Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Day Six!! You've Been GILMOREd!! Jordon Nardino Pens The 1st GIRLS of Sweeps!!

FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! by The Doob	Feb 7th, 2006 12:46:26 AM
One of the most well written shows on TV. Hope it survives the CW debacle...
I'm in love... by Darth Melkor	Feb 7th, 2006 01:02:37 AM
...with Alexis Bledel. Okay, I admitted it. :)
Second damn it by JediShaft	Feb 7th, 2006 01:03:47 AM

Who doesn't love Alexis Bledel? by JediShaft	Feb 7th, 2006 01:05:41 AM
Seriously, if you're out therre gett help.
Fuck this show by Negator76	Feb 7th, 2006 01:21:33 AM
Seriously, shut the fuck up, Herc. This show is the most goddamned annoying thing since MTV's 'Kennedy'. Yes, it's THAT annoying. Everyone talks in the same cutesy, oh-how-pop-culture-referencing -cute-I-am-rat-a-tat banter. And then they have BIG PROBLEMS like, taking a year off from Yale! Prematurely spilling the beans about their perfect wedding! Minor problems renovating their perfect house that they can easily afford to joke about! How droll. Mother and Daughter are BOTH SO FUCKING HOT, how annoying a show must this be to make me hate them? VERY FUCKING ANNOYING!
Love the show by Biowolf	Feb 7th, 2006 01:36:31 AM
Hope it survives the move to CW.
I don't get it. by The Selecter	Feb 7th, 2006 01:56:54 AM
GG talkbacks that nobody here really cares about, yet none for the The Sheild? If this is an attempt to draw in a different demographic, it ain't workin'. For the record, I think GG is actually a pretty good show, but not really worth chatting about afterward.
Negator? Negator? FUCK YOU! by LordEnigma	Feb 7th, 2006 02:10:00 AM
God bless Landau! Nevertheless, Negator, the point of the show and the characters have always been about being as realitic as possible, but doing so in the most interesting way. If you think they all talk alike, then listen to tbe man from Philly talk to the gal Virginia and the chick from Houston, and notice the difference in tone and inflection. You just dont get it. Good for you, but again I respond with what Legosi said about Karloff. That aside, the Shield, easily, demonstrates where Shawn Ryan comes from. Instead of Demons and Vampires, he has created the Mackayverse. Where fucked up shit happens, so heinous, and out of fucking sorts. This show has become a fucking fantasy Cop series. I love it, and even want Mackay to out think Cavanaugh. Still does not change the fact, that Shawn Ryan has gone out there. One last thing about GIlmore Girls. The last name Nardini. Comes from one of ASP's old characters on another show she wrote, and I think created.
Crap...No Inviso-Text to copy this week by SwampyFox	Feb 7th, 2006 05:26:26 AM
Darn.
Gravitas. by paulh	Feb 7th, 2006 06:16:03 AM
It's not like there's an exclusive patent on 24 being the only show with that, right? There'll be a valentine's day episode next week, but none on the 21st (that's when women's figure skating begins at the Winter Olympics).
Re:Who doesn't love Alexis Bledel? by Bauers_Bitch	Feb 7th, 2006 07:22:31 AM
I personally don't think she's all that hot. I actully think she's kind of gangly and lanky. I think Elisha Cuthbert is way hotter.
I still can't believe they killed Johnathan Kent by Bauers_Bitch	Feb 7th, 2006 07:25:47 AM
Fuck you just know some fucking Smallville loving @qu@f@g queer is going to post here I'm just beating them to the punch. SMALLVILLE SUCKS YOU FAGS
As Realistic as Possible? by JustBen	Feb 7th, 2006 08:28:40 AM
You've got to be kidding me. I don't agree with Negator, but give me a break. What makes this show entertaining is precisely because the characters are non-realistic. They're more clever and they think faster on their feet than real people. That's what makes the give-and-take interesting to watch.
Alexis Bledel by Itchy	Feb 7th, 2006 09:17:20 AM
Decent looking in Gilmore Girls, but that annoying prattle is insufferable. However, she looked hot as hell as that skank whore in Sin City. Imagine that.
I wish I knew people who talked like they do on GG by drjohnnyfever	Feb 7th, 2006 05:40:14 PM
All the people I know in real life are fucking stupid.
Political Jibes On GG by Roboteer	Feb 7th, 2006 05:58:15 PM
No matter what side of the political spectrum, these thankfully rare poitical smirks come from, they stop the show dead in its tracks whenever they appear. They are all ultra left wing, but suppose they were not... Loralei:"Honey, have you picked up your results at the clinic yet?" Rory: "I don't want to. They kill babies there and that's mean." Whenever it happens we're instantly aware this isn't the characters (who are decidedly unpolitical) talking, but the writers. And what about these two being the smartest girls in the room? These mini-editorials are so far out and off the mainstream, it calls into question how smart they are and worse, reminds us they're just reciting someone else's lines. I hope it's worth a childish yuk 'sticking it to the man', because they're hurting the show and possibly turning off viewers because of it. Like the classless Jimmy Carter at Mrs. King's funeral today, there's a time and place for political posturing, and this ain't it.
Roboteer... by Negator76	Feb 7th, 2006 07:24:02 PM
Did you just call Jimmy Carter 'classless'? Hmmm. Yeah, what an opportunistic motherfucker, building homes for the homeless and serving as diplomatic envoy while also publishing well-regarded historical novels, well after there's any political/monetary need for him to do so. How dare he remind people that the Kings' legacy is a POLITICAL one. George Bush is so classy... speaking words of respect for a dead woman, apolitical words that have nothing to do with policy. Does it occur to you that he has everything to gain by depoliticizing the legacy of Coretta King, and everything to lose by speaking substantively of his actual policy decisions? No. It's a lot easier to agree with people and appear to be their ally after they're dead, idn't it? But George W. is too fine a man to exploit tragedy for political gain. That would never, ever, ever, september, eleventh, republican convention, in MY GODDAMNED CITY, WHICH HE'S FUCKED OVER IN SECURITY AND RECOVERY AID, THE CITY THAT SUFFERED THE MOST, THAT HATES HIS FUCKING GUTS... Nope. Dubya's wayyyyyyy too classy to step over the dead bodies of the citizenry to push through another tax cut or eviscerate the constitution. But seriously, I understand your sensitivity towards abortion jokes in Gilmore Girls. No one has more of a right to be offended than you, the obvious victim of a botched wire-hanger job. God bless your little malformed head.
Negator 76 by Biowolf	Feb 8th, 2006 12:35:47 AM
Wow. Bitter, much?
Biowolf.... by Negator76	Feb 8th, 2006 01:31:16 AM
What are you doing here? Don't you have an insanely irritating show to jerk off to?
I Vote Negator76 Most Likely to go Postal by Darkfyre	Feb 8th, 2006 10:55:34 AM
Is there anything in his life he feels good about? Doesn't the prospect of a Hillary win in '08 make you happy? And then all our problems will be solved!
Gilmore Girls reminds me of... by veritasses	Feb 8th, 2006 01:51:23 PM
...a university drama club production of some theatre major's final project. From the snappy/rhythmic yet amateurish dialog that no where near approaches the brilliance of Mamet's works, the unnecessary forced inclusion of pop culture references that screams of writers trying way too hard to be cute, to the sometimes painfully bad delivery of said pseudo-Mamet-ish dialog by what might otherwise be likeable actors/characters had they been given better material, to the choice of artificial lighting schemes of the sets reminiscent of a stage show etc. I'm not saying GG is the worst show on tv or that it's always awful. In actuality ,it's not all bad or always bad. It's certainly better then some of the really bad crap on TV (like that joke of a show Commander in Chief or the way over-rated Grey's Anatomy). But it's almost like the creators are deliberately trying to make the show annoying... annoying stories, annoying dialog, annoying characters (the most annoying being the over-weight inn keeper woman) etc and doing a really good job at it. It's too bad because I think there's potential for that show. Some obvious talent buried deep within all those layers of annoying crap. I'll probably still tune in once in a while but it doesn't achieve required watching status for me like BSG, House, 24 and Lost do.
Bitch, bitch, moan, moan by the maven	Feb 8th, 2006 02:54:53 PM
I admit "Gilmore Girls" doesn't have a lot of blood or aliens who blow things up real good but I'm glad Herc has the cajones to regularly include it on a site that is mostly about things getting ray gunned. And thanks to Harry, et al, for letting him do so. GG is great teevee. If more genre shows had writing this wonderful we might have more genre shows on and us fanboys might even get more respect. I agree with the TBer above who said the GG characters aren't meant to be realistic and neither is their dialogue. The say things we all wish we had thought to say at the right moment, and every line spoken has the potential to have huge ramifications even two or three episodes down the line. It's "Twin Peaks" without the forced weirdness, "Northern Exposure" with a lower level of cutesy eccentricity, and "The X-Files" without the final seven seasons. The only complaints I have about it right now are too few scenes with Lorelia and Rory together and too many repeats this season. Otherwise, where it leads, I will follow. (Well, OK, Kirk finding a ray gun wouldn't hurt. Just kidding.)
GG criticism clarifications (hopefully) by veritasses	Feb 8th, 2006 03:32:03 PM
I can see how people find GG go be charming. For the most part, all the charcters are "sweet" and/or are people that have a true heart and genuinely care about other people but have their own flaws and flaws in their relationships. And a series that's simply about relationships (as opposed to conspiracies and outlandish scifi/fantasy/action plots) can be refreshing. Regarding the dialog/characters not meant to be realistic (maybe for "artistic" reasons) I don't have a problem with that, but if they're going to take that tact with their material, then they need to make it really really good dialog/characters otherwise it just comes off as being amaturish or even pretentious. I can see how the writers are trying hard to produce good dialog/characters but their efforts just don't make the grade for me and their results come off more being annoying then anything else. Their snappy "cute" dialog just doesn't work for me. The over the top efforts go beyond "art" and land in the area of annoying. And these characters aren't meant to be annoying, they're meant to be nice and sweet, which is just a shame. Heavens knows that shows like 24 have annoying characters, unrealistic circumstances/setups, etc but there's sort of an implicit understanding that the characters that are annoying are meant to be annoying and the unrealistic circumstances are meant to be that way because we know that 24 is meant to be nothing more than a cheezy soap opera. And the creators of 24 know how to do cheezy soap opera pretty well. The creators of GG need to get out of their drama school artsy mentality trying too hard to achieve more then they are capable of and just tell a good story about relationships and good characters and they'd have a show that would get me coming back for more.
I get your point veritasses but respecfully disagree by the maven	Feb 8th, 2006 06:41:26 PM
I'm afraid if you took away the "snappy 'cute' dialog" and the "drama school artsy mentality" from GG, we'd be left with nothing but another dopey WB (too early to start calling it CW?) sudser and god -- or whoever's in charge -- knows we don't need another one of those. And actually, I kind of wish "24" would lay off its soap opera tendencies and try doing more taut, gritty suspense plots that would lend themselves better to the show. As much as I like Keifer Sutherland in the part, he said himself a few years ago that it would probably be more realistic to kill Bauer off and have someone else take over the lead. It may be time to do that and give the series a reboot. Like I said, I really like Sutherland in this part but it would probably help the show. Nothing personal to all you diehard "24" fans out there.
Likewise maven by veritasses	Feb 8th, 2006 09:48:11 PM
Taste/preference is subjective. I get your point too but I think we can just agree to disagree. No harm done. I actually like reading different perspectives then my own. It's what makes these Talkbacks interesting. My point with GG isn't necessarily that they should completely get rid of the cute/snappy dialog or some of the drama school-ish flavor, rather I think maybe if they just tone it down a few notches and didn't feel compelled to always squeeze in a dozen pop culture refrences every scene or try too hard to make the dialog "smart" rather than "natural" they'd have a really good show. I think (for the most part) that there's enough talent already associated with the show to create a smart, unique, "snappy" (and even "artsy") enjoyable show. I do think 24 has _plenty_ of area's which can be improved as well (like some of the sloppy/lazy plot arcs particularly of previous seasons) but unlike GG, I enjoy 24 enough the way it is to keep watching it week after week. The really stupid things the characters do and say, the wildly unrealistic plot points somehow make 24 addicting. I suppose it's because these soap opera qualities are skillfully held together by the good qualities of the show like the pacing, tragically flawed characters, difficult moral/ethical dilemas, clear cut "good vs evil" battles, inventive twists, satisfying conflict/resolutions, great cliff hangers etc. In some ways, I think the "bad" things about 24 (like really stupid characters) make it more enjoyable to watch since they provide emotional anchor points where I (ahem, I mean fans) can throw popcorn at the TV and yell things like "Logan you dumbass, Walt's clearly playing you like the fool you are". It makes me wonder what stupid bumbling thing Pres Logan's going to do next. 24 doesn't claim to be or try to be anything more than popcorn tv. On the other hand, while I clearly have no idea what the intentions of the creators of GG are, the show comes across (to me anyway) as trying too hard to win an Emmy every show with it's clever, snappy, artsy dialog. I think in some ways, they're relying on every line being smart and witty, as if the cleverness is the defining characteristic of the show. If they just stuck to the basics of good characters and a good story and left it alone with just that, they wouldn't have to rely so heavily on being "smart". I think there are enough good characters and interesting relationships in GG to prevent it from becoming a generic WB show. The writers of GG are clearly talented, but I just don't think they're _that_ talented and I don't think they (along with the actors delivering the dialog) are capable of pulling off what they're trying to accomplish. Oh, and I don't have any emotional attachment to the Bauer character. I do like Kiefer in this role and I do like the character but I do agree that killing him off (probably in a tragic/heroic way) and starting over would be good for the show. Maybe have a small team of competent agents tackling the world's problems a-la the old Mission Impossible series instead of the Bauer-Army-Of-One approach.
Looks like I struck a nerve by Biowolf	Feb 9th, 2006 12:48:59 AM

This will be my final word. Honest. No, really. by the maven	Feb 9th, 2006 05:10:42 AM
Veritasses, I think it
Probably my final word too but... by veritasses	Feb 9th, 2006 11:26:12 AM
...I can't promise anything since I have a bad habit of not being able to shut up ;) I can certainly understand why people love GG. Like I've mentioned above, the show isn't annoying all the time and there're definately good, strong characters and talented people working on that show. It's definitely not one of those mass produced god awful "paint by numbers" shows written by jaded or talentless writers who just don't have a clue. GG definately has charm and this is going to sound wierd but while I find the show annoying for the most part, I don't hate it by any means and I do respect it in many ways. It's not something I would watch religiously but I do like it enough to tune in once in a while. Having praised GG to the extent that I can, I still wish the show lost the points that I find annoying and I hope some of the really annoying characters get yanked off the show (like Rory's friend who lost the job as editor at the paper, the umm... "larger" woman who cooks for the inn and maybe 2 or 3 others... all super annoying to me) I do like Jack as the only guy on the show with balls or a brain and who everyone from the Pres down to the lowset level pion take orders from but I think 5 years of that is enough. If they're ever going to remake the show I think a completely new take would be refreshing. If not the MI style team approach, maybe have two 24 shows running at the same time with two or more "Jack-Types" each being the main protagonist of their own show. The kicker being each protagnoist "Jack" is living through the same day at the same time only they're viewing it from a completely different perspective. Like the show on Monday night could be the "Good Jack" and on Tuesday they would show the exact same hour of the exact same day except viewed from the "Evil Jack's" point of view with the season finales culminating in the two (or more if people like things complicated) "Jacks" facing off. A comparison between 24 and GG does seem like the most unlikely paring one could ever imagine :) Regarding GG being a chick show, I know the show's intented audience and demographics and what not would classify GG as a chick show, but I prefer to categorize them simply as good shows and bad shows - or probably more accurately shows that I like and watch and shows that I don't like and don't watch :)
An Interesting Debate.... by Flem_Snopes	Feb 9th, 2006 03:53:00 PM
...going on above me about two shows that have slipped, but that I still watch pretty much religiously. 24 is suffering from full-on rehash syndrome. It's pretty good rehash, but I'm starting to get a little sick of the aroma. As for Gilmore Girls, I thought it hit its absolute peak the last fifteen minutes of season--was it four?--where Lorelai found out Rory had lost her virginity. I can go with the show's filppancy and unreality, really I think they're trying for an updated homage to the screwball comedy and since I didn't live back in the thirties I don't know if culturally they are spot on or not, but the show always seems to fail when it gets into a "heavy" arc that isn't related to family. The tensions between the elder Gilmores and Lorelai always carried weight. But that's kind of gone away. I liked the Asian tension between mother and daughter. That's gone away, too (and I thought they could have made it even a little heavier). Even the Luke's daughter thing might work if they handle it right. But the forementioned scene when Lorelai confronted Rory was the ultimate. Lauren Graham really sold that scene and it still had a little wiff of the smartass flavor the show is noted for. This was no small feat--that character is pretty liberal and the writers did a good job of not making her seem hypocrital in her outrage. In some ways, I think the show has never recovered from that high point. Everything seems to pale in comparison. I hate the Chris character. Him coming into money seems forced. I thought Rory leaving Yale was a dumb plot point, although I will say that her transformation from goody-goody to directionless was pulled off pretty well. But I just think that character doesn't work well out of the college environment. I may be getting a little tired of the snappy banter, too, it HAS been five years. But the thing about GG is even when it fails it has a tone and rhythm that you find no where else on the vast wasteland. And the same can be said for 24. Which is why I still watch both those shows.
Nicely stated Flem_Snopes by veritasses	Feb 9th, 2006 07:08:26 PM
I don't know enough about GG history to comment on the show's peak but from what I remember from the eariler seasons, I do think the relationships/characters/plots /etc were better, fresher, real back then. All the other stuff you mention were well put too. I think so far, this season of 24 has done an admirable job of injecting some quality back into the show that was lost during seasons 2, 3 & 4. The plots are tighter and are resolved and transition into new directions quickly instead of milking a lame idea for all it's worth and dragging it on and on for weeks on end. They also don't go off on needless tangents and dwell on the minor plot points/relationships as much as they have in the past and they seem to be sticking to making sure everything is focused on helping move the show forward. Getting rid of some of the old characters right in the first few minutes was a nice and unexpected touch and I also like the introduction of Samwise Gamgee. However, I'm a little worried that they decided to bring back Kim Bauer. That could be the beginning of things going down hill.
Aww, heck, I can't shut up either by the maven	Feb 9th, 2006 07:17:25 PM
Hiya, Flem (now there
The Thing No One Mentions by Anton_Sirius	Feb 9th, 2006 08:17:08 PM
The real, secret strength of GG is how well it's plotted. Things that seemed like throwaway lines from a nothing episode in Season 2 suddenly get revealed as ominous foreshadowing in Season 5. The show has a commitment to continuity that 99% of the rest of the shows out ther would do well to try and keep up with. If you need a geekly reference for it, the Gilmore Girls is the closest thing to Claremont's first run on the X-Men we might ever see...
GG Continuity by veritasses	Feb 9th, 2006 09:47:34 PM
Well I'm certainly entirely unqualified to talk about any GG continuity. But I do enjoy (those rare) shows (of which I would count "Lost") that are able to maintain such a tight weave throughout the series. It's a shame I couldn't really get past being annoyed with the show to watch it consistantly and catch on to the continuity bits. Just a thought but it might be cool to see Lorelai go to Yale with Rory (I'm guessing Lorelai never went to colleg?) to get some more Gilmore relationship story arcs. Maven, I never did get into Northern Exposure. I know it was critically acclaimed and had a strong niche following so I'm not sure why but it could be because it was on before I had a VCR :). I'm not big on stuff from the 30's either but I do remember seeing a lot of Marx Brothers/Laure&Hardy etc back when I was a kid. Those are true classics. Well, enough GG talk for this week. I think I'll go troll some other nook of the web :)
How come this show don't have CRACK BABIES? by KAWS	Feb 9th, 2006 11:55:59 PM
I'd relate more to the show if it had some Crack Babies, or perhaps people with rotten teeth. Why is it that everyone is so damn happy all the time, a few people need to get raped by a crazy mexican, so they can wipe the smiles off of a few faces? How come everyone lives in a nice house, where they can leave the door open, and a kind neighbor is just waiting to say hello? Why is it that everyone has a car, and no one ever gets jacked and get sent walking home naked in the rain. The camera never seems to pass by a bum on the street, or a child without enough to eat. Sure, it's a perfect white world, and a perfect show to jack-off to, thanks to a hot mom and daughter duo. But, if I don't see a Crack Baby by next season, I say cancel this show. Crack Babies are the new trend, get with it. You know this to be true.

Talkbacks

Day Six!! You've Been GILMOREd!! Jordon Nardino Pens The 1st GIRLS of Sweeps!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks