Parts 3 & 4 - Call for help & ...brings back some memories (SPOILERS)

Discussion of each of the 18 parts of Twin Peaks the Return

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

User avatar
The Marquis
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 10:07 am
Location: SW Washington State

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by The Marquis »

douglasb wrote:I think the Dougie thing could have been done differently. Coop could have been disorientated without appearing faintly ridiculous. We have a lot invested in this character. Are we supposed to believe his wife doesn't notice he appears brain damaged?
I don't think we actually saw enough of "Dougie" (Doppleganger version) to get any sense on what he was like before. It seemed pretty clear that he was a screw up... perhaps he had serious drug or alcohol problems, or even mental illness and this type of behavior wasn't that off from who he was. The bit with the kid was perplexing though, I love it still, but it was perplexing considering. That's what got me thinking that "drooling Coop" isn't really that far removed from Dougie.
User avatar
RoddimusPrime
New Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:05 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by RoddimusPrime »

BEARisonFord wrote:
interesting theory, but Bobby said Briggs died the day after Coop visited him 25 years prior, so I doubt that's his body.
That's definitely a flaw in the theory, and one I'd considered.

Briggs would either have not been killed right away--- Bobby says he "died in a fire at his station", perhaps the body wasn't recovered intact. The Major could have been taken to the Lodge (as has happened multiple times in the past), faked his death (unlikely) or perhaps a doppelganger of Major Briggs was manufactured.

Admittedly, it's a hard sell that Briggs' physical body has stuck around in secret for all this time if he perished 25 years ago, but Briggs is a character that we know has traveled to the Lodge.

Hastings tells his wife that he didn't actually go to Ruth's apartment, but he did have a dream that night. I've sort of wondered if certain elements of The Return is a reflection of Cooper's dreaming subconscious made manifest. The body of Garland Briggs could be such a manifestation, especially if Cooper killed him.

Anyway, it's going to require more viewings to unpack everything.
User avatar
mtwentz
Lodge Member
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:02 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by mtwentz »

Is Dougie any sillier than Windom Earle playing flute in his PJs?
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
User avatar
sylviecerise
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 1:06 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by sylviecerise »

mtwentz wrote:Is Dougie any sillier than Windom Earle playing flute in his PJs?
Exactly—insanity after a 25-year bender in the Lodge is a lot more understandable than Windom's.
Neosmith
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:56 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Neosmith »

My impressions of the Revival so far: I LOVE IT.

I think how one reacts to it depends on expectations. This is definitely post-1990 Lynch, who returned to more abstract and experimental stream-of-consciousness material. Aspects of Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire all seem to show up in this Return.

If you expected Classic Peaks right off the bat, with all the warm character interactions, soapy plotting and offbeat comedy, you're bound to be disappointed. There are elements of this, but they are few and far between. The opening three hours are very much a sequel to the series finale, continuing that episode's all-out nightmare approach to storytelling.

But take note: the style of the opening episodes is tied to Cooper's mental state. He spends the first three hours in the Black Lodge and/or that other dimension of non-existence, where the Evil arm banishes him. It seems intentional that once Cooper makes it back to the real world, the show returns to more straightforward storytelling and brings back even more old school Peaks characters.

Episode 4 then is the one that is closest to Classic Peaks. And I'm certain the next few parts will continue that Classic Peaks approach until the Lodge again returns to the foreground.

I personally love the stuff with the good, brain-fried Dale being mistaken for Doug. Cooper will have to get his memory back sooner or later, then face off against Killer Cob.
User avatar
bespincrawler
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:42 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by bespincrawler »

Rudagger wrote:Also, question for anyone; I thought I saw Frank Silva's name in the credits for Episode 2 or 3 (in addition to the 'in memory of). Was there archive footage of him somewhere? We obviously saw Don S. Davis as well. Curious who voiced Jeffries in one of the earlier episodes.
In episode 3 (at least i'm pretty sure it was episode 3) when The Arm asks Coop if he remembers his doppelganger, they show that quick scene of BOB and Evil!Coop laughing together in The Black Lodge from the finale.
User avatar
musicaddict
RR Diner Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:03 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by musicaddict »

The good: I have really enjoyed these Parts, there was so much humour.

The bad: I think some of the "bad" acting may due to the fact that actors only got their lines to learn. I reckon some struggled to find motivation for their characters. So far not loving Naomi Watts's character, Chrysta Bell is as terrible as I expected her to be.

CGI - there are no excuses for this. I would have preferred little to no CGI. The fact that people are commending this just because David Lynch's name is attached, there is no way if this was a non-Lynch production that anyone would find this CGI palatable. That dumb floating gold orb? Dougie shrinking into black smoke? Maybe that was where the smoke monster came from on Lost.

Cooper as Dougie experiencing his first urination - what next, his first dump? :roll:
Esselgee
RR Diner Member
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 9:44 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Esselgee »

It seemed like Albert and Cole weren't that shocked by Philip Jeffries having something to do with Cooper, almost like they've had further contact with him since he popped in 1989.

I think the chances of Jeffries actually showing up are pretty slim. It seems like they could have changed that character to be Chet Desmond since Chris Isaak was available and willing to act in this. Unless it has specific ties to Judy.

One of the big problems (for me at least), is that the two lead characters from the original show are basically absent. Harry Truman is not there at all. Cooper, the character that we loved, hasn't really appeared at all either...at least not acting like he had previously. I wonder if we'll ever get the real Cooper back, acting like his old self.
User avatar
TheGum
RR Diner Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon May 22, 2017 9:26 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by TheGum »

Why all the hate on Señor DroolCoop?

It's frustrating to see Coop like that, sure, but I feel like after going through 25 years inside the Red Room, the obstacles en route to re-joining the mortal plain, as well as unintended consequences that may have been a result of the Arm Doppelgänger's subterfuge, anything less than completely baffled and infant like would be kind of way more ridiculous. Also- I kind of came to really enjoy the Lynchian ambivalence of Naomi Watts' character re: DroolCoop's lack of mental acuity. I feel like it was almost an observation on how atrophied relationships can become and how self absorbed people can be, even around someone they see every day. She was furious he wasn't there, and missed work, but only to the extent that it directly affected her.

But going through all that and coming out, fairly normal? HELLOOOOOOOOOOOO!!?
I'm back in style!
User avatar
Ross
Global Moderator
Posts: 2199
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Ross »

mtwentz wrote:Is Dougie any sillier than Windom Earle playing flute in his PJs?
I think so yes. Not Dougie himself, but the reactions, or non-reactions, of the people around him are more absurd than anything in S2 to me. Is his wife also an idiot? Her husband can't dress himself, talk, or go to the bathroom on his own and she doesn't call a doctor? I also think some of the Lucy humor is more broad then her stuff from the original.
"I can see half my life's history in your face... And I'm not sure that I want to."
http://twinpeakssoundtrackdesign.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Hockey Mask
RR Diner Member
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:31 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Hockey Mask »

Weekend at Coopie's. :lol:
Drammatubero
New Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:30 am

Re: RE: Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Drammatubero »

Esselgee wrote:It seemed like Albert and Cole weren't that shocked by Philip Jeffries having something to do with Cooper, almost like they've had further contact with him since he popped in 1989.

I think the chances of Jeffries actually showing up are pretty slim. It seems like they could have changed that character to be Chet Desmond since Chris Isaak was available and willing to act in this. Unless it has specific ties to Judy.

One of the big problems (for me at least), is that the two lead characters from the original show are basically absent. Harry Truman is not there at all. Cooper, the character that we loved, hasn't really appeared at all either...at least not acting like he had previously. I wonder if we'll ever get the real Cooper back, acting like his old self.
I think we're definitely going to see the old Cooper, and we'll see him in Twin Peaks. But not too soon, I guess.
User avatar
The Marquis
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 10:07 am
Location: SW Washington State

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by The Marquis »

I think after the 3rd or 4th time the little red room cloud appeared over a slot machine I laughed every single time. The absurdity of that entire casino bit just couldn't possibly be any better. I'm laughing right now just thinking about it. Brilliant!
User avatar
Jonah
Global Moderator
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Jonah »

counterpaul wrote:Again, we're orbiting Twin Peaks, and it is structurally necessary that the town only gradually opens itself up to us. And of course we'd spend the most time, at first, with the characters investigating Coop.
This is a great way to put it - that we're "orbiting" Twin Peaks. And your whole post was a great read! Thank you.
counterpaul wrote:I'm settling in. I have a million other as-yet unformed thoughts. I don't know how I'm going to deal with only getting an hour at a time from here on out. My one disagreement with Lynch here might end up being that this SHOULD have been delivered as a massive 18-hour experience all at once rather than a weekly series. I mean, it is absolutely not built like episodes of a show. It IS in fact a giant movie, and I don't want to watch it in tiny chunks! I'll get over that, though.
I completely agree. Should have all been uploaded. I can't believe we have to wait 2 weeks for another episode. I think this will be hard to follow on a week-by-week basis. Even if they released 2 a week it would be better. But I'm still in the should-release-it-all-now camp. If it's a movie, then let us get it as a movie, in one go, to watch in whatever increments we choose. Don't say it's an 18-hour movie then insist on a weekly basis like a narrative soap opera or standard TV show. Just my 2 cents.
garethw wrote:
Someone here (Audrey?) had already pointed out that with Jacoby's scene, we were literally watching paint dry, but this article brings up "gold digger" as an amusing visual pun, too.
They also said something like "maybe in the next episode we'll get to see him paint the other side of those shovels!" that made me crack up.
N. Needleman wrote:I I still think we may see Bowie. And the interrogation was spine-tingling.
Very much so. Kyle nailed that performance there.
N. Needleman wrote:I'll say it: I would've killed for Nae Yuuki's character(?) in ep 3 to be Joan Chen as Josie. Imagine tying that thread off in that insane sequence. What was that, pixelvision? I've seen that technique before. That's what it reminded me of, Sadie Benning and pixelvision.
I would have loved if it was Josie too!
Ross wrote:I think so yes. Not Dougie himself, but the reactions, or non-reactions, of the people around him are more absurd than anything in S2 to me. Is his wife also an idiot? Her husband can't dress himself, talk, or go to the bathroom on his own and she doesn't call a doctor? I also think some of the Lucy humor is more broad then her stuff from the original.
Lucy humour is definitely broader. Not very funny either? Surprisingly, I liked the Dougie/Dale stuff. I just think Kyle McLachlan played it incredibly well and made the material work!
Last edited by Jonah on Mon May 22, 2017 1:42 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.
Neosmith
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:56 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Post by Neosmith »

musicaddict wrote:The good: I have really enjoyed these Parts, there was so much humour.

CGI - there are no excuses for this. I would have preferred little to no CGI. The fact that people are commending this just because David Lynch's name is attached, there is no way if this was a non-Lynch production that anyone would find this CGI palatable. That dumb floating gold orb? Dougie shrinking into black smoke? Maybe that was where the smoke monster came from on Lost.
I totally get that.

But I think Lynch's effects here are kind-of awesome in their awfulness. It kinda reminds of the blocky shields in Dune. They are cartoonish, exaggerated, unrealistic - but I do believe that's intentional. TP 1.0 had very little in the way of VFX, but even those looked pretty bad at the time. It's very much in line with the basic digital manipulations of Inland Empire.

It was inevitable that we'd get stuff like this, because Lynch pivoted towards digital video in the last 15 years. This initially bothered me - the new show at times looks cheap and low-grade (especially in the daytime scenes) in comparison to the celluloid appearance of the original series, which was groundbreaking in 1990, because very few series were shot on 35mm.

But the new aesthetic grew me and stopped being distracting after a while. It helps that Lynch still knows how to light the hell out of a mise-en-scene.
Post Reply