World of Blue - Archived Forum 2007-2022

Rhodes wrote:The tweet by David Dalstmachian: "Things will never be the same" is mostly seen as an unjustified hyping of episode 12.

But maybe he is right after all. Maybe the Audrey-scene is indeed the crucial scene of the entire show! The scene that changes everything and forces us to interpret everything we've seen so far in a different light.

Rhodes wrote:

Mr. Reindeer wrote: Sure, they're both terrible marriages, but whereas Shelly was a prisoner, Audrey/Charlie feels like a marriage of convenience

Marriage of convenience --> convenience store?

wAtChLaR wrote:

nick1218 wrote:

its not even top 5 of Lynch films

wait...what?

tresojos wrote:tbh the audrey scene kinda grew on me.

Mr. Reindeer wrote:

Rhodes wrote:The tweet by David Dalstmachian: "Things will never be the same" is mostly seen as an unjustified hyping of episode 12.

But maybe he is right after all. Maybe the Audrey-scene is indeed the crucial scene of the entire show! The scene that changes everything and forces us to interpret everything we've seen so far in a different light.

Why on earth would Dalstmachian have had any knowledge of Audrey's storyline, though? Even if we're assuming that Audrey's path intersects with Warrick's at some point (a huge assumption), how would Dalstmachian, of all people, know that Audrey would first appear in Part 12? Matthew Lillard has said he didn't know what Parts he would be in until the show aired (he was assuming he wouldn't be seen until Part 10-11 IIRC). So if Lillard didn't know what Parts he personally would appear in, I can't imagine that L/F would have tipped a day player like Dalstmachian off to the HUGE reveal of when Fenn would first appear.

I agree that the tweet was a really baffling move -- maybe he received a false tip from another cast/crew member that a certain scene he shot would be included in this Part? -- but I just can't believe that he has some sort of insider knowledge given the secrecy and unorthodox shooting/editing of ths thing.

nick1218 wrote:

tresojos wrote:tbh the audrey scene kinda grew on me.

the Audrey scene was fine, it makes total sense that some things 25 years later are bafflingly different. It cant all be Andy & Lucy. The ending of the scene was funny, as if Lynch was saying "he he Im not going to explain for you" The problem was that the scene went on and on , it should have been tightened up a bit

Mr. Reindeer wrote:Thank you! I'm so perplexed by the multitude of people who seem to believe that these scenes have no value unless we see these characters again or they tell us something about this "Sparkle" conspiracy that people keep coming back to. Why does every scene need to "tell" us something or have some plot significance? In an 18-hour movie, is there not time for some asides and detours? These are essentially little short films implanted in the narrative, and they're some of my favorite parts so far. We're getting a sense of the richness of the TP community, as opposed to just seeing the same 15 townies as in the original show. I adore the "slice of life" quality of these and don't expect them to have any more significance.

Soolsma wrote:Come to think of it, it's actually quite funny how people now feel such a huge disconnect with the once very familiar Audrey character that it immediately sends them thinking in elaborate schemes to explain what's going on. (I've heard people say it's a film set too) While, well I don't know about you people, but as a 27 year old I am already feeling quite a disconnect from my teenage self. My behavior was very different, and even more so the girls I had flings with. I can only try imagine how I'll look upon my teen years when I'm in my late forties.

I know, I know, there are some definite oddities at play there. However, if the scene wouldn't revolve around such an iconic character now seemingly changed so much, wouldn't we just regard those oddities as just.. oddities, which TP always has an abundance of?

DeepBlueSeed wrote: As someone in his 40s (and as someone who had seen modern day Sherilyn Fenn as herself in YouTube clips) I have to say her personality did not strike me as odd. But the circumstances seemed a little weird and, as people have pointed out, she seemed pinned to the spot. I don't know if I was expecting Charlie to move from his chair, but for someone as frustrated as much as she is you'd expect a lot more movement from her.

wxray wrote:

DeepBlueSeed wrote: As someone in his 40s (and as someone who had seen modern day Sherilyn Fenn as herself in YouTube clips) I have to say her personality did not strike me as odd. But the circumstances seemed a little weird and, as people have pointed out, she seemed pinned to the spot. I don't know if I was expecting Charlie to move from his chair, but for someone as frustrated as much as she is you'd expect a lot more movement from her.

Actors absolutely adore DKL, so I doubt he would be cruel to her, although some have guessed he was zinging her a bit for the tardy contract agreement.

What I thought about after absorbing the scene was it reminded me a bit of Boxing Helena, when her legs were cut off. Couldn't move. Talking head. But then this would mean that DKL is being cruel to his daughter Jennifer too. Nah, nothing to do with that, but kind of strangely reminiscent of her scenes in BH.

BGate wrote:"Audrey's in a coma" is the new "Vegas is another timeline/dimension/dream". I'd suggest making your peace with taking that Audrey scene at 100% face value (as much as anything can be taken at face value in Lynch).

guildnavigator wrote:I am completely baffled by the reaction to this part, I was loving it the entire time. Hawk in front of the palmer house was some of the most beautiful photography so far in my opinion, and also the most nostalgic for me, recalling the atmosphere of the pilot episode.