Yeah, I don't understand how recreating an iconic Twin Peaks moment is trolling. I know some people out there hate the original 'Just You' scene but I don't, plenty of other people don't, and Lynch doesn't. So I don't understand this trolling comment either.sewhite2000 wrote:Everybody stop saying "trolling", or define what you mean by that. I thought that was someone who went on the Internet just to stir up shit. Would one of the 67 people on here who claim Lynch is trolling explain what they mean? Because none of you have. Because he plays with audience expectations or because he returns to things most viewers hate, like that song? I don't really understand how that defines as trolling. This is HIS forum, you know. He didn't get on your website and start making trouble.
Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
- Taperecorder
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
-
As above, so below.
-
As above, so below.
-
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned yet that the flooring in the Red Room that Ray was sent to was red and white rather than black and white. Is this a different lodge?
Also, seeing as the original Dougie took the ring with him to the Red Room, yet (assuming it was the same ring, and there aren't multiples) it turned up at the prison soon after, Evil Coop should know sending it to the Red Room wouldn't get rid of it. Was the purpose more to trap Ray there as a punishment for crossing him?
Also, seeing as the original Dougie took the ring with him to the Red Room, yet (assuming it was the same ring, and there aren't multiples) it turned up at the prison soon after, Evil Coop should know sending it to the Red Room wouldn't get rid of it. Was the purpose more to trap Ray there as a punishment for crossing him?
Last edited by BlueLodge on Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Taperecorder
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
You should watch that Big Ed scene again. Something DOES happen. Something HUGE!Jacob wrote: - I loved the ending and I agree with LostintheMovies : it was better to have Ed scene after James's song, because the beauty of Ed looking at the road is precisely the deception and the melancholy.... nothing happened. And that's the point, I guess.
-
As above, so below.
-
As above, so below.
-
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Agreed!Taperecorder wrote:You should watch that Big Ed scene again. Something DOES happen. Something HUGE!Jacob wrote: - I loved the ending and I agree with LostintheMovies : it was better to have Ed scene after James's song, because the beauty of Ed looking at the road is precisely the deception and the melancholy.... nothing happened. And that's the point, I guess.
It took me a while, but when I saw what was happening...!!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
- zeronumber
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:42 pm
Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Thank you kindly for skooling me on this.Saturn's child wrote:http://dilemna.infozeronumber wrote:The Audrey dilemna was most intriguing here.
I think so too. We seemed to see the start of a big storm in one of the ambient TP scenes this ep, & -- as other viewers noticed -- there was a storm mentioned/shown in the LV weather (during one of the Mitchum brother scenes)ThumbsUp wrote:Still think Jacoby's random reference to a big storm is odd though.
I love how this time round with 'Just You', the opinions are exactly as divisive with the first time. Stuck in a time loop indeed.LateReg wrote:I love the song and cried during this performance of it. Truly beautiful, surprising, and perfectly placed this deep into the show.Jadegive2rides wrote:
Did we both hear the same version of the song? Wow, it was painful. A funny homage- but still very painful.
Sycamore, I didn't put a lot of stock in this theory when you first aired it, but you've definitely raised my eye-brows well above their usual level. Excellent work.sycamore wrote:However, I learned who Cassius Clay fought on March 13, 1963 - one fight before Henry Cooper. It's been called the fight of the year: Cassius Clay vs Doug Jones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Jones
Yup. Doug Jones. First, Muhammad Ali fought Doug Jones, then he fought Cooper on the day listed on the big Battling Bud poster.
( i also pronounce whale, "hwale" and the letter "H" , "haytch".)
Sent from my NEC-NE-201A1A using Tapatalk
- Framed_Angel
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 10:16 am
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
From the definition I first pulled up, the parts that apply to Lynch/ Frost getting-a-laugh out of messing with their viewers' expectations would be:sewhite2000 wrote:Everybody stop saying "trolling", or define what you mean by that. I thought that was someone who went on the Internet just to stir up shit. Would one of the 67 people on here who claim Lynch is trolling explain what they mean? Because none of you have. Because he plays with audience expectations or because he returns to things most viewers hate, like that song? I don't really understand how that defines as trolling....
I agree the word 'trolling' is strong by definition and more typically inflammatory as well as disruptive in connotation, based on the usual context.FROM MERRIAM WEBSTER ONLINE : "...posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional ...
I believe we're seeing the term evolve nowadays. I can't say why exactly. WHen I saw that a man was about to have his dandruff-y shoulders massaged I reacted "Ewwww" and then "Oh, Lynch, pffft!" It felt like a Lynchian juxtaposition to me .
When we got a seeming pointless interlude of Hutch & Chantal bantering about Mormons when we've been led to believe they are torture-savoring, ruthless, stealthy killers -- I call that disappointment with a artist/ storyteller since it's already established Chantal likes to snack, we already know they're headed to Nevada, ugh.
So on a scale of 1-10 with dandruff-massage as "1" and useless footage/ weird filler/ other annoyances-one-would-question-of-any-director then I'd say 'trolling' is achieved around a 5 level. You might be annoyed, but you can still laugh. The scene or fragment may be loaded with meaning or none at all and both at once. But unlike stand-alone Dadaism I think there's an extra layer of "provoke" purpose.
Maybe there should be a different word for when a production and the creators behind it do some extra level of messing-around with its viewers, not malicious in intent but maybe "trolling" is seeing a new iteration like the word "bitch" did, within certain contexts.
Or just think of the use of the term as a blend of 'trolling' and 'rick-rolling" in the case of James' stage scene!
"Fool me once... shame on me!"
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Yeah, that's how I understand it as well. Especially that Mr. C kills Ray just after saying "I know where it is" (talking about "the Dutchman"). It's like he's sending Ray precisely where "Jeffries" is...Voltaire wrote:So I think he made Ray wear the ring for 2 purposes. 1. To possibly harvest garmanbozia. 2. More importantly, he wanted to give Mike and presumably Jefferies who might be working with Mike a bit of fuck you. Here is your assassin nice try. Just to let them know they've clearly failed.Jasper wrote:As I've understood it since FWWM, the ring probably dooms the wearer to death, and definitely ensures that they're taken to the lodge in short order (Jeffries, Desmond, Dougie), or upon death (Teresa Banks, Laura, and now Ray). The wearing of the ring seems to guarantee the garmonbozia of the individual to the lawful elements of the lodge (MIKE/Gerard, the Arm, maybe others). In the case of Laura, it also seems to guarantee against possession by BOB.vicksvapor77 wrote:What do we think of the significance of the ring now? Why did Mr. C make Ray put it on? And why did it disappear after his body went into the Red Room?
The contract between the chaotic BOB and the lawful MIKE seems to involve BOB being a harvester of garmonbozia. My question now is why the doppelganger had Ray wear the ring. The doppelganger didn't follow the lodge rule about going back in 25 years after his escape, so why does he seemingly obey the ring contract?
In case anyone thinks I'm being too literal in reading the lodge "mythology", please realize that I'm just looking at it from one angle, and taking that as far as I can. I've always looked at the lodge from multiple angles. Ultimately it might have no rules and might not make sense, but there are things to understand about it which tie directly into the story, so I don't think pondering this is harmful if one realizes that it's just one way of looking at things.
And I agree with Panapaok about Bowie. I'm still hoping for one scene with him. We know Jeffries had originally a big part on the script. So maybe Lynch and Frost, knowing Bowie was ill, reduced the part, making the character as an enigmatic "man behind the curtain"-type but still managed to shoot a few scenes with Bowie himself for a pay-off a the end ? I mean it's weird : if you recast the character, you recast it fully and you don't hide the guy. And if you don't want to show the character at all, well, you stop talking about him. So I'm still hoping for something...
Or maybe the giant aka "???" is Philip Jeffries !
Yeah, I already saw it on the previous pages ! But it's so discreet to me that it doesn't change anything about the mood and the meaning of the scene itself. But it's true it may be a big clue about what's really happening in Twin Peaks. Mother is coming...yaxomoxay wrote:Agreed!Taperecorder wrote:You should watch that Big Ed scene again. Something DOES happen. Something HUGE!Jacob wrote: - I loved the ending and I agree with LostintheMovies : it was better to have Ed scene after James's song, because the beauty of Ed looking at the road is precisely the deception and the melancholy.... nothing happened. And that's the point, I guess.
It took me a while, but when I saw what was happening...!!
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
I hope someone will remember what I am talking about here. Before the pricipal shooting began a rumor had circulated that Twin Peaks was shooting in New York City, and there may have been a mention of Rancho Rosa, or some similar name. People got their hopes up and then it was all opaquely denied, explaining it all due to an unrelated commercial being filmed. It would be something if that was indeed the real deal, but I am just repeating what I heard way back then.Jacob wrote: And I agree with Panapaok about Bowie. I'm still hoping for one scene with him. We know Jeffries had originally a big part on the script. So maybe Lynch and Frost, knowing Bowie was ill, reduced the part, making the character as an enigmatic "man behind the curtain"-type but still managed to shoot a few scenes with Bowie himself for a pay-off a the end ? I mean it's weird : if you recast the character, you recast it fully and you don't hide the guy. And if you don't want to show the character at all, well, you stop talking about him. So I'm still hoping for something...
Or maybe the giant aka "???" is Philip Jeffries !
Is there anybody else here that remembers this rumor?
-
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 1:51 pm
- Location: Exiled in England
- Contact:
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Is it what Ed is eating? I've rewatched it 3 times and can't see anything else.
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
douglasb wrote:Is it what Ed is eating? I've rewatched it 3 times and can't see anything else.
Spoiler:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
??? two cars passing?yaxomoxay wrote:douglasb wrote:Is it what Ed is eating? I've rewatched it 3 times and can't see anything else.Spoiler:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Carrie Page: "It's a long way... In those days, I was too young to know any better."
Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Nope look closer.yaxomoxay wrote:douglasb wrote:Is it what Ed is eating? I've rewatched it 3 times and can't see anything else.Spoiler:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I will spoil it here for you.
Spoiler:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
- New Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:59 am
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Pretty good episode. Two things needs to be addressed:
1) That Sarah Palmer scene could have been used a lot better. Along with Big Ed's at the end scene. I am like say something!
2)
1) That Sarah Palmer scene could have been used a lot better. Along with Big Ed's at the end scene. I am like say something!
2)
This alone makes A LOT of the good stuff happening this season quite forgettable.. (except for ep . A lot of us have waited over 25 years to see Dale. His zombie like state of mind will last at least until the last episode, mark my words. It's a tremendous tremendous shame when you think about it. Feels like having a cold soul. Empty and colorless.djsunyc wrote:btw, i'm now 100% convinced we are not getting our cooper back. this will be dougie vs. dopple till the end. maybe we get 10 seconds...maybe.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:59 am
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
ravingnightmare wrote:Pretty good episode. Two things needs to be addressed:
1) That Sarah Palmer scene could have been used a lot better. Along with Big Ed's at the end scene. I am like say something!
2)This alone makes A LOT of the good stuff happening this season quite forgettable.. (except for ep . A lot of us have waited over 25 years to see Dale. His zombie like state of mind will last at least until the last episode, mark my words. It's a tremendous tremendous shame when you think about it. Feels like having a cold soul. Empty and colorless.djsunyc wrote:btw, i'm now 100% convinced we are not getting our cooper back. this will be dougie vs. dopple till the end. maybe we get 10 seconds...maybe.
Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)
Basically it goes from :
To :
It's easier to save the two pics and see them one after the other to see the "thing".
To :
It's easier to save the two pics and see them one after the other to see the "thing".
Last edited by Jacob on Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.