Differing Views on The Return

[Jonah]

Also worth noting - when I say I'd prefer it cut down to 9 or 12 episodes that doesn't mean I think all the other footage shouldn't exist or should be vaporized. It still could have been bonus footage on extended discs or an extended 18 hour of the show for DVD/Showtime as well. I just think it would have been stronger with a lot more editing. But, as I said, I am torn on this. I said this before but it reminds me a bit of popular authors who as their popularity increases so too does their page count, their earlier works are 250 - 400 pages, their later books are 600 - 1000 page doorstoppers. Sometimes this is because they're writing a series that gets more complex but often their editors just stop editing them/don't dare tell them to trim the excess. That doesn't mean the excess is bad or even always unwarranted, but it can sometimes feel extraneous and a tighter, more concise book or show can be better, highlighting the gems rather than making you wade through filler to find them. I mean, a good example is the Audrey scene - we gained nothing from watching her rant for 10 to 15 minutes. Even 3-5 minutes would have felt more than long enough and accomplished a long-feeling rant and gotten mentions of Billy in. That is just but one of countless examples.

I see what you're saying about other people liking certain scenes so what would you cut - but I mean, look at the Blue Velvet or Inland Empire scenes. I'm sure people find them beloved too or they add deeper meaning to their views, yet they were still cut. I prefer some of the scenes in The Missing Pieces to what we got in FWWM. Lynch made the decision to cut them yet this time around cut virtually nothing. I know he may have felt confined by running times/studios/pressured to cut but he never created extended versions of FWWM, BV, or even IE when he later had the option to - he still kept that cut footage separate. Here it felt like he just threw everything in because he could and/or had a new running time quota to fill. Whatever the reason, I do think it's notable given how he cut other things (even FWWM which he loved and IE which was all his own) down. I mean, FWWM is a good example - he felt it was stronger because all the original actors stories weren't relevant to a movie about Laura and her last 7 days, so he saw the final product as more concise, and stronger. Yet The Return he has no problem going down many extraneous alleyways that lead away from Cooper's story, some featuring the original cast, some randos in the roadhouse or Vegas or wherever. I understand it's a different feel and vibe - but the point is, he can see cutting even beloved footage from one story makes it more concise/stronger, that should have applied to The Return too. But - yeah, it's something I'm torn on as feel the creator's vision should come first. Just sometimes a creator should be open to editing too.

[missoulamt]

Between the French woman and Gordon talking about his erections, its a bit surprising he didnt sleep with Diane at the end.

LOL

[missoulamt]

Jonah is right. Of course, TP on a whole could and should have been edited down. The number of storylines, which often have no bearing on eachother, is overkill. A lot of the content could have comfortably been included on a Deleted Scenes DVD accompanying the proper release.

One scene with Dr. Amp would definitely have been enough.

[Audrey Horne]

Reading the comments and the theories always gets me interested. I enjoy so many of you on this board. But then when I go seek out or rewatch the mentioned scenes, I get shifty and bored. Maybe I just can’t be objective. I just watched a Tammy and Albert scene where he gives her the origin of Blue Rose or Tulpas or something. But all I got out of it was motion sickness from Bell’s wobbling head movements and the pacing and cutting of the scene.

I have a problem with a lot of The Return on that level as well. Maybe there was just too much to juggle with all the locations and characters, and there are certainly visually some arresting images, but the art direction, costume, and all other color pallets combined with the cutting and pacing made the entire thing too murky for me. Again, that is my personal taste, and it might’ve been a reason I couldn’t latch onto this thing on an emotional level.
There were a few times where I did react on an emotional level, but it might just be because of history or (dirty word) nostalgia.

Another reason I might not be the best fit around here is because Lynch’s work is not my favorite. I appreciate and respect him, but I’m not in love with any of his movies on an emotional level like I am with so many of the American medium masters like Hawks, Capra, Sturges, Hitchcock, Lubitsch, Ford, Wilder etc. (many whom were cited by Frost as inspiration for the original series).

To understand my ongoing criticism, my favorite episodes of Peaks were five and six (the cabin/gala and OEJ Cooper, Ed stakeout). And they’re my favorite episodes because of the world Lynch set up through The Pilot and third episode (the definitive installment). I love the relationships, the interactions, the art direction, the editing and especially the crackling screenplays. I think there is a breathing room for so many of the actors in those two episodes also, more playful. The same for the sixth episode of the second season right before Lynch’s killer reveal. I guess for me, Lynch’s episodes aren’t as powerful without these installments between them, and vice versa.

[Brad D]

I think the hard thing about this thread is that the two camps are pretty far apart on much common ground. The thread was made to explore grievances, and some of the most staunch defenders of The Return make sure no critique goes unchecked.

[missoulamt]

Right now I am thinking about Hasting's confession scene. Also too long winded.

[mtwentz]

Maybe I posted this before, but I used to Siskel and Ebert At The Movies growing up as a kid, and those two really got into it at times.

This is my exxagerated take on a Siskel and Ebert exchange while reviewing a movie on their show:

Siskel: (Insert Name of Movie) was an absolutely, divine, creative, innovative piece art that pushed the boundaries of what a cinematic experience can be. It will be on my list for possible Academy Award contenders.Big thumbs up!

Ebert: Did we see the same movie? (Insert Name of Movie) was an absolute bunch of self indulgent garbage. What were you smoking when you saw it Gene?! Have you gone crazy? Two gigantic thumbs down for this stinker!

So I don't think our debating The Return is all that unique. I believe it is just baked in our DNA as a species to debate and argue our opinions.

[missoulamt]

The Fusco brothers in LA/Vegas. Entertaining in short doses but very little, if any, connection to the world of TP? Closer in style to Mulholland Drive then. Maybe the paycheck was simply too hard to refuse for Lynch, with TP being his most successful commercial enterprise.

[Jonah]

The Fusco brothers in LA/Vegas. Entertaining in short doses but very little, if any, connection to the world of TP? Closer in style to Mulholland Drive then. Maybe the paycheck was simply too hard to refuse for Lynch, with TP being his most successful commercial enterprise.

I was surprised how like Mulholland Drive - or at least the pilot of Mulholland Drive, presumably those parts created should it become a series - it felt like.

[Audrey Horne]

Ha I was just thinking about Siskel and Ebert and their Blue Velvet debates. Ebert was a fantastic writer and custodian of film history. But he would definitely get personally ruffled if he felt something was off behind the scenes on a production, and he certainly had his crushes on actresses. He hated Blue Velvet because of what he thought Lynch was putting Isabella through in the naked lawn scene… even though she rebuffed Elbert’s claims and explained why she thought it was in character.

I don’t have a concrete point, just it popped into my head when I watched Chrysta Bell’s introduction scene. You’re wearing a wire… “youaskedmeto.” Their ogling her as she walks away is a choice. Fine. But her character is drawn so thinly combined with the actresses obvious inexperience, that it is impossible for me not to think of her as anything but an object. And as she walks away, the camera tilts down and frames her ass as it’s center and then back up. To me, it’s objectifying the actress and not two characters objectifying another characters. To.me, sometimes I feel Lynch exploits his actresses. He’s a man with power in the industry and no young performer is going to object to him, it would be career suicide.

[missoulamt]

Lynch objectifies the female actors/extras for sure. But that's another discussion, I guess

[Jonah]

Lynch - like Hitchcock, another filmmaker I love - definitely has some problematic and misogynistic tendencies in his art that are impossible not to see, though at least I've never heard any credible stories of Lynch being problematic in real life. Given the conversations going on now regarding misogyny in the film industry and diversity on screen (another area where Lynch and Frost could do with brushing up), I expect a lot of his and their works will fall under increasing scrutiny as time goes on. But that's something I think is going to be an issue with a lot of work from before a certain date. I don't think Lynch is the worst offender - far from it - but the issue is there.

We also need to see more gay and people of colour in his works. That's the kind of statement I would have had a problem with before - as I don't feel a creator should feel forced to include diversity - but I think Lynch could make a good job of it. And come on, everyone's lauding how realistic and progressive Lynch was in showing the new even grittier Twin Peaks given to road rage, shootouts, drugs, even hints at the pandemic - but it's still a very white town with no gay people, no trans people, no black people. Okay, so it's small town America (but still, it's 2017 - Northern Exposure was showing black and gay characters in Alaska in 1990 even if some of their discourse about the gay characters was offensive/problematic, but even that was more highlighting other character's homophobia; China Beach was showcasing black characters in Vietnam in the 60's, in a series that aired on a mainstream network in 1988; many other examples - and this criticism is aimed at the original series too, not just The Return, hence my late 80's/early 90's examples). What about New York and Las Vegas? One black woman who's a prostitute and gratuitously nude. Okay....

[missoulamt]

But she was perfect for that part. I think that's what steers Lynch, as it should be. Anything else would feel forced to me.

[Jonah]

She was great in the role - but she didn't have to be nude. Or why not show Kyle or another actor just as full-frontally nude as her in the scene? Or just have her wear a bra and panties. That aside, the problem isn't with the actress or her not being chosen for the role. The problem is that the only black woman "just happens" to be a prostitute and also "just happens" to be the one (I think?) moment of gratuitous full-frontal nudity. That is problematic no matter how we look at it and I think it deserves being flagged. I've seen others flag it too. Yes, hire a black woman if she's perfect for the role. But hire lots of other black women to play other roles too. No "steering" necessary. I used to think similarly until I looked into it more. Diversity isn't about being steered towards it and feeling the need to include it, it's expanding your pool of people you're considering to include more diverse people. So Lynch doesn't need to go "I need a black actress" but his casting director needs to provide him with just as many black actress options as white actresses. As to whether he still ends up choosing more white actresses, well... I can't get inside the man's head. But diversity isn't about feeling you have to include black/gay characters. It's more about you should want to anyway especially if they end up feeling right for the part. Don't make them black/gay just because, but open your mind that they could be black/gay/trans, etc.

Come to think of it, Twin Peaks - the original series - is surprisingly un-diverse (Denise aside) for such a quirky show that highlights unique characters. Yes, it aired in 1990. But so did the two shows I mentioned above (and they're not even all that progressive themselves - there are probably much better examples).

[Audrey Horne]

I’m not here to destroy Lynch at all. I’ve only heard wonderful things about him from people who’ve worked with him, and also think he’s incredibly nurturing and inspiring to his actors and crew. I guess this was in response to the Tammy character posed a few pages ago. And it goes hand in hand with what I think some of the problems are with The Return. It was a huge project with a lot to juggle and organize. He had a lot of his plate. I get the feeling there were a few times no one would take him aside and point things out to him during the stages of production, one can get myopic and little practical details lost. Like I would say if I felt comfortable with him it’s a bad look to have your only black actress topless in a scene where it adds nothing narratively to the work.

I would use Fenn as an example since it is now public knowledge. Her challenging him on a choice ultimately ended with him calling her and saying it was better in the end with the change. I think he’s open to concerns that probably escape him because there was so much else for him to do. The Return was a tremendous undertaking and I can’t imagine the energy and concentration it must’ve taken.