Parts 1 & 2 - My log has a message for you & The stars turn and a time presents itself (SPOILERS)

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

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

User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Soolsma » Sun May 21, 2017 11:11 pm

Wtf you guys?
Wtf?

I loved that but wtf? :D :D :D

-Laura scared the bejesus out of me.
-Wtf was that thing shredding that poor couple? Was it sort of implied that it was good Coop?
-Was it Jeffries who wants to be with BOB again? Or someone else? Is it gonna be Jeffries vs. Doppelcoop?

So some people here and I were constantly reminding others to go in without expectations.

But this? Man...
Carrie Page: "It's a long way... In those days, I was too young to know any better."
baxter
Posts: 374
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:12 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby baxter » Sun May 21, 2017 11:15 pm

Got up at 5:30am to watch this, and was so emotional initially that I worried I couldn't take any of it in. After a while I was fine- it's just a TV show for christ's sake. :-D

This is what I expected in terms of tone, feel, etc, and it matches everything we were told to expect. Of course, the plot was a total unknown.

Loved episode 1, the "wooden" acting is something Lynch has been doing for his whole career- it's a stylistic choice surely. Lots of E1 reminded me of Blue Velvet actually (the small town police procedural element).

Before S2 started, I came on here to get a sense of what people thought, saw the negativity and then spent a while thinking "oh dear, is this actually shit then?". It's almost like I couldn't have an opinion for the next half hour, then the Cooper in the box thing happened and it was just mentally brilliant. I'm going to enjoy this a lot.

The CGI is really identical to Lynch's art (as is the "fuck you MJA tree"), and I really expected the effects to look like that, so no complaints from me.

This is really 100% not a mainstream series though, and I'm with all of you in wondering how the casual viewer is going to respsond to this. Much like the first series, it will acquire a cult following I feel.
User avatar
Driftwood
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:40 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Driftwood » Sun May 21, 2017 11:16 pm

Soolsma wrote:Wtf was that thing shredding that poor couple? Was it sort of implied that it was good Coop?

I don't think so. it looked like it had a female body and a ... something else head, so maybe it's related to the bodyless woman's head who was found with a different headless corpse? Maybe it was chasing coop? maybe Bad Mr. C had a hand in uh, making it, somehow?
User avatar
Chester Desmond
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Chester Desmond » Sun May 21, 2017 11:19 pm

I have watched all 4 parts, and I have a lot of gripes, I will try to be less upset and more articulate but I am very upset, I am a grown ass man and I was in tears at how bad this was...

Things I liked in Part 1 and 2:

Catherine Coulson, amazing, what a trooper. She invented the character of the log lady, way before Twin Peaks (as I am sure you all know).

Concept of the glass cage, the materialization, the smoke... however the visual effect of the demon was hokey as fuck. Could have been done much better, again Lynch and CGI don not mix well.

The concept of what is happening in South Dakota, the dialog in the apartment complex (but the acting was bad, real bad) and Mathew Illard's acting, very good... the "wife" was appallingly bad acting: what dinner theater did they pick her up from?


Things I did not like:

Lack of music, felt empty.
No mystery, literal as fuck, everything was explained AS IF Lynch needs to explain anything!!!
Visual effects are just so bad. Every time they are used, the body, red room, all of it, not one good use. I mean Laura's face! Ugh!
Kyle is not beleivable as evil Cooper, it's comedic. The outfit, the dialog "you're nice and wet", and "I don't need anything". It is bad dialog and badly acted. Kyle comes off about as soft as a freshly baked warm gooey cookie.
Visual Effects are horrible, needs repeating.
Video looks bad, I watched bits of FWWM after and FWWM wins in every way.
Acting from pretty much everyone with more than a few lines is horrible.
Hang loose, Houlies
User avatar
crazyscottishguy
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:17 am

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby crazyscottishguy » Sun May 21, 2017 11:20 pm

soundchaser wrote:
crazyscottishguy wrote:My only complaint is the Red Room scenes. You can clearly see the difference between digital and celluloid.


I disagree - the scene where Coop walked sideways through what looked like a solid set of curtains had my jaw on the floor. That felt like a perfect use of CGI to me.


for me it's all about perception and perspective. i wanted some warmness added to those curtains, but i can live with they way they are now :lol:
User avatar
twin-b
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby twin-b » Sun May 21, 2017 11:20 pm

Driftwood wrote:I'm kind of surprised at some of the negative reactions from long time twin peaks and lynch fans. seems like people were really expecting season 3 of the abc 1989 tv show even though beforehand everyone here seemed to be saying they knew it was going to be different.

I was expecting more IE/MD/FWWM and would have been fine with that but this isn't even that. This doesn't seem like an advance of Lynch's work to me. It seems like a regression in many ways to his digital video experiments. There's no mood, nothing connecting the various threads musically, visually or otherwise.
User avatar
Soolsma
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Soolsma » Sun May 21, 2017 11:22 pm

Yes, acting is pretty bad sometimes. Yes, acting was bad in the originals.
Carrie Page: "It's a long way... In those days, I was too young to know any better."
User avatar
Chester Desmond
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Chester Desmond » Sun May 21, 2017 11:28 pm

Frank Silva wrote:Kyle is not beleivable as evil Cooper, it's comedic.

Did you think he was believable as evil Cooper at the end of episode 29?


Yes, but it was hard to tel being it was a minute and this is a whole lot more than a minute... even if he wasn't does that mean it is okay???
Hang loose, Houlies
User avatar
garethw
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Deep River

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby garethw » Sun May 21, 2017 11:29 pm

speedbeatz wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:I loved how all these odd creature effects and stuff look straight out of Lynch's paintings and other artworks.

Exactly this. He's making the same type of art that he's been making for the past 10 years, just on a different canvas. I can understand some people feeling like the CGI is "bad"/cheap, but I'm sure the vast majority of it is intentional.


Actually, The Little Tree From Another Place is actually older than that. He's the cover star of Julie Cruise's "The Voice Of Love".
User avatar
Chester Desmond
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Chester Desmond » Sun May 21, 2017 11:30 pm

twin-b wrote:
Driftwood wrote:I'm kind of surprised at some of the negative reactions from long time twin peaks and lynch fans. seems like people were really expecting season 3 of the abc 1989 tv show even though beforehand everyone here seemed to be saying they knew it was going to be different.

I was expecting more IE/MD/FWWM and would have been fine with that but this isn't even that. This doesn't seem like an advance of Lynch's work to me. It seems like a regression in many ways to his digital video experiments. There's no mood, nothing connecting the various threads musically, visually or otherwise.


YEP. This.

I was not a big fan of the ABC original series, LOVED some scenes but for me FWWM is the best and unfortunately still is
Hang loose, Houlies
baxter
Posts: 374
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:12 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby baxter » Sun May 21, 2017 11:31 pm

I'm looking forward to rewatching the first two episodes. The first watch was really about removing preconceptions about what it might be.

I'm baffled that people think there was no mystery. I found the introduction of the box very mysterious.

Probably in feel this sits closest to MD for me. The lack of music was the single most jarring thing for me initially, but I can't see how something this dark would work with a jaunty jazz soundtrack.
Cipher
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:20 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Cipher » Sun May 21, 2017 11:35 pm

baxter wrote:Probably in feel this sits closest to MD for me. The lack of music was the single most jarring thing for me initially, but I can't see how something this dark would work with a jaunty jazz soundtrack.

This does indeed feel like the MD series Lynch never got to make (albeit with more radical supernatural/surreal imagery a la Inland). Though I do suspect more and more of the atmosphere of Peaks is going to be revived as both the characters and viewers get closer to resolution.
User avatar
Chester Desmond
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Chester Desmond » Sun May 21, 2017 11:41 pm

Cipher wrote:
baxter wrote:Probably in feel this sits closest to MD for me. The lack of music was the single most jarring thing for me initially, but I can't see how something this dark would work with a jaunty jazz soundtrack.

This does indeed feel like the MD series Lynch never got to make (albeit with more radical supernatural/surreal imagery a la Inland). Though I do suspect more and more of the atmosphere of Peaks is going to be revived as both the characters and viewers get closer to resolution.


I would agree with this opinion, I would bet a lot of those unfilmed ideas from a Mullholland Drive series have found a home in this series.

I like how in every other Lynch production he implies things and let's you come to your own decision on what they mean, this is very literal, not very figurative. He is saying: THIS is what THIS means and not giving us to the option to figure it out on our own.
Hang loose, Houlies
User avatar
Driftwood
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:40 pm

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby Driftwood » Sun May 21, 2017 11:42 pm

Bad Coop seems like Bob after 25 years in a Dale Cooper body, with all his skills and knowledge, not a wild animal anymore, more like what Windom Earle should of been. I think he's great and creepy everytime he's onscreen. It's unsettling to think all the henious things he's been up to for 25 years. he seems just like dale cooper but with bob "driving" him. also he had a great intro.

I really like michael mann's later movies, which are digital and don't bother trying to ape the look of film, which seems to be why a lot of people hate them. I'm glad a new twin peaks looks like what our modern world looks like, digital, instead of trying to look like the old show or movie but with modern cars and stuff. so for me the big to-do about looking digital and cheap and the lighting and whatever was never a thing. and complaining about things not fitting together... it's the first handful of hours of an 18 hour movie? it's not complete yet? that's like watching the first 10 minutes of deer meadow and the first ten minutes of the laura palmer part of fwwm and complaining nothing fits together.

I do agree the music is lacking. but I had a feeling there wasn't going to be a ton of new angelo stuff anyway

I don't know to me so far it feels like a 25 year later 18 hour sequel to fwwm and the missing pieces that so far is focusing more on the world outside of the town of twin peaks itself, which it seems like we had every warning that that is exactly what it was going to be.

Chester Desmond wrote:When did I ever claim to have solved anything? Nothing to solve, they straight up tell us.

yeah I don't even know what you mean by that
adl345
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 12:43 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Parts 1 + 2 (Spoilers)

Postby adl345 » Sun May 21, 2017 11:46 pm

I notice that they're separating these two parts on the streaming app. That feels like a mistake. Parts 1 & 2 together actually have something close to an episodic structure. Plus, the episode 1 cutoff point is random as all hell.

Return to “Parts Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests