Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

General discussion on Twin Peaks not related to the series, film, books, music, photos, or collectors merchandise.

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

User avatar
Audrey Horne
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Audrey Horne »

Yes, they showed the first season again in the summer of 1990 leading up to the second season premiere. And they aired on Saturday night in the new time slot. The only difference I believe was the pilot was shown on a Sunday (like it originally was) and episode five and six was combined. The week before the premiere we had the Alan Thicke Peaks/Cop Rock special, the Time Magazine cover and the Rolling Stone cover. Kyle hosted SNL Saturday, and the second season premiere was on a Sunday.

It was common practice to show reruns especially during non Sweeps periods. All of the sitcoms definitely. But the hour long dramas I’m having some trouble remembering… Moonlighting, thirtysomething defintiely… but soaps like Dallas and Dynasty, I’m foggy remembering. What a different world, huh?
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Audrey Horne »

Um the Hselly, Leo fight??? I think I meant to spell SHELLY.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Lodge Member
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Mr. Reindeer »

Audrey Horne wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 8:53 pm Yes, they showed the first season again in the summer of 1990 leading up to the second season premiere. And they aired on Saturday night in the new time slot. The only difference I believe was the pilot was shown on a Sunday (like it originally was) and episode five and six was combined. The week before the premiere we had the Alan Thicke Peaks/Cop Rock special, the Time Magazine cover and the Rolling Stone cover. Kyle hosted SNL Saturday, and the second season premiere was on a Sunday.

It was common practice to show reruns especially during non Sweeps periods. All of the sitcoms definitely. But the hour long dramas I’m having some trouble remembering… Moonlighting, thirtysomething defintiely… but soaps like Dallas and Dynasty, I’m foggy remembering. What a different world, huh?
It was indeed. I wasn’t an original Peaks viewer, but I certainly remember 1990s TV. A simple blackout or brownout in your neighborhood meant that your TV and VCR were out of commission and you missed an episode and were hopelessly lost forever, if it was a serialized show! It was very frustrating. I also remember duly setting the VCR to record a show while I was out, but a half-hour power loss would mess up the VCR clock and cause it to record the wrong show/timeslot. Try explaining that to kids today, with their streaming.
User avatar
Jonah
Global Moderator
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Jonah »

I remember those days, putting the little sticker over the hole in the VHS tape to record it - taking it off so it wouldn't be recorded over. I did watch Twin Peaks but I was a child and my memories of it are dim. I'm not even sure how much of it I watched. I remember saying "wasn't she lovely?" or something about the picture of Laura Palmer in the closing credits and having a fascination with her, I remember the Maddy-being-murdered scene, I remember Leland adjusting his tie in the mirror and it showing Bob, I remember being scared of Bob (still am), and I remember buying the Secret Diary (though to this day I've only read a little bit of it) and also being fascinated by the cover image (UK Penguin paperback edition) and many years later tracking down the same copy and buying it again. It's possible that back in the day I only ever saw Episode 14 and 15 or even just 15, but I probably saw a few more - but the above stuff is all that sticks out in my memory from back then. It's highly probable I never saw Season 1 at all. It also might have aired later in Europe than the US. Anyway, that's all I really remember. Oh and the UK cover of the VHS tape of the international pilot, which I previously had as my profile pic on here - but not sure if I came across that at the time or a few years later.
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
IcedOver
RR Diner Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:31 pm

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by IcedOver »

Mr. Reindeer wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:21 pm It was indeed. I wasn’t an original Peaks viewer, but I certainly remember 1990s TV. A simple blackout or brownout in your neighborhood meant that your TV and VCR were out of commission and you missed an episode and were hopelessly lost forever, if it was a serialized show! It was very frustrating. I also remember duly setting the VCR to record a show while I was out, but a half-hour power loss would mess up the VCR clock and cause it to record the wrong show/timeslot. Try explaining that to kids today, with their streaming.
Back then shows were "appointment TV". You had to set your tape or be in front of the set. Made things feel more valuable. Today I procrastinate so much that I never watch shows that interest me. For instance, I watched three episodes of "The Good Doctor" when it started, fell off, kept meaning to watch them On Demand (I don't "stream" anything) and never did, and currently it's on season 4. So for me it and many other series are a lost cause.

I was an original "Peaks" viewer when it aired, and our ABC affiliate aired a Bundle Up telethon in the place of episode 16 (the case solving). I'm sure fans were freaking out, and they must have announced something in the paper or the news that it would be airing on a Saturday morning (or Sunday; can't recall). I think the TV Guide listing was corrected to that as well. So we had to get ourselves set to watch it on Saturday morning.
I DON'T FEEL GOOD!!!!!
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Lodge Member
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Mr. Reindeer »

IcedOver wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 5:58 pm
Mr. Reindeer wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:21 pm It was indeed. I wasn’t an original Peaks viewer, but I certainly remember 1990s TV. A simple blackout or brownout in your neighborhood meant that your TV and VCR were out of commission and you missed an episode and were hopelessly lost forever, if it was a serialized show! It was very frustrating. I also remember duly setting the VCR to record a show while I was out, but a half-hour power loss would mess up the VCR clock and cause it to record the wrong show/timeslot. Try explaining that to kids today, with their streaming.
Back then shows were "appointment TV". You had to set your tape or be in front of the set. Made things feel more valuable. Today I procrastinate so much that I never watch shows that interest me. For instance, I watched three episodes of "The Good Doctor" when it started, fell off, kept meaning to watch them On Demand (I don't "stream" anything) and never did, and currently it's on season 4. So for me it and many other series are a lost cause.

I was an original "Peaks" viewer when it aired, and our ABC affiliate aired a Bundle Up telethon in the place of episode 16 (the case solving). I'm sure fans were freaking out, and they must have announced something in the paper or the news that it would be airing on a Saturday morning (or Sunday; can't recall). I think the TV Guide listing was corrected to that as well. So we had to get ourselves set to watch it on Saturday morning.
I agree with you that it added more value to the experience in a certain way, but also so much stress! I was always terrified during any given broadcast that the reception would go out, or my power, and that was always in the back of my mind making me anxious and detracting from my concentration and enjoyment. We had an antenna on the roof, and during inclement weather it would really screw with the reception, making the shows really staticky and unwatchable. I remember standing outside during thunderstorms, getting drenched and holding the grounding cable for the antenna, trying to stabilize it. The VCR was recording so I could watch the show once it ended. I’d yell in the window to my sisters, “BETTER OR WORSE?” “WORSE!!!” I’d yank the cable the other way and see if that fixed it. It was a lot of work to enjoy a show!
User avatar
eyeboogers
Great Northern Member
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by eyeboogers »

Sometimes that buggy early tech was for the better. Once I had gone away on summer holiday and pre-programmed the VCR to record something. When I returned I discovered that I had accidentally programmed the wrong weekday to record, and what I now had on tape, instead of whatever I had intended to watch, was "Fire Walk With Me". As I started watching I desperately hoped that the whole film had been captured (it had), and instantly became a fan.
User avatar
AXX°N N.
RR Diner Member
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:47 pm

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by AXX°N N. »

eyeboogers wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 1:20 am Sometimes that buggy early tech was for the better. Once I had gone away on summer holiday and pre-programmed the VCR to record something. When I returned I discovered that I had accidentally programmed the wrong weekday to record, and what I now had on tape, instead of whatever I had intended to watch, was "Fire Walk With Me". As I started watching I desperately hoped that the whole film had been captured (it had), and instantly became a fan.
That's so wonderful. :) Random misfortune can reward long-lasting delight. Although my reaction to head colds is always 'no, my work!' nonetheless I've had many a lifelong love affair begin because of being so energy-zapped that all I can do is channel-flip for days.
Recipe not my own. In a coffee cup. 3 TBS flour, 2 TBS sugar, 1.5 TBS cocoa powder, .25 TSP baking powder, pinch of salt. 3 TBS milk, 1.5 TBS vegetable oil, 1 TBS peanut butter. Add and mix each set. Microwave 1 minute 10 seconds. The cup will be hot.
User avatar
mtwentz
Lodge Member
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by mtwentz »

Wait, I’ve been watching Peaks longer than Mr Reindeer? How dis mmd that happen?

I watched the Pilot when it first aired, and I expected the murder to be solved by the end of that episode. I was extremely frustrated instead if intrigued and did not watch again until the Season 1 finale, because I expected by then the murder would be solved.

Again I was frustrated, but was visiting my mom in Chicago and she wanted to watch so we tuned in, and it was that opening scene that dragged on forever that finally got me hooked.

Yep most of America got off the bus with a bumbling old waiter and a smiling bag, but I got on it, really for the first time.

But dang I forgot to record the reveal episode as I was going out that night to meet some girls or something and I read about the episode in the SF Chronicle the next day!

And that to me really is what killed the show. Even someone who was enjoying it as much as I was had a hard time keeping up with TP while it aired on Saturday nights.

But hey, all is well that ends well. We got FWWM in ‘92 and The Return in 2017. And in 2022....who knows
We live inside Dougie's dream....
User avatar
Brad D
Global Moderator
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:56 am
Contact:

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Brad D »

My head is cloudy at the moment, but there was a veiled promise to reveal the killer with ep 8. I think Lynch said “you will see the killer?” The traincar scene left too much ambiguity I guess. It’d be super interesting to see the ratings broken down by the quarter-hour.
User avatar
Jonah
Global Moderator
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Jonah »

I've asked this before, but I'm still wondering who/what viewers at the time thought Bob was at that stage before the big reveal? I mean, the show pretty much did reveal him as some sort of drifter who was the killer - what more were people waiting for/how did they know there would be more to it and what were they thinking, that someone hired Bob or something?
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
User avatar
AXX°N N.
RR Diner Member
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:47 pm

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by AXX°N N. »

Jonah wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 6:10 am I've asked this before, but I'm still wondering who/what viewers at the time thought Bob was at that stage before the big reveal? I mean, the show pretty much did reveal him as some sort of drifter who was the killer - what more were people waiting for/how did they know there would be more to it and what were they thinking, that someone hired Bob or something?
I think it's more that the show, by that point, had also heavily suggested/promised a significance to BOB beyond normal reality. It went from "who did it?" to "what did it?"
Recipe not my own. In a coffee cup. 3 TBS flour, 2 TBS sugar, 1.5 TBS cocoa powder, .25 TSP baking powder, pinch of salt. 3 TBS milk, 1.5 TBS vegetable oil, 1 TBS peanut butter. Add and mix each set. Microwave 1 minute 10 seconds. The cup will be hot.
User avatar
Jonah
Global Moderator
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Jonah »

I'm not sure that it suggested there was more (supernaturally anyway) to Bob at that point. Maybe the writers were suggesting it in interviews, but the show itself seemed to just imply he was a drifter (similar to the international pilot where it was confirmed and whom a lot of the viewers had probably seen), that he and the One Armed Man had worked/lived together, and later revealed that Leland recognised him as a man who lived across from him when he was a boy (both being hints maybe of the ageless/supernatural element).

Other than that, and the fact that the investigation was ongoing, were there any other hints? I get that viewers probably felt there was "more" to the story - or maybe they assumed Bob was some sort of red herring, but by the end of Episode 8 he was shown killing Laura (the more I think of it it is odd that a murder mystery revealed a killer/strong suspect early on, then switched the reveal with a supernatural twist), so at that point viewers could either assume a supernatural explanation or that someone like Ben Horne or someone else hired Bob to kill her.

I'm curious what people were really thinking, guess I'll have to check out the usenet thread, unless someone else here (Mr. Reindeer?) has already read those posts.

And does anyone remember their own thoughts on who/what Bob was when they saw it themselves? I don't think he was revealed to be supernatural until Epiode 14.
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
User avatar
eyeboogers
Great Northern Member
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by eyeboogers »

The VHS of the european pilot had been out since late 1989, and the one armed man had a thing or two to say about the nature of Bob. I understand that this was pre-www, but still, most likely enough people knew, for rumours to get around that this man was more than a drifter.
User avatar
Jonah
Global Moderator
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Why exactly did ABC treat the show so badly?

Post by Jonah »

I stll don't think it indicated he was supernatural though. Even the international pilot just had him as a drifter (who had killed with Mike) and was living in the basement of the hospital. There was no indication the convenience store or anything else was supernatural. There may have been hints - Sarah's visions, Cooper's dream of the red room etc. - but the text still seemed to indicate he was a drifter/serial killer. So it's just odd that people were still complaining about the murder being unsolved, when Episode 8 essentially confirmed that it was Bob and Lynch said people would see the killer. I mean, I know 14 then pulled the big reveal. but I wonder if a lot of casual viewers just assumed Bob was the killer, that the show had revealed it. Sure, I'm guessing a lot of people as I said above thought there was "more" to it. But until 14 and Mike sniffing people in the Great Northen, was there an indication he was a supernatural presence other than the fact that Leland remembered him from his childhood when he presumably looked the same age? Did people think Bob wasn't the killer and was just a red herring? Did they think he was hired by someone? That there was a conspiracy? Or did most people just assumed he was a supernatural presence long before 14? (I vaguely remember there was talk about him having a new face or host by Mike, but pretty sure that didn't happen until after the reveal episode.)
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
Post Reply