boske wrote:Lynch uses shots of Moon and traffic lights occasionally, I find it hard to believe that these are simply placed randomly.
It's not random: they're there for mood. I don't read much into it beyond that, and I don't think he has some elaborate timeline for the show worked out in his head that the phases on the moon are supposed to clue us in to (although he admittedly might be thinking about astrology and the symbolism of the moon phases in the context of a particular scene, since he has expressed interest in such things).
Again, the original show had delibarately placed shots of the moon all over the place, and they didn't line up with any sensible timeline.
wxray wrote:
Lynch sweats the details he wants. He doesn't need 70 takes either. Dumb stuff like microphones showing up in the 1956 car happen, and it's no big deal.
There are lots & lots of little detail glitches. A really clear-cut one: The VW van Carl summons with his excellent whistle-thing has a split-window windshield from the outside, but a single panel from the inside.
You can treat that as a glitch or I guess if you want you could treat it as the van being a lodge-spirit-infested doppelganger-van which shifts to an alternate reality when Shelley & Carl get into it. This would make no less sense than the tedious time-shift reality-shift everything-a-doppelganger theories people come up with - so maybe somebody has come up with it already.
Obviously there are glitches, such as the one mentioned here. If they show, in a span of few minutes, a scene of a crescent moon followed by a scene where Charlie tells Audrie it is New Moon and it is pitch dark outside, is it considered a glitch or simply hinting that the second scene takes place two nights later? Let us not trivialize that with dopplegangers.
wxray wrote:
Lynch sweats the details he wants. He doesn't need 70 takes either. Dumb stuff like microphones showing up in the 1956 car happen, and it's no big deal.
There are lots & lots of little detail glitches. A really clear-cut one: The VW van Carl summons with his excellent whistle-thing has a split-window windshield from the outside, but a single panel from the inside.
You can treat that as a glitch or I guess if you want you could treat it as the van being a lodge-spirit-infested doppelganger-van which shifts to an alternate reality when Shelley & Carl get into it. This would make no less sense than the tedious time-shift reality-shift everything-a-doppelganger theories people come up with - so maybe somebody has come up with it already.
I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't already the hottest thread on the TP subreddit lmao
WRT my original post, it wasn't a comment on either director's ability, just that DKL isn't the continuity perfectionist that Kubrick notoriously was. I would be very surprised if a single shot of a half-crescent moon was crafted to prompt the viewer to look up the moon phases of a particular month on the year that the events were supposed to take place to decipher that the following scene happened on a timeline a couple of days before. It seems much more fitting that the shot was just there for mood, or because it looked nice.
If the question behind the use of the moon is that of intent, the shots of the full moon in the original series are in no way comparable to how the moon is represented on the map. The moon shots are an editing decision, usually essentially an establishing shot or something to add atmosphere. If they wanted to get into moon cycles they'd have to acquire or shoot footage of the moon at different stages. How the moon is represented on the map is a art design decision, and there's no leg work or barrier to them choosing to represent the moon one way or another. I'm not saying there's anything specifically significant about the way the moon is used on the map, but the moon shots in the originally series in now way negates the significance of it one way or another.
boske wrote:Obviously there are glitches, such as the one mentioned here. If they show, in a span of few minutes, a scene of a crescent moon followed by a scene where Charlie tells Audrie it is New Moon and it is pitch dark outside, is it considered a glitch or simply hinting that the second scene takes place two nights later? Let us not trivialize that with dopplegangers.
The moon is intentional. But to go into detail and determine the date is Oct 1, 2016 and it is a waning moon so a child would not be awake goes too far.
Relax and enjoy the mood. I'm also guilty of paying too much attention to stupid stuff sometimes too. But then again, sometimes the details are important (the key in Mulholland drive, for example).
boske wrote:Obviously there are glitches, such as the one mentioned here. If they show, in a span of few minutes, a scene of a crescent moon followed by a scene where Charlie tells Audrie it is New Moon and it is pitch dark outside, is it considered a glitch or simply hinting that the second scene takes place two nights later? Let us not trivialize that with dopplegangers.
The moon is intentional. But to go into detail and determine the date is Oct 1, 2016 and it is a waning moon so a child would not be awake goes too far.
Relax and enjoy the mood. I'm also guilty of paying too much attention to stupid stuff sometimes too. But then again, sometimes the details are important (the key in Mulholland drive, for example).
Totally agree with you, I would not go that far and determine that the date is Oct 1, 2016.
But this is such a strange show, I mean the whole thing is about some co-or-di-na-tes + 2
boske wrote:Obviously there are glitches, such as the one mentioned here. If they show, in a span of few minutes, a scene of a crescent moon followed by a scene where Charlie tells Audrie it is New Moon and it is pitch dark outside, is it considered a glitch or simply hinting that the second scene takes place two nights later? Let us not trivialize that with dopplegangers.
The moon is intentional. But to go into detail and determine the date is Oct 1, 2016 and it is a waning moon so a child would not be awake goes too far.
Relax and enjoy the mood. I'm also guilty of paying too much attention to stupid stuff sometimes too. But then again, sometimes the details are important (the key in Mulholland drive, for example).
Totally agree with you, I would not go that far and determine that the date is Oct 1, 2016.
But this is such a strange show, I mean the whole thing is about some co-or-di-na-tes + 2
One thing to keep in mind, Ep 29 of the original series used a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn as a plot point. That conjunction did not happen in the real world in that year. Lynch/Frost probably didn't bother to looking at an ephemeris for the real world during the Return, either. We should keep to in-story clues to figure out what's going on when.
And I'm still of the opinion the crescent moon means that the Chantel and Hutch scene occurs a day or two before the Audrey and Charlie scene. We know from Ep 9 that Chantel and Hutch got orders to kill the warden on the morning of the 29th. Why would they screw around for two days or so? They got him that night.
Ragnell wrote:
One thing to keep in mind, Ep 29 of the original series used a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn as a plot point. That conjunction did not happen in the real world in that year. Lynch/Frost probably didn't bother to looking at an ephemeris for the real world during the Return, either. We should keep to in-story clues to figure out what's going on when.
And I'm still of the opinion the crescent moon means that the Chantel and Hutch scene occurs a day or two before the Audrey and Charlie scene. We know from Ep 9 that Chantel and Hutch got orders to kill the warden on the morning of the 29th. Why would they screw around for two days or so? They got him that night.
I think that we could come up with a particular sequence of days, it is just that they need not necessarily be "physically" mapped to our actual calendar. I never thought we were dealing with alternate timelines here, but these different story lines could be off each other by a few days, for sure.
We also have no idea how scenes were shifted in editing. There have been times where they have obviously moved scenes around from where they were meant to be. (Lucy's clothes, the last two Log Lady scenes, etc.) Who knows if the Audrey scene was originally to be placed there, or if it was moved around a bit to fit the episodes?
boske wrote:Lynch uses shots of Moon and traffic lights occasionally, I find it hard to believe that these are simply placed randomly.
lol at people who claim anything unorthodox or unexpected as "random." it got old a long time ago. if they've seen Twin Peaks before they should know to expect mood shots, and that stuff is there for a reason and wasn't randomly pulled out of a hat.
The texts we see her receive are in the iMessage form...anyone that has an iphone knows what this is...and in part 9 Mr.C clearly sends a message via a flip phone of some sorts...so how did Diane receive an iMessage?
Am I looking into this too much, because the higher uppers of Twin Peaks don't give a shit...? Or is there something to this? And sorry if this was mentioned before
