Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

[LateReg]

I dunno...I'd like to think that if I were ever to cuckold my significant other, I'd at least have the decency not to ask for her help in locating my mistress (and repeatedly denigrate and insult her in the process). I'm surprised that's even a matter of disagreement. But again, I acknowledge we don't know the circumstances (which is the whole point of the scene). I'm not necessarily saying Audrey is in the wrong...I just find it pretty hard to judge Charlie as being in the wrong based on what we saw. I wonder if flipping the gender roles would change things?

Well I took it as they weren't actually married, but had more of a business arrangement. So there's the difference right there my perception. I know she rubs it in that she's fucking Billy, but Charlie's non-reaction kind of confirmed that they were past the point of caring.

[kleio]

Some of the best shows often have several layers to enjoy and explore, depending on your taste and commitment to delve deeper. With this season's Twin Peaks, both the surface layer and the underlying subtext is incredibly ambiguous and slippery. I'm not sure if the hallmark of a great show is that it requires almost forensic-like examination to appreciate it (and here I'm aware that many have loved every single second of it so far). Some people almost scoff at the idea of enjoying something in real time, without the need for careful analysis based on complex phenomena. But would the Maddy/Leland scene have been better if it required heated discussions afterwards. No. Sometimes creating emotionally powerful moments we can take at face value is the best approach. And this season has been lacking in that department, which is why, I think, very few people have been knocking on their friends' door and said "You HAVE to watch this!"

What is the conclusion of my rambling here? A bit more welcoming surface layer could have given this show a bigger following without compromising the overall quality and potential for deep exploration.

Do you think the multiple re-watches and minute examinations lead to the discovery of meaning or the invention of it?

I think a major part of my disconnection is the portrayal of the characters has been so studied and artificial that I’m just observing what’s happening but not really responding emotionally to it. Consequently, I don’t really have any desire to discuss the actual events of the show. I’m loath to spend the time digging any deeper because I’m not sure there is any “there” there. Or, perhaps it’s there only if you are a huge David Lynch aficionado and can make multiple connections to his other works. Either way, you're right that it cuts out a significant percentage of potential viewers because there isn't a lot for people outside of the club to latch on to.

[The Gazebo]

So, they had to gamble. Their gamble was to do something unthinkable as TP:TR, something that disrupts the original product, without creating one from scratch, and without copying their own original work. [...] By doing so, Lynch/Frost are trying to do something even more difficult, that is to indirectly have some cultural impact, to use your words. [...] To put it in literary terms, they moved from being the best works of Stephen King to (attempting) being Nobel Prize for Literature Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. [...] And even then, Lynch/Frost had only one path to make a consistent, impactful product.

I've just cherry-picked what I think is the essence of your post. Please let me know if I'm misrepresenting you:

1. Lynch/Frost are trying to make an iconic show (again, like in 1990)
2. There was only one path they could go: TP;TR

While nr. 1 would be a dream for any writer/director, do we actually know that this is the intention? Are we sure they're not trying to create "just" a brilliant show for the fans (and failing according to some)? Have Frost and Lynch revealed this mindset, or are you assuming this based on the massive impact of the original show? (I'm not picking on you in particular, I just see a lot of mind-reading among defenders of The Return )

As for nr. 2, I don't like the absolutism. Many different roads can lead to Rome, and none of them have to go through Vegas

[yaxomoxay]

So, they had to gamble. Their gamble was to do something unthinkable as TP:TR, something that disrupts the original product, without creating one from scratch, and without copying their own original work. [...] By doing so, Lynch/Frost are trying to do something even more difficult, that is to indirectly have some cultural impact, to use your words. [...] To put it in literary terms, they moved from being the best works of Stephen King to (attempting) being Nobel Prize for Literature Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. [...] And even then, Lynch/Frost had only one path to make a consistent, impactful product.

I've just cherry-picked what I think is the essence of your post. Please let me know if I'm misrepresenting you:

1. Lynch/Frost are trying to make an iconic show (again, like in 1990)
2. There was only one path they could go: TP;TR

While nr. 1 would be a dream for any writer/director, do we actually know that this is the intention? Are we sure they're not trying to create "just" a brilliant show for the fans (and failing according to some)? Have Frost and Lynch revealed this mindset, or are you assuming this based on the massive impact of the original show? (I'm not picking on you in particular, I just see a lot of mind-reading among defenders of The Return )

As for nr. 2, I don't like the absolutism. Many different roads can lead to Rome, and none of them have to go through Vegas

Cherry pickers are the front line to cherry pies!

1) It depends what you mean by "iconic". If you mean talked about, or even directly studied in cinema classes, no. I don't think that is their intent. Their intent is indirect, that is trying to say something, to move stuff around, but leaving it up to those really interested. In 2017 Jon Snow is iconic, Dale Cooper is not.

2) I don't think that they had many reasonable paths in front of them. Yes, my absolutism can be a bit of a hyperbole, but you would admit that in order to do a good product today they don't have much choice other than to say what they eagerly want to say. .. all while being chained to 25+ years of historical baggage. As for Vegas, I love those parts Again, I am not saying that the final product is great, or horrible. I just don't know it. I don't know if Vegas is stupid, or genius. I enjoy it (esp. after episode 10 and 11) and that's all I can say because TP:TR is - and I think we agree on this - different. As I said, I don't think we have the tools to measure it yet (also because it's not finished).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Venus]

Yeah, Lynch & Frost have triumphed. Even if it's at the expense of the universe known as "Twin Peaks" - prior to 2017, that is. Hey-ho, let's all be happy, merry and jolly forever after.

LOL! Thank you for the un-PC laugh at the end of a long day.

[The Gazebo]

Do you think the multiple re-watches and minute examinations lead to the discovery of meaning or the invention of it?

I think a major part of my disconnection is the portrayal of the characters has been so studied and artificial that I’m just observing what’s happening but not really responding emotionally to it. Consequently, I don’t really have any desire to discuss the actual events of the show. I’m loath to spend the time digging any deeper because I’m not sure there is any “there” there. Or, perhaps it’s there only if you are a huge David Lynch aficionado and can make multiple connections to his other works. Either way, you're right that it cuts out a significant percentage of potential viewers because there isn't a lot for people outside of the club to latch on to.

I'd say 10% discovery and 90% pseudointellectual BS people pull from their back passage (and I'm no exception to this ) This isn't unique to TP, though. Most shows with a potentially rich texture has a high noise ratio in its attempted analysis.

I suppose The Return leaves things more open for debate than the original show did. But like you, I don't have the same emotional connection to what I'm actually witnessing. Paradoxically, I've never spent more time obsessing, reading - trying to "get it" - than I have these past months.

[The Gazebo]

2) I don't think that they had many reasonable paths in front of them. Yes, my absolutism can be a bit of a hyperbole, but you would admit that in order to do a good product today they don't have much choice other than to say what they eagerly want to say. .. all while being chained to 25+ years of historical baggage. As for Vegas, I love those parts Again, I am not saying that the final product is great, or horrible. I just don't know it. I don't know if Vegas is stupid, or genius. I enjoy it (esp. after episode 10 and 11) and that's all I can say because TP:TR is - and I think we agree on this - different. As I said, I don't think we have the tools to measure it yet (also because it's not finished).

Yeah, there is no doubt that there have been many challenges and obstacles to overcome. Many of them inherited from the making of 1 and 2, and some with the passage of time. A few I see as key:

- The death of the main representation of evil (Bob/Silva)
- The unintended fascination with the girl who was only supposed to be wrapped in plastic
- The ambiguous mythology; built ad-hoc at random intervals through Lynch's visions and Frost's philosophical interests
- Filming on location instead of in studios (responsible for the change in tone/atmosphere)

As I've said elsewhere, I still think there is brilliant stuff ahead in the final six episodes. Looking back, I just wish they hadn't made the opening six hours so fragmented and "storyless" (I know opinions vary on the latter), because no matter how much I enjoy episodes 7-12, there is kind of a black cloud hanging over some of the earlier episodes.

[SpookySculder]

See, for me I enjoyed the early episodes. I really liked 1-4. Even though The Return was *nothing* I expected, I was in my "enjoying the ride" mindset. Ep 5 was meh...That's when I began getting a bit antsy. I was extremely disappointed with 6. I felt better after watching ep 7. Ep 8, although visually stunning gave me a wtf moment. It's been downhill for me since ep 9. It's just been exhausting for me to watch since then. One thing that really bothers me is the lack of emotional connection I have with any of the characters. I know other's have brought up this up as well. But what makes it worse for me is that I find I don't even care about the old characters much. Characters that I loved since I was a kid.. I have no emotional attachment to them watching The Return. Well, I did feel a little something for Sarah this past ep.

I've been waiting to see Audrey since the very first ep. I was thinking I'd be super excited, screaming "YAY THERE'S AUDREY"! My reaction was more like "oh there's Audrey....*yawn*".

There are so many characters and so much going on that there's just no character development. I think as a viewer I need to feel some connection, some empathy towards these people in order to appreciate a story/storyline. I'm not feeling any of it.

[KnewItsPa]

Oh god. Episode 12 just killed the last vestiges of mystery of the Blue Rose.

Would it really have been so hard not to cliche it into the Project Blue Book? Really? These could have been separate, things, implied connections, mystery. All the subtlety drained away. Completely exasperated with the bare-faced dumb ass stupidity of the script and led by the nose idiot direction this has taken. Twin Peaks ground down to a slomo b-movie remake of the bloody X-Files.

What happened to Audrey, did she marry Chet from Invitation to Love? Or was it chad? I'm asking myself why I should even care right now. Meh. I don't. No S3 at all would have been far, far, better than watching this pile of sloppy fetid manure.

[The Gazebo]

Ep 5 was meh...That's when I began getting a bit antsy. I was extremely disappointed with 6.
[...]
There are so many characters and so much going on that there's just no character development. I think as a viewer I need to feel some connection, some empathy towards these people in order to appreciate a story/storyline. I'm not feeling any of it.

5 and 6 destroyed a lot. Instead of moving forward with an interesting storyline, we had an insurance drama with Dougie, and midgets we didn't know running around killing characters we never cared about. Add to that the complete absence of familiar atmosphere, and you've got a show which goes out of its way to ridicule its own history.

Anyway, it's just a show. I'll take whatever enjoyment I can, and move on when it's finished.

[Rialto]

Do you think the multiple re-watches and minute examinations lead to the discovery of meaning or the invention of it?

This.

I think I'm getting closer to why I dislike this season so much. It's so shallow. Everything being explained and given full backstory. Probably the most enticing thing about the original series was its sense of mystery.

And in all the enthusiastic defence of The Return that I've seen, it all seems to be based on ascribing intentions to Lynch and Frost that there's no basis for, or making up their own backstory to characters/situations.

It's interesting watching the fan reaction, as a study in semiotics. But also baffling, the lengths people are going to, to ascribe a deeper meaning to this shallow, meaningless nonsense.

[waferwhitemilk]

Thinking back, another obvious trolley joke was Dougie on a deadline scribbling some random drawings on insurance papers and then, when he hands them over, his boss starts to see the answer to a mystery in it, or -in Dougie's words- "make sense of it". Obviously a wink to Frost and Lynch's scriptwriting sessions.

[Agent327]

It seemed to me that Agent327 was implying as much as part of his/her argument, but I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. That's what I was replying to, tho'.

If it seemed that way to you, I think you missed what I actually wrote, and what I quoted/replied to. Of course it's possible to have art that is narrowly appreciated!!!! And it's also possible to have art that is both great AND widely appreciated, and no, it doesn't just give you "Transformers". There are countless of examples of great art that millions of people love.

Secondly, I don't think anyone expected The Return to be a huge hit. Perhaps most hoped for less of a ratings disaster, but I haven't seen a single person predict that The Return would become a huge hit with viewers in general.

I was replying to a poster's specific line, explaining why his "We are MANY who feel this way" (love the new show) is not an intellectually honest statement, since a couple of thousand out of a hundred million should not be described as "many", especially not when the 'many' (wide-spread love of the new show) was the actual point of his argument. So I was explaining why that isn't the case. That's not at all the same as foolishly equating quality with popularity as a general rule of thumb.

I also made sure to explain that it's the substance of the new show that is lacking. The actual content makes it feel like a genius way past his prime, just like McCartney, Wilson etc.
Newer works of those artist also don't hold up to the old standard, they 'drag' just like Lynch's new work, lack sharpness, focus etc, in fact in a quite similar way, perhaps musicians in this forum can spot. And each time you get a similar confirmation bias fan reaction from the big fans of those artists as we've seen in this forum.

A lot of people make the point that non fans don't get Lynch, so of course the broad population wouldn't love The Return, but they fail to look in the mirror and understand that big fans have a vast amount of confirmation bias, despite the fact that they feel 100 % certain that they don't. That's how it works.

[dronerstone]

I guess what's still very important to keep in mind with TPTR is that even back in the day during the original run of seasons 1+2, Lynch was totally being Lynch and wanted to take this vision of his and use it to actually BREAK run-of-the-mill television. Right now in 2016/17, (1) there's no "typical" conservative TV show anymore because many are already doing their own thing (which might be, at least partly, thanks to Twin Peaks) and (2) what we HAVE airing nowadays has changed a huge LOT. Therefore, if one wants to break NEW barriers and bring real ART into the world of TV nowadays, one has to be even MORE extreme/weird/crazy and what some might call "pointless" or lacking the obvious.

At least that'd be my personal interpretation of why this doesn't resonate as much with some.

[Manwith]

I dunno...I'd like to think that if I were ever to cuckold my significant other, I'd at least have the decency not to ask for her help in locating my mistress (and repeatedly denigrate and insult her in the process). I'm surprised that's even a matter of disagreement. But again, I acknowledge we don't know the circumstances (which is the whole point of the scene). I'm not necessarily saying Audrey is in the wrong...I just find it pretty hard to judge Charlie as being in the wrong based on what we saw. I wonder if flipping the gender roles would change things?

The statement that Audrey was sleeping with the missing guy was so matter of fact it was pretty confusing. Maybe they have an open marriage?

I sort of got the impression Charlie may not be someone who is interesting in sex (like, asexual and/ or or autistic or something). I say this because he seemed to be uninterested in anything but paperwork. He didn't seem to care that Audrey was sleeping around, unless he was just being passive aggressive and hiding it.

I agree there's a ton we don't know about that scene.