Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

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

User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 1727
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby N. Needleman » Thu May 17, 2018 6:48 pm

I promise you all if Twin Peaks ever dissatisfies me I will not burn it in effigy.

As for S3, I thought there was a lot of human truth in the stuff with Cooper/Dougie/Mr. C - the whole season is a deep dive inside him, even if it is not explicated in dialogue and largely visual and performance (as is the core of film). Same with Diane/Tulpa Diane, Janey-E, etc. There are smaller but equally deep moments with Bobby and his family, with Carl Rodd, with a lot of folks. Even Audrey's very enigmatic storyline is clearly rooted in her in ways I can only begin to fathom.

Would I have been just as happy or moreso with something more traditionally structured in the style of the old show or other serialized TV today, and with more traditional payoffs? Sure, probably. But I knew going in we were never going to get something much like the first two seasons. I had a feeling we were in for a quantum shift like FWWM or MD, and by the end of the first two hours I loved it but knew I was right. Lynch has gone very far into a different place since, and it started with FWWM. And he slapped me in the face again in Part 18, just like those last 30 mins of MD - almost exactly how I felt watching the bottom fall out of Betty and Diane's fantasy world - and both times I was devastated but fascinated, I loved it. I can't fault people who weren't. All I can say is I process both my love for the characters and the town and continuing story and my love for the material and new story in complimentary ways. I don't think loving the dark ending means I am abandoning old-school Twin Peaks.

So much of the season is about time, age, the past, regret, longing, trauma, how the world's gotten worse or just changed - and a lot of that comes out of, first and foremost, the lost Cooper and the TP/FBI investigations into him with the players reflecting on yesteryear, but also out of the glimpses we get of the town in little pockets and vignettes, not just of the past characters like Norma or Shelly or Nadine or Ed but in the consistently baffling Roadhouse conversation scenes. Maybe they mean something, maybe they mean nothing, but they show not only the darkness and corruption at the core of the town but also just life going by sometimes. Lynch just wanted to show these little slices of life in Twin Peaks. Anyway, this stuff is all suited for another topic.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
Agent Earle
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Agent Earle » Fri May 18, 2018 1:12 am

Dear Mr. Reindeer - always so gracious and insightful. You once again nailed it with your speculation about the nature of my "Santa Claus" post - that is exactly what I meant. Reading your and some of the other S3 lovers' (Needleman's, for instance) comments about the season, I'm almost compelled to give it another shot, that's how good you make its intentions and mechanisms sound. Trouble is, I've got a nagging feeling that a lot of it is you ascribing to it things that just weren't there or, better, are so poorly conveyed that they might as well not be; and since the viewer, a fan of certain property in particular, is inclined to strive to make sense out of what is on the screen, he comes up with a theory that sheds positive light on the show no matter what. Don't get me wrong, theorizing about a beloved show/movie/book/whatnot is certainly a fan and fun thing to do, and Lynch in particular is well known for encouraging it, but in order for it to be, at the end of the day, meaningful and satisfying, there has to exist a strong enough groundwork provided by the creator. It's in this respect that I find TP: S3 to be grossly lacking - to me, it comes across as one giant rigamarole of loosely/un- connected fragments of not-quite storylines, half-ideas and wannabe concepts, where the majority of characters are swimming in a vast universe completely independent/unaware of one another, so much so that they might as well be inhabiting different shows. That was never the case with the original show, for all its multi-writer, multi-director, multi-showrunner, behind-the-scenes-meddling shenanigans and exotically different tones - you always felt that these characters are all a part of one living, breathing, functioning entity, a part of wonderfully, if secretly cohesive world, universe, tapestry. A poster earlier in this thread (I think it was WhiteLodge something) described it beautifully in his long reflection in which he speaks of poor treatment of the show's returning characters - playing off one another before, they're now confined to their single for-lack-of-a-better-term "storyline" for the whole duration of the show. It's like a product of a creative writing school, where a class of future writers were given the assignment to each come up with a story for one of the existing TP characters separately ("Write a scene in which you 'catch up' with TP character AB after 25 years and see what he/she might be doing now"), ie. without the knowledge of a classmate's work. The resulting effort would be not unlike chaos we've witnessed in the official S3: some of it good, some of it bad, some of it even brilliant, but on the whole, not a work where the original creators had a good number of years to come up with a compact, thought-out narrative that would respect what came before and lift in on the whole new quality level. A lot of the "unconnected" feeling comes not only from the script, I gather, but from the way Lynch decided to pull off the third season in, that is by keeping everything under maximum secrecy and maintaining conditions in which the actors didn't have a clue about the bigger picture, and not one actor (including MacLachlan, who in recent interviews seems a tad surprised with what ended up on the screen at the end of the day) knew just what in the Sam hill it is he/she's supposed to be a part of. Hell, even now, months after the show concluded, they still collectively choose their words when it comes to describing the evolution and intentions of the production. One would think at least some of it (how they've come to shape this exact story, what went on during the endless production process, what was left out and what shoved in on behalf of "outside" circumstances and what on behalf of preexisiting storytellers' intentions), would find its way onto the BluRay special features, but no - another missed opportunity. I hope at least a book detailing it all (like Brad Dukes' Reflections) materializes at some point.

Which brings me to NormoftheAndes' response: I hope what I just wrote makes it clear I was not trolling. I'm sorry if my cynical comment offended you in any way as that was not my intention. I'm not hiding the new season of my beloved show has left me disappointed, perhaps even profoundly, and I'm at a point where listening to fans trying to make sense of it all makes me tired and depressed, yet I'm unable to look away and part from it all, not just yet, anyhow. For what it's worth, I always try to avoid argumentation ad hominem during my ramblings here, and it never crossed my mind to label the show's creators as dishonest, ill-intentioned, senile etc. (though I'll admit Lynch trashing S2 just prior to the S3 premiere didn't make me any greater fan of his, to put it extremely politely) - I truly think what they gave us comes from their genuine creative process where they followed their muse and who they are as creators at the moment. It just wasn't (good enough) for me. I'd never go as far as some of the disappointed ones (Gabriel, sylvia_north ...) did, that is chucking out all my TP stuff, as TP's been an integral part of my life, of me, even, for too long. If a continuation of it ever happens (you make a good point with Lynch's comments about a "bronze" and "golden age"), I'll certainly give it a whirl, although I realize a return to the original creative recipe (a pinch of Engels & Peyton, for instance) is a pipe dream.

P.S.: Sorry for any grammatical errors, English is not my first language, and I have to work with what I have.
Last edited by Agent Earle on Fri May 18, 2018 1:39 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 897
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Soolsma » Fri May 18, 2018 1:27 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:This season was largely about Cooper confronting some hard truths about himself, and whatever happens to him from here on.


That's what I've always figured the Return would be about, beforehand and throughout. However, have we ever had any real confrontations? Yes, Coop saw his doppelgänger on the floor, slid the ring on and all was done, but that was pretty much most of it. Admittedly, the annihilated soul of Cooper is indeed a major drive, but the fragments are spread so widely across the board. What disappoints me a lot here is that in the end it all went down without any dialog or interaction between Coop/Mr c./BOB. I do love the post part 17, half evil, half good Coop. I love how Lynch played his Lynch hand there and the ambiguity of it. However, I don't think it was necessary to keep Cooper so predominantly tight lipped then, and all the way throughout. Maybe modern day Lynch thinks this is best, letting imagery and mystery do most of the work, but I can certainly remember a Cooper who could be very mysterious while still being the verbal, expressive and even poetic person he is/was.

That and lack of music were my biggest disappointments. I'm still waiting for someone to cut the entire thing with old TP music. :lol: I might even do it myself one day, if my pc is powerful enough perhaps. And yes, you could tell me that's barbaric sacrilege. I know it is, but I honestly don't give a fuck.
I believe all these phenomena that our putted-up egos and busy ant minds persist in trying to label, categorize, penetrate, and comphrehend, all spring from this same uncanny source. This is the mother of all "others".
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby sylvia_north » Fri May 18, 2018 1:55 am

Part 18 was great for me, too. It just wasn’t symmetrically of quality with the rest. It did not paint the rest of the series with gold like ep 29 and FWWM did.

I also burned my TP/Lynch stuff not in protest, or because it was a passing phase, but because 25 years is over half my life and I’m ready to move on.

I also agree with that sketches of human truth do not human truth make. It’s not enough to be self-referential and let the viewer do 90% of the interpretive work and call it a gift, like the metaphysical abstractions of the original and FWWM.

Twin Peaks, like a lot of Lynch, is attractive because of contrasts- the mundane and the fantastic. That existed in season 3, it was just the film school version of it; someone trying to make something Lynchian and failing. The Colonel said that even Elvis could’t play Elvis in the final years. An Elvis fan himself, DL should know you can be a genius and still lose your touch even if you retain your essence. It’s not negative trolling to observe this.
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 1727
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby N. Needleman » Fri May 18, 2018 3:34 am

Agent Earle wrote:Trouble is, I've got a nagging feeling that a lot of it is you ascribing to it things that just weren't there or, better, are so poorly conveyed that they might as well not be; and since the viewer, a fan of certain property in particular, is inclined to strive to make sense out of what is on the screen, he comes up with a theory that sheds positive light on the show no matter what.


But if that were so why didn't we do it for, say, the Milford brothers drama? Or Evelyn Marsh? The best that can be said about that story is that it's a loving homage/ripoff to Otto Preminger's Angel Face (as Harley Peyton freely admitted when I asked him about it a while back).

Anyway, first let me say I never thought you were trolling. I simply vehemently disagree with you. And all I can tell you is what I genuinely took away from the show both as I watched it in the moment as well as when I considered it over the weeks and months later, in addition to absorbing the creators' own commentary on some of the material (like Lynch's comments when questioned about the Roadhouse scenes - something like that became my hunch as the season went on, but his later comments did solidify it). I didn't feel I had to invent or wish up the context any more (or less) than I did when dealing with the mysteries of the original series or FWWM, or MD or whatever else. Some things were evident onscreen, others were inferred, others were very subjective for different viewers obviously as we process. As we've always done with Twin Peaks, the night of the show, the day after, weeks, years later on the Internet at alt.tv.t-p or dugpa or wherever else. I can't speak for what other people see or don't see or feel or don't feel. I only know what I felt in the moment as I watched, and then what I thought over later.

And yes, the show was fundamentally different, structurally, from its setup in 1991. It was much more in the mold of a Mulholland Drive film treatment - scenes collected much more loosely and dreamily, concurrent narratives, looking in on various stories and characters as certain stories progress and/or converge. But that's what Lynch does now. He was also never going to adhere to conventional premium cable rhythms where, say, the Starks spend a season traveling to Winterfell or whatever. Even now in the new season of Westworld, people are always getting lost in 'fetch quest,' time-sink narratives - who will get where when, and what will they find and what does it mean? It becomes like treading water in a book. I quite like Westworld, it's excellent in many ways, but the overall predictability of the now-standard narrative loop of fetch-travel-stop-travel again in a lot of big shows to fill hours has begun to wear on me. Whereas in Season 3, say what you will about the storyline but Cooper did not spend weeks traveling - he either was somewhere, or went somewhere else. That was refreshing.

Either way, we simply see it differently. And that's fine.

Also: As for Lynch's jab at Season 2, I love Season 2 but didn't take it too seriously. Firstly, Lynch was clearly brusque and out of sorts throughout that interview and fed up doing advance press, which he is not a fan of. Second, we all know Lynch, like Fred Madison in Lost Highway, likes to remember things his own way - for decades he's been insisting he wasn't around for S2 vs. S1 when it was factually the other way around. He seems to do this as a psychological defense mechanism re: his own intense sadness over the failure of Season 2 following the end of the Laura Palmer arc, which hit him very hard. We know how involved he was in early Season 2 and the finale, and we know he was involved in hiring and auditioning a number of new players, including Heather Graham. But the overall trauma of S2 for most of the cast and crew stayed with Lynch, and he distances himself from it a lot in his mind - especially when he clearly wasn't in the mood to be interviewed. But it's not what he did or I suspect what he feels. I doubt he truly associates much of early S2 with "Season 2" in his mind, anyway. Lynch is not a stickler for fan exactitude. It's just not that big a deal.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby mtwentz » Fri May 18, 2018 4:14 am

At the end of the day, don't we expect great art to be divisive? It's like the classic scenario where two friends go to a museum of modern art;; whatever one thinks is a work of genius the other thinks of as a piece of utter pretentious garbage.

Neither of the friends is right or wrong; the art speaks to one persons tastes, but not the other's.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 1861
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri May 18, 2018 5:16 am

Great post, Earle, and I certainly think your well-articulated thoughts are totally valid. I don’t have much to say in response because Needleman and MTWentz already said it all pretty perfectly. I felt something on a gut level throughout S3, which was not the case for much of late S2, and my subsequent thoughts over the past almost-a-year (!!) have been an attempt to articulate and reason through what exactly it was that the work made me feel on that initial contact (which was decidedly NOT disappointment, at least not most of the time). For me, it was and continues to be a rewarding work to engage with despite some flaws. For you, it was a frustrating piece of drivel. As Wentz said, and I think even DKL might begrudgingly agree, we’re both right. Art is subjective. I admire you for being true to your personal tastes (which I believe you have acknowledged can trend toward works that are derided as schlocky by the critical majority). It’s an admirable quality to stand by your sincere likes and dislikes when you’re in the minority, and no one should doubt that your criticisms, while occasionally snarky, come from a place of earnest desire to engage/debate. I’m also really glad that your appreciation for the original show hasn’t been tainted.
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby sylvia_north » Fri May 18, 2018 5:52 am

mtwentz wrote:At the end of the day, don't we expect great art to be divisive? It's like the classic scenario where two friends go to a museum of modern art;; whatever one thinks is a work of genius the other thinks of as a piece of utter pretentious garbage.

Neither of the friends is right or wrong; the art speaks to one persons tastes, but not the other's.



Not a sentiment that hasn’t come up repeatedly. This dedicated critical thread is in general ok/happy others like it, just not sure why they need the reassurance (or concessions to it) being great on the merits OF its divisinesness. From people whose opinions they disagree with. 8) Edit: If the post was not directed at the critical but the rest of the board, I stand corrected.

Crappy art is also divisive. Literally anything anyone does is going to garner varieties of opinions, went entirely without saying
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
User avatar
NormoftheAndes
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:00 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby NormoftheAndes » Fri May 18, 2018 8:20 am

Agent Earle wrote:
Which brings me to NormoftheAndes' response: I hope what I just wrote makes it clear I was not trolling. I'm sorry if my cynical comment offended you in any way as that was not my intention. I'm not hiding the new season of my beloved show has left me disappointed, perhaps even profoundly, and I'm at a point where listening to fans trying to make sense of it all makes me tired and depressed, yet I'm unable to look away and part from it all, not just yet, anyhow. For what it's worth, I always try to avoid argumentation ad hominem during my ramblings here, and it never crossed my mind to label the show's creators as dishonest, ill-intentioned, senile etc. (though I'll admit Lynch trashing S2 just prior to the S3 premiere didn't make me any greater fan of his, to put it extremely politely) - I truly think what they gave us comes from their genuine creative process where they followed their muse and who they are as creators at the moment. It just wasn't (good enough) for me. I'd never go as far as some of the disappointed ones (Gabriel, sylvia_north ...) did, that is chucking out all my TP stuff, as TP's been an integral part of my life, of me, even, for too long. If a continuation of it ever happens (you make a good point with Lynch's comments about a "bronze" and "golden age"), I'll certainly give it a whirl, although I realize a return to the original creative recipe (a pinch of Engels & Peyton, for instance) is a pipe dream.

P.S.: Sorry for any grammatical errors, English is not my first language, and I have to work with what I have.


Great post Agent Earle.

Such a short post seemed like trolling to me but clearly that was not your intention so I apologise. I hope we can get on damn fine here. :D

In terms of the production, I think the final product was definitely shaped by that but I don't think that Lynch's penchant for secrecy really had much to do with that.

What I DO think had a major effect was the decision to go from 9 episodes to 18. Even though Showtime did offer more budget for that, I don't think that they DOUBLED the budget. It is well known that the production was operating as if it was a low-budget indie film. Over 9 episodes the budget could have looked pretty impressive, but stretched over 18 the minor increase in budget overall gives the show a certain quality which I would describe as 'evidently basic' at times! The camera set-ups and overall look is quite bare-bones I would say. That works well for certain scenes like in the trailer park sequences, but Ben's office for instance looks like a pretty obvious set. It doesn't feel lush, like the original show.

Another good example is part 8 - amidst 17 other episodes this one coalesces into a big mish-mash I feel, whereas if this was originally intended to be one of 9 then it would have stood out more. Sabrina Sutherland the exec. producer has said there were a couple of sequences which had to be dropped due to budget constraints. So, instead of some more impressive sequences we got more sequences involving Dougie and the office space, or the Buckhorn FBI set-up - another obvious set.

I am sure that the vortex special effect was deliberately wacky and lo-fi deliberately, but on the other hand this was still dictated by the budget somewhat.

I've got a huge love for season 3 but also a disappointment that is inevitable considering the shortcomings of the production. Showtime just didn't offer a substantial budget for what was planned in the script - but at the same time it seems like Lynch was given free reign to shoot that script however he wanted. I don't think that Frost had major disagreements or discussions with Lynch for how it would all be planned since they were both so happy at being given this chance and I think Frost is now very easy-going.

Do I think Lynch would have benefited from having Engels and Peyton also work on this season - absolutely! Do I think it suffered in the expansion from 9 episodes to 18? Definitely. I wonder if they really had enough material to fill 18 episodes - explaining the driftings longeurs of the Dougie storyline, the lightweight and rather throwaway Mitchums etc. Even the Buckhorn FBI scene are repetitive and feel forced at times.

Considering all of that, how s3 turned out is completely understandable. Its the inevitable result of having too much time that can't be substantially filled by the script they must have had fairly completed back in 2014. Expanding sections or adding extra scenes due to Showtime giving more episodes at that stage is always going to be apparent. Most significantly, give Lynch complete reign over those 18 episodes and you're asking for trouble. So you end up with something that is as baffling as INLAND EMPIRE mixed with delightful, fantastic scenes and other parts which feel less vital.

However, I am still optimistic because the behind-the-scenes make it very clear that Lynch was unhappy with the time restraints on set - linked to budget of course. But if they had not opted to film so many locations and with so many actors, wouldn't they have had more time and money for shooting at the Fireman's theatre?

At the Emmy's screening of part 18 for critics, Kyle said he would love to see Twin Peaks continue. I am not sure if Showtime would opt for another 18-part run. It might be more sensible to go for 10 episodes and focus more closely on a specific storyline, most likely centred around the place the show is named after. I do think that Lynch had a dogged determination to make season 3 the 'doppleganger/ tulpa' season and by that alone I see it as more of a loose story than any sort of ending.
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby mtwentz » Fri May 18, 2018 8:30 am

sylvia_north wrote:
mtwentz wrote:At the end of the day, don't we expect great art to be divisive? It's like the classic scenario where two friends go to a museum of modern art;; whatever one thinks is a work of genius the other thinks of as a piece of utter pretentious garbage.

Neither of the friends is right or wrong; the art speaks to one persons tastes, but not the other's.



Not a sentiment that hasn’t come up repeatedly. This dedicated critical thread is in general ok/happy others like it, just not sure why they need the reassurance (or concessions to it) being great on the merits OF its divisinesness. From people whose opinions they disagree with. 8) Edit: If the post was not directed at the critical but the rest of the board, I stand corrected.

Crappy art is also divisive. Literally anything anyone does is going to garner varieties of opinions, went entirely without saying


No, I disagree. Not everything is as divisive as when a beloved artist breaks new ground, does something different from what his core audience has come to expect . I was just listening to the audio book of 48 Laws of Power the other day, and apparently Pablo Picasso used to create his own 'Profoundly Disappointed' group of followers on a regular basis.

I'm not saying Lynch is Picasso, but I do consider him an artist that likes to shake things up. One should know going into a Lynch project that you may love it, you may hate it, but if nothing else, some of the images/sounds will likely stick with you for a very long time. I personally did not expect much coherence to the new season given the 'pure heroin Lynch' comment by Nevins and was fairly certain even before it aired that a pure heroin Lynch approach was not going to be universally embraced by all fans, even some of those who, in theory, thought they desired the unfiltered Lynch.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 1861
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri May 18, 2018 8:41 am

Soolsma wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:This season was largely about Cooper confronting some hard truths about himself, and whatever happens to him from here on.


That's what I've always figured the Return would be about, beforehand and throughout. However, have we ever had any real confrontations? Yes, Coop saw his doppelgänger on the floor, slid the ring on and all was done, but that was pretty much most of it. Admittedly, the annihilated soul of Cooper is indeed a major drive, but the fragments are spread so widely across the board. What disappoints me a lot here is that in the end it all went down without any dialog or interaction between Coop/Mr c./BOB. I do love the post part 17, half evil, half good Coop. I love how Lynch played his Lynch hand there and the ambiguity of it. However, I don't think it was necessary to keep Cooper so predominantly tight lipped then, and all the way throughout. Maybe modern day Lynch thinks this is best, letting imagery and mystery do most of the work, but I can certainly remember a Cooper who could be very mysterious while still being the verbal, expressive and even poetic person he is/was.

That and lack of music were my biggest disappointments. I'm still waiting for someone to cut the entire thing with old TP music. :lol: I might even do it myself one day, if my pc is powerful enough perhaps. And yes, you could tell me that's barbaric sacrilege. I know it is, but I honestly don't give a fuck.


I think much of the season reflected Cooper’s internal journey, similar to MD in a way, albeit in a more abstract sense, as opposed to the more literal “Cooper confronting his doppelganger” approach many seem to have wanted/expected. DKL at this point in his career just doesn’t work in such straightforward terms.
User avatar
NormoftheAndes
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:00 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby NormoftheAndes » Fri May 18, 2018 8:45 am

mtwentz wrote:
sylvia_north wrote:
mtwentz wrote:At the end of the day, don't we expect great art to be divisive? It's like the classic scenario where two friends go to a museum of modern art;; whatever one thinks is a work of genius the other thinks of as a piece of utter pretentious garbage.

Neither of the friends is right or wrong; the art speaks to one persons tastes, but not the other's.



Not a sentiment that hasn’t come up repeatedly. This dedicated critical thread is in general ok/happy others like it, just not sure why they need the reassurance (or concessions to it) being great on the merits OF its divisinesness. From people whose opinions they disagree with. 8) Edit: If the post was not directed at the critical but the rest of the board, I stand corrected.

Crappy art is also divisive. Literally anything anyone does is going to garner varieties of opinions, went entirely without saying


No, I disagree. Not everything is as divisive as when a beloved artist breaks new ground, does something different from what his core audience has come to expect . I was just listening to the audio book of 48 Laws of Power the other day, and apparently Pablo Picasso used to create his own 'Profoundly Disappointed' group of followers on a regular basis.

I'm not saying Lynch is Picasso, but I do consider him an artist that likes to shake things up. One should know going into a Lynch project that you may love it, you may hate it, but if nothing else, some of the images/sounds will likely stick with you for a very long time. I personally did not expect much coherence to the new season given the 'pure heroin Lynch' comment by Nevins and was fairly certain even before it aired that a pure heroin Lynch approach was not going to be universally embraced by all fans, even some of those who, in theory, thought they desired the unfiltered Lynch.


I don't think that season 3 was anywhere near as radical as that though. It wasn't INLAND EMPIRE in 18 hour form. The way it turned out was the result of hasty scripting at the last minute, a perhaps unwise decision to double the length and then a budget which couldn't stretch to the ambition of the script. Combine all of that with Lynch's dogged insistence on doing things his way, I feel that Frost gave David a very long leash and this resulted in a drifting, inconsistent season.
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby mtwentz » Fri May 18, 2018 9:21 am

NormoftheAndes wrote:
mtwentz wrote:
sylvia_north wrote: I don't think that season 3 was anywhere near as radical as that though. It wasn't INLAND EMPIRE in 18 hour form. The way it turned out was the result of hasty scripting at the last minute, a perhaps unwise decision to double the length and then a budget which couldn't stretch to the ambition of the script. Combine all of that with Lynch's dogged insistence on doing things his way, I feel that Frost gave David a very long leash and this resulted in a drifting, inconsistent season.


One can break new ground and do something radical, and have a drifting, inconsistent season (at least to some). IBy itself making an 18 hour movie is a pretty radical step, although some may be flummoxed by the length. But here's the groundbreaking stuff that I saw:
-Pacing: feeding into a growing countertrend around the world called slow TV.

-Purple Room: Speaks for itself

-Opening Scene with the Fireman: Speaks for itself.

-Episode 8: Speaks for itself.

-Cooper Superimposed Face: Speaks for itself.

-All the Red Room Scenes and Evolution of the Arm: Expanding on the Red Room from Ep. 29

-Narrative style Point 1: We are never told we are in an alternate timeline, or a different reality, or if Carrie Page is Laura Palmer or who the girl is in Ep. 8. Much of The Return has to be inferred.

Narrative style Point 2: The Return was the 'anti-soap opera', deliberately withholding conventional satisfying resolutions for most of its characters (and in most cases, withholding any resolution at all).

-Subverting Expectations: More than any show I can remember, The Return built us up for giant confrontations (Cooper-Bad Coop, Sarah-Laura) that never took place. You can love it, or hate it, but hard not to have an opinion on that style of storytelling.

-Screaming Woman/Sick Girls from Ep. 11- Not sure what to call this, but can't get that scene out of my mind. In fact, the whole scene from Bobby, Shelly and Becky's discussion in the diner up to the sick girl throwing up is unlike anything I remember seeing on television and for me at least, worth the price of admission all by itself.

All of the above can either delight you, or piss you off royally. Both reactions are equally valid.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 897
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Soolsma » Fri May 18, 2018 10:04 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
Soolsma wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:This season was largely about Cooper confronting some hard truths about himself, and whatever happens to him from here on.


That's what I've always figured the Return would be about, beforehand and throughout. However, have we ever had any real confrontations? Yes, Coop saw his doppelgänger on the floor, slid the ring on and all was done, but that was pretty much most of it. Admittedly, the annihilated soul of Cooper is indeed a major drive, but the fragments are spread so widely across the board. What disappoints me a lot here is that in the end it all went down without any dialog or interaction between Coop/Mr c./BOB. I do love the post part 17, half evil, half good Coop. I love how Lynch played his Lynch hand there and the ambiguity of it. However, I don't think it was necessary to keep Cooper so predominantly tight lipped then, and all the way throughout. Maybe modern day Lynch thinks this is best, letting imagery and mystery do most of the work, but I can certainly remember a Cooper who could be very mysterious while still being the verbal, expressive and even poetic person he is/was.

That and lack of music were my biggest disappointments. I'm still waiting for someone to cut the entire thing with old TP music. :lol: I might even do it myself one day, if my pc is powerful enough perhaps. And yes, you could tell me that's barbaric sacrilege. I know it is, but I honestly don't give a fuck.


I think much of the season reflected Cooper’s internal journey, similar to MD in a way, albeit in a more abstract sense, as opposed to the more literal “Cooper confronting his doppelganger” approach many seem to have wanted/expected. DKL at this point in his career just doesn’t work in such straightforward terms.


I agree and I wholeheartedly accept that. however, being a human being and all, it's pretty much impossible to not have any expectations or preconceptions, which is precisely what Lynch plays with. In the end, I guess it is what made part 18 so very powerful. My stomach was twisting and turning when he uttered ''Yes. It's really me Diane". I am never forgetting that feeling.
I believe all these phenomena that our putted-up egos and busy ant minds persist in trying to label, categorize, penetrate, and comphrehend, all spring from this same uncanny source. This is the mother of all "others".
Robin Davies
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: England

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Robin Davies » Fri May 18, 2018 10:52 am

NormoftheAndes wrote:I really think that Frost and Lynch saw s3 as the 'doppleganger' season and that's why we have unsatisfying stories, character situations and a lack of mood. No shot of trees blowing in the wind seductively as such (instead we get speeded-up footage of trees trembling), only mention of damn GOOD coffee, not damn FINE as we know it should be. Something was majorly off all the way through this season.
"Lack of mood"??? I find that incredible. For me S3 delivered the mood of the dark menacing woods much better than the original series which promised this but rarely delivered it. I can understand people criticising characters, plots and some special effects but S3 was stuffed to the gills with eerie, haunting, terrifying MOOD. This is what Lynch does best.
As for "damn fine coffee" I don't think Cooper ever said that exact phrase. He did, however say "Damn good coffee - and hot!".

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return (Spoilers)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests