David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

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

User avatar
The Jumping Man
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:27 pm

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby The Jumping Man » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:42 am

Quite an influx of new people with 10 posts or less. We must take them seriously.
User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 884
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 9:24 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Jasper » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:55 am

On Twin Peaks:

“It’s a real place. All the characters are real. And the place is real.”

—David Lynch (April 2013, Festival International du Film Policier de Beaune)
Castledoque
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:34 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Castledoque » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:25 pm

Spacevessel wrote:Sounds too much like an excuse for sloppy art, which IE definitely was.
And I'm not trying to start a debate here, but it's seems strange to me how someone with a good pair of eyes could not see the cinematic inferiority of both IE and TPS3 in comparison to Lynch's previous works. And as TPS3 shows, the issue is not the project's budget.

And yet for me Inland Empire was never sloppy in the way TP S3 was. Sure in IE there was the digital camera and the uneven photography and the script improvisations. However there were no abandoned storylines. Most of the scenes were turning around the same themes. We even had a basic concept of a love triangle that ends up in murder and we actually got all the possible variations of who the killer and the victim is, in a way no stone was left unturned.

On the other hand, TP S3 is expertly made, but most of the storylines go nowhere or everywhere. IE went to the end of its road, TP went... where? Do we even know? People claim to love the ending for entirely conflicting and mutually exclusive reasons (Cooper failed/Cooper succeeded/there is no Cooper/this is a dream/this is purgatory/the timeline has been messed up/this is an alternate timeline, etc). If the ending can be anything, then it ends up being nothing.
MysteryMan14
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:13 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby MysteryMan14 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:30 pm

It's kind of funny that many people take Lynch's art literally. He put in Fwwm and TR sentences about a dream and the dreamer and a bunch of people are bitching that all evens in TP didnt happen At all. Lynch moved between reality and dreams all the time during his carieer but It doesnt mean that he wiped out all the TP mythology. It would have been too simple and cheap.
User avatar
Framed_Angel
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 10:16 am

Re: L. Frank Baum -- i mean, David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Framed_Angel » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:41 pm

Jasper wrote:On Twin Peaks:“It’s a real place. All the characters are real. And the place is real.”—David Lynch (April 2013, Festival International du Film Policier de Beaune)
So that seals the deal? A quote, from whichever unstated context 4 years ago, pronounced so definitively by an artist whose approach to film involves leaving much open to interpretation -- I'd take that about as literally as Cooper's "One Hundred Per-cent!" Also, Frost who co-created TP may not have felt the same way keeping in mind it was a joint endeavor from both of those wizards.

I wondered if the dream theory (y'all who are acting like this is not a thing viably available to consider in the ending moments of S3, quit that. It's disingenuous as heck) -- isn't in fact what we've seen in the ending of Wizard of Oz. Now I realize Lynch likes the movie. In it, we see Judy garland waking up at the end telling her family and farmhands "and you, and you and you were there!" with 'there' being in her dream or what she concluded was her dream.

So I haven't read the book, did Baum end his original story of Oz that same way?
Since he continued to write of Dorothy's other adventures in faraway places like Oz then I'm thinking you could stick that in there among examples of dual realities. Dorothy was dreaming, *and* she was in a magical place nothing at all like 'home.' Sort of both.

Unlike TP:TR however, the Oz tales tie up their stories with some resolution and maintain continuum
User avatar
referendum
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:29 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby referendum » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:45 pm

David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

he hasn't done. You have.
So, you know, as is the way of things, you are not getting away with it.
''let's not overthink this opportunity''
User avatar
firefly2193
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby firefly2193 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:57 pm

Viewer misinterprets show. Viewer gets furious at their own misinterpretation. :)
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: L. Frank Baum -- i mean, David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:50 pm

Framed_Angel wrote:So I haven't read the book, did Baum end his original story of Oz that same way?


Nope! Purely an invention of the filmmakers. As a childhood reader of the LFB (no relation) books, I've always disliked the movie ending and the way it unnecessarily kills the magic (I know, I know, blasphemy). The rest of the movie is aces tho'.
IcedOver
Posts: 442
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:31 pm

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby IcedOver » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:32 pm

I also reject the whole "it was a dream" thing. If anything, as others have said, he's using that as a metaphor for storytelling. The quote "we are like the dreamer" was misused, though, because it's not something that invites the question "Who is the dreamer?". I am not familiar with the Upanishads, but just looking it up, the other half of that quote was about the spider weaving his web and living in it. It's not about a literal nighttime dream, but the way you construct your life and reality, perhaps referring strictly to subjective reality.
I DON'T FEEL GOOD!!!!!
Manwith
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:04 pm

Re: L. Frank Baum -- i mean, David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Manwith » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:32 pm

Twin Peaks is only a dream in the sense of "Life is but a dream." You don't have to be so literal about it.
Manwith
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:04 pm

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Manwith » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:36 pm

Jasper wrote:On Twin Peaks:

“It’s a real place. All the characters are real. And the place is real.”

—David Lynch (April 2013, Festival International du Film Policier de Beaune)


He's lying though. It's just a tv show. 8)
Cipher
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:20 pm

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Cipher » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:33 pm

IcedOver wrote:I also reject the whole "it was a dream" thing. If anything, as others have said, he's using that as a metaphor for storytelling. The quote "we are like the dreamer" was misused, though, because it's not something that invites the question "Who is the dreamer?". I am not familiar with the Upanishads, but just looking it up, the other half of that quote was about the spider weaving his web and living in it. [b{It's not about a literal nighttime dream, but the way you construct your life and reality, perhaps referring strictly to subjective reality.[/b]

Yes, yes!

And Twin Peaks, at least since Fire Walk With Me, has always been about subjective reality -- the internality of Laura's experience gets written onto a cosmic mythology. And in turn is written back onto.
User avatar
AgentEcho
Posts: 313
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:57 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby AgentEcho » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:46 pm

Good Lord, Lynch did not declare TP as a dream. I guess the internet must have just discovered David Lynch, so maybe these kinds of thoughts shouldn't surprise me.
User avatar
Voided
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:08 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Voided » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:30 pm

I still feel there is some ambiguity. I think generally, most interpretations would consider the story of Twin Peaks as real, but I do think the dream angle is there if you want it to be. I don't see anything wrong with this, and for me it broadens the appeal and the mystery.
I've yet to rewatch the final episodes, but it did occur to me that Richard could be a disturbed man who has delusions of being an FBI agent and is obsessed with a waitress etc. Obviously there are lots of questions about this: How does he know how to fight? Why is there a white horse both outside Judy's and in Carrie's house? Why would the names Chalfont/Tremond become known after the dreaming has taken place?
So, in general I don't think we're supposed to see it this way, but I do think it adds something emotionally poignant to the story if we consider it as one possible reality. After all, Richard/Dale does act differently....almost like a balance/synthesis of both Coopers. The original Cooper is too good to be true and the bad Cooper is extremely dark, so Richard is a more balanced, realistic depiction of a human being.
Just forget you ever saw it. It's better that way.
User avatar
Mystery Roach
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:27 am

Re: David Lynch should not get away by declaring TP as a "dream"

Postby Mystery Roach » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:42 pm

I'm pretty sure Lynch would see the place and characters as real even if they only existed in a dream reality, and in fact I doubt he even makes much of a distinction, because to him cinema itself is both a dream and reality.

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests