Official Thread - TCA Announcement - Twin Peaks on Showtime May 21st
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
- Here Comes That Bob
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:03 am
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Ugh, Michael Cera ...
- Trudy Chelgren
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:07 am
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
I remember reading on the forum a while ago about there apparently being a scene between Andy and Hawk, which was partly improvised, that was supposedly unbelievably funny. I have no doubts about there being a lack of humour. If anything, I imagine the contrasts between the two sides of Twin Peaks will have heightened. We already know it's going to be very dark, violent and disturbing in some places, but I'm sure there will be uplifting moments, funny asides, and emotional levity.
I think the nature of Twin Peaks as a 'TV show' is that it is inherently unbalanced. It's not easy to quantify what makes it what it is; I am of the opinion that FWWM is a profoundly moving masterpiece, some can't stand it. But what I think makes Lynch so special to me, is that I struggle knowing when to laugh. I must have found something funny in every Lynch film, be it a hesitancy in delivering dialogue, or an unexpected moment of light slapstick. I'm absolutely convinced that at some point in S3 I will laugh at something without knowing if the humour was intentional, and I believe that's just as valid as laughing at Andy falling down, or Cooper pinching Harry's nose.
I think the nature of Twin Peaks as a 'TV show' is that it is inherently unbalanced. It's not easy to quantify what makes it what it is; I am of the opinion that FWWM is a profoundly moving masterpiece, some can't stand it. But what I think makes Lynch so special to me, is that I struggle knowing when to laugh. I must have found something funny in every Lynch film, be it a hesitancy in delivering dialogue, or an unexpected moment of light slapstick. I'm absolutely convinced that at some point in S3 I will laugh at something without knowing if the humour was intentional, and I believe that's just as valid as laughing at Andy falling down, or Cooper pinching Harry's nose.
- Here Comes That Bob
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:03 am
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Don't forget my personal favourites...Snailhead wrote:I find FWWM charming... there's humour there. And Lynch contributed a lot of the humour to the original series. I love Frost but he wasn't the only part of the equation responsible for levity.
So, yeah, there's a good number of fun parts to balance the darkness, I find:
- DEER MEADOW. Carl Rodd, Irene, the awkward interactions between Chet and Sam, lotsa fun stuff.
- Albert.
- Bobby walking around the high school.
- Jacques in the pink room.
- Laura getting into that outfit while on the phone with James.
- Laura laughing after Bobby kills the guy. (ok maybe I have a twisted sense of humour...)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNEhVHL ... e=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8_1H4Z ... e=youtu.be
- NightTimeMyTime
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 7:15 pm
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
What you're explaining is the absurdism of Lynch, which I also love, a lot more than the humor. Those moments when you don't know what to feel. It's both sad or dark and funny at the same time. Like the scene in Eraserhead with the chickens. It's horrifying and funny at the same time. You feel uncomfortable but with a smile on your face.Trudy Chelgren wrote:But what I think makes Lynch so special to me, is that I struggle knowing when to laugh. I must have found something funny in every Lynch film, be it a hesitancy in delivering dialogue, or an unexpected moment of light slapstick. I'm absolutely convinced that at some point in S3 I will laugh at something without knowing if the humour was intentional, and I believe that's just as valid as laughing at Andy falling down, or Cooper pinching Harry's nose.
- Rainwater
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 3:00 am
- Location: Under the Sycamore trees
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Honestly, I don't think I'm entirely prepared for it. I've immersed myself in the hype too much, which would, of course, add all that much more to the disappointment. I bet I'm not alone in that.Gabriel wrote:It's always a danger you'll profoundly dislike a belated continuation of a series. I detest modern Doctor Who. I detest all non-Kirk/TOS Star Trek. If I hate the new Twin Peaks, so be it. I'll be massively disappointed, but it won't be the first time. I've got my battle scars!
I wholeheartedly agree. The contrast is not a small part of what made Twin Peaks so special - and, as Snailhead says, FWWM has it as well, albeit the darkness comes in proportionately larger doses.Gabriel wrote:While I understand a lot of people are married to the 'dark' side of a Twin Peaks, a lot of people love it for something more: charm. The original show was charming and witty. No matter how dark things got, there was something quirky that would happen, be it a fish in a percolator or a barbershop quartet in the Great Northern. Indeed, I think the horror was enhanced by the presence of the humour, 'black as midnight on a moonless night' coffee and damn fine cherry pie.
I always found that scene hilarious.Snailhead wrote:- Laura laughing after Bobby kills the guy. (ok maybe I have a twisted sense of humour...)
I'll see you in the trees
- The Jumping Man
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:27 pm
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Don't forget Kyle saying "there's a lightness to it" in the behind-the-scenes promo, which wouldn't make much sense if it's unrelentingly dark.
- eyeboogers
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 729
- Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
- Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
TvinPiks, you and I have had no previous correspondance on this forum and it is perfectly fine to state your opinions. Sometimes it is hard to know how one's writing comes across on online forums, most of your posts seem very aggressive/hostile and I am sure you don't mean them to be that way. Basically what I am trying to say is, if you want other board members to be respectful and curious during debates, be sure to do the same.TvinPiks wrote:Let me reply in polite, noncondescending manner (since your post was doubtlessly as noncondescending as they get): Yes, I am sure.Dalai Cooper wrote:I'm sure your taste is great, just great, but um are you sure you didn't accidentally watch a jodorovsky film instead of mulholland dr cause otherwise I can't see where this quasireligious claptrap comes from
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
It's really hard to read too much into that statement, because it's taken out of context. You don't know what Kyle was referring to- the new show, the original show, the camraderie with his fellow actors, etc.The Jumping Man wrote:Don't forget Kyle saying "there's a lightness to it" in the behind-the-scenes promo, which wouldn't make much sense if it's unrelentingly dark.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Has anybody considered the possibility that Good Dale gets out of the Lodge early in the series, only to discover his doppelganger has caused mayhem on Planet Earth, which creates all kind of dilemmas for him?
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
- eyeboogers
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 729
- Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
- Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Could be interesting, as long as it doesn't get too "Superman III"mtwentz wrote:Has anybody considered the possibility that Good Dale gets out of the Lodge early in the series, only to discover his doppelganger has caused mayhem on Planet Earth, which creates all kind of dilemmas for him?
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Hey that battle between Clark Kent and Superman was classiceyeboogers wrote:Could be interesting, as long as it doesn't get too "Superman III"mtwentz wrote:Has anybody considered the possibility that Good Dale gets out of the Lodge early in the series, only to discover his doppelganger has caused mayhem on Planet Earth, which creates all kind of dilemmas for him?
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Isn't the new show implied? It would be borderline fake news if it wasn't.mtwentz wrote:It's really hard to read too much into that statement, because it's taken out of context. You don't know what Kyle was referring to- the new show, the original show, the camraderie with his fellow actors, etc.The Jumping Man wrote:Don't forget Kyle saying "there's a lightness to it" in the behind-the-scenes promo, which wouldn't make much sense if it's unrelentingly dark.
- eyeboogers
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 729
- Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
- Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
I perceived it as being about the nature of the working collaboration and in no way to be about the tone of the content.DirkG wrote:Isn't the new show implied? It would be borderline fake news if it wasn't.mtwentz wrote:It's really hard to read too much into that statement, because it's taken out of context. You don't know what Kyle was referring to- the new show, the original show, the camraderie with his fellow actors, etc.The Jumping Man wrote:Don't forget Kyle saying "there's a lightness to it" in the behind-the-scenes promo, which wouldn't make much sense if it's unrelentingly dark.
- Rainwater
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 3:00 am
- Location: Under the Sycamore trees
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Same.eyeboogers wrote:I perceived it as being about the nature of the working collaboration and in no way to be about the tone of the content.DirkG wrote:Isn't the new show implied? It would be borderline fake news if it wasn't.mtwentz wrote:
It's really hard to read too much into that statement, because it's taken out of context. You don't know what Kyle was referring to- the new show, the original show, the camraderie with his fellow actors, etc.
I'll see you in the trees
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
That's what I think is most likely too as being the context of Kyle's 'lightness' statement.eyeboogers wrote:I perceived it as being about the nature of the working collaboration and in no way to be about the tone of the content.DirkG wrote:Isn't the new show implied? It would be borderline fake news if it wasn't.mtwentz wrote:
It's really hard to read too much into that statement, because it's taken out of context. You don't know what Kyle was referring to- the new show, the original show, the camraderie with his fellow actors, etc.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly