Sponsored by:
Green Bay Press-Gazette

Monday, March 30, 2009

A little gossip about "Gossip Girl"

Sometimes there's just too much television for one Channel Surfing blogger to handle. And sometimes, instead of giving a show a full review, we just want to gossip about it behind it's back (via e-mail, of course -- we can't talk about a botched nose job or fake Fendi bag in public.) Bloggers Sara Boyd and Malavika Jagannathan have been enjoying the latest news that our dear friend "Gossip Girl" has been sending, via text. But at the same time wonder what will become of the show that's starting to play relationship musical chairs strictly within its own cast?

Sara: After yet another hiatus from our favorite guilty pleasure, “Gossip Girl” it seems the show is back in the swing of things. And by the swing of things, clearly I mean right smack dab in the midst of drama.

Heading into the third new episode since the big break, we find all sorts of tired plotlines ending — and really, thank God for that. Prime example: The story of Chuck and this mysterious, high-class society of, for lack of a better word, hookers, definitely was an odd turn of events. I have a feeling the writers began it, and then didn’t know where to take it and thankfully gave up quickly. I didn’t buy this whole “Chuck the Hero, Chuck the Savior” role reversal and really, no matter how hot this damsel in distress was, Chuck wouldn’t have risked his reputation to try and save her. And really, who wants to watch Chuck be a nice guy? Bleh.

But if nothing else, at least the storyline gave Blair a reason to once again leave Charles in the dust, further continuing the series-long “will-they-won’t-they” of the Upper East Side’s power couple. I’ll admit, it’s getting a bit old but still, it’s much more interesting then Serena and Dan. Especially since it appears the series is playing with an idea that “what’s old is new again.” Cue ex-lovers Blair and Nate. It seems like forever ago that these two were the reigning power couple, and for some it may have slipped your mind completely. After all, both have had more than their share of new love interests since that time. I’m not sure where a Blair-Nate relationship could go but for the time being, it sure makes sense. Blair’s life is up in the air and she’s looking for some stability. Nate is getting ready for an internship with the Mayor and let’s be honest, the Vanderbilt clan wouldn’t have accepted Miss Brooklyn-livin’ thrift-store buyin’ film-festival-lovin’ Vanessa for much longer. Plus, if Nate truly follows the political road, what could look better on the arm of an up-and-coming governor than a Waldorf?

We’ll have to see where this could go but from the looks of it, we could likely see good girl Vanessa turning over to the dark side (aka: Chuck Bass) for a little man-stealing help. And hey, at least it’s not Nate lusting after 15-year-old Jenny. As for Chuck, you know he’s got something up his sleeve after a betrayal from his best pal and a royal diss from his leading lady. Something tells me Leighton Meester’s real-life beau who plays bad boy Carter Baizen may not be gone for good, either.

Malavika: Especially if actor Sebastian Stan’s other show, NBC’s “Kings,” dies in ratings hell.

Sara: Unfortunately, there are signs pointing to Serena and Dan heading toward this idea that what’s old is new again and well, that’s just not true. In this case, what’s old was already old before and is still old. There’s nothing new about Dan and Serena. We know the real-life lovebirds probably want a storyline where they get to make out and be on the clock, but let’s not go back down that road.

Malavika: Young Dan has barely recovered from his Mrs.Robinson-tryst — why saddle him with yet another clichéd re-relationship?

Sara: And really, let that be a lesson to all co-worker relationships — I know there’s plenty on this show, but please, don’t be selfish. I hear there’s a rumor of a Chuck-Vanessa romance, since the real-life couple has been caught canoodling around Hollywood. Ugh, that’s just too predictable. This show has mastered in its ability to throw a few curveballs so let’s see some surprises. When’s the pregnancy scare coming? Who’s going to be the first to change sexual preferences?

Malavika: With news that the show has been picked up for a third season, what “Gossip Girl” needs — other than a few less product placements — are a few new compelling and non-annoying characters. Rumors that bad girl Georgina Sparks (Michelle Trachtenburg) is coming back are stomach churning, despite her penchant for stirring up trouble and drama on the show, because her last appearance on the show was so totally pointless and annoying. With many of our main characters heading off to college next year — “Gossip Girl: The College Years” just doesn’t quite cut it — the show needs a few younger up-and-coming characters that are not Little J “Clown Makeup” Humphrey. But, for now, “Gossip” is at its most intriguing.

Sara: All I know is that I will be anxiously awaiting what's around the corner for our beloved "GG" gang. They haven't disappointed us yet, so here's hoping it's a world of sex, lies and scandal ahead.

Final thoughts?
-- Anyone check the cover of "Rolling Stone" this month? Talk about aggressive. I don't think anyone's wondering if Blake and Leighton are actually friends anymore.
-- How is it that Vanessa is supposed to be a poor girl from Brooklyn, yet manages to keep up with the fashions of the Upper East Side without breaking a sweat?
-- Little J hasn't really been around much lately -- does anyone miss her? Looks like tonight's episode will be all about her 16th birthday, but will we care?

Comment now!

Catch "Gossip Girl" at 7 p.m. tonight (and Mondays) on the CW.

-- Sara Boyd, and Malavika Jagannathan,

Labels: ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home