Summary
-
Another
Gilmore Girls
revival could answer the question of who is the father of Rory’s baby and provide closure to
A Year in the Life
‘s big twist. - Continuing the show with Rory as a single parent might feel repetitive and risk boring viewers, as it would mirror Lorelai’s storyline in the original series.
-
If done well, a
Gilmore Girls
revival could give Rory a satisfying and contented ending.
Despite ending its original run back in 2007, Gilmore Girls remains a beloved series today — enough so that Netflix released a revival in 2016, and many fans are still looking for new episodes following A Year in the Life. A Year in the Life brings some characters’ stories to a more satisfying conclusion than the original run, but the revival does raise questions about others’ fates.
Given that A Year in the Life leaves Rory’s future up in the air, Gilmore Girls could continue in one form or another. Whether Gilmore Girls needs a second revival is a different story, and there are compelling arguments for both sides.
Should: Another Gilmore Girls Revival Can Reveal Who The Father Of Rory’s Baby Is
Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life‘s ending reveals that Rory is pregnant, but it doesn’t offer details about the father of her child. Arguably, knowing the father of Rory’s baby isn’t that important. She’s not in a relationship when the Netflix revival comes to a close, and the implication is that she’ll raise the child alone, following in the footsteps of her mother.
However, Gilmore Girls is a show with many romantic pairings, and all of Rory’s former boyfriends make appearances in A Year in the Life. Naturally, fans — especially those invested in one relationship over the others — are curious about the father of Rory’s child. Another Gilmore Girls revival could answer their questions and offer some closure to A Year in the Life‘s big twist.
Shouldn’t: Rory’s A Year In The Life Ending Would Make A Revival Feel Repetitive
Although it might be nice to get on-screen confirmation regarding the father of Rory’s baby, following her as she raises a child might feel repetitive after the original Gilmore Girls. This is the most logical storyline for a second Gilmore Girls revival to follow. However, this premise is almost identical to the original series.
Rory’s bond with her mother is much less tumultuous than Lorelai’s relationship with Emily (Kelly Bishop) when Gilmore Girls opens, but everything from raising a child solo to juggling parenthood and career aspirations will mirror Lorelai’s character arc. Unless another Gilmore Girls revival can bring something new to the table with Rory’s journey, it will risk treading too-familiar territory and boring viewers.
Should: Rory Gilmore Deserves A Happy Ending
If a Gilmore Girls revival finds a way to make Rory’s parenting journey feel fresh, it would be nice to see Bledel’s character finally get a happy ending. Rory struggles with her dreams for the future throughout Gilmore Girls and A Year in the Life, and the latter doesn’t conclude with her realizing her goals. In fact, A Year in the Life reveals that Rory’s career never quite takes off the way she wants it to. And while she doesn’t need a relationship to make her ending worthwhile, it would be nice to see whether she finds someone or ends up content on her own.
Rory’s ending in A Year in the Life is lacking the contentedness and closure viewers might expect from the Netflix revival. Another Gilmore Girls reboot can offer something more satisfying, both for Rory herself and for those who have followed her journey for years.
Shouldn’t: A Gilmore Girls Revival Could Ruin Lorelai’s Happy Ending
While another Gilmore Girls revival could give Rory a more satisfying send-off, it would risk ruining Lorelai’s hard-earned happy ending. The original Gilmore Girls often puts Lorelai through the wringer, and she struggles repeatedly with her career and love life. A Year in the Life finally gives her closure on both fronts, with her marrying Luke Danes (Scott Patterson) at the very end.
At this point, it feels unnecessary to dredge up more drama for Lorelai to contend with; she already faces so many issues in the original Gilmore Girls, and most are addressed by A Year in the Life‘s end. With that in mind, continuing the show would only rehash old storylines and risk ruining her peace. The only way to make a second Gilmore Girls revival work is to focus more on Rory and her child than Lorelai and Rory.
Should: Lane Kim Deserves Better Than What She Got
If a follow-up to Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life primarily follows Rory, it could give her friends and peers larger roles in the story. This presents an opportunity to address Gilmore Girls‘ biggest failure: Lane Kim’s (Keiko Agena) ending. Lane is Rory’s rebellious and sensible friend throughout Gilmore Girls, and she has big aspirations for herself at the beginning of the show — namely, to lead a lifestyle full of rock and roll. Unfortunately, by the end of the show, Lane remains in Stars Hollow, settling for a life that’s much different than the one she dreams about.
While A Year in the Life suggests Lane is happy with her choices, it does little to improve her ending. With her kids older now, another Gilmore Girls reboot could give Lane the career she deserves, pushing her back into the world of music. It could also see her venturing beyond her small-town life — or at least coming to terms with all she’s given up.
Shouldn’t: Too Many Gilmore Girls Characters Will Be Missing
Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life brings back most of the original show’s cast, but some characters are less prominent because their actors couldn’t dedicate much time to the Netflix revival. That’s seemingly why Sookie and Dean are hardly in A Year in the Life — Melissa McCarthy and Jared Padalecki both have plenty on their plates these days — and this problem will only continue in another revival. Although new Gilmore Girls episodes can excuse absences like Dean’s, others will be more noticeable.
Even if most of the cast agrees to return, a second Gilmore Girls revival will also have trouble fitting some of the original characters into its story. A Year in the Life gives most of them satisfying send-offs, and there’s little reason for Rory to keep bumping into exes like Dean and Jess. Emily also moves to Nantucket, which isn’t too far, but does change the dynamics of the tight-knight Gilmore family.
Should: A Modern Take On Gilmore Girls Could Handle Certain Topics Better
The show remains a beloved piece of pop culture, but there are many harsh realities of watching Gilmore Girls 23 years after its debut. The series is a product of its time, and as such, certain storylines haven’t aged well. Dean’s treatment of Rory is often called out as toxic, and he’s far from the only character to showcase problematic behavior. Gilmore Girls also has a surprising lack of diversity, and Rory and Lorelai often put other women down in the midst of their witty banter. The April and Lindsay storylines of the original series feel particularly unsettling from a modern lens.
A more modern take on Gilmore Girls could fix some of the problems with the original series, rethinking its approach to certain topics. Unfortunately, A Year in the Life also had this opportunity and didn’t do much with it, so another revival may not either.
Shouldn’t: Gilmore Girls’ Setting Is Perfect, But Modernizing It Could Ruin That
Gilmore Girls is set in the small town of Stars Hollow during the early 2000s, and that backdrop is ideal for the series. There isn’t so much technology that the characters are always on their phones, and they often opt for in-person interactions, which ramps up the small-town feel and makes the character moments more intimate.
Continuing to modernize Gilmore Girls comes with risks, as is evident in A Year in the Life. Even if Gilmore Girls takes place in a fictionalized town, it’s still set in the real world. That makes it difficult to ignore things like technological advancements. Depending on when another Gilmore Girls revival is set, this could destroy the comforting feel the series is known for.
Should: Gilmore Girls Still Has A Huge Viewership
Even if there are downsides to another Gilmore Girls revival, there’s little doubt more episodes will draw viewers. The original Gilmore Girls still has a huge fan base, and many rewatch the show every fall. Given the series’ sustained popularity, new content will be a welcome development regardless of what it covers.
Those who take on an annual rewatch of Gilmore Girls will no doubt celebrate new content, and many have been looking for A Year in the Life season 2 since the first revival starting streaming on Netflix. That alone could warrant a follow-up, as there’s clearly a demand for more Gilmore antics.
Shouldn’t: More Gilmore Girls Risks Hurting The Original Show’s Legacy
Just because there’s demand for a Gilmore Girls revival doesn’t mean it should happen. Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life delivers creator Amy Sherman-Palladino’s original ending — a conclusion the series didn’t get to have after its cancelation in 2007. Thanks to the Netflix revival, the creator’s vision for the show was finally fulfilled. Making more Gilmore Girls after the fact risks undoing that and hurting the original show’s legacy.
Additionally, A Year in the Life received mixed reactions from fans. It’s clear that continuing the original Gilmore Girls comes with risks, just as expanding any major series does. It might not be worth it when the original show already has such a solid legacy — one that keeps fans returning year after year regardless of new episodes.
#Reasons #Gilmore #Girls #Revival #Netflix #Happen #Shouldnt