Jump to content

TWIN PEAKS


Romão

Recommended Posts

I'm not going to read 50 pages but did someone already mention how Lynch seems to want to reintroduce 'slow pace'? The pace is as slow as 2001: A Space Odyssey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I really need to adjust to the slow pace ... but I like it!  TV has never been so slow as with Twin Peaks S3.

 

 

(based on the first three eppies)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone here notice that the old boxing match Ms. Palmer was watching was actually on a loop (along with those weird static sounds that kept happening)? At first I thought that scene was boring, but once I realized those details I became quickly unnerved. Something is bound to happen there.

 

BTW: Apparently German TV accidentally aired Episode 14, so be careful for spoilers on that one! I didn't read any spoilers but apparently it is epic!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scallenger said:

Anyone here notice that the old boxing match Ms. Palmer was watching was actually on a loop (along with those weird static sounds that kept happening)? At first I thought that scene was boring, but once I realized those details I became quickly unnerved. Something is bound to happen there.

 

That scene was unsettling - in a way similar to season 2, when the record skipped over and over again in the living room.

 

Wonder if she's watching Dougie's boss's boxing match (re: the poster behind his desk) - Battlin' Bud Mullins or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

I'm not going to read 50 pages but did someone already mention how Lynch seems to want to reintroduce 'slow pace'? The pace is as slow as 2001: A Space Odyssey

 

You're definitely the only person viewing this television show to notice that the pace is on the slow side.  It's definitely not the most common criticism this season of television is getting from viewers around the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this was a really Peaksy episode.  Hopefully this standard holds up for the home stretch now.  I have to say that Audrey's stuff is painful - not because it's bad, but because it's annoying to see this spunky and sexy character in... whatever bind it is that she is in, rather than being the character we all want her to be.  Lynch is a tease, and by god he has a fantastic sense of humor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A much more enjoyable episode than last week's that's for sure. The final third was weak, but Just You at the Road House was at least good for a giggle. I mean, I didn't feel like fast-fowarding this time. Not even the Jacoby scene! The drawn out insight into Sarah Palmer's sad life I could have done without though.

 

It's annoyed me that I can't really enjoy the slow scenes of 'nothingness' in Twin Peaks anymore - purely due to the sheer excess of them throughout the entire season; because in moderation I think such extended scenes of 'uncomfortable weirdness' have their place in the broader canvas of the Twin Peaks experience, but it has just become so much of a thing now, so much of a thematic meta, that I'm just worn out by every unnecessarily prolonged moment on a scene by scene basis. The snail's pace of Lynch's vision this time really dragged down the dramatic sweep of the show overall for me, it's harmed the story in a way which I can't see it fully recovering from after everything is complete, and I come to ponder my lasting impressions of The Return.

 

It'll probably looking something like this: "A maddening, brilliant work of television, the most deeply frustrating thing I've ever watched. Should have been 9 episodes of fabulous, unique TV. So easily could have been."

 

7 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

By the time you adjust, the show gets even slower.

 

The first three episodes were slow in a way which felt new and utterly captivating. It just doesn't work over 18 very long episodes though. 2001: A Space Odyssey was slow but it doesn't touch Twin Peaks in that regard, not even close. That's because Kubrick never ground things to a halt, he kept the creeping momentum very clearly defined and in focus, he took his time but he was actually very economical with his storytelling. Then you remember you're really just comparing 3 hours to 18, and the point becomes moot anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While not bereft of qualities (I could name several), I think ep. 13 is the most underwhelming episode I've seen so far this season, for a myriad of different reasons that I'm too lazy to list right now. That Audrey Horne stuff is just embarassing, for example, and anti-climactic.

 

No, now that I've accepted the fact that this won't be a nostalgia trip, I prefer the episodes when he goes more all-out with the craziness. This one felt (mostly) disappointingly conventional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/2/2017 at 8:01 PM, Thor said:

 

I think this was just a straight-up ode to Marlon Brando in ONE-EYED JACKS

 

1200.jpg

 

0Qn3m9J656d1DKugC.jpg

 

You mean Brando in The Wild One, right?

 

DBiEz6NW0AAgm1v.jpg

 

In the same episode, beautiful contrasting shots when the director of the casino got a beating.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the show is the ultimate, post-modern fantasy. Past situations, places and characters broken down and divided into fragments, and then re-interpreted (notice how few of the characters are actually anything like in the original run). That's a commendable project, I'd say, even if it probably alienates fans of the first two seasons. Interestingly, 90s TWIN PEAKS was also considered post-modern at the time, so this -- then -- would be post-post-modern. I don't know if we have a term for that yet. "Meta" is part of it, but not exclusively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Thor said:

That's a commendable project, I'd say, even if it probably alienates fans of the first two seasons. 

 

I, probably like a couple of the others here, have been spending a decent amount of time entrenched in various Twin Peaks/Lynch fan communities for a while now, and I have seen this used as an argument a few times before, and I think it's nothing more than a convenient fallacy constructed as an easy way to ward off and be dismissive of literally any criticism or dissatisfaction surrounding the new series. Because actually, Twin Peaks fans are by far the most zealously defensive watchers of The Return out there. I very rarely encounter the "alienation" you mentioned. In fact I only really see fans who can't wait for the full eighteen episodes to be in the public domain, such is the allure of the many questions posed by what has been revealed so far. But that does not mean the journey hasn't been problematic for some of those viewers, often for perfectly valid reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Quintus said:

 

I, probably like a couple of the others here, have been spending a decent amount of time entrenched in various Twin Peaks/Lynch fan communities for a while now, and I have seen this used as an argument a few times before, and I think it's nothing more than a convenient fallacy constructed as an easy way to ward off and be dismissive of literally any criticism or dissatisfaction surrounding the new series. 

 

Well, it's just an attempted description of what this particular project might be (or within what tradition it might be viewed). I happen to like it, but I can understand those who don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that's fine. Plenty absolutely love The Return. But we can safely remove the original series from the equation here, and still have the same debate, the same differences of opinion. Similar to how we do in the Game of Thrones thread, or the film one. The same way we do about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Quintus said:

Yes, that's fine. Plenty absolutely love The Return. But we can safely remove the original series from the equation here, and still have the same debate, the same differences of opinion. Similar to how we do in the Game of Thrones thread, or the film one. The same way we do about anything.

 

I'm not sure what your argument is. That we should not talk about the original series when talking about The Return?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think the original series and one's orientation on it needs to be stated or considered as a qualifier when debating the merits and flaws of The Return. It's entirely its own thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quintus said:

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I don't think the original series and one's orientation on it needs to be stated or considered as a qualifier when debating the merits and flaws of The Return. It's entirely its own thing.

 

Oh. Well, I agree. On the other hand, the two approaches are so different, one should at the very least recognize that they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Isnt the movie a very different animal from either show? So what is it that defines Twin Peaks?

 

It is, but it's closer to the original show than THE RETURN, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stefancos said:

Isnt the movie a very different animal from either show? So what is it that defines Twin Peaks?

 

Very different, indeed. 

 

The last time the fans and the critical fraternity conveyed their discontent with a Twin Peaks follow-up, Lynch spat his dummy out and went on to declare Twin Peaks "dead as a doornail".

 

That could still happen again, but let's hope not hey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/08/2017 at 0:40 PM, Stefancos said:

 

Episode 13 was certainly a step up from last weeks. mainly because some excellent stuff with Mr. C. 

The arm wrestling scene was great. And the little interragation with Ray seems like it might put Mr. C on route to Twin Peaks soon.

 

 

The first part of the episode had a strong Tarantino feeling to it, I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stefancos said:

You want more after this? Really?

 

No I meant I hope Lynch doesn't throw another paddy over it if some people say they were disappointed.

 

..

 

Weird headline which doesn't seem to match the statements made in the actual article:

 

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/08/twin-peaks-revival-next-season

 

I interpret this as "if it's deemed a success then more could be on the cards."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally watched the last episode. It's decent I guess. My patience for it all is just wearing thin.

 

The Roadhouse song at the end did put a smile on my face though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We caught up to the latest episode too.  Are they just throwing all continuity out the window now?

 

Coop and the casino brother's waltz into his work clearly straight on from their scenes 2 episodes ago, yet last week we saw a scene with Coop at home in the backyard with his kid.

 

Bobby tells Norma they found something of his father's "today", yet that was 3-4 episodes ago, and Bobby had that whole night sequence with the kid who shot at the diner and he had to go to the van and talked to the lady yelling in the car behind it, etc.


WTF is going on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Quintus said:

This stuff has been being openly debated elsewhere for weeks; people are theorising that events aren't necessarily taking place in the same timeline.

 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, I mean, what's the point of pausing the story of Coop with the casino brothers to show him placing baseball with his kid one week instead, then returning to it later.


What's the point of pausing the story of Bobby, Truman, and Hawk following leads left by Bobby's dad to show Bobby helping out when the restaurant is shot at, then returning to it weeks later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh. This show really doesn't need 18 episodes to tell the story it means to. So far, the first few and episode 8 are the keepers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jay said:

Right, I mean, what's the point of pausing the story of Coop with the casino brothers to show him placing baseball with his kid one week instead, then returning to it later.


What's the point of pausing the story of Bobby, Truman, and Hawk following leads left by Bobby's dad to show Bobby helping out when the restaurant is shot at, then returning to it weeks later.

 

Of all the issues, none of these actually bother me. It's the hours and hours of nothingness in between that have been the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.