Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
eyeboogers
Posts: 409
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby eyeboogers » Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:50 pm

Exactly what Reindeer said. I completely understand where you are coming from Audrey, but I don't think it is meant to be mean spirited - I think it's meant to haunt. And nobody - as in nobody, has said that this was the final word for Twin Peaks or Special agent Dale Cooper.
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1900
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Audrey Horne » Sat Jan 20, 2018 4:19 pm

I can absolutely see your points, believe me. And as soon as it ended, I was shocked there wasn’t a gotcha at play and an immediate announcement “to be continued...”. And I’m not a coherent writer anymore to articulate what I meant by Cooper nit warranting such an ending. I know he’s flawed, and that should be part of the character of course, but to me though deeply invested as a full blooded character, the Peaks creations still work for me more as television tropes where they can then pull the rug out with real pathos. But here, after his wake up in the previous episode feels more like Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown. It felt more like a cheap gimmick. I sat with three other big Peakers in the online fandom and we all looked at one another like Is that all there is? And not urged to open our minds about it and explore but more a ho hum... but that’s just me and kinda voicing why I’m so disappointed with Lynch and Frost. Still love them and think they’re great guys, but just disappointed in their philosophy.

Something also rubs me the wrong way about taking a character like Audrey and putting her through the ringer and leaving her in limbo... not of course if it’s a cliffhanger. It’s like silencing a beacon of a strong woman protagonist that was a semi symbol of the nineties and punishing her.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
Aqwell
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:03 am
Location: Far from here

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Aqwell » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:46 pm

eyeboogers wrote:
Aqwell wrote:That was the whole point! Those who do not learn from their past mistakes (Cooper) are doomed to repeat them. Lynch & Frost plays around with deux ex machina - making Aristotle turn in his grave and purposefully creating (temporary) audience frustration, until episode 18 explains why it had to be that way.
I never doubted it was intented, but from my point of view, the only mistake Cooper could have done was trying to flee his doppelganger instead of facing him at the end of season 2. In The Return the occasion was not even given to him. Cooper is the perfect hero, too good to be true as it would seem. Laura is the one lost in a cycle of darkness and death. Maybe trying to get her back where she belongs was a huge mistake, like us hoping to find our way back to Twin Peaks, but it's an honest one.
I tried to rewatch some episodes recently, for most of it I just skip the boring/awkward stuff, but when Kyle McLachlan is on screen I'm always thinking there was potential for something better. Coop never really came back to Twin Peaks, he is trapped somewhere else further in time, like all of us.
User avatar
Venus
Posts: 457
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:10 pm
Location: England

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Venus » Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:19 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:Audrey — I disagree that Dale is unworthy of this type of exploration. One of the most fascinating things about this season to me is that L/F made the seemingly counterintuitive decision to give the Diane Selwyn/Nikki Grace/Fred Madison treatment to a character who, over the course of 29 episodes of the original show, seemed to be largely infalliable, and more archetype than human — a nerd’s version of James Bond, as it were. How on Earth could fragmenting such a psychologically straightforward character make for compelling television? The fact that they made it work (in shockingly timely fashion) with an exploration of how even the most noble male impulses can have toxic results was riveting to me. Of course, as Mark has pointed out, the foundation was laid in S2 and MLMT, but this season took it to another level entirely. Dale isn’t infallible, nor should he be, because we are ALL flawed and imperfect creatures.

I also disagree that the show is “mean spirited.” I viewed so much of it as deeply humanistic, albeit in a different way from the original and FWWM. For instance, I just watched Part 16 today on Blu Ray, and wept at the scene where Dale tells Janey-E and Sonny Jim, “I’ll walk through that red door, and I’ll be home for good.” To me, that scene says so much about Dale. He loves this family and is providing for them by creating a new Dougie, but he knows that life will never be his, as much as he wants it (echoes of the tape he made in Episode 18, wondering if he is too broken to eventually have a family). He walks away from something beautiful and comfortable to do what he views as the right thing — saving Laura — even if he is wrong. To me, the fact that the season didn't end with Cooper swooping in to save the day while munching a donut makes the piece MORE human, not less. I love the complexity it gave to Dale, and I think it complements rather than diminishes the original.

Are the current states of some characters sad? Sure; but this is a franchise where the inciting incident was the brutal rape and murder of a teenage girl. I don’t think some melancholy and exploration of mortality is unwarranted, particularly when handled with humanity, as I believe it was here. And there is plenty of joy: Dougie, Ed & Norma, Betty & Bobby — heck, even Chantal & Hutch’s moments of casual marital bliss in the truck eating Wendy’s. In a lot of ways, I think this show was far cheerier than Episode 14, Episode 29 or FWWM.


Very interesting Mr R as always, and very articulate. I must say though that this I the one time I've not thought fair enough, you have a point. Maybe it is the Pollyanna in me but in a world as bleak as it is, why can't we have a hero. Why does our 'hero' i.e. Coop, have to be knocked down as I felt he was in TP3. It's actually a very British thing to do. Happens all the time over here in the press - build 'em up to knock 'em down. Coop was as he was for two seasons. I don't know about you but I have never got bored of watching him in those seasons. You're right - he's not infallible but he's not infallible in the first two seasons either. Yes they gave the character complexity but Imo, they lost Dale this time round. Literally lost him on the page. They didn't stay true to his character because they didn't give it a chance to shine for the majority of the new show whilst he was in his vegetative state.

That said though I would be intrigued about where they would take it next if it continued. On a journey to find himself again maybe? Yes the inciting incident of 1&2 was the rape and murder of a young girl and the drama was built around that as the core subject matter, heavy stuff. But Imo the original shows which dealt with it had balance, humanity, humour, intrigue, intelligence and watchability - all things again, Imo, that were sadly lacking in TP3. As for the show being cheerier? I genuinely can't see that.
When Jupiter and Saturn meet...
User avatar
eyeboogers
Posts: 409
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby eyeboogers » Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:33 pm

making Cooper a human being with flaws doesn't have him any less likable or compelling. Even though we have seen the hubris of his savior complex at work, are we rooting for him to find redemption any less? I don't think so. Dale is still good. Everything he has done has been from the best (albeit sometimes misguided) intentions, and no one suffers more from the consequences than him (and Annie Blackburne). The way I see the final scene of the season he also doesn't fail, he is struggling to trust his instincts, but in the end Laura does see clearly and it has a strong effect. The only failure therefore can be that Coop might be headed the way of Philip Jeffries (some level of non-existence) and hadn't poor Laura already suffered enough? Regardless I still want to hear more about Dale Cooper. I still want him to somehow return - not to a past that was already lost, but to some kind of happiness, in which he would have finally learned to face his flaws and stop making the same mistakes. I miss happy season 2 Coop even more after TPTR not less, let's see where he might be found.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:29 pm

Audrey Horne wrote:Something also rubs me the wrong way about taking a character like Audrey and putting her through the ringer and leaving her in limbo... not of course if it’s a cliffhanger. It’s like silencing a beacon of a strong woman protagonist that was a semi symbol of the nineties and punishing her.


I completely understand your feelings, particularly in regards to Audrey. On this rewatch I’ve been making a conscious effort to watch Audrey’s scenes with her ‘90s character in mind, and it is difficult to watch her reduced to an unhappy woman in a loveless marriage. There are also a lot of women on this show written and played in a stereotypically shrewish way, but the interesting thing is that I feel most of those women (Doris, Janey-E, Sylvia, Carrie the mother of the kid who fires the gun) are justified in their anger when they yell. In contrast, Audrey comes across to me as utterly unreasonable and cruel. While we of course don’t know the details of Audrey & Charlie’s situation (or, indeed, whether or not Charlie actually exists), on its face, it seems like Audrey is kind of an awful person for berating her spouse because he is too tired to go searching for her lover. Picture that scenario with the gender roles reversed, and how sickening and abusive that is. I mean, who does that? Certainly not the type of person I would have wanted good-hearted, dreamy Audrey to grow up to become. What I love, though, is the moment of catharsis when she hears her song, and it awakens something of her old childlike self. I think we all, to one extent or another, have turned into someone unrecognizable to our teenage selves, perhaps having been stripped of some of our idealism and dreams, perhaps embittered to some degree by circumstance and our choices — “who I was, I will never be again” — but how beautiful is it that she can hear that song and at least momentarily become freed from all the baggage of the intervening years? How wonderful would it be to suddenly feel like a teenager again, lost in a song and in a dream? And I also gets goosebumps from the moment when she and Charlie enter the Roadhouse as Vedder sings. The resonance of those lyrics to her character is so beautiful.

Of course, there is then that final scene...and I’m still not sure what to make of it, beyond Audrey’s own words: “What? What?” I guess the common interpretation is that she’s in some form of psych ward, and TFD seems to support that. If so, I can certainly understand how you could view that as mean-spirited. Honestly, the more I think about it, I sort of wish DKL had just ended the episode on the creepy/beautiful/surreal experience of Audrey dancing and left out the “Twilight Zone”-style stinger. Even with that moment, though, I still think Audrey’s situation is a bit more complicated/ambiguous than her simply having hallucinated her scenes from the loony bin. Flesh-and-blood people discuss the fact that Billy is missing (I know people have rationalized that Audrey mighy have heard her caretakers discussing this and incorporated it into her fantasy). Given the ambiguous relationship between reality and dreams in the new season, and particularly the odd focus on Billy as seemingly some sort of symbol or touchstone in the narrative, I choose to believe Audrey & Charlie’s scenes are somehow “real” on some plane of reality, and there is more to Audrey’s existence than sitting in a white room talking to herself. Stuff like the references to Ghostwood and to the “contract,” and particularly the “story” reference and the connection to the EotA, make me think that Audrey may have crossed over into the Lodge (as we know Diane did after being raped), and may have even made some sacrifice to help Dale. That latter bit is all rank speculation, of course, but I do like the “room to dream” that DKL left us, and I choose to take a more hopeful view of Audrey’s situation than the (admittedly dismal) face-value approach. But again, I totally get where you’re coming from. I also understand those who believe DKL was punishing Fenn for being difficult (the treatment of Donna in TFD feels even more like Mark oddly punishing the character for the actor’s transgressions).
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:57 pm

Venus wrote:Very interesting Mr R as always, and very articulate. I must say though that this I the one time I've not thought fair enough, you have a point. Maybe it is the Pollyanna in me but in a world as bleak as it is, why can't we have a hero. Why does our 'hero' i.e. Coop, have to be knocked down as I felt he was in TP3. It's actually a very British thing to do. Happens all the time over here in the press - build 'em up to knock 'em down. Coop was as he was for two seasons. I don't know about you but I have never got bored of watching him in those seasons. You're right - he's not infallible but he's not infallible in the first two seasons either. Yes they gave the character complexity but Imo, they lost Dale this time round. Literally lost him on the page. They didn't stay true to his character because they didn't give it a chance to shine for the majority of the new show whilst he was in his vegetative state.


I get what you’re saying completely. I rewatched Parts 16 and 17 over the weekend, and I found mysef rewinding the few scenes of Kyle playing “classic-style” Cooper over and over, wanting to savor every second we got of that because there were so few. It is frustrating — but it was consciously meant to be so, for an artistic purpose. It’s funny that with all the hush-hush spoilerphobia, the one thing we were all confident we would get from the new show was Dale Cooper, from that first press image released by Showtime of a black-suited Kyle drinking coffee. And ultimately, while in one sense we got more Cooper than we ever could have imagined (the jury is still out on how many fractured versions of him we saw), we got so very little of the Dale Cooper we thought we knew.

I also suspect the unavailability of Ontkean probably led DKL to amplify certain themes of “you can’t go back” that were already present in the script. I think we might have gotten some Coop-and-Harry banter and a bit more Classic Dale if Ontkean had been on board. Without that essential piece of the “classic TP formula,” I suspect that DKL fully committed to the Sunset Blvd. theme that “the old team back together” is a sad, unattainable illusion. This is pure speculation, of course...bur DAMN, I’d love to see that script.

Ultimately, I love what L/F did in terms of subverting expectations, but a part of me certainly can’t help wishing the parties involved HAD seized the opportunity to do the easier, more obvious thing, and have Kyle play the character we remember and love for a longer stretch of the show. I can certainly relate to your POV, because no matter how many times other posters on here try to sell me on the “green glove battle” with analyses of how it brilliantly subverted narrative expectations, all I can see is a poorly-executed CGI action sequence unworthy of the franchise. I comprehend the excellent defenses of the scene that people that have made, and can appreciate the scene on an academic level from those perspectives, but it still just flat out doesn’t work for me (I watched it again today). Obviously, that’s how you feel about the treatment of Dale in TP:TR. You get it, you understand what they were going for, and it doesn’t work for you.

As for the show being cheerier? I genuinely can't see that.


Well, I said it was cheerier than Episodes 14 and 29 and FWWM — DKL’s last three directorial endeavors in the franchise prior to the new show. And I stand by that. Those three works are pretty damn bleak (the only case you can make for FWWM is its ending is arguably more upbeat than TP:TR’s). But I agree that compared to the original series overall, particularly the episodes with little Lynch involvement, the new show is undeniably more dour.
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1900
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Audrey Horne » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:35 pm

Reindeer, as usual you’re an excellent read.

However, you’re examples of Audrey are nothing that I have issue with. I think they’re actually some of the most successful parts of the new show. It’s exactly what should be happening to a beloved character in an ongoing saga. Introduced them back in a terrible situation so you’re shocked and then tune in again, just like Cooper stuck in a limbo.., though I’d say Dougie went on about six or seven episodes too long.i mean we don’t want good things to happen to our protagonists DURING the story, or what’s the point, right? Story is conflict. Audrey’s dance and mirror moment was thrilling because you’re immediately revisiting her earlier scenes and looking at them in new context... nothing you were watching previously is what you thought. Perfect. And also perfect that it went hand in hand with Coooer waking up, and that a character like Diane had a similar predicament like Audrey and we just witnessed her horrible fate... so that’s all gangbusters going into a finale. The stakes are raised and have been earned.

My problem is that the follow up, or more importantly the non follow up reads as nothing but hollow shock value. This is with the knowledge that Mark and David worked on something for years of plotting, and this is their product, meaning they say they have nothing planned beyond this ending. If this was a cliffhanger then it would be bravo, you’ve whetted my appetite with some nitpicking. But that’s not really the case. And what I meant about Audrey and rape is ... well, that’s great in terms of themes and the essence of the original show, especially with a character like Audrey (who worked best when she was a yang to Laura’s yang) and by the Coooer character ( because that was arguably the most treasured pairings along with Coooer and Truman.). So we’ve got something pretty meaty here that should be explored whether in hopeful resolution or even darker consequences. But there’s a casualness to this that’s seems irresponsible or not even on Lynch and Frost’s radar that I find offputting. I think I’m being pretty objective about it, and would say the same thing if the rape had been of Shelly, Donna or Annie, etc.

I came away from this that Coooer as a person wasn’t really explored, human dynamics weren’t really explored, instead everything replaced by metaphysics.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:02 pm

Audrey Horne wrote:My problem is that the follow up, or more importantly the non follow up reads as nothing but hollow shock value. This is with the knowledge that Mark and David worked on something for years of plotting, and this is their product, meaning they say they have nothing planned beyond this ending. If this was a cliffhanger then it would be bravo, you’ve whetted my appetite with some nitpicking. But that’s not really the case. And what I meant about Audrey and rape is ... well, that’s great in terms of themes and the essence of the original show, especially with a character like Audrey (who worked best when she was a yang to Laura’s yang) and by the Coooer character ( because that was arguably the most treasured pairings along with Coooer and Truman.). So we’ve got something pretty meaty here that should be explored whether in hopeful resolution or even darker consequences. But there’s a casualness to this that’s seems irresponsible or not even on Lynch and Frost’s radar that I find offputting. I think I’m being pretty objective about it, and would say the same thing if the rape had been of Shelly, Donna or Annie, etc.

I came away from this that Coooer as a person wasn’t really explored, human dynamics weren’t really explored, instead everything replaced by metaphysics.


Totally fair. For my part, I view Part 18 as a Rosetta Stone in terms of unlocking what the show is saying about Cooper’s character and about his relationships with women throughout its run (e.g., in Part 17 he looks away when he realizes Naido is Diane — indicating some guilt/culpability in her rape, even if he wasn’t technically responsible — but in Part 18 he coldly and obliviously has sex with Diane anyway, leading her to leave during the night, saying that she doesn’t recognize him anymore. I think there is a sweetness and kindness to Dale, as represented by his Dougie side, but also a singlemindedness and self-absorption that creates some pretty massive blind spots, and I think that’s something a lot of men might learn from). I do think the themes were dealt with, in terms of both Dale’s character and the larger social issues, but it was done in relatively elliptical, oblique, below-the-surface fashion...which is the way DKL has been dealing with themes, on and off, since Eraserhead. That can be intriguing, frustrating, or both at once. I’m personally intrigued by the portion of the iceberg we were given, but I can certainly respect the perspective that it’s irresponsible for male creators to raise issues of rape and then not properly deal with the victims’ perspectives in a more tangible way onscreen (although I do think Dern killed it when confronting Diane’s rape by the doppelganger).
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:37 pm

eyeboogers wrote:In terms of connecting her with the jumping man, many forget that the jumping man also becomes Philip Jeffries (Bowie's actual face) as well in those split-seconds.


I don’t think people forget — I haven’t even heard this before! Do you have a screenshot of a frame you think is Bowie? I just freeze framed the whole thing, and while I saw a few abstract shapes that sort of reminded me of Experiment/Judy (as does Jumping Man’s whole twitchy movement throughout the brief shot), I didn’t see Jeffries anywhere.
User avatar
Snailhead
Posts: 541
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 2:45 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Snailhead » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:25 pm

OK after a few months away from this thing I really like it again... Golly, I've never had such a love/hate relationship with a movie or show before like this! I was really impressed by part 5 and 11 on recent watches. Most surprisingly, I like part 17 now. I'm not crazy about the green glove guy but I will say that they did a great job of portraying BOB in that scene.

But I bet I'll hate it again in 6 months :lol:
Welcome to Canada...
LateReg
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby LateReg » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:11 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
eyeboogers wrote:In terms of connecting her with the jumping man, many forget that the jumping man also becomes Philip Jeffries (Bowie's actual face) as well in those split-seconds.


I don’t think people forget — I haven’t even heard this before! Do you have a screenshot of a frame you think is Bowie? I just freeze framed the whole thing, and while I saw a few abstract shapes that sort of reminded me of Experiment/Judy (as does Jumping Man’s whole twitchy movement throughout the brief shot), I didn’t see Jeffries anywhere.


I also never knew this until it was mentioned here. But then knowing it I randomly noticed his face in the scene without even thinking of it during my last rewatch. However, I would like proof of this as I'm not sure if I was tricked into seeing it or if I actually saw it!
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:32 am

LateReg wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:
eyeboogers wrote:In terms of connecting her with the jumping man, many forget that the jumping man also becomes Philip Jeffries (Bowie's actual face) as well in those split-seconds.


I don’t think people forget — I haven’t even heard this before! Do you have a screenshot of a frame you think is Bowie? I just freeze framed the whole thing, and while I saw a few abstract shapes that sort of reminded me of Experiment/Judy (as does Jumping Man’s whole twitchy movement throughout the brief shot), I didn’t see Jeffries anywhere.


I also never knew this until it was mentioned here. But then knowing it I randomly noticed his face in the scene without even thinking of it during my last rewatch. However, I would like proof of this as I'm not sure if I was tricked into seeing it or if I actually saw it!


I think it’s just Sarah’s face being stretched and morphed, but I’d be happy to be wrong!
LateReg
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby LateReg » Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:36 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
LateReg wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:
I don’t think people forget — I haven’t even heard this before! Do you have a screenshot of a frame you think is Bowie? I just freeze framed the whole thing, and while I saw a few abstract shapes that sort of reminded me of Experiment/Judy (as does Jumping Man’s whole twitchy movement throughout the brief shot), I didn’t see Jeffries anywhere.


I also never knew this until it was mentioned here. But then knowing it I randomly noticed his face in the scene without even thinking of it during my last rewatch. However, I would like proof of this as I'm not sure if I was tricked into seeing it or if I actually saw it!


I think it’s just Sarah’s face being stretched and morphed, but I’d be happy to be wrong!


I should have been more clear, but I can't exactly remember. I saw both their faces, seconds apart. One, then the other. But I can't remember whose I saw first. And like I said, I didn't go back to double check but I swore I saw Bowie's face...but only while remembering that someone said his face was there. Hopefully someone posts a screencap.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:37 pm

LateReg wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:
LateReg wrote:
I also never knew this until it was mentioned here. But then knowing it I randomly noticed his face in the scene without even thinking of it during my last rewatch. However, I would like proof of this as I'm not sure if I was tricked into seeing it or if I actually saw it!


I think it’s just Sarah’s face being stretched and morphed, but I’d be happy to be wrong!


I should have been more clear, but I can't exactly remember. I saw both their faces, seconds apart. One, then the other. But I can't remember whose I saw first. And like I said, I didn't go back to double check but I swore I saw Bowie's face...but only while remembering that someone said his face was there. Hopefully someone posts a screencap.


Oh, I got what you meant! What I meant is, I believe all the human faces in that sequence are Sarah’s — some frames severely distorted almost to the point of unrecognizability. I personally didn’t see anything particularly Bowie-ish to my eye, but I could have missed it. That sequence (like the Experiment in the glass box) is a really fun beautiful freeze frame.

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return (Spoilers)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests