Why the Gilmore Girls Revival was Disappointing

For all those Gilmore Girls fans out there, it’s needless to say that upon news of the revival entitled A Year in the Life (2016), we were all excited. Excited to see what the lives of Lorelai, Rory, and all the other characters of in their world had brought them nearly ten years later. Perhaps it’s due to the fact that revivals or reunions of shows can never quite embody the greatness of an original, but I’m sad to say that I was quite disappointed by the revival. Sure, it satisfied a part of me to see these beloved characters on screen again, but I was underwhelmed and often perplexed by some of the plot features and character arcs, and here are some of the reasons why. Warning: this post contains heavy spoilers for Gilmore Girls and Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life.

They brought back the “Rory cheating” storyline

Before I go further in this post, it’s worthwhile to know a bit of history behind the original show. Amy Sherman-Palladino was the creator and main show runner for six seasons, but when Gilmore Girls went into its seventh season, Sherman-Palladino left and was replaced by David S. Rosenthal. This resulted in a relatively noticeable shift, and more notably, the show didn’t end the way Sherman-Palladino had envisioned. For years afterwards she mentioned in interviews that she had intended the show to end with “four final words”, but never revealed what they were. So to me, this revival was very much all about the original creator finishing the show the way she wanted it to. Of course, modifications would have to be made, as it was set nearly ten years later. Which brings me to my main point: the revival throws Rory back with Logan Huntzberger as if those years had never passed. For those who don’t remember, Logan broke up with Rory after giving her an ultimatum (rather immaturely) to either marry him or part ways. In the present, there’s a catch, as Logan is engaged to someone else, thus making Rory the “other woman”. Sound familiar? That’s because it is. The last we saw Rory be a part of an affair was with Dean Forester in Season 4, sleeping with him while he was still married to Lindsay. While Logan isn’t yet married in the revival, it’s still pretty abominable to see cheating so normalized that viewers have to put up with Rory and Logan pining for each other, and acting as if his fiancé is the obstacle. Even when Rory tells Lorelai about the secret relationship, Lorelai’s only reaction is along the lines of “why didn’t you tell me sooner?” As reprehensible as some of Rory’s actions were in the original series, she always seemed to learn from them or move forward with some semblance of culpability. In the revival, though, she hardly seems to remember mistakes from her past, or care about anyone but herself.

Rory has surprisingly little aim in life, given her credentials and original ambition

Rory may have been many things, but in the original series, she was always ambitious, incredibly book-smart, and passionate. In the Season 7 finale, Rory was setting off to work for the Obama campaign. In the present, it seems she’s done little more than that job all those years ago. Now, I find it highly unlikely that she would have left that job without having networked or making valuable contacts. I’m not one to doubt how tough the job market is, and I realize that part of the aim of the revival was to reflect on the current state of living, but I still find it uncharacteristic that someone as driven as Rory was seemingly twiddling her thumbs between working on the Obama campaign and having one published article in the New York Times. She’s also more entitled than ever in the new series, treating every opportunity that comes her way as if they are inferior to her abilities, even though she’s essentially jobless and homeless. When she goes in for an interview with an online magazine that have been after her for a year, she acts entitled for having to go through the interview process and not be given the job right away. As many discrepancies as she might have had in the original series, Rory was never quite this consistently immature, and it’s disappointing to have seen her regressed.

Luke and Lorelai have apparently never discussed having kids until now

In the original show, it was heavily implied that Luke was interested in having kids with Lorelai, and even though they didn’t discuss it often (especially since, after the April incident, they don’t get back together until the very last episode), it was still something they touched on. Once again, I find it implausible that the couple didn’t talk about it once in the last decade. When Lorelai brings it up to Luke in the revival, he brings up the factor that Lorelai’s age may not allow her to bear biological children. Thus, it seems unlikely that a couple who previously divulged a serious interest in children would suddenly abandon the topic for a number of years, only to bring it up later to say “Yeah, that would have been nice, but it’s too late now.”

The Stars Hollow musical

Why? Why? Why? Why was there ten straight minutes (I wish I was kidding) worth of various musical numbers? Ultimately, it didn’t contribute anything to the characters storylines and it took up precious time, seeing as the revival only consisted of four one-hour long episodes. Those ten minutes could have been spent on relevant storyline, instead of on the cringe-worthy and uncomfortable Stars Hollow Musical rehearsal.

Why the “Gilmore Girls” book?

While I love a good metafiction, I don’t necessarily love it in a show that has rarely ever employed metafictional moments before. The show has always struck me as one that stayed away from stereotypical tropes – even the trope of a “small town setting” was somewhat shattered because so much work went into the creation of Stars Hollow that it seems original in all its quirky small town glory. However, turning the concept of Lorelai and Rory’s relationship into inspiration for Rory’s new memoir project (which she literally names Gilmore Girls) seems like too easy an out, and is unconvincing. Even in the fictional world, who would want to read a memoir written by someone who’s largely unknown? It reduces her entire life’s work and ambition down to a story that we as viewers already know, which deviates from the lifetime of endless opportunities that Rory was constantly set up with in the original series.

The long awaited ‘four final words’ ending

This is the ending Sherman-Palladino had planned from the start for the original series. To fill you in again, the final words are: (Rory) “Mom?” (Lorelai) “Yeah?” (Rory) “I’m pregnant.” Which means that if Sherman-Palladino had stayed on to complete Season 7, Rory would reveal to be pregnant when she had just graduated from college – which would have been a completely different, and perhaps more sensical, context. I think there was so much hype around the fact that Sherman-Palladino revealed she had this vision planned, years and years ago, about the way the original series would end, that the whole revival centered on the “full circle” theme. While I’m not condemning the fact that Rory is pregnant, I never thought of Gilmore Girls as being a show where Rory’s life mirrored Lorelai’s so uncannily. Now we see almost exact mirrors, with Logan as Rory’s Christopher, and Jess as Rory’s Luke. Moreover, Rory faces the possibility of raising her child alone, just like Lorelai did, and it all seems like a derivative direction for the show to be taken in.

While this post might seem largely negative, the factors I’ve outlined are namely ones that stood out the most to me as being unusual or nonlinear of the characters we knew so well in the original series. I think a huge part of why the revival wasn’t entirely well received is because of the time restraint (only four episodes). Gilmore Girls was a show that always took its time building on a character’s storyline, and A Year in the Life felt extremely rushed in a lot of ways, so it’s no wonder that viewers were left unsatisfied. The decade time jump, as well, probably should have been considered further as opposed to mainly fulfilling Sherman-Palladino’s vision for the original ending, though I can understand how hard it would be to combine the two. Ultimately, A Year in the Life pleased the nostalgic part of me that wanted to see Stars Hollow, its inhabitants, and the Gilmores again. If Sherman-Palladino decides to continue further with this series, I can’t say I won’t be excited to see what comes.

~ Z ~