Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
waferwhitemilk
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:18 am

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

Postby waferwhitemilk » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:05 am

Rhodes wrote:If this were true, why didn't he just write a popular, fan-service script?

He could have written a more popular, more commercially viable script in 10% of his time-investment.

You say that as if writing a commercially viable script that pleases the fans would be the easiest thing to do, but i disagree and counterask: if it was that easy to come up with a commercial script that pleases fan why doesn't everyone do it? My opinion: there is an arty creative approach and there is an artisanal crafty approach. Both take talent and time to do well. Lynch's mistake was going with the arty creative approach for The Return, where he tried to again be so different and weird and creative that he would revolutionize tv a second time. However we're 25+ years further down the road now and compared to the barren landscape of the late 80s there is now such an incredible amount of offbeat, weird, creative shows and visuals all around us, that the correct way to tackle a reboot like this would have been less ambitious in the arty approach but doubledown on the artisinal approach: show us the craft of a team of people who know their material inside out and have honed their skills through time. Sadly, The Return was none of that, from the cheap digital look to all the sloppy inconsistencies.
mlsstwrt
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 12:35 am

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

Postby mlsstwrt » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:16 am

First, I think it's a shame if posters here are going into other threads and mocking fans of The Return. I feel like it's fine to express those views here because the thread is pretty clearly defined in its title. Enter at your own risk and all that.

I'm not complaining about people criticising this group, outside of this thread. Of course they have every right to do that. I find it a bit weird when they do it IN THIS THREAD. That's surely deliberately antagonistic. The reasons given are always quite laughable though. The only real way that people have found to attack this group is by making the false argument that we're not happy because we didn't get a warm cherry pie version of Twin Peaks, a straightforward continuation of the original. We keep making this same point. That is NOT what we wanted. We just didn't want an incoherent mess. We keep getting asked, well what would have made you happy? I don't fucking know, I'm not getting paid to write and direct movies. Like it's our job to say what we would have been happy with?! To make this binary though, the only choices were what we got or some saccharine and unimaginative nostalgia fest is pathetic in its oversimplification. We wanted something good, not a cynical cash grab.

I loved that post ABR. And I happen to agree with it. Just imagine - you make a work whose very point is to antagonise an audience. Then the audience showers you with praise, calling every episode genius. How would you feel about that? How would you feel if you spit in someone's face and their reaction wasn't to punch you as hard as possible but lick up that spit while purring, 'Mmmmmm..... delicious.'

That's how I feel about this. I wouldn't post it outside of this thread because I appreciate it's offensive to fans. But it is how I feel about this and I'm interested in discussing it with OTHER PEOPLE WHO FEEL THE SAME WAY. Not out to offend anyone. There is no way Lynch would make this and not be conscious about how much it would piss people off. I don't think he would be at all surprised by this thread. Maybe he would be surprised by the threads calling this the greatest work ever produced and I can only imagine it would increase his epic cynicism even further.
User avatar
waferwhitemilk
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:18 am

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

Postby waferwhitemilk » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:21 am

mlsstwrt wrote:Just imagine - you make a work whose very point is to antagonise an audience. Then the audience showers you with praise, calling every episode genius. How would you feel about that? How would you feel if you spit in someone's face and their reaction wasn't to punch you as hard as possible but lick up that spit while purring, 'Mmmmmm..... delicious.'

That's the funniest part imo.. it's like troll vs troll! Lynch trying to troll the TP fans by making a deliberately shitty show and the fans trolling him right back by saying it's the best thing he ever did!!
User avatar
powerleftist
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:40 pm

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

Postby powerleftist » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:23 am

David Lynch didn't even bother to read Frost's book (he said it himself). That's how much he cared for a coherent story. Every fan has put more thought and hours thinking and discussing this show than the man himself. The reason why this show has been unpredictable it's because it just didn't make sense. Breaking Bad was unpredictable because the writers spent a lot of time and effort on thinking creative ways to solve plot arcs. The Return was unpredictable because it was just a collection of random vignettes.

For instance: why did Sarah Palmer freak out upon seeing the beef jerky? David Lynch doesn't care. It was never intended to make sense. It's just a cool thing that happens, and that's it. There is no deeper meaning, no connection to other events. It really is just Sarah freaking out on beef jerky. So fans can make anything of it and can discuss it for years: since it has no meaning, it can have any meaning, which makes the discussion endless.
User avatar
snusmumrik
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:13 pm

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

Postby snusmumrik » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:39 am

mlsstwrt wrote:The only real way that people have found to attack this group is by making the false argument that we're not happy because we didn't get a warm cherry pie version of Twin Peaks, a straightforward continuation of the original.


I'm not sure about that. In fact, the only person I've seen arguing with you guys in this particular thread (some months ago, don't remember the username) was just trying to make you calm down and not expect anything more extraordinary than original Twin Peaks.

On the other hand, there is a perpetual sentiment in this thread that claims we - people who like The Return - are somewhat delusional and just pretend to like it, and it's objectively bad because John and Jane are offended by Lynch's treatment of gender issues, or because the show is not "warm" enough, or because there's not enough of Badalamenti's music, or because there's so much of other music, etc., etc. Don't get me wrong, there's some legitimate criticism in this thread, and the show is no masterpiece for sure, but 90% of the posts here are just people being offended or pissed off by the fact it simply isn't what they expected it to be.
Julee Cruise wrote:Fkin keyboard, I Yelled my Head off in Anger!
User avatar
powerleftist
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:40 pm

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

Postby powerleftist » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:41 am

snusmumrik wrote:90% of the posts here are just people being offended or pissed off of the fact it simply isn't what they expected it to be.


That is just not true.

Part 8 was unexpected but delightful. Sarah eating a neck was unexpected but delightful. The Arm turned into a tree was unexpected but delightful.
Last edited by powerleftist on Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
David Locke
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:24 pm

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

Postby David Locke » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:42 am

The amount of Gordon Cole in The Return does strike me as pretty excessive and self-indulgent on Lynch's part, in retrospect. He's portrayed in such a flattering light, unsurprisingly - look at the beautiful women he beds! Look at how even Tammy makes goo-goo eyes at him! Did anyone notice that, in Part 17? After the cringe-y "You've gone soft in your old age" / "Not where it counts, buddy" exchange, we cut to a reaction shot of Tammy, and she's smiling and looking at Cole as if she wants to fuck him right then and there. Like, it's a ridiculously over-the-top "oooh, sexy" kind of reaction. Very silly. I enjoyed a lot of the Albert/Gordon/Tammy/Diane team this season but after around Part 11 they, or Cole, got a bit dull. If you think about it, they spent the entire Parts 9 through 17 basically locked up in that Buckhorn hotel! Overall Cole was just used much better in the original series - sparingly, so as to be more effective. I don't like the fact that he could almost be considered a protagonist in TR, or maybe one of the five or so biggest characters in terms of screentime.
mlsstwrt
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 12:35 am

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

Postby mlsstwrt » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:47 am

snusmumrik wrote:
mlsstwrt wrote:The only real way that people have found to attack this group is by making the false argument that we're not happy because we didn't get a warm cherry pie version of Twin Peaks, a straightforward continuation of the original.


I'm not sure about that. In fact, the only person I've seen arguing with you guys in this particular thread (some months ago, don't remember the username) was just trying to make you calm down and not expect anything more extraordinary than original Twin Peaks.

On the other hand, there is a perpetual sentiment in this thread that claims we - people who like The Return - are somewhat delusional and just pretend to like it, and it's objectively bad because John and Jane are offended by Lynch's treatment of gender issues, or because the show is not "warm" enough, or because there's not enough of Badalamenti's music, or because there's so much of other music, etc., etc. Don't get me wrong, there's some legitimate criticism in this thread, and the show is no masterpiece for sure, but 90% of the posts here are just people being offended or pissed off by the fact it simply isn't what they expected it to be.


I've read every post in this thread and I don't agree with the above. I haven't given much thought to gender issues and am certainly not going to dislike a show because it's not politically correct. I think to say there is 'some legitimate criticism' is not correct. There is a great deal of extremely coherent and legitimate criticism. And to say that the worst we have had to endure in this thread has been one guy trying to get us to calm down is disingenuous.

I keep asking the question as to why people who love The Return bother to post here at all. Haven't received one response to this. Whenever I ask the question it gets ignored.
User avatar
snusmumrik
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:13 pm

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

Postby snusmumrik » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:47 am

powerleftist wrote:
snusmumrik wrote:
mlsstwrt wrote:90% of the posts here are just people being offended or pissed off of the fact it simply isn't what they expected it to be.


That is just not true.

Part 8 was unexpected but delightful. Sarah eating a neck was unexpected but delightful. The Arm turned into a tree was unexpected but delightful.


Again, I'm not saying people in this thread are wrong or they all feel the same, or something like that. Just pointing out the general discourse (hence "90%").
Julee Cruise wrote:Fkin keyboard, I Yelled my Head off in Anger!
User avatar
boske
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

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

Postby boske » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:03 am

Myself, I have long stopped reading the episode and other threads, let alone post in them, and forget about criticizing the show there, never done that. We have had this thread for it as a sort of a safe haven. Have some profoundly disappointed folks ventured there and said a few words? I have no idea. For the record, I did vote in that poll, I am one of these 20 or so people who ended up hating the show.

Anyway, I do not live in town where I spent most of my youth. I was there once a few years ago. yes the buildings are still there, there are a few new ones here and there, and I did not see anybody familiar. It is as if I visited another dimension that is strikingly similar and yet profoundly (here's the word!) different. So you cannot really go back, I did not need TR to tell me that. What I did not want though is to spend 18 hours in the sewage system underneath the director's mansion with just a flashlight in my hand. Can these people coming here in waves simply get it, once and for all? Please read this thread a bit more, it is hard to repeat ourselves each time. It is as if we need a ReadMeFirst.txt that should be posted somewhere.

Finally, I had the soundtracks preordered. As much as I'd like to get those few Angelo's songs, I cancelled the order last night, that's my message. And I am cancelling the subscription this month too. I will not be watching TR again, and will definitely not be getting it on disc.
User avatar
snusmumrik
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:13 pm

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

Postby snusmumrik » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:09 am

mlsstwrt wrote:I think to say there is 'some legitimate criticism' is not correct. There is a great deal of extremely coherent and legitimate criticism.


There is, indeed, there were some posts a month ago. Now try to find them among all the "Lynch betrayed me, I want my honest American money back" trash of the last few pages.


mlsstwrt wrote:And to say that the worst we have had to endure in this thread has been one guy trying to get us to calm down is disingenuous.

I keep asking the question as to why people who love The Return bother to post here at all. Haven't received one response to this. Whenever I ask the question it gets ignored


No, I legitimately haven't seen anything in this thread that could be labeled disrespectful to the disappointed from TR - granted, I haven't read everything, but I've read most of it. Now, if you view this thread as some kind of haven where nobody with a differing opinion is allowed to tread - sorry, but I can't respect that.

P. S. Please, don't get me wrong, I don't seek confrontation - it was mostly the "The only real way that people have found to attack this group is by making the false argument that we're not happy because we didn't get a warm cherry pie version of Twin Peaks" part that made me comment on your post.
Julee Cruise wrote:Fkin keyboard, I Yelled my Head off in Anger!
User avatar
David Locke
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:24 pm

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

Postby David Locke » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:10 am

I tried to watch Inland Empire last night (had seen it actually 3 times before, but years ago)... couldn't finish it. Got to 2 hours in, will have to watch the rest soon, but man - IMO at least The Return wasn't that shoddy! Certainly aesthetically, IE is so amateurish in sound and image and even a lot of the acting, it feels like a student film shot on a 2003 Sony handi-cam or whatever and I've just never been able to get into that. It has standout scenes throughout but it's 3 hours so, whatever. But the flaws of IE are present in TR, even if it's a lot slicker and better overall. Basically since going digital Lynch has lost a lot of his craftsmanship and more exacting nature, and he's been content to just get lazy and accept weak substitutes for the real thing. IE is way more extreme than TR but it's still a warning that Lynch totally crossed the threshold into almost structure-less, self-indulgent projects. As much as I like or love many parts of TR (and thus am much more positive on it than most of this thread's regulars I guess), I still think it's like night and day looking at the brilliance in form and content of BV, FWWM, LH, TSS, MD... and then TR or IE. Celluloid inspired a certain discipline in Lynch, I suspect, as I've said before. Without a net and with his digital cameras he just goes wild.
User avatar
boske
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

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

Postby boske » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:12 am

David Locke wrote:The amount of Gordon Cole in The Return does strike me as pretty excessive and self-indulgent on Lynch's part, in retrospect. He's portrayed in such a flattering light, unsurprisingly - look at the beautiful women he beds! Look at how even Tammy makes goo-goo eyes at him! Did anyone notice that, in Part 17? After the cringe-y "You've gone soft in your old age" / "Not where it counts, buddy" exchange, we cut to a reaction shot of Tammy, and she's smiling and looking at Cole as if she wants to fuck him right then and there. Like, it's a ridiculously over-the-top "oooh, sexy" kind of reaction.

Yes, saw that too. Just imagine how that scene was being directed: "Thrysta :-), you now look at the camera and appear subtly agitated, yes, good, good, like that". What a joke.
User avatar
David Locke
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:24 pm

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

Postby David Locke » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:16 am

boske wrote:
David Locke wrote:The amount of Gordon Cole in The Return does strike me as pretty excessive and self-indulgent on Lynch's part, in retrospect. He's portrayed in such a flattering light, unsurprisingly - look at the beautiful women he beds! Look at how even Tammy makes goo-goo eyes at him! Did anyone notice that, in Part 17? After the cringe-y "You've gone soft in your old age" / "Not where it counts, buddy" exchange, we cut to a reaction shot of Tammy, and she's smiling and looking at Cole as if she wants to fuck him right then and there. Like, it's a ridiculously over-the-top "oooh, sexy" kind of reaction.

Yes, saw that too. Just imagine how that scene was being directed: "Thrysta :-), you now look at the camera and appear subtly agitated, yes, good, good, like that". What a joke.

:lol: At least TR didn't end with Cole/Lynch waking up suddenly in bed after another of his Monica Belluci dreams, the sheets soaking wet :shock:

Remember, it could always be worse...
User avatar
BOB1
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Poland

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

Postby BOB1 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:17 am

riesje wrote:... character arcs, like that only matters. Lynch isnt intrested in that at all, never was.


Sorry for taking these couple of words out of context but I totally disagree with that. In his best years (most years, actually), Lynch created characters that were driving his films like nothing else. It's the human drama of Jeffrey Beaumont, Laura & Leland Palmers, Fred Madison, Alvin Straight that made these movies so fascinating. Not the only factor, of course, but a particularly strong factor. The same counts for Twin Peaks, clearly. Many times over this thread people would point out that first half hour of The Pilot created more interest in its characters than xx hours of The Return. Yes, because Lynch STOPPED being interested in it. But not that he never was.
C'mon even Inland Empire. I don't understand this film, I have trouble not falling asleep on it, yet what keeps me fascinated is the character that Laura Dern portrays - the scene where she dies/not dies tears me apart as one of the most powerful death scenes ever in cinema; and I could name many of her scenes and tell you that they are character-driven because there is such a strong emotional content in them that relates to the matters of Nikki's identity, her hopes, fear, whatever.

The Return is unprecedented in Lynch's work as far as ignoring characters as a powerful thing that drives the story. Sorry, not unprecedented - Eraserhead was like that, too. Eraserhead wasn't interesting BECAUSE we so cared about Henry's bother with the strange child or anything like that. Other things made it work (or not work, for some). Only Eraserhead I bought, I don't buy The Return.
Bobi 1 Kenobi

B. Beware
O. Of
B. BOB

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests