We Don't Need More 'Gilmore Girls' Episodes, We Need More Gilmore Girls
The universe is screaming out "More Gilmore Girls!" and the upcoming Gilmore Girls: A Year In The Life is delivering that. But is it enough? When TVLine asked Alexis Bledel and Lauren Graham about the possibility of more Gilmore Girls revival episodes, the leading ladies talked about being emotionally exhausted from getting the revival together, although the show could bleed on indefinitely. Graham even phoned in with, "Rory visits Lorelai in the home. This week on..." God. It could happen. There is a way the Gilmore Girls could, and should, live on forever. However, more episodes is not necessarily the way to execute that.
Now, if you've been following, oh, anything about the show published here in the last year and a half, you know that nobody wants a Gilmore Girls Season 9 (or 10, or 11) more than me. If Gilmore Girls goes on forever, then I will never stop running out of things to write about, and the beige walls of my apartment would be plastered with cash. (Or not really. I'll still be a journalist, after all. You know what I mean.) However, my personal beliefs about media is that, well, there can be too much of a good thing.
You don't need to make that spin-off. You can cut things off at a fifth sequel. After a while, money too strongly motivates overusing a property, and it leads to poor story-telling or tainting a franchise with a great legacy. I want to see the Gilmore girls blossom into Gilmore women, but I really feel like this seasonal offering is the way to do it versus pushing several more years in that Connecticut small town. Rationally, this should be the swan song sung after the swan attacks Jess on the riverfront. And I think this swan song is being played, because of closure more than anything.
Moreover, this is the right climate (politically, socially, or otherwise) to revive the show for quick comfort food, like a stack of Mallomars or array of donuts. Being a woman in the burgeoning Donald Trump administration is such a frightening concept that you want to return to a show that radiates feminism, warmth, and excellent pop culture banter all at once. The Gilmore Girls revival is a comfy blanket of nostalgia and a vicious counteract to an anti-woman society all at once. For that, I couldn't be more grateful that we're getting to hang out with Rory and Lorelai again. But I this should be the wrap-up of that story... and, from there, the baton should be passed.
The nonstop excitement and buzz about the Gilmore Girls revival has showcased a lot of things, specifically that the series was one-of-a-kind. You know what, though? It shouldn't be. Amy Sherman-Palladino's vision and flair for writing will always be unique to her, of course. Nobody's arguing that. However, there are so many untapped female talents out there that should have their voices heard through their own strong-but-flawed characters. There are other great feminist stories that should be up on television, and we should continue to explore the nuances of mother-daughter relationships. This resurrected interest in the Gilmore Girls has proven there's both a market and a need for that.
So, while I don't think we really need more Gilmore Girls episodes after this, I absolutely believe that we need more Gilmore girls out in the universe. Brilliant and witty, neurotic and ambitious, supportive and strong, we need women like that behind and in front of the camera. I want the legacy and the influence of the show to permeate through pop culture in ways stronger than "Babette Ate Oatmeal" t-shirts on Etsy (although those are also very, very important). So, while I want closure for the Gilmore Girls revival, I hope it opens new doors and helps lead the way for a media revolution... after it calms us down with chatter about Amy Schumer and huge cups of coffee.
Images: Netflix; Giphy (2)