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
HoodedMatt
Roadhouse Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:28 am
Location: Finland

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

Postby HoodedMatt » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:10 am

I really can't believe that this is such a massive issue. For literally decades people have been coming to the show and falling in love with it despite its flaws, which in my opinion are very much overstated and have been so for so long that they have become mythologised, and I really doubt that suddenly people are going to switch off en masse because of them now. There will be those who tune out, but if Showtime does the right thing and promotes the show properly* I'm sure that fall out can be minimised so it makes very little difference.

*By which I mean show some of the retrospectives from the various box sets or make their own. Get the nostalgia flowing in those folks who've not grabbed the blurays yet while priming the new viewers on what to expect (to a degree). When it comes to airing the show, show it two or three episodes daily up until the air date of the new series, with FWWM in between. If they do that, it's more than likely to cancel out any large scale drop off in viewing figures as if you don't like an episode, drop out for a day or two and pick it back up! Simple.

Regarding any editing of the show to remove stuff, I'm against it. Twin Peaks is what it is, warts and all. Revisionism is not worth it, not even to get Evelyn Marsh out of the picture. Hopefully, Lynch and Frost accept that as well.
User avatar
FauxOwl
RR Diner Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:08 pm

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

Postby FauxOwl » Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:48 am

james wrote:
Ajax Rules wrote:
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.


For the record, I am also against the re-edit idea, but I'd like to point out about this age thing... the most stubborn, immature person I've ever met was a man in his 50's, and he constantly brought up his age as though it were a badge of entitlement (probably not an uncommon characteristic among those who don't get particularly wiser as they get older). Which is why I brought up the bit in "A Slice of Lynch" where Lynch asserts his opinion about the irrelevance of age when it comes to wisdom of the Dale Cooper character.
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 12:46 pm

cinemartin wrote:According to you. ?


Of course according to me. Who else would I be representing on a discussion board? That goes for any opinion expressed by anyone here.


cinemartin wrote: Maybe the masses are begging for an Ajax Rules cut, but I doubt.


I do indeed think that there is a substantial market under Lynch fans for a re-edit of S2, especially when this was authorized and even excecuted by Lynch himself. And I do think there is another group of people who do not beg for a re-edit, but would be okay with a re-edit to appear as an "extra's", which is what I'm proposing.


cinemartin wrote: 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?


Why would it be arrogant or wrong to have that wish? But of course, the difference is that hardly anyone feels this way or thinks about Wild at heart at all. Again you erroneously make the suggestion that my feelings about S2 are just a private opinion. But I would never suggest that Lynch should re-shoot the Inland Empire scene with the Asian prostitute (which I don't like). Because that is indeed a private opinion. The controversy surrounding the second half of Twin Peaks, on the other hand, is a well documented phenomenon that many, many, many people feel passionate about (in a bad way) even 25 years later. It is a FACT that Lynch himself hates it.

I totally respect someone like Ross, who says "I do like it". But you do something else. You claim (knowing better) that you don't know what I'm talking about and that it's my private opinion. No, it's not. If you ever read anything about TP, you know that this debate is much more broadly established than just Ajax Rules.
User avatar
james
RR Diner Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Rules

Postby james » Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:27 pm

"The controversy surrounding the second half of Twin Peaks, on the other hand, is a well documented phenomenon that many, many, many people feel passionate about (in a bad way) even 25 years later. It is a FACT that Lynch himself hates it.

I totally respect someone like Ross, who says "I do like it". But you do something else. You claim (knowing better) that you don't know what I'm talking about and that it's my private opinion. No, it's not. If you ever read anything about TP, you know that this debate is much more broadly established than just Ajax Rules."


It is definitely not a fact that Lynch himself HATES the second half of TP. This sort of viewpoint strikes me as over-zealous and aggressively adopting the 'Lynch as film messiah' standpoint. Even if this were true, Lynch would need the approval of Mark Frost, Harley Peyton and others who produced the show to just go in there and make a whole new version as a re-edit. The truth is this will 100 percent, for sure, not happen GUARANTEED though. If Lynch wanted to go back and re-edit his own episodes for some reason (which also wouldn't happen) then fair enough, but he does not have carte blanche permission to just go in and chop out 10 episodes in whole or in part, episodes which were directed by others in good faith, written and produced by others.

If Lynch literally HATED the episodes you say he does, it makes very little sense why he would direct all of the Log Lady introductions for the show - which cover EVERY episode, no matter how fantastic or not so great each one was! Is this not proof that Lynch could appreciate the show even in its ups and downs? That is part of the beauty of the show - how it got from there to here. Whilst the last few episodes do show a return to real quality, all of their content is determined by the previous episodes. The show clearly did meander and drift after the death of Leland, but that did in fact suit the depressed tone of the events portrayed. I'm sure the writers even felt this themselves and wanted to tackle how best to proceed for the characters - it did seem almost as if the show had a different side that appeared and even from the '3 days later' episode, Cooper even seems to be acting in a different manner - was the end of the second season anticipated even then? I think so, albeit in a subtle manner. Probably, the show should have been more direct and introduced the 'damaged' Cooper aspect and Windom Earle plot immediately after the last Leland episode.

I apologise for guessing your age as being 30, maybe I have some big aversion specifically to that age and need to discuss it with a therapist. :D

Obviously you think that about 10 episodes of Twin Peaks are, as you write further up this page, 'garbage' and I would not agree with that at all. Even when the show is not firing on all cylinders, it was still better than everything else shown on tv at the time. Maybe given time you could make a different assessment of the lesser episodes - but then I feel myself that ALL of Twin Peaks is good in some way or another. If you just cut out a lot of material, then the show would just excise a lot that makes sense more of what comes later, I feel.
Last edited by james on Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

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

Postby dugpa » Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:29 pm

My take is if they re-edit, cool.

If the re-edit sucks no worries since I have my Blu.

If they don't, still cool.

As Brad pointed out, we are getting 9 episodes of new Twin Peaks by Lynch and Frost.

Let's move on and talk about the new series which is the topic of this thread.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
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 1:47 pm

Back in 1992 the majority of people thought Fire Walk With Me was completely wrong. They wished there was a way to retrieve the deleted scenes that featured more of the characters we love and edit them back in and edit out all the stuff that didn't matter to the "story" of Twin Peaks; Sheriff Cable, Deputy Cliff, Carl Rod, Philip Jeffries, etc. They also wanted it to be "less dark"; lose Partyland and all else they deemed "excessive". I think that notion is fundamentally wrong, and I'm willing to be you agree with me. If someone came on the board today saying not only that they planned to do that, but that they are certain David Lynch would agree with them and be willing to put this fan cut on the DVD as a bonus feature, I'd say the same thing to them that I'm saying to you.

They just spent years going back and painstakingly remastering the show from original elements, recreating carefully composed VFX from SD to HD, and including everything they felt was necessary to Twin Peaks. But you're saying you know for a FACT David Lynch hates 50% of what's there, the same David Lynch that I told you was responsible for Josie in the night stand, who was definitely completely present for at least 2 of the episodes you want to completely reedit (acting as Gordon Cole, who can only hear the voice of Shelly, in what I'm assuming is one of the subplots you deem unnecessary to Twin Peaks). What you're saying is absurd.
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby dugpa » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:44 pm

Moved conversations on re-edit of Original Series here.
User avatar
thor008u2
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:55 pm
Location: Mt. Si
Contact:

Re: Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby thor008u2 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:00 pm

The question implies that Lynch-Frost would want the series re-edited. To what end? How would a re-edit better serve the new episodes to follow? I know there have been lengthy discussions about how to truncate S2 into a more coherent storyline. But to delete Nadine's super human cheerleader arc and many other similar scenes would impinge on the charm of the series. Besides, the entire storyline will have happened 25 years ago, which makes it relevant to leave it be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
N. Needleman
Lodge Member
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby N. Needleman » Sun Dec 07, 2014 11:54 pm

They won't. Lynch and Frost wouldn't. And it shouldn't be done. End of.

It's just not in those guys to practice that kind of fannish revisionism, and it's not in the show either IMO. It has its hills and valleys, its bogs and roundabouts. It moves forward. That's part of its magic to me, even the parts that are not so great. I think that perceived arc of quality - from great to 'bad' to wild and great again - is so much part of TP's cultural legend now, too. You can't divest the show from itself and you can't revise its imprint in the culture and our history.
The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
Jonfen
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:51 am
Location: Liverpool, UK
Contact:

Re: Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby Jonfen » Mon Dec 08, 2014 2:18 am

I definitely wouldn't want them to edit out anything whatsoever. I've personally never understood people who think that any of the storylines are so poor that they detract from the show as a whole. Sure, I like some plot points a lot more than others but I don't think a single one qualifies as 'bad', myself. Yes, even James going off solo :lol: . Maybe that says more about me!

On top of that, Lynch almost definitely isn't the kind of person to do this, or even want to.
lindseylee
New Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:21 pm

Re: Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby lindseylee » Mon Dec 08, 2014 2:48 am

Jonfen wrote:I definitely wouldn't want them to edit out anything whatsoever. I've personally never understood people who think that any of the storylines are so poor that they detract from the show as a whole. Sure, I like some plot points a lot more than others but I don't think a single one qualifies as 'bad', myself. Yes, even James going off solo :lol: . Maybe that says more about me!

On top of that, Lynch almost definitely isn't the kind of person to do this, or even want to.


Here's a twist. What if Lynch wanted to do an edit extending the Series with deleted material?
Jonfen
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:51 am
Location: Liverpool, UK
Contact:

Re: Would Showtime Edit Original Series for Twin Peaks 2016

Postby Jonfen » Mon Dec 08, 2014 5:19 am

lindseylee wrote:Here's a twist. What if Lynch wanted to do an edit extending the Series with deleted material?


That would be a lot more interesting to me. As long as it was sanctioned by Lynch and Frost then I'd be behind it all the way.

I doubt they'd go for it though, Lynch especially.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests