Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
boske
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

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

Postby boske » Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:31 pm

LateReg wrote:Judging by the fact that Cooper just wakes up after his short coma, and was fully aware of everything that was going on, I'd say it's pretty obvious that all of Cooper was there, and just trapped. What we see when he takes down Ike, for example, is a major component of himself rising to the surface. I don't need to know the exact split of who inherited what regarding Cooper vs. Doppelcoop, but I would certainly say that the Cooper we know and love from the original series was trapped inside Dougie the whole time. That strikes me as very much the idea there. So if you want to boil it down to essential traits, that could be right, but I think of it as the essential traits simply coming to the fore from time to time as an exploration of the major components that make up Cooper, things that you can't take away.

I have no argument with you thinking of Dougie as a toddler, and I can even agree with that. However, he's a toddler with Dale Cooper trapped inside of him, and I think that's very clear, and it very much adds up to me. No, it's not the gradual progression I expected and continued to hope for, but it makes sense to me. (It also, much to the chagrin of many, ties into the ideas of interacting with the audience, subverting expectations, etc., all of which I think are very important to embrace, as well as the idea that Cooper is simply Cooper, helplessly trapped, and therefore incapable of the gradual progression we all hoped for from week to week.) And as far as what Lynch said in that interview I referenced, there's no reason to doubt him on that one aspect. It was spoken very plainly, without a prompt, as one of the aspects of the new show Lynch wanted to explore before the show even started airing. In fact, while Lynch remained his cagey self for most interviews, I would say that he let slip out far more than I'd seen him let slip in recent years, here or there in the interviews.

They tried really hard to represent the instantly awaken Cooper as the original goofy Coop that it felt out of the place and a bit over the top. I think it was very convenient (for them) to have a trapped Coop that could be brought up the surface when necessary and otherwise kept dormant, that it could have gone forever. He is trapped and not evolving, "tune in again next time to see what we have in store for you". I would be more willing to give them credit for the whole concept if it were for one not for the manner of Coop's actual awakening which totally gave the scheme away for me. I get it that all is well that ends well, and that the old Coop is back (for only 15 minutes though), it was simply just too little too late. We can disagree here too, but I am not giving them a free pass. I honestly fail to see the point of the whole Dougie endeavor. There is a greenish light on Antony's face so he must be lying, there is a slice of lodge with curtain above a Black Jack machine, so that must give the next jackpot. There is some dandruff on Anthony's collar, I have to go give him a neck massage. It is their right to come up with this, but it is not a ride that I want to be on.

LateReg wrote:David Lynch playing Gordon Cole remains a very important piece of all this. It's too bad it had to rub so many of you the wrong way. I love the layers and all it contributes and ties together.

We could replace him with another teapot and not miss a beat. :wink: Cheers!
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 » Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:06 pm

David Lynch playing Gordon Cole remains a very important piece of all this. It's too bad it had to rub so many of you the wrong way. I love the layers and all it contributes and ties together


I always forget he was in this - some of his 2,863 scenes slipped my mind. It was practically a Barbara Streisand directed movie.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

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

Postby sylvia_north » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:34 am

David Lynch playing Gordon Cole remains a very important piece of all this. It's too bad it had to rub so many of you the wrong way. I love the layers and all it contributes and ties together


Part of what? Subverting audience expectations? To see Cole as an old school ie inappropriate boss? I don’t think this turn is that unexpected. Imagine if Hitch or Stephen King gave themselves such prominent self effacing parts? It’s more potent in small doses. Cole’s esteem fell in my eyes from this overkill.

Regarding budget constraints, i can’t decide if making time for Cole talking would be better than leaving those things which couldn’t be shown abstract? If they can give us a living supernatural map and have Hawk see curtains in the woods apropos of nothing, why not exploding tulpas etc.
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
LateReg
Posts: 690
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

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

Postby LateReg » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:12 pm

sylvia_north wrote:
David Lynch playing Gordon Cole remains a very important piece of all this. It's too bad it had to rub so many of you the wrong way. I love the layers and all it contributes and ties together


Part of what? Subverting audience expectations? To see Cole as an old school ie inappropriate boss? I don’t think this turn is that unexpected. Imagine if Hitch or Stephen King gave themselves such prominent self effacing parts? It’s more potent in small doses. Cole’s esteem fell in my eyes from this overkill.

Regarding budget constraints, i can’t decide if making time for Cole talking would be better than leaving those things which couldn’t be shown abstract? If they can give us a living supernatural map and have Hawk see curtains in the woods apropos of nothing, why not exploding tulpas etc.


I would say that just about any positive critical reading of the show probably loves what Lynch did with Cole, just as I have observed that many negative reactions, at least on this board, center on Lynch as Cole as being a big problem.

On a basic level, I don't understand the hate since the character himself separated from the actor portraying him would of course become a vital part of telling this story. He's one of two surviving members of the Blue Rose Task Force, and he's partly responsible for Cooper's disappearance. That said, separating the actor from the director, Lynch the actor gives a fantastic and fun performance, in my opinion.

But if we take everything wrapped up together, as we must, I think the basic approach is obvious and I won't be telling you anything you don't already know. Lynch is the director of the film, Cole is the director of the FBI, both know more about what's happening on the show and outside of it than they're leading on. Lynch serves as an anchor to one of the major things the show does very well: the blurring and blending of fact and fiction, fantasy and reality, peeling back the layers to arrive at some sort of truth. These ideas run rampant throughout the show as it riffs on the passage of time and aging and the nature of nostalgia and the idea of reboots and revisiting the past, and contains scenes that either address the real world (the 1% and the housing crash) or seemingly the making of the show (Fenn's dialogue) or drift directly into the real world (Monica Bellucci) and culminates, arguably, with a scene set in our reality with the real owners of the Palmer house. There's metatext throughout and doubles abound, and Lynch's Cole is more evidence of both. There's plenty of other aspects I like about Lynch's Cole, including what you reference: the winking portrayal of an old school boss that may or may not be more fact than fiction, which complicates and/or clarifies the show's un-PC lack of hand holding or modern concerns when it comes to gender. Which I love.

As far as whether Lynch/Cole needed to explain certain elements...well, I'm on the fence about that. On the one hand, I like it as another deconstruction of television/film norms (show don't tell) and as it ties in to the meta-aspect of Lynch as all knowing master of ceremonies, but on the other hand it stops the otherwise obscure narrative in its tracks. But I find myself naturally involved with the narrative and themes on an equal intertwining level, both working at the same time, so it all works for me on that higher level on which I believe the show is mostly functioning. And if he's explaining certain things only because of budget cuts, well, that makes it even better from my POV when thought of in terms of Lynch the director revealing that information, deliberately blending behind the scenes with what we're seeing on screen.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2102
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:06 pm

There’s also the fact that most of the exposition-y dialogue feels very Frost, both in terms of his interests (mythology-building, the supernatural and arcane) and his writing style (see similar long stretches of exposition in his last two books). Watching DKL — a man notoriously distrustful of words and uncomfortable with expressing himself verbally — enthusiastically deliver long stretches of dialogue that feel distinctly un-Lynchian in both concept and form adds an extra layer of weirdness, if not irony, to the proceedings. It’s similar to the original run, where Cole was the harbinger of all things Windom Earle, a character DKL seemingly had nothing to do with and whose existence he seems to have been at best indifferent to (I don’t think I’ve ever heard/read him say the character’s name in an interview).

Also, the moment when directing legend Cecil B. DeMille says Gordon’s name in a scene about the futility of getting the old team back together and trying to relive past glories is one of the most amazingly layered meta moments I can think of in any film. (Sorry, I try to avoid praising the show in this thread, but it seemed very relevant to the current conversation.)
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 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:43 pm

Reindeer, I’m right there with you the Sunset Blvd. moment... I loved it. But I also loved Catherine’s moment with Mr. Neft, and naming Laura’s cousin Maddy Ferguson... hell, even naming the dead girl with a haunting photo Laura. I’m all down for Peaks being a meta and genre blender. Again, my problem was just story structure (and a few nitpicks about languid directions wishing sometimes Leslie Linker Glater would come in coupled with some asute zippy Peyton writing!)
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
LateReg
Posts: 690
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

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

Postby LateReg » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:10 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:There’s also the fact that most of the exposition-y dialogue feels very Frost, both in terms of his interests (mythology-building, the supernatural and arcane) and his writing style (see similar long stretches of exposition in his last two books). Watching DKL — a man notoriously distrustful of words and uncomfortable with expressing himself verbally — enthusiastically deliver long stretches of dialogue that feel distinctly un-Lynchian in both concept and form adds an extra layer of weirdness, if not irony, to the proceedings. It’s similar to the original run, where Cole was the harbinger of all things Windom Earle, a character DKL seemingly had nothing to do with and whose existence he seems to have been at best indifferent to (I don’t think I’ve ever heard/read him say the character’s name in an interview).

Also, the moment when directing legend Cecil B. DeMille says Gordon’s name in a scene about the futility of getting the old team back together and trying to relive past glories is one of the most amazingly layered meta moments I can think of in any film. (Sorry, I try to avoid praising the show in this thread, but it seemed very relevant to the current conversation.)


Yes, absolutely all that. I've said before that I thought the intended function (whether or not it works) of the expositiony dialogue was to keep the viewer on their toes, never allowing us to get a grasp on how the show operates from moment to moment, which goes along with what you're saying. And the Sunset Blvd moment is certainly as layered as it gets, and perhaps wouldn't work as well if not for Cole's extended presence. Or maybe it still could if this thing were less than 18 hours, but that we could only surmise. I still do wonder how this would play - how much tighter or more sustained it would feel - in even a 14 hour version, and what Lynch would have cut if the studio demanded it.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2102
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:18 pm

Audrey Horne wrote:Reindeer, I’m right there with you the Sunset Blvd. moment... I loved it. But I also loved Catherine’s moment with Mr. Neft, and naming Laura’s cousin Maddy Ferguson... hell, even naming the dead girl with a haunting photo Laura. I’m all down for Peaks being a meta and genre blender. Again, my problem was just story structure (and a few nitpicks about languid directions wishing sometimes Leslie Linker Glater would come in coupled with some asute zippy Peyton writing!)


I don’t disagree. On the one hand, I respect DKL for taking the languid pacing to such an extreme, and I’m unequivocally glad that something this artistically adventurous and aggressively non-user-friendly exists in the exact form that it does. But on the other hand, I worry that the occasional over-indulgences slightly diminish earlier masterworks of torturous pacing (calling Mr. Mibbler) by revealing this as a well DKL goes to (and drinks deeply from) a bit too often. Some instances worked like gangbusters for me (Jacoby’s shovels, Dougie), while others fell flat or left me with mixed feelings (the floor sweeping, “it’s not about the bunny” and Wally). And I can’t quite articulate why some moments struck me as revelatory while others seemed self-indulgent, other than to say that art is subjective.
Gloomferret
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:35 am

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

Postby Gloomferret » Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:32 am

Part two of my article on criticism of season three is now live at :https://25yearslatersite.com/2017/12/12/something-is-missing-criticisms-of-the-return-part-2/
User avatar
boske
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

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

Postby boske » Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:56 am

I appreciate what was written here regarding Gordon Cole's place in the grand scheme of things, but we'll have to simply disagree over it. However, both these views, are in my opinion, entirely subjective and relatively true, and thus valid and merited as such. While blurring lines between Cole and Lynch (which was what Monica Belucci scene clearly led to after some previous "prolonged" hinting), could be legitimately viewed on one side as an avant-garde piece of "meta" art, effacing the line between the author and the medium, on the other hand it could also be regarded as an abomination, an excessive and unwarranted act of self-aggrandizing, as well as some some other more colorful stuff that is not fit to print.

The first season of TP had very little Cole and functioned just fine. While he was not some much an obstacle later on and had a valuable niche role to play, I was never a fan of how Lynch (admittedly) wrote himself into the script to get Cole to kiss Shelly, and (Lynch) then wondered aloud and how he got away with it. He co-wrote the Return, directed it, presumably cherry-picked all the musical acts, did some of the effects, played the center-piece, I mean, why not don a blonde wig and play Laura Palmer too? :lol: We may disagree here, but he simply sucked all the oxygen out of the room. Sure, let him do it, he has the right after all, I do not deny that, but why call it Twin Peaks The Return? It is more of a solo album, Lenny Kravitz style, where Lenny gets to write all the material, play all the instruments, sing and then produce it. I said a few pages back how Dougie should have been on the DVD cover, maybe I was wrong, maybe it should have been Cole with that proverbial very fine bottle of Bordeaux.
User avatar
mtwentz
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

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

Postby mtwentz » Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:16 am

boske wrote:
LateReg wrote: Still, there is no explanation how an incapacitated Dougie, who relies on higher powers for any formative activity, can tackle a veteran criminal (who then later got to trip himself :lol:), and is then back to square one not being able to catch a softball or get out of the elevator, let alone a car. These things do not add up for me, they are simply made up on the fly without any consideration. Trying to make some of it or instill some sense into it, or find a rule or plan to it is futile, there is none. There is no logic to it.


To me the explanation is pretty simple, having read the book the Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg.

Science has proven that even when the part of the brain that directs conscious thought is destroyed or impaired, the part of the brain that controls unconscious habits can still function normally. There was a guy who lost most of his function to reason and rationalize through some kind of brain injury, and could not explain how to get from point A to point B and thus had to be confined to his house lest he ever leave and get lost. And then one day while no one was looking, he somehow wandered out of the house and his family was frantic, they thought they might never find him.

Some time later, the man returned back to the house, and when they asked him where he had been, he could not say, he had no idea. So the next day, they did a stakeout of the house, and they found he went a long walk that he had gone on day after day before his brain injury- it was the same route every time.

It turns out the part of the brain that controlled his habits was still functioning, independent of his conscious mind. So consciously, this man could not tell you where he had been, or how he had gotten there. But the unconscious part of his brain took him along his walking route and back every time.

So that's how I interpreted DougieCoop being able to get Ike the Spike. His deeply ingrained, rigorous FBI training is basically unconscious habit and is still intact, even though his conscious mind is basically fried (until he later jolts himself back awake of course).
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
mtsi
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:56 pm

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

Postby mtsi » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:45 am

I really believe that if social media weren't available during this Season 3 run, many more of us would be just fine with the show as is. Disappointed perhaps, but it seems to me (and I'm one of them) that our collective disappointment contributes to the overall feeling....that we amplify each other.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
We live inside a dream.
User avatar
boske
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

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

Postby boske » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:00 am

mtwentz wrote:So that's how I interpreted DougieCoop being able to get Ike the Spike. His deeply ingrained, rigorous FBI training is basically unconscious habit and is still intact, even though his conscious mind is basically fried (until he later jolts himself back awake of course).

Yes, that for sure is one fair way of looking at it.

A relative of mine, who is now deceased, had suffered a stroke and went to live on for another seven years. He was largely incapacitated in his right side, but was able to walk with difficulty. He could not use his right arm nor speak, aside from a few phrases, and as hard as he tried to express himself, he simply could not. It is hard being aware of something you want to say that these are not the words that come out of your mouth (I have seen it). I was not near him at a particular point in life when I heard that he sneaked out of the house, started his old car and drove off on a country dirt road. He went to a particular place not that far away (just a few miles off, he was seen there), the place that he had been very fond of. He somehow managed to operate the car that had the manual gear, so he must have had to briefly let go off the steering as he was shifting gears using his left hand, and using both legs to operate the clutch and the gas pedal with his inferior right leg. He did come back and did not do that escapade again, but his desire to visit a familiar place must have been so great that he could not simply push it aside. Human brain in such a condition is (from what doctors told me, I am not of that profession) like a giant splendorous chandelier whose lights are slowly going out never to be seen again.

What does this have to do with Dougie? I agree that Dougie may still have had it in him to tackle Ike, but I fail to see that he could not have gotten out of elevator or sliding door. Still, it does not really matter, that is not the main point here which is that what they did there was excessive and unnecessary. Dougie could have been there for a few episodes, but what transpired for me was rather nasty. What point where they trying to prove? That there was a dumb doctor who thought everything was fine. That TP the Return was largely about this absurd character that is fun to see slamming into doors and slurping coffee and everybody pretending it was all just normal, maybe just a tiny little be off? I mean, we spent roughly 80% of time on that? Sure, they are free to come up with such stuff but me calling it for what I think it is should not be filed under "unhappy because did not get what one expected" folder (not directing this at you by the way). TR is just a show, it should not be exempt from criticism. What does that mean, we cannot criticize anything because if we do it is because we did not get what we wanted? We got something we did not like, period. Some people liked it, great, fine with me.
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Postby yaxomoxay » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:43 am

mtwentz wrote:
boske wrote:
LateReg wrote: Still, there is no explanation how an incapacitated Dougie, who relies on higher powers for any formative activity, can tackle a veteran criminal (who then later got to trip himself :lol:), and is then back to square one not being able to catch a softball or get out of the elevator, let alone a car. These things do not add up for me, they are simply made up on the fly without any consideration. Trying to make some of it or instill some sense into it, or find a rule or plan to it is futile, there is none. There is no logic to it.


To me the explanation is pretty simple, having read the book the Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg.

Science has proven that even when the part of the brain that directs conscious thought is destroyed or impaired, the part of the brain that controls unconscious habits can still function normally. There was a guy who lost most of his function to reason and rationalize through some kind of brain injury, and could not explain how to get from point A to point B and thus had to be confined to his house lest he ever leave and get lost. And then one day while no one was looking, he somehow wandered out of the house and his family was frantic, they thought they might never find him.

Some time later, the man returned back to the house, and when they asked him where he had been, he could not say, he had no idea. So the next day, they did a stakeout of the house, and they found he went a long walk that he had gone on day after day before his brain injury- it was the same route every time.

It turns out the part of the brain that controlled his habits was still functioning, independent of his conscious mind. So consciously, this man could not tell you where he had been, or how he had gotten there. But the unconscious part of his brain took him along his walking route and back every time.

So that's how I interpreted DougieCoop being able to get Ike the Spike. His deeply ingrained, rigorous FBI training is basically unconscious habit and is still intact, even though his conscious mind is basically fried (until he later jolts himself back awake of course).


The Power of Habit is a great book, it truly changed my perspective on my actions and what I do on a daily basis. It’s a must read for everyone. I agree with your post.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Postby yaxomoxay » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:54 am

boske wrote:. Dougie could have been there for a few episodes, but what transpired for me was rather nasty. What point where they trying to prove?.


I think two of the points that Dougie makes are:
1) How badly the world needs a Dougie (honest, without much entitlement, etc.)
2) How badly TP needs a fully capable Coop.

I bet that many viewers were like “we need Coop. We need Coop” over and over. I was one of them for a while, and I do admit that in a certain way I am sorry that I saw fully functional Dale Cooper only for two episodes (which in reality is 29+2+ part of a movie). In a twisted way, his almost complete absence made Cooper even more important, more precious. As the casino lady says, “I hope that you realize how lucky you are”. I am not saying that DKL wanted this by any means (can’t really read my own mind, let alone his!), but it’s something I think about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bob Rice and 17 guests