I fucking loved it. They sounded the same as ever - speechifying as always.bob_wooler wrote:Is that mother's hat? priceless.Odnetnin wrote:Literally my favorite scene set in the town thus far. R-E-S-P-E-C-TAgent Earle wrote:
Yeah, right.
It was like watching Vladimir and Estragon in Beckett's Waiting for Godot. Excruciating.
Parts 3 & 4 - Call for help & ...brings back some memories (SPOILERS)
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
- N. Needleman
- Lodge Member
- Posts: 2113
- Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
- WhiteLodge90
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:45 pm
- Location: You're on the path. you don't need to know where it leads. just follow.
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Driftwood wrote:the scene was literally like every other scene they've ever had, just a new one. unless it's really that shocking they ... Aged! in there intervening yearsAgent Earle wrote:"Duped" would be an understatement in my case. That Horne brothers scene has to be a contender for the most awful scene in the whole of Twin Peaks. It felt like you're witnessing two gimps in a stage play. And people (including me) thought some late S 2 stuff was bad...WhiteLodge90 wrote:
Also I really hope we get more of the Hornes. I feel kind of duped with them.
That wasn't my point. It seemed to present very little in terms of plot and ended very abruptly. That was my whole point.
The milk will get cool on you pretty soon.
-
- Bookhouse Member
- Posts: 1173
- Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Come on. It was like watching a couple of dimwits blabbering nonsense to fritter the (run)time away. I know it's Lynch but it's also supposed to be Peaks. Yeah, yeah, I get it, this is not some nostalgic rehash, but I still find the scene AWFUL. So shoot me.
- N. Needleman
- Lodge Member
- Posts: 2113
- Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
- teddyleevin
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:53 am
- Contact:
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
I want to know more about those rich folks in NYC that keep his "spa running." .... NYC, huh?
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
I think Jerry's sideline in growing drugs might have a few other avenues to it. Especially if it's tripling their profits. Might they have got greedy and been mixed up in the drug deals in at the school.
- Ubermensch33
- Roadhouse Member
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:41 pm
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (Spoilers)
I agree with you about Andy and Lucy. The old TP stuff seems forced and awkward so far (not terrible, just meh) with the exception of Hawk and Margaret. I do think something is going on with Lucy - some kind of mental disorder/dementia.Taperecorder wrote:The only stand out characters (new & old) for me so far are: Matthew Lilard as William Hastings (SO GOOD!!!); Jane Adams as Constance Talbot (I want to see much more of her!); Dana Ashbrook as Bobby Briggs (that crying at the unexpected photo of Laura Palmer was beautiful); and Robert Forester as Sheriff Truman (I am hoping we go to great places with him).
So far, while Kyle McClachlan has been great, I feel no connection to Cooper, DoppleCoop, or Dougie. It's been nice seeing Lucy & Andy but they feel less fun and way more awkward now (a result of the lack of music and clunky editing perhaps?). It was nice to see Denise but that whole scene was odd. Specifically the way Cole seemingly talked down to his superior. Something about that line “There's room in this Federal Bureau of Investigation for more than one beautiful woman.” rubbed me the wrong way. Ben and Jerry Horned was fun but seemed pointless (unless of course we get back to them in future episodes). I liked all those strange, odd, and creepy characters in the shack where we are first introduced to DoppleCoop.
What'd y'all think of the characters (so far)?
We've barely seen Shelly and James, Ben and Jerry, haven't seen Norma or Audrey. I like that this isn't reliant on the old characters, though I wouldn't have said that a week ago. I was so excited to see everyone, but now I realize it just wouldn't have worked without other significant characters and story lines. I am very excited to see how the old characters are interwoven throughout the next 14 (!) hours.
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
They were not blathering nonsense. They were setting up the characters as to where they are today. To summarize:Agent Earle wrote:Come on. It was like watching a couple of dimwits blabbering nonsense to fritter the (run)time away. I know it's Lynch but it's also supposed to be Peaks. Yeah, yeah, I get it, this is not some nostalgic rehash, but I still find the scene AWFUL. So shoot me.
-Ben is till running the great hotel and has hired an attractive assistant. He denies having sex with her, but there may be something there.
-Jerry is running a marijuana edibles company.
-There is a customer form New York who has lodged a complain, and is comped by Ben for two days. This may or may not be connected to the mysterious billionaire in New York.
It did not stick out to me as good a scene as the brie sandwiches or smoked cheese pig scene, but it was mildly amusing. Certainly not awful in my opinion. The real test is where it leads next.
F*&^ you Gene Kelly
- N. Needleman
- Lodge Member
- Posts: 2113
- Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
"Wheels up!" is what killed me.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Taste is mutable.Agent Earle wrote:Come on. It was like watching a couple of dimwits blabbering nonsense to fritter the (run)time away. I know it's Lynch but it's also supposed to be Peaks. Yeah, yeah, I get it, this is not some nostalgic rehash, but I still find the scene AWFUL. So shoot me.
- bob_wooler
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 2:00 am
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Believe this is a new DL-interview (Cannes official): http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/festi ... ult-series
The most interesting bits:
The most interesting bits:
So Lauras final days may be important to this, as he said earlier, but not necesseraly FWWM as such?(On the writing/shooting process)
At what point did the tone of the plot establish itself?
We considered the flavour we wanted to give this third season all the way through the process of making it. Each of the locations chosen for filming gave the series a particular atmosphere through its details, its light, its acoustics and the behaviour of the individuals who live there. All of these perceptions produced ideas; the most important thing for us was to stay faithful to them.
How important is the feature film Twin Peaks, Fire Walk with Me, to understanding this sequel?
The audience does not need to have seen the two preceding seasons, or the feature film, to get the new plot. On the other hand, the process will be easier for those who are familiar with them, because they will have more information to help them understand.
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
This might be a bad question
But did i miss something? Because I don't understand why Cooper don't speak to Albert at all!
Also, something is terrible wrong with Albert generally
But did i miss something? Because I don't understand why Cooper don't speak to Albert at all!
Also, something is terrible wrong with Albert generally
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Everything's important, if you want to try to understand it as much as possible, but you don't need to have seen it. He doesn't want to turn potential viewers away with such prerequisites (and when promoting the show). He probably thinks it's a fun idea for people to just dive in and roll with it.bob_wooler wrote:Believe this is a new DL-interview (Cannes official): http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/festi ... ult-series
The most interesting bits:So Lauras final days may be important to this, as he said earlier, but not necesseraly FWWM as such?(On the writing/shooting process)
At what point did the tone of the plot establish itself?
We considered the flavour we wanted to give this third season all the way through the process of making it. Each of the locations chosen for filming gave the series a particular atmosphere through its details, its light, its acoustics and the behaviour of the individuals who live there. All of these perceptions produced ideas; the most important thing for us was to stay faithful to them.
How important is the feature film Twin Peaks, Fire Walk with Me, to understanding this sequel?
The audience does not need to have seen the two preceding seasons, or the feature film, to get the new plot. On the other hand, the process will be easier for those who are familiar with them, because they will have more information to help them understand.
Also - i like this 2003 idea, it's simple and explains the 15/3 element. Also opens up the possibility for DroolCoop and Mr C to still be the same person and other crazy narrative ideas. I'd prefer it if we just got normal Coop back straight away in Episode 5 and it's all hunkydory though.
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
I like the 2003 idea too. The Jeep may just be a bad prop dept job.
However, I know DKL has said he loves to watch "Velocity Channel," so I'd expect him to have a little more grasp on model years.*
* - He loves the art of what they do to cars, to recraft them. I don't think he gives a flip about model years.
However, I know DKL has said he loves to watch "Velocity Channel," so I'd expect him to have a little more grasp on model years.*
* - He loves the art of what they do to cars, to recraft them. I don't think he gives a flip about model years.
- chromereflectsimage
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 246
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:03 am
Re: Parts 3 + 4 (SPOILERS)
Shelly mentioned her daughter Becky was involved with a guy who was bad news. Maybe he's part of this drug trade?Mairzy wrote:I think Jerry's sideline in growing drugs might have a few other avenues to it. Especially if it's tripling their profits. Might they have got greedy and been mixed up in the drug deals in at the school.