- twinpeaks.png (38.93 KiB) Viewed 315 times
IcedOver wrote:I believe that "Peaks" is over. This was it as far as something with that title goes. Whether Lynch wants to do something else with Showtime not with that title, who knows? The series this year was essentially a Lynch variety show with a "Peaks" wrapping, so I'm not finding a compelling reason for something else with that title to exist. My interest in any new "Peaks" on TV was over in 1991, and I was never too curious about what a continuation would be like, nor did I think it would ever happen. When the announcement of this show was made, and that it would follow on plots of the second season, I was very skeptical. Then came this totally unexpected direction for the show. Through its ups and downs (more of the latter), probably most assumed that it would provide some kind of satisfying capper. Whether or not you consider the way it turned out to be satisfying (I'm on the fence about Part 18, but fucking hate the "Back to the Future" bullshit of 17), the fact is that they had eighteen hours, longer than most cable seasons, and this was what they came up with. What would a continuation be -- addressing storylines that it's clear Lynch just felt like shitting on? It's not worth it.
Agent Earle wrote:Other than the fact that I yearned for some kind of Peaks continuation ever since the conclusion of S 2 or, by extension, FWWM (and that I walked about in a trance for a good number of months when S 3 was announced back in 2014), those are pretty much my feelings on the possible future additions to what's now sadly known as Twin Peaks. Yeah, 18 hours of friggin' new Twin Peaks - my, how unearthly excellent that sounds (on paper).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests