Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

General discussion on Twin Peaks not related to the series, film, books, music, photos, or collectors merchandise.

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

User avatar
Jasper
Great Northern Member
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Jasper » Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:57 pm

cinemartin wrote:Personally, I find the talk of reediting season 2 more cringeworthy than adding the "May The Giant Be With You" titles. I find all the second guessing of Lynch's creative thought processes in this vein to betray a lack of understanding about Lynch's work from the time period


People have always been and continue to be unhappy with the ABSENCE of Lynch.

DAVID LYNCH:
"I had very little to do with Season 2, and I’m not happy with it. Up until “Who Killed Laura Palmer?” I was with it 100 percent, and then it drifted away."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... -west.html

You seem to speak as though the rough patch is season two is David Lynch's work, but the problem for many is that for the most part it is not. You appear to make several more statements under this assumption, but I don't think those statements need to be addressed individually. The answer to all of them is that it's not really Lynch's work, but something to which he retained a tenuous connection.

cinemartin wrote:most of the scorn I'm seeing lately by some regarding Season 2 is of the comedic goings on in Twin Peaks during that time. Would we be editing out the hospital food bit from the second season opener in the potential reedit? That was almost certainly a Lynch creation.


The general complaints are about the section after the reveal of the murderer, and before the finale. None of these complaints are new, and they're generally about quality and cohesiveness, not something so simple as not enjoying comedic bits. I'd recommend watching every Q&A installment of the USC Twin Peaks retrospective series for insight from the many people involved in its creation.

cinemartin wrote:Also, the talk of Lynch not working well with collaborators is completely false


It seems like one or two people said they thought Lynch's film work, where he is definitively in the driver's seat, was generally stronger than some of Twin Peaks, where Lynch was a co-creator, the implication being that if Lynch was definitively in the driver's seat for all of Twin Peaks, it would be even better. Maybe, maybe not, but I don't think it's meant to be a general comment about Lynch working with others.

As for talk of editing the rough patch of season two, people love Twin Peaks, and they like to rewatch it, but for most there's a long stretch where the character of the show suddenly changes for the worse. Many view this stretch as something of a necessary slog, because the parts they don't enjoy are intertwined with a few jewels and the overall narrative arc which eventually gets us to the beloved finale. It's natural that some people would wish to sculpt things to remove some of what they find tedious and not in keeping with the best of the series. It's a creative impulse born from a love of what's felt to be the true essence of that universe.
User avatar
N. Needleman
Lodge Member
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby N. Needleman » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:18 pm

The creative impulse on the part of a fan is certainly understandable, sure. What I don't track with is saying they have to officially reedit the show on Showtime or for re-release. That is never going to happen, and shouldn't IMO - the original show is indelible in the public consciousness, warts and all. I also don't think Lynch or Frost would ever even consider doing it. There's also the idea that Lynch would want to throw everything back into FWWM, which he does not, or that he should dismiss Mark Frost, which it seems he would never do, on the grounds of some artistic purity test.
The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
cinemartin
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby cinemartin » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:21 pm

Yes, I can understand everyone having their preference of what should or shouldn't be in the second season. That's what keeps things interesting in conversation. However, in practice it's a whole other issue. I also find basing your own personal preferences on what you believe are the personal preferences of David Lynch, simply because you're a Lynch fan, therefore having the same creative impulses and preferences, to be in bad faith because it attempts to negate what other people feel about a certain work. Statements like "You can't honestly tell me that you like the Little Nicky plot?" are insulting, especially when they're backed up with reasoning having to do with David Lynch's intentions for the show, reasoning that makes little sense when one looks honestly a the situation. If you want to cherry pick from Lynch's work to support your comments, that's fine, but know there are counter examples to be brought up.

The quotes that you're showing are all retrospective quotes, reflecting statements that are easily made when faced with failure and disappointment. We can also look at Brad's book showing it was likely Lynch who came up with Josie's face in the doorknob. We can hear Lynch's voice directing the TV commercials late in the second season on the DVD extras (are we to believe Lynch was so busy with other things to neglect Twin Peaks, but still found time to make sure the commercials for it were perfect?) Again, I'm not saying one way or another that Lynch was there everyday or in Japan or working on Wild At Heart or doing weather reports. I'm saying, it was his show, his and Frost's, and if he wasn't there he has to take responsibility for any failures. And, from everything I read, he does for the most part. Which is why trying to find a through line through S02 that more definitely confirms to his vision is pointless, especially because you never know what the hell that guy is thinking anyway. Indeed, that's what he's famous for.r.
User avatar
Jasper
Great Northern Member
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Jasper » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:45 pm

N. Needleman wrote:The creative impulse on the part of a fan is certainly understandable, sure. What I don't track with is saying they have to officially reedit the show on Showtime or for re-release. That is never going to happen, and shouldn't IMO - the original show is indelible in the public consciousness, warts and all. I also don't think Lynch or Frost would ever even consider doing it. There's also the idea that Lynch would want to throw everything back into FWWM, which he does not, or that he should dismiss Mark Frost, which it seems he would never do, on the grounds of some artistic purity test.


I don't think anyone said that they have to edit season two for showtime. I think most (probably all) realize that it's something that would never actually happen. That said, I think there's some validity to concerns that some new travelers might never reach the shores of season three due to some stormy seas encountered in season two.

N. Needleman wrote:There's also the idea that Lynch would want to throw everything back into FWWM, which he does not.

N. Needleman wrote:I also find it really presumptuous to be making all sorts of leaps about Lynch and Frost and what we would supposedly know about them better than the men themselves. Case in point: Putting all of the deleted footage from FWWM back into the film on the assumption Lynch wanted it back in. Unless I am very misinformed, what I've always heard is that Lynch cut FWWM to his own specifications, choosing to cut all of the Missing Pieces deleted material out. He never wanted to put it back in and still doesn't, AFAIK.


You've presumed that Q2 and anyone else who may have attempted an extended edit believe that Lynch wanted the material in there. The Missing Pieces are parts of a larger narrative, and some simply wanted to experience them in the way they (mostly) appear in the script. Anyone that invested knows that Lynch has final cut and was happy with the theatrical cut of the film. I don't think anyone here is unaware that Lynch considers the theatrical cut to be his true vision.

N. Needleman wrote:The film that exists is the one he has chosen. I believe he was extremely hesitant to even release the deleted scenes for years.


Lynch tried for many years to release the cut footage, but refused to release it in anything less than finished form, which was an expensive proposition. John Neff made an interesting post detailing what was required financially and work-wise to get the footage to Lynch's standard, but I can't seem to locate it. Suffice it to say it was a major undertaking.

N. Needleman wrote:There's also the idea that Lynch would want to throw everything back into FWWM, which he does not, or that he should dismiss Mark Frost, which it seems he would never do, on the grounds of some artistic purity test.


I think that such a notion is exceedingly rare.
User avatar
N. Needleman
Lodge Member
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby N. Needleman » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:49 pm

No, I'm not talking about Q2. That's clearly a fan work done out of love. It's not trying to make a case for "this is how it all should be."
The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
Ajax Rules
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:56 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Ajax Rules » Fri Dec 05, 2014 3:29 am

N. Needleman wrote:Remaking TP to some new specs after the fact is just not possible.


This is of course, utter BS. You may not like it, but it is obviously possible.

For example (as was mentioned earlier): Leave all episodes until Leland's death in tact. Leave the final episode in tact. Re-edit the twelve episodes in bewteen into two episodes in order to enable a smooth transfer to to the final episode. Evelyn and Little Nicky en Billy Zane remain part of the "canon" (just like the content of Laura's secret diary, for example), but are not shown anymore [the Original episodes could be shown as 'extra's' in a new dvd-box. Or the new re-edit could be added as an extra; it doesn't matter].

My point was not that it was going to happen. I don't think it is going to happen. I think that it should happen, though (given my own subjective taste and preferences). Although I think, it is highly unlikely, I don't think it is 100% impossible. Several arguments are given in this very thread why Lynch might want it, why (many) fans might want it, why it might be feasible, and why it might be good for the success of season 3. And re-edits, different versions, etc. are quite common in the world of film, so why should it be 100% impossible?
User avatar
james
RR Diner Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby james » Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:21 am

Ajax Rules wrote:
N. Needleman wrote:Remaking TP to some new specs after the fact is just not possible.


This is of course, utter BS. You may not like it, but it is obviously possible.

For example (as was mentioned earlier): Leave all episodes until Leland's death in tact. Leave the final episode in tact. Re-edit the twelve episodes in bewteen into two episodes in order to enable a smooth transfer to to the final episode. Evelyn and Little Nicky en Billy Zane remain part of the "canon" (just like the content of Laura's secret diary, for example), but are not shown anymore [the Original episodes could be shown as 'extra's' in a new dvd-box. Or the new re-edit could be added as an extra; it doesn't matter].

My point was not that it was going to happen. I don't think it is going to happen. I think that it should happen, though (given my own subjective taste and preferences). Although I think, it is highly unlikely, I don't think it is 100% impossible. Several arguments are given in this very thread why Lynch might want it, why (many) fans might want it, why it might be feasible, and why it might be good for the success of season 3. And re-edits, different versions, etc. are quite common in the world of film, so why should it be 100% impossible?


This is why I enquired as to your age and guessed you were about 30, probably no older. Surely I'm right? You're just being very adamant and even a bit aggressive about this idea when that's all it is.

Editing 12 episodes down into 2? What would that end up looking like - a fast-paced skip forward? Or a crazed recap? Which elements would you keep in those condensed 2 eps? Mainly the Cooper scenes?
cinemartin
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby cinemartin » Fri Dec 05, 2014 8:11 am

If you don't like that long stretch of the second season, why don't you just skip it and watch the "Previously on Twin Peaks" from Episode 25? It succinctly lays out all the major plot developments that happen during that period, narrated by Cooper talking to Diane. It is very well done and was meant to recap after the long hiatus that took place after the episode where Josie dies. I figure if you really hate the show after the murder is solved, you can go right to that after episode 16 and feel ok about it. Other than that, I'm not so sure what you would want.
Ajax Rules
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:56 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Ajax Rules » Fri Dec 05, 2014 8:13 am

james wrote:This is why I enquired as to your age and guessed you were about 30, probably no older. Surely I'm right? ?


I cannot possibly see why this would be relevant. And what's wrong with being 30 anyway? Who's the childish one asking questions like this for the second time?

james wrote: Editing 12 episodes down into 2? What would that end up looking like - a fast-paced skip forward? Or a crazed recap? Which elements would you keep in those condensed 2 eps? Mainly the Cooper scenes?


Let me be clear that probably those 2 episodes would not be the best two episodes of the entire show. The pacing could be a bit off, although a good editor would be able to make a decent cut. But the result would still be so much better (and less time-consuming!) than the entire 12 terrible episodes.

Viewers who dislike these 12 episodes have to choose between two evils: 1. Watching more than 10 hours of garbage in order to see a couple of enjoyable/relevant scenes. 2. Skipping the 12 episodes altogether and having to miss out on these enjoyable/relevant scenes.

So a solution is to do a re-edit using only these enjoyable scenes and the scenes that are necessary for a smooth transition to episode 29 (and/or season 3). Even if you have to rush a little bit or work with time lapses or whatever, this is still a very good idea (without having to change the canon or even change the show. Just add these two episodes as extras on the next dvd's).
User avatar
Brad D
Global Moderator
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:56 am
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Brad D » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:32 am

These re-edits aren't happening, whatever side of the fence you're on. The two guys that put together the PILOT are doing NINE new hours of stuff, if that doesn't make you happy, why bother?
Ajax Rules
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:56 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Ajax Rules » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:43 am

Brad D wrote:These re-edits aren't happening, whatever side of the fence you're on.


You don't know that. Maybe Showtime considers it too risky to broadcast the low quality episodes and lose newcomers before Season 3 even begins.

Brad D wrote: The two guys that put together the PILOT are doing NINE new hours of stuff, if that doesn't make you happy, why bother?
It does make me happy. Very happy.
User avatar
Ross
Global Moderator
Posts: 2204
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Ross » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:49 am

Brad D wrote:These re-edits aren't happening, whatever side of the fence you're on. The two guys that put together the PILOT are doing NINE new hours of stuff, if that doesn't make you happy, why bother?

Agreed 100%

As someone on the other side of the fence, meaning I quite love season 2, I don't agree with the complaints. But everyone has different opinions- I'm certainly not going to change my opinion after 25 years. And I'm sure people that don't like it aren't going to change theirs. I'd say If you hate it, just don't watch it. But if there are scenes you enjoy, just hand pick them yourself and watch those.
"I can see half my life's history in your face... And I'm not sure that I want to."
http://twinpeakssoundtrackdesign.blogspot.com/
cinemartin
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby cinemartin » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:54 am

Risky for who? Why are people so concerned who new viewers feel about season 2? It sounds like you used to work for ABC. I've been showing pretty much everyone I cross paths with Twin Peaks for the past 2 decades. Some people go bananas for it; others could care less. I've never showed it to anyone who loved the first half and stopped watching it because of a few episodes in the second half. The only experience I had that was similar was when I showed a kid that works for me and he tuned out before the murder was even wrapped up, just because he got bored. It's the way it is - I'm not concerned with how other people feel about the show. The deal is done. They're making 9 episodes whether all of America tunes in or just a few people from this board. I'll be watching no matter what; maybe I'll love it, maybe I won't, but I'm definitely not going to rewrite these 9 episodes if it doesn't conform to my view of the show, chiefly because I had nothing to do with the making of the show. If there's one thing I'm positive about, it's that David Lynch doesn't care about what audiences expect of him. He's going to make whatever he feels is right. From the day Eraserhead premiered, he's had his detractors. He'll have them forever. I love Twin Peaks and I'm extremely happy Lynch and Frost are continuing. I've never really cared what ABC or Showtime or somebody who enjoys a more streamlined narrative thinks would make a better Twin Peaks.
Ajax Rules
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:56 am

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby Ajax Rules » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:18 am

cinemartin wrote:Risky for who? Why are people so concerned who new viewers feel about season 2? .


I couldn't care less about new viewers. But I hope that ABC cares and it motivates them and Lynch/Frost to finally clean up the mess of Season 2. Twin Peaks could be the best show in the history of television. Season 2 could be just as brilliant as season 1. IF a little work is invested. If concerns about new viewers is what triggers this, I'd be very happy.

cinemartin wrote: I've been showing pretty much everyone I cross paths with Twin Peaks for the past 2 decades. Some people go bananas for it; others could care less. I've never showed it to anyone who loved the first half and stopped watching it because of a few episodes in the second half.


Oh, come off it! Don't pretend as if this is just my complaints or those of one or two people. The lower quality of season 2 is acknowledged by 99% of journalists, reviewers, fans and Lynch himself. Of course, it is still a subjective opinion, but do not act as if there really is no issue regarding the second half of S2.
cinemartin
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Twin Peaks: Season Three confirmed for 2016 on Showtime

Postby cinemartin » Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:48 am

[/quote] "But I hope that ABC cares and it motivates them and Lynch/Frost to finally clean up the mess of Season 2. Twin Peaks could be the best show in the history of television." [/quote]

According to you. Someone else may think the second half of season 1 sucks and wants to edit that out. Or edit out all scenes with Donna and James. Maybe the masses are begging for an Ajax Rules cut, but I doubt.

[/quote] "Oh, come off it! Don't pretend as if this is just my complaints or those of one or two people. The lower quality of season 2 is acknowledged by 99% of journalists, reviewers, fans and Lynch himself. Of course, it is still a subjective opinion, but do not act as if there really is no issue regarding the second half of S2.[/quote]

Ok. Its statements like this that I find so insulting and why other people are questioning your age; it's because its a very immature way of looking at art where you demand that all things that halfway interest you to conform to your desires as opposed to actually reckoning with something on its own merits as it exists. There's no telling how you'll feel yourself in 10 years, so maybe every decade you can do a new reedit to show everyone exactly what the best version of their favorite show looks like. I never loved the Wizard of Oz references in Wild At Heart - any chance you can draw up a blueprint to edit those out for me?

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hopesfall and 34 guests