Are we trying to get a season with 13 episodes?
I think we're trying for 8-13 episodes at this point. Anything we can get that would shift the impact of the series back to where it should've been years ago.
Rob- I still don't know what to tell people on the forums who want to know what happened and heard various rumors about it. I can't just say: "Nothing is confirmed" because straight answers would help back us up. Otherwise people will be asking "If it's the actresses faults then why should we care?" and "Why should we bother helping if even the actors didn't want to continue with the show", etc.
I totally understand where you're coming from on this one and all I can do is emphasize a few points that we do know:
1) One, the other or possibly (but not likely) both actresses rejected the network's most recent offer at the end of April. That does not mean that they were walking away from the negotiating table or anything. It just means that whoever rejected the offer rejected the offer.
2) The most reliable rumors *and* news reports *and* interviews with Ed Herrmann and Lauren (among others) indicate that the issues that the actresses were most concerned with were scheduling and exhaustion issues, NOT money. Reports from the network's camp also confirm that the actresses were offered substantial increases in salary. If money were the issue, we'd have known long before now.
3) It's not the actresses' fault, per se. IMO, it's *everybody's* fault. For whatever reason, more than one person was not willing to budge on the issue that caused the negotiations to collapse.
4) That said, the CW made the final decision to walk away from the negotiation table on May 2nd. They could have done with Gg exactly what they tried to do with VM and what ABC *succeeded* in doing with According to Jim, which was to not announce anything about Gg's fate and start negotiating again under less pressure. According to Jim just got renewed for 18 episodes nearly two months after the fall schedule was announced and in *that* case, the problem reportedly was with one of the lead actors (not Belushi). In any case, the CW handled the end of Gg *badly.* They're already taking hits from not just fans, but critics and advertisers.
5) "Why bother when the actors didn't want to continue the show?" That's entirely debatable. Many of the actors on the show *did* and likely still *do* want the show to continue. Scott Patterson was *signed* for season 8, as were other cast members who were under contract. Interestnig but less-reliable rumors even have it that Lauren herself may have been signed to season 8 as early as mid-April. Kelly Bishop, Liza Weil and Edward Herrmann all voiced their displeasure with how the show ended to varying degrees of sentiment in Washington Post article on May 15th. Bishop blasted how the series ended as "insulting the fans." IMO, as I'm looking back on it now, Bishop may not have been *only* speaking her mind, she might have been speaking by proxy for someone she thinks highly of on the show and who thinks highly of her. There are certainly some political things going on in the fallout of the show's cancellation in which certain people involved in the show are sort of naming who to blame by not naming her. There are three possible "her"'s, two in front of the screen and one behind the screen and one of them, I think, can 100% safely be ruled out because of something that she has done that I'll note below.
6) "Why bother when the actors didn't want to continue the show?" Part 2: Amy Sherman-Palladino spoke to Michael Ausiello of TV Guide at Fox's party at the Upfronts in May, and she told him that she wants to do a 2-hour movie in "a year or two." As Deadwood and Angel fans know, a promise like that means nothing until/unless contracts are signed. However, every single lead actor, including Alexis and Lauren, voiced interest in such an idea. Lauren and Scott were particularly enthusiastic, Alexis a little less so. But like I said, no contracts are signed or are even close to being signed and waiting for Amy's schedule to free up, while an interesting concept, is simply ridonkulous. You don't wait for a person's schedule to "free up" in showbiz, you make the agreement and then compare calendars and find the a time far enough in advance, but soon enough in advance in which every person's schedule is free -- usually it's far enough in advance that it's at the point where nobody has any firm plans for that slot -- usually, 6 to 8 months in advance, less further out when you're NOT an A-List movie star. For instance, deplorably, Lauren is more or less working booking-to-booking at this point, three-to-four months at a time, in wife roles that are waaaay beneath her talent. She signs to play the next wife role around the time her filming ends for her current wife role. And is in initial talks for yet another Wife role after that while she's filming the current one and signing onto the next one. She's clearly following a short-term plan of taking too many lame roles in a row for *some* reason.
I've said this before: Lauren admitted on the June 12th edition of The Tonight Show that "we didn't say goodbye properly" to the crew. A couple of hours later, in her chat with posters at the GoldDerby.com message board, she extended that sentiment to include the fans, actively asking them questions about why they want to see a 2-hour movie and what they'd like to see in one. She also stated that she planned to talk to Amy when she went to NYC. Graham and Bishop have also been having a little bit of a mutual admiration society of their own over the past month or so, with Graham remarking that in the cast, she's closest to Bishop and Bishop admitting in an interview published in the Post-Standard of Syracuse, NY at
http://www.syracuse.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/entertainment-0/118284868022980.xml&coll=1 that she considers Graham to be her daughter.
The reason that I'm going on at length about this is because I'm hoping that you can use it to distill the following two points:
A) Even though the CW walked away from the negotiating talks *primarily in frustration,* they did desperately want to keep their 2nd-highest rated show and were doing everything they could to try to figure out a solution. However, their frustration came through in the perfunctory terseness of the cancellation announcement itself. Somebody at the network *does* need to be reminded that the show can and should continue despite the way that that negotiation process fell apart.
B) Since one of the actresses was "less amenable" to coming back than the other (you do the math), it's a tricky situation to finesse because it boils down to not money, but politics. Finessing the situation so that the person who is perceived to be the real stumbling block isn't totally alienated from coming back to the negotiating table is tricky business. And yes, I'm being deliberately but transparently circumspect. Conversely, convincing the other two parties that a revival could and should be done with as little partcipation by the third party as she wants could be a possible solution. There are other possible solutions that could be discussed, but I'm being circumspect, again, because
I don't want to piss mumbletymumblety off . . . because IMO, it's not constructive to base a revival campaign for a show cancelled in such a unique way by directly placing blame on any particular person, especially not when IMO, they all DO own a piece of it. (Lauren should never have made that Pact.). Regardless of who is to blame, the actresses have *both* expressed interest in some sort of a continuation of the series. So our goal is more to convince both them and the network that a revival -- and a longer revival than what Amy had suggested -- is in everyone's best interests, the actresses', the network's, the studio's, the viewers' and IMO, most importantly, the *story's* best interest. (Lauren,of course, is now lamenting the season finale.)
Or, to put it more simply:
There's still a LOT of interest in the show, even from one of the two lead actresses. So in a situation like this, where it's not constructive at all to place blame on anyone or even to assume anything about an actress who doesn't communicate to the press all that much, I think we more or less need to stay out of the argument of why the show was cancelled and just concentrate on a message just as simple and nuance-unchallenged: that we know that they're interested and we therefore think that they all should come back to the table and make the compromises necessary to give *everybody* the ending to the show that it deserves.
Like I said, I don't know how to distill that down into anything simpler, I just hope that my rambling has given you enough material to work with to do what I have no clue how to do.
BTW Rob- if you or Heather are planning anything that involves New York let me know because I live close enough where I can help if there are plans... but I need a little more than a month's notice so I can buy Bus or Train tickets at reasonable prices.
No current plans unless you were to find out that one or the other Gilmore actresses were going to be doing a junket across all of the NYC-based talk shows anytime soon. OTOH, if you could find out where Jezebel James is filming -- probably Silvercup Studios -- you should also find out if they give tours and if so, take it and wear Gg-related clothing or a pin or whatever, while doing so. That's just off the top of my head as a suggestion.
-- Rob
--------------------------
Season 8: Because Rory's temper comes out in ways that she's often oblivious to.
We can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's best Gilmore Girls forum. The ORG Forum will be just that. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster. 
