended. Season 7 went a little off the rails without her direction -- though I can't say she always thought things through well (coughAPRILcough).

Still, she knew her endgame, and, with A Year in the Life, she got us there. More or less. She wanted Rory pregnant (tick). Likely by Logan (presumptive tick). All three Gilmore girls were on friendly speaking terms (tick). Even Jess and Luke were on good terms, helping each other deal with emotions and all that nonsense (tick). And, after the first season, she wanted Luke and Lorelai together (tick). 

Why mess with a good thing?

Luke and Lorelai are in a good place

Gilmore

Speaking of...

Luke isn't perfect. He made some viciously inappropriate comments throughout the series. He appears to be at least a little homophobic. He thinks breastfeeding mamas should stay home (come at me, bro.). He didn't have the slightest clue how to grieve in a way that didn't alienate everyone around him. He had a temper and hid things from those he loved, often for no reason at all.

And still, he brought out the best in Lorelai. He calmed her crazy nature. He learned how to be selfless for her. Yeah, she took advantage of him, but she loved the crap out of him.

The last we saw of them, they were getting MARRIED. Imagine all the star-eyed emojis here in a row. The last thing I want to see is more strife put between them, especially just for the sake of more screen time. It's 100% happily ever after for these two, as far as I'm concerned.

We got to see Rory fail

 Gilmore

While I may have always identified with Rory in the original series, the thing that bothered me was that she always landed on her feet. Her struggles were constantly undermined by the fact that someone was there to bail her out (sometimes literally). She always had Lorelai, her grandparents, Logan, Paris ... there was a revolving door for who would save Rory, and she never fully appreciated them.

In A Year in the Life, Rory didn't have it all together. She fell apart. It stung to watch, especially in a what-am-I-doing-with-my-own-life sort of way. But it felt more realistic than anything we'd seen of her before.

Rory isn't the best at everything. In fact, she's not even all that good. But, just like when the town rallies behind her, she's our gal. When she's jobless, we'll find something to fill her time (though maybe not her pockets). When she gives a not-so-great speech at commencement, we'll clap (but mostly because she made Luke cry).

What I don't want to see is her stumbling around being a mum. We got that with Lorelai; she didn't know what she was doing, but she came up swinging. Either Rory will magically have herself together or she will be relying on the kindness of everyone around her to pick up the pieces of her pregnancy -- and she's not the bootstraps kind of girl like she thinks she is (and like Lorelai actually is). I don't really want to see her as Supermum or a parenting failure.

I don't want to see Logan win

Gilmore 

He's handsome, okay. He's rich, sure. He's also smarmy and selfish. You know he's probably the father of Rory's baby. Logan's always wanted an excuse to be with Rory, and having a baby with her means they're linked. 

You can say that, with all the single parent talk Rory was doing -- especially going to visit Christopher -- that she doesn't intend to keep Logan around. But you have to remember that Lorelai cut Christopher completely out of her decision-making processes and her life in general, and he was still. always. there. He found a way to be around when we were all "Oh, how lovely would it be if Lorelai and Christopher were together?!" He was still there when it was "Christopher, get your act together and realise what you've got with Lorelai." He remained even when it was "Christopher, seriously, GTFO."

Logan will always be there. He might leave Odette for Rory. He might try to still keep her on the side. He might want to have two families and pretend everything is perfect in public.

Ugh. #TeamJess.

We won't see Sookie again

Gilmore 

You know it's true.

 

Okay, I'd still watch more Gilmore Girls. But I wouldn't like it.


Share


Are you sure you want to delete this?

ConfirmCancel