Annie and Dale

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

Agent Earle
Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Agent Earle » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:30 am

Yeah, I can live with what you say, though it's a bit more tactful than what I've been clamoring so far. :)
Last edited by Agent Earle on Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:31 am

Novalis wrote:I don't disagree with you.

I'm not trying to justify this as a creative choice, personally I think it's a bad choice. Reducing Norma's sister to 'some girl' is a terrible way to carry on. It's better in some ways not to mention her at all than to mis-credit Annie as a random no-one.

Sadly though it's one of the kinds of creative choice that I see as part and parcel of Lynch's way of working. He creates and decreates, he giveth and he taketh away like some lordly demiurge ignorant of fans' human feelings and investments. It's very unfortunate and telling that women never get fleshed out enough, and apart from a select few favourites who weren't even part of this universe before (i.e. Chrysta Bell, Laura Dern) can't seem to be disposable enough. This is why I always say that I lower my expectations accordingly when I watch something Lynch-written. I'm far from being without criticism of Lynch. Or Frost for that matter.

I steadfastly believe that writers and artists do incur responsibility for their works, and for depicting the world, and for portraying relationships and assigning value to their representations of people, fictional or not. On those fronts I deem Lynch and Frost to be failing us, and failing themselves as a matter of regularity in this season. OTOH I try to bear in mind that the way Lynch plays with 'ideas' and indexes all his creations back to his transcendental fishing trips means that he himself perhaps doesn't see these characters as being as flesh-and-blood as we do. Maybe to him they're all just so many straw dogs to be arranged on the chessboard and swept away at his whim. He can be a cold fish, let's face it.


I disagree with a lot of this...or, at least, I think the reality is much more nuanced. On a predictable version of this type of show, we would have seen several existing characters die or at least suffer tragic circumstances, to up the ante, particularly given what a bloodbath TR ended up being. But all the characters from the original show ended up relatively untouched. Harry and Margaret's illnesses were informed by real-world situations, but other than that, Audrey is the only character who fares particularly poorly (Sarah's not doing great, but that could be anticipated, and I think her storyline is one of the most tragically human on TR; and of course, Dale and Laura are left in an ambiguous place, but that's the heart of the story being told here). I think DKL's love for these characters is manifested in the fact that for the most part he couldn't bring himself to cause them pain in service of the story, whereas most of the new characters prove totally expendable. And he found a place for nearly all of the old cast, with very few exceptions.

Now, the nuance I mentioned: characters and actors seem sort of indelibly intertwined in DKL's mind, and in many cases, I get the sense that DKL was thinking more about what sort of shtick he would like to see the actor do in the new show than what the natural evolution of the character would be (I'm thinking Jerry, Jacoby, Ben, Albert, even Gordon). So, in that sense, I agree with you. But in a quirky way, I think the evolutions of these characters feel sort of more realistic than if L/F had tried to create some artificial progression of their old arcs. These folks have lived 25 years of life we're not privy to, and they are who they are now. I love that, even though I don't know that DKL put that much thought into it.

Anyway. This is all a long-winded way of saying that, while characters like Bobby and James may not have gotten the screentime some of us hoped for, I think DKL's treatment of them was very compassionate and informed with deep love -- in his own mind, even if that didn't translate to the screen for some viewers. I think he really rejoiced in seeing the actors bring these roles to life again.

But, back on topic, I think DKL loves Heather Graham but just doesn't really care about Annie. It wasn't his character, and he didn't feel any need to revisit her beyond the closure he gave her in FWWM and TMP. I do share Agent Earle's annoyance over the fact that her relationship to Norma was ignored here and in the otherwise perfect Episode 29, but I think it's more a footnote than a fatal flaw to the show since IMO her character was never more than a plot device.
Agent Earle
Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Agent Earle » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:38 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:I do share Agent Earle's annoyance over the fact that her relationship to Norma was ignored here and in the otherwise perfect Episode 29, but I think it's more a footnote than a fatal flaw to the show since IMO her character was never more than a plot device.


You mean Episode 7 (of the new series)?
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:02 am

Agent Earle wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:I do share Agent Earle's annoyance over the fact that her relationship to Norma was ignored here and in the otherwise perfect Episode 29, but I think it's more a footnote than a fatal flaw to the show since IMO her character was never more than a plot device.


You mean Episode 7 (of the new series)?


Yeh, when Hawk mentions her. Especially since Norma was only a couple years behind Frank in school and was in Harry's circle, it would seem logical for Hawk to say Annie is Norma's sister. i can buy Frank not knowing Annie since she appeared to be much much younger than Norma and Frank left town at some point according to TSH, but Hawk's description of her as some girl is not great.
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Novalis » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:41 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
Novalis wrote:I don't disagree with you.

I'm not trying to justify this as a creative choice, personally I think it's a bad choice. Reducing Norma's sister to 'some girl' is a terrible way to carry on. It's better in some ways not to mention her at all than to mis-credit Annie as a random no-one.

Sadly though it's one of the kinds of creative choice that I see as part and parcel of Lynch's way of working. He creates and decreates, he giveth and he taketh away like some lordly demiurge ignorant of fans' human feelings and investments. It's very unfortunate and telling that women never get fleshed out enough, and apart from a select few favourites who weren't even part of this universe before (i.e. Chrysta Bell, Laura Dern) can't seem to be disposable enough. This is why I always say that I lower my expectations accordingly when I watch something Lynch-written. I'm far from being without criticism of Lynch. Or Frost for that matter.

I steadfastly believe that writers and artists do incur responsibility for their works, and for depicting the world, and for portraying relationships and assigning value to their representations of people, fictional or not. On those fronts I deem Lynch and Frost to be failing us, and failing themselves as a matter of regularity in this season. OTOH I try to bear in mind that the way Lynch plays with 'ideas' and indexes all his creations back to his transcendental fishing trips means that he himself perhaps doesn't see these characters as being as flesh-and-blood as we do. Maybe to him they're all just so many straw dogs to be arranged on the chessboard and swept away at his whim. He can be a cold fish, let's face it.


I disagree with a lot of this...or, at least, I think the reality is much more nuanced. On a predictable version of this type of show, we would have seen several existing characters die or at least suffer tragic circumstances, to up the ante, particularly given what a bloodbath TR ended up being. But all the characters from the original show ended up relatively untouched. Harry and Margaret's illnesses were informed by real-world situations, but other than that, Audrey is the only character who fares particularly poorly (Sarah's not doing great, but that could be anticipated, and I think her storyline is one of the most tragically human on TR; and of course, Dale and Laura are left in an ambiguous place, but that's the heart of the story being told here). I think DKL's love for these characters is manifested in the fact that for the most part he couldn't bring himself to cause them pain in service of the story, whereas most of the new characters prove totally expendable. And he found a place for nearly all of the old cast, with very few exceptions.

Now, the nuance I mentioned: characters and actors seem sort of indelibly intertwined in DKL's mind, and in many cases, I get the sense that DKL was thinking more about what sort of shtick he would like to see the actor do in the new show than what the natural evolution of the character would be (I'm thinking Jerry, Jacoby, Ben, Albert, even Gordon). So, in that sense, I agree with you. But in a quirky way, I think the evolutions of these characters feel sort of more realistic than if L/F had tried to create some artificial progression of their old arcs. These folks have lived 25 years of life we're not privy to, and they are who they are now. I love that, even though I don't know that DKL put that much thought into it.

Anyway. This is all a long-winded way of saying that, while characters like Bobby and James may not have gotten the screentime some of us hoped for, I think DKL's treatment of them was very compassionate and informed with deep love -- in his own mind, even if that didn't translate to the screen for some viewers. I think he really rejoiced in seeing the actors bring these roles to life again.

But, back on topic, I think DKL loves Heather Graham but just doesn't really care about Annie. It wasn't his character, and he didn't feel any need to revisit her beyond the closure he gave her in FWWM and TMP. I do share Agent Earle's annoyance over the fact that her relationship to Norma was ignored here and in the otherwise perfect Episode 29, but I think it's more a footnote than a fatal flaw to the show since IMO her character was never more than a plot device.


Well I do try to entertain all views while not necessarily committing myself to any of them sometimes. I'm by nature something of a diplomat. Or a doormat - I forget which. This was more an experimental post to see what would happen if I went down this road and empathised with the profoundly disappointed for a change (not that I don't or am incapable of doing so). It brings out in me a dislike of Lynch's treatment of and segregation of actors into various factions (close friends, whose characters will be treated with respect, vs. more distant friends, whose characters might not be), particularly among women. It's hard to see if anyone else notices this or whether it's just a pattern I'm imagining. I'd ask everyone to think about it, in any case. It also draws out in me a certain disdain for the 'auteur theory' that in certain circles is enjoying a renaissance. This simmering tension in me (over perceived nepotism, favouritism and the inclination to regard directors as geniuses rather than sceniuses -- to borrow Eno's term) reveals them to be pet peeves that aren't necessarily anchored in my regard towards Lynch but towards the industry he's involved with, and, in a broader context, the culture industry in general. So it stands to reason that poking this bear is going to unleash unwarranted or undeserved animosity towards any one particular director that happens to be pushed into the spotlight of my damning gaze. I understand this, and can make allowances for myself, but I sometimes forget what I'm writing is public and that it will appear to others as if I fully stand behind what I'm saying. I don't, however; I'm just adopting a multitude of stances in the spirit of inquiry. I'm curious what would happen if I felt this way or that, so I sometimes take on those attitudes to find out where it leads. 'A tulpa wrote it'. :)

Excuses aside, I don't disagree with you either. The long haul has shown conclusively that Lynch cares about (certain) of his characters, in some cases enough to spend lots of silent time with them, just being with them and not particularly in a hurry to show their dramatic action. This is a way into a psychological intimacy with characters that I think a lot of other directors could learn a lot from.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Novalis » Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:15 am

Incidentally, although it was a while ago now and most people will have seen it, this was tweeted from Mark Frost: https://twitter.com/mfrost11/status/906648406570831872

Image

Amusing to imagine Frost emerging from that elevator, Phillip Jeffries style, muttering 'we're not going to talk about Annie'.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
User avatar
referendum
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:29 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby referendum » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:30 pm

I realise this is lowering the tone somewhat, but has anyone else in the UK noticed that Heather Graham is the woman in the bath in the new '' Foxybingo.com '' advert? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRI6wKpjaUQ
''let's not overthink this opportunity''
User avatar
Taperecorder
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Taperecorder » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:14 pm

I understand the point you are trying to make about the "how's Annie?" catchphrase during the cliffhanger finale. But that is not what I am talking about. I just can't wrap my head around the fact that for 23 years I've been watching Norma's sister Annie start working at the Double R diner where she meets Dale Cooper and they fall in love. She is also talked into entering the Miss Twin Peaks pageant and helped by Cooper to write a speech which helps her win. She is then kidnapped by Coopers old partner Windom Earle and taken to the Red Room. Cooper then goes to rescue her and fails. His doppelganger escapes the lodge. Cut to 25 years later: According to TSHOTP & TP:TR Norma has no sister; Lana won the Miss Twin Peaks pageant; Cooper seems to have forgotten he was in love; and Annie was just a girl who left town. Yet the doppelganger is out there on the loose...

I would have been genuinely ok if nothing new happened with the Annie character but the backstory stayed the same . Or if they explained her away as a Tulpa. Anything but a lame ret-con that seems to be what we have gotten. :?
-
As above, so below.
-
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:35 pm

Taperecorder wrote:I understand the point you are trying to make about the "how's Annie?" catchphrase during the cliffhanger finale. But that is not what I am talking about. I just can't wrap my head around the fact that for 23 years I've been watching Norma's sister Annie start working at the Double R diner where she meets Dale Cooper and they fall in love. She is also talked into entering the Miss Twin Peaks pageant and helped by Cooper to write a speech which helps her win. She is then kidnapped by Coopers old partner Windom Earle and taken to the Red Room. Cooper then goes to rescue her and fails. His doppelganger escapes the lodge. Cut to 25 years later: According to TSHOTP & TP:TR Norma has no sister; Lana won the Miss Twin Peaks pageant; Cooper seems to have forgotten he was in love; and Annie was just a girl who left town. Yet the doppelganger is out there on the loose...

I would have been genuinely ok if nothing new happened with the Annie character but the backstory stayed the same . Or if they explained her away as a Tulpa. Anything but a lame ret-con that seems to be what we have gotten. :?


Lana winning MTP was just something Mark said at book store appearances. It's not in the book. And I also don't believe the book ever says Norma has no sister -- it just retcons Vivian out of existence. Which is odd, but doesn't necessarily affect Annie one way or the other. Honestly, Episode 29 feels like the biggest Annie retcon, with Norma cheerful while her sister has been abducted.
User avatar
The Archivist
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 2:54 pm

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby The Archivist » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:26 am

I wonder if, in his 25 years in the Lodge, Cooper has lost part of his memories, slowly replaced with only the elements he needed to fulfill his mission - or the mission the Fireman gave him.

Would be interesting to see him slowly re-acquire his memories, hitting him with guilt and sense of failure, should a fourth season happen.
User avatar
Taperecorder
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Taperecorder » Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:52 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:Lana winning MTP was just something Mark said at book store appearances. It's not in the book. And I also don't believe the book ever says Norma has no sister -- it just retcons Vivian out of existence. Which is odd, but doesn't necessarily affect Annie one way or the other. Honestly, Episode 29 feels like the biggest Annie retcon, with Norma cheerful while her sister has been abducted.


Oh yeah? Weird. I thought I read that Lana won it in the book. Huh.

You know, I never actually noticed that Norma scene you are talking about in episode 29 until my final rewatch this spring (final rewatch before TP:TR). I was shocked! Shocked that it happened and shocked that this was the first time I had noticed/realized this was taking place after her sister was kidnapped.
-
As above, so below.
-
User avatar
Doctor S
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:09 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Doctor S » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:19 am

The inconsistencies and lack of continuity from episode to episode in the original (especially season 2) are constant. I think that's part of the reason why I don't understand this particular criticism of The Return.

With that being said, I'm firmly in the camp of those who wanted Annie to get some screen time.
User avatar
Taperecorder
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Taperecorder » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:14 pm

Doctor S wrote:The inconsistencies and lack of continuity from episode to episode in the original (especially season 2) are constant. I think that's part of the reason why I don't understand this particular criticism of The Return.
With that being said, I'm firmly in the camp of those who wanted Annie to get some screen time.



I guess I figured there was a reason for inconsistencies back then. It was pre VHS-TV/DVD/BluRay/streaming. They could only imagine people watching this live on television and hopefully the odd re-run. Plus there were so many writers and directors working on it that it was bound to get messy. Why and how they could fuck that up now in this "golden age" of television is baffling. The writing/direction of The Return compared to shows like the Wire, Mad Men, the Killing, Carnivale, the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Top Of The Lake, True Detective (season1), and many others is downright sloppy in comparison. I am not saying those shows are better - just saying that THAT is how you tell stories nowadays. Even Lynch claims to have loved a few of them. I don't know. I feel like if you had the Frost/Lynch imagination + Lynch Direction + this modern day TIGHT storytelling (which many current writers/directors who have brought us to this point, ironically, claim to have been inspired by Twin Peaks) - we shouldn't have to be wracking our brains over the Norma's sister/non-sister/is she real/is she ret-conned/somewhere in-between stuff. It all just seems so goddamn sloppy and lazy in the end.
-
As above, so below.
-
Aerozhul
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:07 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Aerozhul » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:51 pm

Novalis wrote:Incidentally, although it was a while ago now and most people will have seen it, this was tweeted from Mark Frost: https://twitter.com/mfrost11/status/906648406570831872

Image

Amusing to imagine Frost emerging from that elevator, Phillip Jeffries style, muttering 'we're not going to talk about Annie'.


If this is so irritating to him, that fans would ask a reasonable question related to a 26-year-old cliffhanger that he was partly responsible for, then perhaps he should answer the question? Both Frost and MacLachlan said we'd get resolution to this particular question with TR, but we didn't. If it's not in the book and they don't plan on more TP, then it would be nice for him to just answer the damned question and get it over with so no one bothers him with this again.

And yeah, I realize he was probably being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it still rubbed me the wrong way.
Agent Earle
Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Annie and Dale

Postby Agent Earle » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:34 pm

Taperecorder wrote:
Doctor S wrote:The inconsistencies and lack of continuity from episode to episode in the original (especially season 2) are constant. I think that's part of the reason why I don't understand this particular criticism of The Return.
With that being said, I'm firmly in the camp of those who wanted Annie to get some screen time.



I guess I figured there was a reason for inconsistencies back then. It was pre VHS-TV/DVD/BluRay/streaming. They could only imagine people watching this live on television and hopefully the odd re-run. Plus there were so many writers and directors working on it that it was bound to get messy. Why and how they could fuck that up now in this "golden age" of television is baffling. The writing/direction of The Return compared to shows like the Wire, Mad Men, the Killing, Carnivale, the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Top Of The Lake, True Detective (season1), and many others is downright sloppy in comparison. I am not saying those shows are better - just saying that THAT is how you tell stories nowadays. Even Lynch claims to have loved a few of them. I don't know. I feel like if you had the Frost/Lynch imagination + Lynch Direction + this modern day TIGHT storytelling (which many current writers/directors who have brought us to this point, ironically, claim to have been inspired by Twin Peaks) - we shouldn't have to be wracking our brains over the Norma's sister/non-sister/is she real/is she ret-conned/somewhere in-between stuff. It all just seems so goddamn sloppy and lazy in the end.


Couldn't have put it better myself. How some can excuse this type of creativity in this day and age with "TP has always been sloppy with its consistency, it's part of its nature" is beyond me. It really doesn't put the creators in any favorable light. Shouldn't we expect (and demand) they do better (next time)?

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests