What the hell? I can't believe that no one has ever spotted Kyle in that one. I've seen these pics a million times and I never saw Kyle with the wig, lol.eyeboogers wrote:and we didn't spot him on that bottom cast & crew picture at all, since we weren't aware of the long hair.Cooperscoffeecup wrote:I remember this article, god we talked about those actresses for pages... How strategically placed were those poles in the shot of Kyle. you couldn't tell then that he had a wig on. Imagine if we saw the full Mr C back thenEsselgee wrote:
Here ya go:Spoiler:
NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
This is - excuse me - a damn fine cup of coffee.
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Sorry to go off-topic but can someone point me in the direction of the main thread about The Missing Pieces - I've searched through the forum and can't find it. Thanks in advance.
There's one under the FWWM thread, but seems to be only 10 pages or so long. I remember a much longer one. Also, is there a Rewatch thread? I've searched for these in the search forum but can't find either. Anyone have links? Thanks!
There's one under the FWWM thread, but seems to be only 10 pages or so long. I remember a much longer one. Also, is there a Rewatch thread? I've searched for these in the search forum but can't find either. Anyone have links? Thanks!
Last edited by Jonah on Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I have no idea where this will lead us, but I have a definite feeling it will be a place both wonderful and strange.
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
WOW. I've also looked at that pic a million times and it NEVER registered with me that Kyle was in the photo!Panapaok wrote:What the hell? I can't believe that no one has ever spotted Kyle in that one. I've seen these pics a million times and I never saw Kyle with the wig, lol.eyeboogers wrote:and we didn't spot him on that bottom cast & crew picture at all, since we weren't aware of the long hair.Cooperscoffeecup wrote:
I remember this article, god we talked about those actresses for pages... How strategically placed were those poles in the shot of Kyle. you couldn't tell then that he had a wig on. Imagine if we saw the full Mr C back then
"Whatever happened, happened." -Daniel Faraday
- Twink Peaks
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:01 pm
- laughingpinecone
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
- Location: D'ni
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
...the cryptid we deserve.....Ashok wrote:WOW. I've also looked at that pic a million times and it NEVER registered with me that Kyle was in the photo!Panapaok wrote:What the hell? I can't believe that no one has ever spotted Kyle in that one. I've seen these pics a million times and I never saw Kyle with the wig, lol.eyeboogers wrote:
and we didn't spot him on that bottom cast & crew picture at all, since we weren't aware of the long hair.
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
-
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:54 pm
- Location: Australia
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
i think i have missed something here....Jonah wrote:We didn'tdid we? The one we saw so far was different right?Spoiler:
- ToriFreak2016
- New Member
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:01 am
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Anyone noticed that aside from the first two episodes, the ratings have ticked up each week. That's positive. We will see if that continues this week.
Zak
Zak
- SpookyDollhouse
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Another thing re:ratings : there's probably a good number of people waiting to binge watch it after it's complete. AND rewatchers binge watching. Viewership life continues.
- Wonderful & Strange
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 513
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:01 pm
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
There's been such a consistent media and social media buzz on the show, it makes sense that more people are catching on.ToriFreak2016 wrote:Anyone noticed that aside from the first two episodes, the ratings have ticked up each week. That's positive. We will see if that continues this week.
Zak
But personally, I think analyzing shows' success according to live ratings these days makes little sense.
On a more important note, any leaks of Episode 7 yet?
Boy, I love my clues and screenshots about what's coming up next.
Member of the Agent Tammy Preston Defense Lodge
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
There is no way to put a good spin on the ratings: they are terrible. Twin Peaks is the 99th rated cable show.Wonderful & Strange wrote:There's been such a consistent media and social media buzz on the show, it makes sense that more people are catching on.ToriFreak2016 wrote:Anyone noticed that aside from the first two episodes, the ratings have ticked up each week. That's positive. We will see if that continues this week.
Zak
But personally, I think analyzing shows' success according to live ratings these days makes little sense.
On a more important note, any leaks of Episode 7 yet?
Boy, I love my clues and screenshots about what's coming up next.
That being said, that does not mean it won't end up being a financial success. A small but devoted international fan base can hopefully make up for the lack of a larger audience. In any case, I feel sorry for the millions who do not know what they are missing!
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
- Harry S. Truman
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:48 pm
- Location: Spain
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
mtwentz wrote:There is no way to put a good spin on the ratings: they are terrible. Twin Peaks is the 99th rated cable show.Wonderful & Strange wrote:There's been such a consistent media and social media buzz on the show, it makes sense that more people are catching on.ToriFreak2016 wrote:Anyone noticed that aside from the first two episodes, the ratings have ticked up each week. That's positive. We will see if that continues this week.
Zak
But personally, I think analyzing shows' success according to live ratings these days makes little sense.
On a more important note, any leaks of Episode 7 yet?
Boy, I love my clues and screenshots about what's coming up next.
That being said, that does not mean it won't end up being a financial success. A small but devoted international fan base can hopefully make up for the lack of a larger audience. In any case, I feel sorry for the millions who do not know what they are missing!
The Audience of a series in this case Twin Peaks Season 3, is not only audience in live, also audience in streaming, online... All these audience is very important also. Part of these millions of people that you say i am sure that see in streaming. Twin Peaks Season 3 has a lot of audience that shown this numbers.
- Wonderful & Strange
- Great Northern Member
- Posts: 513
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:01 pm
- Contact:
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
The question is: why should we assume that live ratings matter when the show is on a pay channel?
For example, The Walking Dead's ratings at their highest would be lower if on a pay channel. Very few shows would overcome the pay barrier, maybe Game of Thrones would be one of them.
I think you have to look at other factors like streaming subscriptions, which cost less than Showtime, and critical buzz.
And again it's important to point out that great art has nothing to do with popularity. If it did, museums would have lines down the street trailing from them. Our culture is mainly interested in mindless entertainment, and anything that takes focus, time, and thoughtful analysis is going to be consider boring and difficult.
So depending on your POV, low popularity is a sign of success.
For example, The Walking Dead's ratings at their highest would be lower if on a pay channel. Very few shows would overcome the pay barrier, maybe Game of Thrones would be one of them.
I think you have to look at other factors like streaming subscriptions, which cost less than Showtime, and critical buzz.
And again it's important to point out that great art has nothing to do with popularity. If it did, museums would have lines down the street trailing from them. Our culture is mainly interested in mindless entertainment, and anything that takes focus, time, and thoughtful analysis is going to be consider boring and difficult.
So depending on your POV, low popularity is a sign of success.
Member of the Agent Tammy Preston Defense Lodge
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
Most definitely and ultimately, Showtime cares most about 1) Prestige and 2) Subscriptions. Someone like me would never be counted in the Nielsen ratings because I do not have a cable subscription, I just bought the Showtime streaming app. If Twin Peaks can blow the roof of their Internet subscriptions, the ratings become less and less and important.Harry S. Truman wrote:mtwentz wrote:There is no way to put a good spin on the ratings: they are terrible. Twin Peaks is the 99th rated cable show.Wonderful & Strange wrote:
There's been such a consistent media and social media buzz on the show, it makes sense that more people are catching on.
But personally, I think analyzing shows' success according to live ratings these days makes little sense.
On a more important note, any leaks of Episode 7 yet?
Boy, I love my clues and screenshots about what's coming up next.
That being said, that does not mean it won't end up being a financial success. A small but devoted international fan base can hopefully make up for the lack of a larger audience. In any case, I feel sorry for the millions who do not know what they are missing!
The Audience of a series in this case Twin Peaks Season 3, is not only audience in live, also audience in streaming, online... All these audience is very important also. Part of these millions of people that you say i am sure that see in streaming. Twin Peaks Season 3 has a lot of audience that shown this numbers.
BTW, Harry, how have you been enjoying the show? I have not seen you on the forums very much. Or has it not aired in Spain yet?
Last edited by mtwentz on Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
Re: NON SPOILERS: Twin Peaks: Season 3 on Showtime Thread
They only matter to me because I would like the show to do really well: I would like for it to reach a larger public.Wonderful & Strange wrote:The question is: why should we assume that live ratings matter when the show is on a pay channel?
For example, The Walking Dead's ratings at their highest would be lower if on a pay channel. Very few shows would overcome the pay barrier, maybe Game of Thrones would be one of them.
I think you have to look at other factors like streaming subscriptions, which cost less than Showtime, and critical buzz.
And again it's important to point out that great art has nothing to do with popularity. If it did, museums would have lines down the street trailing from them. Our culture is mainly interested in mindless entertainment, and anything that takes focus, time, and thoughtful analysis is going to be consider boring and difficult.
So depending on your POV, low popularity is a sign of success.
I hate having to worry about ratings, though, so I am really glad Lynch and Frost decided to make this a Limited Series. Thus, we do not have to worry about cancellation. I suspect like the original series and FWWM, this new show will grow in popularity over time.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly