Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

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

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

User avatar
The Gazebo
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:34 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby The Gazebo » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:46 pm

I don't really care if the effects are 'shitty' - I find myself more concerned with the overall (lack of) suspense of disbelief. No problems with Laura's face suddenly smeared on to Donna's in season 1 (as rubbish as it seems in retrospect), but Sarah removing her face destroyed what was building towards an incredibly creepy scene.
cgs027
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby cgs027 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:49 pm

referendum wrote:mr reindeer
looking at DKL's paintings, drawings, Photoshop "experiments," &c. He loves playing around with dimensions, space, overlaying one forced perspective onto a completely different perspective. Doesn't mean you have to like it, or that it can't take you out of the scene, but it's definitely intentional.


yes this is the thing i really like about this series, he throws all this into the soup, and the kitchen sink, and then all the stuff you have never even thought about that lurks behind the kitchen sink. Does it add up to one great dish? No. Is it amazing to watch? Yes.


I read someone say Lynch basically Trojan horsed a ton of old ideas under the moniker of Twin Peaks, and I can't disagree. There are definitely elements of Ronnie Rocket (electricity, and hell, they used the subtitle of the movie as a line of dialogue), One Saliva Bubble (Dougie), the whole woodsman video game.... Not that some of these ideas hadn't previously creeped into TP before, but there is definitely, as you say, a kitchen sink approach. Certainly intriguing to watch, even though these disparate elements don't always work when pushed against one and other.
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby whoisalhedges » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:04 pm

IMO, *bad* FX is when someone tries to make something look "real" and fails.

In re: TPTR, look no further than Mr. Todd's head shot. If there's *one* thing Hollywood FX pros know how to do, it's gunshots. Instead, we got that.

It's clear that Lynch is making an artistic decision that certain visual effects are going to be stylized, very "fake"-looking. You might not like it. But if you think it's a failure, it's a failure of imagination, not execution. If he wanted this stuff to look "realistic," it would.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2914
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:13 pm

cgs027 wrote:I read someone say Lynch basically Trojan horsed a ton of old ideas under the moniker of Twin Peaks, and I can't disagree. There are definitely elements of Ronnie Rocket (electricity, and hell, they used the subtitle of the movie as a line of dialogue), One Saliva Bubble (Dougie), the whole woodsman video game.... Not that some of these ideas hadn't previously creeped into TP before, but there is definitely, as you say, a kitchen sink approach. Certainly intriguing to watch, even though these disparate elements don't always work when pushed against one and other.


There's a thread for that! :mrgreen: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=3570

Those who think the tulpa effects were simply cheap should look at this post in particular. Several shots in the sequence very deliberately mimic paintings DKL did.
cgs027
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby cgs027 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:17 pm

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
cgs027 wrote:I read someone say Lynch basically Trojan horsed a ton of old ideas under the moniker of Twin Peaks, and I can't disagree. There are definitely elements of Ronnie Rocket (electricity, and hell, they used the subtitle of the movie as a line of dialogue), One Saliva Bubble (Dougie), the whole woodsman video game.... Not that some of these ideas hadn't previously creeped into TP before, but there is definitely, as you say, a kitchen sink approach. Certainly intriguing to watch, even though these disparate elements don't always work when pushed against one and other.


There's a thread for that! :mrgreen: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=3570

Those who think the tulpa effects were simply cheap should look at this post in particular. Several shots in the sequence very deliberately mimic paintings DKL did.


Crap, my bad, I didn't even know this existed. I had actually seen that comment totally out of context of the dugpa forum. It's actually funny to see how off topic this ep 16 thread has become -- I swear everyone is getting slaphappy for Sunday night! (Thanks for the link, will check it out).
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2914
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:49 pm

cgs027 wrote:Crap, my bad, I didn't even know this existed. I had actually seen that comment totally out of context of the dugpa forum. It's actually funny to see how off topic this ep 16 thread has become -- I swear everyone is getting slaphappy for Sunday night! (Thanks for the link, will check it out).


No worries! I was just shamelessly plugging a thread I started.

I think the coolest find so far is that DKL made a sketch of the frogbug seemingly back circa 1970!
Rik Renault
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 6:41 am

Re: RE: Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby Rik Renault » Fri Sep 01, 2017 3:00 pm

referendum wrote:
The problem is these effects are shitty and cheap and look like they are from some stupid game like fucking candy crush or one of those stupid instagram apps where it transposes shit over the picture


look - shitty effects: https://theapproach.co.uk/artists/john-stezaker/images/
These are brilliant. I want them all. They'll have to suffice as wallpapers and lock screens for now. Thankyou for this serendipitous introduction.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
BGate
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:15 am

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby BGate » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:03 pm

whoisalhedges wrote:IMO, *bad* FX is when someone tries to make something look "real" and fails.

In re: TPTR, look no further than Mr. Todd's head shot. If there's *one* thing Hollywood FX pros know how to do, it's gunshots. Instead, we got that.

It's clear that Lynch is making an artistic decision that certain visual effects are going to be stylized, very "fake"-looking. You might not like it. But if you think it's a failure, it's a failure of imagination, not execution. If he wanted this stuff to look "realistic," it would.


This is as concise and accurate as it can possibly be said. If you look at that scene and think, "Wow, budget issues, huh?", that's a you problem.

Look no further than some of the gorgeous FX work in Part 8, where it served the story to have more classically photo-realistic (although still very surreal) imagery. Did they hire a pro for that one and get some clown off the street to do the rest? It's not that hard to grasp if you just think for a second.
User avatar
ScarFace32
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:45 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby ScarFace32 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:11 pm

SpookyDollhouse wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:
Nobody's saying those are digital effects. It's an example of physical collage work in comparison to what's essentially being done with computers in Twin Peaks.


What's the comparison? Those collages are well executed while the Tulpa disappearing scenes look like shit


I think ur wanting to argue just for the sake of it now. :P
Watch the video I linked.


Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?
Elric99
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby Elric99 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:48 pm

ScarFace32 wrote:Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?


If you watch the credits this season, only one visual effects house has done the effects in every part: BUF. So the same guys that did the super realistic atom bomb test and frog-bug also did the tulpa effects. So it isn't about cost or the quality of the effects house doing the work, it clearly is done in a particular style on purpose.
User avatar
ScarFace32
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:45 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby ScarFace32 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:03 pm

Elric99 wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?


If you watch the credits this season, only one visual effects house has done the effects in every part: BUF. So the same guys that did the super realistic atom bomb test and frog-bug also did the tulpa effects. So it isn't about cost or the quality of the effects house doing the work, it clearly is done in a particular style on purpose.


That's true and it does seem intentional but they also could have spent a lot of the fx budget on part 8 don't you think?
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Fri Sep 01, 2017 6:15 pm

ScarFace32 wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:
What's the comparison? Those collages are well executed while the Tulpa disappearing scenes look like shit


I think ur wanting to argue just for the sake of it now. :P
Watch the video I linked.


Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?


it doesn't matter who made them, it matters what they were told to look like. There is no way this was not intentional. You're grasping at straws here bro. But yea BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET etc
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Fri Sep 01, 2017 6:16 pm

ScarFace32 wrote:
Elric99 wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?


If you watch the credits this season, only one visual effects house has done the effects in every part: BUF. So the same guys that did the super realistic atom bomb test and frog-bug also did the tulpa effects. So it isn't about cost or the quality of the effects house doing the work, it clearly is done in a particular style on purpose.


That's true and it does seem intentional but they also could have spent a lot of the fx budget on part 8 don't you think?


No, episode 8 looks how they wanted it to look. Also, in arguing about episode 8, you're discreetly parroting the "CGI gotta be convincingly real/unreal or it's bad" thing I've been pokin on about. But ok.
User avatar
ScarFace32
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:45 pm

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby ScarFace32 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 8:42 pm

SpookyDollhouse wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:
Elric99 wrote:
If you watch the credits this season, only one visual effects house has done the effects in every part: BUF. So the same guys that did the super realistic atom bomb test and frog-bug also did the tulpa effects. So it isn't about cost or the quality of the effects house doing the work, it clearly is done in a particular style on purpose.


That's true and it does seem intentional but they also could have spent a lot of the fx budget on part 8 don't you think?


No, episode 8 looks how they wanted it to look. Also, in arguing about episode 8, you're discreetly parroting the "CGI gotta be convincingly real/unreal or it's bad" thing I've been pokin on about. But ok.


I like the head crushing....was that cgi? How is me arguing that episode 8 may have used up a lot of the budget saying cgi has to look real?
User avatar
Wonderful & Strange
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 16 - No knock, no doorbell (SPOILERS)

Postby Wonderful & Strange » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:07 pm

ScarFace32 wrote:
Elric99 wrote:
ScarFace32 wrote:Yes I watched it, you're right but also how much of those visuals were determined by the cost? Who actually made the effects used in that short?


If you watch the credits this season, only one visual effects house has done the effects in every part: BUF. So the same guys that did the super realistic atom bomb test and frog-bug also did the tulpa effects. So it isn't about cost or the quality of the effects house doing the work, it clearly is done in a particular style on purpose.


That's true and it does seem intentional but they also could have spent a lot of the fx budget on part 8 don't you think?


Or they could have done everything they did intentionally, don't you think?

You have to understand that David Lynch is not a realist. His aesthetic interests are all about challenging realist representation. That's what surrealism, expressionism, Dada, and absurdism are all about.

EDIT: When people resort to speculation about budgets, I begin waiting to see if they have anything to support the idea. Or is it just pure speculation?
Member of the Agent Tammy Preston Defense Lodge

Return to “Parts Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests