Off topic but the Golden Globes are voted for by 95 journos who are near legendary for voting for whoever threw 'em the best party / gave 'em the best swag.
They're not much up from meaningless.
Quite. All the big awards are based on popularity, which TV network's involved, or which studio, and who can buy the most publicity or air time for their nominees.
If you focus just on wins you're essentially claiming that only award-winners are talented, and given the history of brilliant people who've been unfortunate enough to give their best performances in the same year as others (Oscars, Emmys, SAGs, Golden Globes, same principle applies) and therefore have never won but have multiple nominations. Doesn't make them any less talented than the winners, a great deal of the significance is in the nomination..
No I'm not, I'm saying winning an award is only one aspect of whether or not someone is talented and, therefore, denigrating an award because it's a "popular one" is as meaningless as venerating an award because it's supposedly a more credible one.
Whether or not Lea and Chris were nominated for Emmys or Golden Globes this year or last is irrelevant, the fact remains that they are the only ones of the student-playing cast who have ever been nominated for awards that are voted for by critics and by their peers. .
No they're not. The whole ensemble has been nominated for, and won, the SAG award including all the other student cast members.
Chris and Lea are the only two members of the student cast who received Golden Globe nominations which, as has been said, are just as much a popular award as the Teen or Peoples' Choice ones. It's not, however, at all surprising they're the only two student cast members nominated as they are, technically, the two "leads" of the show in S2 which is the only time they were both nominated. Lea Michele was the only one nominated for their first season alongside Matt Morrison for best actor.
Of all the cast members on Glee, Jane Lynch is the most nominated.
No they're not. The whole ensemble has been nominated for, and won, the SAG award including all the other student cast members.
Chris and Lea are the only two members of the student cast who received Golden Globe nominations which, as has been said, are just as much a popular award as the Teen or Peoples' Choice ones. It's not, however, at all surprising they're the only two student cast members nominated as they are, technically, the two "leads" of the show in S2 which is the only time they were both nominated. Lea Michele was the only one nominated for their first season alongside Matt Morrison for best actor.
Of all the cast members on Glee, Jane Lynch is the most nominated.
Sorry, I thought it was self-evident that we were talking about individual nominations/wins, not ensemble ones - the discussion did start from Teen Choice Awards after all. Ensemble awards are different things entirely, it's still not recognition of the quality of an individual performance. Lea and Chris are the only ones to garner an individual nomination.
And I specifically said student-playing cast members, thus excluding Matt Morrison and Jane Lynch, because I don't think that comparison does anything to make Chord Overstreet or Blake Jenner look any better at all.
Any of the cast could have been nominated - Dot-Marie Jones is nominated for Guest Actress this year. So while it's not surprising that Lea and Chris are the ones who got the big award nominations, they still had to earn the nomination, which they did and none of the rest of the cast have done.
Clearly we're never going to agree on this, but the point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe the Teen Choice awards are any indication of the winners' talent, they're nothing but a popularity contest driven by pre-teen fans. I put much more emphasis on actual industry awards where it's one person one vote rather than a test of how many times someone can hit the speed dial button/fill in an online form. The fact remains that nominations and wins at industry awards do carry weight in the industry itself, much more so than the popularity awards, which only the winners ever seem to bother turning up for!
Sorry, I thought it was self-evident that we were talking about individual nominations/wins, not ensemble ones - the discussion did start from Teen Choice Awards after all. Ensemble awards are different things entirely, it's still not recognition of the quality of an individual performance. Lea and Chris are the only ones to garner an individual nomination.
Why would it be self-evident because we were discussing the Teen Choice Awards? They have awards which are given to ensembles, Glee won the Best Comedy which is an award given to the whole cast.
Clearly we're never going to agree on this, but the point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe the Teen Choice awards are any indication of the winners' talent, they're nothing but a popularity contest driven by pre-teen fans.
I put much more emphasis on actual industry awards where it's one person one vote rather than a test of how many times someone can hit the speed dial button/fill in an online form.
BIB: Which is exactly what occurs with the Peoples' Choice Awards. Neither Chris or Lea has been nominated for an "industry" award since 2011 which is entirely in line with the fact that the novelty of Glee wore off.
Do I think Lea and Chris are better actors than Blake Jenner, of course they are and yes I do, but I also don't think he's a crap no talent, as has been inferred in this thread and it would seem that an element of the award giving organisations, as well as the TV critics, would agree with me.
As I said, denegrating one award because it's a "popular" one but venerating a different award is a none argument as all awards are based on popularity for both the nominee and the show they appear in.
There are plenty of problems with both kinds of awards. People's and Teen Choice are, as has been said, just giant popularity contests that, these days, depend on which individual has the most switched on fans who can utilise their internet connection until they get an RSI! Helps when Lea (and others) tweet to her 3 million followers about the nominations, asks for votes, and provides them with a handy link to do so! That's how those votes work, it's also worth bearing in mind that Teen Choice Awards are run by Fox. iI's actually in the T&C that Fox can choose the winner from the 'voted shortlist'. That's not the case with People's Choice, and these awards are far better indicator of an actor's popularity with the wider audiences.
As for the industry ones like Emmy's, GG etc, there's a huge amount of politics involved. If your show is not 'flavour of the month' or the current 'brand new shiny', then it really doesn't matter how good an actor you are, you're not going to win. Amy Poehler has never won an award, despite being one of the finest comedic actresses around, because Parks and Recs isn't, well, 30 Rock or Modern Family. Often nothing to do with talent - not taking away anything from Chris Colfer's GG - he deserved to take the award over the monolith of the FOUR MF nominees in his category. Talk about stacking the decks - that show has got it down to an art form!
Saying all this, it's utterly fruitless pitting one actor against another in this show. They're all subject to the vagaries of the writers' whims. All can benefit from a passionately well-written storyline, or have to suffer the indignities of being a bland, out-of-character mouthpiece for whatever 'issue of the week' Ryan Murphy has latched onto. However, if you asked me(!), Chris Colfer isn't just the best actor on this show (closely followed by Jane Lynch), he's one of the best actors of his generation. I suspect everyone will look at Glee in 10 year's time, exclaim how young and cute he was in early season 1 footage, and realise how good he was in Glee and how much better he's gotten since. But that's just my opinion, and everyone's got one!
Saying all this, it's utterly fruitless pitting one actor against another in this show. They're all subject to the vagaries of the writers' whims. All can benefit from a passionately well-written storyline, or have to suffer the indignities of being a bland, out-of-character mouthpiece for whatever 'issue of the week' Ryan Murphy has latched onto.
However, if you asked me(!), Chris Colfer isn't just the best actor on this show (closely followed by Jane Lynch), he's one of the best actors of his generation. I suspect everyone will look at Glee in 10 year's time, exclaim how young and cute he was in early season 1 footage, and realise how good he was in Glee and how much better he's gotten since. But that's just my opinion, and everyone's got one!
I completely agree with your first paragraph, the actors are at the mercy of the scripts and storylines they're given and can only do their best with what they're given. It's why, personally, I rate/rated Cory Monteith as one of the most talented actors because he portrayed a confused, naive teenage boy with aplomb while working through some of the most dreadful story narrative written on Glee and with some of the worst lines.
I also mostly agree with your second paragraph, I think Chris Colfer is an incredibly talented young man who will only improve with age. But I don't think he's better than Jane Lynch and I think that, at the minute, he struggles with the lighter stuff. He's an incredibly gifted dramatic actor but his comedy/romance stuff can sometimes feel a bit stilted.
I think Chris Colfer is an incredibly talented young man who will only improve with age. But I don't think he's better than Jane Lynch and I think that, at the minute, he struggles with the lighter stuff. He's an incredibly gifted dramatic actor but his comedy/romance stuff can sometimes feel a bit stilted.
I've got to say I totally agree with this. I didn't realise how good he is in glee, I don't like Kurt much because he gets on my nerves. But watching Chris in Struck by Lightening, you see a whole different side to him, and his writing abilities are pretty great too.
I've got to say I totally agree with this. I didn't realise how good he is in glee, I don't like Kurt much because he gets on my nerves. But watching Chris in Struck by Lightening, you see a whole different side to him, and his writing abilities are pretty great too.
I thought he was ok in Struck By Lightning, and not a bad scriptwriter either, but I think he's better in Glee, and definitely one of the best actors on the show despite how irritating his character can be! I don't think he's better than Jane Lynch though, I don't think anyone on the show is better than her.
I hope Ryder and Unique become friends, I ship them so much but I don't think they'll ever date so I hope they at least get to become comfortable in each others presence.
Jacob Artist is my favorite by far from the current Glee member's, I adore his voice and his stage presence is great too
He is an absolutely incredible dancer, I really wish they'd showcase that aspect of his talents a bit more. I was watching Lights Out again yesterday and during We Will Rock You he performs an absolutely amazing series of pirouettes. Like you, I also love his voice, he has a real soulful quality to it which is very easy to listen to.
I hope Ryder and Unique become friends, I ship them so much but I don't think they'll ever date so I hope they at least get to become comfortable in each others presence.
I'm hoping for this as well, I think it would be incredibly interesting to explore their friendship given the catfish revelation and how Ryder opened up to Unique without knowing who it was. I agree that it's unlikely they'd be shown dating though, I think Fox is still too "conservative" for that.
Although the one thing I've really taken from this conversation is the reminder that Ryder I'd dyslexic and was sexually abused. It's really terrible that I could forget that, especially the abuse thing. The only thing I really think of his character for is that he has a thing for Marley...
In fact I'd probably say the same about most of the new characters. I certainly don't like them as much and haven't watched all the S4 episodes multiple times like I have the others but I really could only give you the "one sentence cliche" that each of those characters was rather than their personal growth.
With Ryder's I think it's more a case of "issue of the week" syndrome where they really didn't come back as recurring things.
Just dawned on me to wonder what he will be like in the Finn episode. Shame they won't bring back Rory as I'm sure the two of them would make for interesting commentary on their idolising relationship with him.
"one sentence cliche" that each of those characters was rather than their personal growth.
How is that any different than original New Directions in their first season though? They were all one note cliche characters when first introduced and had hardly changed by the end of Season One.
Does anyone know if Jonathan Groff is expected to return this season? I want him back on the show!!!
I was shocked to hear of Cory's news. I never even knew he had a drug problem. I started watching Season 1 again and I love it even more the second time round. I've forgotten how young they all were and how good the songs were.
Does anyone know if Jonathan Groff is expected to return this season? I want him back on the show!!!
I was shocked to hear of Cory's news. I never even knew he had a drug problem. I started watching Season 1 again and I love it even more the second time round. I've forgotten how young they all were and how good the songs were.
There's nothing to suggest Jonathan Groff will be on Glee this year. He's filming with Ryan Murphy atm for The Naked Heart and I think has quite a few other commitments lined up with Ryan's show Looking on HBO.
He's about the only person I could see them using for Rachel's possible new "love interest" some time in the future though so who knows.
If Glee only lasts 2 more seasons I kind of hope Rachel doesn't find like a true love. Finn was hers and it will take more than two seasons for not just Rachel to get over Finn but for the audience to feel comfortable with Rachel getting a new endgame romance.
If Glee only lasts 2 more seasons I kind of hope Rachel doesn't find like a true love. Finn was hers and it will take more than two seasons for not just Rachel to get over Finn but for the audience to feel comfortable with Rachel getting a new endgame romance.
While I agree with you, I think it's highly unlikely Rachel will be left partner-less, certainly by the end of the show. Her dream was always how to reconcile her ambitions with her love so I think TPTB will want to show that she succeeded at that. After all, it's Cory's death which will prevent that happening with Finn in the show's narrative rather than anything they write for her.
This is why I can see them turning back to Jessie St James, the only other person in Rachel's past who has appreciated the talent and the person and who, I think anyway, honestly did love her (in a written for TV show kind of way ). The fact he's played by Lea's closest friend I think would also probably make it a lot easier for her to act on screen.
I think what we're talking about here - outside of the first 6 months of the show, when Rachel will surely be in mourning just as much as Lea is - is up to 44 episodes of this show left (if they run to their 6 season limit, as mentioned by the guy in charge of Fox, Kevin Reilly) without Rachel having a meaningful romantic storyline - it certainly limits their storytelling ability for their lead actress. I'm going to be practical here - Lea went back to work less than 4 weeks after her boyfriend died, and filmed 2 episodes of Glee before starting the memorial episode where she was probably likely to be required to play her character just as normal (i.e. not in mourning, just regular old Rachel). If she could do that, what makes people think that in 12-18 months time, the show won't ask her (and she won't agree) to a character development where Rachel falls in love again? Lea is a total pro - as has been evidenced by how she's dealing with all of this right now, and returning to work ensures this show, that Cory loved dearly, gets made and people have jobs still. I'm actually not concerned in the slightest with Lea being given scripts this season or next that develop Rachel's character, and ask her to do emotionally tough things. She can basically do anything she sets her mind to.
As for future romance, it's unlikely to be the epic 3 season long saga of Finchel, but people who've lost the loves of their lives don't suddenly also lose the ability to love again. And actually, Jesse St James (were J.Groff to be available) would be an absolutely valid and suitable candidate. We also wouldn't have the annoyance of having to establish a brand new character, wonder about the chemistry between the actors or dwell on a newbie's back story - we already pretty much know it. From a character perspective, a New York Rachel, learning the ropes on B'way and starting to make her name for herself would be almost perfectly suited to a more mature Jesse. He showed major signs of growth the last we saw him, when he was asking Carmen Tibideaux to give Rachel a place at NYADA. Both are ambitious, over-dramatic and love exactly the same things. Let's be honest, the guy who said 'I picked the Stephen Sondheim biography section for our clandestine meeting place, because only he would be able to express my melancholia' is basically on Rachel's exact wavelength here! He may not be her future husband, but as a medium term committed boyfriend, I think he'd do very well for her.
There's nothing to suggest Jonathan Groff will be on Glee this year. He's filming with Ryan Murphy atm for The Naked Heart and I think has quite a few other commitments lined up with Ryan's show Looking on HBO. He's about the only person I could see them using for Rachel's possible new "love interest" some time in the future though so who knows.
I think what we're talking about here - outside of the first 6 months of the show, when Rachel will surely be in mourning just as much as Lea is - is up to 44 episodes of this show left (if they run to their 6 season limit, as mentioned by the guy in charge of Fox, Kevin Reilly) without Rachel having a meaningful romantic storyline - it certainly limits their storytelling ability for their lead actress. I'm going to be practical here - Lea went back to work less than 4 weeks after her boyfriend died, and filmed 2 episodes of Glee before starting the memorial episode where she was probably likely to be required to play her character just as normal (i.e. not in mourning, just regular old Rachel). If she could do that, what makes people think that in 12-18 months time, the show won't ask her (and she won't agree) to a character development where Rachel falls in love again? Lea is a total pro - as has been evidenced by how she's dealing with all of this right now, and returning to work ensures this show, that Cory loved dearly, gets made and people have jobs still. I'm actually not concerned in the slightest with Lea being given scripts this season or next that develop Rachel's character, and ask her to do emotionally tough things. She can basically do anything she sets her mind to.
As for future romance, it's unlikely to be the epic 3 season long saga of Finchel, but people who've lost the loves of their lives don't suddenly also lose the ability to love again. And actually, Jesse St James (were J.Groff to be available) would be an absolutely valid and suitable candidate. We also wouldn't have the annoyance of having to establish a brand new character, wonder about the chemistry between the actors or dwell on a newbie's back story - we already pretty much know it. From a character perspective, a New York Rachel, learning the ropes on B'way and starting to make her name for herself would be almost perfectly suited to a more mature Jesse. He showed major signs of growth the last we saw him, when he was asking Carmen Tibideaux to give Rachel a place at NYADA. Both are ambitious, over-dramatic and love exactly the same things. Let's be honest, the guy who said 'I picked the Stephen Sondheim biography section for our clandestine meeting place, because only he would be able to express my melancholia' is basically on Rachel's exact wavelength here! He may not be her future husband, but as a medium term committed boyfriend, I think he'd do very well for her.
I sooo hope you're both right about Jesse and Rachel. It would be perfect to have them back together again and I loved the Jesse St James character!
I love Jesse. His face when watching her sing 'It's all coming back to me' during Nationals was adorable. Total love there. That's the only love match Rachel can have now in my eyes!
Read an interview with Dianna Agron earlier, where she basically said she wasn't asked back for the tribute episode (on my phone so can't post a link)
If this is true, can see a massive backlash against Ryan Murphy and the writers...
Read an interview with Dianna Agron earlier, where she basically said she wasn't asked back for the tribute episode (on my phone so can't post a link)
If this is true, can see a massive backlash against Ryan Murphy and the writers...
I'll be extremely annoyed if that's true. It's simply not an excuse to say there was no reason to bring her back when a) they're bringing everyone else back, b) it's a tribute to Cory, not a regular episode of the show and c) Dianna and Lea have always been close friends.
I think it's inexcusable not to have everyone back to be honest.
Read an interview with Dianna Agron earlier, where she basically said she wasn't asked back for the tribute episode (on my phone so can't post a link)
If this is true, can see a massive backlash against Ryan Murphy and the writers...
The current poll on The Glee Forum would seem to indicate that most people don't care or accept there must be a reason for it.
She doesn't say she wasn't asked back, but the article implies it. The actual quote is:
Agron, who was reduced from a series regular to appear in just three episodes last season, was not asked to participate in the memorial show. In fact, the actress isn’t certain she’ll be back at all this season.
She doesn't say she wasn't asked back, but the article implies it. The actual quote is:
The reporter tweeted that it was Dianna herself who said she wasn't asked back.
It just doesn't make sense - every other person in the cast with the exception of Heather Morris is in the episode, and that's excusable because she's heavily pregnant. Dianna isn't busy, and Quinn was a character that was important in Finn's storylines on Glee. They'd made up and moved on, there's nothing to suggest that Quinn wouldn't come home for a memorial or whatever they're going to do. Especially if every other character is.
I think it's a mistake on Ryan Murphy's part, all the characters should be there to pay tribute to Finn except where, like Heather, there is a genuine good reason for the actor not being able to film the scenes.
Comments
Quite. All the big awards are based on popularity, which TV network's involved, or which studio, and who can buy the most publicity or air time for their nominees.
No I'm not, I'm saying winning an award is only one aspect of whether or not someone is talented and, therefore, denigrating an award because it's a "popular one" is as meaningless as venerating an award because it's supposedly a more credible one.
No they're not. The whole ensemble has been nominated for, and won, the SAG award including all the other student cast members.
Chris and Lea are the only two members of the student cast who received Golden Globe nominations which, as has been said, are just as much a popular award as the Teen or Peoples' Choice ones. It's not, however, at all surprising they're the only two student cast members nominated as they are, technically, the two "leads" of the show in S2 which is the only time they were both nominated. Lea Michele was the only one nominated for their first season alongside Matt Morrison for best actor.
Of all the cast members on Glee, Jane Lynch is the most nominated.
Sorry, I thought it was self-evident that we were talking about individual nominations/wins, not ensemble ones - the discussion did start from Teen Choice Awards after all. Ensemble awards are different things entirely, it's still not recognition of the quality of an individual performance. Lea and Chris are the only ones to garner an individual nomination.
And I specifically said student-playing cast members, thus excluding Matt Morrison and Jane Lynch, because I don't think that comparison does anything to make Chord Overstreet or Blake Jenner look any better at all.
Any of the cast could have been nominated - Dot-Marie Jones is nominated for Guest Actress this year. So while it's not surprising that Lea and Chris are the ones who got the big award nominations, they still had to earn the nomination, which they did and none of the rest of the cast have done.
Clearly we're never going to agree on this, but the point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe the Teen Choice awards are any indication of the winners' talent, they're nothing but a popularity contest driven by pre-teen fans. I put much more emphasis on actual industry awards where it's one person one vote rather than a test of how many times someone can hit the speed dial button/fill in an online form. The fact remains that nominations and wins at industry awards do carry weight in the industry itself, much more so than the popularity awards, which only the winners ever seem to bother turning up for!
Why would it be self-evident because we were discussing the Teen Choice Awards? They have awards which are given to ensembles, Glee won the Best Comedy which is an award given to the whole cast.
BIB: Which is exactly what occurs with the Peoples' Choice Awards. Neither Chris or Lea has been nominated for an "industry" award since 2011 which is entirely in line with the fact that the novelty of Glee wore off.
Do I think Lea and Chris are better actors than Blake Jenner, of course they are and yes I do, but I also don't think he's a crap no talent, as has been inferred in this thread and it would seem that an element of the award giving organisations, as well as the TV critics, would agree with me.
As I said, denegrating one award because it's a "popular" one but venerating a different award is a none argument as all awards are based on popularity for both the nominee and the show they appear in.
As for the industry ones like Emmy's, GG etc, there's a huge amount of politics involved. If your show is not 'flavour of the month' or the current 'brand new shiny', then it really doesn't matter how good an actor you are, you're not going to win. Amy Poehler has never won an award, despite being one of the finest comedic actresses around, because Parks and Recs isn't, well, 30 Rock or Modern Family. Often nothing to do with talent - not taking away anything from Chris Colfer's GG - he deserved to take the award over the monolith of the FOUR MF nominees in his category. Talk about stacking the decks - that show has got it down to an art form!
Saying all this, it's utterly fruitless pitting one actor against another in this show. They're all subject to the vagaries of the writers' whims. All can benefit from a passionately well-written storyline, or have to suffer the indignities of being a bland, out-of-character mouthpiece for whatever 'issue of the week' Ryan Murphy has latched onto. However, if you asked me(!), Chris Colfer isn't just the best actor on this show (closely followed by Jane Lynch), he's one of the best actors of his generation. I suspect everyone will look at Glee in 10 year's time, exclaim how young and cute he was in early season 1 footage, and realise how good he was in Glee and how much better he's gotten since. But that's just my opinion, and everyone's got one!
I completely agree with your first paragraph, the actors are at the mercy of the scripts and storylines they're given and can only do their best with what they're given. It's why, personally, I rate/rated Cory Monteith as one of the most talented actors because he portrayed a confused, naive teenage boy with aplomb while working through some of the most dreadful story narrative written on Glee and with some of the worst lines.
I also mostly agree with your second paragraph, I think Chris Colfer is an incredibly talented young man who will only improve with age. But I don't think he's better than Jane Lynch and I think that, at the minute, he struggles with the lighter stuff. He's an incredibly gifted dramatic actor but his comedy/romance stuff can sometimes feel a bit stilted.
I've got to say I totally agree with this. I didn't realise how good he is in glee, I don't like Kurt much because he gets on my nerves. But watching Chris in Struck by Lightening, you see a whole different side to him, and his writing abilities are pretty great too.
I thought he was ok in Struck By Lightning, and not a bad scriptwriter either, but I think he's better in Glee, and definitely one of the best actors on the show despite how irritating his character can be! I don't think he's better than Jane Lynch though, I don't think anyone on the show is better than her.
He is an absolutely incredible dancer, I really wish they'd showcase that aspect of his talents a bit more. I was watching Lights Out again yesterday and during We Will Rock You he performs an absolutely amazing series of pirouettes. Like you, I also love his voice, he has a real soulful quality to it which is very easy to listen to.
I'm hoping for this as well, I think it would be incredibly interesting to explore their friendship given the catfish revelation and how Ryder opened up to Unique without knowing who it was. I agree that it's unlikely they'd be shown dating though, I think Fox is still too "conservative" for that.
Although the one thing I've really taken from this conversation is the reminder that Ryder I'd dyslexic and was sexually abused. It's really terrible that I could forget that, especially the abuse thing. The only thing I really think of his character for is that he has a thing for Marley...
In fact I'd probably say the same about most of the new characters. I certainly don't like them as much and haven't watched all the S4 episodes multiple times like I have the others but I really could only give you the "one sentence cliche" that each of those characters was rather than their personal growth.
With Ryder's I think it's more a case of "issue of the week" syndrome where they really didn't come back as recurring things.
Just dawned on me to wonder what he will be like in the Finn episode. Shame they won't bring back Rory as I'm sure the two of them would make for interesting commentary on their idolising relationship with him.
How is that any different than original New Directions in their first season though? They were all one note cliche characters when first introduced and had hardly changed by the end of Season One.
I was shocked to hear of Cory's news. I never even knew he had a drug problem. I started watching Season 1 again and I love it even more the second time round. I've forgotten how young they all were and how good the songs were.
There's nothing to suggest Jonathan Groff will be on Glee this year. He's filming with Ryan Murphy atm for The Naked Heart and I think has quite a few other commitments lined up with Ryan's show Looking on HBO.
He's about the only person I could see them using for Rachel's possible new "love interest" some time in the future though so who knows.
While I agree with you, I think it's highly unlikely Rachel will be left partner-less, certainly by the end of the show. Her dream was always how to reconcile her ambitions with her love so I think TPTB will want to show that she succeeded at that. After all, it's Cory's death which will prevent that happening with Finn in the show's narrative rather than anything they write for her.
This is why I can see them turning back to Jessie St James, the only other person in Rachel's past who has appreciated the talent and the person and who, I think anyway, honestly did love her (in a written for TV show kind of way
As for future romance, it's unlikely to be the epic 3 season long saga of Finchel, but people who've lost the loves of their lives don't suddenly also lose the ability to love again. And actually, Jesse St James (were J.Groff to be available) would be an absolutely valid and suitable candidate. We also wouldn't have the annoyance of having to establish a brand new character, wonder about the chemistry between the actors or dwell on a newbie's back story - we already pretty much know it. From a character perspective, a New York Rachel, learning the ropes on B'way and starting to make her name for herself would be almost perfectly suited to a more mature Jesse. He showed major signs of growth the last we saw him, when he was asking Carmen Tibideaux to give Rachel a place at NYADA. Both are ambitious, over-dramatic and love exactly the same things. Let's be honest, the guy who said 'I picked the Stephen Sondheim biography section for our clandestine meeting place, because only he would be able to express my melancholia' is basically on Rachel's exact wavelength here! He may not be her future husband, but as a medium term committed boyfriend, I think he'd do very well for her.
I sooo hope you're both right about Jesse and Rachel. It would be perfect to have them back together again and I loved the Jesse St James character!
If this is true, can see a massive backlash against Ryan Murphy and the writers...
I'll be extremely annoyed if that's true. It's simply not an excuse to say there was no reason to bring her back when a) they're bringing everyone else back, b) it's a tribute to Cory, not a regular episode of the show and c) Dianna and Lea have always been close friends.
I think it's inexcusable not to have everyone back to be honest.
The current poll on The Glee Forum would seem to indicate that most people don't care or accept there must be a reason for it.
The article is in the New York Post.
She doesn't say she wasn't asked back, but the article implies it. The actual quote is:
http://tvline.com/2013/09/01/finn-tribute-episode-glee-season-5/
The reporter tweeted that it was Dianna herself who said she wasn't asked back.
It just doesn't make sense - every other person in the cast with the exception of Heather Morris is in the episode, and that's excusable because she's heavily pregnant. Dianna isn't busy, and Quinn was a character that was important in Finn's storylines on Glee. They'd made up and moved on, there's nothing to suggest that Quinn wouldn't come home for a memorial or whatever they're going to do. Especially if every other character is.
I think it's a mistake on Ryan Murphy's part, all the characters should be there to pay tribute to Finn except where, like Heather, there is a genuine good reason for the actor not being able to film the scenes.