The Rory Gilmore Book Club discussion
Gilmore Girls Discussions
>
The Return of Jezebel James - Amy's New Show!
date
newest »

Hmm sounds interesting. I'll have to remember to watch that. I like Parker Posy


Oh! Oh! And she was hysterical in Josie and the Pussycats! Is it time to braid each other's hair now???

Same here, Sarah. :(
Although, I'm not complaining - I had seats on the glass on the corner at an AMAZING hockey game. It was outstanding to see their expressions again and have them hit the glass right in front of me. Sigh. I love that sport!
Although, I'm not complaining - I had seats on the glass on the corner at an AMAZING hockey game. It was outstanding to see their expressions again and have them hit the glass right in front of me. Sigh. I love that sport!



The concept is a little weak. When Parker is being Parker, she's brilliant. When they put her in "situational comedy" jokes it was a bit like watching bad dinner theater.
But it was great seeing Lulu, Paris' nanny, and Max! Sarah (Parker Posy) is a bit like if Rory and Paris had a baby and then fed it nothing but crack. I like her best when she's at her job. They need to keep her at work for most of the show.



I just finished watching it. You can hear Amy's voice coming through but not as much as I wanted. Crossing my fingers for more as they all settle into their roles. I
I loved seeing Gypsy and Max. I always thought Max didn't get enough air time. It will be interesting to see who else Amy is able to squeeze on the show.
Oh, and the amazing Diane Wiest! need I say more.
Well apparently I missed the pilot by like an hour online. (Other networks offer several episodes of their shows at once.) It was very confusing since I didn't know that the sister was pregnant, etc. You know, I wasn't impressed. The best parts were when Max was in a scene (any scene) and when the housekeeper was telling the movers where to put the furniture. I love Parker Posy, but I'm just not feeling her in this role. Not at all. I'm so bummed I missed Gypsy, though!! Sarah... I'm feeling you on both counts.



Being someone who was adopted and knowing that adoption already has a tough enough time being accepted as a viable alternative for having children, the whole stranger-using-my-bathroom just wasn't funny. (And the joke really wasn't that funny even if I didn't take it personally.)
And while I know a lot of home schooled children ARE socially inept, I know a lot who have transitioned into regular schools/college just fine too. It kind of felt like they were trying to show how "big city cool" they were by making fun of the redneck country folk...which I'm not saying can't be funny, but the whole scenario felt tired and recycled.
I hope the next few episodes get better because I can't see this show making it much longer.
And seriously, I didn't think they could create a more annoying character than Taylor, but that dad is just terrible and wrong.

I'm also adopted and I was annoyed by the bathroom thing, too. I think it was this show that implied that the baby might grow up and go crazy on her (I'm sure I didn't see that somewhere else, right?), which I always find pretty offensive. I usually just try to ignore ignorant comments like those, but you do bring up a good point!
I heartily agree on the home school thing. Sorry, but I know loads of kids and adults who were socially very well adjusted - and really very smart, too, who were home schooled. I didn't appreciate that at all.
Hey, did you guys know that they passed a law in California that requires all home school teachers to have teaching degrees now? How ridiculous is that? I mean, the current National Spelling Bee champ will no longer be able to be home schooled, for one, as his mum doesn't have that degree. He is so far beyond his age group scholastically, but he and others will likely be put in back in the system with their age level rather than skill level... in the school system that is cutting teachers yet again because of the state budget. (Or his mom will have to go get a great-paying job after being a stay-at-home mom all these years to pay for private school. Lame.)
When I was a teacher of music, art, drama, and dance, I was contracted to public and private schools, after-school programs, and home school groups. You know, the children that learned the quickest and were the most well behaved were the home schooled children. They were well adjusted, bright, and excelling. They were able to soar in subjects that interested them, and really dig in and work (with individualized help) on problem areas. If a family can afford to do this and has the desire, why on earth would we take that away??? Certainly general state testing for home schooled kids could show if a child is falling terribly behind and then steps could be taken to correct this or move them back into the state system.
Sorry... major tangent!!! I just don't get how we can keep letting the government take away our freedoms for our "benefit." Sheesh.
It eerily reminds me of a futuristic story I read in school - I wish I could recall the name or the author - where everyone had to have/be exactly the same... no one could excel or be overly attractive or overly smart. So this couple were watching this TV show and this dancer, who happened to be their son I think, tore off his mask (so that everyone looked the same) and instead of continuing to stumble around with the rest of the troupe (so that no one watching would feel these people were better than them), he did this glorious dance. The couple were momentarily astonished until whatever it was that kept them all status quo caused them to forget... because they couldn't be any smarter than their neighbor.
***(You school teachers, PLEASE tell me the name and author if you know it as it impacted me so much that though I read the 25 years ago and I still remember it! Thanks!)
Again, sorry for momentarily usurping this post.
Hey, did you guys know that they passed a law in California that requires all home school teachers to have teaching degrees now? How ridiculous is that? I mean, the current National Spelling Bee champ will no longer be able to be home schooled, for one, as his mum doesn't have that degree. He is so far beyond his age group scholastically, but he and others will likely be put in back in the system with their age level rather than skill level... in the school system that is cutting teachers yet again because of the state budget. (Or his mom will have to go get a great-paying job after being a stay-at-home mom all these years to pay for private school. Lame.)
When I was a teacher of music, art, drama, and dance, I was contracted to public and private schools, after-school programs, and home school groups. You know, the children that learned the quickest and were the most well behaved were the home schooled children. They were well adjusted, bright, and excelling. They were able to soar in subjects that interested them, and really dig in and work (with individualized help) on problem areas. If a family can afford to do this and has the desire, why on earth would we take that away??? Certainly general state testing for home schooled kids could show if a child is falling terribly behind and then steps could be taken to correct this or move them back into the state system.
Sorry... major tangent!!! I just don't get how we can keep letting the government take away our freedoms for our "benefit." Sheesh.
It eerily reminds me of a futuristic story I read in school - I wish I could recall the name or the author - where everyone had to have/be exactly the same... no one could excel or be overly attractive or overly smart. So this couple were watching this TV show and this dancer, who happened to be their son I think, tore off his mask (so that everyone looked the same) and instead of continuing to stumble around with the rest of the troupe (so that no one watching would feel these people were better than them), he did this glorious dance. The couple were momentarily astonished until whatever it was that kept them all status quo caused them to forget... because they couldn't be any smarter than their neighbor.
***(You school teachers, PLEASE tell me the name and author if you know it as it impacted me so much that though I read the 25 years ago and I still remember it! Thanks!)
Again, sorry for momentarily usurping this post.

"Fox has closed the book on Amy Sherman-Palladino's post-Gilmore Girls comeback vehicle, The Return of Jezebel James, after three abysmally rated outings. A Fox spokesperson confirms that the comedy starring Parker Posey and Lauren Ambrose as unlikely sisters has aired its last episode."
The full article is here:
http://community.tvguide.com/blog-ent...


I also think that a HUGE part of what made GG work was the town. Stars Hollow was another character and all of the townspeople were a part of the magic of the show. The supporting cast of this one was just awful.
I didn't watch the show yet because I had an inkling they weren't moving forward on it - they didn't tape too many shows to begin with. Bummer.

And I agree with you Sarah. The writing is uneven for her in this role. Is she compassionate but quirky or smart yet ditzy? Loud or quiet? It kind of drove me nuts. And I like Lauren Ambrose but I thought her character was dull, duller, and dullest.

Sarah, do you remember anything about the title of that story or perhaps the author? I'm dying to get a hold of it again... or at least relieve my brain of the scouring it's giving itself trying to remember!


You can read the whole story here:
http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave...
(credit belongs to my YA book club members! Thanks!)
Meghan, thanks for this! I missed this when it was posted, so I'm psyched to know! Somehow I thought it was somebody like Vonnegut, too, but really couldn't remember. So glad to have it again! Now I'm going to go re-read it!
It's a sitcom about a single New York book editor named Sarah (Parker Posy) who gets her free-spirited younger sister Coco (Lauren Ambrose) to carry a baby for her.
Amy is quoted as saying, "I was still reeling from the whole Gilmore thing [referring to her departure from the series]. Fox called and said they wanted to do a female comedy. What I felt like creating was what I started out doing: a traditional studio-audience sitcom, like Roseanne [Amy wrote for Roseanne from 90-94]. My favorite scenes to write were the Roseanne-and-Jackie moments, so it was an easy leap: Make this show about sisters. Either that, or make 'em gay."
She went with straight sisters. Ambrose says taping in front of a live audience is "wonderfully scary." Amy says of Parker's image as a "wacky, out-there indie girl" is "ridiculous; she's a sweet perfectionist." Fans adored Gilmore's tart perfection; we'll see if they bite on Posey's sweet version, too.
(culled from Entertainment Weekly's review. Sorry if I plagerized. This is the most recent issue so the strike has been factored in on the episode count.)