General Discussion on the New Series (All Opinions Welcome)

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

User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

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

Postby N. Needleman » Mon May 21, 2018 11:09 am

sylvia_north wrote:David Lynch *is* prestige TV. He and Frost, already prestigious from his Hill Street Blues acclaim, was possibly the first to deserve that title. He is no longer indie, he is no longer the adventurer rebel. He has access to massive audiences, corporate support, because of his respected brand of deliberate weirdness that in its current incarnation had anyone else’s name on it would be ignored but must always be called refreshing because of said prestige. Prestige TV is the industry elite’s embrace of high art, thanks to Lynch, mixed with low-brow titallliation to capitalize on the widest possible audience.


That's easy to say devoid of context, but in practice it's not factual. Mainstream prestige TV - meticulously plotted for story and characters beats, often years in advance - bears no resemblance to Lynch's work as we know it, certainly not Season 3. In fact, the lack of so many of those things is a crucial part of many of the complaints (not mine, but they're there!) in this thread.

Try to draw a line between the production and manufacture of Game of Thrones, Westworld, Fargo, etc. to that of Season 3. It's difficult to impossible. Performers on S3 often had next to no script, no schedule, some written on napkins the day of, some actors given a call date practically the night before. Scenes made up on set because Lynch liked the idea of a hangout scene for Cole, Tammy and Diane smoking cigarettes. FX and edits don't match. The mysterious shapeshifting RR Diner at night. I can go on and that's not even getting into the above issues re: story and character.

Vegas Elvis still trotted out the old chestnut hits we were oversaturated with already, but then found most success doing what everyone else had been doing in the genre he created


Except no one is doing what Lynch did with Season 3. For better or worse, no one else could get away with it.

If it validates your view of Season 3 to claim it is somehow of a piece with other popular TV of 2017-18 today, hey, go for it. I'm just not sure you'll get many takers on that view either among the season's fans or non-fans.

anything in TP3 can mean whatever you want it to mean which makes theorizing a go-nowhere game.


That viewpoint hasn't been new since 1990, nor has it stopped anyone since 1990.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
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 » Mon May 21, 2018 11:29 am

N. Needleman wrote:
sylvia_north wrote:David Lynch *is* prestige TV. He and Frost, already prestigious from his Hill Street Blues acclaim, was possibly the first to deserve that title. He is no longer indie, he is no longer the adventurer rebel. He has access to massive audiences, corporate support, because of his respected brand of deliberate weirdness that in its current incarnation had anyone else’s name on it would be ignored but must always be called refreshing because of said prestige. Prestige TV is the industry elite’s embrace of high art, thanks to Lynch, mixed with low-brow titallliation to capitalize on the widest possible audience.


That's easy to say devoid of context, but in practice it's not factual. Mainstream prestige TV - meticulously plotted for story and characters beats, often years in advance - bears no resemblance to Lynch's work as we know it, certainly not Season 3. In fact, the lack of so many of those things is a crucial part of many of the complaints (not mine, but they're there!) in this thread.

Try to draw a line between the production and manufacture of Game of Thrones, Westworld, Fargo, etc. to that of Season 3. It's difficult to impossible. Performers on S3 often had next to no script, no schedule, some written on napkins the day of, some actors given a call date practically the night before. Scenes made up on set because Lynch liked the idea of a hangout scene for Cole, Tammy and Diane smoking cigarettes. FX and edits don't match. The mysterious shapeshifting RR Diner at night. I can go on and that's not even getting into the above issues re: story and character.

Vegas Elvis still trotted out the old chestnut hits we were oversaturated with already, but then found most success doing what everyone else had been doing in the genre he created


Except no one is doing what Lynch did with Season 3. For better or worse, no one else could get away with it.



If it validates your view of Season 3 to claim it is somehow of a piece with other popular TV of 2017-18 today, hey, go for it. I'm just not sure you'll get many takers on that view either among the season's fans or non-fans.

anything in TP3 can mean whatever you want it to mean which makes theorizing a go-nowhere game.


That viewpoint hasn't been new since 1990, nor has it stopped anyone since 1990.


^ wrong, actually. We had good, solid, evidentially based theories that we talked about daily for decades with almost full consensus, on everything.

Uh, not doing what others were doing was my point? He would have been more successful, commercially and to the fans, if he’d changed with the times instead of giving us The Greatest Hits and filler. But he is prestige TV, he defined it. I have no idea how you’re defining it, but it’s the TV others defer to. If there’s a HUGE name behind it that was able to manipulate Showtime as much as he did you can’t pretend it’s indie.

Hipsters love to feel like they’re not consumerists and old ppl love to feel they’re still edgy though so I guess the marketing worked

Remember, too, Elvis had a nice extended swan song in Vegas some called his peak and still had talent when he was a mess, so I’m not calling TP3 a total failure or whatever. DL was the King of TV comebacks last year for sure.

And I promise, being that I posted on the designated critical thread, my objective isn’t to change anyone’s mind. Otherwise I’d be on the other threads bothering you, N.
Last edited by sylvia_north on Mon May 21, 2018 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

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

Postby N. Needleman » Mon May 21, 2018 11:51 am

sylvia_north wrote:^ wrong, actually. We had good, solid, evidentially based theories that we talked about daily for decades with almost full consensus, on everything.


Consensus on some ideas, sure. But there's been wild-ass theorizing on all manner of things for decades. Did everyone agree with John Thorne's (was it John Thorne?) Deer Meadow dream when it first emerged? I sure didn't and still don't, but it is a fascinating and worthwhile idea. That's going to continue forever now, not just about Seasons 1 and 2 but on 3. Don't believe me, look at these threads or at the TP subreddit, or Blue Rose Magazine. We may not agree with all of the theories, but the theorizing is no less valid than it ever was whether or not you personally like the new season.

Uh, not doing what others were doing was my point? He would have been more successful, commercially and to the fans, if he’d changed with the times instead of giving us The Greatest Hits and filler.


This doesn't make sense to me no matter how I hair-split it. If Lynch had trotted out the 'damn good coffee' touchstones more avidly and provided much more fan service and conventional payoffs, that would've been doing the Greatest Hits. He chose not to do much of that. He also chose not to do what most other prestige TV is doing - commercially successful, 'consumerist' prestige TV. Based on your rather labored Elvis analogy, I would think either option Lynch chose would be perceived as out of touch and foolish to you. He can't win for losing no matter what he does.

Also: Is he a commercially successful Vegas Elvis sellout, or was Season 3 less commercially successful (which it was ratings-wise as opposed to subscriptions, that's a fact) and somehow he's still a deluded old man with no indie cred left? Which is it?

But he is prestige TV, he defined it. I have no idea how you’re defining it, but it’s the TV others defer to.


I'm sure everyone will be making their own Part 8 (or god forbid, Part 12 - please no) soon. Actually, they probably will - but the bigger point here is that they will never abandon the more commercially and narratively satisfying rhythms of story + character beats virtually all prestige TV follows but Season 3, for better or worse, chose not to. The overall production will be incredibly influential in future, but Westworld or GOT's spinoffs will not magically begin to emulate the narrative roundelays or blind alleys of Season 3 any time soon. Only Lynch does that or seems to even want to. They will not defer to that because the modern industry and business will not allow for it and most people simply don't want to do that, which is fine.

Hipsters love to feel like they’re not consumerists and old ppl love to feel they’re still edgy though so I guess the marketing worked


I really couldn't care less about either - I just liked it, period. I'm simple that way.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
LateReg
Posts: 688
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 5:19 pm

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

Postby LateReg » Mon May 21, 2018 12:19 pm

sylvia_north wrote:...


1. I also had looked up the definition of radical before posting what I did to make sure that I was using it correctly. If you think I'm not, then I'm sorry for the confusion. But I believe I am using it in a way that it is commonly used, such as by Matt Zoller Seitz when he referred to each Lynch film becoming more radical in form since the original Twin Peaks. I did not think the word could only be used when outside or longterm change was affected; rather, I meant that the fundamental nature of typical TV was shaken up within the 18 hours of The Return, which it vastly was. I still think this is proper use of the word radical to describe something that in and of itself does not adhere to the traditional or fundamental way of doing things. (And Merriam Webster also describes it as such in definition 3a.)

2. Prestige TV is as you define it, but there is also another way to define it now that it is the norm. Most Prestige TV feels the same, looks the same, is paced the same, etc. That's what I was referring to and The Return in no way resembles the current model of Prestige TV. I've read a couple articles from the past few years addressing this exact thing, ie that Prestige TV no longer exists because it is so much the norm that nothing stands out from anything else. Once again, coming at it from different angles.

3. Lynch has his own clung-to style, yes, and I see The Return as a summation, culmination and further evolution of it. That no one else does what he does can't simply be chalked up to each person having their own style; 90% of the movies and TV made are made in the exact same style, and the other 10% stands out stylistically. Lynch's is an extreme style, which is why no one else is doing what he does and also why whatever he does will still seem radical because it's not adhering to the established forms. I can agree that they have already been established by him, but once again, I see him endlessly evolving his style and interests and it still feels new. I find it crazy that something like Lost Highway is still considered a radical/confounding form of storytelling even after 20 years, but that's what happens when next to nobody is breaking free of the traditional modes, whereas Lynch continues to push further into abstraction. Lynch may be part of the establishment as you say because he has earned prestige status and respect, but he is still an iconoclast and his art sits well outside of the establishment. Few artists grow more adventurous with age or can return to the purest ideology of their earliest works, but Lynch has done both and I respect the hell out of that.

4. I'm not defending the green glove scene, but I am interpreting it in a way that fits naturally with the rest of what I've seen in The Return; I don't love the scene, but I accept it as a vital, intellectually satisfying and well-made piece of the puzzle. My interpretations have come very naturally while watching and through discussion with people here, and I think that just as the Judy playing card looks like a Rorschach blot, the show is also built like one. I don't think that's an easy thing to accomplish, and I've frequently stated the show was built upon rhythm and rhyme and theme and tone rather than plot, and I think it's quite unique and invigorating. There's nothing wrong with a work being open to endless theorizing especially when the work is not based in plot.
BGate
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:15 am

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

Postby BGate » Mon May 21, 2018 2:14 pm

Feel free to direct me to all the prestige TV shows that prefigure the middle 20 minutes of Part 8. I would genuinely love to watch them!
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 » Mon May 21, 2018 7:03 pm

BGate wrote:Feel free to direct me to all the prestige TV shows that prefigure the middle 20 minutes of Part 8. I would genuinely love to watch them!


https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/t ... estige-tv/ “It’s Not Prestige, It’s Just TV”

"Prestige TV" as a label is meant to denote quality, but it's most frequently applied to the shows produced by certain networks—HBO, FX, Showtime, sometimes AMC, and increasingly Amazon and Netflix. Even the other series that fall under the category (like, Lifetime's UnREAL) have earned the "prestige" badge based on how similar they are to these other offerings. They accrue critical acclaim, but genres tend to follow a pattern: Over time, the markers of quality become both set in stone and increasingly easy to imitate—and the art becomes stale.

Soooo yeah, if you’re using ‘mainstream good tv’ -I don’t watch tv, so I’m not judging other shows either way- as ‘prestige’ I don’t know what to tell you. Don’t call something high quality or innovative if it’s not, man. Don’t call Twin Peaks something else if it’s not prestige but I think for y’all and this writer it fits the definition..

When the higher ups at Showtime want another cash cow, I’m sure they’ll take the next sure-thing surrealist mainstream film director to stick a short film in the middle of a potentially otherwise mostly disappointing show, but for now we only have one. Like I said, an entertainer in a class by himself. Or wait, Terrence Malick could do a show, but he doesn’t show enough titty and gore for the circus. Watch a movie if other cinematic TV doesn’t get artsy fartsy enough for you. It’s buried a couple posts ago, but I dismissed the ‘but it’s new for tv’ argument already, because short and long form have overlapped. Movies are TV like, TV are movie-like, and each consumer can customize how they watch a film or show, usually it comes out of the same home screens.

I honestly don’t come to this thread to debate, I’ve always had the YAY-sayers blocked.

Sometimes I have a feeling people aren’t selective enough about what they consume so their standards are low. I only had Twin Peaks and a few other things to compare it to because I always believed nothing would compare. Nothing has! Not even Twin Peaks.
Last edited by sylvia_north on Mon May 21, 2018 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
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 May 21, 2018 7:38 pm

As someone who has watched pretty much all the shows mentioned in that article, I found the author’s conclusions to be pretty silly. The main thing I get from that article is that the writer really has a bee in his bonnet about Fargo for some reason. While I can sort of see what he’s getting at, Fargo is a pretty poor example to choose. He’s correct that Fargo is glossy and lacks the depth of, say, a Mad Men. But it never pretends to be anything other than what it is, and his characterization of the show as “serious people doing serious things” is silly. Does he even watch the show? It tends toward absurdism far more than pontification, and has way more of a sense of humor than most of the “prestige” genre (the self-serious Westworld would have been a far better example IMO). It’s also ridiculous IMO to say that Breaking Bad and The Wire haven’t aged well. Those shows continue to be unsurpassed cultural and critical touchstones. It’s tough to tell what exactly would please this guy. He complains about shows incorporating/expanding upon elements of prior successful works (which has ALWAYS been a major part of cultural and artistic development), then somehow seems to fault the earlier works for appearing less groundbreaking in retrospect. Short of every work being absolutely without precedent and earth-shatteringly original, what exactly is he looking for?

I do agree with him about Hannibal. I’d venture to say that it might be the closest show tonally to TP S3, particularly in its final season. The Young Pope, too, although I only got around to watching the first couple episodes before it got away from me. Seems like TP S3 might be right up this guy’s alley, honestly.
baxter
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:12 pm

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

Postby baxter » Mon May 21, 2018 8:42 pm

:-D

Great posts above about the relationship between recent Lynch works. I've been reading the Cahiers du Cinema Twin Peaks special recently, since I don't have time to start my epic rewatch. Reading is slow because my French is crap, but it's a great dissection of the show, and even more impressive considering that the first special was written after only 8 episodes.

I had completely forgotten about the "time and time again" reference in the black lodge. That to me is the explanation for the final episodes, and it is wonderfully ambiguous at the same time. To me, it means that after Cooper's attempt to save Laura, he simply repeats the intervening years but in an alternate timeline. He comes out the lodge (when? in the past still?), then crosses to an alternate reality.

It could also mean "repeating this over and over", but that's an extrapolation to me. It could be an interpretation, but we aren't given enough information to know.
User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

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

Postby N. Needleman » Tue May 22, 2018 12:06 am

Anyone who slams The Wire is delusional.

sylvia_north wrote:Soooo yeah, if you’re using ‘mainstream good tv’ -I don’t watch tv, so I’m not judging other shows either way-


That's your prerogative, but I think if you don't watch other what are considered 'prestige TV shows' like Game of Thrones, Westworld, Fargo, Breaking Bad, etc. then it's going to be hard for you to understand what we're discussing and comparing/contrasting when we discuss the differences between modern popular prestige TV and this show. We're dealing directly in its modern contemporaries.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
BGate
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:15 am

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

Postby BGate » Tue May 22, 2018 2:53 pm

sylvia_north wrote:
BGate wrote:Feel free to direct me to all the prestige TV shows that prefigure the middle 20 minutes of Part 8. I would genuinely love to watch them!


https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/t ... estige-tv/ “It’s Not Prestige, It’s Just TV”

"Prestige TV" as a label is meant to denote quality, but it's most frequently applied to the shows produced by certain networks—HBO, FX, Showtime, sometimes AMC, and increasingly Amazon and Netflix. Even the other series that fall under the category (like, Lifetime's UnREAL) have earned the "prestige" badge based on how similar they are to these other offerings. They accrue critical acclaim, but genres tend to follow a pattern: Over time, the markers of quality become both set in stone and increasingly easy to imitate—and the art becomes stale.

Soooo yeah, if you’re using ‘mainstream good tv’ -I don’t watch tv, so I’m not judging other shows either way- as ‘prestige’ I don’t know what to tell you. Don’t call something high quality or innovative if it’s not, man. Don’t call Twin Peaks something else if it’s not prestige but I think for y’all and this writer it fits the definition..

When the higher ups at Showtime want another cash cow, I’m sure they’ll take the next sure-thing surrealist mainstream film director to stick a short film in the middle of a potentially otherwise mostly disappointing show, but for now we only have one. Like I said, an entertainer in a class by himself. Or wait, Terrence Malick could do a show, but he doesn’t show enough titty and gore for the circus. Watch a movie if other cinematic TV doesn’t get artsy fartsy enough for you. It’s buried a couple posts ago, but I dismissed the ‘but it’s new for tv’ argument already, because short and long form have overlapped. Movies are TV like, TV are movie-like, and each consumer can customize how they watch a film or show, usually it comes out of the same home screens.


I'm coming into the middle of this so I have no idea what you're talking about, honestly. Are you being sarcastic about the Malick thing? I would be elated if that happened, and he's really the only American mainstream-ish analogue to Lynch right now (a sad statement when you realize they're both in their 70s).

The over-saturation of "quality" TV has led to the term "prestige" becoming sort of a pejorative among certain corners of the internet. But I love many things that are considered "prestige TV" (Sopranos, Wire, Twin Peaks, True Detective S1). And yes, the line has blurred between film and TV, but that doesn't mean it's not instructive to note that the new TP both engages with the conventions of prestige TV and completely upturns them (that's why this thread is 400 pages long). It is challenging in a way that pretty much nothing on TV is (or has ever been). And the same goes for current mainstream American filmmaking, so no, it's not just about being "new for TV".

I think your problem is that you view that assessment, which is simply an objective observation, as purely a value judgement. Being unique and "groundbreaking" and "weird" are not in and of themselves the reasons why I love this version of TP so much, and view it as such a wonderful artistic achievement. It's a big part of it, sure, because I get pleasure out of seeing artists play with and push their given medium. But like I said, I also love a show like The Wire which is almost ALL about the storytelling and the characters and not very interested in form or style (though that's not to say it's completely uninterested or uninteresting in those ways)
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 May 23, 2018 2:56 pm

sylvia_north wrote:. This isn’t a cult or anything :wink:



Shhh!! Are you crazy??? Do you want to die of a painful death??? Hopefully THEY didn’t hear you.... ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
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 » Wed May 23, 2018 2:59 pm

yaxomoxay wrote:
sylvia_north wrote:. This isn’t a cult or anything :wink:



Shhh!! Are you crazy??? Do you want to die of a painful death??? Hopefully THEY didn’t hear you.... ;)


8) xo If you can’t wear your cult status like a badge of honor, what kinda rabid Lynch fan are you :?:
LFB > S3 < green tea latte Frank
User avatar
Mr. Strawberry
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:17 pm
Location: Nevada City, CA
Contact:

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

Postby Mr. Strawberry » Thu May 24, 2018 1:30 pm

Agent327 wrote:Yeah, during it's run sheer probability dictates that there will be moments, story arcs that will get your attention and get you intrigued if you stick around.
One thing that is POSSIBLE, and could instill hope in those disillusioned so far, is Coop returning to his old self, the FBI agent somewhat in the ballpark of his former self doing his thing.
That combined with taking on a good case, perhaps directly tied to his own history could at least make a difference for a lot of people.

But of course, if the description is accurate, that this is all about "Cooper's journey back into Twin Peaks" it may not happen until quite late....

The above was posted on May 23, 2017. Just happened to read it and noticed that Agent327 had basically predicted the ending.
Not taking any calls.
User avatar
NormoftheAndes
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:00 am

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

Postby NormoftheAndes » Thu May 24, 2018 3:18 pm

Mr. Strawberry wrote:
Agent327 wrote:Yeah, during it's run sheer probability dictates that there will be moments, story arcs that will get your attention and get you intrigued if you stick around.
One thing that is POSSIBLE, and could instill hope in those disillusioned so far, is Coop returning to his old self, the FBI agent somewhat in the ballpark of his former self doing his thing.
That combined with taking on a good case, perhaps directly tied to his own history could at least make a difference for a lot of people.

But of course, if the description is accurate, that this is all about "Cooper's journey back into Twin Peaks" it may not happen until quite late....

The above was posted on May 23, 2017. Just happened to read it and noticed that Agent327 had basically predicted the ending.


I wouldn't say the prediction was accurate at all!
User avatar
Henrys Hair
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:28 am
Contact:

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

Postby Henrys Hair » Thu May 24, 2018 3:50 pm

Gabriel wrote:
StrangerDanger wrote:Impressive theory!


So the series will end with Coop pulling Laura alive from the water outside the Martell's house? ;)


This was posted a day later by Gabriel in response to mtsi's theory that "this season is basically the first 2 seasons in reverse. We start with (figuratively) episode 29 and we get to journey back to episode 1"

He may well have said it in jest, but it turned out he wasn't so far off the mark after all.

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jordanlake, LateReg and 9 guests