Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Discussion of each of the 18 parts of Twin Peaks the Return

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

User avatar
firefly2193
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by firefly2193 »

garethw wrote:
rocketsan22 wrote:
firefly2193 wrote:Loved the episode, aesthetically brilliant throughout. The roadhouse scene with that music had me somehow incredibly tense.

I hope the final four parts are as good as this one.

I also hope that the wherever the story goes, and I have literally no idea (which is ridiculous/great at this point) doesn't do any sort of dis-service to the Laura Palmer story at the heart of Twin Peaks original. I don't think Lynch would do that. But occasionally TPTR feels a bit like a fanfic tacked onto Twin Peaks without a real thematic build on the story that came before it. I hope this doesn't remain the case, but at the very least I hope the purity of the Laura Palmer tragedy remains in tact (unless meaningfully enhanced and developed upon).
This^^^^^^^^^ 1,000x over...
Add one more voice to that chorus. I am really enjoying the new show as a stand-alone piece, and its links to the original, but Laura's story is a heartbreaking tragedy, and the most fully fleshed-out work in a portfolio of work full of references to child abuse. It seems unconscionable to me to trivialize that story, and I'd not have expected Lynch to do that. On the other hand, Freddie the jolly green-gloved Lynchian take on a comic book hero seems to be inexplicably and perilously headed in that direction.

On the other hand, I also wonder whether I'm right that that story was really as important to Lynch as I always assume -- he never intended, after all, to reveal it. So what does that mean?
There's a good chance Lynch grew to love the story. As with most of Lynch works they are almost completely organic - Bob in TP, the finale of Mulholland Drive, etc. But Fire Walk With Me puts little doubt to how much he treasures the Laura Palmer story, and how central he found it to the heart of Twin Peaks.

I'm glad many here also share the love and desire to protect the Laura story. However, with Lynch's work, it always best to reserve judgement until the end. Just imagine ending Mulholland Drive before the Club Silencio scene. Lynch has always absolutely nailed finales (TP ep29, FWWM, Mulholland Dr), often bringing together everything that went before it. Given that, and both Lynch's and Sheryl Lee's attachment to the character, I have a lot of hope that these fears will be allayed and we'll have something wonderful. Just a dose of fear in there too though :wink:.
User avatar
zeronumber
RR Diner Member
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by zeronumber »

Ok,
Here is another 2¢.

After the suspensful answer and subsequent aural cue to the answer that "Tina" was that girls mom....

We are left mystified that she did not say what we all were thinking and reply "Audrey".

This,along with our previous two encounter with Audrey and Charlie leads me to the following (obtained by Tibetan method...) associations to conjecture the following:

I purport that Audrey is Tina.

Perhaps she is suffering a schizophrenic split in which Tina is her other self. Who has a life, a daughter and apparently issues with which Audrey hates.

Charlie is some sort of facilitator... And to be clear and eliminate any ambiguity...

The phone call he place to "Tina", may have all been a charade! (There was no Tina on the phone!) He already knew all the somewhat shocking details and was only pressing Audrey by not telling her the things which she may already know as "Tina" but has not been able to dissociate as Audrey. (And maybe vice versa)

I think this can ground the Audrey situation in to reality, while still allowing for all of of the conflictions in the various tales which include Billy.


Just my 2¢.

Sent from my NEC-NE-201A1A using Tapatalk
User avatar
mtwentz
Lodge Member
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by mtwentz »

Saela wrote:
mtwentz wrote:Hey folks, we've got 4 hours to go and these are the subplots we have to find resolution to (in addition to the main Good Coop/Bad Coop/Janey-E plot):

1. Red/Shelly/Bobby
2. Steven/Becky
3. Audrey's story (including presumably Richard and Charlie)
4. James/Renee
5. Ben/Beverly
6. Ed/Norma and Norma's Pies
7. Dr. Amp/Nadine

In addition, we also have yet to find out the fates of the following characters who do not appear this season: Annie, Leo and Donna

Do you think we can get resolution to all this in 4 hours? Or will we have to wait for Frost's book to get some of the final answers? Am I missing anything?
I think a lot of those subplots could be finished with only a scene or two...and I think the whole Norma/Ed thing doesn't necessarily need anything more than what we've seen. Norma is in a relationship with some quy who wants to change the way she makes her delicious pies (which is why we don't like him), while Ed is still alone and sad.

Also, I don't think we'll ever know what happened to Donna and Leo, but if Lynch/Frost really want to give us something, a sentence would be enough.
Long story short, I think there's still enough time.
I generally agree. I mean, I honestly don't really care that much about most of them, they seem to be peripheral.

The exception would be Red and how he affects the town and Bobby and Shelly. It seems to me there has to be a confrontation building in that storyline and I am surprised we have not seen more of it up until now.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
User avatar
firefly2193
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by firefly2193 »

LateReg wrote:
firefly2193 wrote:For me this episode, in contrast to the past few parts highlighted why The Return can be a bit polarising for me. The scenes that feel the most alive and exhilarating are those that engage primarily through visual, intuitive film-making - scenes like the extended Naido/woods scene, or the Sarah Palmer scene. When The Return gets bogged down in characters simply talking in a room, often talking about events that we already know, there's a sense of over-exposition and heavy handedness.

An example of both of these was in the opening scene with Cole's dream. On the one hand, the visual story being told was both tantalising and subtly unnerving. But it was slightly undermined by Cole literally describing the events we were seeing on screen as they happened, or even just before they happened. I feel this could've been entirely more effective if we were simply shown Cole's dream without narration. Essentially, for me the show thrives when it shows rather than tells.
Hi. I agree with what you're saying here about when the show feels most alive. I'm responding to repost a thought I let loose in another thread in regards to the sometimes clunky exposition, as I was pondering this yesterday.

Sometimes we get ZERO information; other times, like when Truman is on the phone with Cole about "two Coopers," we get oddly truncated information, and then other times we get something explained to us nearly completely (sometimes I feel like a bug on a wall, witnessing a natural conversation for a second time, while others I feel like the audience, witnessing a dump of information solely for my benefit). Beyond the fact that I personally think the more expositional elements don't feel much different from certain scenes in the original series and therefore may either be totally sincere or an inside-joke that I'm meant to chuckle at (Albert starts off chunks of exposition with "as you know" for crying out loud!), I think there has to be some intentionality to all of this. At the very least, it adds to the playful and jarring nature of The Return, never allowing a viewer to become comfortable with the way the story is being told. I think it's definitely a calculated part of the wild ride.
I personally just think its either occasionally poorly written or has been unnaturally extended to make 18 parts. There's the potential that Frost and Lynch legitimately thought TPTR would be viewed by people who had never seen Twin Peaks before - which, after the first two parts, is definitely not the case - and therefore stuck in lots of unnecessary exposition. But then they simultaneously wrote a show that would make literally zero sense to any new viewer. Similarly, a lot of the over exposition is about things we the audience have already seen - in particular the FBI slowly debriefing the events that have gone before. This perhaps suggests to me that these scenes have been added to extend a script that was originally written with 9 parts in mind.

Obviously that is pure speculation, and I can't wait for the new information to come out from producers, crew, perhaps even Frost, after this is all wrapped up. I would *love* to see the original script. Unless the ending changes everything, I would also love to see a 12 or 14 hour edit of this whole thing. TPTR is actually primed for some very interesting re-edits - how would the whole thing feel if it was divided up differently? Say, each different storyline edited as one continuous long piece? Or re-cut in chronological order? As with most fan edits, I'd expect these not to work as well as the original, but I'd suspect a 12-14hour edit could be brilliant.
DangerMo
New Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:57 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by DangerMo »

thunderclap82 wrote:While an interesting idea the only thing I can say that goes against this is that Lynch in the dream is wearing the hearing aids Cole wears. If this were true, that it wasn't Cole in the black and white sequence but Lynch himself, then he wouldn't have the hearing aids in.
Unless in the Paris sequence the hearing aid is NOT a hearing aid, but an iPod through which Lynch was learning how to whistle Rammstein tunes????

I'm still not over the grief that I was attending a meeting in Paris the day they shot exterior scenes, apparently not too far from my office on top of that (Montparnasse), as I was receiving tweets indicating that the shooting was on its way, and the clients just wouldn't shut their mouths and put an end to what had then become the most inept business meeting ever.... I WANTED TO BE AN EXTRA IN THIS, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!

What I didn't know then was that Belluci was going to be in the scene, and, small world, she was my neighbor when she was still living with Vincent Cassel in Paris. GRIEF, GRIEF, GRIEF....

Besides that, I'm still 100% in with this show: tour de force!
Saela
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:34 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by Saela »

mtwentz wrote:
Saela wrote:
mtwentz wrote:Hey folks, we've got 4 hours to go and these are the subplots we have to find resolution to (in addition to the main Good Coop/Bad Coop/Janey-E plot):

1. Red/Shelly/Bobby
2. Steven/Becky
3. Audrey's story (including presumably Richard and Charlie)
4. James/Renee
5. Ben/Beverly
6. Ed/Norma and Norma's Pies
7. Dr. Amp/Nadine

In addition, we also have yet to find out the fates of the following characters who do not appear this season: Annie, Leo and Donna

Do you think we can get resolution to all this in 4 hours? Or will we have to wait for Frost's book to get some of the final answers? Am I missing anything?
I think a lot of those subplots could be finished with only a scene or two...and I think the whole Norma/Ed thing doesn't necessarily need anything more than what we've seen. Norma is in a relationship with some quy who wants to change the way she makes her delicious pies (which is why we don't like him), while Ed is still alone and sad.

Also, I don't think we'll ever know what happened to Donna and Leo, but if Lynch/Frost really want to give us something, a sentence would be enough.
Long story short, I think there's still enough time.
I generally agree. I mean, I honestly don't really care that much about most of them, they seem to be peripheral.

The exception would be Red and how he affects the town and Bobby and Shelly. It seems to me there has to be a confrontation building in that storyline and I am surprised we have not seen more of it up until now.
I still like to have all those subplots in there because they make The Return a richer experience, in my opinion. I agree about Red/Bobby/Shelly and also Richard, but I'm sure we'll see a satisfying conclusion to all of that before we can focus on Cooper again.
LateReg
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by LateReg »

firefly2193 wrote:
LateReg wrote:
firefly2193 wrote:For me this episode, in contrast to the past few parts highlighted why The Return can be a bit polarising for me. The scenes that feel the most alive and exhilarating are those that engage primarily through visual, intuitive film-making - scenes like the extended Naido/woods scene, or the Sarah Palmer scene. When The Return gets bogged down in characters simply talking in a room, often talking about events that we already know, there's a sense of over-exposition and heavy handedness.

An example of both of these was in the opening scene with Cole's dream. On the one hand, the visual story being told was both tantalising and subtly unnerving. But it was slightly undermined by Cole literally describing the events we were seeing on screen as they happened, or even just before they happened. I feel this could've been entirely more effective if we were simply shown Cole's dream without narration. Essentially, for me the show thrives when it shows rather than tells.
Hi. I agree with what you're saying here about when the show feels most alive. I'm responding to repost a thought I let loose in another thread in regards to the sometimes clunky exposition, as I was pondering this yesterday.

Sometimes we get ZERO information; other times, like when Truman is on the phone with Cole about "two Coopers," we get oddly truncated information, and then other times we get something explained to us nearly completely (sometimes I feel like a bug on a wall, witnessing a natural conversation for a second time, while others I feel like the audience, witnessing a dump of information solely for my benefit). Beyond the fact that I personally think the more expositional elements don't feel much different from certain scenes in the original series and therefore may either be totally sincere or an inside-joke that I'm meant to chuckle at (Albert starts off chunks of exposition with "as you know" for crying out loud!), I think there has to be some intentionality to all of this. At the very least, it adds to the playful and jarring nature of The Return, never allowing a viewer to become comfortable with the way the story is being told. I think it's definitely a calculated part of the wild ride.
I personally just think its either occasionally poorly written or has been unnaturally extended to make 18 parts. There's the potential that Frost and Lynch legitimately thought TPTR would be viewed by people who had never seen Twin Peaks before - which, after the first two parts, is definitely not the case - and therefore stuck in lots of unnecessary exposition. But then they simultaneously wrote a show that would make literally zero sense to any new viewer. Similarly, a lot of the over exposition is about things we the audience have already seen - in particular the FBI slowly debriefing the events that have gone before. This perhaps suggests to me that these scenes have been added to extend a script that was originally written with 9 parts in mind.

Obviously that is pure speculation, and I can't wait for the new information to come out from producers, crew, perhaps even Frost, after this is all wrapped up. I would *love* to see the original script. Unless the ending changes everything, I would also love to see a 12 or 14 hour edit of this whole thing. TPTR is actually primed for some very interesting re-edits - how would the whole thing feel if it was divided up differently? Say, each different storyline edited as one continuous long piece? Or re-cut in chronological order? As with most fan edits, I'd expect these not to work as well as the original, but I'd suspect a 12-14hour edit could be brilliant.
I agree about the potential for interesting re-edits. But I am strongly against the whole idea that some scenes exist just to pad it. Lynch wanted the freedom for it to be as long or short as he wanted it. The exposition scenes in particular aren't necessary for padding; this film didn't need to be any specific length. Trimming all the exposition scenes barely shortens the film when you think of it in terms of episodes, because episode lengths vary. He could have had every episode be 48 minutes rather than "add scenes." Because of the freedom of Showtime, there was no need to pad the film, and Lynch could have easily removed an hour or two of material and still came up with 18 Parts. I still think the more expositional scenes like those you mention are in line with those in the original series, and like you say are often telling us what we already know, catching us up in a way that makes me think they are done with a wink and a nod, and keep me on my toes when imbalanced with everything else that is left open to interpretation. They also feel strangely realistic, as sometimes in life people have the same conversations multiple times...it just usually doesn't make for good TV!
User avatar
referendum
RR Diner Member
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:29 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by referendum »

''The exposition scenes in particular aren't necessary for padding''
one thing i noticed about these exposition scenes pretty early on, in the '' this is the chair'' episode, was that, over and over again in TP TR, something happens, and then you hear it described verbally, or the same event is seen again through someone else's eyes, there is alot of juggling with Point of View, with what ' really ' happened and what is remembered.... so i have been seeing what you call ' exposition ' scenes as deliberate repetitions, second versions of the same thing, which is something of a theme of this series, repeated dialogue, re-used shots, doppelgangers, and so on.

Any projected 'mega-movie' edit of this in the future would lose an hour plus by ditching all/ most of the roadhouse bands.
Last edited by referendum on Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
''let's not overthink this opportunity''
mickeyfickey
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:03 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by mickeyfickey »

I'm really surprised that so many fans have this insistence upon wrapping all the loose ends up. I certainly hope, for the longevity of the product, that many of them remain a mystery. That's the beauty of this show and what has kept us coming back for more. The mysteries are the entire crux of the Twin Peaks experience, not the answers. If anything, I feel like this season has been a little bit TOO expository, and would have preferred if Diane was never introduced as a real character, for example. I love The Return though, what an absolute treat it's been.
LateReg
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by LateReg »

referendum wrote:
''The exposition scenes in particular aren't necessary for padding''
one thing i noticed about these exposition scenes pretty early on, in the '' this is the chair'' episode, was that, over and over again in TP TR, something happens, and then you hear it described verbally, so i have been seeing what you call ' exposition ' scenes as deliberate repetition, which is something of a theme of this series, repeated dialogue, re-used shots, doppelgangers, and so on.

Any projected 'mega-movie' edit of this in the future would lose an hour plus by ditching all/ most of the roadhouse bands.
Yes, see that's what I'm getting at. These scenes call attention to themselves and thus must be looked at and thought about re: their purpose before we decide if we like them or not. There's some intention there to be deciphered.
User avatar
Troubbble
RR Diner Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by Troubbble »

zeronumber wrote:Ok,
Here is another 2¢.

After the suspensful answer and subsequent aural cue to the answer that "Tina" was that girls mom....

We are left mystified that she did not say what we all were thinking and reply "Audrey".

This, along with our previous two encounter with Audrey and Charlie leads me to the following (obtained by Tibetan method...) associations to conjecture the following:

I purport that Audrey is Tina.

Perhaps she is suffering a schizophrenic split in which Tina is her other self. Who has a life, a daughter and apparently issues with which Audrey hates.

Charlie is some sort of facilitator... And to be clear and eliminate any ambiguity...

The phone call he place to "Tina", may have all been a charade! (There was no Tina on the phone!) He already knew all the somewhat shocking details and was only pressing Audrey by not telling her the things which she may already know as "Tina" but has not been able to dissociate as Audrey. (And maybe vice versa)
Was loving this idea at first, but now I'm stuck... Can't reconcile the fact that the daughter identifies her mother as Tina.

Still an interesting thought otherwise, though.
User avatar
Troubbble
RR Diner Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by Troubbble »

No reason to worry about the amount of unresolved subplots in Twin Peaks, because they are bound to coalesce to an extent as we approach the final episode... There are connections between the events we've seen which aren't clear yet -- but they soon will be!

I expect Red to be a key figure in the final episodes, and wouldn't be surprised at all if there was some link between he and Cooper (or the Black Lodge).
User avatar
zeronumber
RR Diner Member
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: RE: Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by zeronumber »

Troubbble wrote:
zeronumber wrote:Ok,
Here is another 2¢.

After the suspensful answer and subsequent aural cue to the answer that "Tina" was that girls mom....

We are left mystified that she did not say what we all were thinking and reply "Audrey".

This, along with our previous two encounter with Audrey and Charlie leads me to the following (obtained by Tibetan method...) associations to conjecture the following:

I purport that Audrey is Tina.

Perhaps she is suffering a schizophrenic split in which Tina is her other self. Who has a life, a daughter and apparently issues with which Audrey hates.

Charlie is some sort of facilitator... And to be clear and eliminate any ambiguity...

The phone call he place to "Tina", may have all been a charade! (There was no Tina on the phone!) He already knew all the somewhat shocking details and was only pressing Audrey by not telling her the things which she may already know as "Tina" but has not been able to dissociate as Audrey. (And maybe vice versa)
Was loving this idea at first, but now I'm stuck... Can't reconcile the fact that the daughter identifies her mother as Tina.

Still an interesting thought otherwise, though.
The girl knows her as Tina...and may or may not know about Audrey. (If she does...maybe she needs to play along. She is obviously a player, herself...with secrets?)

Sent from my NEC-NE-201A1A using Tapatalk
User avatar
Pinky
RR Diner Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:21 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by Pinky »

I hope for Naido's sake that they buy Sarah's story, otherwise she's taking a trip to the holding cells and that will make for an interesting night...
User avatar
Troubbble
RR Diner Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Part 14 - We are like the dreamer (SPOILERS)

Post by Troubbble »

Pinky wrote:I hope for Naido's sake that they buy Sarah's story, otherwise she's taking a trip to the holding cells and that will make for an interesting night...


Sarah wasn't in Twin Peaks when she encountered that trucker, was she?

Regardless though, I think the stage *is* set for some strange goings-on to come in those holding cells.
Post Reply