Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Well, loyal readers, er, reader, I am neck deep in work-related doo-doo. I've got so much to do, I'm going to continue this de facto blogging sabbatical I've been on for the past week. I barely have time to watch TV, let alone write about it.
This was fun. But, life is forcing me to take a break.
In the meantime, enjoy all the Lost-Alias-Nip/Tuck-DesperateHousewives-VeronicaMars-24-Threshold-GilmoreGirls-CurbYourEnthusiasm-MyNameIsEarl-ArrestedDevelopment-PrisonBreak-EverybodyHatesChris-AmazingRace-ProjectRunway-America'sNextTopModel-Invasion-Scrubs fun you can!
P.S. While I'm partially dying that Lost is taking a three-week hiatus, I can't help but be grateful for its timing.
Friday, October 14, 2005
The previous post about Veronica Mars prompted me to reflect on the TV series that make for the best DVD viewing. There are some shows that just have more "pop" -- are more exciting or engaging -- when viewing them without commercial interruptions and without waiting a week between episodes.
Fullmoon has commented on the pleasure of watching Lost Season 1 on DVD. Highly recommended.
What other shows are better viewed by DVD?
My vote for the most enhanced enjoyment through viewing on DVD is 24. The adrenaline and tension created in the show remains at a constant high. The commercial breaks are gone and so the plot keeps you hurtling forward like an out-of-control train. Cliff hangers are exciting, yet not the least bit frustrating, because you simply start the next episode or stick in the next disc. Last season was the first I watched 24 as it aired on Fox. I still loved it, but I really missed the high-impact experience of a 24 marathon viewing session. If I had even a scintilla of self-control, I think I'd sit out this season of 24 when it starts in January and wait for it to come out on DVD. Sadly, though, self-control and self-discipline are not among my strongest traits. (One drawback of viewing 24 on DVD is that the continuity and improbability issues are intensified. But, if you're willing to suspend disbelief, it's a heck of a ride.)
I imagine that watching Alias on DVD would be an experience similar to watching 24 on DVD. I've simply been too committed to watching Alias as it airs to ever have the DVD-watching experience.
From what I've caught of Prison Break this season on Fox, I'm thinking it could be a winner on DVD.
Anyone have other recommendations for shows that translate well to DVD, perhaps even improved over watching them as they air?
Intelligent Life on Mars
I caught this week's episode of Veronica Mars. (Actually, I taped it and watched it at midnight in anticipation of my all-nighter on Wednesday night.) It's on against Lost, so it requires intentional and meticulous planning if I want to watch. As Wednesday evening comes nearer my excitement over Lost has a tendency to render me paralyzed and incoherent. So, I haven't caught every episode of Veronica Mars this season.
At any rate, I was reminded of how excellent this show is. If you're not watching it, you should. If you're in the market for a show to watch on DVD, watch Veronica's first season.
Monday, October 10, 2005
Desperate for Developments
Did anyone else feel like last night's Desperate Housewives episode was nothing more than marking time?
We saw some character development with Gabrielle, but it was pretty clearly going to happen at some point.
We got a little more in the "is-George-a-total-psycho?" department, but really only more questions.
Unfortunately, Susan is becoming a parody of herself. Maybe, if the teasers for next week pan out, she'll get more to do with the reintroduction of Zach into the storyline.
I like the Betty Applewhite character, but I'm not yet hooked into the prisoner-in-the-basement mystery. There has to be more to it than revenge against an abusive spouse. Right?
I don't know what to think of Lynette's (to this piont weak) workplace drama.
Loved to see Harriet Sansom Harris back. Too bad she's going away. Loved Felicia.
It looks like next week's episode may be a return to form, though.
Sunday, October 09, 2005
Firefly . . . Better Late than Never
I loved Joss Whedon's Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. I never watched the short-lived Firefly, though.
With some favorable buzz for Serenity, the recently released theatrical film which is a continuation of the Firefly story, and with my love for Whedonesque imagination and dialog, I decided to add the Firefly DVDs to my Netflix queue.
I watched the pilot episode last night. Loved it. I'll keep you updated as I watch the rest of the episodes.
I hope I'll be able to find the time to catch Serenity in the theater as well.
Wasteland Spouse and I caught two replayed episodes of My Name is Earl last night on NBC. Four words: Hill. Air. Ye. Us.
You know a show is a potential classic if it can pull of a stupid carrot-smoking gag with a straight face . . . and make it funny!
Earl Hickey is a treasure chest of a character. The karma cleansing hook is great and can be sustained for quite some time (especially if Earl has to keep adding more wrongs to his list with each one he rights).
The revelation in this show, though, is Jaime Pressly as Joy, Earl's bottle-blonde, redneck, former beauty queen ex-wife who lives with her collection of children and the dim witted -- but lovable -- Darnell in a rented 1972 trailer with a documented carbon monoxide leak. Joy is a great character and Pressly fits her like a glove. My favorite line came after Joy informed Earl that she'd pawned his heirloom cuckoo clock and, in response to Earl's shocked reaction, said, "What, you don't think cigarettes grow on trees?"
(P.S. Thanks, Fullmoon, for the nudge to watch the show!)
Friday, October 07, 2005
Fullmoon: Let's Talk Lost! (UPDATED)
So, two stellar episodes of Lost have come and gone during my self-imposed blogging hiatus.
Loved 'em! Let's see . . . Can I summarize how much I love Lost this season? It's "honey-will-you-sleep-in-the-wet-spot" good, that's how good this show is.
A few random observations/questions:
- If you haven't visited Dharma Industries yet, you should. Not much there, but still.
- Same goes for the Hanso Foundation webpage.
- Sayid is the MacGuyver of the island, no? Soon he'll be building a nuclear warhead from coconuts and polar bear feces.
- Lots of faith/science stuff still floating around
- Jack: hero, anti-hero, or villain?
- Ana Lucia . . . good, bad, or just plain badass?
- How cool was the training video? I love that the really crucial stuff was damaged or spliced out.
- Electromagnatic qualities, polar bears, and sentient homocidal black smoke. What doesn't the island have to offer?
What's been your favorite little tidbit of the last couple of episodes?
UPDATE: Via 815 (which is a great, and usually hilarious, source of Lost minutia) I point you to the following:
Monday, September 26, 2005
UPN and Google Video are offering a free streaming video of the entire premiere episode of Everybody Hates Chris here.
?sdrawkcaB gniklaT saW tlaW
So, I didn't catch this at all on my own, but it turns out that, when Shannon saw weird, wet Walt in the jungle on last Wednesday's Lost premiere, the reason that you couldn't figure out what he was saying -- and neither could Shannon -- was becuase he was talking backwards.
Check out this link, courtesy of Lemon-Red at 815 Blog, which reverses the audio in that scene. Walt clearly says, "Press the button. The button is bad."
What button? [The execute button on Desmond's computer in the geodesic hatch?] Why is it bad? [It controls the "monster"/alerts the Others/releases a deadly toxin?]
Larry David: Clearly Not a Father of a 4 Year Old
Last night's season premiere of Curb Your Enthusiasm included a running gag about whether one should pick up the phone when engaged in conjugal activities.
Clearly Larry David doesn't live with a 4 year old. Setting aside the notion of when parents of preschoolers find time for intimacy (Hint: usually not at times when the phone is likely to ring), answering the phone quickly falls outside the job description of such parents. Having a 4 year old is like having your own little (completely unreliable) answering service.
I'm certain Wasteland Kid would have picked up the phone and would be asking -- in an inappropriately suspicious voice -- "Who are you?" long before one of us could roll over and pick up the phone.
(I know, Amanda Sue. TMI.)
Sunday, September 25, 2005
The Part of Lynette Scavo Will Now Be Played By . . .
So, did anyone else notice that Felicity Huffman's forehead was freakishly immobile during the first interview scene on tonight's season premiere of Desperate Housewives?
Friday, September 23, 2005
Desperate Housewives Makes You Smarter
I knew it.
In what appears to be a little fluff piece about the new season of Desperate Housewives, there's a great little bombshell dropped at the end. According to this book, today's serialized shows (like DH, Lost, 24, and Reunion) make us smarter.
Take that, Wasteland Spouse!
"Suvivors Strike Back" or Survivors Can't Blog?
There's a group blog at the CBS survivor website called "Survivors Strike Back."
Caught a bit of both Martha's and Donald's apprentice.
Regarding Martha's bunch of Apprenti: Proving that, in the right circumstances, "creative" is a synonym for "annoying."
Regarding The Donald's crew: Melissa needs a serious reality check (which ain't gonna happen on a "reality" TV show). Melissa, my dear, it is NEVER the case that a uniformly reviled person is hated for his or her beauty, competence, and brains. Never. Intimidating? No. Psychotic? Perhaps.
Lost Head Scratchers
The Lost premiere, predictably, rocked my world. I love that show.
- Who'd have ever guessed that MTV's The 70s House would be in the hatch? Not me.
- "Make Your Own Kind of Music" -- Mama Cass rocks, plus my 7th grade choir sang that song at my spring concert. You gotta, make your own kind of music. Sing your own special song . . . .
- Hurley's tirade: "Life's not so bad, right? Sure the Others are coming to, like, eat us all, and every once in a while someone blows up all over you, but you get to sleep in every morning."
- The "numbers" on Desmond's high-pressure drug injection kit.
- The sum of the "numbers" (108) appearing on the freaky-deaky mural at the entrance to Desmond's geodesic dome with the giant computer processors in it.
- All the other appearances of indivdual "numbers" throughout the episode (e.g., time of death of the car wreck victim was 8:15; Desmond was riding his stationary bike at 16 mph before the explosion rocked his groovy underground pad; the last number in the combo for Desmond's safe looked to be 42).
- Wet Walt: ghostlike, mouting something to Shannon, and spooky!
- Locke explicitly acknowledged what we saw in last season's finale: that the "monster" appeared to be just a column of weird, black smoke.
- The victim of Jack's future wife's bad driving was likely Shannon's dad. (His last name was Rutherford.)
- Charlie is starting to be a bit of a rabble-rouser. Just wait until he does the smack.
- We didn't even get to see what was going on with the rafters . . . even MORE to look forward to in next week's episode.
- Important lesson: No scene is a throwaway on this show. (Confession: Got a little bored with Jack's stair running flashback scene. Stopped paying close attention. Then (duh!), Desmond the "almost" doctor shows up in the hatch and I find myself wondering what the heck he and Jack talked about in that scene.) Repeat after me: I must pay attention to every detail of every scene of Lost.
Best. Show. Ever.
Can I get a holla back?
Everybody Hates Bedtime
I'm reading The Secret Garden to Wasteland Kid at bedtime. I'm intrigued by how much WK enjoys the sometimes ponderous story and equally hard to grasp broad Yorkshire dialogue (which I, of course, manage to completely mangle in an attempt to make it sound authentic). WK instists that we read a couple of chapters a night. These are not short chapters, mind you.
In addition, I think we've done a few thinks right as parents. On one count, though, we've utterly failed. WK refuses to fall asleep alone. I have to lay there in bed until WK is in full-on REM. The slightest attempt to sneak out of the room before WK is sawing logs causes freakish and immediate wakefulness and requires the whole routine to start over from scratch.
What does this have to do with TV? It means I often completely miss any show that airs in the 8 o'clock hour (sometimes into the 9 o'clock hour as well).
Case in point: Everybody Hates Chris. Totally missed it last night. After an entire summer looking forward to this show (see here, here, here, and here), I'm on bedtime duty.
Have I mentioned how much I want TiVo?
Nearly a week later, I've almost recovered from the horror of the Emmys. What a shitty show that was . . . all around.
I was bored to tears. I was annoyed by the Emmy Idol competition. And I was in shock at many of the winners.
I've already mentioned my disdain for the Emmy voters' choice of winner for dramatic actress. Boston Legal produced the dramatic actor and supporting actor statues for James Spader and William Shatner. Not that either of these two guys is an embarrassment, but there were certainly more deserving performances last year. It was almost as if the Emmy voters forgot to watch TV last year. Sure, Spader's Alan Shore breathed life into the floundering Practice a year ago, but the new show floundered itself some and Spader's performance began to wear thin. Did the voters just forget about all the other great performances and shows? How about Kiefer Sutherland, Ian McShane, and Hugh Laurie, for instance. Sutherland, in contrast to Spader's sometimes shallow approach, continues to imbue CTU agent Jack Bauer with depth and charisma that lifts 24 beyond the thrill-a-minute freakshow it might otherwise be. (It would still be a freaking entertaining thrill-a-minute freakshow, but I'm glad Sutherland helps the show transcend that level of entertainment.) He deserves to be awarded for that.
Don't even get me started about the snub of Terry O'Quinn's fascinating portrayal of parapalegic-cum-suvivalist/sherpa/priest John Locke on Lost. Shatner's scenery-chewing, self-mocking, yet one-note, portrayal of Denny Crane just doesn't hold a candle to the depth and mystery O'Quinn brings to the Lost island.
The Everybody Loves Raymond lovefest was a bit misplaced as well. I've never been a fan, but even many hardcore fans of the show whom I know couldn't justify the wins of Raymond and its cast members over Desperate Housewives and Arrested Development.
Tony Shalhoub might be great in Monk. I wouldn't know. That vote, though, strikes me as a tragically unhip choice in the guise of hipness.
Thank goodness Lost took home the big prize. It almost made up for the flood of lameness that preceded it (and the aftershock of lameness that followed it . . . the Raymond win).
Finally, I Can Sleep Soundly Now . . .
Little Chance of Curbing My Enthusiasm
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
"Note to self: I don't need to see that!"
"Of Our Days, And Our Nights"
Were you watching the Emmy telecast when Conan O'Brien spoofed the "Emmy Idol" competition by pretending to sing the theme to Charles in Charge?
I haven't been able to get that song out of my head for 2 days now.
Charles in charge of our days and our nights . . . .
Monday, September 19, 2005
Lost Spoilage Alert
According to MSN (via Newsweek online), there's some serious Lost spoilers somewhere on the message boards on abc.com. I'm not looking though. As much as I want to know, I'd like the experience to be genuine -- to the extent that's possible on a show about an island inhabited by mysterious plane crash survivors, "Others," polar bears, crazy French ladies, and some sort of gaseous quasi-mechanical carnivorous dinosaur-like monster.
So, why am I posting the link? It's like scratching around a mosquito bite or nibbling on the crust of a pie. Not particularly satisfying, but enough to almost fool yourself into thinking you're giving in to the temptation.
Don't go read the spoiler. I don't want you to. It's probably a hoax anyways. And, if not, then don't ruin the fun of Wednesday night by reading what you're going to be seeing Wednesday night.
Patricia Arquette? Patricia Arquette. Really? Really. Un-uh! No, really.**
I think there'll be more Emmy blogging later, but this just couldn't wait:
Patricia. Arquette. Lead. Actress. In. A. Drama. Series.
For Medium. I know, Medium!!
I always thought that was more descriptive of the quality of the show than of the paranormal abilities of the lead character.
Clearly, some Raymond fans got frustrated realizing that Patricia Heaton would likely lose to one of the Housewives in the Lead Actress in a Comedy Series category (props to Felicity!), so they decided to vote for a Patricia in the weaker drama category. Ingenious!
**Transcription of an internal conversation I had with myself around 10:30 pm yesterday.
Saturday, September 17, 2005
"The Season of Die, Woman, Die"
In today's Washington Post, Lisa de Moraes offers a disturbing critique of this season's crop of new shows in her article "Female Characters, Made to Suffer for Our 'Art.'" The article highlights six storylines from the new shows that particularly illustrate a pattern of extreme violence and violent crime against women. (The shows are Killer Instinct on Fox, Close to Home on CBS, Supernatural on the WB, Invasion on ABC, and Criminal Minds on CBS. I can't figure out what the sixth show is, the one in which "pregnant [women] get pulled out of the shower at night by huge, hideous, wolflike creatures who rip the fetuses out of their wombs.") De Moraes argues that the writers/creators of the shows and the network executives act both blind and deaf to this phenomenon, probably purposely.
Why? Because, she suggests, these shows are chasing the ever elusive 18-34 year-old male demographic. Apparently, young men like to see young women tortured, killed, probed by aliens (more likely, left naked after being probed by aliens), and brutally raped. Or at least that's de Moraes's hypothesis. Moreover, she suggests that there is likely oneupmanship at work here as well.
To be sure, de Moraes has engaged in a bit of cherry-picking here. She's selectively highlighted a fairly small sample of the larger number of new shows to illustrate her point. Nevertheless, I think she's done a fair job of pointing out the staggering level of violence on TV shows. And the victims appear to be disproportionately female.
This is interesting, coming after the "chicks who kick ass" genre that blossomed only a few years ago. These shows, like Buffy, Alias, Xena, Snoops, and many others were/are violent, but the women were/are seldom the victim of the horrific violence that de Moraes describes.
Let's also be clear that men don't come out smelling like roses in these shows. Aside from Supernatural where the baddies are, well, supernatural, it's men who are perpetrating these disturbing deeds. Still, there's a definite difference between reflecting the reality that men are most often the perpetrators of violent crime and reflecting the"reality" of these heinous crimes by re-creating them for our viewing "pleasure." I don't think that de Moraes is wrong when she suggests that it reveals more than just our desensitization to, or even obsession with, violence.
The parade of horribles from the Season of Die, Woman, Die might not be so, um, horrible, if the creators, writers, and network executives had some higher purpose in reflecting the so-called reality of these crimes. But, reading de Moraes' account of their answers at press tours makes one wonder if they think at all about these kinds of issues. One executive, whose shows include all of the CSIs, Close to Home, and Criminal Minds, explains that they should probably study the issue to see if it's a problem. Probably. Study.
Does this mean I won't watch the shows or that I think that violence on TV has grown to epidemic levels? No and maybe. I'll watch some of these shows. I won't let Wasteland Kid watch them, but I wouldn't have anyways. I fall within that target demographic, so I'm part of the problem. My tastes trend, as you may have noticed, toward the more fantastic when it comes to violence. Ripped from the headlines doesn't really appeal to me at all. Is that a distinction with a difference when it comes to de Moraes' point? Probably not. I don't think it's appreciably (or morally) "better" to be entertained by fantastical violence rather than realistic violence. And we seem to be entertained by violence quite a bit. That's why I think it's important to maintain a healthy sitcom and relationship drama contingent, so at least if violence is rampant it doesn't have to be overwhelming.
But, in the meantime, you guys -- and it does seem like the writers, creators, and network execs are mostly men -- in TV creation and development should lay off the kinky/sadistic/fetishistic killing of women. It's not a pretty reflection on you or us. It shouldn't be entertaining.
Suresh Joachim broke the Guiness world record for longest time spent watching TV this week. 69 hours, 48 minutes.
The rules stipulated that Suresh's eyes had to be glued to the screen except for a 5-minute break every hour and a 15-minute break every 8 hours. He watched only ABC shows for the entire 2 9/10 days. His viewing marathon was conducted in the lobby of WABC-TV in Manhattan. "Highlights" included: a couple of episodes of Tony Danza's talk show (yeah, I know, I figured it would have been canceled already too), Star Jones reminiscing about her wedding and reminding everyone she's a lawyer on The View, and hour upon hour of pre-dawn World News Now. Luckily for Suresh, WABC doesn't carry The Maury Show.
Just to clear up any potential confusion: I am not Suresh. Even Wasteland Fan has limits.
I caught the two-hour series premiere of Threshold last night on CBS. I liked it and will likely stick with it for a while to see how it develops.
My biggest concern is that, unlike Lost, the show will be almost entirely plot-driven. There were some hints that character history will play into the show a bit. Molly's (Carla Gugino) character, a contingency expert, suggested she'd lived through a catastrophe and that her father had walked out on her and her mother when she was young. So, that's something. I'm not so sure the tough-woman-with-daddy-issues angle will be all that interesting, but we'll see. The other characters were pretty thinly sketched so far. Cavennaugh (Brian Van Holt), the ghost-agent-with-the-hots-for-Molly, appeared to be mostly muscle and little else. Data, er, I mean, Dr. Nigel Fenway (Brent Spiner) is a serial divorcee and a crusty genius. Ho, hum. Lucas Pegg (Rob Benedict) is a paranoid, geek-boy engineer, who's engaged to be married in just over a month. Despite the character's lack of definition, I was most intrigued by him and Benedict's portrayal. Arthur Ramsey (Peter Dinklage), the linguist and mathematician, is a debauched, gambling womanizer. Not sure there's anywhere to go with that. Finally, sorry, but Charles S. Dutton just looked uncomfortable, out-of-place, and ill-used as JT Baylock, the Deputy National Security Advisor.
Still, the plot is interesting enough to keep me interested for a while with the hopes that the characters catch up.
On another note, William Mapother is fast becoming the Christopher Walken of prime time TV. When a show needs a creepy and convincing, yet oddly engaging, villain-ish character, he's the go-to guy of the moment. And he fills the role well.
"It's All About Character, Character, Character"
So sayeth Damon Lindelof showrunner and executive producer of Lost in an interesting article about the show in today's online version of the NY Times (registration may be required to access the story, I'm not sure).
A few things struck me about the story. First, it's always good to be reminded of the plasticity of the plotting of weekly dramas. Even though the writers/creators often have a pretty clear idea of where the story is headed, the details are often up for grabs. The article notes the evolution of the relationships among Michael, Jin, and Sun as an example. The hostility between Michael and Jin and the hinted relationship between Michael and Sun were dropped as the writers became invested in Jin and Sun's complex relationship, as developed in their flashbacks. Even more revealing, the writers noticed that Harold Perrineau and Daniel Dae Kim had become good friends on set and leveraged that connection in the reconciliation of and growing respect between Michael and Jin. Fascinating. And evidence of the appropriate use of story in service of character rather than the other way around. Lost is really a great example of how keeping character first is vitally important, even in the midst of one of the best and most complex plots on TV.
Second, Damon Lindelof is only 32. Perhaps this little factoid jumps out at me a bit more as I approach another birthday, but that's darn impressive.
Third, Carlton Cuse and Lindelof intimate that they'd prefer to take up Stephen King's challenge in a recent ew.com column (upon which I commented here) and end the show according to the story, not the ratings. However, they admit that ABC is in the driver's seat on that decision.
Fourth, the uproar (aka, tempest in a teapot) over last season's hatch cliff-hanger is mentioned. It's odd, but I never once felt cheated by that. I thought the revelation of the "Others'" interest in Walt was a more interesting development and probably never expected to see down the hatch. As has been widely reported elsewhere, the NYT article also assures readers that the hatch plays a central part early in the second season and we'll get to know what's there. That's good enough for me.
Finally, I'm fascinated at how harshly Lindelof dissed the storytelling in the Matrix trilogy. It's accurate criticism. I'm just surprised.
Friday, September 16, 2005
The Early Demise of Survivor
If you're anything like me, the first couple of episodes of a season of Survivor make or break it for you. That's when you get to know the castaways and speculate how the personal dynamics will play out for the rest of the season/game. I just can't join in the middle of a season and make enough sense of the interactions and personalities to care.
So, the sad/good (it depends on your perspective, I suppose, and I haven't quite yet figured it out for myself) news is that I had a meeting with my (couple hundred) students last night during the premiere of Survivor Guatemala. I won't be able to watch it next week either. Then it conflicts with Alias beginning on the 29th. Clearly, this season is not in the cards for me.
I wonder if I've watched my last episode of Survivor.
WILY TV 9/14/05: That MoFo Mo Po
I've tried to come up with an appropriate post to convey the shock and disbelief that accompanied my recent realization that Maury Povich still has a syndicated "talk show" on TV.
But, I just can't.
That car wreck should have lost its voyeuristic draw years -- years!! -- ago. It's approaching its 15-year anniversary, people. Fifteen. Years.
How is it that Sally, Ricky, and Jenny can't make it, but Maury (who lagged behind in terms of "substance" and "entertainment" even among this slow crowd) is still alive and kicking? Sure, Jerry Springer's show is still around, but it raised the genre to a freakish sort of macabre artform and a was cultural phenomenon. So, it makes sense that Jerry would outlive the others. (Heck, that show's even been adapted into a hit opera.) But, Maury? Oh, the humanity.
What I Learned Yesterday on TV: There are some depths of TV fandom even I cannot endorse. That mofo Mo Po has got to go.
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Knock 'Em Dead Amanda Sue!
They'd be insane not to jump at the chance to have you!!
Sorry for the break from the theme, but Friend of Wasteland Fan Amanda Sue Pickering has a big day on Friday and we wish her well.
(Posting this a bit early in the hopes ASP sees it before she leaves.)
A Note About the Gilmores
Despite my abundance of love for all things Lorelei and Lorelei, I won't be blogging about the new season of the Gilmore Girls. Why, you ask? Well, Wasteland Spouse and I (and Wasteland Kid) only caught on to the Gilmores about 18 months or so ago. So, we watched the first few seasons on DVD and, as any sane and reasonable humans beings would, we loved it.
I have surreptitiously kept up on the current happenings in Stars Hollow, but Wasteland Spouse has not, preferring to let the story unfold for her as if she'd been watching the episodes in first run. Thus, WS is content to wait for the DVD releases of seasons 4 and 5, before watching season 6. I respect that choice. So, I won't be spoiling WS's experience by blogging about the current episodes here.
Except that I will say . . . (Hey, WS, stop reading here!!!) . . . what an odd twist of fate it's been watching how Rory's life is almost the mirror image of Lorelei's in some ways, especially when it comes to their relationships with Richard and Emily. Lorelei becomes estranged from R&E when she stumbles off the blue-blood path; Rory detour causes her to grow closer to them and away from Lorelei. Or, perhaps the issue is that Lorelei is more like Emily than she cares to believe . . . .