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

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

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

User avatar
garethw
Posts: 436
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Deep River

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby garethw » Tue May 23, 2017 2:11 pm

thedougpa wrote:Am I the only one that thought the image on the playing card was an ant's head?


It's a Mulholland Dr reference: it's Ant Ruth.

Sorry, I'll show myself out.
User avatar
Jonah
Posts: 1009
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:39 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Jonah » Tue May 23, 2017 2:11 pm

gavriloP wrote:and already listened what Laura really whispered etc. :) )


What is it that she whispered do you know?
User avatar
The Marquis
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 10:07 am
Location: SW Washington State

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby The Marquis » Tue May 23, 2017 2:15 pm

akmonday wrote:
The Marquis wrote:Another scene that I think was particularly entertaining and really funny for different reasons than mentioned here is the "CAR SICK!" scene. The more I think about it, the funnier the whole thing is.

You've got Albert, a guy with a long history of forensic work, ultra concerned about the possibility of woman vomiting in the car that he blurts out "Car Sick". Why? I don't know.. I found it funny considering his history. It's almost as if he's trying to scare the car sickness out of her, like one would if they were trying to help somebody else be rid of the hiccups. Then, in the most subtle, yet hilarious way, Tamara waves him off, like "stfu, I got this". I dug the hell out of that character bit from Tamara and it brought a bit of depth to both her and Albert.. and of course, as several others have mentioned before... "The Cossacks are in Russia" was in there for good measure.

A fantastic scene. Can't wait to go relive it again.


He says that Agent Palmer gets car sick; her head is slumped to the side in the front seat. it's a bit difficult to see in the first shot but more obvious in the second one. Cole is asking why her head is like that, and he says "she gets car sick"


Right, right. Still love the way it works for her character. Super fun, reality based stuff, random. I also love the way the shots are done of her during that whole bit.
User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Soolsma » Tue May 23, 2017 2:19 pm

Ross wrote:So what's the consensus on if the Red Room scenes are all CGI now or now. I had heard they built a red room set, but they sure look CGI to me. They look fake in a distracting way. Could it just be an illusion of being shot on digital?


Most of it is real, except for when it's moving in physically impossible ways. You can easily tell that when Cooper moves the curtains to step through, they move very natural, such things are quite complicated to accomplish with CGI and it would be a lot of effort compared to filming the actual thing.
I think it's mostly the weird setting plus the high definition which give it that unreal/disoriented look.
Carrie Page: "It's a long way... In those days, I was too young to know any better."
kez26266
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 3:40 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby kez26266 » Tue May 23, 2017 2:20 pm

Apart from the cgi red room, I thought it was amazing and it really blew me away! Feel bad for those who haven't enjoyed it so far though, must be disappointing after all this time.

Can't wait to rewatch parts 1-4!!!
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Tue May 23, 2017 2:26 pm

sylviecerise wrote:Other than the fact that Lynch has made it abundantly clear in the past that Cooper was not possessed by BOB ....


I think his point was that, although Bob is inside Coop, it's not "possession" in the horror movie sense. The show uses the words "inhabiting," "parasite," and "symbiosis" to describe the Bob/Leland dynamic, and FWWM supports the idea of symbiosis as opposed to "possession."' "Possession" has pop culture connotations that DKL possibly disliked given his more nuanced approach to Bob. I think the intentional mirror imagery in Episode 29 hints strongly that Bob's relationship to DoppelCoop is pretty similar to whatever happened with Leland -- albeit oddly different because it's a doppel whereas every indication is that inhabited-Leland was his real world self. DKL says in the Rodley book that Coop was "with Bob," which sounds to me almost like being pregnant!

Of course, none of this means that he is still "with Bob" 25 years later. But there's good reason to think that's where 29 ended, and I'm not aware of anything DKL has said that contradicts this.
User avatar
Coffee
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Coffee » Tue May 23, 2017 2:50 pm

Just saw Part 4 - perhaps my favourite of all the parts so far. Some very funny stuff in there, I needed a comedic break from the darkness of the last three parts! The tinted blue "Blue Rose" scene between Albert and Gordon might just be my favourite scene from the reboot so far...

"Albert.... Albert.... Albert...."
User avatar
Deep Thought
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:05 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Deep Thought » Tue May 23, 2017 2:50 pm

GoodMorningAmerica wrote:I went googling for well-known Richards and Lindas and uncovered some curious linkages.


An interesting thing someone posted somewhere (sorry, I don't remember who or where) is that a character in Frost's book, Richard Nixon, was born in Yorba Linda, CA.
There's your roast beef and cheese.
Agent327
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:12 pm

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Agent327 » Tue May 23, 2017 2:52 pm

ravingnightmare wrote:Long time lurker here. I'll say I am quite surprised how some people nag endlessly. The continuation is exactly what it needs to be. It fits perfectly our time and era. No matter what Lynch would've offered. I think a lot of you had prematurely decided to dislike it because of the big lack of atomospheric and talkative continuation from the old show. .


I disagree.
When criticism is labelled "nagging", that in itself hints at a strong a bias.

Also 'it fit's perfectly our time and era' is hard to argue for due to the complexity of those entities. Besides, even if you were granted that claim just for the sake of it, that doesn't make it good. One could just as well argue that in 1990 Twin Peaks was actually very anti-era, in that it broke with most of the things the 80s and 90s stood for, which was one of it's very best qualities, the timeless quality.

Regarding 'nagging'....What you consider nagging could be a completely justified point of criticism from someone who has a different perception than you.

I personally will follow this revival with great interest, and I was prepared for something VERY different...as in fact were most people on this board.

One of the main reasons I signed up here as a member, was to MAKE the point that it would most likely be very different. In my first post, I expressed concern that for several reaons they would be likely to neglect the warmth and cosy feel (and look) of the original show, and how that was a big part of the magic of the series to me. The contrast between the warmth and the horror, expecting them to capture to latter much better than the former this time around. And what good things we could expect if that element disappeared. Things like that.

I quickly found out that most fans on this board were, like myself, already well prepared for that to happen. And in fact, were surprisingly ready to love whatever Lynch served up, as were they generally positive about 95 % of the promotional material...even far more giddy and thankful than I think much of that promotional material warranted.

In short, people were ready to love it, ready for something quite different.....willing to be somewhat 'enraged' and still try to love it. But there are absolutely legitimate criticism to be made, on a huge variety of topics and details relating to the new series. Things you can dive into.That's part of what makes a board like this 'nerdy'. Unless you assume that this new series couldn't have been any more perfect in any way and additionally claim that subjectivity doesn't exist.

In my opinion, this new show is problematic on many fronts and promising and intriguing on others. It's a complex, difficult beast.

I do completely agree with the last part of your post, that it's likely to become more appealing to those who are turned off by it, IF they stick around. I hope they do. It's very possible that there will be some highly intriguing story lines plus moments that will make viewers care more for some of the characters down the line.
Last edited by Agent327 on Tue May 23, 2017 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ross
Posts: 2204
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Ross » Tue May 23, 2017 2:56 pm

Is Goaz wearing a false belly? He's much thinner in real life, correct?
"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
Pöllö
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:28 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Pöllö » Tue May 23, 2017 3:02 pm

Ross wrote:Is Goaz wearing a false belly? He's much thinner in real life, correct?

What I thought too. I think so.
The cow jumped over the moon.
User avatar
Troubbble
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Troubbble » Tue May 23, 2017 3:08 pm

sneakydave wrote:Did folks spot the blue rose on the table in the non-existent place whilst Coop is talking to Not-Ronette?

Apologies if I'm late to the party on that one....


I did notice that, but hadn't seen it mentioned yet. Good to note.

I also hope we can get screenshots of some of the phantom images that have briefly flashed on the screen occasionally... No idea what I saw, but it was...something!
User avatar
dud
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 1:09 pm
Location: North Jersey

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby dud » Tue May 23, 2017 3:18 pm

^what specific moments are you referencing?
User avatar
Troubbble
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby Troubbble » Tue May 23, 2017 3:21 pm

Something else I haven't seen talked about: the seeming confirmation that black lodge residents can travel to our world via electricity.

Wish I had noted every time you could hear audible electrical buzzing in FWWM...

Also: In Episode 1 or 2, we saw the curtains pulled up tp reveal an endless void. Is the odd place Cooper ends up in Episode 3 a "nonexistence" zone like some have speculated, or just a heretofore unseen aspect of the Black Lodge? It certainly seems to have the same fluidity of time and space we've seen before in the Red Room.
rocketsan22
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 7:30 am

Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)

Postby rocketsan22 » Tue May 23, 2017 3:26 pm

has the possibility that Eddie Vedder is going to play a BOB derivative been discussed?

Return to “Parts Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests