Twin Peaks

Discuss TV shows old and new.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Cde.
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:56 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Twin Peaks

#451 Post by Cde. » Tue May 09, 2017 1:06 pm

whaleallright wrote:why would people want the "mysteries" to be "addressed"?

one of the things I admire about the final cut of Fire Walk with Me is that instead of "clearing up" the dangling plot lines from the series, it mostly, deliriously compounds the confusion.
I don't so much mean explaining things as returning to to those mysteries and deepening them. I like the idea of featuring the more intriguing characters from FWWM.

User avatar
PfR73
Posts: 625
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:07 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#452 Post by PfR73 » Tue May 09, 2017 1:19 pm

Yes, my biggest hope for the new season, before the cast list was released, was for more Sam Stanley.

User avatar
JamesF
Posts: 395
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 1:36 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#453 Post by JamesF » Fri May 12, 2017 6:40 am

Next new trailer - I'm fairly certain the actress at 0:29 is Bonnie Aarons, who played the hobo behind Winkee's in Mulholland Drive, but she's not listed in the big cast list released last year. If it is her, makes you wonder if any other unannounced players are likely to turn up...

oh yeah
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#454 Post by oh yeah » Fri May 12, 2017 7:37 am

Honestly this teaser almost reminds me more of Inland Empire than it does FWWM or the original series. Visually it's rather less conventionally "pleasing" than the previous teasers, and the way he's using digital is actually not THAT far removed from the look of IE. Obviously this is much smoother, sleeker, and more professional and pretty looking but there's still a certain lack of distance between audience and image, almost like Lynch is taking inspiration from the stark, unfiltered CCTV/YouTube/iPhone images we're so inundated by today. Maybe that's a stretch but certainly IE called to mind such formats, as well as the internet itself in the way its narrative took detour after detour into a new story/world, like some distracted person browsing the web -- rabbit holes inside rabbit holes. That kind of complexity would not be surprising to find here, too. Really I suspect that lots of traits on display in IE or post-millenium Lynch generally will be visible here, possibly alienating some fans. Artists evolve, and nothing can stop that, especially with a guy like Lynch. And so it almost seems like even films like FWWM and Lost Highway are quite far from where he's at now, aesthetically. However, I also thought the editing and sound that Lynch did a couple years back on The Missing Pieces was very digital-Lynch/Inland-esque, and I thought it worked great. I'm not much of a fan of that film and just haven't been able to get interested/invested in it the way I have with most of his preceding features, but I think his newer, rawer, even weirder style can certainly be put to effective use.

User avatar
Banasa
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:35 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#455 Post by Banasa » Fri May 12, 2017 9:31 am

hearthesilence wrote:And GRAY. Kinda wish Coop went gray too, now it looks too much like a dye job.
Maybe in Season 3, Bob comes back as Reverse Bob and decides to keep peoples hair a solid color opposed to going grey.

calculus entrophy
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#456 Post by calculus entrophy » Fri May 12, 2017 9:35 am

I agree. One thing that is hard for today's new audiences to comprehend is how conservative the rest of network tv shows were pre-Twin Peaks. If he follows that template into today's completely edgy cable/streaming setting, all bets are off. Or one can hope!

1990

Rank Program Network Rating
1 Cheers NBC 21.3
2 60 Minutes CBS 20.6
3 Roseanne ABC 18.1
4 A Different World NBC 17.5
5 The Cosby Show 17.1
6 Murphy Brown CBS 16.9
7 Empty Nest NBC 16.7
8 America's Funniest Home Videos ABC
9 Monday Night Football 16.6
10 The Golden Girls NBC 16.5

User avatar
Banasa
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:35 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#457 Post by Banasa » Fri May 12, 2017 9:47 am

I apply that logic of how television was too with The Simpsons which I watched when it was at least in its first or second season when it was on. The appeal/disdain of a character like Bart really helps me understand how popular and edgy the show was when it came out.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28514
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#458 Post by domino harvey » Fri May 12, 2017 9:59 am

I don't know, that episode of Empty Nest where David Leisure skins Dreyfuss alive and wears his pelt as a suit was pretty extreme

calculus entrophy
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#459 Post by calculus entrophy » Fri May 12, 2017 10:07 am

I stand corrected. They did break new comedy ground with pre X-Files Duchovney as a cross dressing FBI agent. It was fun for the whole family.

User avatar
swo17
Posts: 13495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Twin Peaks

#460 Post by swo17 » Fri May 12, 2017 10:23 am

domino harvey wrote:I don't know, that episode of Empty Nest where David Leisure skins Dreyfuss alive and wears his pelt as a suit was pretty extreme
To say nothing of that episode of The Cosby Show where Bill Cosby was allowed near women and children.

calculus entrophy
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#461 Post by calculus entrophy » Fri May 12, 2017 10:36 am

And who could forget the top issue of the day, courtesy of the VP boy wonder:

At the end of “Murphy Brown” Season 4, the title character, played by Candice Bergen, gave birth and became a single mother. Quayle criticized the series for “ignoring the importance of fathers by birthing a child alone” and the fifth season premiere of “Murphy Brown” responded to Quayle’s comments.

“It just was a firestorm. It was in campaign coverage for six months after that, and the front page of The New York Times and the Post. That was fairly intense. We had to put security on the tape night of our show for people to go through.”

User avatar
swo17
Posts: 13495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Twin Peaks

#462 Post by swo17 » Fri May 12, 2017 10:50 am

There was also of course the infamous feud between Bush Sr. and The Simpsons.

Fast forward 30 years to Barack Obama endorsing House of Cards...

User avatar
mfunk9786
Posts: 11721
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Twin Peaks

#463 Post by mfunk9786 » Fri May 12, 2017 1:19 pm

Going to enjoy watching these and avoiding any writing about them online. Lynch definitely wasn't made for these times. Why in the world would you write an "X Questions We Want Answered From the New Season of Twin Peaks" article to begin with? Since when is Lynch in the business of answering anything? The beauty of his work is in the amount of questions that are asked and are left to the viewer to answer for themselves, often more with their emotion and instinct than with their logic.

User avatar
teddyleevin
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks

#464 Post by teddyleevin » Fri May 12, 2017 1:26 pm

The cringe-inducing "Get caught up on all your favorite quirky moments from Twin Peakz" listicles have been at an all-time high lately and are only going to get worse. Having billboards with Sheryl Lee's face on 'em in Times Square is wonderful but I guess there's a downside to such northern exposure.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Posts: 11721
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Twin Peaks

#465 Post by mfunk9786 » Fri May 12, 2017 1:30 pm

teddyleevin wrote:I guess there's a downside to such northern exposure.
100 emoji

User avatar
denti alligator
Posts: 2714
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

Re: Twin Peaks

#466 Post by denti alligator » Fri May 12, 2017 1:50 pm

Reminds me of the first audience question at the NY/US premiere of Inland Empire.

Geek in audience: so, um, like, when you first watch Mulholland Drive it seems all, like, convoluted, and, like, the different narrative strands don't quite, um, line up, you know? But then, after repeated viewings you can actually put the pieces together to make a story that is coherent and makes sense, right? Well, um, is that the case with this film, too?

Lynch (with perfect hair): [long silence] [matter of factly] Yeeeeesss.

[silence]

[Next question]

I'm looking forward to the new series but am a bit bummed I couldn't find the time to re-watch the first two seasons and the FWWM. SoI 'll be doing that over the summer, as I watch the first new episodes. It will be a great opportunity to compare in close proximity.

User avatar
kidc85
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:15 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#467 Post by kidc85 » Fri May 12, 2017 4:22 pm

oh yeah wrote:Honestly this teaser almost reminds me more of Inland Empire than it does FWWM or the original series.
I think the most interesting thing so far is the complete lack of Badalamenti's original soundtrack. Who wouldn't get intensely nostalgic at a few notes of the theme? But it's not there. The trailers are giving off a serious 'the Twin Peaks you know isn't coming back' vibe to me. There's obviously no way that it will go full-Inland Empire, not least because Mark Frost is on board as well, but I can't wait to find out what kind of tone the new series is going to take on.

Cde.
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:56 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Twin Peaks

#468 Post by Cde. » Sat May 13, 2017 3:51 am

kidc85 wrote:There's obviously no way that it will go full-Inland Empire, not least because Mark Frost is on board as well, but I can't wait to find out what kind of tone the new series is going to take on.
Variety's big new feature reported that the script Frost and Lynch delivered in January 2015 was around 400 pages. The final show is in 18 hour long parts. This leads me to wonder, is a lot of the final show going to have been conceived of during production or improvised, like Inland Empire?

User avatar
kidc85
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:15 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#469 Post by kidc85 » Sat May 13, 2017 7:07 am

Cde. wrote:around 400 pages.
Not too sure what the significance of this is: how long would you expect a 400 page script to be once filmed?

Cde.
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:56 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Twin Peaks

#470 Post by Cde. » Sat May 13, 2017 7:12 am

kidc85 wrote:
Cde. wrote:around 400 pages.
Not too sure what the significance of this is: how long would you expect a 400 page script to be once filmed?
Usually, a page is expected to represent approximately one minute of screen time. So, seven hours or so. It's apparently based on this number that Showtime initially ordered nine episodes, but Lynch demanded the freedom to do more, and this was the reason for his briefly exiting the project.

Even if there's a lot of very slow or wordless sequences, the discrepancy between these two numbers is huge.

oh yeah
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#471 Post by oh yeah » Sat May 13, 2017 9:24 am

kidc85 wrote:
oh yeah wrote:Honestly this teaser almost reminds me more of Inland Empire than it does FWWM or the original series.
I think the most interesting thing so far is the complete lack of Badalamenti's original soundtrack. Who wouldn't get intensely nostalgic at a few notes of the theme? But it's not there. The trailers are giving off a serious 'the Twin Peaks you know isn't coming back' vibe to me. There's obviously no way that it will go full-Inland Empire, not least because Mark Frost is on board as well, but I can't wait to find out what kind of tone the new series is going to take on.
I agree it's odd and unfortunate that there's been no Badalamenti in these teasers with actual footage, but there was an earlier promo which did feature what sounded like a re-worked, new version of (I think) Laura Palmer's Theme. It was just a brief, minimal thing with the music clip playing against some moody footage of a dark forest (not actual series footage, I'm certain). So that promo, plus some things I've read from Lynch or others, do imply Badalamenti will be a pivotal part of S3 -- but, he might not be nearly as pivotal as he was in the original series. I wouldn't be surprised if he scored only about half of the new episodes (maybe less, even), with Lynch himself and a wide variety of musicians (e.g. Trent Reznor) scoring the remainder.

I'm sure Lynch still loves and is on good terms with Angelo, but given his deep dive into the music world in the past decade, it's not surprising he'd want more of his own compositions or ones from other (mostly newer) artists that he admires to be featured in the show. And the fact that Badalamenti didn't compose anything for Inland Empire - a big departure for Lynch, just like that film's low-grade digital look and lack of much pre-planned structure or a script - only makes it more likely that he may not be as dominant on the soundtrack for S3 as he was for the original series and film. This would be "such a sadness," as Lynch would say, and not because of some desire to replicate the magic of the original series, some need to have every original player from cast to crew return dutifully to their given role. Rather, it would simply be a great loss because Badalamenti is such an incredibly great talent, and so obviously suited for anything Peaks. Indeed, I'd argue that almost all of his best compositions are from either FWWM or the series. The scores for Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, and especially The Straight Story (simply gorgeous) and Mulholland Drive (the main theme alone makes it classic) are all wonderful... but that pretty brief window from about 1989-91 just yielded an astonishing number of masterful pieces for both the series and especially the film. So I just don't think a mixture of Lynch and a variety of other artists's music is likely to compete with the singular sound Badalamenti provides.

All that said, though, it neither surprises nor bothers me one bit that no teaser yet has gone the route of easy nostalgia at all. It truly does seem like Lynch is saying - get ready, folks, because this will not be a simple replica of something I did over 25 years ago. Or, to be lame for a minute - that gum we like so much has indeed come back in style, but that style is a pretty radical departure from the previous iteration. Getting Big Red when you're expecting Juicy Fruit, if you will. But seriously, this latest teaser has very strongly solidified the suspicion I've had that these episodes will perhaps similar to FWWM in certain ways, but in many ways more akin to Inland Empire's unusual approach. I applaud this even if the season turns out to disappoint greatly; no truly great filmmaker (or any artist) can or would attempt to basically time-travel to an earlier stage in their development just to please some viewers. Nope - Lynch follows his muse, or whatever it is, and he doesn't look back or recreate past efforts. He can't help but be constantly looking forward, really.

I will admit that my excitement for and confidence in the new season, sky-high following the previous two teasers of new footage, did dip just a slight bit after this latest preview. I just worry that we'll get the flaws of Inland, the messiness and almost arbitrary sense of structure (or lack thereof) compared to other Lynch films which are really quite thoughtfully structured despite being ostensibly intuitive and non-traditional and often non-linear, etc. But yes, having Frost on board - a talented writer who I still don't find terribly interesting without Lynch to balance him out - would seem to indicate that this likely won't be totally out-there nor disappointinly undercooked like post-Mulholland Lynch works have tended to seem.

User avatar
Finch
Posts: 2762
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Twin Peaks

#472 Post by Finch » Sun May 14, 2017 5:30 am

So, Twin Peaks returns next Sunday and I have no idea what to expect, and that's the beauty of it. Will it blow people's minds again like it did in 1990? Perhaps, perhaps not. It will inevitably disappoint some people (though hopefully not everyone) but that's just how it goes. I do despair though at the fans who already gripe that "if it's anything like Fire Walk With Me, it's not going to be Peaks". Fire Walk With Me is Twin Peaks from a specific perspective, and while it has three or four scenes that I don't like or find effective, it's easily better than the second season (Lynch's three episodes excepted) and some episodes of the first (for my money, it's Lynch's best feature after Mulholland Drive & Eraserhead).

What makes me hopeful for season three is that Lynch and Frost wrote the entire thing and Lynch directed every second of it. Other directors did terrific episodes (Tina Rathborne with episode 4; Stephen Gylenhaal's episode 27 was the best directed episode of the second season outside of Lynch's) but with Lynch directing, you knew you were in for something particular special when one of his episodes came up (episode 8 is perhaps slightly less great than the rest but episode 14 just about eclipses episode 29 as the series' best to date). With Lynch directing every episode of season three, this season has the potential to be utterly amazing from start to end. Is it May 21 yet? And who else is staying up until 2am to watch it on Sky Atlantic?

Zot!
Posts: 1240
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Twin Peaks

#473 Post by Zot! » Mon May 15, 2017 3:20 am

My worst tendencies want it to be exactly like the original season. But thats nostalgia. It really helps that all the characters have aged, as it really demands that change is necessary. Im rewatching the original now, and it's striking how much of it is really built around the timing and structure of network TV of the day. Something that Is truly antiquated. I cant see that format being preserved, even though the original was also quite nostalgic in terms of its themes, music, clothes, etc...
Whatever form it takes, I am very excited.

User avatar
med
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:58 pm

Re: Twin Peaks

#474 Post by med » Mon May 15, 2017 8:18 am

Zot! wrote:Im rewatching the original now, and it's striking how much of it is really built around the timing and structure of network TV of the day. Something that Is truly antiquated.
People slag on the second season—not without justification—but one of the things I was thinking about while recently working my way through that season was that even if Lynch didn't have to bow to network demands about the show's content AND the show wasn't cancelled, the series would likely have started to sag under the rigors of a 22-episode season for however many more seasons it may have run. That's a lot of airtime to fill.

Which is just one of the many reasons I'm excited for this new season. 18 episodes and that's it.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Posts: 11721
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Twin Peaks

#475 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon May 15, 2017 11:18 am

Does anyone have any predictions as to what the narrative structure of this season will be? 18 episodes is a whole lot of material. I have to imagine it's going to center around another happening in Twin Peaks, likely involving a new set of young people, that brings Agent Cooper back in (or perhaps he merely lives there and is not in the FBI any longer at all). I mean, we still have to parse what happened to him after the finale, but something tells me that Lynch isn't interested in bridging the narrative gap between there and the current day.

I trust David Lynch more than any auteur on the planet to do this correctly, particularly in the watered down field of television, but we're less than a week away and I'm having a hard time even imagining what's in store.

Post Reply