N. Needleman wrote: I'm not putting the theory on you personally, I just hate seeing those float around because it always smacks of a drive of wanting to turn TP into some mid-range 2000s basic cable genre show people can relate to easier or make more schematic and less bafflingly instinctual.
Give example, please.
Pick one. It could apply to many.
What in the world's wrong with a little geek myth-building now and then? I find it quite charming. Besides, it shows people really care about their favorite show(s)!
I don't have a problem with it in moderation. I have a problem when either fans or creators subscribe to the theory that Everything's Connected and at times, either supplant their reality with the objective canon of the show or in the case of the showrunners, cheapen what has come before to make it utterly schematic and comic book-ish, diminishing the original story. I am one of the few fans of Ridley Scott's very flawed Prometheus, but the giant albino men of that film do take away from the original Alien's "space jockey", and the new Alien: Covenant film looks poised to complete drain all mystery in favor of a paint-by-numbers 'here is how it all happened'. And I love Star Wars, but this ain't Star Wars and Cooper ain't a Skywalker.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
I think Kenneth Welsh tried to make the character dynamic and interesting, though he was really bogged down by the writing that left much to be desired.
The real Windom problem for me is that he is ridiculously overpowered. It kills any decent tension when he's pretty much a supervillian with an absurd amount of ability and resources. His death scene was very satisfying.
asmahan wrote:I think Kenneth Welsh tried to make the character dynamic and interesting, though he was really bogged down by the writing that left much to be desired.
The real Windom problem for me is that he is ridiculously overpowered. It kills any decent tension when he's pretty much a supervillian with an absurd amount of ability and resources. His death scene was very satisfying.
Speaking of, when I first saw the penultimate episode with the Miss Twin Peaks scene toward the end, it briefly occurred to me Nadine was going to nab Earle with her superstrength. Thankfully, that never happened.
djerdap wrote:But taken into account how many discrepancies there are in Frost's book and knowing that continuity isn't necessarily Lynch's priority, there might be continuity errors and contradictions in the show itself, especially with the events of post-Laura TP.
It seems like most people take it as accepted fact that Lynch doesn't particularly care about continuity. I'm curious what this is based on. While I could certainly see it being the case, given his love of dream logic and disregard for conventional storytelling, I don't see any empirical data to support it. Outside of TP, we haven't seen him function in a long-form story setting, and I don't think many if any of the continuity errors in TP can be attributed personally to Lynch. In FWWM, he went out of his way to stick to the 1989 calendar (unlike the series writers in many instances), and even tracked down the actress who played Laura's teacher in the pilot, for what amounted to a couple of out-of-focus shots.
From IE and the Frank Silva experience, we know that Lynch believes firmly in letting the work speak to him rather than imposing his will. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if he stuck to season 2, warts and all, treating the blemishes as an opportunity rather than an impediment. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if I'm wrong and stuff does end up being retconned, given Lynch's professed disappointment with season 2, but I think it's far from a given.
For me I just found his character irritating and not sinister or a serious match for Cooper at all. Over the course of all these years I've never warmed to his character/role at all. In the end when Bob says, 'Be quiet' I'm like, 'Yeah, at last!'.
Venus wrote:For me I just found his character irritating and not sinister or a serious match for Cooper at all. Over the course of all these years I've never warmed to his character/role at all. In the end when Bob says, 'Be quiet' I'm like, 'Yeah, at last!'.
djerdap wrote:
From IE and the Frank Silva experience, we know that Lynch believes firmly in letting the work speak to him rather than imposing his will. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if he stuck to season 2, warts and all, treating the blemishes as an opportunity rather than an impediment. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if I'm wrong and stuff does end up being retconned, given Lynch's professed disappointment with season 2, but I think it's far from a given.
I don't see the need to retcon Season 2 because I feel like there will be very little of Season 2 specifically addressed in Season 3, other than the good Dale in the Lodge/Bad Dale outside dilemma (and even that has its roots in Season 1's dream sequence). Then again, I have no adequate explanation for the continuity errors in Mark Frost's recent book, so it's possible there is a larger S2 retcon master plan.
I feel like Earle was only effective onscreen in his first appearance (when he meets Leo) and in the last episode. The whole scene where Earle takes Annie into Glastonbury Grove is so friggin' bonkers but it works ("I am Windom Earle!" and the aforementioned "Twelve Rainbow Trout!" lines). The fact that he's dispensed by BOB so easily and anticlimactically speaks volumes about how Lynch felt about the character.
I do think he was an effective offscreen villain in the episodes before he made his entrance. I rather like the episode when they find the vagrant in the Sheriff's office, making it seem like he could strike anywhere and anytime. But once we saw him prancing around in his underwear in a cabin in the woods, the threat became much less real.
^ Hell yes brother/sister. That is a beautiful post. Exactly my thoughts on the matter.
In an ideal Season 2, Episode 29 would have been the first time we saw Earle, with one exception - the video shown by Briggs (black and white on a lil TV). I vaguely remember feeling quite tense the first time watching the series whenever the name Earle was mentioned ... til he actually showed up. Damn was he lame, totally overexposed.
I would have also hated BOB if every episode in season 1/early season 2 we would occasionally cut to him chilling in the Black Lodge giving evil speeches about what he was gonna do next.
djerdap wrote:
From IE and the Frank Silva experience, we know that Lynch believes firmly in letting the work speak to him rather than imposing his will. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if he stuck to season 2, warts and all, treating the blemishes as an opportunity rather than an impediment. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if I'm wrong and stuff does end up being retconned, given Lynch's professed disappointment with season 2, but I think it's far from a given.
I don't see the need to retcon Season 2 because I feel like there will be very little of Season 2 specifically addressed in Season 3, other than the good Dale in the Lodge/Bad Dale outside dilemma (and even that has its roots in Season 1's dream sequence). Then again, I have no adequate explanation for the continuity errors in Mark Frost's recent book, so it's possible there is a larger S2 retcon master plan.
I feel like Earle was only effective onscreen in his first appearance (when he meets Leo) and in the last episode. The whole scene where Earle takes Annie into Glastonbury Grove is so friggin' bonkers but it works ("I am Windom Earle!" and the aforementioned "Twelve Rainbow Trout!" lines). The fact that he's dispensed by BOB so easily and anticlimactically speaks volumes about how Lynch felt about the character.
I do think he was an effective offscreen villain in the episodes before he made his entrance. I rather like the episode when they find the vagrant in the Sheriff's office, making it seem like he could strike anywhere and anytime. But once we saw him prancing around in his underwear in a cabin in the woods, the threat became much less real.
Do we have documentation about how Lynch feels about the character? As I always say, I think he was a potential goldmine, but was poorly executed
I don't see the need to retcon Season 2 because I feel like there will be very little of Season 2 specifically addressed in Season 3, other than the good Dale in the Lodge/Bad Dale outside dilemma (and even that has its roots in Season 1's dream sequence). Then again, I have no adequate explanation for the continuity errors in Mark Frost's recent book, so it's possible there is a larger S2 retcon master plan.
I feel like Earle was only effective onscreen in his first appearance (when he meets Leo) and in the last episode. The whole scene where Earle takes Annie into Glastonbury Grove is so friggin' bonkers but it works ("I am Windom Earle!" and the aforementioned "Twelve Rainbow Trout!" lines). The fact that he's dispensed by BOB so easily and anticlimactically speaks volumes about how Lynch felt about the character.
I do think he was an effective offscreen villain in the episodes before he made his entrance. I rather like the episode when they find the vagrant in the Sheriff's office, making it seem like he could strike anywhere and anytime. But once we saw him prancing around in his underwear in a cabin in the woods, the threat became much less real.
Do we have documentation about how Lynch feels about the character? As I always say, I think he was a potential goldmine, but was poorly executed
Yes, that would interest me also. Namely, there seems to be this persistent rumor going on and on in fan circles that Lynch didn't like - or downright hated - the Earle character. However, I have yet to see a single interview/article/media piece with Lynch saying so or even referencing the character AT ALL. So, if any of you know otherwise, I'd be grateful if you could point me in the right direction.
On another note, I think it's wrong to compare Bob with Earle in terms of which was a better villain. There was never any doubt that Bob was the greatest evil (or villain, if you please) on the show. Earle was just something to occupy the viewers with after the Palmer stuff was seemingly resolved, a way to deepen the show's central protagonist's backstory with a much needed grim, serious, compelling storyline in the sea of goofiness and comedy that dominated the last third of the show. With him meeting his end in the last episode the way he did, he demonstrated just that and has served his purpose (pointing to the far greater dark forces surrounding Twin Peaks than any human mastermind could even comprehend, let alone master) beautifully. That being said, I would like for his spirit to be somehow present during the third season, if only because I like shows who know and acknowledge their history, however checkered it may be.
dkenny78 wrote:
I don't see the need to retcon Season 2 because I feel like there will be very little of Season 2 specifically addressed in Season 3, other than the good Dale in the Lodge/Bad Dale outside dilemma (and even that has its roots in Season 1's dream sequence). Then again, I have no adequate explanation for the continuity errors in Mark Frost's recent book, so it's possible there is a larger S2 retcon master plan.
I feel like Earle was only effective onscreen in his first appearance (when he meets Leo) and in the last episode. The whole scene where Earle takes Annie into Glastonbury Grove is so friggin' bonkers but it works ("I am Windom Earle!" and the aforementioned "Twelve Rainbow Trout!" lines). The fact that he's dispensed by BOB so easily and anticlimactically speaks volumes about how Lynch felt about the character.
I do think he was an effective offscreen villain in the episodes before he made his entrance. I rather like the episode when they find the vagrant in the Sheriff's office, making it seem like he could strike anywhere and anytime. But once we saw him prancing around in his underwear in a cabin in the woods, the threat became much less real.
Do we have documentation about how Lynch feels about the character? As I always say, I think he was a potential goldmine, but was poorly executed
Yes, that would interest me also. Namely, there seems to be this persistent rumor going on and on in fan circles that Lynch didn't like - or downright hated - the Earle character. However, I have yet to see a single interview/article/media piece with Lynch saying so or even referencing the character AT ALL. So, if any of you know otherwise, I'd be grateful if you could point me in the right direction.
On another note, I think it's wrong to compare Bob with Earle in terms of which was a better villain. There was never any doubt that Bob was the greatest evil (or villain, if you please) on the show. Earle was just something to occupy the viewers with after the Palmer stuff was seemingly resolved, a way to deepen the show's central protagonist's backstory with a much needed grim, serious, compelling storyline in the sea of goofiness and comedy that dominated the last third of the show. With him meeting his end in the last episode the way he did, he demonstrated just that and has served his purpose (pointing to the far greater dark forces surrounding Twin Peaks than any human mastermind could even comprehend, let alone master) beautifully. That being said, I would like for his spirit to be somehow present during the third season, if only because I like shows who know and acknowledge their history, however checkered it may be.
I'm pretty sure that in Martha Nochimson's book, Lynch was quoted as saying that Windom Earle is "all Mark Frost" or something like that.
"Earle was just something to occupy the viewers with after the Palmer stuff was seemingly resolved, a way to deepen the show's central protagonist's backstory with a much needed grim, serious, compelling storyline in the sea of goofiness and comedy that dominated the last third of the show."
This is the rub though - Earle is not grim or serious at all! I don't really see how a cheesy-ass pantomime horse ted raimi in a chess piece mf is any less goofy than the goofiest s2 shenanigans, and I personally find it harder to swallow because it's being sold to us as the "serious" plotline. Like, people in this thread keep talking about "prancing around in his underwear" - this isn't exaggeration, he is literally prancing around in his fucking underwear! It's not even so much about comparing him to BOB - leland, the renaults, and the earlier iterations of hank, leo and ben all carried far more menace than this capering fool (hell, even jerry was creepy in some of the lynch eps!)
Mr. Reindeer wrote: I wouldn't be particularly surprised if he stuck to season 2, warts and all, treating the blemishes as an opportunity rather than an impediment. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if I'm wrong and stuff does end up being retconned, given Lynch's professed disappointment with season 2, but I think it's far from a given.
I'm so much rooting for the first alternative. Honestly that's exactly what he already have done once already with the lackluster part of season 2 with the finale. He proved that he could take almost literal shit and turn it on it's head and make it compelling dark and beautiful. With a skill like that it would be almost degrading for him to take a retcon route instead... it would feel like a completely unnecessary thing to do to me. But I'd also like to point out what someone already said earlier: even if W. Earle is not literally retconned, he can still more or less be almost 100% ignored or considered a finished chapter (that I'm already consider him being, looking at his final scene with BOB). One character or two mentioning him in passing or so wouldn't hurt the new story one way or another.
Snailhead wrote:^ Hell yes brother/sister. That is a beautiful post. Exactly my thoughts on the matter.
In an ideal Season 2, Episode 29 would have been the first time we saw Earle, with one exception - the video shown by Briggs (black and white on a lil TV). I vaguely remember feeling quite tense the first time watching the series whenever the name Earle was mentioned ... til he actually showed up. Damn was he lame, totally overexposed.
I would have also hated BOB if every episode in season 1/early season 2 we would occasionally cut to him chilling in the Black Lodge giving evil speeches about what he was gonna do next.
You're on to something here, but I'll propose an alternative-
That first scene with Leo meeting Earle in the cabin was, I think most of us agree, very well done. What if, in the following episodes, it is left to our imagination what is happening to Leo in the Cabin with Earle, and we get little glimpses here and there of Earle, but the character gets very little screen time. Then finally, Earle gets significant screen time once his connection to the Black Lodge is revealed.
I think most of us agree that with Windom Earle, less would have been more, at least in the beginning.
By the way, one poster (don't remember who) speculated things might have been different if Lynch had directed the Diane Keaton episode. He might have gotten the character on more solid footing.
