Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:41 am

Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:I don’t know that Coop was ever planning on Laura making it “home” if you mean the Palmer house. He seems to be leading her to the gold pool/portal to the Fireman’s quarters, presumably to use as a weapon against Judy (“two birds, one stone”). If he took her home, Leland/Bob would continue raping her and probably eventually kill her anyway. I think when he said they were going “home,” he meant the White Lodge.
I agree with that, but then why 'Richard' took 'Carrie Page' litterally back to Laura's home at this end? Ok Leland is long dead and Richard/Coop doesn't know about Sarah Palmer dark state, but it seems very odd to get Laura back to the house where she was molested for years. And if it is truly an alternate universe, did Richard/Coop really expect Carrie/Laura to remember her other self memories? And what would have been Sarah's reaction to see her dead girl coming home 25 years later? Little to no sense at all...


To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy, if we accept that that is indeed the entity that is inside Sarah/the house.
User avatar
Aqwell
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:03 am
Location: Far from here

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

Postby Aqwell » Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:11 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:37 am

Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:


She has the other glove from Freddie’s set.
Kilmoore
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:20 pm

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

Postby Kilmoore » Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:10 am

Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:

Well, that's one theory. There's also a theory that Laura screaming detonated her as a weapon, destroying Judy and the pocket dimension was in.

It's all just theories. There are no answers.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:36 am

Kilmoore wrote:It's all just theories. There are no answers.


I get why that’s frustrating, but it’s not an inherently bad thing. The same could be said for, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey. There are plenty of examples of ambiguous cinema being received incredibly well and incredibly poorly, and of course at the end of the day it’s all a matter of opinion.
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Postby yaxomoxay » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:16 am

Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:


It is evident that you never had to fight a golden jelly bean!

I think she realizes who she is, that’s why she screams and everything goes dark. She clearly hears her mother saying “Laura”.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

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

Postby yaxomoxay » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:18 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:


She has the other glove from Freddie’s set.


Lol.
Freddie is one of the things I will criticize about TP:TR. Not the glove thing. It could be even charming, I really don’t care about the oddity of his character.
But the guy that has to fight BOB can’t just information dump us and fight the boss monster. Unless I am missing something, his story should’ve been expanded much more and in a much better way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Kilmoore
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:20 pm

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

Postby Kilmoore » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:49 am

yaxomoxay wrote:Freddie is one of the things I will criticize about TP:TR. Not the glove thing. It could be even charming, I really don’t care about the oddity of his character.
But the guy that has to fight BOB can’t just information dump us and fight the boss monster. Unless I am missing something, his story should’ve been expanded much more and in a much better way.

Yeah. He tells us, instead of us seeing, how the Fireman gave him the glove and told him to beat up BOB. And then we see Andy given insignificant visions by The Fireman. Why not combine these and have Andy be the pure, innocent force that is chosen to beat BOB?

I can't see this as anything else than an intentional "fuck you" to anyone who cares about the original Twin Peaks. They made it very clear that the old characters don't matter.
Poiuyt
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:26 am

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

Postby Poiuyt » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:47 pm

Troubbble wrote:Multiple people unashamedly bashing Mullholland Drive? No wonder I can't get down with you people! Wow...


i loved mulholland drive when i saw it in theaters in 2001, but i was also 14 at the time. it's easier for me to see it for what it is now: a failed tv pilot with a tacked-on twist ending.

granted, my opinion on lynch in general has soured after watching the return.
User avatar
powerleftist
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:40 pm

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

Postby powerleftist » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:03 pm

Kilmoore wrote:
Aqwell wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:To awaken her memories since he needs/wants Laura to know who she is. And possibly also to confront Judy...
Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:

Well, that's one theory. There's also a theory that Laura screaming detonated her as a weapon, destroying Judy and the pocket dimension was in.

It's all just theories. There are no answers.

That would be something straight out of a comic book, in the worst possible sense.

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
Kilmoore wrote:It's all just theories. There are no answers.


I get why that’s frustrating, but it’s not an inherently bad thing. The same could be said for, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey.

I think 2001 is pretty straightforward, at least once you read its basic meaning.
Kilmoore
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:20 pm

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

Postby Kilmoore » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:29 pm

powerleftist wrote:
Kilmoore wrote:
Aqwell wrote:Which unfortunately did not happen. I'm still curious to know how he would have fight her/It. With his super secret weapon Laura, under her golden jelly bean appearance? By the power of love? :wink:

Well, that's one theory. There's also a theory that Laura screaming detonated her as a weapon, destroying Judy and the pocket dimension was in.

It's all just theories. There are no answers.

That would be something straight out of a comic book, in the worst possible sense.

And Cooper just randomly failing in an unexplained quest would be straight out of a horribly badly written TV-series.
User avatar
eyeboogers
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

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

Postby eyeboogers » Sat Oct 21, 2017 1:33 am

Kilmoore wrote:
powerleftist wrote:
Kilmoore wrote:Well, that's one theory. There's also a theory that Laura screaming detonated her as a weapon, destroying Judy and the pocket dimension was in.

It's all just theories. There are no answers.

That would be something straight out of a comic book, in the worst possible sense.

And Cooper just randomly failing in an unexplained quest would be straight out of a horribly badly written TV-series.


My point is that none of those things are unexplained, you just - as an audience member, have to get engaged and do some work for once. For some reason many of you seem terrified of the notion of not being spoonfed everything. How about celebrating artists that push the medium forward, challenge audiences and in the end give us much more rewarding experiences (if we let them). This whole thread is the biggest mystery of "Twin Peaks" to me.
Kilmoore
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:20 pm

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

Postby Kilmoore » Sat Oct 21, 2017 1:52 am

eyeboogers wrote:For some reason many of you seem terrified of the notion of not being spoonfed everything.

Oh, come off it. There is a distinct difference between finding the answers through interpretations and the answers not existing at all. From what I have seen, TP:TR falls solidly in the latter category.

People arrogantly wave their theories around as if they were some established truths. What was Cooper doing with Laura, Judy=Mother=The Experiement, what happened at the end... all of those things have no proven, solid answers. Theorize away, but don't use your theories as evidence that other people's theories are wrong.

Here's my theory: The continuity issues, the pointless characters and storylines, the vague non-ending that has nothing to do with episodes 1-16 aren't results of some artistic brainstorm. They are careless, sloppy writing. Because Lynch and Frost don't care about Twin Peaks. They walked away when the original series was still running. Lynch has repeatedly said over the years that Twin Peaks is dead. They had stories they wanted to film, and the only way to get funding was to call it Twin Peaks and slap some old characters in. This why stories with Ed, Norma, Jacoby, Carl Rodd, Sarah etc. are so pointless, they're just there to make it look like it's Twin Peaks. It's meant to be a pointless piece of "art" with no answers. Which, in my book, makes it a complete waste of time.

Mind you, I hated FWWM when it first came out, for many of the same reasons. I do adore it now. Maybe time will change my view, but I'm quite certain it won't this time.
User avatar
eyeboogers
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

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

Postby eyeboogers » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:43 am

Kilmoore wrote:
eyeboogers wrote:For some reason many of you seem terrified of the notion of not being spoonfed everything.

Oh, come off it. There is a distinct difference between finding the answers through interpretations and the answers not existing at all. From what I have seen, TP:TR falls solidly in the latter category.

People arrogantly wave their theories around as if they were some established truths. What was Cooper doing with Laura, Judy=Mother=The Experiement, what happened at the end... all of those things have no proven, solid answers. Theorize away, but don't use your theories as evidence that other people's theories are wrong.

Here's my theory: The continuity issues, the pointless characters and storylines, the vague non-ending that has nothing to do with episodes 1-16 aren't results of some artistic brainstorm. They are careless, sloppy writing. Because Lynch and Frost don't care about Twin Peaks. They walked away when the original series was still running. Lynch has repeatedly said over the years that Twin Peaks is dead. They had stories they wanted to film, and the only way to get funding was to call it Twin Peaks and slap some old characters in. This why stories with Ed, Norma, Jacoby, Carl Rodd, Sarah etc. are so pointless, they're just there to make it look like it's Twin Peaks. It's meant to be a pointless piece of "art" with no answers. Which, in my book, makes it a complete waste of time.

Mind you, I hated FWWM when it first came out, for many of the same reasons. I do adore it now. Maybe time will change my view, but I'm quite certain it won't this time.


You are very certain in general it seems. When other people are able to see how story elements connect you dismiss it as "theories" - though many of the things you claim is nonsense are spelled out pretty clearly on the show. Try taking a second look with some of these things in mind? maybe it will click for you in the way Fire Walk With Me eventually did. I honestly think this thread has soured the experience for many of those that have posted in it. Making people blind to the great parts by constantly nitpicking.
Kilmoore
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:20 pm

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

Postby Kilmoore » Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:34 am

eyeboogers wrote:You are very certain in general it seems. When other people are able to see how story elements connect you dismiss it as "theories"

If there was a consensus backed by things we actually see on screen, you would have a point. There isn't, you don't.
eyeboogers wrote:I honestly think this thread has soured the experience for many of those that have posted in it.

This was my thought before the final two episodes aired. I though the toxic atmosphere of people determined not to like the show no matter what was pointless. Once it turned out it was all for nothing, this became the only thread that made sense.

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests