World of Blue - Archived Forum 2007-2022

First time poster, but a very long time reader of these boards and of Lynch forums in general.

I've finally been driven to post from a sense of genuine shock that many long-time fans of TP have responded so negatively to both the Return generally and to parts 17-18 in particular. To clarify, I can completely understand disappointment from the general viewing public and even from those who enjoyed the original show but hated FWWM. The Return was never going to be a ratings juggernaut (it didn't have to be) and it was never going to bring back viewers back into the fold who were alienated by the very different approach FFWM took.

What's hard for me to square is the idea that there are folks here who loved FWWM and are aware of Lynch's film-making since then (especially Inland Empire) but who expected something neat, clean, and familiar from this new season and its conclusion. The very fact that Lynch/Frost insisted on "Return" as a title is a pretty obvious nod to Norma's vehemence in rejecting "comeback" in favor of the former term in Sunset Blvd, and signaled all along that we would not be getting a cozy continuation of a past series. "I am dead, yet I live" indeed.

No art - or kitsch or some half-measure if you find yourself on the profoundly disappointed side - is above criticism. Lynch/Frost's work is no different. But it is disheartening to see some responses here resorting to the lowest common denominator through claims the makers of this show are lazy or mean-spirited. 70 year-old men don't direct 16 1/2 hours of film for projects about which they are careless or contemptuous.

For my part, I got exactly what I had always wanted (but also feared and dreaded) from the Return. And there were parts that I hated mixed in with those moments when I laughed or started to cry. But there were also moments that transcended what we usually think of as television.

I've never been so shaken and sickened by a swerve I knew was coming. Absolutely masterful!

I didn't love all of The Return, but the last two parts made it worthwhile for me. Amazing, rewarding stuff!

Judy's old name/pronounciation meaning "to explain" in chinese blew my mind one more time. Makes perfect sense on several levels!

'Satisfied' isn't really the word I'd use for my response. 'Satisfied' suggests it fed my appetite, which it didn't -- it profoundly didn't. And I am glad of it since those appetites are all received in any case. What this work did was differ substantially from anything and everything I routinely desired or anticipated from Twin Peaks. It transported me to many very unexpected places. It had the power to frighten, frustrate, entertain and bewilder me.

I'd say I was impressed.

pinballmars wrote:When a new Twin Peaks project was announced about three years ago, I loved it not because I wanted a trip back to the 90s and to hang out with those old characters, but because the world of Twin Peaks seemed like a perfect platform for David Lynch to REALLY go to the fucking moon and surprise and enrage and baffle. That's part of the character of Twin Peaks, I say. It's not a mystery that can be solved in a few minutes. It might not be a mystery that can be solved ever. It's a dense thicket of question upon question upon question upon question. THAT'S the soul of Twin Peaks, to me.

And I'd say that I got that. More than I even expected.

This series was beautiful stuff and I'm looking forward to re-watching it many more times.

Fair enough. But what we got has no artistic integrity under the label "Twin Peaks". It might as well have been called (and it should've been, but then I guess Showtime, aided by Lynch & Frost, wouldn't have reeled in as many suckers as they did) "DKL Presents the Wonderful and Strange Rigaramarole of Dougie Jones: The Poo Flows (or Does It?)".

Agent Earle wrote:

pinballmars wrote:When a new Twin Peaks project was announced about three years ago, I loved it not because I wanted a trip back to the 90s and to hang out with those old characters, but because the world of Twin Peaks seemed like a perfect platform for David Lynch to REALLY go to the fucking moon and surprise and enrage and baffle. That's part of the character of Twin Peaks, I say. It's not a mystery that can be solved in a few minutes. It might not be a mystery that can be solved ever. It's a dense thicket of question upon question upon question upon question. THAT'S the soul of Twin Peaks, to me.

And I'd say that I got that. More than I even expected.

This series was beautiful stuff and I'm looking forward to re-watching it many more times.

Fair enough. But what we got has no artistic integrity under the label "Twin Peaks". It might as well have been called....

the same could be said for FWWM.. matter of fact a lot of people said just that

Doctor S wrote:First time poster, but a very long time reader of these boards and of Lynch forums in general.

I've finally been driven to post from a sense of genuine shock that many long-time fans of TP have responded so negatively to both the Return generally and to parts 17-18 in particular. To clarify, I can completely understand disappointment from the general viewing public and even from those who enjoyed the original show but hated FWWM. The Return was never going to be a ratings juggernaut (it didn't have to be) and it was never going to bring back viewers back into the fold who were alienated by the very different approach FFWM took.

What's hard for me to square is the idea that there are folks here who loved FWWM and are aware of Lynch's film-making since then (especially Inland Empire) but who expected something neat, clean, and familiar from this new season and its conclusion. The very fact that Lynch/Frost insisted on "Return" as a title is a pretty obvious nod to Norma's vehemence in rejecting "comeback" in favor of the former term in Sunset Blvd, and signaled all along that we would not be getting a cozy continuation of a past series. "I am dead, yet I live" indeed.

No art - or kitsch or some half-measure if you find yourself on the profoundly disappointed side - is above criticism. Lynch/Frost's work is no different. But it is disheartening to see some responses here resorting to the lowest common denominator through claims the makers of this show are lazy or mean-spirited. 70 year-old men don't direct 16 1/2 hours of film for projects about which they are careless or contemptuous.

For my part, I got exactly what I had always wanted (but also feared and dreaded) from the Return. And there were parts that I hated mixed in with those moments when I laughed or started to cry. But there were also moments that transcended what we usually think of as television.

To quote those of the "profoundly satisfied" who've been dropping in The Profoundly Disappointed thread on a regular basis: as far as your description of those who are disappointed in the series is concerned, you're making gross and inaccurate generalizations. I'd point you to some 250 pages (and counting) of thread that will give you a pretty good general feeling as to the basis for the complaints (hint: expectations of "neat" and "clean" have nothing to do with it), but what would be the point? You've obviously made up your mind about us, untrue fans of The Master and His Work.

As to the accusations of laziness: not bothering to get your facts straight about the contents of YOUR OWN show which has been around for a quarter of a century before embarking on the writing course for new installments (be they in book or cinematic form) qualifies as laziness in my book, so I guess I'm guilty in this regard. And a case could be made for being contemptuous when all you are willing to do when fans ask you about the possibility of some 25 years-old resolutions in the new work is answer them in riddles (which ultimately amount to jackshit - in case you should wonder, I mean comments such as "I guess you remember Lana Milford winning the TP beauty pageant of 1989" and the like).

claaa7 wrote:
the same could be said for FWWM..

Hardly. But it's okay to disagree.

Agent Earle wrote:

claaa7 wrote:
the same could be said for FWWM..

Hardly. But it's okay to disagree.

i agree

Agent Earle wrote:

Doctor S wrote:
You've obviously made up your mind about us, untrue fans of The Master and His Work.

As to the accusations of laziness: not bothering to get your facts straight about the contents of YOUR OWN show which has been around for a quarter of a century before embarking on the writing course for new installments (be they in book or cinematic form) qualifies as laziness in my book, so I guess I'm guilty in this regard. And a case could be made for being contemptuous when all you are willing to do when fans ask you about the possibility of some 25 years-old resolutions in the new work is answer them in riddles (which ultimately amount to jackshit - in case you should wonder, I mean comments such as "I guess you remember Lana Milford winning the TP beauty pageant of 1989" and the like).

My tone was ill-chosen. I really don't believe that Lynch is above criticism. Far from it. I personally find his TM obsession to be distracting at best and predatory at worst, and I think that some of the thinking to which it has led him has generated the parts of everything including and since Inland Empire that I find frustrating.

I stand by my point about laziness however. It is not "HIS OWN" show (in reference to Lynch). It is rather a show which he sees himself as having been instrumental in creating and which (again, in his opinion) went completely off the rails in the wake of his absence from it. This may be an overly narcissistic point of view on his part, but it seems to be where he is coming from when he discarded the parts of that continuity which he did.

I should have left speculation about the dissatisfied crowd's motivation out of it. My honest point is that I was surprised to learn that there are a significant number of viewers who liked FWWM but disliked the Return.

I count myself as profoundly satisfied by the whole thing and shaken by the ending in a way I still can't stop thinking about. Really, it's the whole experience that I'll miss. It can only be new once. Absorbing every hour and having it alive in my head all summer long - it was unforgettable. I wish everyone could have had the same experience, but it's not the kind of thing that could reach everyone in the same way.

Doctor S wrote:

Agent Earle wrote:

Doctor S wrote:
You've obviously made up your mind about us, untrue fans of The Master and His Work.

As to the accusations of laziness: not bothering to get your facts straight about the contents of YOUR OWN show which has been around for a quarter of a century before embarking on the writing course for new installments (be they in book or cinematic form) qualifies as laziness in my book, so I guess I'm guilty in this regard. And a case could be made for being contemptuous when all you are willing to do when fans ask you about the possibility of some 25 years-old resolutions in the new work is answer them in riddles (which ultimately amount to jackshit - in case you should wonder, I mean comments such as "I guess you remember Lana Milford winning the TP beauty pageant of 1989" and the like).

My tone was ill-chosen. I really don't believe that Lynch is above criticism. Far from it. I personally find his TM obsession to be distracting at best and predatory at worst, and I think that some of the thinking to which it has led him has generated the parts of everything including and since Inland Empire that I find frustrating.

I stand by my point about laziness however. It is not "HIS OWN" show (in reference to Lynch). It is rather a show which he sees himself as having been instrumental in creating and which (again, in his opinion) went completely off the rails in the wake of his absence from it. This may be an overly narcissistic point of view on his part, but it seems to be where he is coming from when he discarded the parts of that continuity which he did.

I should have left speculation about the dissatisfied crowd's motivation out of it. My honest point is that I was surprised to learn that there are a significant number of viewers who liked FWWM but disliked the Return.

No hard feelings, man, I'm just venting a little, though this is not the appropriate place to do it, I realize that. I could add a thing or two about the show going off the rails in light of Lynch's (self-imposed) absence, but I'll leave you guys to your own thread and tiptoe my way to the other side.

counterpaul wrote:Count me in! I never imagined the ending we got, but now that we have it, I can't imagine a more perfect one.

seriously? you cant even conjure up anything in your personal imagination that can be better? nah, cant be

nick1218 wrote:

counterpaul wrote:Count me in! I never imagined the ending we got, but now that we have it, I can't imagine a more perfect one.

seriously? you cant even conjure up anything in your personal imagination that can be better? nah, cant be

how would you have the finale? please, enlighten me.

nick1218 wrote:

counterpaul wrote:Count me in! I never imagined the ending we got, but now that we have it, I can't imagine a more perfect one.

seriously? you cant even conjure up anything in your personal imagination that can be better? nah, cant be

I genuinely can't. This ending, to me, perfectly encapsulates who Cooper is and what drives him, and why that leaves him at sea. It's deeply sad and deeply compassionate and totally true to the character I've loved for 27 years. It's perfect.