Twin Peaks Return: The Profoundly Disappointed Support Group

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

User avatar
Deep Thought
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:05 pm
Location: Florida

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

Postby Deep Thought » Sat Feb 10, 2018 11:40 am

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:1) Can you, for example, provide a link of you defending a non-Lynch work that employs a deux ex machina like Green Glove to defeat a child abuser? Or anything in the same ballbark, if this even has a ballpark.

2) Or of you defending a non-Lynch retcon that calls into question a narrative's central moment like Laura's murder?

3) Or of you defending a director other than Lynch narcissistically inserting himself in his show to mention his groin? Or ballpark, so to speak.

4) Or defending a central character's key turning point being as random as sticking a fork in a socket?

Etc.


Kay, I thought I kind of covered this in my first post above, but if we want to get into particulars. . . Now I am sorry I do not have a body of movie criticism to draw upon, so I cannot post a "link" to an argument I made in the past. If you think I am defending my favorite movies here in some convoluted scheme to justify my blinding devotion to Lynch, then well I am at a loss.

I'll try and stick with just the ten movies I listed:

1) Deus ex Machina: Well, the ending of Ordet is about as machina as they come, it maybe even defines the term! As this has been in my top 5 movies for many years (there are about 20 movies in my top 5) I hope that is defense enough for my being OK with non-Lynch Dues ex Machina.

2) You got me there. In movies it is called a plot twist and is rather ho hum much of the time, but in a longer format show it is difficult to relate such an "established" plot point being given the Rashomon treatment. I rarely watch TV so I would think literature would be a better place to look. On the face of it I do not understand the criticism, other than being upset that your expectations were overturned. For me, overturning expectations can be a good thing, and should not be discounted for its own sake.

3) Well, I liked when Jodorowsky did it in The Holy Mountain by surrounding himself with a half-naked couple as the white alchemist. He also titled a film after his character El Topo. Maybe The Return should have been called, Cole's Back (and Bigger than Ever). My 17 year old son, who loved Cooper and loved the original series (but who doesn't know from Lynch other than me telling him he wrote and directed the show) believes Cole is his favorite character in TR. Is he mistaken?

4) Have to disagree about the randomness, as this whole electricity thing was established throughout the show. I enjoyed the surprise of the fork, and for an example of a great movie surprise, watch any good movie, there will at least one in there.

I think I'll just accept that the "dissapointed" are coming at this work with emotional expectations and leave it at that. The John Cage example is apt. Lots of people hate his work because they think he is helping "destroy music" or some such. Me? I just don't listen to him. The Return seems to be destroying TP for some people. If they are looking at it without nostalgia, they would say (as many have on Dugpa, and moved on), oh well, not my cup of tea, and find something else more to their liking. I can't imagine getting upset with Jarmusch for one of his movies I don't like, and I can't imagine getting mad at Lynch either. It's a logical fallacy to think that because there exists a cult of Lynch that all who like Lynch are cultists. And that is what you are saying.

I've never poked my head in here because I am not emotionally attached, and I understand completely the disappointment those that are are feeling towards TR. But it seems this thread is now morphing into a regular criticism thread.
There's your roast beef and cheese.
User avatar
laughingpinecone
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
Location: D'ni
Contact:

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

Postby laughingpinecone » Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:34 pm

I'm on record strenuously defending a puzzle in a video game where the solution is to stand still on a switch for twelve minutes and a half, is that cred enough?
Same series, different installment, the thrilling end of a generational saga, the fate of an entire civilization is at stake... the mute first-person protagonist you naturally assume to be 'you' is later revealed in a forum post to be the self-insertion of the game's lore guy. I love it. Hell, I cosplayed as myself cosplaying as the guy, that's how much I loved that reveal.
Most of that fandom finds that puzzle tedious, I find it thematically poignant on one narrative level and hysterically funny on another, and a magnificent specimen of in-your-face puzzle design gameplay-wise. That protag reveal could be seen as narcissistic, I think that it was the smartest choice they could make for the overall story and couldn't care less about the state of the guy's ego. These things happen all the time, it's really not a Lynch conspiracy.

I don't understand the defenses of TPTR that are like "it's tedious on purpose and that's so brilliant because of whatever metatextual commentary", though. I legitimately don't find it tedious, like I don't find plenty of video art tedious and like I happily stood still on my damn switch for a full twelve minutes and a half. We can discuss metatextual commentary till the cows come home but I do think the work has to be engaging on some level first.
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:52 pm

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return was proof enough of its own awfulness, but also telling was the way its fans went about defending it, and also how they didn’t. See the Facebook grunts above, the drive-by daftness throughout this thread, and now Mr R lowering himself to a Clouseau-grade deduction that certain criticism of Chrysta B’s acting was ‘misogyny’ (definition: contempt for women in general). Did the original poster say whether the implied pornstar was female or did Mr R make that sexist assumption? Either way, trying to see contempt for women in general in such a comparison for CB’s gorgeous-but-wooden performance seems a bit desperate. That it should come in defence of The Return, of all shows, smacks of the Trump/Goebbels propaganda tactic of accusing those who oppose you of the very sins your own side has committed. Not that dear old Mr Reindeer is in reality Donald Trump. Surely not.


Ya got me. Apologies for any typos, this jade ring is clunky, and I’m a little jittery from too much covfefe. ;)

I suppose I should be offended by the Clouseau gibe, but I’m always happy to see any reference to the brilliant if troubled Peter Sellers.

I think it was pretty obvious from the nature of Bell’s performance if not from the posts themselves (I’m not going to comb back right now) that the authors were saying she resembled a female porn star. Her gait and breathy manner of speech in TP:TR are distinctly feminine and very much in the Marilyn Monroe “bombshell” line. And since you’re a fan of asking people for links to times they’ve made similar arguments in other cases, I will reiterate MY earlier request: show me a single instance on this board where a user has complained about a male actor being too ugly, too old, being the male equivalent of a “hag” or being compared to a porn star, and then maybe we’ll reevaluate whether the comments on the actresses are sexist. Until then, I think I’ve made my case. Even taking sexism out of the equation, I agree with MT that ANY personal attacks on actors’ appearances or ages have no value in evaluating an artistic work.

And would I have made the same choices L/F made in a work of my own? Of course not; I also wouldn’t have made Eraserhead. Creating any unique or unusual work of art requires two steps: coming up with the concept, and then having enough faith in your own instincts to execute it. Since my mind doesn’t work like DKL’s, I never would have come up with this set of ideas, so I can’t even conceptualize whether I then would have had enough faith in my sensibilities to believe they would work.

As for your request for links to praise for other works, I’m afraid I’m not very active on many forums. I’m more of a lurker...I lurked here for years before the new show went into production and I came out of hiding. I posted on the Lost forums (the Fuselage), but I believe those have been deleted. Ditto the IMDB boards. I’ve never used Reddit, and can’t think of anywhere else I’ve actively contributed since the Usenet days. I will say that I enjoyed many of Lost’s exercises in “audience antagonism,” such as ending the first season with a plunge into the darkness of the hatch, leaving the audience to wonder all summer what was inside. The Prisoner finale would likely also fall into the category of “audience antagonism,” perhaps the most masterful example of it in television history.

I guess if I’m understanding properly, you’re specifically addressing your request to those who acknowledge that the show is “incoherent, ugly, tedious,” &c., but who also defend those aspects as being strengths? I don’t recall anyone ever saying that in so many words, but I could have missed it or forgotten. It would certainly be an odd stance to take, because most of the words you used are pejoratives. For instance, I might characterize the show (for argument’s sake) as dense and meandering, which means something similar to “incoherent and tedious,” but with less of a negative slant. The words you’ve chosen pretty much inherently carry dislike for the work in their definitions, so it would be pretty strange to say, for instance, “I found it tedious and I loved that about it,” unless the person is a masochist.

In any event, it’s tough to think of other works that are exactly analogous to what L/F did here, because TP:TR is a pretty unique case, as a 25-years-later sequel that aggressively engages with and subverts nostalgia for the original. Many of the things that annoy/disappoint people in this thread are VERY specific to this work and only this work because it’s such a rare thing. But to address a few of your critiques and name some other works that I like which may be roughly analogous:

You mention a retcon and that it was “all a dream.” I interpret these elements of the show differently and in a more nuanced manner than you do, for reasons that I and others have outlined elsewhere, so these critiques don’t apply here for me (personally, I hate “it was all a dream” endings, even the beloved one in the otherwise excellent movie of The Wizard of Oz).

In terms of incoherence and tediousness, do you find Paris, Texas tedious? Does Mad Men’s defiance of traditional story structure and lack of conventional resolution of Don’s arc after 7 seasons antagonize you? Those come immediately to mind as works that I love which might raise similar reactions. Other examples that spring to mind: Last Year at Marienbad, Cosmopolis, Videodrome, Holy Motors, Upstream Color, The Lobster.

In terms of narcissism, I guess I’d submit 8 1/2 as Exhibit A and probably a dozen Woody Allen films as Exhibit B. Gordon/DKL’s presence in this work doesn’t hold a candle to either of those.

I have no issues with the portrayals of older women, only with certain users’ reactions to the actresses on here. I do have issues with some of the violence against women, but I personally feel that by the end, it was put in proper context. YMMV, of course.

And I still think the green glove battle is a sadness, even as I can appreciate some of the arguments for its merits.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:16 pm

I also think the electrical socket, far from being random, was kind of predictable in retrospect. Electricity has been set up as a major force of the TP supernatural impliedly since Episode 2 and very explicitly since FWWM. We even had DougieCooper staring at an outlet in the Las Vegas PD in an earlier Part as foreshadowing. Whether the choice works for you is another matter, but I think “random” is the wrong word choice.
Hartright
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 11:50 am

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

Postby Hartright » Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:34 pm

"Often fans told us they were okay with the show’s levels of incoherence, ugliness, tediousness, narcissism, randomness, etc, and with the portrayal of older women, the retcon, it was all a dream, plus of course “Hey, let’s try out the deux ex machina trope. Now where would be a suitable place? I know, let’s use it to culminate the story arc of the slicer of the infant Laura’s privates!”. "
(from Blue Rose Case)



I have some issues with some of Lynch's work and (TPTR the return in particular) but I was so thrilled to watch television that was so unpredictable that I could never anticipate where it might go next. You speak of "incoherence, ugliness, tediousness, narcissism, randomness," as though they are inherent qualities of the work but my experience was very different. I had no expectations or hopes for anything in particular and I did not experience TR in the manner in which you express.

I am comfortable with plots that feature many digressions, and threads that don't lead anywhere. I love being dropped into character's situations with little or no context or explication provided (I love a good eavesdrop!). This may seem like incoherence to a particular viewer but I often prefer it to generic and predictable character development. Lynch is hardly the originator here. Sterne's novel Tristram Shandy was published in 1759 and it's continual interruptions, tangents and red-herrings are frustrating and hilarious at the same time. I've loved reading the novels of Joyce. And Pynchon too - The Crying of Lot 49 contains a mystery which grows more confusing and convoluted and remains maddeningly/brilliantly unresolved at its conclusion.

There were dark elements in TR - I often have an issue with onscreen violence and its titillating effects and I found some scenes problematic and uncomfortable to watch. "Ugliness"? - perhaps. It's there in Ancient Greek drama, Shakespeare etc. The world contains much ugliness and depicting it has a long tradition. The representation of the abuse and violence which female characters endure was my biggest problem with the series. I've mentioned earlier that I believe that that which we depict we also celebrate. Viewers are placed to be willing participants in the sadism on show - even as we feel revulsion and condemn it. I know many people to whom I will not recommend TR for viewing because I know of their level of tolerance for on screen violence. But for me this is the compromise of being in an audience of any kind - participating vicariously in the suffering of others.

"Tediousness"? - I felt frustrated with sections of the Dougie story but was also intrigued and delighted along the way. When the build-up of tension during the delayed-gratification episodes is "finally" released we find that this also is unsatisfactory. I have found many works of art that I ultimately regard highly very frustrating or difficult at times. I don't always presume that this is a fault - either with me or the work. I enjoy grappling with something that challenges me. This series was far too odd to be tedious for me - I was always wondering "where is this going?" "why has this been placed there?" I often found scenes hard to read and there was so much delight in trying to understand and account for it all.

I don't really find Narcissism in TR. Lynch is hardly the first director to write and act in his own work. TR takes up similar themes to some of Lynch's earlier work and no doubt there are resonances throughout his films - as happens for many artists across many disciplines.

"Random"? - Lynch seems, from the Behind The Scenes footage, to be very particular and deliberate in his direction. From watching TR I perceive great attention to detail, visually incredible passages, careful shots, many surprising choices. There are many surprises and plot twists. I found the inclusion of Freddie's role most odd and deflating (pardon the pun). The sheriff's station showdown seems overly schematic and perfunctory at the same time as it is very surprising - disappointing perhaps. My reading is that with the awakening of Cooper we are presented with an impossible version of the character - a cliche-ridden hero who pardons gangsters, ties up loose ends, and is in total control. This version of Cooper, and the convenient conclusion he helps orchestrate, can't hold - and the final two episodes present a very strange and unsettling development that I feel defies easy explanation. Mentions of dreams, time-travel, other dimensions, fractured identities etc don't really do justice to explain the disturbing place where we find ourselves at the season's end.

"Who is the dreamer?" With our desires and fantasies we construct self-serving and self-defeating narratives through which we persevere in a confusing world where our sense of identity and order, is under threat from that which we can't control or understand. The lodges and other un-explained forces problematise straightforward views of human agency and responsibility - much like the intervention of Greek Gods in Homer, and many other story-telling and faith traditions. We are tossed along by our own deficiencies and the vicissitudes of fate/chance and can never fully reach resolution or closure ...
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 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:36 am

A bit of an aside, but anyone who thought TPTR was too slow moving and who has a Netflix subscription should watch the SlowTV series from Norway- TPTR will seem like a hyper-warped video game by comparison and you'll be screaming for the guy sweeping the Roadhouse or Jacoby painting the gold shovels :-)
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
AnotherBlueRoseCase
Posts: 145
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:17 am

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

Postby AnotherBlueRoseCase » Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:24 pm

And would I have made the same choices L/F made in a work of my own? Of course not; I also wouldn’t have made Eraserhead. Creating any unique or unusual work of art requires two steps: coming up with the concept, and then having enough faith in your own instincts to execute it. Since my mind doesn’t work like DKL’s, I never would have come up with this set of ideas, so I can’t even conceptualize whether I then would have had enough faith in my sensibilities to believe they would work.


Nicely put but a bit evasive here, Mr President. IIRC you defended a certain aspect of TR strongly for page after page, but then when you were asked page after page if you yourself would have included this aspect in your own hypothetical show you refused to answer, repeatedly, as did everybody else arguing the same point for pages.

I guess if I’m understanding properly, you’re specifically addressing your request to those who acknowledge that the show is “incoherent, ugly, tedious,” &c., but who also defend those aspects as being strengths? I don’t recall anyone ever saying that in so many words, but I could have missed it or forgotten. It would certainly be an odd stance to take, because most of the words you used are pejoratives. For instance, I might characterize the show (for argument’s sake) as dense and meandering, which means something similar to “incoherent and tedious,” but with less of a negative slant. The words you’ve chosen pretty much inherently carry dislike for the work in their definitions, so it would be pretty strange to say, for instance, “I found it tedious and I loved that about it,” unless the person is a masochist.


And yet Deep Thought has just said this very thing about various films s/he likes (“I’m loving the tediousness of it all”). Can't speak to his/her masochism, mind.

In any event, it’s tough to think of other works that are exactly analogous to what L/F did here, because TP:TR is a pretty unique case, as a 25-years-later sequel that aggressively engages with and subverts nostalgia for the original. Many of the things that annoy/disappoint people in this thread are VERY specific to this work and only this work because it’s such a rare thing.


Fair enough, but all that’s being asked for is a link or two to ANY non-Lynch defences of ANY of these, all of which have been defended to the hilt here and elsewhere: incoherence, ugliness, tediousness, narcissism, randomness, etc, and with the portrayal of older women, the retcon, it was all a dream… The point is not to rehash debates about whether the show is actually incoherent, ugly, tedious etc, so I won’t respond to the rest of your post. But every single one of the above has been defended, or at least described as unproblematic, repeatedly on TP sites. Many, many people have said stuff like “I loooove how hardly anything fits together. Such a refreshing change from the usual spoonfed TV crap.” Or “I love how completely meaningless Coop’s return was. I’m crying tears of joy here.” Etc, etc.

So the response is simply, “Really? Then could you link us to somewhere you’ve said something similar about a non-Lynch work?” That’s a fairly long list above, and it could easily be doubled. Yet not one fan has been able to link in the way requested, to a single equivalent defence, and as is becoming pretty clear, probably none of them ever will, because many fans only praise this stuff when it’s done by Lynch.

The TR critics in this thread have gone to great lengths to back their arguments with detailed illustration, often within the context of general approaches to art. This gave authority, sincerity and plausibility to their comments because they were consistent with a general aesthetic.

This many enthusiasts sorely lacked. When people said things like “Green Glove beating BOB is one of my favourite moments in all of Twin Peaks” the natural response is “Hard to believe you’d be saying that if e.g. Tarantino did it.” And the same applied to defences of the other items on the list above. “Really? You’re seriously okay with that for its own sake and not just because of Lynch? Well, please link to your defending something similar.”

Radio silence, and it still continues.

Many fans’ supposed liking of aspects of this show was wildly inconsistent with their approach to work by other artists. I saw this IRL and I’m confident in saying the same of the online TR fanbase. So many defences just didn’t ring true, which may be one reason so many fans fell back onto Facebook-level stuff like “Well, I just like what I like. Plus anyway it’s impossible to articulate appreciation of Lynch.”

Sorry if this response is a bit messy/”shoddy”, Mr President. I’m writing it fast while waiting for a train.

Laughingpinecone –

I'm on record strenuously defending a puzzle in a video game where the solution is to stand still on a switch for twelve minutes and a half, is that cred enough? 


If you’d been defending TR’s tediousness after defending the video game stunt’s tediousness it might have been, but nope. Different context.

Welcome to the Support Group, Hartright. I know it’s long, but the thread has dealt with every one of your points several times. It’s worth a read, though.
Lynch on Trump, mid-2018: "He could go down as one of the greatest presidents in history."
User avatar
Deep Thought
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:05 pm
Location: Florida

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

Postby Deep Thought » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:32 pm

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:
And yet Deep Thought has just said this very thing about various films s/he likes (“I’m loving the tediousness of it all”). Can't speak to his/her masochism, mind.


Hey, I see my name mentioned!

Ahem. Remove the word masochism and you are getting a little warmer. Try this: "Can't speak to his/her mind." I would agree with this sentiment Rose, you can't.

So a steak of masochism is required to champion 2001? I wish I could say I have not heard that argument before.

I've no doubt that what you are saying about the fans' reaction to TR online is accurate. My immediate thought upon hearing that fans are defending something that they would not have done in the past is: "good on Lynch using his celebrity to help spread open mindedness about artistic approaches to narrative." But, if being an art judge, jury and jailer is what makes you happy, that seems harmless to me.

Tying in the enjoyment of The Return that some Lynch fans have to some groupie mentality does hold some truck with me me. I just look at it as a positive, because like you said, I like my art painful and harder to swallow than most. Let's get some more people on board!
There's your roast beef and cheese.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:54 pm

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:Nicely put but a bit evasive here, Mr President. IIRC you defended a certain aspect of TR strongly for page after page, but then when you were asked page after page if you yourself would have included this aspect in your own hypothetical show you refused to answer, repeatedly, as did everybody else arguing the same point for pages.


Hmmm, I’m afraid I don’t remember which aspect of the show this is referring to. I’ll admit, it’s not a particularly interesting hypothetical for me to think about personally, which may be why I glossed past it when you first asked. My creative sensibility is very different from Mr. Lynch’s. I tend to be word-oriented rather than visual, and more focused on linear thought rather than intuition. I’m more apt to sit down and work out an elaborate timeline of a world (something we’ve learned neither Lynch nor Frost cares much about) rather than engage in abstractions. I admire Lynch’s ability to trust his intuition and subconscious to the degree that he does, and the results generally tend to connect deeply and viscerally with me, but I’m just not hardwired to create the same way he does. My mind works completely differently. So imagining a hypothetical universe where I think the way he does is just uninteresting to me. That being said, if you care to remind me which aspect of the show this was specifically addressing, I’d be more than happy to answer the question now.
User avatar
laughingpinecone
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
Location: D'ni
Contact:

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

Postby laughingpinecone » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:39 am

If you’d been defending TR’s tediousness after defending the video game stunt’s tediousness it might have been, but nope. Different context.

Case 1: aspect of a work is considered tedious by many. I enjoy it, because I find stillness meaningful in that context, and happily defend it.
Case 2: aspect of a work is considered tedious by... honestly it's hard to get a read on TPTR reactions, but let's still say many. I enjoy it, because I find stillness meaningful in that context, and happily defend it.
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
AnotherBlueRoseCase
Posts: 145
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:17 am

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

Postby AnotherBlueRoseCase » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:20 am

In fact we may have stumbled across a way of measuring precisely how much the cult of Lynch has blinded TR’s fanbase.

Think again about the shovel-painting, floor sweeping, chevrons above the slot machines, the striptease in front of the writer-director, the Monica Belushi dream, “Not where it counts, buddy”, “Oooh YOU’RE nice and wet”, the cheap digital look, the older women mostly shrews, the repeated failure to follow through on subplots or make them cohere, the minimal use of the original cast, the amount of dead air, the refusal of suspension of disbelief, Dougie’s sexual awakening, Laura’s murder cast in doubt, the whole thing perhaps a dream, Green Glove vs BOB, Cooper’s return delayed to episode 15 after endless teases and then prompted by a fork stuck in a socket. Now try to answer as honestly as you can: how would you have felt about the above, singly or especially as a package, if this Twin Peaks revival had been made by Tarantino?

That response you just had to sniggering Quentin fucking Tarantino doing all this to Twin Peaks, that’s the honest one and the right one. Your response to all this when perpetrated by David Lynch, if any different, that’s the fanboy one. The distance between the two is precisely how blinded you’ve been by the cult of Lynch.

There, that’s what I’ve been failing to articulate. And that’s my response to any TR fan who now comments here: would you still be saying that if the exact same show had been made by Tarantino? No, really.

Some fans won’t be able to answer that honestly, or even allow themselves to ask it. Some might, though.

------------------

Mr R --

Sorry, but as I've indicated I'm not interested in rehashing old discussions. Plus I'll be away now for weeks, so just won't be around to keep chatting.

Talking of links, however, I would be genuinely intrigued to read any of your work online. PM me if you wish.
Lynch on Trump, mid-2018: "He could go down as one of the greatest presidents in history."
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 » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:25 am

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:In fact we may have stumbled across a way of measuring precisely how much the cult of Lynch has blinded TR’s fanbase.


While I think knowing something was directed by a certain director who one admires can and probably does influence one's take on the initial viewing, most of us have seen TPTR multiple times. It's really a reach to think people are so psychologically influenced by the maker of a film that they fool themselves into believing they are being entertained.

I've had a few problems with TPTR, it is not, in my view, 18 hours of pure perfection. But the parts that work, work really well for me, and have gotten me to reflect more even than the original run on the nature of consciousness, identity, dreams, reality, etc. Do some of the plotlines drop off suddenly with seemingly no payoff? Sure. Do some of the scenes with Cole, Albert, Tammy and Diane become too expository for my tastes? Absolutely.

At the end of the day though, I've thought more about The Return than any show since the original Twin Peaks. And I really doubt it's due to some fanboy love of Lynch on my part, especially since I am a Peaks fan much more than a Lynch fan.
"Dougie is COOPER? How the Hell is this!?"
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

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

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:27 am

I’m probably the wrong person to ask the Tarantino question, since I’m a fan of a lot of his stuff. Of course, he’s probably a poor fit for TP (as he is for Star Trek IMO — I’m both fascinated and terrified to see what that will look like). But if he had made TP:TR, I think my first reaction would be shock and admiration that he had managed to subdue his usual frenetic style and produce such a languorous piece.

Again, these types of hypotheticals don’t interest me much. I appreciate what you’re trying to get us to acknowledge in ourselves, but the fact is, I think most of us can agree that, love it or hate it, no one but Lynch could have or would have come up with this particular mix. It’s like asking how I’d feel about ‘8 1/2’ if it weren’t directed by Fellini. Do I like TP:TR because it was directed by Lynch, or do I like Lynch because he creates works like TP:TR? It’s a chicken or the egg question, although I truly believe in my heart of hearts that it’s far more the latter. I’ll certainly admit that, to a degree, the goodwill he has built by making several of my all-time favorite films has conditioned me to trust him more than I would a first-time filmmaker or someone like Brett Ratner whose work I actively dislike, just as you might have more patience listening to a seemingly stupid joke if it’s being told by a friend you know to be very funny, trusting that it will pay off. But I can call a spade a spade when Lynch makes something that I find qualitatively bad (Dumbland, On the Air), and I’ve been pretty honest with myself and this board about the elements of the new show that I disliked. Maybe you’re not satisfied that my enjoyment of the show doesn’t hinge solely on the name in the credits, and maybe you never will be. And that really doesn’t bother me, because, while it has led to some good spirited debate, it ultimately really doesn’t matter whether you believe me.
IcedOver
Posts: 387
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:31 pm

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

Postby IcedOver » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:00 am

AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:
There, that’s what I’ve been failing to articulate. And that’s my response to any TR fan who now comments here: would you still be saying that if the exact same show had been made by Tarantino? No, really.

Some fans won’t be able to answer that honestly, or even allow themselves to ask it. Some might, though.


It's a difficult hypothetical to consider this show exactly as delivered being made by someone else. I think all fans' outlooks and anticipation would have been totally different had another person come on to helm it at any point. Tarantino isn't the ideal choice for the hypothetical because he has his own thing. If, say, it wasn't David Lynch but David Nutter, a prolific, bland TV director who is brought on to do pilots, just a style-less technician, who did all or part of this, the reaction to the myriad flaws wouldn't be as charitable. Same if it had been J.J. Abrams, who gets hate for all he does. If the overrated and bland David Fincher had done it, as some floated when Lynch "quit", then I think the reaction would have been similar but not as rabid as to Lynch, because for some reason he is considered an auteur even though I view most of his films as garbage. Lynch has one of the most specific and recognizable styles of any filmmaker, and probably the most ardent fans of any one filmmaker, so of course many are going to give him the benefit of the doubt. To me, I think many have gone overboard in excusing so much of this show, even down to production goofs, as intentional. I don't give a pass to all the problems.
I DON'T FEEL GOOD!!!!!
Robin Davies
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:52 am
Location: England

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

Postby Robin Davies » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:41 am

IcedOver wrote:The usage of the "TP" theme in the LV context (as they drive past what are clearly cast and crew trailers -- one of many goofs) was a very poor decision.
Where are these "cast and crew trailers"?

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shazbot and 11 guests