Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

[LateReg]

Let me ask the yay-sayers in this thread. Even to you does not calling this 'The greatest hour of television ever made' (as many in the main thread seem to be doing) seem radically over the top?

Do those of you who loved this think it ranked up there with the Pilot or Episode 14 say? I'm genuinely interested.

That green glove boy scene was ATROCIOUS. Maybe you have to be a Brit to understand how much that grated. When the guy used cockney rhyming slam (snappin' 'is Gregory (i.e. Gregory Peck, Neck) my jaw dropped. Cockney rhyming slam in Twin Peaks. I've lived in England for 40 years and never actually heard someone use cockney rhyming slang. Maybe if I go into the right East End boozer, they will, I don't know, I don't go there. But in.....frigging.... Twin Peaks.

That aside, just introducing this new character at this stage, this poverty Marvel superhero, what is the point of this. Lynch and Frost sat down and crafted the original. Here they are just putting their random ideas up on screen. Lynch's damn dream about Bellucci. How can anyone think this isn't self indulgent clap trap of the lowest order?

I'm afraid my comments are going to become more and more hostile as we go along because I'm genuinely pretty angry at this point. And I hope the smart and decent 'pro' posters will take that into account. You seem like cool, intelligent people and I'm not trying to offend but, like you, this has been a big part of my life for 25 years. And it's being ruined. And there's nothing I can do to stop it. Ok, in retrospect I should never have watched this. I wish I could go back a few months and make the decision not to. But what TP fan could have decided not to watched it because it might ruin their memory of the original. Maybe 1 in 100,000.

So I'll watch it to the bitter end but I doubt I'll ever spend quiet afternoon daydreaming about the world of Twin Peaks again. It's a big loss and I'm actually angry at Lynch for this. So yeah, fuck you Lynch. You should have stuck to the TM, homes.

All I have to say is I thought the Bellucci thing was positively brilliant. As I texted to a friend today: "So what's hilarious is that yesterday morning I found out thru a stupid Google search without even clicking on the page that Monica Bellucci might be in the episode..and I've been waiting and waiting for her appearance, and I was mad that I knew she was going to pop up. I had thought she might play a lodge queen or something. But then knowing she might be in it made it even better because I never in a million years would have guessed she was playing herself because Cole has recurring dreams of her! The one spoiler I knew I still couldn't predict. She asks who is the dreamer and Lynch is in the scene, an awesome moment signifying that on one level he is obviously the dreamer (director). Its been recently raised that this whole entire thing could be dreamt by somebody, so if Lynch is dreaming it onto the screen and then somebody else within his dream is also dreaming it, and then there's doppelgangers that are manufactured and all that stuff about tulpas stemming from the mind and gaining their own consciousness, that's layer upon layer of thought as a central and now explicitly stated idea in the film which is pretty great. It's interesting in the Bellucci sequence that she is a real life person...it really calls attention to things taking place in the real world and opens up certain possibilities. To go along with Bellucci being a real person I think it's fascinating that we also now have a totally unreal person in Twin Peaks in the form of the eyes sewn shut Japanese woman."

See, I absolutely detest that idea. It's just to each their own I guess but to me the above is Quentin Tarantino getting it absolutely right about Lynch but 25 years too early.

What is detestable about it? It's just an idea about art and creation and storytelling and drives home the idea of living in a bottomless dream, which is central to most of Lynch's work. It's not an actual plot point, just another layer of many in the text. With how much Tarantino calls attention to other films in his work, I actually think he'd quite like this idea.

[Rialto]

Small point: when Frank Truman calls Gordon Cole to tell him about the missing pages from Laura's diary, why doesn't he mention the massive fuck off clue that Major Briggs left for them?

The clue that leads to the portal? I think it was because he wasn't sure it would lead to anything. Better to check it out and report actual details than just some cryptic little message. Frank seems like a very pragmatic person, so he wouldn't be inclined to pass on anything he hadn't confirmed for himself.

I was more thinking of the print out of cosmic messages received at the TP Blue Rose outpost, that indicated 2 Coopers - just like Truman was telling Cole about from Laura's diaries.

Given Cole and Briggs connections, you'd think Truman might like his help deciphering this stuff?

[waferwhitemilk]

Re: the dreaminess of it all, one thing I liked about 'Inland Empire' was this idea of a bottomless dream, which btw I also agree with on a philosophical level, and to me the succesful thing about that experiment was exactly that it didn't make a lot of sense, every scene just followed the other without trying to. The original 'Twin Peaks' off course was a lot more conventional with a narrative that veered into the absurd here and there but that on a basic level made sense. That also worked great and was a succes. Now for 'The Return' it's mostly the senseless dream vibe we're getting, but this is then mixed with these -imo- very clunky explanatory dialogue where they suddenly act as if it's a conventional narrative where there's a plot that actually matters! This to me is a less succesful mix, and I'd go as far as saying it's the worst of both worlds: a plot that doesn't work because of the senseless dreamquality of it all and a dream that doesn't work because it keeps getting interrupted by a clunky plot. And i'd go even further and say that the middleground between a conventional narrative on the one hand and an experimental dream on the other often seems to be -to me at least- a clunky trolley vibe.

[Rialto]

Also, I heard someone say '18 hour movie' again! Let's be clear, this is not structured like any movie - not classic 3 act structure, not 5 act, not 8 sequence, not 'art house' (whatever that even means - it's a 'how long is a piece of string' definition for anything that doesn't fit in an easy box).

In a movie, roughly every 8-15 minutes there would be some kind of twist, cliffhanger, question raised or mini-climax. In this, that might equate to similar at the end of every episode. You can't excuse each episode meandering around till it almost randomly ends by saying 'but it's an 18 hour movie'. It's not.

[boske]

I was going to say that at the meta level, Lynch probably views the audience as these Roadhouse hipsters that enjoy, episode after episode, any kind of "material" that he throws at them. He likes a band so it must be good, and you should listen to it too, it's his party after all.

At the same time there is a small table somewhere in the corner where a few people hate some of the music and have a lively conversation. At the point of mentioning that some of the acts are not to their liking, an occasional Chad pops up telling them to "suck it up, Buttercup"."Poor Baby, boo-hoo". Thanks Chad! Please don't send Richard Horne our way.

Anyway, a lot of people expect that Julie Cruise will be the final Roadhouse act, and she may as well be. But what if it is Lynch singing "Crazy Clown Time"? That has been the pattern thus far.

[boske]

About our Green-Gloved friend. When he bored us (and James, mind you ) to death with his (g)love story, he should have at least also told us how he had crossed the border and entered the U.S. with that thing still on his hand. Yes, I get it, it is just an 18-hour movie...

[mlsstwrt]

All I have to say is I thought the Bellucci thing was positively brilliant. As I texted to a friend today: "So what's hilarious is that yesterday morning I found out thru a stupid Google search without even clicking on the page that Monica Bellucci might be in the episode..and I've been waiting and waiting for her appearance, and I was mad that I knew she was going to pop up. I had thought she might play a lodge queen or something. But then knowing she might be in it made it even better because I never in a million years would have guessed she was playing herself because Cole has recurring dreams of her! The one spoiler I knew I still couldn't predict. She asks who is the dreamer and Lynch is in the scene, an awesome moment signifying that on one level he is obviously the dreamer (director). Its been recently raised that this whole entire thing could be dreamt by somebody, so if Lynch is dreaming it onto the screen and then somebody else within his dream is also dreaming it, and then there's doppelgangers that are manufactured and all that stuff about tulpas stemming from the mind and gaining their own consciousness, that's layer upon layer of thought as a central and now explicitly stated idea in the film which is pretty great. It's interesting in the Bellucci sequence that she is a real life person...it really calls attention to things taking place in the real world and opens up certain possibilities. To go along with Bellucci being a real person I think it's fascinating that we also now have a totally unreal person in Twin Peaks in the form of the eyes sewn shut Japanese woman."

See, I absolutely detest that idea. It's just to each their own I guess but to me the above is Quentin Tarantino getting it absolutely right about Lynch but 25 years too early.

What is detestable about it? It's just an idea about art and creation and storytelling and drives home the idea of living in a bottomless dream, which is central to most of Lynch's work. It's not an actual plot point, just another layer of many in the text. With how much Tarantino calls attention to other films in his work, I actually think he'd quite like this idea.

I guess I want Twin Peaks, not Inception. I don't know, I don't mean that I hate the idea as such, it's just not the level I want TP to work on. And in Ep14 the way it was said was like, wow this is so profound. It just reminded me of someone saying, 'What if we all live in a computer simulation?' and thinking they've said something brilliant.

I'm not going to fall out with someone who loves Spring Breakers and Enter the Void.

[boske]

Final thought of the morning: why Monica Belucci? Why not Rosie O'Donnell?

[douglasb]

Because Belucci came with French money attached.

It's odd - TP used to be its own reality. Now we're asked to accept it's our reality.

[mlsstwrt]

Because Belucci came with French money attached.

It's odd - TP used to be its own reality. Now we're asked to accept it's our reality.

This really is it. Great way of summing it up in a few words.

[boske]

Because Belucci came with French money attached.

True. Ironically though, she is Italian. Now that hostess from South Dakota, she is French I believe? Her friend's mother had a turnip farm and a missing daughter that will turn up, or something, or whatever.

It's odd - TP used to be its own reality. Now we're asked to accept it's our reality.

Sigh.

[waferwhitemilk]

It just reminded me of someone saying, 'What if we all live in a computer simulation?' and thinking they've said something brilliant.

For a movie about this, I can't recommend 'Welt am Draht' (Fassbinder 1973) enough!

[Aqwell]

Because Belucci came with French money attached.

Those froggies... they're everywhere, sneaky little cockroaches trying to blend in despite speaking a 5 yo level english.
They can't fool anybody though, even on a forum...
By the way, Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me was co-produced by? Yes, them again. French people love Lynch weirdness, usually. People at Cannes Film Festival booed the movie in 1992 but praised the first two episodes of season 3.
Go figure...

[mtwentz]

Using the Red Room for slot machines and cherry pies is something you may or may not like, but I for one certainly do not see it as a big break thematically or in tone from the original series.

We fans have really big differences of opinion.
I was stunned then I first see it, even worse than the puke contest between Mr C and the real Dougie Jones, which the last won in the form of a one-way ticket to the Blacklodge.
Seriously it's as if a mini Yoda floating in the air said Luke to take all the money and run off. Quirky, yes, but you can't mix goofy humor with the most magical element of the show without ruining it.[/quote]

So making jokes about coffee in the Black Lodge, and having Jimmy Scott sing Under the Sycamores is not goofy humor? My mom and I laughed about these scenes for years .

[mtwentz]

See, I absolutely detest that idea. It's just to each their own I guess but to me the above is Quentin Tarantino getting it absolutely right about Lynch but 25 years too early.

What is detestable about it? It's just an idea about art and creation and storytelling and drives home the idea of living in a bottomless dream, which is central to most of Lynch's work. It's not an actual plot point, just another layer of many in the text. With how much Tarantino calls attention to other films in his work, I actually think he'd quite like this idea.

I guess I want Twin Peaks, not Inception. I don't know, I don't mean that I hate the idea as such, it's just not the level I want TP to work on. And in Ep14 the way it was said was like, wow this is so profound. It just reminded me of someone saying, 'What if we all live in a computer simulation?' and thinking they've said something brilliant.

I'm not going to fall out with someone who loves Spring Breakers and Enter the Void.

We are not getting Inception when we watch this new show, that is an insult to Lynch: Christopher Nolan is a wannabe surrealist (no slam on Nolan, he's a great filmmaker overall, but he doesn't do surrealism very well IMHO).

But overall, your complaint here strikes me as somewhat odd: The idea of living inside a dream came directly from Fire Walk With Me, and most of Lynch's work since FWWM are interpreted by fans as showing alternate realities, potentially dream and/or fantasy realities- Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive and (from what I understand, still have not seen it) Inland Empire. The Straight Story is the exception.

And of course, even the original Twin Peaks was built on a dream. In fact, the simplest interpretation of the European pilot when viewed in isolation is that the final 20 minutes (including the boiler room scene with Bob and the Red Room scene) constitutes Cooper's dream.

Is it future, or is it past? Is it a dream, or is it 'real'? If those questions don't titillate you, don't stir your imagination, Twin Peaks is probably not for you.