Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

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

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

User avatar
Ragnell
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:50 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Ragnell » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:17 am

whoisalhedges wrote:
Novalis wrote:I'm the kind of person who considers Glitch Art beautiful, so for me these faults, bugs and defects, whether motivated or unmotivated, are absolutely significant. I recognise of course they may be entirely inconsequential to the plot, but the plot is hardly ever what has held my attention with Twin Peaks, or indeed most of Lynch's work. I'm certainly not hooked into the idea that everything has to mean something. I love Asemic Writing for example; here it's the opacity of the form, the fact that it doesn't transparently communicate anything but brings the materiality of the signifier as such to the foreground. A lot of Lynch's devices do the same, especially his experiments in sound design.

Agreed.

When it comes to the "glitches" in TPTR (and TSHOTP, but that does have to be considered slightly differently at least, as Lynch was uninvolved) I think there are three kinds, and they are ALL present:

1) evidence of "something" going on in-universe, particularly in Twin Peaks itself
2) an artistic choice made by Lynch (and/or Frost)
3) mistakes

I think there have been some mistakes. Miriam's last name on the letter? The crew said that was a prop error. Serendipitously, it worked - but we were told it was a mistake. I'm sure there have been others.

When it comes to #1, actual temporal anomalies, my thoughts are very close to this article: https://25yearslatersite.com/2017/07/19 ... rt-jacoby/ I don't think what we're looking at is some kind of Star Trek/P.K. Dick alternate timelines, I just think it's these little "timequakes" for lack of a better word.

And with artistic decisions, often made in editing: I don't think Diane wearing green while putting coordinates into the phone, "Dougie" having a catch with Sonny Jim (who is wearing the same outfit he wore in Part 5), Bobby finding something from the Major "today," or perhaps most controversially Hawk's going to Glastonbury Grove in Part 2, are instances of time jumping forward and back. I think those scenes were placed where they are during Lynch's editing his "18 hour movie" into 18 parts, into television "episodes." I think he made these choices for thematic, emotional, dramatic reasons. Sometimes (especially with Lynch) the medium is the message; he often structures his films for a very specific reason - and that reason is intuitive, not plot-dependent.

I'm not the most eagle-eyed viewer. I didn't catch ANY of the wardrobe "malfunctions." I didn't catch Ed's reflection until it was shown to me. But I've still seen a LOT of things being shown "out of order."

TIME as it's traditionally understood isn't the only thing we're dealing with here, either. I'm still in the camp (I might be the only person who thinks this, in fact :lol: ) that in the past 2 parts we've seen "Schrödinger's Audrey" - nobody in Twin Peaks has seen her. The only character we see interacting with Audrey is Charlie. So, as far as I'm concerned, she is unobserved; and as such, she both woke up from her coma and did not. I'm FAR from the only person to look at Lynch with a wink toward quantum mechanics; Martha Nochimson wrote a whole book about it. But I am the only person I know to consider Audrey Horne in TPTR to be in an unobserved, and thus simultaneously dead and alive state. How that's gonna break down, I haven't the faintest. But until she talks to someone whom we have EVER seen outside that room, her reality in unobserved.


Eddies in the spacetime continuum. ("Er, who, is Eddy, then, exactly, then?")

I'm with you on the scenes being thematic. Over in the Timeline thread we've been trying to put them together chronologically, and I'm pretty sure the catch scene happened the afternoon after they saw the Doctor. But it didn't suit the Dougie-Janey-E plot in Ep 10, it didn't mesh with the Mitchems plot in Ep 11, but it did work really well with the Fatherhood themes in Ep 12. I think the same thing happened with the Becky-Shelly phone scene (Just checked, Shelly does NOT have the much more prominent leg scrape so the arm bruises are just shadows.) Happened before Ep 11, but suited Ep 13 better. It's part of an entire "Go back a couple days and look at that" feeling in all the Twin Peaks that ep, like this is the time to see what Ed and Norma are doing, whether it affects the plot or just supports the theme.

And I think I may also be in the Schroedinger's Audrey camp. I'm open to all 3 major theories about her, and speculating happily with people in each line. We haven't had confirmation about anything other than she is in a really weird place. I do think, given the prominence of the Hornes, we'll get some resolution with this even if it's just Audrey getting to the Roadhouse.
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby whoisalhedges » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:31 am

Ragnell wrote:And I think I may also be in the Schroedinger's Audrey camp. I'm open to all 3 major theories about her, and speculating happily with people in each line. We haven't had confirmation about anything other than she is in a really weird place. I do think, given the prominence of the Hornes, we'll get some resolution with this even if it's just Audrey getting to the Roadhouse.

Woohoo! a group of two! Won't we feel smug if we end up being right!

...of course, if we end up being right, we'll have no way of knowing - her quantum state will be determined the moment someone outside of that room interacts with her (or maybe even just referring to her in the present time; vs. Will Hayward's "she was in a coma," which is just the state she was in 25 years ago).

:?
User avatar
Dreamy Audrey
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Dreamy Audrey » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:18 am

boske wrote:Back to Mr. C for a moment: when asked how he had gotten the ring while in prison, he said that it had been given to him by somebody who had looked like a guard. Who else was at the prison then? Albert, Gordon?
Gordon, Albert, Tammy, Warden Murphy, Inspector Randy Hollister, Diane, Warren (guard who brought DoppelCoop food), Johnson and Holland (two guards who brought DoppelCoop back to his cell and later to Murphy's office, Johnson also helped C. and Ray escape), and a few guards in the background.
Image
The name Holland is pretty interesting, considering it's related to Dutchman (and Holland means "wood land"), but it could be a coincidence, since it's only on his uniform and hasn't been spoken aloud. This guard didn't have any speaking lines and wasn't credited.
Last edited by Dreamy Audrey on Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
boske
Posts: 378
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby boske » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:24 am

Dreamy Audrey wrote:
boske wrote:Back to Mr. C for a moment: when asked how he had gotten the ring while in prison, he said that it had been given to him by somebody who had looked like a guard. Who else was at the prison then? Albert, Gordon?
Gordon, Albert, Tammy, Warden Murphy, Inspector Randy Hollister, Diane, Johnson and Holland (two guards who brought DoppelCoop back to his cell and later to Murphy's office, Johnson also helped C. and Ray escape), and a few guards in the background.
Image
The name Holland is pretty interesting, considering it's related to Dutchman (and Holland means "wood land"), but it could be a coincidence, since it's only on his uniform and hasn't been spoken aloud. This guard didn't have any speaking lines and wasn't credited.


Sorry, I ommitted that it was about Ray getting the ring and not Mr C. So it may have been a guard, but then again, the FBI were there at the same time...
User avatar
Coopergänger
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:19 am
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Coopergänger » Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:48 pm

Dreamy Audrey wrote:
alek2702 wrote:
Hockey Mask wrote:This is just editing to adjust timing of cars. Nothing more.

Exactly, they just edited part of the frame, happens often these days.

How would editing only Ed's reflection help with adjusting the timing of the cars?
You can see the glitch not only on Ed's reflection but on the entire background. Same effect as when you change between 2 different Photoshop layers wich are identical but aren't 100% correctly superposed.

It is without a doubt just an editing decision to bring more movement to the frame (the car passing away twice).
User avatar
alek2702
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby alek2702 » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:04 pm

Dreamy Audrey wrote:
alek2702 wrote:
Hockey Mask wrote:This is just editing to adjust timing of cars. Nothing more.

Exactly, they just edited part of the frame, happens often these days.

How would editing only Ed's reflection help with adjusting the timing of the cars?

I think they were tinkering with the whole background to get the two passing cars closer together and the glitch is simply the missing material in between. Notice the jump cut happens just as the car's headlights are about to hit the road behind the reflection.
It's like with people reading a bit too much into Richard's hand getting too deep into the girl's neck in Part 4, when in reality it just looks like bad head replacement (probably done for similar reasons too).
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:19 pm

Coopergänger wrote:
Dreamy Audrey wrote:
alek2702 wrote:Exactly, they just edited part of the frame, happens often these days.

How would editing only Ed's reflection help with adjusting the timing of the cars?
You can see the glitch not only on Ed's reflection but on the entire background. Same effect as when you change between 2 different Photoshop layers wich are identical but aren't 100% correctly superposed.

It is without a doubt just an editing decision to bring more movement to the frame (the car passing away twice).


Nope. The entire background, including Ed, does not exhibit any glitch. It is limited to the window reflection only. Trust me on that.
User avatar
Major Briggs
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Major Briggs » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:25 pm

It's really disappointing that the emotional impact of the scene is being urderappreciated because of a fucking reflection that won't mean anything...
User avatar
Coopergänger
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:19 am
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Coopergänger » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:27 pm

Nighthawk wrote:
Coopergänger wrote:
Dreamy Audrey wrote:How would editing only Ed's reflection help with adjusting the timing of the cars?
You can see the glitch not only on Ed's reflection but on the entire background. Same effect as when you change between 2 different Photoshop layers wich are identical but aren't 100% correctly superposed.

It is without a doubt just an editing decision to bring more movement to the frame (the car passing away twice).


Nope. The entire background, including Ed, does not exhibit any glitch. It is limited to the window reflection only. Trust me on that.
Yes it's there, my friend... There's a change between two different layers on the entire background. I replayed the moment over and over last night. Big TV, best quality as possible. Trust me.
User avatar
Coopergänger
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:19 am
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Coopergänger » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:44 pm

Major Briggs wrote:It's really disappointing that the emotional impact of the scene is being urderappreciated because of a fucking reflection that won't mean anything...
I think all people here understand very well and appreciate the emotional impact of the scene, thank you very much. Hey, you can talk about that if you want.

Now, can we go on talking about the things we want?
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Novalis » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:57 pm

Major Briggs wrote:It's really disappointing that the emotional impact of the scene is being urderappreciated because of a fucking reflection that won't mean anything...


I'd like to point out that I was indeed moved to sadness and sympathy over how Big Ed was obviously feeling; the emotional content of that scene was not lost on me. Maybe that dimension of the scene, emphasising Ed's solitude and hopeless toying with his soup stirrer, burning paper with god-knows-what secret dreams and wishes written on them, and overlaid with the closing credits as it was (with all the melancholic finality, elegiac and valedictory quality that always carries) has been under-represented on this thread.

It's been pointed out that earlier in the day he scolded Bobby that 'eating alone ain't no good'. And yet here he is. God-damn that must hurt, hearing your own words ringing in your ears like that -- because it's a million to one odds that portion of his day is weighing on him and tugging at his heart-strings. That part of the day when he saw the unfulfilled symbol of his lost future, his muse, his Norma. Ed sinks in his soup quagmire, feeling like a big fat hypocrite who doles out warm advice to the young at heart when his own heart is steeped in gelid gasoline to stop it aching and biting at him. And still it bites.

I'd add that this seems very much the only way Ed can preserve his fantasy Norma. If he actually moved on it, I think both he and Norma would be horrified by the results. He's by no means breaking down; this behaviour sustains him, he draws a kind of jouissance from it just as the troubadour draws jouissance from their heart-wrenching song and poetry to the diaphanous imago of their unrequited obsession.

Ed the eternal troubadour.
Last edited by Novalis on Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:59 pm

Coopergänger wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Coopergänger wrote:You can see the glitch not only on Ed's reflection but on the entire background. Same effect as when you change between 2 different Photoshop layers wich are identical but aren't 100% correctly superposed.

It is without a doubt just an editing decision to bring more movement to the frame (the car passing away twice).


Nope. The entire background, including Ed, does not exhibit any glitch. It is limited to the window reflection only. Trust me on that.
Yes it's there, my friend... There's a change between two different layers on the entire background. I replayed the moment over and over last night. Big TV, best quality as possible. Trust me.


Do you have any visual evidence of that?
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby yaxomoxay » Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:59 pm

Coopergänger wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Coopergänger wrote:You can see the glitch not only on Ed's reflection but on the entire background. Same effect as when you change between 2 different Photoshop layers wich are identical but aren't 100% correctly superposed.

It is without a doubt just an editing decision to bring more movement to the frame (the car passing away twice).


Nope. The entire background, including Ed, does not exhibit any glitch. It is limited to the window reflection only. Trust me on that.
Yes it's there, my friend... There's a change between two different layers on the entire background. I replayed the moment over and over last night. Big TV, best quality as possible. Trust me.


I see the opposite. There is a small reflection next to the right pump, that one doesn't do anything weird.
The more I look into it, the more it looks like on purpose, and Big Ed's expression looks like a reaction to it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby sylvia_north » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:01 pm

alek2702 wrote:
Dreamy Audrey wrote:
alek2702 wrote:Exactly, they just edited part of the frame, happens often these days.

How would editing only Ed's reflection help with adjusting the timing of the cars?

I think they were tinkering with the whole background to get the two passing cars closer together and the glitch is simply the missing material in between. Notice the jump cut happens just as the car's headlights are about to hit the road behind the reflection.
It's like with people reading a bit too much into Richard's hand getting too deep into the girl's neck in Part 4, when in reality it just looks like bad head replacement (probably done for similar reasons too).


Every beat of this scene is orchestrated for you to notice this reflection. It makes even more sense because it follows "Just You and I," and so did BOB the last time we heard it. It's worthy of an Anatomy of a Scene analysis someday.
the reflection is centered in the frame and he a) sets down the cup shifts and b) squints to further guide our eyes to it:
ED'S OTS shot:The reflection still holding the cup and setting it down with a jerk motion, like Nadine and the refrigerator door that just came right OFF. He reacts to it immediately while it's still in the frame, turning his head (wtf, did I just see..?)
-cut back-
ED's MS: still reacting, creeped out. He looks at the cup, hesitates before touching it, tightens his lips, examines it. the last 3 Moonlight Sonata chords start. He turns it twice on the table reminding me of Shelly's mysteriously turning RR mug which is also shown in an over the shoulder shot not being moved by physical action , and lifts it again at the most audible note. He frowns still looking deeply into the cup, before stirring and drinking.
-silence, credits-
Last edited by sylvia_north on Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
User avatar
Coopergänger
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:19 am
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Coopergänger » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:02 pm

Nighthawk wrote:
Coopergänger wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Nope. The entire background, including Ed, does not exhibit any glitch. It is limited to the window reflection only. Trust me on that.
Yes it's there, my friend... There's a change between two different layers on the entire background. I replayed the moment over and over last night. Big TV, best quality as possible. Trust me.


Do you have any visual evidence of that?
Check out the episode itself. Big TV, best quality. It's IMPOSSIBLE to see that on a simple gif or low hd vids.

But it's THERE.

Return to “Parts Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests