Skip to main content

"Gilmore Girls": What a Difference a Week Makes

We were thisclose to recapturing the wit, energy, and spark of Gilmore Girls with the last few episodes, penned by the ever-wonderful show's creator, Amy Sherman Palladino. The first half of the season--which saw a lack of any episodes written by Amy or her writer-producer husband Daniel Palladino--devolved into a soppy mess wherein Rory and Lorelai went their separate ways after a fanastic and brilliant season finale. While the concept behind the jaw-dropping split made sense (with Rory dropping out of Yale, moving out of Lorelai's house, and moving in with grandparents-from-hell Richard and Emily), the execution was extremely flawed to say the least... especially without Amy and Daniel at the helm.

So imagine my excitement when we had two back-to-back brand new episodes written by Amy herself! We got back the Gilmore Girls of yesteryear--snappy repartee, the best ever Friday night dinner with Emily and Richard, the Gilmore girls reuniting, Rory moving in with Paris and returning to Yale, true and real emotional connections between my beloved characters. Even the ridiculous plotline with Luke discovering he had a twelve-year-old daughter suddenly made sense and took on new dimensions and depth. I was in heaven, envisioning a brilliant second half of a lackluster season...

And then I watched last night's episode. And was sucked back to earth.

It wasn't...bad. It just wasn't very good, especially coming off Amy's two episodes. The scenes seemed awkward, the dialogue stilted and overwritten, the Michel plotline mind-bogglingly dull and out-of-place (I'm sure Yanic has a certain number of episodes committment and this was counting towards that after not being seen for a while). Plus, Rory had helmet head. Not a good look for the girl. Especially, when she's been looking so gorgeous of late.

The lesson: an Amy-and-Daniel-free Gilmore Girls is not a Good Thing. With the show a near lock to return next season on the new CW network, I can only hope that they renew their executive producer deals and bring them on board for next season (and any subsequent ones). I'm sad for the loss of the new show they'd been working on (reportedly a Philadelphia Story-esque romantic dramedy), but hope this means that they can stay on Gilmore Girls at least for a little while longer.

Fortunately, I checked my TiVo as soon as the episode ended to see who had written next week's episode... and was relieved to see it was written by Daniel. I breathe a sigh of relief. While we never know what life may bring us next, at least I know I'm in store for a top-notch episode of Gilmore Girls next week.

What a difference a week makes.

Gilmore Girls airs Tuesday evenings at 8 pm on the WB (for now, anyway).
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
I agree. A Gilmore episode without Amy or Daniel is like cereal without milk...dry and flakey. I feel very conflicted about next season. I love Gilmore Girls and am thrilled that is is returning but if Amy and/or Daniel are not at the helm, is there really any point? I have seen too many of my favorite shows suffer horrible deaths whilst their creators have moved on to other things ("Alias") or have been less involved ("Buffy") and I just don't know if I can handle any more. For now I will just keep my fingers crossed that Amy and Daniel defy showrunner burn-out for one more year and give us another sparkling season of Gilmore Girls to enjoy.
2/09/2006
Jace Lacob said…
Hopefully, things won't go the way of "Alias" or "Buffy" with "Gilmore Girls." (At least with J.J. leaving Alias, we got LOST and--albeit for a brief time--Joss was able to bring us Firefly when he left Buffy.) But there's something sad about a show after the creator/showrunner has left the building and turned the lights off on their creation. Things always seem a little smaller, and a little less bright, and certainly a little bit sad. And we don't want our Gilmore Girls to be sad, now do we?
2/09/2006
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Have a Burning Question for Team Darlton, Matthew Fox, Evangeline Lilly, or Michael Emerson?

Lost fans: you don't have to make your way to the island via Ajira Airways in order to ask a question of the creative team or the series' stars. Televisionary is taking questions from fans to put to Lost 's executive producers/showrunners Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse and stars Matthew Fox ("Jack Shephard"), Evangeline Lilly ("Kate Austen"), and Michael Emerson ("Benjamin Linus") for a series of on-camera interviews taking place this weekend. If you have a specific question for any of the above producers or actors from Lost , please leave it in the comments section below . I'll be accepting questions until midnight PT tonight and, while I can't promise I'll be able to ask any specific inquiry due to the brevity of these on-camera interviews, I am looking for some insightful and thought-provoking questions to add to the mix. So who knows: your burning question might get asked after all.
253 comments
Continue reading full story...

What's Done is Done: The Eternal Struggle Between Good and Evil on the Season Finale of "Lost"

Every story begins with thread. It's up to the storyteller to determine just how much they need to parcel out, what pattern they're making, and when to cut it short and tie it off. With last night's penultimate season finale of Lost ("The Incident, Parts One and Two"), written by Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse, we began to see the pattern that Lindelof and Cuse have been designing towards the last five seasons of this serpentine series. And it was only fitting that the two-hour finale, which pushes us on the road to the final season of Lost , should begin with thread, a loom, and a tapestry. Would Jack follow through on his plan to detonate the island and therefore reset their lives aboard Oceanic Flight 815 ? Why did Locke want to kill Jacob? What caused The Incident? What was in the box and just what lies in the shadow of the statue? We got the answers to these in a two-hour season finale that didn't quite pack the same emotional wallop of previous season
135 comments
Continue reading full story...

In Defense of Downton Abbey (Or, Don't Believe Everything You Read)

The proof of the pudding, as they say, is in the eating. Which means, if I can get on my soapbox for a minute, that in order to judge something, one ought to experience it first hand. One can't know how the pudding has turned out until one actually tastes it. I was asked last week--while I was on vacation with my wife--for an interview by a journalist from The Daily Mail, who got in touch to talk to me about PBS' upcoming launch of ITV's period drama Downton Abbey , which stars Hugh Bonneville, Dame Maggie Smith, Dan Stevens, Elizabeth McGovern, and a host of others. (It launches on Sunday evening as part of PBS' Masterpiece Classic ; my advance review of the first season can be read here , while my interview with Downton Abbey creator Julian Fellowes and stars Dan Stevens and Hugh Bonneville can be read here .) Normally, I would have refused, just based on the fact that I was traveling and wasn't working, but I love Downton Abbey and am so enchanted with the proj
55 comments
Continue reading full story...