NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
- Hockey Mask
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:31 pm
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
"I'll see you in a week."
- Rainwater
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 3:00 am
- Location: Under the Sycamore trees
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Really weird stuff.Hockey Mask wrote:"I'll see you in a week."
- Attachments
-
- GORDON.png (616.1 KiB) Viewed 8781 times
I'll see you in the trees
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Twin Peaks is fortunate in this respect. Almost all of the music was created specifically for the show. Other shows used popular music and failed to anticipate the rise of television shows on DVD. And frankly, I think if Twin Peaks had used popular music on it's soundtrack, it would have neutered much of the show's atmosphere. Just another thing that sets it apart.Mallard wrote:You've heard it correctly. The rights issues caused the show being put on DVD with all of the music from the TV airings replaced, basically massacring the original atmosphere and experience. A crying shame! I hope one day (maybe with a BluRay release, should that ever happen, though it currently looks like a tough call) this gets put to right.
Can anyone imagine if they tried to pull that on a Twin Peaks release? There would be riots.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
But this analogy cuts both ways. The Beatles are a perfect example of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. While Lennon and McCartney are universally hailed as the more creative of the Beatles, their talent was amplified by the band and their solo careers arguably less impressive.bob_wooler wrote: You're absolutely right, however, (a bit far-fetched comparison, but still) there wouldn't be any Beatles without George and Ringo either, still it's not controversial to claim that Lennon/McCartney was, creatively, the most important half of the combo, neither should it be to point out the same about Lynch vs. Frost. It's simply a fact.
Regardless of Lynch's filmmaking talents, Twin Peaks is a collaborative effort. And as groundbreaking as it was in 1990, I don't think the show could have possibly succeeded without Mark Frost. Measuring the relative talent or input of either creator is kind of pointless. It doesn't matter how much of each man's sensibilities were involved in the creation, just that they were both needed.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
This. While Lynch obviously did more this time around as the sole director people seem to forget that the 40 vs 100% ratio was more or less reversed in the original season 1. After episode 2 Frost did about everything together with the session workers. And who pitched this new show? Frost did.Agent Earle wrote:I'm sure Lynch can do Art like no other - he's proven so time and time again (and I love some - mind you, not all - of his cinematic output). But with this current project, I don't want simply Lynch's art - if I'd want that, I'd be just as content if he was to "publish" various bric-a-bracs on his web page daily. What I want is the continuation of Twin Peaks, with established honest-to-God characters (and new ones) and their honest-to-God storylines (and new ones), I want something with actual, living, breathing, honest-to-God PLOT, sprinkled with Lynch's magic and elevated by it - and I can't/couldn't have had that without Mark Frost. A fact.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Those are interesting points. Something that I find very interesting, however, is that without getting into a debate about which films are Lynch's best, the three films of his that are considered his established masterpieces are those that he wrote himself with no collaborators or prior source material: Eraserhead, Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive.Gabriel wrote:I think Mark Frost is a bit like, as businessmen say, the 'silent partner.' His involvement is essential (FWWM was a great, great movie, but I'm not sure how far a series of movies would have gone without Frost's return at some point,) but he's happy to work behind the scenes developing the mythology, writing the books, focusing on the scripts, while David Lynch acts in the show, directs it and does the publicity; something which Frost tends to eschew. Also, I think Lynch's collaborators are hugely important to his work. Frost once desribed Lynch as being very much a 'stylist' and I think the best of Lynch's work comes from his level of collaboration. Once he has a locked script, he's very good at going to the set or location and building on it, but I rather think the structural 'borders' (I won't go so far as to say 'limitations') of a good script bring out the best of Lynch's creativity. In part, that's why I'm looking forward to the new Twin Peaks so much. Mark Frost's involvement, in my opinion, will help focus David Lynch's talents to turn what's written in ink into cinematic gold.
- bob_wooler
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 2:00 am
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
I weren't measuring or trying to put Frost or his contributions down, I just made an observation (with Lynch being involved in absolutely everything in the creative process this time around, it's probably more relevant to the new series than back in 89-91).timgerdes wrote:But this analogy cuts both ways. The Beatles are a perfect example of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. While Lennon and McCartney are universally hailed as the more creative of the Beatles, their talent was amplified by the band and their solo careers arguably less impressive.bob_wooler wrote: You're absolutely right, however, (a bit far-fetched comparison, but still) there wouldn't be any Beatles without George and Ringo either, still it's not controversial to claim that Lennon/McCartney was, creatively, the most important half of the combo, neither should it be to point out the same about Lynch vs. Frost. It's simply a fact.
Regardless of Lynch's filmmaking talents, Twin Peaks is a collaborative effort. And as groundbreaking as it was in 1990, I don't think the show could have possibly succeeded without Mark Frost. Measuring the relative talent or input of either creator is kind of pointless. It doesn't matter how much of each man's sensibilities were involved in the creation, just that they were both needed.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Although it is a bit exaggerated that the 40-100 ratio was reversed in season 1 (Lynch directed three times as much as Frost!), I basically agree with what your trying to say.DirkG wrote:This. While Lynch obviously did more this time around as the sole director people seem to forget that the 40 vs 100% ratio was more or less reversed in the original season 1. After episode 2 Frost did about everything together with the session workers. And who pitched this new show? Frost did.
But that doesn't prove at all that both of these men are equally important. Because I think we will see two completely different shows. Season 1 was really a joint effort. We will soon be able to compare it with season 3 (The Return), that seems to be the "pure heroine version of Lynch". It's really up to the individual viewer what approach he likes best. For me, already after seeing just 1 minute of the new footage, this is not a difficult choice at all.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Things were so upbeat on here until all this Frost vs. Lynch talk started. Is it just me or is anyone else starting to find it's dragging down the excitement and conversation a bit?
-
-
Whoever did this made a great job. It works really well! Thanks for posting.MoondogJR wrote:Somebody combined all the trailers in one video: https://youtu.be/HSFR6oqwLVM.
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
-
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:51 pm
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Melissa Bailey confirmed to me it's her with the chihuahua in the trailer:
https://twitter.com/baileymblala/status ... 9972513793
https://twitter.com/baileymblala/status ... 9972513793
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
It's pretty funny how "all the trailers combined" is less than two minutes. But I like that.
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Cool. Nice bit of sleuthing!vicksvapor77 wrote:Melissa Bailey confirmed to me it's her with the chihuahua in the trailer:
https://twitter.com/baileymblala/status ... 9972513793
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
- chromereflectsimage
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 246
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:03 am
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Nicole LaLiberete confirmed its her in the trailer as well
https://www.instagram.com/p/BT-SaEZAGx- ... erte&hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/p/BT-SaEZAGx- ... erte&hl=en
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Loving the new trailer - watched it so many times. Was wondering, could the guy recording himself be a young Leland?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: NO SPOILERS: Twin Peaks Season 3 on Showtime May 21st 2017
Yeah I know. It's one of these conversations that bubbles up every couple of months or so. Probably inevitable. At least not as much as a downer as MJAs FB posts .Jonah wrote:Things were so upbeat on here until all this Frost vs. Lynch talk started. Is it just me or is anyone else starting to find it's dragging down the excitement and conversation a bit?
-
Whoever did this made a great job. It works really well! Thanks for posting.MoondogJR wrote:Somebody combined all the trailers in one video: https://youtu.be/HSFR6oqwLVM.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly