Let's talk changes: how would you change the second season?

Discussion of Twin Peaks TV Series, Fire Walk With Me, and Books

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

Forum rules
Welcome to the forum. We know our members are passionate about their love for all things Twin Peaks. You wouldn't be here if that wasn't the case. Despite having differing viewpoints it is a policy that we all treat each other with mutual respect.

Posting abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated, or any material that may violate any laws be it of your country or the country where this forum is hosted will get you permanently banned.

Posting of spoilers are allowed as long as you indicate (Spoilers) in the topic name and use the Spoiler Tag.
User avatar
silenttwn
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:52 pm

Let's talk changes: how would you change the second season?

Postby silenttwn » Tue May 29, 2007 1:47 pm

I think a lot of people out there like to think up ways to "improve" season two. These changes would be things they would've liked better like changing Windom Earle, etc. So let's say you have a time machine. You go back in time and for some odd reason you're now David Lynch, with the complete power to change season two to your liking. What would you do?

For me, I would pretty much have James and Donna be mere cameos after Leland is caught. They lose a lot of significance after Maddy's death and it would've been best to leave it at James leaving Twin Peaks and that's the end of that.

Second, I would have made the "quest for Bob" a major part of the story after Leland dies. That "Arbitrary Law" episode at the end seriously makes it seems like the killer is really still out there and that they must find this Bob. But after that in the show, it kind of drops off the radar. I would have Bob infect/possess Windom Earle. It's a bit convenient, but it really makes sense. I think Bob, in all his abstractness, would want to get to Windom to get to Cooper, as Cooper has potential to be a good "vessel."
User avatar
Brad D
Posts: 922
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:56 am
Contact:

Postby Brad D » Thu May 31, 2007 12:40 pm

i would have:

put leland in a coma, once he awakes a manic mess and recovers he helps to save coop from the black lodge. would also have kept laura as a main character to help in the search for bob.

let bob have possessed someone else but keep it a secret until the finale, maybe have josie or ben horne knocked off.

annie and eveline never would have existed

coop and audrey's romance would have been a big story line..with earle kidnapping her and taking her to the lodge

those are the main things i would have changed.
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Postby Audrey Horne » Thu May 31, 2007 9:21 pm

Gee, what am I going to change?

But since I've been so Twin Peaks obsessed these past two months with the release of the DVDs, I am brought back to 16 years ago when my fellow peaks fans would complain and talk about what we would have done.

I would have followed what Lynch wanted in terms of keeping the Laura Palmer mystery the McGuffin -but if Leland is revealed then keep it, BUT don't let the authorities find out. Ben is arrested, but then Maddy's body is discovered. Ben is still retained, perhaps Leland must defend him. Audrey is still messed up with her post heroin addiction/truth about her father. Windom does study and toy with Cooper -but not in the over the top manner. Audrey is the sole person that also knows her father was plotting with Catherine to burn down the mill (episode five spying on them). Cooper's atteaction to Audrey is NEVER acted upon -but is still always connected to her narratively. Windom Earle sees her as his weakness, even if Cooper doesn't acknowledge it. Audrey's sight is more prevailant -her dancing to music in the air, her ring, her prayers to Cooper, her pure heart shows that she is capable of entering the Lodges, and mirrors Laura's life. Naturally, Windom takes her to the Black Lodge with Cooper following.

that would be the main structure.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Postby Audrey Horne » Thu May 31, 2007 9:33 pm

oh yeah, Windom would have been the person who shot Dale at the cliffhanger in the first season.

Andrew is dead.

Pete would have befriended Audrey -they were gold together.

get Leo out of that coma.

No Lana, no Annie, no John Justice Wheeler, no Evelyn. No LITTLE NICKY!!
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
Hank_Jennings
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:05 pm
Location: Australia

Postby Hank_Jennings » Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:22 am

Those have been some great ideas. I'm not sure what I'd really change in terms of major storylines, but I do think using the murder investigation as a McGuffin would have been a better idea in my opinion. I think Leland & Maddy were far better characters than some of the awful characters that were introduced after they were killed, so if the investigation was a McGuffin as intended, then they wouldn't have been killed off so soon.

I also think Nadine's superhuman storyline was too cheesy. I also felt that Nadine's suicide attempt was quite emotional, and I felt that the superhuman storyline turned it into a joke. I would have either had her die, or kept her in a coma.

I would not have had that Milford Brother rivalry, and that Llana character wouldn't have been introduced at all.

If James Hurley was going to leave town, then he'd stay gone and not be seen again unless he was going to return.

With Windom Earle, I think they introduced him far too late. If they, after the killer was revealed, had to bring in a new storyline, then I would have had Windom Earle introduced, or atleast focused on him, instead of Agent Cooper being suspended, & finishing off Jean Renault.
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1229
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

Postby dugpa » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:11 pm

Hank_Jennings wrote:
If James Hurley was going to leave town, then he'd stay gone and not be seen again unless he was going to return.


James could easily leave town and never return. I'm sure one day, someone will do a fanedit and make this simple cut. Blasphemous? Maybe, but the idea of sitting through the Evelyn scenes again is pure horror.
User avatar
Brad D
Posts: 922
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:56 am
Contact:

Postby Brad D » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:24 pm

yeah...seriously...you could axe james out for good after episode 16 and you'd hear no complaints for me. evelyn is a hideous human being on top of that.
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1229
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

Postby dugpa » Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:39 pm

I often wonder how many out there have felt the need to apologize for some of the weaker story lines of Twin Peaks when introducing Twin Peaks to a person that hasn't sen the series before.

I find myself doing that quite often after the first time when I didn't give the disclaimer, the person who I had introduced asked me why I had exposed her to the horror that is Evelyn Marsh.

Don't get me wrong. It is what it is, and Episode 29 more than makes up for it, but I am wondering how many others are like me and are borderline embarrassed while watching those Evelyn Marsh scenes.

:roll:
User avatar
iar
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:17 pm
Location: Wales

Postby iar » Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:45 am

As yet, I have not introduced anyone else to Twin Peaks, but the first thing that crossed my mind after having watched Series 2, was that it needed some kind of disclaimer explaining the awful parts!

I have to say, without wanting to seem ridiculously pro-David Lynch, that what he says in Lynch on Lynch (albeit very little) makes a lot of sense. I don't think it's any secret that Lynch would have dragged the mystery of Laura Palmer's death on far, far longer. I think that is THE number one issue. Had we not had to suffer the unveiling in the middle of the series it would have changed everything. I had no problem with the actual episode showing Leland killing Maddie...infact it's one of the best!! But it is in entirely the wrong place!!!

Had the mystery been kept alive there's a very good chance we would never have to see Evelyn or Lana...or Little Nicky...there just wouldn't be space for them! Windom Earle should stay but should not be a pantomime baddie...which is what he becomes.

I have no doubt that had David Lynch stuck with the 2nd season throughout, he would have managed to keep the mystery alive without it seeming boring or pointless. I do not think he would have subjected us to some of those horrible story-lines either. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Lynch hated Cooper out of FBI uniform! Just like I did!!
User avatar
charles
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:58 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Postby charles » Thu Jun 14, 2007 8:11 am

Hear! Hear! If we lived in my ideal world (one where Twin Peaks would still be on the air) and I had my druthers, David Lynch would have written and directed EVERY episode of Twin Peaks, first and Second Season... and 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th,.....
User avatar
grrlskout
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 1:08 pm

Postby grrlskout » Thu Jun 14, 2007 6:31 pm

dugpa wrote:Don't get me wrong. It is what it is, and Episode 29 more than makes up for it, but I am wondering how many others are like me and are borderline embarrassed while watching those Evelyn Marsh scenes.

:roll:


Usually when we have our Twin Peaks Marathons, we will fast forward past Evelyn and pretty much any James and Donna subplot in the second season.... MOSTLY his ST00PID SINGING!?!?!?!!?!!!

I don't mind Lana or Windom. I think Lana adds to the quirkiness of the sub-characters. And I actually do find Windom scary ~ though I guess some don't. And Little Nicky... well... yeah. But really that one doesn't take up *too much* time.

But Evelyn *presses fast forward*
User avatar
garethw
Posts: 436
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Deep River

Postby garethw » Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:47 am

The thing that bugs me about James's singing scene is that I *don't* want to ffwd through it - because Sheryl Lee does such a great job in that scene.

Little Nicky's never bothered me that much either. He's hardly in it.
User avatar
Brad D
Posts: 922
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:56 am
Contact:

Postby Brad D » Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:37 pm

i find it amazing that the most cheesy/awkward scene of the series for me (james, maddy, and donna singing that song) is immediately followed by one of the most haunting things i've ever seen. with that said, i could never fast forward through that scene.
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1229
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

Postby dugpa » Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:07 pm

I enjoy the Maddy, Donna, James scene. I think all scenes with Sheryl Lee in them are great. James and Donna by themselves however is another thing altogether.

The music in the song is great as well, but the vocals and lyrics are cheesy but then again they are probably cheesy on purpose. I often wonder if Lynch intended Hurley to be a tool.

-B
User avatar
goodguyseatpie
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:16 am
Contact:

Postby goodguyseatpie » Tue Jun 19, 2007 5:45 pm

Frankly, I wouldn't have changed much with the series.

I've been watching Twin Peaks for about fifteen years now. When I first saw it as a young teenager, I thought it was the best thing I had ever seen. I didn't think anything was cheesy or bad, even Little Nicky and Evelyn. I even like Mayor Milford and Dougie because they fit so well with the Lynchian elderly motif.

Nowadays, I think, sure those elements are bit cheesy, but are they any worse than stuff in other shows? Think about how cheesy some of the stuff in X-Files was, but it was still a good show overall (though I never saw the last few seasons).

Those cheesy elements for me are part of the charm of Twin Peaks. Alright, even as a teenager, I groaned a little at James' girly voice, but I also liked the sentiment of 1980's teenagers acting like they're from the 50's. (same with just about any other characters on the show).

I still like Windham Earle and Annie. I don't know why people complain about them so much. I think somebody just read a critic complain about Windham being a Bond-like villian, and now it just gets repeated over and over. Annie is so quirky (and, well, I think Heather Graham is divine) that for me she fits right in.

The Evelyn story doesn't bother me because it really doesn't take up too much time and I understand the context of why the writers dreamed it up. It's not too far removed from Peyton Place to start thinking about Brando and James Dean-like melodramas. It's not the highest quality story in TP, but I'll take the show, warts and all.

Perhaps the reason so many TP fans on this board complain about these elements is because of the relatively short life of the series. In a longer run, the cheesier storylines would seem small and muted compared to the larger arc and emotional center and mood that TP invokes. As it stands, some of these elements stick out. But in the past fifteen years, I've introduced dozens of people to Twin Peaks and none of them have complained about the cheesy stuff. The usual reaction is "You mean that's all there is??"

So I said I wouldn't change much. There are actually two things that kind of irk me, and always have. One is the Miss Twin Peaks pageant. I don't mind the actual story, but the event itself is pretty stupid, but I guess it was meant to be. The other is Harry and Josie's relationship. I can't stand movie relationships that are based on physical attraction alone. All Harry ever said was "Josie is a beautiful woman" and stuff like that. What did he REALLY see in her besides her beauty?

Sorry for the rant.
GGEP

Return to “Twin Peaks Movie, TV, Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests