Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Discussion of Twin Peaks TV Series, Fire Walk With Me, and Books

Moderators: Annie, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne, Brad D

Forum rules
Welcome to the forum. We know our members are passionate about their love for all things Twin Peaks. You wouldn't be here if that wasn't the case. Despite having differing viewpoints it is a policy that we all treat each other with mutual respect.

Posting abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated, or any material that may violate any laws be it of your country or the country where this forum is hosted will get you permanently banned.

Posting of spoilers are allowed as long as you indicate (Spoilers) in the topic name and use the Spoiler Tag.

Will there be more Twin Peaks released in the future?

Yes
29
71%
No
12
29%
 
Total votes: 41
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1814
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby mtwentz » Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:49 pm

I don’t think cast members dying should have much influence. Jack Nance and Frank Silva died in the 90s, followed shortly thereafter by Don Davis. But that didn’t stop Season 3.

One or both of the creators dying would be different, of course.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sun Oct 27, 2019 2:12 pm

IcedOver wrote:As far as him using "Peaks" as a playground to do what he wants and just slapping the "TP" name on it (even more than was done this time), I'm not sure I can get behind that.


I can understand this sentiment, which has been expressed by others as well, but I have to disagree, only because TP has from its inception always been about constantly reinventing itself. Even the Pilot itself starts out as one thing (grief-stricken town) for its first “television hour,” then switches to a totally different gear once Coop swings in past the sign and brings some much-needed levity/weirdness. The Pilot is completely grounded in reality (aside from the very last shot of Bob in the mirror, which most first-time viewers are likely to completely miss). E2 then kicks things into a totally different realm with the Red Room. E8 does the same, in an entirely different way, etc. etc. I still find it genuinely shocking to view the Pilot in light of the supernatural stuff that comes later (and I’m just talking about the original show); it almost feels like an entirely different rulebook in some ways, even as it also feels entirely of a piece in other ways (this is also exactly the way I feel about TP:TR). For better or worse, S2 was constantly transmogrifying itself, leading fans to mentally break it up into different sections of varying subjective quality (plaid Coop, etc.). FWWM took the franchise into a much more psychological space than it had ever gone before. I honestly think the objections to the stylistic shift in TP:TR are just a result of the fact that people had 25+ years to sit with the original material and rectify the many many prior stylistic shifts. TP:TR is certainly a radical work, but it’s not nearly as disassociated from the original as some tend to think, solely because TP never quite knew what it wanted to be. And in a weird way, that has always been its greatest strength.
LateReg
Posts: 900
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby LateReg » Sun Oct 27, 2019 2:54 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
IcedOver wrote:As far as him using "Peaks" as a playground to do what he wants and just slapping the "TP" name on it (even more than was done this time), I'm not sure I can get behind that.


I can understand this sentiment, which has been expressed by others as well, but I have to disagree, only because TP has from its inception always been about constantly reinventing itself. Even the Pilot itself starts out as one thing (grief-stricken town) for its first “television hour,” then switches to a totally different gear once Coop swings in past the sign and brings some much-needed levity/weirdness. The Pilot is completely grounded in reality (aside from the very last shot of Bob in the mirror, which most first-time viewers are likely to completely miss). E2 then kicks things into a totally different realm with the Red Room. E8 does the same, in an entirely different way, etc. etc. I still find it genuinely shocking to view the Pilot in light of the supernatural stuff that comes later (and I’m just talking about the original show); it almost feels like an entirely different rulebook in some ways, even as it also feels entirely of a piece in other ways (this is also exactly the way I feel about TP:TR). For better or worse, S2 was constantly transmogrifying itself, leading fans to mentally break it up into different sections of varying subjective quality (plaid Coop, etc.). FWWM took the franchise into a much more psychological space than it had ever gone before. I honestly think the objections to the stylistic shift in TP:TR are just a result of the fact that people had 25+ years to sit with the original material and rectify the many many prior stylistic shifts. TP:TR is certainly a radical work, but it’s not nearly as disassociated from the original as some tend to think, solely because TP never quite knew what it wanted to be. And in a weird way, that has always been its greatest strength.


Exactly. "Slapping" the Twin Peaks name on something isn't remotely in the realm of what I was saying, nor is it really a thing that would ever happen. Playing in the sandbox of Twin Peaks is what I was saying. There is a wider range of freedom in that sandbox than in any of Lynch's other projects which have always been more focused/streamlined, and now that I see just how far the show has gone in multiple directions while still remaining Twin Peaks through and through I say bring it on as that is where Lynch can be at his most broadly creative and his mind can run the most wildly. I'm not, however, suggesting he make his Robert Johnson biopic and call it Twin Peaks, nor he would never do that, unless Johnson were to play at the Roadhouse, in which case, yeah, bring it on.

As far as dialing it back within Twin Peaks, I can fully envision something once again shot on film, more streamlined, more consistently visceral like FWWM. I absolutely couldn't see where he'd take his art after INLAND EMPIRE, though, because it seemed to me he had no interest in straightforward narratives and he couldn't take the aggressive experimentation any further, and had expressed no interest in working with a major studio. Which is why The Return, with its kitchen sink/day in the life approach to anti-narrative, seems like the culmination and advancement of everything to me, a way to move forward without compromise, and now also a way to free himself to do anything he wanted to, especially within Twin Peaks. And as perfect as that ending is, it also provides a reset to go literally anywhere with the narrative.

Which is all to say that if we don't get anymore, fine. It went out on the highest note possible imo, and the rare magnitude of its return can stay unprecedented. But if we do get more, then even better because I feel as though that ending also provided a launching pad that can lead to any possible destination no matter how traditional or experimental, and that The Return itself has given Lynch extra clout to make something with just as much freedom and a slightly larger budget, especially due to the critical success of Part 8.

(mtwentz, per your querie in a different thread, the series was nominated for a lot of Emmy awards, even if it didn't win any. But there's no way that Showtime could have possibly expected a show acclaimed for its experimentation and uniqueness to win any of these awards if they're at all conscious of the types of shows that have been winning lately, so I don't think the lack of awards would have affected their decision for more Peaks in the slightest. Based on year-end lists, Nevins himself did say that they've never had a show as critically acclaimed as The Return, so I don't see what more Showtime could have asked for.)

To answer the question of this thread, I voted yes. Because I know that the Peaks world may call to Lynch and Frost, because of some of Lynch's comments, and because I believe there is something to the rumor that something is happening. I also believe that some of the tweets mean something and most do not, but that's just a sense I have and nothing concrete other than the perhaps false belief that Michael Horse is a beautiful and intuitive spirit who is in the circle of trust. I also believe that Lynch/Frost/Sutherland's silence is telling of the fact that there is potentially something in the works.
JackwithOneEye
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:26 pm

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby JackwithOneEye » Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:35 pm

My hope is that David Lynch makes something new. I would be equally happy if he did the Robert Johson project or Ronnie Rocket or something else other than Twin Peaks if he wanted. I do think the serialized episodic format works best for him, gives him a bigger sandbox with room for tangents and dream sequences and alternate realities and so forth. A Robert Johnson or Ronnie Rocket or One Saliva Bubble et all limited series on Showtime could be great.
ManBehindWinkies
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:08 pm

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby ManBehindWinkies » Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:53 pm

This is what we know: All of the necessary parties have expressed at least an openness to do more (Lynch, Frost, Showtime). There is still enough interest from fans to make another season a financially viable project. This is what we can probably safely assume: Lynch and Frost have had discussions about what they would do if the franchise were to continue. The rumors of more coming may not be credible, but they are certainly plausible. No one is trying to kill the rumors, which they would want to do if there was some kind of project that would be announced that wasn't new original Twin Peaks material. I think they are working on making more. There's still all kinds of reasons why it might not happen. But there seems to be plenty of indication they are moving towards it.

As far as them "slapping" Twin Peaks on something... David Lynch and Mark Frost are the creators of Twin Peaks. If they slap "Twin Peaks" on something, it is Twin Peaks, whether fans like it or not. The opinion of fans about what it or isn't Twin Peaks could not be less important, sorry...
User avatar
Rainwater
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 3:00 am
Location: Under the Sycamore trees

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby Rainwater » Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:10 am

ManBehindWinkies wrote:As far as them "slapping" Twin Peaks on something... David Lynch and Mark Frost are the creators of Twin Peaks. If they slap "Twin Peaks" on something, it is Twin Peaks, whether fans like it or not. The opinion of fans about what it or isn't Twin Peaks could not be less important, sorry...

True.
φ
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1814
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby mtwentz » Mon Oct 28, 2019 7:32 am

The ultimate 'slapping a label' on a sequel that really had nothing to do with the original movie, was 'Curse of the Cat People'. It was a great film, but calling it a sequel was a stretch.

As long as what is produced is mind expanding like The Return, I am up for anything.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
AXX°N N.
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:47 pm

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby AXX°N N. » Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:57 pm

Two thoughts on the "slapping the name Twin Peaks on" sentiment. Not to dogpile on IcedOver, it's just a sentiment I've seen a lot, expressed a lot more hostile elsewhere.

1) For me, detecting aesthetic similarities with his recent paintings, shorts, music, music videos, and even ads, was one of the most enjoyable aspects of my watching S3. Noticing similarities to One Saliva Bubble and especially Ronnie Rocket ... seeing certain things like electrically-transmogrified limbs elongating and ever-shifting geographies of ultra-dark night dwellings where parking lots somehow become labyrinthine, floored me off my ass. These are things I never thought I'd see executed, especially not on TV.

2) Twin Peaks was always built off of prior material. It began because of the failed Marilyn Monroe film, which obviously in the case of Laura Palmer, certain thematic aspects were ported over, less obviously in the case of Norma Jennings, whose name is almost exactly Norma Jean, and is herself a once-bombshell prom queen turned tragic, just less in the extreme. To approach the original as hostile as some approach S3, you could say, "God, how lazy, half the music is from his stage play!" And not only was the music ported over from Industrial Symphony, but so was the angelic Julee Cruise and the enigmatic Michael J. Anderson. Not to mention that in terms of the dark underbelly/americana facade, a lot of Peaks is a development on Blue Velvet, and Isabella Rosellina was even supposed to play Josie, who was originally italian... and I'm sure there are others I'm missing.
Recipe not my own. In a coffee cup. 3 TBS flour, 2 TBS sugar, 1.5 TBS cocoa powder, .25 TSP baking powder, pinch of salt. 3 TBS milk, 1.5 TBS vegetable oil, 1 TBS peanut butter. Add and mix each set. Microwave 1 minute 10 seconds. The cup will be hot.
User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 1147
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Do you honestly believe there will be more Twin Peaks?

Postby Soolsma » Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:49 pm

I have made it so that one may change their vote.
Carrie Page: "It's a long way... In those days, I was too young to know any better."

Return to “Twin Peaks Movie, TV, Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests