Newb on this forum and long time TP fan ( OG -90). this is my first post and it may stike a devotee as an annoying first post; but i am not trying to be belligerent. I only ask because i have been viewing this forum and i cannot believe these issues havent been raised before.
What is the audience for this new iteration of tp? Are showtime- L/F creating this MORE for a new audience or the old fans? You may say both, but I suspect that is a taller order than can be handled. TP is a very niche show at this point and i dont know if answers to old questions (s2 cliffhangers et al.) will interest a newcommer nor do i see many people sitting through a marathon of "old shows "(yuck) to catch up. It will be a delicate balancing act on catering to old fans by answering questions that a newcommer doesnt care about or wiping the slate clean
Will the age of the cast be a factor- do you think many young people are gonna tune in to a show in 2017 where 90% of the cast is over 50? This obviously changes plot points for certain s2 cliffhangers ( watching a 50 year old Donna trying to find her " real daddy" is a quick example) but what i find more interesting vis a vis the ages of the cast is how they will handle the spiritual/dead characters. Is Leland going to return from the spirit realm- yes but in this afterlife you age 2 1/2 decades; what about lodge inhabitants?
Great Forum!!
What is the audience?
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
Re: What is the audience?
Honestly have no idea, and I suppose we won't until they finally show something off.
I'm inclined to think, despite as you say that it's a tall order, that it's designed to do both. Most of these long-delayed sequel stories tend to pick up threads of the original tales while using a new set of characters to pull you into it. Force Awakens is sort of the prime example right now of how to successfully use enough backstory of the original movies to satisfy old fans, while using new characters who can discover that information for themselves so that the new audience isn't lost. There's certainly enough cliffhanger threads leftover (primarily Dale) that could carry the main plot, but you'll need some new characters in order to have elements of mystery and exposition dumps that don't feel too weird.
I don't expect characters like Ed, Norma, Ben Horne, etc. to have nearly as large parts as they originally did (lots of these actors had straight up retired, so, I imagine it becomes trickier when deciding whether or not to write large roles for them in hopes they'll come out of retirement).
Either way, Showtime will want more than just the original fans back in order for Twin Peaks to be a success, and they can't reasonably expect the audience to have seen the entire original series + FWWM (even if they do run the repeats before the airing, or release a novel .. Star Wars is probably the most well known media property in the world, and it still dropped books mostly for the hardcore to fill in the gaps while allowing the revival to start fairly fresh).
I'm inclined to think, despite as you say that it's a tall order, that it's designed to do both. Most of these long-delayed sequel stories tend to pick up threads of the original tales while using a new set of characters to pull you into it. Force Awakens is sort of the prime example right now of how to successfully use enough backstory of the original movies to satisfy old fans, while using new characters who can discover that information for themselves so that the new audience isn't lost. There's certainly enough cliffhanger threads leftover (primarily Dale) that could carry the main plot, but you'll need some new characters in order to have elements of mystery and exposition dumps that don't feel too weird.
I don't expect characters like Ed, Norma, Ben Horne, etc. to have nearly as large parts as they originally did (lots of these actors had straight up retired, so, I imagine it becomes trickier when deciding whether or not to write large roles for them in hopes they'll come out of retirement).
Either way, Showtime will want more than just the original fans back in order for Twin Peaks to be a success, and they can't reasonably expect the audience to have seen the entire original series + FWWM (even if they do run the repeats before the airing, or release a novel .. Star Wars is probably the most well known media property in the world, and it still dropped books mostly for the hardcore to fill in the gaps while allowing the revival to start fairly fresh).
Re: What is the audience?
I know a few people who have picked up on the buzz around the series and are determined to watch the old one before the new one airs. I think it helps that a) TP is a known classic, b) it's not really that long and c) Lynch is well known even if they haven't seen TP (an entire generation seems to have got into him due to Mulholland Drive which makes me feel ancient).
Even so, I suspect that the series will be designed to be comprehensible to someone who has not seen the first series, at least initially. But surely it will have extra meaning and resonance for someone who saw the old series.
Taking away the Cooper story for a moment (however that ends up), I can see the general town interactions being truly amazing. Characters that you knew 25 years ago interacting in the present day and referencing that era. I remember Mark Frost talking about the passing of time being a big element of designing and having fun with the new show. The only similar example that comes to mind is the British comedy classic Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads, which followed up on a sitcom some years previously. It felt like you were reconnecting with old friends having lived their adolescence with them.
Even so, I suspect that the series will be designed to be comprehensible to someone who has not seen the first series, at least initially. But surely it will have extra meaning and resonance for someone who saw the old series.
Taking away the Cooper story for a moment (however that ends up), I can see the general town interactions being truly amazing. Characters that you knew 25 years ago interacting in the present day and referencing that era. I remember Mark Frost talking about the passing of time being a big element of designing and having fun with the new show. The only similar example that comes to mind is the British comedy classic Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads, which followed up on a sitcom some years previously. It felt like you were reconnecting with old friends having lived their adolescence with them.
-
laughingpinecone
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
- Location: D'ni
- Contact:
Re: What is the audience?
I think they're writing for themselves and then if we like it, good, and if we don't, tough luck. Of course they will have considered how to balance exposition for new and old audiences and other technical concerns, but there are some rumors that go completely against what the fanbase would have wanted, so I really don't think they're aiming to please this or that subset of the audience.
I also think that Coop's situation could easily be the start of a stand-alone Lynch movie: a man split in two, and the part he always repressed was overcome by the personification of the evil that men do. Anyone who'd enjoy, say, Lost Highway, should be able to roll with this plot hook alone.
Then, the way I'd do it, all the other characters would be presented anew, with new storylines that present compelling characters in compelling situations, and old viewers should be able to connect the dots. For example, if there's no trace of Hank in Norma's life, he probably remained in jail once and for all, and her starting situation with Ed and Nadine should tell us at a glance what happened to their relationships. Another example, Donna's parental troubles had to be sorted out shortly after the cliffhanger, but the way they were sorted out obviously had long-lasting consequences. She could be in a plot with Ben, showing a strained relationship, and new viewers would be presented with a character who's spent her life struggling with her bloodline, or she could have a plot that has zilch to do with the Hornes, and old viewers would infer that she eventually accepted that her biological father doesn't influence who she is and how she was brought up. It's a tough balancing act but they did spend an inordinate amount of time writing that script.
...and at least since it made it to Netflix, it's not particularly niche? There's a constant stream of new viewers commenting on social media. Of course all revivals have to account for people who aren't familiar with the old canon - even Star Wars, as Rudagger pointed out. But there are so many people in the teens and twenties and early thirties discovering it on a daily basis, the fanbase is really really not overwhelmingly made of OG viewers at this point.
PS
I'm pretty much the cheerleader of the Forster-positive camp and this still stung too soon
I also think that Coop's situation could easily be the start of a stand-alone Lynch movie: a man split in two, and the part he always repressed was overcome by the personification of the evil that men do. Anyone who'd enjoy, say, Lost Highway, should be able to roll with this plot hook alone.
Then, the way I'd do it, all the other characters would be presented anew, with new storylines that present compelling characters in compelling situations, and old viewers should be able to connect the dots. For example, if there's no trace of Hank in Norma's life, he probably remained in jail once and for all, and her starting situation with Ed and Nadine should tell us at a glance what happened to their relationships. Another example, Donna's parental troubles had to be sorted out shortly after the cliffhanger, but the way they were sorted out obviously had long-lasting consequences. She could be in a plot with Ben, showing a strained relationship, and new viewers would be presented with a character who's spent her life struggling with her bloodline, or she could have a plot that has zilch to do with the Hornes, and old viewers would infer that she eventually accepted that her biological father doesn't influence who she is and how she was brought up. It's a tough balancing act but they did spend an inordinate amount of time writing that script.
...and at least since it made it to Netflix, it's not particularly niche? There's a constant stream of new viewers commenting on social media. Of course all revivals have to account for people who aren't familiar with the old canon - even Star Wars, as Rudagger pointed out. But there are so many people in the teens and twenties and early thirties discovering it on a daily basis, the fanbase is really really not overwhelmingly made of OG viewers at this point.
PS
(lots of these actors had straight up retired, so, I imagine it becomes trickier when deciding whether or not to write large roles for them in hopes they'll come out of retirement).
I'm pretty much the cheerleader of the Forster-positive camp and this still stung too soon ] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
Re: What is the audience?
To me, I would say the return to Twin Peaks is a mixture of a few factors for Lynch and Frost. Unfinished business after the off-screen shenanigans of S2, a chance to make TV history again perhaps and a little love letter to the fans who have stuck by it and obsessed over it all these years. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Lynch and Frost feel they owe the fans anything, they may take this series to places we may not want or like, but it will hopefully be the better for it.
Also, from what I can see, there are a lot of young actors and actresses in this. To me it is the perfect blend, a little like Mad Men. Showtime will obviously want as large an audience as possible, they won't get Game of Thrones numbers but if they can get bank on getting all original and relatively new fans back then they have some solid numbers as a base. It's hard to really stereotype Peakies, they are of all ages and backgrounds, but I think the new series will appeal to a number of young first time viewers too.
Also, from what I can see, there are a lot of young actors and actresses in this. To me it is the perfect blend, a little like Mad Men. Showtime will obviously want as large an audience as possible, they won't get Game of Thrones numbers but if they can get bank on getting all original and relatively new fans back then they have some solid numbers as a base. It's hard to really stereotype Peakies, they are of all ages and backgrounds, but I think the new series will appeal to a number of young first time viewers too.
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.
-
Eater of Iguanas
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 9:17 pm
Re: What is the audience?
Everyone above makes good points, but another thing to keep in mind as far as the practical, business side of this question: the business model of a premium cable channel is very different from that of a broadcast network. The audience for the former is much smaller, and notably more affluent and educated, than for the latter. They're more plugged into certain kinds of cult media, and into chatter from cultural gatekeepers like critics and bloggers. A Showtime or HBO can do fine with a show that's "niche" by broadcast standards. HBO, for example, was happy to run The Wire for five years despite its low audience numbers, because it had a devoted audience that would subscribe to see it, and it brought prestige, media buzz and awards to the channel (and its afterlife is strong - I swear half my friends own that show on DVD or Blu-ray).
I'm pretty sure that for the majority of this demographic, even if they've never seen Twin Peaks, it's a known name with a definite mystique around it - for a lot of them, something they've been meaning to check out for years but have never gotten around to (and for some of them, the same thing is true of David Lynch in general). My immediate co-workers at my Manhattan corporate office engage in a lot of "water cooler talk" about shows like Game of Thrones, Person of Interest, Community, Homeland, etc. (and they include a few Peakies). Just last week one guy was surprised to learn from me about the revival and said, "OK, I'll definitely check out the original show before the new one airs." Of course, I e-mailed him the "survival guide" that someone on this forum made, I forget who - the one with the color-coded chart for great, okay and sketchy episodes.
Some relevant anecdata that I shared previously in a thread since eaten by internet gremlins: Last year I went to check out "Twin Peaks Wednesday" at a hipster bar/screening room in Brooklyn - they were running the entire series, projected on a wall screen, two hours at a time, along with a bingo game where you filled your card by spotting visual or aural motifs or stock phrases while watching. It was packed, mostly with people who looked too young to have seen the show on original airing. Two young women had virtually identical TP-related tattoos and showed them off to the cheers of the crowd.
Similarly, I went on a date last year where I noticed a tattoo of the Owl Cave symbol on the wrist of our waiter - it turned out my date was a Peakie, too, and the three of us ended up in a ten-minute discussion about the show and the revival.
So, yeah - I think the audience is there, among both original fans and those who haven't seen it but would jump on board the new one in a heartbeat.
(Welcome to the forum, Fred, and no need to apologize for raising skeptical questions and views - I'm the resident FWWM hater on the forum, and it doesn't shut me up!)
I'm pretty sure that for the majority of this demographic, even if they've never seen Twin Peaks, it's a known name with a definite mystique around it - for a lot of them, something they've been meaning to check out for years but have never gotten around to (and for some of them, the same thing is true of David Lynch in general). My immediate co-workers at my Manhattan corporate office engage in a lot of "water cooler talk" about shows like Game of Thrones, Person of Interest, Community, Homeland, etc. (and they include a few Peakies). Just last week one guy was surprised to learn from me about the revival and said, "OK, I'll definitely check out the original show before the new one airs." Of course, I e-mailed him the "survival guide" that someone on this forum made, I forget who - the one with the color-coded chart for great, okay and sketchy episodes.
Some relevant anecdata that I shared previously in a thread since eaten by internet gremlins: Last year I went to check out "Twin Peaks Wednesday" at a hipster bar/screening room in Brooklyn - they were running the entire series, projected on a wall screen, two hours at a time, along with a bingo game where you filled your card by spotting visual or aural motifs or stock phrases while watching. It was packed, mostly with people who looked too young to have seen the show on original airing. Two young women had virtually identical TP-related tattoos and showed them off to the cheers of the crowd.
Similarly, I went on a date last year where I noticed a tattoo of the Owl Cave symbol on the wrist of our waiter - it turned out my date was a Peakie, too, and the three of us ended up in a ten-minute discussion about the show and the revival.
So, yeah - I think the audience is there, among both original fans and those who haven't seen it but would jump on board the new one in a heartbeat.
(Welcome to the forum, Fred, and no need to apologize for raising skeptical questions and views - I'm the resident FWWM hater on the forum, and it doesn't shut me up!)
Last edited by Eater of Iguanas on Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
N. Needleman
- Lodge Member
- Posts: 2113
- Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm
Re: What is the audience?
Who cares?
Presumably they're not trying to run 5-8 years. They're trying to do a little more TP and end it their way. I think it has already captured a generational audience thanks to the many consecutive generations who have picked it up on syndication, DVD and Netflix, but regardless, this is a specific project with a specific personal aim for those involved. They do it and they're out. Getting a Walking Dead-sized audience share likely does not interest them (though it's possible).
Presumably they're not trying to run 5-8 years. They're trying to do a little more TP and end it their way. I think it has already captured a generational audience thanks to the many consecutive generations who have picked it up on syndication, DVD and Netflix, but regardless, this is a specific project with a specific personal aim for those involved. They do it and they're out. Getting a Walking Dead-sized audience share likely does not interest them (though it's possible).
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
-
DeerMeadowRadio
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:57 pm
Re: What is the audience?
I think the audience is just smart people who like quality challenging viewing. In terms of new fans vs. old fans, to some degree that's not as relevant as it used to be. If you are behind a season or two nowadays there are very few obstacles to catching up in a few weeks (if that) if you are so inclined. In fact, if you are like me, you are actually on the lookout for something good to catch up on. So I think TP will do really well ratings-wise...maybe not blockbuster numbers, but think if they want to do more episodes, they would be good on the ratings/business side of things.
Come Listen to Deer Meadow Radio - A Twin Peaks Podcast
http://www.deermeadowradio.libsyn.com/
Re: What is the audience?
I think, to be fair, The Wire was a very cheap show to make. It used a lot of non-actors and actors who weren't really big names (a few have gone onto bigger stuff since, but, many still aren't household names). From what I can tell, the new Twin Peaks is pretty costly, at least by Showtime standards. Penny Dreadful got axed due to price/low ratings, and HBO has cancelled plenty of critically acclaimed but expensive shows before their time due to the cost/audience ratio being poor (Carnivale, Rome, Deadwood).Eater of Iguanas wrote:Everyone above makes good points, but another thing to keep in mind as far as the practical, business side of this question: the business model of a premium cable channel is very different from that of a broadcast network. The audience for the former is much smaller, and notably more affluent and educated, than for the latter. They're more plugged into certain kinds of cult media, and into chatter from cultural gatekeepers like critics and bloggers. A Showtime or HBO can do fine with a show that's "niche" by broadcast standards. HBO, for example, was happy to run The Wire for five years despite its low audience numbers, because it had a devoted audience that would subscribe to see it, and it brought prestige, media buzz and awards to the channel (and its afterlife is strong - I swear half my friends own that show on DVD or Blu-ray).
Someone mentioned FWWM in this thread, and while I love the movie, that business decision boggles my mind to this day. A show cancelled due to sagging ratings gets picked up for a movie deal? Yikes. I imagine someone got fired for that. Serenity suffered the same fate, despite all the 'Browncoats' (Firefly fans). Reviving stuff either needs to be done a good decade later for nostalgias sake, or needs to be made while the show is still popular/recent. Interestingly, X-Files exemplifies all the ways to do it right and wrong (i.e., the financially successful first X-Files film made while the show was still airing and popular versus the box office bomb second X-Files film after the show ended on a whimper .. followed by the ratings-success television series revival a good decade after the show initially ended).
-
LostInTheMovies
- Bookhouse Member
- Posts: 1558
- Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:48 pm
Re: What is the audience?
It was part of a deal with a French production company, so probably the incentive was how well Peaks was doing overseas at that time. There also seems to have been a weird lag in TP/Lynch's fortunes, in that Lynch's reputation took a while to catch up with the show's failure. At that time, I think pop culture was a bit less coordinated than it is now, so that parts of it moved really fast while others moved more slowly - the left hand was still praising Lynch as a hot celebrity while the right hand was declaring Twin Peaks a ghost town. I think Lynch himself didn't realize how far his star had fallen until FWWM's release. He seems to have even presented it at Cannes (with a big gala party, Julee Cruise singing, and I think even fireworks?) as if TP - and post-Blue Velvet Lynch - was still a hot commodity, with its cancellation a mere footnote. It all happened so fast.Rudagger wrote:Someone mentioned FWWM in this thread, and while I love the movie, that business decision boggles my mind to this day. A show cancelled due to sagging ratings gets picked up for a movie deal? Yikes. I imagine someone got fired for that.
That's what I mean though - Fire Walk With Me was conceived about 6 months after the show landed on the cover of dozens of magazines, had a spin-off book on the New York Times bestseller list, and was featured all over the Emmys. That stuff all happened in September 1990 and, near as I can gather, Lynch proposed FWWM in March or April of the following year. Granted, in that 6 months everything had changed but 6 months is still a really short time. I don't think an American studio would have greenlit it though, even if New Line did agree to pick up the distribution.or needs to be made while the show is still popular/recent.
-
FrightNight
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 1:45 am
Re: What is the audience?
Oh, no, not the "Swan Song Theory" again ...N. Needleman wrote:
They're trying to do a little more TP and end it their way.
Other than that, congrats to everyone on this thread for making really interesting contributions/contemplations as to how a "new" TP audience may look. I particularly like the musings about the conditions for a successful revival and shudder at the mention of something called a "hipster bar"
Re: What is the audience?
Sign me up for the Swan Song Theory. If they pull an X-Files revival and end it on a cliffhanger, with no real confidence that it'll ever get resolved, I'll frankly be pissed off. I trust they won't do that though, even FWWM, thought it was intended to continue into a trilogy, ended with much more closer than the original show ever did.FrightNight wrote:Oh, no, not the "Swan Song Theory" again ...N. Needleman wrote:
They're trying to do a little more TP and end it their way.
Other than that, congrats to everyone on this thread for making really interesting contributions/contemplations as to how a "new" TP audience may look. I particularly like the musings about the conditions for a successful revival and shudder at the mention of something called a "hipster bar"
Re: What is the audience?
LostInTheMovies wrote:It was part of a deal with a French production company, so probably the incentive was how well Peaks was doing overseas at that time. There also seems to have been a weird lag in TP/Lynch's fortunes, in that Lynch's reputation took a while to catch up with the show's failure. At that time, I think pop culture was a bit less coordinated than it is now, so that parts of it moved really fast while others moved more slowly - the left hand was still praising Lynch as a hot celebrity while the right hand was declaring Twin Peaks a ghost town. I think Lynch himself didn't realize how far his star had fallen until FWWM's release. He seems to have even presented it at Cannes (with a big gala party, Julee Cruise singing, and I think even fireworks?) as if TP - and post-Blue Velvet Lynch - was still a hot commodity, with its cancellation a mere footnote. It all happened so fast.Rudagger wrote:Someone mentioned FWWM in this thread, and while I love the movie, that business decision boggles my mind to this day. A show cancelled due to sagging ratings gets picked up for a movie deal? Yikes. I imagine someone got fired for that.
That's what I mean though - Fire Walk With Me was conceived about 6 months after the show landed on the cover of dozens of magazines, had a spin-off book on the New York Times bestseller list, and was featured all over the Emmys. That stuff all happened in September 1990 and, near as I can gather, Lynch proposed FWWM in March or April of the following year. Granted, in that 6 months everything had changed but 6 months is still a really short time. I don't think an American studio would have greenlit it though, even if New Line did agree to pick up the distribution.
I mean, according to Wikipedia, the film was formally announced a month after the show had already been cancelled, so, it's still a little odd to me that someone didn't ask the question of if that indicated it wouldn't be financially viable. But, as you said, I imagine many were banking on the still freshness of the material, and that a movie version might capture audience attention again ("Oh, Twin Peaks, yeah, I lost track of it, but, a movie sounds neat!")
Re: What is the audience?
Twin Peaks had a pretty large cult following. On network Television in the 1990s, a cult following was not enough to make a show profitable. However, a cult following could have made Fire Walk With Me very profitable, as the same viewers go to see the movie several times.Rudagger wrote:LostInTheMovies wrote:It was part of a deal with a French production company, so probably the incentive was how well Peaks was doing overseas at that time. There also seems to have been a weird lag in TP/Lynch's fortunes, in that Lynch's reputation took a while to catch up with the show's failure. At that time, I think pop culture was a bit less coordinated than it is now, so that parts of it moved really fast while others moved more slowly - the left hand was still praising Lynch as a hot celebrity while the right hand was declaring Twin Peaks a ghost town. I think Lynch himself didn't realize how far his star had fallen until FWWM's release. He seems to have even presented it at Cannes (with a big gala party, Julee Cruise singing, and I think even fireworks?) as if TP - and post-Blue Velvet Lynch - was still a hot commodity, with its cancellation a mere footnote. It all happened so fast.Rudagger wrote:Someone mentioned FWWM in this thread, and while I love the movie, that business decision boggles my mind to this day. A show cancelled due to sagging ratings gets picked up for a movie deal? Yikes. I imagine someone got fired for that.
That's what I mean though - Fire Walk With Me was conceived about 6 months after the show landed on the cover of dozens of magazines, had a spin-off book on the New York Times bestseller list, and was featured all over the Emmys. That stuff all happened in September 1990 and, near as I can gather, Lynch proposed FWWM in March or April of the following year. Granted, in that 6 months everything had changed but 6 months is still a really short time. I don't think an American studio would have greenlit it though, even if New Line did agree to pick up the distribution.
I mean, according to Wikipedia, the film was formally announced a month after the show had already been cancelled, so, it's still a little odd to me that someone didn't ask the question of if that indicated it wouldn't be financially viable. But, as you said, I imagine many were banking on the still freshness of the material, and that a movie version might capture audience attention again ("Oh, Twin Peaks, yeah, I lost track of it, but, a movie sounds neat!")
However, the problem with FWWM is that it wasn't a hit with Twin Peaks fans in the U.S. Many of them only went to see it once.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
Re: What is the audience?
Lynch does not create his art for an audience- according to him, he creates what he is inspired to create, and hopes there is an audience for it.FredTruax wrote:Newb on this forum and long time TP fan ( OG -90). this is my first post and it may stike a devotee as an annoying first post; but i am not trying to be belligerent. I only ask because i have been viewing this forum and i cannot believe these issues havent been raised before.
What is the audience for this new iteration of tp? Are showtime- L/F creating this MORE for a new audience or the old fans? You may say both, but I suspect that is a taller order than can be handled. TP is a very niche show at this point and i dont know if answers to old questions (s2 cliffhangers et al.) will interest a newcommer nor do i see many people sitting through a marathon of "old shows "(yuck) to catch up. It will be a delicate balancing act on catering to old fans by answering questions that a newcommer doesnt care about or wiping the slate clean
Will the age of the cast be a factor- do you think many young people are gonna tune in to a show in 2017 where 90% of the cast is over 50? This obviously changes plot points for certain s2 cliffhangers ( watching a 50 year old Donna trying to find her " real daddy" is a quick example) but what i find more interesting vis a vis the ages of the cast is how they will handle the spiritual/dead characters. Is Leland going to return from the spirit realm- yes but in this afterlife you age 2 1/2 decades; what about lodge inhabitants?
Great Forum!!
I think that's why we love him so much- he goes with the creative flow, the inspiration, and doesn't worry about ratings or pandering down to the lowest common denominator.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly