Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
yaxomoxay
Great Northern Member
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Post by yaxomoxay »

RedRum wrote:
yaxomoxay wrote: A couple of lines by Ed and Norma were enough to change the entire story arc. 25 years later just answering to the question if they are together or not is sufficient to change the original story arc (if you really can't exclude S3 from your mind).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I absolutely whole hearlily disagree....

On the subject of food... you're saying a wiff of roast beef is enough to fill the belly....

I'm telling you that much of what made twin peaks was in the detail and interactions with the characters.... Take that away and you have an empty shell of a series...
That's not the heart of TP. TP is much, much more complex. Again, S2 failed for specific reasons even with the element you talk about.
Also, you can find developed characters and interactions in Gilmore Girls, but I bet you don't want the Gilmore Girls.

I also notice that since I have proven you wrong you keep changing the subject and keep asking the meaningless question to more people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
N. Needleman
Lodge Member
Posts: 2113
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

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

Post by N. Needleman »

RedRum wrote:Do you deny that Season three alters the tone and meaning of seasons one and two??
I answered this question several messages ago.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
User avatar
RedRum
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:17 am

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

Post by RedRum »

N. Needleman wrote:
RedRum wrote:Do you deny that Season three alters the tone and meaning of seasons one and two??
I answered this question several messages ago.
No you didn't....

And you wont, because to do so would mean you were on a linear path to some sort of reasoning... which you avoid because you and yaxomoxay are playing a game of troll the Twin Peaks fan.

Let me ask you this... What kind of person would spend an inordinate amount of time on a thread that is directly opposed their views? Except you haven't actually stated your views... because you don't really have one... since anytime anyone questions you on it you shrink away with some defensive or deflective comment.

I put it to you that you would perhaps be happier to not post here and either set up your own ' I LOVE SEASON THREE' Thread where you and other can suck on each other’s love of what the rest of us can't stand....

Of course you are just trying to make people angry so you can feed off the emotion that you stimulated... except you are more than obvious and so fail.
yaxomoxay wrote:
RedRum wrote:
yaxomoxay wrote: A couple of lines by Ed and Norma were enough to change the entire story arc. 25 years later just answering to the question if they are together or not is sufficient to change the original story arc (if you really can't exclude S3 from your mind).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I absolutely whole hearlily disagree....

On the subject of food... you're saying a wiff of roast beef is enough to fill the belly....

I'm telling you that much of what made twin peaks was in the detail and interactions with the characters.... Take that away and you have an empty shell of a series...
That's not the heart of TP. [SNIP]

I also notice that since I have proven you wrong [SNIP]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So you just said that you don't believe that the characters were central to the original's success? Right???

And that I have been proven wrong?

Right??

One marvels are ones intellect... I mean wow I was really put in my place :lol:

There is little wonder you love Season three if you don't think Characters were central to what made Twin Peaks... Twin Peaks....

Yet again... if you don't like Characterisation and the interaction thereof, how did you love season one and two and three where they are the exact opposite....

You are as transparent as noon on a cloudless day....
User avatar
AhmedKhalifa
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:28 pm

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

Post by AhmedKhalifa »

To make things clear, I do think it's possible to love the original series and still love TPTR. Obviously millions do just that. Power to them. But it's also possible to love the original series more than THE RETURN and also be justified, and not be called nostalgic, wants no change, and stuck in the past. I think it has more to do with sensibilities than anything else. I for one prefer the incomparable mix of dreamy gentleness and shocking horror of the original, to the cold, self indulgent, wayward tone of TPTR. Obviously others disagree, and think TPTR is the way forward. Whatever. I think I'm beginning to realize that a lot of it has to do with whether you're more of a Lynch fan than a TP fan, and vice versa. Because, it is undeniable now that TP was more of a collaborative effort than previously thought, while TPTR is the creation of a single, self indulgent artist who hasn't been challenged for years.
"That's what I need, a clean place, reasonably priced."
Rialto
RR Diner Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 8:56 am

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

Post by Rialto »

RedRum wrote:
N. Needleman wrote:
RedRum wrote:How can you be a fan of the original yet not mind that it gets corrupted for a return?
Because we fundamentally disagree with you about whether or not it has been corrupted.
I see.. so its a case that you genuinly like toothpaste in your Orange juice?

Well each to thier own...

I think you are not listening to all the other voices here in this thread that agree with me... WE disagree with you...
RedRum, just stop. You don't have to be 'right'. It's not essential that you persuade people who love the show, that it's actually shit. Give it up. Everybody doesn't have to agree with you. It's exhausting watching you try to browbeat others into seeing The Return the way you see it.

It's fine if you hate it. I hate it. But you don't need the validation of everyone in the World bending to your POV. Stop, please.
User avatar
RedRum
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:17 am

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

Post by RedRum »

Rialto wrote:
RedRum wrote:
N. Needleman wrote:
Because we fundamentally disagree with you about whether or not it has been corrupted.
I see.. so its a case that you genuinly like toothpaste in your Orange juice?

Well each to thier own...

I think you are not listening to all the other voices here in this thread that agree with me... WE disagree with you...
RedRum, just stop. You don't have to be 'right'..
and another enters the fray...

and you'er who exaclty?

Your input into this debate is what?

your views ont he subject at hand is??

Oh I get it you just wanted to pop your head round the door and say RedRum you#re wrong... Right???

Pah... you people are too easy to destroy...

NEXT!
User avatar
RedRum
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:17 am

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

Post by RedRum »

Rialto wrote:
RedRum wrote:
N. Needleman wrote:
Because we fundamentally disagree with you about whether or not it has been corrupted.
I see.. so its a case that you genuinly like toothpaste in your Orange juice?

Well each to thier own...

I think you are not listening to all the other voices here in this thread that agree with me... WE disagree with you...
RedRum, just stop. You don't have to be 'right'..
and another enters the fray...

and you'er who exaclty?

Your input into this debate is what?

your views ont he subject at hand are??

Oh I get it you just wanted to pop your head round the door and say RedRum you're wrong... Right???

Pah... you people are too easy to destroy...

Come back when you have something worth while to contribute though....

NEXT!
Last edited by RedRum on Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Agent Earle
Bookhouse Member
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

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

Post by Agent Earle »

AhmedKhalifa wrote:
Some of the staunchest supporters of TPTR don't seem to hold the original TP in as high a regard as us older fans who watched it countless times and cherish it for its flawed beauty. I'm even getting the feeling that Lynch himself is almost being resentful to fans who adored the original, since it wasn't purely his vision in the first place. Instead, he's taking it back, so to speak, pushing it farther and farther away from its roots and towards what he thinks he should be doing now in accordance with how' he perceives himself and what critics expect of him, rather than honoring and enhancing the best aspects of the original. A sad, sad situation for us old fans.
THIS x 1000 times! Congratulations on your thoughts, couldn't have said it any better and I agree with every letter.
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Great Northern Member
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Post by yaxomoxay »

RedRum wrote: Let me ask you this... What kind of person would spend an inordinate amount of time on a thread that is directly opposed their views?
Me, that is a person that likes to learn new things from people with opposed views. I learn a lot on this thread. I can find agreement with what I think by staying with myself. Some of the thinking in this thread is good. I don't have to agree in order to learn.
Except you haven't actually stated your views... because you don't really have one... since anytime anyone questions you on it you shrink away with some defensive or deflective comment.

I put it to you that you would perhaps be happier to not post here and either set up your own ' I LOVE SEASON THREE' Thread where you and other can suck on each other’s love of what the rest of us can't stand....
And we are defensive?

So you just said that you don't believe that the characters were central to the original's success? Right???
It wasn't THE central part. It was one of the MANY things that made TP special. This is not the Gilmore Girls where one element is fundamental. TP is much deeper than that. Yes, 25 years ago it was an important piece of TP, but it was not THE piece. Remove Laura Palmer's murder and not much is left as S2 displayed. By keeping up with this story that characters are central you diminish TP.
And that I have been proven wrong?

Right??
Yep, because you expect something as difficult, complex, and important as TP to remain intact after new elements are introduced (which is inevitable). ANYTHING that touches TP will modify its past. TSHOTP modify its past. FWWM modify its past. Leland modified its past. It's so evident that you can't see the obvious. Yes, season 3 change the tone of the originals. YES! IT DID IT. Now the question is how can anyone who's a lover of TP expect the tone of the originals to remain intact (independently of the fact that you like the new season or not). Updating Bobby, Norma, Ed, Cooper, Nadine even just a tiny bit was going to change the tone of the originals. If S3 was only an "update" movie, with just the characters in TP and the only things we saw were just updates (good or bad it doesn't matter) the tone would've changed anyways. 2017 Bobby Briggs cop is going to change the perspectives of the old Bobby. 2017 Bobby Briggs criminal is going to change the perspectives of the old Bobby. And so goes for every other character. Nadine and Ed were going to be changed by the mere fact that they appeared. And so it happened.
One marvels are ones intellect... I mean wow I was really put in my place :lol:
You just don't see it because you're too busy regurgitating your superiority as a superior TP fan.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by yaxomoxay on Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
RedRum
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:17 am

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

Post by RedRum »

Agent Earle wrote:
AhmedKhalifa wrote:
Some of the staunchest supporters of TPTR don't seem to hold the original TP in as high a regard as us older fans who watched it countless times and cherish it for its flawed beauty. I'm even getting the feeling that Lynch himself is almost being resentful to fans who adored the original, since it wasn't purely his vision in the first place. Instead, he's taking it back, so to speak, pushing it farther and farther away from its roots and towards what he thinks he should be doing now in accordance with how' he perceives himself and what critics expect of him, rather than honoring and enhancing the best aspects of the original. A sad, sad situation for us old fans.
THIS x 1000 times! Congratulations on your thoughts, couldn't have said it any better and I agree with every letter.
Absolutely.... though there are some that say they do... but it’s impossible to do so and to reconcile the third season as they are just diametrically opposed to each other.
krzhuva
New Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 6:22 pm

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

Post by krzhuva »

RedRum, you have already gotten your answer. Change is inevitable. The original itself was the opposite of some narrowly defined space that defies fluctuations. Unpredictability and the unrestricted flow of ideas have always been at its core. I remember Lynch saying in some old interview that for him, one of the most fascinating things about Twin Peaks was the feeling that ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN. ‘Anything’ naturally includes characterization that you hold so dear. In an instant, he could transform the sweet Donna into a straight-from-film-noir hot smoking dame. Or, you know, Cooper into Dougie, and the old Peaks into The Return.
Starting position’s more comfortable, though, as one great arm-wrestler once said.
User avatar
Venus
RR Diner Member
Posts: 457
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:10 pm
Location: England

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

Post by Venus »

AhmedKhalifa wrote:To make things clear, I do think it's possible to love the original series and still love TPTR. Obviously millions do just that. Power to them. But it's also possible to love the original series more than THE RETURN and also be justified, and not be called nostalgic, wants no change, and stuck in the past. I think it has more to do with sensibilities than anything else. I for one prefer the incomparable mix of dreamy gentleness and shocking horror of the original, to the cold, self indulgent, wayward tone of TPTR. Obviously others disagree, and think TPTR is the way forward. Whatever. I think I'm beginning to realize that a lot of it has to do with whether you're more of a Lynch fan than a TP fan, and vice versa. Because, it is undeniable now that TP was more of a collaborative effort than previously thought, while TPTR is the creation of a single, self indulgent artist who hasn't been challenged for years.
Yep, I said something similar to this a while back in the dim and distant past :) probably without the self indulgent bit, but there ya go. I'm not a Lynch fan. I've watched a lot of his work and it's intrigued me at times, freaked me a bit, interested me and really thats where I left it. I would say I a more of a TP fan in the fact that I like a bit of diluted Lynch and the world of TP. Full on heroin DKL isn't for me. It's interesting that if this was a straight 50/50 collaborative effort with Lynch and Frost then maybe it was the additional writers in the original series that seriously helped to craft it into what it was as a whole and maybe I've been crediting the wrong people all these years if TP3 is anything to go by. Sometimes in life all of the right collaborative forces meet at a point in time and magic occurs. It's all in the timing.

PS is anyone else still waiting for the 'poo to flow' as Kyle M put it? I'm waiting for some scary stuff but for me, it's not happened yet and I scare quite easily. (no boo jokes here please) :lol:
Last edited by Venus on Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
When Jupiter and Saturn meet...
Rialto
RR Diner Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 8:56 am

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

Post by Rialto »

RedRum wrote:
N. Needleman wrote: I've discussed my feelings about this series
I didn't ask you how you feel...

I asked you how you think... and the question still stands...

Do you deny that Season three alters the tone and meaning of seasons one and two??
Shush now, that's enough.
User avatar
N. Needleman
Lodge Member
Posts: 2113
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

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

Post by N. Needleman »

RedRum wrote:
N. Needleman wrote:
RedRum wrote:Do you deny that Season three alters the tone and meaning of seasons one and two??
I answered this question several messages ago.
No you didn't....
Yeah, I did.
Let me ask you this... What kind of person would spend an inordinate amount of time on a thread that is directly opposed their views?
I'm glad you asked. I've been waiting for this question.

Like others have mentioned, I initially came to this thread at its inception out of curiosity and sympathy to try to hear critical takes that might be nuanced or different from the more pervasive positive POV. I thought it might be worth a thoughtful conversation. But as I found page after page of really personal, nasty attacks on first Lynch and Frost start to develop, then the crew and cast, then more and more often a lot of insults about the rest of us on the forum - I went from trying to be the bigger person or asking politely for it to lessen, to lately just being really disillusioned.

I kept hoping it would change, because we had posters who kept asking some of the rest of us (me included) to stay, saying they really wanted to talk about the show, wanted other opinions, wanted this earnest give and take in conversation, just like in these last 20 or so pages - but they still can't seem to stop implying that we're all clueless or lying to ourselves, like it's some sort of reflexive, angry instinct. And when they're called on it suddenly it's not a discussion anymore, it's a venting zone again and won't we please respect that.

Well, sorry, that doesn't work when you're an adult. You can't say you really want to talk to people about it and then still insult them in the next post (or breath). Pick one, or just admit you simply expect us to be at your disposal for however you want to behave. Which is not fair and not honest with either side. And frankly, it's a little late after 160+ pages to keep saying (for like the ninth or tenth time) that you have a lot of raw feelings and we should all be aware you or someone else might not be able to control your behavior towards the rest of us.

That's what galls me most of all - the insistence on being understood and respected coupled with the apparent disinterest in consistently respecting the rest of us. This show is just as dear and important and passionate a subject for us as it is for you. Your anguish is not uniquely privileged. You having a deep wealth of feeling for it is not a free pass to play gatekeeper for whether we're true fans, or just call us a slew of names while you try to process your feelings about a television show.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
Rialto
RR Diner Member
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 8:56 am

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

Post by Rialto »

And Needleman and Yaxomoxay - stop encouraging him.

If you were my kids I'd have sent you all to your rooms by now.
Post Reply