# Glee - ANyone still watching?



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

Haven't seen a post yet this thread. Anyone still watching?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Not here. I still check out the songs online, but I've lost what little interest I had in the show. I'll still watch this week's episode though.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Still watching


Finn dies this week.













Spoiler alert.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

I didn't watch last season and haven't watched this season so far, but yeah, I'll be recording this week.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

Wife and I still watch but we fast forward thru a lot of it and just watch the singing parts. Sue's character has once again become hard to watch. I have gotten to the point where they need to dump her.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I watch and still enjoy.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

I had a very small laugh at the Carrie scene in the 2nd week of the Beatles.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

No


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Just like most shows, I batch up & watch at some point, but I'm "only" one behind on this one.


----------



## DavidJL (Feb 21, 2006)

No


----------



## MikeCC (Jun 19, 2004)

No. I gave up on this show early last year.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

No

Our local news radio host sort of ripped the latest Glee episode that's dedicated to the drug addict actor.


He called it the show honoring a "junky". He went on to say it was somewhat offensive that they are honoring a junky for an hour as opposed to honoring folks who died honorably etc etc. 

I can see his point...they seem to be glorifying this kid who's been on drugs for some time, hasn't really done much other than this one flash in the pan show and now he gets a nationwide audience send off. All for being a drug addict.


----------



## The Spud (Aug 28, 2002)

I still watch because I still enjoy the music. I don't enjoy the newer cast members as much as the originals.

On a side note, the guy who made the Ed Sullivan Beatle suits for the premiere episode participates on a Beatles forum that I'm on. He didn't do the Sgt Pepper costumes.

www.beatlesuits.com


----------



## kettledrum (Nov 17, 2003)

I'm a season behind. I had planned on watching Season 4 this summer but my TiVo got struck by lightning so bye bye Season 4 of Glee that I had saved up.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

I bailed after season 1, and tried to come back this season. I couldn't make it through the episodes.

I will watch Finn's episode though, and then no more.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

I stopped watching after they stole Jonathan Coulton's _Baby Got Back_ arrangement and gave him zero credit, and then told JC that he should be grateful to them for doing so.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

I still watch but its definitely losing steam. 1st couple season were the best.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

I'm still watching because my wife likes it, but I think the show sucks now, and has sucked for a while. I'm the first to admit that season 1 was extremely entertaining. In fact, my wife an I went to see them live that summer, and it was damn fun. Unfortunately, the show has gotten worse and worse every season since.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

busyba said:


> I stopped watching after they stole Jonathan Coulton's _Baby Got Back_ arrangement and gave him zero credit, and then told JC that he should be grateful to them for doing so.


You mean the one he is now marketing as "In the Style of Glee" and that he violated the copyright agreement on when he did the arrangement. Okay.

Not that I am taking a side. There are two sides to everything.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> You mean the one he is now marketing as "In the Style of Glee"


Yes. That was his form of protest.



> and that he violated the copyright agreement on when he did the arrangement.


No. He paid all the royalties due to the rightsholder for his derivative work.



> Not that I am taking a side. There are two sides to everything.


True, but not all sides are of equal merit.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

busyba is correct. JoCo licensed "Baby Got Back" under a mechanical compulsory license, which permits rearrangements of the song, so he was OK on that end. However, he got caught unaware when he didn't realize that under a compulsory license, any rights for the song, including any rearrangements made to the song, remain with the original rights holder. Legally, Glee was safe to use JoCo's arrangement. Morally, though, one might have hoped that Glee's musical producers to at least contact JoCo to let him know that they intended to use it.

There remains an *extremely* high likelihood that they used his original performance track, one he released on the internet as a karaoke version. There, Glee was definitely in the wrong, as they would have needed to obtain a synchronization license from JoCo, which they did not. However, he opted not to pursue that (rightfully judging 20th's lawyers to be bigger and badder than his lawyers).

I believe there also was a reasonable legal argument that, given the original "song" was a rap song with no melody, technically all JoCo licensed under the compulsory license was the words. Therefore, JoCo's melody was a unique creation that he should have owned... but again, that would have required a much more protracted legal fight that he probably would have lost.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> busyba is correct. JoCo licensed "Baby Got Back" under a mechanical compulsory license, which permits rearrangements of the song, so he was OK on that end. However, he got caught unaware when he didn't realize that under a compulsory license, any rights for the song, including any rearrangements made to the song, remain with the original rights holder. Legally, Glee was safe to use JoCo's arrangement. Morally, though, one might have hoped that Glee's musical producers to at least contact JoCo to let him know that they intended to use it. There remains an *extremely* high likelihood that they used his original performance track, one he released on the internet as a karaoke version. There, Glee was definitely in the wrong, as they would have needed to obtain a synchronization license from JoCo, which they did not. However, he opted not to pursue that (rightfully judging 20th's lawyers to be bigger and badder than his lawyers). I believe there also was a reasonable legal argument that, given the original "song" was a rap song with no melody, technically all JoCo licensed under the compulsory license was the words. Therefore, JoCo's melody was a unique creation that he should have owned... but again, that would have required a much more protracted legal fight that he probably would have lost.


My point was I don't give a crap. The Glee people did their due diligence. He didn't. So we should protest and stamp our feet because he thought he was wronged when he wasn't? What is this, Congress?

Maybe he should also apologize to Richard Head who put the song to melody before he did.

There is a reason for laws like these. Glee did their job. Just because some "artist" didn't understand the law and got in a snit doesn't make either side "morally right" or not. Let's see. He thought he had rights to the song. He was wrong. But he pouts better. Good for him.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

I don't have as much of an issue with Glee honoring Cory as I did with the Emmy awards. Regardless of how, they lost a friend. Now if the writer's really wanted to deal with "issues", they wouldn't candy coat the OD.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

TonyD79 said:


> My point was I don't give a crap. The Glee people did their due diligence. He didn't. So we should protest and stamp our feet because he thought he was wronged when he wasn't? What is this, Congress?
> 
> Maybe he should also apologize to Richard Head who put the song to melody before he did.
> 
> There is a reason for laws like these. Glee did their job. Just because some "artist" didn't understand the law and got in a snit doesn't make either side "morally right" or not. Let's see. He thought he had rights to the song. He was wrong. But he pouts better. Good for him.


for someone who doesn't give a crap you've certainly put a lot of thought into this

Glee is crap 
always has been 
always will be

Glee is to music and talent what Twilight is to vampire movies


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

jamesl said:


> for someone who doesn't give a crap you've certainly put a lot of thought into this
> 
> Glee is crap
> always has been
> ...


speaking of crap.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

They put a lot of thought into it.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

jamesl said:


> for someone who doesn't give a crap you've certainly put a lot of thought into this Glee is crap always has been always will be Glee is to music and talent what Twilight is to vampire movies


As any intelligent person, I researched the topic then figured out that I don't give a crap about the whining artiste.

As for the rest of your post, classic thread crapping. Thanks for participating.


----------



## MusicMama (Mar 6, 2005)

Watched bits and pieces of last season based on recaps. If I liked what I heard in the recap, then I watched, otherwise just deleted the ep from my Tivo. Skipped the first two eps but watched this one live. Cried like a baby at some of the scenes between the characters, especially at the last scene with Mr. Shue.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

MusicMama said:


> Watched bits and pieces of last season based on recaps. If I liked what I heard in the recap, then I watched, otherwise just deleted the ep from my Tivo. Skipped the first two eps but watched this one live. Cried like a baby at some of the scenes between the characters, especially at the last scene with Mr. Shue.


God bless commercials, for breaking up the sad scenes with butter and automobiles, or I would have lost it. That was the most heartfelt episode I have ever seen of any show. Yes, he was a junkie, but he was their friend and co-worker, and that showed.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> My point was I don't give a crap.


If what you don't give a crap about is being factually correct, that much is obvious.

If it's something else, then one has to wonder how you gave enough a crap to post your response in the first place.



> So we should protest and stamp our feet because he thought he was wronged when he wasn't?


A) He absolutely was wronged, regardless of whether or not the actions stood up to legal scrutiny. There's a lot more to right and wrong than merely what's written in law books.

2) Who's stamping their feet and protesting? I simply decided that I had no interest in being a patron of an artist who plagiarizes (even if in a legal manner) other artists' (JC was not the first indie artist to be treated in that way, just the one with the most fans and publicity "juice") work.



> He was wrong. But he pouts better.


Apparently he's got nothing on you.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> There remains an *extremely* high likelihood that they used his original performance track, one he released on the internet as a karaoke version. There, Glee was definitely in the wrong, as they would have needed to obtain a synchronization license from JoCo, which they did not. However, he opted not to pursue that (rightfully judging 20th's lawyers to be bigger and badder than his lawyers).


Back in January, in his blog post about the situation, his last statement was, "I will have a lot more to say about this situation soon, most likely Monday", and that was the last that he's said publicly on the subject, as far as I can tell.

Based upon that, I have a suspicion that someone on the Glee side made some kind of settlement with him, and that included an NDA and a gag order.


----------



## Anthjo (Aug 7, 2007)

Alfer said:


> No
> 
> Our local news radio host sort of ripped the latest Glee episode that's dedicated to the drug addict actor.
> 
> ...


Really?

Michael Jackson was a prescription junkie and (likely) a pedophile. Millions mourned.

Elvis was a fat, slobbering mess at the time of his death. Millions mourned. Continues to be revered to this day.

Whitney Houston was a crackhead.

Princess Diana was an adulterer who chose to drive with a drunk and drugged driver. Entire nations mourned. Got a worldwide "send-off"

John Lennon had a lot of demons that were well-documented, especially to those who followed the Beatles.

Ronald Reagan was no friend to early AIDS sufferers when he refused to acknowledge that the disease even existed. Talk about a "send-off". News outlets covered it for weeks.

The point is that a young man died way too soon. It's sad. The dangerous thing is that he appeared, at least on the surface, to seemingly have it all. A gig on a popular TV show, good looks, a beautiful and talented girlfriend....who knows what he dealt with growing up. He was a friend and co-worker to many of Glee's cast members. I thought the writers managed to honor him in a touching and poignant way without the whole thing feeling exploitative.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I still watch it. But I fast forward over anything with Becky or Rachel and anything with Kurt and Blaine together, about 80% of anything with Sue, maybe 65% of anything with Kurt, almost anything with Mercedes or Brittany or Quinn singing, and about 30% of most of the group singing. So it's generally a pretty quick watch.

I'm caught up now to the Finn-dies episode, which I'll watch sometime over the weekend. And I fully expect to be completely disgusted by whatever story they've chose to surround it that I'll probably be deleting the season pass soon, though.

The shows biggest mistake, and probably the major reason for its significant decline the last few years is to not have graduated the seniors and been done with them, but to just further spread the show too thinly and in ways that require too much stretching of storylines to keep the original characters in play.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

I still watch on a weekly basis. Last year I fell behind but eventually caught up. This year, I wanted to watch last night's episode. I have to admit there were times in the episode I felt a little dust in my eye.

Since this isn't a spoiler or episode thread, I will spoiler my comments about this episode:


Spoiler



I thought this was a very well done episode. I liked that they focused on original characters and their reaction to Finn's/Corey's death. Everyone's reaction felt "right". The songs were a good choice, especially Seasons of Love. This is one of my all time favorite Broadway Songs and I thought the kids did a great job with it.

The scene with Kurt, Burt, and Carol was excellent. You have to wonder how much of their emotion was a reaction to Corey's death versus just acting. That was one of the best scenes in Glee in a long time.

Loved Santana finally getting back at Sue. She was able to final get out all the aggression she had built up in High School. We got to see the "Good" Sue again later as she admitted her weakness. But, I doubt this will last.

I am disappointed that neither Quinn nor Brittney were there. Since all the other originals were there (even Mike Chang, who didn't have a line in the whole episode), I have to believe this was a decision by the actresses. But, if I were in their place, I think I would make EVERY effort to take a week in my life to be part of the episode.

Did we really need another "Tina is selfish" scene? Sorry, not needed.





dswallow said:


> The shows biggest mistake, and probably the major reason for its significant decline the last few years is to not have graduated the seniors and been done with them, but to just further spread the show too thinly and in ways that require too much stretching of storylines to keep the original characters in play.


I agree 100% on this. I wish the Producers would have gone ahead with their original plan of spinning off Kurt & Rachel in New York. For the past 1 1/2 season the show has been off track trying to split show between two locations (and hap hazard attempts to tie the two groups together.)


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

TriBruin said:


> Since this isn't a spoiler or episode thread, I will spoiler my comments about this episode:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



At the time of filming, Heather Morris (Brittany) was 8 months pregnant, so she was unavailable for that reason.

Dianna Agron (Quinn) was unavailable for an undefined scheduling conflict.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Anthjo said:


> Really?
> 
> Michael Jackson was a prescription junkie and (likely) a pedophile. Millions mourned.
> 
> ...


Difference being that all those folks were "legends" in their roles in society...this kid, not so much.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

Donbadabon said:


> I bailed after season 1, and tried to come back this season. I couldn't make it through the episodes. I will watch Finn's episode though, and then no more.


Me, too. Finn was the character that sold me on the show, in the pilot. And without him, the show feels empty. So, I'm done.

The farewell show was brutal. Glad I watched, but man.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

Alfer said:


> No Our local news radio host sort of ripped the latest Glee episode that's dedicated to the drug addict actor. He called it the show honoring a "junky". He went on to say it was somewhat offensive that they are honoring a junky for an hour as opposed to honoring folks who died honorably etc etc. I can see his point...they seem to be glorifying this kid who's been on drugs for some time, hasn't really done much other than this one flash in the pan show and now he gets a nationwide audience send off. All for being a drug addict.


What would you have had them do? He was the star of the show. He was loved by the cast and crew. People do love addicts, you know. Also, his girlfriend is still on the show. So, what should they have done?

Also, it's 'junkie'.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

A simple note posted at the end of a regular episode saying that "he will be missed" or similar. That too would have been a good option.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Lori said:


> What would you have had them do? He was the star of the show. He was loved by the cast and crew. People do love addicts, you know. Also, his girlfriend is still on the show. So, what should they have done?
> 
> Also, it's 'junkie'.


And the better word is "addict." As in, he made a bad choice and got "addicted" to narcotics, and unfortunately in the end that addiction killed him.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

Alfer said:


> A simple note posted at the end of a regular episode saying that "he will be missed" or similar. That too would have been a good option.


What do they do about the character? This wasn't a goodbye to Cory, it was a goodbye to Finn.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> And the better word is "addict." As in, he made a bad choice and got "addicted" to narcotics, and unfortunately in the end that addiction killed him.


 Well, yes, but if you're going to use the word, learn how to spell it.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Lori said:


> What do they do about the character? This wasn't a goodbye to Cory, it was a goodbye to Finn.


I think it was both. While watching the episode, I kept thinking they were going to show flashbacks of him during pivotal moments from the show. About halfway through, it suddenly dawned on me that they made a deliberate decision for the episode to be more about the actors saying goodbye than the audience. I'm cool with that. It wasn't just a character dying, it was their friend. I'm sure filming those scenes was very cathartic for them.


----------



## gilmoregirls102 (Dec 29, 2005)

gweempose said:


> I think it was both. While watching the episode, I kept thinking they were going to show flashbacks of him during pivotal moments from the show. About halfway through, it suddenly dawned on me that they made a deliberate decision for the episode to be more about the actors saying goodbye than the audience. I'm cool with that. It wasn't just a character dying, it was their friend. I'm sure filming those scenes was very cathartic for them.


I wondered (and then realized) the same thing.

The scene with Burt and Finn's mom had me sobbing.

"After your child dies, you are still a parent...you're just a parent without a child..."



God, that was emotional!


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

busyba said:


> If what you don't give a crap about is being factually correct, that much is obvious. If it's something else, then one has to wonder how you gave enough a crap to post your response in the first place. A) He absolutely was wronged, regardless of whether or not the actions stood up to legal scrutiny. There's a lot more to right and wrong than merely what's written in law books. 2) Who's stamping their feet and protesting? I simply decided that I had no interest in being a patron of an artist who plagiarizes (even if in a legal manner) other artists' (JC was not the first indie artist to be treated in that way, just the one with the most fans and publicity "juice") work. Apparently he's got nothing on you.


Crap. It is business and standard practices. Glee understood them. He didn't. This kind of thing happens everyday.

And I meant he is stamping his feet. Them co opting the name of Glee. Yup. He is a great man.

Btw, my facts came from his website.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Alfer said:


> Difference being that all those folks were "legends" in their roles in society...this kid, not so much.


And "this kid" gets a send off on HIS show. Hardly the same scale because he wasn't the legend that Michael Jackson or Elvis were.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> You mean the one he is now marketing as "In the Style of Glee" and that he violated the copyright agreement on when he did the arrangement. Okay.
> 
> Not that I am taking a side. There are two sides to everything.


What are you both talking about?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> Crap. It is business and standard practices. Glee understood them. He didn't. This kind of thing happens everyday.


A great many injustices happen everyday. Just because Glee's brand of plagiarism is a standard business practice, that doesn't mean their victims should just silently take it dry.



> And I meant he is stamping his feet. Them co opting the name of Glee.


"Co-opting the name of Glee", wow... that's some high comedy right there. I picture you holding your wrist to your forehead as you say that.

He sold his song as a cover of _Baby Got Back_ with an arrangement that was in the same style as the one on Glee (which just so happened to be his original arrangement, but hey, that's just a standard business practice, right?), and advertised it as such.

What he did was perfectly legal too. By your stated standards, you _should_ have no problem with that. And in any case, the fact that you do is largely unimportant as yours is the vastly minority view: his "cover" of the Glee version ("It's a cover of Glee's cover of my cover of Sir Mix-a-Lot's song, which is to say it's EXACTLY THE SAME as my original version.") absolutely crushed Glee's version on the iTunes charts.



> Yup. He is a great man.


And all the proceeds from the sales of that single (minus itunes fees and royalties to Sir Mix-a-Lot) went to charity.

So your sarcasm notwithstanding, he's certainly a better man than most.



> Btw, my facts came from his website.


Well then, you'll have to link to the page on his website where he supports you claim that "he violated the copyright agreement on [Baby Got Back] when he did the arrangement", because either you are reading his words wrong, or... well... actually, there's really no other explanation, since that's a patently false statement.

As for the show, just because what you do may be legal, that doesn't mean you can't be a dick for doing it. What Glee did was a dick move.

Personally, I don't feel the need to patronize dicks. What you choose to do with your free time is your business.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

702 said:


> What are you both talking about?


When the show featured the Sir Mix-A-Lot song "Baby Got Back," last season I believe, they used an arrangement of the song that internet recording artist Jonathan Coulton composed and recorded. Coulton only found out when the Glee recording of the track hit iTunes.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Not that you're taking a side...


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

Music rights (and cover songs) confuse the hell out of me. I thought this was Sir-Mix-A-Lot.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

gweempose said:


> I think it was both. While watching the episode, I kept thinking they were going to show flashbacks of him during pivotal moments from the show. About halfway through, it suddenly dawned on me that they made a deliberate decision for the episode to be more about the actors saying goodbye than the audience. I'm cool with that. It wasn't just a character dying, it was their friend. I'm sure filming those scenes was very cathartic for them.


Ryan Murphy said that most of what you see on screen were first takes because the cast and crew were too emotional to do a second.



> "...those performances that youll see  almost everything in that episode  is from the first take of every performance because the actors and the crew had a really hard time shooting it.
> 
> Ryan added that along with the cast, the crew was actually extremely upset, making it really hard to finish.
> 
> Ive never seen a crew that you cant continue shooting because theyve left the room sobbing, he explained.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

702 said:


> Music rights (and cover songs) confuse the hell out of me. I thought this was Sir-Mix-A-Lot.


The lyrics are Sir-Mix-A-Lot's. The music and arrangement are Coulton's (but by virtue of certain wrinkles of copyright law governing covers, Coulton doesn't actually own the rights to his own music and arrangement in that song).

So while they (maybe*) did nothing wrong from a legal standpoint, they passed off the original arrangement of the song as their own, or at the very least, without giving due credit to the composer.

*I say "maybe" because there's a strong argument to be made that not only did they plagiarize the arrangement, but they might have simply used JC's original recording as well, instead of having their own musicians just rerecord "in the style of". If they in fact did that, _then_ they would have done something illegal.

Couple that with the fact that JC rather abruptly went completely mum on the matter, leads me to believe that Glee's producers came to a legal settlement with him.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

With music, could I record an album of a bunch of cover songs, and as long as I don't take writing credits, could I sell it?

Is this why with the early Guitar Hero songs they used cover versions for most songs?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

702 said:


> With music, could I record an album of a bunch of cover songs, and as long as I don't take writing credits, could I sell it?


You'll owe royalties to whoever owns the rights to the song, but otherwise yes.

Furthermore, the person who owns the rights to the song can't actually stop you from putting out a cover version; all they can do is collect the royalty.

(And they can't "backdoor veto" your cover by charging an exorbitant royalty either, the royalties for just audio-only covers are based on a scale determined by the copyright office. The artist has no say in that instance.)



> Is this why with the early Guitar Hero songs they used cover versions for most songs?


More or less, yes. Not using the original recording means that there's one less type of royalty to pay.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

702 said:


> With music, could I record an album of a bunch of cover songs, and as long as I don't take writing credits, could I sell it?


Yes. You would obtain a type of license called a compulsory license, then as long as you just want to re-record their song, don't change the lyrics or the fundamental nature of the song, and you acknowledge their ownership of the song, you're OK.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> Yes. You would obtain a type of license called a compulsory license, then as long as you just want to re-record their song, don't change the lyrics or the fundamental nature of the song, and you acknowledge their ownership of the song, you're OK.


What does the fundamental nature mean? Some of the covers are vastly different.

Hayseed Dixie comes to mind.

On a related note, parodies are fair game right? I know Weird Al seeks permission, but he doesn't need to correct?


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

parody and satire is covered under fair-use.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

Music licensing is complicated, messy and quite lucrative. Groups like ASCAP and BMI act similar to the mob doing things like going to restaurants and demanding licensing fees. There's a story out there about a guy named Richard Phillips who was playing his own original music in a restaurant and BMI still demanded licensing fees on it. It's a messed up business.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

It's a racket for sure - my music industry survey class in college could have been renamed: "**** the RIAA and **** BMI, too"

I actually switched schools and majors after that class because I didn't want to be a part of it.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



I still missed them. There has been no mention of Brittany so far this season. It's like she just disappeared.  Quinn of course was written off, but too bad Diana Agron could not have returned in someway as Q for this.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Quinn of course was written off, but too bad Diana Agron could not have returned in someway as Q for this.





Spoiler



Unlike Heather Morris, Dianna Agron was most likely purposely excluded from the episode. I don't think she is very well liked by Ryan Murphy and some of the cast members.


----------



## Lenonn (May 31, 2004)

Wow - I've seen sad television and movies before, but nothing like what _Glee_ did. I was crying pretty consistently throughout the episodes. I lost a close friend unexpectedly last year, so I think it hit a little too close to home for me (so much so that I'm not sure who my tears were more about: Corey/Finn's death or my friend's).

Great acting (if you can call it acting in this case, based on what Ryan Murphy said about the episode) all around.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

Finally they show that Sue does have a heart. I hope she tones it down from now on.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

SNJpage1 said:


> Finally they show that Sue does have a heart. I hope she tones it down from now on.


There has been zero character development with her. Every time she shows she has a heart, it's all washed away an episode or two later. I wouldn't count on it happening this time either.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Azlen said:


> There has been zero character development with her. Every time she shows she has a heart, it's all washed away an episode or two later. I wouldn't count on it happening this time either.


This. They've gone through multiple cycles where she's actually a very nice character, such as the last time she was principal, or even during first season when she went back on her agreement with Figgins to have the glee club disbanded if they didn't win. Each time, she goes back to the same nasty character she was before. It's seriously bordering on bipolar.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

LoadStar said:


> This. They've gone through multiple cycles where she's actually a very nice character, such as the last time she was principal, or even during first season when she went back on her agreement with Figgins to have the glee club disbanded if they didn't win. Each time, she goes back to the same nasty character she was before. It's seriously bordering on bipolar.


I've mentioned it before, I think Murphy really isn't that creative, each character fills a slot in his crafted world and if one no longer fills that gap, they are replaced or "returned to form".

He NEEDS Sue to be a source of conflict, without it he flounders.

It'll be interesting to see how he fills the "everyman" slot Finn held.


----------



## LaurenLMHC (Aug 28, 2013)

Last week's show (The End of Twerk) was really good. It reminded me of what I used to love about GLEE. 

And Unique's song truly got to me.

I thought the twerking thing was stupid, mainly because it's ridiculous how much attention the Miley Cirus thing got, but I really enjoyed Marley's performance. It was very pop, but emotional too.

THEY BETTER NOT SCREW UP THE BJ episode!!


----------



## MikeCC (Jun 19, 2004)

LaurenLMHC said:


> THEY BETTER NOT SCREW UP THE BJ episode!!


 _Wha--?!_

I haven't been watching. _Are they showing a BJ episode for sweeps? _And how do they screw up a BJ? Even a mediocre one is still a good one.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Have only watched the first 2 eps of the year so far.. (Hmm, I may have to re-check #2.. I have it listed as watched, but I don't remember watching it). Have been watching other stuff, plus #3 will just be sad (despite me thinking he did himself in).


----------



## LaurenLMHC (Aug 28, 2013)

MikeCC said:


> _Wha--?!_
> 
> I haven't been watching. _Are they showing a BJ episode for sweeps? _And how do they screw up a BJ? Even a mediocre one is still a good one.


Billy Joel. lol


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

With the exception of the Cory Monteith tribute, this show has become soulless.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Jesda said:


> With the exception of the Cory Monteith tribute, this show has become soulless.


:up::up:


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Jesda said:


> With the exception of the Cory Monteith tribute, this show has become soulless.


I stopped watching Glee a while ago, while still occasionally listening to the music from the show. I dropped in to watch the Monteith/Finn tribute, and thought "This is really good. Why did I stop watching?"

Then I watched the next episode and remembered. It was unwatchable, IMO. Soulless is probably just one of many applicable criticisms of the show.

I was so hoping that the tribute episode would be a watershed episode that would allow the show to re-dedicate itself to what made it great once, but that did not happen at all. Except for a throw-away line or two, watching the next episode was almost like the tribute episode never happened.


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

Jesda said:


> With the exception of the Cory Monteith tribute, this show has become soulless.


I agree, mostly. I think that it still feels like the people in NY are real...but the McKinley folks feel like robots. Poorly-dressed, poorly-coiffed robots.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Has anybody else but me been watching _Dancing with the Stars_ this season?

Amber Riley has been tearing up the joint, and if there's any justice, she'll end up as the champ.

So if the online voting is still open, vote for Amber!


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Amber hurt her knee, so Derek Hough choreographed around it this week to give her a better chance to heal (the other dance this week was the Viennese Waltz). Here's their jazz:


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

murgatroyd said:


> Has anybody else but me been watching Dancing with the Stars this season?
> 
> <spoilers snipped>


Thanks. I hadn't watched this week's episode yet, so knowing who goes home will make it nice and anti-climactic.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

The "fall season finale" will be "a Christmas episode that they made for last season but Fox would not air it":


> Sue Sylvester introduces the episode as a Christmas special that FOX did not allow to air from last year. The members of New Directions audition for roles in McKinleys living Nativity Scene. Meanwhile in New York, Rachel, Kurt and Santana work as Santas elves at a mall in the all-new Previously Unaired Christmas episode of GLEE airing on Thursday, Dec. 5 (9:00-10:00 PM ET/PT) on FOX. (GLE-508) (TV-14 D, L)


I realize it says "Christmas Special", but the description makes it sound like just another episode that happens to take place around Christmas.

I see two problems with this.

First, they did a Christmas episode last season - "Glee, Actually." Of course, they could always say that they made that episode after Fox rejected the earlier one, but then you have to worry about deciding which one is "canon" and then not referencing the other episode in future episodes. (Oh, wait, never mind, I forgot -this is Glee we're talking about - _what_ continuity?)

Second, how do you handle the absence of Finn - and, for that matter, Brittany, who was still attending McKinley at the time the episode is supposed to take place?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

they didn't even handle the absence of Brittany this year/season. Does she appear in this year old episode? That would be weird.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Not to mention, from what I understand, the events of the show right now occur sometime during the spring, as this season continued directly from the end of last season.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> they didn't even handle the absence of Brittany this year/season. Does she appear in this year old episode? That would be weird.


I thought that I heard Brittany was written out, that she got some sort of a mid-year acceptance to a university because she was tested as some sort of genius. (Don't ask me for more details, it's one of those things that I heard about in passing, as I wasn't really watching at the time.)


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> I thought that I heard Brittany was written out, that she got some sort of a mid-year acceptance to a university because she was tested as some sort of genius. (Don't ask me for more details, it's one of those things that I heard about in passing, as I wasn't really watching at the time.)


I recall the story line, (some math thing, I think) but I thought something happened and it fell through. Is she REALLY actually officially and permanently gone from the show?


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

As for Finn, he wasn't in every episode, and sometimes only in passing. This could be one of those. If he was hardly in it, easy to edit/change around him.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> I recall the story line, (some math thing, I think) but I thought something happened and it fell through. Is she REALLY actually officially and permanently gone from the show?


According to what I'm reading online, Brittany was written out in the season finale, "All or Nothing," in which she was awarded and accepted a mid-year admission to MIT.

As for how permanently she's gone, it's possible she returns for a guest appearance, but Heather Morris is definitely no longer under contract as a series regular for season 5. (http://tvline.com/2013/06/28/glee-season-5-cast-heather-morris-mark-salling-not-returning/)


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

that sucks


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

I will miss B.S. Pierce and her video cat blog.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I wish I could have been on Fondue for Two


----------



## FrodoB (Jan 3, 2005)

LoadStar said:


> According to what I'm reading online, Brittany was written out in the season finale, "All or Nothing," in which she was awarded and accepted a mid-year admission to MIT.
> 
> As for how permanently she's gone, it's possible she returns for a guest appearance, but Heather Morris is definitely no longer under contract as a series regular for season 5. (http://tvline.com/2013/06/28/glee-season-5-cast-heather-morris-mark-salling-not-returning/)


I got the impression that this was what she wanted, being highly pregnant at the time and all. Maybe she just wanted to take a year off to be a mom. (It's certainly the reason she wasn't in the Finn tribute episode.)


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

jsmeeker said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I still missed them. There has been no mention of Brittany so far this season. It's like she just disappeared.  Quinn of course was written off, but too bad Diana Agron could not have returned in someway as Q for this.





Spoiler



I still think it was weird they weren't there - they could have done a face shot of Brittany there have been plenty of dealing with pregnant women on TV shows before this - and I don't see any good reason why Agron wasn't there.



I have agreed with most of your comments - 
however - the last two weeks have been not so bad. 
Glambert's song from 2 weeks ago was pretty awesome and As someone else mentioned Unique's solo was not exactly what I would call soul less.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

David Platt said:


> Thanks. I hadn't watched this week's episode yet, so knowing who goes home will make it nice and anti-climactic.


Sorry.


----------



## LaurenLMHC (Aug 28, 2013)

Good god, that Xmas special was awful


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

LaurenLMHC said:


> Good god, that Xmas special was awful


Yes. yes. yes.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

betts4 said:


> Yes. yes. yes.


Most of this series has been brutal since after season 2.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I watched the first few minutes... fast forwarded about 10 minutes... then again... then again... and finally realized there didn't appear to be anything redeeming in the episode and gave up. The show has completely lost its way. Hard to believe that FOX is likely going to stick with this thing for another season and a half.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

The whole Santa/elf thing was ridiculous.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

So was this episode a truly "lost" episode (i.e. filmed last year and never shown) or was it filmed this year but labeled lost to cover the fact that it does not fit in to this season's time line?

Also, have they ever explained where Sugar and Joe went? As far as I know they should still be part of the Glee club.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

THey actually said the word "Fugly" I never thought I'd hear that on network tv.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

TriBruin said:


> So was this episode a truly "lost" episode (i.e. filmed last year and never shown) or was it filmed this year but labeled lost to cover the fact that it does not fit in to this season's time line?


The second one.

Jane also mentioned that one of the scenes Fox ordered cut included the explanation as to why Will no longer had his job in Washington. That sounds like something Family Guy would do. ("So, Lois, how did you lose your job with Fox News? - You know what? The episode's just about over; does it really matter?", and "Tell me, Brian, how could you have fathered a boy who's now a teenager if you're only eight years old yourself - Go complain on the Internet"). Also, somebody claims that the names on the stockings that Jane fills with coal are actresses who beat her out for various awards, although the only three people to have beaten her out for Emmys are Betty White, Julie Bowen, and Merritt Wever (which might have been the name on the last stocking).



> Also, have they ever explained where Sugar and Joe went? As far as I know they should still be part of the Glee club.


So should Brittany - in fact, Santana _did_ mention that Brittany was still in Lima, yet she (and Finn (who hadn't died yet), for that matter) did not appear.

IIRC, there was also a bit of discontinuity involving someone's hair length.


----------



## LaurenLMHC (Aug 28, 2013)

TriBruin said:


> So was this episode a truly "lost" episode (i.e. filmed last year and never shown) or was it filmed this year but labeled lost to cover the fact that it does not fit in to this season's time line?
> 
> Also, have they ever explained where Sugar and Joe went? As far as I know they should still be part of the Glee club.


Well, I think Sue made some comment about how Glee members randomly disappear in one of the earlier episodes. I guess that was their way of saying "We know this makes no sense, but we don't care enough to explain it."

As I was watching, I had the feeling that it was filmed this year. This show is hard to follow, but I believe Brittany and Finn would have still been around if this was December 2012.

I'm just so disappointed in this show because of the endless talent it hosts. These kids deserve a quality outlet to express their amazing skills


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

I actually finished the season. What a crappy end. Couldn't the Funny Girl producers sue Rachel into oblivion for breech of contract? 

How long is a standard broadway contract for?


----------



## replaytv (Feb 21, 2011)

not me.

I enjoyed it for a while, but too much drama and not enough music. I especially hate the 'Sue' character. I loved her on 2 and half men though.

I do still have the Duets episode on my Tivo and listen to the music now and then. Really love the last duet.. one of my favorite songs of all time.

'Happy days are here again/Get happy'


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

I'm still watching but I heard Fox might be scaling back the final season, can't say I blame them.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I gave up a few seasons ago, but I saw that the ratings for the finale were shockingly bad -- like almost 40% lower than the previous series low. Only a 0.6 in the demo. I don't know how Fox can afford to do a full season next year.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

I gave up on this show a long time ago, but I recently went back and watched the pilot. I honestly think it's one of the best pilots for any show ever written. In fact, the entire first season is excellent.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I bailed a while back, came back briefly to see what honestly should have been the series finale (the last one in Ohio) and have zero interest to return now at this point.

As I said, that last one in Ohio should have been the end of the series. It was a perfect ending, with most of the original characters taking their final bows on stage. What they have now is a pale imitation of what the show once had, and I think the ratings reflect that.


----------



## MikeekiM (Jun 25, 2002)

Nope...not watching this at all... Loved the first season, and still watched through part of the second season...but haven't had the interest to keep up with it after that...

Is it still any good?

Are the song's worth listening to outside of watching the shows? I used to purchase some of the songs way back then...


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

It's so... terrible


----------



## Anthjo (Aug 7, 2007)

Not only watching but actually enjoying it since they left Lima and the awful new kids behind. This New York storyline should have been implemented a long time ago. 

It's been great seeing and hearing Amber Riley and Naya Rivera on a regular basis. I also like them working in contemporary recording artists Adam Lambert and Demi Lovato into the show. The high school thing had run it's course, as had Sue Sylvester.

All of that said, I'm sure I'm in the minority. LOL.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Anthjo said:


> Not only watching but actually enjoying it since they left Lima and the awful new kids behind. This New York storyline should have been implemented a long time ago.
> 
> It's been great seeing and hearing Amber Riley and Naya Rivera on a regular basis. I also like them working in contemporary recording artists Adam Lambert and Demi Lovato into the show. The high school thing had run it's course, as had Sue Sylvester.
> 
> All of that said, I'm sure I'm in the minority. LOL.


Wait, so all the new kids are permanently off the show? The only people that the show focuses on now are the original Glee club kids? All the adults are off the show as well? No more Sue, Will, etc?


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I gavce up a couple of season ago when it changed days. The show changed after that first season. The first season the show had it's heart in the right place. You rooted for almost all of the kids. Then as the seasons went on they made the kids far less likable and at times downright mean and nasty.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Maui said:


> Then as the seasons went on they made the kids far less likable and at times downright mean and nasty.


And the Baby Got Back incident showed that it wasn't just the kids, it was the producers as well.

That was my last episode.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

busyba said:


> And the Baby Got Back incident showed that it wasn't just the kids, it was the producers as well.
> 
> That was my last episode.


I agree with this. I really enjoyed the show up until they took Coulton's arrangement without any acknowledgement. After that the show just left a bad taste in my mouth and I've given up on it as well.


----------



## gilmoregirls102 (Dec 29, 2005)

I stopped watching it as well. I finally deleted all the episodes from the TiVo without watching them.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

gweempose said:


> Wait, so all the new kids are permanently off the show? The only people that the show focuses on now are the original Glee club kids? All the adults are off the show as well? No more Sue, Will, etc?


Yep just the New York kids. Rachel, Kurt, Mercedes, Sam, Blaine, and Artie. Brittany was there for an episode, but I'm not sure if she or Santana will be around next season.


----------



## TracySMiller (Oct 14, 2002)

For some sadistic reason I watched until this season end, but I can't take it anymore. I don't know what they plan for next season, but I'm not watching anymore.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

TracySMiller said:


> For some sadistic reason I watched until this season end, but I can't take it anymore. I don't know what they plan for next season, but I'm not watching anymore.


From what I have heard...


Spoiler



For some yet unexplained reason, the show is moving to Los Angeles next season. This would explain the whole business with Rachel and the TV pilot. No idea as to how they're going to explain how she avoids being sued by the Funny Girl producers for breach of contract.

Keep in mind that the "second generation" characters (e.g. Marley, Kitty, Uniq/Unique/however it's spelled) have graduated, so they're available to show up attending, e.g., UCLA.)


Still no word yet on how many episodes they're going to make.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

That Don Guy said:


> From what I have heard...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Scary that I know this but, regarding your Spoiler:



Spoiler



The only characters that graduated this season were the remain 1st Generation Characters (Tina, Blain, Sam). The 2nd Generation are still in school (I think most of them would only even be classified as, at best, Juniors.)

I suspect the only time we will ever see them again is in the finale, if they close at WMHS, like they should.



To answer the original question, I am still watching and probably will to the end. But this show has fallen SOOO far, it is not even funny.


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

realityboy said:


> Yep just the New York kids. Rachel, Kurt, Mercedes, Sam, Blaine, and Artie. Brittany was there for an episode, but I'm not sure if she or Santana will be around next season.


OK, I'm curious now. How did they write off the new kids?


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Jagman_sl said:


> OK, I'm curious now. How did they write off the new kids?





Spoiler



Principal Sue killed Glee club.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

Kamakzie said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Principal Sue killed Glee club.





Spoiler



Seriously, she killed the Glee Club! Next year, Glee: The Zombie Years.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

TriBruin said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, she killed the Glee Club! Next year, Glee: The Zombie Years.





Spoiler



Yeah she said funding for glee club would be slashed if they didn't repeat as champions. They came in 2nd so she followed through.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Jagman_sl said:


> OK, I'm curious now. How did they write off the new kids?


Red wedding.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Now _that_ I would have watched...


----------



## Jagman_sl (Mar 14, 2001)

Thanks for the replies.


Spoiler



I think I may have even seen the episode where she threatened that, but I guess I didn't realize that this time her threats were for real. And I stopped watching before the axe actually came down.



The Red Wedding approach does have its merits, though. I can think of a few of the new students I would like to know will never appear again on the show, even as guests in New York. Though I did kind of like Marley and Sugar....


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

TriBruin said:


> Scary that I know this but, regarding your Spoiler:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



There were a couple of time skips in the second half of this season. After Artie, Tina, et al. graduated (which took place in 2013 - remember, they finished second at 2013 Show Choir Nationals), they jumped forward a few months (so they could show Artie already in film school), and then there was another jump forward to April 2014 (so they didn't have to bother showing Rachel in previews for Funny Girl). Marley, Kitty, et al. would be just about ready to graduate when Season 5 ended.



I think they'll get as many members of the cast (from all seasons) together for the final episode, similar to how Fame ended; they'll probably finish with a massive version of "Don't Stop Believing."


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

That Don Guy said:


> I think they'll get as many members of the cast (from all seasons) together for the final episode, similar to how Fame ended; they'll probably finish with a massive version of "Don't Stop Believing."


again? That's how they ended things after Glee Club ended. Really, I think that should have been the end of the whole series right there.


----------



## 702 (Feb 9, 2003)

Maybe the show will end on a sad note. Rachel is bankruptcy from being sued into oblivion by the Fanny Girl producers. Maybe the last scene of the show will be her and Will sitting in a bar...



Spoiler



I read that Ryan Murphy said he won't say much, but the very final scene of the show will be between Rachel and Mr. Schuester


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Casting Spoiler...



Spoiler



Chris Colfer


has been let go from the show, citing "personal issues."

I'm no longer watching, and I'm still rather shocked by this. (You can read this news on TV Line, and probably most other press outlets covering TV.)

Now, the news comes from this actor's Twitter feed, and there's a possibility that the account was hacked... but I'd guess that TV Line would have confirmed the news with the actor's publicity, so who knows?

Edit: and as I guessed, the Twitter account was hacked. Never mind...


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Glee producer 20th Century Fox TV issued this statement: &#8220;We&#8217;ve been alerted that Chris Colfer&#8217;s Twitter account has been hacked. Rumors of his dismissal from Glee could not be further from the truth. We love Chris and look forward to working with him again this season.&#8221;


----------



## Neenahboy (Apr 8, 2004)

LoadStar said:


> Casting Spoiler...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Talk about the "rush to be first" exemplified. Astonishing that no one thought to call his manager before drafting breathless articles on the development.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Neenahboy said:


> Talk about the "rush to be first" exemplified. Astonishing that no one thought to call his manager before drafting breathless articles on the development.


Agreed. I just figured that a fairly reputable website like TV Line, staffed with veteran reporters, would have gone to the actor's publicists before basing an entire story on a single tweet.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> Agreed. I just figured that a fairly reputable website like TV Line, staffed with veteran reporters, would have gone to the actor's publicists before basing an entire story on a single tweet.


I don't think there are any reputable news sources anymore. Even cnn displays tweets during breaking stories.


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

Not shocking, can't blame Fox.

https://tv.yahoo.com/news/final-season-glee-reduced-13-episodes-183051676.html


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

Sad news about the boyfriend of Becca Tobin (Kitty):

Becca Tobin's boyfriend found dead


----------



## kettledrum (Nov 17, 2003)

Way behind but still watching. Just watched Cory's tribute episode from early Season 5 last night. Wow, that was hard. I have never sat through something so sad before...


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

Here are the "announced" spoilers (and a little speculation) for the final season:


Spoiler



According to Ryan Murphy, the show is going back to McKinley High, and five new high school characters have been announced. One thing that isn't clear is, how much time has passed since the end of Season 5. (Based on the events of the last few episodes of Season 5, all of the New Directions members that we know of - Marley, Kitty, Unique, etc. - will have graduated by now. Of course, Brittany was on the "five-year plan," so anything's possible.

The speculation: what are they going to do with Rachel? My guess is, her planned TV series fell through, and with nowhere else to go (and Sue presumably gone - probably hosting a game show in her mansion or something), she ends up becoming the new coach of New Directions, the same way Will resurrected it in the first episode.


----------

