Re: 'Twin Peaks: The Final Dossier' Novel by Mark Frost 10/31 (SPOILERS)
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:27 am
Love it.
a Twin Peaks and David Lynch Electrical Resource
https://www.dugpa.com/forum/
"The Final Dossier" IS Frost being forthcoming. It's basically the teacher's guide to "The Return".Mr. Reindeer wrote:Frost is reminding me more and more of Damon Lindelof during the height of Lost hype, when every answer was a cagey “Hmm that’s intersting...or IS it?” I was hoping he’d be a little more forthcoming with all the material (for now) out in the world, but I guess not.
It is almost certainly also Lynch's. Frost would not write that identity in without Lynch's go-ahead. And Frost has said he had a heavy hand in scripting Part 8.Xavi wrote:Well, that's just your and Frost's opinion, man.N. Needleman wrote:Be that as it may, they clearly intended for it to be Sarah.
I feel quite confident in saying he did not intend for the girl to be the child Diane traveling through time to before she was born.Since when are you entitled to express the intentions of David Lynch? Did he tell you personally?
I was talking about the violation of the girl/Sarah in 1956, not Tracey and Sam. And I would use a lot of words to describe the sex scene in Part 18, but loving and fully consensual and comfortable are not any of them.I did not notice any violation in the Diane Dale love scene at all, nor during Tracey and Sam's love scene. There was willingness from both sides
No, sorry.Don't you think the kiss at the 430 mark has something to do with the suggestion of a second kiss related to the frog-moth that crept in after the girl's first kiss?
I was speaking more about transparency regarding his writing process (i.e., admitting he slipped up on continuity or explaining why he changed certain things, rather than continually teasing that every discrepancy is due to some elaborate master plan). I’m perfectly fine with no substantive answers about the show’s mysteries, I feel Mark tends to be a bit TOO forthcoming in that regard (TFD being exhibit A). But I wish he could have an honest dialogue with fans about behind-the-scenes stuff, which is much more interesting to me.eyeboogers wrote:"The Final Dossier" IS Frost being forthcoming. It's basically the teacher's guide to "The Return".Mr. Reindeer wrote:Frost is reminding me more and more of Damon Lindelof during the height of Lost hype, when every answer was a cagey “Hmm that’s intersting...or IS it?” I was hoping he’d be a little more forthcoming with all the material (for now) out in the world, but I guess not.
I think that’s more or less it. It still contradicts the series, where Ben signed Ghostwood over to Catherine in Episode 14, and at the end of the series she and Andrew were planning the Ghostwood Estates, which (as you note) Ben opposed.vicksvapor77 wrote:I noticed Mark wrote that Ben sold his multi-acre land of Ghostwood Forest to developers. Does this align back to the series now a bit more? Does it jive better or worse with the retcon in the first book with Catherine? I can't keep it straight anymore. Does the following sound right based on the books? I can't keep the Packard Mill land/Ghostwood land apart anymore and I'm not sure Mark can either. Please correct me where I have it incorrect based on the books.
-The Packard Mill burns down and Catherine closes it permanently
-Catherine and Andrew (retcon) had possession of the Packard Mill land and properties
-Ben, who in the series was against the Ghostwood development project, seems to have secretly planned the purchase of the Packard Mill land from Catherine
-Andrew dies and the Packard Mill goes back into Catherine's sole possession
-Catherine sells the Packard Mill and its associated properties to Ben and the Ghostwood developers and becomes a recluse (despite the date on the contract being way too early)
-Per The Final Dossier, Ben subsequently sells his hundreds-acre private parcel of the Ghostwood Forest land to development project, which becomes a private prison (Not sure if this land is related or not to the Packard Mill land)
Okay thanks. I'll have to rewatch some of the original series to catch that stuff again. We are assuming the Packard Mill and Ghostwood Development are technically separate development areas, right? So maybe the Packard Mill stuff isn't relaly a retcon at all and is more just inserted "secret history" not presented in the original series narrative?Mr. Reindeer wrote:I think that’s more or less it. It still contradicts the series, where Ben signed Ghostwood over to Catherine in Episode 14, and at the end of the series she and Andrew were planning the Ghostwood Estates, which (as you note) Ben opposed.vicksvapor77 wrote:I noticed Mark wrote that Ben sold his multi-acre land of Ghostwood Forest to developers. Does this align back to the series now a bit more? Does it jive better or worse with the retcon in the first book with Catherine? I can't keep it straight anymore. Does the following sound right based on the books? I can't keep the Packard Mill land/Ghostwood land apart anymore and I'm not sure Mark can either. Please correct me where I have it incorrect based on the books.
-The Packard Mill burns down and Catherine closes it permanently
-Catherine and Andrew (retcon) had possession of the Packard Mill land and properties
-Ben, who in the series was against the Ghostwood development project, seems to have secretly planned the purchase of the Packard Mill land from Catherine
-Andrew dies and the Packard Mill goes back into Catherine's sole possession
-Catherine sells the Packard Mill and its associated properties to Ben and the Ghostwood developers and becomes a recluse (despite the date on the contract being way too early)
-Per The Final Dossier, Ben subsequently sells his hundreds-acre private parcel of the Ghostwood Forest land to development project, which becomes a private prison (Not sure if this land is related or not to the Packard Mill land)
I thought he *did* disappear when he touched the ring. We didn't literally see him vanish off the screen, but it fades to black after he finds it and then the trailer (which the Chalfonts had been renting) is gone too when Cooper gets there. Seemed like a definite case of Lodge magic to me.mtwentz wrote:I too had always assumed it was Deputy Cliff, but apparently the original script had Desmond disappearing when he touched the ring. I also think The Return implies that Desmond disappeared in the same way as Philip Jeffries and Agent Cooper.trismegistus wrote:I just presume he was killed by Deputy Cliff. The only thing that really causes any doubt for that is what happened with Ray Monroe.BEARisonFord wrote:Just finished the book the other day, and although it's a little slighter than I thought it would be, I still really enjoyed it. The tragedies of Annie and Audrey were particularly poignant to me and felt tonally in line with what I expected.
I'd still love to know whatever happened to Chester Desmond someday, but at this point I am most definitely not holding my breath.
The implication of the series seemed to be that the Packard land was in or adjacent to Ghostwood, since it seemed to be an important part of the bargain. But maps (such as in the Access Guide) depict the Mill land as separate from Ghostwood, so who knows. I still think the book contradicts the show either way, because in the show Ben sells the Ghostwood development to Catherine whereas in the books Ben keeps it and sells it to the shady prison people.vicksvapor77 wrote:Okay thanks. I'll have to rewatch some of the original series to catch that stuff again. We are assuming the Packard Mill and Ghostwood Development are technically separate development areas, right? So maybe the Packard Mill stuff isn't relaly a retcon at all and is more just inserted "secret history" not presented in the original series narrative?
This is a nice analysis on Audrey's character and I think explains her attachment to Cooper. He clearly understood this was missing in her life, and there was a need for some sort of emotional connection that was never fulfilled by her family and her lack of friends. Her brief friendship with Cooper, sadly, is probably one of the only such relationships she ever had if JJW has been retconned out of the story and her character never evolved into the Audrey we saw at the end of Season 2. To build on that, while I do think she may have decided to keep the child to have someone in her life to love and whom would love her back, if she was unaware that she was raped, it's possible she assumed she and Cooper had a romantic encounter that she couldn't remember as a result of the bank explosion/coma, and she kept Richard assuming it was Cooper's. Richard was a way of keeping a part of Cooper in her life, since she couldn't remember the one moment she had always hoped to have with him, never knowing that she was actually assaulted and raped by the person whom she trusted the most. (Yes, I know it was Mr. C, but to Audrey it would have been Cooper.)laughingpinecone wrote: a key aspect of Audrey was always her lack of strong, intimate emotional connections. The lonely girl who grew up observing people from behind holes in the walls etc. I used to think she probably woke up too late to decide whether to keep the baby and suffered her teen pregnancy, but once I heard her story, it is not unthinkable, imho, that she would cling to the chance of getting to develop one such connection by default as a mother.
How could Mr C possibly know? Did Richard tell him? Then, how could Richard possibly know, when not even the mother had no clue?Mr C wrote:"Good-bye, my son."