Part 12 - Let's rock (SPOILERS)

[counterpaul]

Sure, it's a given that the final cut will be exactly as Lynch intended, but that doesn't mean how effectively the story is told isn't subjective.

You're totally right about this, of course. I probably could have phrased things better in the post you've quoted. I was responding very narrowly to this idea I keep seeing that seems to imply that time is quite literally short--that L/F had 18 hours to tell a story and they've bungled it and now they have to rush to cram everything into the last 6 hours. That's the only claim I would call false.

It's totally valid to watch a 3 hour film, and subjectively feel that it didn't allow enough time to develop its ideas or follow through on everything it set out to do. Saying the director intended it to be precisely that long doesn't really matter, in this instance. This is no different.

100%. After the whole thing is over, we'll be able to assess how the structure served (or didn't serve) the story as a whole, and whether more time might have been better spent on some storylines/non-sequiturs/thematic excursions vs others. I guess I just feel like those particular conversations are impossible to really have before we reach the end. That isn't to say that discussions of whether certain scenes work well on their own or in the flow of what we've seen so far aren't valid--they totally are! But we simply don't know how much time the story as a whole needed in order to work well until we've seen the whole story.

So, on that matter alone, I feel like the most productive approach is to relax and let TPTR work its spell on you.

I still have hope that once the show is finished, it will all feel cohesive (on its own terms- however fragmentary it ends up). But counting the remaining hours and worrying we mightn't end up with something as focussed as we'd hoped isn't unreasonable.

Fair enough, but I feel no need to count the remaining hours. Sure, there's a part of me that dreads no longer having new material to look forward to, but that would be the case no matter how long this was. And, as I said, I don't feel like it's possible to know how much time would best serve the overall story prior to seeing it, so worrying about that seems like pointless self-harm. In the meantime I've found it best, for my own sanity, to keep my eye on the doughnut rather than the hole as DKL likes to say.

I'm more surprised that you'd say the amount of time a scene takes up out of the whole is irrelevant, given how fluent you obviously are in the cinematic language- how rhythm, pacing, structure etc shape meaning, affect, interpretation. It's these issues that are being unpacked when we use terms like 'running out of time'. I've really enjoyed reading your posts on the forum (reminding me at times of Walter Murch's writing) and I find this view hard to reconcile with others you've expressed... Apologies if I've misunderstood your point here.

First, thank you for the compliment! I really appreciate that anyone is reading my long ramblings here.

Second, once again, I obviously could have phrased things more effectively in that post. I was speaking to a very, very narrow set of criticisms that irk me in that post. Very narrow.

I completely agree with you that the amount of time a scene takes up in the whole piece, and how scenes are arranged rhythmically, is incredibly important. Aesthetically, it's absolutely paramount!

So far, I've found Lynch's rhythms in TPTR to be impeccable. I haven't yet had a chance to watch Part 12 in the greater context of the whole (it's, of course, getting harder and harder with each passing week to watch the whole piece as one--sleep?! who needs sleep?!), but I adore the way the longer scenes functioned rhythmically in this hour and I imagine that the contrast with the relatively snappier scenes of Part 11 will be quite effective. This is a piece that has ebbed and flowed since the start. I'm not seeing any evidence that this is becoming less effective as the piece continues.

I can see how an extended rhythmic lull at this point might make some viewers restless and worried, and how that might be a totally valid structural criticism of an 18 hour piece. I think, however, this is tempered by what we're actually seeing. I mentioned this elsewhere, but the scene with Gordon and his lady friend was a beautiful reminder that the lulls are a crucial thematic element of this piece and will likely remain so all the way to the end. The passage of time is an essential object of inquiry here, and the structure consistently underlines this theme.

[SpookySculder]

If those Entertainment Weekly covers had featured the actors/characters that had the highest appearance time in TPTR, who would have been on those covers instead of 10 that are actually on there?

those EW covers are beginning to feel like false advertising

[Jonah]

Robert Ontkean?

Thanks - fixed. I guess I have Harry on the brain!

[mtwentz]

Robert Ontkean?

Thanks - fixed. I guess I have Harry on the brain!

No worries I figured it was a kind of Freudian style slip

[Deep Thought]

I think you probably didn't understand my point... your comments have absolutely no relevance to my perspective on the scene. I was cracking up during the Audrey scene so I didn't hate it, but if you thought it was beautiful and moving from what we saw, that's fine. I'd be interested to hear you elaborate on that.

OK, The Audrey scene is one of my favorite scenes so far; although there are many great scenes, this one is brilliant. (I am in fact amused by the hate this episode is getting. A familiar feeling to a DL fan - people hating on your happiness.

One of my favorite novels (going by re-reads) is The Unconsoled, by Kazuo Ishiguro. I’ve recommended it to several very well-read friends and they have invariably hated it with a passion similar to what I am seeing towards this scene, for the same reason. As many have already said here, the scene is frustrating to watch. Yes, well The Unconsoled is 500 pages of frustration, which is the point. Frustration and regret act in concert.

We can read “Audrey was frustrated,” or we can experience it! I understand why many, including my wife who walked out during the scene, internalize the frustration of the character onscreen just as we internalized the grief of the mother during the hit and run scene. No one complained “Ah, that scene was so SAD! It was a terrible scene! DL is trolling our emotions!” If you understand Mulholland Drive, you can let this scene wash over you with the same understanding, while enjoying the greater mastery of the character’s desires. Yes, I do think this scene is as/more effective than much of the broader symbolism in MD (which I love), except for the Club Silencio sequence, maybe Winkies. Why? Because it has time to develop!

Now, whether this action takes place in Audrey’s unconscious mind, in Twin Peaks, in the lodge, in the hospital, in her home with her misshapen husband – it does not matter because it takes place! Is the “Gordon Cole leering at the French tourist to SD” scene any more solid and intentional because it takes place in “reality”? I’d argue no, and even if we eventually find out that Audrey is indeed unable to leave her “real” home because her overbearing iron-fisted milquetoast of a husband says OK go ahead and leave (he never say she can’t leave, and even says “I’ll go with you”), the impact plays out the same regardless. Audry needing his protection only makes sense in certain scenarios which don't involve this being an internal struggle.

This is a dream sequence (please see the above paragraph before you disagree). It follows dream logic and uncannily captures the slow burn of dread experienced in a typical dream. A Typical Dream: I need to take my son to baseball practice. Oh my, he is late, I finally found the keys but now my neighbor needs help cleaning out his garage because he saw a rat. And these files need to be reordered, etc etc. (Coincidentally, last week I awoke from a dream and had to tell my wife, because the dream ended with me actually accomplishing my goal for the first time in years).

The husband is an aspect of Audrey’s personality, just as characters in IE are aspects of the main character. He (or rather she), is blocking Audrey from her desires, or perhaps trying to guide her towards salvation (the two not being mutally exclusive). As many have noted, both characters are rooted in their spots, she on the verge of leaving, he blocking the exit. Many times during the scene the momentum begins to take Audrey on her journey but progress is never made. He is very tired, and repeats this several times. It is very dark outside and there are thousands of square miles of woods. He seems not to know what Audrey wants throughout the conversation, and she must repeat herself. He says “you know I don’t have a crystal ball” as he gestures towards his crystal ball. He only has her best interests at heart, and has always taken care of her (Audrey doesn’t deny this). These are just a few of the surface details, and don’t include the nuances in acting and pacing. I could go on at length, but enough for tonight. I don't have time to get into the phone call.

Audrey’s journey is already more interesting than Cooper’s to me, and even though her character is grating, she now joins Candie and DougieCoop as the character I look forward to seeing the most of for the last 6(!) episodes.

Stunnning, stunning, stunning scene.

[mtwentz]

Great perspective Deep Thought. I plan to do my rewatch later this week and will keep your theory in mind.

[Cooperscoffeecup]

If those Entertainment Weekly covers had featured the actors/characters that had the highest appearance time in TPTR, who would have been on those covers instead of 10 that are actually on there?

those EW covers are beginning to feel like false advertising

I took them as a way of re-introducing the existing characters. Nothing more.

[Esselgee]

So when did Albert join the Blue Rose Taskforce? If he was already a member when Cooper came to Twin Peaks, then why did Cooper have to request that Albert come do Laura's autopsy instead of Sam? Wouldn't it automatically be Albert since he was a Blue Rose agent? Did Sam become a Blue Rose agent after working on the Theresa Banks case? Maybe Albert only became a Blue Rose agent after his time in Twin Peaks.

[Mr. Jackpots]

So when did Albert join the Blue Rose Taskforce? If he was already a member when Cooper came to Twin Peaks, then why did Cooper have to request that Albert come do Laura's autopsy instead of Sam? Wouldn't it automatically be Albert since he was a Blue Rose agent? Was Sam a Blue Rose agent? Maybe Albert only became a Blue Rose agent after his time in Twin Peaks.

I don't think Sam was an initiate in the Blue Rose Squad. But just a close colleague. Not fully in the loop though.

[Audrey Horne]

Excellent work, Deep Thought. I haven't even had time yet to watch it again, and was hardly listening to all the names she and he listed, but instead the body language and the strange almost stilted rythym.

I'd think if this was a conversation between The Giant or the Little Man and Cooper it would be received better. I think down the line it will be a scene that grows on people.

[Little Pine Cone]

I don't get this endless litany of Jacoby nonsense everyone on every forum is going on about.
Lynch did not reuse the same Dr. Amp scene again.
He reused the commercial for the shovels, and only half of the commercial at that.

Yes, the scene opens with the same dialogue but anyone who's watched or listened to these types of shows will know they tend to have the same familiar intro.
Then Jacoby runs his commercial, which we have seen. But it plays out on the screen / monitors, his and Nadine's, differently.
But the following moments are all new.
His rant is thematically similar to previous rants but the dialogue is completely different.
So really, we only rewatched a part of the commercial again which must have amounted to 40 seconds of screen time yet everyone everywhere is acting like those 40 seconds was 40 minutes and wrongly claiming the scene in its entirety, was a repeat. Yet it wasn't.
Calm down everyone, jeez.

[wAtChLaR]

I don't get this endless litany of Jacoby nonsense everyone on every forum is going on about.
Lynch did not reuse the same Dr. Amp scene again.
He reused the commercial for the shovels, and only half of the commercial at that.

Yes, the scene opens with the same dialogue but anyone who's watched or listened to these types of shows will know they tend to have the same familiar intro.
Then Jacoby runs his commercial, which we have seen. But it plays out on the screen / monitors, his and Nadine's, differently.
But the following moments are all new.
His rant is thematically similar to previous rants but the dialogue is completely different.
So really, we only rewatched a part of the commercial again which must have amounted to 40 seconds of screen time yet everyone everywhere is acting like those 40 seconds was 40 minutes and wrongly claiming the scene in its entirety, was a repeat. Yet it wasn't.
Calm down everyone, jeez.

and immediately juxtaposed with Audrey's entrance.....intentional

[LateReg]

My only thought is that stuff like this is the result of the extension from 9 parts to 18, or some something as a result of the editing.

I still don't get the whole speculation about the "extension from 9 parts to 18" thing going on here. We don't know exactly what happened, but we do know that Lynch has complete control. By that logic, he wanted it to be 18 hours, or thereabouts. Maybe The Return would have been tighter or even better if it were the originally announced 9 parts, but in Lynch's head it seems that it was always 18 parts. I'm just saying: We shouldn't blame the "filler" on the fact that it is 18 hours instead of 9. It was always supposed to be the way it is now, Lynch didn't add in stuff just to fill time because the episode count suddenly doubled. Sure, if Showtime would have restricted him to only 9 hours, then this would be a different beast entirely, and in that sense the 18 hours enables Lynch to linger longer than some would like. But every time someone comments in the negative about the doubling of the runtime, it seems to insinuate that Lynch isn't doing this the way that HE thinks is best, which I think is certainly false.

It was speculation on my part, but it was based on the idea that when that whole showdown occurred where Lynch demanded a larger budget from Showtime, Showtime eventually agreed but on the condition of getting 18 parts out of it. This may or may not be true (I expect we learn a lot more in a few years time and all the spoiler sensitivity is gone and people talk about the whole process more).

I don't believe that is true at all. That's always been a rumor that spiraled out of control and has never been substantiated in any way. Why would Showtime demand more parts? They could have just spread the episodes out, airing them every other week if they wanted to keep subscribers over a longer period of time. As Counterpaul said in response to me, the dispute was most likely over the fact that Showtime didn't understand that Lynch needed more time to tell the story. The script itself seemed like it could be accomplished in 9 parts, but Lynch doesn't work like a normal director where one page equals one minute, and that is where the misunderstanding likely arose from...look at Part 8, which was probably ten pages of script but took an hour onscreen. This is of course just more speculation, but it truly makes no sense to think that Lynch/Frost spent three years writing a script and then doubled it on Showtime's request within the span of four months before shooting began. No one involved would think that would be possible or a good idea, and all signs point to Lynch having complete control, with no one telling him what to do.

[Ross]

Showtime didn't demand 18 episodes.

[Esselgee]

I must be stupid because I just now realized that the kid that plays Sonny Jim played the robot boy on the CBS show "Extant" that I watched both seasons of.