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

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

User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Postby yaxomoxay » Thu Oct 05, 2017 6:57 pm

Redlodge wrote:The lack of new posts and the complete lack of interest
says it all. W.


Lack of posts doesn’t really mean much. We analyzed this thing ad nauseam. I loved it, but now I check the forum once a week or so and real life called me back.

However I’d be curious to see monthly traffic stats for the forum since it opened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eva Marie
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:26 am

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

Postby Eva Marie » Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:23 pm

VERY interesting observations from Frost. It makes perfect sense that the only 2 Lynch projects that gained mainstream success were collaborations: TP and Elephant Man (the script was written by someone else).

There are only 2 good things I got out of the TR experience: this thread and becoming a MacLachlan fan. I'm just so terribly impressed with the fact that Kyle saw the whole script and thus the pointlessness of the Dougie storyline, and yet still injected warmth and pathos into the character. Same with Mr. C., but the opposite.

It's also interesting how his personal trajectory contrasts DL's: they come from the same region, have similar upbringing and spent almost the same amount of time in Hollywood - but with diametrically opposite effect on their personalities. While DL over time crawled up his own behind and became disconnected from the real world; Kyle gradually lost his shyness, grew more comfortable with the business and became known as one of the most grounded and ego-free players in the industry. You can even look at how they use SM to see it: Kyle bends over backwards to stay in touch and friendly with his and TP fans, while DL used it to dupe fans into supporting him in his TR power play. I've heard MacLachlan repeat over and over as to how grateful he is to Lynch for launching his career. It's really ironic that these days it's DL who was lucky to have him (in terms of quality and attitude, not star power).
Eva Marie
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:26 am

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

Postby Eva Marie » Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:33 pm

I also take my hat off to Roger Ebert for his cynical approach to Lynch and never changing his stance on Blue Velvet (my opinion on it is much the same). It's obvious that he never bought into the personality cult despite highly praising Mulholland Dr. I wish we still had him around - he would've torn TR to shreds like it deserved.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:33 pm

Eva Marie wrote:VERY interesting observations from Frost. It makes perfect sense that the only 2 Lynch projects that gained mainstream success were collaborations: TP and Elephant Man (the script was written by someone else).


Important correction/clarification: the script to The Elephant Man was COwritten by Lynch and two other writers. Yes, the Bergen/DeVore script predated his involvement, but once he was brought on to the project, he substantially reworked the format and structure of the script to make it less historically accurate but more cinematic and narratively compelling (in reality, and the original draft, most of the conflict happened earlier in Merrick’s life, with his time with Treves in the hospital happening all in one lump period over the last decade or so of his life as one long anticlimax). And Lynch generously (wisely?) included the screenwriters in the rewriting process, something many other directors would not have done.

Also, you seem to be operating on the premise that TP S3 was NOT a collaboration, something I just don’t buy. Every indication is that L/F worked on the script together for three long years, and Lynch honored that script, albeit adding scenes and improvisations here and there. I’ve spoken at length about this elsewhere, but it seems clear to me that while S3 undeniably features plenty of David’s indulgences, Mark’s obsession with mythology-building — something David has never expressed any particular interest in in prior works — is in ample supply. Compare the highly ambiguous approach to Judy in the Lynch-helmed FWWM/TMP to the more literal approach in the collaborative S3 (the latter of which notably ties in with TSHoTP and its Crowley/Whore of Babylon iconography). Mark seems completely happy with the show based on his Twitter (and he is certainly one to speak his mind).
Eva Marie
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:26 am

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

Postby Eva Marie » Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:47 pm

As for his woeful attitude to women in TR - Lynch isn't actually old enough to claim the "old school" excuse. He's a Boomer: he was still at an impressionable age during Womens' Lib (20s) and publication of Feminine Mystique (17). He wouldn't actually have seen many Tammy and French turnip girl types during his lifetime (certainly none during his adult years). They're clearly an exaggerated fantasy in his head and that's why they're so offensive to female audiences. Based on TR and Laura Dern's character in Blue Velvet - he seems to be nostalgic for a type of woman that never existed (even in France).
douglasb
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 1:51 pm
Location: Exiled in England
Contact:

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

Postby douglasb » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:02 am

Anyone 'Disappointed' folks going to the UK Peaks Fest this weekend? Not sure how I would feel. Think being surrounded by so much positivity might make me want to re-enact the Civil War.
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

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

Postby sylvia_north » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:30 am

Eva Marie wrote:As for his woeful attitude to women in TR - Lynch isn't actually old enough to claim the "old school" excuse. He's a Boomer: he was still at an impressionable age during Womens' Lib (20s) and publication of Feminine Mystique (17). He wouldn't actually have seen many Tammy and French turnip girl types during his lifetime (certainly none during his adult years). They're clearly an exaggerated fantasy in his head and that's why they're so offensive to female audiences. Based on TR and Laura Dern's character in Blue Velvet - he seems to be nostalgic for a type of woman that never existed (even in France).


Ha! Yes, she encompasses the billion dollar French Girl industry myth. And if she's an unironic statement also, we have to take Mark on his word- he'd know best. (Recently read a great book called A Strange Stirring about the cultural impact of Friedan, I recommend.) Marilyn Monroe didn't really exist either except as a caricature creation to embody the need for an ultra feminine object for an insecure post-war America.

I think Lynch was probably more influenced by the messages of Hugh Hefner. DL's a "simple guy," after all, says Frost. The girl next door is an accessible object, and men are liberated from accountability, these being the themes of both EH and the Playboy philosophy. Beautiful Girl Across the Hall even sounds like The Girl in Seven Year Itch- called Girl Upstairs in Billy Wilder's toned down movie- and serves the same role. MM was Hef's first victim and Lynch's ur-Laura, as Frost mentions above, and we know DL admired Wilder.

Nodding to old school Freudian housewife sexism is no different than nodding to its modern capitalist/pop-Darwinist version. White American males dominate mainstream culture, they satisfy the needs of the market and dictate the needs of the market, they even apparently get to define feminism and sell it back to us. Liberal dudes like Lynch can overlook class analysis and reap the rewards.

As far as Mark's contribution, he says he types. http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/tele ... ation.html and DL says SHOTP is Mark's TP, emphasis mine, and to me that meant all the concessions to Mark wanting some narrative momentum and adventure happened there *shrug* If he's distanced himself that much from the creative process other than taking dictation and styling some absurd monologues, and tossing DL some relevant bits from the book he won't read, or borrowing from the script for his book. Since he appears to have been relieved of his prior structure-imposing duties, I'm not going to lay the burden of what went wrong with TR on Frost. It's hard to say for sure but I think most of us are schooled in recycled Lynchisms. They are easy to recognize.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:31 am

sylvia_north wrote:
Eva Marie wrote:As far as Mark's contribution, he says he types. http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/tele ... ation.html and DL says SHOTP is Mark's TP, emphasis mine, and to me that meant all the concessions to Mark wanting some narrative momentum and adventure happened there *shrug* If he's distanced himself that much from the creative process other than taking dictation and styling some absurd monologues, and tossing DL some relevant bits from the book he won't read, or borrowing from the script for his book.


You seem to be completely mischaracterizing the quote about Mark typing. He has said in other interviews (I think the Wrapped in Plastic phone interview from the season 1 DVD) that most writing collaborations have the writer who paces and the writer who sits and types. He and David are both the writer who paces, so Mark took one for the team and typed since David can’t. This doesn’t mean he was “taking dictation” or didn’t contribute equally from a creative standpoint. Indeed, the fact that all the ideas were filtered through him gives him MORE control over the script (I’ve been in both positions; the transcriber can infuence things in subtle ways — similar to the discussion on editors in the Gender thread). Plus, the interview you’re quoting is from 1990, so your implication seems to be that Mark NEVER contributed to their cowritten episodes, from the Pilot on, beyond “taking dictation”?

And the fact that Mark wrote a book he has been talking about wanting to write since the mid-‘90s is far from per se proof that he was frustrated or shut out of the creative process on the show. I’m certain he hoped to seize the opportunity to write this book from the moment he convinced Lynch to revive the show, before they’d written a word of script. TSHoTP is clearly the product of decades of thought and research, and gave him the ability to explore ideas he never could have addressed on the series, old or new, because print literature is a very different medium. It’s really difficult for me to understand this argument, which seems to keep coming up, that the book is somehow proof that Mark was unhappy with the series.

I’ll also just briefly say that IMO TSHoTP doesn’t exactly represent the paradigm of “narrative momentum and adventure.” While Frost will never be as eccentric as Lynch (that’s a tall order), I do think TSH demonstrates that Mark has evolved into a fairly idiosyncratic and narrative-defying storyteller in his own right. People change, artists evolve.

Look, I think we can all agree that the new show is more Lynch than Frost. But I also think there is zero basis to say it is not a collaborative effort, in the face of all crew member commentary to the contrary. And if we want to talk about textual analysis, I defy anyone to find an analogue in IE, MD, or any of Lynch’s “solo” work to long scenes of FBI agents sitting in a hotel room recounting elaborate mythological backstories, or to Dougie solving Blue’s Clues in the epic Vegas casino insurance claim war (which IMO feels
like pure goofy L/F synergy a la One Saliva Bubble more than anything either of them has ever done solo).
LateReg
Posts: 468
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

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

Postby LateReg » Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:24 am

Re: Mark Frost's quote about David Lynch's storytelling abilities. I responded to the same quote about a year ago, stating that the three films that Lynch has written without a co-writer are considered his three masterpieces: Eraserhead, Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive. So while Mark Frost is criticizing Lynch, there also seems to be an opposite side to that criticism, ie that the normal narrative rules needn't apply to Lynch's dream logic. Also, Frost is criticizing a movie that he hadn't seen and had only heard is a mess, but which went on to become one of the most acclaimed movies of its generation. For my money, Mulholland Drive is actually tightly constructed, and not at all a mess. Not conventional storytelling by any means, but tight and logical in its own way.

Now, I'm not defending Lynch here or belittling Frost. I'm just pointing out an obvious fact about Lynch's most highly regarded movies from an historical/critical aggregate perspective, which is food for thought in terms of Frost's criticisms, which leads me to more questions. I believe The Return's script was definitely a collaborative effort. Yet the final product resembles an extended version of Mulholland Drive more than any of Lynch's other films. So, did Frost end up seeing and loving Mulholland Drive? Did he come around on the promise of that style of storytelling? Or did Lynch shift the script around in the editing room to such an extent that the final product no longer resembles the script, despite containing all of the scenes from the script?

In other news, I've finally caught up on this thread, having read all 311 pages. I have something of greater substance, or at least length, to contribute at some point in the future.
User avatar
David Locke
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:24 pm

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

Postby David Locke » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:26 am

I've been doing a very protracted re-watch of Season 3 (I guess that's what we're calling it now? ;) ). I started out watching quite quickly, like a few episodes a day, but I got tired of it. I just find the thing to be too dispiriting and dark and cold and all those adjectives to be really watchable. I mean, and I love dark stuff. I love e.g. Lost Highway and other Lynch things, naturally. But S3 has a kind of joyless misanthropy at times... I don't know how else to describe it. That as well as a weird miscalculation of tone, where scenes drag on and are either meant to be funny or meant to be compelling somehow, but simply fall flat. For a less dramatic example (it's still a good scene), I'd say look to the long conversation between Truman and Ben in Part 12 - and then Ben's odd conversation with Beverly, ending with another profession of love for that old bicycle of his. It's just... weird. Not even because too much exposition, but it's a scene I don't know quite what to do with. We're given so much time to ponder in S3 but it's almost deliberately spent on uninteresting things or unimportant things - meanwhile, the juiciest material too often zips past as if L&F were unaware of its potency. I dunno.

I feel kind of like this during a re-watch:
Parts 1-2: intriguing, exciting even. A promising start mostly.
Part 3: fairly superb...
Part 4: ...but it wears thin, and I can't abide much of the Dougie stuff this time around. A certain glumness sets in here as it becomes clear what we'll be saddled with for over 10 episodes...
Part 5: Things heat up nicely with a propulsive pace and that great Trouble/Richard scene, though I wish Dr. Amp never made it from page to screen and overall it's more a collection of short punchy scenes than it is a more concentrated work - because there's so much "stuff," most scenes don't get time to settle in and make a deeper impression. Stuff like Becky and Stephen almost grates watching now, knowing that it will just turn into the most beguiling whimper of a narrative...
Part 6: ...and then we slow down again for a wrenching hour of pure cruelty, which is still somehow fascinating (unlike the weak Part 10). I guess Red's scene kind of carries a lot of the weight, what a great character and performance!
Part 7: momentum, etc etc. Not terribly interesting though... well, the last few scenes do stay with me. But the plotty Mr C plot doesn't.
Part 8: honestly haven't re-watched in full since the premiere of it. I love it but it's also like Eraserhead - very very dark and dangerous and... gross at the end, ha. But no, it is really terrific.
Part 9: underrated but mostly just a pleasant hour because its breezy low-key nature is a nice reprieve from the darkness.
Part 10: ugh, I dunno man... I can't re-watch much of this, it's pure cruelty without balance, yes yes that is the point perhaps but whatever. The Laura/Cole scene and Log Lady scene redeem it a bit though.
Part 11: great, surely one of the better hours...
Part 12: dull, aimless padding

To be continued (maybe) as I rewatch...

Just going from the first watch (or two, as I watched most twice initially) - I'd round things out by saying 13 was a decent if kind of stiff hour, 14 was exciting tho I don't like the mythos ramping up with GreenGlove, 15 is heartbreaking and creepy, 16 is satisfying but frustrating for taking so long to arrive, 17 is half greatness half questionable or even terrible decision-making, and 18 is the best of them all.

BTW - can I just vent here to say again how much I truly dislike the whole Dr. Amp thing/what they did with Jacoby..? And similarly, everything with Nadine was little better. Ugh, what a waste. And such a waste of time, spent on Jacoby. The joke was old the first time 'round! Why repeat it so, so much? Baffling. Nadine's revelation in 15 with Ed is kind of nice, if rushed, but I could not care less about all of the other repetitive shots of her admiring Dr. Amp's show. Again, such a waste, to give us these characters but reduce their arcs to the tiniest fragments and often just repeat the same image/scene/idea over and over... (look at Leland for a quite literal example!)
Last edited by David Locke on Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
The Gazebo
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:34 pm
Location: Norway

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

Postby The Gazebo » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:37 am

LateReg wrote:I believe The Return's script was definitely a collaborative effort. Yet the final product resembles an extended version of Mulholland Drive more than any of Lynch's other films. So, did Frost end up seeing and loving Mulholland Drive? Did he come around on the promise of that style of storytelling? Or did Lynch shift the script around in the editing room to such an extent that the final product no longer resembles the script, despite containing all of the scenes from the script?


I'm not sure we'll ever know. They wrote the first nine episodes together, and then it seemed Lynch went solo and added more, leading to his run-in with Showtime. TSHOTP adds a bit more to the puzzle. To use a musical analogy, it seemed like Frost came into the studio with a dozen songs, written in his basement, and then Lynch as the producer tried to make them as compelling as possible. Both had lots of ideas, I think. But in sum, it never created the perfect storm like it did in 1990. The ideas they had were too far removed from the original idea of the show.

LateReg wrote:In other news, I've finally caught up on this thread, having read all 311 pages. I have something of greater substance, or at least length, to contribute at some point in the future.


Well done :D Or maybe commiserations - it takes a special kind of willpower to wade through hundreds of pages of wailing and gnashing of teeth by us naysayers. :)
User avatar
The Gazebo
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:34 pm
Location: Norway

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

Postby The Gazebo » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:57 am

David Locke wrote:I've been doing a very protracted re-watch of Season 3 (I guess that's what we're calling it now? ;) ). I started out watching quite quickly, like a few episodes a day, but I got tired of it. I just find the thing to be too dispiriting and dark and cold and all those adjectives to be really watchable. I mean, and I love dark stuff. I love e.g. Lost Highway and other Lynch things, naturally. But S3 has a kind of joyless misanthropy at times... I don't know how else to describe it. That as well as a weird miscalculation of tone, where scenes drag on and are either meant to be funny or meant to be compelling somehow, but simply fall flat.


I haven't even come close to doing a re-watch. I mean, it's such an idiosyncratic show. There are several golden nuggets in there, great scenes, wonderful cinematography...but it's just too fragmented. The Return, for me, ended up as just a collection of random ideas, without any consistent and compelling storyline or enticing or foreboding atmosphere throughout. The opening hours, with the glass box and Evil Coop's introduction at Otis' place - brilliant! Slow pacing - no problem. Then we ended up in Vegas, and I just can't get past that. What an awful creative choice. In episode 7, I really thought we were heading back to TP full time. And the beginning of episode 12, with the visit to Sarah's house, I honestly thought we were in for a classic episode. But those moments - along with everything else in the show - just faded out (whatever happened to the dude Andy was questioning outside his house?).

What a wasted opportunity. My lifeline is this: If this show is as groundbreaking as the critics claim, then it won't take long for some up-and-coming director to take the best ideas from The Return and make a compelling show which satisfies those of us who waited for a beautiful and creepy small-town world to immerse ourselves in.
User avatar
David Locke
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:24 pm

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

Postby David Locke » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:07 pm

The Gazebo wrote:
David Locke wrote:I've been doing a very protracted re-watch of Season 3 (I guess that's what we're calling it now? ;) ). I started out watching quite quickly, like a few episodes a day, but I got tired of it. I just find the thing to be too dispiriting and dark and cold and all those adjectives to be really watchable. I mean, and I love dark stuff. I love e.g. Lost Highway and other Lynch things, naturally. But S3 has a kind of joyless misanthropy at times... I don't know how else to describe it. That as well as a weird miscalculation of tone, where scenes drag on and are either meant to be funny or meant to be compelling somehow, but simply fall flat.


I haven't even come close to doing a re-watch. I mean, it's such an idiosyncratic show. There are several golden nuggets in there, great scenes, wonderful cinematography...but it's just too fragmented. The Return, for me, ended up as just a collection of random ideas, without any consistent and compelling storyline or enticing or foreboding atmosphere throughout. The opening hours, with the glass box and Evil Coop's introduction at Otis' place - brilliant! Slow pacing - no problem. Then we ended up in Vegas, and I just can't get past that. What an awful creative choice. In episode 7, I really thought we were heading back to TP full time. And the beginning of episode 12, with the visit to Sarah's house, I honestly thought we were in for a classic episode. But those moments - along with everything else in the show - just faded out (whatever happened to the dude Andy was questioning outside his house?).

What a wasted opportunity. My lifeline is this: If this show is as groundbreaking as the critics claim, then it won't take long for some up-and-coming director to take the best ideas from The Return and make a compelling show which satisfies those of us who waited for a beautiful and creepy small-town world to immerse ourselves in.

Very true. A lot of great stuff in there, but it's 18 hours long! And it just did not need to be, as is quite obvious now. Like I said, I all but stopped my re-watch for several weeks because it just got me so bleh... depressed and dispirited, not just because the show is disappointing but because it has those qualities in the way it works on the viewer. Very downbeat, even Dougie's story I find really depressing a lot of the time.

And yeah - Vegas... not the best idea. The atmosphere of this didn't need to match S1/S2/FWWM exactly, but just as S2 was in the same general atmospheric universe as S1, and then FWWM the same as the series, so too did S3 need to have a certain continuity... and I just don't get it a lot of the time, I don't get that Peaks feeling, or even much of a Lynch feeling, from watching this brightly-lit, Tati-meets-Tarantino Vegas stuff with its weird combination of the Mitchums/Candie and Dougie, and all the hitmen and lowlives. S3 scrapes the barrel of human ugliness, but in a way that feels less true, vital or simply engaging to watch than ever before in Lynch.
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

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

Postby sylvia_north » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:10 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:...


We don't disagree on most of those points, I even indicated Frost's absurdist humor. And I never said it wasn't a collaboration, but the thing you said- that Lynch had the reigns. My point was TR didn't demand the same structure season 1 demanded and that from what we know Mark takes dictation. Obviously Frost's influence is in there, but the skills and abilities he lent to S1 weren't applied for whatever reason. I've read in multiple places that this is their writing process and dictation does encompass translating, or filtering, of course like any other vital member of crew that helps get the story across. No one, except maybe Vince Gallo, can fill every production role. And compared to S3, SH zips along like Clancy/Grisham with, I think, with metric tons of foresight, character, structure, intrigue.

I've done a couple rewatches. It's not very rewatchable. So much skippable content that slips even below Cheerleader Nadine quality. My esteem for Kyle has also increased. If the retarded guy is consistently the best part of the show, and those stock establishing shots :wink: , that says a lot about the rest.
Last edited by sylvia_north on Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
User avatar
Henrys Hair
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:28 am
Contact:

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

Postby Henrys Hair » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:12 pm

LateReg wrote:Re: Mark Frost's quote about David Lynch's storytelling abilities. I responded to the same quote about a year ago, stating that the three films that Lynch has written without a co-writer are considered his three masterpieces: Eraserhead, Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive.


The writing credits for Mulholland Drive are confusing. The film's credited to Lynch alone, while the pilot's credited as a co-write between Lynch and Joyce Eliason. I've no idea what happened to Eliason's involvement/contribution between the pilot and the movie...

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests