"Rob Jensen" <ShutUpRob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:jnbul3hpqbn9vo3dtq7o4hundtcvqmbsdt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:30:38 GMT, "Sandy McDermin" <mcdermin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rob Jensen" <ShutUpRob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:blfcl39sqh1bt59bc7ges26fdf6k10uua1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> From this week's Ask Ausiello at:
>>>
>>> http://www.tvguide.com/ask-ausiello
>>>
>>> Question: What is Alexis Bledel up to these days? - Maria
>>>
>>> Ausiello: Beats me, but had Gilmore Girls been back this season, she
>>> would've been (wait for it) spending time with ex-leading man Matt
>>> Czuchry! No lie. Czuchry recently confirmed to me that despite Rory
>>> and Logan's series-ending split, he quietly inked a new deal with the
>>> show last spring that - if Gilmore was renewed for an abbreviated,
>>> 13-episode eighth season - would've called for Logan to return.
>>> "Contractually, there was an agreement that I would come back for a
>>> certain amount of episodes," reveals the upcoming Friday Night Lights
>>> guest star, who insists TPTB didn't clue him in on why Logan would've
>>> returned. "I don't know [what would've happened], because those
>>> episodes were never written. There were a lot of hypotheticals about
>>> what those 13 episodes would be." At the very least, the return
>>> engagement probably would've given Rory-Logan a better send-off than
>>> the forced breakup we got. Looking back, even Czuchry concedes the
>>> duo's split felt rushed. "I felt like that particular episode, where
>>> he asks her to marry him and then they break up and it's done, just
>>> felt like too much at once considering that this relation****p was
>>> something that had evolved over three seasons." That said, he
>>> acknowledges that Gilmore producers were in a tough spot creatively
>>> because "when they shot the episode, it wasn't known whether it was a
>>> season finale or a series finale. I think that if everybody would've
>>> known that it was a series finale, things would have went
>>> differently."
>>>
>>
>>This pisses me off. Why bring him back only to say goodbye again?
>
> Because at that point, since *they thought that the show was going to
> end with season 8, *they hadn't finished his story yet.* The clear
> implication, IMO, is that given certain storytelling conventions, the
> s8 *real* series finale was going to end with Rory and Logan back
> together, if not also either engaged or married.
>
>>And, if
>>that wasn't their intention -- considering the total precariousness of a
>>"season 8" -- they did a piss poor job of communicating any other kind
of
>>ending between Rory and Logan but a bleak one.
>
> Sorry, can't blame that one on the writers -- Bledel had agreed in
> principle to come back for a 13-episode s8 even though the contracts
> weren't signed. Even given that the fate of the show was up in the
> air at that point, *she* had given them the signal that she was going
> to be coming back, so they plowed ahead with their original plans for
> Rory and Logan and *then* she started welching on the deal. By that
> point, the season finale was so close to being shot that Lauren had to
> order a last minute rewrite in order to have the show work as either a
> season finale *or* a series finale -- and ultimately, upon reflection,
> she decided that the episode didn't work -- and admitted so publicly
> at her GoldDerby chat.
>
> Here's the thing to remember: Alexis put the show in an untenable
> position creatively. Because she *didn't* give them a straight answer
> either way until *beyond* the last minute (two and a half weeks
> *after* the season finale had wrapped filming, mind you), the rest of
> the cast and crew did NOT know whether or not the show was going to be
> back this fall until The CW walked away from the table in frustration
> and put the show on indefinite hiatus (I refuse to use anything
> resembling the term "cancellation" until Amy's done with the show,
> BID..)
>
> When an actor is giving mixed signals, the default is NOT to assume
> that the show is ending, the default is to go ahead with what is
> factually known, which is, business as usual. You make the minimal
> adjustments that you have to, but the reality is that unless you know
> for sure that the given show is ending, you *have* to ignore such
> amateurish maneuvers and write the story as though it's going on --
> after all, the actor *could* have simply been playing for a much
> bigger salary and there's no way of knowing for sure one way or the
> other until a concrete resolution has occurred. And that's among any
> number of reasons why you don't do anything other than business as
> usual in filmic storytelling until told otherwise.
>
> There are simply too many jobs at stake to assume anything other than
> business as usual until the conditions have actually changed. And
> let's say that the writers *did* make a more concrete resolution to
> the series in the season finale (such as, say, Lor and Luke getting
> married) and *then* Bledel didn't welch on the 13-episode deal. Then
> what you've got is the last season of Dawson's Creek, where everyone
> had expected the show to end and then the show got unexpectedly
> renewed at the last minute, resulting in a season where *no one*
> wanted to be there.
>
>>Rotten network, rotten showrunner, rotten writers, and misdirected
actors.
>
> Indecisive actress, indecisive actress, indecisive actress and, oh
> yeah, indecisive actress.
>
> It really is as simple as that.
>
Yes, ... global warming? I hear that's Alexis Bledel's fault too.
Everything is Bledel's fault and not that of *anyone* else involved with
this show? You give her far, far too much credit.
Sandy
|
