the Missing Pieces

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

User avatar
LostInTheMovies
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:48 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby LostInTheMovies » Sat Dec 20, 2014 10:24 am

Xryztofer wrote:Doesn't the fact that the letter "T" was placed under her fingernail have to make it a Bob killing? That's his signature. If it were just Leland stopping her from blackmailing him, he wouldn't have bothered with that, and I doubt it would have even occured to him in a non-possessed state of mind.


Good point. I used to think that perhaps this was Leland's solo kill but I think this misses the point almost as much as saying Bob did it alone, simply using Leland as helpless vessel. As StealThisCorn says above, the two are very much hand-in-glove and their relationship seems to be a two-way street. Here's a thought: Leland "let Bob in" but does that really mean Bob ran the show from then on? Yes, he claims Bob "made" him do terrible things but FWWM leads us to believe that's Leland's own (self-) evasive maneuvers. He's still spinning in Between Two Worlds as well ("I didn't do those things") even though we've seen him tell Laura he's conscious of her abuse and witnessed how intertwined his motivations are with Bob.

I think Bob is more like the Christian concept of Satan than a horror-movie possessive demon: he tempts people and preys on their weakness but they retain their agency. It's about whether they submit to him rather than make a one-time mistake. Think about it: Leland claims he was helpless once Bob was inside but Laura has had him inside of her (at Harold's, under the fan, and while writing the diary) and yet she retains the capacity to resist him. Like any parasite, Bob feeds off his host but I don't believe he truly controls them.

StealThisCorn wrote:Well, actually, the viewpoint me and LostInTheMovies have kind of come to talking about this is that the film very much blurs the lines between Leland and Bob and their various responsibilities and motivations. I very much think this was a conscious decision by Lynch to make a strong narrative against domestic child abuse and rape, without literally letting "the devil" get blamed for it, which could stop real world victims from being able to relate.


And I think there is a spiritual ethos at play, too. In Lynch's work the spirit world, which corresponds to the subconscious/collective unconscious, is a much greater reality than the everyday physical, material world. Bob, and indeed all of Lynch's images, are brilliant ways to visualize these forces ("an abstraction given human form" as he says to Chris Rodley). Because the later part of the show goes so far in externalizing and isolating these spiritual forces, what's most striking about FWWM is how culpable Lynch makes Leland, and how human and psychological Laura's trauma becomes. But he is still retaining a foot in the spirit world and depicting Laura's crisis as part of a larger spiritual struggle. This really bugged me the first time I saw the movie - it seemed inappropriate somehow. But as I get a better sense of what Lynch is going for, I can appreciate it more.
User avatar
james
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby james » Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:21 am

Lostinthe...

Some fascinating discussion which I think could be expanded into a big discussion about the direction now of Twin Peaks. The unanswered questions about BOB, Cooper, Leland, Laura and so on are a big part of it continuing now. As well as the coffee and pie.

Do you really see BOB as a parasite because I think FWWM doesn't go forward with that sort of notion. It may be suggested in the show, but I think it was moved away from because it seemed like a devil possession storyline. Is Leland really possessed by the devil or by something else?

The whole creation of BOB in the show happened of course by chance, suggesting that there is a lot of truth to Lynch saying sometimes he is working solely by intuition. I don't think though that Lynch really wishes to explain what or who BOB is in fact.

I don't see FWWM and Twin Peaks as a whole dividing the world into two, as in the physical world and the spirit one - both are supposed to be seen as 'one and the same' - or two sides of the same coin. I really think Frost and Lynch will be working right now on the tree growing from the seeds of this next volume of Twin Peaks, both using a great deal of intuition overall - those two work together so well because they're sort of two sides of the same writer in a sense - the perfect combination of rationale and intuition.

I think FWWM was partially lacking in the areas you mention, where we were trying to get some mystery or insight into Laura's inner world - whilst I loved the wall picture scene involving her dreaming and entering into the room in the picture - overall it was my feeling that Lynch and Bob Engels were not tackling Laura as well as if Frost had also been involved. It could be argued that BOB was just as much a part of Laura as Leland in FWWM, but again, I feel this was not really delved into as deeply as it could have been given perfect circumstances. As we all know, back in 1991 and 1992, the angels were not there to save FWWM.

However, the chances now are that something quite fascinating and creative could come out of this new part of Twin Peaks and how it tackles many things like BOB. Have you thought of another interview with Martha Nochimson perhaps to discuss this further?
User avatar
LostInTheMovies
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:48 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby LostInTheMovies » Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:30 am

james wrote:I don't see FWWM and Twin Peaks as a whole dividing the world into two, as in the physical world and the spirit one - both are supposed to be seen as 'one and the same' - or two sides of the same coin.


I agree with you, at least as far as the film. I think Twin Peaks the show does flirt with that division, though it's never 100%. At times the Lodge mythology seems primarily metaphysical, at others it strays into Indiana Jones-esque territory. But yes, in the movie - and in Lynch films in general - two sides of the same coin is the perfect way to put it. Anyway, you may find my upcoming mythology video interesting. It attempts to flesh out Lynch's and Frost's contributions to the mythology; as I gather, Lynch mostly conceived of random and striking images and motifs while Frost was behind most of the ideas/concepts of the mythos - mostly borrowed from Theosophy. But it only goes up to just before finale - later chapters will deal with how Lynch tied these two aspects of the mythology (his images and Frost's ideas) together in the finale and FWWM.

I think FWWM was partially lacking in the areas you mention, where we were trying to get some mystery or insight into Laura's inner world - whilst I loved the wall picture scene involving her dreaming and entering into the room in the picture - overall it was my feeling that Lynch and Bob Engels were not tackling Laura as well as if Frost had also been involved.


While it would be very interesting to see Frost's approach to a Laura story (since he did, after all, help conceive her and execute her backstory on the show) I disagree since I think Lynch's strong suit was empathizing with Laura. I actually think, based on quotes I've read, Frost might be more receptive to this aspect of the tale now but the impression I get from his comments in 1990 is that he was eager to move past Laura on to a much bigger story. I don't doubt he would have added something interesting to a Lynch-Frost FWWM but I think the crucial thing for that film was Lynch's involvement.

Engels is an open question: he scripted some of the best Laura's-friends-explore-her-mystery scenes in the series so I'd imagine that aspect interested him but in interviews he seemingly only wants to talk about the planets of creamed corn and Eisenhower's inauguration! Or maybe that's just what people ask him about.

As for "insight into Laura's inner world" I think the film goes about as far as it could, psychologically speaking. Do you mean (pardon the crude terminology) the "mechanics" of it? As in how her relationship to Bob functions, etc? I agree it's pretty ambiguous in the movie but I think that's what Lynch was striving for, for better or worse and in that sense a hypothetical Lynch-Frost partnership on the film may have been an impossibility at that time. They were just moving in such fundamentally different directions even though they'd started in sync. Lynch, in FWWM, wants us to assemble the interpretation for ourselves - although I do think the new series will clarify a lot of the stuff the film left ambiguous. It's going to be really fascinating and thrilling to see the two creators meld once again, the perfect coda to the whole experience (unless of course, we end up getting even MORE Twin Peaks afterwards haha - I don't think I'll complain, though I'd be happy with these 9 episodes being a "conclusion" too).

Have you thought of another interview with Martha Nochimson perhaps to discuss this further?


I would love to, but I got the impression she doesn't like to speculate on what's to come so it will probably have to be in 2016 or 2017! Interestingly, she didn't think much of The Missing Pieces at all - basically just saw them as rightly-deleted material. I wonder if her views on that will shift in upcoming years; personally I found they had a lot to offer both aesthetically and thematically.
Last edited by LostInTheMovies on Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:20 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
LostInTheMovies
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:48 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby LostInTheMovies » Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:39 am

james wrote:Do you really see BOB as a parasite because I think FWWM doesn't go forward with that sort of notion. It may be suggested in the show, but I think it was moved away from because it seemed like a devil possession storyline. Is Leland really possessed by the devil or by something else?


Oh and just to clarify this idea - Lynch definitely moves away from the Exorcist-esque aspects of "devil possession" established on the show BUT he doesn't move all the way in the other direction by making Bob simply a projection of Laura's psychic defenses. Instead he finds a middle ground on which, as you say, the spirit world and human world are two aspects of the same phenomenon, not just one being a "puppet" of the other.

So yes, I think Bob is a parasite in the film but more like a real parasite in that he feeds off the host without actually controlling them (although he does have more influence than a real parasite would), and less like a horror-movie ghoul on which we can project all the evil (sparing the human characters any responsibility). This maintains the psychological realism of the movie will also amplifying the spiritual mythology.
User avatar
james
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby james » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:25 am

In terms of the 'Exorcist' type of demon, I meant that in the tv show, BOB was pretty distinctly an 'inhabiting spirit' - whilst in FWWM this was made less clear-cut. From my own perspective on this, because the film focused primarily on Laura, Lynch tried to make the demonic BOB as a manifestation of some more general 'evil in the woods' but also specifically related to the sexual abuse Leland angle.

It's even more confusing, because the brief shots of screaming mouths in FWWM are certainly like images seen in The Exorcist. When we see Laura say 'fire walk with me....ME!' to Harold, we get the brief shot of her mouth looking 'evil' and rotten - later on, when Leland was shown abusing Laura in bed they did shoot something with a pig's head, although this has never been shown in the deleted scenes, just one photo behind-the-scenes. So its pretty obvious that Lynch opted to broaden the depiction of 'evil' as a whole into something broader and deeper, in a way. I do think that FWWM was an attempt to create more story as a whole to Laura's life but in a pretty direct and hard-hitting way. Whilst BOB was still scary, it is arguable that the more he was used on-screen, the more it was necessary to dream up new ideas and situations to depict with him in. As shown in the tv show, sometimes scenes with him in could seem not so impressive when a different director was in the driving seat - although I really like the shot of BOB appearing at Glastonbury Grove in the Stephen Gyllenhaal episode.
User avatar
BOB1
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 1:11 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby BOB1 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:14 pm

But isn't BOB in Fire Walk With Me even more an independent entity than in the series? In the series he is an "inhabiting spirit", needs a vessel etc.etc. but actually doesn't seem to exist very much outside the context of his victim. Only in the final episode he appears on his own and doessomething on his own - for example destroys Windom Earle.
However, in Fire... the world of spirits seems to me much more on its own. Convenience store meeting, Chalfonts and the wall picture, the ring and all, the fight for garmonbozia...

It's still very important what you guys stated about BOB, that
he tempts people and preys on their weakness but they retain their agency. It's about whether they submit to him rather than make a one-time mistake. Think about it: Leland claims he was helpless once Bob was inside but Laura has had him inside of her (at Harold's, under the fan, and while writing the diary) and yet she retains the capacity to resist him. Like any parasite, Bob feeds off his host but I don't believe he truly controls them.

and that's something that only Fire Walk With Me shows really strong. From the series one could get this impression that poor Leland lost control of his life and generally was good and noble but alas... The movie shows him as a corrupted man who evokes hardly any positive feelings. When BOB was inside, he didn't know (hence the "goodnight princess" scene), but when he was gone Leland was still this wreck of a man and his house and family were wrecks, too.
Bobi 1 Kenobi

B. Beware
O. Of
B. BOB
User avatar
james
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby james » Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:58 am

BOB1 wrote:But isn't BOB in Fire Walk With Me even more an independent entity than in the series? In the series he is an "inhabiting spirit", needs a vessel etc.etc. but actually doesn't seem to exist very much outside the context of his victim. Only in the final episode he appears on his own and doessomething on his own - for example destroys Windom Earle.
However, in Fire... the world of spirits seems to me much more on its own. Convenience store meeting, Chalfonts and the wall picture, the ring and all, the fight for garmonbozia...

It's still very important what you guys stated about BOB, that
he tempts people and preys on their weakness but they retain their agency. It's about whether they submit to him rather than make a one-time mistake. Think about it: Leland claims he was helpless once Bob was inside but Laura has had him inside of her (at Harold's, under the fan, and while writing the diary) and yet she retains the capacity to resist him. Like any parasite, Bob feeds off his host but I don't believe he truly controls them.

and that's something that only Fire Walk With Me shows really strong. From the series one could get this impression that poor Leland lost control of his life and generally was good and noble but alas... The movie shows him as a corrupted man who evokes hardly any positive feelings. When BOB was inside, he didn't know (hence the "goodnight princess" scene), but when he was gone Leland was still this wreck of a man and his house and family were wrecks, too.


BOB1 - yes, its all part of Lynch wanting to go deeper and deeper into the world of the Lodge/ red room and ways of showing BOB in my view. In FWWM this is achieved through various different portrayals of entering into the Lodge - as if the film was the establishing of various new 'portals' for a sequel.

The way BOB is in the 'last' episode was set-up by Frost, Engels and Peyton in the script but Lynch changed it somewhat and made it more based around fire, rather than have BOB holding some sort of extracting device - for extracting souls. Lynch's version of the script changes this to mention soul clearly in terms of Windom wanting Cooper's. Windom is not distinctly destroyed but I would argue that BOB most definitely subdues Earle with the use of fire, extracting his soul - it would have been entirely plausible for BOB to use Windom's body as a vessel.

Of course, many write that Cooper was possessed at the end, rather than split into two Coopers - one which was 'with' BOB. So again, we end up with something of a confusing question - which is, can BOB control more than one person at a time? I'd imagine the answer is most definitely a 'yes'...! I think that fits in well also with FWWM where, as you write, BOB is more free-floating and part of a much larger universe than we may have first assumed - especially considering that portals to the Lodge or Convenience Store must exist in South America!
User avatar
StealThisCorn
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:53 pm
Location: Laying on Laura's lap in the Red Room / Gorging on garmonbozia with Bob Above the Convenience Store

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby StealThisCorn » Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:41 pm

Yes, I was going to add, how does the way Lynch took the direction of Bob in the last episode of the series fit with our attempt to reconcile the two portrayals--the more heavy-handed possession angle of the show and the much more insidious, parasitical corruption of the film--where we see Bob get back into our world through inhabiting Cooper's doppelganger, or, as some theorize, directly possessing Cooper himself whilst his soul is trapped in the Red Room/Black Lodge? I know Lynch didn't originally write that moment, but he used it and it really does represent the most striking, perfect way he could have ended that episode in my opinion, yet it seems more of the possessive type of relationship between entity and "host".
User avatar
Jerry Horne
Posts: 4105
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Private Portland Airport
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby Jerry Horne » Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:58 am

Let's keep things on topic.
User avatar
hopesfall
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:33 am
Location: Coventry, UK

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby hopesfall » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:24 am

Jerry Horne wrote:Let's keep things on topic.


Was this meant for the S3 non-spoiler sticky?
User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby Jasper » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:21 am

hopesfall wrote:
Jerry Horne wrote:Let's keep things on topic.


Was this meant for the S3 non-spoiler sticky?


People were bitterly arguing about the Exorcist or something. It got to be a bit much, so all that stuff was deleted.
User avatar
LostInTheMovies
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:48 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby LostInTheMovies » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:48 pm

Jasper wrote:
hopesfall wrote:
Jerry Horne wrote:Let's keep things on topic.


Was this meant for the S3 non-spoiler sticky?


People were bitterly arguing about the Exorcist or something. It got to be a bit much, so all that stuff was deleted.


ha, darn - I'm kind of curious what this was now.
User avatar
Odnetnin
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2014 4:38 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby Odnetnin » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:15 am

LostInTheMovies wrote:ha, darn - I'm kind of curious what this was now.


I would characterize it as more of a lively debate about the existence of sexual innuendo/undertones in The Excorcist and The Shining (and presumably The Missing Pieces, although the fact that I don't remember would indicate that it got off topic rather quickly). I can't recall specific examples, but I was reminded of the discussion when I stumbled upon the following analysis of The Shining (I think that the issue of Playgirl came up): http://www.collativelearning.com/the%20 ... %2016.html

I wasn't around for when it all got out of hand. It's a shame as I found the initial posts quite fascinating.

And to do my part to stay on topic, I would like to pose a question: is the convenience store scene more effective in its original form, intercut with Bowie ramblings, or in its unedited MP form? I can't answer myself as I haven't seen the latter yet--technically I'm still only on season one of TP! I'm a terrible fan--but the image of the Jumping Man appearing, seemingly out of hell, is one of my favorites in all cinema. A critic called it Lynch at his most unhinged; if that is so, then unhinged is my preferred flavor of Lynch!
Last edited by Odnetnin on Fri Jul 03, 2015 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
james
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby james » Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:21 am

In my view, the convenience store scene works in both the FWWM cut-down version or the long cut in the Missing Pieces.

In our video casts, Cameron makes a good point that the full scene should have been included in the released film back in 1992, which I really agree with. Lynch includes some digital zooms and extra sound work on this whole scene in the Missing Pieces - maybe they weren't happy in that respect back then so cut the scene down.

I think the long version of the scene is the most effective overall and could have wowed people more back on its release date. It's a pretty disturbing scene on some strange level, sonically and visual in its full version. Cameron in our videos thinks that the film could even have had more success if the full version were included in 1992.
mlsstwrt
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 12:35 am

Re: Twin Peaks: The Missing Pieces - analysis/thoughts etc

Postby mlsstwrt » Tue Jul 14, 2015 4:24 am

Am reading through this whole fascinating thread.

Is this just to discuss the cut scenes? Or anything and everything on the Blu-Ray? Does anybody know of a thread on here discussing the interview with the Palmer family? If there is one, apologies, I've missed it. I saw the interview with Leland first (on YouTube) and then the Sarah and Laura interviews on the Blu-Ray, later. Before watching the interviews I was much more interested in Leland and Laura than Sarah. After watching the interviews, I'm no less intrigued by Laura and Leland but I thought the interview wish Sarah was astounding. I've never seen grief portrayed more harrowingly than in Twin Peaks (in most series/films, the husband/wife/son/father/brother/sister, etc will be sad for about 2 mins before basically just rallying and getting on with things, to a ludicrous degree often, exposing the relevant death as a plot device only, not an event) and I've never been as affected by a portrayal of grief as I was by Grace Zabriskie's performance. I thought it was astounding. The pain that Sarah has been through is almost tangible, it just seeps out of the screen. While you're watching it you can't help but SEE Sarah's life since her daughter and husband died, a fate far worse than death, just unrelenting, undiminishing grief.

Return to “Fire Walk With Me (1992)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest